When you watch the video report courtesy of KFYR TV5 in Bismark North Dakota, try doing the old timing trick from when we were kids -- count to yourself "one one thousand, two one thousand, three one thousand...."  What you will realize was that the truck was through the front of the store and impacted the back of the store faster than you can complete the first one one thousand......

See the video and the story coverage from KFYR HERE

Drunk drivers crash into all kinds of things -- mostly other cars and drivers, and tragically pedestrians.  But of course stationary objects take the biggest brunt -- poles, guardrails, fire hydrants, and houses seem to be the most common.  But storefronts take a beating too, and this is just one of four liquor store accidents from the weekend just passed that I saw in media reports.  Impaired driving of all kinds -- alcohol, drugs, and marijuana -- seems to be more and more common.  And it is a bigger factor than most realize for businesses along busy streets where vehicle traffic can pass by at high speed, or where intersections might point traffic straight at storefronts.

This video shows very clearly the great amount of damage that a 5000 LB vehicle moving at 25 to 30 MPH can do.  ASTM continues to document and complete a standard covering the testing of bollards and barriers and other safety devices for exactly this application, as regular readers of these pages are aware.

So ask yourselves -- could anyone standing in that store protect themselves?  Could they move out of the way of an oncoming pick up truck?  Of course not.....so why do we expect people to protect themselves against things that they cannot?  Local codes need to catch up to what is happening out in the world.  Sixty times per day or more, a vehicle crashes into storefronts.  People are injured and killed everyday.

And it doesn't have to be this way.

A study was released this week about the frequency of drugged driving in the journal Public Health Reports.

In a nutshell -- driving under the influence of multiple drugs is on the rise,  driving under the influence of prescription drugs is on the rise, and the average age of drivers who are operating vehicles under the influence of three or more drugs is climbing along with the tide of aging Baby Boomer drivers.

The research found some startling increases and trends:

--They compared rates for drivers  testing positive for drugs after being involved in fatal crashes between 1993 and 2010. They found that the number of those who had three or more drugs in their body increased from 11.5 percent to 21.5 percent during that period.

--Drugged drivers involved in fatal crashes in the United States are more likely to test positive for prescription drugs, marijuana and multiple drugs than they were 20 years ago, a new study finds. These drivers are also now more likely to be older than 50, according to the researchers.

"While we've seen a decrease over the years in motor vehicle fatalities involving people under the influence, the nature of those crashes is changing," Wilson said.   "These trends are likely to continue into the future given the aging U.S. population, an increasing reliance on prescription medications by medical providers, and increasing initiatives to legalize marijuana" he noted. "However, it is unclear whether current state policies are completely up to the challenge of addressing the growing issue of drugged driving."

Thanks to the National Institutes of Health coverage of the study -- see their review of the study HERE

Based on these findings and based on the evidence we see every day of the increasing frequency of pedal error crashes and crashes resulting from other driver error, we have to agree -- drugged drivers (on legal prescription medicines, marijuana, alcohol, illegal or un-prescribed medications and sometimes all of the above) are a huge risk to Americans where we live, work, play, and shop.

It is important to know the crash resistance of a product before it is purchased and installed in order to protect people and property, particularly at a site like First Responders Park in Hilliard Ohio, near Columbus.  Dedicated to the first responders and decorated with artifacts of stone and steel from the World Trade Center, the park is busy with bike riders and pedestrians and is beautifully laid out and designed.

Unfortunately, it is not well protected. 

This was proven last night when a DUI driver in a small passenger car drove into the line of decorative bollards and sheered off or shattered four of them.  A small passenger car hitting four proper steel bollards would have been stopped cold and the bollards maybe slightly damaged;  these decorative bollards had no impact resistance whatever;  they failed to stop the car and will now have to be replaced. 

See video coverage of the park and damage to the decorative bollards HERE.

ASTM, the worldwide standards organization is in the final stages of completing a new test standard (WK 13074) which will provide engineers, architects, developers, property owners, and municipal or other governmental end-users with a clear and specific qualification for products and manufacturers of safety barriers for low speed (30 MPH) applications.   Vehicle incursions, whether accidental or deliberate, put people at risk every day;  more than sixty such crashes happen in the US every day, with thousands injured and hundreds killed every year.

Specifiers, you need to be on notice --   if your intent is to separate people and property from inept or drunk or violent drivers;  if you are going to install barriers in order to protect people where they live, work, play, or shop;  if you want to comply with the emerging standard AND have a safer result for your project;  if you want to protect yourself from future liability  --  remember that "decorative" is for pretty, not for safety.  The public sees decorative railings or pretty bollards such as the ones at this park and they make a presumption of personal safety, a presumption that is NOT based on the actual vehicle stopping capabilities of the product.

There is plenty of good product out there that looks beautiful and has actual crash resistance -- your clients and your projects and your customers are depend on you to make better choices.

This is an update from our previous blog post on this subject from February 24th 2014 (HERE.)

Researchers at the University of Colorado School of Medicine have released a study which shows a substantial  increase in drivers involved in fatal accidents who have tested positive for marijuana.  While not claiming that all of these drivers were impaired, the study does draw a correlation between increased use and availability of marijuana since Colorado decriminalized it in 2009 compared to the years prior to to 2009.

