The Denver Gazette laid it out plain: Denver keeps doubling down on Vision Zero-style street redesigns, and traffic fatalities still climbed last year from 80 to 93. Since Denver adopted Vision Zero in 2017, the article says deaths are up 82%. If that doesn’t make you at least raise an eyebrow, you’re not paying attention.
And Weld County should care because Denver is the lab where bad ideas get piloted, then shipped statewide with a grant application and a press release. Today, it’s bollards, speed humps, road diets, and automated speed ticketing. Tomorrow, it’s the same mindset aimed at your county roads, your commutes, and your tax bill. In the Denver/Boulder Bubble, gravity is optional, but the paperwork is forever.
Let’s not pretend the slogan isn’t doing a lot of work here. I’ve been involved in Northern Colorado transportation for over two decades, and about 10 years ago, this term started creeping into conversations: Vision Zero. It’s one of those branded and packaged slogans that liberals love to latch on to because it just FEELS right. Who’s going to argue with zero deaths? The same way nobody argues with ending poverty or stopping bullying. A committee wrote this. You can tell.
Let me pump the brakes right here: every traffic death is a tragedy, no doubt. I mourn for families who lose a loved one on the road. But I am also a realist. People are people. Accidents happen. The proper goal is to MINIMIZE deaths, not to sell a utopian promise and then act shocked when human nature refuses to cooperate.
Here’s the part they skip: results. Denver’s own numbers in the article show serious injuries dropped last year (410 to 356), but over the life of the program, serious injuries are still up 22%. Pedestrian deaths jumped to 35, cyclist deaths rose, and scooter deaths jumped to eight. DOTI says safety is central and points to lowering speeds, signage, signal timing, and more automated enforcement. Meanwhile, critics quoted in the piece argue the redesigns may be creating more erratic driving and a false sense of security, and they point to distracted driving, too. So which is it? Show me the numbers, corridor by corridor, treatment by treatment, before you staple another proven countermeasure onto a street that regular working folks have to use.
And let’s talk about the real lever nobody wants to pull: INVESTMENT in roadways. Install safety features, expand capacity. That’s not sexy for activists, but it works in the real world. I said it before and I’ll say it again: Since north I-25 has been widened to 3 lanes, traffic accidents have decreased by 46%. That’s huge. The problem is, the same crowd that loves chanting Vision Zero gasps at the very thought of widening roadways. “But, but, but what about the GREENHOUSE GAS?!” So instead, they reach for road diets and behavior control.
For lefties, VZ is just another hammer to be used to regulate your behavior. Who pays? Who profits? Who gets blamed? The driver gets blamed, the taxpayer pays, and the consultants keep eating.
The Bullet Point Brief
- Denver fatalities rose from 80 to 93 last year while Vision Zero keeps expanding.
- Since 2017, the article says deaths are up 82%, which should trigger a serious results check.
- Serious injuries fell last year, but the long-run trend cited is still higher than where it started.
- Before more redesigns and ticketing, publish corridor-by-corridor outcomes and costs.
- Prioritize real roadway investment and capacity where it improves safety and flow.
My Bottom Line
Every traffic death is a tragedy. But a utopian slogan is not a safety plan.
If Denver wants credibility, show the work: what changed, what it cost, and what the before-and-after numbers are on each corridor.
Locally, we should keep pushing investments that move people safely and resist one-size-fits-all mandates dressed up as compassion.
And if the solution is more cameras and more control, answer the basic question first: where, exactly, did it reduce deaths?
Source: The Denver Gazette
