For many years is being developed and authorized the construction of extensive housing projects in the upper part of the city, such as Zirándaro, Capillas de Piedra, El Paraíso, El Deseo, Los Arcángeles, Luminaria, Lomas de San Miguel, Jardines de Allende, without any consideration of how to supply them, or those already living in the zone, with sufficient water. As could easily have been predicted, the city is now facing a water shortage.

The municipality’s plan The Acuaferico involves drilling eight wells around the perimeter of the Presa Allende, between the communities of San Marcos and Cabras Juan Xido. From there the water would be pumped to cisterns at various points around the city.

We are all very aware of the urgent need to address the issues of water supply, quality and distribution in San Miguel de Allende. However, we are concerned about the government’s failure to consult local experts, community leaders, or the leaders of the ejidos which will be affected by the drilling on their land, all of whom have expressed their concerns about the effects of these new wells on the quality and supply of their water. We have the following questions for our municipal government.

• Does the municipality have the appropriate permits to drill in the area around the Presa? On January 13^th, 2021, CONAGUA suspended the drilling of three wells around San Marcos calling into question the legality of the process.
• Has the municipality done a proper environmental impact studies as legally required to be presented to and approved by SEMARNAT?
• How will the municipality ensure the safety of the water, extracted from close proximity to the Presa, which is highly contaminated with untreated sewage, agricultural runoff and even industrial waste, as well as the arsenic and fluoride which are present in much local water?

What will their testing methods be? How will the water be treated?

• How will these projects be financed and what role will private investors play?
• We have all heard about the frustrations of residents of the upper part of the city with the construction of a sewage drain through their neighbourhoods to deal with the overabundance of waste being produced by these new developments. Is this really the only solution being offered to a problem that will only grow, especially if local governments continue to authorize building in zones without adequate infrastructure?

Citizens and residents of San Miguel de Allende   demand a municipal government capable of serious and thoughtful long-term planning to address this pressing issue. We look forward to a fully transparent response to all our questions and concerns regarding these projects.

OCSMA

Traduccion

J.F.

2. Sapasma intersection

This intersection is in the process of being established. A left lane is available for traffic coming from the Libramiento/Conspiracion intersection and that is good. A left turning lane from Pipila to Sapasma street is not clear to see at this moment when there is no good lane marking on the pavement . does not seem to be planned.  Turning lanes – both to right and left – coming from Alcocer seems to be OK. Again, everything will be so much better once pavement painting of lanes has been established. From Alcocer a special left turning lane will be available to the street leading to Tres Cruces.

Traffic lights will be established for both vehicles and pedestrians. However, for the latter there will be no pedestrian passage across the libramiento at the southern end of the intersection and that is OK considering the driving pattern and general development. However, while there are pedestrian traffic lights for the northern crossing of the Libramiento between Sapasma street and the road to Alcocer, traffic lights for pedestrians are not established across the Sapasma street which is bad, since there may be many school children from the nearby school wanting to cross the Sapasma  street to reach the parking lot (to be picked up by a parent).

The stop line for vehicle traffic coming from the Libramiento/Conspiracion intersection is well placed rather far from the traffic light of the Sapasma intersection.

There are no directional signing at this intersection. Maybe a sign showing direction towards Alcocer would be a good idea.

Some details:

• As was the case at the Libramiento/Conspiracion intersections also at this Sapasma intersection the traffic light signalling is not all placed correctly above the traffic lane.
• One pedestrian traffic light located right at the corner of the Sapasma street and the Libramiento is placed too far from the pedestrian crossing and should be corrected.
• Coming from Pipila it is not clear – due to the ongoing construction – if a proper left turning lane towards Sapasma will be established, but this will be necessary may not be needed due to limited turning traffic
• Two lanes from Pipila towards the Libramiento/Conspiracion interchange will be extended to 4 lanes after the Sapasma intersection, two to continue towards Libramiento/Conspiracion intersection and the two others to be a parallel road. However, those two lanes are narrowed to one just before the entrance to Liverpool. I believe some study should be done to make this design better, perhaps in connection with the left turning possibility from the south bound traffic to Liverpool (see abovebelow).
• I shall not comment on the very problematic signing for vehicles coming from Pipila wishing going towards Alcocer.
• The extremely unusual and very problematic turn from Alcocer and Libramiento/Conspiracion towards Tres Cruces should be changed. Suggested is that the street from Tres Cruces should just after the Portal change its alignment to go a bit up to a point at the Alcocer road approximately 100-150 m above the Sapasma intersection and at that point be linked to the Alcocer road in a normal, small intersection. This will take away many dangerous traffic safety problems. To establish this more safe solution will require the town to expropriate a bit of land, something the administration until now has not wanted to do.

