CityWatchLA - When Politicians Die They Get Buildings Named After Them-- When Kids Die …

CityWatch, Nov 19, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 92

The City of Los Angeles honors civic leaders and local heroes by naming buildings in their honor, but crosswalks are reserved for the children who die trying to cross the street. This is hardly the mark of a Great City.

Marvin Braude served the City of Los Angeles as a City Councilman for thirty-two years, a significant contribution that was memorialized with the Marvin Braude Bike Trail, the Marvin Braude Mulholland Gateway Park and the Marvin Braude Constituent Service Center. John Ferraro served the City of Los Angeles for five decades and his thirty-five year tenure as a City Councilman is the longest of any member. His contribution to the City of Los Angeles was memorialized when the landmark Department of Water and Power's General Office Building was renamed the John Ferraro Building.

Demariya Grant was a nine-year-old who simply wanted to cross the street but was struck and killed by a hit-and-run motorist, prompting the City of Los Angeles to memorialize the incident with the "Demariya Grant Memorial Crosswalk" on Rodeo Road between Rodeo Lane and Farmdale Avenue near Dorsey High School.

Jason Quarker was struck and killed while crossing Jefferson on his way to the 6th Avenue Elementary School, prompting the City of Los Angeles to memorialize his sacrifice with the "Jason Quarker Memorial Crosswalk" at 6th and Jefferson.

Two weeks ago, Emely Aleman, 12, and Angela Rodriguez, 10, were struck by a motorist as they attempted to cross Laurel Canyon Boulevard, a tragedy that resulted in the death of Emely and critical injuries to Angela. The City of Los Angeles will memorialize the incident with the "expedited installation of a traffic signal" that was originally scheduled for 2012.

The City acknowledges municipal liability for the streets of Los Angeles if it knows of the dangerous conditions and does nothing to mitigate them. For example, the City Attorney pays out on vehicle damages caused by potholes if the claimant shows that the city had knowledge of the pothole and failed to act in a timely manner.

The "prior knowledge" and "timely manner" conditions would seem to apply comprehensively to the streets of Los Angeles citywide. It's no secret that the streets of Los Angeles are filled with fast and dangerous traffic, a simple fact that is supported by traffic statistics. The LAPD loses more police officers in vehicle crashes than to gunshots, yet the LAPD still wear bullet-proof vests instead of helmets.

Emely and Angela attempted to cross Laurel Canyon Boulevard at an intersection that has a long legacy as a dangerous location. Pedestrians have been struck three times this year and a cyclist was killed last year by a hit-and-run motorist, all at Laurel Canyon Boulevard and Archwood Street.

Speed limits that can't be enforced, streets that can't be crossed, and traffic signal improvements that are prioritized based on deaths are all symptoms of a systemic failure to prioritize public safety.

As the NoHo community petitions City Hall for help in managing the traffic in their neighborhood, the LA Department of Transportation drifts without a General Manager. Two Assistant General Managers grapple with five divisions that operate with silo independence, resulting in budget overruns, performance failures, and anticipated funding forfeitures.

LA's Department of Transportation has been taken to task for removing crosswalks in an attempt to reduce motorist/pedestrian conflict, a strategy that has been mocked as the equivalent of reducing forest fires by chopping down the trees. Critics claim that the LADOT's antiquated traffic strategies fail at every level and that the "bigger, wider, faster" strategy for moving motor vehicles has not only failed to relieve congestion but has also resulted in local neighborhood streets under siege.

It's time for the City of Los Angeles to honor civic leaders who champion public safety by confronting the dangerous conditions on the streets of Los Angeles.

It's time for the City of Los Angeles to honor the lost lives of the children who die on the streets by making it a priority to control the traffic that terrorizes our communities.

When the Mayor gets done with the press conferences celebrating LAPD Chief Charlie Beck's 1st anniversary as LA's top cop, it is imperative that he focus on the real opportunity to make Los Angeles a safer city, one where children can safely walk to school and then return home at night to their families. That is the mark of a Great City.

(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.)

Death Déjà Vu on Pacific Coast Highway

CityWatch, Nov 12, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 90

The City of Los Angeles is preparing to engage in a construction project on Pacific Coast Highway that has cyclists up in arms, claiming that the intermittent lane closure, K-rail placement, and prohibition on cyclists is a violation of the law and a demonstration of poor planning. The project in question is the Bureau of Engineering "Coastal Interseptor Relief Sewer" that runs from Will Rogers State Beach to the City of Santa Monica Border.

Cyclists claim that the proposed traffic mitigation plan violates the law by banning cyclists from PCH and is reminiscent of the Caltrans permitted construction site of five years ago that was the site of the tragic deaths of two cyclists.

At 10 am on October 31, 2005, Scott Bleifer, 41 and Stanislav Ionov, 46 were riding north in the shoulder of PCH when they encountered K-rail that blocked the shoulder, forcing them into the adjacent travel lane at a high speed.

They were then hit from behind and killed by the driver of a catering truck who ran over them and then continued without stopping until farther down the road.

The driver was charged with two counts of felony vehicular manslaughter and two counts of felony hit-and-run in their deaths. He told investigators that he didn't see the cyclists until it was too late to stop.

The flyer that the City released last week details a traffic mitigation plan that includes banning cyclists from PCH at Will Rogers State Beach, requiring them to exit through a construction site in the parking lot and then ride to Santa Monica before returning to PCH.

Cyclists have engaged in animated discussions with both the Pacific Coast Highway Task Force and at the Caltrans Bicycle Advisory Committee, protesting the permitting process of Caltrans and the traffic mitigation plans of the City of LA.

PCH has a long legacy as a congested and conflicted route, not just for cyclists but for pedestrians and for motorists.

In 2008 Caltrans created "Encroachment Permit Protocols" to address this conflict but detractors claim that it demonstrates a motor vehicular bias and fails to support the needs of pedestrians, mass transit passengers and cyclists on PCH.

On a per-mile basis, the fatal crash rate for motorists on the two-mile stretch of PCH running through West Los Angeles is considerably higher than on the twenty-one miles of PCH that runs through Malibu.

If the City of Los Angeles is serious about safety on the streets of LA, it will seize this opportunity and work with the community to make PCH safer for all road users.

(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 - Slow Down for Julia

CityWatch, Mar 9, 2010
Vol 8 Issue 19

Julia Siegler stood on the north side of Sunset Boulevard and looked at her school bus, parked on south Cliffwood Avenue. She looked to her left, began to cross the street and hesitated, getting knocked to the ground by one vehicle and then run over by a second vehicle.

Much can be made of the fact that Julia crossed the street against a red light, and it has. But not much has been made of the fact the two motorists left the scene of the traffic collision before the Los Angeles Police Department arrived.

The first LAPD press conference offered up incorrect information of the crash and of the motorists, sending the public and the LAPD on a goose chase that was resolved later that day when the two motorists made contact with the LAPD. Much could also be made of the speed of the motorists, but it wasn't. Questions as to the speed of the motorists were rebuffed with "Not an issue!" responses. (The question was "What was the speed of the motorists?)

Much could be made of the environment, but it wasn't. Sunset Boulevard is a very fast street with lots of motor vehicle traffic. Sunset and Cliffwood, the scene of the tragedy, is signalized so I asked the obvious question "Was the demand actuated ped crossing button working?" I didn't get an answer.

That prompted me to go and take a look at the traffic signals at Sunset and Cliffwood, along with the signals at the intersections to the east and to the west. Here's what I found.

Sunset and Cliffwood is an intersection with demand-actuated signals at all four corners, requiring pedestrians to use a push button to call for a pedestrian "walk" phase.



