PEDESTRIAN COLLISIONS IN LOS ANGELES 1994 through 2000

Transcription

1 PEDESTRIAN COLLISIONS IN LOS ANGELES 1994 through 2000 City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation Gloria Jeff, General Manager March, 2006 This document printed with grant funds from the California Office of Traffic Safety

2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Executive Summary iv 1.0 Introduction Pedestrian Collision Study Methodology and Scope of Study Scope of Data Data Limitations Pedestrian Right-of-Way Walking Rates in Los Angeles Pedestrian Collisions in Los Angeles Overview Pedestrian Action Location of Pedestrian Collisions Traffic Controls Functioning Age Distribution for Location of Pedestrian Collisions Injury and Location of Pedestrian Collisions Traffic Violations Cited in Pedestrian Collisions Pedestrian Right-of-Way at Crosswalks (CVC 21950) Pedestrian Outside Crosswalks (CVC 21954) Circular Red or Red Arrow (CVC 21453) Basic Speed Law (CVC 22350) Hit-and-Run Collisions Demographic Makeup of Pedestrians Involved in Collisions Gender Age Children and Young Adult Collisions Sobriety Environmental Conditions In Pedestrian Collisions Time of Day Seasonal Variations Geographical Distribution of Pedestrian Collisions Conclusion 42 Appendix A Council Districts 45 Appendix B - Pedestrian Collisions 46 Appendix C - Pedestrian Collisions by Council District 49 Appendix D - Population Density 64 Appendix E Pedestrian Collisions by Census Tract and by Population 65 i

3 FIGURES Figure 1. Pedestrian Collisions and Pedestrians Involved in Collisions Per Year 6 Figure 2. Pedestrian Injuries Per Year ( ) 7 Figure 3. Pedestrian Fatalities Per Year ( ) 8 Figure 4. Location of Pedestrian Collisions 13 Figure 5. Injury Severity and Location of Pedestrian Collision 17 Figure 6. Vehicle Code Right-of-Way at Crosswalks: Distribution of Vehicle Code Sections A Through C 21 Figure 7. Age Distribution for Violations of CVC Figure 8. Distribution of CVC Section 21453:Circular Red or Red Arrow subsections (a) to (d) 23 Figure 9. Percentage of Pedestrian Collisions Per Age Group ( ) 27 Figure 10. Pedestrian Collision, Injury and Fatality Rate for the Year Figure 11. Pedestrian Collisions for Age Groups Under 20 Years Old 31 Figure 12. Time Distribution for Vehicle-Pedestrian Collisions for Pedestrians Under 20 Years Old 32 Figure 13. Hourly Distribution of Pedestrian Collisions 42 Figure 14. Seasonal Distribution of Pedestrian Collision 42 TABLES Table 1. Modes of Transportation to Work, 2000 Census 5 Table 2. Traffic Collisions Versus Pedestrian Collisions, Los Angeles ( ) 6 Table 3. Pedestrian Collision, Fatality and Injury Rates Per Year 7 Table 4. Injury Severity for Pedestrian Collisions ( ) 8 Table 5. Pedestrian Fatality Rates for the Five County Region and San Diego County, Table 6. Pedestrian Action ( ) 10 Table 7. Pedestrian Action By Age Group 10 Table 8. Collision Control Factors: Methodology of Interpreting Database 12 Table 9. Pedestrians Injured in Collisions at Intersection Versus Non-Intersection 13 Table 10. Number of Pedestrians Involved in Collisions at Signalized Intersections 14 Table 11. Number of Pedestrians Involved in Collisions at Non-Signalized Intersections 14 Table 12. Number of Pedestrians Involved in Mid-Block Collisions (Excluding Mid-Block Crosswalks) 14 Table 13. Pedestrians Involved in Collisions by Age and Location of Pedestrian Collision 15 Table 14. Pedestrian Collisions by Age and Location of Pedestrian Collision 16 ii

4 Table 15. Pedestrian Action by Age Group for Mid-Block Collisions Not in Crosswalks 16 Table 16. Degree of Pedestrian Injury and Location of Pedestrian Collision 17 Table 17. Injury Severity by Age Group: Collisions at Signalized Intersections 18 Table 18. Injury Severity by Age Group: Collisions at Non-Signalized Table 19. Intersections 18 Injury Severity by Age Group: Mid-Block Collisions Not in Crosswalk 19 Table 20. Injury Severity by Age Group: Mid-Block Crosswalks 19 Table 21. Most Frequently Cited Vehicle Code Violations ( ) 20 Table 22: Age Distribution for Violations of CVC Section Table 23. Degree and Number of Injuries Related to Speeding 24 Table 24. Injury Severity for Hit-and-Run Pedestrian Collisions 25 Table 25. Hit-and-Run Pedestrian Collisions: Victims Age Distribution by Population of Los Angeles 25 Table 26. Hit-and-Run Offense for Pedestrian Collisions 25 Table 27. National Pedestrian Fatality and Injury Rate by Age, Table 28. Pedestrians Collision Rates by Age, According to Year 2000 Census 28 Table 29. Pedestrian Collisions by Age Group and Injury Severity 29 Table 30. Pedestrian Action - for Age Groups Under 20 Years Old 33 Table 31. Relationship between Sobriety and the Injury Severity for Pedestrians Involved in a Collision 33 Table 32. Pedestrian Sobriety Levels Versus Collision Locations 34 Table 33. Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group-All Collisions 35 Table 34. Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group at Signalized Intersections 36 Table 35. Table 36. Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group at Non-Signalized Intersections 37 Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group: Mid-Block Crossing (Not in Crosswalk) 38 Table 37. Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group: Mid-Block Crosswalk 39 Table 38. Roadway Condition in Pedestrian Collisions ( ) 40 Table 39. Lighting Conditions in Pedestrian Collisions ( ) 41 Table 40. Roadway Surface Conditions in Pedestrian Collisions ( ) 41 Table 41. Weather Conditions in Pedestrian Collisions ( ) 41 iii

5 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) prepared this report as part of the Livable Communities Project in conjunction with the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG). The goal of this report is to provide an overview of the factors associated with pedestrian collisions in the City of Los Angeles and to provide maps displaying the associated factors. This information enables the City to identify factors of pedestrian collisions in order to plan preventive measures through education, traffic engineering, and enforcement. Geographic Information System (GIS) software was used to graphically display patterns of pedestrian collisions combined with other associated factors such as demographics. Goals of this Report LADOT is using the data obtained from this report to assess factors that may be involved in the pedestrian collisions. Also, LADOT is designing educational outreach programs to address road user behavior that contribute to pedestrian related collisions. In addition, engineering and enforcement efforts may be focused on conditions that exhibit a relatively high number of collisions. GIS mapping visually allows LADOT to see those areas with a concentration of collisions. Overview of Pedestrian Collisions in Los Angeles This analysis covers the seven-year period from 1994 to It includes reported collisions on City streets and on private property within the City and draws upon data from LADOT s Traffic Accident Information System (TAIS) database. The report examines collision factors such as type of collision, type of traffic controls present at the site of the collision, age of pedestrian, environmental conditions, time patterns, geographical distribution and other associated factors. In the seven-year period from January 1, 1994 to December 31, 2000 There were 315,320 reported collisions, an average of 45,046 collisions per year. A total of 22,350 collisions involving pedestrians, an average of 3,193 per year. Pedestrian collisions represented 7.1% of all reported collisions. An average of 1.1 pedestrians were involved in each collision. A total of 549 pedestrians were reported as fatalities from the collision, an average of 78 per year. Pedestrian fatalities represented 2.3% of all collisions involving pedestrians. Pedestrian injuries represented 96.2% of all reported pedestrian collisions. Pedestrian fatalities represent 36.8% of all traffic fatalities. 39% of all pedestrian collisions occur mid-block (not in crosswalks). 26% of all pedestrian collisions occur at signalized intersections. The majority of collisions involved California Vehicle Code violations of Right-of- Way at Crosswalks, Pedestrians Outside Crosswalks, Circular Red or Red Arrow, and the Basic Speed Law. iv

6 Collisions peak between 7:00 am to 8:00 am and again between 3:00 pm to 7:00 pm, most likely corresponding to school and work related trips. Collisions were clustered around major intersections and arterial highways. Collisions were clustered in City areas where population densities were high. Hit-and-runs represent 30% of all pedestrian collisions. Compared to the national pedestrian fatality rates, Los Angeles experienced above average fatality rates in the year 2000 of 19.2 compared to 17.3 nationally (per million population). Compared to national rates, fatality rates (per million population) in Los Angeles are high for children under the age of four (8.0 nationally compared to 21.0 in Los Angeles) and for pedestrians over the age of seventy (31.7 nationally compared to 61.6 in Los Angeles). Sidewalk or Driveway Collisions 6% Private Property Collisions 14% Location of Pedestrian Collisions Signalized Intersection Collisions 26% Mid-Block Crosswalk Collisions 1% Unknown 0% Mid-Block Collisions (Not in Crosswalk) 39% Non-signalized Intersection Collisions 14% Most Frequently Cited Vehicle Code Violations ( ) Vehicle Code Section Description Frequency Percent Pedestrian Right-of-Way at Crosswalks 6, % Pedestrians Outside Crosswalks 6, % Circular Red or Red Arrow 1, % Basic Speed Law % Starting Parked Vehicles or Backing % "Walk", "Wait", or "Don't Walk" % Crossing Between Controlled Intersections % Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs Causing Injury % Right-of-Way on Sidewalks % Various Other Violations % None No Violation Reported 5, % Total 22, % v

