[sustran] IRF says misinterpretation in HT Story on cycle tracks

[eric britton]

Dear Anvita and all,

In all your good letter Anvita what strikes me above all is your sentence
"reporters mostly suffer from problems of attention deficit".

Which suggests to me that the media and the public need reliable, balanced
and concise help from informed planners and others who do not suffer from
this disorder of the extreme time pressures under which they work -- and who
are capable of providing short honest syntheses of all our long reports and
necessary technical documents and debates behind the projects and policies.
This balanced interpretive work is pure gold, but it is a step for which by
and large we are not perfectly geared today. Our challenge really.  (In fact
this is one of the things that we are really trying to do with both World
Streets and India Streets, but the only way we can do this well and
sufficiently is to have our smart colleagues coming in and lending a hand
from time to time.)

But let me close by seconding your great closing message, I.e., the
importance of demanding cycle "facility" on all roads. (I use the singular
because to my ear it seems to suggest not that we necessarily create space
for physical separation but also ensure the even more important step of
having traffic that is by the street's actual architecture slowed down a
safe cycling pace."

Finally, a thought as to how busy reporters and editors take this kind of
ruckus when something screws up as in this case. My guess is that their skin
is far too thick to be much impressed by normal communications on the
subject. More powerful medicine  is probably needed.

Best/Eric





------

-----Original Message-----
From: sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org at list.jca.apc.org
[mailto:sustran-discuss-bounces+eric.britton=ecoplan.org at list.jca.apc.org]
On Behalf Of Anvita Arora
Sent: Monday, 13 December, 2010 07:15
To: sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org
Subject: [sustran] IRF says misinterpretation in HT Story on cycle tracks

Dear All,
I forward the letter by IRF to HT reporter.
Both officials from the IRF and UTTIPEC have now issued letters to Hindustan
Times for the story saying that it is a misquote of statements. As Romi had
pointed out that they have interpreted "need-based" cycle tracks on the less
than 30 m right of way roads to "not-needed" and taken as "removal".
Whoever maybe at fault, what this incident shows that the media is clearly
representing the car users and will pick up any excuse to ensure that their
space on the roads is not taken up by other modes like cyclists. This echoes
the campaign against the Delhi BRT that the media had created in 2007.
Possibly the lesson for us is that camaigning for cycle inclusive planning
still needs to be done in an activist mode with the message that cycing
facilities need to be on ALL roads and is mandatory. Rational planning terms
like "need-based" cycle tracks and options like painted lines etc only give
ammunition to remove cycle tracks.
We are just finalizing a manual on "Cycling Inclusive Planning in the Indian
Subcontinent" which deals with these discussions of where do we need
segregated tracks, where painted lines and where traffic calming considering
the Indian roads and conditions. But we all know that the media doesn't read
manuals and reporters mostly suffer from problems of attention deficit. So,
I repeat, that our message cannot be diluted and we have to demand cycling
facilities on all roads.

Best regards
Anvita

---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Varinder Arora <varinderkarora at gmail.com>
Date: Sun, Dec 12, 2010 at 12:15 PM
Subject: clarification on Mr K.K.Kapila's (Chairman IRF) quote
misinterpretation in HT Story on cycle tracks .
To: subhendu.ray at gmail.com, subhendu.ray at hindustantimes.com
Cc: romionly at gmail.com, qadeeroy at gmail.com, Ashok Bhattacharjee <
diruttipec at gmail.com>, madhukishwar at csds.in, asthanaprabhakar at gmail.com,
geetamt at gmail.com, splcommtpt at nic.in, Nippo <nipesh.ar at gmail.com>,
ud-spa-09 at googlegroups.com, patwardhan.sujit at gmail.com, Rajendra Ravi <
rajendra_ravi at idsindia.net>, Anvita Arora <anvitaa at gmail.com>, Dinesh Mohan
<dmohan at cbme.iitd.ernet.in>, sujit at parisar.org, info at irfnet.org,
info at irfnet.eu, info at irfnews.org




Dear Subhendu,

This refers to your HT story "Cycle Tracks may be on the  way out"  dated
November 9, 2010  where Mr K.K. Kapila's,(Chairman, International Road
Federation)  statement has been misinterpreted .

The HT reporter had called up saying that UTTIPEC is planning to propose to
"replace" or make need based several  cycle tracks on 30 meter width roads,

So any person would appreciate such a move and no where Mr Kapila has said
that the  cycle tracks should be removed from anywhere .

IRF has already taken up the cause for safety of  two wheeler and cyclists
with Ministry of Road Transport and Highways as well as Ministry of
Industries.

IRF has also taken up a National project on safety for cyclists with help of
bicycle manufacturers and  two wheelers. The trials for the project are on
for last one month.

IRF is the last body to appreciate removal of cycle tracks rather it has
been promoting construction of more cycle tracks in the capital and other
metro cities.


With best regards


Varinder K Arora
PRO, IRF, India
09811153833
varinderkarora at gmail.com



-- 
Anvita Arora, PhD
Transport Planner,
Resident Representative, Interface for Cycling Expertise (I-CE), Netherlands
CEO, Innovative Transport Solutions (iTrans) Pvt. Ltd., TBIU, IIT, Delhi
email: anvitaa at gmail.com
-------------------------------------------------------- 
To search the archives of sustran-discuss visit
http://www.google.com/coop/cse?cx=014715651517519735401:ijjtzwbu_ss

-------------------------------------------------------- 
If you get sustran-discuss via YAHOOGROUPS, please go to
http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/listinfo/sustran-discuss to join the real
sustran-discuss and get full membership rights.

================================================================
SUSTRAN-DISCUSS is a forum devoted to discussion of people-centred,
equitable and sustainable transport with a focus on developing countries
(the 'Global South'). 
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: winmail.dat
Type: application/ms-tnef
Size: 5898 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://list.jca.apc.org/public/sustran-discuss/attachments/20101213/1225c9f4/winmail-0001.bin