- Published on Wednesday, 13 April 2011 10:48
- Written by IVM
Impression report – Transantiago (Oscar Figueroa & Rosanna Forray)
Juan Carlos Dextre
The experience in the implementation of the Public Transport system that can name him " BRT opened " and that has as name Transantiago is interesting for the region, because we are in a period in which many cities there want to imitate the models of "Trasmilenio" that it is a closed BRT or that of "Transantiago" on that since we it have commented treats himself about an opened BRT.
The first comment that there would be necessary to do is which is the aim of a change in the system of the Public Transport of surface? If the aim focuses on the most efficient way of moving persons to and from, then it is possible that the offer of implementation of Transantiago's system is not so bad.
Nevertheless, if the attention focuses on the needs of mobility of the persons who live in Santiago and, therefore, it is important the level of coverage of the system, the inconveniences derived from the necessary transfers to complete a trip from his origin up to his destination, the special needs that the persons have with limited mobility, that is to say, persons with disabilities, persons of the third age, ladies with children in arms or in baby's cars, etc. Already it is not sufficient to take technical decisions; the important thing is the social service that the public transports give to the society.
The second reflection is on what Oscar Figueroa and Rosanna Forray comment on what public it serves the Transantiago and who it serves the Metro networks. In this respect it is true that Transantiago is seen as a system of transport for the poor, whereas the Metro is for the middle class for above.
It is interesting to observe that the public administration has major interest to subsidize the system of metro or the urban highways, destined to solve the problem of the mobility of the persons that more income, whereas for the public transport of surface, which loads more of the double of the passengers of the Metro, the subsidy is seen evil, reason by which so much the coverage of the system and the frequencies of the service are defined on the basis of the level of income that must generate the system and not on the basis of a level of service adapted for the users.
This type of concessions need to deliver him the exclusivity to the BRT, as it happens with the Metropolitano in Lima, generating that many users stop having reasonable alternatives for his short trips in which they could pay a third of the rate in the conventional transport, which they could raise to the vehicles with his packages of the market or which they could travel with his suitcases when they have to do a connection with the intercity transport, that is to say, many users stop having a service that covers his special needs, with the excuse of which the system must be profitable for the operators who gained the operation.
Finally, it is necessary to have care with those who "sell" these systems, due to the fact that they offer for demands of up to 50,000 passengers hour per direction like as a Metro, or that implement them as if it was a product of factory that cannot be modified, which generates enormous impacts when it take place for historical zones, segregating the territory and causing visual intrusion with the big stations that are inserted in the public space. The systems of transport are not good or bad, it is necessary to make compatible them with the level of demand, with the public space that they cross and with the needs of mobility of the society.