“To plan a sustainable future we need to think the linkages between housing, open space, and transport infrastructure, otherwise you have people working in silos and isolated projects. Two examples from Mexico City: firstly the suburban train that is planned to run from the northern area of the Federal District into the State of Mexico is an opportunity to connect the city and the larger region. But is this being thought of as not just a transport policy but also a land use policy? Are we looking at where densification can occur all along the suburban train? At where open space can occur? Are master plans being done at each of the places where this is going to touch and relate to design and questions of architecture? Secondly the question of Bando Dos, the central city and high-value areas: can we include affordable housing within the new developments? Can we take the high profits realised and reinvest them back into the urban core to encourage social immigration rather than polarisation?”
“How can we build more housing and at the same time give the city a better shape? How can the amount of housing units be increased while expanding public space? How can we design housing so that new units improve quality of life in the city? Not just ours, but also for the next generations… Not enough water, too much congestion? Our constraints are no excuse, really. We need to work together, architects and other disciplines. I believe that the real estate market holds an enormous potential if the city knows how to tap into it. The enormous resources invested in real estate can also be linked to the creation of open spaces and cultural facilities. Together, we can achieve forms of development that are sustainable.”
“In Mexico City, both the Federal District and the State of Mexico, we have a great tradition of self-help housing and also of popular mobilisation around housing issues. In the mid 1990s, of the 500 public protest acts that took place annually 70% related to housing. There was a very strong social pressure since most policy programmes did not cater for the lower income groups. After the political decentralization of the city and the election of Mr. Cárdenas these expectations were reflected in housing policy in three areas. Firstly, the opening up of consultation channels and the planning process; secondly, the democratisation of decision-making powers in the field of housing; and thirdly, the participation of multiple actors in the implementation and management of actual programmes.”
“Housing improvement programmes in Mexico City are at the centre of three debates: discussions on how to overcome poverty; the debate on urban strategy; and issues on how to recognise people’s self-help efforts to public policy. Since 1998, housing improvement programmes have become an essential part of the housing and social policies taken by the Federal District’s government. As a result of these programmes, 100,000 units have been improved over 9 years. This fact demonstrates that housing improvements are a viable option, within the current political and economic context, for families living in poor areas to improve their conditions. The programmes also fit the consolidation strategy that seeks the densification of the built-up area while restraining peripheral urban expansion.”
