It has been a very bad six months for crowds and pedestrians in America.





First came Mardi Gras in New Orleans in February, when a crowd watching a passing parade was struck from behind by a pickup truck driven by a very intoxicated driver.  28 people were injured, some seriously.


Next came Times Square in May, where a crazed driver accelerated down a sidewalk in Manhattan deliberately aiming at pedestrians, injuring 22 and killing one young girl. 


Now in August comes the events in Charlottesville Virginia, when an angry driver deliberately crashed into a street demonstration, resulting in the death of Heather Heyer and injuries to 19 others. 


Three separate incidents involving angry or drugged drivers.  Three separate incidents where pedestrians and visitors were struck without warning.  Three separate incidents that have put the rest of America on notice:

1)  Vehicle attacks against pedestrians and crowds, whether acts of terrorism, acts of anger, or criminal acts such as drunk driving, are increasing.

2)  Failure to take simple preventive measures against possible vehicle incursions into crowds exposes the public to death and injury

3)  Failure to take preventive measures after being put on notice of hazardous conditions will expose cities and counties to civil litigation and judgements.


Today I saw a news report (pasted and cited below) which if accurate, could expose the City of Charlottesville Virginia and Albemarle County to increased civil liability in any upcoming litigation that stems from this vehicle-into-crowd crime.  A county employee had sent an email to the Charlottesville City Council warning just four months prior to this incident that the area of the attack was vulnerable to just this kind of vehicle attack.  Says the report in the Daily Progress "He noted that driving a large vehicle into pedestrian groups at tourist destinations had become the “new terrorist trend,” and he warned that the Downtown Mall “could be an immediate threat.”

Three points raised in the article seem to be prominent:  a) the lack of a coherent traffic plan for these demonstrations, b)  the lack of enforcement of a vehicle ban called for in the traffic plan as drawn up, and c)   the lack of any effective barriers to actually prevent vehicle incursions.  These will be significant factors in any case that is brought against the city and the county in this matter.


More broadly, this report highlights a more universal truth for municipal officials -- not only are they all on notice that pedestrians are increasingly targeted on purpose in America, it is also clear that crowds in areas perceived to be under the control of public safety officers presume that they are safe from accidental or deliberate vehicle incursions.  They assume that if the police have a presence on scene or there are traffic cones set up, the area has been made safe. Thus having been put on notice, failure by any municipal agency to take appropriate steps could be seen as negligent in any civil litigation.

While the legal fallout from the Charlottesville incident will likely take many months if not years to resolve, this basic fact remain:


Vehicle-into-crowd incidents are frequent, they are dangerous, and they are deadly.  Ask officials in New Orleans, New York City, and Charlottesville.  If you cannot reach them, ask officials in Austin Texas (four killed at SXSW by a drunk driver) or Stillwater Oklahoma (four killed at the Oklahoma State University homecoming parade by an impaired driver) and see if they can speak with you.  If not, you can probably reach someone in Santa Monica California (10 killed and over 60 hospitalized at a farmer's market.)


The need to protect pedestrians and crowds from deliberate or accidental vehicle intrusions is obvious, officials in cities and counties large and small have been placed on notice by recent events and national coverage, and a failure to act will result in two things:  more body counts, and more lawsuits.

It doesn't have to be this way.




http://www.dailyprogress.com/news/local/county-employee-raised-concerns-about-downtown-mall-crossovers-in-april/article_c970b3c2-8162-11e7-82d4-0fa6fb7ba8af.html
 
County employee raised concerns about Downtown Mall crossovers in April

• BY DEAN SEAL
• Aug 14, 2017

An Albemarle County emergency management employee warned Charlottesville’s City Council in April that the Downtown Mall’s vehicle crossovers posed an immediate danger to public safety.


Months before a car plowed into a group of anti-racist demonstrators, killing one and injuring 19 others, the county employee penned a letter to the city imploring officials to install collapsible traffic bollards at certain access points on the Downtown Mall. He noted that driving a large vehicle into pedestrian groups at tourist destinations had become the “new terrorist trend,” and he warned that the Downtown Mall “could be an immediate threat.”
The sole response to the employee’s April 10 missive was a four-sentence email from Councilor Bob Fenwick that did not address the crossovers, the Downtown Mall or any substantive portion of the original email.