When I pushed the button, the response was immediate and countdown started for the east west traffic, shifting to amber and then to red. I've never seen such a responsive traffic signal. I tried it with traffic, without traffic, with cars on Cliffwood and with none. In all cases, that signal offered an immediate response and a ped "walk" phase within seconds. Was this signal operating like this on February 26 when Julia Siegler attempted to cross Sunset?

Further confusing, Cliffwood has four demand-actuated signals but the east/west ped "walk" phase is set for fully-actuated timing. In other words, it is always a walk phase unless shifting to red.

Sunset and Kenter, just to the east of the tragic crash, is an intersection with demand-actuated signals used to cross Sunset and fully-actuated signals to cross Kenter. That means peds only need to push the button to cross Sunset.



I pushed the button and waited. Nothing happened. No countdown, no chirping for the blind, no indication that I had done anything meaningful, significant, or likely to result in an opportunity to cross Sunset supported by the "walk" phase of the traffic signal.

I tried it several times and in the video you can see that it took almost a full minute and the arrival of three motor vehicles on Kenter to get a "walk" phase to cross Sunset. Kenter also only has crosswalks on three sides of the intersection.

Sunset and Burlingame is an intersection to the west of Cliffwood and it has one demand-actuated signal to cross Sunset and one demand-actuated signal to cross Burlingame. This intersection is odd in that the default setting for the intersection is an all red, yet anybody approaching from any direction gets instant recognition.



Motorists don't need to slow down or stop, the signal simply turns green as if to "approve" of their passage.

Pedestrians approaching the "all-red" intersection simply push the buttons and get an instant ped "walk" phase with no hesitation or countdown. I tried it several times, with and without oncoming traffic and it was uncanny.

If ever a pedestrian needs to feel powerful, simply come to this "first-come, first-served" intersection and hit the ped button. "Walk!"

Sunset and Bundy is a busy signalized intersection farther to the east of Cliffwood that gets fairly decent traffic from south on Bundy as well as both directions on Sunset.



This intersection also features fully-actuated signals for east/west pedestrians and demand-actuated signals for north/south pedestrians. The white "walk" phase is quite fast , requiring pedestrians to be in place and ready to move. Not really the hospitable environment for pedestrians.

On either side of Cliffwood, there are traffic signs with speeds posted, some white (regulatory) and some yellow (advisory). Traveling east, on the approach to Cliffwood where Julia attempted to reach her school bus, motorists are greeted by a yellow sign that "advises" motorist that the "comfortable" speed is 25 mph.



From the west, motorists are informed by a white sign that the speed limit is 35 mph and also advised that the "comfortable" speed is 30 mph. There is no better time than now to look at all of the signage on Sunset and ask "Why?" Is this the limit of LA's attempts to control traffic.

More "suggestions" and "advice" to motorists traveling too fast to even read the signs which then prompts the LADOT to embark on a billboard campaign advising motorists to keep their eyes on the road. "Slow Down" must be a regulation, not simply a suggestion.

Traffic engineers can probably explain the three-sided crosswalk configuration over the four-sided crosswalk. They can probably use a slide rule to justify the short white "walk" phase and the longer "flashing hand" phase of the three part crossing signalization.

They can even offer up the "Crosswalks give pedestrians a false sense of security" demonstrating that even traffic engineers make mistakes. (It was a question, not a conclusion, at the end of the infamous Berms traffic study.

Often misquoted and always misunderstood, it has served the LADOT well but the pedestrian community has suffered. Traffic engineers and law enforcement officers can work all day to explain the complexities of using radar/laser tools for speed limit enforcement, they can talk all day about through-put and congestion and capacity and friction and conflict and eye lines and they can try very hard to impress me with how complex the world of traffic control really is for the professional, forget about the amateur.

But the real question is this: Do pedestrians need a degree from MIT to cross the street?

Would it be too much to have some sort of "pedestrian" logic applied to the traffic signals at the four neighboring intersections on Sunset Boulevard? The pedestrians walk down streets like Cliffwood with no sidewalks.

They are trained to walk in the street with motor vehicles. They push buttons that may or may not respond, they stand and watch the world go by, sometimes reminded that on the food chain of Los Angeles transportation, they rate right up there with the trash (can) and that if they really want to cross the street, they need to get in an automobile like everybody else.

In the days immediately following Julia's tragic death, the LAPD and others put the emphasis on pedestrian and their responsibility for their safety. Good advice, but not enough.

When there is a traffic collision, it must be standard operating procedure to test the street signals, not just for demand-actuated responsiveness but for all phases and for all modes.

As a cyclist, I encounter intersections such as Sunset and Park or Sunset and Rosemont that won't recognize cyclists and won't cycle green unless a motor vehicle approaches.

Ever wonder who trains cyclists to run reds? LADOT. By the way, it's the law that signals recognize all modes, it's just not common in Los Angeles. The current failure rate for LA's parking meters is 20% which begs the question, "What's the failure rate for traffic signal sensitivity and accuracy?" Anyone can guess but why guess when people are dying.

When there is a traffic collision, it must be standard operating procedure to investigate speed as a factor. Nothing about LA's traffic will change without data and when I called to get the speeds of the motorists, the question was dismissed.

Standing at the corner and watching the oncoming traffic from the east, vehicles traveling 35 mph would have been slowing down traffic. That street is fast. If cars are moving, they pose a threat. The faster they move, the great the threat. We must have data.

The City of Los Angeles has an underground bunker below City Hall East where the LADOT operates the Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control (ATSAC) system [LINK] but the LADOT doesn't play well with others nor does it share its data. That must change.

When there is a traffic collision, it must be standard operating procedure to evaluate that street, the community, the behavior of the people who use the street, and to ask the hard questions. Are we working together to make this street safe for all people? Are we making the safety of our most vulnerable a top priority?

Julia Siegler's death is tragic. It shouldn't have happened. It has resulted in a sense of helplessness in the larger community made up of Julia's neighbors and family and friends and schoolmates and even strangers.

An impromptu memorial of hundreds of flowers, candles, photos and stuffed animals, sits at the accident site at the corner of Sunset and Cliffwood, along with a sign that reads “Slow Down, For Julia.”

In Los Angeles, we name buildings after politicians, and we name intersections after children who get killed trying to get to school. That must change!

(Stephen Box is a transportation advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net)

CityWatchLA - Two Tales of Cyclists Down and the Uneven Hand of Justice

CityWatch, Nov 10, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 92

Last year, on July 4th, Dr. Christopher Thompson drove his car down Mandeville Canyon and came up behind two cyclists, pulled alongside and exchanged words then pulled in front and slammed on the brakes, seriously injuring both cyclists and telling the police officer who first arrived at the scene that he did it "to teach them a lesson."

That same week, as Paul Moore rode his bike south on Bundy Drive, a motorist approached him from behind, overtook him and then turned right, slamming him to the ground.

Unlike Christian Stoehr and Ron Peterson, the cyclists in Mandeville Canyon, Paul didn't get up. In fact, before the day was over, surgeons would remove a section of his skull, storing it in a refrigerator for later reattachment, all in an effort to alleviate the cranial swelling and bleeding. That evening Paul slipped into a medically-induced coma that allowed his brain to rest and recover.

By Monday morning, news of the Mandeville Canyon incident had spread and by early afternoon, LA City Councilman Bill Rosendahl stood before the press and proclaimed "Cyclists need a Bill of Rights!"

Concerns that the case would be handled as a traffic collision instead of a criminal act were cleared up by the LAPD's Captain Eaton who flanked Councilman Rosendahl and assured the public that this was a road rage incident that would be investigated as a felony criminal assault. This show of force went a long way toward reassuring the cycling community that justice would be pursued.

