Today Los Angeles Walks learned about a dangerous and irresponsible anti-road diet motion that will go before the Los Angeles Neighborhood Council Coalition at a meeting tomorrow, December 1, 2018 (agenda item 2.2). The following is a comment letter LA Walks submitted to LANCC in response.
The meeting will be held on Saturday, December 1 at 10am at LA DWP Headquarters on Hope Street. For information see here.
To send your own comment, email: firstname.lastname@example.org.
To appointed Neighborhood Council representatives, other Neighborhood Council members, and members of the public,
We at Los Angeles Walks are extremely disturbed with the placement and contents of item 2.2 on tomorrow’s LANCC meeting agenda, a motion that seeks to stake out a position for the LANCC on roadway reconfigurations (or “road diets”) that is radically different than adopted City policy and the policy choices of individual Neighborhood Councils.
Simply put, roadway reconfigurations that reallocate roadway space to a variety of travel modes, commonly referred to as “road diets,” are a long-proven street safety measure that help make streets safer for all, and especially for people walking. The motion listed for item 2.2 in tomorrow’s meeting agenda is misinformed at best, and maliciously mendacious at worst. Its passage would be terrible for people who walk in Los Angeles.
We urge the appointed representatives of the LANCC to reject this dangerous and irresponsible motion on its face.
Los Angeles Walks is a pedestrian advocacy organization that seeks to make walking safe, accessible, and fun for all Angelenos. One of the most dangerous factors for people walking in LA is vehicle speed. According to reports from the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (NHTSA) cited by Los Angeles’ Vision Zero initiative, people struck by a vehicle travelling 20 mph face a 10% risk of death -- if struck by a vehicle travelling 40 mph, walkers face an 80% risk of death.
That’s why roadway reconfigurations are such effective safety improvement measures: they reduce prevailing speeds, leading to fewer, less serious crashes and less risk for serious injury and death, especially to people walking and biking. The Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) knows as much, stating clearly:
Why consider a Road Diet? Four-lane undivided highways experience relatively high crash frequencies — especially as traffic volumes and turning movements increase over time — resulting in conflicts between high-speed through traffic, left-turning vehicles and other road users. FHWA has deemed Road Diets a proven safety countermeasure and promotes them as a safety-focused design alternative to a traditional four-lane, undivided roadway.
According to the FHWA, roadway reconfigurations can have crash reduction factors of 19 - 47%. They have also been around a very long time, with the first installation in 1979 in Billings, Montana (the first road diets in Los Angeles being implemented in 1980). Lastly, roadway reconfigurations have resulting ancillary benefits including but not limited to:
- Space for expanded sidewalks and/or transit and bicycle lanes, creating safer and more pleasant experiences for users and also closing network gaps;
- Reducing crossing length for people walking, reducing the amount of time they are exposed to auto traffic in the roadway;
- On 4-to-3 lane conversions (reconfiguring from two lanes of auto travel in each direction to one auto lane in each direction plus a center left turn lane), the creation of a continuous center turn lane which enable protected left-hand turns (99% crash reduction factor) as well as space to install pedestrian refuge islands for midblock crossings (46% crash reduction factor);
- The creation of a center left turn lane also creates a street easier for emergency vehicles to navigate by creating a generally open lane as well as giving space for cars to pull over;
- Also, on 4-to-3 lane conversions, the elimination of passing lanes, eliminating the possibility of a passing car passing a stopped car and hitting a pedestrian crossing the street;
But how about Los Angeles’ recent history? A 2016 study of Los Angeles road diets looked at a group of five corridors where a roadway reconfiguration had occurred and compared before and after conditions on those corridors with control streets that corresponded to the road diet corridors. For these streets, a 32.4% reduction in crashes occurred as compared to an 8% reduction for the control group. Injury rates were reduced on the road diet corridors by 36.7% as compared to an 8% reduction for the control group.
Local residents of Silver Lake have calculated that the Rowena Avenue roadway configuration has also had a demonstrably positive effect on street safety, with injury collisions down 21.5% and sever injury collisions down 33% over a five year period after installation of a road diet in March of 2013. For the same timespan for the City of Los Angeles as a whole, injury collisions were up 8.5% and severe injury collisions were up 12%.
Again, simply put, roadway reconfigurations, or road diets, are a proven tool to help reduce prevailing speeds, calm and organize traffic, enable safer turning movements, and make all road users safer. They especially can help people walking by reducing crossing distances, slowing traffic and enabling safer turns.