“Thank you for the email. Many of us are working on how to best protect our families, friends and neighbors, not just in the outside areas but the inside areas as well. This is a real challenge when we live in an open society but we will address it as appropriately as possible. I would not want to publicize our efforts for obvious reasons,” reads Fenwick’s response in its entirety.


The concerned employee, who told The Daily Progress his letter represented his own views and was not sent on behalf of Albemarle County or his department, asked to remain anonymous.


Chief Al Thomas said the violence was initiated by “mutually engaged combatants” at an “alt-right rally” that was met with large numbers of counter-protesters.


The employee wrote that there are “hundreds of types of traffic bollards on the market that are relatively cheap,” and that certain types still would permit access to the mall for emergency personnel when necessary.


“I know that these access points exist for public safety vehicles to enter the mall for emergency situations, therefore a collapsible type that can be quickly unlocked when needed would be best to explore,” he wrote.



James Alex Fields Jr., 20, a security guard from Maumee, Ohio, is charged with second-degree murder in Heyer's death.


When reached by email, Fenwick recalled reading the email and said that past efforts to install traffic bollards “never had enough support.”


“If I remember correctly the last time this came up, the fire department and first responders were very concerned about possible delays in immediately locating a key or a passcode, and to address this concern, I noticed more frequent training drills in moving the large safety vehicles around and down the mall,” Fenwick wrote. “Perhaps this time that will change.”


He added that in the wake of the tragedy, the city would take renewed looks at security improvements.


When asked, Mayor Mike Signer was unclear about whether he’d seen the email.


“I mean, we get thousands of emails,” Signer said. “The city manager receives all the emails that are sent to council … I think the question would be what really could stop somebody determined to use a car as a weapon?”


“I think it’s something we should look at with our professional staff who received that email,” Signer continued. “My initial inclination is we should keep striking a balance between public safety in our civic spaces with an eye toward having an open society rather than a closed one.”


Both the ACLU of Virginia and the Rutherford Institute received blame from some for the turn of events Saturday because of their representation.


City Manager Maurice Jones said he had seen the email in question, and that it had sparked a discussion about safety in Charlottesville.
“I shared those concerns especially after the incidents in Berlin, Nice and Stockholm,” Jones wrote in an email. “We have been discussing these types of bollards as part of a more comprehensive look at safety.”


In his original email, the county employee warned that there were four locations on the mall that could be targeted for a vehicular attack, including the Fourth Street crossover where James Alex Fields Jr. is accused of driving his gray Dodge Challenger into a crowd of people during Saturday’s white nationalist rally. Fields faces a second-degree murder charge, among others.


During a news conference Monday, Charlottesville Police Chief Al Thomas said that, like other streets crossing the Downtown Mall, Fourth Street was not supposed to be open to traffic during the rally, which saw thousands of white nationalist demonstrators and anti-racist protesters inundating the heart of the city.


When asked why Fields’ vehicle and two other cars were able to access Fourth Street, Thomas replied, “I’m not sure.”
A city official later confirmed that Fourth Street was supposed to be closed as part of the event’s traffic plan, and that authorities still were investigating how Fields’ vehicle and two others were able to access the street.


White nationalist leader Matthew Heimbach drew a crowd outside the court-house but was shouted down.
 
More than a decade ago, the Fourth Street crossing was a hot-button issue for the City Council. After the crossing at Second Street was opened in 1994 despite widespread public opposition, the idea of opening another crossover was floated to the council by downtown business owners.


Those owners claimed the then-recent closures of Sixth and Seventh streets for the construction of what is now known as the Sprint Pavilion had impacted their sales, and that a new crossover could ease traffic congestion and parking difficulties.


The notion faced adamant opposition from pedestrians and city residents “who want[ed] the mall to remain as car-free as possible,” according to a 2006 Daily Progress report, and the Charlottesville Planning Commission voted against the crossover earlier that year, though the council was not bound to the recommendation.


In April 2006, the council voted to open the Fourth Street crossing for a one-year trial run, which started on May 1, 2006. The following year, the city voted to make the crossover permanent, saying it had made it easier for drivers to navigate around downtown and access shops without burdening pedestrians.
“A majority of the councilors concluded that the one-year trial of the Fourth Street East crossing, which ended last month, had benefited the business community and should become an enduring fixture on the commercial strip,” reads a 2007 Daily Progress article.


