CityWatchLA - The Politics of Crosswalks

CityWatch, Oct 26, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 85

This past week the paths of two teenagers tragically crossed when sixteen-year-old Conor Lynch attempted to run across Woodman Avenue where he was hit and killed by a car driven by an eighteen-year-old motorist who then fled the scene.

The LA Times ran a brief article that included a quote from the LAPD indicating that Conor "was jogging across Woodman Avenue midblock and not at a crosswalk." This simple statement set off a flurry of reader comments that demonstrates the mythology of crosswalks and the subjective nature of transportation engineering.

The readers can be divided into two camps; those who empathized with the motorist and those who empathized with the pedestrian. To be sure, it was evident that all agreed that the events were tragic all around but the blame was frequently assigned to one or the other party based on understandings or misunderstandings of the law regulating the simple crossing of a street.

Some readers saw the jaywalking as indicative of fault, commenting "If it is true that Conor was jaywalking then it was his fault and I feel really bad for Moran."

Others saw the motorist's behavior as the cause, commenting "People drive too fast in the rain and careless all day and night in Los Angeles."

The details of the incident are still under investigation but it is apparent that attitudes and opinions vary widely on the rules of the road, the definition of jaywalking and the efficacy of crosswalks.

Rules of the Road: Pedestrians are permitted to cross the street mid-block. The exception is in locations that are between intersections that are controlled by traffic control signal devices or law enforcement officers.

Obviously, it's never a good idea to step out into the street without checking for traffic, but the notion that mid-block crossings are illegal is simply incorrect. Streets are for crossing, at the intersections in marked crosswalks, at the intersections in unmarked crosswalks, and also in between if the adjacent intersections aren't traffic signal controlled. In other words, the standard is: our streets are crossable unless restricted.

Definition of Jaywalking: Some people refer to pedestrians who cross the street against a red light "Jaywalkers" while others use the term for those who cross the street outside a crosswalk.

Either way, it is simply a "nickname" that is not codified in our vehicle code or municipal code and is actually an antiquated term of derision. 90 years ago, a "jay" was a hayseed who didn't understand the ways of the city, typically accustomed to cutting across fields and village lots.

As for the definition of jaywalking, it's vague and varies, and is about as useful as a discussion of jaydriving. In other words, it reinforces attitudes without clarifying the rules of the road.

Efficacy of Crosswalks: The City of Los Angeles has long been engaged in a debate over crosswalks and their usefulness, resulting in the see-saw battle that sees some advocating for the addition of more crosswalks while the LADOT looks for opportunities to remove crosswalks.

A visit to the City Council's Transportation Committee will yield a wealth of transportation mythology that supports increase of speed limits and addresses the dangers of crosswalks with the explanation that "Crosswalks give pedestrians a false sense of security."

This phrase has been repeated by transportation engineers and then parroted by councilmembers for so long that it has become accepted as the truth and serves as the core bias that supports the current campaign to increase speed limits, widen streets, and remove crosswalks.

The "false sense of security" theory can be traced back to the 1972 "Herms Study" which included a bit of unfortunate speculation that has taken on a life of its own.

When Herms discovered that there were more pedestrians struck (per person crossing) at marked crosswalks than at unmarked crosswalks, he failed to account for the fact that the crosswalks are typically installed where pedestrian/vehicle conflicts are an issue.

That unfortunate open question has been misinterpreted to the point of absurdity, motivating an entire generation of traffic engineers to dedicate their careers to removing marked crosswalks and failing to provide new ones, all in the misguided belief that they are dangerous and that pedestrians are better served on unmarked crosswalks.

Our councilmembers are quick to reject community pleas for safer streets by stating authoritatively "Our studies show that there are more injuries to pedestrians when there is a crosswalk than when there is no crosswalk. You see, crosswalks give pedestrians a false sense of security." This is typically followed by a "yea" vote on speed limit increases and street widenings.

At issue is the simple fact that our streets are dangerous, not just for pedestrians, but for everybody.

As speed limits increase, motorists have less time to react to pedestrians and require more distance to stop.

Last year the LAPD conducted a pedestrian sting on Reseda Blvd.

