Hey, there! Log in / Register
Pedestrian struck and killed in Jamaica Plain
By adamg on Wed, 12/25/2013 - 12:16am
Around 8 p.m. at Columbus Avenue and Amory Street, Stanley Staco reports, adding the person went into cardiac arrest in the ambulance. The Globe reports she died at the hospital.
Neighborhoods:
Topics:
Free tagging:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Science behind nighttime pedestrian deaths
After the Hyannis pedestrian death the night before this one, I searched on nighttime pedestrian fatalities. Media photos taken at the scene clearly show how dark it was and the only people readily visible in images are responders wearing florescent green jackets with reflective stripes.
Most US pedestrian traffic deaths happen at night and the worst months are October through February, the darkest months in the northern hemisphere. Pedestrian deaths per year used to be 2 to 4 times what they are now from the early 1900s to around the 1980's, with little progress reducing them since. Why? Psychological research shows pedestrians greatly overestimate their visibility at night. Here is a theory:
After millions of years of evolution, the lizard brain in humans is hardwired with a survival rule: "When out in the open, if I can see him, he can see me." This had been fairly true day and night for millions of years. It was mostly true at night even with the low illumination from fire. Its only been little over a 100 years that we have had bright artificial light, less than a blink in the evolutionary process timescale. The rule still holds in daylight, but now at night we can see vehicles having reflectors and lights, but drivers actually can't see us until we are much closer to them, when its often too late to avoid impact. For millions of years we saw the light reflecting off someone which is dimmer than now seeing direct light from vehicle lights, another trick on perception. Studies show that pedestrians consistently overestimate how visible they are to drivers at night, and thus take greater risks based on the false assumption.
The rule being hardwired in the brain and needing to be overruled with learning also helps to explain why people get so angry when they learn drivers did not see them - the driver broke the hardwired (but false) rule! An inverse hard-wired rule would be: "I don't see them, so they can't see me." We see that one at play when having to teach kids to close their blinds at night before undressing. Another example is people not realizing how large blind spots are for the trucks and buses we can clearly see. Folks need reminders including signs reading "if you can's see my mirror, I can't see you."
There is a serious lack of education when it comes to teaching people to make themselves more visible at night that should happen every fall as days get shorter. Some info here, here, here, and here.
Dr. Richard Tyrrell at Clemson University has been a leader in safety-related visual perception research. Studies on nighttime safety not done by him or his students still often cite his papers. Research has also taken place in Australia on SMIDSY "Sorry Mate, I Didn't See You" and elsewhere. Well established is that human color perception is poor in low light, so we rely on contrast then (cones vs. rods in the retina). Colors like red which look bright in daylight become far less bold and visible at night, hence the move for safety gear from orange to higher contrast yellow/green.
The most effective passive visibility tools for cyclists and pedestrians are reflectors that move in a natural cadence: reflectors on ankles, knees, pedals, and bike wheels. Worst is wearing lots of black and dark blue without any reflective materials.
You're a classy guy Mark.
A family lost someone important to them on Christmas and all you can do is blame the victim.
Despite the fact that I
Despite the fact that I immediately roll my eyes when I see this guy's username after a post on this or related topics, this was actually a great post. Great information.
Also, outside of the really well lit areas, I've noticed time and again, especially in the early morning, that I don't even see pedestrians on the sidewalk until I'm right up on them (as in within 10-15 ft) and I'm talking even in areas where I'm going 25-30 mph. All it would take for a driver to hit someone crossing the street in a darkened area is to look away from the road ahead at the wrong second.
haha
I did the same thing when I saw his username.. :) But he's been trying to make this point for weeks...
But ya I agree, good post, with citations!
TAKE NOTE UHUB TROLLS: You wanna have an valid argument.. back your statements up (I'll be taking the same advice too)
is this too controversial?
EVERYONE should err on the side of caution.
Trolling
To note everyone. The word trolling means to say stuff intended to get a rise and only that. In the example of Markk, he seems to be quite sincere.
This distinction is important because saying "this person is a troll" is only a dismissing counter argument if the person is only trying to anger people rather than advocate or express a point.
Great article - maybe save a life or few this year
I don't think about this but Mark is absolutely on target. I believe there is more to this though than just not being visible. Drivers who play the music so loud it is audible several feet are distracting themselves by the volume. Folks who are talking on their cell while driving, or even texting, are automatically decreasing their capacity to make sudden decisions like swerving or stopping to avoid hitting a person.
The most important sense when driving is sight. That applies to driver and pedestrian alike. Anything that impedes seeing or being seen is an invitation to disaster.
Maybe its time to turn reflective bands used by bicyclists into fashion accessories. Put them on jackets, make wearing them on sleeves or ankles fashionable. We could turn to wearing white pants but that violate the holy of holy fashion laws during the winter and spring. So it's best to stick with reflective couture.
