Salvemos Las Lomas Headline Animator

En defensa del patrimonio urbano de la ciudad

Las Lomas de Chapultepec es un fraccionamiento residencial diseñado y desarrollado en los años 20's, sobre las colinas ubicadas al poniente de la ciudad, bajo el concepto urbanistico suburbano americano de la epoca, respetando la orografia y los collados que permiten el drenaje natural y areas de absorcion del agua de lluvia; se le doto con parques, calles amplias y avenidas jardinadas, que siguen las curvas de nivel del terreno, lotes grandes y reglamentaciones para mantener la densidad de construccion baja con mucho jardin, casas abiertas con setos perimetrales bajos en lugar de bardas; se le dotó de varios centros de barrio para alojar comercios y servicios necesarios para los vecinos, a distancias caminables.
Al paso del tiempo, por sus cualidades humanas y urbanisticas intrinsecas, se convirtio en la mejor y mas prestigiada colonia residencial de la ciudad.
A partir de la regencia del Sr. Hank, y como consecuencia del cambio al uso del suelo en las 7 manzanas entre la Fuente de Petroleos y Prado Sur/Prado Norte, autorizado sin consultar a los vecinos y aprovechado por el mismo, inicia el deterioro y la destruccion de la colonia; se construyen edificios de oficinas, que trajeron poblacion flotante, muchos autos y con estos comercio informal y ambulante, los cuidacoches, invasion de las calles con autos estacionados durante todo el dia, y la saturacion del transporte publico.
Simultaneamente, en Bosques de las Lomas, cambian el uso de suelo a los lotes del circuito Ciruelos y Duraznos, autorizando edificios de oficina, con identicas consecuencias. La apertura del puente de Monte Libano a Tecamachalco primero, el de Cofre de Perote después y el llamado Puente Viejo, permitieron la invasion de la colonia por miles de autos de residentes en Tecamachalco, La Herradura, y mas recientemente Interlomas y los desarrollos inmobiliarios en esa zona del estado de Mexico, colonias desarrolladas sin planeacion urbana integral, sin dotarlas con vias de acceso independientes y perimetrales a Lomas de Chapultepec y Cuajimalpa. En el colmo de falta de planeacion, se desarrolla Santa Fe/Bosque de Lilas sin las vias de acceso necesarias, ni servicio de trasporte publico adecuado, y las calles de acceso, existentes desde hace años, no se arreglan para que opere un transporte publico de calidad y asi absorber parte del aforo vehicular que transita entre el sur poniente y Santa Fe/Lilas, sin ingresar a las Lomas, por tal motivo todos los automoviles atraidos a estos desarrollos son obligados a transitar por Paseo de la Reforma, Palmas y Virreyes, Constituyentes/Observatorio desde y hacia el Periferico, unica via para llevarlos al norte hacia Ciudad Satelite o al sur hacia San Jeronimo y Viaducto al oriente.
El problema tiene solución, pero ésta no es ampliar vialidades ni hacer obras que incentiven y faciliten la movilidad en automovil con 1 ocupante, sino en ofrecer transporte publico de calidad que transporta 200 personas por autobus y hacer que quien causa el congestionamiento, el automovilista, pague por ello, en beneficio de los mas.

lunes, 19 de noviembre de 2012

Pasivando el Trafico -postales de Londres

@TS:

I understand your concerns, and these need to be implemented well, but let's think about it like this.  In Paris, we would have cars that move through with a speed limit of 30km/h. At this rate, we can move 1 car 0.5km/min.  Add in traffic lights and traffic, and this gets reduced to our average: ~ 10km/h, or 0.16km/min.  So we can do a few things:

1. We can reduce the stop/start time from traffic lights and traffic.  If a car could continually move through at 10km/h, it would get to the end point just as quickly as a car that moves at 30km/h with the stop/go of traffic lights.  10km/h seems slow, but the end throughput is just as a high as before, and the rate of accidents drops over 50%, with the rate of accident mortality dropping over 95%.  This is a HUGE win: massively decreasing road accidents, while maintaining average time from start to finish for driving.

2. Decreasing overall speed of traffic encourages alternative forms of transportation because it makes them safer.  One of the biggest reasons cited from non-bikers is a fear of getting hit by cars.  You can either add more bike lanes, or make the routes they already take slower (and thereby safer).  This can have a net positive impact on a zone, with zero traffic flow impact.

3. We have seen net movement flow actually INCREASE by reducing traffic speed, and here's how.  First, imagine 100 cars moving at 10km/h, or taking about 6.5 minutes to go 1km. An average car length at 4 meters + space between, you end up with ~ 10 meters per car including gaps. 100 cars = 1,000 meters, or 1km. If you take 2 lanes, that means you get 200 cars per km.  In Europe the average number of persons per car is 1.5 (in the us, this is closer to 1.1).  Let's take our higher number, and we see that we move 300 people in the 6 minutes for a 2 lane road.  We also see an average of 3 bikes / minute in Paris (not high for Europe), or 18 people on bikes. Now let's take out one lane, so we are moving 150 people in cars per 6 minutes.  Since we consistently see biking multiply by 10x when we provide dedicated space for them, we immediately see ~ 30 bikes per minute, or 180 people on bikes per the 6 minutes.  Our net human flow has now gone from 300 people in cars to 150 people in cars + 180 people on bikes, or 330 people total.

