Unfortunately the leadership of our city is in the hands of an impotent bunch of councillors headed up by a narcissist Lord Mayor (who is an engineer). The Lord Mayor has created a road network building boom. He has commissioned tunnels and given the go ahead to build an expensive toll bridge within 250m of an existing bridge. Both bridges will pump traffic into the same thoroughfare on the southern side of the bridge.
A feasibility study for the bridge was undertaken by an engineering company who provided a report to our Council. This report shows that overall, building the bridge increases congestion! Despite being on notice as to these figures and despite significant public outcry against the bridge the bridge is to be built.

What city has ever paved its way out of traffic congestion?

Meanwhile, many of the citizens of my city must drive their cars into and around the city as the public transport system is manifestly inadequate.

Curitiba’s story is inspiring and gives me hope that, with the right leadership, cities can be built to serve the best interests of their people and the environment.

KUDOS..Curitiba!

Unfortunately, the problem I see is that, in already-built-up cities, the necessary changes to existing roads and road use make it almost impossible to implement — specifically “… a system in which two roads exclusively for public transport are surrounded by the standard one-way street for private transport.”

That being said, it obviously would be to our benefit if public transit became THE method of commuting and general movement in and around cities.

Cheers
J.

“Curitiba also shows that cities that generate over one million tons of solid waste annually do not necessarily require expensive mechanical garbage separation facilities.

Waste management was considered a key element in the improved quality of life. Curitibanos now recycle two-thirds of their garbage, in a program that costs no more than the old landfill. But the city is cleaner, its people have more jobs, farmers have more dependable income, and the poor receive food and transportation benefits.

The “Garbage that is not Garbage” and “Garbage Purchase” programs involve curbside pick-up and disposal of recyclables sorted by households and in less accessible areas, exchange of collected garbage for food or transit tickets by low-income residents. The “All Clean” program temporarily hires retired or unemployed persons who concentrate on areas where litter has accumulated.

Trash is separated into only two categories, organic and inorganic, picked up in two different types of trucks. Poor residents in areas unreachable by truck bring their waste to neighborhood centers, where they exchange it for bus tickets or eggs, and milk bought from outlying farms. Trash is separated at a plant built of recycled materials, sorted by workers who are handicapped, recent immigrants and alcoholics. Recovered materials are sold to local industries. Styrofoam is shredded and used for stuffing for quilts.

Since its 1989 start-up, the recyclable waste program has separated 419,000 tons – enough to fill 1,200 twenty-story buildings. Inorganic waste (plastic, glass, paper, aluminum) totals 13% of garbage collected.

Curitiba’s selective garbage collection system now extends to twenty-four surrounding municipalities.”