As for Paul, he slipped into the pool of anonymity that comes with being one of 550 LA Fire Department medical transports that occur each day in the City of Los Angeles. Of those 550 transports, approximately 100 of them are the result of a traffic collision and they include motorists, pedestrians and cyclists. Paul was just one of many.

The public clamored for more information on the Mandeville Canyon incident, the press responded with radio, television and newspaper coverage. The blogs were filled with activity and comment sections had to be shut down because of the intense debate and personal animosity that took place.

Meanwhile, Paul's wife worked quietly to investigate the circumstances that left her husband lying on the street with multiple broken bones and a left frontal lobe injury that resulted in Aphasia which is the inability to form words.

It took two days for Rosendahl and Eaton to step up to the microphone and to address the Mandeville Canyon incident. It was eight days before Paul's wife received the Police Report in the mail with information on Paul's collision.

The report detailed the location, the motorist and the cyclist. There wasn't much else there except that Paul's bicycle had been transported to the Fire Station. It's curious that the bike wasn't considered evidence but, of course, that would imply an investigation.

Paul's wife went to Fire Station #59 and found Paul's bike with very little damage. One of the firemen looked in the log, found the incident number, and said the team who responded to the accident was not working, except for the Captain who was out on a call.

Paul's wife left and called Capt. Cessor, introducing herself and asked about Paul and the traffic collision. She asked if Paul was conscious when the LAFD arrived at the scene but Cessor responded "Can't answer that. Can't answer anything medical due to confidentiality."

Questions about who called 911, what happened to Paul's helmet, which corner the collision occurred on yielded a response that was completely discouraging.

Cessor informed Paul's wife "I don't know where your questions are going, so I'm going to refer you to the Arson Unit as they are the legal experts." She passed over the phone number for the Arson Unit adding "They probably wouldn't have any information about this accident."

By now, Rosendahl was calling for a Cyclists' Town Hall to address the issues that cyclists encounter as they ride the streets of Los Angeles. He went on to convene the Mandeville Task Force that would look for ways to mitigate tensions between cyclists and motorists. He continued all the way to the Transportation Committee and then the City Council where he urged his fellow Councilmembers to incorporate the Cyclists' Bill of Rights into the city's Bicycle Plan.

Paul's family spent the same period of time struggling to navigate the medical system and the insurance labyrinth and the emotional journey, celebrating the fluttering of eyelids and the twitches and grimaces that they counted as the signs of Paul's recovery.

Paul left UCLA and went to the Barlow Respiratory Hospital and then back to UCLA and then out to Casa Colina in Pomona. Through it all, his family was by his side, playing music, talking to him, struggling to communicate and to encourage and to maintain hope through the recovery process.

Periodically there would be some activity in the Mandeville Canyon case and members of the cycling community would hold vigil at the LAX Courthouse, hoping against hope that justice would be served and reporting back on the developments.

As for Paul, justice was limited to battles his family and his doctors fought with the insurance company's grievances and appeals representatives, quite a tough position for the victim of a crime.

Apparently, when Rosendahl told the world "Cyclists need a Bill of Rights!" it didn't include Paul Moore, a cyclist whose life was ruined by a motorist who "right-hooked" him in violation of CVC 21750 which specifies that “the driver of a vehicle overtaking another vehicle or a bicycle proceeding in the same direction shall pass to the left at a safe distance without interfering with the safe operation of the overtaken vehicle or bicycle…”

The Cyclists' Bill of Rights claims, as right #4, "Cyclists have the right to the full support of our judicial system and the right to expect that those who endanger, injure or kill cyclists be dealt with to the full extent of the law."

This past week, the cycling community threw a virtual Twittertape parade when the jury in the Mandeville Canyon trial came back with a guilty verdict on all seven charges for Thompson including Assault with a Deadly Weapon and Mayhem. Thompson was considered a flight risk, denied bail, remanded into custody where he awaits sentencing.

Unfortunately, there are many more cases out there, including the motorist charged with the hit-and-run death of a cyclist on PCH, the motorist charged with the hit-and-run death of a cyclist on Glendale Boulevard, and the motorist charged with the hit-and-run death of a cyclist in Santa Clarita.

Add to the mix the motorists who are charged with hit-and-run assaults on cyclists on the Westside and in Echo Park and Downtown and the Mandeville Canyon case starts to look like the exception, not the rule.

Most alarming is the simple fact that Paul Moore's life was destroyed by a motorist who right-hooked him just 1500 yards from Bill Rosendahl's Westside office and Paul never made it past dispatch statistic for the LAFD team that transported him to UCLA. He spent 6 months in the hospital, he lost the ability to move and to talk and his family was left to struggle with his recovery and with the surgeries and with the seizures and the financial struggles and the insurance battles, and in the midst of all of the debates over equality and justice, Paul was completely forgotten.

"What about Paul?"

(Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net) ◘

LA.Streetsblog - Courtroom Drama for Cyclists throughout the County

LA Streetsblog by Stephen Box on October 13, 2009

The wheels of justice grind slowly and sometimes it's hard to believe that the system is working but a survey of the legal landscape in LA County reveals that there are several cases working that should be of great interest to the cycling community. Danny Jimenez, local cyclist and lawyer, says "victims are often discouraged by the difficulty in obtaining justice but when the system works, it's encouraging to see a Judge and a Prosecutor and a Jury doing their job and doing it well."

In the last year and a half, there have been several drunk driving and road rage incidents that have shaken the cycling community, leaving a trail of dead and broken bodies behind along with a general feeling of frustration and despair for the friends and families of the victims.

Dr. Christopher T. Thompson is charged with 2 counts of Assault with a Deadly Weapon (245a) 2 counts of Battery with Serious Bodily Injury (243d) reckless driving (23103a) and reckless driving causing specified injury (23105a) and Mayhem (203) all stemming from the Mandeville Canyon Road Rage incident that left two cyclists broken, bleeding and lying on the road. Thompson's case is slowly working itself through the system at the LAX Courthouse. Today, they will pick a judge to replace Judge Cynthia Reyvis and will then hear pre-trial motions. Tomorow, they start jury selection.

Alejandro Hidalgo is charged with vehicular manslaughter (191.5a) and DUI (23153a) (23153b) in the death of Jesus Castillo on Glendale Boulevard and his case is coming up in the Downtown Criminal Courthouse. The next hearing is on October 30 at 8:30 and no trial date has been set for this case.


Robert Sam Sanchez is charged with Vehicular Manslaughter (191.5a) and DUI (23153a) and Hit-and-Run with serious bodily injury (20001a) in the death of Rodrigo "Rod" Armas and the injury to his son, Christian Armas on PCH and that case is coming up in the Malibu Courthouse. The next hearing is on October 20 at 8:30 am and no trial date has been set.

Marco Antonio Valencia is charged with Vehicular Manslaughter (191.5a) and DUI (23153a) and Hit-and-Run with serious bodily injury (20001a) and in the death of Joe Novotny on Bouquet Canyon Road in Santa Clarita and that case is coming up in San Fernando Courthouse. The next hearing is on October 28 at 8:30 am and no trial date has been set.

Jim Azpilicueta is charged with two counts of Assault with a Deadly Weapon (245a) and Hit-and-Run with serious bodily injury (20001a) in an incident that caused a cyclist to sustain significant injuries including severe damage to her face. The arraignment is set for October 14 at 8:30 am.