We see this time and time again.  If the goal is to increase the total number of *cars* moved, by all means, making bigger, faster roads is the way to do that.  But if the goal is to increase total number of *people* moved, we see slight increases in car congestion yields such incredible benefits in pedestrian and bike throughput that the ultimate gains far outweigh the increase in congestion.  As an added bonus, the slight increase in congestion creates stronger demand for alternatives over time, thus increasing our overall capacity and decreasing congestion.  When no alternatives are provided, congestion has nowhere to go.

Un ilustrativo video que muestra la diversidad de acciones que pueden tomarse con el objeto de hacer las calles mas seguras, mas amigables a peatones y ciclistas, calles completas y compartidas que atienden las necesidades de todos los actores urbanos, subordinando a los mas perjudiciales y estorbosos.

domingo, 18 de noviembre de 2012

El Trafico Mitico

ROBERTO REMES TELLO DE MENESES

Pocas cosas pueden transformar más a una persona que el automóvil. La histeria fluye y, hasta cierto punto, es socialmente aceptada. En esos momentos, el resto del mundo no importa nada, sólo sé que los demás me estorban.

Las grandes ciudades suelen fabricar esos incómodos momentos de histeria. En la misión de llegar a nuestro trabajo, casa o compromiso, asumimos nuestro rol y hacemos todo lo necesario para alcanzarla. Eso incluye claxon, insulto, cerrón, acelerón, atajos, pasarse el alto.

El remedio más efectivo que he encontrado contra la histeria del tránsito pesado es no manejar diario. Puede ser que en mi caso esto reporte cierto estoicismo, porque por lo regular no voy a un punto específico sino que suelo visitar tres o más lugares cada día. Me suelen acompañar mi bicicleta plegable, o la bicicleta barata que encadeno en la parada del trolebús.

El segundo remedio, entendiendo que sólo una minoría de los automovilistas está dispuesta a cambiar de modo de transporte por la congestión, es hacer respetar los límites de velocidad. Éstos pueden variar de ciudad en ciudad pero andarán entre 80-100KmH en vías sin semáforo, 60-70KmH en avenidas y en 30-40KmH en calles secundarias. Asimismo, hay que ser excesivamente respetuoso del peatón, detenerse, darle su espacio y su tiempo.

Cuando uno se calma frente al volante, hay menos momentos de sorpresa que lo alteren a uno. Tengo más tiempo para ver al que viene rápido, al que se me va a cerrar, y puedo estar más propenso a ceder el paso. Se acaba el estrés, el congestionamiento se torna relativo: ya no depende de las obras en curso, la lluvia torrencial, o las supuestas genialidades de un gobierno para promover la movilidad sustentable.

En la Ciudad de México, en Paseo de la Reforma, el gobierno tomó los primeros 2 metros de la lateral para hacer una ciclovía hace un par de años. Hubo quejas, pero en realidad ese espacio correspondía a automóviles estacionados ilegalmente. El estacionamiento ilegal es más tolerado por otro automovilista que una ciclovía.

Enmedio de la histeria, el conductor supone que todas las políticas públicas de la ciudad tendrían que enfocarse a resolver SU congestionamiento, SU problema. Los agentes de tránsito deben salir a darle más tiempo al verde del semáforo en su camino, que no me instalen una ciclovía, que no den un carril exclusivo al transporte público, que quiten ESE auto mal estacionado.

No tengo la menor duda de que los gobiernos tienen que escuchar las distintas visiones de un problema para entenderlo y solucionarlo. El error recurrente, en materia de congestionamiento, consiste en creer que un congestionamiento en específico es un problema público, y en consecuencia están dispuestos a invertir decenas o cientos de millones de pesos para resolverlo.

El verdadero problema, cuando uno ve autos detenidos o avanzando muy lentamente, está en la manera en que todos decidimos movermos. Las ciudades se expanden, la poblacion aumenta, se requieren más viajes y éstos son más largos y utilizando los mismos carriles que todos compartimos. 

