RE: Program contents...

Hi Brenda and everyone,

Sorry to write again, but I just wanted to clarify that I supported a
focus on transport in the Bogota conference programme. What I wrote was
intending to focus more on what to do with the conference series in the
future. Of course it's impossible to separate the topics of transport
and urban design. And also most World Carfree Network member
organisations are bicycle advocacy groups, which certainly needs to be
recognised and also not seen as a bad thing!

And while I think the word "proximity" is in common usage as much as the
word "mobility" (in English and French at least), my point wasn't to
focus on abstract concepts so much as practical applications. In
Bogota, for example, they have two streets joined in a "t" shape (La
Zona Rosa T) that are totally carfree and devoted to enjoyment of the
place, not trying to get somewhere else as fast as possible. The value
of that is something immediately appreciable, regardless of our
economic and educational backgrounds (although that particular place is
upscale). So I think part of our challenge is to highlight such examples
and work on replicating them throughout the world in different, locally
unique forms for the enjoyment and benefit of everyone.

Also, I agree that in some parts of the world it may be valuable for
Towards Carfree Cities to focus mainly on transport. However, in Europe
and North America there are other, larger conferences that cover this
theme. This would be much more of an issue in Portland than in San Luis
Potosi, given the Pro Walk / Pro Bike conference coming to nearby
Seattle. So we'd have to distinguish our conference from theirs, both
in theme and methodology.

Given that the conference series is called Towards Carfree Cities, I
think a good place to start is to learn from the world's existing
carfree cities. The ones I've visited seem to work well precisely
because of their emphasis on proximity first and mobility second.* I
don't want to set up the two ideas as being in opposition to each
other, but I do think the former types of strategies should get
increased emphasis in the future. 

Others? Shy list members can comment too!

Randy

* In the still-carfree medina of Fes, Morocco, traditionally each
neighbourhood (microscopic by today's standards) was self-sufficient in
terms of at least a dozen facilities: school, mosque, bread oven, mill,
hammam, public toilets, fountain, etc. This to me is the perfect
example of proximity - create ways in the "design" process for people
to fulfill their wants and needs as locally as possible, avoiding the
need for mobility. Of course people still want and need to move as
well, so it becomes a question of to what extent we should accommodate
movement, and at the expense of what. The two concepts must be applied
together. It may sound theoretical, but it's something we do even when
rearranging furniture in our bedrooms. Curiously we consistenly get the
compromise about right with our indoor environment, but almost never in
our outdoor environment.


Randall Ghent
Membership & Conference Coordinator
WORLD CARFREE NETWORK
Kratka 26, 100 00 Prague 10
Czech Republic
tel/fax: +(420) 274 810 849
skype: wcn-icc / randallghent
[email protected]




[carfree_network] list guidelines and unsubscribe information are found at http://www.worldcarfree.net/listservs/. Send messages for the entire list to carfree_network-3hfIC0tI0F+k/GrYEfjPQuG/[email protected] Send replies to individuals off-list.