As you may know, Transportation Alternatives put on a red carpet premiere Tuesday night for the "Biking Rules" PSA competition at the Brooklyn Academy of Music. The contest pitted video entries against each other in two main categories: "Why Biking Rules" and "Street Code."  

Videos in the "Street Code" category encourage people to use lights, bells, stop at red lights, ride with traffic and generally ride safely and courteously. "Why Biking Rules" is pretty self-explanatory.

Out of some 80 total submissions, about 40 PSAs (and a slideshow of photos) played to a sold out theater. The shorts were truly impressive and scored a well-earned victory over George Clooney, Ewan McGregor, and Mariah Carey at the box office.

Above is one of the winning high-def entries in the Biking Rules category: "Lights Turn Heads," by Aldo Arias and Pam Tietze. You can see the rest of the winners here.

Don't miss back-to-back opportunities to get involved in changing your city over the next few days.

Then on Monday night, Livable Streets is co-hosting Transportation Alternatives' Community Board Jammy Jam, a party where you can learn about community board membership and complete your application over drinks and dinner. Joining your community board is an incredibly powerful way to help shape our city's planning decisions, and this event will get you through paperwork with fun and ease.

We hope you'll join us for some good times and a better city!

The teen driver of this Saturn rear-ended another car, which lurched into 17-year-old Janine Brawer of Staten Island, pinning her beneath. She died from her injuries. Brawer was one of seven city pedestrians killed in the past week. Of the 10 motorists involved, four fled. No charges were reported against those who remained at the scene, while one of the hit-and-run drivers escaped criminal charges for killing an as-yet unidentified pedestrian in Brooklyn. Photo: Daily News

Fatal Crashes (13 Killed This Week, 268 This Year*, 25 Drivers Charged**)

• SI: Teen's Crash Pushes Car Into Fellow Student; No Charges (Advance, News, Post, WINS)  
  
• Bronx: Hit-and-Run Driver Mows Down 28-Year-Old Woman; CT Man Killed in Separate Crash (News)
  
• Brooklyn: 78-Year-Old Grandmother Killed by Driver on Her Birthday (Post)
• Brooklyn: Hit-and-Run Driver Strikes Ped, Bus; Charged Only With Leaving Scene (Post)
  
• Queens: Pedestrian Hit by Three Drivers; One Flees Scene (NY1)
  
• Queens: Unidentified Ped Death Brings No Charges, Scant Media Coverage (Streetsblog)
  
• Queens: Two-Car Collision Leaves 67-Year-Old Passenger Dead (Qns Courier)
  
• Farmingdale, LI: 14-Year-Old Cyclist Killed; No Charges Filed (Newsday 1, 2, AP)
• Continental Village, LI: Trucker Killed After Oncoming Driver Crosses Center Line (LoHud)
• Stratford, CT: Driver Exits Car After Crash, Killed When Another Driver Plows Into It (AP)
• Sayreville, NJ: Pedestrian, 28, Dies of Injuries From Early Morning Crash; No Charges (S-L)
  
• Montville, NJ: Tractor Trailer-Car Collision Kills 1 (S-L)

Injuries, Arrests and Property Damage

• Gothamist Newsmap: 4 Unidentified Pedestrians Hit in Last Seven Days (1, 2, 3, 4)
  
• Manhattan: Joe Biden's NYPD Escort Rammed by Livery Cab Driver (HuffPo, NYT)
• Related: Biden Security in Two Other Recent Crashes; 1 Leaves DC Pedestrian Dead (UPI, WaPo)
  
• Manhattan: West Side Crash Backs Traffic Into Jersey, Westchester (Streetsblog, City Room)
• Brooklyn: 9 Hospitalized After Crash Involving 4 Cars, School Bus (AP)
• Brooklyn: Wrong-Way Hit-and-Run Driver Injures 1 in Pulaski Bridge Collision (Post)
• SI: Teen Rams Police Car After Reckless Driving Stop (Advance)
• Larchmont, NY: Pedestrian Hit, Hospitalized With Head Injuries; No Charges (LoHud)
• White Plains: Road Rager Assaults Fellow Motorist After Minor Crash (LoHud)
  
