Photo: Waltarr/Flickr

But Bloomekatz reports that lawsuit is the tip of the iceberg:

But there are four other cases pending that could leave the city on the hook for hundreds of millions of dollars.

Fixing all of Los Angeles’ sidewalks would be a daunting task: Officials estimate the cost of improving them all would top $1.5 billion. But advocates for the disabled hope they can make a measurable dent in the problem.

The article continues with a series of short quotes from pedestrian advocates, including L.A. Streetsblog Editorial Board Member Deborah Murphy, and disabled pedestrians struggling with the city’s broken network of sidewalks.

Next comes a quote from Council Member Bernard Parks who both criticizes the city for not investing in infrastructure and then excusing not making the investment today based on the city’s budget crisis.

However, Bloomekatz’s research puts lie to that particular claim.  The City of Sacramento dedicates 20% of its pedestrian funds to sidewalk repair.  That level of dedication can make a real impact on the State Capitol, and it could make a real impact here as well.

Los Angeles has a choice to make, it can fix its sidewalks now or it can wait for more court orders.

Jason King was in a Madison Avenue crosswalk when a dump truck driver backed into him and dragged him 30 feet. King's death prompted then-Senator Carl Kruger to take action -- not for tougher penalties for deadly driving, but for a ban on listening to music while walking. Photo: DNAinfo

But a closer look reveals some major caveats. First, the study relied on notoriously unreliable media reports to come up with 116 cases, between 2004 and 2011, in which pedestrians were killed or injured while wearing headphones (total U.S. pedestrian deaths during those years numbered in the tens of thousands). The majority of victims cited in the study were struck by trains, not cars, which as much as anything could call into question the perils of walking on train tracks — or the need for safer pedestrian thoroughfares.

Researchers noted that the overall use of headphones probably increased during the study period. If the study has any evidence that not wearing headphones is safer than wearing headphones, none of the press accounts we’ve seen have picked it up.

Then there’s this detail, reported by NPR:

The study is not the last word on the subject, the researchers concede. Because the data are drawn from media reports, they cannot say conclusively whether accident victims might have also had mental problems or drivers might have been at fault, for example.

Come again? With no accounting for driver error, this study isn’t worth the paper its printed on. In taking motor vehicles and their operators out of the equation, you might as well pin pedestrian deaths on Chuck Taylor tennis shoes or Orbit chewing gum.

Even if you start from the premise that the onus is on pedestrians to protect themselves from powerful multi-ton vehicles, the findings here are suspect at best. And though lead author Richard Lichenstein acknowledges that the study is basically a conversation-starter, the road to hell is paved with good intentions. Stories like the ones circulating today lend credence to the idea that traffic crashes are as unpreventable as natural disasters, and the best we can do is remain vigilant and hope we don’t die. When a paper like the New York Post sees a chance to pen a victim-blaming headline, it doesn’t sweat the small print.

Photo:CICLE

Following a batch of applications this summer that included a lot more community outreach than in years past, the City of Los Angeles is looking for two transportation planners to work on a city-wide SRTS plan for one year.  The funding for the positions is part of the “bicycle-pedestrian set-aside” from the city’s share of Measure R “Local Return” dollars.  While there has been some grumbling that Measure R funds are meant to go towards Capital Improvements, spending money to improve the city’s woeful SRTS program was supported in committee by L.A. Walks, the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition and the Safe Routes to School National Partnership (the Partnership.)

For now, a top priority is finding two people best able to fill the positions at LADOT.  The job applications can be found on the city’s website by clicking here.  The Partnership urges anyone interested in the positions to apply while noting that even with these positions, the Los Angeles is well behind other cities when it comes to dedicating staff for pedestrian improvements.  Even these positions will be somewhat split between bicycle and pedestrian work as bicycle access is a major component of SRTS planning.

Of course, hiring new staff is one step on a journey.  Cyclists well remember the frustration felt when seemingly progressive ideas disappeared from drafts of the Bike Plan before the city settled on a plan that was acceptable to advocates at the eleventh hour.  There’s no reason why a progressive Safe Routes to School Plan wouldn’t involve some advocacy campaign as well.

Bernard Parks, where the sidewalks aren't so bad.

While Parks’ plan has been jeered by just about everyone who has heard it, the former LAPD Chief’s plan is at least trying to address the third-world quality of the city’s pedestrian network in some places.  Homeowners were in charge of sidewalk repair in Los Angeles until 1974 when the city received a massive federal grant to take on the problem.  However, over nearly 40 years the grant ran out, and the sidewalks have gotten worse.

Parks outlines the depth of the problem on KPCC’s Pat Morrison Show, via KCET:

“(S)ince the 1970s, the city took responsibility for sidewalks that were broken by trees. Over time, they’ve taken responsibility for all sidewalks. The city has tried over the last 20 years to repair sidewalks. They’ve expended over $100 million over a 10 year period and fixed only 500 miles of sidewalks. And the sidewalks – about 10,000 miles of them – are in worse repair [...] than they were before.”

Wow, it’s hard to believe this is the same guy that was worried that the city wouldn’t be able to spend $3 million a year on pedestrian projects in the summer of 2010.

Regardless of one’s views on Parks’ current proposal, there is no doubt that the city does need to get serious about the dismal state of our sidewalks.  A back of the napkin calculation based on Parks’ numbers above would show a $1.9 billion need.  Even if the city were able to magically take the 405 “Sepulveda Pass Improvement Project”money and reprogram it to sidealk repair it still wouldn’t be enough.

Last year, Parks proposed a “point of sale” plan where the cost of replacing the sidewalk would be included in any housing purchase so that the sidewalks would be repaired, if needed, when a real estate title exchanged hand.  It would take decades, but in about three decades the city would have a “new” series of sidewalks.  I have to admit I scoffed at the idea when it was proposed, but studies by UCLA’s Parking Guru Donald Shoup, who is also a trained economist, shows that a “point of sale” system doesn’t have a negative impact on real estate sales and values.

Of course, the city could always just declare sidewalk repair a high priority and find the funds, local or state, to get the job done.

Have a better idea?  Leave it in the comments section and we’ll be certain to forward your ideas to the City Council Transportation Committee staff.

Its difficult to create a safe mid-block pedestrian crossing, but there is always something you can do to make aModel Street Design Manual crossing safer. All images in this story come from

Over the past few months, we’ve checked in on the efforts of five communities in Los Angeles County to create more livable, walkable, bikeable and healthier communities through better transportation planning through the Los Angeles PLACE Grants.  However, Los Angeles County is home to 11 million residents, and less than 750,000 live in PLACE communities.

But that doesn’t mean that the LA County Public Health Department (LACDPH) doesn’t have a plan for the rest of the county.  Partnering with the UCLA Luskin Center for Innovation, LACDPH awarded a RENEW Grant to create a “Model Street Manual” to help the rest of the county, and anyone else who was interested, begin to think of their streets in a different way.

“It’s time we started designing our streets for people and quality neighborhoods instead of just cars,” explains super-planner Ryan Snyder, the lead consultant for the plan. “We hope the street manual will change the way cities here and across the US design their streets. The manual should be real a game changer.”

The manual starts with an explanation of the difference between traffic control devices, the application of which is controlled by the state, and traffic calming which isn’t.  The state’s Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices biases streets towards moving traffic makes installing traffic control devices a difficult undertaking.  Making a difference between traffic calming and traffic control is an important legal distinction, because if a municipality deviates from state rules, it could be found at fault in traffic crashes.

For example, stop signs, traffic signals, and flashing beacons are expected to meet minimum thresholds before application. These thresholds include such criteria as number of vehicles, number of pedestrians or other uses, distance to other devices, crash history, and more.

Traffic calming, such as speed humps and bump outs, don’t fall under the same restrictions.  Thus, municipalities are encouraged to adopt a strategy of slowing traffic to increase street safety as one of many practices to make streets safer for all users.

The manual also lists the benefits of adopting a true “complete streets” ideal when completing road projects.  The benefits are many, and this list is probably familiar to many Streetsblog readers, but seeing the list together creates a striking picture.

• The goals of designing living streets are to
• Serve the land uses that are adjacent to the street; mobility is a means, not an end
• Encourage people to travel by walking, bicycling, and transit, and to drive less
• Provide transportation options for people of all ages, physical abilities, and income levels
• Enhance the safety and security of streets, from both a traffic and personal perspective
• Improve peoples’ health
• Create livable neighborhoods
• Reduce the total amount of paved area
• Reduce streetwater runoff into watersheds
• Maximize infiltration and reuse of stormwater
• Reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other air pollution
• Reduce energy consumption
• Promote the economic well-being of both businesses and residents
• Increase civic space and encourage human interaction

While the manual doesn’t give a list of the potential negative impacts of promoting living streets, we’ve prepared a list for comparison purposes.

• People driving cars will find it more difficult to drive dangerously

So how do we get from a traditional street design to one that emphasizes the first list of benefits over automobile speed?

It would take forever to go through all of the individual treatments available to municipalities, but the basics aren’t going to surprise any regular Streetsblog reader.

Sidewalk design in a dense residential area.