7 1.0 Introduction Walking is a basic means of transportation and one that is used by most people on a daily basis. For some, walking is their primary mode of transportation, while others may only walk from their car to their work place. Regardless of the frequency or distance walked, most people are pedestrians at sometime each day. Today, traffic engineers and planners seek to integrate plans for automobiles, bicycles, pedestrians, and public transportation in concert with one another. According to the Transportation Element of the Los Angeles City General Plan, The City has shifted its approach to solving transportation and air quality problems by linking population and employment concentrations with transit systems The Framework s more pedestrian friendly vision and the correlation between proposed land use intensity and the transit system will reduce the City s dependence on the automobile and improve the City s quality of life. Today, a multitude of benefits that walking offers as a means of transportation are more widely recognized by planners, engineers and residents. Walking provides a healthy environment, a good source of exercise, economic benefits for shopping districts, cost effective means of transportation, increased community interaction, independence for children, cleaner air, less congestion, less wear and tear on the roads, community vitality, and improved quality of life. 1.1 Pedestrian Collision Study The goal of this study was to provide an in-depth analysis of the factors associated with pedestrian collisions in Los Angeles in order to plan future preventive measures through outreach, education, traffic engineering, and enforcement. Research alone will not improve conditions for pedestrians, but will provide transportation engineers with the knowledge needed to plan effective safety campaigns. For this reason, the Los Angeles Department of Transportation (LADOT) with funding provided by the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has prepared this report to provide a better understanding of the factors associated with pedestrian collisions. A portion of the SCAG funding was used by LADOT to hire a transportation-planning graduate student to assemble and correlate the data and prepare several GIS maps. This analysis covers the seven-year period from 1994 to It includes reported collisions on streets and private property within the City, drawing data from LADOT s Traffic Accident Information System (TAIS) database. The report examines collision factors such as type of collision, intersection controls, age of pedestrian, environmental conditions, time patterns, geographical distribution and other associated factors. While it is important to understand the types of collisions that occur, it is equally important to understand who is most at risk. For this reason, a large portion of this study 1

8 focuses on the ages and geographical patterns of pedestrian collisions. Geographic Information System (GIS) software was used to graphically display patterns of pedestrian collisions combined with other associated factors such as demographics. 1.2 Methodology and Scope of Study Data for this study were recorded in LADOT s Traffic Accident Information System (TAIS) using Paradox database management software record data. The data come from police collision reports. Previous to 1996, the Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) used its own form for reporting collision reports. Since then however, LAPD has implemented California Highway Patrol (CHP) Form 555 as its form for reporting traffic accidents. This has resulted in standardization of collision data collection in California. 1.3 Scope of Data The data analyzed include pedestrian collisions from January, 1994 through December, There were 22,350 collisions recorded during the seven-year period in the TAIS database in which 24,305 pedestrians were involved, since each collision can involve more than one pedestrian. However, this type of collision is reported as one event involving more than pedestrian. Data gathered on the collisions contain information about the location, environmental factors and actions relating to the actual collision. Pedestrian data contain demographic data and specific conditions related to the pedestrian, such as injury, sobriety, pedestrian action and describe the condition of traffic control devices present at the time of the collision. The data categories used for this analysis are based on data gathered from CHP Form 555 stored in the LADOT TAIS system. Categorically, the data gathered in CHP Form 555 includes: Location Date, day of week, and time Vehicle code violation Environmental and roadway conditions Demographic information: sex and age of pedestrian Injury information Hit-and-Run violations Sobriety Pedestrian actions In addition, data gathered from the 2000 U.S. Census Bureau has provided demographic data on the City tract and block group level for the City of Los Angeles. Census data contained in Appendix A has provided detailed maps on the economic and housing characteristics compiled from households that completed the Census 2000 long-form questionnaire (about one in six households). 2

9 1.4 Data Limitations For the purposes of this study, data compiled from police records of reported collisions served as the most efficient method to gain a wide range of information on pedestrian collisions. The data used in this study is limited by the extent of information police are able to gather at the time the collision is reported. Also, the data only represents accidents reported to the LAPD and CHP. According to the LAPD Traffic Manual, officers are to complete Collision Reports according to seven Traffic Reporting Criteria when one or more of the following factors are involved: fatality, injury, traffic felony, City property or liability, driving under-the-influence, hit and run, or rail conveyances. Collisions that do not get reported are most likely incidents that do not involve automobiles or minor collisions in which there is little or no injury. There may be a reluctance to report collisions in cases involving parties that feel it is unnecessary to notify the police or feel a distrust or fear of the police. It is difficult to estimate how many collisions go unreported, so for the purpose of this study, we must depend on data from the TAIS database. An additional problem with Traffic Collision reporting is the accuracy of the reporting. For example, police officers tend to report more commonly used vehicle code violations to describe collisions rather than more accurate, but less used, violation codes. This may contribute to the high occurrence of some vehicle code violations and the low occurrence of others in police reports. Also, the quality of data collected in police reports at the scene of the collisions can vary. For example, there is some ambiguity regarding the definition of an intersection which may place the crosswalk outside of an intersection. Also, victims or witnesses are not always able to accurately describe the collision. A lack of baseline data on pedestrian volumes creates a challenge to study pedestrian collision rates. Unlike data stored for vehicles, pedestrian volumes and the extent of pedestrian travel is difficult to measure. This creates a challenge in determining a pedestrian collision rate. In order to rate the pedestrian collisions in a particular area to the volume of pedestrian traffic, empirical data rather than actual volume counts of pedestrian was used. With this limitation it is difficult to determine if pedestrian collisions in an area are due to high pedestrian volume or other factors. Census counts on the tract level have been used in the special analysis of collisions as an aid in understanding collision density to the population density. 1.5 Pedestrian Right-of-Way There is a perception problem amongst both drivers and pedestrians regarding their safety and right-of-way in the roadway and within crosswalks. It is therefore important to understand, first, what constitutes a crosswalk and secondly, how California state law defines pedestrian right-of-way. California law defines a crosswalk as: That portion of a roadway included within the prolongation or connection of the boundary lines of sidewalks at intersections where the intersecting roadways 3

10 meet at approximately right angles or Any portion of a roadway distinctly indicated for pedestrian crossing by lines or other markings on the surface. A distinction is not made between marked and unmarked crosswalks at intersections in California State law regarding pedestrian right-of-way. Pedestrians generally have the right of way at intersections, stipulating that they use due caution when crossing. California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section states that, the driver of a vehicle shall yield the right-of-way to a pedestrian crossing the roadway within any marked crosswalk or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection. The pedestrian also has the right of way at traffic signals, as long as they enter the roadway during the WALK or green phase of the signal, and have the right-of-way until their crossing is complete (CVC Sections 21456, and 21451). Prior to the 1970 s it was generally accepted that marked uncontrolled crosswalks were safer for pedestrian crossings than unmarked uncontrolled crosswalks. The City of San Diego conducted a crosswalk study in 1972 that challenged this belief. The study found that the rate of collisions occurring within marked crosswalks compared to the rate of collisions outside the marked crosswalk was 6:1 and the rate of crossings made within marked crosswalks compared to those made outside the crosswalk was 3:1. It concluded that pedestrians were twice as likely to be involved in a collision while crossing within a marked crosswalk, than in an unmarked crosswalk. This ratio varies with place and time. However pedestrian collisions rates in marked crosswalks continue to remain high. The reason for the difference in collision rate is often believed to be the over confidence in the safety of marked crosswalks by pedestrians. In addition, crosswalk visibility from the perspective of automobile drivers is limited. These two factors may result in high rates of pedestrian collisions. In response to these studies, the City of Los Angeles has taken measures to increase crosswalk visibility by installing ladder crosswalks, using fluorescent green signage, and installing additional red curb on the approaches to the intersection. Education and enforcement for drivers and pedestrians are also important tools to combat collision rates. 1.6 Walking Rates in Los Angeles While it is difficult to gauge the distance and frequency people travel by foot, more general data on the modes of transportation used to get to work provides us with an overview of the transportation network. Looking at the different modes of transportation for the five most populous cities in California indicates that there are commuters who walk to work. With the exception of San Francisco, a higher percentage of Los Angeles residents walk and use public transportation than residents in San Diego, San Jose, and Long Beach. 4

11 Table 1. Modes of Transportation to Work, 2000 Census Modes of Transportation California Los Angeles San Diego San Jose San Francisco Long Beach Car, truck, or van 86.4% 80.5% 86.2% 90.4% 51.3% 86.3% Public transportation 5.1% 10.2% 4.2% 4.1% 31.1% 6.6% Bicycle 0.8% 0.6% 0.7% 0.6% 2.0% 0.7% Walked 2.9% 3.6% 3.6% 1.4% 9.4% 2.5% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census Pedestrian Collisions in Los Angeles 2.1 Overview For the seven-year scope of this study, there were 315,320 traffic collision reports of which 22,350 reports involved 24,305 pedestrians. Pedestrian collisions reports represent 7.1% of all reports. Therefore, an average of 1.09 pedestrians were involved in every collision that involved pedestrians. There were an average of 3,193 pedestrian collisions a year and about 76 pedestrian fatalities per year. There were a total of 549 reported fatalities, or 2.3% of all pedestrians involved in collisions. The number of reported collisions generally declined each year during the study period except for an increase in the year Total pedestrian collisions declined 5% over the seven-year study period. Pedestrian collisions declined 16% from 3,498 collisions in 1994 to 2,934 in However, pedestrian collisions increased 6% from 2,934 in 1999 to 3,107 collisions in The number of actual pedestrians involved in collisions shows a slightly different pattern. There was an increase in the number of pedestrians from 1994 to 1996 with an average growth of 3.8%. This growth declined in 1997 with a significant reduction of 14.3% from 1996 to This was followed by decline for two more years until 2000 when the number of pedestrian involved in collisions increased back to 1997 levels. Figure 1 compares the number of collisions involving pedestrians per year and the total pedestrians involved in collisions per year. 5

