Norman Garrick compares street network design from pre-1950 and post-1950, factors that help determine the overall safety of safe pedestrian travel, and explains why it is so obvious that the pandemic of sprawl development is to blame for unsafe, poorly designed, disconnected neighborhoods. Studies prove that Street Network Design has an integral role in providing safe, pedestrian friendly,and highly accessible communities. We must re-think the suburban model in order to reform emergency response.

2. Davis, CA 14 % of people ride to work

3. Davis, CA Road Fatality Rate: 1 per 100,000

4. Road Fatality Rate for All 157 California Cities Over 40,000 number per 100,000 population 0.0 17.3

5. Road Fatality Rate for All 157 California Cities Over 40,000 number per 100,000 population

7. Risk of Fatality (Fatalities as % of Injuries) California Cities of 40,000 to 120,000

9. Adapted from Stephen Marshall Pre-1950’s Post-1950’s Evolution of the Street Network

12. FHA Technical Bulletin No. 7 (1938) Planning Profitable Neighborhoods

14. Street network, safety and sustainability in 24 medium sized California cities Cities selected to represent a range of traffic safety level

17. Citywide Street Network Neighborhood Street Network Linear Tree Grid Tributary Radial Grid Tree Adapted from Stephen Marshall, Streets & Patterns

18. 550 Intersections per Square Mile Network Scale

19. 110 Intersections per Square Mile Network Scale

20. 45 Intersections per Square Mile Network Scale

21. Link-to-Node Ratio = 1.61 Link-to-Node Ratio = 1.13 Link-to-Node Ratio = 1.16 Network Connectivity

23. Safety Analysis Based on Geo-coding 230,000 Accident Records in 24 California Cities

24. Safety and Travel Choice Analysis done for 1040 Census Block Groups 24 California Cities

25. Travel Choice Based on Census Data 1040 Census Block Groups, 24 California Cities

26. versus

27. versus Safety Risk of Severe Injury or Fatality Chance of being Severely Injured 30% Higher Chance of being Killed 50% Higher

28. Odds of Dying in a Road Accident based on Intersection Density 1 in 200 1 in 500

29. Percentage of People Walking, Biking or Taking Transit

30. Percentage of People Walking, Biking or Taking Transit Effect of Intersection Density for Cul-de-sac Network

31. Percentage of People Walking, Biking or Taking Transit Effect of Intersection Density for Gridded Network

32. Thanks to US EPA and CNU

33. 28,000 14,000 8,000

34. 15,000 11,000 14,000 11,000

35. 8,346 10,524 12,831 8,600 2,461 28,820 7,518 6,774

36. 16,186 10,364 13,154 24,283 5,898 15,547 17,107

37. Davis: Response Time 14.9 mph 14.2 mph 12.7 mph

42. Downtown Hartford 1960 to 2000 Parking

43. City of Hartford 1960 to 2000 Population and Employment

44. Evolution of Network in California Cities

45. Norman W. Garrick

46. Norman W. Garrick 11 X 2 X

48. Norman W. Garrick Sustainability Gap USA Norway Daily Miles Traveled For every man, woman and child

50. Working on Detroit