Read on Twitter
Paris, h/t @grescoe. An observation follows... /1
/2 As I've noted before often, one of my favorite examples of "mayoring" is Lee Myung-Bak, while serving as Mayor of Seoul. (FTR, he's now in jail, but for crimes as President, not as Mayor). Recall that Lee's unlikely elxn win pivoted on a bold promise: to tear down -
/3 - the Cheonggyecheon freeway & restore the historic stream underneath it to something resembling its natural, pre-freeway state. He delivered, within a single term of office. This success is often discussed in a context that pisses me off about urbanist chatter -
/4 - and you see it often with Paris' Mayor Hidalgo as well. There's an easy-breezy, "urbanism is inevitable" faction of the cities business that sometimes makes urban change out to be a simple matter of will, a magic wand, and suddenly, things are As Desired-!!!
/5 And you see it with chatter about Hidalgo - "look, she's banning cars & parking, that's all it takes!" You see it in slide decks citing the Cheonggyecheon freeway removal. "See how easy it was?" Toll this, build that, ban this, open that, it's all so easy if you just do it!
/6 What's almost never cited: the CONCURRENT promise that Lee also delivered on in his one-term mayoralty. When Lee took down the freeway, he had political room to do so b/c he promised to *simultaneously* improve transit service to cover 100% of any lost traffic capacity.
/7 He didn't deliver any lectures about induced demand, nor did he pretend that there didn't have to be some response to those worried about change or inconvenience. He compensated, adjusted, and invested to counter the certainty of resistance.
/8 And: he delivered on that transit promise, in a highly complex transit environment with multiple private operators. (Seoul's bus system reforms in his era are worth a look on their own merits for anyone interested, distinct from the freeway removal itself).
/9 Likewise: everyone selling Hidalgo as a model mayor b/c of various Parisian car and parking decrees is missing the larger half of the policy. Paris (in conjunction with national + regional partners) is punching hard to make transit & active transport commutes an even more -
/10 - viable option in a city where both were already pretty damn viable options. Every major policy initiative in history has tradeoffs, both practical & political, and offsets and tradeoffs have to be covered for most public policy shifts to succeed beyond a single elxn cycle.
/11 It astounds me just how often the urban - and especially urbanIST - chatter I see in any given day pretends those tradeoffs don't exist, that they don't have to, or that they can just be put off for another day. If you want to lose, fine. Be my guest & keep thinking that way.
