Cycling, traffic safety, traffic justice, and legal topics; energy, transit and transportion economics
[UPDATE: Oct 14, see Investigation, below]
According to item at biketempe.org, and thread at azfixed.com… Bike commuter Jay Fretz was killed in a a collision at the intersection of Alamenda and McClintock Drive in Tempe at approximately 6:30p Monday 5/17/2010. Police say the driver on McClintock ran the red light and hit and killed the bicyclist as he was crossing through the intersection. Continue reading “Commuter cyclist killed in Tempe”
I thought that this story: Capital takes bag tax in stride, is an interesting example of a negative incentive. And it got me to thinking about incentives affect behavior. Incentives are entertainingly the central theme of the best selling book Freakonomics, which I disussed here.
So the story is that Washington D.C. enacted a law that mandates that anyone who sells food must charge 5 cents for each bag given. Customers can either bring their own bags, or not use a bag, or pay the nickel. There were the usual predictions of the world coming to an end, however the WSJ story claims no major disruptions have occurred, and even some who opposed the tax initially now have changed their minds.
The bags often become floating trash and muck-up the Chesapeake watershed — a negative externality. The tax is designed to cut disposable plastic bag consumption and, it is hoped, plastic bag waterway pollution by 50%.
Here where I live, we have no such bag tax, of course, but it is trendy for grocery retailers to offer customers a nickel credit for each bag brought in that is then reused — a positive incentive.
Looking around here, it is obvious that the (coincidentally) equal positive incentive has had very little impact on bag usage, whereas the incentive in D.C. has had a large impact. I’ve also noticed that initially the grocers offering the incentive volunteered the credit, and now they seem to “forget” or not notice to give the credit unless the customer points it out, and most/many aren’t likely to do that to earn a nickel or a dime.
I’m thinking there must be a lesson here for things like free parking; which is that positive incentives have little impact, while negative incentives have a huge influence on behaviors.
As part of my project to monitor the most serious bicycle – vehicle collisions, I will be obtaining the Arizona Crash Report(ACR) for every bicyclist fatality in 2009. Continue reading “Obtaining Police Reports”
[update: this posting has been superseded — please see:
which has detailed, finalized stats and discussion]
First, some perspective: In the state of Arizona, approximately 1,000 people are killed per year in traffic collisions of all types. The number of cyclist (usually called a “pedalcyclist” in the jargon) fatalities fluctuated between15 and 36 per year over the past twenty years, with an average of about 25/year.
[as a sidebar, Arizona total traffic fatalities which have been as high as 1,293 just a couple of years ago, were down to 937 for 2008. The exact cause of this happy trend is a matter of great debate, e.g. the effect of economic recession, and photo-enforcement. Even after this dramatic reduction Arizona roads remain significantly more dangerous than US averages ]
I have become increasingly frustrated by what seems to me to be short-shrift paid to analysis of crashes resulting in a cyclist’s serious injury/fatality Continue reading “Pre-preliminary 2009 Bicyclist Fatality Report”
Get them here.
Here’s a typical national news story, from the LaTimes Traffic Deaths and Injuries Plummet in 2009: “Fatalities drop 9.7% from 2008 as the number of deaths dips to its lowest point since 1950, the Transportation Department says.” The official toll for 2009 is 33,808.
Closer to home, the total for 2009 in Arizona of 807 traffic fatalities represents a significant year-over-year drop that began in 2006, when there were 1,293 fatalities.
Per mile (VMT) figures won’t be available for awhile; it appears Arizona, which is consistently more dangerous than US averages will continue to close the gap.
Per capita figures show Arizona, again, consistently more dangerous than US averages, but continuing to improve.
Bicyclists, statistically did not fare well in 2009. At 25 deaths, that is 6 higher than 2008, bucking the overall trend. Though the usual caution applies, the number of cyclist deaths is (thankfully) quite small, so a variation of just a few makes large percentage differences, and trends are harder to discern year-over-year.
Prior to the official release, i was aware of 16 fatalities; I am now aware of another 9 but they are identified only by date time and (usually) location — but not name. I was shocked to find out that Phoenix had 9 fatalities, of which I only knew about 4 previously. How can that be?