Lastly, LADOT already has a policy of conducting local outreach before any project, including any roadway reconfiguration project. Local residents deserve to have a say to potentially support roadway reconfigurations in their communities if they so desire without the LANCC having issued a general advisory prohibition. As projects come up for design consideration, that is the appropriate time for individual communities to work with LADOT on the best street safety measures to implement.
To conclude, the motion on the agenda is a misinformed stance of the efficacy of roadway reconfigurations that seeks to put words in the mouth for each individual Neighborhood Council. Please reject the motion on its face and leave discussions about roadway changes to communities to decide for themselves.
 FHWA: Accessed on 11/30/2018: https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/road_diets/
 Martinez, Severin: Who Wins When Streets Lose Lanes? An Analysis of Safety on Road Diet Corridors in Los Angeles. Pg 7. Accessed 11/30/2018: http://bike.lacity.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/10/SeverinMartinez-WhoWinsWhenWeLoseLanes-2016.pdf
 Ibid: Pg 29
 Ibid: Pg 30
 Keep Rowena Safe. Accessed 11/30/2018: https://www.keeprowenasafe.com/safety-research
Families and friends gathered together in LA State Historic Park to honor loved ones impacted by traffic violence at Los Angeles Walks’ annual World Day of Remembrance for Road Traffic Victims event on November 18, 2018.
The Southern California chapter of Families for Safe Streets, a group of individuals and families who have lost a loved one in a traffic collision or survived a severe crash, welcomed close to 100 attendees to Los Angeles Walks’ annual World Day of Remembrance (WDR) event - this year in LA State Historic Park.
SoCal Families for Safe Streets, a project of Los Angeles Walks, planned the gathering to honor and celebrate their loved ones’ lives, and to demand an end to preventable traffic deaths and serious injuries.
Debbie Hsiung and Beverly “Grandma Beverly” Shelton, the co-founders of SoCal Families for Safe Streets (above), framed the day with the painful reminder that 64 people died on Los Angeles’ city streets in the first six months of 2018 - about one every three days. Like Debbie and Beverly, 64 families must deal with the anger, pain, and devastation of that reality for the rest of their lives.
Debbie and Grandma Beverly called attendees to action, inviting them into the work to advocate for safer street design and to ensure pedestrian and bicyclist rights are elevated in a city that historically prioritizes drivers and expediency.
Areli Morales (far right) and her family provided World Day of Remembrance attendees the opportunity to decorate pan de muerto in honor of loved ones lost to traffic violence. Areli and her family honored the life of her grandfather, who was struck and killed while legally crossing the street in East Los Angeles in 1994.
Event attendees from all over the city honored the lives of loved ones -- and strangers alike -- through participatory activities, like decorating luminaria bags and lighting wish paper, as well as by sharing stories and cultural traditions with one another.
World Day of Remembrance acknowledged the burden of grief that families too often bear silently, and engaged attendees to become advocates for just policies that put an end to traffic fatalities and severe injuries.
As Debbie Hsiung said in her remarks, “Every single one of these deaths is more than a headline. It’s more than a dot on a map or a data point in a chart. We are families and communities shattered by a sudden, horrific, PREVENTABLE death. And we say, ‘enough.’”
If you’d like to know more about Families for Safe Streets, please click here.
All photos by Rabi Abdnour except for the top image.
Vote NO on Prop. 6 on November 6!
Election day is only one week away and much has already been written about Proposition 6, a ballot initiative that would take away current roadway improvement projects by repealing a gas tax increase enacted through Senate Bill 1 (SB 1: The California Road Repair and Accountability Act of 2017). That gas tax increase helps fund a long backlog of road and bridge repair projects in the state of California. Repealing it would be a bad and short-sighted decision, as the LA Times Editorial Board made clear in this article.
If voters pass Prop. 6, it won't just halt the maintenance and repair of our roads and bridges, it will also slow down the progress being made to improve public transit, walking, and biking. SB 1 funding dedicates $100 million to pedestrian and bike projects, and over $750 million to transit agencies to help increase access and service1.
