Today’s Headlines

  • Public Transit Ridership Soars to Its Highest Level in 52 Years (WaPo)
  • Driver Hits Five People Selling Girl Scout Cookies in Burlingame; Won’t Face Charges (ABC7)
  • California High Speed Rail Must Include the Central Valley (CHSRB)
  • SF Examiner Editorial on Sunday Streets’ "Surprising Converts" 
  • Oregon Rep Proposes Bicycle Registration Bill (BikePortland)
  • With Biking on the Rise, How Should Cyclists Use the Road? (NYT)
  • How We Drive: "The Helmeted Cyclists as Indicator Species"
  • Effort Raises Money for Injured Cyclists in Chico (Chico Enterprise-Record)
  • Why Developers Like Cul-de-Sacs (Austin Contrarian via Streetsblog.net)

  • Re: the Austin article

    You also need to consider the width of the streets.

    The typical suburban standard requires 12 foot traffic lanes and 10 foot parking lanes (44 foot street width).

    New Urbanists, who design a connected street grid, have generally gone back to the traditional street width, 10 foot traffic lanes and 8 foot parking lanes (36 foot street width).

    In some cases, New Urbanists have gone even further. Andres Duany has designed neighborhood streets as narrow as 19 feet. He calls them “yield streets,” because if two cars are going in opposite directions they cannot pass each other and one must yield by pulling into the parking lane.

    Narrower streets are needed to slow down traffic when you have a connected street system that lets traffic drive through neighborhoods. You can imagine that “yield streets” slow traffic considerably. If this subdivision were built with a connected grid of yield streets, it would require less asphalt than it does with its current cul-de-sacs.

    Developers build those wide streets, because they are generally required by law.

  • Dave

    Regarding the ABC7 article:

    Does anyone know if a general member of the public (or advocacy organization) can sue the driver for reckless endangerment of the public?

    While I do not generally advocate for all the silly lawsuits, it seems that where the city refuses to take action, the civil courts can come into play.

    At the end of the day, I’m wondering what can be done to hold the driver accountable by third parties when the police/DA will not take action.