• Brightwaters, LI: 4 Elderly Pedestrians Hit, 2 Seriously Injured; Driver, 73, Didn't See Them (Newsday)
• Bay Shore, LI: Toddler Seriously Injured When Mom Spins Into Another Car (Newsday)
• Wantagh, LI: Crumbling Overpass Drops Debris on Parkway, Causing 10-Car Crash (AP)
• Wyandach, LI: Man With Suspended License Arrested for DWI, Had Kids in Car (AP) 
  
• Bayonne: Driver Critically Injures 77-Year-Old Ped, Ticketed for Failure to Yield (Jersey Jrnl)
• Newtown, CT: 17-Year-Old Driving 4 Other Teens Arrested for DWI After One-Car Crash (CT Post)
  
• Newtown, CT: State Legislator Can't Resist Violating Cell Phone Law (AP) 
  

Following Up

• Manhattan: Truck Driver Auvryn Scarlett Gets 20-to-Life for Killing Tourist Couple (Post, News, TWC)
• Brooklyn: Ped Killer Complains That Vic's Prosecutor Mom Is Taking His Case Too Personally (News)
  
• Bronx: R'dale Press Has Thorough Coverage of Drana Nikac Crash, Profile of Det. Kevin Spellman
• Milford, CT: Police Release Harrowing Video of Cop Crash That Killed 2 Teens (HuffPo/AP)
• Related: Officers Accused of Drag Racing as Department Blames Dead Kids (CT Post 1, 2, 3)
• Suffolk Co.: Driver Ducks Community Service "Sentence" After 2006 Fatal Crash (Newsday)
  
• Carmel, NY: Slap on the Wrist for DWI Mom Who Wrecked Car Full of Terrified Children (LoHud)
  
• Diane Schuler Crash Featured in New York Mag
  
• Roselle Park, NJ: Driver Surrenders in Fatal Hit-and-Run (S-L)

Photo: AP

• Orlando, FL: Noted Boston Cardiologist, Triathlete Killed Taking a Run; No Charges Expected (Globe)
• Medford, NJ: Driver Hits Cyclist While Texting Drug Dealer (AP)
  
• Baker City, OR: Church Van Crash on Icy Road Kills 2, Injures 11 (AP)
• Minneapolis: Tour Bus Driver Suffers Aneurysm; 2 Dead, 21 Injured (AP)
  
• Cleveland, OH: Cellphone-Using Bus Driver Gets Six Months for Fatally Striking Pedestrian (AP)
• Columbus, OH: Driver Fails to Stop for School Buses, Kills Woman on Crutches; No Charges (WCMH)
• Asheville, NC: Death of 4-Year-Old Leads to Call for Pedestrian Improvements (Citizen-Times)
  
• Morganton, NC, Population 17,000, Sees 4 Pedestrians Hit, 1 Fatally, in One Week (News Herald)
• Chattanooga, TN: Man Killed Trying to Aid Injured Pedestrian; No Charges for Either Driver (Times FP)
• McLean, VA: Wife of Sen. Dick Lugar Arrested for DWI, Hit-and-Run After Hitting Parked Car (AP)
  

Trends and Other News

• "Leandra's Law" Clears Albany; City Enforcers Streamline DWI Protocols (Sblog, News, NYT, NY1)
  
• Suburban NY Lawmakers to Introduce 3-Foot Cyclist Buffer Law (LoHud)
• Teen Drivers Killing Themselves, and Others, for the Privilege of TWD (WaPo)
  
• Obama Admin Wants Seatbelts for Long-Distance Buses (AP)
• Tom Vanderbilt Debunks the Myth of the Daredevil "Jaywalker" (Slate)
  
• NHTSA Says Hybrid Drivers Hit More People; Treehugger Has Doubts; Car Blog Finds the Funny
• This Just In: Drivers With Severe Visual Impairment Have Trouble Seeing Pedestrians (PRN, MedPage)
• In Macon, GA, Pedestrians Account for Over Half of 2009 Traffic Deaths (Telegraph) 
  
• Philly Launches Cyclist Crackdown as Drivers Flout the Law With Abandon (Inquirer, I-911)
  
• Letter From Highway Safety Director Makes You Glad You Don't Live in Louisiana (Daily Comet)

* Since the week of June 8
** Drivers charged for deaths since the week of June 8, based on latest available reports

A protected bike path will soon wrap around the circumference of Park Circle. Some segments are bi-directional.

