These pages have mentioned Starbucks any number of times.  Few large chains do so little to protect customers and employees from vehicle incursions -- the record of crashes and injuries and legal claims continues to pile up.  Eventually, action will be taken, but not yet apparently.

While Starbucks is only peripheral to this discussion, I want to call your attention to a recent crash at a Starbucks in Vestavia Hills, Alabama injured three people inside the store.  Nothing unique about the crash, the injuries, or the cause.  What I wanted to point out is that in this case was a very clear photo of the scene which clearly illustrates how useless wheel stops are.  Dangerous, ADA non-compliant, and useless -- why does anyone ever install wheel stops?

Wheel stops do not stop.  No car is stopped by a wheel stop.  If you are a store owner or a restaurant owner or a parking lot owner, if you think you are solving a problem by installing them you are wrong.  First of all, they are ineffective.  Second, they are dangerous and cause more trip and fall claims than anything else in a parking lot.  Third, they act as little launching pads so that if a car hits them at speed, the front of the car is lifted up and onto the sidewalk at a higher speed than if the curb was struck directly.

Thanks to WNCT 9 for their coverage.  See the coverage and additional photos HERE

So Starbucks -- and every other retail and restaurant chain -- please take a look at the facts.  Three people were injured at this store who were completely unprotected by wheel stops.

And it didn't have to be that way.

Dunkin Donuts, you have been on notice for a long time that your store designs and lack of safety barriers put your customers at risk and put employees working inside at risk.  Hundreds of accidents over the years, dozens of injuries documented, tragic fatalities, and still no action.  And now, another preventable accident, another preventable injury, and another failure to take basic safety precaution to prevent a simple vehicle incursion incident from becoming a vehicle-into-building accident.  This latest example occurred in West Bridgewater,
Massachusetts this weekend, when a Toyota jumped a curb and struck a man entering the store.

See the great coverage from Maria Papadopoulos at the West Bridgewater Enterprise HERE.  Scott Eisen gets photo credit for the photo, which in addition to showing how the car jumped the curb and how the pedestrian entering the glass door was completely unprotected, also clearly proves once again that wheel stops do not stop anything.  Dunkin Donuts, stop wasting money on ineffective concrete trip hazards and invest just a little more in an actual steel bollard that meets ASTM specifications!

The Storefront Safety Council has assembled data on more that 7,500 crashes to date and with every month we learn more about the causes of vehicle-into-building accidents and how frequently certain type of businesses are struck.  Month after month, coffee stores and restaurants are among the most often struck -- and month after month, Dunkin Donuts appears on the list, all too often involving injuries to patrons and employees.  For a link to 2012 statistics, click HERE

Dunkin Donuts, you know how often your stores and those of your franchisees are struck.  You cannot pretend that these crashes are rare and unusual.  You are on notice that this situation is a persistent unsafe and hazardous condition and you have chosen to not correct this condition.  Greater liability awards in cases just like this one in West Bridgewater will be the result.  Underwriters and insurance carriers, now you are on notice that higher judgements will result because of the failure on the part of Dunkin Donuts to spend (or specify for franchisees) just a few thousand dollars per store in needed safety equipment.  And plaintiff attorneys, you are also on notice -- plenty of admissible evidence exists that should be included in personal injury claims against Dunkin Donuts.

What a nightmare. 

More than a year has passed since an impaired motorist slammed into this beautiful building on South Park Place in Newark Ohio.  Tenant businesses have been forced to close or move out, the owner has faced a battle with his insurance company, and because the driver was uninsured, even more time and expense has increased the burden on the building owner.

This is a nightmare that everyone can learn from.  Thanks to the great coverage by Hannah Sparling of the Newark Advocate, we have a great many details to pass along to you.

"It’s been more than a year since a vehicle smashed into the building at 39 S. Park Place, but soon, the space will be ready to lease again.Workers are painting, replacing windows and the front door, fixing walls, and redoing trim. Then, hopefully in a week or two, the building can go back on the market, owner Gary McAnally said..."

"The building is believed to be the oldest on the south side of the Courthouse Square. It’s been vacant since April 2013, when a driver with a suspended license and no insurance drove the wrong way around the Square and smashed into the building, knocking out a support column.  Police said the driver was cited for suspicion of operating a vehicle while intoxicated..."

"“Even though I had building insurance, the driver had no insurance. ... It just takes a while,” (the owner) said."
See full article HERE

Lost income from rent.  Hassles with the city building approval process.  Out of pocket expenses.  Businesses hurt and moved away.....what is the recovery period after a vehicle-into-building crash like this?  In this case, 15 months before things are (mostly) back to normal.  No physical injuries in this accident, but a great many economic, commercial, and personal damages -- which the driver will pay almost none of.

I hope that steps were taken to protect the building from another hit from another driver in the future -- it would be a shame for a century-old building to have to go through this all over again.

An SUV is seen approaching a library to park near the entrance.  We see the SUV as it turns off of the street and moves through the parking lot.  Unfortunately, the drive aisle is pointed directly at the library entrance and there are no barriers to prevent an incursion by an oncoming vehicle.  As we see from the several different camera angles, the SUV accelerates instead of slowing down;  several pedestrians are nearly struck; and in a split second the vehicle is several car lengths into the library and comes to rest on top of debris and patrons.

Several injuries -- fortunately all of the injured are recovering.

Thank to Westchester News 12 for great coverage.  See the video HERE.

By all appearances, this seems like a case of pedal error.  Although sudden acceleration has not been ruled out, there have been no reports of mechanical issues.  The 58 year-old driver claims that there was some sort of mechanical failure;  this is not indicated from the video.  The SUV clearly accelerates, and comes to a stop only because of the debris (and people) piled in front of it after crashing through the entry and the circulation desk.