An LAPD officer in plain clothes would cross the street in the crosswalk and motorcycle officers waiting on the side streets would cite motorists who failed to yield to the pedestrian. The LAPD couldn't keep up with the violators.

The unfortunate thing about this sting is that many motorists were traveling under the speed limit but they didn't have the reaction time or the stopping distance necessary to make a safe stop before the crosswalk.

Watching a City of LA vehicle skid to a stop, it was apparent that this street was engineered for conflict.

It's evident that the rules of the road are widely misinterpreted by the general public, typically reinforcing our particular perspective or bias.

The term "jaywalker" is often used but rarely understood, further perpetuating misunderstandings between motorists and pedestrians.

Of greatest concern is the fact that our streets have become politicized, with traffic control decisions being made by people who simply repeat old fallacies in support of the current paradigm of traffic control and the resulting engineered conflict.

The tragic death of Conor Lynch has stirred a debate in our community over how the streets should work and how pedestrians and motorists can both find their place in the mix. It's a worthy conversation and the simplest way to honor Conor is to seize this moment and to work together to make our streets safer for everybody.

(Stephen Box is a grassroots advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at: Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net. Disclosure: Box is also a candidate for 4th District Councilman.)

CityWatchLA - Inside the Crosswalk Sting at Deadly Intersection

CityWatch, Apr 10, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 29

Watching the LAPD conduct a crosswalk sting operation is like watching the home team win the big game, over and over again. Last week, Capt. Trotter of Valley traffic responded to the recent spike in pedestrian deaths by deploying a team of traffic officers to the intersection of Reseda and Dearborn on the west side of Cal State Northridge.

Sgt. Justice ran the operation which consisted of plainclothes officers crossing the street in the crosswalk while a dozen officers stood by in squad cars and on motorcycles to cite the motorists who fail to yield the road to the pedestrians.

Senior Lead Officer Del Valle was the first LAPD "decoy" to cross the street and on his first pass three motorists blew past him, earning citations from the motorcycle officers who raced into the congested street with lights, sirens and loudspeakers full bore.

Within minutes, all officers were busy writing tickets and the decoys had a chance to rest while waiting for the supporting team to reposition.

The intersection of Reseda and Dearborn has residential on one side and CSUN on the other. In both directions on Reseda there are abundant restaurants, coffee shops and businesses that draw a heavy pedestrian crowd, all supported by crosswalks that challenge the primacy of the motor vehicle.

The crosswalk sting drew immediate attention from neighbors, the merchants and students with many stopping by to thank the LAPD and to share their own "ped vs. motorist" horror stories.

As for the motorists, their responses ranged from "there was no ped" to "I didn't see the ped" to " I thought the other cars were stopping to turn" to "I just followed the other cars." These excuses prompted Capt. Trotter to explain "When a motorist sees other cars slow down or stop, they must assume there's a pedestrian in the area, even if they can't see one, and they must slow down and be prepared to yield."

The impact of the sting was dramatic to watch, especially when the motorcycle officers rode into the traffic with one arm in the air like cowboys herding cattle and pulling over up to four motorists at a time.

Sgt. Justice was asked how other neighborhoods could advocate for a similar operation in their community but his response was less than encouraging. "The LAPD doesn't respond to public pressure but uses data to determine where to deploy our forces."

In other words, LA's vision for safe streets is based on reacting to the unnecessary death of our most vulnerable before we act to make our streets walkable, ridable and livable.

If you'd like to work with the LAPD to make our streets safer, take a walk to your local police station and invite the Captain to go for a walk.

Unfortunately, getting a police escort is the only safe way to cross the street these days. Let's work together to change that. (Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. )

CityWatchLA - Pain on LA’s Deathwalks Turns Epidemic

CityWatch, Apr 3, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 27

If you want to kill somebody in Los Angeles … and get away with it … jump into a car and run them down while they're in a crosswalk. Chances are that the authorities will scratch their heads, do a study and then remove the offending crosswalk and/or raise the speed limit and you'll end up getting an apology for any road hazards that interfered with your journey.

Three months ago, at 6:35 in the morning, 58-year-old Gwendolyn Coleman stood at the corner of 5th and Flower in Downtown and waited for the light to turn green. As she crossed the street, a DASH bus turned left onto Flower and struck Coleman who died at the scene. The bus operator explained that he did not see her because of a blind spot.

