[sustran] New Mobility in Paris - Innovatoins profiles for review and comment

[Eric Britton]

My fond hope and firm guess is that Dave Holladay will not mind my sharing
this posting with you all. These are good points and certainly need to be
taken into account in any neural presentation such as that which I am in the
process of trying to piece together, not only on the Velib' project but also
the other innovative measures being reported on in my Paris survey

Right under Dave's good note, you will see the "screening criteria" which I
am putting forth as acid tests for each selected measure and recommendation,
including, you can bet, Velib'

Comments on all this most welcome - and again I propose that they either be
shipped to me privately at eric.britton at ecoplan.org or to the New Mobility
Idea Factory via theNewMobilityCafe at yahoogroups.com address. (Otherwise
apologies for cross-posting but I do believe there is wide interest here
among our different groups. Also please feel free to share more broadly.)

Eric Britton

PS. Review copies are now available for comment.




-----Original Message-----
From: Tramsol at aol.com [mailto:Tramsol at aol.com]
Sent: Friday, May 04, 2007 6:08 PM
To: eric.britton at ecoplan.org
Subject: Battle for the money... on the streets of Paris

Eric

I'm trying to get a picture of what mayhem you may experience in your lovely
city when the City hands over almost 2000 on-street advertising sites (worth
about E 35 million per year?) to JC Decaux in return for them spending E70m
on their Velib cycle hire system.

Currently Decaux are locked in the courts with Clear Channel whose system
operates in a similar way and reckon that there was monkey business when the
contract was awarded.  Both bike hire systems work essentially on the
fu8nding delivered by the advertising panels and are the sweeties offered
like the e-pissoirs and bus shelters given away by the same companies - to
get space for posters in the public realm.  The business is generally very
dirty in the way that a good exclusive deal for a city is worth a bundle of
money.

I am also concerned to find out the likely fate of Roue Libre, supported by
RATP, which ires out bikes from rail stations and converted buses, driven to
parks and public spaces at weekends and on holidays.  It would seem that in
one part of the city administration signing up the Velib, they have signed
the death warrant for a successful scheme of some 10 years standing.

Can you find out any more/any contacts?

By contrast London has now got OYBike which unlike the Decaux and CC schemes
does not come with automatically attached advertising baggage.
Unfortunately it does not yet have the backing of TfL's Cycling Centre of
Excellence but a number of London Boroughs have installed smaller Pool Bike
systems whcih are available to the public, and the University of E London
scheme is so successful that within hours of installation - and a week
before official launch, it was being used for (late) night-time shopping
trips.  OYBIke is part of a tendered package for Toronto and is facing the
Decaux machine (a huge team flown in) in Chicago (with their 1 person flying
economy class...).  Dave Wetzel has been trying out the system recently.

Check out www.oybike.com <http://www.oybike.com>

Dave





Bottom-Line new mobility tests:
1.	Traffic reductions: Does this new mobility tool help to reduce (and
especially SOV) car traffic in the city?
2.	Environment sustainability: Does it offer a proven, significant,
cost-effective capacity for reducing CO2 and other sources of pollution?
3.	Synergies: Does it synergize with and open up space for yet other  new
mobility  options, reforms and measures?
4.	Accessible: Is it widely accessible and easy to use?
5.	Equitable: Is it affordable and socially equitable?
6.	Public space: Does it help to improve the quantity/quality of public
space in the city?
7.	Cost effective: Can it be brought on line at relatively low cost?
8.	Fast results: And show significant results within a single electoral
mandate?
9.	Replicable: Is it replicable in other cities (with proper preparation and
adaptation of course)?
10.	Experience-proved: Has enough experience been accumulated both in Paris
and elsewhere so that cities wishing to look closely at the concept can do
so with confidence?
11.	Flexible: Does the approach permit a range of alternative planning,
financing and implementation alternatives?
12.	Reversible: Can it be readily and cheaply reversed, or radically
restructured or moved to a better location, if it proves somehow
unsatisfactory in its performance?
13.	Participatory: Does the project by its nature invite, provide for active
public participation and collaboration?
14.	Open: Is that information accessible to diligent professionals?
15.	City-transformation:  Is it a 'city-transforming' project that can lead
to a much more sustainable city and higher quality of life for all?

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20070505/887509c4/attachment.html