(Editor's note.  Some people are asking why there isn't more on the bike amenities at the station.  The Source did such a good job on the lockers and racks issue that we didn't think it was necessary.  Read their review here. )

As many of you know, the Gold Line Eastside Extension is scheduled to open on Sunday stretching from the Little Tokyo Arts District to Atlantic Boulevard in Monterey Park.  Because of some controversy over the safety measures taken by Metro, a team of six cyclists including myself, Carlos Morales, Renee Morales, Browne Molyneux, Steven Frein, and Andrew Didia headed out to check out the new stations, and the area around them, for ourselves.  Andrew deserves some sort of prize for doing the ride on his birthday.  Browne's review of the ride will be available on The Bus Bench next week.

Overall, we had a favorable impression of the future Gold Line and see how it will be a boon for the communities through which it passes.  However, there were some safety concerns we had, especially at the Little Tokyo and Indiana Stations.

For the record, we're going to set-aside the issue of whether or not stations should be grade-separated with the exception of Indiana Station.  Indiana is the first station not separated after the two that are. 

Also, I timed every intersection to see if the timing was appropriate for pedestrians to get across the street.  The farther east that we went, the worse the signal timing was.  Our recommendation is that the city or Metro should do a study of all the crossing times at these intersections and re-time several of them.  In the meantime, the short signals on the east are going to create pedestrian/car conflicts.

There was also a general concern that there are no gates separating the trains from the pedestrian crossings.  For a pedestrian crossing the street, the site of a train coming at them, even if it stops, with nothing between them is a daunting one.  Without gates, pedestrians are in a more vulnerable position.

Last, we didn't look at the intersection from a driver's perspective.  If that's what you're looking for, call AAA.

We also noticed that there were workers installing signs and doing cleaning at every stations.  Some stations had power tools and even construction materials.  The best analogy I can give is that Metro is acting like I did in college when I was cramming for exams at the last second.  Maybe Sunday is too soon to open?

You can read our station by station review after the jump after a surprise impromptu interview with Los Angeles City Councilman and Metro Board Member Jose Huizar who happened to be giving an interview to a Metro camera person at Mariachi Plaza.  For all of my pictures, check out the LA Streetsblog Flickr pool.  Before the jump, let's here from Councilman Huizar on the state of the $4.5 million that the Metro Board put towards safety improvements along the Eastside Extension.

Honest question, if all the safety improvements aren't going to be done for a couple of months, why are we opening the station in two days?

We began the ride at Union Station and headed South to the Little Tokyo Station, where we had a series of concerns with the pedestrian crossing at Alameda and Temple Street. 

For pedestrians going east on the North side of the street, a wall creates a blind intersection for trains traveling South.  Mercifully, the tracks that are running feet from the crossings are going north so the pedestrian does have some space.

However, for everyone walking along the east side of the station, the northbound rail cars travel feet from you at all times.  You can literally reach out and touch the cars as they go past.

On the south side of the intersection, there is a pedestrian island separating the station from the street for pedestrians.  Unfortunately, the island is only a couple of feet wide.  A group of people standing on the island could easily spill out into the rail area.  Worse, a family, with the parents looking forward, could easily miss someone behind them taking a step backwards into the tracks.

As a whole, that intersection needs improvements.  Widening the island or using pedestrian gates to help keep people off the tracks are two solutions.  No matter what, this intersection is going to need some help.

The good news is this intersection was one of the worst we saw the entire trip.  I was a little worried when we had so many complaints from the first intersection we saw...

The intersection at the South side of the station was an improvement, although trains taking a right from first onto Alameda again cross so very close to the sidewalk.  There is another pedestrian island, but this time it's a much larger island.

It should be noted that both crossings had flashing "train approaching" signs along with wide, brick crosswalks and yellow uneven entrances to the crossings so vision impaired pedestrians have a warning before crossing the tracks or a street.  All of these amenities appeared at every intersection affected by the Gold Line.

From there we traveled east to the Pico/Aliso Station in Boyle Heights.

This hard hat had plenty of times to cross the six lanes of traffic and transit. </sarcasm>

Maybe we were distracted because the staff on hand at this station were the only ones that let us get up into the station of the raised ones.  From where we were standing, the intersections looked good.

We continued on first street down First Street to Mariachi Plaza.  The station itself blends beautifully with the iconic architecture around the plaza.  It looks great and enhances the plaza area.  Good work, architects.  Sadly, there were no mariachi's present at the time of our arrival.  Instead, we had Councilman and Board Member Huizar.

That's Browne, not the Councilman

Generally, we found both ground level stations for below-level rail to have adequate amenities.  Many of the problems that we note at stations are caused by adding a third mode of transit to an already busy street.  As I said earlier, we don't intend to make the argument that the line needs to be built below grade.  From a safety standpoint, it can't be a coincidence that the stations we felt most comfortable and safe around were the same ones that didn't have the train running on the street.  Even the crossing signal times seemed adequate.

Our next stop was Soto Station.

Soto station through steel.

Soto station has a huge plaza surrounding the station, but is sort of charmless.  Especially after the beauty of Mariachi Plaza, the giant empty plaza surrounded by fence architecture style seemed more like a prison than a transit stop.

Of course, by Sunday the fence should be down and according to some the plaza will be full of street vendors.  At the south side of the station were some benches so we assume that there's going to be something for those sitting to do in the rest of the plaza.  The layout of the station plaza reminded me of the Santa Monica/Vermont Station on the Red Line, and that station features a handful of street vendors selling hats, sunglasses, and food.

From there, we returned to at-grade stations stopping at Indiana.

Fencing on the far side

Our first reaction was, "why isn't this station built below grade?"  The poor quality of the street and sidewalks had us concerned.  When you add in the experience our friends at Curbed had here a couple of months ago, and there are larger problems.

The light rail, not at-grade again, comes down first and turns right into Indiana station.  After traveling south through the station, it then takes another right onto third.

In the middle of the station, passengers have the option to cross the tracks to get to the center island or to get back onto the street by crossing through a series of gates that you can push open.  True, there are large flashing lights when a train is coming, but at the least this crossing should be below or above grade and the fences should be closed.  Having gates that can be opened that easily is a recipe for disaster.

