Is it not RIGHT NOW the best time to make a clear presentation or summary of the major action points for carfree cities and areas? Gas prices are causing headaches and otherwise unsolvable problems for both private citizens and their communities, cities, regions, etc.
What I would propose:
1. Make cycling 100% safe where possible, by creating segregated lanes without any contact with motorised traffic.
2. Make walking 100% safe with segregated lanes/paths, etc.
3. Lower the price of public transport especially when it is run on electricity or other sustainable energy forms.
4. Learn about the benefits of compact living for citizens and their cities, regions, etc: - Better economies at all levels - Better air quality and environment - Better health - More room for nature to thrive - Less energy used - Less greenhouse gases emitted - etc!
> Segregated cycling is debatable. Usually the cycle lanes provided are > cluttered with street furniture, discontinuous, or transfer the problem to > shared route pedestrians. Sometimes too drivers park on or crash onto > segregated lanes. There is the feeling that segregation is often used to > prevent cyclists from getting in the way of fast motorised traffic, thus > threatening the common law right of cyclists to use public roads. Already > in Britain cyclists are banned from some sections of major public highways > and tunnels.
> Surely the aim instead should be to reduce the danger presented to > vulnerable road users by traffic which is presently permitted to travel > too fast and too carelessly? Car free cities and areas of course virtually > remove the problem.
> Doug.
> > Hi everyone! > > Is it not RIGHT NOW the best time to make a clear presentation or > summary > > of the major action points for carfree cities and areas? Gas prices are > causing headaches and otherwise unsolvable problems for both private > citizens and their communities, cities, regions, etc. > > What I would propose: > > 1. Make cycling 100% safe where possible, by creating segregated lanes > without any contact with motorised traffic. > > 2. Make walking 100% safe with segregated lanes/paths, etc. > > 3. Lower the price of public transport especially when it is run on > electricity or other sustainable energy forms. > > 4. Learn about the benefits of compact living for citizens and their > cities, regions, etc: > > - Better economies at all levels > > - Better air quality and environment > > - Better health > > - More room for nature to thrive > > - Less energy used > > - Less greenhouse gases emitted > > - etc! > > with good wishes, > > Aaron > > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "World Carfree Network" group. > > To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com > Replies are sent to the author of the message. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
>Surely we cannot go straight for a 100% carfree world, not least because car-like vehicles are needed for emergency services.
Emergency services are a bit of a red herring. The actual number of trips is very small and most of the police activity can be on bikes. The number of ambulance runs will be down significantly now that people aren't getting hurt in car crashes.
Except for Venice and Fes, no existing city has streets that are too narrow for emergency services. When we narrow the streets after cars are gone, we must make sure not to make them so narrow that fire trucks cannot serve all buildings. This is not difficult, and smaller fire trucks are already in wide use in Japan in any case.
So, there's really no reason to delay on the conversion to carfree cities.
I have noticed in some car-free areas of Shanghai, the fire service is built into the community's structure. There are facilities with extinguishers and hoses at certain points in the community, which means the community members are largely their own fire department.
It is also worth noting that these communities have no buildings taller than three stories, which also tends to mitigate the need for more elaborate fire protection investments.
[mailto:carfree_network@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of J.H. Crawford Sent: 29 February 2012 22:31 To: aaronkmtho...@gmail.com Cc: jag...@riseup.net; carfree_network@googlegroups.com Subject: Re: [carfree_network] With gas prices major problem: opportunity for carfree program
Aaron said:
>Surely we cannot go straight for a 100% carfree world, not least because car-like vehicles are needed for emergency services.
Emergency services are a bit of a red herring. The actual number of trips is very small and most of the police activity can be on bikes. The number of ambulance runs will be down significantly now that people aren't getting hurt in car crashes.
Except for Venice and Fes, no existing city has streets that are too narrow for emergency services. When we narrow the streets after cars are gone, we must make sure not to make them so narrow that fire trucks cannot serve all buildings. This is not difficult, and smaller fire trucks are already in wide use in Japan in any case.
So, there's really no reason to delay on the conversion to carfree cities.