Supporters of Prop. 6
Supporters who want to pass Prop. 6 - ending the gas tax increase created through SB1 - include the California Republican Party, Republican Speaker of the U.S. House, Paul Ryan2, Republican U.S. House Majority Leader, Kevin McCarthy, Republican U.S. House Majority Whip, Steve Scalise, and a number of other Republican representatives, senators, and taxpayer associations3.
Supporters argue that the funds from the gas tax increase will just be diverted for other uses, but SB1 funds are “protected under a constitutional amendment, which safeguards new dollars for transportation use only.”4
Who else is saying NO to Prop. 6
Those opposed to Prop. 6 come from a broader base of community and labor organizations, public safety and social justice advocates, environmental nonprofits, senior citizen coalitions, businesses, cities, and government officials including: Bike San Gabriel Valley, Move LA, Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy, East Los Angeles Community Corporation, Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles, Parents for Safe Routes, Safe Routes to School National Partnership, and Sierra Club California, just to name a few. You can access the long list of coalition members who are urging California voters to vote no on Prop. 6 here.
The “No on Prop 6” Coalition mentioned above has also created a fact sheet that informs us on what’s at stake here. If Prop. 6 passes, more than 6,500 local bridge/road safety and transportation improvement projects would abruptly stop with no plan B in the works5.
So if you’re in support of safer roads, and trying to relieve traffic congestion by making other modes of transportation more reliable, convenient, and safe (like walking, biking, and taking public transit), then please vote NO on Prop. 6.
Check out this interactive map that displays the local LA County projects that SB 1 is funding. Some of those projects include: Active Aging, Safe Routes for Seniors in Santa Monica, West Santa Ana Branch Bikeway Phase 2, and San Gabriel River East Bank Greenway & Neighborhood Connections in Baldwin Park/Walnut Creek
Councilmember Ryu recently submitted a motion to LA City Council requesting that the LA Department of Transportation review the CD4-commissioned "Rowena Avenue, Waverly Drive, and Angus Street: Cut-through Traffic Study."
The motion may go before the LA City Council Transportation Committee as early as Wednesday, October 24, 2018, the committee's next meeting. We need everyone to take action to #KeepRowenaSafe!
Read below for more details.
Courtesy of Keep Rowena Safe
Terence Heuston, a Silver Lake resident and founding member of Keep Rowena Safe, submitted the following comments to City Councilmembers on September 25, 2018.
As a Silver Lake resident, I can attest that prior to the "Rowena road diet," locals often referred to the dangerous arterial road running in front of Ivanhoe Elementary School as "Rowena Raceway." As far back as 2006 there are documented meeting minutes from the Silver Lake Neighborhood Council Urban Design Committee calling for an Environmental Impact Review for a Rowena "road diet." Following years of community discussion, outreach, and coverage in the press documented here, Councilmember Tom LaBonge formally requested via a council motion that LADOT study installing a road diet on Rowena. Yet, it was too late for 24 year-old Ashley Sandau - while the road diet was being studied she was killed crossing the street in front of two schools. The drivers in three lanes stopped their cars for her; the driver in the fourth lane did not. That driver killed Ms. Sandau.
The road diet that the City subsequently installed ensures that the tragically foreseeable death of Ms. Sandau cannot occur again, since the road diet alignment prevents it. Any other configuration listed within Kimley-Horn's "Rowena Avenue, Waverly Drive, and Angus Street: Cut-through Traffic Study" "options" re-introduces the danger of a car in the "fast" lane swerving into the "slow" lane around a car that has stopped for a pedestrian - the exact manner in which Ms. Sandau was killed.
As most of you know, when a car crash is reported to the LAPD, the record of that crash is forwarded to a central database (SWITRS) maintained by the California Highway Patrol. FIVE independent reviews of the SAME data: LADOT, LAPD, independent data scientists, an independent transportation planner report, and the recent Kimley-Horn study all show the same result: the formerly dangerous road, where a young woman died crossing in front of two schools, is "significantly safer than before."
Based on the unanimous findings of five different sources reviewing the same data there can be no justification for adding another travel lane in front of two schools. Furthermore, you can view the Rowena Town Hall video where two out of every three Silver Lake residents who speak on the matter support the road diet (50 in favor, 25 opposed). The community does not want another lane.
I am writing to ask you to amend the motion submitted by Councilmember David Ryu (11-2130-S4) to request that LADOT prioritize safety in their evaluation of the “Rowena Avenue, Waverly Drive, and Angust Street: Cut-Through Traffic Study” conducted by Kimley-Horn for CD4. There is no need to make a street with a proven safety record more dangerous in order to address the cut-through traffic on side streets. There is an array of options that can elevate the safety of Angus Street and Waverly Drive without putting elementary school students at risk.
