Plans for Berkeley's now-dead BRT/complete streets plan. Image: Berkeleyside.

The BRT proposal went far beyond improved bus service. It was a textbook example of the ‘Complete Streets’ concept. The Plan would have incorporated Class II bike lanes, traffic calming, and ped safety improvements. The Plan addressed many problems in the blighted Telegraph Ave corridor, particularly the lack of landscaping. And, yes, it was genuinely popular with the electorate. Voters overwhelmingly favored BRT proposal by 80% in at least two citywide referendums (three if Measure “G” is counted).

But the high approval ratings was not enough as City Council killed the project anyway...

Earlier this week, Ken Archer at Greater Greater Washington posted this revealing graphic showing the relationship between the amount of driving we do in the United States and the death toll on our roads. Even as conventional traffic safety techniques have made driving less deadly, the rise in miles driven knocked back those improvements. It wasn't until our collective mileage flattened out that safety gains could be fully realized. Thousands of lives were saved when the growth in driving came to a halt.

So it should seem obvious that policy discussions of the risk posed by traffic should prioritize measures to reduce driving and encourage travel by other means, but, as Archer notes, public health authorities tend not to attack the problem that way:

Traffic is the leading cause of death among children worldwide and the leading cause of death among 1-34 year olds in the United States. So, why isn't traffic considered the top threat to public health by the CDC, WHO and federal, state and local governments?

Why don't officials approach traffic reduction with the same urgency that they approach, say, tobacco or malnutrition? The answer can be found in the CDC's publications on injury prevention...

The CDC, NIH and other agencies focus on traffic safety as the preventable cause of death, not traffic itself. WHO's recommendations for addressing traffic fatalities are "speed, alcohol, seat-belts and child restraints, helmets, and visibility." [Editor's note: The WHO and CDC have also issued reports recommending traffic reduction strategies.] The flaw in this exclusive focus on traffic safety is that increased safety only matters when vehicle miles traveled (VMT) are kept static or reduced. Instead, safety improvements that reduce fatalities per VMT have been offset by rising VMT...

Are we serious about public health? The sooner we start demanding honesty about the causes of the top killer of children here and abroad the better, because during the 2 minutes you spent reading this article, another child died in a traffic collision.

One agency that has focused attention on traffic as a public safety threat, Archer notes, is the New York City Department of Health, which recently released a report indicating that the city's robust transit system is a big reason why traffic-related child deaths are relatively low -- one-third the national average.

Elsewhere on the Network: Cap'n Transit on transit funding kludges. (What's a kludge? You'll just have to follow the link.) M-Bike notes another milestone for Michigan's complete streets bill. And Straight Outta Suburbia critiques Los Angeles's minimum parking requirements.

If transit supporters don't turn out at the polls, service in Thurston County will plummet by about 25 percent compared to levels made possible by a small sales tax hike. Image: Seattle Transit Blog

Three Tuesdays from now, Thurston County, Washington, home to state capital Olympia, will vote on whether to increase its sales tax by 0.2 percent in order to fund transit. And according to the Seattle Transit Blog, the stakes are high:

The revenue predicament of Intercity Transit should by now be familiar. Tax revenues are down about 13% from 2007 levels. The agency has already cut some nonessential programs and raised fares, and is now facing a 9% cut in February 2011 and a further 14% in 2012.

Likely 2011 cuts include, according to this handy fact sheet:

• Elimination of the Dash shuttle (Capitol Campus-downtown Olympia)
• Elimination of Rt. 42 (SPSCC-Family Court)
• Reduction in Rts. 13 (Tumwater-Olympia), 41 (TESC-Olympia), 94 (Yelm-Lacey-Olympia) and 620 (Olympia-Lacey-Tacoma)

followed in 2012 by:

• Elimination of all transit service on Sunday [just like everyone else]
• Elimination of Rt. 67 (Tri Lake-Lacey)

More from around the network: Midwest High Speed Rail reports that construction between St. Louis and Chicago begins as soon as September. SoapBoxLA looks at how to introduce a new director of city planning. And Car Free Baltimore explores the relationship between street crime and choosing to walk. 

In a packed Ken Edwards Center community room, exceeding the bike parking available at the building,  Parks and Recs commissioners Richard McKinnen and Phil Brock outlined plans for a Santa Monica Ciclovia proposal and the possibility of bringing a bike share system to Santa Monica, like a number of other cities are doing. They also solicited input from the audience on a host of various issues on what needs to be better in Santa Monica for cyclists, from paint on the streets to racks for bike parking.

The great thing about McKinnen and Brock stepping in to champion cycling in Santa Monica, is that while they do not have the power and authority of the council members, they can with voting support of fellow parks commissioners place items on the council agenda to be considered. Expect to see a lot of council consideration on cycling issues moving forward.

