Anatomy of An Accident

10TH STREET ACCIDENT UPDATE

Click to Enlarge

The Claremont Courier reported yesterday on the details of last week's accident at Indian Hill Blvd. and 10th Street. The Courier confirmed that five-year-old Noah Witt is out of intensive care now but remained at Pomona Valley Hospital.

The Courier article, by Tony Krickl, also said that neighbors and parents of children at Sycamore Elementary are working to try to get the City to make the intersection safer. Krickl described the intersection's history:

The city is well aware of the dangers at Indian Hill Boulevard and 10th Street. In 1996, Fred Neal, a retired professor from Claremont Graduate University, was killed while crossing at the same intersection. Neighbors complain they hear weekly screeching of tires and witness near miss collisions. They say that lighting and blocked views from the rows of trees that line the street can make turning onto Indian Hill difficult.

The intersection sits at the northwest corner of Memorial Park, with students and park goers often using the crosswalk to traverse Indian Hill Boulevard. The current speed limit on that stretch of Indian Hill is 30 miles per hour, but neighbors say drivers are regularly seen speeding or talking on their cell phones while zipping by.

In July 2001, the city installed flashing pavement lights on the crosswalk that are activated by a push button on either side of the 10th Street. Questions about the light's effectiveness and overall safety at the crosswalk have come up at a couple different city forums over the years, most recently at the Traffic and Transportation Commission meeting in January 2009.

Regarding the crosswalk system's maintenance, one of our readers wrote in earlier this week and said that the button on the intersection's southwest corner wasn't working just a few nights before the accident. So much for the crosswalk's pedstrian-activated flashing lights. Coincidentally, this is the same corner the pedestrians who were hit on Thursday were crossing from.


A BRIEF CHRONOLOGY

JANUARY, 2001

We decided to look back at the history of the 10th Street crosswalk. The matter of installing the current in-pavement flashing light system came before the Traffic and Transportation Commission on January, 25, 2001. As you might expect, the staff report, by City Engineer Craig Bradshaw, laid out some very rational arguments for why he was recommending installing the crosswalk system:

SUMMARY

The Traffic and Transportation Commission TTC recently approved a city-wide crosswalk policy. One of the unprotected crosswalks that met the criteria of the new policy to stay in place is the Indian Hill Boulevard crosswalk at 10th Street. Since the crosswalk is staying in place and is located on a busy street near large pedestrian traffic generators it is desirable to provide additional safety measures. The two pedestrian safety features being recommended for the Indian Hill Boulevard crossing are the in-pavement warning lights and self-flagging. These features have proven successful in improving pedestrian safety in locations where pedestrian lights are not warranted. Staff recommends that the Traffic and Transportation Commission direct staff to install the crosswalk warning system utilizing in-pavement flashing lights and self-flagging at the crosswalk located on Indian Hill Boulevard at 10th Street and return this item to the Commission in six months for further review.

As with any Claremont staff report, it included some marketing material from the system's manufacturer that touted the wonders the crosswalk system would work in improving pedestrian safety.

The minutes show commission voted 5-0 (two members were absent) in favor of the system. Some familiar names popped up. The commission's Vice-Chair at the time was Tim Worley, who pops up again and again on local issues. At that time he was a traffic expert. Now he is a water expert. Worley presided over that meeting on 1/25/01 because the commission chair was absent.

Another person who is listed in the minutes is then-Traffic Commissioner Ellen Taylor. Taylor, who seemed to be on the commission primarily as a resume builder for her city council candidacy in 2005, made the motion to go forward with the in-pavement lighting system. Apparently, she liked the marketing materials provided by Bradshaw.



JULY, 2001

The Traffic and Transportation Commission minutes for June 28, 2001 (page 9), state that City Engineer Bradshaw reported that the in-pavement lighting system installation at 10th Street would be complete by the first week of July. Bradshaw promised that staff would come back to the commission with a report on the crosswalk's effectiveness after six months.


2002

We checked the Traffic and Transportation Commission minutes from November, 2001, to December, 2002, but did not see where Bradshaw made his six-month report on the crosswalk to the commission.