Sunny Southern California! Most days are a beautiful day to walk, bike, or spend some time outside waiting for the bus or train – this is part of what makes LA living so livable.
But summer – and the Santa Ana winds of the fall – can be brutal, especially in heavily paved and low-income urban areas with hardly a tree in sight. The sun’s rays and the heat radiating off the sidewalk can make an otherwise pleasant stroll feel like a punishment, and leave you thirsty for a tall drink of cold water. In the wet season, neighborhoods parched in the dry months flood from trash-blocked storm drains or lack of infrastructure, swamping intersections with pollution-laden puddles and waterlogging kids on their way to school. Cities and non-profits have dreams to plant more trees and address these issues, but seem stuck on their way to implementing solutions, citing a lack of funding to build or maintain infrastructure.
If only we could do something to address this web of worries!
We can! This November 6, voters will be asked to consider County Measure W for Safe, Clean Water.
This measure (W for Water), would fund an action plan to tackle these overlapping issues: extreme weather like drought and flooding, water contamination, and the funds to both build solutions and keep them running. Through a modest parcel tax that collectively makes a big difference, this measure would invest $300 million a year into our communities and water infrastructure, building and maintaining public projects like Echo Park Lake and the South LA Wetlands, the Avalon Green Alley network, planted medians and parkways, and retrofitting schoolyards, we can turn LA County into a sponge instead of a slick.
Milton Street bulbout, photo credit Joe Linton, StreetsblogLA
Right now, we’re wasting 100 billion gallons of water each year, sending it through our storm drains and river channel as fast as possible into the ocean. By “unpaving” the County, planting more street trees, converting blacktops into playgrounds, running raingutters to cisterns, and diverting storm drains to parks, we can use nature and science to capture and clean this water – enough for 3.5 million people. At the same time, we’ll be investing in our communities with shade and green space, bringing much needed resources especially to low-income communities, and creating thousands of good jobs building projects and keeping them humming over time. All for about $7 a month for the average homeowner (and $1-3 a month if you own a condo)!
Join environmental justice advocates, public health experts, firefighters, labor leaders, scientists, and regular humans from all walks of life in voting Yes on W for water this November 6! (Click here for a lengthy list of endorsing organizations and elected officials.)
Guest blog post by Lauren Ahkiam, Director of Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy's Water Project. LAANE is a member of the OurWaterLA Coalition, which advocates for clean, safe, affordable and reliable water for all.
We love shared bikes and scooters (also known as "personal mobility devices") -- we really do! Dockless scooters and bicycles could be a boon to Los Angeles, which suffers from car-clogged streets and polluted air. They're likely to reduce car trips and increase walking trips, which we're all about.
As the City of Los Angeles develops its rules and guidelines for a pilot dockless scooter and bike program, though, we want to make sure operators (and eventually users) seriously consider the rights and needs of vulnerable populations like older adults and people with disabilities. These groups often rely on walking and rolling for transportation and physical activity, and deserve a reliably clear, safe, accessible public realm.
On Wednesday, June 27, 2018, the Los Angeles City Council Transportation Committee discussed, amended, and approved pilot program rules and guidelines developed by the Los Angeles Department of Transportation.
We appreciate Councilmember Bonin and Councilmember Martinez requiring that operators conduct outreach with disability rights groups or Independent Living Centers as part of the permit application process.
On March 4th, 2018, as part of our annual March Forth! celebration, Los Angeles Walks closed a street to vehicles and opened it to people. What happened? Kids played, adults talked to one another, people of all ages learned to skateboard, took Jeepney tours, designed their dream streets, and SO MUCH MORE!
Thank you to all who participated, especially our generous and talented program partners, who provided opportunities for residents of Historic Filipinotown to learn, experience, relax, remember, and connect.
Thanks to Gregory Grano for the video!
"Grandma Beverly" Shelton, co-founder of SoCal Families for Safe Streets, submitted the following letter to LA Weekly in response to a recent article on Vision Zero in Los Angeles.