Obvio, molesta que en un punto específico uno destine atípicamente 20 minutos pudiéndolo pasar en 2. Sin embargo, desde que yo tengo uso de razón, la autoridad se aboca a “resolver” el tráfico punto por punto y no con una visión general: necesitamos mantener o disminuir los kilómetros recorridos en auto, y canalizar los nuevos viajes al transporte público o bicicleta. Para lograrlo sólo hay dos vías convergentes: 1) que la ciudad se compacte y 2) que de manera sistemática los automovilistas pierdan territorio (que se destine espacio de calle a poner ciclovías, carriles exclusivos para el bus, ampliacion de banquetas, que se peatonalicen calles, que se elimine el subsidio a la gasolina y se aplique un impuesto destinado a transporte publico, que paguen por estacionarse en calle, y por uso de vias de acceso controlado e ingreso a zonas congestionadas, etc. y asi se encarezca  y racionalize el uso).

… Mientras tanto, el lector mira de reojo el semáforo lejano y lee con escepticismo este artículo. Espera que lo pongan en verde por 5 minutos (que ningún peatón cruce) y que por fin pueda llegar rapidamente … al siguiente congestionamiento, ¿Qué no se dan cuenta los políticos?, murmura con experiencia.

(@GoberRemes)

 

sábado, 17 de noviembre de 2012

El oficio del ciudadano - El Sitio del Discurso - Adqat -

El oficio del ciudadano Oct 30   Categorias: Adqat Editorial
El oficio del ciudadano
0.0/5 Rating (0 votos)

Aprender un oficio requiere muchas horas de práctica, una mecánica pero progresiva repetición de ciertos actos de manera que cada vez es posible ejecutarlos mejor. A través del trabajo manual con las cosas aprendemos más de nuestro cuerpo y descubrimos cómo el afuera afecta el adentro. El filósofo pragmatista Richard Sennett detalla que se necesitan en promedio 10,000 horas de trabajo manual para perfeccionar un arte y convertirse en maestro. 

Podríamos intentar concebir la ciudadanía como un oficio que tiene como materia prima a la ciudad y como instrumento de trabajo prácticas para la adquisición de comportamientos ‘dignos de admiración’, guiados por una serie de reglas o pautas, tal como un oficio artesanal más, que también requiere muchas horas de práctica, disciplina y constancia.

¿Es posible definir un oficio como tal? La pretensión suena pedante y moralista, como si alguien tuviera la autoridad para hablar del tema cuando basta una mirada de ceja levantada al panorama mundial actual como para deprimirse o para reconocer la banalidad en que ha caído tal discurso.

Ni modo, metamos las manos al barro. ¿En qué consistiría tal oficio? En primer lugar en reconocer el lugar de trabajo, el taller. Para este caso hablaremos de la ciudad, lugar donde ya vive más de la mitad de la población mundial. Definir lo que es ciudad es algo sumamente complejo. Para usos prácticos de este escrito diremos que es ese espacio que es público –de todos y de nadie-, que articula personas, mercancías, recursos, servicios y que está reglamentado. Pensemos sobre todo que la ciudad es una calle y en sentido más amplio, una articulación de calles. Una calle cerrada por casetas, como ocurre con un fraccionamiento, sería una ciudad aparte.

¿Y quién es el artesano? Definamos provisionalmente lo ciudadano como el acto de hacerse 
partícipe de la vida de los demás y aprender a hacer parte de la propia vida a los otros dentro de un ámbito compartido. El ciudadano sería aquel que incorpora ciertas prácticas en función del mundo que habita. Se entiende a sí mismo como parte de la especie y no un agregado contingente. Es decir, se sabe ser social de manera necesaria: vive, comparte y depende de los demás. En nuestro caso, ciudadano sería el que se articula con los otros en la calle.

¿En qué consistiría tal articulación? Primero habría que evitar el tradicional error de pensar que lo ciudadano es un asunto legal, las obligaciones y los derechos que uno adquiere al vivir en un Estado-Nación. Ciudadano es quien es parte de una polis. Es algo que no está dado y por lo que hay que trabajar, hacerse parte de algo, de un espacio, de los otros. Y hacerse parte no es un asunto discursivo, moral, o no únicamente. Previo a ello es el reconocerse siendo material, una entidad física como el asfalto, los árboles, las banquetas, la luz del sol, los otros, los animales, los semáforos.

Ser ciudadano no es algo abstracto sino algo muy concreto, como la harina para amasar el pan no es una idea sino algo tangible que se puede moldear con las manos. El ciudadano es lo que es su ciudad y lo que va sucediendo en ella. Por eso puede ser un oficio muy cruel y muy duro, cuando se vive en una ciudad destrozada.
Pero ese reconocerse como parte de la ciudad tampoco es un asunto pasivo, como sentarse en una banca a esperar que las piernas se conviertan en poste cableado. Requiere, como el trabajo oficioso de un taller, que se intervenga la materia prima y que se sude con ella, que se emplee mucha concentración y mucho cuerpo: El ciudadano es el que altera su espacio público. Podríamos decir que los grafiteros lo hacen muy bien, aunque muchos se sientan agredidos por sus prácticas, lo que requeriría un diálogo para no quedarse en el enojo. Hay formas más completas que el grafiti, al final una técnica rudimentaria y un tanto tribu-céntrica, pero el primer paso sí que lo dan: perderle el miedo al oficio, afectar eso que me rodea y afectarme haciéndolo.

