That's so sad. As a pedestrian it reminds me to be attentive when crossing, even in a crosswalk. As a driver it reminds me that getting there a few seconds early isn't worth someone's life.

Those few extra steps may save your life! Thank you, Marie for following up on this..

My hometown in Massachusetts implemented a program to sign up locals to commit to "share the road" and drive safely and civilly. I wish we could do something like that here. http://www.northamptonma.gov/pacecar/

There is absolutely no reason why we couldn't implement a similar program, Tom. It is shocking how cavalier some drivers are on our streets. You should see them try to get by the crossing guards at El Rodeo narrowly avoiding them and the children!!!

Ar least several times a month I see people cross in an unsafe manner and I am always thankful that I was able to see them before something horrible happened. However, even more often as a pedestrian crossing Wiltshire at the lights, I am close to being hit by cars whose occupants don't want to wait!

Its so risky to step into the street and expect that traffic will stop for you especially on super busy streets like Wilshire Blvd. And combine that risk with so many times I see pedestrians crossing obviously texting as the stroll across at such a slow pace. Yep might be the last message they ever send. I watched one texter' nearly walk into 3 parked cars, geesh.

While crossing north on Olympic I've been cut off by southbound drivers making their left turn right in front of me and even when I was pushing a baby stroller. Sadly, I frequently drive my kids to Roxbury Park even though we live walking distance. There are alot of aggressive and disrespectful drivers out there whose behavior demonstrates they simply don't care about others' safety.

I have invented The Ultimate Mobile Vehicle Safety Device that will save many motorists as well as pedestrians from injury, suffering and death..............GUARANTEED.

This is no scam.

I'm sure we all have an inventory of experiences where pedestrian safety seems to be the last thought on drivers' minds. And why would drivers' think differently? Because many years ago they passed a cursory written exam and aced the road test?

They have no guidance in Beverly Hills for any other concern than their destination. Our roads are for all purposes reserved only for motorists; they're planned, designed, and striped for them. Calling out specific intersections like Wilshire/Santa Monica and Olympic/S. Beverly for clear markings to ensure safer passage for pedestrians and cyclists goes nowhere with Transportation. There is never any change, even after significant injury collisions. I know because I keep asking.

Yet Federal policy guidance and California law says that the 'roadway' (which includes streets and sidewalks) is for all users. State law since 2008 mandates that cities incorporate those principles into their general plans, but Beverly Hills adopted our car-centric circulation element under the wire, before that law took effect. I see tragic fatalities and unfortunate injuries as predictable - and predicted - outcomes that could be avoided if we took the cue of other cities and put safety first.

Another positive change would be improving the reporting of traffic collision injuries and deaths as they happen so that we can 1) understand the scope of the problem soon, rather than wait a full year+ for state data; and 2) see exactly where these collisions are occurring.

That means working with the Police and Transportation to make sure that these incidents are properly coded and catalogued. Safety is a key consideration on my site, Better Bike, where I advocate for for safe conditions for cyclists here in town. Yet I when find out about a Beverly Hills bike collision it's not from the PD (and I've asked), or the blotter, but because somebody picks up the phone to say, "I got hit at Crescent and Santa Monica and I was in a coma for a week and the hospital for a month. I was rear-ended while on my bike at the stoplight."

the people in Beverly Hills drive like maniacs. I have seen them drive so fast in residential neighborhoods..its like they have no consideration for others. Beverly Hills is known as this ritzy high class place yet the people drive like they are all drunken idiots.