To the Editor of LA Weekly,
When my grandson Zachary Cruz was five years old, a man driving a welding truck struck Zach as he crossed the street with a school employee and three other children in Berkeley, CA. Zachary died there on the street. As a resident of Ventura, I represent one of the thousands of people traumatically impacted by severe traffic collisions every year in and around Los Angeles, and am a co-founder of the recently formed Southern California Families for Safe Streets. Members of the group are all mourning the abrupt and senseless loss of a family member killed in a traffic collision or are adapting to life with our own serious traffic-related injury.
Hillel Aron’s recent piece, Is L.A.’s Ambitious Plan to End Traffic Fatalities Already Dead? (November 2, 2017), completely omitted our voices. This is common. Despite the fact that we and our loved ones bear the greatest burden, recent media coverage of traffic safety efforts in Los Angeles focus almost entirely on projects’ impacts on car commuters, effects on local businesses, and the pressure elected officials face. Too often, this is how people gauge whether a safety project “works” or “doesn’t work” as Mayor Garcetti implies in Aron’s piece.
SoCal Families for Safe Streets exists to remind people why the City initiates safety projects in the first place: to prevent deaths -- deaths that destroy families, lead people into deep depression, stress marriages, strain resources, and shatter communities.
It is time for Mayor Garcetti, Los Angeles City Council members, and all regional leaders to stand firm, like former NYC Mayor Bloomberg did in the example provided in Aron’s piece. We call on policymakers to unapologetically support evidence-based strategies that reduce severe collisions and save lives.
Vision Zero is not dead. My grandson is dead. Aidan Tam, 7 years old, is dead. Jonathan Hernandez, 14 years old, is dead. Valentina d’Alessandro, 16 years old, is dead. And so are more than 500 people in Los Angeles since the City launched Vision Zero in August 2015. With courage and conviction, our elected officials can take meaningful steps to stop this. We urge them to do so.
Southern California Families for Safe Streets welcomes you join us in the fight for safe streets that prevent death and protect families. For more information, visit: http://www.losangeleswalks.org/socal_families_for_safe_streets.
Beverly “Grandma Beverly” Shelton
Co-founder, A to Z Families for Safe Streets
Co-founder, Southern California Families for Safe Streets
Written by Maryann Gray
On a beautiful spring day in 1977, when I was a 22 year-old student living in rural Ohio, I hit and killed an 8 year old boy named Brian who ran into the street in front of my car. Back then, his family’s mailbox was across the street from their house, which made for more efficient mail delivery. The “street,” however was a heavily trafficked rural highway, U.S. Route 27. Brian had forgotten to watch for traffic after picking up the family’s mail.
Although this collision was not my fault in any legal sense, the fact is that I am the one who killed him. For decades, I felt undeserving of happiness, compassion, or love. Not a single day has gone by when I have not thought about Brian. He was with me on the day I defended my doctoral dissertation, on my wedding day, and on the day my father died. He is with me as I write this.
Maryann Gray is the founder of http://accidentalimpacts.org/.
Twenty-five years after the crash, I finally decided to deal with my guilt, shame, fear, and grief, along with lingering symptoms of PTSD. I started therapy and began a deep exploration of the collision and its aftermath. Among many other steps, I read the accident report and newspaper articles for the first time, and I flew out to Ohio from my home in Los Angeles to quietly visit the crash scene.
In preparation for my visit to Ohio, I googled Brian’s address, intending to look at the site via Google maps. What popped up in the search results, however, was an article that listed U.S. Route 27 in Butler County, Ohio as one of the most dangerous highways in America. This 14-mile stretch of road even had a nickname – the Highway to Heaven.
I was startled. I had spent countless hours ruminating about my own responsibility for Brian’s death, but I had never questioned the external conditions that contributed to this collision. It turned out that Brian was one of many victims on Route 27. Between 1960 and 1986, 87 people were killed on that 14 mile stretch – 3 or 4 people killed per year, every year, for more than a quarter of a century.
In the late 1980s, the residents of Butler County and their elected officials organized and advocated for improvements to the road. Only then did the State come through with funding. In the years that followed, workers widened narrow stretches of the road, smoothed out steep curves, added shoulders, and improved the signage. The speed limit was reduced. I don’t know exactly when, but sometime after Brian’s death the mailboxes were moved so that they sat in front of the houses rather than across the street. Today, the collision rate on Route 27 has dropped considerably, although it remains a dangerous road.