You can view a summary spreadsheet of each of the 25 fatalities here.
There is a detailed report available: Manner and Fault in Bicyclist Traffic Fatalities: Arizona 2009.
The Arizona Republic’s take included the odd conclusion that “Arizona benefits from being a younger state” thus the roads here are newer thus safer.
Arizona benefits from being a younger state. Because most development here is relatively recent, the roads are newer and designed to safer, more modern standards.
That means wider lanes and shoulders, better signs, smoother curves and banks, more guard rails and more innovations such as rumble strips, which are ruts in the sides of highways that alert drivers when they veer off the road.
“These are things people drive by every day which they may or may not notice. But they all contribute to make our roads safer,” said Laura Douglas, an Arizona Department of Transportation spokeswoman.
Rumble strips, for example, reduce the accident rate by a third, she said. ADOT also paints extra-thick road stripes, installs new guard rails that cushion crashes and uses larger, easier-to-see traffic signals, Douglas said.
Arizona traffic death toll drops to a 16-year low 9/11/2010, The Arizona Republic
This might be true in isolated examples, such as the rumble strips. Overall, though, this ignores the human-behavior dimension of driving. So, e.g. newer roads are much wider and straighter and the likely result is that drivers will drive faster. Maybe you’ll get relatively fewer wrecks but the ones that occur will be more violent as a result. If you look at the state-level NHTSA figures you will find the safest state is….. drumroll please… Massachusetts! A very old state. Arizona’s VMT rate is over twice as deadly as Massachusett’s. The disparity in per capita rate, since Arizonans drive more miles, is even worse.
Massachusetts happens to be the safest state in the US, but it’s not an outlier, the relationship holds up generally — states where most development pre-dated automobiles have far lower death rates, and vice versa.
“Better” roads also have a vicious circle effect of raising the number of miles driven, thus exposing one to more risk, albeit a decreasing risk per mile. In other words, dwelling on rate per VMT is misleading. Likewise, “better” vehicles, which are from an engineering perspective are much safer, have not yielded the expected improvement. Since as usual, human-behavior kicks in and drivers, knowing their vehicles are “safer”, (unconsciously or not) drive just a little more risk.
I just got finished with Power Hungry: The Myths of “Green” Energy and the Real Fuels of the Future by Robert Bryce.
The basic gist is that everything you “know” about power, particularly if you are an American, is wrong. His data is no doubt correct, but I think he goes out of his way to sometimes mislead. For example he claims that the United States economy is somehow very energy efficient. To prove his point he gives figures for the change in energy intensity over some period shows that the US is “winning”, beating such countries as France and others. The trouble is, a simple trip to wikipedia shows that actual, and not the percentage change in Continue reading “book: Power Hungry”
[Update: on 9/1/2010 the driver was cited Case Number: M-1442-TR-201001097, Somerton Municipal Court]
Cyclist Doug Flynn was killed, and at least one more rider injured, in a head-on collision last year (Sept 24, 2009) by a driver trying to pass a large farm tractor on a two lane roadway.
[for a line-item on each fatality since 2009; follow this link]
A tribute to Doug posted on the YBC’s website reads “Yuma Bike Club is Continue reading “Founder of Yuma Bike Club killed in head-on collision”
52 year old cyclist Charles Waldrop was killed by a hit and run driver who witnesses say was driving at a high rate of speed and swerving. Police say an anonymous tip lead to the apprehension and arrest of 23 y.o. Timothy Kissida after he traded (via the “Cash for Clunkers” program) a light blue 1992 BMW 325i w/damage consistent with hit-and-run.
Kissida plead guilty to manslaughter and was sentenced today, drawing 10.5 years in prison (which is the presumptive sentence for a class 2 felony, see 13-704). The leaving the scene charge resulted in some sort of suspened sentence w/probation.
Case number CR2009-007394, the sentence is in this minute entry.