Subdued reflectivity
There was a line of tweed fabric in the UK a few years ago called Dashing Tweeds. It had reflective threads woven into the fabric periodically, which made it somewhat reflective at night but not distractingly bright during the day. I've never run across it as part of an actual garment in an actual shop, but the idea seemed promising.
In outerwear too
My daughter has had several winter coats over the years that look perfectly ordinary but reflect light like crazy. Her current one just looks medium blue with white snowflakes normally but a flash photo or headlights completely lights her up. Like the little reflective bits in tent lines.
Limited clothing options yet
Dashing Tweeds still exists, but is high-end woolens with commensurate pricing. In Europe, Engelbert-Strauss sells work, sport, and casual clothes often with reflective piping. Carhartt here in the US is not nearly so good at putting refelective details on coats that don't scream. Ski and snowboard coats and nylon motorcycle jackets are better bets for being warm and visible. With such poor clothing options in the US, visible hat, gloves, scarf colors, reflective sneakers, and add-on reflective stickers, bands, sashes etc. are the options. I sincerely hope a US clothing maker sees the opportunity to capture a clothing segment of safer casual outerwear
Fashion Forward
A white scarf with a dark coat aids visibility without breaking rules. A white knit cap is good, easier for women to get away with. Many sneakers have reflective stripes on them, if not blinking LEDS! On Amazon, reflective material is available in silver and even black adhesive stripes so its not even noticed on black bikes and helmets. More and more sportswear has reflective piping or more. Traditional outerwear is the challenge.
You've omitted the biggest factor
Drivers, walled off from the world by glass and steel, traveling at speed, have a much more difficult time seeing what's going on around them.
We don't have too many facts so I'll keep it to generalities. We do know that the crash occurred on Columbus Ave in JP/Roxbury. Anyone who has walked there knows how horrible that street is for pedestrians. It's treated like a highway by the city, and accordingly by drivers as well. We don't know what speed this driver was traveling, and probably will never know, but most cars are traveling at a very high rate of speed on this particular street. It's posted as 30 mph, but I severely doubt that is ever followed, except in times of congestion. Deaths seem inevitable under the circumstances.
Instead of blaming the victim for "not wearing reflectors" (allegedly), maybe you should consider asking drivers, in a densely populated urban area, to travel more slowly and carefully. If you cannot see the street ahead of you within braking distance, then you are going too fast. The rest of the world shouldn't have to dress up in special clothing so that a few can speed recklessly at night. There are roads that are engineered for high speeds under most circumstances, those are called limited access highways, and that is where it is appropriate to go fast. Not on a city street.
As for the dangerous and decrepit state of Columbus Ave, I'm aware of a Jackson Square community organization that is working on the matter, but that is of cold comfort to the family who lost a loved one yesterday.
More science
This brings up another psychology question: Are drivers at night choosing speeds based on the visibility of other vehicles and stationary objects that are more visible than mobile pedestrians in all dark clothing? Stationary objects like signs, crosswalk markings, parked cars, and traffic islands are often more visible and familiar than pedestrians in all dark, so don't inspire great speed reduction at night. Other vehicles on the road have more potential for accidents, but they have lighting, and are thus highly visible. Being that 99% of hazards at night are visible to drivers, many likely don't drive speeds at night for the 1% invisible hazards.
Lots of excuses there Markky
Drivers shouldn't be choosing speeds based on "1% of invisible hazards" or whatever you choose to call pedestrians. Posted speed limits and common sense driving in night/low visibility conditions should be able to keep drivers from killing pedestrians and cyclists.
Shouldn't you be advocating for better road design? Drivers can't be bothered to follow speed limits or common sense when driving in night/low visibility conditions, thus traffic calming designs like bump outs and wider sidewalks/narrow roadways should be further implemented to slow down traffic.
This brings up an interesting
This brings up an interesting concept. A driver will drive on a road at a speed that individual driver deems safe for the road that driver is on. A road like Columbus between Jackson Sq and Eggleston, with multiple wide lanes, makes driving faster seem safer. Add the dark in, with a presumed fewer number of drivers, pedestrians and cyclists and driving even faster seems safe.
Thought experiment
Matthew, we know you have an anti-car agenda to promote at every opportunity, but consider a thought experiment:
If you had a cloaking device that could bend light around you and made you 100% invisible, who would be at fault if you got hit by a car in an unsignaled crosswalk, you or the driver? Now, what if the device only made you 99.9999% invisible, who would be at fault? Is there a specific visibility threshold at which you don't blame the driver?
My point is that everyone ought to do what they can to be safer. For me, last year I did spend $30 for an ANSI class 3 safety jacket that I wear most of the time in winter, especially at night. This week, osjl.com has insulated fleece gloves for $4 and I got a pair of white ones for visibility. I only suggest others think about being visible at night, realize when they are close to invisible to traffic, act accordingly, and try to wear something more visible going forward.