Conclusion: This intersection with corrections as mentioned above and proper lane markings and less pavement will be able to function rather well.

It is essential to create a balance between urbanized areas with concret and green areas that provide us with environmental services that counteract againts the effects of human activity in urban areas. The heat island effect is becoming more and more noticeable as the temperature increases. It is enough to drive out the city to realize the difference in temperature with the countryside.

In the midst of the health crisis, caused by the Covid-19 pandemic and in view of the analysis that everyone is making of what will come after it, we must recognize that we have experienced a phenomenon very similar to having a microscope in front of us, which would allow us to see the smallest details of another of the crises that San Miguel de Allende is going through: the environmental crisis. A crisis that, according to the experts, goes hand in hand with the crisis of human rights.

Above all, we must recognize the human right to the environment. As Dr. Leticia Merino Pérez explains in her book: “Environmental Crisis in Mexico, Route to Change”.

In the 1987 Brundtland Report, Annex I, the following was identified as a general legal principle:

“All human beings have the fundamental right to an environment adequate for their health and well-being.

Within the national legal framework, the human right to the environment is recognized in the constitution in article 4, paragraph 5, which states

“Everyone has the right to a healthy environment for his development and well-being. The State shall guarantee respect for this right. Environmental damage and deterioration shall give rise to liability for whoever causes it in terms of the provisions of the law”.

Added paragraph DOF 28-06-1999. Reformed DOF 08- 02-2012.

It is mentioned in the General Law of Ecological Balance and Environmental Protection, in its first article, section I, which states

ARTICLE 1 – This law regulates the provisions of the Political Constitution of the United Mexican States that refer to the preservation and restoration of the ecological balance, as well as the protection of the environment, in the national territory and the areas over which the nation exercises its sovereignty and jurisdiction. Its provisions are of public order and social interest and are intended to promote sustainable development and establish the basis for it:

I.- Guarantee the right of every person to live in a healthy environment for their development, health and well-being; Reformed section DOF 05-11-2013

Here are also judgements in different courts that have recognized the human right to the environment.

Having a healthy environment implies, among other things, maintaining the tree inventory of our state, of our municipality. Last May 2019, a proposal was presented to the Congress of the State of Guanajuato to approve the Law for the Protection of Urban Trees and Green Areas. This proposal has not yet been revised.

It seems that there is a lack of coordination between the directorates in charge of the environment and the one that executes public works. On the one hand, they reforest and when a modification to the urban environment is planned, from the desk des fortunately cannot be considered the existing trees.

However, this city, this planet; will be inherited to the youngest. What is the opinion of the young people, in whom we have all the hope, so that they command the changes that the world needs? Here is a space to listen to their opinion about it.

WE SHARE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR OF THE NEWSPAPER ATENCIÓN, FROM A YOUNG WOMAN WHO REFLECTS ON THIS

San Miguel de Allende, Guanajuato

July 10, 2020

The privilege of green areas

To the editor of the Attention newspaper:

After reading information regarding citizen complaints about logging caused by public works workers and recent news about the plans to “remodel” the Almenas Walkway in the Malanquin neighborhood: Some months ago, during the development of the Save 41 Trees movement, a girl came to notify us that the municipality also wanted to remove the trees from the main street of Malanquín; today I learned that the news is real and now they are not removing them for “maintenance of the public road” but because they are not endemic. I regret that they take this argument to exercise their power and their desire to impose spaces without green areas on the people. I doubt very much that the municipality will take the same measures with the non-endemic vegetation that is found in the center and in gardens adjacent to nice areas generally inhabited by Americans or Mexicans with a high socioeconomic level. I doubt very much that they will “take the precautions” that they took when they removed the trees from the Salida a Celaya for doing their overpass project; the measures of covering the trees with high screens so that people would not see them being uprooted. I doubt that they do this only because the Malanquin is neither a central area not an area frequented by tourists. When we go to the outskirts of cities there is always one element in common, apart from the violence, the lack of green spaces. It seems to me that limiting the trees (of any kind), the vegetation and the community spaces that abound in them is an aggression that we have well neglected and internalized. As well as getting rid of existing vegetation as if it had no value. There are enough sources and studies that tell us about the benefits of a space with trees to reduce the levels of stress and delinquency, enough information we have to develop infrastructures that coexist with nature. These governments, beyond being …, are classist and violent. I am grateful for the space and time given to read this text. Sincerely

Victoria Delgado

Like most of San Miguel, the Colonia Guadalupe was a very traditional neighbourhood centered around the church and the many orchards until recently. A few years ago, the neighbourhood began to grow due to its safety, proximity to centro and popularity with foreigners. Older buildings were knocked down to make way for spec houses. The orchards were gradually consumed by new stores and restaurants. In 2012, an American named Colleen Sorenson, started the Muros en Blanco project to coincide with the Calaca Festival. She brought graffiti artists from all over Mexico to express themselves on the walls of the colonia. The first festival was well-supported and well-attended. The atmosphere was exciting, creative and fun. At that time, it appears that everyone was in favor of the project. In recent months and years though the general attitude has changed. It seems that much of this change is due to a lack of communication between newcomers and those that have made their homes in the Guadalupe for generations. Whereas many newcomers love the idea of a funky art district, some of the older residents are uncomfortable with the murals and what they represent. Moreover, many are offended by Muros en Blanco’s publicity which states that the Colonia was “high risk” and characterized by “theft, vandalism, drug addiction and abandonment” until they moved in, creating further divisions within the community. All this has been brewing under the surface for some time.

Earlier this year, due to the security crisis, many neighbourhoods in San Miguel organized Whatsapp groups and neighborhood committees to keep each other informed and help each other out. Guadalupe was probably the most effective colonia in the city at organizing block by block. As neighbours connected, the murals came up as a topic of concern and conversation began amongst residents about the future of the project. Everything really came to a head a few months ago when the government offered to re-plaster and paint 200 houses. Many who applied had murals that they either didn’t like or that had deteriorated. This caused the panic on social media amongst those with the mistaken impression that the mural project was under attack. But again, no one wants to end the project. Muros en Blanco is justifiably protective of what they have begun but he neighborhood committee believes all residents should have a say in the project. There are really only two concerns they would like to address: maintenance and subject matter.

As far as anyone can tell, there was never a plan for long term maintenance. Murals are by nature temporary; peeling and fading are inevitable with exposure to the elements. Should they be touched-up and restored regularly? Allowed to fade away? Painted over after a certain amount of time? The issue is complicated by the question of ownership. It seems logical that a mural on private property belongs to the owner of the property. But paint is expensive. Are property owners responsible for painting over a work that has deteriorated or that they don’t like? Do the artists have a say in what happens to their work? Does Muros en Blanco? These are questions that the neighbourhood committee is looking at.

The issue of subject matter and aesthetics is more complicated. A lot of Guadalupe residents simply do not like many of the murals. Others find them confusing. Some say that there are too many. We heard the term “visual pollution” used many times Art is highly subjective and good art should be provocative. But while we love the idea of artists having free reign to express themselves, and we find the idea of placing limits on art worrying, perhaps there do need to be some guidelines when it comes to public art. The neighborhood committee is looking at the idea of a unified theme, as broad or narrow as residents choose, much like they use in cities like Tepoztlán. One theme could be the history of San Miguel, or, more specifically, the history of the Guadalupe and the Aurora. Another idea was to follow the theme of the street names. They are also looking at a possible colour scheme. They have submitted many of their ideas to Muros en Blanco and hope to come to a shared vision of the future together soon.