In fact, jumping in to get things on the agenda immediately, councilman McKeown has tacked the Ciclovia proposal onto the end of the agenda for tonight's council meeting...

Yesterday marked the 20th anniversary of the Americans With Disabilities Act, the landmark law that set federal standards to make public places universally accessible. Two decades later, the ADA has improved access for millions, but in many places, the spirit of the law seems lost on those who shape the streets.

To get a sense of how far we have to go before our streets safely accommodate everyone, look no further than the Buford Highway, the suburban arterial roadway outside Atlanta featured in this PBS report (hat tip to Stephen Davis at T4America). The one-two punch of automobile-centric street design and development patterns have made this road a deadly hazard for anyone without a car -- an increasingly large segment of the local population.

At the League of American Bicyclists blog, Jeff Peel makes the connection between the dangers people face on roads like the Buford Highway and the "unfinished business" of the ADA:

While we should take today to celebrate this historic achievement, let’s also take a moment and think about the work remaining to be done. Twenty years after ADA, and almost 40 years since the first requirements for curb cuts in Federal projects, it’s shocking that lack of access is still an issue anywhere in the transportation system. The fact that it is still an issue highlights the entrenched nature of State DOTs and local public works agencies that are so resistant to change. Where the ADA has forced transportation agencies to integrate the needs of people with disabilities into planning and projects, the needs of everyday pedestrians, transit users and, of course, cyclists are still routinely overlooked or dismissed. And don’t forget, the ADA didn’t require sidewalks -- it says that if they are present, they must be made accessible. That’s why Complete Streets is so critical and is part of the unfinished business of ADA, and that’s why the disability community has been such a leader in the Complete Streets movement.

Elsewhere on the Network: Where the Sidewalk Starts looks with envy to Victoria, British Columbia, where lawmakers are looking to decriminalize the act of jaywalking downtown. A USA Today report on commuters opting to take light rail or bike to work prompts some ideas from Walkable DFW on how to structure incentives to commute by transit. And Rob Pitingolo ponders the growing popularity of intercity bus travel.

A proposal to build new office and residential space near the end of Boston's Green Line will also triple the amount of parking at the station. Photo: HelveticaFanatic/Flickr

The station already has a sea of 960 parking spots surrounding it, functioning as a park-and-ride. According to member blog Newton Streets and Sidewalks, the current plan for development calls for tripling that number, to 2,720 spots. When all is said and done, parking will eat up 748,000 square feet of the project, far more than will be used as commercial space. 

So how will all that parking affect how people get to this supposedly "transit-oriented" development? Well, we can safely say it will generate more car traffic, but the developers haven't bothered to look at whether they should pursue a less car-centric approach. Writes Nathan Phillips:

In the world of simulation modeling, analysts routinely conduct what is called a sensitivity analysis. For a variable of interest (say vehicle trips in a traffic study), modelers tweak the value of an independent variable (say # of parking spaces) - increasing/decreasing it by some fraction, and evaluate how sensitively the output variable (traffic) responds.

The "Traffic Impact and Access Study" prepared by Vanasse Hangen Brustlin, Inc. for the developers of Riverside, has a glaring, fundamental flaw: it does not study the impact of number of parking spaces on traffic. This should be one of the FIRST things produced by a traffic study for a proposed development.

Without that information, there's no way to know how this development can maximize transit use and minimize driving trips. Continues Phillips:

At a minimum, this study should be extended to evaluate how the number of daily vehicle trips would change if the number of parking spaces were decreased by, say 1/3rd or 1/2, or increased by those fractions.

Going one step further, involving a glimmer of enlightened thinking about "transit oriented development", the analysis could then estimate how restricted parking would drive more use of the D line, the Commuter Rail from the western suburbs, and buses...

Riverside neighbors need to understand that parking is the key lever on traffic. This is a far more effective focus than to focus on complicated freeway ramps and yet more pavement. More parking does not alleviate the traffic problem; it exacerbates it. The current plan allocates the most space to parking (748,000 sq ft), more than the office space and retail space combined. For "transit oriented development" this makes no sense.

More from around the network: Human Transit explains that transit shouldn't be sold as a fix for traffic congestion. Utility Cycling shares the informational video for DecoBike, Miami Beach's 1,000-bike bike-sharing program set to open in September. And Twin Cities Streets for People prepares to celebrate the 20th anniversary of an oft-unheralded victory for pedestrians: the Americans with Disabilities Act.

The nine cities served by a single bike-sharing system in Germany's Ruhr Valley. Image: Bike-Sharing Blog.

