viernes, 20 de noviembre de 2009
Articulo: New Study Quantifies High Personal Costs of Building CA Cities for Cars
by Matthew Roth on November 19, 2009
In the Bay Area, where annual car ownership costs on average over $8,000 per person, individuals spend roughly $34 billion every year on personal transportation costs, compared to only $4.6 billion spent by public agencies on transit and roads combined. Households with poor access to public transit not only spend double the amount per year on transportation when compared to those with good access to transit, they produce more than double the amount of CO2, a greenhouse gas.
"The most astounding thing is that agencies pinch their pennies on transit and cut back and we feel like we can't afford not to save that service," said Stuart Cohen, Executive Director of TransForm. "We're already spending more than seven times as much as our agencies spend on public transit and roads just on buying and operating our vehicles."
What's more, the report points out that fuel costs represent a small minority of the cost of owning a car, so the craze for electric and other low-emission vehicles will not dramatically reduce the transportation costs for those living far from their jobs and far from transit. The best solution to combating climate change, the report notes, is to build walkable, vibrant communities where residences are situated close to job centers.
The report highlights California's Senate Bill 375 (SB 375), which establishes a legislative framework for mandating smart growth along transit corridors, and it argues there are economic incentives for individuals, developers, cities, and regions for limiting the role of the private automobile in transportation spending.
"By reducing public and private transportation costs and increasing revenues to local governments, SB 375 can help put dollars back in the pockets of consumers and local governments," said Cohen.
Windfall for All counters the claim that SB 375 will be too costly to implement during the current economic crisis with several examples of how planning denser cities and offering alternatives to private car travel can save money.
First, in Sacramento, the Sacramento Area Council of Governments (SACOG) created a 2050 development blueprint that forecasts current development patterns and compared them to smart growth patterns. SACOG found that Sacramento would save $9.4 billion in public infrastructure costs (transportation, utilities, water, etc), $655 million in annual residents' fuel costs and $8.4 billion less for land purchases to offset environmental degradation from sprawl. The city would also see a 300 percent increase in public transit use if the city clustered development around transit within an urban growth boundary.

In the Bay Area, parking regulations are a significant impediment to dense development. In San Leandro, parking minimums of more than two parking spaces for each new home made dense development a planning impossibility. When San Leandro re-wrote its downtown plan, it rezoned to allow 3,400 new homes, more than seven times the limit under the old zoning laws. The first development in the new Downtown Transit-Oriented Development Strategy, The Alameda, designed by San Francisco Architect David Baker, saves $3.9 million by eliminating a level of parking and produces 30 more affordable units, according to the report.
Based on these and other case studies, Cohen suggested California should consider levying a climate impact fee on gasoline to generate enough money to expand public transit options and expand walkable communities while improving the economy and meeting ambitious greenhouse gas targets.
"Building our communities with the expectation that every driver in a family is going to have to own their own car is part of what is part of what is bankrupting families," said Cohen. "The infrastructure for the... roads and those patterns of growth is part of what is bankrupting our public agencies."

Windfall for All Critical Recommendations
- Integrate full economic analysis into planning. The huge dividends from efficient land use become evident once personal costs, not just public budgets, are considered. Without such analysis, we will continue to promote plans and policies that cost too much for families, businesses, and local governments.
- Provide cities and counties with an infusion of funds to engage the community in planning. The state should make funds available for updating zoning codes and parking policies to make more efficient use of land and resources. Identifying strategies to maintain and expand the number of affordable homes is also critical.
- Fund cost-effective public transportation. The state needs to provide leadership and restore funds for public transit, as well as make it easier for regions to raise new revenues with climate-impact fees. Economic analysis could determine whether such fees, if spent in ways that promote more efficient communities, can reduce our overall costs.
- Innovate, evaluate and replicate. There are dozens of innovative strategies – whether an individual program such as car-sharing, or a comprehensive rewards approach such as UC San Diego’s. MTC, the Bay Area’s transportation agency, will soon launch the first “Transportation Climate Action Program.” This program will seed, evaluate and replicate innovative programs. Other regions should follow suit.