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "World Carfree Network" group. To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com Replies are sent to the author of the message. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
Great idea about building in emergency capacity for communities. Buildings can also be more fire proof.
Here in Bologna (Italy), I rarely see a fire truck, although I see plenty of car crashes and ambulances. This contrasts with the USA where the Fire Department is typically the first on the scene at all emergency response, because they are fastest and generally deployed by default.
I assume fire engines are rarely seen because the city is built of bricks; a building on fire seems very unlikely. Good thing too as people tend to be locked behind multiple gates and doors, and the density means an urban wildfire could spread very quickly.
In the USA, automobile congestion is a major factor in emergency response delays, causing additional loss of life. (In contrast there's no delay when there's a critical mass ride when a fire truck needs to get through, because bicyclists clear the street almost instantly, whereas motor vehicle gridlock has no option.)
All the more support for carfree cities, even if they must be built with bricks with hoses dangling everywhere. :)p
The original idea was to get the word out: this is an exciting idea. Maybe easier said than done, but one must start somewhere. Is there any energy for this? Should a committee be created? WCN was working on identifying media contacts around the world at one point when I was on the Steering Committee. There is so much opportunity to put the carfree cities idea on the web now (commenting on news articles and blogs, for instance), and there are rarely articles about the carfree cities solution. Letters to the editor of major newspapers is an additional approach. It just takes time, although it can be fun, and more effective with some coordinated energy. One approach (or first step) would be to make resources available:
* How to make a public message
* Where to make a public message
I know such things have been made many times, most NGO/NPO groups have at least an internal one. So we could probably find some of these and make a super global excellent one.
Then in terms of making it happen, since we can assume zero funds at present we could maybe make a game...you get points...
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Lloyd Wright <lwri...@vivacities.org> wrote: > I have noticed in some car-free areas of Shanghai, the fire service is built > into the community's structure. There are facilities with extinguishers and > hoses at certain points in the community, which means the community members > are largely their own fire department.
> It is also worth noting that these communities have no buildings taller than > three stories, which also tends to mitigate the need for more elaborate fire > protection investments.
> Best regards,
> Lloyd
> -----Original Message----- > From: carfree_network@googlegroups.com > [mailto:carfree_network@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of J.H. Crawford > Sent: 29 February 2012 22:31 > To: aaronkmtho...@gmail.com > Cc: jag...@riseup.net; carfree_network@googlegroups.com > Subject: Re: [carfree_network] With gas prices major problem: opportunity > for carfree program
> Aaron said:
>>Surely we cannot go straight for a 100% carfree world, not least because > car-like vehicles are needed for emergency services.
> Emergency services are a bit of a red herring. The actual number of trips is > very small and most of the police activity can be on bikes. The number of > ambulance runs will be down significantly now that people aren't getting > hurt in car crashes.
> Except for Venice and Fes, no existing city has streets that are too narrow > for emergency services. When we narrow the streets after cars are gone, we > must make sure not to make them so narrow that fire trucks cannot serve all > buildings. This is not difficult, and smaller fire trucks are already in > wide use in Japan in any case.
> So, there's really no reason to delay on the conversion to carfree cities.
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "World Carfree Network" group. > To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com > Replies are sent to the author of the message. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "World Carfree Network" group. > To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com > Replies are sent to the author of the message. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
I like the sound of paying more attention to the carfree message in the media. And yes, in fact there was a media working group in the past, although that has not been very active of late. But if there is renewed interest in that, there is no reason why we couldn't restart that! I would suggest, if Aaron, Jason and others are interested, we could start by first recruiting a few more volunteers, and then continue with the work on the media list.
It would make the most sense to start with a few modest goals, and see how that goes. Work could consist of both sending reactions to car-slanted stories in the media, as well as getting out the word with blogs and articles in various places. There could also be a basic message template that could function as a press release or a basic article to build on.
Are there people who would like to work on that? I could put a call out to join in the bulletin or elsewhere, but it would be good to have 5-10 or more people to get started.
On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Jason Meggs <jme...@bclu.org> wrote: > Great idea about building in emergency capacity for communities. > Buildings can also be more fire proof.