I'm glad that the issue is being reported. The writer, however, exhibits little sensitivity or wisdom. In the comments above, she rants, "...last week I witnessed a man who was technically jaywalking with a young girl in his arms and when a car honked at him, he cussed at the driver. What a terrible example to set for a child." #1: We could all stand to revisit the driver's manual. The pedestrian ALWAYS has the right of way, & we are ALWAYS responsible for keeping our eyes open for crossers, whether they are crossing at intersections or not. #2: While neither jaywalking nor cussing are behaviors to teach children, neither is judging people, esp. people whose circumstances we don't know. Was he crossing to catch a bus for which he may have to wait another 40 minutes, so he could get his kid to school or to the doctor? Was he trying to rush her to a bathroom before she soiled herself? No, it wouldn't make his behavior acceptable, but it would make it understandable, at least. Who is anyone to judge another as a bad parent? #3: The writer's comment suggests that jaywalkers deserve to be hit as it takes the focus off drivers & focuses on pedestrians. Beverly Hills has a 25mph speed limit in most business districts, incl. Wilshire Blvd. Are drivers following the law? The reaction time is a lot greater when one follows the posted rules. No one gets their come-uppance by being injured or murdered on the road. To suggest so is irresponsible.

@Mark
I fail to see any need to cross a busy roadway mid-block at any point. Especially Wilshire Boulevard. Drivers AND pedestrians AND bikers need to be aware of their surroundings. No one should assume they have any more right to the road than anyone else. That's when people get careless. That's when accidents happen. To suggest that the motorist is at fault when a pedestrian crosses mid-block is unfair. At this point, we don't know if the pedestrian was looking at her cell phone or walking distracted. The police are still investigating.

@Marie, no question - all road users must be attentive and prudent, like making a full stop and looking (as required) before proceeding through a controlled intersection. (A full stop alone won't satisfy the law.) Many situations call for judgment, and here a 'reasonable person' standard is invoked.

I'd suggest that one such instance is crossing out of a crosswalk, which is not illegal per se and so requires prudence and due care. For example the CVC says:
"(a) Every pedestrian upon a roadway at any point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection shall yield the right-of-way to all vehicles upon the roadway so near as to constitute an immediate hazard. (b) The provisions of this section shall not relieve the driver of a vehicle from the duty to exercise due care for the safety of any pedestrian upon a roadway." (sec 21954).

There exists corridors that do invite mid-block crossing; there are crossing opportunities with curb ramps but without crosswalks. My block of Reeves is the former; Olympic Blvd. the latter.

The kid chasing a ball would likely relieve the motorist of fault (an unforeseeable event) while the dad with child impeding traffic (which is against the law) would likely bear at least some liability. My point was that at our low speed limits, nearly every collision should be avoidable with due care - that is, respecting the limit and driving prudently. As a ped, I stop and look before stepping out.

I live in Beverly Hills and you have to be careful.
The streets have gotten much worse over the years that even if you are careful, something can happen.
A lot of drivers are not from Beverly Hills, but they act like they own the roads.
Good to see more police around.

George Vreeland Hill

I am adding to this thread presently to note the need to emphasize to and educate drivers of large SUVs, namely Escalades, among others, their responsibility when driving through town as well. While fundamentally I believe these cars are a troublespot on many levels, in traffic, with pedestrians and bicyclists, in our neighborhoods, near our schools especially, they need to be hyper-vigilant driving, and I fear that isn't the case. See the recent tragic story:
http://www.ktla.com/news/landing/ktla-family-on-bikes-hit-in-wreck-concord,0,1339924.story

Mel, since these vehicles are classified as light trucks, I suggest that we regulate them accordingly - as commercial vehicles - with insurance requirements and perhaps special licensing. DC began belatedly looking at the safety aspects, and added requirements like lowered bumpers, but that doesn't address the visibility problem among others.
For a long time, the US conferred a federal tax deduction (now phased out) that perversely encouraged purchasing them. That added to their popularity through the 1990s and 2000s (now on the wane).
I always felt that they reflected the motorist. Some buyers subscribed to the early wilderness themes in marketing. Later, though, the message shifted to become more pernicious, with buyers echoing the 'ride high' and fortress messages that were motivating factors but inimical to co-existence on the roads, and in life. All my opinion!