- New development should minimize pollution from new residents – or pay to mitigate it. The San Joaquin Valley is encouraging efficient development from the start. New developments that don’t provide walkable communities with convenient transportation choices must mitigate the costs of the air pollution that will be generated by future residents. The state and regional air districts should encourage this same system for mitigating the costs of greenhouse gases.
http://sf.streetsblog.org
Articulo: Porque Caracas Retrocede
Citemos un solo ejemplo: en la clasificación del año 2002 de la revista América Economía de las mejores ciudades de América Latina para hacer negocios, en la cual las variables de calidad urbana juegan un rol clave, Caracas ocupaba el lugar 25 entre 37 ciudades, por debajo de Bogotá que se ubicaba en el 16 y por encima de Medellín en el 32; en la medición de 2009 Caracas había caído al lugar 49 entre 50 ciudades, mientras que Bogotá subía al 6, afirmándose como una de las ciudades líderes de la región, y Medellín al 25.
El fenómeno no deja de sorprender porque Caracas es una ciudad de tamaño manejable (la mitad de Bogotá), capital de uno de los países más ricos del continente y que no hace demasiado era la envidia de muchos por la calidad y modernidad de sus infraestructuras y equipamientos.
Hoy, cuando el conocimiento se ha transformado en el factor de producción más importante, se sabe que las ciudades juegan el papel fundamental en el desarrollo nacional y que su buen desempeño depende de la buena integración social y de la calidad de su capital humano y del medio urbano, tres aspectos en los que Caracas no ha hecho sino retroceder en los últimos diez años.
En los 80 el Metro fue el orgullo de los caraqueños, pero hoy no sólo está atrasado en el avance de las obras sino que además, como finalmente han reconocido sus propios directivos, se encuentra al borde del colapso; los importantes esfuerzos realizados por municipios como Chacao y Baruta, con el 12% de la población de la capital, poco pesan frente al desastre de Libertador y Sucre, con 85% de la población y en manos de la “revolución” durante diez años.
En materia de capital humano es imposible olvidar la razzia gubernamental contra Intevep y el CIED, los centros de investigación y formación de Pdvsa, que conllevó la pérdida del 70% del personal más calificado; en paralelo se registra el acoso de las universidades de más prestigio y el intento de sustituirlas por vergonzosos remedos y las acciones dirigidas a politizar la investigación en el IVIC, además de la aplicación generalizada de la Lista Tascón como filtro para el ingreso de personal en la administración pública.
Como lo ha registrado Newsweek, el talento se ha convertido en el principal producto de exportación de Venezuela. En lo referente a la integración de la sociedad basta con oír los paranoicos discursos del Presidente insultando de la manera más soez y tildando de “enemigo de la patria” a quien se atreva a discrepar.
Esos son los tres principales retos que los caraqueños debemos enfrentar si queremos vivir en una ciudad digna e inclusiva, de la cual todos podamos sentirnos orgullosos y donde vivir sea un gusto y no esta suerte de tortura china a la que hoy se nos somete en nombre del “socialismo del siglo XXI”.
http://www.talcualdigital.com
Articulo: Caracas, luego existo
Valle de temblores y lágrimas, sobrada de aguas, verdes, luz, azules y senos. Habitada por insectos que se deslizan entre cemento, gamelotal y gente que se estorba entre sí. Quedamos frente al Ávila que invasivo escamotea la mirada hacia horizontes más lejanos donde bosteza el mar tan próximo que somos y no aceptamos ser. Porque el caraqueño, cuando se traslada hacia La Guaira, Macuto, o Los Caracas, conducta ya no tan habitual, lo hace como si emprendiera una expedición hacia quién sabe dónde.
Para tal aventura, de apenas 30 kilómetros por autopista, se acicala, perfuma, llena las maletas del carro hasta la cacha con cavas, vituallas y menjurjes para evitar contacto con el exceso de precios y penurias, y del sol que achicharra.
Esta ciudad, llagada de toda plaga, enseña con desdén sus basuras, sus muertes, sus desidias y caos, todos nuestros. Nos parecemos tanto a lo que no quisimos ser que fíjese usted que hasta hace poco nos tuteaban como la sucursal del cielo y otros piropos que de tan parecidos a la realidad no dejaban de ser sino meras redundancias.