> Here in Bologna (Italy), I rarely see a fire truck, although I see > plenty of car crashes and ambulances. This contrasts with the USA > where the Fire Department is typically the first on the scene at all > emergency response, because they are fastest and generally deployed by > default.
> I assume fire engines are rarely seen because the city is built of > bricks; a building on fire seems very unlikely. Good thing too as > people tend to be locked behind multiple gates and doors, and the > density means an urban wildfire could spread very quickly.
> In the USA, automobile congestion is a major factor in emergency > response delays, causing additional loss of life. (In contrast there's > no delay when there's a critical mass ride when a fire truck needs to > get through, because bicyclists clear the street almost instantly, > whereas motor vehicle gridlock has no option.)
> All the more support for carfree cities, even if they must be built > with bricks with hoses dangling everywhere. :)p
> The original idea was to get the word out: this is an exciting idea. > Maybe easier said than done, but one must start somewhere. Is there > any energy for this? Should a committee be created? WCN was working on > identifying media contacts around the world at one point when I was on > the Steering Committee. There is so much opportunity to put the > carfree cities idea on the web now (commenting on news articles and > blogs, for instance), and there are rarely articles about the carfree > cities solution. Letters to the editor of major newspapers is an > additional approach. It just takes time, although it can be fun, and > more effective with some coordinated energy. One approach (or first > step) would be to make resources available:
> * How to make a public message
> * Where to make a public message
> I know such things have been made many times, most NGO/NPO groups have > at least an internal one. So we could probably find some of these and > make a super global excellent one.
> Then in terms of making it happen, since we can assume zero funds at > present we could maybe make a game...you get points...
> Jason
> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Lloyd Wright <lwri...@vivacities.org> > wrote: > > I have noticed in some car-free areas of Shanghai, the fire service is > built > > into the community's structure. There are facilities with extinguishers > and > > hoses at certain points in the community, which means the community > members > > are largely their own fire department.
> > It is also worth noting that these communities have no buildings taller > than > > three stories, which also tends to mitigate the need for more elaborate > fire > > protection investments.
> > Best regards,
> > Lloyd
> > -----Original Message----- > > From: carfree_network@googlegroups.com > > [mailto:carfree_network@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of J.H. Crawford > > Sent: 29 February 2012 22:31 > > To: aaronkmtho...@gmail.com > > Cc: jag...@riseup.net; carfree_network@googlegroups.com > > Subject: Re: [carfree_network] With gas prices major problem: opportunity > > for carfree program
> > Aaron said:
> >>Surely we cannot go straight for a 100% carfree world, not least because > > car-like vehicles are needed for emergency services.
> > Emergency services are a bit of a red herring. The actual number of > trips is > > very small and most of the police activity can be on bikes. The number of > > ambulance runs will be down significantly now that people aren't getting > > hurt in car crashes.
> > Except for Venice and Fes, no existing city has streets that are too > narrow > > for emergency services. When we narrow the streets after cars are gone, > we > > must make sure not to make them so narrow that fire trucks cannot serve > all > > buildings. This is not difficult, and smaller fire trucks are already in > > wide use in Japan in any case.
> > So, there's really no reason to delay on the conversion to carfree > cities.
> > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > > "World Carfree Network" group. > > To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com > > Replies are sent to the author of the message. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
> > -- > > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > > Groups "World Carfree Network" group. > > To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com > > Replies are sent to the author of the message. > > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > > carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > > For more options, visit this group at > > http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "World Carfree Network" group. > To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com > Replies are sent to the author of the message. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
> Very happy to hear of this interest coming together. Good strong ideas on > next steps.
> I suggest we organize a first skype meeting offline with everyone who has > expressed interest.
> To reiterate, in an updated way:
> There is so much opportunity to put the carfree cities idea on the web > now (commenting on news articles and > blogs, for instance), and to put it in more mainstream media; there are > rarely articles about the carfree > cities solution. (I know many of us do this in one way or another, > commenting on articles, but what about *specifically* promoting an end to > the car in the city?)
