Any news or announcements threatening given the high probability that they become reality, given the mindless dynamic search and production of the road solutions "that mystery - suspiciously-lights or the actions of our social leaders, public or private, really scare me.
These threats, Valdivia is expanding to 4 tracks Valdivia Bridge (towards the Teja Island), or, instead, a tunnel under the River Valdivia from the Obelisk to the Los Robles Ave. And last weekend, in a Mercury in Santiago, I posted a mega plan of road infrastructure to Viña del Mar and around, again with the inspired leadership of Mr. Osvaldo Urrutia of SECPLAN of that city.
The thesis that I affirm my critical stance towards these policies vials, in the logic "to a greater demand for road space more choice" is the belief that the car park has a behavior similar to that of gases (other than stinky), ie, conforms to the container (streets, avenues) that contains, grows the container then growing the number of cars, and serving the "Tragedy of the Commons" by Garret Hardin, yes with a high compression capacity and charging a high cost to the quality of life of ALL citizens, not just those individuals transported in motor vehicles and roads collapse supposedly justified to expand. The extension creates a sense of improvement, but this is temporary and transitory, as the increase of road space is one of the most efficient stimuli for more people to buy and use self and time, again the space is narrow, and it seems that nothing has changed. Improvement can last 5, 10 years or so, anyway, the point is equivalent to postpone a problem, not solve it, is as sweeping and keep the dirt under the carpet or close a deep wound without being disinfected.
wore a time trying to sit down and sort through these ideas and put them in writing, when the net I get a clear SUSTRANLAC Article "The circle of urban immobility" , Charles A. G. Gonzalez on the subject. Refers to transportation planning from the offer and its consequences. Closes with some questions that invite discussion.
suggest taking the same concepts in place a transportation planning from the decline in demand as a starting point to finding solutions.
You can read below.
I hope to motivate any reader to think Valdivia or city in which c / u live differently from the conventional view.
The circle of urban immobility
Posted by: "Jorge Iván Ballesteros Toro" guatica@gmail.com
Wed, February 2, 2011 8:43 a.m. (PST)
Courtesy
Carlos A. G. Gonzalez - Consultant and Researcher Mobility and Urban Development.
The solution to the problems of urban mobility does not lie in building
increasingly of road infrastructure, just look at the example of
major U.S. cities to realize it. Reviewed by Carlos
A. G. Gonzalez, Carlos A. González
"Since the problem of urban mobility is that more and more cars but fewer roads are built, the solution is as simple as redress the balance, rushing to build more infrastructure road. " This statement, though it sounds logical, it is far from being true.
The first thing to say is that if the problem was so easy resolve and would be resolved for many years. It is no secret that nearly half a century ago, cities like Los Angeles (CA), Dallas (TX) and Detroit (MI) among others, choosing to follow such logic, built major highway systems. Nor is it a secret that in today , these cities are not only suffering from a heavy congestion of traffic , and multiple negative externalities associated, but the situation instead of abating, appears to have worsened dramatically. A despite its obvious failure, this outdated approach to planning transport widely implemented in U.S. cities during the 70, remains entrenched in our collective imagination, and what is worse, remains the guiding light of decisions of much of the local politicians, with only few exceptions.
From the technical rigor of the discipline of transportation, the idea of \u200b\u200bsolving mobility problems only from road infrastructure to offer more private cars, is known as' transport planning from offer. " That is, a trite exercise that evolved from the rule of three, in which it is estimated how many new roads or lanes must be constructed so that traffic flowing again normally. As we do not repair the common citizens is that it is the 'Chronicle of a Death Foretold', as the rule of three evolved also determines when this extension will be completely collapsed, and well, a few years later, everything starts again. In this way, we will circling this pernicious cycle of urban immobility.
The small detail, insignificant to some, is that the space for way the city is not infinite, is in fact a scarce resource. Thus, once we used all available space will discover, without any surprise that the fleet has continued to grow at an even faster rate, both by the expectation that there will be more roads, for the great momentum that gives the auto sector growth. In such a scenario , it is clear that the effects of congestion are no longer equal but even worse, that the average speed by car, as in downtown New York, is similar to which, 100 years ago, had the horse drawn carriages, that the crowded double-decker freeways, as Mexico City, is a monument to waste, and that dangerous pollution levels, as in Santiago de Chile, prevent us from go out a few days each year. Futurism "without foundation? No, just the brief account of a sad reality.
For those who analyzes urban-based arguments and environmental not wake them the same respect as those made from 'pragmatic' economic approach, only remains to remind the frustration of taxpayers to see how, after heavy investment in infrastructure road, the congestion problem quickly reappears even seems more serious. Thus, private car owners precious claim your Mayor quick fixes, and this, not to lose popularity among future Voters, he hastens to scratch the already precarious local coffers as to provide more 'roads'. Another small, insignificant you want: not only the city budget is limited, but the for infrastructure in the circle of immobility, it is always sufficient given the insatiable demand for private investment vehicle.
is then only fall back on gimmicks such as' megaprojects by Contribution Benefit Valuation General 'and' urban highways electronic toll concession ', the only thing that will, barring a few exceptions where work is really necessary, it will consume more soil city and bring more vehicles into the city.
Could it be that in Colombia we have to get to the point of chaos and waste to realize that addressing the problems of urban mobility from the viewpoint of supply does not lead anywhere? And if such an approach does not work what are the alternatives? Are we in time to redirect the course, and avoid the long way of errors city American some try to sell as models worthy of imitation ? Without doubt this is an urgent and promising new discussion begins.
* * Consultant and Researcher Mobility and Urban *.
PhD (c) Urban Studies, University of Cambridge.
www.carlosagonzalez.org
Available at:
http://www.dinero.com/opinion/opinion-on-line/circulo-inmovilidad-urbana_83213. aspx
0 comments:
Post a Comment