The DOT plan [PDF] got a thumbs up from Brooklyn CB 7 back in June. Here's a look at the wide open sea of asphalt Park Circle used to be, seen from Coney Island Avenue:

The best thing about the project is that motor vehicles are now channeled into a tighter space. Traffic is noticeably calmer -- the circle doesn't feel like an extension of nearby speedways anymore. Here's a tighter shot of that same angle today, zoomed in on a fairly huge new traffic island:

More pics after the jump.

A bi-directional approach to the Ocean Parkway Greenway -- much, much easier to use than the overpass you see in the background.

It's also much easier to cross Prospect Park Southwest where it meets the circle. Technically, there's separate space for pedestrians and cyclists at this crossing, but I think we'll see a lot of sharing here.

The exit from Prospect Park. Yes, that is a "multi-lane" bike path heading toward Park Circle.

Not pictured in this post: The terrible TD Bank building on the opposite side of Prospect Park Southwest from the park. Its curb-cutting driveways, parking lot, and drive-through window are a real blemish on this much-improved urban space.

Graphic: New York Times/Chicago News Cooperative.

Streetsblog has been following the Chicago parking privatization closely because it is the poster child for all that can go wrong with Public Private Partnerships, or PPPs. The basic idea behind a PPP is that the government leases public transportation infrastructure -- say a bridge, highway, airport, or parking meters -- that can generate user fees. In exchange for the fees, a private investor pays the government a large upfront fee or assumes the cost of improving the infrastructure. PPPs are popular in Europe, especially at airports.

Sustainable transportation advocates should care about PPPs for a number of reasons. First, politicians and bureaucrats are captivated by the fantasy that PPPs are the ultimate free lunch, generating billions in transportation investment at no cost to the taxpayer. President Obama's euphemism for PPPs is "creative financing." Here in New York, state officials have repeatedly presented a PPP as the way to raise billions for the astronomical cost of replacing the Tappan Zee Bridge. This is dangerous thinking. PPPs do inflict a cost, and it's a big one. Huge amounts of revenue that could be directed to public transit, or crucial road and bridge repair, are instead going to Wall Street.

The second concern is that PPPs allow public officials to skew the public planning and review process and put private profit before public benefit. A private investor has tremendous leverage over what gets built if they are the government's main financing option. The investor's goal is to make money, not to produce the greatest public benefit over many decades.

Despite the latest revelation, Chicago is only beginning to recognize the inherent problems with privatizations. According to the Times, Alderman Scott Waguespack introduced a measure that would require an "independent third-party valuation" of major asset lease proposals before any future privatization deal is completed. The legislation would require "a comparison of public retention and private leasing over the life cycle of the agreement." This could serve as an important safeguard, but so far, the measure only has 12 co-sponsors among the council's 49 other members.

The piece, by Haya el Nasser, starts out talking about how population is falling in many of the suburbs that grew most quickly over the last few decades -- places like Bellevue, Washington. These communities have become known as "boomburbs." But their boom days are past -- for now. Some have begun losing population.

The most interesting angle in the article, however, isn't the decline of suburban fortunes and the real estate market that fueled them. It's what municipal leaders and researchers are saying will be necessary to make those places economically viable in the future. Which is this: they'll have to become more like cities. Denser. More walkable. Not bedroom communities, but self-contained communities.

Robert Lang, a professor of sociology at the University of Nevada, Las Vegas who coined the term "boomburbs," put it this way: "The irony is that if they want to keep growing, they must grow as cities, which is diametrically opposite of how they got so big in the first place."

And transit will be key to that transformation:

Will light rail pave the way to a different future in Irving, Texas? (Photo: pinecone via Flickr)

Population has declined since 2006 in Irving, Texas, but the city is prepared for healthy growth as soon as a light-rail line to Dallas/Fort Worth International Airport is completed. "Eventually, you have to shift your focus to not just booming growth but redevelopment," Mayor Herbert Gears says. "That (rail) line is what's given us the opportunity to create an urban center."

Condominiums, apartments and retail are planned along the transit line. The city projects a 240,000 population by 2015, an 11% jump.

Growth in Henderson, Nev., near Las Vegas, has slowed but not stopped. "With the slowdown we've seen, it gives us an opportunity to take a breath," says city spokesman Bud Cranor. Henderson is focused on creating "green" jobs and a more sustainable urban environment, he says.