Por ejemplo hay quienes abren surcos en el asfalto para sembrar hortalizas  y compartirlas con el barrio. O quienes pintan la calle para otorgar seguridad a quienes la usan y no precisamente en un auto. También hay quienes utilizan toda su creatividad para dejar hermosa su fachada, algo que suma a la belleza o resta fealdad a la ciudad.  O mis favoritos, los que hacen arte efímero al moverse, de manera artesanal, con suma discreción por la ciudad: en bicicleta, patineta o a pié. Ellos practican el oficio del ciudadano que encuentra su mejor vinculación con el movimiento en la calle y con la menor exposición mortal de los demás. Han integrado su vivir en comunidad en gran medida.

Por el contrario, ciudadano no es aquel que presume una gran estatura moral y hace de opinólogo en los grandes medios, ni el que vota cada tres años, mucho menos el que es votado para robar dinero público. No lo es necesariamente el que sólo trabaja para sacar plata pero no trabaja su acción entre la casa y el negocio. Tampoco lo es el activista que sólo en momentos mediáticos pone el ejemplo. 
Estrictamente, ciudadano no es nadie que viva en una sociedad donde la sangre corre todos los días y donde el presidente compra un avión de miles de millones de dólares cuando hay millones de bocas hambrientas. No hay ciudadanía en un país que vota al partido que más ha robado, como no hay ciudadanía en el país que quiere votar a los menos peores.

No hay ciudadanía como sí hay panaderos, fontaneros, electricistas, albañiles, mecánicos, maestros, pintores, poetas, cineastas, artistas, barrenderos. ¿Por qué? Porque nadie nos dijo que había que dedicarle tiempo y esfuerzo, que también es un oficio placentero y que es el más digno de todos los que podríamos aprender. 

Jesús Carlos Soto Morfín

Anexo de supuestos y propuestas para pensar de otra manera el oficio 

 Se cree que:

A.     Se es ciudadano únicamente por adquirir una serie de derechos y entre ellos el del voto.
B.     Es necesario un sistema representativo divido en dos ideologías fundantes: la izquierda y la derecha.
C.     El ámbito del deber se restringe a estatutos morales definidos por la tradición.
D.    Basta con respetar las leyes vigentes y tener un trabajo remunerado.
E.     Somos incapaces de auto gobierno y por lo tanto mecanismos coercitivos para forzarnos a vivir en sociedad son los únicos medios para formar una cultura de respeto.  

Se podría repensar que:

A. Lo ciudadano se adquiere por práctica y es una profesión de por vida; una ética que debe cultivarse y que requiere de cuidado. Lo ciudadano es una cultura de hábitos, no son derechos, esos se deberían tener por pertenecer a la especie humana.
B. El deber es un compromiso que cada quien adquiere consigo mismo de manera autónoma y lúdica (con imaginación y libertad inventiva). No hay leyes incuestionables, y las que estén vigentes habrán de respetarse en tanto no atenten contra la integridad propia sino por el contrario, sean causa de bienestar.
C. La desobediencia civil como un mecanismo fundamental de la ciudadanía cuando se instituyen leyes injustas (es más que un derecho). Por lo tanto, sería el pilar del aparato democrático, no los partidos políticos.
D. La provocación al otro como una manera de educarnos socialmente. En lugar de tomar las armas es mejor practicar la violencia simbólica. Avergonzar públicamente a aquel que con sus actos genera una vida pública degradante. 
E. Sólo se puede ser ciudadano entre ciudadanos, por lo tanto hay que asumir la tarea de transformar el comportamiento de los congéneres. Si se vive en un país corrupto es muy probable que seamos partícipes, de algún modo, de ello.
F. Las ideologías no son lo esencial sino la organización colectiva en función de objetivos compartidos, donde la conservación territorial es prioridad no sujeta a discusiones ideológicas. No puede haber sistema político alguno sin agua, aire o tierra sanos.
G. Cualquier trabajo no es digno por el sólo hecho de proveer sustento a quien lo ejerce. Se necesitan condiciones mínimas y retribución suficiente. El estatuto del trabajo debería estar a la par del estatuto del ocio. Ambas cosas son vitales.
H. La función pública debería ser considerada una tarea de alta exigencia a la que no cualquiera debería acceder y no debería considerarse más como un oficio. No más especialistas en política, es decir, políticos. Se requieren ciudadanos oficiosos que sepan gobernarse, hacer bien el pan, reparar las tuberías, pavimentar las banquetas o dar clases en escuelas públicas, que por un momento decidan gobernar sobre los otros, hagan uso exclusivo de los servicios públicos y, después de un período, regresen a lo suyo.