One of the main keys, of perhaps greater importance than bike lanes or large sidewalks, is the quality of the road intersections.  A disproportionately large amount of crashes occur at intersections and the design of the intersection can also lead to dangerous intersections throughout the street.  For example, many community activists point to a lack of stop signs and stop lights as the main reason a community is unsafe, but in many intersections, there are better options.  For example, traffic circles (aka roundabouts) is a superior treatment at many residential and other intersections.

Of course, providing a safe way for people to cross at an intersection is also paramount to creating safe streets, crosswalks, bike and pedestrian countdown timers, wayfaring signage and bike boxes (painted areas that give bikes priority at intersections) are all different treatments that provide a safer way for people to mix with cars in addition to a traditional crosswalk and pedestrian light.

Of course, the manual addresses Pedestrian Crossings, Bikeway Design, and Transit Accommodations as important components of creating a complete street.  A series of treatments are proposed that takes space currently dedicated to moving cars to moving people.  Bus bulb outs make it easier to get on the bus and reduces traffic speed in areas where pedestrians and cars mix.  Separated bike lanes gives bicycles their own space on the street.  Sometimes, the most impressive designs are the most basic.  The manual also gives sidewalk design guidelines for areas with different uses and densities, covering everything from office parks, to main street, to a suburban residential area.

My favorite chapter is on “Streetscape Ecosystem.”  A truly Livable Street is all about multiple uses in the public space.  I love the parts about creating furniture, waste cans, public art and shopping areas, the text about storm water runoff and rain water management is equally important.  After all, a Livable Street is a Green Street.

Last but not least is the density and land uses that surround the street.  Just as its important to build a street to match the existing development, its important to plan development to match a street.

Snyder describes the manual as a “game changer,” but its also a challenge.  No longer do communities have the excuse of not understanding smart growth principles or the claim that its “impossible” to change a street’s DNA.    The manual and its team have created a public framework for anyone to use.  The challenge to urban planners and transportation engineers everywhere is whether or not they have the courage to.

(Full Disclaimer: Two of the contributors to the manual, Deborah Murphy and James Rojas, are members of the LA Streetsblog Editorial Board.)

The above map shows Long Beach broken down geographically by census data and racial diversity. The lighter the dot, the higher the percentage of residents are Caucasian. The Vista Street Bike Boulevard, 3rd and Broadway Segregated Bike Paths and 2nd Street Green Sharrow are in the South Central and Southwest parts of the city, leading to charges that Long Beach’s bike boldness has been about servicing well-to-do caucasian areas and not the rest of the city.

During the past three years, Long Beach has shown a commitment to pushing the envelope when it comes to promoting clean and green transportation options.  However, the purpose of this article and last week’s series is to examine if the city has lived up to its agreement with the L.A. County Public Health Department to fulfill its Policies for Livable and Active Communities and Environment (PLACE) Grant the city was awarded in 2008.

The other four communities that received a PLACE Grant used their funds to bring in experts and planners to create master plans.  Long Beach used most of their grant to hire Charlie Gandy, a leader in the field of transportaion infrastructure and a spokesman that oozes charisma, but by his own admission “isn’t much of a master plan guy.”

As a result, the other four communities provided me with hundreds of pages of documents prepared as part of their grant.  Long Beach provided quite a bit less, although what they did provide is part of a Master Plan update that is planned for later this year.  But for now, Long Beach is in first place among the five cities that received PLACE Grants, but they’re in fifth as far as the planning portion of the grant.

That’s the bad news.  The good news is it appears that based on the information available, Long Beach is on the right track.  In the long-run, the content of the final document is what’s most important, not what month it is passed in.

While Long Beach city staff have worked on updating their mobility element, much of the city’s attention has been drawn to the innovative measures bicycle projects and that’s by design.

“We wanted to show people what was possible,” explains Derek Bunham from the city’s planning department.  ”It can be hard for the public, hard for the decision makers, to see the policy on a large scale.  So we decided to show them what can be done with demonstration projects.”

Many of these pilot projects have been in business districts and the well-to-do community along Vista Street, where the first Bike Boulevard was put in earlier this year.  Four different people commented to me, all on background, that Long Beach was “putting in the most for the people that need it least” with its progressive programming.

Longtime Long Beach resident Alan Allesio was not one of those people.  Alessio refers to the much-praised infrastructure as “kind of a tease” to the rest of the city and “There are certain areas that got a lot, and if you happen to live in that area, then you can really dig what’s going on.  I don’t live in one of those areas.”

For their part, city staff understands their issues and says that better bike projects are on their way for the entire city soon.  “When you build demand, you start with the early adopters, the neighborhoods that get it and want to go first,” Gandy explains.  ”We were funded for fifteen miles of bike boulevards, and we’ve just begun with 1.5 miles.  The rest will happen, and they won’t happen on streets that look like this one.”

In other words, the city is hearing complaints about equity but when the funded projects are completed, the projects that will most likely get done barring something unforeseen happening, then the equity issue will vanish.  Rather than just take city staff at their word, we created this map to test their claims.

You can view the full map at GeoCommons.

The above map breaks Long Beach up in to its different census tracts.  Inside each tract is a small circle which shows what percent of the residents living inside the tract are minorities and how many are Caucasian.  Clicking on the dot will give you that data.  The red, orange and white lines show bike projects that will be completed in the short-term.  Clicking on the line will tell you what street, the length of the project, and whether the project will be a bike lane, bike boulevard, or something else.

The map demonstrates that the city, if it follows through on the short-term and funded projects in the map, that the city will create a network that serves communities of all races and will provide residential connections to the beaches, the Downtown, the new transit plaza and those Bike Business Districts that are proving so popular.

But that’s not to say that existing bicycle infrastructure, even the new ones in the upper-class, mostly Caucasian neighborhoods or business districts are for everyone.

“There’s our indicator species,” Gandy remarked during our bike tour, gesturing to a Latina woman and two tween-age children on beach cruisers heading down Broadway on a trip to the beach.  ”She feels comfortable enough in a separated bike lane to ride in normal clothes, without a helmet.  That trip is probably made in a car without that lane.”  Don’t worry, the kids were wearing bike helmets.

Later on our ride, we followed a family of five, all Latino, and their neighbor from next door, who was riding to the beach path from Pacific Avenue across town.  When we chatted with the family.  In the words of the father, “No way we would have tried this a couple of years ago.  No way.”

Or, as former Long Beach resident and founder of the L.A. County Bike Coaliton Joe Linton put it, “Long Beach is the most bike friendly city in Southern California.  All that new infrastructure is used by everyone, regardless of where they live.”

But while Long Beach has tripled its infrastructure of bicyclists in the last three years, the city has also been working on an update to the circulation element to its Master Plan.  As Bunham put it, “the policy is going to catch up the infrastructure.”

The city has done outreach to create an element that incorporates both traditional and new facilities for cyclists and pedestrians.  While the plan hasn’t been revealed to the public, a twenty-page document entitled “Principles for Active Living and Complete Streets” that outlines the goals that Long Beach’s transportation and circulation element should meet when it comes to the City Council in the fall or early winter.

“If you look at our existing Mobility Element, you see a lot about road widenings about moving cars,” Dunham explains, “Now we want to focus more on people than cars.  Focus on pedestrian, bike ant transit travel  This is such a big shift, we wanted to create a public document that showed the principles so that people can see what we’re talking about.”

“We’re not trying to play a zero sum game, or declare war on the car or anything like that.  We’re trying to link modes together not get rid of one.”

So what does “Principles for Active Living and Complete Streets” promise Long Beach?  It outlines the principles that Long Beach should follow.

• Balance the Needs of all Modes of Travel
• Promote Walking
• Promote Bicycling
• Promote Transit
• Create Dynamic and Context Sensitive Streets
• Protect and Enhance the Environment
• Build Healthy and Active Neighbors
• Create Transit Oriented Development Along Transit Routes
• Ensure Connectivity to Active Routes and Other Modes

“Our big focus has been on shifting short trips,” explains Ira Brown, who is working on the Master Plan update with the planning department. “People would usually take the car to go to the laundromat, go to the store, and that trip can be made on a bike or by foot. We want to help people make that decision.”

Which isn’t to say that there’s nothing for advocates to do in Long Beach.  While the principles and maps released are a great start, there are always things that can go wrong in a couple of months.  When Long Beach does release its Draft Master Plan this fall, Streetsblog will update its Long Beach series.

Damien Newton wrote this story while participating in The California Endowment Health Journalism Fellowships, a program of USC’s Annenberg School for Communication & Journalism.

Thanks to an ADA lawsuit settlement, crossings such as this one may become a thing of the past in L.A. Photo: Ubrayj02/Flickr

Crumbling sidewalks and intersections without curb cuts are a common problem in L.A., but they’re a lot more noticeable when you’re moving with wheels.  Whether it’s pushing a baby stroller, or doing some sidewalk bicycle riding, the lack of curb cuts is suddenly a major issue.  While its a minor inconvenience to someone who is healthy and pushing wheels by choice, people who suffer from some physical ailment can find the lack of a curb cut to be as daunting a barrier as a moat filled with crocodiles.