However, there's a larger issue with this station that would be best addressed by bringing in some progressive transportation engineers and changing the character of the three streets, First, Third and Indiana, that surround the station.  Even with large crosswalks, the area had a bad feeling to it, with traffic racing along the street and trains moving through the station just feet from the sidewalks.

Our next stop was the Maravilla Station.  The station itself, like the other raised stations at Pico/Aliso and the two that end the line, are located in the street so pedestrians have to cross the street to get to the station.  It seems that at all of these stations there is going to be conflict between pedestrians trying to get to the station and catch a train and cars, who may have a green light at the time, not looking for them.

Of particular interest at this station was the bike parking.  I'm standing in a circle with racks and lockers.  The Christmas tree is the start of the station.  See any issues?

Another note is that it was nigh impossible for seniors that we saw to cross Third all the way.  A pedestrian trying to get across from the north to the south might miss a train while jogging across the street, even with the signs.  Especially with the giant Christmas tree.

From here we moved the East L.A. Civic Center.  The Civic Center stop is going to have the same issues as the others with a mid-street station, but other than that we found the crosswalks to be wide and the signals to be strong.  A wide street again creates an issue for pedestrians.  Maybe the city should have a task force to address pedestrian signal timing around the stations?

For our car driving friends. Be careful making a left out of the Eastside Civic Center. The train is partially blocked.

Our last stop is the Atlantic Station, where the crosswalk signalization problem kicked into over-drive.  Because each intersection had a series of islands, there were times were it would take over five minutes to cross the street, and that was for Browne who is young and healthy.  A senior might well just give up on crossing altogether.

It may be the end of the line, but our friend the bus moves forward.

On the east side of the station, you actually have to cross a lane of traffic to get to a signal-call box.  I've never seen that before.

From there, we got back on our bikes and headed west toward Little Tokyo and Union Station.  To summarize our views and impressions:

1) The Gold Line is going to be a positive for the community.  The route was well chosen.

2) Our general concerns with the intersection timing should be addressed across the line by LADOT

3) Metro doesn't seem ready for the opening.  There was work being done on every station, and sometimes it involved construction equipment.  Maybe by tomorrow it will all be fine, but today it seems not yet ready.

4) There still needs to be a lot of work done around Indiana Station.  The crossing within the station should also be improved somehow.

5) The intersections around Little Tokyo also need to be addressed.  The one at the North side of the station seems particularly dangerous.

6) First could use a bike lane.  It's wide enough and it's a good idea to combine modes.

Pedestrian life downtown. Photo by MarcTonySmith/Flickr

Los Angeles -Long Beach-Santa Ana Metro Area is among the most dangerous communities in the nation for pedestrians, ranking third in the percentage of crashes involving pedestrians and 27th out of the 52 largest metro areas in total pedestrian safety, a new report shows. Unfortunately, the report also shows that our Metro area shows the least political will to correct the problem, ranking in the bottom 10% when it comes to spending funds to protect the most vulnerable road users. The Greater Los Angeles Metro Region ranked fourth from the bottom when it comes to spending money to fix dangerous roads. You can read the full local press release by LA Walks at their blogsite.

The report, Dangerous by Design: Solving the Epidemic of Preventable Pedestrian Deaths (and Making Great Neighborhoods), ranks America's major metropolitan areas and states according to a Pedestrian Danger Index that assesses how safe they are for walking. An update of the 2004 Mean Streets report, Dangerous by Design was released by Transportation for America and the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership.

The report also examined how states and localities are spending federal money that could be used to make the most dangerous streets safer, and found that Los Angeles -Long Beach-Santa Ana Metro Area ranks 48th, spending (only) $0.45 per person. Yet, 26.99% of traffic deaths in the metro area are pedestrians, making the metro area the 3^rd highest rating location in the nation. This percentage is particularly high since only 2.7% of the population walks to work.  In other words, few people commute to work by walking, owing in part to the unsafe nature of our streets, and our governments are not spending nearly enough money to reverse that trend.:

"Los Angeles is where we are in the rankings because we are not investing to protect our citizens from speeding traffic as well as designing and building livable streets in our neighborhoods," said Deborah Murphy, Founder of Los Angeles Walks, "Be it the horrific crash that claimed the lives of two USC students after one was drug for almost 200 yards, or the case of a commuter being slammed by a city-bus in a crosswalk downtown; there are too many crashes every year that point to a dangerous system in need of real investment."

Unfortunately, these types of crashes are all-too frequent. Just last night, a pedestrian was killed by a car while legally crossing the street in a crosswalk in Long Beach.

One small step the City of Los Angeles could make immediately is setting aside a portion of its Measure R Local Return funds for bicycle and pedestrian safety. The City Council Transportation Committee is set to vote on how to spend it's portion of the county-wide transit tax on November 18.

"As Congress prepares to rewrite the nation's transportation law, this report is yet another wake-up call showing why it is so urgent to update our policies and spending priorities," said James Corless, director of Transportation for America.

Angelenos could have a great impact on the debate in Washington, D.C. on how transportation dollars are spent. ⁞ After all, L.A. is the largest city in the home state of Barbara Boxer, the Chair of the Senate Transportation and Infrastructure Committee.

If the equivalent of one jumbo jet full of Americans died every month, the resulting public outcry would be deafening. Or would it?

Anne Canby, the former Delaware transportation secretary who heads the Surface Transportation Policy Partnership (STPP), raised that question today as her organization helped unveil a new report on the nation's pedestrian safety outlook. In fact, Canby said, nearly 5,000 U.S. pedestrians die every year in traffic crashes -- but the resulting public health risk has yet to register as an urgent national issue.

The report released today, a joint effort by STPP and Transportation for America (T4A), ranks the nation's most dangerous cities for pedestrians and bicyclists according to a "danger index" that factors in the number of residents who walk to work.

The top 10 most dangerous areas (viewable above) were all located in the south. Florida has the dubious distinction of hosting the top four riskiest cities, though the study's authors noted that the state's large percentage of retirees were not disproportionally represented in fatality data.

The rankings are likely to be troubling for residents of the most dangerous cities, but the report's rundown of federal safety spending paints just as lackluster a picture.

Since the 2005 transportation bill took effect, according to the report, U.S. cities with populations greater than 1 million have spent an average of $1.39 per person in federal money on pedestrian and bicyclist safety. Under the 1998 transportation bill, the same U.S. cities spent just $0.82 per person in federal money -- a rise that today's report deems "a vast improvement" but Canby finds lacking.