12 Figure 1. Pedestrian Collisions and Pedestrians Involved in Collisions Per Year 4,500 4,000 3,500 3,000 2,500 2,000 1,500 1, ,720 3,725 3,863 3,498 3,465 3,243 3,310 3,096 3,226 3,141 3,320 3,007 3,226 3, Year Collisions Pedestrians Pedestrian collisions often result in injuries and have a higher fatality rate compared to auto collisions. About 96.2% of the pedestrians involved in the reported collisions experienced varying degrees of injury. However, since LAPD will only prepare a collision report if there is an injury involved, it is unknown how many collisions occur where there are no injuries. There were 549 reported pedestrian collision fatalities from 1994 to 2000, accounting for 2.3% of the pedestrians involved in collisions. The fatality rate for pedestrians has declined from 0.18 in 1994 to 0.15 in In Los Angeles, pedestrian collisions account for 7.1% of the total collisions reported from 1994 to However, pedestrian fatalities disproportionately represent 36.8% of the total highway fatalities in the City. Table 2. Traffic Collisions Versus Pedestrian Collisions, Los Angeles ( ) Year All Traffic Pedestrian Collisions Collisions All Traffic Fatalities Pedestrian Fatalities Pedestrian Fatals to all Fatals Total Total %* Total %* Total %* % ,634 3, % % % 34.08% ,490 3, % % % 32.16% ,750 3, % % % 36.77% ,728 3, % % % 45.28% ,104 3, % % % 37.11% ,746 2, % % % 37.10% ,868 3, % % % 40.34% Total 315,320 22, % 1, % % 36.82% * % of all traffic collisions 6

13 Table 3. Pedestrian Collision, Fatality and Injury Rates Per Year Year Pedestrians Involved Pedestrian Collision Rate* Pedestrian Fatalities Fatality Rate* Pedestrian Injuries Injury Rate* , , , , , , , , , , , , , , *Adjusted rate per 100,000 population for the City of Los Angeles 2000 census population of 3,694,820 Figure 2. Pedestrian Injuries Per Year ( ) 3,700 3,600 3,500 3,556 3,550 3,481 Pedestrian Injuries 3,400 3,300 3,200 3,100 3,000 2,900 3,044 3,082 2,966 3,163 2,800 2,700 2, Year 7

14 Figure 3. Pedestrian Fatalities Per Year ( ) Pedestrian Fatalities Year Table 4. Injury Severity for Pedestrian Collisions ( ) Level of Injury Pedestrians Percent No Injury % Complaint of Pain 7, % Visible Injury 11, % Severe Injury 3, % Fatal % Total 24, % Pedestrian fatality rates in the Five County Region of Southern California and San Diego County show that Los Angeles County experiences about average fatality rates, despite the large number of pedestrians killed in traffic accidents. In fact, the City of Los Angeles has a much lower fatality rate for the year 2000 of 1.92 compared to the County. Table 5. Pedestrian Fatality Rates for the Five County Region and San Diego County, 2000 County Pedestrian Fatalities Population Pedestrian Fatality Rate* Los Angeles 213 9,519, Orange 39 2,846, Riverside 42 1,545, San Bernardino 41 1,709, San Diego 62 2,813, Ventura 9 753, Source: National Center for Statistics and Analysis * Per 100,000 Population 8

15 2.2 Pedestrian Action The Pedestrian Action describes actions of the pedestrian in relation to the roadway, intersection, or crosswalk and is included in the statistical data portion of the police report. This code is important to assist in understanding if the pedestrian was in a crosswalk, mid-block location, or not in the roadway. Pedestrian actions are categorized into seven groups: Crossing in a crosswalk at an intersection, in a crosswalk not at an intersection, crossing not in a crosswalk, in the road, not in the road, or approaching or leaving a school bus. The pedestrian action Crossing in a crosswalk at an intersection was the most frequent pedestrian action preceding a collision, accounting for 39.8% of the collisions. The driver was cited for failing to yield to a pedestrian in a crosswalk (CVC 21950) in 63% of these collisions. These collisions involve pedestrians crossing in marked crosswalks and unmarked crosswalks because the data does not provide information on whether it is a marked or unmarked crosswalk. Pedestrian collisions may be higher at intersections because crossings are concentrated at intersections and exposure is higher. Another factor could be that a pedestrian expects vehicles to yield the right of way at intersections. These collisions typically occurred during peak hours when traffic volumes are high. Collisions at mid-block crosswalks, pedestrian action crossing in crosswalk not at intersection, represented 1.5% of the collisions. Children ages five to nine and adults ages 20 to 49 were most frequently involved in these collisions. Pedestrians involved in collisions while crossing the street, but not in a crosswalk, make up 28% of all collisions. Youths under 15 years of age represent 42% of these pedestrians. Dusk or dawn is a factor in 65% of the collisions. These types of collisions may be reduced with increased parental education, pedestrian safety training targeting youth, and more driver education. Pedestrians in the road accounted for 11.6% of the collisions. This type of crash often involves pedestrians walking along the shoulder or curb area, pedestrians getting into vehicles, or pedestrians standing in the road. Sometimes it can be difficult to determine if the pedestrian is in the road or crossing the road if no witnesses observed the crash and the victims cannot articulate their actions. Pedestrian collisions outside of the road represent 19% of the collisions. These collisions usually occur on private property, driveways and sidewalks. More than 69% of these collisions (13%) happened on private property. These collisions generally occurred during business hours from about 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. with a high concentration from 2:00 pm to 6:00 p.m. A review of the age groups shows a high rate of toddlers and adults aged 25 to 40. Eleven collisions involved approaching or leaving a school bus. Of the 11 reported collisions, three of the pedestrians involved were under the age of 18. Those over 18 9

16 years of age were probably dropping children off or supervising loading activities. Four of the collisions occurred between 7:15 a.m. and 7:45 a.m. The other collisions occurred between 1:00 p.m. and 6:45 p.m. In all but one case, collisions occurred in daylight, in clear weather and on dry roadways. Three incidences took place on private property. Table 6 shows the frequency and percent of pedestrian actions for each group of collisions from 1994 to Table 7 shows the distribution of cited pedestrian actions among age groups. Table 6. Pedestrian Action ( ) Pedestrian Action Frequency Percent A No pedestrian involved % B Crossing in (marked or unmarked) crosswalk at intersection 9, % C Crossing in crosswalk not at intersection % D Crossing: not in (marked or unmarked) crosswalk 6, % E In road (includes shoulder) 2, % F Not in road (on private property, on sidewalks or walkways) 4, % G Approaching or leaving school bus % Unknown Action % Total 24, % Table 7. Pedestrian Action By Age Group Age Crossing: x- walk at intersection Crossing: x- walk not at intersection Crossing: not in x-walk In road Not in road (pvt prop, sidewalks) Approaching or leaving school bus Unknown Peds Percent Peds Percent Peds Percent Peds Percent Peds Percent Peds Percent Peds. Peds Percent % % % % % 0 0.0% 0 1, % % % 1, % % % 1 9.1% 0 2, % % % % % % 1 9.1% 0 1, % % % % % % % 0 1, % , % % % % % 1 9.1% 0 3, % , % % % % % 1 9.1% 1 3, % , % % % % % % 0 3, % % % % % % 0 0.0% 0 1, % % % % % % 0 0.0% 0 1, % % % % % % 1 9.1% 0 1, % % 6 1.7% % % % 0 0.0% % % 1 0.3% 8 0.1% 5 0.2% % 0 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % Unknown % 1 0.3% % % % 1 9.1% % Total Peds 9, % % 6, % 2, % 4, % % 1 24, % Total 10

17 2.3 Location of Pedestrian Collisions Traffic safety professionals are very interested in the type of traffic controls at collision locations. Traffic engineers are especially interested in the traffic controls where collisions take place at crosswalks. Unfortunately, a crosswalk is defined as marked with crosswalk lines, or unmarked as the prolongation of the sidewalk across an interested. Police reporting agencies often consider traffic striping, signals, or signs as traffic controls. Therefore, when data was reviewed under the Traffic Controls Factors portion of the data page, it was determined to be irrelevant as it relates to crosswalk controls. The Traffic Control portion of the data has four categories controls functioning: controls not functioning, controls obscured, and controls not a factor. LADOT was able to identify intersections controlled by traffic signals. However, it is impossible to relate crosswalk or other intersection controls as the data is reported. An analysis of collisions with the factors that lead to these collisions including the pedestrian actions, age of the pedestrians involved, pedestrian sobriety and the level of injury resulting from the collision. Using Microsoft Access and ArcView GIS, collision reports were queried to find collisions that occurred at intersections, signalized intersections, intersections without signals, and at non-intersection locations. The method of selection is based on the pedestrian action preceding the collision. This category provides the most accurate information regarding whether or not the collision occurred at an intersection. GIS was used to find collisions at signalized intersections. Collisions that were recorded to have occurred in the intersection, regardless of the type of traffic control present, were selected and mapped using ArcView. This created a point file with each point representing the intersection of two streets where one or more collisions occurred. A point file of signal controls at intersections throughout the City was then mapped and layered on the afore mentioned map of collisions. Using these two point files, the intersection of both layers was found, thus creating a new file of intersectional collisions that occurred at signalized intersections. The following Table 8 details the methods used for obtaining pedestrian collision counts for control traffic device factors in this study. 11