El oficio del ciudadano consistiría en una serie de prácticas cotidianas, que irían desde la clasificación de la basura, hasta la participación constante en el barrio con tareas de organización básica para la toma de decisiones en función de problemas de cuadra. Nadie debería alegar que por exceso de trabajo no tendría tiempo para ello, pues no debería existir trabajo alguno que arrebatara horas al oficio ciudadano. Así, lo ciudadano dejaría de ser moneda de cambio para los partidos y los medios de comunicación para ser lo que en principio se pensó: la responsabilidad que asumían hombres en la práctica libres, para darse sus propias leyes a través del intercambio de la palabra en un espacio común. Todo lo contrario a la tiranía, la dictadura, la nobleza o el monopolio mediático.

Déje un comentario

 

jueves, 15 de noviembre de 2012

Como Viajas es Quien Eres

How you travel is who you are

About the author
Ken Worpole is an author and policy adviser.
The world, it seems, is constantly on the move. People routinely travel more, and farther, than in any previous era in history, and huge material and social infrastructures are needed to accommodate the incessant, universal human flow. The disciplines of work, study, and family, the seasonal holiday, the search for refuge or simply for ‘experience’ itself, trigger our movements and give them purpose. For some, it’s cool to be elsewhere; for others, it’s a matter of life or death; for most, it’s both routine necessity and pleasure.

No wonder that understanding of transport, tourism, and travel issues, and their connection to other aspects of society, is a prime concern for governments, businesses, and policy and research institutes around the world. Yet the very ‘professionalisation’ of this concern can itself remove us from the heart of what travel is about: the experience of movement.

Indeed, the problem with much of the conventional debate about transport policy is that it is preoccupied with the quantity of movement rather than the quality of experience. While rightly concerned with the damaging ‘externalities’ of travel – traffic accidents, pollution, despoliation of the landscape, unquenchable appetite for finite environmental resources – transport experts pay too little attention to the ‘internalities’. By this I mean the sense of existential autonomy which often comes with travel, the rugged invulnerability which drivers clearly feel as they escape the traffic and find a clear road, the pleasures of the view from the train window passing through a landscape, as well as, of course, the immiserating attenuation of the self and of the spirit which results from just as many other journeys – grid-locked in traffic on the motorway, waiting for a bus while passing cars spray you with surface-water, or stuck at an airport as the fog descends with only yesterday’s paper to read and ’flu coming on.

These banal yet essential realities of many people’s lives are very far from the images of travel that surround us – in tourist brochures, lifestyle magazines, and television advertisements or programmes – which often present the travel experience as an escape from confinement to freedom. Departure, movement, and arrival are bathed in a luminous glow of carefree contentment. All is sleek, shiny, smooth, spacious, and smiling. To be on the move is to be fulfilled.

The sheer, lived contrast between reality and fantasy is a further reason to start a discussion about transport that begins with human experience. Thus, rather than agonising over the travel statistics which confirm the sheer scale of travel across the globe, it might be more productive to reflect – at the outset of this debate at least – on the nature of movement itself, its existential highs and lows, its role in everyday life, as well as its opportunities and dangers. Otherwise no amount of legislation, regulation or moralising will make a scrap of difference in the long term.

What we want, and do

Changing people’s travel patterns – and not just other people’s – hypocrite, lecteur! – is going to involve a significant change in lifestyles and values: for travel is only one factor in an inter-related world of social and cultural complexity and change. No amount of admonition or exhortation is likely to make a certain Mr Prescott of Hull wait fifteen minutes for a bus in Castle Street or Ferensway to get to Hull station in order to catch the 10.25 to Kings Cross, changing at Doncaster for the delayed Edinburgh-London train, only to wait in darkness and squalor at Kings Cross Underground Station for the Circle Line, arriving a total of five and a half hours later at Westminster, exhausted and bad-tempered. No, Mr Prescott will travel by Jaguar or jet; that is why we know he is important – because of the forms of travel he uses. Travel is an exercise in power and responsibility, which can be used for the good or for the bad. How you travel is who you are.

So unless we change people’s perceptions of themselves and their relations to others, we are unlikely to see politicians queuing for buses, city analysts donning cycle helmets, or pensioners swanking it in the back of limousines. In its present form, in Britain at least, travel is ridden with status-envy and sheer bad faith. As the recent Select Committee report on Walking in Towns and Cities (June 2001), noted, “Pedestrians have been treated with contempt. In a myriad of ways when we walk we are treated with less respect than when we drive”. This equation of travel mode with moral worth was made by Margaret Thatcher who claimed that if a man found himself on a bus at the age of twenty-five he knew he had failed in life. (I suspect that privately the present Prime Minister feels much the same).

Yet politicians are not the only ones guilty of hypocrisy by any means: it comes with the territory. At a recent meeting of the Town & Country Forum – the informal seminar group which inspired thisopenDemocracy strand – several rural campaigners admitted that although one of the rallying cries of the Countryside Movement was for more buses in rural areas, they admitted that in reality very few would use them. As we know, in public people will claim to want one thing, but in practice often choose to do something else.

