Advocates tally pedestrian-car crashes in Durham -- and the results aren't pretty

 Durham bicycle and pedestrian activists have long fought for attention for walker safety and connectivity issues. 

And it's not an easy fight. Pushback on the overly car-friendly design of Alston Ave. (an objection shared by City transportation pros) led to objections from some in the local community that "outsiders" were getting in the way of what they perceived to be a much-needed economic boon.

Meanwhile, advocates for pedestrian facilities sought for the creation of the "DurhamWalks!" plan to guide sidewalk projects several years back -- only to find themselves grousing over what they've perceived as a slow roll towards implementation.

There've been some areas of progress, notably in adding pedestrian signalization to a range of intersections; a recent DurhamWalks! update report for City Council noted that 24 new traffic signals with lit pedestrian crossings or signalizations of existing intersections have taken place since 2006. (Among those: the often-dangerous Broad/Perry connection near Duke's East Campus.)

Still, bike/pedestrian advocates are arguing, there's more to be done -- and there's evidence that despite the investment to date, the City and county aren't making progress in actually reducing the number of car-walker accidents.

It's an assessment that a recent City progress report on DurhamWalks! doesn't disagree with.

The Durham Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Commission sent forth its own press release last week, noting the release of an interactive map that shows just where car-pedestrian crashes have taken place over the past five years.

In the map below (link to larger version with key to symbols), the larger the circle, the greater the number of pedestrian/car crashes between 2004 and 2008.

View Larger Map

It's a tough map to look at, and one that shows a disproportionate number of crashes along the aforementioned Alston Ave.; near shopping centers on NC 98/Holloway; and in the high-car sections of downtown, like Roxboro St. and the Downtown Loop. 

It's even tougher when you see some of the other statistical data that BPAC brings up in its press release. Among the disturbing trends:

• Despite completing long-deferred investment in trails, sidewalks and the like, pedestrian crashes actually went up almost 25% in the 2003-2007 period versus 1997-2002, from a mean of 96 per year in the first period to 120 per year in the second.
• In the ten years that ended in 2007, African-American residents made up almost 60% of crash victims, a figure that's 50% higher than one would expect by population proportion -- and one which we might expect would be a result of greater levels of poverty in heavily-black East Durham, and the reliance on foot-power for access to shopping, employment and the like.
• A study by UNC's Highway Safety Research Center suggests that on a per-capita basis, there are more pedestrian crashes involving children in Durham than in any other community in North Carolina.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Of course, these data go back a few years. And there's an important caveat to be made here: by 2007, when some of the latest data on pedestrian safety is available, very little of the DurhamWalks! plan has been implemented.

Still, that plan's our best route to future progress. How much progress has the City made since the mid-decade implementation of the DurhamWalks! plan?

According to a February update to City Council, the progress to date seems decidedly mixed.

As noted above, two dozen pedestrian crossing signalizations have been completed since 2006, including two on Alston. And the report notes that City staff are using the prioritization data on corridors to 

Yet of twenty new-sidewalk projects ranked by DurhamWalks! in category "A" -- as the highest priority projects -- only one has been completed, a 1.66 mile, bond-funded sidewalk on Roxboro from Enterprise to Cornwallis. That compares to a 30% goal for completed construction by 2010.

Five more are slated for construction this year -- meaning the City may just hit that target -- but only through the magic of ARRA stimulus funding, meaning that the relative progress wouldn't be so hot if not for those federal funds.

Most of the remaining category "A" projects are funded, but most will use regional MPO air quality mitigation funding, a limited source that means projected construction dates are stretching out as far as 2017.

Curiously, four category "C" (lowest priority) projects have been completed in the same time period. Two of them make sense, accomplished as they were as part of the scheduled widening of MLK Jr. Pkwy. But Vickers Ave. and Watts St. also had bond-funded sidewalk projects make the list. We're not sure whether those were in the works before the DurhamWalks! plan's implementation or not.

So, where have dollars gone instead?

