transportation

Paris (19) Les Halles
The Canopy

The Canopy

Some 35 years ago I visited Les Halles for the first time; I was a small kid, but I remember going out of a then brand new RER through a hole (set to later become the central court), and seeing on the background the church of Saint Eustache. The commercial centre is open in 1979, at the most central spot of the Paris public transportation system. Vasconi and Pencreac’h’s architecture has not aged well, and in 2004 the City of Paris held a competition to renovate the commercial centre and the associated underground city, which extends under the garden up to the Bourse du Commerce.

David Mangin’s project, winner of the competition held in 2004 to choose an urban planning scheme for the scope of what one were the Halles, or central market, has been critized; it is too early to evaluate its qualities, but it is no doubt a clear change. The images in this post portray a particular element of the planning scheme, the Canopée+Pôle Transport project, which concerns the architecture of the large glass structure over the main court of the present mall and  its connection to the underground station, and is being built according to the project by Patrick Berger and Jacques Anziutti Architectes. Works have three interest points: on one side, the glass canopy that will cover the “hole” to the underground. On the other side, the works while the commercial centre stays open “as usual” (not often well solved, but it is not an easy job). Finally, the large concentration of temporary structures for the different specialists working on the project, which seems at first sight a housing project. In some months the results will be seen; now you can already see the green spaces organized in a more informal way.

As a comparison element, maps at the same scale (overlay grid is 100 m) of Les Halles (previous configuration, with a sketchy red outline for the Canopy), and of the Puerta del Sol in Madrid, that after the opening of the new Cercanías (a system like RER in Paris or BART in San Francisco) plays a similar urban role, albeit with a more traditional architecture.

The Canopy as seen through the sitework offices

The Canopy as seen through the sitework offices

Puerta del Sol, Madrid

Puerta del Sol, Madrid

Les Halles area, Paris

Les Halles area, Paris

Canopy and works

Canopy and works

A temporary corridor during works

A temporary corridor during works

How much energy is the city using

The London Heat Map, an interesting initiative to adress energy in the city

Accounting the urban energy consumption raises some issues:

–          Electricity is often provided by several private companies that do not disclose detailed information. Gas delivered by pipe is in the same situation. Despite that, you can (theoretically) obtain a figure at the household level.

–          Fuels are rather complex, but for deliveries to big clients. How to count the automotive fuels, at the pump, at the owner’s address, or in the road sections where they are burnt? And the bottled gas sometimes sold in some filling stations? Or wood?

–          Renewable energy can be decentralized generation; if it is later delivered to the general grid its accounting is more complex (but you an always think of a citywide balance)

And there is another problem: efficiency. What matters is not just how much energy you use, but rather how efficient that use is. The district heating systems that are common in northern Europe often begin as isolated power stations, but gain in efficiency as they are integrated in grids, as well as a home can be more efficient if the wall insulation is upgraded. So there is not just an issue of consumption, but also of the benefit that derives.

The energy part of the Green City Index, by Siemens, gave in 2009 the highest mark to Oslo (8,71), while London was 10th (5,64) and Madrid 12th (5,52) among the 30 studied European capitals. These marks resulted from 3 quantitative criteria: energy consumption (Gj per capita), energy intensity (Mj per unit of real GDP), renewable energy consumption (% of total consumption); and a fourth qualitative element addressing energy policies.

Centrality and periphery in Madrid since 2000 (4)
Ridership by transportation corridor for interurban buses in 2011 (CRTM data)

Ridership by transportation corridor for interurban buses in 2011 (CRTM data)

Many statistical data sets can have some inertia, as they can show data which only changes when an administrative record is updated; cadastral data used in precedent posts is relevant, but in a crisis such as the present one, they can mask in some areas an “empty shell” reality (I am sure the cadastral data on current uses in Detroit is far from reflecting real issues in many parts of the city…). Transit ridership seems more pertinent in many senses, altough it can have less detail.

The 2011 yearly report by CRTM, the metropolitan transportation authority for Madrid, shows significan statistical information; and altough the geographical segmentation of the report is somehow less detailed than what I would like for that purpose, central Madrid still appears as the core of metropolitan activities.

Cycle superhighways

The new Barclays Cycle Superhighways are cycle routes (painted in blue, 1,50 m wide, on the car plaform) running from outter London into central London. They are meant to provide a safer and faster journey for commuters. A bike rental service is associated, and you can also learn to ride your bike. It is a possitive experience, but not entirely revolutionary.

Enter SkyCycle, a concept by British landscape Architect Sam Martin proposing a network of elevated cycle paths between the main London Tube stations, including transformed unused elevated rail lines and new infrastructure. This would increase bike speed and reduce cyclist’s deaths.

The system would not be free, as cyclists would use the Oyster card (an integrated transportation forfait) to gain access, paying about a pound to commute, which would be a third of the equivalent tube ride. It seems that a corporate partner is being searched for. But there are also some skeptics that would like to focus on the local bike networks.

The above image, that can be seen in the Rebar website (altough I have found no futher data on that in the site), seems to predict that such ideas could become common in next months.

Rail land

The rail systems were around the western world one of the first signs of the change brought by the first industrial revolution. The large passenger stations of the XIXth century were joined by goods stations in a moment in which the railroad was the only way to get a high speed transport of goods between distant points.
This pioneer role can be felt today as an obsolescence. One of the first modern speculative bubbles was the British Railway Mania of the 1840s, which exploded in 1846. Already in that moment companies had to be authorized by an Act of Parliament to gain the right to acquire land. Even if many of the companies were ruined by the end of the bubble, most of them were integrated into larger companies. With local differences, most of the European countries started their rail history with private companies, which with time were nationalized and again privatized. Meanwhile, the rail lines that were conceived to serve the XIXth century urban network have served societies that have been transformed. Many lines have been closed due to their economic failure as demography has changed, but also due to changes in the railway management systems or political decisions concerning the role of rail in the city.
The usual cases of rail evolution concerning urban planning is:

  •   Closure of entire lines that have been considered economically unsustainable. It is usually the case in demographically depressed areas and means that stations as well as track land are liberated. In many cases the entire lines have been reconverted into bike and pedestrian paths.
  • Closure of parts of the line in local areas, usually for straightening the lines, with scarce urban impact.
  •   New urban bypasses, suppressing level tracks in the urban areas. This eliminates the barrier effect of the level tracks, but turns the new station into a distant point, with urban integration problems. In Spain it is the case of cities such as Cuenca.
  • Burial of the urban rail thoroughfares. It is the most expensive solution, but it is usually the best for cities as it allows a stability of the urban centralities. This usually means associated urban operations with mixed uses in the old central stations, and the transfer to out of town sites of classification and goods stations. In Spain, it is the case of Logroño, León (to be executed) or Cordoba
  • Duplicity, with new stations for high speed in out of town sites, maintaining the old central stations for other trains, including metropolitan lines. It is usually a less satisfactory options. This is the case of Tarragona in Spain.