San Miguel has grown so quickly, and change is hard for all of us. The population a hundred years ago was less than 7000 people. Those who have arrived in the last few years and decades come from all over Mexico and the world. They bring with them differing visions of culture and community. We at the Observatorio believe that through open, honest, discussion and good-willed negotiation, residents, independent artists, the neighbourhood committee, and Muros en Blanco, can come up with a plan to maintain the tradition of public art that will continue to inspire us all.

Green areas are essential to the well-being of every city in the world. Parks, playgrounds and gardens are vital for mental and physical health. Access to green areas is correlated with lower obesity and even reduction in crime. In this age of global warming, trees and vegetation have taken on a more urgent role of temperature moderation and rainwater absorption. They prevent soil erosion, control dust, carbon and pollution, and provide habitat for wild animals and birds.

However, if you look at a satellite map of San Miguel de Allende, you will see a blanket of cement and stone, especially in the newer developments.

We have been trying to establish the exact percentage of green spaces in San Miguel’s urban area. The responses have ranged from 2.8% to a little over 12%. The discrepancies may arise from the definitions of what is a green space and whether it includes only publicly accessible parks or private gardens as well. Let’s accept the higher number of 12%. How does that compare with the most livable cities in the world? Very poorly.

There are many factors that make a city livable but one thing they all have in common is abundant, easily accessible green space. Take Vienna for example, ranked as the world’s most livable city. Over 51% of its urban area is green space. That’s 120 m2 for every resident. Or Vancouver where over 92% of residents live within a five-minute walk of a green space. Even Hong Kong and Singapore, both tiny island nations where land is at a premium have 40% and 47% green spaces respectively.

Not only do we have inadequate green spaces in San Miguel, the few well maintained and functioning parks are in the most expensive areas of town. This makes them inconvenient or inaccessible to those from the poorer colonias and communities, reinforcing class and socioeconomic division. Compare the equipment and maintenance of say the Guadiana park with the parks in colonias such as Barrio La Palmita or La Luz.

Recently, we met with Francisco Peyret, Director of Medio Ambiente y Sustentabilidad, in the current municipal administration, to discuss these issues and hear his plans to address them. Director Peyret told us that he has made the restoration of the 80 parks within the urban area a high priority. He is trying to get neighbours involved in the maintenance of their local parks, something we can all participate in. The Direccion of Medio Ambiente y Sustentabilidad is also actively working on the urgently needed restoration of the arroyos, especially in areas where their degradation and contamination are hazardous to the health of residents, such as around the San Juan de Dios market. Throughout the municipality, the Direccion is involved in ongoing reforestation and watershed restoration, including Henry Miller’s project in Doña Juana which we have already reported on. Seven more similar projects are planned for next year.

We asked Peyret about the situation of the 33 fiscus. He explained that when the city took on the project of improving the health, safety and livability around the Avenida Guadalupe, they were forced to address the row of fiscus planted 20 years ago along the center of the Avenida. Fiscus, while lovely, are not native to this area. They require a lot of water. These particular trees were also planted far too close together and in an unfortunate strip that impedes both pedestrian and vehicular traffic in an extremely busy area. It was decided to transplant the trees to a more suitable location. When the improvements to the area are completed, the same number of trees will be planted along the Avenida, but instead of fiscuses or other exotics, they will choose species native to the area.

We agree that the Avenida Guadalupe is a mess – unhealthy, over-crowded and unsafe – and are pleased to see that the government is improving the area. We also agree that the fiscuses were a poor choice.

However, we are extremely concerned about the loss of much needed biomass.  Any new trees will take years to grow to the size of those that are already there and thus years to provide the same amount of shade and absorb an equal amount of carbon and pollution.

We also question the process of transplantation. It is not a simple exercise and it is unclear whether the government has access to the level of expertise required to successfully transplant mature trees. The fact that they are considering doing so at the time of year when trees are most vulnerable, suggests that they do not.