The state of Los Angeles’ sidewalks is in terrible shape, especially when it comes to following the American with Disabilities Act which requires cuts to make sidewalks accessible to those in wheelchairs.  But thanks to a proposed legal settlement between a group of disabled Angelenos and the City of Los Angeles things might finally be changing.

Rather than battle the plaintiffs in court, the City decided to settle out of court.  But just because the plaintiff’s are settling doesn’t mean that the City is getting off easy.  Assuming the court approves the settlement the city will have to:

• Place curb cuts or access ramps to intersections on 1,000 intersections in less than a year.
• The city will spend up to $4 million each year to improve pedestrian crossings and safety in high-risk areas that have more pedestrian traffic, such as the areas around schools, government buildings and parks.
• Over the next twenty five years, the city will bring all areas to compliance with the American with Disability Act
• The city will complete a survey to see what the needs and cost are to bring the city into compliance with the ADA.
• The City will create an advisory committee to monitor progress in complying with the new settlement
• The Superior Court will have final say, not the City, to decide whether or not the City is holding up its end of the agreement.

The city is playing things close to the vest, they very politely refused comment for this story, but Los Angeles’ advocacy community was effusive.  ”They’ve had plenty of time to fix this ongoing issue, it’s sad that a lawsuit is needed to get justice for pedestrians,” commented Deborah Murphy, the founder of L.A. Walks and Chair of the City’s Pedestrian Advisory Committee (although here she is speaking as the former and not the latter.)

Photo:QsySye/Flickr

By “plenty of time,” Murphy is referring to the decades of neglect that Los Angeles’ sidewalks have undergone, especially when it comes to the ADA.  Murphy and other advocates believed the city had turned a corner more than a decade ago with the City Council unanimously made a commitment in 1999 to use funds from a settlement with the tobacco industry to repair sidewalks and parks.  However, that commitment ended after the first year of a twenty-five year settlement and the sidewalks continued to crumble and fall more out-of-date with modern standards.

Another warning for the City of Los Angeles was the landmark decision in Barden v Sacramento.   Joan Barden and other plaintiffs sucessfully argued that the State Capital violated the ADA by allowing sidewalks to fall into disrepair.  The Ninth Circuit Court agreed , ruling that the ADA convers anything “a public entity does,” which includes the construction and maintenance of sidewalks.

“This is a great example that class action lawsuits can have a great benefit to the public,” commented Howard Krepack, a Partner with Gordon, Edelstein, Krepack, Grant, Fulton & Goldstein LLP.  ”This is a great thing for disabled or injured pedestrians, or anyone that regularly uses sidewalks.”  Krepack is not a class action lawyer.

Because the settlement impacts so many people, it literally impacts every disabled person that lives within or visits Los Angeles there will be a chance for the public to comment on the settlement before it is finalized by the court.  Krepack explained the process to me over the phone.

The court is going to want to hear from as many people as possible to make sure the agreement between the two parties is fair.  While the agreement does a lot for the state of the city’s sidewalks and pedestrian crossings, it also protects the city somewhat from future lawsuits.  There is a “no opt-out” clause in the settlement, meaning that “…members of the Settlement Class will not be able to opt out of the Settlement Class if the Court grants final approval of the proposed settlement.”  But, there is a an opportunity for people to either protest (or support) the settlement.

If you are a member of the Settlement Class, you can object to any part of the settlement. You can give the reasons why you think that the Court should not approve it. To object, you must send a letter or other document stating that you object to the settlement. Please be sure to include your name, address,
telephone number, your signature, a reference to the pending actions, the portions of the settlement to which you object, and the reasons that you object.

You must mail your objection (first class mail, postage paid), postmarked no later than September 7, 2011, to all of the following:

Clerk of the Court
Los Angeles Superior Court
600 South Commonwealth Avenue
Los Angeles, California 90005

David Raizman, Esq.
Drinker Biddle & Reath LLP
1800 Century Park East, 14th Floor
Los Angeles, California 9006

Mike Arias, Esq.
Arias Ozzello & Gignac LLP
6701 Center Drive West, 14th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90045

Morse Mehrban, Esq.
Law Offices of Morse Meharban
12100 Wilshire Boulevard, 8th Floor
Los Angeles, California 90025

From there, the Court will hold a Final Approval Hearing at 10:00 a.m. on October 20, 2011, at the Los Angeles Superior Court, 600 South Commonwealth Avenue, Los Angeles, California 90005 in Department 324. At this hearing, the Court will consider whether the settlement is fair, reasonable, and adequate.

At last week’s Art Walk, the monthly event where downtown art galleries open their doors to the public for free, thousands of people gathered to walk through the Downtown.  The event is changing the way people view Downtown Los Angeles, but last week, tragedy struck.

A two-month old infant in a stroller was killed when a Mercedes jumped a curb and struck the stroller and her mother.  It was initially reported that the driver would face no criminal charges, but later it was reported that he might face vehicular manslaughter.  The LAPD believes he was trying to parallel park front first when he hit the gas instead of the brake, careened into a parking meter, and then into a crowd.

Some have responded to the crash by calling for the walk to go carfree.  Others are claiming that Art Walk has become to large an event to be managed efficiently and should be closed.  Streetsblog had a chance to interview Mayor Villaraigosa on the phone today and we asked him about the crash (more on the rest of the interview tomorrow):

First, it’s obviously a terrible tragedy and our hearts go out to the family.  It’s irresponsible to blame Art Walk for this crash, from what I understand it was a freak accident…It’s too soon to talk about what, if any, changes are needed.  I know Art Walk is working with the city to make people as safe as possible when people are crossing the street.

Streetsblog contributor Brigham Yen advances the argument that the City should think of making Art Walk, at least part of it, car-free  on his self-named blog.  Yen points out that New York does the same thing in Times Square on weekends.  Commentors at other blogs are calling for a monthly mini-Ciclavia on Spring and Main Streets between 2nd and 9th, where the Walk regularly takes place.

While we certainly agree with the concept of car-free parties, it seems unlikey to happen in the short-term.  Remember that after each CicLAvia, which covers 7.5 miles, the non-profit group that programs the event is presented with a six figure bill.   While a lower bill would come for Art Walk, both Main and Spring Street host just under a mile of Art Walk.  Over the course of a year, Art Walk closures would cost more than the two CicLAvia closures.

Is anyone willing to bring the money to close Spring and/or Main Streets to car traffic in Art Walk?

If the City won’t pay for the closures, and they probably won’t, then it’s incumbent on Art Walk to figure something out.  The sponsor list for Art Walk doesn’t seem to be able to foot a $500,000 bill so the businesses who benefit from the walk would have to step in to the gap.

There are still five more Art Walks scheduled for 2011: August 11, September 8, October 13, November 10 and December 8.  Whether there are any significant changes to the event remains to be seen.

We'll never know if the now-funded improvements to Jefferson and Ketzler would have saved the K-Town Ridazz, but we do know it will make the intersection safer for the hundreds of people that climb these stairs to the Baldwin Hills Park Scenic Overlook. Photo: Adventures in Los Angeles, Art and Architecture

Last Friday, the Baldwin Hills Conservancy, a county agency, awarded Culver City $570,000 to improve the intersection of Jefferson Boulevard and Hetzler road, the same intersection where Christine Dahab crashed into a group of stationary Midnight Ridazz early in the morning of June 16.  The improvements include the installation of a raised median near the intersection to differentiate the area surrounding the Scenic Overlook and the rest of the park from the industrial area around it, bike lanes from Duquense Avenue to the west to the City border to the east, a sidewalk on both sides of Jefferson and installation of a pedestrian signal at Hetzler.

Referring to the improvements and the crash, Charles Herbertson, the Director of Public Works for Culver City said, “I’m not sure any of the things we’re proposing would have stopped that, but it couldn’t have hurt.”  Herbertson also stressed that the proposal was before the Conservancy since before the crash and that the city has been trying to find funds to improve the intersection for a long time.

Even while the city scrambled to find funding to fix the intersection as more and more people used it to access the park, city leaders sounded the alarm that the intersection could claim lives before funding is identified.  Consider these two quotes from Culver City Councilmen on the situation at Jefferson and Hetzler from Culver City Patch about a grant application for the Metro Call for Projects:

“My gut tells me that in between those years of waiting, something bad is going to happen across that boulevard and then we will have to react in lieu of waiting for that grant,” Cooper said.

O’Leary agreed as well, calling the situation an accident waiting to happen.

“It saddens me that we have to have accidents, possibly deaths on the roadway to prove that this is an area that this is absolutely needed,” O’Leary said. “I got an e-mail today stating that there are women bringing children, toddlers running across the street and there is traffic traveling at 50 miles an hour at a blind bend. If there is no funding, then we need to find a way, somehow.

If Culver City receives its proposed grant from the Metro Call for Projects, they will use it to extend the Jefferson Boulevard Bike Lanes another mile to Overland Ave.

The unsafe conditions at Jefferson and Hetzler were also hardly news to people who visit the park.  Journalist Eddie North-Hager, founder of popular news websites Leimert Park Beat and Culver City Times, regularly visits the park and informed me over the weekend that everyone who visits the park knows the issues with Jefferson Blvd.