The article highlights what is emerging as a powerful unifying argument for smarter development: economics. It's an approach that could bring conservatives and liberals together. And it will certainly be part of Transportation for America's upcoming discussion on conservatives and public transportation.

More from the network: Bike Portland on results from an ad campaign that asked, "Should cyclists pay road tax?" Dotage St. Louis on an attractive replacement for a parking lot. And Rights of Way in Portland, Maine, on what a difference a four-foot narrowing of a street can make.

Surprisingly (or not), @FakeMTA isn't the only agency impersonator. For official, oddly engrossing transit Tweets, try @NYCTSubwayScoop.

We know what you're thinking. As of this writing, @FakeNYCDOT is still available.

More lanes, or more housing and parks? Image of proposed Deegan Expressway widening: NYSDOT. Image of the community plan for a de-commissioned Sheridan Expressway: SBRWA.

The DOT is considering tearing down the little-used Sheridan, a decision that would clear trucks off local streets and make room for housing, shops, and parks by the Bronx River. But the capital plan sets aside just $2 million for the project. As advocates said in testimony today, that's only enough cash to muddle through the studies already underway.

To repeat: The capital plan includes $266 million to widen a highway in an asthma-choked area of the Bronx, and $2 million for a project that could dramatically improve neighborhoods pummeled by truck traffic. Addressing a State Senate committee today, advocates made the case for a different approach.

"We call on the NYS DOT to reinstate funding for the Sheridan project by reducing the size and scope of the Major Deegan Expressway project," said the South Bronx River Watershed Alliance in a written statement. "With scarce resources, the agency must do a better job of prioritizing transportation investments that promote the safety, health and well-being of New York City residents."

The Tri-State Transportation Campaign submitted detailed commentary on the full capital plan, which you can read here. Here Tri-State explains why the New York State DOT, which doesn't expand highways to the same degree as other DOTs, still has a weakness for widening certain types of roads.

NYS DOT often plans large or over built rehabilitation projects under the guise of "bringing the roadway up to modern design standards." While certain modern design changes can help improve safety, spending millions of dollars, in some cases hundreds of millions, to simply widen interchanges, intersections, or build additional lanes does not make sense. Such projects often do little to solve congestion in the long-run, and come with very high price tags at a time when we have no money to waste.

(Photo: Richard Masoner of Cyclelicious)

Send your JPEGs to sarah [@] streetsblog [dot] org, or tag them with "kidbikes" and "streetsblog" in Flickr. Your deadline is next Tuesday, November 24.

Our past slide shows have been on bike traffic, space hogs, work bikes and crummy transit conditions. Check them out if you haven't already.

Robert Puentes, senior fellow at the Brookings Institution's Metropolitan Policy Program. Photo: Brookings

The goal is simple: Every week, a different person will weigh in on the same four queries about the future of the nation's built environment. The questions will remain the same, in order to provoke a thoughtful exchange of views on the biggest challenges facing transportation policymakers -- but the range of participants will be limitless.

Our guest for the inaugural Four Questions is Robert Puentes, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution's Metropolitan Policy Program (MPP) and a prolific analyst of growth and development issues. (Check out more from the MPP at its blog, The Avenue.)

Any suggestions for future participants in The Four Questions? Let us know in the comments.

1. Transportation planning -- the evaluation and construction of transit, road, and bridge projects -- is often considered primarily a state and local issue. What specific type of role should the federal government should have in the mix?

We've actually proposed a three-pronged strategy for our national transportation program.

First, the federal government should lead in those areas where there are clear demands for national uniformity, or else to match the scale and geographic reach of certain problems. We must define, design, and embrace a new, unified vision for transportation policy. Its focus should be on infrastructure investments that support the competitiveness and environmental sustainability of the nation rather than on funding individual states or spending on singular needs.

The federal government should create a National Infrastructure Bank (NIB) able to select and finance large, multi-modal and multi-jurisdictional infrastructure projects on a merit basis. The NIB would be the window through which states, groups of states, and metropolitan areas would request financing or grants for a range of infrastructure projects -- from road and rails to ports and pipes. The federal government would provide initial capital that NIB would use to issue bonds. The Treasury would pay the interest on the bonds and it would act as a lender of last resort for the principal of the NIB loans. The proceeds from the bonds would be used to finance major projects proposed by public entities (states, municipalities, agencies).

