Arteaga-Isabel

IMPRESSIONS REPORT – LIMA CASE STUDY Isabel Arteaga Arredondo Bogotá, January 2012

Generally speaking, the two casestudies reviewed (how to walk in Miraflores, and from Public Transport companies to the Metropolitan ) show current mobility features, which are shared with other Latin American cities such as Bogota. It is surprising to hear that in both cities (Lima and Bogota) similar problems arise and similar solutions have been found at different times, despite the differences at the political, social and cultural levels. But it is also surprising to find out, through these examples that we know very little about the experiences of other countries in our region. We find that urban mobility policies implemented have gone through the same conflicts upon inception, but at different times, and that we haven’t learned from that experience so as not to fall into the same traps.

The first case, how to walk in Miraflores aims at understanding the impact pro-mobility projects have had on the Miraflores district (one of the most touristy in Lima) and determining which are the pending issuesas far as safety and accessibility of its pedestrian network is concerned, focusing on reduced mobility.

It seemsobvious that in our cities, the automotive mobility logic prevails over the pedestrian one.

It has led to the development, not only of the road infrastructure, but also the urban perception, the way we understand the city, the way we move around it. This still seemsto be a constant theme, despite the important steps taken in recent years in order to balance the pedestrian and automotive logics. This casestudy highlights it in Lima, in Bogota it has been debated over the last ten years when priority started being given to pedestrian areas as opposed to areas dedicated to cars. This objective, however, has not been fully reached. The prevailing logic seemsto continue being: vehicles before pedestrians.

It is surprising to find out, through the data in this casestudy; about the little interest Lima’s residents have for pedestrian mobility and sidewalk conditions, despite the high percentage of trips made on foot. I consider that Bogota has come a long way in this area, based on the Cultura Ciudadana (Citizen Culture) programs launched in the mid 90s, and on a number of civil engineering works built in 2000. Nevertheless, this topic still seemsto be considered as less important than bringing solutions to “on wheels mobility”.

One of the casesmentioned in the report and which I consider as shared with Bogota is linked with dedicating streets to pedestrian and the impact this has had in the transformation of urban space and social practices, particularly in anything related to the development of “new leisure areas”. The physical improvement of the street and the transformation of the road surface into public space, have obviously improved the local environment and pedestrian’s urban quality of life. It is, nevertheless, difficult to hope that these operations will have an impact at the urban

scale and that they will be duplicated in any part of the city that is not strategic for tourism or leisure (heritage centers, restaurant areas, etc…)

On the other hand, regarding the debate about underground parking lots in public spaces(parks or squares for instance), in cities such as Bogota it still hasn’t emerged. For some, increasing vehicle accessto already saturated commercial areas is counterproductive for mobility; for others who refer to positive examples such as European cities (for example Barcelona), these have proven not only accessimprovement to those areasand a rejuvenation of the pubic space, but also the use of the levels below a public space can generate income for the city as well as requalify it.

Another relevant topic dealt with in the document is the census of public and private objects (street furniture and fixtures) found in the relevant streets. We have tried to analyze why so many of them are not well located, which lead us to think that it is the institutional lack of coordination together with fragmented private initiatives that have made these elements prevent rather than facilitate pedestrian mobility in this touristy district. Usually, in such cases,the responsible institutions aren’t coordinated and efforts are made individually which produces a partial vision of the city that, as is the casehere, counters pedestrian quality mobility.

This interesting observation of the streets, their furniture, fixtures and signposting aiming at improving reduced mobility population access,could lead to specific recommendations for the public authorities dealing with how to reorganize public and private furniture and fixtures on the sidewalks, together with an adapting of the streets in order to facilitate walking …based on this observation, what could these recommendations be for the short, medium, or long terms?

The second casestudy: From Public Transport companies to the Metropolitan: A transport improvement in Lima? Recounts the appearing of Lima’s Metropolitan (BRT), and tries to establish whether this mode of transport is a real improvement, solving transport issuesin this city since Lima’s inhabitants described it as being one of their major concerns after safety.

In Bogota, as in Lima, traditional (disorganized bus services) and new (BRT in this case) systems currently coexist. It is acknowledged that the BRTnetwork is not the only mode of transport in these complex cities, and transport mode diversity is not only necessary, but also expected. The question, in both cities, is: how can they coexist? Bogota is trying to implement an Integrated Public Transport System (SITP), which would include the Transmilenio BRTsystem together with busesfrom the old system. The SITPcomprises the integrated connection and operation of different modes of Public Transport, the institutions planning mobility, accessibility infrastructure, circulation and collection of this system amongst other things. In the caseof Lima, the question would then be whether considering getting rid of the old system would be possible and realistic?

Similarly, Public Transport in Bogota has been private in a large part…the similarities with Lima are surprising in this respect according to the account of this casestudy. Deregulation and total liberalization, informality, oversupply, relationships between stakeholders, the struggle to get any additional cent, etc. are characteristics of Public Transport in these cities and are the reasons

why solutions such as the BRThave started to appear. These sometimes appear to be the “only and realâ€? solutions to the consolidated chaos. Many of the strategies mentioned in Lima are similar to those implemented in Bogota‌It would be interesting to identify which public policies and strategies were adopted in this liberal system, in order to get rid of unfair competition in attracting passengers, the Metropolitan being one of them.

It is obvious that the Metropolitan is not the solution to the total revamping of the Collective Transport System in Lima. What other strategies have been implemented? How is the Metropolitan integrated with the Metro, and what are the results? How are the local and national institutions in charge coordinated? Do they represent a complementary network? How do these two systems improve passenger travel time? How do municipal and national policies complement each other for the implementation of these two new systems?What might be the impact on urban mobility improvement over the short, medium and long terms?

Undoubtedly, one of the mandatory strategies in such a caseis the re-education of Collective Public Transport users. A few years ago, in Bogota, a Citizen Culture program was implemented with this objective. Usually, the lack of formality of the traditional system makes it highly valued by the users compared to the rules imposed by an organized system such as the BRTor the Metro, particularly at the onset of implementation. Reactions will always start by being negative due to resistance to change. Later, when the efficiency of the new modes of transport has been proven, urban culture will change. The problems mentioned about the inception of the Metropolitan are similar to those witnessed in Bogota when the Transmilenio was introduced. Changesare always difficult, especially when going from informal to formal, from disorganization to rules imposing order. It is important to note that the Metro and BRTalone will not be able to change the current transport system, it is necessary to set up a multi-modal system integrating other modes of mobility (for example integrating bicitaxis to the SITPin Bogota, which is currently unthinkable).

Otherwise, mobility will continue being impossible in our cities. Lima, Santiago or Bogota have proven that no change of this nature has ever been implemented without some technical, political or citizenship issues.