Pero a eso no vinimos, a regodearnos en la cantinela de lo que no hemos podido. Acudimos aquí más bien a susurrarnos a los ojos, entre tanto barullo, lo que la música hecha por lugareños nos silba desde la calle de lo entrañable y cómplice. Y es que esta última entrega de Tesoros de la Música Venezolana dedicada a Caracas, es una voz que le habla a cada quien de lo que quiere oír o callar o reír o borrar para siempre. En todo caso es un radar. Por ello es que al entonar de memoria lo que nos ofrece esta antología se respira y suda al unísono lo que pertenece al pueblo común, tan solidario como solitario, de tiempo tan chiquito y tantas veces desdeñoso de lo que le atañe más allá de narices y polvos.
Yo que soy caraqueño luego existo, y además cobro religiosamente quince y último para mostrar mi fe de vida, me doy el lujo malsano de padecer del masoquismo de adorar a Caracas a pesar de que ella tenga la pérfida costumbre de tragarse a sus hijos.
"¡Es que los quiero tanto!" La música que han recogido con varita mágica Ilan Chester y sus panas pareciera construirse mientras la vida pasa a millón, a lomo del caballo que galopa detrás de lo que ya no será jamás pero seguimos irremediablemente persiguiendo para nunca más volver. ¿Pero qué importa que no se pueda? Regodearnos en lo imposible es nuestro mayor éxtasis y por eso dejamos las puertas entreabiertas no obstante tanto zancudo, malandro y demás alimañas, para que pueda entrar lo que nos falta.
Y finalmente, para expresarlo en palabras de García Márquez, más caraqueño que Cristóbal Colón, "era difícil ser feliz pensando en Caracas, pero era imposible no pensar en ella", damos las gracias a Ilan por habernos hecho merecedores de este obsequio que llega en momento oportuno en el que salir huyendo no es de lo más elegante que se diga.
Articulo: Parking Garages, a Multilevel History
A 1920s postcard of the Euclid Square Garage in Cleveland.
text sizeAAANovember 18, 2009
Henry Ford was the father of automobile assembly lines. President Eisenhower was the father of the interstate highway system. But the paternity of the parking garage is less clear. Like most inventions, its mother, of course, was necessity.
An exhibit at the National Building Museum in Washington, D.C., traces the history of these ever-present structures that dot the American landscape.
While the exhibit doesn't pinpoint the actual birth of the first parking garage, it does offer some facts about its early years and some of the design challenges associated with storing cars.
By 1929, there were 23 million cars on American roads, and parking quickly became a problem. Cities looked for solutions.
"The parking garage needed to be invented — it didn't really exist before," Sarah Leavitt, the curator of the exhibit, "House of Cars: Innovation and the Parking Garage," tells NPR's Robert Siegel.
An early engineering solution for multistory garages was car elevators, Leavitt explains. In the 1920s, designs were also being drawn up for ramps, including one design called the "Double Helix" for its two spiral ramps to get cars into the structure.
EnlargeCourtesy of Library of Congress
The D'Humy ramp system, first introduced in 1918, features split-level floors to maximize the number of parking spaces.
These early garages were staffed with professional parking attendants. Drivers weren't allowed to park their own cars. Some places also offered whole levels just for women so they could feel safe in the structures. And others offered babysitting while drivers shopped.
By the 1950s, the country was experiencing a parking garage construction boom. That's because parking garages permitted shoppers and workers to spend time and money downtown. Self-parking came into wide scale at this time too, Leavitt says.
And while the exhibit includes some ardent efforts at design, a parking garage is ultimately a parking garage. It's more likely to be an eyesore than a sight for sore eyes. So the garages soon went underground.
There was an added perk for these underground structures: Builders took advantage of federal funds by making them serve a dual purpose as bomb shelters.
"House of Cars" runs through next July. But if you plan to travel by car, the National Building Museum offers no parking garage. The closest one is two blocks away.
">LINK