Three weeks ago, at 6:40 in the morning, 60 year-old Victoria Santos stood at the corner of Lassen and Zelzah in the Valley and waited for the light to turn green. As she stepped into the crosswalk, an eastbound motorist on Lassen turned right on the red and struck Santos who died at the scene. The motorist explained that he stopped
at the limit line, looked and didn't see anybody and then proceeded. The police have determined that the death was the fault of the victim.

This past Sunday, at three in the morning, 19-year-old Adrianna Bachan was in the crosswalk at Jefferson Boulevard and Hoover when she was struck and killed by a hit-and-run driver.

Later that night, 56-year-old Agapito Gaspar Nicholas was in the crosswalk at Figueroa and Avenue 51 in Highland Park when he was struck and killed by a hit-and-run driver.

This past Tuesday night, at 6:25 in the evening, Alina Sheyman and Maria Velasquez, both in their 70's, were killed in the crosswalk of Fountain & La Brea when a left turning car hit another car and caused it to spin out of control, killing the two women. (This intersection is the border of Los Angeles and West Hollywood.) The motorists were released.

Through it all, the primacy of the motor vehicle remains unchallenged while pedestrians are killed on a regular basis. Adding insult to injury … or death, speed limits are being raised and crosswalks are being removed, both of which discourage pedestrians and communicate clearly that the streets of Los Angeles streets aren't made for walking.

From the NoHo Arts District to Woodland Hills, crosswalks get targeted for removal, first with a sign that indicates "This marked crosswalk at this location is proposed to be removed as part of a traffic safety improvement." The logic behind the crosswalk removal is that they give pedestrians a false sense of security.

Instead of posting "Abandon all hope..." signs throughout the City, imagine what would happen if we worked together to create that elusive "sense of security" instead of simply denying any grounds for its existence.

Incredible community capital is repeatedly wasted in debating the logic, the law and the engineering behind the speed limit increase proposals and the city's policy for the removal of crosswalks.

Law enforcement authorities argue that the same "speed trap" laws apply to everyone, from small towns in the High Sierras to Los Angeles, and that their hands are tied as far as the establishment of speed limits. Somehow this argument falls short of addressing the fact that Los Angeles is the largest city in the state and that it
has the most significant traffic congestion in the nation.

Our City's leadership has failed in their mandate to make safety on our streets a priority by not addressing this situation with an aggressive context specific solution.

Meanwhile, traffic engineers argue for the removal of crosswalks in Los Angeles, pointing to a study performed several decades ago in San Diego that indicates that less traffic fatalities occur without a crosswalk than with a crosswalk.

The LADOT performed its own study some time ago and repeated the results, all of which is the foundation for the City's policy to reevaluate existing crosswalks periodically and to remove them when resurfacing and restriping streets.

While it's true that the studies demonstrate a reduction in traffic fatalities at locations that had crosswalks removed, the City is unable to determine how much of that is due to a simple reduction in the number of pedestrians crossing the street.

Also, LA's study failed to include incidents that involved turning vehicles, yet that is the dangerous and common situation that took the lives of the aforementioned of Coleman, Santos, Shayman and Velasquez. Hardly conclusive and hardly satisfactory.

The real opportunity here is for the City of Los Angeles to move from a reactive approach to traffic safety and to develop a vision for public safety that goes beyond writing speeding tickets and restricting pedestrians and actually includes a full complement of traffic solutions and puts a premium on the safety of everybody on the streets.

It's not too late for us to honor Gwendolyn Coleman by working together to make 5th and Flower a pedestrian oriented intersection.

It's not too late for us to create "ped zones" around CSUN and USC and other schools that guarantee that they are the safest places for pedestrians instead of the most dangerous.

It's not too late for us to create a full tool box of traffic calming solutions and to move speed limit increases to the end of the list of options after road diets, traffic calming and significant safety engineering that provides a safe and level playing field for pedestrians, cyclists and mass transit passengers in their daily joust with motorists.

Need we ask the question: How many more Gwendolyn Colemans have to die? (Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch.)

