Wow, I wasn't expecting to run into the "All Lives Matter" rhetoric here, but I suppose I'll take the bait. Imagine you have two shifts of workers, making the same product. One shift consistently produces more output than the other. That on its own is an observation that needs more investigation in order to figure out why. Perhaps the faster shift came up with a better method, and that method should be taught to everybody. Perhaps the faster shift is skipping a step, and needs to be retrained. The first step is figuring out why there is a difference.

In the case of pedestrian fatalities, there is clearly a difference by race. The next questions are why that difference exists, what can be learned from it, and what needs to be changed. Perhaps it is a difference by location, and sidewalks need to be set back further from the road. Perhaps it is increased miles by walking, and the solution is to have wider public transportation that doesn't need as much walking at the endpoints. No matter what the fundamental cause is, the existence of a measurable difference in fatality rates means that we can look for deeper causes to see why those differences exist, and what can be improved.

There's no racism in identifying a difference in death rates. There would absolutely be racism to ignore and allow such a difference to continue.

Sorry, but I don't understand how any of the factors you identify have any association with race. People living in those conditions may be more or less vulnerable, no matter their race. As between equivalent fatality rates, prioritizing a particular race is, of course, definitionally racist. I agree with the parent comment that focusing on race here serves no purpose other than to make a relative statement about the prioritization of races.

Is it sexist to care that men commit suicide at a higher rate than women?