According to the DurhamWalks! progress update, a substantial focus has been on repairing existing sidewalks, and implementing curb-cut ramps -- both efforts that align with the City's ADA settlement requiring facilities that are accessible to persons in wheelchairs and other mobility aids.

Still, the City has encumbered $2.1 million out of the $3.6 million dedicated for new sidewalk construction in the 2005/07 bond referendum.

BCR's question: outside of the three bond-funded category A/B/C projects (Watts, Vickery, and Roxboro) -- just what sidewalks have been funded out of those dollars?

~ ~ ~ ~ ~

To really know how well the investments are working, we'll need to see the impact of pedestrian crashes going forward.

It's heartening to know that the Highway Safety Research Center at UNC will be working on a study within Durham, a multi-year, grant-funded project to evaluate and improve pedestrian safety. 

(Without going into the details, suffice it to say that earlier such initiatives got cold-shoulders from at least some elements of City government, to whom pedestrian crashes weren't perceived as a problem -- a startling conclusion given what the data on pedestrian crashes shows.)

And of course, there's another survey point we can use to see how things are going.

In 2005, 30% of Durhamites were satisfied with sidewalks.

By 2007, that number had fallen to 27%. 

In 2009, that number was up a bit, to 38%.

Good progress -- but as the status of priority projects shows, there's way more progress still to be made.

Comments

[Steve Graff]

One way in which the city can help to reduce car/pedestrian crashes is to put a stop to the speeding of city vehicles. The city should insert a clause into the employment contract of every city employee that they are expected to obey the laws of the city/county/state. Drivers of city vehicles should be required to sign a statement that they understand and agree to abide by the traffic laws. Violators should receive corrective action, and if the problem continues suspension and finally firing the employee should be used.

The city needs to stop tolerating speeding by it's employees driving city vehicles. This behavior threatens the safety of other drivers, pedestrians and cyclists. It increases fuel expenses due to decreased fuel mileage. It increases wear and tear on the city fleet, resulting in more frequent repairs and decreased "useful life" of the vehicles. It also increases wear on our streets, requiring more frequent repairs and re-paving. The continued speeding of city vehicles also signals to other drivers that Durham does not care about speeding, and in fact encourages it based on the driving behavior of it's very own employees.

Speeding - it's unsafe, and fiscally irresponsible.

[Visconti]

Here are some specifics that need to be considered:

1. In high pedestrian traffic areas, there should be a No Turn on Red signals at all intersections
2. Light cycles for main thoroughfares need to be adjusted. Right now, they are green for too long for commuter traffic and very short for residential (side road or streets) traffic.
3. Eliminate the intersection sensors. These are those devices implanted in the ground that activate a green light when a car arrives. These sensors benefit cars, but do not help pedestrians or cyclists who have to wait 2 or 3 minutes to cross a street.
4. Add more traffic lights at dangerous intersections including point 1.
5. Stop widening streets in urban areas. More sidewalks, less asphalt. Local residents should be the priority, not commuters.

[Matt Drew]

I guess we can add sidewalk construction to the list of basic city services that the City has to borrow money to fix. Sigh.

[steve saltzman]

The word "accident" is misleading. These are crashes. Each one its own logic and explanations. The difference is more than semantic. As you note in your posting, African Americans are disproprtionately victims of these car-human being crashes. That isn't being unlucky: i.e. accidental.

[Jeremy T]

@Visconti:

The street sensors are a great design, keeping main road traffic free from unnecessary stops at lesser used side streets. It's worth inconveniencing a few peds and cyclists to save all the fuel that would be wasted on commuter traffic stopping at empty intersections (and I say that as a cyclist). Whenever you stop traffic you waste energy, so you have to try and do it as seldom as possible.

The "press to cross" ped buttons work great at such intersections, but there's no analog for bikes. I don't know if it's feasible to allow lower weights to trip the sensors so cyclists can trigger a light change. I either end up running lights (shh, don't tell the popo) or going up and mashing the ped button. It's inconvenient, but I recognize the need for it.