"Safety for pedestrians has not really advanced a great deal over this period," Canby told reporters today, adding that walking and biking have yet to be "regarded as full forms of transportation."

Pedestrian and bicycle safety is often funded through Transportation Enhancements (TE), a program that sets aside 10 percent of each state's aid from Washington for green transport. But as Streetsblog Capitol Hill reported last month, TE took a disproportionate hit when congressional inaction forced the cancellation of $8.7 billion in state DOT contract authority.

The authors of today's report delved deeper into that trend and found that most state officials sit on their hands when it comes to spending available bicycle and pedestrian money, both for safety and better infrastructure:

[M]ost states have not fully utilized these funds, obligating (i.e., actually spending) only 80.4 percent of the nearly $9.4 billion made available through the Transportation Enhancements program since 1992, and only 35 percent of the Safe Routes to Schools program since 2005. This leaves federal funds, which could be dedicated to improving pedestrian and bicyclist safety, effectively unspent. This is not for lack of local need or interest in such projects, by and large, but rather a reflection of state DOTs' priorities. ...

Worse still, the large amount of unspent funds in those programs make them a prime target for meeting federal [cancellation] requirements ... In FY 2008 alone, states returned over $98.5 million in TE funds to the federal government through rescis- sions, equivalent to a 12 percent reduction in the 2008 apportionment of TE funds.

Using Federal Highway Administration records, the report's authors found an average of 1.5 percent of federal transportation spending is focused on pedestrian and bicycle safety, while pedestrians alone account for 11.5 percent of traffic fatalities.

"We're worried that this is only going to get worse," Dr. Linda Degutis, associate professor of emergency medicine and public health at Yale University, told reporters today. "We've not seen a significant decline in injuries or deaths of pedestrians."

What can be done to remedy the whopping safety funding gap? Requiring that federal safety money be spent in an amount proportional to the risk facing pedestrians would be a place to start, but the report focuses on the advantages of a national "complete streets" policy that would tell transportation planners to accommodate all road users.

In its statement on the STPP/T4A report, the National Complete Streets Coalition urges adoption of that national policy, which is part of the six-year, $500 billion national infrastructure bill that's currently stalled in the House.

Earlier today, Walk Score, the website that ranks areas based on how easy it is to lead a car-lite lifestyle, has taken a big step towards improving its metrics by adding transit data.  As long as a city has google transit, which thankfully Los Angeles now does, you can get a much clearer picture of how easy it would be to ditch your car after moving to a new neighborhood.

The site's usefullness to home buyers and others just looking to move is one of the sites' most useful tools.  Local real estate websites, such as Zip Realty, use Walk Score on their website to help home buyers make decisions.  When we were planning to move to Los Angeles, my wife and I used Walk Score to narrow down the neighborhoods in which we looked for a rental house; so I can vouch for the site's usefulness.  Of course, the site doesn't take into account urban design and safety issues, but between google street view and the LAPD's crime map that information is also readily available.  In other words, Walk Score is a great place to start, but you probably want to do a little more research before signing a lease, a fact Walk Score doesn't try to hide.

Walk Score has a use that they don't advertise, what I call "Livable Streets Trash Talking."  My neighborhood has a Walk Score of 87, which is way higher than the scores for my brother's in Woodland Hills (67), my mom's in Marina Del Rey (71) or my Church's in West L.A. (72.)  Since I work from home, I can also boast that my "office" has a more walkable area than the Flying Pigeon Bike Shop (71) and my wife's office in Brentwood (72).  However, the trophy for having the most walkable community around your office goes to the Bus Rider's Union who edged the Bike Coalition with a score of 98 to 95.

Two years ago I poked the LADOT and LAPD for not putting out safety tips for Halloween.  Sure enough, last year an email arrived in my inbox announcing the Department's advice to parents, children and drivers on All Hallows Eve.

The LADOT released some very similar looking advice for this year. After a list of good for young pedestrians and their parents; there's a quote from General Manager Rita Robinson encouraging parents to take the safety of their children seriously.

While there's nothing to argue with in the content of the release, there is something to say about what the release is missing.  There's eleven suggestions for parents and children and just a sentence for drivers.  The release should have spent more time on driver safety, after all it takes two to make a crash and distracted drivers are more of a menace tomorrow night than any other night of the year. 

To help out for next year, here are some suggestions for the Halloween 2010 release:

On Halloween evening, there will be more children walking the streets than any other night of the year, some of whom will be wearing dark colored clothing. The LADOT reminds drivers to:

1. Drive even more slowly than usual on surface streets and residential street
2. Have your lights on even if it's not dark
3. Pay attention to the road at all times.
   

Any other suggestions?  Feel free to leave them in the comments section.  The release can be found after the jump, which is a especially helpful because the link to the release from the Watch the Road website doesn't work.  (update: they've updated the link, it works here: ttp://www.ladot.lacity.org/pdf/PDF170.pdf)

TRICK-OR-TREATERS ON HALLOWEEN
LOS ANGELES (October 28, 2009)—

The City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) wants to remind parents that Halloween is a great time to teach children about pedestrian and traffic safety.

LADOT has issued simple guidelines that will help safeguard children on Halloween night and whenever they walk in their neighborhoods at night.
1.    Adults should accompany children to make sure safety rules are followed.
2.    Cross streets only at intersections and look both ways before crossing a street.
3.    Walk within crosswalks.
4.    Wear white or reflective clothing so that costumes are bright enough to be seen at night by motorists.
5.    Add reflective tape to bags to collect treats.
6.    Choose costumes that are flame-retardant.
7.    Children should carry flashlights.
8.    Walk in well-lit areas.
9.    Remove any masks before crossing streets.
10.    Look before crossing driveways to make sure vehicles are not backing up.
11.    Never cross a street in the middle of the block or between parked vehicles.

The best safety lesson parents can teach to their children is to model the correct pedestrian behavior.
“Halloween is a great time to start,” said Rita L. Robinson, general manager, LADOT. “When children see their parents are cautious and looking both ways before crossing the street, children will internalize the value of being safe citizens,” said Robinson.