Dean Seal is a reporter for The Daily Progress. Contact him at (434) 978-7268, dseal@dailyprogress.com or @JDeanSeal on Twitter. Daily Progress staff writer Chris Suarez contributed to this story.

Simple.  Clean.  Effective.  In an area with almost no setbacks and a tight space shared by cars, pedestrians, and customers with shopping carts, Walmart prevented tragedy in Princeton Texas cheaply and effectively. 

Simple lesson, well learned.  Well done, Walmart!

In a little more than a week, this town saw the tragedy, saw the problem, and resolved to find a solution. The result: an ordinance requiring safety bollards in front of retail stores and other vulnerable locations

Contact me if you want a copy of the ordinance. Here is the media report:
http://wiat.com/2017/03/01/midfield-passes-ordinance-for-barriers-in-front-of-businesses-after-fatal-crash/


Midfield passes ordinance for barriers in front of businesses after fatal crash

By WIAT Staff Published: March 1, 2017, 1:20 pm Updated: March 1, 2017, 5:36 pm

MIDFIELD, Ala. (WIAT) — The City of Midfield passed an ordinance on Monday at their council meeting after an SUV crashed into a dentist’s office, killing 6-year-old Camlyn Lee.

Midfield Mayor Gary Richardson says the ordinance is for businesses to place a barrier in front of their building if parking is within 10 feet of the entrance to the facility.

Current businesses are grandfathered in and will not have to make those changes unless they make changes to their building or the parking lot at that point the new rule will apply.

The dentist’s office Vital Smiles where the fatal crash occurred will be putting up the barrier in front of their structure.

In the America’s heartland, many of us live out our everyday lives without the worry of terrorist striking close to our towns and cities, simply believing that the threat of terrorism will not visit their own home town or city. Since 911 our government has successfully thwarted similar attacks on a grand scale, but they have been unsuccessful at stopping them entirely, as terrorists today have changed their strategy and are now striking softer targets which could occur right here in the state of Kentucky.

A very alarming threat and growing new trend is the increase in vehicle ramming attacks on innocent people going about their day. Terrorists overseas have suggested conducting vehicle ramming attacks— using modified or unmodified vehicles — against crowds, buildings, and other vehicles.
This seemingly new and destructive form of terrorist attack is fast becoming one that security experts fear the most, because it can cause untold carnage and seemingly can come out of nowhere.

While Homeland security has sophisticated systems in place to alert them to those acquiring weapons or explosives, getting your hands on a vehicle is very easy. These low-tech vehicle attacks can be carried out by lone wolf terrorists who are inspired by an ideology but are not actually working within a specific political movement or group making them harder to detect. Vehicle ramming attacks offer terrorists who have limited access to explosives or weapons an opportunity to conduct an attack with minimal prior training or experience with little to no warning.

Such attacks could be used to target locations where large numbers of people congregate, including sporting events, entertainment venues, festivals, parades, fireworks displays, public school functions, universities or shopping centers. In essence, any such event that attracts a high number of people in a confining space could be a target.

One of the very first deadly vehicle ramming terrorist attacks in our history was the attack in Beirut barracks bombing on October 23, 1983 when two trucks bombs struck separate buildings killing 241 U.S. and 58 French peacekeepers, six civilians.

Such events have remained rare until Israel started to experience such attacks in growing numbers over the past decade. Then here recently such attacks have started to increase worldwide in the last year, where the body counts have been rather significant.

On December 19, 2016 in Berlin, Germany, a truck was deliberately driven into the Christmas market. The attack left 12 people dead and 56 others injured. One of the victims was the truck’s original driver, who was found shot dead in the passenger seat. The perpetrator was a Tunisian asylum and was killed four days after the attack in a shootout with police near Milan, Italy.

On November 28, 2016 at Ohio State University, a car ramming attack and mass stabbing occurred at 9:52  a.m. EST in Columbus, OH. The attacker, a Somali refugee, was shot and killed by the first responding OSU police officer, and 13 people were hospitalized for injuries. The next day law enforcement officials stated that the attacker was inspired by terrorist propaganda from the ISIS.
​
On the evening of July 14, 2016 in Nice France, a 19-ton cargo truck was deliberately driven into crowds celebrating Bastille Day resulting in the deaths of 86 people and injuring another 434.