Our major concern though is a lack of a long-term sustainable plan for greening the city. How do we know that in another 15 or 20 years another administration won’t come up with a new plan and remove whatever trees this administration plants? Trees are complicated living systems that live for centuries. Tearing them up every time an administration wants to leave their mark is extremely short-sighted and irresponsible. Protest is important and every tree, like every living thing, deserves to live and flourish. But focussing on individual trees or parks isn’t sustainable. We need to work on restoring the entire ecosystem after centuries of abuse.

We at the Observatorio are encouraged by many of Director Peyret’s plans and his enthusiasm We will continue to watch closely to see how those plans come to fruition and we encourage all residents to do the same. What we plant today will affect the lives of Sanmiguelenses for generations to come.

Fluoride is generally believed to be beneficial in very small doses for the prevention of tooth decay. However, high levels can be extremely dangerous. We have all seen the staining and discoloration of the teeth that indicate dental fluorosis or skeletal fluorosis around the municipality. But the damage is much more serious than aesthetics. Studies correlate in utero exposure with intellectual impairment and behavioral problems such as ADD. Joint pain is common, as are cardiovascular problems. Renal failure and some types of cancer may also be connected to fluoride.

The effects of arsenic are less visible that those of fluoride but equally concerning. Arsenic is a neurotoxin and potentially hazardous to children’s physical and mental development. Arsenicosis causes skin problems, pain and vomiting. It also can lead to kidney failure and cancers.

Both arsenic and fluoride are odorless, colorless and completely undetectable to the eye so there is no way to know what we are drinking. Most of us living in the urban area drink bottled water, raising the issue of plastics. Some have the resources to install expensive and wasteful reverse osmosis systems. For those living in the rural communities, the only option is often drinking well water.

All local experts agree that the only way to stem this massive public health crisis is rain water catchment. A few months ago, a group of 14 NGO’s came together, along with SAPASMA and the municipal government, to form the Agua Vida coalition. The coalition is focused on education and conservation along with the promotion and installation of rain water catchment systems. One member, Caminos de Agua, has installed hundreds of cisterns, with plans for thousands more, and is developing inexpensive filters. Another member, The Rotary Club, has installed approximately 1400 cisterns. Their work has just begun.

If you are concerned about what is in your water, Caminos de Agua offers water testing through their website www.caminosdeagua.org. if you want to reduce your use of the aquifer, most houses can be retro-fitted for rainwater catchment, even in the urban area. Caminos del Agua will be offering an information session on how to do so soon. Check their website for dates.

We at the Observatorio applaud the efforts of the Agua Vida coalition. Access to safe drinking water is a basic human right. We hope that SAPASMA will do their part to ensure that every member of the municipality can enjoy this right.

We were encouraged by the municipality’s project of giving away free trees. It did, however, raise some questions. Will these trees be planted in appropriate places for them to flourish? How are they going to be maintained so that enough of them survive to have a positive effect on our environment? Are they species endemic to this area? And can they possibly make up for the thousands of trees that have been destroyed for construction?

A few days ago, we had the pleasure of meeting with Francisco Peyret, Director of the Departamento de Medio Ambiente y Sustentabilidad, and Veronica Landini, a member of his team. We wanted to hear their responses to these concerns and what their plans were to address environmental issues in San Miguel de Allende.

Francisco and Veronica answered our last question first. They assured me that there was a moratorium on new developments that will not be lifted until the Plan de Ordenamiento, which will clarify environmental restrictions and requirements on all new construction, was finalized. While we can’t get back what we have lost, at least we can hope that we will not lose more.

They also explained that yes, most of the species they are growing are endemic to this region such as encino, mesquite and huizache, along with fruit trees, pirul and jacaranda, which are well-adapted to this climate. The DMAYS has expanded their greenhouses in Parque Landeta so they can produce enough seedlings to continue the process of reforestation indefinitely.

The conversation then moved on to the give-away. Only a portion of the trees are going to private individuals. Courses are being offered at places like CEDECOM so citizens can understand how to care for and ensure the survival of their trees.

The over-all plan, however, is much more ambitious. The majority of trees, many tens of thousands, will be part of a program of reforestation and watershed renewal.