LADOT wants to remind drivers that pedestrian safety is their responsibility too and they should drive carefully whenever children are present. Every school day, LADOT crossing guards or traffic officers are assigned to monitor elementary school crossings for student volume, motorist traffic and other factors.

LADOT is dedicated to moving Los Angeles forward as quickly and safely as possible. Drivers, bus riders, bicyclists and pedestrians are encouraged to visit LADOT’s website at www.ladot.lacity.org for information about DASH, Commuter Express, bicycling in the City and an array of transportation services.

For more information about pedestrian safety, visit the Watch the Road website at www.watchtheroad.org.

Area commuters can visit the Department’s website for real-time traffic and parking facilities information. Real-time traffic reports are a product of LADOT, innovators of the Automated Traffic Surveillance and Control System (ATSAC) technology.
###

Via TreeHugger, Copenhagenize reports that Volvo is in the final stages of testing technology to improve safety for people outside its products -- a "pedestrian detection" system available in S60 models next year:

It is meant to spot all pedestrians in front of the car as well as off to the sides in a 60 degree angle. It will warn the driver with a red flashing light on the windshield if the car is on a collision course with a pedestrian.

If the driver doesn't react quick enough it will brake automatically up to 25 km/h and stop by itself if the car is traveling under 25 km/h.

The system cannot recognize bicyclists yet, but engineers are working on it.

At first blush, a car on the lookout for pedestrians seems like a can't-lose safety measure. But a lot depends on how drivers compensate, knowing that their vehicles can mitigate their own lapses in judgment and attention. Might a safer, smarter car lead people to take more risks and exercise less care behind the wheel?

Since this is exactly the sort of question that comes up again and again in Traffic (recipient of the 2008 Streetsie for best book), I emailed author Tom Vanderbilt to get his take on the merits and drawbacks of Volvo's new tech. Here's what he wrote back:

It's hard not to be of two minds about this. On the one hand, I'm all for personal responsibility and putting the driver in charge. On the other hand, there are certain times when even the most cautious driver might be plagued by some shortcoming in perception or attention -- e.g., a few months ago I almost hit a cyclist because I did not see them in my right-rear blind spot, and I wasn't expecting a cyclist to be there. It's unfortunate that it doesn't work at night, given the overrepresentation of pedestrian fatalities at that time, partially having to do with visibility. But in any case the real question is whether even with negative behavioral adaptation there's still a net safety gain. And the other bright spot is at least someone besides Honda is actually thinking about pedestrians from the car's point of view.

Interestingly, I've heard that some of the settings at which auto engineers place these systems for activation are much more stringent than what drivers themselves seem to desire -- so maybe the car really would know best in this situation.

And of course there's other things we could do, vis a vis technology, to improve urban traffic safety, "Intelligent Speed Adaptation" being top of the agenda here. This too is a form of "collision avoidance," as obviously the slower you're going, the more time to avoid a crash.

A coalition of activists for seniors and the disabled went to federal court to try and force Caltrans to meet federal safety standards for sidewalk, intersection and other pedestrian amenities.  The group charges that when doing road construction, our state DOT is ignoring the federally mandated fixes and upgrades that are required by the American with Disabilities Act (ADA). 

An attorney for the plaintiffs tells the Times that data from Caltrans from 2001 to 2006 shows that the agency failed to install about 1,000 required curb ramps during road improvements. The 1,000 missing improvements doesn't include curb ramps that were installed but don't comply with federal law.

Caltrans and urban officials from around the state seem aware of the problem.  The Times explains:

Government officials and powerful municipal organizations such as the League of California Cities have contended that access lawsuits will burden financially strapped state and local agencies that are already struggling to comply with the law. Caltrans estimates that it would cost about $2.5 billion to make improvements statewide...

...Caltrans has spent $10 million -- an amount that will be spent annually for the next several years -- to build and upgrade curb ramps as well as improve sidewalks.

I'm certainly not a math expert, but at this pace it will take Caltrans a mere 250 years to bring California into compliance with the ADA, assuming no conditions get worse over the next two and a half centuries.

While that $2.5 billion seems to be a huge amount of money, certainly thrown out by the League of California Cities to scare people away from supporting the safe streets and sidewalks that all Californians deserve, consider that LA County itself will be spending $8 billion of Measure R funds to increase highway capacity and encourage car-driving commutes over the life of the gas tax.

Locally, the City of Los Angeles has its own ADA problems.  Back in January Donald Shoup broke down the many issues that the City faces as it tries to come into compliance and the many ways its dropping the ball.

A college-age Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN), with her father at right. (Photo: Klobuchar for Senate)

Coburn's amendment fell short by a vote of 39-59, with three other Democrats, Sens. Russ Feingold (WI), Evan Bayh (IN), and Claire McCaskill (MO), also aligning with the majority of Republicans in favor of the opt-out.

Feingold, Bayh, and McCaskill are fiscal hawks who frequently vote to limit the scope of government spending, making their votes less surprising than Klobuchar and Webb's -- if just as disheartening for clean transportation advocacy groups.

Klobuchar in particular hails from a state where bicycling is a popular element of local culture. She has spoken often of her personal appreciation of biking, hiking, and other outdoor activities, and welcomed a 14-year-old climate activist to Washington after the young girl's 1,500-mile bike ride.

Klobuchar's office has not yet responded to an inquiry about her vote on Coburn's two amendments to the Senate spending bill that funds U.S. DOT for next year. The second Coburn amendment that fell short today was a modified version of his earlier proposal to restrict all "transportation enhancements."

Even when limited to only block funding for transportation museums, however, the second Coburn plan was defeated on a 41-57 vote.

Last week, the South Pasadena Police Department held a traffic sting.  A group of squad cars laid in wait while cars whizzed past a school bus, with lights flashing and stop sign extended.  Once cars passed the bus, the police swooped in and handed out tickets like candy on Halloween to the over 160 cars that didn't stop for the well-marked school bus.

The reaction?  Outrage.  Drivers and commenters at the Times' LA Now Blog couldn't believe that someone would dare ticket people for violating the law, which is an especially troubling of car-culture entitlement because really?  Going past a school bus with its lights flashing is one of the deadliest ways to break a traffic law.

The favorite complaint of those ticketed was that the bus was parked on a high-traffic, six-lane Huntington Drive near Milan Avenue where it's insane to park a school bus.  South Pasadena police were able to promptly respond that actually, the location was chosen because it was near where a handicapped child boards the bus every school day.