There is another case pending in the Hit-and-Run with Serious Bodily Injury (20001a) incident that left Roadblock lying on Glendale Boulevard after being hit from behind and flipped into the air, landing with just enough consciousness and awareness to catch a partial license plate of the car as it sped off into the distance. The arraignment is set for Nov. 2 at 8:30 am in Dept. 60 Metro Court.

Missing from the dockets of the Southland Courthouses is the infamous Hummer vs. Cyclists case. The LAPD response to the Hummer vs. Cyclists incident received much attention and resulted in a City Council motion directing an LAPD report on police activity and the resulting investigation. It also stirred a Storm the Bastille ride to City Hall, three visits to the Police Commission, and claims filed with the LAPD Inspector General. But it did not result in a court case.

This is why cyclists need the Cyclists' Bill of Rights. The CBR has picked up endorsements from the City Council, from the City's Bicycle Advisory Committee and from neighborhood councils around LA. The CBR claims as right #4 "Cyclists have the right to the full support of our judicial system and the right to expect that those who endanger, injure or kill cyclists be dealt with to the full extent of the law."

Now is the time for the cycling community to embrace the Cyclists' Bill of Rights and to insist that it be included, as written, in LA's Draft Bike Plan, just released and already under attack for having a 42 day window for public participation and not using imperative language that will support the rights of cyclists on the streets of Los Angeles.

Pay close attention to what's happening in City Council, in the Courts and, most of all, on the Streets!

Father and Son Grand Tour Dream Ends With Tragedy

photo credit hereinmalibu

21 years ago, Rodrigo "Rod" Armas strapped on his helmet, hopped onto his bike and set off on the LA Wheelmen's Grand Tour, an annual cycling event that starts and finishes in Malibu, drawing participants from throughout California as well the surrounding Western States. Grand Tour riders typically have an appetite for distance as is evidenced by the route options which range from the 200 Kilometer, 200 mile, 300 mile and 400 mile routes.

The Grand Tour is a fully supported event meaning that there are abundant pit stops and sag teams that patrol the route, offering everything from encouragement and refreshments to medical and mechanical support. The ride starts early on Saturday morning and riders must complete their selected route within 24 hours.

This past Saturday, Rod again saddled up for the Grand Tour, this time accompanied by Christian, his 14 year-old-son. They were among the last cyclists to check in, picking up numbers 473 and 474. Rod strapped on the same helmet he used 21 years before and the father and son team set off on the Highland Double, a 200 mile route that heads up to Port Hueneme and then turns inland over the rural, quieter and hillier back roads of Ventura County.

At around 9pm on Saturday evening, Brian Meek, a cyclist who had stopped with mechanical difficulties was in the Rincon pit stop when two cyclists rode in, stirring cheers and applause. The cyclists were Rod and Christian and they were the two last riders on the Highland Double route. Bryan reports that as Rod sat down he dropped his helmet in the dirt. "One of the guys at the stop took it from him and said he would clean it for him. The father and son were tired but in great spirits and shared some of their ‘stories’ with all of us. I listened as the father shared that he was wearing the same helmet he used 21 years ago the first time he rode the Grand Tour.

As Saturday turned into Sunday, Rod and Christian had approximately 190 miles behind them including 8500 feet of elevation gain and four very challenging hills. They were riding on the shoulder in ideal conditions. the sky was clear, there was great visibility, the roads were dry and there was a slight off shore breeze. All was well and they were within miles of rolling into the finish line in Malibu.

A SAG driver passed the father and son team on PCH and reported that all was well and that the cyclists were making good progress toward the Malibu finish.

At approximately 1:30 am, the next SAG driver came across an emergency scene with medical and law enforcement personnel at work on the two cyclists who lay on the ground at 34000 PCH. The SAG driver radioed back to the the other support teams in order to coordinate the Triple Century cyclists who would soon be riding south on PCH past the emergency scene.

Rod was pronounced dead at the scene and Christian was airlifted to UCLA Medical Center with severe and comprehensive injuries. Their bodies were crushed, their bikes were destroyed, their blood was on the road and yet there was no sign of the person responsible for the mayhem.

The LA County Sheriff's Department provides law enforcement services for the City of Malibu and they found an abandoned Dodge Ram pickup truck approximately 1 mile farther south on PCH. There was no sign of a driver.

The Ventura County Sheriff's Department deployed a K-9 unit to the scene in an effort to locate the person who drove the truck into Rod and Christian and then left them broken and bleeding on the road.

Two hours later at 3:25 am, a security guard at Zuma Bay called from the guard shack to report that he had found the suspect and the Sheriff's Department arrested Robert Sam Sanchez, 30, of Oxnard. Sanchez was transported to a hospital where a blood test was performed and then he was placed in the Lost Hills Station jail where he was charged with Vehicular Manslaughter (191.5a) vehicular DUI resulting in injury (21153a) and felony hit and run (2991a).

The story thus far is chilling and has had a significant impact on the cycling community, who for the most part, will pause for a moment as the realization that "It could have been me!" sinks in and then go back to life as usual.

But for some, this is more than a moment to mourn the loss of one of our own and the opportunity to offer condolences to the broken family left behind, this is the time to ask some hard questions.

1) Robert Sam Sanchez, the suspect who stands accused of running down Rod and Christian, has already bailed out and is at home enjoying freedom and the assumption of innocence, an assumption that will probably prevail if he has access to any decent legal representation.

Sanchez was not caught behind the wheel of the vehicle, the investigation is taking place by two Deputies who are part of the traffic division of the Sheriff's Department, not the criminal division, and their Supervisor is on medical leave.

What's it going to take for this investigation to be conducted with the full and enthusiastic support of the LA County Sheriff's Department? What's it going to take to get the District Attorney involved now, while the investigation is under way? (btw this is #4 of the Cyclists' Bill of Rights - "cyclists have the right to the full support of our judicial system and the right to expect that those who endanger, injure or kill cyclists be dealt with to the full extent of the law."

2) Lt. Glafkides, the Watch Commander on duty Saturday evening and Sunday morning reports that she has worked this station for 3 and half years but she has never heard of the LA Wheelmen or the Grand Tour. There were 4 Deputies on duty in Malibu that night. There were none on duty in the unincorporated areas around Malibu. The LA Sheriff's Department also handles law enforcement responsibilities for other "contract" communities such as Hidden Hills, Westlake Village, Calabases and Agoura Hills. All totaled, there are approximately 145 square miles in the area that are under the watch of the LASD.

How does the Sheriff's Department not notice the large number of cyclists rolling through the community and how is it that the Watch Commander doesn't know of such a significant event? Lt. Chew relates that he has an email from the LA Wheelmen indicating that an event would be taking place but somehow the Watch Commander never received the message nor noticed in the years prior that the Grand Tour was taking place.

3) PCH has such a horrific record of traffic tragedies and through it all, cyclists find themselves having to argue for their rights on the road. Brad House was hit from behind by a road raging motorist and flipped into the air over the car. The judge found Brad at partial fault, after all, he was in the lane!

Two cyclists, Scott Bleifer and Stanislov Ionov, were hit from behind and killed by the operator of a catering truck. This incident stirred a significant community debate that had many arguing that the cyclists were at fault for riding two abreast and in the lane.

Missing from the discourse is the simple discussion of how pedestrians and cyclists and mass transit passengers and motorists can all use PCH while maintaining some sense of balance based on equality and a guarantee that all modes of transportation will be supported.

After the deaths of Scott and Stanislov, the PCH Task Force was formed and given the mandate of reviewing safety issues for cyclists on PCH, monitoring conditions on PCH and maintaining interagency responsibility for the conditions of PCH. Velo LaGrange and the LACBC and others tout this as one of their accomplishments and yet...the PCH Task Force has gone dormant and cyclists are dying. Why, even the "Share the Road" signs are getting hit by motorists!