Aux jambes, citoyens

Therefore, in this opening contribution to the transport strand of City & Country I want to start a discussion about the most basic form of transport: walking. Perhaps if we could understand walking better, who does it, when, where, why and so on, it might be possible to effect a small shift in attitudes and behaviour. In turn, such a shift would have impacts further down the line, because the whole issue of mobility is that an intervention in one area re-configures the entire field.

The British are following their American rather than European cousins in this respect, and slowly giving up the habit of walking. Between the 1980s and 1990s the number of trips per person by foot fell twenty per cent. In 1971 seventy per cent of seven-year-old children made their own way to school, mostly on foot. Today it is less than ten per cent for that age group. In the last twenty years or so, it seems as if some ghostly pied piper has spirited away the children from the streets of Britain – a displacement even more pronounced in North America – to the extent where their presence, when it occurs, is regarded as a sign of trouble. Partly this is the result of the disastrous priorities of twentieth century urban planning, illustrated by the words of one Los Angeles planner, cited in Rebecca Solnit’s engaging new history of walking, Wanderlust (Verso, 2001), who asserted that, “The pedestrian remains the largest single obstacle to free traffic movement.” In the war between the car and the walker in the modern city, the car clearly seems to have won.

Take the example of the Greenwich Millennium Village, which according to its designers was intended to be a model of environmentally friendly construction and long-term sustainability. Despite the fact that the Millennium Village has at its heart one of the most modern and expensive metro stations in the world, only completed two years ago and connecting residents to central London within minutes, a recent article by aGuardian journalist reported that – at ten minutes’ walking distance – a number of Millennium Village pioneers considered the station too far, and carried on using their cars to get to the local schools, shops and even work-places in the city.

Transport policy alone does not provide transport solutions. There are clearly many non-transport factors in the Millennium Village at work, about which as yet we know too little. Still, where there are feet, there’s hope. Of all journeys in the UK, large and small (though mostly small), walking is still a significant way of getting to places, as the following table shows:

Main mode of travel, all trips (Source: National Travel Survey 1997 – 99)
MODE %
Car driver 40
Walk 27
Car passenger 22
Bus 6
Cycle 2
Rail 1
Other 2
TOTAL 100%

In short, therefore, daily travel patterns in the UK are largely made up of walking journeys and/or travelling by car. What the figures in this table do not distinguish is the length of journey, though common sense tells us that walking journeys are likely to be shorter than journeys made by bus, rail or car. However, this in itself raises an interesting philosophical question, as to why traffic planners invariably attribute greater importance to long journeys than shorter ones – which they most certainly do. The sheer amount of money spent per user-journey on motorway and air infrastructure, is, I suspect, rather more than that spent per user-journey on city streets, pavements, minor roads, or cycle-paths. (The writer, Iain Sinclair, who recently gave a lecture at the British Library on walking round the M25, discussed with his audience the suggestion that much motorway and air infrastructure has covert military capabilities – making certain kinds of long-distance travel a continuation of war by other means, I suppose).

We have a right to query, surely, whether small journeys really are less important than long ones? Is the accompanying of children to school on foot, the pensioner’s trip to the library or post office, or the lunch-time walk of office workers to the park, restaurant or café, really less socially or economically important than the car journey of the commuter, or the long-haul flight of the sex-tourist? The American urbanist, Jane Jacobs, famously argued that most business in New York was done in the street, café or restaurant, rather than at business conventions or trade fairs.

Walking into the light

The concern with the quality rather than the quantity of travel could help us see transport policy in a new light, and walking comes with a distinguished history of human insight and self-improvement. The walker-philosopher is, after all, a key figure of the Enlightenment. Jean-Jacques Rousseau admitted in hisConfessions that he could “only meditate when I am walking. When I stop, I cease to think; my mind only works with my legs”. Wordsworth, Coleridge, Henry David Thoreau, Kant and Kierkegaard were among other famous meditative walkers. In the late twentieth century, this connection is happily still asserted. The French structuralist, Jean-Christophe Bailly, has spoken of a “generative grammar of the legs” (grammaire generative des jambes), while his compatriot, Michel de Certeau, claims that “The act of walking is to the urban system what the speech act is to language”.

Reflect also on the fact that two of the most interesting and original – though not always consistently brilliant – writers in England at present, W.G.Sebald (though his native language is German) and Iain Sinclair (already mentioned), derive their reflexive, free-associational style from their walking expeditions, which often form the basic subject matter of their books. Or think also of the narrator of Thomas Bernhard’s great novel, Korrektion, who recalls his daily walks to and from school with his best friend as constituting perhaps the most enjoyable and instructive moments of his life, much more educational than the time spent at school itself.