Whoops.

While I wasn't present at the sting, this sounds like a good-faith effort to protect school children who use the bus by targeting motorists who don't come to a stop when they see the flashing lights on the bus and surrounding the flashing stop sign.  Apparently this kind of education is necessary based on the number of LA Now commenters that don't think breaking this law is a big deal.

For a quick sampling of some of the comments at LA Now, read on after the jump.  If you're interested in getting a full sampling, their story, with its exciting comment section, can be found here.

First, a little blame the victim:

The ticket operation pulled in 80K...how much did it cost for this nonsense? Instead of issuing bogus tickets, how about the parents of that disabled child take him to a safe place to board the bus instead of fining drivers who don't stop in the middle of traffic.

Some bizarre paranoia:

This is horrible!
First the government takes our tax dollars to bail out the privately owned banks.
The government needs more of our money so they sick the police on the general public to basically rob off by setting up a fake school bus.
This sounds too horrible to be true!
I have a feeling this isn't the first stunt that will be taking place to get the rest of our savings from us.
This is really scary and needs to be looked into!

And my personal favorite, that speeding past a bus with flashing lights isn't a "real crime":

Just another reminder that the police are more interested in ticketing citizens and "setting them up" than focusing on the real issues...crime.

Crosswalks.  There are few things in Los Angeles that create such controversy, yet are part of our everyday lives.  In truth, every intersection in Los Angeles is a crosswalk, unless specifically marked otherwise, much to the consternation of the LADOT.  When students are rundown in the crosswalk at USC, planners and engineers take a look at the crosswalk.  When cities try to figure out the safest way to get students to and from school, a big part of the effort is a look at the crosswalks.

Yet, a lot of our city officials still don't understand crosswalks.  When an intersection has an unacceptable number of crashes, the many LAPD divisions respond by ticketing pedestrians crossing against a flashing hand, even if they get through the intersection before the hand solidifies; while drivers continue to merrily run red lights right in front of them.  In 2007, the LAPD gained notoriety nationwide when they ticketed an 82-year old "cane wielding" woman who couldn't cross the street in the time the pedestrian signal gave her.  Amazingly, the LAPD closed ranks around "Officer Kelly" claiming he was saving her life.  Who can forget the memorable quote from Kelly's boss,

"I'd rather not have angry pedestrians," Zaboski said. "But I'd rather have them be alive."

When a group of students tested whether they could cross the street in the time allowed they could, but only if they ran.  Maybe next time Officer Kelly could put down his pad and help the elderly?

And last week the LAPD was back in the news concerning crosswalks, this time showing a lack of understanding of the law, not just a lack of common sense.  A woman riding her bike in a crosswalk is killed by a collision with a car.  The officer on the scene determines the woman is at fault because she was riding on a crosswalk and riding the wrong way, against the flow of traffic.

That would make for sound legal reasoning, except in Los Angeles it is legal to ride on the sidewalk and there is no such thing as crossing the "wrong way" in a crosswalk.  When a local cyclist wrote their Councilman, Greg Smith, he received a response from the Chief of Staff, John Dellinger who wrote about his decades of experience with the LAPD and went on to repeat several falsehoods, including the oft repeated myths that cyclists can't ride in crosswalks or sidewalks.

At the bottom of his excellent post, "Who Teaches the Teachers," Stephen Box notes that nowhere in federal, state or city law does it state that it is illegal to ride a bike in the crosswalk.  In fact, when the LADOT and Metro design bike trails, such as the Orange Line Bike Path, they actually require people to cross the street at crosswalks at various locations.  Yet neither the officers at the scene nor the City Council Office, with its decades of experience as a police officer, seemed to know this.

Unfortunately, we haven't been able to find out what exactly the LAPD is teaching its beat officers about crosswalks.  When directed by the City Council to discuss their training, the LAPD discusses their training of pedestrians and cyclists.  When the LADOT is asked about their outreach efforts and why they can't get the message across they actually take credit for other state's far more succesful programs, claiming they crib their writing, even while the LAPD continues to add to their laughable track record.

As we approach the summer season, a time when streets are more filled with people NOT in a car, and the number of crashes involving cyclists and pedestrians continues to grow; now would be the perfect time for some city or county leader to take a stand and make this the start of a new commitment to making the streets safe for cyclists and pedestrians.

For the brave politician who takes the charge, there's a lot of work to do with an entrenched bureaucracy that views moving cars above keeping non-car users safe.  Need some proof?  Consider the case of Gwendolyn Coleman and the crash that killed her nearly half a year ago.  At the time, advocates lamented that it took a fatal collision, one where the victim was clearly not at fault, for the city to take action.  Unfortunately, the joke was on us.  Since the crash there have been no changes even proposed for the deadly Downtown intersection of Fifth and Flower.

This is not an islotated incident.  In just the past forty-eight hours, an LADWP truck crashed into and killed a cyclist crossing the street, a group of bus riders were basically attacked by a wild car driver while waiting for the bus, and earlier today another woman was killed while crossing the street.

There have been some cases where following a crash, change has come.  The LADOT agreed to use signage to try and traffic calm Hoover Avenue after the family of a victim was killed in a horrific crash where her companion was carried by the offending vehicle before the driver got out and removed the victim from his windshield before driving off.  Also, after two prominent cyclists were harassed in May of 2008, Metro went through a process of bringing together cyclists and bus drivers to try and bring about a better understanding of sharing the road.

In both cases, change didn't come because of the glaring need to fix a dangerous road, but because the victims, their families and their friends knew how to pull the levers of power and bring about change.  While that's great an all, justice and the rights to safe streets are something that everyone deserve.  Not just people with connections or the attention of the television cameras.

Of course, even in cases where a crash gets continued attention, the issues that caused the crash don't just go away.  Last year, following the harassment of Enci Box and Eric Richardson on the day after Bike to Work Day by a pair of Metro buses, Metro put together a panel of cyclists and bus drivers to try and address the issues.  A year later both the large issues, that cyclists have the right to safely cycle in bike lanes, and small ones, that it is both illegal and dangerous to honk at cyclists to "say hi," remain unresolved.

