They think protecting drivers cars from scratches is more important than protecting pedestrians from getting hit, so they make the sidewalk part of the “clear zone”

Physical design is not neutral.

Physical design is an expression of our values.

  • Sconrad122@lemmy.worldEnglish
    71·
    5 days ago

    The FHWA guidance on guardrails (https://highways.dot.gov/safety/rwd/reduce-crash-severity/guardrail-101) is very clear that the guardrails are there for drivers and in fact makes exactly zero mentions of pedestrian safety. Many states have specific guidance that guardrails should be placed behind sidewalks. Here is an example from NCDOT: “The preferred treatment is to place the face of the guardrail 12 feet from the face of the curb. The 12 feet width provides ample sight distance for any intersecting streets or driveways near the guardrail installation. This placement method will also accommodate for sidewalk installation. The guardrail will be placed behind the sidewalk” (https://connect.ncdot.gov/projects/Roadway/Roadway Design Manual/03. Guardrail, Barriers and Attenuators.pdf). “Them” is the institutionalized practice of traffic engineering that treats safety of those outside of a vehicle as an afterthought and not a primary purpose of road design elements in the US (and to varying extents, other countries)

    • wieson@feddit.orgEnglish
      1·
      4 days ago

      I paraphrased from my guidance (RPS not FHWA). We don’t all live in the US, which was the point.

      • Sconrad122@lemmy.worldEnglish
        31·
        4 days ago

        I suppose I may have found it more obvious than you that this image was taken in the United States, which possesses a plethora of places that look like this. I did try to look up RPS guardrails to get a bearing on the context you were coming from, but didn’t come up with relevant results, probably because the search engine is biased for English/American results to English/American queries. You mind me asking where RPS is from?