What with (typical) agenda of bicycle, why it captures popular imagination and what is the missing piece of puzzle!

Why people support and promote bicycle agenda? Some support considering it is environmentally sustainable, promotes healthy life and community; some, reconsidering their values, choices and transportation means due to new enlightenment on subject, emerging from social, professional and commercial media. Social media in a sense that captures bicycle in all its action and glory all the time; professional media in a sense every alternate post talking about subject of new mobility beyond fossil fuel; and commercial media in a sense those promoted by scores of new businesses emerging almost everyday around idea of bicycle, bicycle infrastructure, MaaS etc.

A lot is happening in this space of bicycle, micromobility and at its periphery, as its still easier for an individual or a group of people to think of building a business around the subject of bicycle, e-bicycle, e-scooters etc. So we see lot of buzz and momentum around the bicycle agenda.

Why even some of those people support bicycle agenda even if they don’t own a bicycle. Possibly they relate more bicycles with safer streets, so good for them irrespective.

There are those who own car but still support bicycle agenda, either they use less car and more bicycle and public transport OR simply to go with the popular opinion OR to distinguish themselves from other (bad?) car owners, considering themselves good car owners. This including cars of all shape, size and fuel types.

Then from a panoramic world view-

There are those who support and want to use bicycle but they don’t have access to bicycle tracks and bicycle infrastructure in their city. (They are many)

There are those individuals and dual income household who / at least one of them cannot bicycle to work due to long distance of work place. (They are many too)

Lets just not talk about role of weather here, as there are always both examples to quote.

There are those individuals and those households who can't even afford the bicycle, whether for individual or for whole family. (There are way to many)

Lets also not forget those, who cannot manage without car, or cannot manage only with bicycle, considering the kind of personal, household or professional situation they are in. (Health, ability, old dependent members, household members with special needs etc.) (There are still many)

So, contrary to the popular notion, bicycle agenda is a complex subject, its not always about either “for” or “against” if you assess subject at global level, going beyond city and neighbourhood. Typical bicycle agenda has certainly lot to do with reducing dependency on fossil fuel, health and safer streets, but researchers, planners and policy makers must consider that individual, household and community choices are not always obvious or easy.

[Views and observations are personal] 

The problem of picturesque cities and towns!

Please visit my web page "Urban Tenets" at https://urbantenets.nl/

************************************************

The beautiful and picturesque cities and towns, which are many here in Netherlands for instance; the problem with them is that every time you step out on to the street or from the moment you arrive in these scenic cities and towns, you run the risk of unintentionally getting captured in someone or other’s camera, unexpectedly and at an unimaginable frequency; either getting immortalised in someone’s digital archive or soon to be published on all sorts of social or professional media. You will find yourself surrounded by amature and professional photographers alike, who just can’t help capturing the beautiful surroundings and in the process capturing you, while you may find yourself doing the same. Come to think of it; not to speak of locals and camera-shy, though it may sometimes be amusing but many a times rather uncomfortable and scary experience, even for tourists. It somehow feels very awkward at times and sometimes a nuisance, it also feels very different than the passive city surveillance, which are increasingly being boasted as essential application for smart cities, while later can still be controlled and be anonymised.

Getting unintentionally or intentionally captured in someone’s (eg. phone) camera is a social problem for sure, rather it’s not just a problem of a picturesque city, it’s a problem of any city, any tourist attraction, any commercial district, any event, any workshop etc.

Thinking of solutions, it’s not that nothing can be done; but certainly, choice cannot be left at the user end.

So, on part of all phone manufactures, they may play their role by allowing automatic and default feature something like face blur for unintended persons in crowed situations or otherwise (without compromising on the subject of interest or overall aesthetics of composition), may be based on geolocation or some algorithm; possibly on their next launch.

Social and professional media platforms may play their responsible role again by automatically blurring the faces of people in background or adding Bokeh blur or some other effects during the process of picture upload to public posts and during sharing/ forwarding of photographs, possibly on their next upgrade.  

#city #touristcity #touristtowns #smartcity #urbanplanning #urbanmanagement #architecture #Netherlands #Amsterdam #photography #rotterdam #Denhaag #Hauge #Utrecht #Eindhoven #Delft #socialmedia #futurecities #facebook #linkedin #instagram #twitter #iphone #samsung

How autonomous our public spaces are, and why its worth consideration to think beyond contextual planning.

Please visit my web page "Urban Tenets" at https://urbantenets.nl/

************************************************

Whether our public spaces are autonomous or do they only have identity and utility as a function of something else. Public spaces for instance, not being autonomous has an embedded problem, that is, if something else on which it depends, if that something else - the context - changes then public space may become defunct or underutilized.

The traditional urban planning and urban design values of context and surroundings are important but over-emphasis on context may be a compromise and sometimes inefficient way to deal with scarce resource.

Context in a built environment may change anytime or over a period of time due to forces of commerce, real estate, demographic changes, technological shifts, aggravated climate change impacts, and this context anchorage may hence be counterintuitive, a severe compromise on the quality of public realm for instance and even question mark on its existence.

Land is scarce and precious in a city and lifestyle dynamics is changing, so public spaces are expected to serve a purpose larger than its traditional perceptual value, they are expected to have a functionality beyond its established notion and planning and design which should look for its own identity and autonomy.

Hence the need of context independence (doesn’t mean anti-context) and autonomy of spaces (doesn’t mean incompatibility to surrounding) may be worth consideration.

Today, take water out of equation (for instance due to dry riverbed, polluted water) and our waterfronts may not function as envisaged; take buzz out of market place (unaffordable commercial real estate, vacant array of shops, emergence of new attractions elsewhere) and market squares may not perform as expected. If the context is gone, then once thriving public space may become deserted just like that, hence the need of autonomous public spaces.

So, the question to deliberate is, how do we plan and design our public spaces, rich and engaging enough, safe enough and attractive enough on its own, so that they function at its peak autonomously, irrespective of context, while having a context can always be an additional advantage.

#Urbanplanning #urbanmanagement #urbandesign #smartcity #publicspaces