The City of Malibu refers to the Sheriff's Department who refer to Caltrans. Meanwhile PCH remains a very busy and congested and conflicted corridor that more closely resembles a traffic sewer than a vital community lifeline.

Through it all, the cycling community has to ask the hard question "What are we going to do about it?"

4) The speed limit on PCH varies from fast to faster to really fast. The exact numbers vary but range from 45 to 50 to 55. Again, the LASD refers to the State's speed trap law and throws up their hands saying, "It's state law, we set the limits based on the 85% rule." (This is the "science" where motorists vote in an opinion poll with their gas pedals)

Do we really live in communities that are so helpless? Are we not adults with some responsibility for our city, our county and our state? How is it that we tolerate such helplessness from our leadership and from out law enforcement offices?

If PCH needs to be slowed down, let's slow it down. There are 28 miles of PCH through Malibu and on this past Saturday night there were 4 Deputies on duty. Engineer a road diet, implement traffic calming technology, do something other than wring hands and wonder why people are dying!

photo credit independentsources

5) The Office of Traffic Safety put the spotlight on Malibu and reported that "Malibu is #1!" Unfortunately the category was for vehicle injuries. Granted, the report from the Office of Traffic Safety is based on statistics from 2005 but unless something dramatic has changed, Malibu is left with the lingering reality that for a City of their size and with the number of miles traveled, they have been recognized by the State of California as:

#1 for vehicle injuries
#2 for alcohol accidents
#1 for alcohol related accidents for the age group 21 to 34
#1 for speed related accidents
#2 for accidents after dark

Granted, there is a motorcycle cop in Malibu who leads the County in tickets issued but unless he is going to escort me every time I ride my bike to the store, he's an anecdotal anomaly. The brutal reality is this: Malibu is a tough place for pedestrians, for cyclists and for mass transit passengers who must navigate some brutal stretches of PCH.

What are we doing to address the significant danger of the speeding motorists and intoxicated motorists that have Malibu one of the most dangerous communities in the State of California?

6) Motorists who run over pedestrians and cyclists choose to run. They do it time after time and then again. The penalty for running is better than the penalty for being drunk. This inequity in the law needs to shift.

Even worse is the simple fact that hitting a pedestrian or cyclist while sober is hardly a crime. After all, "He came out of nowhere!" is a legal defense and "I didn't see him!" is an acceptable explanation for killing and maiming.

The motorist who ran down LA Wheelmen Bobbi Fisher from behind was sober but had a dog in his lap and was distracted, resulting in a broken back for Bobbi. The motorist wasn't even cited.

The motorist who turned left into oncoming LA Wheelmen on a tandem simply said "I didn't see them." Advanced in age and with failing eyesight, the motorist lost his California license, a small inconvenience he overcame by pulling an out of state license using his vacation property as his address. He still drives to the local pub in Malibu while the cyclists slowly heal.

Putting a motor vehicle on the road is a significant responsibility and yet our leadership acts as if it is a basic right and that any effort to hold a motorist accountable is an infringement of their basic human rights.

What is it going to take for us to take the lead and to establish safety and freedom of fear as basic human rights. (btw - this is #1 of the Cyclists' Bill of Rights. Cyclists have the right to travel safely and free of fear.)

7) Ride organizers and Cycling clubs live in fear of LIABILITY. Why? For encouraging people to get off the sofa and go for a ride?

What is it going to take for "We don't need no stinkin' permits!" to become the battle cry of access to the new public space, the streets of our communities?

In fact, what's it going to take for us to shift the fear of liability and to reverse the relationship. Our leadership should be the ones grimacing and cringing and feeling the full fear of liability every time another pedestrian or cyclist is injured or killed on the public streets that they are responsible for maintaining and supervising!

Why are pedestrians and cyclists treated as 2nd class citizens when they want access to our streets? These streets belong to the public and our leadership is responsible for maintaining fair and equitable access.

Why would we tolerate anything less?

As for me, this is far from over. I'll see you on the Streets!

LAPD - "Who Teaches the Teachers?"

(LAPD Officers ride the Hollywood/Vine crosswalk until they defer to the primacy of the motor vehicle and ride out into the oncoming traffic)

A couple of months ago, I was observing the LAPD's Valley Traffic Division as they conducted a pedestrian crosswalk sting on Reseda Boulevard. It was an amazing sight to watch. A police officer in street clothes, the "decoy," would step out into the crosswalk and begin to cross the street. Motorcycle officers stood lined up on the side streets, at the ready to ride into the relentless traffic to cite the motorists who failed to yield the crosswalk to the pedestrian. It was like watching cowboys herd cattle with the traffic cops pulling over as many as four motorists at a time and lining them up curbside for their tickets. It was an amazing sight to witness.

At midday, when the sting operation shutdown for lunch, I saw Officer "K" writing tickets for three male cyclists. My curiosity was piqued. After all, this was a crosswalk sting. The LAPD was there to cite motorists who failed to yield to pedestrians. I watched.

The cyclists were riding inexpensive bikes on the sidewalk when they were stopped and they were dressed as if on their way to or from some form of manual labor. They might be referred to as workforce cyclists. They were silent throughout the ticketing process. They avoided eye contact, they took their tickets and they silently rode north on Reseda.

I asked Officer "K" what the cyclists had done to warrant the citations.

He explained that they had crossed the intersection in the crosswalk against the flashing hand.

I commented that the law prohibiting crossing against the flashing hand applied to pedestrians and that the 3 men were clearly cyclists, not pedestrians.

That was when Officer "K" smiled and said "That's why I wrote them up for crossing against the solid circular red!"

I pointed out that the light couldn't have been red because the crosswalk still had the flashing hand.

He said he had to write it that way because there was no California Vehicle Code (CVC) to rely on to enforce that ban against riding in the crosswalk.

I countered by pointing out that it's not illegal to ride a bike in the crosswalk and that was why there was no CVC prohibiting it.

He stiffened up a bit here and responded that it was up to a Judge to decide and that even if the ticket got thrown out by the Judge, the process was a learning experience.

I closed my mouth and held my tongue but from my perspective, the process had become the punishment, not the lesson.

I'm not sure when the LAPD mandate went from enforcing the law to teaching the law but it leaves me wondering "Who Teaches the Teachers?"

The City Council asked the same question last month when an incident between the operator of a Hummer and several cyclists sparked the cycling community to ride en masse to the Police Commission and the Inspector General claiming bias based policing.

Cyclists involved in the Hummer vs. Cyclists incident claimed the Hummer driver hit a cyclist and then left the scene, driving over three more bikes in the process and dragging one of them up the street. The LAPD responded, caught the Hummer driver, interviewed those at the scene and then allowed the driver of the unlicensed Hummer to drive away from the incident.

The cyclist community was so enraged by this incident that they scheduled a "Storm the Bastille" ride on May 1st and asked the City Council to join them in fighting for even handed and equitable enforcement of the law. The City Council responded to the complaints of the May 1st "Storm the Bastille" cyclists with the following motion (09-1035):

MOTION Numerous incidents have been reported relative to bicycle and vehicle collisions and aggressive motorists attitudes to law-abiding people riding bicycles. Complaints have also been raised regarding the treatment of bicyclists by the Los Angeles Police Department. It is critical that the City respond to these situations and respond appropriately.

I THEREFORE MOVE that the City Council direct the Los Angeles Police Department to report on recent bicycle incidents and conflicts between bicyclists and motorists, as well as efforts to increase police officer training related to bicycling activities and applicable regulations and laws.