You don't see
What you aren't looking for.
People in crosswalks have this thing called the RIGHT OF WAY when the intersection isn't signalized.
If you are driving too fast to see a pedestrian and stop YOU ARE DRIVING TOO FAST.
If you are unable to see people in crosswalks STOP DRIVING.
It really is that simple
PEDESTRIANS HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY. If you cannot deal with the road conditions DO NOT DRIVE,. Period.
Here's Columbus and Amory in
Here's Columbus and Amory in 2011: http://goo.gl/maps/gX6c2
No crosswalks, which is gross incompetence by the BTD. Has it improved since then?
Not so sure
As it is on Google, northbound traffic is prevented from taking a left on to Armory by a raised median. ADA compliance would require a break in the median to put a crosswalk there, then some motorists and cyclists might try to take the dangerous left through it. The area already has been made safer for pedestrians with the elevated median strip. Pedestrians are safe there while waiting for a break in traffic on one side or the other when crossing in two safer movements. This makes crossing even safer than painting a crosswalk there, because pedestrians are more careful when jay walking, and some let their guard down at crosswalks, assuming everyone will see them and stop.
Your point might hold water in Fantasy Land
But this is the real world and we are bound by things like physics and rule of law. Its a funny thought experiment you bring up but its the kind of point a 10 year old would make, I highly doubt that you put much thought into it.
Speaking of physics, maybe drivers should be required to take some courses in Velocity and Momentum when they are licensed, to better understand how powerful there cars are and the keys to making sure they operate their vehicles in a safe manner for all road users and pedestrians.
Markky, we know you have an anti-everyone-that-doesn't-drive-a-car agenda to promote at every opportunity, but consider actually thinking for once.
Actual Experiment
I pulled on my high-viz IKEA vest at dusk to cross at a marked crosswalk on Summer St. this evening.
Several drivers travelling too fast for the conditions ignored me, despite my high visibility and reflector-striped gloves moving up and down to point out the fact that I WANTED TO CROSS AT A CROSSWALK.
So much for that. They saw me. They didn't give a shit about the road rules or the safety of anybody or anything but their special hurry.
So stop blaming it all on visibility. The real problem is special driver privilege, disregard for the laws, disregard for safety, and lack of enforcement.
Traffic Calming Designs
I seem to recall Markky Mark ranting on here in the past about the grand conspiracy of road designers creating dangerous road conditions with their traffic calming layouts, like bump-outs and wider sidewalks. Narrow lanes make for slower vehicular travel, thus we should see fewer cars driving fast on our streets. This also makes it dangerous for cyclists, not to mention the greater amount of car exhaust that is building up from the slower moving cars. Or so his argument goes.
Traffic calming not applicable
Two of the three nighttime pedestrian fatalities so far this week did not occur in urban locations. Both were poorly lit areas were drivers would not expect pedestrians. People don't have control over who is sharing the roads but have control over what they choose to wear, so why not choose to be more visible and safer?
In the US, about 23,000 people die every year from the flu, yet less than half the population gets a flu shot. How will you blame that on drivers?
Were there crosswalks?
Then drivers damn well should expect pedestrians.
Traffic calming makes a huge difference because that first nasty ass hump gets your attention if you weren't "expecting pedestrians".
Amory at Columbus isn't urban? Seriously? Oh, but there's a place to drive vroooooommmmm. God forbid you ever walk anywhere and notice things like, oh, train stations, businesses, etc.
No crosswalks
No crosswalks in the Barstable/Hyannis crash or the Billerica crash. That's why I wrote 2 of 3 were non-urban.
To all the (mostly anon) haters: Go ahead, wear all black. Perhaps win a Darwin award. The human gene pool thanks you.
Keep making those excuses Markky
God forbid drivers operate their vehicles at speeds safe enough to notice many of the "invisible hazards" that seem to dart out at them on the road. My heart bleeds for those good natured drivers that never break the law or drive at excessive speeds that they decide are safe enough, common sense and speed limits be damned.
34,000 Americans were killed by cars in 2012, yet less than half the population gets a flu shot. How will you blame that on dark clothing?
I've noticed that you haven't engaged many of my solid points up above, I'm led to believe you aren't hating on them because you don't have a leg to stand on but by all means, continue to make excuses for drivers that kill. Bottom line, if you can't drive safe enough on our streets, stay off the road. The human gene pool thanks you.
As a walked, I have to agree
I hate walking this time of year, and it has nothing to do with the cold, though a snowy sidewalk doesn't help my mood. No, it's the darkness and my near invisibility.