Those of us who love the cities we live in, know that it is only by walking (or cycling) through our favourite districts that we experience them again and again in all their uniqueness, atmosphere and detail. So – there is much to be gained by re-asserting the human scale of walking and its social richness in urban transport policy, remembering the Latin dictum, solvitur ambulando: “many things are solved by walking”.

In addition to the essay on the problems at Railtrack by Christian Wolmar already posted, in the weeks ahead we look forward to contributions from John Adams, Professor of Transport Policy at University College London, on some of the dangers represented by a world of “hyper-mobility”; Ben Plowden on “living streets”, some original thoughts on “tourism without traffic”; reflections on “the school run”; and many sharply divided opinions on the pleasures and pitfalls of the modern car.

We welcome all thoughts on this most vital of subjects, given the original assertion of this strand that “how you travel is who you are”.

martes, 13 de noviembre de 2012

Calles de Igualdad | En lugar de prioridad, que haya equidad. En lugar de coercion, que haya eleccion.

Media_httpwwwequality_pjank

Una causa para reformar el sistema de trafico, de uno que afirma el derecho de prioridad por uno que afirma la igualdad y equidad entre todos los usuarios de las calles.
Afirma, por experiencias reales, que la señalizacion de transito en una de las causas del congestionamiento del trafico y de las muertes y accidentes en la calle, porque enfatiza las 'prioridades' inspirando una falsa garantia de seguridad y asi desresponsabiliza a los usuarios de tomar las precauciones necesarias para no afectar a terceros con nuestro conducir.

lunes, 12 de noviembre de 2012

Las bicicletas de la foto | | Ciudad Posible - Onesimo Flores

Media_httpwwwbostongl_xxzda

La actitud al uso o rechazo de la bicicleta como medio de transporte urbano, es un condicionamiento mental en el que intervienen atavismos clasistas, y de estatus social preconcebidos y prejuiciosos, que hacen temer un trato discriminatorio y segregante, prejuicios sobre la 'propiedad' de montar en bicicleta a cierta edad avanzada o usando vestimenta formal de negocios. Para muchas personas la bicicleta significa fracaso economico y social, ser un 'loser' socialmente hablando.

domingo, 11 de noviembre de 2012

Jaime Lerner on what London can learn from his transformation of a Brazilian city | Society | The Guardian

Jaime Lerner rarely leaves home without his little black book. In between meetings with Russian senators, European diplomats, Korean politicians or Brazilian governors, the 70-year-old architect and urban planner opens the notebook and scribbles down his latest ideas.

Inside, there are sketches of the "portable street", a plan to transform deserted, rundown city centres into bustling communities. There are blueprints for the Dock-Dock, a tiny, futuristic automobile intended to cut congestion and pollution levels. And there are rap lyrics.

"It's possible, it's possible! You can do it! You can do it," reads the most recent, entitled The Sustainable Song. "Make the transition. Cut carbon emissions!"

Leaf through the notebook and it is easy to get a sense of the audacious and often eccentric thinking that has made him a hero in his native Brazil and a reference point for architects and city planners the world over. He is celebrated as the mayor who oversaw the once-unthinkable transformation of his hometown, Curitiba, turning a grimy, congested state capital into an economically viable example of green living and social responsibility.

Increasingly, Lerner is hailed as an environmental hero whose notebooks may hold some of the solutions to the problem of climate change - a man on a crusade to improve living and environmental conditions for future generations.

Lerner, the son of Polish immigrants, was born in 1937 in Curitiba, a then small city in the south of Brazil, which is today home to around 1.8 million people. His fascination with the city began early. As a child, he remembers watching the impoverished immigrant workers pouring off trains in the city's central station outside his house, the politicians scurrying to work in the town hall, and the clowns larking around in the circus next door. "I did my course of both fantasy and reality on that street," he recalls.

It was a time of huge social change in Brazil, with immigrants from across the world streaming into the country in search of a better future. "I always felt a great connection with the street," he says. "My dream was to be an architect."

Fantasies

After dropping out of engineering school - his local university did not offer a course in architecture at the time - and then finally studying architecture, Lerner began putting his own fantasies into practice in order to confront the realities of his hometown. By the mid-1960s, the population of Curitiba had burgeoned to nearly 500,000 and the problems that all large cities face were starting to appear.

Frustrated by the responses of the authorities, Lerner and a group of young, idealistic architects and engineers began to set out their own designs for the city's future. "I saw things happening that I thought were wrong," he says. "They were destroying the city's history, opening up big roads that wiped out the whole memory of the city, planning the city just for cars."

In contrast, Lerner's masterplan for the city involved a mix of affordable, integrated transport as well as social and environmental programmes that would help break down social divisions and bring new life to the capital of Paraná state. In 1971, aged just 33, Lerner was "appointed" mayor by the military regime that ruled Brazil between 1964 and 1985. The Lerner revolution, which would later be replicated in cities from Colombia and Cuba to Russia, began.