The motion was made by Councilwoman Janice Hahn and Councilman Bill Rosendahl, seconded by Councilmembers Ed Reyes, Tom LaBonge, Eric Garcetti and Wendy Greuel.

Unfortunately, the motion directing the LAPD didn't elicit the response the cyclists sought.

LAPD Deputy Chief Kirk Albanese reported to the City Council two weeks later but he failed to address "police training related to bicycling activities and laws," instead regaling the council with his version of the Hummer vs. Cyclists incident. He relied on his memory for the report, having neglected to bring the actual file (a compilation of three reports, initially logged as two reports and finally released as single report with a single report number) and I would contend that he made a few mistakes along the way including referring to the cyclists of Los Angeles as "these people."

Albanese reported that the cyclist hit the Hummer, a statement that is contradicted by reality. The cyclist was hit from behind, the damage was to the rear of the bike and he was thrown forward. Tough to do unless the LAPD is going to claim that the cyclist also broke the laws of physics. Albanese continued by claiming that the statements of all witnesses were taken, again contradicted by reality. I forwarded the contact info of another witness to the incident to the LAPD, one who was not on the ride or in the Hummer but who lived in the area. He had identified himself to the Officers at the scene but was told, "We already know what happened." Albanese then referred to the investigating division as both Central Traffic and South Traffic. A small mistake, but nonetheless, a mistake.

Through it all, the Deputy Chief of the LAPD demonstrated some serious skills. He was initially directed to report on LAPD training but he artfully dodged that instruction and shifted the discussion to an incident but denied the City Council the opportunity to actually review the report which left him free to present his version of the incident unchallenged.

The LADOT Bikeways Coordinator sat next to him and followed suit, turning the conversation into an off-topic discussion of bicycle safety and responsibility training for cyclists as well as the updates of the City's Bicycle Plan and the LADOT website.

The LAPD and the LADOT made no pretense of addressing training for the LAPD on bicycling regulations and laws and that is a complete failure, not only to respond to a City Council directive, but to the community as a whole.

The need to address training for the LAPD on bicycling regulations and laws was made clear this past week.

On Monday, June 1, 2009 at approximately noon, a woman rode her bicycle on the sidewalk of Louise Avenue in the valley. As she approached the intersection of Valerio she rode into the intersection on an unmarked crosswalk. At the same time a large truck approached the intersection on Valerio and proceeded to turn right onto Louise. The cyclist and the truck collided, she fell to the ground and the truck crushed her head as she lay on the street.

The operator of the truck, which was equipped with a crane and was hauling DWP power poles, was unaware of the incident until he was notified via walkie talkie by his "pilot" in the escort vehicle that was behind the truck.

This incident is tragic, a life was lost. In addition, the lives of those involved will forever be scarred by the horrific nature of the scene. The fact that the vehicle was moving through a quiet residential neighborhood is also a concern as is the fact that the truck was operated by an LADWP contractor.

But especially disturbing is the resulting confusion during the investigation of the incident and the confusion over "the rules of the road."

Councilman Smith's office responded to the incident the next day and explained, via email, that "the bicyclist was reportedly riding on the wrong side of the roadway and traveling against the traffic flow; making her the initial "primary cause" of this tragedy." The email went on to detail the law enforcement experience of Councilman Smith, Chief of Staff Mitch Englander and Public Safety Deputy Jim Dellinger.

The LAPD's Public Information Officer confirmed the report that the LAPD considered the cyclist the "primary cause" of the incident because she was riding a bike in a crosswalk which is a violation of CVC 21200 which requires a cyclist to obey the rules of the road. The PIO explained that a cyclist must either dismount at crosswalks or ride on the right side of the road with traffic.

I asked if he had ever ridden the Orange Line Bike Path or the Chandler Bike Path or any of the City's bikeways facilities that actually direct cyclists into the crosswalk at intersections. The PIO paused and then suggested that I speak to the investigating officer.

I called the LAPD's Specialize Collision Investigation Detail (SCID) and spoke to the investigating officer assigned to this case who also explained that cyclists must obey the rules of the road which prohibit riding a bike in the crosswalk. I asked for the actual vehicle code or municipal code that prohibits cyclists from riding in the crosswalk and he simply referred to CVC 21200 and repeated the claim that cyclists must dismount before using a crosswalk.

The cyclist who lost her life at the intersection of Louise and Valerio is not here to explain what happened. She is not here to defend her actions and in a way it doesn't matter because, regardless of who is determined at fault, she is still dead.

But...I believe we have an obligation to be accurate in applying the law to this incident and it is either illegal for a cyclist to ride a bike in a crosswalk or it's not. That is a simple issue that can be settled quickly and if the LAPD's appraisal of this incident is based on that ruling then it is very important that we are accurate in applying the law.

I contend that it is not illegal to ride a bike in the crosswalk. It might not wise, it might not be advisable, but it is definitely not illegal. cyclists are not required to dismount at intersections or at crosswalks.

The fact that there is confusion over such a simple issue demonstrates the real need for specific training for the LAPD on bicycling activities and applicable regulations and laws.

On May 1, 2009 the City Council called on the LAPD to report on police officer training related to bicycling activities and applicable regulations and laws.

This tragic incident and the resulting confusion demonstrate the need for the LAPD to review and report on their departmental training of the rules and regulations that govern safe and effective cycling in the City of Los Angeles.

p.s. Attached is a 2006 City Council resolution addressing cyclists in the crosswalks.

CityWatchLA - Echo Park Ghost Rider

CityWatch, Apr 24, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 33

Jesus Castillo moved from Sonora, Mexico to Echo Park in search of the American Dream. He was 44. He didn't own a car. In fact he didn't have a drivers license. He simply rode his bike everywhere.

He lived in Echo Park and he was a day laborer, taking work when he could and where he could. Through it all, he rode his bike everywhere.

A week ago, late at night, he was riding south on Glendale Boulevard when he was hit from behind by a motorist who, according to witnesses, was swerving. He was killed just under the Sunset crossing of Glendale Boulevard. The police arrested the motorist within hours and charged him with vehicular manslaughter and drunk driving. The motorist had a suspended license and was driving the car belonging to his mother.

The parents of Jesus Castillo are in town, having traveled from Sonora to visit the spot where there son was run down from behind and left to die in the streets by a drunk driver.

Cyclists responded to the news with shock and with outrage and with hard questions.

What are we doing to get drunk drivers off the streets? What are we doing to get drivers with suspended licenses out of the driver's seat? How do we get those convicted of drunk drivers into diversion programs that have a real impact?

Last week's Office of Traffic Safety Conference in San Francisco addressed this very subject and highlighted the need to support law enforcement with innovations in the judicial programs so that the cycle of abuse can be stopped.

The Honorable Richard Vlavianos of San Joaquin showcased a DUI Court program that addressed high risk, multiple offenders and has a documented 50 percent increase in compliance rates and an 80 percent reduction in recidivism among the high risk offenders.

What's it going to take for the largest City in the most populated State in the most powerful Country in the world to step up and make public safety on our streets a priority?

As for the cyclists, they ride this Friday at 8 pm with a Ghost Bike. It's a tradition in the cycling community around the world that when a cyclist is killed by a motorist, a white bike is placed at the location to memorialize the tragic and unnecessary loss of life.

Let's work together to make sure this is the last Ghost Bike placed in our community. (Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net.)

CityWatchLA - Zero Deaths, Everyone Counts

CityWatch, Apr 21, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 32

California's Office of Traffic Safety, the department that administers traffic safety grants, recently convened a statewide Summit and, for the first time, invited bike activists to participate. I was honored to receive a "scholarship" to the conference in San Francisco.

