For me, the pedestrian, the great Brussels' central pedestrian

is extremely important

in the history of the city center of Brussels.

Why ? Because for the first time

and in such a dramatic way, I would say,

we realize that a public space

is not only a place of mobility,

was it sustainable, was it durable,

but is also a place, at least as much,

a place of pleasant stillness.

And so, many local residents, many passers-by,

many visitors realized

the fun one could have by occupying this public space,

by strolling there, by staying still for a while,

by chatting there without being constantly disturbed

by noise and by car odors.

And so, to me, that is a very important thing.

Obviously this is only a small space over all of the Brussels Region

but it made noise and there are already now

redevelopment underway or planned

for several other municipal places

and several other places in Brussels.

So I think it's really something

which must affect not only places

but also the streets of our entire city,

streets that, too, must cease to be in a priority

places where we move quickly to get from one place to another

in order to be places where we can stay

to talk with others, to let our children play.

So about this issue of understanding the general context

in which appears the pedestrian project

it seems to me important to remember, even briefly,

some trends that seem to me decisive and major.

It's economically incontestably

the idea that historic city centers, especially here,

must be able to give a new appeal

in a jet of competition with peripheral centers.

It's how city centers redefine their atmospheres,

their qualities to ensure the attractiveness,

that is sometimes threatened by a strong competition

from the peripheral centers.

That is perhaps a first general line

on an economic stand point.

Socially, I think it's interesting too

to note that overall the policies of the city,

of the urban renewal,

of the consideration of the importance of urban quality

must be understood in a context

that is of a weakening of the policies

of the income redistribution.

In the global context of trade,

there is undoubtedly more constraints and difficulties

to organize social cohesion

via income redistribution.

And therefore, city policies are playing an increasingly important role

to ensure, to induce forms of social cohesion,

of conviviality, of living together.

And so, there is an important point at this level

that is given to city policies.

The development of public spaces therefore participates ...

And thus improvements of public spaces

to pedestrian or semi-pedestrian,

clearly take part of this trend.

Third element is of course, the environmental dimension.

I basically take back the three spheres of sustainable development,

the environmental dimension,

which aims tp seek to develop

the least polluting modes of transport,

the least expensive, therefore,

in terms of resources and emissions.

And so it is obviously also in relation with health issues,

so gives more place to weak users

who can practice and exercise.

So here are also major public health issues.

So it all also contributes to the understanding

in this general context to say that finally,

at the political level itself,

there is no doubt in Brussels a sort of a political momentum

at the level of the city of Brussels,

which allows to understand that there is a shared and common vision

between the different parties, personalities,

who are currently in power in the city of Brussels

because it basically is a project

which dates back many years,

this idea of transforming the central boulevards,

and above all the central boulevard,

but also to re-articulate the boulevards to the nearby neighborhoods.

This is a project that dates back several years,

which today, here, looks ready to go to something

that would be this pedestrian.

No doubt we should put quotation marks around the pedestrian,

insofar considering that the accessibility

by car is allowed for residents,

for the elderly,

for people with reduced mobility, to taxis, etc

it is probably in a layout

that will be further situated somewhere

near a semi-pedestrian shared space.

We'll see exactly where to place the cursor

but we must also agree on this.

But I am convinced that in all residential areas of cities

there are ways to restore the hierarchy that should really prevail

in all of these places, which is as follows,

which is already done in some places of the world:

a street, a space between the houses must be first

a place where children can play;

secondly, a place where vehicles may be parked;

and only thirdly a place

where cars can move to go from their home region,

their starting point

to where they can park.

For me, it's the hierarchy in a residential area.

And when you have this hierarchy,

the relationship between people is transformed.

A merchant, resident of the city told me

that when the pedestrian was created,

suddenly she began to breathe for the first time

since long ago.

And she took time to talk with her neighbors.

And to me, that's it.

That's the transformation, the change in hierarchy

in the use of public space.

It is also a transformation of relationships between people,

because if children play in the streets,

parents speak with each other

and collusion will establish solidarity, collaboration.

That's a city transformed

by conversion of the mobility mode.

On the specific issue of challenges to meet

to pursue this approach,

I think there is undoubtedly a sociological issue

which is to make the center of Brussels

an urban space where the Brussels-based company can do society

so to speak, where everyone feels somewhere equally at home.

Today, Brussels lacks those places.

No doubt that Brussels is a city of neighborhoods,

made of too many neighborhoods and not of enough centers.

I think there is a sociological issue

of social diversity on this issue of living together that arises here.

And the vision scope of pedestrian poles is part of this idea

of social diversity,

a place that would be attractive

and that would interest all of Brussels.

That certainly is a question.

A second issue is the city model

thaht we want to defend today

for this rehabilitation of historic centers.

I think the idea here is scope to develop

a city model inhabited, an inhabitad center,

so a mix of uses, functions.

So the center of Brussels will not be a shopping mall

in competition with other shopping malls,

but will be of a living space shared by inhabitants,

external users, employees,

strollers, students, and so on.

So there it really is, I think, this city model

which also underlies this proposal.

It is important to say it, compared to other projects

of city centers, even European,

that sometimes tend toward too much monofunctionality.

A third element, to me it seems, compared with the stakes,

is the challenge of mobility, undoubtedly.

The boulevard would allow to <i> bypass </ i>, I would say,

the weakest link of the inner ring,

which is the west side link, along the canal.

The central boulevard would allow to <i> bypass </ i> that.

From the moment we limit transit,

very clearly here,

with the pedestrian project

it must be ensured that the movement of traffic,

even though we can aim for a reduction of the car pressure

it must in any case be ensured that this displacement

finds its place in a redefinition of the crown, belt,

of the heart of Brussels.

And that is obviously an important issue that must be resolved

for the municipal and regional authorities from elsewhere.

This is an issue that clearly arises at both levels.

And finally, I'll point perhaps a final challenge

that seems interesting

and that is the issue of time management.

I mentioned briefly that some users

can access the center.

I have not mentioned, for example, suppliers

who can come in from this hour to that hour in the morning,

that some users may be able to park on certain streets

sometimes.

We can already see that in the Rue Neuve there is an improvement,

a development that was proposed whereas before

Rue Neuve was pedestrian 24/24, 7/7.

Today and before the pedestrian project,

it was adapted with a differentiated temporal management regime

as cars, people, users

could use it for parking at night

to avoid a series of problems

particularly linked to the insecurity of these places and so on.

So I think the question of learning

the differentiated management in times of public space

will arise, is already arising.

And this is a particularly interesting political issue.

It will also manage the issue, in terms of time frames,

of urban events, nocturnal nuisances, and so on.

All this is part of this difficulty,

at least these new issues that arise in a context

of public space that somehow puts society face to face with itself.

So society is once again engaged with itself.

For these dynamic to extend, one will have to realize

thaht it does not apply only to public spaces

which can be assimilated to public places.

It can also be applied to the streets.

So that means it will be needed to also establish

which will often be difficult,

a form of differentiation between different types of blocks,

streets that will continue to serve primarily

for passing cars and other vehicles

and then the streets that will be primarily places

where residents can meet,

can have activities,

can plant trees and so forth.

And so it obviously demands

to act locally in these places,

it requires thinking broadly at the entire agglomeration

and then resolve the inevitable tensions,

inevitable conflicts,

because what is in the collective interest

is not necessarily in the immediate interest of every inhabitant,

of each resident, of each household

who live in a given city.

Part 3: Le piétonnier de Bruxelles

Mobilité et urbanisme

Rencontrer les enseignants