SETTING THE RECORD STRAIGHT (publ. 5/7/2015, page A4)
A story and accompanying tables incorrectly reported the fatality crash rates in major U.S. and global cities. The rates were for each 100,000 residents in the cities listed, not for each 1,000 residents.
SAN JOSE — Drivers, bicyclists and pedestrians on San Jose streets use the second safest urban roads in the nation. But now there’s a plan to make them safer, as the city embarks on an aggressive $80 million program to slow down speeders, narrow wide streets in favor of bike lanes, make crosswalks more visible and improve lighting across the Bay Area’s biggest city.
The city Department of Transportation on Monday will unveil what is being called “Vision Zero,” an extensive effort to reduce fatalities and serious injuries based on what’s been tried in Sweden and other European countries that have cut road deaths by as much as 53 percent since 1997. The report is the most comprehensive look at San Jose traffic plans for the next five years to change “priorities to focus on a city for people, not cars.”
The long-term target is reducing the number of solo drivers from 80 percent to 40 percent by 2040. Realistic? Perhaps not. Ambitious? Most certainly.
Only New York, Seattle and San Francisco have embarked head first to this extent. While it’s too soon to gauge the impact, city officials insist its time to envision the kind of city it wants to be in the years ahead.
“This is going beyond the engineers and cops,” said San Jose DOT director Hans Larsen. “It’s not just street design and enforcement.”
San Jose’s injury crash rate of 3.18 per 1,000 residents is about half of the national average and the second lowest of comparable-sized cities in the Bay Area and Southern California. And its fatality rate of 3.72 per 100,000 residents is the second lowest of the 10 biggest cities in the country.
Yet 42 people died on San Jose roads last year, and 150 were badly hurt, with 3,200 suffering injuries.
“Far too many people die in traffic crashes in San Jose,” the 30-page report states, concluding that “for the most part these aren’t accidents; traffic crashes are mostly the result of poor choices along with roadway designs that in the past have focused on the efficiency, speed and convenience of motorists.”
Half of the fatalities occurred on just 3 percent of the city’s 2,400 miles of local streets, and they’ll be given the most attention: Almaden Expressway, Alum Rock Avenue, Blossom Hill Road, Branham Lane, Capitol Expressway, Jackson Avenue, King Road, McKee Road, McLaughlin Avenue, Monterey Road, Story Road, Tully Road and White Road.
Branham will be narrowed from Cherry Avenue to Monterey Road, and a two-lane stretch will be widened to remove the current bottleneck that tempts drivers to speed up after passing through the slowdown.
It can’t happen soon enough for Charlene Lennon, of San Jose, whose 20-year-old daughter, Aly Snow, was killed on Branham 51/2 years ago when two racing drivers lost control and sent her car careening into a tree as she and a friend returned from a store after buying milk and cookies.
“Branham Lane, the name sends shivers down my spine,” Lennon said. “This particular road is dangerous, as are many others in our city. At one time Branham Lane was a quiet street. A safe place for those that drove it, walked it and hung outside their homes. Now, it feels more like an expressway; a road that is used as a thoroughfare.
“The city needs to take action to improve road safety. Nobody should lose a child to this type of tragedy.”
The city has already signed off on using 10 miles of streets in North San Jose to test vehicles with advanced technology aimed at avoiding crashes and warning drivers of pedestrians and bicyclists.
Here’s what else the city plans to do with the $80 million, which comes mostly from federal and state grants for safety and clean air:
The plan also would target drunken drivers and pedestrians. Of the 42 deaths in 2014, 15 were intoxicated — seven drivers, six pedestrians, one motorcyclist and one bicyclist.
Getting solo drivers out of their cars has been a tough commuting habit to change for three decades. Going from 84 percent to 40 percent over the next 25 years may be asking for too much.
“That’s a very ambitious goal, but I don’t think there is anything wrong with an ambitious goal,” said Leah Toeniskoetter, the San Jose director for SPUR, a transportation advocacy group. “We need to go as far as we can or we are cutting ourselves short.”
Stockholm’s death rate is a minuscule 1.23 per 100,000 residents. San Jose’s rate of 3.72 is low by U.S. standards but triple that of the Swedish city. The reason, Larsen said, is Sweden’s willingness to embrace technology from in-car safety systems to advanced speed and red-light cameras.
“Cars don’t get distracted. They don’t get drunk. They don’t get drowsy,” he said. “And they can see in the dark.”
Contact Gary Richards at mrroadshow@mercurynews.com or 408-920-5335.
INJURY CRASH RATES
FOR CALIFORNIA CITIES
Fremont 2.15*
San Jose 3.18
Long Beach 4.13
San Diego 4.17
San Francisco 4.92
Santa Rosa 5.27
Oakland 5.56
Santa Ana 5.90
Anaheim 7.02
Los Angeles 7.73
* Per 1,000 residents
California Office Traffic Safety
FATALITY CRASH RATES FOR 10 LARGEST CITIES
New York 3.2
San Jose 3.72
Chicago 4.40
San Diego 4.90
Los Angeles 5.47
Philadelphia 5.66
Phoenix 8.44
Dallas 8.7
San Antonio 8.90
Houston 9.44
* Per 100,000 residents
National Highway Traffic Safety Administration
FATALITY CRASH RATES GLOBALLY
Stockholm 1.23
Berlin 1.60
Tokyo 1.70
Hong Kong 2.10
London 2.69
Paris 3.09
* Per 100,000 residents
Source: New York City Pedestrian Safety Study
