[sustran] Re: Bogota's time machine

[Cornie Huizenga]

Dear Carlos,

Thanks for this sobering update. It clearly demonstrates the importance of
intensifying advocacy for a systems change approach to urban transport. I
expect that at BAQ 2008 we will be able to have a discussion on the need for
and (the how-to) of such a systems change approach.  In Asia we now have a
large number of BRT's on the drawing board or in partial operation. How do
we ensure that this becomes part of a sustained comprehensive change and
that we avoid a Bogota like situation.

Cornie

 Message: 1
> Date: Sat, 26 Apr 2008 18:33:52 +0800
> From: Carlosfelipe Pardo <carlosfpardo at gmail.com>
> Subject: [sustran] Bogot?'s time machine
> To: Global 'South' Sustainable Transport
>        <sustran-discuss at list.jca.apc.org>
> Message-ID: <48130510.7020006 at gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
> Hi,
>
> There have been a lot of rumors regarding Bogot?'s "fate" in terms of
> transport, and a lot has happened in the last months. Some may be
> interested in knowing more about it. I will do my best to summarize the
> key issues of this "time machine" towards the past (I would say
> somewhere around the 80s) that our city has started to experience in
> terms of transport policy and practice. It's based on the latest
> "development" plan of the city, press announcements and a recent meeting
> I attended where the new Secretary of Mobility described their projects
> in some detail. If anyone would like to correct or add something,
> they're most welcome:
>
> *BRT and Metro*: As with Curitiba, many rail promoters are very
> interested in developing a rail system for Bogot?. This in itself isn't
> too bad. The bad thing is that one strategy has been to discredit the
> xistent BRT systems. This story is very long, so I won't get into it.
> For Bogot?, the current mayor won the elections partly because he
> promised to build a metro, and because the BRT's
> 6-people-per-square-meter operations had people doubting about its
> efficacy as a mass transit system. However, the mayor has never said (or
> maybe doesn't know) that a metro will have the same operation
> characteristics, but at a much higher cost. However, a bid for studies
> to develop the metro will be open soon (two weeks ago, 42 companies
> expressed their interest in taking part in such a study), financed with
> loans from development banks. In this regard, the World Bank has told
> the municipality clearly that they should be very careful about
> developing a rail system due to the known risks of such a system.
> At the same time, the mobility secretary has said "we cannot build more
> BRT (TransMilenio) because we have no more money". Strange but
> true...more about financing below. Regarding the BRT's operation and
> structure, they have also announced that they will "improve" operations,
> mainly by changing the financial structure and (see this!) possibly by
> changing the payment to operators by kilometers to another scheme (by
> passengers? that could take us 10 years back in just a couple of months).
> Finally, they have just announced that, on the "S?ptima" Avenue (where
> plans for BRT phase III had been fully designed already), they will
> build a "busway" (not a BRT, but a busway, like the one that proved that
> this scheme would not work in Bogot?, in the 1980s and 1990s). They said
> this will enhance the (fare) integration of the new integrated scheme
> they are proposing, which they say would be ready in one year. For such
> a scheme, IADB is providing a grant to the city.
>
> *Parking: *Last week, they have also announced that, due to congestion,
> cruising, and delivery truck problems, they will now "solve everything"
> by opening up parking bays in the city, AT NO COST. I told the Secretary
> of Mobility that this would just increase congestion if they didn't do a
> proper parking pricing policy, but he answered "I can't charge users for
> parking if I don't have good public transport"... Chicken and egg
> problem # 1. Further, one must note that sidewalks which were previously
> built are now being partially torn down by some shop owners, etc. Ah,
> but I have to be fair: cars can only park a maximum of 3 hours in the
> newly opened parking bays.
>
> *Roads and Highways: *Yet another idea of the current administration has
> been to say that, to solve the current deterioration of the current
> roads, they will build new roads with the "innovative model" of a
> concession. Yes, there is something strange here also: new roads to
> solve the deterioration of old roads.  I suggested they concession the
> maintenance of the existing roads, and charge for their use while using
> the charge to invest in public transport and partially solve the
> financing problem described below. However, this wasn't seen as viable
> or useful or even logical. It's also relevant to note that, since they
> have started to prioritize traffic management, traffic police are now
> overriding red phases for intersections on the BRT and pushing cars to
> the limit of the intersection (yes, on top of the pedestrian crossing
> /zebra).
>
> *Bikeways: *When the Chamber of Commerce asked the Secretary of Mobility
> about the role of bicycles in the transport system, he said "I never
> thought a bicycle could be part of a transport system". However, he went
> on a trip to Europe to learn about transport measures, and his
> conclusion about bicycles was that they are only feasible to use in the
> Netherlands, where the average trip distance is 2km. Thus, Bogot? should
> not promote bicycles (despite the existent 340kms of fully segregated
> bikeways and its 8-fold increase in use since their implementation).
>
> *Land use*: The last related measure proposed is that they will build an
> intercity train. The argument the Secretary of Mobility has given is
> that "people want to live in suburbs and leave the noise and pollution
> of the city". That is, the city is inevitable noisy and filthy, so the
> people who can afford it should do their best to live as far away as
> possible... and the city must cater the needs of those oh unfortunate
> rich people. A lesson on equity.
>
> *Financing the system*: During elections, the candidate for mayor said
> he would finance all transport improvements (metro, road network) with
> the funds gathered from traffic violations (e.g. "tickets"). Now they
> have seen that this is not viable, so they say that all development
> banks are "begging" them to take a loan, which would be payable starting
> 2015... Also, they have reminded us that concession highways pay for
> themselves...
>
> *Politics*: As if the above were not enough to demonstrate how Bogot?
> will go back to the stone age in transport, there are also heavy
> political battles involved. In summary: any proposal that sounds like
> sustainable transport (livability, equity, less car use, more bicycles,
> more public transport) will be labeled "Pe?alosa" and they will say you
> come from his political party. Of course, under this administration all
> doors will be closed if you just mention that name, since he was the
> opposing candidate to the current mayor.
> I would also say that the current plans to stop further development of
> transmilenio and do busways is a deliberate attempt to stop any project
> that had to do with Pe?alosa, as if the development of a city had
> someone's name attached to it, the current Bogot? with wide sidewalks
> and bikeways is dubbed "Pe?alosa's city". And, since local GDP has
> increased significantly and USD exchange rate has dropped, everyone
> has/wants to have a car (loans are also pretty easy to get) and hates
> any anti-car measure.
>
> Ok, and for those who have heard about the Sunday carfree day (Ciclov?a)
> from 7am to 2pm, a congressman has proposed a law that will limit the
> time of the Ciclovia to 12 noon, and should start at 5am, despite the
> fact that at least 1million users are using the ciclov?a from 11 to 2pm.
> His argument: many people suffer from the congestion of those 117 km,
> and bikeways aren't used during that time (according to him). So,
> following this rationale, a recreational measure has to pay for the
> excessive car use in the city.
>
> That's it, in a nutshell. Sorry for the black hat, but I thought it
> would be useful to describe the status quo of Bogot?'s transport. If all
> goes as planned, we will be back in 1980 by the end of this
> administration, but we'll have the additional problems: a huge loan on
> an inexistent subway, unprecedented population of cars and motorcycles
> and the expected increased pollution, injuries, deaths in road accidents
> or from respiratory problems, and a dirty, inefficient and congested city.
>
> What to do? Comments are most welcome.
>
> Best regards,
>
> --
> Carlosfelipe Pardo
>
>
>