18 Table 8. Collision Control Factors: Methodology of Interpreting Database Category Method Total Intersection Collisions Pedestrian Action = B: "Crossing in Crosswalk at Intersection" Road Condition = Not J: "Private Property" Intersection Collisions on Private Property Pedestrian Action = B: "Crossing in Crosswalk at Intersection" Road Condition = J: "Private Property" Intersection Collisions Collisions at Signalized Intersections Pedestrian Action = B: "Crossing in Crosswalk at Intersection" Pedestrian Action = B: "Crossing in Crosswalk at Intersection" Collisions at Non-Signalized Intersections Non-Intersection Collisions Mid-Block Collisions (Not in Crosswalk) Mid-Block Crosswalk Collisions Private Property Collisions Sidewalk or Driveway Collisions Using GIS, found Intersection of Signals and P.A.=B + T.C.=A, B, or C. Pedestrian Action = B Crossing in Crosswalk at Intersection Using GIS, removed Intersection with Signals. Pedestrian Action = D: "Crossing not in Crosswalk" Pedestrian Action = E: "In Road (Includes Shoulder)" Pedestrian Action = G: "App / Leaving. School Bus" Road Condition = Not J: "Private Property" Pedestrian Action = C: "Crossing in Crosswalk, Not in Intersection" Road Condition = Not J: "Private Property" Road Condition = J: "Private Property" Pedestrian Action=Not B: "Crossing in Crosswalk at Intersection" Pedestrian Action = F: "Not in Road" Road Condition = Not J: "Private Property" Using the above methods to interpret the database codes, the following Tables indicate the number of pedestrian involved in collisions at intersections with or without signals. This data determined that 60.2% or 14,625 of all pedestrians involved in collision for duration of the study occurred at non-intersection locations such as mid-block locations, on private property, on sidewalks or driveways. The highest percentage of nonintersection collision of total collisions, 9,565 or 39.4%, occurred mid-block locations not marked as crosswalks. The total number of pedestrians involved in collisions at intersections is 9,679 or 39.8% of the 24,305 total pedestrian collisions. Of the pedestrian injuries at intersections, 60.77% or 5,882 of the injuries occurred at signalized intersections, which constitute 24.2% of the 24,305 total pedestrian collisions. 12

19 Table 9. Pedestrians Injured in Collisions at Intersection Versus Non-Intersection Category Number of Pedestrians Signalized Intersection Collisions 6, % Signalize Intersection on Private Property 8 0.0% Non-signalized Intersection Collisions 3, % Total Intersection Collisions 9, % Mid-Block Collisions (Not in Crosswalk) 9, % Mid-Block Crosswalk Collisions % Private Property Collisions 3, % Sidewalk or Driveway Collisions 1, % Total Non-Intersection Collisions 14, % %Total Pedestrians Total Collisions 24, % Figure 4. Location of Pedestrian Collisions Private Property Collisions Driveway 14% (3,283) Collisions Signalized 6% (1,430) Mid-Block Crosswalk Collisions 1% (348) Mid-Block Collisions (Not in Crosswalk) 39% (9,565) Sidewalk or Intersection Collisions 26% (6,239) Unknown 0% (8) Non-signalized Intersection Collisions 14% (3,432) Signalized Intersection Collisions Unknown Non-signalized Intersection Collisions Mid-Block Collisions (Not in Crosswalk) Mid-Block Crosswalk Collisions Private Property Collisions Sidewalk or Driveway Collisions 2.31 Traffic Controls Functioning The traffic signals were functioning for 95% of pedestrians involved in collision at signalized intersections. Pedestrians were injured when signal controls were not functioning in 0.4% of the injuries. For the mid-block collisions, 7,228 or 75.6% reported traffic controls as not a factor or not present at the time of the collision. In 24.1% or 2,307 of the mid-block collisions, traffic controls were reported functioning. Collision reports data do not specify the nature of the traffic control device, but a cursory review of collision reports shows that traffic striping is often considered a traffic control device. 13

20 Table 10. Number of Pedestrians Involved in Collisions at Signalized Intersections Traffic Control Device Number of Pedestrians Controls Functioning 5, % Controls not Functioning % Controls Obscured 3 0.1% No Traffic Controls/Not a Factor % % Total Pedestrians Unknown 4 0.1% Total collisions at Signalized Intersection 6, % Table 11. Number of Pedestrians Involved in Collisions at Non-Signalized Intersections Traffic Control Device Number of Pedestrians Controls Functioning 2, % Controls not Functioning 4 0.1% Controls Obscured 7 0.2% No Traffic Controls/Not a Factor % Percent Unknown 2 0.1% Total Controlled Non-Signalized Intersections 3, % Table 12. Number of Pedestrians Involved in Mid-Block Collisions (Excluding Mid- Block Crosswalks) Traffic Control Device Percent Number of Pedestrians Controls Functioning 2, % Controls not Functioning % Controls Obscured 8 0.1% No Traffic Controls/Not a Factor 7, % Unknown 6 0.1% Total Mid-Block Collisions 9, % 2.32 Age Distribution for Location of Pedestrian Collisions The incidence rates for pedestrian collisions greatly vary in both age and type of traffic control device present. The data reveals that age is a major factor in the number of collisions that occur for the different types of traffic control devices. While it is important to look at the real numbers of collisions that occurred for each category and age group, the data has also been normalized for the population size of each age group according to census tabulations for the year 2000 population for the City of Los Angeles. The following are observations regarding the age distribution of collisions in relationship to traffic control devices. Majority of pedestrians involved in collisions occurred at mid-block locations (not at a marked crosswalk) accounting for the highest number of collisions for each age group up to the age of

21 Children ages five to nine make up the largest single group of pedestrians involved in mid-block collisions (not at a marked crosswalk), accounting for 17.4% of the mid-block crashes. They represent the largest age group of pedestrians after adjusting for population size. Pedestrians aged 20 to 39 have the highest collision numbers at signalized intersections. However, when normalized for the population distribution, pedestrians aged 60 and older experienced the highest collision rate. For collisions at non-signalized intersections, pedestrians ages 20 to 29 account for most collisions but 10 to 14 year-olds experienced the highest collision rate when normalized for population size. Table 13. Pedestrians Involved in Collisions by Age and Location of Pedestrian Collision Age Signalized Intersections Non-Signalized Intersections Mid-Block (w/o Crosswalks Mid-Block Crosswalks Peds %* Peds %* Peds %* Peds %* % % % % % % 1, % % % % % % % % % % , % % 1, % % , % % 1, % % % % 1, % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % 6 0.0% % % % 1 0.0% % 1 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% Unknown % % % 1 0.0% Total Pedestrians 6, % 3, % 9, % % *Percent of all pedestrians involved in collisions or 24,305 ( ) 15

22 Table 14. Pedestrian Collisions by Age and Location of Pedestrian Collision (Adjusted for Population) Age Population Signalized Non-Signalized Mid-Block Mid-Block (L.A. 2000) Intersections Intersections (w/o Crosswalks) Crosswalks Peds Rate Peds Rate Peds Rate Peds Rate , , , , , ,949 1, , ,779 1, , , , , , , , , Unknown Collision rate per 100,000 population for Los Angeles, 2000 Table 15 shows children aged five to nine Crossing Not in a Crosswalk at the time of the collision make up the largest single group for this type of collisions, constituting 15.2%. Second and third largest group in this category of collisions are, adults aged 20 to 29 and 30 to 39 crossing not in a crosswalk with 8.6% and 9.0%, respectively. Table 15. Pedestrian Action by Age Group for Mid-Block Collisions Not in Crosswalks Age Crossing Not In Crosswalk In Road Approaching or leaving a school bus Total Peds %* Peds %* Peds %* Peds %* % % 0 0.0% % 5-9 1, % % 1 0.0% 1, % % % 1 0.0% % % % 0 0.0% % % % 1 0.0% 1, % % % 0 0.0% 1, % % % 3 0.0% 1, % % % 0 0.0% % % % 0 0.0% % % % 1 0.0% % % % 0 0.0% % % 5 0.1% 0 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% Unknown % % 1 0.0% % Total Pedestrian 6, % 2, % 8 0.1% 9, % *Percent of all pedestrians involved in collisions or 24,305 ( ) 16

23 2.33 Injury and Location of Pedestrian Collisions Injuries were highest among pedestrians in mid-block locations, which accounted for 39.4% of all collisions. However, normalizing the injury severity to represent 100% for each category of collisions shows the relative severity of collisions for each group. Midblock collisions not in crosswalk resulted in the highest number of fatalities and severe injuries. Of the mid-block collisions, children aged five to nine experienced more injuries than any other group. Table 16. Degree of Pedestrian Injury and Location of Pedestrian Collision Level of Injury Signalized Intersections Non-Signalized Intersections Mid-Block* Mid-Block Crosswalks Peds Percent Peds Percent Peds Percent Peds Percent No Injury % % % 7 0.0% Complaint of Pain 2, % 1, % 2, % % Visible Injury 2, % 1, % 4, % % Severe Injury % % 1, % % Fatal % % % 5 0.0% Total 6, % 3, % 9, % % Figure 5. Injury Severity and Location of Pedestrian Collision 2% 1% Mid-Block Crosswalks 4% 32% 52% 13% 3% Mid-Block Non-Signalized Intersections 4% 3% 22% 52% 19% 2% 32% 48% 14% 1% No Injury Complaint of Pain Visible Injury Severe Injury Fatal Signalized Intersections 36% 48% 12% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% 17