2003-2004

At some point in this period, accident victim Noah Witt was born.


SEPTEMBER AND OCTOBER, 2005

The 10th Street crosswalk did make it back to the Traffic and Transportation Commission almost four years after it was installed. On September 22, 2005, Craig Bradshaw presented a report on city staff's findings. Bradshaw's report said:

SUMMARY

As a means of improving pedestrian safety at the intersection of Indian Hill Boulevard and Tenth Street in-pavement crosswalk lights were installed in July 2001 along both edges of the southerly crosswalk to provide improved visibility of the crosswalk to approaching drivers. The lights are connected to a pedestrian actuated push button and flash when pedestrians push the button before crossing the street. Staff has received substantial feedback since the installation of the pedestrian lights with most of the feedback being negative in nature and combined with requests that the crosswalk lights be removed. In reviewing the pedestrian lights and whether they are serving the safety function for which they were originally installed staff believes that the pedestrian lights may be creating a false sense of security and a potential safety concern for pedestrians.

STAFF RECOMMENDATION

Based on feedback from the public and staff findings it is recommended that the Traffic and Transportation Commission determine if it is appropriate to remove the crosswalk lights at the intersection of Indian Hill Boulevard and Tenth Street.

According to the minutes for the 9/22/05 meeting, Tim Worley, like any Claremonster, was averse to reversing a decision. Rather than going with the staff recommendation to remove the crosswalk, he moved for two alternative choices to try to keep the lighted crosswalk in place with some adjustments. Worley also moved that commission ask staff to obtain more information and report back to the commission. The commission unanimously approved Worley's motion.



At the 10/27/05 meeting, staff came back to the commission with the supplementary information Worley had asked for:

3. Indian Hill Boulevard and Tenth Street Review of In-Pavement Crosswalk liqhts continued from September 22, 2005

Associate Engineer Loretta Mustafa gave an updated staff report She stated that the commission had recommended that the in pavement lights remain in place but wanted additional information to make the intersection safer and the crosswalk more visible. She reviewed the measures included in the report of some of the measures that have been or will be implemented. Staff has met recently with manufacturers that are looking at some new pedestrian signage LED signs that could be possibly wired into the pedestrian push button which will light up at the same time as the lights in the crosswalk. Staff has talked to Human Services Department about relocating the banner and will be pursuing handing out pamphlets at community events and educate the residents to make that crosswalk safer and more successful.

The commission received and filed the report, which also recommended seven measures for improving the crosswalk's visibility and effectiveness. The report said the matter would come back to the commission for review in one year.


2006-2009

We checked the agenda materials for City Engineer Bradshaw's one-year, follow-up review, but we couldn't find a record of that.

As we wrote last week, the matter did come back to the commission in January this year with a recommendation that the in-pavement system be removed. The commission directed staff to do an initial study under the California Environmental Quality Act, but there was no timeline on that. Those studies have various boxes to check off and include some sort of traffic analysis to justify the proposed change.

We wonder if the box for "five-year-old hit" gets checked.

To recap: January 2001 - crosswalk system approved; July, 2001 - crosswalk system installed; 2001-2005 - complaints pile up, staff recommendation to remove crosswalk system; January, 2009 - commission asked to approve crosswalk system removal, initial study requested; May 14, 2009, pedestrians struck.

Claremont: Competence in Action.

Proposed Downtown Parking Ordinance Nixed

Parking in downtown Claremont has long been a problem. Too many cars, too few parking spots. The problem is compounded by workers at Claremont Village businesses who take up prime parking spots in the Village's two-hour parking areas. Some of these workers move their cars throughout the day to the nearest open spot as their time runs out.

In response to this so-called "car shuffling," in June this year the city's Traffic and Transportation Commission approved a staff recommendation on a proposed downtown parking ordinance that would restrict people from parking within 300-feet of their previous parking spot. The parking ordinance was supposed to go to the City Council on July 8th for a vote, but it was pulled for some unknown reason.