Stephen Box tells the story of how his wife was forced off the road by a Metro Bus last week:

We were riding southbound on Vermont in lane #2 alongside parked cars at approximately 3:25 pm in light traffic. I was in the lead, Enci was in second position and the bus was in third. I heard Enci scream, I looked back and saw a bus behind me but not Enci. I pulled over and the bus passed me, pulling to the curb just yards further on. Then I saw my wife riding down Vermont.

Bus Operator #25119 had just "asserted" himself into the #2 lane at the expense of my wife's position and in doing so, forced my wife to choose between the side of the bus, the parked cars or simply braking to avoid getting hit by the bus as it came from behind alongside her and then simply merged right toward her.

This story is eerily similar to the one he told almost a year ago:

She looked over her left shoulder at the approaching traffic and saw an 18 Wheeler in the #1 lane and a Metro Rapid Bus (750) in the #2 lane. They were side-by-side and traveling at the same speed.

Enci had parked cars to her right and no room to spare. She held her line, with only inches between her and the parked cars. There were only a few parked cars remaining before the Boulevard opened up and the #2 lane widened.

The Bus Operator did not slow down and had no room to move to the left. He passed Enci with inches to spare. Enci had no wiggle room at all.

So where does this leave us?  What do we need from the yet to be crowned champion mentioned in the first paragraph?

While no government agency can control everything that happens on the street, the place to start is with government owned vehicles, government owned properties and government owned streets.

For government owned vehicles, a higher standard needs to be established for people driving city vehicles.  How can we expect the city, or county, or Metro to have the moral authority to other drivers how to drive safely.  If agencies don't feel up to doing this training themselves, groups such as the League of American Cyclists have prepared materials that are widely available for them.

We'll talk more about what the government agencies can do on the streets and their owner properties on Thursday.  In the meantime, any elected official that wants to step up and lead us to teh promised land of safe streets, there's an army of constituents ready to back you.

Last Friday the LAPD was at it again.  In what they claimed was an effort to make the intersection of Wilshire and Western safer for pedestrians, the LAPD was handing out tickets to pedestrians who crossed the street against a flashing red hand.  In the ten minutes I observed their their ticketing I observed the following.

First, nearly all of the people being ticketed made it across the street before the traffic signal they were facing turned red.  In other words, their actions put nobody in danger.  The three LAPD officers were in a constant state of filling out ticket forms, and I counted two pedestrians who didn't make it across before the red.  One of whom was an elderly woman who started as soon as she got the white person and who received no help from the LAPD officers busy writing tickets.

Second, at somewhere over thirty vehicles I lost count of the amount of vehicles that made a left hand turn after the light they were facing turned red.  Unfortunately, my slow frame camera had trouble getting a clean shot of a car running a red, but was able to capture an image of an articulated Metro Rapid Bus in the act.  For the record, I was standing next to an LAPD officer when I snapped this picture.

Third, many of those people rushing across the street against the flashing reds, but before the solid reds, were trying to catch a bus.

The message?  Impatient drivers running red lights aren't causing crashes throughout the city.  It's the fault of pedestrians who make it across the street before the traffic signal turns red. Of course, this "blame the pedestrian" mentality also exists with the LADOT who believes removing unsignalized crosswalks is the best way to make crossing the street safer for pedestrians.

It's honestly no wonder that David Jassy thinks he can get out of physically assaulting and repeatedly running over a pedestrian with the "these things happen defense."  We live in a city where pedestrians are assumed at fault for crashes while red-light-running motorists are given carte-blanche.

Back in January, the LA Downtown News reported on exciting new design standards for new development in the Downtown which will lead to wider sidewalks, landscaped parkways and medians, and bring additional streetlights, trees and street parking to Downtown.  The standards, approved last week by the City Council, will require that as new development comes to the Downtown, that developers will be required to come up with pedestrian plans for the development.

Another part of the plan requires that 75% of the parts of buildings at street level be zoned retail, office or other active uses. The standards also dictate that buildings' primary entrances open onto the sidewalk or a sidewalk-accessible public space.  This part of the new rules may be more important than the sidewalk requirement.  Let's face it, there are plenty of areas in Los Angeles that have wide, attractive sidewalks, but as I discovered when I went for an unplanned, unmapped walk in the Downtown in 2007 wide sidewalks along dead streets with no pedestrian attractions aren't going to encourage anyone to walk through the neighborhood.

In other words, if I were to be planning the new development of Streetsblog Towers in Downtown L.A., I would be required to look at widening sidewalks around the Towers, not widening the road.  In addition to my office, Streetsblog Towers would also have some shops and other attractions for people walking by. 

While these new design standards are certainly a sign that elected officials are looking for ways to breathe life into dead streets, it remains to be seen if they're really willing to do what it takes to truly reclaim the streets for everyone and change the city's parking requirements for new developers.  It's great to encourage people to walk by planning a better walking environment.  It would be even better if those pedestrians aren't required to pay for other people's parking when they buy or rent in the Downtown.

The East Hollywood Neighborhood Council has barely been in existence for two years, yet they've already layed out a vision for transportation in the video East Hollywood on the Move, led the way by endorsing the Cyclists Bill of Rights before any other Neighborhood Council and proclaimed that streets are for people, not cars, at the first annual ArtCycle.  Last night they began to marry their vision with policy when they declared themselves a "pedestrian oriented community" and vowed to get all members of the community involved in redesigning parts of the community following the "Sole Mates" process.

The first step will be reaching out to stakeholders such as businesses, community groups, and schools to get people involved and excited about bringing safer and more comfortable streets to the East Hollywood Community.  While the idea of designing your community's transportation around pedestrians is certainly a ground-breaking idea, the process of building and funding the plan is as exciting a model as the pedestrian focus.  Instead of the "Design and Defend" strategy exemplified by the Pico-Olympic Plan or the "complete public outreach and never let anyone see the final document" strategy exemplified by the 20?? Bike Master Plan.

Once outreach is completed, the next step is to set pedestrian standards for all part of the neighborhood then getting the funding for the projects.

We'll keep our eyes on the happenings in EHo.  In the meantime, if you want to read more, SoapBox has the full press release.

Following the outcry after two USC students were run down in the Crosswalk at Hoover and Jefferson, the parents of one of the students, the one who was slain, demanded that the city "fix" this intersection.  Some Streetsblog readers noted that this intersection already has one of the safest designs, a Scramble-crosswalk.  Given that pedestrians are being mowed down throughout the city, is the LADOT really going to focus on this one intersection?