Yet while there are clearly areas of physical infrastructure development where the federal government needs to lead, Washington also needs to put itself squarely in the service of state, local, and business leaders whose knack for solving problems has always driven this country forward.

2. As the gas tax loses some of its value in an era of more fuel-efficient vehicles, should it be increased or abandoned in favor of a new system of transportation financing? Or should both options be in play?

Just as transportation is not an end in and of itself, neither is increasing funding the primary solution to the nation's transportation problems. However, because of the short term conundrum of the federal government obligating more federal money for transportation than it has to spend and the disdain for the annual rescissions, many are calling for the next Congress and the new President to increase the federal gas tax. This puts the cart before the horse.

Simply put: we should not continue to pour more money into a dysfunctional system before serious attempts at significant policy reform. In other words, the federal transportation program is not just broke; it is broken. The funding debate needs to shift from spending more and more taxpayer dollars on the same product to where, what, and how to spend that money better. So in addition to just focusing on increasing revenues for the existing program the nation deserves a real conversation about curbing the demand for transportation spending. It is impossible to start with a funding solution or what the optimal level of investment should be when there is no agreement about what the federal role should be, what problems we are trying to solve, or what questions we are trying to answer.

[Former deputy Transportation Secretary] Mort Downey has pointed out that no major federal transportation reform has ever occurred without a major increase in revenues. This should be another one of those times.

We need a clear articulation of the goals and objectives of the federal program, and the desired outcomes. The program should then be structured to get to those outcomes. At that time, all options toward reinvigorating transportation funding should be on the table to meet the transportation challenges of the future while also ensuring financial revenues will be available.

3. The lion's share of federal transportation funding is sent through state DOTs that then pass aid on to major cities. Do you think this approach allows urban, suburban, and rural needs to be fully met?

The intent established in the ISTEA legislation of 1991 to elevate the importance of metropolitan decision-making to better align with the geography of regional economies, commuting patterns, and social reality has largely been subverted. Federal transportation policy has only haltingly recognized metros' centrality to transportation outcomes, and continues to assign states the primary role in transportation planning and programming.

Left to their own devices, most states have not embraced the intent of federal law and have not devolved sufficient powers and responsibilities to their metropolitan areas. They remain the principal decision-makers on transportation projects, including those within metropolitan areas. Many state DOTs still wield considerable formal and informal power and retain authority over substantial state transportation funds.

One positive step to enhance metropolitan decision making was the sub-allocation of funds directly to the regional and local government structures initiated by ISTEA. This helped strengthen metropolitan areas by changing the decision-making body for a portion of the overall funding, giving local officials the ability to spend federal transportation funds based on the unique needs of their region. However, the reality is that these funds still make up only a very small share of the overall funding pie. Taken together, federal law only gives metropolitan areas direct control over a small share of road and bridge funding under SAFETEA-LU. This misalignment has led to a dramatic shift in the way funds are raised in major metropolitan areas as these places are increasingly turning to voter-approved “local option taxes” to pay for certain metropolitan-scale projects.

Funding analyses in several states show how these biases harm metropolitan areas. These areas contribute significantly more in tax receipts than they receive in allocations from their state’s highway fund or through direct local transfers. In other words, although the donor/donee debate is alive and well on the national level between states, that same rationale -- logical or otherwise -- does not appear to have had anywhere near the same impact on spatial funding allocation within states.

4. Transportation contributes 30 percent of America's total CO2 emissions. Do you think a national cap-and-trade system should proportionally address this problem? If not, how should it be addressed?

To improve the environment, several states as well as the federal government have already articulated a desire to reduce transportation-related mobile source emissions in order to confirm with the transportation provisions of the Clean Air Act. We should go further and in addition to a net reduction in carbon dioxide emissions a reduced dependence on foreign oil is also critical (which is a clear benefit to the national economy). To that end, the federal program should support all three legs of the stool—vehicle efficiency, fuels standards and alternatives, as well as demand reduction strategies promoting efficient development patterns, telecommuting, and increasing travel options for people and goods. Related to the above question, a carbon tax is a good idea as an environmentally-motivated tax that could potentially generate revenues for a range of transportation choices such as transit.