24 Table 17. Injury Severity by Age Group: Collisions at Signalized Intersections No Injury Complaint of Visible Injury Severe Injury Fatal Total Age Pain Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % % % % % 4 0.1% % % % % % 5 0.1% % % % % % 3 0.0% % % % % % 0 0.0% % % % % % 5 0.1% 1, % % % % % 8 0.1% 1, % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % 8 0.1% % % 3 0.0% 3 0.0% 8 0.1% 3 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% Unknown % 9 0.1% % % 2 0.0% % Total Pedestrians % 2, % 2, % % % 6, % Table 18. Injury Severity by Age Group: Collisions at Non-Signalized Intersections No Injury Complaint of Visible Injury Severe Injury Fatal Total Age Pain Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % % % % % 1 0.1% % % % % % 4 0.1% % % % % % 1 0.0% % % % % % 3 0.1% % % % % % 2 0.1% % % % % % 9 0.2% % % % % % 1 0.2% % % % % % 6 0.2% % % % % % 9 0.2% % % % % % % % % % % % % % % 0 0.0% 9 0.3% 3 0.1% 1 0.0% % % 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% Unknown 6 0.2% 7 0.2% 2 0.1% 9 0.3% 3 0.1% % Total Pedestrians % 1, % % % % 3, % 18

25 Table 19. Injury Severity by Age Group: Mid-Block Collisions Not in Crosswalk Age No Injury Complaint of Pain Visible Injury Severe Injury Fatal Total Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % % % % % % % % % 1, % % % 1, % % % % % 4 0.0% % % % % % % % % % % % % 1, % % % % % % 1, % % % % % % 1, % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % % 2 0.0% 7 0.1% 2 0.0% 2 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% Unknown % 8 0.1% % % % % Total Pedestrians % 2, % 4, % 1, % % 9, % Table 20. Injury Severity by Age Group: Mid-Block Crosswalks No Injury Complaint of Visible Injury Severe Fatal Age Pain Injury Total Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % % 7 2.0% % 1 0.3% 0 0.0% % % 6 1.7% % 8 2.3% 0 0.0% % % 4 1.1% 8 2.3% 2 0.6% 0 0.0% % % 7 2.0% % 4 1.1% 0 0.0% % % % % 4 1.1% 1 0.3% % % % % % 0 0.0% % % % % 7 2.0% 1 0.3% % % % 8 2.3% 5 1.4% 2 0.6% % % 6 1.7% % 1 0.3% 0 0.0% % % 6 1.7% 9 2.6% 1 0.3% 1 0.3% % % 2 0.6% 3 0.9% 1 0.3% 0 0.0% 6 1.7% % 0 0.0% 1 0.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.3% % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.3% 0 0.0% 1 0.3% Total Pedestrians 7 2.0% % % % 5 1.4% % 19

26 2.4 Traffic Violations Cited in Pedestrian Collisions In 78% of the 22,350 reported pedestrian collisions examined in this study, at least one party was cited for violating a California Vehicle Code (CVC) Section. There were 121 different CVC Sections cited as violations. Two CVC Section violations represent more than 53% of the collisions and the top nine CVC Section violations represent over 70% of all collisions. It is not surprising that the highest infractions relate to right of way at crosswalks and pedestrians crossing outside crosswalks. Sometimes the violation alone is inadequate to determine the violation since subsections of the code may assign more specific infractions. Also, when Driving Under the Influence is cited it cannot be determined what other violation(s) may have occurred. The large number of collisions where no violation was recorded should be addressed through better training of officers. Training would also assist in better reporting of right-of-way violations. The nine most frequently cited Vehicle Code violations are: Table 21. Most Frequently Cited Vehicle Code Violations ( ) Vehicle Code Section Description Frequency Percent Pedestrian Right-of-Way at Crosswalks 6, % Pedestrians Outside Crosswalks 6, % Circular Red or Red Arrow 1, % Basic Speed Law % Starting Parked Vehicles or Backing % "Walk", "Wait", or "Don't Walk" % Crossing Between Controlled Intersections % Driving Under the Influence of Alcohol or Drugs Causing Injury % Right-of-Way on Sidewalks % Total Percentage of Top Nine Violations 70.3% No Violation Reported 5, % 2.41 Pedestrian Right-of-Way at Crosswalk (CVC 21950) The most common violation cited in pedestrian collisions is CVC Section Rightof-Way at Crosswalks. Section (a) assigns the right-of-way to pedestrians when crossing the roadway within any marked or unmarked crosswalk at an intersection. It does not, however, relieve a pedestrian from using caution when leaving the curb. Section (b) states, no pedestrian shall suddenly leave the curb or other place of safety and walk or run into the path of a vehicle which is so close as to constitute an immediate hazard. Section (c) does not relieve the driver of using due care for the safety of a pedestrian in a crosswalk. Of the 24,305 pedestrians involved in collisions, 6,719 or 27.6% cited CVC Section In 86% of these citations, the driver was cited for not yielding the right-of-way to the pedestrian (CVC (a)). The pedestrian was cited in 8.6% (580 collisions) of these collisions for not using due care (CVC 21950(b)). It is assumed that the 5.3% of the collisions that did not site a section would 20

27 assign the violation to the motorist. So in total, 91.4% of these cases assigned the violation to the driver. See Figure 6. Figure 6. Vehicle Code Right-of-Way at Crosswalks: Distribution of Vehicle Code Sections A Through C (c)= 0.1% 21950(Not Reported)= 5.3% 21950(b)=8.6% 21950(a)= 86.0% 2.42 Pedestrians Outside Crosswalks (CVC 21954) A violation of CVC Section was cited in 6,325 collisions or 26% of the collisions. CVC Section states that pedestrians crossing the street, not at a crosswalk, must yield the right-of-way to all vehicles. Children ages 15 years and younger represent 42% of the jaywalking collisions, See Figure 7. It is believed that many of these types of crashes involve children darting into the roadway. 21

28 Figure 7. Age Distribution for Violations of CVC Ages % Ages % Ages 80+ 2% Unknown 1% Ages % Ages % Ages % Ages % Table 22: Age Distribution for Violations of CVC Section Number of Violations of CVC Section Ages Percent % 4-9 1, % % % % % % % % % % % Unknown % Total 6, % 2.43 Circular Red or Red Arrow (CVC 21453) Crossing or turning at a circular red or a red arrow accounted for 4.3% of all pedestrian injuries in collisions. CVC Section (a) through (c) specify driver actions at a red indication or red arrow indication. CVC Section (d) specifies that pedestrians must obey any red indications unless directly differently by pedestrian control signals. CVC Section (a) specifically states that the driver facing a steady red light must 22

29 stop at the marked limit line or before the crosswalk until signaled to proceed, except when making a right turn on red. In 724 or 70% of the pedestrian collisions, the driver was cited for failing to stop at the limit line or before entering the crosswalk. CVC Section 21453(b) allows drivers to make a right turn (or left for one way streets) on red after stopping providing they yield to all pedestrians lawfully within the crosswalk. Right turn on a red signal is allowed at most intersections to facilitate traffic flow. However it increases the potential for conflict with pedestrians at busy intersections. CVC Section 21953(b) was cited in 57 collisions. CVC Section 21953(c) states vehicles shall stop for a red arrow until an indication permitting movement is shown. Only one collision involved this violation. CVC Section 21953(d) indicates a pedestrian shall not cross on a circular red or red arrow unless directed otherwise by a pedestrian control signal. These violations are cited in 152 collisions or approximately 15% of the collisions. This problem is indicative of a large number of pedestrians crossing against a red light. This can be reduced through stronger enforcement at traffic signals and education about pedestrian safety at signalized intersections. The following Figure 8 shows this distribution. The number of crashes where no CVC section was cited is assumed to relate to driver error. Figure 8. Distribution of CVC Section 21453: Circular Red or Red Arrow subsections (a) to (d) D=152 15% C=1 0% Not Reported=97 9% A B C D A=724 70% Not Reported B=57 6% 2.44 Basic Speed Law (CVC 22350) In over 3% of the collisions, a violation of the basic speed law was cited as a contributing factor for the collision. Although this accounts for a small percentage of all the pedestrians involved in collisions, it results in increased injuries to the pedestrians. Severe injuries resulted in 16.5% of the collisions, which is higher than the overall injury rate for pedestrian collisions. In addition, the fatality rate for pedestrian collisions with speeding vehicles is 4.3%, 2% higher than the overall injury rate for pedestrian 23

30 collisions in Los Angeles. Speeding vehicles result in more injuries to pedestrians due to the force of the impact. W. A. Leaf and D. F. Preusser explain the relationship between extent and frequency of injury for pedestrians and vehicle travel speed in Literature Review on Vehicle Travel Speeds and Pedestrian Injuries written for the NHTSA (1999). Leaf and Preusser used a sample of speed and injury severity data for 6,171 collisions from the General Estimates System (GES) and Fatality Analysis Reporting System (FARS) to create a national estimate of 283,828 collisions. They concluded that in crashes with vehicle travel speeds up to 20 miles per hour, there is a 15.8% chance of fatality or incapacitating injury. Between 20 and 35 mph, this value goes up to 27.5% and from 35 to 50 mph the likelihood of a fatal or incapacitating injury is 48.2% for pedestrians. In 43.2% of the collisions caused by speeding vehicles, the driver was charged with a felony for fleeing the scene of the accident resulting in injury or death and almost 2% were charged with misdemeanors. The injuries caused by speeding make it one of the most dangerous types of traffic collisions for pedestrians. See Table 23. Table 23. Degree and Number of Injuries Related to Speeding Level of Injury Total % Total Speed % Speed Speed Pedestrian Injuries Injuries Related Injuries Related Injuries Related Injuries to Total Injuries No Injury % % 4.85% Complaint of Pain 7, % % 2.93% Visible Injury 11, % % 2.77% Severe Injury 3, % % 3.45% Fatal % % 5.98% Total 24, % % 19.98% 2.5 Hit-And-Run Collisions Almost one-third of all pedestrians involved in collisions, 7,159, were victims of hit-andrun offenses in which the driver of the vehicle failed to stop at the time of the collision and render aid. Hit-and-run collisions accounted for 153 fatalities or 0.6% of all pedestrian fatalities. The majority of the pedestrian victims were ages 30 to 59. Pedestrians at intersections experienced proportionately more hit-and-run collisions than pedestrians crossing at mid-block locations. However, due to the fact that more overall collisions occurred in mid-block areas, there were more actual mid-block hit-andrun offenses. 24