[Matt Drew]

I agree with Jeremy - the right way to do is to allow the light sensors to be tripped by bicycles and lighter vehicles. I even have trouble with the sensors sometimes on my scooter, which doesn't have a lot of metal (Yamaha C3).

[GreenLantern]

Yeah, that's right Visconti..always blame the driver of a car instead of the bicyclist or pedestrian. How many of the pedestrians were drunk, high, or otherwise in and out of it? People step into traffic sometimes, bicyclists think they can swerve out in front of cars, or pass by them at a red light...it's not always the driver's fault.

We've spent millions on sidewalks and trails in this city, and the statistics don't show any improvement. Our roads are in really bad shape for car traffic, and cars are by far the biggest user of the roads. I rarely see bicyclists on ANY street in the city or county. I see as few pedestrians on sidewalks, despite all the money you guys want to spend trying to shut down car traffic. We cannot afford the cost of insuring no car will ever hit a pedestrian or bicyclist, especially since there are so few of them using the roads compared to cars.

Visconti: The more rabid your hatred for drivers, and the more militant you become as a cyclist, the more us commuters will become on the roads. You need to be careful.

[Tar Heelz]

Interesting map and statistics.

Does anyone reading have background on the metrics that went into concluding that 60% African American victims is 50% higher than the predicted level?

Doesn't seem reasonable to expect that just 30% of Durham crash victims would be black. Given the map, I suspected black victims might be an even larger percentage of these crashes. Only city crashes are included. Durham is 43.5% black. Did the writers expect expect that the victims would be disproportionately white?

Next you realize that all of Dook's on-campus crashes are excluded. Certainly, any stats need to either add in those crashes or remove those census tracts (of largely white majorities) from the equation.

Finally, as noted by Kevin, these crashes are far more prevalent in black neighborhoods. It certainly WOULD be a shock to see large numbers of white victims at Fayetteville & Pilot or Holloway & Hoover.

Anyway, the bottomline is that while pedestrian wrecks are not entirely avoidable, some efforts make some sense. Durham has certain intersections where there appears to be at least one crash every two years or so. Let's do something about those areas.

Also, it sure would be a great idea to work to convince Durham residents that crosswalks are more than a subtle suggestion.

[Tar Heelz]

By the way, has anyone tried this to trip a light?

http://bicycleuniverse.info/transpo/triggering-signals.html

Good idea for assistive postings for bicyclists:

http://www.humantransport.org/bicycledriving/library/signals/green.htm

[GreenLantern]

With all the drug dealers and prostitutes hanging out in east Durham, I can see a higher percentage of blacks coming into contact with a lot of drivers either drunk or wasted on something. I'll admit the sidewalks along Holloway and Alston are in pretty bad shape, but the "pedestrians" around there seem to think the roads are an adult playground.

[Retro-Grouch]

@GL.

re-read visconti's post, there is no blame put on drivers, just concrete suggestions if the city were serious about pedestrian issues.

I particulary agree with 1, 2, and 5.

1. In high pedestrian traffic areas, there should be a No Turn on Red signals at all intersections

2. Light cycles for main thoroughfares need to be adjusted. Right now, they are green for too long for commuter traffic and very short for residential (side road or streets) traffic.

5. Stop widening streets in urban areas. More sidewalks, less asphalt. Local residents should be the priority, not commuters.

also I would suggest you open your eyes if you rarely see cyclists "anywhere in the city or county" and stop with your not so veiled threats of violence, i.e. "you need to be careful."

Roads are to be shared, don't go playing around with safety or people's lives because you have issues.

[Visconti]

@GreenLantern

"Yeah, that's right Visconti..always blame the driver of a car instead of the bicyclist or pedestrian."

Beyond bizarre. Where did I blame drivers? I made a a series of proposals to protect pedestrians. What does that have to do with blaming cars?

"How many of the pedestrians were drunk, high, or otherwise in and out of it?"

Why do you have to assume that pedestrians are high?

"People step into traffic sometimes, bicyclists think they can swerve out in front of cars, or pass by them at a red light...it's not always the driver's fault."