“I know a lot of people from Leimert Park and all over the city come to climb the Aztec pyramid like stairs. And we all park at the bottom along Jefferson, which is a major four-lane street with fast cars, few lights and few sidewalks,” North-Hager added,  “I’ve seen a couple of car accidents as people were attempting to parallel park. I worry, both as a motorist and a pedestrian, of much worse collisions as people dart in and out of parked cars to cross the street. I hope they add some sidewalks, some additional parking and a lighted pedestrian crossing – these are the costs necessary for building what already is a very successful park.”

The pedestrian signal is actually as much about showing pedestrians where to cross the street as it is to slow traffic.  Herbertson and North-Hager both noted that people are crossing the street where they parked and not at the unmarked crosswalk.

Even before the crash, the Culver City Bike Coalition has been backing the city’s efforts to create safe space for everyone at the deadly intersection of Jefferson and Hetzler.  In a letter dated June of this year, the CCBC urged the Baldwin Hills Conservancy to get involved in funding safety improvements for Jefferson Boulevard near the Overlook.

But for Herbertson, the most important improvement is just letting drivers know that there is a park in the area, and to slow down.  “It will help a lot, especially making the area more visible.  The area is so industrial you can drive past it without realizing you’re passing a state park.”

It's too bad that we often need to see this before we can see real pedestrian safety improvements. Photo:Daily News

The past week has been a dismal one for pedestrian safety issues.  One week ago, the K-Town Riders were probably peacefully planning out their ride, checking their tires, or otherwise going about their business with no idea the carnage that would be unleashed on them.  One week ago the fate of our city’s red light camera program was still uncertain.  But one week ago, one of the deadliest intersection in the city still didn’t have a traffic light.

Well, at least there’s some good news from the last seven days.

Over six months after Emely Aleman, 12, and Angela Rodriguez, 10, were crossing the street in a marked crosswalk when they were hit and tossed fifty feet in the air by a Jeep Cherokee.  Aleman passed away at the hospital, while Rodriguez is on the long road to recovery.  It was the third crash at the intersection of Laurel Canyon Boulevard and Archwood Street. in 2010, down from four crashes in 2009.

Yesterday, Councilman Paul Krekorian announced that construction of a traffic signal at that intersection has begun.  Krekorian and School Board Member Tamar Galatzan, who ran against Krekorian for the seat he now holds, teamed together with the community to create the political pressure to expediate the light’s installation.  A council resolution in Aleman’s name was passed by the City Council late last year urging LADOT to install this signal as quickly as possible.

The Council District 2 blog quotes Krekorian:

“Last fall, tragedy struck our community when Emely Aleman was fatally hit by a distracted driver as she crossed the street in a cross walk,” said Councilmember Paul Krekorian, who represents the area. “That tragic accident occurred on a busy stretch on Laurel Canyon Boulevard that had long been in need of more safety measures. After the accident, I stood with Emely’s friends and family and promised that my office would work with LAUSD Board Member Tamar Galatzan to expedite installation of a streetlight at the intersection.”

However, at least two members in the room were clearly in opposition.  Councilman Paul Koretz and Councilman Bill Rosendahl joined Councilman Dennis Zine, who was not present, in speaking out against the cameras.  Koretz read a list of studies done by other cities on the benefits of their red light programs, all of which found the program lacking.

“Red light cameras make no sense for the City of Los Angeles, currently,” he concluded.

Oddly, he did not mention his own city’s study, which found a reduction of 62% in crashes at intersections where the cameras were implemented.  While 200 cyclists and pedestrians have been killed in car crashes since the cameras were instituted throughout the city, none of them were killed in intersections with the lights.  He also didn’t mention that the Federal Highway Administration have found that crashes are reduced at intersections with red light cameras.

Rosendahl conducted a lengthy interview with Rhodes Rigby, the Mayor of Loma Linda.  Loma Linda is a city of 22,000 people and had once installed four red light cameras.  Four years into the project, they pulled them out after one camera was bringing thousands of tickets for people illegally turning right on red lights without stopping.  Apparently Loma Linda’s experience is a perfect counterpart to the City of Los Angeles which has over four million people and installed 32 red light cameras.

Rigby and Rosendahl both believe that illegally turning right at a red light without stopping isn’t a major issue.  Rigby even stated that “few crashes and fewer injuries” are caused by these crashes.

Since I know the Councilman’s staff reads Streetsblog, let’s say it again, with links:

When the Federal Highway Administration discusses the conflict between pedestrians and automobiles it ranks “right on red” as the top concern.  A look at crash fatality statistics nationwide shows that in Los Angeles, almost one quarter of all crash fatalities are pedestrians.

Which is not to say the cameras didn’t have its share of support in the Council.  In addition to Alarcon and Parks, Councilmen Jose Huizar and Richard Alarcon both spoke in favor of the motion to continue the program.  Alarcon noted that the issue is personal for him and that, “There is a culture we need to change in Los Angeles, and in particular in the San Fernando Valley.”

The Council is expected to vote on this issue next Tuesday.  Before the Council debate began a group of speakers that included public health and public safety officials spoke in favor of keeping the lights while a coalition of neighborhood activists and one technology expert spoke against.  During one particularly moving part of testimony, when a family showed a picture of their daughter killed by a red light runner at an intersection, Council Woman Jan Perry, who was chairing the meeting allowed them to speak well over their allotted time.

There is more to walking than walking. Photos by Jan Gehl.

Editor’s note: Streetsblog San Francisco is thrilled to present a three-part series this week by renowned Danish architect and livable streets luminary Jan Gehl. The pieces are excerpts are from his book, “Cities for People” published by Island Press. This is part two. Donate to Streetsblog SF and you’ll qualify to win a copy of the book, courtesy of Island Press.

It is a big day when at about one year of age a child takes that first step. The child’s eye level moves from the vantage point of the crawler (about 1 foot) above the floor to about 2.6 feet.

The little walker can see much more and move faster. From now on everything in the child’s world — field of vision, perspective, overview, pace, flexibility and opportunities — will move on a higher, faster plane. All of life’s important moments will hereafter be experienced on foot at standing and walking pace.

While walking is basically a linear movement that brings the walker from place to place, it is also much more. Walkers can effortlessly stop underway to change direction, maneuver, speed up or slow down or switch to a different type of activity such as standing, sitting, running, dancing, climbing or lying down.

A city walk illustrates its many variations: the quick goal-oriented walk from A to B, the slow stroll to enjoy city life or a sunset, children’s zig-zagging, and senior citizens’ determined walk to get fresh air and exercise or do an errand. Regardless of the purpose, a walk in city space is a “forum” for the social activities that take place along the way as an integral part of pedestrian activities. Heads move from side to side, walkers turn or stop to see everything, or to greet or talk with others. Walking is a form of transport, but it is also a potential beginning or an occasion for many other activities.

Many factors impact on walking speed: the quality of the route, the surface, the strength of the crowd, and the age and mobility of the walker. The design of the space also plays a role. Pedestrians usually walk faster on streets that invite linear movement, while their pace falls while traversing squares. It is almost like water, which flows rapidly along riverbeds but moves more slowly in lakes. Weather is another factor. People move more quickly when it is raining, windy or cold.

Life takes place on foot in Amman, Jordan.

On Copenhagen’s main walking street, Strøget, pedestrian traffic on cold winter days is 35 percent faster than on good summer days. In summer there are many pedestrians in the city promenading and enjoying the process, while pedestrian traffic in winter is considerably more targeted. When it’s cold, people walk for warmth. On average the walking speed in summer is 14.2 min per km/23 min per mile, corresponding to 4.2 km per hour/2.6 mph. Corresponding winter walking speeds are 10.3 min per km/16.6 min per mile corresponding to 5.8 km per hour/3.6 mph.

A walk of 450 m/0.3 mile takes about five minutes, while a walk of 900 m/0.6 mile will take about 10 minutes at 5.4 km per hour/3.4 mph. Naturally, these time estimates are only valid if the area is uncrowded and people can walk without obstacles or breaks.

An acceptable walking distance is a relatively fluid concept. Some people happily walk many kilometers/miles, while even short walks are difficult for old people, the disabled and children. Walks of 500 m/0.3 miles are mentioned frequently as a distance most people are willing to walk. However, an acceptable distance also depends on the quality of the route. If the pavement is good quality and the route interesting, a considerably longer walk is often acceptable. Conversely, the desire to walk drops drastically if the route is uninteresting and thus feels tiring. In that case a walk of only 200 or 300 m/0.12 to 0.18 mile will seem like a long way, even if it only takes less than five minutes on foot.

A distance of 500 m/0.3 mile as an approximate goal for acceptable walks is supported by the size of city centers. By far the majority of city centers are about one km2/0.39 sq mile, corresponding to an area of 1×1 km/0.6 x 0.6 mile. This means that a walk of a kilometer or less will bring the pedestrians around to most of the functions in the city.

Huge cities like London and New York have corresponding patterns, as they are divided into numerous centers and districts. The magic one km2 center size can certainly be found in these cities. The acceptable walking distance does not change just because the city is larger.

This street sign in Poland discreetly recommends that people keep their arms close to their sides

An important prerequisite for a comfortable and pleasurable walk is room to walk relatively freely and unhampered, without having to weave in and out and without being pushed and shoved by others. Children, older people and people with disabilities have special requirements for being able to walk unhindered. People pushing strollers, shopping carts and walkers also need plenty of room for walking. Groups of young people are typically the most tolerant about moving about in crowds.