Attacks like those in Berlin or Nice are easy to replicate and difficult to prevent, that is the simple fact. Sensitive facilities, such as airports and transportation hubs, government and military buildings already have the proper security crash and attack-resistant bollards in place to prevent such attacks. Many of these anti ramming barriers are disguised as flower boxes, benches, street lights, garbage bins, etc.

What is concerning to me as a risk management and safety profession aren’t the large venues in larger cities, but instead the smaller venues in small towns and cities.

Sizeable crowds show up to weekly summer music concerts, marathons, festivals, parades …etc., producing crowds where several hundred to several thousands in attendance. Many of these events will have street vendors, alcohol and food concessions; with entire families, strollers, pets standing in the middle of a street distracted by the events of venue, like bowling pins in a bowling alley.

These events usually occur on closed-off streets in the heart of that community, obstructed only with safety cones — without any anti-ramming security barriers in place to protect the public from a vehicle ramming attack.
With enough planning and time major larger cities have caught on and are now employing temporary concrete barriers to block streets off. Some cities will also strategically place dump trucks filled with sand to help thwart ramming attacks. Just recently in New York City used more than 80 sanitation trucks along the 2 ½ mile route for the Macy Day Parade this past Thanksgiving as protection.
Unfortunately every defense has its flaws and consequently security experts has been tossing around the deployment of a technology already developed called “directed EMP devices” as a countermeasure to stop car ramming attacks once they have begun.

If deployed these electromagnetic pulse devises could be used by local police to disable a vehicle by simply pointing the device at the moving vehicle, boat, or construction equipment involved in the attack, by emitting radio frequency pulses that overload the sensors in a vehicle’s electronic controls. For as long as it emits the pulses, the engine cannot be restarted. If vehicle-based ramming attacks trends continue to increase, I would expect that local law enforcement agencies will start deploying these as a countermeasure.

The reality is that you can’t protect every event from an attack like this and it is impossible to reduce the risk to zero. Crowds of people are abundant in just about every American town or city and law enforcement must be prepared to protect them from an evolving playbook of terrorist tactics.

Law enforcement agencies as well as the general public should be zealously aware of suspicious activity that could be indicative that a vehicle ramming attack is being plotted. 

Here are some countermeasures to consider.

• Commercial driving schools and rental facilities of commercial vehiclesand& construction heavy equipment should be educated on what to look for, such as nervousness during the purchase, paying in cash, or lack of familiarity with the vehicle’s operations.
• The theft of commercial vehicles and construction equipment prior to special events should be closely scrutinized by business owners and law enforcement.
• Improved accountability of unattended large commercial and construction vehicles are often parked for long periods of time.
• Signs of unusual modifications to commercial motor vehicles, heavy equipment, passenger cars, and sports utility vehicles (SUVs), such as homemade attempts to reinforce the front of the vehicle with metal plates should be reported.
• Commercial motor vehicles or heavy equipment being operated erratically, at unusual times, or in unusual locations, particularly in heavy pedestrian areas should be reported immediately.
• A vehicle operator’s apparent unfamiliarity with commercial motor vehicle or heavy equipment operation (unable to back up; trouble with shifting; poor lane tracking; unfamiliarity with basic vehicle mechanics such as air brake operations, slack adjusters, fifth wheel operations, Jake brakes, engine type, or location of fire extinguishers and other emergency equipment) should be reported.
• Truck drivers and truck stop operators/employees should report shady and unusual people or vehicles loitering around a truck stop for no apparent reason.

Everybody will need to be vigilant as it will take the help of the entire community to prevent such attacks.
In the interim regardless of size of the community, event planners, mayors, county government officials and/or police chiefs must begin to consider the use of temporary barriers, sanitation trucks or dump trucks to adequately barracked. Consideration should be given to physically obstructing roadways leading into special events that involve dense pedestrian traffic in every community within our great state.
Remember — if you are alert today, you will be alive tomorrow!

Be Safe My Friend.

