Blood on their Hands- the doctrinaire anti freeway movement

In a message dated 8/8/2008 2:00:17 P.M. Eastern Daylight Time, myz7@comcast. net writes:

The 2006 data by state is at
http://www.fhwa. dot.gov/policy/ ohim/hs06/ pdf/fi20. pdf

I have always stressed to the anti-freeway people that, by forbidding freeways, they are increasing fatalities. When existing freeway capacity is reached, drivers shift to parallel arterials and, then, neighborhood streets to find a less congested route. That makes the more dangerous roads more dangerous for autos, bikes and pedestrians.

Mel

Thanks, Mel,

Your point on building or widening freeways is quite valid.

What Lave/Elias showed in 1987, and was again showed after 1995, was that posting the proper speed limits on the freeways helps divert more traffic to them and off the more dangerous surface highways and arterials, with statewide safety gains.

If a freeway is posted at 65 (likely below the 30th percentile speed) and a roughly parallel surface highway is posted at 55, there is much less incentive to divert to the freeway. The freeway, in most places, should be posted at 75, 80 or 85 to reflect actual 85th percentile speeds (depending on the area) and a much greater proportion of drivers would divert if they could legally save the larger amount of time the higher limit permits.

Regards,

Jim Walker

So much for our jesuitical "environmentalist" and "safety" organizations!