What is it, how it affects NYC and the future of the policy
Just yesterday I was walking back from Baruch College where I was standing at an intersection and witnessed a pedestrian nearly hit by an oncoming vehicle. The person was not paying attention at all and was looking at their phone while wearing their headphones. They didn’t seem to notice the vehicle speeding at almost 40 mph, and kept walking casually while being plugged in. Another instance, was the other week when I was in Union Square, I was again witness to a close-call. A pedestrian was attempting to cross the street, not paying attention, oblivious to the fact it wasn’t their right of way to cross. They were inches from being struck. It is not just the speeding driver who is at fault, and it is not always the unaware pedestrian who is to blame. With pedestrian related accidents at near epidemic levels in NYC right now, both sides of the issue need to accept fault for fatalities. There are many solutions to reducing the number of fatalities which the Mayor’s office has released. We need more than just policies to be implemented if we want to decrease fatalities. We need to educate community members on what can be done and work together to fix it.
Panelists during the first segment at a conference yesterday presented by City & State talked about ways which their companies are participating in the reduction of fatalities. Kevin Hatfield, Co-President of Hailo, North America, the company behind the Hailo app which allows users to request a cab in just a few seconds, suggested how the app can help improve safety for taxi drivers.
“There is concern with Hailo because it requires drivers to use phones while driving,” said Hatfield. “When you’re using Hailo you’re not actually on the phone. Our new interface [Driver 2.0] allows the driver to operate the program hands free.” Hatfield went on “Why not celebrate good driving records [and] positive aspects of the driving communities.”
While improvements to user interfaces are important and deserve support, the death of pedestrians, however, certainly overshadows that improvement. The Mayor’s office has drafted a list of proposals in their policy paper Vision Zero, which details a plan of action to reduce traffic accidents involving pedestrians.
Under the Vision Zero program, certain proposals have been crafted to better enforce safety, includng — implementing street designs that reduce dangerous speeding, expanding the 20mph zone and implementing roundabouts in more areas where accidents are prone. However, one proposal I have a problem with is installing “safe speed detectors.” What is the purpose of a safe speed detector and how much more of an effect does it have versus stop lights? Drivers will still likely speed through them as they do yellow lights. Criticism against safe speed detectors is vast and wide. Critics argue the purpose of this program is simply to act as a financial generator for the city. Proponents argue that the funding should be funneled into programs such as grants for schools or a city scholarship program. Or wait, I have an idea, what about instead of using its funds for grants or scholarships, maybe you can use it to fund UPK???
This makes sense since there, presumably, will be “safe speed detectors,” therefore the City can rely on them to fund UPK past the four-year term limit of the Mayor. This, of course is probably too logical to pass.
Whatever the City does to implement Vision Zero, it needs to continue its outreach programs into areas particularly concerned with pedestrian safety. It can only create more sensible ways for pedestrian safety with the cooperation of community members.