Keven Moore works in risk management services. He has a bachelor’s degree from University of Kentucky, a master’s from Eastern Kentucky University and 25-plus years of experience in the safety and insurance profession. He lives in Lexington with his family and works out of both Lexington and Northern Kentucky. Keven can be reached at kmoore@roeding.com.

Goleta California in October.  Kettering Ohio and Encinitas California this week.  Three storefront crashes at Trader Joe's stores in three months.  For a chain that values and promotes its image of a happy team working to serve happy communities, these three crashes (after more than a half dozen over the last three years) show a large gap between what gets said and what gets done at Trader Joe's.

Since announcing their comprehensive storefront protection program called “Universal Parameters for Site Safety Low Speed Barriers" in 2015, Trader Joe's has suffered a number of additional crashes and suffered millions of dollars in judgements and settlements stemming from storefront crashes.  Apparently, progress has been very slow on their protection program, because none of the photos of Goleta, Kettering, or Encinitas show any sort of protection for pedestrians, customers, and employees.

The Grocery Industry has been ON NOTICE for years that this problem exists -- insurers, risk managers, and safety folks like the Storefront Safety Council have all documented the problem.  Programs that have been announced and/or already underway by companies in the grocery industry are being praised and recognized by many, including our own Storefront Safety Initiative. On that topic, please see www.storefrontsafetyinitiative.org


With something more than 60 vehicle-into-building crashes per day, storefront crashes are a national problem.  They will not stop by themselves.  If a company announces a safety program and does a poor job of follow-through, what is the message they are sending to employees and customers?  Ask Cumberland Farms, who lost a Massachusetts case last year that will cost them several tens of millions of dollars in damages for a single wrongful death of a customer.

Three accidents in three months.  It doesn't have to be this way.

A Trader Joe's grocery store suffered a serious injury crash on 8 October.  A vehicle operated by an elderly driver crashed into the storefront -- the cause of the accident is as yet unknown.  However, the lack of protection from such accidents is VERY WELL KNOWN.  A rash of similar crashes caused Trader Joe's to initiate "Universal Parameters For Site Safety" which includes the installation of barriers to protect storefront from oncoming vehicles.

Clearly -- no effective barriers were installed at the Trader Joe's in Goleta:
http://www.keyt.com/traffic/shopper-suffers-serious-injuries-after-vehicle-crashes-into-goleta-grocery-store/109090548 

Trader Joe's has paid large damage awards in previous accidents, and has initiated a program to prevent such incidents from happening again.  But good intentions are not the same as good progress -- we will be continuing to monitor their progress.  Sadly, we just have to keep watching the news to see how they are doing.

September is National Preparedness Month And has been designated by the Department of Homeland Security as a time for civilians, government, businesses, and institutions to join together to start planning to prevent tragedy and catastrophe BEFORE disasters occur.  For more about this program, see this link at READY.GOV

We here at the Storefront Safety Council want to point out that when a car crashes into a convenience store or a restaurant or a dentist's office, it is indeed a disaster for a customer that is killed or an employee severely injured.  It is surely a disaster for a small business owner suddenly faced with structural repairs, lost business time, and lost inventory or equipment.

The point is an obvious one;  the best way to prepare for the disaster of a vehicle crashing into a building is to prevent the crash in the first place.  Planning and best practices and simple efforts can pay off in the form or decades of safe operation and zero vehicle disasters at your business or property.

It really is all about being prepared.

AB-2161, written and championed by California State Assemblyman Bill Quirk (D-20), passed the California Assembly and Senate with no dissenting votes, and was signed into law July 22 by Governor Jerry Brown. The new law makes California the first state in the U.S. to encourage through statute the use of protective safety barriers at vulnerable locations including parking lots, retail centers, office buildings and restaurants.

The law "provides that the use of certain vehicle barriers at a commercial property may be considered by insurers as safety devices that qualify for a discount on the owner's insurance premiums," explained Storefront Safety Council Co-Founder Rob Reiter. "Prior to adoption of the appropriate standards by the California Building Standards Commission, the new law defines an appropriate barrier as a device 'that is installed to protect persons located within, in, or on the property of, buildings, or to protect pedestrians, from collisions into those buildings by motor vehicles'."