> We can point to successful examples like recent carfree days in Rome and > Milan (to curb pollution). What about the most deadly vehicular pollutant > there is, CO2? When will we begin to address that, or has humanity given > up hope?
> Press releases can generate articles -- but only if they're written and > sent! Letters to the editor of major newspapers can be written as well, > along with longer OpEd pieces. With some organization this could be > successful.
> It just takes time, although it can be fun, and more effective with some > coordinated energy.
> One approach (or first step) would be to make resources available:
> * How to make a public message > - With example statements, press releases, etc.
> * Where to make a public message > - With contact lists
> I know such guides have been made many times, most NGO/NPO groups have at > least an internal one. So we could surely obtain some of these and make a > super global excellent one.
> The very first step is to form a working group.
> If we can make a game out of this even better (from the bouncy playful > rather not be a robot perspective. (Hm, robots...can they be used for good, > not just evil? Hmmm........)).
> Jason
> On Thu, Mar 8, 2012 at 6:27 PM, Justin Hyatt <jus...@zofi.hu> wrote:
>> Hi Aaron, Jason and all,
>> I like the sound of paying more attention to the carfree message in the >> media. And yes, in fact there was a media working group in the past, >> although that has not been very active of late. But if there is renewed >> interest in that, there is no reason why we couldn't restart that! I would >> suggest, if Aaron, Jason and others are interested, we could start by first >> recruiting a few more volunteers, and then continue with the work on the >> media list.
>> It would make the most sense to start with a few modest goals, and see >> how that goes. Work could consist of both sending reactions to car-slanted >> stories in the media, as well as getting out the word with blogs and >> articles in various places. There could also be a basic message template >> that could function as a press release or a basic article to build on.
>> Are there people who would like to work on that? I could put a call out >> to join in the bulletin or elsewhere, but it would be good to have 5-10 or >> more people to get started.
>> any thoughts?
>> Justin
>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 4:05 PM, Jason Meggs <jme...@bclu.org> wrote:
>>> Great idea about building in emergency capacity for communities. >>> Buildings can also be more fire proof.
>>> Here in Bologna (Italy), I rarely see a fire truck, although I see >>> plenty of car crashes and ambulances. This contrasts with the USA >>> where the Fire Department is typically the first on the scene at all >>> emergency response, because they are fastest and generally deployed by >>> default.
>>> I assume fire engines are rarely seen because the city is built of >>> bricks; a building on fire seems very unlikely. Good thing too as >>> people tend to be locked behind multiple gates and doors, and the >>> density means an urban wildfire could spread very quickly.
>>> In the USA, automobile congestion is a major factor in emergency >>> response delays, causing additional loss of life. (In contrast there's >>> no delay when there's a critical mass ride when a fire truck needs to >>> get through, because bicyclists clear the street almost instantly, >>> whereas motor vehicle gridlock has no option.)
>>> All the more support for carfree cities, even if they must be built >>> with bricks with hoses dangling everywhere. :)p
>>> The original idea was to get the word out: this is an exciting idea. >>> Maybe easier said than done, but one must start somewhere. Is there >>> any energy for this? Should a committee be created? WCN was working on >>> identifying media contacts around the world at one point when I was on >>> the Steering Committee. There is so much opportunity to put the >>> carfree cities idea on the web now (commenting on news articles and >>> blogs, for instance), and there are rarely articles about the carfree >>> cities solution. Letters to the editor of major newspapers is an >>> additional approach. It just takes time, although it can be fun, and >>> more effective with some coordinated energy. One approach (or first >>> step) would be to make resources available:
>>> * How to make a public message
>>> * Where to make a public message
>>> I know such things have been made many times, most NGO/NPO groups have >>> at least an internal one. So we could probably find some of these and >>> make a super global excellent one.
>>> Then in terms of making it happen, since we can assume zero funds at >>> present we could maybe make a game...you get points...
>>> Jason
>>> On Thu, Mar 1, 2012 at 1:16 PM, Lloyd Wright <lwri...@vivacities.org> >>> wrote: >>> > I have noticed in some car-free areas of Shanghai, the fire service is >>> built >>> > into the community's structure. There are facilities with >>> extinguishers and >>> > hoses at certain points in the community, which means the community >>> members >>> > are largely their own fire department.
