[sustran] Re: [NewMobility] Finding a win-win strategy for Bogota

[Lake Sagaris]

Hi Eric and everyone on the list (I'm reposting this because it didn't go 
through yesterday)

Your observations are interesting and worthwhile, although I'd like to 
clarify a few points. On El Tiempo, I was referring to their incredibly 
biased coverage (Banner headlines "Chaos is coming!" in reference to the 
August 6th expansion of TransMilenio) while we were in Bogota. (I worked as 
a foreign correspondent for 20 years before switching to translation two 
years back, so have some sense of fair and biased ways of handling 
controversy in the media). This was primarily in another paper owned by the 
same group, although there were several articles in El Tiempo itself and I 
was amazed at how one-sided it was.

Both Pato and I thought that probably one of the most important successes 
of Transmilenio was the fact that not only has it created what we consider 
a "metro-quality" (ie first rate, egalitarian transport for all) means of 
transportation, it has done so by working with private bus firms. We see 
this as being of incredible importance because of the highly fragmented 
structure of bus ownership in Santiago and indeed most Latin American 
cities. There's not much point in simply blaming the buses for the poor 
quality of public transport -- they are primarily PYMEs, the small and 
medium-sized firms that are so in fashion today because they create 
employment etc. What Transmilenio did, however, which may end up being its 
most significant contribution was to  restructure the way private ownership 
functions, and that constitutes a breakthrough for all of us grappling with 
these issues in this continent.

The reason there is such strong anti-bus sentiment in most Latin American 
cities comes from a variety of sources. Undoubtedly, the resentment is 
fueled by the fact that the buses are in such bad shape, are involved in a 
disproportionate number of serious, crippling and fatal accidents, and as a 
system treat their basically captive customers very poorly. This does not 
endear a system to its users, potential or actual. Users have not only the 
right, but the obligation to criticize and from there go on to demand and 
work for improvements to the buses they are forced to ride in. This is 
where much of the anti-bus sentiment comes from, because it is the 
overwhelming perception of the system -- and it corresponds to reality 
(unfortunately, for all us bus advocates, because there are some wonderful 
things about buses in LA, mainly related to short waiting times, because 
the coverage is so high).

That said, one of the points we have brought up often is that it makes no 
sense for the public works ministry or other governmental bodies to be 
willing to subsidize a single highway project like the Costanera Norte to 
the tune of US$120 million, then turn around and say there's no money for 
public transit, as has happened in Santiago in recent years.

Our local proposals include the idea of taxi lanes to bring customers to 
restaurants in Bellavista, for example, precisely because of their 
importance to the local economy (many of our residents -- ie members of 
Living City -- are taxi owners/drivers) and because while taxis may not be 
as efficient as buses on some levels, they are more practical for some uses 
and more efficient than having the area overrun with people trying to park 
during rush periods. They are also a practical alternative when linked to 
our market areas, where again they are an essential part of our urban 
ecology and economy.

By the way, I don't think your comments on the "us" and "them" dichotomy or 
characterizing people as "suits" vs. "non-suits" is very helpful, to be 
honest, at least not in the Latin American context. We don't think like 
that at Living City and that doesn't strike me as the attitude we have 
found among transport engineers, urban planners and others we have ended up 
working with over the years. (It is in fact amazing who wears suits and who 
doesn't in these cultures.) And virtually everybody uses buses (60-80%), 
with a lot of working and poor people using bicycles... So bike lanes are 
extremely important to improving equality through transport mechanisms.

We thought that one of the weaknesses of the TransMilenium and bike lanes 
approach used in Bogota was the lack of integration of small and 
medium-scale local commerce, which is extremely important to creating 
thriving economies, especially in the cities of Latin America. The bike 
lanes in Bogota have created an incredible network of mobile stands 
offering juice to people out on their bikes on Sundays, but small cafés 
(with some exceptions) and other commerce were mostly closed. This is good 
from the mental health point of view, no doubt, as everyone has a right to 
rest, but poor because it keeps the road-as-the-place-for-bikes approach 
restricted to bikes-for-fun, rather than bikes-for-serious-urban 
transportation, which is where many many people would like to see them. 
Bikes, in flat cities like Santiago, are an excellent option for moving 
young people to and from school and, if organized well, can improve safety 
levels on streets.

Anyway, these are a few thoughts based on our recent visit and these 
comments. I would add that we're not really into looking for "models" to 
bring home and try on whole (most people are pretty fed up with the 
economic "model" that has been forced down peoples' throats over the past 
20 years), but rather looking at, and learning from the experience of other 
cities, particularly those facing similar challenges. Again, we thought 
that Bogota has made a major contribution by overcoming the private vs. 
public administration models and offers a breakthrough in that sense -- if 
individual bus owners can be brought together so as to make some management 
of the system possible. That would create win-win situation for everyone.

Best
Lake



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.jca.apc.org/manage/private/sustran-discuss/attachments/20010808/280575fb/attachment.htm