31 Table 24. Injury Severity for Hit-and-Run Pedestrian Collisions Injury Severity Number of Pedestrians Involved Percent of Total Collisions Complaint of Pain 2, % Visible Injury 3, % Severe Injury % Fatal % Total of Injury and Fatality 6, % No Injury Reported % Total of Hit-and-Run Collisions 7, % Table 25. Hit-and-Run Pedestrian Collisions: Victims Age Distribution by Population of Los Angeles Age Pedestrians Percent Population Rate* % 285, % 297, % 255, % 251, , % 638, , % 644, , % 508, % 339, % 213, % 166, % 78, % 14, % Unknown % 0 0 Total 7, % 3,694, * Rate given at collisions per 100,000 population Table 26. Hit-and-Run Offense for Pedestrian Collisions Hit-and-Run Offense Signalized Intersections Non-Signalized Intersections Mid-Block Mid-Block Crosswalks Peds Percent Peds Percent Peds Percent Peds Percent Felony 1, % 1, % 2, % % Misdemeanor % % % 3 0.9% Not a Hit-and- Run 4, % 2, % 6, % % Total 6, % 3, % 9, % % 25

32 2.6 Demographic Makeup of Pedestrians Involved in Collisions 2.61 Gender Data does not indicate that gender plays a significant role in pedestrian collisions in Los Angeles compared to national rates. Males represented the majority of pedestrians involved in collisions comprising of 57.0% of all pedestrians in collisions. Females represented 42.6% and the gender was not indicated in 0.4%. It is difficult to determine if males are involved in a higher percentage of collisions due to the safety habits of males or if they have more contact with automobiles as pedestrians. Without sufficient baseline data, it is difficult to determine any relationship Age Children ages five to nine and adults ages 20 to 49 are most frequently involved in collisions. The distribution of pedestrian collisions shows that children ages nine and younger account for the largest group of pedestrians involved in collisions, about 18% of all collisions. Pedestrians in the thirties account for the second largest group of pedestrians involved in collisions. This can be attributed not only to the crossing habits of both groups, but also to the age distribution of the population of Los Angeles. Collision counts have been normalized for the distribution of the population for each age group to determine collision rates. The following Tables and Figure 10 provide data for collision, injury and fatality rates for the year This is based on the population of Los Angeles according to census data for the year The following formula was used to determine collision rates: Collision Rate = Number of Collisions (population/100,000) Pedestrians aged five to nine and ten to fourteen experienced the highest collision rates. (The age group of 100 to 110 has the highest collision rate. However, there was only one incident). Once adjusted for population size, pedestrians aged 30 to 39 have lower collision rates. This is the largest age group in Los Angeles so, despite a low collision rate, pedestrians in this age group do comprise over 16% of the City s pedestrian collisions. Compared to national pedestrian fatality rates, Los Angeles experienced above average rates in the year 2000 of 1.92 compared to 1.73 nationally (per 100,000 population). Compared to national rates, fatality rates in Los Angeles are high for children under the age of four and for pedestrians above the age of 70, but are below national rates for pedestrians age ten to

33 The age distribution of collision victims shows patterns in rates and types of collisions. The age ranges are broken into ten-year increments except for children are broken into five-year increments. This was done to better classify children into more age similar developmental brackets. Figure 9. Percentage of Pedestrian Collisions Per Age Group ( ) Percent Pedestrian Collisions Per Age Group 18.0% 16.0% 14.0% 12.0% 11.0% 15.7% 16.3% 13.4% 10.0% 8.0% 6.0% 6.9% 7.8% 7.2% 8.1% 5.3% 4.7% 4.0% 2.0% 0.0% 2.2% 0.3% 0% 0 to 4 5 to 9 10 to to to to to to to to to to to 109 Table 27. National Pedestrian Fatality and Injury Rate by Age, 2000 Fatality Injury Population Pedestrian Pedestria Age Groups (years) Rate (per Rate (per (thousands) s Fatalities n Injuries 100,000) 100,000) 0 to 4 18, , to 9 19, , to 15 24, , to 20 19, , to 24 14, , to 35 37, , to 44 44, , to 54 37, , to 65 23, , to 69 9, , to 79 16, , , , Unknown Total 274,633 4, , Source: NHTSA, National Center for Statistics & Analysis, Traffic Safety Facts 2000: Pedestrians 27

34 Table 28. Pedestrians Collision Rates by Age, According to Year 2000 Census Age Groups (years) Population (L.A. 2000) Pedestrians involved In a collision Collision Rate (per 100,000) Pedestrian Fatalities Fatality Rate (per 100,000) Pedestrian Injuries Injury Rate (per 100,000) , , , , , , , , , , , , > Unknown Total 3,694,820 3, , The severity of accidents for each age group provides a description of their resilience to recover from collisions. While collision rates increase somewhat for pedestrians above the age of 40, the likelihood of a fatality greatly increases. Figure 10 shows relatively low fatality rates for pedestrians aged 10 to 29, yet there is a steady rise in the groups above the age of 30. In summary, minors are most likely to be involved in a collision, however, the severity of collisions increases with age. 28

35 Figure 10. Pedestrian Collision, Injury and Fatality Rate for the Year 2000 Pedestrian Collision, Injury and Fatality Rates, 2000 Age 100 to to to to to to to to to to to 14 5 to 9 0 to 4 Fatality Rate (per 100,000) Injury Rate (per 100,000) Collision Rate (per 100,000) Rate (per 100,000 populatio n) Table 29. Pedestrian Collisions by Age Group and Injury Severity Age No Injury Severe Visible Injury Complaint of Fatal Total Group Injury Pain Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Ped. % % % 1, % % % 1, % % % 1, % % % 2, % % % 1, % % 8 0.0% 1, % % % % % % 1, % % % 1, % 1, % % 3, % % % 1, % 1, % % 3, % % % 1, % 1, % % 3, % % % % % % 1, % % % % % % 1, % % % % % % 1, % % % % % % % % % % % 7 0.0% % % 1 0.0% 1 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 0.0% Unknown % % % % % % Totals % 3, % 11, % 7, % % 24, % 29

36 2.63 Children and Young Adult Collisions Almost one third of all pedestrians involved in collisions (32.9%), or 8,011 pedestrians, were 19 or younger. Therefore further analysis of this age group is required. Researching collision factors involving children and young adults will assist the City of Los Angeles to implement a pedestrian safety program through education in schools. In addition to reducing collisions amongst children and teenagers, safety education can also create safe and long lasting habits that can carry into adulthood. National Collision data for 2000 shows almost 23% of all children in the U.S. between the ages of 5 and 9 killed in traffic collisions were pedestrians. Nearly one fifth (18%) of all traffic fatalities under the age of 16 were pedestrians. This high percentage of pedestrian fatalities may be related to the fact they are eligible to drive and that they are involved in more pedestrian activities. Children age three to eight are at higher risk for pedestrian collisions. Physiological studies have shown that children in this age group are less capable of crossing a street than older children. Their ability to perceive directions of sounds, speed, and distance of objects lags behind older pedestrians. Children from two-years old begin to exhibit the ability to walk rapidly and independently. However children under the age of seven are not fully able to determine if a road is safe to cross. This precarious stage in development is the cause of many child collisions. According to NTHSA and FHWA data, children are less capable of judging the speed and distance of approaching vehicles. In addition, children have one-third the field of vision of adults. These factors make crossing the street very difficult for children and may explain the high rate of collision for this age group when they are not supervised. Children below the age of four make up the smallest group of pedestrian collisions under the age of nineteen with 1,685 pedestrians, or 6.9%, of all pedestrians involved in collisions. These children are still learning to walk and developing their ability to perceive speeds of oncoming vehicles. They most likely receive more supervision than any other youth age group, resulting in lower collision rates. Children aged five to nine make up 11% of all pedestrians involved in a collision, or 2,668 pedestrians. As mentioned earlier, children in this age group are still developing their ability to perceive oncoming traffic. However, it is in this age group that children begin elementary school, and may have less supervision playing and walking to and from school. The next age group, ages 10 to 14, shows a drop in collisions to 7.8%, or 1,904 pedestrians. At these ages, children and teenagers are better able perceive traffic while crossing the street. Youths age 14 to 19 represent 7.2% of all pedestrians involved in collisions or 1,754 pedestrians. At this age safe pedestrian habits and awareness of automobile traffic should be more developed than younger age groups. 30