Metroradruhr operates using the telephone rental system. As with neXt bike, Metroradruhr has the convenience of reserving bikes for large groups in advance. Registration is required to use the system, but there are no subscriptions. The price is €1 per hour ($1.30 US) for any bike or according to which bike is chosen, starting from €5 per 24 hours ($6.50 US).

Linking an area together with a single bike-sharing system has incredible convenience for the users and strengthens a region's public transit options.

As we all know, Bike-sharing in Germany is really Rad-verleihsystem!

Pittsburgh's bus system is far from the only subsidized transportation in Pennsylvania. Photo: Port Authority

The funding crisis has intensified since April, when the feds rejected a bid from Governor Ed Rendell to raise money by tolling Interstate 80. The solutions Rendell is floating now, including a tax on oil company profits or raising the state gas tax a few cents, are meeting resistance from rural legislators who don't like the idea of spending part of the revenues on transit.

Streetsblog Network member the East Busway Blog says bring on the transportation starvation, as long as it cuts both ways:

I am 100% in support of pulling all state funding from the Port Authority (and SEPTA for that matter) with the caveat that the state no longer maintain any roads or fund any new roads. Counties and municipalities would be on the hook to maintain all existing roads and fund any new road construction or expansion, to include limited access highways without the help of state funds.

It’s hard to hypothesize what this would be like because it is unprecedented.  It's even harder to imagine how it would be all funded; not a pretty scenario given our auto-centric society.

The Busway blogger's thought experiment, which involves a look at Colorado's privately financed and managed highway, E-470, and an assortment of new tolls and taxes that motorists would have to absorb, leads him to this conclusion:

So, once again, anyone willing to trade privatized transit for privatized roads, I’m all for it.  That way everyone can finally see that no form of human transportation, be it automotive, rail, air, or bus is un-subsidized.

More from around the Network: The Congress for the New Urbanism's report on replacing New Orleans' Claiborne Expressway with an urban boulevard is generating a stir in St. Louis and Seattle, where the future of downtown freeways is a hot topic. Transit in Utah links back to an important Citiwire story about the benefits of mixed-use development for city tax revenues. And Transit Miami is watchdogging a Florida DOT project that should make a commercial corridor more walkable and bikeable.

Photo: Daily Breeze

On Monday, Villaraigosa told reporters that he wouldn't abandon his newest form of transportation, but neither would he hold the cab driver accountable. "He was very concerned when he realized it was me," Villaraigosa said. "He was careless, but that's not illegal. He certainly didn't do this on purpose."

That response didn't sit well with Network member BikingInLA:

That’s where the Mayor is wrong -- and where he’s done a huge disservice to everyone else on the roads, especially his new friends in the cycling community.

Because what the driver did was illegal. He pulled away from the curb without making sure the bike lane he was parked next to was clear. And as a result, caused a cyclist to be injured.

It’s called failure to yield. And it is against the law.

Yet our mayor just told everyone within reach of his words -- and in this wireless world, that’s just about everyone -- that cutting off a bike is really okay. Careless driving is no big deal.

The cab driver who cut off Villaraigosa is probably a well-meaning, hard-working guy, and no one wants to punish nice people. But if public figures and elected officials can't talk about careless, sloppy driving as a public safety risk, many millions of nice people won't think twice about actions that endanger, injure, and yes, kill other people on our streets.

Also on the Network: On Transport notices that top honors in Money Magazine's "Best Place" awards went to a town that doesn't seem to have much sense of place at all. Charleston Moves reports that a measure to restrict bike parking in that city's downtown was thankfully abandoned by city hall. And Richard Layman laments that the press doesn't report on traffic-inducing land-use decisions until it's too late.

But instead of using that moment to protect the cycling community he so recently joined, he let a careless driver off the hook. Sending a clear message that drivers should pay attention. But if they don’t, no big deal.

It was just an accident.

As it turns out, Saturday’s outing was the Mayor’s first bike ride in years, and lasted all of 30 minutes before he hit the pavement. And in answer to the question some people have been asking, yes, he was wearing a helmet. In fact, he landed on it first before breaking his elbow. Maybe that’s why he’s still a little confused on the subject.

His Honor may have written — and Tweeted — that bikes belong on L.A. streets and he’ll be back on a bike as soon as he’s able. But according to the Daily Breeze, Villaraigosa insists that the cab driver shouldn’t face charges.

“He was very concerned when he realized it was me,” the mayor said. “He was careless, but that’s not illegal. He certainly didn’t do this on purpose.”

That’s where the Mayor is wrong — and where he’s done a huge disservice to everyone else on the roads, especially his new friends in the cycling community.

Because what the driver did was illegal. He pulled away from the curb without making sure the bike lane he was parked next to was clear. And as a result, caused a cyclist to be injured.

It’s called failure to yield. And it is against the law.