91视频

I just returned from Mexico City, and it鈥檚 always interesting to compare the ways foreign cities have been planned (or not) and developed over time and the effect that has on various aspects of their livability.

Colonial Mexico City was essentially developed on top of the Aztec city of Tenochtitlan, which was organized into five sections using a grid street system. The Spaniards used that as a starting point for their city, eventually creating new neighborhoods during different eras surrounding the 鈥淐entro鈥� 鈥� the historic center.

Even in the time of the Aztecs this was one of the biggest cities in the world, and it is now an urban agglomeration of perhaps 24 million. But what started as a meticulously planned place over many centuries and different civilizations is now a hopelessly sprawling mega-city.

Throughout the middle of the last century a large colonial city with a variety of close-in urban neighborhoods like Roma and surrounding smaller cities like Coyoacan grew into a fairly densely populated extended city that covers about 800 square miles. (By comparison, Los Angeles has about 13 million people spread over more than 4,800 square miles.)

To serve its transportation needs, Mexico City has a well-functioning but overloaded subway and bus rapid transit network, and a number of local bus lines. However, transit largely serves closer-in communities while most people struggle to move around via car. This creates some epic traffic jams, some of the longest commute times imaginable and terrible air quality. It鈥檚 hard to understand how its water, sewage and other services even function, but it still keeps growing.

The bottom line is that it was allowed to grow without proper controls and planning, and unfortunately those who suffer the most are the poorest, who live largely in the suburbs farthest away.