Pedestrian deaths are not only the result of bad drivers and bad luck, although both play a part. They also result from the choices we make as a society about how much to invest in road safety. Individual responsibility is essential to stopping the carnage on the roads. So is advocacy, policy, urban planning and design, engineering, and education.
I am pleased to honor Brian’s memory by supporting Los Angeles Walks, the LA Vision Zero Alliance, and Southern California Families for Safe Streets this World Day of Remembrance.
At the upcoming Tuesday, October 10th Personnel and Animal Welfare Committee meeting, LA City Council members will consider a spending plan for integrated road reconstruction and Vision Zero safety projects that span three City departments. A collaboration between the LA Department of Transportation (LADOT), Bureau of Engineering (BOE), and Bureau of Street Services (BSS), the spending plan is an effort to increase the departments’ efficiency and impact, and encourages a more holistic approach to public works projects that are developed with a health equity lens.
We love it! But, we want more.
We want to see departments work together on complete streets projects that don’t just go curb-to-curb, but wall-to-wall. We want to see smooth, safe streets AND sidewalk repair, curb ramps, street trees, and bus shelters.
Have you ever stood at a bus stop with people gathered in the shade of one skinny utility pole because there is no bus shelter or trees to provide relief? Los Angeles can avoid that by leveraging our transportation dollars to improve the entire public realm from wall-to-wall in the creation of true complete streets. When we do that, we are making investments that prioritize safety and, importantly, show an immediate return on the quality of life for our communities.
During the 2018 budget negotiations in the City of Los Angeles this past May, policymakers settled on an important compromise - one that most of us would consider common sense, but that a City staffer might call magical.
Before the compromise, Council members were in disagreement: with limited funds available, some elected officials wanted to prioritize spending on critical roadway repairs, fixing potholes and reconstructing “failing” streets. Others wanted to direct funds to Vision Zero projects - those that redesign the highest need streets for safety in order to address the public health emergency of traffic fatalities in LA.
After dramatic deliberations, Councilmembers decided that the City can accomplish both goals by having departments work together, and that funding should go towards projects that incorporate both roadway reconstruction and redesigns for safety.
To be fair, Los Angeles Walks initially balked at the notion of diverting funds to roadway repairs at a time when fatal and severe pedestrian collisions continue to rise. But, we have come to see the value in this compromise and the importance of cross-departmental collaboration, one of the pillars of the Vision Zero framework. We also see that as an opportunity for the City to execute an efficient use of public funds.
We would like to have the City Council include wall-to-wall complete streets alongside all other potential plans for the City’s integrated road repair/Vison Zero project list, including access and sidewalk repair, street trees, and bus shelters.
MORE ABOUT THE PLAN
Since the City Council passed the FY18 budget this past spring, LADOT, BOE, and BSS have worked together to develop a Vision Zero 2017-18 workplan that includes both street reconstruction and Vision Zero components. At the September 20th Public Works and Gang Reduction Committee meeting, leaders of each department together presented the names of 11 corridors that light up on all of their individual lists: those “D” and “F” streets in need of reconstruction that are also on the City’s Vision Zero High Injury Network.
As outlined in a report by the City Attorney’s Office, the initial source of funding proposed for these projects is the Measure M Local Return Fund, which includes $12.84 million for street reconstruction and $6.62 million for Vision Zero (total: $19.46 million). The use of funds from the remaining Measure M Local Return Fund ($650,00) and SB1 Special Gas Tax Improvement Fund ($24.06 million), which includes $11.95 million for street reconstruction and $12.76million for Vision Zero, will be proposed in subsequent reports, and will cover salaries and other resources necessary for 2017-18 work during the construction phase of these projects.
In a city where everybody walks, bikes, rides the bus or drives a vehicle, our transportation investments don't have to be separated into silos like "bus," "walk," or "vehicle speed." By expanding departmental coordination and improving all aspects of the street from wall-to-wall, we can increase safety directly, through Vision Zero safety projects, and indirectly, through higher quality and more dignified infrastructure for people walking, biking, and taking transit. By encouraging more people to walk, bike, and take transit - and making it convenient and pleasant, we will increase safety for all.
Join us at the Tripping Point advocacy training summit!
>> Boost your advocacy skills for sidewalks, crosswalks, street trees, and bus shelters at The Tripping Point: Valley Edition, a FREE one-day advocacy training summit on October 21st at Panorama City High School. Food, childcare, and Spanish-English translation available!