Given the recent spike in pedestrians deaths in Los Angeles coupled with the City's current financial woes, I fully expected to encounter a full contingent of City Council and DOT representatives, all with grant proposals in hand and all asking "What can we do?" But such was not the case.

What I encountered was 750 people from around the state, ranging from law enforcement officers to traffic engineers to public health advocates, all marching under the banner of "Toward zero deaths, every 1 counts" and all committed to working together to not just lowering the number of deaths on our streets but to eliminating them altogether.

The uniqueness of this conference was apparent at registration when I was handed a flyer that reminded guests "do not leave service revolvers unattended in the guest rooms." It continued at the opening session when the call to order included a moment of silence for those law enforcement officers and road maintenance workers who had been killed this past year while working to make our streets and highways safer for everybody.

During the conference I had breakfast with a Police Officer from Vernon, population 100, who wanted to know how he could address the safety of the "workforce" cyclists who work in Vernon and ride the sidewalks, often after dark, and who don't know the rules of the road.

I had lunch with a Police Officer from San Francisco and heard first hand how they were able to establish a working relationship with the cycling community, all while making safety a priority and somehow accommodating a Critical Mass ride that regularly draws thousands of cyclists to the streets.

I had dinner with traffic engineers who punched holes in the "crosswalk removal" studies and the "false sense of security" mythology that is so often referenced as the LADOT reevaluates and removes our crosswalks.

Through it all we heard of the current trend in traffic safety which is to focus on surviving the collision, a scenario that leaves the pedestrians and cyclists on the street as vulnerable or more vulnerable than ever. While the mileage death rate is at its lowest point since it began being measured, speed-related fatalities are on the rise.

Tom Vanderbilt, author of "Traffic: Why We Drive the Way We Do (and What It Says About Us), drove home the point that our greatest opportunity for improving safety lies in modifying motorist behavior in order to prevent the collisions, not in simply engineering to survive them.

As the conference progressed and the speakers offered solutions from all directions it became apparent that there is no simple answer but that there are a multitude of approaches and our greatest opportunity is to simply lay down some priorities and to work together to make them happen.

To that end I am pleased to announce that pedestrian and cyclist safety is one of the eight areas of focus for the Office of Traffic Safety, that the OTS is keeping track of the numbers and that the OTS mission is to effectively and efficiently administer traffic safety grants that reduce traffic deaths, injuries, and economic losses.

The hard questions for the City of Los Angeles is these:

• What are LA's priorities for safety on the streets?
• Does LA evaluate pedestrian, cyclist and motorist safety?
• Is LA going after the funding that will support efforts to make our streets safer for everybody?

(Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net)

CityWatchLA - Speed on LA’s Streets: Who’s in Charge?

CityWatch, Apr 17, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 31

Got a speedy response from Councilman Greig Smith on my CityWatch article on speed limits and speed being a killer. His thoughts:

“I appreciate your concern about speed limit engineering studies. What is missing in your article is that we are REQUIRED by state law to readjust our speed limits every few years to properly reflect the average speed. If that is not done, or if the city CHOOSES to ignore that study, the city MAY NOT use radar on those streets. Considering that the most reliable ticket for speed is done by radar tracking, to not comply means that will be little or no enforcement on those streets. I have been to Sacramento to try and get he law changed for years. The legislature refuses to make changes to the law. I have always argued that this process automatically raises speeds each time you do it, until you reach a level of speed that is the maximum cars can travel on a road, regardless of what is safe.

I don't know if your were unaware of this law, or you purposely over looked it so you can blame the City Council for this, when it is clearly out of our control. Either way I believe a correction is warranted.”

GREIG SMITH
Councilman, 12th District

Councilman Smith is correct when he points out that my article failed to mention the state law addressing the establishment of speed limits and the use of radar/laser speed limit enforcement. The omission was not because I am unaware of the law nor was it because I wanted to blame the City Council for the law but simply because I have written about the law so many times that this time I left it out.

Nevertheless, here is a recap of the relevant "speed trap" law. California State law specifies that in order to use radar/laser speed limit enforcement, the speed limit of a street must be set based on a survey of unobstructed traffic during non-peak hours and the speed limit is to be set at the 85% mark. This speed limit survey is to be conducted every 5-7 years and if the speed limit certification lapses, law enforcement officers can't use radar/laser to enforce the speed limit.

Councilman Smith, in my opinion, is incorrect when he claims "it is clearly out of our control."

This is Los Angeles, the largest City in the most populated State in the most powerful Country in the world. Nothing is out of our control if we work together to make it happen.

1) John Fisher, the Assistant General Manager of the Department of Transportation, sits on the California Traffic Control Devices Committee which has been reviewing the "speed trap" law and the conditions for surveying and establishing speed limits. Communities throughout the state have expressed their frustration with the status quo. Is the City of Los Angeles doing all it can to encourage Fisher to fight for change?

2) Councilman Dennis Zine recently introduced a City Council Resolution calling for a revision to the "speed trap" law and the City Council approved it. Was this a simple gesture to appease community activists opposed to the recent wave of speed limit increases or was this the battle cry of a City Council prepared to fight for a change to State Law?

3) Assemblyman Paul Krekorian has introduced the "Safe Streets Bill" (AB776) that will allow local governments, through a public process, to consider pedestrian safety when reviewing local speed limits, not just the rising speed of passing motorists. Has the City Council taken a position on the "Safe Streets Bill" and are we prepared to go to Sacramento to support Krekorian?

4) While Fisher works the CTCD committee for changes and Zine takes that resolution on the road and Krekorian fights in the Assembly, the City of Los Angeles has a full tool-box of engineering solutions at its disposal including bulb-outs, road diets, refuge islands and other traffic calming devices that would put safety first.

The brutal reality is this, we are in the midst of a crisis. Our streets are crowded, our streets are dangerous and they're getting faster and faster, not safer. The presumption that motorists will drive at a prevailing speed that is safe is simply flawed. That speed may feel safe for the motorist safely inside a vehicle engineered for speed but that doesn't take into account the more vulnerable pedestrian or cyclist on the street.

The City of Los Angeles maintains speed limit certification on 700 street segments. Some of these surveys have been expired for years and some of the surveys rely on old data collected long ago. Why the rush to increase the speed limits when we have so many opportunities to work together to make our streets safer for everybody.

I spoke to Councilman Smith and he indicated that he has lobbied and testified in Sacramento in an effort to have the "speed trap" law revised so that local authorities have more control of their streets. He went so far as to call it "a stupid law" and said he is willing to continue the battle.

In response to my suggestion for traffic calming measures, he acknowledged that our streets are engineered for speed but countered that he thinks more law enforcement is the best opportunity to make our streets safer for everybody. He added that there is a real need for education, "especially in our multi-cultural environment with so many interpretations of the rules of the road."

He concluded our conversation by pitching another solution to the current crisis on the streets and that is to simply combine the City's grants programs under one Grants Department so that we can go after law enforcement money, education money, engineering money and do it effectively and efficiently. Currently each City Department conducts their own grants programs, some effectively and some ineffectively, but ultimately resulting in the City falling far short of our "Fair Share."

The opportunity is ours. I'm calling for a moratorium on speed limit increases. It's time for us to decide if we're going to work together to make Los Angeles the City of Great Streets or if we're going to continue to let people die in our crosswalks. It's our call. (Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist advocate and is a CityWatch contributor. He can be reached at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net)

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.)

CityWatchLA - Death in the Crosswalk

The sign reads: A woman’s life ended here today and many will be changed. God bless her and her family. Let’s all slow down a little here in downtown.