When Michael Bloomberg was first elected eight years ago, I and many others thought such a wealthy mayor might assert his independence from developers who choose to serve their own self-interest at the expense of the city's long term needs. Six years later, the release of PlaNYC 2030 finally gave hope to that desire. The mayor put forth a vision that, despite some shortcomings, promised a framework for sustainable, equitable growth. For all the city's progress toward advancing those goals, however, it has taken several steps backward by continuing to build real estate projects that erode the walkable city. Mayor Bloomberg’s re-election provides an opportunity to correct these oversights and refine his administration’s legacy on building an equitable and environmentally sustainable city.

A rendering of the proposed Hudson Yards development on the far West Side. Only a hard-fought court battle against Mayor Bloomberg, the Department of City Planning, and other public agencies prevented this project from adding up to 20,000 parking spaces in Manhattan.

Unfortunately, creativity, innovation and commitment to the principles of sustainability stop with these few agencies. Other public servants charged with planning for the future of the city have abdicated that responsibility. The Department of City Planning, despite some exemplary work on open space design and enhancing opportunities for world-class architecture, has ignored planning for the New York City of 2030. Instead, it has focused on rezoning the city as if we still lived in the 1960s, using the language and planning concepts of that discredited era rather than preparing to meet the challenges and opportunities of the 21st century.

Together with private developers, the city's Economic Development Corporation and other quasi-government entities, the planning department has embraced outmoded redevelopment plans for Willets Point in Queens, Hudson Yards on the far West Side, Atlantic Yards in Brooklyn, and Columbia University's expansion into Manhattanville without any substantive regard to the principles and goals of PlaNYC.

These large-scale development plans fundamentally ignore the issue of sustainability. And they cast the form of the city in concrete for a century or more.

In these developments, the street is nothing more than square footage added to permit greater building heights and densities. Streets in these developments divide rather than integrate neighborhoods. Traffic lights are recalibrated, for instance, to facilitate the flow of traffic and hinder pedestrian movement by reducing crossing times. Perversely, these measures are dubbed “mitigation” in the environmental review process. Without them, the development would not be allowed to proceed. This is because the developments include more space for car parking than needed -- far above the norm in New York City -- creating more traffic and necessitating such "mitigations."

This runs against the principles of good urbanism and drains the life out of the city. The street is the common denominator of every neighborhood in New York. Streets, more than buildings, make up the city’s patrimony -- its "genius loci." When I grew up in New York in the 1950s, streets were our parks, our gardens, and our athletic fields. They facilitated activity, exercise, and civic discussion. They were places that fostered social interaction and social cohesion. They met needs that transcend any particular era. As we move deeper into the 21st century, we need to reintroduce these functions into our neighborhood fabric.

What does this mean in practice? At the Atlantic Yards site in Brooklyn, for example, development that enhances streetlife and improves the public realm -- development consistent with the principles of PlaNYC -- would not close streets, as developer Forest City Ratner intends to do. Instead, as proposed in the UNITY Plan, the street grid of Fort Greene would extend through the Yards, weaving into the Prospect Heights grid to the south.

The UNITY Plan for the Atlantic Yards site.

To build a sustainable city, we need to think and plan on a small scale, not just the mega-project scale. We need to engage more New Yorkers in the process of building neighborhoods, not just the politically connected or wealthy. The place where everything comes together, where we all meet and interact, and where sustainable planning must begin, is the street. The mayor has the intellect and the openness to understand this. He now has four years to reinforce what his administration has done well so far. Four years to change direction from past mistakes. Four years to focus on what has been ignored until now.

Photo: @10/Flickr

Worsened gridlock follows automatically from making curbside parking cheaper. The lessened likelihood of being served a parking ticket can be expected to draw more auto trips into Manhattan and around town as well. The added congestion isn’t huge; most car trips not made are on account of other factors, and only a tenth of all parking tickets are being assumed away. But the impact will be visible.

Most of the estimated 334,000 hours lost, around 85 percent, will come from drivers outside the Manhattan Central Business District, putting an ironic stamp on Council Member Tish James’ reminder to the mayor that his narrow re-election was “a call from average New Yorkers for relief.”

Note: Readers who want to check the analysis in the BTA should head to the Parking worksheet, a dozen tabs from the back.

