SafeTREC at UC Berkeley focuses on improving road safety through research, data analysis, and community programs. It collaborates with California agencies to develop safety tools, evaluate technologies, and offer training to promote safer transportation. Key initiatives include pedestrian and bicycle safety, traffic injury mapping, and policy analysis.

This article focuses on a survey conducted in 2000 about traffic safety in California. Several key concerns were identified by residents. The survey, which was carried out online and included a diverse sample of California residents, highlighted speeding and aggressive driving, distracted driving, and drunk driving as the top issues. SafeTREC, the author of the article, is advocating for enhanced safety measures for pedestrians and cyclists in California. This includes initiatives such as stricter enforcement of traffic laws, improved infrastructure catering to pedestrians and cyclists, as well as educating drivers on the significance of practicing safe driving behaviors.

This article focuses on a design to help UCLA students with large commutes to school. Many students have these large commutes because they cannot afford to live in Los Angeles, so they must reside outside of LA. The design is for a series of mobile pods for UCLA's BruinHub. BruinHub was made to offer those students who live far away from campus a place to rest, eat, study, bathe, sleep, etc. This area was made after a study in 2009 found that 43%  of students commuted 60 minutes or more to school, and nearly half of those chose to sleep overnight elsewhere rather than return home. During the COVID-19 pandemic, they also found that a third of students considered withdrawing from UCLA due to not having housing, a large commute, or unreliable internet. The mobile pods are used to provide somewhere to rest or to study in private and are found all throughout UCLA's BruinHub.

This article outlines the critical failures of the still-in-development California High Speed Rail system, namely the catastrophic political compromises that doomed the project from the start and the failures of the California High Speed Rail Authority in this project. This rail project was initially estimated to cost the taxpayers of California $33 billion—an august sum, no doubt, yet one Californians believed was more than justifiable, and as such they approved the project via a 2008 referendum. However, numerous critical failures doomed the project, such as the California High Speed Rail Authority's treatment of their development partner, SNCF (the French national railroad), a fatal game of "political horse-trading" with influential Central Valley politicians, and a failure to get the state government's support when the going got tough. Now, Californians face an eye-watering $113 billion estimated price tag to finish this gargantuan endeavor, and quite literally nobody knows where this money could possibly come from. However, after already sinking billions upon billions of dollars into this flawed project, the state of California has fallen victim to the sunk-cost fallacy, continuing to build the project-that-cannot-be-finished by dumping an additional $1.8 million per day into the railway.

In this article, the author argues that e-bikes are not worth the benefits that are provided by them, and are instead a liability to their riders and the surrounding public. Referring to electric bicycles as the worst mixture of motorcycles and bicycles, the author states how e-bikes do not provide the exercise or safety that is found when riding a regular bicycle. One of the author's main arguments against the popular usage of e-bikes is the severity of crashes when they occur. E-bikes can average a speed of over 25mph, posing a threat to pedestrians and regular cyclists within their lane. A cyclist who spends a lot of money on a bike is considered to be an avid connoisseur of the sport, yet when someone purchases an e-bike, the feedback is mixed, from approval to disdain for moving into the “easier” side of biking. E-bikes are not gaining popularity, and rather than showing the connection between bicycles and motorcycles, they represent the divide.

This article talks about the benefits of cargo bikes, and their uses for multiple types of transportation, such as bringing children to school and grocery shopping. There is both an environmental advantage, and an advantage in lowering the congestion of traffic and pollution. There are less issues with parking and more operationally friendly for packages and other deliveries. Though there is the downside of maneuvering the bike in traffic situations and there being a size limit on transportation of objects with the bikes, these bikes are overall beneficial to anyone who utilizes one. 

This article highlighted a new issue with American electric cars. Batteries are extremely heavy, and when you pack an already heavy SUV with batteries, it begins to trigger weight limits and demolish vehicles in a collision. These vehicles also have grown so tall and large that pedestrians can't be seen near the bumper. Adding in the silence of electric cars, there has been an increase in slow-speed pedestrian crashes. The point of this article is for American companies to make smaller, more small city-friendly cars. 

Honestly, though, I don't think that will ever happen. Just look at Texas, We literally say "Everything is bigger in Texas." Nobody drives a smart car there and nobody will.

Following the idea that no one says "they love wearing helmets" and the panic after Sweeden required helmets for 15 YOs and younger, students Terese Alstin and Anna Haupt created the Hövding. The pair explored their original idea of making protective gear that wasn't bulky. Their solution? A neck-based system with airbags that inflate during a crash. The airbags claim to have better impact protection and are multi-impact, something no traditional helmet can claim. 

But what about the drawbacks. The biggest problem is the looks. Frankly, it looks stupid. One of the big proponents of the Hövding was it looked better than a helmet. The actual product however looked more like a neck brace. There's also the safety concern. This protective device placed explosives all around the user's head. One short circuit or a false fire for a crash and the rider certainly is going down.

In the end, this technology didn't catch on. It was clunky and no one trusted the tech to do its job.

Smith writes an opinion piece advocating for the intrinsic benefits of a university to the city it resides in. He starts by debunking the myth of educating populous, since most people do not stay or contribute economically in the same city after graduation. Rather, the value comes from the intellectual environment a university creates and the research and development initiatives undertaken by the university. People come to a city with a university because of the intellectual environment, with the school acting as a magnet for great minds. He speaks to how research done by a university  and student interns influence the development of the local information economy, creating economic cores around colleges. The article is an opinion, meaning it is more biased than traditional journalism, but it shines a light on some economic benefits that colleges can provide to their communities.

Alexandra Lange asserts the need for more accessible public places for teenage girls. She quotes from interviews of several important figures including leaders of teenage interest groups, urban designers, and parks experts, using their testimony to display the problems. Teenagers are seen as invaders and outsiders at playgrounds, and the parks built for adolescents serve masculine audiences (skate parks, basketball courts, etc); girls above the age of 8 are 4 times less likely to use parks than boys and 40% of young women aged 11-21 claim feeling unsafe outdoors based on studies done by interviewees. Teenage girls are often overlooked in the public sphere, and by actively working to make public spaces more inclusive and equitable, especially for adolescents at a crucial social period is necessary to have accessible, open, and vibrant communities.