In building a road system, there are a few features I would like to include that would undoubtedly save a few lives every year. However some of these features are expensive.
What price is "worthwhile" to spend in order to save a life? (I know that is a deep question, but it is reality.
My libertarian side says, no one is required to drive, and therefore, no additional money should be spent on keeping roads safe. But my reasonable side says that the cost to save a life is too relative to give a number. The answer would always be it depends. Extra rails on curved roads is one thing. GPS guided cars is something completely different.Originally posted by Imray
Unfortunately with how many people drive everyday, saving only a few lives is not worth the money most likely. If you can prove it would save thousands of lives over time, then you might have a chance. Otherwise, the money will go to fill pot holes...
A common mistake people make when trying to design something completely foolproof is to underestimate the ingenuity of complete fools. -Douglas Adams
I think scale matters a lot as well.
If your proposed solution is local then the value of the lives might be lower (because the pot of funds is smaller) rather than a regional or even national approach.
And these features that you would like to include are...?
I found you a new motto from a sign hanging on their wall…"Drink coffee: do stupid things faster and with more energy"
What value have you calculated for QOL ("our streets are safe!!!") vs. ("our roads are narrow and 'congested'")?
-------
Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.
I am interested in this as well...
And that concludes staff’s presentation...
This is a pretty vague question and these issues can be surprisingly complex. What things are you suggesting and/or getting pushback about?
I will relate a story a professor once told me about working as a planner in King County WA. The planners reviewing a residential subdivision plan were suggesting narrow streets to slow traffic and create a healthier balance between pedestrian use and vehicular. The fire department was quite insistent that the roads be wider to accommodate trucks in the event of a fire. The arguments went round and round for a while until one of planners looked at the stats for people dying in home fires as compared with pedestrians injured or killed by cars on residential streets. Far more people die from being hit than fires it turns out. The solution they agreed upon was rollover curbs in the unlikely event an emergency vehicle had to get in there.
People dying in a fire obviously sounds terrible. But building codes and materials used today have resulted in a dramatic reduction in home fires. Not so with car/pedestrian accidents.
Someone arguing for wider streets could easily have said “what cost is too much to save the lives of people in a burning home?!” but as you can see, its not as cut-and-dried as that.
The purpose of life is a life of purpose
If you want to be technical about it, here is our benefit cost safety analysis. In 1993 each fatality was worth a little over $3 million when you look at lost wages, impact to the family, and things such as opportunity costs for police and fire.
Lots of countermeasures can be put in place that would reduce not only fatalities, but bodily injury and property damage for significantly less than $3 million.
http://www.semcog.org/PrinterFriendl...?id=4294971149
http://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/hsip/tsp/...p09043/cs5.cfm
We hope for better things; it will arise from the ashes - Fr Gabriel Richard 1805
Sounds like Bellevue.
There's a city in these parts where the planners took Fire out to an area where they coned off the new proposed street width, and had them drive their trucks around. Fire found they could make the turns and Chief signed off. Since then other cities have followed suit and their Chiefs said "if it's good enough for Themville, good enough for me!". There's a good chance that newer subdivisions on the Front Range have narrower streets because of what the planners did.
Also, streets lined with large-statured trees do wonders to slow traffic and there are multiple benefits conferred by the trees.
-------
Give a man a gun, and he can rob a bank. Give a man a bank, and he can rob the world.
I thought this thread was going to be about police and fire departments. The title is a phrase I hear at every budget session.
"If you don't like change, you're going to like irrelevance even less" General Eric Shinseki
Is a gun shop a reasonable home occupation?
Quote