Now we know. It turns out the staff recommendation, pushed by Claremont City Engineer Craig Bradshaw and the Claremont Chamber of Commerce's Past-Chair Sonia Stump and Chair-Elect Paul Held, is illegal. The Daily Bulletin's Wes Woods II reported on the subject:

A Traffic and Transportation Commission ordinance passed in June designed to making it harder for Village employees to park in the downtown core had to be thrown out, city officials said.

"There's legal issues to work with in terms of what's enforceable. So it's not a simple issue," said city engineer Craig Bradshaw.

The soonest a new ordinance could be created to address the troublesome issues is January, Bradshaw said.

Mayor Ellen Taylor said prohibiting moving a car in the Village to a parking spot within 300 feet of its initial spot was at odds with state law.

"The commission dealt with incomplete information," Taylor said. The issue of shuffling cars to different parking spots in the Village has been around for 20 years, Taylor said.

When he was a councilmember and, later, a Mayor of Claremont, Held loved using his power to back illegal or unconstitutional measures. Remember Measure A, the anti-conflict-of-interest law that passed with 55% of the vote? After the initiative passed, Claremont and City Attorney Sonia Carvalho did everything within their power to prevent the new city ordinance from being enacted.

Yet, contrary to what Carvalho was telling the City Council, the law was ultimately upheld by state courts and was ruled to be constitutional. Carvalho and the City Council tried to undermine a city ordinance lawfully approved by a majority of Claremont voters, but they failed.

So it's not surprising that once he got a little taste of power again on the local Chamber of Commerce, that Held would be up to his old tricks. Held, too, was one of the main forces behind the 2005 Preserve Claremont campaign. As you can see by his support on the Chamber of Commerce, he's suffered no ill-effects from his efforts at manipulating that election either.

City Council Meets Tonight

The Claremont City Council eases back into action tonight with a somewhat modest schedule following its August recess. At 5:15pm, the council will meet in closed session for a conference with labor negotiators regarding the Claremont Professional Employees Association. The council will also be discussing price and terms of a prospective agreement with Arteco Partners over the Padua Theatre.

The regular council meeting begins at 6:30pm with a number of routine administrative items, including the introduction of three new commissioners:

• Angela Bekzadian-Avila, Human Services
  
• Rosemary Fisher-Anaya, Police Commission
• Sayeed Shaikh, Police Commission
  

The council will also accept the resignation of Human Services Commission Chair Gwen Carr. No word on why Carr stepped down, but you can bet that fellow Human Services Commissioner Valerie Martinez had more than a little to do with the resignation. The word on the street is that Martinez, who was the spokeswoman and brains behind the Claremonsters' Preserve Claremont campaign, maneuvered against Carr's appointment to commission chair and seems to have continued to work against Carr by manipulating her fellow, less-aware commissioners.

In addition, the council will also vote on a resolution against the LA County Metropolitan Transportation Authority's Measure R sales tax increase. The resolution also expresses support for the Gold Line.

Other items on tonight's council agenda include a discussion of the elements of a proposed mansionization ordinance that would try to implement tighter controls over the sorts of homes that can be built in town, as well as the adoption of a residential parking permit policy.

The parking issue came up previously with the residents on Via Santa Caterina in the Claraboya neighborhood. That neighborhood sits at the trailhead for Johnson's Pasture, and the residents there have complained of parking and crime problems since the city purchased Johnson's Pasture. Via Santa Caterina residents might want to take a closer look at our Forked Tongues post from yesterday. From what we're hearing, the city's trail of broken promises is growing, so don't get too comfortable with the parking situation on Via Santa Caterina.

Reporter Wes Woods II had an article on the parking permit issue:

City staff has recommended the City Council establish such a program and, if approved at tonight's council meeting, the ordinance could be adopted by the end of October.

Councilwoman Linda Elderkin said the ordinance "authorizes ground rules for setting up possible parking areas by permit and the rules for doing that."

Elderkin added: "The first important thing is this policy does not authorize any particular area yet."

The neighborhoods identified in the agenda report as being interested in the ordinance include College Avenue between Foothill Boulevard and Seventh Street; Baughman Avenue between Berkeley Avenue and Indian Hill Boulevard, and the residential area to the west of the Village Expansion. A residential permit for Via Santa Catarina has been established through a separate ordinance.