Every evening I walk from Forest Hills Station to Rosindale Square during rush hour, about a mile. Due to the railroad tracks, there are few busy interesections from Ukraine Way (at the station) to Firth Road (by the square). Still, during this time it seems I have a near miss with a car weekly. Thankfully it is near and due to the conditions were it not near it would not be fatal, which is why I ignore my better judgement. I am not jaywalking, at least in these instances, but rather the drivers, when they do a quick check for walkers, miss me in my dark coat and dark pants.
I should wear reflective items when walking home from work,but I think I would look foolish.
Good point
What we need is a huge public attitude shift, like what happened with smoking- from chic and glamorous to not.
Walking in the street in dark coat and dark pants needs to go from being fashionable to foolish. It takes years of media campaigns to make such changes, but what has started needs to continue.
BTW, you don't have to look silly while still being safer: reflective materials that look dark grey and even black under normal light are available. White knit cap, scarf, and mittens help without looking foolish.
What we need is a huge public
What we need is a huge public attitude shift, like what happened with smoking- from chic and glamorous to not.
Driving in the street in with your head up your ass needs to go from being fashionable to foolish. It takes years of media campaigns to make such changes, but what has started needs to continue.
BTW, you don't have to look silly while driving a reasonable speed and paying attention: putting down your goddamn phone and watching where you are going and adjusting your speed for the conditions is always available available. Not returning texts and removing your head from your ass help without looking foolish.
Oh, I can look foolish
I do stay safe while running this time of year. I have a hunting cap that is one side bright orange, one side winter camo. I will be seen while running.
I just gotta remember to tuck the orange vest into my pocket in the morning.
Facts
The victim is my neighbor that lived across the street from the accident scene and probably came from commuting on the train. I'm sure her first thought wasn't "let me put on my reflective vest for my 1.5 minute walk home."
No blaming
I don't think there is any "blame" focused on what a person is wearing. If anything the death of the woman points out that heavily trafficked roads are poorly designed for pedestrian. The decision to endanger pedestrians by automotive vehicles was made years decades ago when the car was declared king. Where cars (SUVs, trucks etc.) are king pedestrians are peasants.
The irony of course is that so much of Boston is poorly shaped for vehicles to begin with having developed as a horse and buggy city.
Car is king and it won't abdicate easily. Cars, SUVs, etc. represent power. There are many who see vehicles for what they are - tools for transportation. But too many still look at a car or SUV and see power, supposed freedom and supposed independence.
In all my more than 20 years
In all my more than 20 years of driving which I logged more than half a million miles, I have never NOT seen a pedestrian. I have never had a pedestrian sneak up on me, appear from out of nowhere, ambush me, or otherwise go unnoticed by me when I was behind the wheel. Ditto for dogs, cats, cows, white tail deer, bicyclists, wheelchair occupants, and kids chasing basketballs. If you can't see something, ANYTHING, in time to avoid colliding with it when driving, then you should'nt be driving, because it indicates you are either not using good judgement, not following rules of the road, or physically incapable. "I never saw him" shouldn't be a universal alibi. It's an admission of guilt because it's the driver's JOB to SEE THINGS and act accordingly. If you can't see, hang up the keys !
If everyone drove as well as you and I
There would be no traffic accidents, also no traffic congestion due to far fewer drivers allowed to drive. Auto body businesses nearly all gone, workers unemployed. That's not the real world where people need transportation to get to jobs, shopping etc.. Also ban children from cars unless there is another adult to control them- distracted driving long before there were cell phones!
So I guess Europe isn't the real world
Places like Copenhagen, Amsterdam, and most of Switzerland simply don't exist.
You are really full of it, MarkK.
The "real world" isn't what you think it is. That's because you hardly ever see it, moving from sheltered bubble to sheltered bubble.
Another death last night
http://police.billericaps.com/index.php/2013/12/26/fatal-pedestrian-acci...
3 days, 3 nighttime pedestrian deaths, 0 daytime pedestrian deaths. Is there a pattern?
People, please try to make yourselves more visible at night. Consider visibility when shopping for outerwear, backpacks, footwear, pet collars & leashes etc. Suggest your friends and coworkers in all dark do the same.
Three drivers who don't pay attention
That's what I see.
As for "can't expect them to look". Bullshit. We need much better public transit? Yes - but that is no excuse for slaughter blamed on the victims who HAVE THE RIGHT OF WAY.
Wear conspicuous clothing Because of so many bad drivers
Rather than looking at the situation to assign blame, consider prevention. Because many drivers have poor observational skills, pedestrians and bicyclists will want to better their odds of survival by doing what they can to be noticed. I see lots of drivers who don't take their foot off the gas and start slowing when a traffic light 1/4 mile ahead turns yellow - they don't seem to notice it red until right upon it, and then brake. This isn't on the driving license road test and really subjective for an examiner to fail someone. If these drivers fail to notice an illuminated object (traffic light), what chance does a pedestrian in all dark clothing have? Its much easier to put on something visible than try to get all the marginal drivers off the road or sent to driver's ed.