CityWatch, Jan 13, 2009
Vol 7 Issue 4

“Let’s All Slow Down A Little”
By Stephen Box

Time in the cross walk ran out for Gwendolyn Coleman last week.

On Wednesday, January 7th, at 6:30 in the morning, Gwendolyn Coleman stepped into the crosswalk at 5th and Flower Downtown LA and started to cross the street. She never made it. She was hit by a DASH bus and killed. The LAPD later reported that the woman had been crossing the street legally and that the DASH operator did not see the woman because of a blind spot.

The circumstances of this tragic incident are shocking and have resonated not just through the downtown area, as is evidenced by the spontaneous memorial, but throughout the city. Discussions broke out on the danger of LA's streets and the difficulty a pedestrian has in competing with vehicular traffic for the simple right cross the street safely.

This particular intersection is especially tough for pedestrians. The first of the three phases, the "Walk" phase, is only 4 seconds long. There are six lanes to cross and the "Walk" phase is only sufficient for a healthy adult to get to the second lane before the blinking red hand appears.

The debate over signal timing, along with arguments over the speed of motor vehicle traffic on streets with significant pedestrian activity, have long been a point of contention and this intersection is a sad but excellent example of a bias toward moving cars at the expense of the safety and convenience of pedestrians.

The City Planning Commission has just unanimously approved a proposal to make Downtown Los Angeles more walkable and pedestrian-friendly. The proposal has been in the works for two years and consists of two parts, an Urban Design Standards and Guidelines element and a Downtown Street Standards element.

While this significant step is much too late for Ms. Coleman, it's not too late to honor her by working together to make LA a better … and safer … place for pedestrians.

Meanwhile, the Department of Transportation is appearing before Wednesday's Transportation Committee meeting with proposals to raise the speed limits at several locations throughout the Valley.

There's no better time than the present for LA’s citizens, the LADOT and City Planning to begin working together at leveling the safety playing field for those who cross the City’s many crosswalks on foot.

(Stephen Box is a transportation and cyclist activist and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at Stephen@thirdeyecreative.net)

CityWatchLA - The Sound of Death on LA’s Streets…and No One is Listening

CityWatch, Oct 10, 2008
Vol 6 Issue 82

LA Traffic
By Stephen Box

Two weeks ago, in the early evening of a warm Friday night, Michael Duffin parked his car on Hazeltine Avenue, across the street from his home in Valley Glen, a quiet residential community in the south Valley of Los Angeles.

He pulled up behind two of his neighbors who had just parked on the street and who were standing next to their cars engaged in a conversation.

Hazeltine Avenue, in the half-mile stretch between Oxnard and Burbank, is a dimly lit street with parking on both sides, one lane of travel in each direction and a median strip to accommodate left turns. It has no crosswalks, no stop signs, no signals, no speed bumps, nothing to slow down the traffic that flows unimpeded through the neighborhood. Duffin exited his car holding a bag from Burger King and began to cross Hazeltine mid-block between Hatteras and Emelita.

He made it two-thirds of the way and was in the northbound lane when a car traveling in excess of 60 mph hit him, throwing him 80 yards up the street. He landed at the corner of Hazeltine and Emelita.

He never saw it coming. His neighbors across the street never saw it coming. They reported hearing the sound of an impact “like a car hitting another car. It was loud and it was solid. We looked and then we saw Michael lying in the street.”

The driver of the car never stopped. Michael Duffin was pronounced dead at a local hospital.

Michael was not alone. Two hours later Jose Silva left a sporting event at Cathedral High School in Chinatown and began to cross the street when he was struck by a speeding car as it ran a red light, hitting him with such force that he was thrown forward and then hit again by the same car. The driver of the car never stopped. Jose was pronounced dead at the scene.

Unfortunately, these incidents aren’t unusual or even uncommon. In fact they’re barely news. In the days that followed, a motorist racing down La Cienega at 125 mph crashed head-on into a mini-van, killing himself and severely injuring the two occupants of the other vehicle.

On Victory Boulevard, a motorist traveling at 90 mph lost control and hit a tree so hard that a front wheel broke off and flew into the bedroom of a nearby home. The motorist was killed. The occupants of the home were unharmed.

Our streets are engineered to move traffic. They are filled with high-performance vehicles operated by low-performance motorists. In terms of lives lost, only cancer and heart disease have a higher toll than traffic.

Recent debates over speed limit increases in order to provide for radar enforcement fail to address the fact that our streets are engineered for speed and our neighborhoods are under siege.

A decade ago, a motion was introduced to the Los Angeles City Council, recognizing that with the continuing growth of the City “traffic problems such as excessive speed, commuter shortcuts and spillover from commercial developments are becoming increasing serious in residential neighborhoods and are adversely affecting the quality of life more than ever before.” The motion went so far as to call for traffic-calming measures including “speed hump installation, narrowing of paved roadways and the installation of speed-limit signs and other measures designed to discourage unnecessary traffic in residential neighborhoods and reduce the speed of vehicles traveling through them.”

It concluded by calling on the Los Angeles Department of Transportation to protect residents “from traffic flows that are excessive or inappropriate for their neighborhoods” and to create a Neighborhood Calming Section.

Since then, there have been many innovations in traffic calming techniques including roundabouts, ped scrambles, pelican crossings, bulb-outs, safety islands and shared streets.

Since then, community members are becoming more emphatic about reclaiming their streets, about creating neighborhoods where kids can walk to school, where streets are crossable and where the quality of life is more important than maintaining “alternate routes.”

Since then, community members have become more active and educated and committed to promoting innovations in transportation and not just those who have traveled to Europe. One only has to visit West Hollywood to see bicycle boxes and pelican crossings, roundabouts and safety islands that make one slow down just to watch, in envy, as environmental solutions provide equality for pedestrians, cyclists, motorists and mass transit passengers.

Meanwhile, in Los Angeles, the LADOT is busy installing ped scrambles in ten different locations throughout the City. Ped Scrambles are all-walk phases of an intersection that provide pedestrians with the option of crossing the intersection diagonally.

While the LADOT is to be applauded for its implementation of the ped scramble, members of the community are left wondering how this all came about with no contact with the community. It’s not that the idea is bad, it’s just that the community might have some insight as to the best intersections, based on first hand experience.

All of which brings us to the real opportunity for innovation in transportation in Los Angeles and that is to engage the community in the process.

Its local community members that know which Franklin Avenue valets are racing through which side streets at midnight. They’ve got a proposed solution, if anyone is ready to listen.

It’s local community members that have Woonerf plans already drawn up, all in an effort to reduce the speed of the cut-through traffic on their residential street, if anyone is ready to listen.

It’s local cyclists who can tell you that there are 34 streetlights burned out or missing on the Cahuenga Pass, making dodging the uneven manhole covers and potholes difficult at night, if anyone is ready to listen.

It’s local bus passengers that can tell you which intersections are tough for bus connections and great for ped scrambles, if anyone is ready to listen.

It’s local pedestrians who can tell you which streets are simply not crossable on foot, if anyone is ready to listen.

The people of Los Angeles deserve more from the LADOT than an email address and the opportunity to submit questions, if properly formatted and vetted by committee, board and then chair.

The people of Los Angeles deserve the right to participate in the vision for their community … from the beginning, and that includes our plans for how we move, how we get about and how we share our public space.

It’s time for the LADOT and people of Los Angeles to partner in making our streets great places for walking, for riding, for living and for sharing, for all modes of travel. For making them safe for the Michael Duffins and Jose Silvas. And the hundreds of other who will follow to their sad ends if the LADOT doesn’t engage the community and take action now.

(Stephen Box is a cyclist activist and writes for CityWatch. He can be reached at: Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net.)