Officials noted Monday that the ordinance states "a finding would have to be made that no alternative to the proposed zone exists that is feasible or practical."

Permits would cost between $12 and $14 each and would be established with each resolution that creates the separate permit zones in the city, said city engineer Craig Bradshaw.

The police chief, or designee, would be responsible for issuing permits and no more than four permits per address would be issued, Bradshaw said.

A word to the wise, don't put too much stock in anything the city engineer, Police Chief Paul Cooper, or the city's chief planner Lisa Prasse have to say. Those holdovers from the Glenn Southard-era are among the worst of Claremont's Promise Breakers, and we'll try to fill in the blanks as soon as we get more details.

City Council Meeting
- Closed Session, 5:15pm
- Regular Session, 6:30pm
Council Chambers
225 W. 2nd St.
Claremont, CA 91711
(909) 399-5460

Q & A

A reader wrote in with a number of questions and observations regarding ongoing issues and events in Claremont:

Hi Buzz -

Can Buzz be a nickname for ombudsman (ombuzzman)?

1) What's behind the frequent 'chlorine' smell in our tap water the past few days? Is it just at our house? We haven't had any recent plumbing changes. What's the water company up to?

2) At the City's tree lighting ceremony, why was the host so intent on catering to and recognizing the out-of-towners? "Who's visiting from out of town?!?!?!? Raise your hands!!!!" I didn't hear much appreciation for those who live here in Claremont. The whole evening, however, was a fun one - both at the tree lighting and throughout the Village. I know the city hopes that the Village expansion brings in visitors (and their sales taxes), but tout Claremont and its citizens first and foremost at public events, and then give a brief welcome to any visitors.

3) Regarding the trolley news, wasn't the original route supposed to include the Old School House, with north/south runs up Indian Hill and down College? Why not include that Foothill/Indian Hill corner if so much development is going on there. The smaller route through the Village, the Expansion and the Metrolink parking lot is far too limited and short-sighted.

4) Regardless of the parking spots, what exactly is the store (or stores) going in right on the corner at the Sprouts Center on Mountain and Foothill?

5) Is that a temporary test road closure on the west end of Santa Barbara where it joins Mountain (across from the future store spot mentioned above)? Unlike the roundabout, I think this is a good idea. Santa Barbara is too close to Foothill, and there is too high a chance for accidents.

Our responses:

1. We don't know what the chlorine smell is from. If anyone has any information on this, please pass it on. The Golden State Water Company's Region 3 office phone number is (909) 394-3600. Give them a call with any questions.
   
   
2. We suspect the focus on out-of-town visitors at the tree-lighting ceremony probably has some connection with the city and the Chamber of Commerce's ongoing print and cable TV ad campaign.
   
   
3. Yes, when the trolley idea was first floated, there was some talk of a longer route incorporating the colleges and the Old School House. However, the Traffic and Transportation Commission's Citizen's Committee for Off Track Trolley System Subcommittee studied the matter and issued a report on December 10th that found it would be best to start small and focus on two groups: visitors and people using the parking structures on First St. because they are supposed to be more likely to spend in Claremont (this takes us back to question #1).
   
   Incidentally, the Citizen's Committee included the ubiquitous former Mayor Judy Wright, who is listed a "citizen."
   
   
4. The retail developmont at the northwest corner of Mountain Ave. and Foothill Blvd. is a 9,900 square-foot, single-story retail space proposed by James Harris and Foohill Mountain LLC. You can read more about it in the 10/24/07 Architectural Commission agenda report on the matter.
   
   The site, at 805 W. Foothill, used to have a Chevron gas station.
   
   Here is a description of the project taken from the staff report for the Architectural Commission:
   
   
   
   (Click on Image to Enlarge)


5. Yes, the city had received requests from a majority of residents on Santa Barbara Dr. to have the street closed off at Mountain Ave. in order to discourage through traffic from people trying to get past traffic at Mountain and Foothill Blvd.
   
   According to the 10/25/07 Traffic and Transportation Commission agenda report for the matter, city staff, under City Engineer Craig Bradshaw, had originally recommended the closure be placed at Colby Circle rather than Mountain. Staff later opted to keep the temporary closure at Mountain. The 10/25/07 staff recommendation was to keep the temporary closure in place and to study the effects with a possible permanent closure in the future.
   