If we look at photographs from 100 years ago, pedestrians are often shown moving freely and unimpeded in every direction. Cities were still primarily the province of pedestrians, with horse-drawn carriages and trolleys and a few cars merely as visitors.

In step with the car invasion, pedestrians were first pushed up along building façades and then increasingly squeezed together on shrinking sidewalks. Crowded sidewalks are unacceptable and a problem worldwide.

Studies of urban streets in London, New York and Sydney illustrate the problems of narrow sidewalks for large crowds of pedestrians on streets where most of the area is designed for car traffic, despite the fact that the number of drivers is far lower than the number of pedestrians crowded together on the sidewalk.

The pedestrian traffic on sidewalks moves in columns that are pushed and shoved, and everyone must move at the speed dictated by the pedestrian stream. The elderly, the disabled and children cannot possibly keep up.

Various limits are suggested for what is considered an acceptable amount of space for pedestrian traffic, depending on context. Based on studies in New York, William H. Whyte proposes up to 23 pedestrians per minute per meter/three feet on the sidewalk. Studies in Copenhagen propose 13 pedestrians per minute per meter/three feet of sidewalk, if the limit for unacceptable crowding on sidewalks is to be avoided.

If walking is to be comfortable, including acceptable distance and pace, there has to be room to walk without too many interruptions and obstacles. These qualities are often offered in dedicated pedestrian areas, but seldom on sidewalks on city streets. On the contrary, it is impressive to note how many obstacles and difficulties have been incorporated into pedestrian landscapes over the years. Traffic signs, lampposts, parking meters and all types of technical control units are systematically placed on sidewalks in order “not to be in the way.” Cars parked on or partially on sidewalks, thoughtlessly parked bicycles and undisciplined street displays complete the picture of a pedestrian landscape where pedestrians have to maneuver like skiers down a slalom course in order to move along sidewalks that are too narrow in the first place.

The high priority given to car traffic and parking have created unreasonable conditions for pedestrians all over the world.

Enough space for walking is impor- tant to all groups of pedestrians, but especially children, the elderly and the disabled.

Walking in urban landscapes can present many other petty annoyances and difficulties. One is pedestrian fences intended to keep walkers confined to crowded sidewalks. Barriers erected on pavements at intersections to keep pedestrians away from corners extend some way down the street, causing more detours and annoyance

Interruptions in sidewalks to provide cars with uncomplicated access to garages, driveways, delivery gates and gas stations have gradually become a natural part of the street scene in car-dominated cities.

On Regent Street in London, 45 – 50,000 pedestrians daily force their way through 13 unnecessary sidewalk interruptions, and in Adelaide, South Australia, streets in the city center offer pedestrians no fewer than 330 unnecessary sidewalk interruptions.

In addition to these meaningless interruptions that force pedestrians, wheelchairs and strollers up and down curbs at garages and gates, there are many unmotivated interruptions where small streets run into larger ones. In almost all of the situations mentioned, the sidewalk should be led unbroken through entrance ways and side streets as part of a general policy of inviting rather than discouraging pedestrian traffic.

The combination of inadequate space and annoyances large and small is supplemented by endless waiting time at stoplights at city intersections. Pedestrians are typically given low priority and thus face long waits at red lights followed by short green-light periods. The green light often only lasts seconds before being replaced by blinking red signals meaning that it is now time to run to avoid delaying the traffic.

When walking resembles an obstacle course (Sydney, Australia).

In many places, particularly in the UK and other areas inspired by British traffic planning, crossing the streets is not a basic human right but rather something pedestrians have to apply for by pushing a button at intersections. Sometimes they even have to press three times to make it through the maze at complicated intersections. In these cities any thought of being able to walk 450 meters/1,476 feet in five minutes is a fantasy.

The center of Sydney has many pedestrians, as well as many intersections, many stoplights, many pushbuttons and long periods of waiting. Here pedestrians can easily spend half of the total walking time waiting for the “walk” signal. Waits of up to 15 percent, 25 percent or even 50 percent of a walk are common on many traffic streets in cities around the world.

By comparison, the waiting time on a one-kilometer/0.6 mile walk on Copenhagen’s main walking street, Strøget, is only 0 – 3 percent of walking time. A goal-oriented walk through the city via Strøget can be done in 12 minutes, but many people spend far more time because the walk is so interesting.

Another special walking phenomenon has been noted on sidewalks where crossroads streets and light signals cause pedestrians to stop frequently. Pedestrians move in clumps and therefore always in crowds, even at times when there isn’t much pedestrian traffic.

Every time the pedestrian stream meets a red light the pedestrians stop, and the slightly slower walkers have time to catch up with the main field, after which everyone is once again amalgamated into a clump. When the light turns green, the clump moves forward again, but disperses slightly before the next stoplight, where everyone  is gathered once again. Between clumps, the sidewalk is typically almost devoid of people.

Urbanites all over the world are highly energy conscious when it comes to saving their own energy when walking. They cross streets where it is most natural for them, avoid detours, obstacles, stairs and steps, and prefer direct lines of walking everywhere. When pedestrians can see the object of a walk, they rechart a course along the shortest line. Their pleasure from direct walks can be seen clearly in city squares, by their footsteps after a snowfall and on countless tramped paths worn across lawns and landscapes the world over.

Walking directly to your destination is a natural response, often in an unfortunate and almost comic conflict with architects’ rulers and the resulting right-angled urban projects. These right-angled design projects look neat and proper until the corners, lawns and squares are trodden on in every direction.

It is often easy to foresee the preferred lines of walking and to incorporate them to a reasonable extent in the design of complexes and landscaping. Preferred lines often inspire fascinating patterns and shapes.

Many cities have consistently allowed entrances, garages and side streets to interrupt sidewalks. However, cars should yield on side streets, allow- ing pedestrians and bicycles to continue on without interruption (Regent Street, London).

A standard traffic solution in Copenhagen.

About 500 meters/1,640 feet is a distance most pedestrians find acceptable. This is not an absolute truth, however, because what is acceptable will always be a combination of distance and the quality of the route. If comfort is low, the walk will be short, while if the route is interesting, rich in experience and comfortable, pedestrians forget the distance and enjoy experiences as they happen.

The “tiring length perspective” describes the situation in which the pedestrian can see the whole route at a glance before even starting out. The road is straight and seemingly endless, with no promise of interesting experiences along the way. The prospect is tiring before the walk is even begun.

Even a long walk feels short along a curved road with plenty to see (Cartagena, Colombia).

In contrast, the route can be divided into manageable segments, where people can walk from square to square, which naturally breaks up the walk, or along a street that winds enticingly, inviting the pedestrian from one section to the next. A winding street does not have to twist much to prevent the walker seeing very far down the street, but is constantly walking towards corners and twists, where new vistas open.

Copenhagen’s main pedestrian street, Strøget, is a good kilometer/0.6 mile long and runs almost directly from one end of the city center to the other. Countless twists and turns along the way keep the spaces closed up and interesting. Four squares further divide the route and make walking the length of the city center psychologically manageable. We walk from square to square, and the many twists and turns make the trip interesting and unpredictable. Under these circumstances a walk of one kilometer/0.6 mile or more is no problem.

Street patterns, the design of space, rich detail and intense experiences influence the quality of pedestrian routes and pleasure in walking. The city’s “edges” also play a role. We have plenty of time to look as we walk, and the quality of the ground floor façades we pass close by at eye level, is particularly important to the quality of the tour. The section on lively cities proscribes “small units and many doors” for streets frequented by pedestrians.

The principle of narrow units and many experiences is also important along pedestrian routes that don’t have shops and stalls. Front doors, building details, landscaping and greenery in front of housing, offices and institutions can make a valuable contribution to interesting experiences on walks. If buildings also have a primarily vertical façade expression, walks seem shorter and more manageable, whereas buildings with powerful horizontal lines underscore and reinforce distance.

Walking up stairs is harder than walking on a flat surface, and we avoid stairs whenever we can. And for many groups in society stairs are a direct barrier.

Stairs and steps are another area that clearly illustrate pedestrians’ major interest in saving energy. Horizontal movements are no big problem. If the telephone rings in a neighboring room, we just get up and answer it. However, if the telephone rings on another floor, we shout to ask if someone else will answer it. Going up and down stairs and steps requires new movements, more muscle power, and walking rhythm has to be changed to climbing rhythm. These factors make it more difficult to go up and down than to move on the same plane, or alternatively, to be transported mechanically up and down. At metro stations, in airports and department stores, people stand in line to take the escalator, while staircases next to them are almost empty. Shopping malls and department stores built in several stories rely on escalators and elevators to move people from floor to floor. If the transport breaks down, people go home!

It is interesting to study daily life in multistory housing. In almost all cases, the bulk of activity takes place on the ground floor. Once you have entered the living room, you naturally tend to wait before going upstairs again. Children bring their toys down into the living room, where they play with them all day until their parents take them back up again at bedtime. The lower floors are almost always more well-worn than the upper ones. Second-or third-floor rooms are almost always used less than those on the ground floor, and roof terraces are used far less than outside space with direct access without climbing stairs. The heaps gathered on the bottom steps waiting to be taken upstairs speak volumes about the physical and psychological problems related to internal stairs.