Photo: hebedesign via Flickr

While researching a recent pedestrian death in Savannah, I ran across this television news report, which I think deserves to be examined on its own. If I’m hearing him correctly, this is the message delivered by a Savannah Chatham Metropolitan Police officer:

"Someone could be looking down at their cellphone. Next thing they know they look up and there’s a kid in the road or a person in the road where they are not supposed to be at. And they don’t have time to stop. And like I said, pedestrians will lose that battle every time."

Perhaps this short comment from the officer was taken from a longer segment in which he railed against distracted driving. I hope that’s the case and if so, I commend him for it. But if not, it suggests a terribly casual attitude toward an awfully dangerous practice.

Sustainable Savannah links to Tom Vanderbilt's recent excellent essay on Slate, "In Defense of Jaywalking." Read it if you haven't already. It is a concise and well-researched examination of the biases against pedestrians -- biases that are reflected in media coverage and law enforcement, but most importantly, in street design.

More from around the network: Transportation for America will be hosting an online discussion December 7 on conservatives and public transportation. Biker Chicks of West Chester decries the push to register bikes in Philadelphia. And Mobilizing the Region talks about how transit operating aid is the best route to job creation.

To mark its 50th anniversary, the Insurance Institute for Highway Safety recently pitted a 1959 Chevrolet Bel Air against its contemporary counterpart, a 2009 Malibu, in a 40 mph crash test. As you can see in the video, the Malibu destroys its predecessor.

The results were intended to demonstrate how much safer cars are now than a half-decade ago, but my first thought was that the new vehicle is the same make and model that NYPD Detective Kevin Spellman drove into Drana Nikac at an estimated 30 mph -- a speed that carries a pedestrian fatality rate of up to 45 percent.

So while modern-day engineering may be better at protecting drivers and passengers, the auto industry and the IIHS -- whose "bigger is better" philosophy ignores those outside of vehicles -- have a long, long way to go before they can crow too loudly about overall safety.

According to a spokesperson, the authority plans to have the paths open on an alternating basis. Updates are posted on the PA website, and are also available by signing up for cyclist and pedestrian email and mobile alerts.

BRT + bike: East Side avenues have enough space for physically separated busways and protected bike lanes.

Sometime next month, reports Pete Donohue in today's Daily News, DOT intends to release detailed plans for First and Second Avenues. So far, we've only seen what an "off-set" bus lane configuration would look like, but DOT and the MTA are still considering a range of options. It's pretty clear that off-set bus lanes, placed between curbside parking and traffic, won't qualify as world-class.

Unlike separated lanes, off-set lanes require camera enforcement -- and state legislation -- to function properly. Albany rejected bus cams last year, and even if legislators suddenly change their minds, a camera-enforced off-set configuration invites conflict. Buses would have to contend with cars and delivery trucks trying to access the curb. Separated lanes eliminate that conflict and, paired with protected space for cyclists, invite more biking and walking.

So what would real-deal BRT look like on the East Side? The image up top is one of two options that Transportation Alternatives is backing to deliver the maximum benefits for transit riders, cyclists and pedestrians. The window of opportunity to get these ideas out there won't stay open much longer.

"We are pushing for a visionary design that's going to catalyze thousands of pedestrians, cyclists and bus riders, and turn them into champions of BRT," said TA's Wiley Norvell. "We know there will be opposition to change on First and Second Avenues, regardless of what is proposed; what is critical is that the design delivers the kind of new mobility that will build its own constituency of ardent supporters." Each option is projected to reduce the 70-minute travel time along the whole M15 bus route down to about 40 minutes, Norvell said. Implementing the same improvements applied to the Bx12 route on Fordham Road would only bring travel time down to 60 minutes.

Follow the jump for the other preferred design, showing a center-median bus-and-bikeway.

A center-median BRT configuration, with a protected bike lane similar to the new path on Allen Street.

Keep in mind that these are conceptual plans, and there's a great deal of flexibility in the details. In both configurations, local buses would operate in the separated busway, with smaller local stations placed in the median. Correction: In the first configuration, local bus service continues unchanged along the curbside. In the second, local buses would operate in the separated busway, with smaller local stations placed in the median. The second design can accommodate either two bus lanes in between stations, so BRT buses can pass the locals, or bays spaced at intervals for local buses to pull over and allow BRT buses to pass. Elements like bikeway design, curbside parking, and turning restrictions on vehicles could likewise vary within the framework of these plans.

