Mr. Plowden's concern with the safety of TWMVs again raises the
question, "What is the goal of the event?" Is safety the main concern
being addressed via Car-Free day? If so I would think there are many
other more effective programs that could be implemented in Bangkok.

The World Car-free Network (www.worldcarfree.net) states the goal of
car free day to be "promoting alternatives to car use". It does not
specify which aspect of these alternatives is most important (air
quality, petroleum consumption, livability, health, etc). Carlos's
question comes down to whether motorcycles and tuk-tuks should be
considered an alternative to car use. My impression from the carfree
website is that motorcycles are not generally considered as one of the
alternatives.

Of course South-east Asia is not well represented on the list of
cities hosting car-free days. The Euro-centrism of this concept may
prevent motorcycles from being specifically addressed. Clearly TWMV
play a very different role in Bangkok than in London. Jakarta is the
only city I saw listed as a CarFree Day host and it appears that they
closed two main streets to all motorized traffic for 10 hours. Perhaps
this included a ban on motorcycles as well as busses.

Of course the issue may come simply down to the practicality of
enforcement. Motorcycles are infamous in Bangkok for disregarding
traffic laws. Keeping them off the streets would be a difficult task.

In distinguishing between tuk-tuk and motorcycles, the line is made
less clear by motorcycle taxis. It seems unfair to allow hree-wheeled
taxis, but not taxis with two wheels. It may also be difficult to
distinguish between a motorcycle taxi and a family on a motorcycle.

Another point to consider is what will be done with the car-free
space. If it is used as a festive location, then motorcycles may be
as out of place there as they would be at a temple festival.

Overall it seems to me best to use and all-or-nothing approach and
adjust the scope and location of the event to make enforcement
managable. It appears that most car free day events do not close all
streets in the entire city. Identifying a location where transit is
available and development is dense enough and attractive enough to
draw interest seems the most important concern.

Regarding transit, Mr. Bruun commented that the high fares on the
Skytrain represent a misguided decision because the masses cannot
afford to use it. I believe that this was an intentional effort to
target wealthier people who are more likely to be car owners. Whether
this is an equitable policy and whether it is working as intended are
important questions, but I do think that the car-owning population was
at least part of the target group for the Skytrain. If the goal was to
reduce car trips, it seems like a good choice.

-Scott