We must act on impaired driving

Opinion editor’s note: Strib Voices publishes a mix of guest commentaries online and in print each day. To contribute, click here.

•••

Since the Park Tavern crash we have mourned the deaths of neighbors and friends, and have seen calls of support for the injured and deserved recriminations and criminal charges for the accused. While these are appropriate responses, they don’t do enough to address the underlying issues that make it possible for people who are impaired by alcohol or drugs to drive a vehicle and hurt people.

The crash is part of a disturbing national trend of traffic violence. In America alone, this crisis claims the lives of 40,000 people and leaves millions more injured each year. Dangerous driving behaviors have escalated. As drivers, almost every one of us contributes to this through impairment, distraction, speeding or tailgating. We must think beyond ourselves and check these behaviors.

Shifting personal choices won’t be enough, however. Societally, we have to couple increased personal responsibility with layered strategies that reduce risk. Others already have shared important actions to create accountability around the use and abuse of alcohol and drugs. On the infrastructure side, there are multiple research- and engineering-based solutions that can be quickly implemented to help minimize likelihood of future crashes and mesh with existing public safety and enforcement strategies. We just need the collective will to act.

Minnesota already requires those convicted of impaired driving more than three times in 10 years to use an interlock device, a proven intervention that prevents a vehicle from starting if the driver is impaired. The devices are also sometimes used as part of the consequences for drivers with fewer DUIs. In all cases, though, interlock devices are eventually removed. Perhaps that requirement should not sunset. Once you have proven you lack the judgment to not drive impaired, you should have to prove you are not impaired every time you drive. Beyond interlocks, we could use technology to provide further checks on those convicted of impaired driving by requiring telematics tracking or installation of speed governors on their vehicles. These steps would provide additional monitoring of driving behaviors and lower the risks associated with high-speed driving.

We can adapt other technologies to protect pedestrians and vulnerable public spaces. We already prohibit certain vehicles, such as shared mobility scooters, from entering or leaving a designated area through a process called geofencing. The same concept could be applied to cars. If a vehicle attempts to drive into a restricted, geofenced area, its engine cuts out or its brakes automatically bring it to a stop. By leveraging the locational data our vehicles and phones provide, we could geofence vulnerable areas and preclude vehicles from entering them.

We could use basic infrastructural elements to harden the edges of vulnerable areas. The Park Tavern’s patio was divided from its parking lot with simple fencing. These materials delineate public space but offer little protection from drivers traveling at speed. We already use concrete planters, apron barriers and bollards to protect pedestrians, bicyclists, and buildings that have restricted access. We could start programs to support businesses interested in protecting outdoor gathering spaces with more substantial infrastructure.

We should look at how our land use rules enable impaired driving. In most parts of the U.S., zoning codes require parking minimums at bars. This practice incentivizes driving to a location where the main activity is drinking alcohol. What if instead we minimized the number of parking spaces available at bars? Modes of transportation such as walking, biking, transit, carpooling with a designated driver or rideshare apps can fill the gap and help reduce the number of impaired drivers.

We aren’t helpless in this situation. We need not only react to tragedies, but can act to prevent them. What amounts to a public health crisis on our roads will not self-correct. We must stop it through infrastructure, regulation, enforcement and collective will. Impaired driving is one of the most apparent and damaging examples of this crisis and solutions to minimize it are likewise clear. Taking these actions will not only make our roads and gathering spaces safer for all but can set a course for expanding safety interventions around broader issues such as speeding.

Kyle Shelton is director of the University of Minnesota’s Center for Transportation Studies.