You are now blaming cyclists. While there are certainly idiot cyclists out there, most cyclists are not suicidal. The fact of the matter is that a car can kill a cyclist very easily and the humane thing to do is to be careful.

"We've spent millions on sidewalks and trails in this city, and the statistics don't show any improvement."

Show us some figures to back this statement.

"Our roads are in really bad shape for car traffic, and cars are by far the biggest user of the roads."

I agree that the roads are in a really bad shape. I drive every day and the number of potholes is unbelievable.

Pedestrians, naturally, don't use the roads. They cross them and they need to be protected.

"I rarely see bicyclists on ANY street in the city or county."

You probably don't see too many because it is really dangerous. I only cycle on weekends and use the American Tobacco Trail.

"I see as few pedestrians on sidewalks, despite all the money you guys want to spend trying to shut down car traffic."

Who is you guys? I am a driver and I don't want to shut down traffic. As to few pedestrians, obviously you don't visit downtown, 9th street, the Duke campus area, etc.

"Visconti: The more rabid your hatred for drivers, and the more militant you become as a cyclist, the more us commuters will become on the roads. You need to be careful."

Threatening language there. Who said I hate drivers? I am a driver, who drives every day. Militant cyclist?, lol. Your vitriolic language betrays you, and you are the one showing hatred for cyclists, pedestrians and minority communities.

[Steve Graff]

"5. Stop widening streets in urban areas. More sidewalks, less asphalt. Local residents should be the priority, not commuters."

I would go further on this one to say "Narrow streets in urban areas." Far too many drivers treat residential streets as expressways. Not only does this pose a safety risk to other drivers, cyclists and pedestrians, it also causes a great deal of noise which reduces the "qualify of life".

[Todd P]

The DurhamWalks Plan will just be another great plan gathering dust at City Hall until money is put into implementation.

Durham will never be able to get enough grants or borrow enough money to build the sidewalks that are needed. There's nothing wrong with grants or bonds, but it is going to take tax dollars dedicated in the annual budget to make real progress toward implementation.

It would also help if projects were actually built according to the need and rank in the plan, and not just by who is politically connected or screams the loudest at the City Council meeting.

[Matt Johnson]

Pre-rant caveat: I am generally in favor of improving pedestrian/cyclist access in the city/county, and I think improvements are a fine use of my city tax dollars.

However, I feel no sympathy for most of the people whose accidents created those two big circles on Erwin Road. Jaywalking across Erwin in front of the Duke hospital is so bad during rush hour that I am not surprised it is one of the most accident-prone areas of Durham. And these are (supposedly) highly educated doctors, nurses, and researchers!

As anyone who has tried to travel from Main Street to Cameron Blvd on Erwin knows, those lights at Trent/Fulton/Douglas/LaSalle change extremely frequently. They are also all equipped with pedestrian cross buttons that (from personal experience) work quite well. So there is NO EXCUSE for people running out into traffic to cross Erwin Road. If those jaywalkers (that is, people breaking the law by not crossing at a marked crosswalk!) are taken out of the statistics above, it becomes a much more tractable situation.

[Moe Rivera]

"With all the drug dealers and prostitutes hanging out in east Durham, I can see a higher percentage of blacks coming into contact with a lot of drivers either drunk or wasted on something. I'll admit the sidewalks along Holloway and Alston are in pretty bad shape, but the "pedestrians" around there seem to think the roads are an adult playground."
Posted by: GreenLantern | March 08, 2010 at 11:32 AM

@Green

You are wrong! Prostitution and drug dealing are the only traffic calming measures that East Durham has. People SLOW down to buy drugs and pick up whores.. not speed up... So your assumption is flawed..