"The city of Curitiba became a reference for doing exactly the opposite of what other cities were doing," he says. "Other cities were building big bridges and freeways, and we were making pedestrian streets. Many cities were building metro systems, and we started our own transport system."

Key to the transformation was stealth, Lerner believes. "I said: 'We have to do things quickly because next week we might not be here anymore [because of the dictatorship].' And you have to be quick to avoid your own bureaucracy. Bureaucracy is like a fungus that contaminates everything." Over the following 20 years, a period during which Curitiba underwent drastic, rapid changes, Lerner was mayor three times. "We built the opera house in two months, the botanical gardens in three months, Niemeyer's museum in five months. We transformed the city's main street into a pedestrian area in 72 hours. It wasn't that we were chasing after records - it was necessity."

In 1988 came Lerner's masterpiece , the Rede Integrada de Transporte (RIT), or integrated transport system. The network - later reproduced in Bogotá, Los Angeles and Panama City - involved the construction of futuristic-style "tubos", tube-like streetside bus shelters from which people could travel anywhere in the city for a flat fare. The RIT was, in effect, a low-budget overland subway.

Then there were the recycling projects. Under Lerner, Curitiba began a pioneering project, exchanging food for separated rubbish with the poor in the favelas (shanty towns) that surrounded the city. "Today, Curitiba has the highest level of rubbish separation in the world," Lerner points out with pride.

At that time, Lerner recalls,"Brazil was changing, but the population's income was dropping. We realised we had to enter more into the social field - education, health, paying attention to the children. It was a very rich period of innovation."

The signs of Lerner's urban revolution are everywhere: in the once-abandoned quarries and landfill sites that have become parks and recreation areas; in the Lighthouses of Knowledge, educational centres where the city's youth can study and socialise free of charge; in the cultural centres and theatres; and even in the signs hanging from car garages, proudly proclaiming how many tyres they have recycled since the year began.

Curitiba is not perfect, as the wooden shanties near the airport and the rising murder rate indicate, but it is a radically different city from most others in the continent. The city's GDP is the fourth highest among Brazil's cities, behind only São Paulo, Rio de Janeiro and the capital, Brasília. Curitiba also boasts some of the countries lowest illiteracy and unemployment rates. "I don't like the word 'model', but Curitiba is a reference point for the whole world," Lerner says.

Buoyed by his successes as mayor, Lerner was elected governor of Paraná state in 1994. And, with paltry resources, he was forced again to look to innovation. "We did a deal with the fisherman," he recalls. "If he fishes fish, the money goes to him. If he fishes rubbish, bottles, glass, cans, we will buy it from him. If the conditions are bad for catching fish, he'll catch rubbish. The more rubbish he gets, the more money he gets and the cleaner the bay gets. The cleaner the bay gets, the more fish he'll be able to fish. It's a win-win solution."

Such initiatives have earned Lerner many fans across the world, and his programmes are today a fixed part of many urban planning curriculums.

In 1975, he was appointed an urban planning consultant by the UN. Wally N'Dow, former head of the UN Centre for Human Settlements (Habitat), has described Curitiba as "a wonderful example, because cities that follow this lead can jumpstart the economies, assist the poorest of their poor, and clean up their cities."

Since giving up politics in 2002, Lerner has become a kind of international ambassador for sustainable planning. Virtually every week he receives an international delegation in Curitiba at his former home, which is insulated by a grass-covered roof.

Lerner speaks of his hopes for the world's cities with an evangelical passion. All cities are capable of solving problems, he believes, be they the slums of Rio de Janeiro or Caracas or the congestion of London and Paris. " I'm optimistic about cities," he insists. "Mayors that I talk to say, 'This can't be done in my city; it's very big; it has 10, 12 or 15 million people.' Or they say, 'Oh, our country is very poor, our city doesn't have the resources.' And I always say it is not a question of scale or of resources - any city in the world can improve, and improve a lot, in less than three years."

Lerner also believes that urban planning can be a key weapon against global warming and climate change. "As I'm a descendent of Jews, I have some commandments that we need to follow," he says. "First commandment: use your car less. Second commandment: separate your rubbish. Third: live near to your work, or work near your home. It needs to be about life, work and movement being all together."

The rest, he says, is a question of simplicity. "One of the things I have learned is that we have to be committed to simplicity. There is no need to be scared of simplicity. And we can't want to have all the answers in the world. Many cities end up putting off things because they want to understand everything. They don't understand that innovating is about starting. Taking care of a city is a process that you start, and then give the population space to respond. There is no place in a city that can't be better. There is no toad that can't be a princess, no frog that can't become a prince."

· Jaime Lerner will be speaking in London next Monday, one of a series of Exemplar Talks at Somerset House. For details email exemplartalks@somersethouse.org.uk

Transeúnte » Puentes peatonales, monumentos al automóvil