Never underestimate the power and influence grieving parents can have on the political system.  The Daily Trojan reports that USC and the LADOT have worked on a plan to further improve the crosswalk.  In the short term, speed sensors, repainted crosswalks and better lighting.  In the long-term, we can expect either a pedestrian bridge or tunnel to completely separate motorized and non-motorized transportation.

However, would any of these changes really prevented the crash that killed Adriana Bachan last month?  After all, if I were a USC student coming home from a party in the early morning, I would take my chances crossing at street level rather than walk into a tunnel where who-knows-what is waiting for me. Similarly, all the lighting and paint in the world isn't going to stop a drivers so deranged that after carrying a student 500 yards on their hood they calmly get out of the car, remove the victim, and drive off.  Yet, the article doesn't mention any effort to increase traffic enforcement near campus.

All the engineering in the world can't stop unsafe, uncaring drivers.  While the LADOT and USC's intersection plans may make the intersection safer, the only thing that is going to stop deranged drivers is better and more consistant enforcement of traffic laws.  Police in the Valley seem to have already learned this lesson.  It's a lesson that should be carried city-wide.

The National Safe Routes to Schools Partnership wants stimuls funds for the Arroyo Seco Greenway. Image: La Cita Vida/Flickr

As part of its share of the federal stimulus package, Caltrans was allocated $28 million for "Transportation Enhancements," a federal funding category that is home to bicycle, pedestrian, beautification and other road projects that aren't widening or fix-it projects.  However, according to the National Safe Routes to Schools Partnership, Caltrans is having trouble spending those funds.  From a letter from the partnership to Caltrans:

Earlier this week, Caltrans Headquarters staff communicated to me that they had only been able to identify 30-35 percent of the state’s $28 million in TE funds for construction by the CCC, and only one bicycle project in the entire state. We know that there are many more bicycle and pedestrian projects that meet the ABX3 20 TE requirements.

One bikeway project in the entire state?  Jeesh.  Fortunately, the Partnership is fully capable of doing its own outreach and analysis.  After talking to governments around the state, the Partnership created it's own list of worthy "TE" projects which can be found exclusively here.  Among those projects the Partnership would look to see funded are the first phase of the Arroyo Seco Greenway and trail imrpovements for the Los Cerito Wetlands.

The full letter from the Partnership to Caltrans can be found after the jump.

April 10, 2009

Mr. Will Kempton, Director ;California Department of Transportation

Re:ARRATransportationEnhancementsfundsandABX320Priorities

Dear Mr. Kempton:

The Safe Routes to School National Partnership, based in California, is pleased that the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) includes $77 million in Transportation Enhancements (TE) funds for California. The resulting projects will help to enhance the livability of communities throughout California while also creating jobs.

As you know, the state legislation to implement the recovery act, ABX3 20, established a hierarchy for TE projects such that projects that can be constructed by the California Conservation Core (CCC) or their affiliates should be funded first, followed by bicycle/pedestrian projects. We understand Caltrans has $28 million to program for TE projects on the state highway system and that the remainder of the TE funds will be programmed by metropolitan planning organizations and regional transportation planning organizations, but all TE ARRA funds are subject to the new criteria in ABX3 20.

Earlier this week, Caltrans Headquarters staff communicated to me that they had only been able to identify 30-35 percent of the state’s $28 million in TE funds for construction by the CCC, and only one bicycle project in the entire state. We know that there are many more bicycle and pedestrian projects that meet the ABX3 20 TE requirements.

The Partnership conducted outreach to cities, counties and advocates throughout the state to identify potential bicycle and pedestrian projects on the state highway system that are eligible for TE funding. Attached is a list of these candidate projects, which includes 25 bicycle and pedestrian projects totaling more than $56 million. Our instructions were for project sponsors to identify projects that are ready-to-go, on the state highway system, so that funds could be obligated quickly, and projects constructed by Caltrans in the near term.

In light of these findings, we urge Caltrans to take the following actions:

1)   Outreach: Have Headquarters contact the 12 Districts with a sample letter to send to every Congestion Management Agency, city, and county with a request to identify ready-to-go TE projects on the state highway system that that could be built by the CCC or are bicycle/pedestrian projects.

2)   Ensure Regional Compliance: Have Headquarters Local Assistance contact the RTPAs/MPOs and advise them to comply with the ABX3 20 hierarchy for TE project selection, and follow up by reviewing eligibility to ensure that the regional share of TE is being programmed in compliance with the law, and that the regions meet the obligation date deadlines.

2)   Obligate 50 percent by June: Obligate only 50 percent of the TE money by the June 2009 deadline so that there is enough time to meet the state-legislated priorities for TE while also ensuring that California doesn't lose any of the $77M in TE funding.

3)   Accountability: Create a process that is transparent and accountable for both the state and regional shares of the TE funds. There should be an opportunity for wide public input to truly incorporate the needs and priorities of California’s communities. Please post all information on the state’s recovery website, including whether a funded project involved the CCC or was a bicycle/pedestrian project.

In addition to creating construction jobs in the near-term, completed bicycle and pedestrian projects will provide opportunities for people to walk and bicycle to shops and other destinations, thereby helping to create a vibrant local economy and thriving livable communities.

I look forward to working with you to ensure accountability and transparency for programming the TE ARRA funds. As always, I’m pleased to have the opportunity to work with you to improve mobility and safety for bicyclists and pedestrians within the great state of California.

Please let me know how Caltrans intends to proceed to identify and program projects for the TE portion of ARRA funding. If there is anything I can do to assist Caltrans in this process, please do not hesitate to call on me. I look forward to your response.

Best regards,

Deb Hubsmith

Safe Routes to School National Partnership

Last weekend, the lives of a family were changed forever, when a distracted driver decided that shaving a couple of seconds of off the trip home for his family was more important than making sure he protected other users of the road.  He plowed through the intersection of Jefferson and Hoover, killing USC freshman Adriana Bachan and maiming her companion.

Bachan's family has not been camera-shy in demanding that their daughter's murderer be brought to justice, the alleged driver of the vehicle has been brought in but her passenger who helped remove bodies from the car before it sped off is still at large; but now they're setting their sights on a different target: improving the deadly intersection where Adriana was killed.  The Santa Barbara news website Noozhawk has the story:

Welch also spoke for Bachan’s father.