Also, don't forget that BRT enhances service mainly by reducing the amount of time buses stand still or get bogged down in traffic. Average speeds improve dramatically, but these buses won't be zooming down the avenues.

Organized support for a multi-modal solution for the East Side is starting to coalesce. "If the DOT doesn't put bikes in their BRT designs, they're missing an opportunity," said Kurt Cavanaugh, managing director of the East Village Community Coalition, a local advocacy group. "Planning for buses and bikes together makes it as sustainable as possible."

Second-rate design is really not an option on this one. We have a mayor who's gone to the mat for congestion pricing, a DOT commissioner committed to safer, greener streets, and an MTA chair who's made better bus service priority number one. If New York can't pull off a visionary design for sustainable transportation now, maybe we never will.

Senate environment chairman Barbara Boxer. Photo: Politics Now

In the letter, Sens. Jim Inhofe (OK), Kay Bailey Hutchison (TX), and Richard Shelby (AL) joined Democrats in asking both parties' leaders to overcome the objections of a "small number of senators" who prevented quick passage of a six-month extension in September -- citing their opposition to using unspent financial bailout money to keep transportation programs running.

The senior Democrats signing onto the letter were: environment committee chairman Barbara Boxer (CA), Commerce Committee chairman Jay Rockefeller (WV), and Banking Committee chairman Chris Dodd (CT). Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus also signed the letter, but the Finance panel's chief Republican, Sen. Chuck Grassley (IA), did not attach his name.

A Grassley aide said the senator is concerned about the long-term financial health of the nation's highway trust fund and would prefer to address the issue in a multi-year bill rather than a months-long extension.

The political climate surrounding infrastructure investment, roiled in recent days by Democrats' new determination to pass job-creation legislation before the end of the year, remains highly uncertain. But the senators' letter signals that any new transportation spending is likely to be distributed using the same funding framework used in the 2005 bill, rather than through any revamped policy that might put roads and transit projects on a more equal footing.

The reason, simply put: If a six-month extension wins approval before the current stopgap transportation measure expires on December 18, a 2010 jobs bill could well be on its way to the president's desk by the time any broad reforms would reach the top of the congressional agenda.

However, the fate of any extra infrastructure spending was not mentioned in the senators' letter, which emphasized the importance of providing a steady funding stream that would "give states the certainty they need to plan and contract for" road as well as transit and bike infrastructure projects. A cancellation of contract authority triggered by the congressional inaction forced cuts to clean transportation budgets in more than 45 states.

Check out a complete copy of Tuesday's letter after the jump.

Dear Majority Leader Reid and Minority Leader McConnell:

One of the best ways to spur job creation and economic recovery is through infrastructure investment. That is why a longer term extension of the surface transportation program is so important to maintaining our nation's vital bridges, roads, public transportation and other related infrastructure, restoring our economy and creating good jobs for American workers.

In July, the Committee on Environment and Public Works, the Committee on Commerce, Science, and Transportation, and the Committee on Banking, Housing and Urban Affairs each reported an 18-month ex tension of the surface transportation program prior to the expiration of the 2005 surface transportation bill, the Safe Accountable, Flexible, Efficient Transportation Equity Act: a Legacy for Users (SAFETEA-LU), with bipartisan support.

We believe a multi-month extension of SAFETEA-LU is the best solution. It would give states the certainty they need to plan and contract for transportation infrastructure projects. The Department of Transportation estimates that every $1 billion spent on transportation and matched by the states supports approximately 35,000 jobs. It would also give the Department of Transportation's highway safety agencies the certainty they need to continue implementing safety-critical programs that keep motorists safe on our roads.

SAFETEA-LU expired at the end of September and, unfortunately, there was objection to floor consideration of the bipartisan legislation extending these important programs. This necessitated two short term extensions to the surface transportation program, attached to Continuing Resolutions. Short term extensions mean less money is available for states, and do not provide states the certainty they need to keep crucial transportation projects moving forward.

On a bipartisan basis, we have decided to move forward with a 6-month extension. Unfortunately, a small number of Senators continue to object and will not allow an extension to be considered by the Senate without a cloture vote.

We urge you to file cloture on the motion to proceed on the 6-month extension and dedicate the time necessary to complete this important legislation, so we can put Americans back to work and keep our economy moving.