The reason why these "pedestrians" are more likely to be hit is because there's zero traffic calming measures in east Durham. While West/south Durham has speed humps, radar signs, and neck downs, Matter of fact, East Durham hardly has lines on the road (North Elizabeth). we spend only a fraction of road $$ in East Durham. Creating a pedestrian Utopia on one side and a traffic slum on the other....
i have the perfect example of TWO Durham's on Trinity Ave. If one were to look at the corner of E. Trinity and Avondale... 3 accidents! Why? not because of whores and dealers, but because there's horrible planning going on in both roads, and if you look at the opposite intersection on the "good" side.. which would be W. Trinity and N. Buchanan Blvd and you find ZERO accidents..... Two Durhams....

Don't get me started on Avondale and W. Club... SOMEONE needs to get fired for designing that Cluster F*ck of an intersection.

It's bullshit politics and I don't want to play.... but we are playing politics with people's lives...

[ACW]

I despise the sensor lights. First, half the time they don't work when a car pulls into the lane that should trigger them. Second, it's impossible to predict the traffic pattern (when I pull up to the left turn lane, am I going to get a green arrow when it senses my car, or am I going to sit through two cycles of light changes?)...
I think the topic has been discussed -- back during the traffic circle post -- that drivers perform better when they know they must *think* and *observe*. However, in the last six months alone, I have seen too many cars proceeding against traffic lights because there is no reliable pattern.
Finally... when sensors are used, doesn't this override existing signal changes? Doesn't this disrupt the overall flow of traffic? ...creating a queue of backed up vehicles and drivers blocking the intersections as they try to 'make it' through the light? ...obscuring other drivers' views of pedestrians?
I say: automate the whole darn thing, pop up some of the aforementioned 'No Right on Red' signs, and -- as funding permits -- add elevated crosswalks in the most dangerous locations.

[Tar Heelz]

Stepping back a moment, doesn't this map cover a time period of 10 or 11 years?

The greatest number of incidents in any intersection is 6. Large circles show up with just 3 wrecks.

Is an intersection "dangerous" if the wreck frequency is about one injury every two years at the very worst intersections?

Is this really as bad a situation as it might appear at first glance?

[Moe Rivera]

@Tar heelz

so what's an acceptable amount of injury caused by dangerous intersections?

I hate to live in your world...

[Steve Graff]

I'd be interested in seeing the data for car crashes that cause damage to property - i.e. crashing into fences, crashing into church signs, crashing into porches, crashing into fire hydrants, crashing into utility poles, crashing into parked cars, etc. You know, the stuff that I have seen on my street in four years that I have lived here. I would be concerned, however, that the data would not be complete since often times the driver keeps on driving after crashing.

I continued to be amazed at the large number of truly shitty drivers that plague this city, and am surprised that more people aren't getting injured, maimed or killed.

[Greg Garneau]

The Pedestrian Crashes map covers a five year period (2004 - 2008). It locates all crashes involving pedestrians where the reporting officer provided the approximate crash location (the street and the nearest intersecting street). It is interactive -- clicking on a marker provides the map user with the frequency and the severity of the crashes at that location. The markers are also designed to infer approximation -- that this immediate area requires attention as opposed to this exact intersection. The markers are also transparent which enables a map user to examine the underlying street conditions: sidewalks, crosswalks, traffic signals, and even pedestrian signals if the "Street View" feature is utilized.

Pedestrian and bicycle crashes are under reported. The map does not include all pedestrian crashes for 2004 - 2008 (compiled by NCDOT for the period) because the location was reported as "Unknown". Analysis of the available data shows that Durham has the worst safety record for children of any community in NC.

It is believed that the only other municipality to have a map of this type is Miami, Florida. Attention should be paid to the corridors where business, public facilities (such as schools and hospitals), and public transit create the presence of large numbers of pedestrians and the prevailing/actual speed of motor vehicles through those same corridors.

[Erik Landfried]

I wanted to recognize the last commenter, Greg Garneau. He is the one who did the painstaking work of cleaning up the data and presenting it in this amazing fashion. At BPAC, we actually refer to this map as the Garneau Report. It's a great example of taking data that would sit on a spreadsheet on someone's desktop somewhere and turning it into something tangible (and in this case quite sobering).