Stairs and steps definitely represent a genuine physical and psychological challenge for pedestrians. If possible pedestrians certainly will avoid them. However, like street length, staircases can also be disguised to make the trip seem more doable. If at the foot of a five-story building we could see the entire staircase with its seemingly endless steps, most people would find it impossible to crawl to the top, unless their lives were at stake. In situations like these it is interesting to see the wide- spread use of elementary “staircase psychology.”

If we can see the staircase all the way to the top, we find the climb all the more tiring.

Staircases are angled to wind from landing to landing, dividing the climb into shorter segments. It is like moving from “square” to “square,” and the climber never gets the chance to see the entire course of stairs in its exhausting length. That way we are enticed into the building, even if we have to climb. Even when the enticement is utterly convincing, it is the elevator that is the most used if there is one. Naturally staircase psychology is also used successfully in public space, where examples like the Spanish Steps in Rome demonstrate that a climb can be beautifully combined with interesting experiences.

With regard to visions of lovely urban space that invite people to walk as much as possible, the conclusion is actually very simple. Stairs and steps are genuine obstacles — in principle to be avoided wherever possible. When a necessity in the pedestrian landscape, stairs and steps must have comfortable dimensions, and visual interest and staircase psychology must be used purposefully. Ramps or elevators are estab- lished for rolling pedestrian traffic and people with reduced mobility as a matter of course.

If we consider situations where pedestrians are free to choose between ramps and stairs, we see that they clearly prefer ramps. Walking rhythm can be maintained if height differences are evened out by allowing the terrain to rise and fall slightly or by using ramps. Children, the disabled and rolling pedestrian traffic can also complete their walk without interruptions. Ramps are not always as full of character as stairs and steps, but they are generally preferred.

Marathon preparation in Venice means ramps instead of stairs.

Shoppers have a choice of ramps, stairs and escalators at this shopping center in Beijing, China.

In the early years of the automobile invasion, from the 1950s to the 1970s, road engineering focused uncritically on increasing capacity on the roads and preventing accidents to pedestrians. The solution to both problems was often to segregate traffic and lead pedestrians under or over roads by means of pedestrian underpasses and bridges. This meant subjecting pedestrians to stairs on either side of the crossing. Planners quickly learned that pedestrian underpasses and bridges were exceedingly unpopular and only worked if tall fences were also built along the roads, so that pedestrians literally had no other way out. This still did not solve the problem of strollers, wheelchairs and bicycles, however.

Pedestrian underpass systems had the additional disadvantage of being dark and dank, and people generally feel insecure if they are unable to see very far ahead. In short, the often expensive pedestrian underpasses and bridges were in conflict with the basic premises for good pedestrian landscapes. Seen in the perspective of current visions of inviting people to walk and bicycle more in cities, clearly pedestrian underpasses and bridges can only be solutions in those special cases where major highways must be crossed. Solutions must be found for all other roads and streets that allow pedestrians and bicycles to stay on street level and cross with dignity. An integrated traffic model will also make city streets friendlier and safer as cars will have to move more slowly and stop more often.

Today the world is full of abandoned pedestrian underpasses and bridges. They belong to a certain time and a certain philosophy.

in Japanese cities the overpass- es are intertwined into larger systems. Level of difficulty: great. Chances of interesting promenades: small (Sendai, Japan).

Naturally pavements play an important role in pedestrian comfort. In future the quality of pavement and surfaces will be particularly important in a world with more senior citizens and pedestrians with reduced mobility, more rolling pedestrian traffic and more people wanting to take children to the city. It is desirable for surfaces to be even and non slip. Traditional cobblestones and broken natural slate stones are full of visual character, but seldom live up to modern requirements. In places where the character of the old cobblestones has to be maintained, bands of flat granite have to be added to enable wheelchairs, strollers, small children, senior citizens and women in high heels to move in relative comfort. This type of pavement, combining old with new, is used in many cities and can be designed as elegant floors for public space, while paying history its due.

As far as possible, a good city for walking must function all year round, day and night. In winter it is important that snow and ice are cleared, and, to use the Copenhagen model as an example, pedestrian areas and bicycle paths should be cleared before roads for car traffic. On cold days when pavements are icy, pedestrians have a far greater risk of injury than do car drivers, who typically drive more slowly and carefully. In all parts of the world and in all seasons, ensuring dry nonslip surfaces for pedes- trians is an important part of whole-hearted invitations to walk in cities.

Lighting is crucial once night falls. Good lighting on people and faces and reasonable lighting for façades, niches and corners is needed along the most important pedestrian routes to strengthen the real and the ex- perienced  sense of security, and sufficient light is needed on pavements, surfaces and steps so that pedestrians can maneuver safely.

Please walk — around the clock all year round.

Murphy, presenting for the MyFigueroa project team. Photo:LA Streetsblog/Flickr

Over the course of this year, I wanted to take time ever now and then to introduce you to members of our L.A. Streetsblog team here in Los Angeles by letting you hear them discuss transportation issues in their own words. Previous articles have focused on CicLAvia’s Joe Linton and the Safe Routes to School’s National Partnership’s Jessica Meaney.

Today, we focus on Deborah Murphy.  Long time Streetsblog readers might wonder, “Hey, didn’t we meet Murphy already,” but given her role not just with L.A. Walks, but as a key member of the My Figueroa project team that could change South Park forever, now seems like a great time to check back in.

For those of you that haven’t read/listened to a Streetscast, I’ll provide the topic and a quick quote before posting the audio.

Murphy and her traveling companion, Rhone, a the GOOD party for CicLAvia in March. Photo: GOOD L.A.'s Editor, Alissa Walker/Flickr

Topic 1: Pedestrian Safety

“Everyone thinks of Los Angeles as the city for cars…It wasn’t always that way when I was a kid. Los Angeles was the place where when you stepped off the curb, everyone stopped, and not just because you were a kid.”

Topic 2: Murphy Updates Us on the My Figueroa Project and Explains the Team’s Vision

“11th Street is something we want to look at in particular between Figueroa Street and Broadway…We can really turn the street into an outdoor linear park…maybe an outdoor living room…”

Topic 3: Proposal for L.A.’s first Bikestation

“…at the corner of Pico and Figueroa Street…”

Topic 4: The Growth of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Advocacy Communities in Recent Years

“It’s been great since Streetsblog came around…We can fight for a better piece of the transportation pie.”

Topic 5: If You Could Change One Thing About Transportation in Los Angeles

“Everyone should slow down…”

Every circle represents a half mile radius from a school. Every red circle shows the highest possible danger to pedestrians based on state statistics. The map is of "Central Los Angeles." To download more maps, click here.

This morning, Transportation for America (T4A) released a report, “Dangerous by Design” which gives a state-by-state ranking of how dangerous each state is for pedestrians.  While there are certainly worse states to take a walk in than California, 6,957 Californians died (of 47,700 nationally) while walking as result of a crash between 2000 and 2009.

Locally, the news isn’t any better.  The Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana region ranked as the 27th most dangerous place in the country to take a walk; more dangerous than every California region except the Riverside-San Bernadino region and Greater Sacramento.  2,533 pedestrians were killed in the Los Angeles region between 2000-2009.

However, the reality of pedestrian danger really strikes home when looking at a new series of maps released by the State of California and University of California-Berkeley that break down how dangerous it is to walk to school based on the number of pedestrian collisions within one half mile of a school.  That sea of red pictured in the map above is a jarring look at the main barrier to promoting walking and bicycling to school.  In too many areas, parents believe it just isn’t safe.

Predictably, where one lives and how much money one makes are the top factors in determining how safe it is to talk to school, or work, to do errands or just for exercise.  T4A notes that low-income and minority communities are most likely to feel the brunt of poorly designed streets imperiling pedestrian lives.

In the 234 counties nationally where more than 1 in 5 families has a household income lower than the poverty level, the pedestrian fatality rate averages 2.91 per 100,000 persons, significantly higher than the national rate of 1.6 per 100,000 nationwide.

Meanwhile, the rates of pedestrian fatalities for non-Hispanic whites was 1.38 per 100,000.  The rates were higher for nearly all minority groups, with 1.45 for Asian Americans, 2.23 for Hispanics and 2.39 for African Americans, per 100,000 people.

Nearly everyone agrees the solution to this safety epidemic is better funding for safer streets.  But at the federal level, where a transportation funding bill seems to be mired in bureaucratic fear of asking voters to invest in our country’s infrastructure, help seems a long way away.

“There is a debate in Congress now about whether the federal government should dedicate resources to protecting pedestrians,” said Ryan Wiggins, of Transportation for America. “The reality is that 67 percent of all pedestrian fatalities in the last 10 years occurred on roads eligible to receive federal funding. As taxpayers we should emphasize that our federal tax dollars be spent on improving safety, not putting our children, families, and friends at risk particularly when more people are choosing to walk and bike as a result of high gas prices.”

Locally, the picture is equally bleak, although there are some silver linings.

A recently passed master plan for the Southern California Association of Governments region, which includes Los Angeles and five other counties, set aside a whopping half of a percent of its thirty year plan for bicycle and pedestrian projects despite the crash and fatality statistics for these modes making up a full 25 percent of all road fatalities.

However, there are some signs that underfunding pedestrian safety is going to change, although challenges remain.

“Turning around an auto-centric town like Los Angeles doesn’t just require political will, it requires a major infrastructure investment to restore the pedestrian amenities we stripped away to make room for cars,” said Los Angeles City Councilmember and Transportation Committee Chair, Bill Rosendahl.

“The city (of Los Angeles) recently allocated $1.2 million in funding to develop a citywide strategy for Safe Routes to School to address the safety issue on the streets around our schools, however due to the current hiring freeze, this project could potentially stall if the City does not respond swiftly to provide the staff we need to work on this plan,” writes Alexis Lantz of the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition.

The $1.2 million comes from the Measure R Local Return funds.  The City of Los Angeles dedicates 10% of their “local return” funds to bicycle and pedestrian projects.

But the battle for safe streets isn’t just about staff, but about political will, Jessica Meaney from the Safe Routes to School National Partnership calls on Los Angeles to step up for safety.  “ We need the city to give us staff, a plan and projects on the ground right away so we can see our transportation priorities shift, putting safety first, people first, not cars.”

Most of South Lake Avenue functions like a strip mall, with parking in the back and stores with "convenient" back door entrances that siphon pedestrian activity away from the actual South Lake Avenue itself. There's many more pictures of South Lake after the jump.

For awhile now, I’ve contemplated the perplexing question of “What can improve South Lake Avenue (an underperforming shopping district)?” and I’ve come up with my own conclusions as to why the moribund district performs so poorly.

Let me also start off by saying “Thank you” to those who took the time yesterday to email me their thoughts expressing their very valid concerns over the unfortunate news that Borders will be closing their location on South Lake Avenue due to their recent bankruptcy and reorganization (a Borders store associate on South Lake Avenue told me “one to two months”).

I was just as bummed about the news, and as a result of those emails I received, I felt compelled to go out and “exam” South Lake Avenue today by doing my own little research. I asked myself the obvious question as I walked up and down the street: “Why are there so few people walking on South Lake Avenue?”

The answer in my opinion is quite “simple” and boils down to two major drawbacks that hamper South Lake Avenue: 1) The tenant/business mix is uninteresting in its current configuration, and 2) the back entrances to the businesses from the Shoppers Lane parking lot is insidiously harmful to South Lake Avenue in the front.

Many customers who park in the back lot, enter and exit stores through the back as well, preventing South Lake Avenue from generating any substantial amount of healthy foot traffic

The current mix of businesses that line South Lake Avenue is really not that interesting (I walked up and down and found it really quite boring). Part of the joy of having a shopping district is being able to stroll and window shop a variety of interesting stores and restaurants mixed in to add some spice (think Old Pasadena). However, for South Lake Avenue’s case, between mattress stores, gallery frames, and appliances, a substantial portion of the stock of businesses are, quite frankly, uninteresting to the everyday pedestrian shopper. Plus you have a lot of “bunching up” where many restaurants (like Panda Express, Hamlet, etc.) are further north in a group (like a food court) instead of being more mixed in adding to a more dynamic experience.

And now we go into the territory of “parking,” which is always controversial and loaded with emotions (this is the land ruled by cars, and more cars, right?). Nevertheless, I am going to say it isn’t the lack of parking that is damaging South Lake Avenue (as many believe that’s the case). I believe that over half of South Lake Avenue falls victim to what I call, “the strip mall paradigm,” which is to say people park their cars (in the back parking lot on Shoppers Lane much like a strip mall) as close to the store they plan to shop in (i.e., Ross, Pier One, etc.) much like a strip mall.

Back door entrances really function as the front door as more people enter and exit through the back than the official "front."

What you have are people entering through the back of the stores because the back really becomes the “front,” if that makes any sense. Case in point, there is a Ross cashier checkout “conveniently” located by the back entrance to accommodate most of their customers entering and exiting through the back (where the parking is of course), so in essence, the back of the store really starts to function like the front of the store.

So if people/customers are entering and leaving through the back of these stores, what that phenomenon really is doing, collectively, is siphoning away much of the potential pedestrian foot traffic/energy along South Lake Avenue making the district feel “too quiet” and even “dead.” This becomes a big problem over time, turning into a vicious cycle that’s hard to break as people (including business owners) perceive South Lake Avenue to be an unattractive location to do business or shop.

Back doors could be closed to the public, only used for loading and unloading of merchandise

I propose:

Closing off the back door entrances and forcing people to walk some extra steps will certainly help generate some extra foot traffic from an otherwise "quiet" South Lake Avenue

1) The stores and businesses close their back entrances (open only to loading/unloading), forcing people who park in the back lot to walk to the front of South Lake Avenue through lovely, but dying corridors like the Burlington Arcade, which could really benefit from the continuous foot traffic if more people are forced to walk through there. This would make South Lake Avenue seem much more lively as there would always be more people walking up and down the street since they can no longer slip into stores from the back.

2) The South Lake Avenue Business Association (run by Gina Tleel) should get all the major property owners in a room (easy as herding cats right?) and figure out a master lease plan where owners are on the same page. That way, South Lake Avenue will start to have a plan on what kind of businesses would perform the best, and therefore, benefit the community and its customers the most.

Voila!

As for Borders closing, there is not much we can do about that, but we can take it as an opportunity to make sure that the next business that leases the space will be just as beneficial to the community.

Closing back entrances and directing people to walk through corridors like Burlington Arcade could also help this dying arcade by boosting business (Photo courtesy of iamnotastalker.com

Shops like these without back entrances should be replicated throughout the entire district, funneling all avaliable pedestrian energy to the street

This gas station may be good for cars, but it's bad for pedestrians, and should not be allowed to exist on a pedestrian thoroughfare such as South Lake Avenue if the goal is to do everything we can to promote a pedestrian-friendly environment

Chicago's Active Transportation Alliance serves as a model of how to integrate communities of color into livability programming. Photo courtesy of Active Transportation Alliance

“I think there were about 300 or 400 people,” he said. “And really, I could count on one hand people I thought were people of color.”

Hernandez is the director of outreach and advocacy for the Active Transportation Alliance in Chicago. His own organization has a predominantly white, affluent membership, he says, but that’s changing. And a new study by the Centers for Disease Control highlights the urgent need for smart-growth and livability organizations to diversify and include the full range of people who care about these issues.

The CDC asked people how “street-scale urban design policies” (read: sidewalks, lighting) affect their level of physical activity. Overall, about 57 percent of adults said these neighborhood features were “moderately” or “very” important – but people of color placed far greater importance on those factors in the built environment than the white people surveyed.

In fact, 50.5 percent of black respondents and 40.6 percent of Hispanic respondents said neighborhood features were “very important” in determining their level of physical activity. Only 26.9 percent of the white people surveyed gave that answer. A quarter of the white respondents said it wasn’t important at all, while only 12 and 13 percent of Hispanics and blacks, respectively, said that.

Hernandez says that low-income communities and communities of color “get” issues of walkability, though they may feel alienated by the jargon livability advocates use. “People want to be able to walk and feel safe; they want their kids to be able to play outside,” he said. “The instant you start talking to people about what they like and don’t like about their block, they might say, ‘I hate that it’s hard for my kids to walk to school’, or ‘It’s hard for my kids to play outside.’ ‘We’re worried about how fast the cars are going.’”

He said Chicago residents often say their block party is their favorite event of the year. “You ask them, What happens at your block parties?” he said. “‘Well, the instant all the cars move, all the kids go out and play. It’s one of the only times we really talk to all our neighbors.’”

Laura Barrett, director of the Transportation Equity Network, laments the “segregation” between community organizations and some transportation advocacy groups. “Some people pursue walking and biking as a ‘white’ issue,” she said, “but low-income people who are stuck in these neighborhoods and have to walk and bike everywhere are incredibly impacted” by neighborhood features like high-traffic streets, abandoned buildings, and lack of green space.

Photo courtesy of Active Transportation Alliance

According to the CDC’s survey, people of color are also more willing than white people to take civic action on neighborhood issues. It found that 58.8 percent of blacks said they were willing to write letters to elected officials about neighborhood livability issues, as well as 47.8 percent of Hispanics. Only 36.7 percent of whites were willing to write letters, though more of them were willing to pay more property taxes for better neighborhood design. Blacks were less willing to do that – but 6.3 percent of them (and 5.8 percent of Hispanics) were interested in running for office to support neighborhood improvements. Only 3.2 percent of whites were willing to go that far.

So if people of color are ready and willing to take action, why aren’t they prominent actors in most livability-focused organizations?

“We targeted five communities along Chicago’s west side,” Hernandez says. “And when we started this work, they were all pretty hesitant. At the time, we were the Chicagoland Bicycle Federation, so it sounded like some cycling club.”