The area around San Miguel was once covered in forests. Since colonial times, we have been steadily cutting down that forest and overgrazing the land, leaving damaged or non-existent soil that does not absorb rainfall, produce healthy crops or provide adequate grazing lands for livestock. Our rivers have been dammed and damaged by the removal of gravel and sand for construction. We are at increasing risk of flooding.

In October, Francisco became aware of a pilot project begun by residents and NGO´s in the community of Doña Juana that involves rebuilding the river bed, restoring the soil, and planting 21,000 trees in an area of 42 hectares, forming a voluntary protected area. Along with the Dirección de Medio Ambiente, he decided to support their work as a pilot project. The municipality provides resources, materials and equipment. The residents of Doña Juana, which is home to approximately 500 people, provide the labor. Already, they are seeing the benefits of their hard work and have agreed to maintain the area and limit access to livestock to prevent further damage. Six more communities are scheduled to begin similar projects soon. They will multiply throughout the area.

Aside for the improvements to life in the rural areas, reforestation and watershed restoration will increase rain absorption, preventing flooding and damage to the top soil, and greatly improve air quality for all of us.

We at the Observatorio Ciudadano, are very excited to see grass-roots, well-planned projects like this that will benefit all Sanmiguelenses. If you would like to participate in the project or would like to adopt a tree, please contact the DMAYS through Facebook #direccióndemedioambienteysustentabilidad.

Early in the morning of Monday, June 1st, San Miguel de Allende experienced a dramatic storm. Houses, businesses and property were damaged. Streets were washed out. Rooves collapsed. Over 2 meters of ice, water, and mud blocked Calle Santo Domingo. The hail was still piled up around the Luciérnaga 2 days later. It was an unusually heavy storm.

Or was it?

Not really. We had 12 cm of rain in two hours on Monday morning. It is not unheard of to have up to 24 cm. There was a surprising amount of hail, but damage was mostly done by excess water, not ice. This was actually a very typical summer storm.

In order to understand why it was so destructive, we need to look at the geography of the area and how we have affected it with poor planning and lack of environmental awareness.

San Miguel forms part of the Sub Cuenca Támbula Picachos watershed. Starting in the Picachos mountains, runoff flows right through the center of town via the arroyo Atascadero into the Presa Allende. In the past, even in the heaviest of storms, property was rarely damaged as much of the water was absorbed; the Atascadero and the land above it acting as a natural sponge and buffer zone. However, recently we have been covering that land with cement and stone for new developments, housing and industrial parks. The water that would have been absorbed, hundreds of cubic meters, now flows right into town.

This effect was first noticed when the Luciérnaga Mall was built about a decade ago. After cementing over approximately 100,000 square meters to build the mall, estimates of the increased water flow through the Atascadero Arroyo were as high as 73%. Since then, the municipality has continued to authorize new development in the area. We do not have recent studies, but there is no doubt that the flow of water has only increased as a result of this building, almost certainly setting us up for even more serious flooding that could threaten both property and lives. It also threatens the very developments that are causing the problem. The increased water can potentially wash out the soil underneath, a scenario which has caused building collapse at sites all over the world, such as in Santa Fe, CDMX. It is in everyone’s interests to resolve the situation.

We at the Observatorio Ciudadano have two suggestions on how to prevent the loss of life and property that will inevitably come of we do not care for our watershed.

Firstly, it is imperative that the municipality finalize zoning regulations that will not only require environmental studies for all new development, but that will ensure that those studies are acted upon.

Secondly, it is just as imperative that we restore the Atascadero to a state where it can more easily and efficiently absorb rain water and run off. A few weeks ago, we wrote about the successful river restoration and reforestation in the community of Doña Juana. We would like to see a similar project in the Atascadero where developers, government and citizens come together for the good of all.

Sanmiguelenses are justly proud of our Cultural heritage and make great efforts to preserve it. We need to make the same efforts to preserve our Environmental heritage.

Thanks to Roger Jones of Regeneration International, Susana Alonso of Preservación San Miguel, Henry Miller, founder of El Maíz Más Pequeño, and Dr Pablo Jaramillo, of the UNAM Morelia for sharing their experiences, knowledge, and expertise.