37 Figure 11. Pedestrian Collisions for Age Groups Under 20 Years Old 3,000 2,668 (11.1%) Number of Collisions 2,500 2,000 1,500 1,000 1,685 (6.9%) 1,904 (7.8%) 1,754 (7.2%) Age Knowing the times youths are involved in pedestrian collisions may allow us to better understand traffic conditions when collisions occur, the time of day children are most in need of better supervision and how to make safety reduction measures more effective. The following graph displays the time distribution of collisions for pedestrians younger than 20. This time distribution is much like the distribution for all pedestrians with most collisions occurring between 7:00 a.m. and 8:00 p.m. A morning peak occurs at 7:00 a.m. with 674 pedestrian collisions. The number of collisions drops between 8:00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m. than the number of collisions start rising every hour after 9:00 a.m. until a maximum of 997 pedestrian collisions at 3:00 p.m. The highest number of collisions occurs in the after school hours between 3:00 p.m. and 8:00 p.m. The before and after school peaks may be attributed to both high automobile traffic levels and school arrival and dismissal hours. The number of pedestrian collisions steadily declines after 6:00 p.m. 31

38 Figure 12. Time Distribution for Vehicle-Pedestrian Collisions for Pedestrians Under 20 Years Old Time Distribution of Pedestrian Crashes for Ages Under 20 Pedestrians Midnight 2:00 AM 4:00 AM 6:00 AM 8:00 AM 10:00 AM Noon 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM Time The crossing habits of pedestrians under age 20 have a distinctly different trend when compared to overall pedestrian habits. Reviewing Table 30 pedestrians under age of nine have a lower number of collisions crossing in marked or unmarked crosswalks at an intersection (pedestrian action B.) The rate for children ages four and younger is 21.1% and the rate for children ages five to nine is 24.1% while the rate for all pedestrians is 39.8%. This could be a result of better supervision when crossing at intersections, the deployment of crossing guards near schools, fewer intersection crossings, or crossing at points other than crosswalks amongst these age groups. However, the percentage of collisions for pedestrians age 10 to 19 is higher in crosswalks at intersections than the rate for all pedestrians. Collisions involving children age 10 to 14 while crossing in an intersection represent 45.7% of the collisions, and for pedestrians ages 15 to 19 represent 47.5% of the collisions. These high rates could be the result of taking more risks and being less cautious when crossing the street than other age groups. More than 44% of pedestrians younger than five were hit while crossing the street not in a crosswalk. Pedestrians between the ages of five and nine were involved in these types of collisions 54.7% of the time. For pedestrians aged 10 to 14 and 14 to 19, the rates were lower at 33.5% and 24.9%, respectively. This data clearly shows that the most prevalent safety hazard for children below the age of nine is crossing mid-block, not using the crosswalk, and possibly darting out into the roadway. It is important that an emphasis be placed on educating safe crossing procedures for children. In addition, 32

39 emphasizing safe places for youths to play away from roadways could reduce collisions involving children. Table 30. Pedestrian Action for Age Groups Under 20 Years Old Age 0-4 Age 5-9 Age Age All Ages Pedestrian Action Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % B Crossing in a (marked or unmarked) % % % % 9, % crosswalk at intersection C Crossing in a crosswalk not at an % % % % % intersection D Crossing not in (marked or unmarked) % 1, % % % 6, % crosswalk E In road (included shoulder) % % % % 2, % F Not in road (on private property or % % % % 4, % walkway) G Approaching or leaving a school bus 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 1 0% 2 0.1% % Total 1, % 2, % 1, % 1, % 24, % 2.7 Sobriety Pedestrian actions and safety may be affected by drug and alcohol use. During the seven year study period, 1,568 pedestrians had been drinking or under the influence of drugs at the time of the collision. This accounts for 6.4% of all pedestrians involved in collisions. Table 31 shows the number and percent of pedestrians that were injured or killed that had been drinking at the time of the collision. At first there appears to be little difference between injury rates for had not been drinking and HBD-under the influence. However, pedestrians that were severely injured or killed show higher rates for HBD-under the influence and Under drug influence compared to those that had not been drinking. Table 31. Relationship between Sobriety and the Injury Severity for Pedestrians Involved in a Collision Total Number of Percent of Severe Serious Complaint of Sobriety Pedestrians Total Killed Injury Injury Pain Not reported % Had not been drinking 18, % 154 2,470 9,407 5,905 Had Been Drinking (HBD) Under the influence % HBD-Not under the influence % HBD - Impairment not known % Under drug influence % Impairment Physical % Impairment not known 2, % Not Applicable % Total 24, % 535 3,566 23,374 7,548 33

40 Pedestrian sobriety levels vary by collision location. The total number of pedestrians involved in collisions that had been drinking represents approximately 6.4% of all collisions. Mid-block collisions experienced a higher number of pedestrians that had been drinking prior to the collision, while collisions at controlled intersections, signalized and non-signalized, involved fewer pedestrians that had been drinking. Pedestrians in their twenties, thirties and forties had a highest ratio of being under the influence when involved in a collision. The age range of 30 to 39 make up the largest group of pedestrians involved in collisions while under the influence of alcohol ( HBD-Under the Influence ), most of which were at mid-block locations. Table 32. Pedestrian Sobriety Levels Versus Collision Locations Signalized Intersections Non- Signalized Mid-Block Mid-Block Crosswalks Total Sobriety Levels Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Had not been drinking 5, % 2, % 6, % % 14, % HBD-Under the influence % % % % % HBD-Not under the influence % % % 0 0.0% % HBD-Impairment Unknown % % % % % Under drug influence 3 0.0% 2 0.0% % 1 0.0% % Other physical impairment 6 0.0% 1 0.0% % 3 0.0% % Impairment not known % % 1, % % 2, % Not applicable % % % 9 0.0% % Total Pedestrians 6, % 3, % 9, % % 19, % *Not including collisions at mid-block crosswalks 34

41 Table 33. Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group-All Collisions Age Had not been drinking HBD- Under the influence HBD- Not under the influence HBD- Impairment Unknown Under drug influence Other physical impairment Impairment not known Not Applicable Total Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % 0-4 1, % 2 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % 1, % 5-9 2, % 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% % % 2, % , % 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% % % 1, % , % % 6 0.0% % 2 0.0% 2 0.0% % % 1, % , % % % % 5 0.0% 8 0.0% % % 3, % , % % % % 4 0.0% 7 0.0% % % 3, % , % % % % 4 0.0% 4 0.0% % % 3, % , % % % % 1 0.0% 5 0.0% % % 1, % , % % 7 0.0% % 0 0.0% 3 0.0% % % 1, % % % 4 0.0% % 0 0.0% 2 0.0% % % 1, % % 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% % 9 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 2 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4 0.0% Unknown % % 2 0.0% % 2 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % Total Pedestrians 18, % % % % % % 3, % % 24, % 35

42 Table 34. Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group at Signalized Intersections Age Had not been drinking HBD- Under the influence HBD- Not under the influence HBD- Impairment Unknown Under drug influence Other physical impairment Impairment not known Not Applicable Total Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% % 8 0.1% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % 4 0.1% 2 0.0% 6 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % % % % 1 0.0% 2 0.0% % % 1, % % % % % 2 0.0% 2 0.0% % % 1, % % % 7 0.1% % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % % 1 0.0% 9 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % 4 0.1% 3 0.0% 8 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 1 0.0% % % 1 0.0% 2 0.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% % % % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 2 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 4 0.1% 0 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% Unknown % 7 0.1% 1 0.0% 5 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 1 0.0% % Total Pedestrians 5, % % % % 3 0.0% 6 0.0% % % 6, % 36

43 Table 35. Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group at Non-Signalized Intersections Age Had not been drinking HBD- Under the influence HBD- Not under the influence HBD- Impairment Unknown Under drug influence Other physical impairment Impairment not known Not Applicable Total Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 5 0.1% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 8 0.2% % % 9 0.3% 4 0.1% % 1 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % % 9 0.3% % 1 0.0% 1 0.0% % % % % % 2 0.1% % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % % 9 0.3% 5 0.1% 9 0.3% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 5 0.1% % % 1 0.0% 2 0.1% 6 0.2% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 3 0.1% % % 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 7 0.2% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 0 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.1% 2 0.1% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% Unknown % 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.1% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 0.1% 0 0.0% % Total Pedestrians 2, % % % % 3 0.1% 1 0.0% % % 3, % 37

44 Table 36. Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group: Mid-Block Crossing (Not in Crosswalk) Age Had not been drinking HBD- Under the influence HBD- Not under the influence HBD- Impairment Unknown Under drug influence Other physical impairment Impairment not known Not Applicable Total Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % % 2 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % % 5-9 1, % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % % 1, % % 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% % % % % % 2 0.0% 6 0.1% 2 0.0% 2 0.0% % % % % % % % 3 0.0% 2 0.0% % % 1, % % % % % 2 0.0% 4 0.0% % % 1, % % % % % 3 0.0% 2 0.0% % % 1, % % % % % 1 0.0% 4 0.0% % % % % % 2 0.0% % 0 0.0% 2 0.0% % 4 0.0% % % 8 0.1% 1 0.0% 6 0.1% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 7 0.1% % % 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% % 5 0.1% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.0% 0 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% Unknown % % 1 0.0% % 1 0.0% 0 0.0% % 2 0.0% % Total Pedestrians 6, % % % % % % 1, % % 9, % 38