Assemblyman Quirk
Assemblyman Quirk worked on the bill for two years, with support from The Storefront Safety Council and many stakeholders, and with staff support from Legislative Assistant Miranda Flores in the 2016 term and from Dr. Scott Sellars, 2014-2015 Science and Technology Policy Fellow in the California State Legislature, during the 2015 term. The full text of the bill and the legislative counsel's digest is available online, and is reprinted below:

The Storefront Safety Council applauds the hard work of Assemblyman Quirk and his staff.  This important legislation sets the pace for the rest of the nation, costs taxpayers nothing, and will help guide standards and building codes in California and nationally in the coming months and years.  The use of discounts as an incentive to property owners and businesses will encourage adoption of these safety measures even for older properties that want to reduce liability risks today and amortize savings over longer timelines.


Assembly Bill No. 2161
CHAPTER 73

An act to add Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 11895) to Part 3 of Division 2 of the Insurance Code, relating to parking lots.

[Approved by Governor July 22, 2016. Filed with Secretary of State July 22, 2016.]

LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST
AB 2161, Quirk. Parking lots: design: insurance discount.
Existing law provides that building standards shall be filed by the California Building Standards Commission with the Secretary of State and codified only after they have been approved by the commission. Existing law regulates the issuance and renewal of liability insurance policies in this state.
This bill would authorize an insurer to consider the installation of vehicle barriers as a safety measure and would authorize an insurer to provide or offer a discount on the property owner’s insurance covering damage or loss to the covered commercial property or liability arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of the commercial property relative to the reduced risk of installation of the barriers. The bill would require that any discounts be determined to be actuarially sound and approved by the Insurance Commissioner prior to their use.



BILL TEXT
THE PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA DO ENACT AS FOLLOWS:

• SECTION 1. Chapter 6 (commencing with Section 11895) is added to Part 3 of Division 2 of the Insurance Code, to read:
  CHAPTER 6. Commercial Property Parking Lots: Vehicle Barrier Discount
  11895. (a) An insurer may consider the installation of vehicle barriers as a safety measure and may provide or offer a discount on the property owner’s insurance covering damage or loss to the covered commercial property or liability arising out of the ownership, maintenance, or use of the commercial property relative to the reduced risk to the property as a result of installation of the barriers if the discount provided or offered is provided or offered consistent with Article 10 (commencing with Section 1861.01) of Chapter 9 of Part 2 of Division 1.
  (b) For the purposes of this section, a vehicle barrier is a safety device that meets, at a minimum, the vehicle impact protection standards as provided by the State Fire Marshal and adopted by the California Building Standards Commission and that is installed to protect persons located within, in, or on the property of, buildings, or to protect pedestrians, from collisions into those buildings by motor vehicles.
  (c) Any discounts on insurance provided in accordance with this section shall be determined to be actuarially sound and approved by the commissioner prior to their use.

Last night in Kingsport Tennessee, a driver drove BACKWARDS into a Wal-Mart store, drove BETWEEN bollards installed too far apart to do any good, and slammed into a family of four who was exiting the store.  All four -- mother, father and two young children, were rushed to the hospital.

There is a great piece of reporting including an on-scene stand-up that explains the layout and the situation quite well (no video of the accident itself, so no horror scenes.)  Video from local station WJHL HERE

Goal post bollards -- we have written about them before.  Costco, Dunkin Donuts, Baskin Robbins, and many others have had accidents where bollards or safety barriers are installed NOT to prevent head-on crashes into storefronts but instead intended to keep vehicles from pulling up parallel to the sidewalk to load and unload.  Millions and millions of shoppers and pedestrians are able to pass between bollards and other safety barriers just fine -- with their carts -- so this phenomenon of "unsafety barriers" has no rationale that makes sense.

Final irony;  this accident occurred on the same day that a jury in Massachusetts found convenience store chain Cumberland Farms liable in the death of Kimmy Dubuque when she was killed in a storefront crash in 2010.  The jury awarded her family $32 million in damages -- due in part to evidence presented that Cumberland Farms had recorded hundreds of storefront crashes in years previous and dragged its feet on an announced program to protect patrons and employees at all of their stores.

I am sure we will hear a great deal about this Wal-Mart case and about this family in the days and weeks to come.  This sort of accident is foreseeable, predictable, and preventable.  A family of four has been injured in an accident that is WAY too much like so many others.  It didn't have to be this way.