Every crash has its own story, but to me, the overall picture from this map is evident: pedestrians tend to get hit most often in places where motor vehicle traffic is high and speeds are also high. The Downtown Loop is a perfect example. 11 crashes on the Loop itself, but only 2 inside the Loop and 1 in the Brightleaf Square area. Can that be explained by "drunken prostitute pedestrians" who love to cross the Loop on foot all day? I don't think so. I absolutely believe that there needs to be more education and enforcement for pedestrians and motorists alike, but don't tell me engineering doesn't matter. Just look at the map if you don't believe me.

I knew when I saw that there were 21 comments on this post already that about half of them would be of the "pedestrians are usually at fault and I don't feel bad for them" variety. It's the same tune every time this issue is brought up. And you know what? Pedestrians sometimes are at fault. But that's misses the point because it turns pedestrian safety into an us (drivers) vs. them (pedestrians) issue. Most of us are both pedestrians and drivers anyways. Let's move on from that argument.

The real issue is that pedestrians are getting injured and killed in Durham and that is trending upward. If that doesn't rise to the top of your priority list, that's cool. But to not think that is a problem at all is just sticking your head in the sand. It's a problem. There are things that can be done to help reduce the problem. So instead of passing out blame, let's first admit that the problem exists and there is a lot more that we as a community need to do to address it.

Finally, I want to clear up what seems to be some confusion. The data Kevin refers to is over an 11 year period (1997-2007). The map is over a 5-year period (2004-2008) and as Greg points out, is not a complete list of all crashes - only the ones that had a location easily identified. There is some overlap in the data sets, but don't get them mixed up.

[Dan S.]

@Greg Garneau: I'd really like to know the story behind one of the crashes on the map: Brown Bark and Stephens Lane.

Brown Bark is a 300ft street that dead-ends into a cul-de-sac, with a grand total of 9 houses on it. Stephens is a relatively quiet street in that doesn't serve as a shortcut to anywhere.

I'm left scratching my head.

[fletchfoto]

GreenLantern,

I'm not surprised you don't see many cyclists. That's how so many of us get run over, drivers like you aren't paying attention.

[Greg Garneau]

@ Dan S.

I do not have the full reports on the crashes -- but one can imagine scenarios that involve children on residential streets. As for the "Unknowns" -- it is likely that the report was taken in the Emergency Room and the pedestrian was -- due to injuries -- unable to provide a complete account of what happened. Further to that point -- there are many hit and run crashes in the statistics.

[Toby]

Here are some pictures that illustrate nicely what pedestrians in the Holloway Street corridor face on a daily basis. These are clearly not "drug dealers and prostitutes", but people trying to get where they need to go, on foot.

http://wasssup.posterous.com/holloway-street-pedestrian-olympics-0

[Liz Ananat]

Green Lantern,

A quick math lesson:

Durham is 37.2% African-American, according to the US Census.
http://quickfacts.census.gov/qfd/states/37/37063.html

But let's round that to 40%, to make the math simple. So there's a 40% chance that any given person in Durham will be African-American.

60% of those injured in crashes were African-American. In other words, there's a 60% chance that any given crash victim is African-American.

Relative to the base probability that a Durhamite is African-American, the probability that a crash victim is African-American is 1.5 times as high (60 divided by 40 is 1.5).

We often express "1.5 times as high" as "50% higher."
Or, as Kevin put it, "a figure that's 50% higher than one would expect by population proportion."

[Liz Ananat]

Sorry--that math lesson was meant for Tar Heelz.

[Kelly]

I'm in favor of narrowing some of the streets in Durham--I think Erwin Road is a prime candidate. Duke has facilities on both sides of Erwin Road, people crossing to go to offices, classes, or med center & university functions--and they face 5 lanes of traffic, a seemingly endless wait for the "walk" signal--and then you practically have to be a sprinter to cross all the lanes in the allotted time. And the reason there are so many jaywalkers? Its like a mile between intersections with cross-signals. Let's make it a boulevard--put a curb and tree plantings in the center lane, have a left-turn lane and a through lane. Make it look less like a freeway and slow the traffic down. Just MHO.