[Breaking news: there is an even newer victory over the city of Flagstaff’s harassment of cyclists legally using the roads: on Oct 29, the cyclist prevailed AGAIN in court… I will be writing up another article covering that in more detail soon. So at trial, the court dismissed 1 count 815A, TR-2010007979; and the 2 further 815A counts were dismissed on a motion from the prosecutor, TR-2010007976. Though i may have the case number mixed up because 2010004702, an 815A and 701E is also dismissed]
Flagstaff cyclist Justin Pryzby is at it again — not riding in the gutter. Continue reading “Some cyclists just won’t stay in the gutter”
An 82-year old motorist turning left onto Union Hills from 15th Avenue struck and killed an 11-year old girl riding in the crosswalk on August 5, 2010. The girl was heading southbound on the west side (i.e. going with the flow of adjacent traffic).
Names have not been released, Phoenix Police officer “Martos said the woman was not impaired and likely will not be charged. Police are still investigating.”
I’m not familiar with this area or intersection [google maps], though Union Hills Dr appears to be a typical Phoenix “car sewer”; 5 lanes of rush rush.
The mechanics of the collision are very similar to Maxwell v. Gossett, where the Arizona Supreme court found for the cyclist, and against the motorist who was turning through the crosswalk. If anything, this is a stronger case for the bicyclist, given the direction.
The so-called “left cross” is a common mode of collision; Bradley Jason Scott [tbagblog] was killed on Tempe a few weeks ago in a left cross (but not involving a crosswalk).
[azfamily][arizonarepublic][kpho] The kpho piece says in part that “police are trying to determine if she was riding the crosswalk or in the street, because, police say, it is illegal to ride in a crosswalk…”
Where does such patently false, mis-information come from?
Setting aside the issue on the relative merits of sidewalk cycling…
By way of some more background on the legality of cycling in crosswalks; an analysis prepared by the Tuscon City Attorney’s office in 1998 found that (my emphasis) “…it is apparent that under the present state of law in Arizona a bicyclist is not prohibited from riding on or across a crosswalk…”.
It’s worth pointing out that this conclusion was reached in Tucson where it is patently illegal to cycle on the sidewalk. I am not aware of any Phoenix ordinance that affects crosswalks, thus we would fall back to the same cases and Arizona statutes analyzed in the above memo.
That being said, saying something is not prohibited is not the same as saying that the car driver must be automatically at fault, e.g. “the court held that bicyclists must still exercise due care and concern for their safety while about to enter or in the crosswalk”.
Please see Sidwalk Cycling in Arizona for more details and references, especially Maxwell v. Gossett.
This is adot incident 2414621 and Phoenix Incident number 10001096939 [I had gotten the number off by a digit from phoenix traffic records, I may have written it down wrong, in any event that caused a large delay in analysis. Victim Madeleine Pila Driver: Marguerite Savarese.
The ACR is available from the city of Phoenix online, there is presumably a DR as well available from Records but I do not have that.
The narrative in its entirety is succinct and very descriptive:
Traffic unit 1 (pedalcyclist) was riding her bicycle southbound in the crosswalk on the west side of the intersection of North 15th Avenue and West Union Hills Drive. Traffic unit 2 (vehicle) was making a left hand turn from northbound 15th Avenue to westbound Union Hills Drive. Unit 2 collided with unit 1 in the marked crosswalk. As a result of the collision, the operartor of unit 1 was pronouced dead at the collision scene by responding paramedics
THE TRAFFIC UNITS ARE LISTED ALPHABETICALLY BY LAST NAME
Note that in Arizona, “Unit #1 is the vehicle, pedestrian, pedalcycle or animal rider that caused the collision or was most at fault” (refer to ADOT AZ Crash Manual; links here), there is no provision for assigning units in any other way. To do so destroys the usefulness of statistics in the ADOT crash database (ALISS). If police are going to do this, it should be corrected before submitted for final inclusion in the database — was this done? It’s not clear; but given that the driver was never cited for any infraction (according to case lookup), it appears the investigation results stand as initially entered.
Though there would seem to be no confusion in assigning fault, the cyclist was for no apparent reason listed in Block 20, Violations/Behaviors “13. Failed to keep in proper lane”. This is nonsensical. From the narrative the cyclists should have been assigned “1. No Improper Action”. See Maxwell v. Gossett for further verification that the cyclist was doing nothing whatsoever wrong in riding through a crosswalk.