But it wasn’t just the name change that helped build trust and partnership with these groups. Active Trans went to community members where they were – at PTA meetings and block parties – and engaged them on the issues that were important to them. They realized that violence, or the perception of violence, was at least as significant a barrier as traffic in encouraging community members to use parks and go outside. They partnered with them on issues like housing access and jobs. And they linked all of these issues back to changes in the built environment that would improve their quality of life. “Now we have African-American and Latino community-based organizations going to their councilmen and alderman and asking for bicycle and pedestrian improvements,” says Hernandez.

The CDC study is an interesting document, but more than that, it’s a wake-up call for livability advocates who need to do a better job of reaching out to people of color.

The offending crosswalk via Google Maps.

I pressed the crosswalk button and waited until the traffic light signaled me to cross the street. Before I stepped onto the cross walk on Main Street at the intersection with Granada, heading north, I looked ahead slightly left to see if there were any on coming cars.

Besides the handful of cars stopped by the red light at Main Street the coast was clear.  I did notice a white van stopped at the southbound Granada left hand turn lane waiting to make the turn.

There was nothing to signal danger as I proceeded to cross this street, something I do every day.  All of a sudden the white van starts making a left-hand turn, a mere 10 seconds after I stepped into the crosswalk. I was not even half way across the street before I watched this van head right toward me.

I thought to myself this can’t be happening. This driver clearly sees me.  I am right in front of them.

Seemingly, in slow motion this white van approaches.  I am thinking what do I do? I can’t believe this is happening. I am a moving target getting ready to get hit by this white van.

Luckily the van was driving slowly so I was able to stop the van with my hand. The impact of stopping this machine set my adrenaline rushing through my body.  I started to bang on the driver side window for at least an apology for her attempt on my life.

Rojas at Beyond Cars exhibit with Rail L.A. Photo: LAist

But she just giggled and drove on!

This is the closest I ever came to death.  I spoke to my mother, another resident of Alhambra, and neighbors about my attempted tragedy. It turns out everyone, pedestrian, joggers, and cyclists, have all had similar near death experiences using Alhambra’s streets.

Unfortunately, not everyone has escaped injury.  For example, my neighbor, a senior citizen, was hit by a car and sent to convalescents because of injuries and later died because of them. Or a woman was killed by a car while getting a news paper for her husband.

The transportation environmental conditions of Alhambra should not warrant so much fear and unsafe street condition. The streets are paved, have sidewalks, in a low-density environment.

This is not Downtown LA with high pedestrian counts and traffic volumes. I count maybe ten  pedestrians a day on my street.

This in not East LA where vendors, transit riders, and children use the streets. This is not a place of high truck traffic. So why are the streets so perilous to use in Alhambra?

There’s plenty of potential reasons, but ultimately it will be up to the people of Alhambra , and their government leaders, to address.

There's being a danger to yourself...Photo: Seattle Daily Photo.

The Downtown LAPD is at it again.

Downtown has long been known as one of the least pedestrian-friendly precincts. LAPD officers on the downtown beat have routinely ticketed pedestrians for such “infractions” as crossing an intersection against a flashing red hand signal while motorists breeze through red lights mere feet away; now the Division is proudly touting a new effort to crackdown on Downtown “jaywalkers” to reduce pedestrian crashes.

Unlike the commenters on the Times’ article announcing the “crackdown,” who assume this effort is a ploy to fill the city’s coffers to the tune of $191 per infraction, let’s take the LAPD at their word.  Let’s assume that this crackdown is about making the Downtown safer for pedestrians.  Then, let’s ask them to please spend more time enforcing the law against automobile drivers who are far more likely to cause a fatal crash than a pedestrian.

...and being a danger to everyone. LAPD should learn the difference. Photo:Los Angeles Times

An astute reader might note that the Times’ article, available on the paper’s L.A. Now page, quotes a Lieutenant Vernon who claims that in 2009 there were “three accidents involving a vehicle and a pedestrian in the downtown area between Nov. 25 and Dec. 31.  Two of those incidents were blamed on the person on foot and resulted in serious injury to the pedestrian, Vernon said. The third incident, which resulted in a pedestrian’s death, was due to a speeding driver.”

Wow, that means, based on this uselessly small sample size, that pedestrians are twice as likely to cause a crash than a driver.  It also makes you wonder which of these crashes were the fault of the pedestrian: the December 14th crash where a car jumped a curb and killed a photographer on the sidewalk or a November 26th crash where a woman was dragged over a half mile before the police stopped the driver after noticing the body.

Even if the LAPD had their facts straight, there’s still the question as to whether or not a “jaywalking crackdown” is the best way, or even a good way, to make streets safer.  Traffic expert Tom Vanderbilt, author of the book Traffic, argues otherwise.

So what can be done? The answer is not jaywalking crackdowns. These tend to be hard to enforce, lower the public opinion of the police, reinforce the idea of car dominance on city streets, and, most importantly, do not provide an effective bang for the buck. Indeed, the Netherlands, which has essentially legalized jaywalking, has an enviable pedestrian safety record.

Vanderbilt closes the above article by noting that media reports on crashes are often selective and slanted, and they discourage readers from digging beyond the assertions thrown out by reporters and the police.  Nowhere is that more true than in Los Angeles.

At this point, you have to feel bad for the City Council when it comes to the issue of raising speed limits. Despite the pleas from community groups and road users, the Council feels stuck when the LAPD and state law are telling them that the benefits of raising the limits on certain local roads outweigh the costs. As we’ve covered in the past, state law requires that every seven years municipalities that use radar to enforce speed limits do speed surveys and adjust the speed limit to the eighty-fifth percentile.

Efforts to change the state law have run in to opposition from the California Highway Patrol, AAA and other speeding traffic advocates and have never escaped one of Asm. Mike Eng’s transportation committee hearing. Thus, this Wednesday, the City Council Transportation Committee is faced with the sad task of voting on whether to increase speed limits on five streets in the Valley. You can read the full list of proposed increases on the agenda, or visit my Google map above to see what local streets are due for a bump in car traffic speed.

Ironically, listed right after the increases on the agenda is a report from the LADOT on their plans pedestrian safety applications for federal “Highway Safety Improvement Projects” funds.  In an effort to be more involved in project planning in their districts, Council Members Bill Rosendahl and Bernard Parks asked LADOT to continue to update the Council throughout the application process.

Most of the projects listed are to install traffic lights or widen sidewalks.  One is a road widening in the name of “congestion relief.”  Three others are actually more interesting and complex projects that might one day be responsible for maintaining or lowering a speed limit in the future.  Not coincidentally, two of those three projects are in Parks’ and Rosendahl’s districts.

Standing in the intersection of 11th Ave and 48th Street, looking east. Looks like a good candidate for a diet.

The first is in Parks’ South Los Angeles District.  The project would cost $750,000 and the city is asking for $675,000 of those funds.  What make it interesting is that the LADOT is proposing a road diet and bike lanes for 48th Street between Normandie and the city limits as well as a two-way left turn lane at 48th and 11th. Another road diet? This is the third time this year we’re discussing Road Diets and LADOT in the same breath. in addition to the “famous” diet on Wilbur Avenue in the valley, there was also a diet on James M. Wood Boulevard.

The second highlighted project falls in Jan Perry’s District along the Central Avenue Corridor Project between Slauson and Washington Boulevard.  The city is asking for over $800,000 to widen sidewalks and improve pedestrian crossings at ten intersections along Central Avenue.  Bulbouts, smart crosswalks, streetscaping…it sounds like the CRA, the sponsor for the project, is trying to “Portlandize” this slice of South L.A. with the goal of making pedestrian’s lives a little safer and encouraging more people to use transit.

The third project that works outside the box is in Bill Rosendahl’s 11th Council District.  The project would basically recreate the sidewalk along a stretch of Entrada Avenue and identify and improve the best crossings along the road.  The project has a low budget of $1 million, and city is hoping the federal government will pitch in 90% of those funds.

Poor Paul Koretz.  He’s stuck with the road widening project as the soul applicant for his District.

All in all, the LADOT’s proposed list of federal grant applications looks pretty good.  Of course, a list of projects is only as good as their applications.  Hopefully, LADOT (and its partners with the Community Redevelopment Agency and Bureau of Street Services) can bring home the bacon and make these corridors and intersections a better place to live, play and walk.

The crosswalk at Laurel Canyon Boulevard and Archwood Street via Google Maps

What use is a law if nobody bothers to enforce it?

Case in point: a story in today’s Daily News there was a story about a “Jeep v pedestrian” crash that sent two young girls from the crosswalk to the hospital.  Compounding the tragedy, the LAPD looked at the crash description and decided that nobody was at fault.  First, let’s look at the crash description:

The girls — ages 10 and 12 — were in a marked crosswalk on Laurel Canyon Boulevard near Archwood Street when a Jeep Wrangler hit them around 7:20 p.m., said Detective Bill Bustos of the Los Angeles Police Department’s Valley Traffic Division…

…”He was just driving down the street and unfortunately, did not see the girls,” Bustos said. “The girls, when they were crossing the street, we don’t know if they saw the car.”

I guess it was just an accident, then.  No harm, no foul.

California Vehicle Code Section 21950 (a) states unambiguously:

The driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or within any unmarked crosswalk at an intersection, except as otherwise provided in this chapter.

I checked the rest of the chapter. I didn’t see anything about saying one “didn’t see the girls” after the crash.