45 Table 37. Pedestrian Sobriety by Age Group: Mid-Block Crosswalk Age Had not been drinking HBD- Under the influence HBD- Not under the influence HBD- Impairment Unknown Under drug influence Other physical impairment Impairment not known Not Applicable Total Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % Peds % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.3% % % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 0.9% 0 0.0% % % 3 0.9% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 4 1.1% 1 0.0% % % 3 0.9% 0 0.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 9 2.6% 3 0.0% % % 2 0.6% 0 0.0% 3 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 8 2.3% 0 0.0% % % 5 1.4% 0 0.0% 4 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 2 0.6% 1 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 1 0.3% 0 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 3 0.9% 1 0.0% % % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.3% 0 0.0% 6 1.7% % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.3% % 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Unknown 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 1 0.3% Total Pedestrians % % 0 0.0% % 1 0.0% 3 0.0% % % % 39

46 2.8 Environmental Conditions in Pedestrian Collisions The State of California Traffic Collision Report captures data describing environmental conditions that may play a factor in the collision including roadway surface, lighting and weather. This data is stored in the TAIS database and is used in this study to determine the role each factor may have played in causing these collisions. Multiple data fields are included in the environmental conditions including weather, roadway lighting, roadway surface, roadway condition. Roadway surface includes information about dry, wet, icy or slippery conditions. Data collected under roadway condition includes construction, private property, curves, and other information. Almost 84% of the collisions involving pedestrians did not report any unusual roadway conditions or no unusual conditions existed. Collisions that occurred on private property stand out as having the largest influence in this category representing 13.7% of all collisions. All other collision factors combined represent 2.4% of all collisions. This includes collisions in alleys that represent 0.5% of the collisions. The small number of collisions involving unusual conditions does not indicate any patterns of contributory factors. Lighting conditions, roadway surface conditions, and weather conditions do not present any surprising results (See Tables ) Table 38. Roadway Condition in Pedestrian Collisions ( ) Roadway Conditions Frequency Percent Not Reported % Holes % Loose Material on Roadway % Obstruction on Roadway % Construction-Repair Zone % Reduced Roadway Width % Flooded % Other % No Unusual Conditions 18, % Alley % Private Property 3, % Curve in Roadway % Railroad X Within 200 Feet % Total 22, % 40

47 Table 39. Lighting Conditions in Pedestrian Collisions ( ) Lighting Frequency Percent Not Reported % Daylight 15, % Dusk-Dawn % Dark: Street Lights 5, % Dark: No Street Lights % Dark: Street Lights Not Functioning % Total 22, % Table 40. Roadway Surface Conditions in Pedestrian Collisions ( ) Roadway Surface Frequency Percent Not Reported % Dry 20, % Wet 1, % Snowy or Icy % Slippery % Total 22, % Table 41. Weather Conditions in Pedestrian Collisions ( ) Weather Frequency Percent Not Reported % Clear 19, % Cloudy 1, % Raining 1, % Fog % Snow 0 0.0% Total 22, % 2.9 Time of Day Hourly variations in reported pedestrian collisions follow a discernible pattern. Starting from the early morning from 12:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m., pedestrian collision reporting is low. Reporting reaches its lowest volume during the slowest traffic hours of the day from 3:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m. In the hour of 7:00 a.m. there is a morning peak of 1,491 collisions. This is directly related to morning rush hour traffic in which most people are trying to get to work, drop off children at school or daycare and are generally in a hurry. There is a drop in activity after the rush hour period with a gradual rise from 9:00 A.M. to 3:00 PM. (from 897 to 2,181 reported collisions). Children make up the largest age group of pedestrians involved on collisions around 3:00 P.M., therefore, they have a large effect on the hourly distribution of collisions. A second rush hour peak occurs from 5:00 to 7:00 p.m. and then steadily declines into the evening hours. Pedestrian collisions follow similar hourly patterns of peak traffic and auto collisions. Improving peak hour traffic safety could greatly reduce pedestrian collisions. For children, crossing guards, improved safety education and increased after school supervision could reduce collision rates. 41

48 Figure 13. Hourly Distribution of Pedestrian Collisions 2500 H ourly Variation in Re porte d Pe de strian C ollisions ( ) 2000 Collisions :00 AM 2:00 AM 4:00 AM 6:00 AM 8:00 AM 10:00 AM 12:00 PM Hour 2:00 PM 4:00 PM 6:00 PM 8:00 PM 10:00 PM 2.10 Seasonal Variations Occurrences of pedestrian collisions showed little seasonal variation. Figure 14 shows only slight differences in the numbers of collisions reported from month to month. There was a slight dip in reported collisions during the summer months while October and December have the highest number of collisions. Higher collision rates in the fall and winter could be associated with shorter daylight, however the difference is not dramatic. The peak in December may be due to an increase in holiday traffic and rainy weather conditions. Figure 14. Seasonal Distribution of Pedestrian Collision Seasonal Variation in Reported Pedestrian Collisions ( ) 2500 Collisions January February March April May June July August September October November December 2.11 Geographic Distribution of Pedestrian Collisions Using ArcView GIS mapping software, collision locations were mapped to reveal spatial patterns throughout the City. Using the primary and the secondary street names recorded in the TAIS data, 98% of the collisions were plotted on a street map of Los 42

49 Angeles to the nearest intersection. The remaining 2% did not correspond to an identifiable intersection, suggesting a problem with the street names. Due to the size of Los Angeles, the City covers over 465 square miles, it is divided into fifteen geographical regions according to fifteen Council District boundaries. This allows us to closely examine collision distribution throughout the City. In addition, a series of maps displaying population density, collisions per census tract and collisions per population of each census tract relate collision occurrences to population distribution. These maps are provided in Appendix A. Population density, pedestrian exposure to vehicle traffic, type of crossing facilities, vehicle speeds, and land use are all factors that contribute to the geographical distribution of pedestrian collisions. The maps display collisions at intersections, major roads and a relation to population densities. While collisions were scattered throughout the City, the majority occurred in and around central Los Angeles. Overall, fewer collisions occurred in the San Fernando Valley (in the north) and in San Pedro area (the southern portion of the City). Overall, collisions were highly dispersed. The highest number of pedestrian collisions to occur at one intersection is 17. However, 70% of intersectional collisions occurred at intersections where less than four collisions occurred during the seven-year period of this study (within one standard deviation (+1 and -1) of the mean of 2.2 collisions at one intersection). The maps show a correlation between population density and collision frequency. The area located between Western Avenue, the Hollywood, Harbor and Santa Monica Freeways is both densely populated and experienced more collisions than any other area in the City. It is also the location of major automobile and transit corridors in Los Angeles. In addition, the Hollywood area located along Hollywood Boulevard and Sunset Boulevard has particularly high population densities and collision rates. As a potential contributing factor is the popular commercial shopping area, serving a large volume of pedestrians and vehicles. Downtown Los Angeles is the exception to this rule. The clusters of collisions in this area are most likely due to high pedestrian traffic during the day. Collisions have formed clusters along arterial streets. This can be interpreted in more than one way. On one hand, major streets present dangers for pedestrians due to their width, high traffic volume and speed. However, more pedestrians and vehicles use these streets, creating more opportunity for more collisions to occur. 3.0 Conclusion This analysis of pedestrian collisions in Los Angeles provides in-depth information on the specific circumstances of these collisions. It is difficult to come to a comprehensive 43

50 conclusion regarding the causes of pedestrian collisions as they involve many factors. The analysis does lead to some significant insights. These include: There were 315,320 reported collisions, an average of 45,046 collisions per year. A total of 22,350 collisions involving pedestrians, an average of 3,193 per year. Pedestrian collisions represented 7.1% of all reported collisions. An average of 1.1 pedestrians were involved in each collision. A total of 549 pedestrians were reported as fatalities from the collision, an average of 78 per year. Pedestrian fatalities represented 2.3% of all collisions involving pedestrians. Pedestrian injuries represented 96.2% of all reported pedestrian collisions. Pedestrian fatalities represent 36.8% of all traffic fatalities. 39% of all pedestrian collisions occur mid-block (not in crosswalks). 26% of all pedestrian collisions occur at signalized intersections. The majority of collisions involved California Vehicle Code violations of Right-of-Way at Crosswalks, Pedestrians Outside Crosswalks, Circular Red or Red Arrow, and the Basic Speed Law. Collisions peak between 7:00 am to 8:00 am and again between 3:00 pm to 7:00 pm, most likely corresponding to school and work related trips. Collisions were clustered around major intersections and arterial highways. Collisions were clustered in City areas where population densities were high. Hit-and-runs represent 30% of all pedestrian collisions. Compared to the national pedestrian fatality rates, Los Angeles experienced above average fatality rates in the year 2000 of 19.2 compared to 17.3 nationally (per million population). Compared to national rates, fatality rates (per million population) in Los Angeles are high for children under the age of four (8.0 nationally compared to 21.0 in Los Angeles) and for pedestrians over the age of seventy (31.7 nationally compared to 61.6 in Los Angeles). 44

51 Footnotes Herms, B. Pedestrian /Crosswalk Study: Accident in Painted and Unpainted Crosswalk, Highway Research Record Number 406 Pedestrian Protection, Highway Reach Board, pp 1-13, Washington CD 1972 W. A. Leaf and D. F. Preusser, Literature Review on Vehicle Travel Speeds and Pedestrian Injuries, U. S. Department of Transportation, National Highway Safety Administration, Report Number DOT HS , October

52 Appendix A 46

53 Appendix B 47

54 Appendix B 48

55 Appendix B 49

56 Appendix C 50

57 Appendix C 51

58 Appendix C 52

59 Appendix C 53

60 Appendix C 54

61 Appendix C 55

62 Appendix C 56

63 Appendix C 57

64 Appendix C 58

65 Appendix C 59

66 Appendix C 60

67 Appendix C 61

68 Appendix C 62

69 Appendix C 63

70 Appendix C 64

71 Appendix D 65

72 Appendix E 66

73 Appendix E 67