“Jim will be back, and he will be the biggest advocate for that intersection at Jefferson and Hoover,” he said.

The intersection where Bachan was killed is notoriously treacherous for pedestrians, and her mother said she’s on a mission to see that the area’s safety is improved. She said she’d like to see a pedestrian bridge constructed.

“You’ve all been there and you’ve seen the children crossing and the cars almost hitting them,” she said. “Somebody will do something, that I can assure you.”

Keeping the intersection foremost in the public’s memory is paramount for Carmen Bachan, and she thanked the media for covering the memorial.

“Keep my baby’s story alive,” she said. “Don’t let it go away.”

While it's more than inspiring to see a family try and turn a tragedy into something positive, it's also a sad statement that the only time people focus on the deadly conditions pedestrians face is when someone dies and their survivors demand it.

Two weeks ago, the Daily News reported that the number of pedestrians killed in the valley had increased by 230% as compared to the same time last year.  This somewhat horrifiying stat passed through the public consciousness with barely a ripple.

In the last couple of days, you can barely turn on the television without hearing about more pedestrians being mowed down by careless drivers.  Sometimes the drivers stay to talk with the police and paramedics, sometimes they run, and sometimes they even drag the battered victim into their car and drive off.

However, despite the dramatic rise in crashes and deaths, the city is still treating each incident as an isolated one and not the symptom of a broken transportation system that places a low priority on protecting the system's most vulnerable users.

Lest you think I'm exaggerating, let's look at some highlights from the past year.  Last summer 200 angelenos signed a letter begging the Metro Board to set aside some of the revenue from what is now called Measure R for bicycle and pedestrian projects.  Despite just about every other constituency getting their piece of the pie, our pleas fell on deaf ears.

When the LADOT discovered that a disproportionate amount of crashes occur in crosswalks that aren't associated with traffic lights or signs, they immediately began a campaign to remove unsignalized crosswalks from the street.

And of course, when Gwendolyn Coleman was sent flying while crossing the street, the reaction was shock and awe at the violence of the crash there haven't been any changes implemented or proposed for the deadly intersection of Fifth and Flower.

While the LAPD is treating these "isolated incidents" with respect for the most part, we aren't seeing a corresponding rise in enforcement of laws that lead to safer street such as enforcement of vehicles running red lights, encroaching into crosswalks during red light signals or other forms of reckless driving.  However, we are seeing a crackdown on group bike rides which have killed a grand total of zero pedestrians in the past year.

If the LAPD won't step up, and given the amount of man hours its taking to decide what to do about bike licenses that seems more than unlikely, then it's up to our elected leaders to take the ball and demand both a city-wide pedestrian safety plan and better enforcement of traffic laws that protect pedestrians. 

Given the state of enforcement of these laws, and the track record of prosecuting those drivers crashing into pedestrians, this seems a ripe issue for the City Attorney's race.  If anyone wants to take a crack at writing a question for the candidates should leave a note in the comments section.  If not, I'll have a draft list of questions for City Attorney and City Council 5th District for your review on Friday.

The result?  The five person CPUC panel backed an Alternative Decision written by Commissioner Chong which still requires a pedestrian bridge at the Farmdale crossing near Dorsey High School but only relieves the Construction Authority from building a crossing at the Foshay Learning Center.  The ruling should allow for a speedier construction of Phase I of the Expo Line than if they had went with the original suggestion to build pedestrian bridges at both locations.  However, they still need to come up with several million dollars to build the pedestrian bridge for Farmdale.

A second alternative was offered by Commissioner Timothy Simon which would have required the bridge for Dorsey High School, but denied the permit to build near the Foshay Learning Center until a new study could be completed on the pedestrian access to and from the Learning Center after Expo is built.  Simon even channeled some of the opposition calling the process that has led to the removal of pedestrian concerns for Foshay an example of why minority communities don't have faith in the public process.

A CPUC judge ruled previously that the Expo Construction Authority had to build pedestrian bridges at both Dorsey High School and the Foshay Learning Center but his ruling is considered only a "suggestion" until the panel made its final ruling this morning.

The decision was blasted before it was even issued.  The Los Angeles Unified School District, a longtime opponent of the line released a letter slamming the decision making process as "closed door."  Expo Communities United (ECU), the group with which Damien Goodmon is most closely affiliated, released a letter supporting the LAUSD's position.  After the ruling, Goodmon told Streetsblog:

...I find it unfortunate that the Commission adopted such a legally flawed Decision.  There are more legal holes in the Chong Alternative Decision, than a pound of swiss cheese.  Furthermore, the process which led to the Decision will clearly earn concern any actual judge. 

Nonetheless, we look forward to participating in the now mandatory environmental review process, regarding which of the grade separated options at Farmdale will be adopted.  Unlike the previous environmental review process, the community enters the process with adequate legal representation.

Additionally, we now more firmly recognize that the only changes that will occur at Foshay or at other crossings along the line, will need to be obtained politically or through other legal courts.

Buried in the text of CPUC's ruling is a summary of the public comment.  The document admits that nearly 90% of the comments it received were either against at-grade crossings or against Expo altogether.  The early reactions to this decision seem to show that these opponents are not satisfied with either the process or result of the CPUC hearings. 

So the question remains, is this the final hurdle before Construction on Phase I of the Expo project can be completed, or is it just another stop on Expo's bumpy ride.

On the heels of TA's report on the human toll of driving too fast, we bring you this highly disturbing ad from the UK Department for Transport's THINK! campaign, showing the difference a few miles-per-hour can make when it comes to avoiding a collision. Ideally material like this (Australia has a similar PSA) would be part of a required curriculum for American drivers -- not to mention police, prosecutors and lawmakers, who all too often seem just as unwilling to draw connections between the act of reckless driving and its consequences.

But we probably shouldn't expect to see this brand of reality TV on US airwaves anytime soon. Instead we get crash test dummy cartoons and spots like this new Acura commercial -- motorist-centric, sanitized and disconnected from the grim truth of auto-inflicted violence.

In the same vein, though cast in a more suburban context, is this equally disturbing Irish ad, offering a real-world antidote to ubiquitous car-maker "Just you and the open road" propaganda.

Video: anacarol80/YouTube