Though there seems to be no confusion about what the driver did, the driver was listed in Block 20, Violations/Behaviors “16. Inattention/Distraction”. That may well be true, however, it is apparent from the narrative that the driver committed a “7. Made Improper Turn”
In short, the driver was most-at-fault, and should have been assigned unit number 1 along with the violation/behavior noted above, and should have been cited (according to court records, the driver was not cited).
There is also an apparent error on the ACR but doesn’t affect the outcome, Block 14 Type of intersection is marked as “12 (Controlled Access Area) Intersection Related”. The intersection is not in a controlled access area (a.k.a. a freeway interchange) and should presumable be “2 Intersection Related”.
This is IncidentID = 2414621 In addtion to what was described above as errors done by the investigating officer on the ACR (and signed off on by a supervisor), the following errors and inconsistencies were noted in the ADOT crash database record:
I have no idea. I have informed Phx PD VCU at least twice (once while the investigation was still supposed to be open, and again in May 2012 when I reviewed Phoenix fatalities). They have steadfastly refused do the right thing; claiming their mis-handling of crosswalk cases is ” based on a sound and experienced understanding of the law along with the guidance of Department, City, and County Attorneys”. Their conclusions appear to directly contradict Maxwell., and indeed those I’ve contacted seem to have never even heard of it.
Consider the case of a 12-year-old boy in Scottsdale struck while proceeding straight in a crosswalk who was struck and seriously injured by a left-turning driver. This is exactly the same configuration as the Pila fatality. However Scottsdale PD not only cited the driver for a bad turn, but also charged him with 28-672, a misdemeanor. Phoenix rewards dangerous, inept drivers with NO_IMPROPER_ACTION while Scottsdale punishes them with criminal charges.
So, apparently Phoenix’s city attorney or Police Department knows something that Scottsdale’s doesn’t, or vice-versa. And of course the County Attorney is one-in-the-same (I mean: Scottsdale and Phoenix are both in the same county); and of course the same state laws exist in both cities — there was no mention of any city codes in the Pila report. I don’t believe any of it, I’m willing to guess no attorney ever reviewed it (I mean for citations; i imagine the case received perfunctory review for negligent homicide charges)
This has many of the similar elements of botching as PPD above, the belief, not based on any law, that it’s somehow illegal to ride in a crosswalk, soapboxla explains:
On Monday, June 1, 2009 at approximately noon, a woman rode her bicycle on the sidewalk of Louise Avenue in the valley. As she approached the intersection of Valerio she rode into the intersection on an unmarked crosswalk. At the same time a large truck approached the intersection on Valerio and proceeded to turn right onto Louise. The cyclist and the truck collided, she fell to the ground and the truck crushed her head as she lay on the street.
…But especially disturbing is the resulting confusion during the investigation of the incident and the confusion over “the rules of the road.”
Councilman Smith’s office responded to the incident the next day and explained, via email, that “the bicyclist was reportedly riding on the wrong side of the roadway and traveling against the traffic flow; making her the initial “primary cause” of this tragedy.” The email went on to detail the law enforcement experience of Councilman Smith, Chief of Staff Mitch Englander and Public Safety Deputy Jim Dellinger.
The LAPD’s Public Information Officer confirmed the report that the LAPD considered the cyclist the “primary cause” of the incident because she was riding a bike in a crosswalk which is a violation of CVC 21200 which requires a cyclist to obey the rules of the road. The PIO explained that a cyclist must either dismount at crosswalks or ride on the right side of the road with traffic.
The legal statues, codes, and ordinances are detailed at bicyclelaw.com’s blog — they happen to be analogous to Arizona’s state statutes and Phoenix’s ordinances.
This is one of those sorts of stories you hear but just can’t quite believe until you see the youtube video.