Now for the irony:  the designers of the building did think that bollards would be a good idea to place at the library entrance;  unfortunately, they thought two of them were sufficient and those two were placed so widely apart that the SUV had no trouble passing right between them......they look more like goal posts than barriers in the photo below.  With a nice easy access ramp to the glass doors making it even easier.

Poor design execution.  Failure to see an obvious hazard and failure to take simple and inexpensive steps to prevent a predictable and foreseeable incident.  Once again, young lives have been altered and bodies injured because of a common accident with a common cause, and because designers and builders and a municipality have failed to follow a simple standard of care to protect library patrons and employees.

It didn't have to be this way....

Today I had the chance to go to the Farrell's Ice Cream restaurant in Buena Park California, scene of a fatal accident which I have posted about previously.  My trip was prompted by comments from Farrel's CEO Michael Fleming, which were reported in the Orange County Register.  These remarks seemed misleading and self serving, and I wanted to go and see the situation for myself.

To see the Register's coverage and see the context of Mr. Fleming's remarks, please click HERE.

What caught my attention in the remarks was the idea that customers were unprotected because of some code requirement for ADA compliant parking.  The entire frontage of the restaurant is taken up by five parking spaces, of which four are marked ADA spaces which point directly at the building entrance and seating areas.  Here is a photo taken some time before the accident last Friday night showing the layout -- Ms. Malin was struck and killed at the bench on the far right.

As you can see, all four spaces are pointed directly at the entrance or the outdoor bench seating and waiting area.  The spaces appear to be marked and striped and signed in conformance with California ADA regulations.  There is a wheel stop in front of each of the four signposts.  You can see the decorative fence in the background of the three spaces to the right of the entrance.

The Register attributes the following remarks to Mr. Fleming:

"Fleming said a new law requires that handicapped parking spaces, located directly in front of the restaurant’s front door, be level with the building. During construction, Fleming said, a curb in front of the parking spaces was removed to comply with the law. He believes that, had the curb been there, it may have slowed the car that killed Malin. He also said he’ll be speaking with the city to see what can be done to improve safety at the restaurant."

I have two objections regarding these remarks.

First, they are inaccurate.  I checked with Mr. David Vogel of Parking Design Group about these claims, and his reply was clear:  "Accessible spaces are not required to be level with the front door.  The unloading zones of the accessible spaces need to lead to an accessible path of travel which may include a curb ramp (max. slope of 8.33% with max. 2% cross slope).  This curb ramp cannot be within the accessible space unloading zone but can be located along the accessible path of travel with detectable warning strips.  Curb ramps and detectable warning strips are covered in the Californian Building Code (CBC) Sections 11B406-2 and 11B705."

Second, if Mr. Fleming was concerned about unprotected customers, he should have put crash-resistant bollards or barriers in place to protect them instead of the ineffective wheel stop and flimsy railing that were installed.  Nothing prevented the installation of such barriers in front of the parking spaces to protect waiting customers.  I will say it again;  no ADA requirement, no building code, no architectural guideline of any kind prevented Farrell's, the parking lot designers, the building architects, or Mr. Fleming, from making sure that there was an effective barrier in place to prevent an accident exactly like this one from happening.

How do I know this?  Look again at the photo above.  Look at the entrance of the restaurant on the left side of the photo.  No flimsy little fence there -- the entrance is protected by two sturdy six inch diameter steel bollards filled with concrete.  This clearly marked and ADA compliant accessible space and unloading zone has two steel bollards in front of them, and yet are in full compliance with the "new law" that Mr. Fleming indicated as a contributing factor in the accidental death of Marisa Malin and injuries to six others.

Here is a close-up shot of the two bollards which I took this afternoon during my site visit:

So Farrell's was concerned enough about safety to install bollards at the entrance, but not concerned enough about safety to install them in front of the other ADA spaces which pointed directly at waiting customers outside the restaurant.  Why the entrance and not the outdoor seating area?  I am sure that every litigator in Southern California would like to ask Mr. Fleming that question in a deposition.  What could be the cost difference between the decorative railings installed in the space between the pillars versus the cost of two bollards installed in the space between the pillars?  I would estimate the price difference at less than $1000.  However you put a price on one dead and six injured, I have to believe that $1000 will not begin to cover the tab in anyone's calculation.

One final point:  Mr. Fleming made it very clear that he has heard about storefront crashes such as this accident, and was aware of accidents such as this one happening frequently.  Again, quoting from the Register coverage: 

“This is one of those tragedies I’ve read about over and over again,” Fleming said. “And this time I lived it. It was horrific.”   He said that all Farrell’s locations are flying flags at half-staff in memory of Malin.

I submit two things; 

First, if you feel the need to protect your entrance with steel bollards because of the hazard of a vehicle incursion accident, why would you NOT protect the customer waiting area and benches exposed to exactly the same hazard? 

Second, if you have read about these types of accidents happening over and over again, why would you NOT take basic steps to prevent a needless death at your new restaurant?

This accident will now fade from the news and results of investigations will be released.  I expect that soon the lawsuits will start to be filed.  The case will eventually wind through the courts and liability will be determined and injury claims paid out.  It is so sad -- sad for the Malin family, sad for the families of those injured, sad for the driver and his family, and especially sad because this event was entirely preventable and predictable. 

The restaurant industry is on notice:  pedal error accidents occur every day.  Join the Storefront Safety Council, take a stand for safety, and protect your customers and employees against the known and frequent hazard of vehicle incursion accidents.  This is not rocket science, and this will not cost a fortune.  Safety is the New Green, and safety is good for business.