Quoting directly from the press release by the University:

"The researchers found that fatal motor vehicle crashes in Colorado involving at least one driver who tested positive for marijuana accounted for 4.5 percent in the first six months of 1994; this percentage increased to 10 percent in the last six months of 2011. They reported that Colorado underwent a significant increase in the proportion of drivers in a fatal motor vehicle crash who were marijuana-positive after the commercialization of medical marijuana in the middle of 2009. The increase in Colorado was significantly greater compared to the 34 non-medical marijuana states from mid-2009 to 2011. The researchers also reported no significant changes over time in the proportion of drivers in a fatal motor vehicle crash who were alcohol-impaired within Colorado and comparing Colorado to the 34 non-medical marijuana states.

........"While the study does not determine cause and effect relationships, such as whether marijuana-positive drivers caused or contributed to the fatal crashes, it indicates a need for better education and prevention programs to curb impaired driving."  See full text HERE.

Both Colorado and California have seen an upswing in drivers testing positively for THC in their bloodstream since the decriminalization in their states.  California estimates 7% of nighttime drivers test positively, and now Colorado has seen a doubling in the rate of drivers in fatal accidents who test positively.  No one can say exactly what this means for safety on the roads;  I can predict that we will see an increase in pedal error accidents over time among drivers using marijuana, just as we would see an increase n such accidents if the consumption of beer were to suddenly double.

Clearly, more studies and more education will help identify and combat some of this problem.  At the end of the day, all of us will need to be aware of the possibility that the car coming toward us might be driven by someone who is 'driving while high"  -- so we need to protect ourselves just as we would if

The California research figure is cited  here:
http://kosu.org/2014/02/with-support-for-marijuana-concern-over-driving-high-grows/

The statistics on causes of storefront crashes is our own analytical data which can be found here:
http://www.storefrontcrashexpert.com/storefront-crash-statistics.html

28 years of using wooden barricades to protect the crowds at the SXSW Festival.  As they say, it was a question of WHEN, not a question of IF.  And now, the question is answered.  Once and for all.  As it was in Santa Monica ten years ago.  As it was answered in Venice Beach this past summer.  And now in Austin Texas

I think that Sarah Goodyear writing for The Atlantic Cities said it perfectly -- the title of her article this morning is "We're Shamefully Bad at Protecting Pedestrians at Events like SXSW" (full article HERE.)

By all reports, this is the first such incident in the 28 year history of the South By Southwest Festival.  But the previous 27 years have nothing to do with the events last night.  The Festival will never be quite as carefree again.  Families of the dead and injured will never be quite the same.  Lives have been changed.  Now, lawyers and lawsuits and settlements will do their work.  Millions will be paid out in claims.  Austin will make new safety and security plans.  It didn't have to be this way.

10 year ago the events at the Santa Monica Farmer's Market showed everyone that even well run and recurring events were vulnerable to wayward drivers.  10 people were killed and over 60 injured in that incident.  The NTSB spelled out a solution clearly for everyone in the country to see in their report on the incident:  

"Had Santa Monica installed a temporary rigid barrier system, such as bollards, at the closure limits of the Santa Monica Certified Farmers’ Market, the barrier system might have arrested or reduced the forward motion of the accident vehicle, thereby preventing it from continuing into the farmers’ market and eliminating or greatly reducing the number of casualties."   (see the full report HERE)

Just 7 months months ago, a rampaging vehicle killed a tourist on her honeymoon on the Ocean Front Walk along Venice Beach, just a few miles from Santa Monica.  This serene beach bike and pedestrian path was also relatively unprotected despite the lessons of ten years before in Santa Monica. (see ongoing news coverage HERE)

Early this morning, Austin Chief of Police Art Acevedo held a news conference at the scene of the carnage, in which he showed clearly his concern, his anger, and his determination to bring the driver to justice.  At the end of his remarks he made this statement:

"We do these events very well, but you cannot stop a person who rather than face drunk driving charges decides to speed at a high rate of speed, go around a uniformed officer forcing him to run out of the way, then at a high rate of speed show total disregard for the sanctity of human life," Acevedo said.  (see the five minute video HERE)

With all respect, the Chief is not correct.   The fact is, you CAN stop a vehicle from entering into a closed pedestrian area.  It is done all the time.  And it can be done without huge expense and without building a fortress at every intersection.  Some time in the last 27 years, city officials needed to take a look around and say, "How can we do this better so that a tragedy like Santa Monica or Venice Beach cannot happen in Austin."

I guess they will now.  But it didn't have to be this way.

The legalization of marijuana sales in certain states is creating some concern about an increase in traffic accidents.  There is some anecdotal evidence that as many as 10% of drivers in fatal accidents are under the influence of THC, and the State of California is already seeing as many as 7% of drivers on the road at night test positively for marijuana in their system.

With pedal error already the #1 identified cause of storefront crashes (accounting for as many as 46% of all incidents) and the "under the influence" identified at the #2 identified cause at over 20%, it is clear that there is a risk of increase in both these categories as more people "drive while high."

The California research figure is cited  here:
http://kosu.org/2014/02/with-support-for-marijuana-concern-over-driving-high-grows/

The statistics on causes of storefront crashes is our own analytical data which can be found here:
http://www.storefrontcrashexpert.com/storefront-crash-statistics.html

What are your thoughts?  Is this a risk management issue that is one of those "unintended consequences?"