CityWatchLA - Retiming LA’s Deathwalks

CityWatch, Feb 27, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 17

Gwendolyn Coleman stood at the corner of 5th and Flower in downtown Los Angeles, waited for the signal to change and then stepped into the crosswalk where she was promptly struck by a DASH bus and killed instantly. That was seven weeks ago.

In the days immediately following the tragic incident, a spontaneous memorial was erected curbside and flowers, notes, candles and photos appeared, as strangers came together to pay respect to the victim and to draw attention to the circumstances that took her life.

Since then, the memorial has disappeared, the debate over the walkability of our downtown streets has faded, and the intersection of 5th and Flower is as it has always been, heavily traveled by pedestrians, cyclists, motorists, truck drivers and bus operators, all competing for space and all in a hurry.

Pedestrians standing at the Southwest corner of 5th and Flower look across seven lanes of traffic to the north and six lanes of traffic to the east. Crossing the street here is not for the feint of heart, which is a shame because this is an intersection that invites crossing.

After all, there's a shopping mall on one side, a restaurant, a Starbucks, a bank, the Central Library and a huge park area that simply beckons and invites people, if only it didn't require crossing the traffic sewer.

For the intrepid pedestrian who is determined to cross, it pays to be ready, for 5th and Flower only allows between four and five seconds of "Walk" which means one needs to be standing on the curb and ready to jump. The street is wide and a pedestrian doesn't get very far in five seconds, perhaps across two of the six or seven lanes. Then the flashing hand appears and the real pressure starts, along with the vehicles nudging and nosing into the crosswalk as they compete for their turning opportunity.

The science of signal timing is touted by the LADOT as being quite complicated, requiring a room full of computers, located in a bunker under City Hall, and run by a team of experts who are able to fine-tune and adjust signals throughout the City to keep traffic flowing smoothly and efficiently and at capacity.

All of which begs the simple question, why can't we give pedestrians at the southwest corner of 5th and Flower more than a 5 second "walk" phase? Are we so committed to moving vehicles that we'll squeeze the pedestrians down to the absolute minimum and then tighten it just a tad more? Apparently so.

The high-tech sophisticated signal timing is supported by the low-tech "human touch," the LADOT traffic officers who step into the whirlwind of traffic to coax a little more capacity out of the street. Just one block west of 5th and Flower an officer works his magic, whistling and waving and directing motorists to their respective lanes, all in an effort to move cars onto the freeway quickly and efficiently, clearing the intersection and making room for other motorists. None of this activity has anything to do with protecting pedestrians though, simply getting more vehicles through the intersection.

Elsewhere in the downtown LA area, pedestrians fare better than in the 5th and Flower auto-zone.

DOT staff leaving their headquarters at 1st and Main can cross the street to City Hall with 30 seconds of "walk" giving them plenty of time to think about that pedestrian safety report they're about to deliver to the City Council's Transportation Committee. Lest they dawdle, the countdown signal, a feature not found at 5th and Flower, will remind them that the clock is ticking and the flashing hand will give them 15 additional seconds of encouragement.

Meanwhile, DOT staff on their way to meet with the LAPD brass over at Parker Center will get 30 seconds of "walk" supported by a countdown signal, all in order to safely cross the street at 1st and Los Angeles.

DOT staff have a Starbucks close by, just like the folks at 5th and Flower, the difference being that Starbucks customers at 1st and Los Angeles Street get 30 seconds of "walk" supported by a countdown signal in order to facilitate a safe coffee break.

As for our friends over at the LATimes, the same ones who neglected to note Gwendolyn Coleman's tragic death until pushed by LAist, StreetsBlog and CityWatch, they enjoy 20 and 25 seconds of "walk" in order to cross 1st and Spring streets on their way to City Hall.

Pedestrians on Broadway, one of the busiest and most vibrant streets in the downtown area, fare better than those on 5th and Flower but not as well as those at City hall. Broadway enjoys a more modest 15 seconds of "walk" at 5th, 4th, 3rd and 2nd streets, leaving one to wonder if the "science" of signal timing is based on any connection to the reality of the local street life in the downtown area or if it's based simply on a commitment to moving motor vehicles as efficiently as possible, pedestrians be damned.

When intersections with heavy pedestrian traffic receive little support and intersections with light pedestrian activity receive favorable signal timing, it appears that the real commitment is to keeping the traffic moats flowing while pedestrians remain isolated and trapped on urban islands. Unless of course, you're on your way to City Hall!