>>> > It is also worth noting that these communities have no buildings >>> taller than >>> > three stories, which also tends to mitigate the need for more >>> elaborate fire >>> > protection investments.
>>> > Best regards,
>>> > Lloyd
>>> > -----Original Message----- >>> > From: carfree_network@googlegroups.com >>> > [mailto:carfree_network@googlegroups.com] On Behalf Of J.H. Crawford >>> > Sent: 29 February 2012 22:31 >>> > To: aaronkmtho...@gmail.com >>> > Cc: jag...@riseup.net; carfree_network@googlegroups.com >>> > Subject: Re: [carfree_network] With gas prices major problem: >>> opportunity >>> > for carfree program
>>> > Aaron said:
>>> >>Surely we cannot go straight for a 100% carfree world, not least >>> because >>> > car-like vehicles are needed for emergency services.
>>> > Emergency services are a bit of a red herring. The actual number of >>> trips is >>> > very small and most of the police activity can be on bikes. The number >>> of >>> > ambulance runs will be down significantly now that people aren't >>> getting >>> > hurt in car crashes.
>>> > Except for Venice and Fes, no existing city has streets that are too >>> narrow >>> > for emergency services. When we narrow the streets after cars are >>> gone, we >>> > must make sure not to make them so narrow that fire trucks cannot >>> serve all >>> > buildings. This is not difficult, and smaller fire trucks are already >>> in >>> > wide use in Japan in any case.
>>> > So, there's really no reason to delay on the conversion to carfree >>> cities.
>>> > -- >>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups >>> > "World Carfree Network" group. >>> > To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com >>> > Replies are sent to the author of the message. >>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com >>> > For more options, visit this group at >>> > http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
>>> > -- >>> > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> > Groups "World Carfree Network" group. >>> > To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com >>> > Replies are sent to the author of the message. >>> > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> > carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com >>> > For more options, visit this group at >>> > http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
>>> -- >>> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >>> Groups "World Carfree Network" group. >>> To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com >>> Replies are sent to the author of the message. >>> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >>> carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com >>> For more options, visit this group at >>> http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
>> -- >> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google >> Groups "World Carfree Network" group. >> To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com >> Replies are sent to the author of the message. >> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to >> carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com >> For more options, visit this
A newbie to the group here, but I wanted to say this is a great topic. Right now is a catch-22 with the funds tight everywhere, cities are less willing to spend money on things like bike infrastructure which they consider frivolous right now even though it is a good financial decision in the long run. It irks me to know end when I see the wasted funds on road repair over and over again without a moments thought to how cheap and easy adding some bike infrastructure would be along with it.
As for the plan, I think focus on the economic benefits, as that is where people are feeling the pinch and that is where they are looking for relief. Devin Longmont, CO
What are the highest levels at which road repair funds are distributed?
This should be a requirement.
In general we need to re-think roads. They can't be maintained in their present form given projected shortfalls of energy and resources, nor are they needed in those forms. More green space, more cobble or gravel, less parking space, more areas off-limits to trucks (which do major damage to local streets), etc...
On Fri, Apr 13, 2012 at 2:00 AM, Devin Quince <coultra...@gmail.com> wrote: > A newbie to the group here, but I wanted to say this is a great topic. > Right now is a catch-22 with the funds tight everywhere, cities are less > willing to spend money on things like bike infrastructure which they > consider frivolous right now even though it is a good financial decision in > the long run. It irks me to know end when I see the wasted funds on road > repair over and over again without a moments thought to how cheap and easy > adding some bike infrastructure would be along with it.
> As for the plan, I think focus on the economic benefits, as that is where > people are feeling the pinch and that is where they are looking for relief. > Devin > Longmont, CO
> -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google > Groups "World Carfree Network" group. > To post to this group, send email to carfree_network@googlegroups.com > Replies are sent to the author of the message. > To unsubscribe from this group, send email to > carfree_network-unsubscribe@googlegroups.com > For more options, visit this group at > http://groups.google.com/group/carfree_network?hl=en?hl=en