   The resident complaints didn't seem to include the proposed development at Mountain and Foothill.
   
   This contrasts a similar matter that came before the Traffic and Transportation Commission several years ago when some residents, notably then-City Economic Development Director Scott Miller, had requested a permanent closure at Kemper Ave. and Padua. No formal traffic study was done and the permanent closure was put in place - a typical waiving of rules by the Claremont 400 for one of their friends.

Here's a map of the Mountain-Foothill area showing the Santa Barbara Dr. closure and the proposed retail development at the old Chevron station site:

(Click to Enlarge)

Staff Credentials

The Claremont 400 love to tell us how our city staff members are the most well-trained, the most highly qualified, the most competent of any staffers around.

So, we wonder, why is it we're always getting into such messes, whether it's putting over $5.3 million of city money into the failed Orange County Investment Pool in the 1990's, losing out on a $1 million open space grant because of faulty deed language for Johnson's Pasture, or $17.5 million because the city failed to implement a Vegetation Management Plan they created for the Claremont Wilderness Park?

That got us here at the Insider to thinking that maybe our staffers qualifications aren't as sterling as we're led to believe.

We came across City Engineer Craig Bradshaw's resume on Linkedin, and saw this for Bradshaw's education:

Education

• Rushmore University
• Brigham Young University
• Brigham Young University

Turns out Bradshaw has an MBA degree from Rushmore. Never heard of it? Rushmore University, that bastion of higher learning, is unaccredited and is located in the Cayman Islands. It deals exclusively in "distance learning."

At Rushmore, once you get your degree, you can become an associate professor and join a faculty that counts among its ranks such learned educators as Morten Middelfart. (Honest, we didn't make that one up!)

The Rushmore website boasts:

After you graduate from your program you may be eligible for an appointment to the position of Associate Professor of Rushmore University. To be considered for this honor, you must be the author of a published book or other significant project. An Associate Professor usually acts as an advisor for a Rushmore student who wants to study one of his or her books or related materials.

Self-promotion? Marketing? You tell us.

In any event, in 2006 Claremont paid Bradshaw $129,910.63 in earnings plus $48,520.50 in benefits. Not doubt there's some stepped-up pay scale for having that Rushmore MBA degree. Imagine what an MBA from an accredited university would get him!

Claremont seems to love those "distance learning" degrees. Recall that the city hired a biologist named Thomas Leslie to do it's biological study for the Padua Park environmental impact report (EIR). Leslie, whom the Claremont Courier reported signed his report for the Padua EIR "Thomas Leslie, Ph.D./Biologist," got his doctorate (in theology) from the Universal Life Church, an online institute of "distance learning." That ULC degree, by the way, cost about $100.

(Coincidentally, Leslie, like Bradshaw, did his undergrad work at BYU.)

Rushmore (established 1996) gets a lot of ribbing from other educators. Blogger and economics professor Ronald M. Ayers, who teaches at the University of Texas at San Antonio, wrote this back in 2005:

Rushmore is certainly different from the more widely known, accredited online universities, such as the University of Phoenix. You can enroll in Rushmore's MBA (Master of Business Administration) program for a one-time payment of $5,499. No Bachelor's degree, the normal prerequisite for an MBA? No problem, because Rushmore doesn't require a Bachelor's degree. Don't waste your time studying for the usual admissions test either. There is none. Speed is of the essence at Rushmore, though. Because there are no admissions tests and no transcripts required, your application will be processed in a mere three days.

Not only are there no admissions tests, there are no tests at all, according to Ayers. Rushmore was founded in South Dakota, which explains the name, but the state apparently cracked down on unaccredited universities, and the school relocated to the Caymans. The Chronicle of Higher Education had an article in March, 2001, about states trying to get handle on diploma mills like Rushmore.

You'd think that a place like Claremont that calls itself "The City of Trees and Ph.D's" would do a better job of verifying credentials. Oh well, at least this explains Claremont's traffic woes, which Bradshaw oversees as the City Engineer.