It's not too late to celebrate the life of Gwendolyn Coleman with a tribute that will truly honor her, a pedestrian-safe 5th and Flower intersection complete with signal timing that encourages and protects those on foot. (Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist activist and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net.)

Memorializing Fallen Pedestrians

Damien Newton from StreetsblogLA writes of a group in Portugal who install pedestrian crosswalks made up of the names of those pedestrians who have died crossing the street. The artistically designed memorials include the tag, "1/4 of car accident victims are pedestrians."

Here is Los Angeles, we also have a mechanism for memorializing those who have died in an attempt to simply cross the street. While not quite so dramatic as the ZebraStripe crossings in Portugal, the Los Angeles memorials serve as a constant reminder that our streets are dangerous and that crossing them is risky business.

Los Angeles names buildings and freeways after civic leaders and local heroes but crosswalks are reserved for the children who die trying to cross the street. Hardly the mark of a Great City.

The "Demariya Grant Memorial Crosswalk," on Rodeo Road between Rodeo Lane and Farmdale Avenue near Dorsey High School, was dedicated in memory of nine year old Demariya Grant who was struck down and killed by a hit and run driver in December 2005. The "Jason Quarker Memorial Crosswalk" at 6th and Jefferson honors Jason Quarker, who was struck and killed while crossing Jefferson on his way to the 6th Avenue Elementary School.

Meanwhile, LAist draws attention to the machinations of the Los Angeles Department of Transportation as they contemplate the removal of the crosswalk at the corner of Magnolia and Blakeslee. The crosswalk falls halfway between Lankershim Blvd. and Vineland Ave.

The Intersection has significant housing on the north side of Magnolia and on the other side of the street are abundant amenities ranging from local theatres to restaurants to shops to a local church which meets in one of the theatres. It would seem that the intersection of Blakeslee would be an ideal location for a crosswalk but the LADOT has posted signs indicating that "the marked crosswalk at this location is proposed to be removed as part of a traffic safety improvement."

A call to the posted number at the LADOT yielded an explanation for the proposed crosswalk removal consisting of "The crosswalk is being reviewed in order to determine if it meets the state and federal guidelines."

Hmmm! "Traffic Safety Improvements" and "State & Federal guidelines" sound like worthy motivations until you factor in the proposed action: they're proposing to remove a crosswalk!

John Fisher, Assistant General Manager of the LADOT explained that they did a study a several years ago and they reviewed 7 years of data, determining that the removal of crosswalks resulted in a 61% reduction in pedestrian collisions. As a result, the department routinely looks at the crosswalks in Los Angeles and evaluates them for removal. Fisher adds, "Of course, if this location is an activity center, then this would be taken into consideration as we evaluate the crosswalk, the flow of traffic and the volume, the pedestrian activity and the community response."

(When Fisher was asked if the reduction of ped collisions might be due to a reduction in pedestrians, he acknowledged that it might be an explanation but was not part of the study)

This particular street was recently featured in the LATimes in an article that detailed the community's response to the increase in parking meter rates along with the extended hours of operation. Critics charge that the LADOT acted without public input or notification and that effect on the community was negative. Now this?

Nancy Bianconi of the NoHo Arts District was shocked to find out that the LADOT was considering the removal of the crosswalk, exclaiming "If anything we need a smart crosswalk, one complemented by lights and traffic calming that supports the vibrant streetlife that we are working to create in the NoHo Arts District."

Linda Fulton, owner of the Avery Schreiber Theatre, points out that the city has made a lot of money off that crosswalk, writing tickets to motorists who don't yield to the pedestrians. "There are 7 theatres between Lankershim and Magnolia, there is lots of mixed-use development on Magnolia, all drawing pedestrians to this community, and we need to support the pedestrians, not abandon them in favor of improving the flow of traffic."



On the south side of Magnolia there are shops, 7 theatres, restaurants and other attractive signs of streetlife. It seems like the least the LADOT could do is to support those who simply want to cross the street.

This is the sign the LADOT posted on both sides of Magnolia, soliciting comments on a process that isn't explained. A phone call to the number is answered by a woman who says "I can't answer questions, I only take down comments."