The cop gets indicted. And later on fired/resigned. Pogan fired (or resigned or whatever. the good news is he is no longer in law enforcement). Continue reading “Some cops REALLY don’t like critical mass”
In an incident where a car driver was driving waaaay too close to cyclist Paul Katan. Katan is a certified cycling instructor and works for Prescott Alternative Transportation.
“…a jury convicted the Jaguar driver, Jack Ingebritson, 64, of misdemeanor (criminal) charges of endangerment and reckless driving. On Tuesday, Prescott City Magistrate Arthur Markham fined Ingebritson $1,500, ordered him to perform 32 hours of community service and go to traffic survival school.”
Inquiring minds wonder: how is it that the trial was in some unspecified June date, and the story just made it to the newspaper on July 14,2010? I tried to look up the court records for the rager, but didn’t find anything (Prescott muni, and justice are not online there).
There was a follow up editoral a few days after the news story.
The convicted rager “… admitted that he was five to six inches from the bike, according to the police report.” While Ingebritson was clearly guilty of endangerment, and reckless driving, it seems to me that his actions were an assault; he intentionally placed his weapon a few inches from the victim.
Here is a roundup of Arizona’s assault and endangerment statutes.
The news article refers to “endangerment”; if they are referring to §13-1201. a violation of which is a class 1 misdemeanor, I have to wonder about the magistrate’s judgment — a small fine and a few hours of community service for such a (potentially) dangerous crime?
I’m thinking/wondering if a more appropriate charge would have been assault, and potentially aggravated assault. “Generally, the essential elements of assault consist of an act intended to cause an apprehension of harmful or offensive contact that causes apprehension of such contact in the victim” [legal-dictionary]. Note that the act does NOT need to result in any actual contact, or any actual physical harm, just creating the apprehension is enough. The guilty man intended to drive very close to the cyclist, it was not accidental.
On the other hand, violation of §13-1203(A)1 is also a class 1 misdemeanor (the same as endangerment, seems a little odd?). To be guilty of aggravated assault, §13-1204, a deadly weapon or dangerous instrument would have had to been used in committing the assault. Personally, I find that multi-ton, multi hundreds of horsepower automobiles can be dangerous instruments. Anyway, aggravated would bump up the crime to some level of felony.
The other charge which the defendant was found guilty of was reckless driving. That would be 28-693, and is a class 2 misdemeanor. Nothing was mentioned regarding the driver’s license of the culprit. Which leads me to believe the magistrate was letting him off too easy. “In addition, the judge may require the surrender … of any driver license of the convicted person… and may order the driving privileges of the person to be suspended for a period of not more than ninety days”. Why no revocation, or suspension?
More on driver’s attitudes towards parking:
“I’m kind of flabbergasted,” … “It seems like we’re getting taxed right and left. They shouldn’t be charging for this. It’s going to be a financial burden for some people.”
And what is “this”? Why, (formerly) free parking of course. Parking must be “free” and plentiful. And I’m sure it could be a burden for some, but let’s keep things in perspective; Phoenix recently instituted a 2% grocery tax.
The plan would charge $5 a day, yearly passes would be available for $75. [arizona republic]
More externalities of mass motorization.
The Arizona Republic ran this USA Today story under the better-named headline “Gulf spill can’t rival oil seepage from cities: Over time, tiny drips add major pollution to oceans”.
“Human-caused spills send more than 300 million gallons of oil into North American waters every decade, an amount roughly double the highest estimate of the BP spill”… “the largest human-caused source of oil into the environment is the byproduct of millions of autos and other oil-powered devices.”
Land-based oil spills add up, too
USA Today, 6/30/2010 Continue reading “Little drips make a big mess”
In order to mitigate marine damage, some of the oil that is leaking from the blown-out BP / Deepwater Horizon well, around 10,000 barrels a day is being burned into the open air in a completely uncontrolled combustion. [story from AP: BP starts burning oil from leaking ruptured well, June 16, 2010]
BP or whoever can theoretically run around an pick up every tar ball and clean off every pelican, but who is going to clean the air? As is usually the case, nobody does. So everyone gets dirtier air. It’s just blowin’ in the wind. Just another externality of oil and gas consumption.
Ezra Klein had a good piece on externalities in last week’s Washington Post: