Page 1


Diana Berry Melissa Bonfil Antoinete Delvillano Caitlin Fisher Julia Gankin Ryan Giles Joshua Hendershot Taylor Jackson Dennis Knoff Carly Leasia Talia Pinto-Handler Alexandria Stankovich Maria Sviridova

BORDERLINE PERSONALITY Shaping communication and (mis)behavior at the US/MX border

University of Michigan // Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning Preliminary Site Research // UG4 Winter 2010 // Steven Christensen Studio


2


3


4


CONTENTS 6 Introduction Steven Christensen 10 Geography Taylor Jackson Talia Pinto-Handler Maria Sviridova 26 Population Caitlin Fisher Alexandria Stankovich Carly Leasia 50 Economy Ryan Giles Dennis Knoff Joshua Hendershot 68 Mobility Julia Gankin Diana Berry 86 Security Antoinette Delvillano Melissa BonďŹ l 100 Site Photos 5


6


INTRODUCTION

Public Works vs. Infrastructure The word infrastructure is still in its infancy, having only recently become the primary way we refer to the physical and organizational structures that allow our society to operate. Although the term was used by the US military to describe certain tactical projects in the 1940s, it was not commonly used in a civilian context until 1970. Until that time, these civic structures were referred to as public works, a term with a very different political connotation. Whereas the word infrastructure remains abstract in its relationship to existing social systems (connoting only the physical or some invisible substratum thereof) the term public works suggests a constructed reflection of the needs, priorities, values, and aspirations of an associated public.

Border as Center The San Diego – Tijuana Metropolitan Area is a territory of continuous urban fabric that includes the city and suburbs of San Diego in the US and Tijuana, Playas de Rosarito, and Tecate in Mexico. The population of this region is just over 5 million, making it by far the largest bi-national community in North America. Were the Mexican population included in the US government’s rankings, this region would be the 10th largest Metropolitan Statistical Area (larger than the MSA that includes Boston, Cambridge, Quincy, and the other cities that are part of that Massachusetts/New Hampshire conurbation). Opposite top: View of San Ysidro Port of Entry from Mexico side of border. Middle: Brooklyn Bridge, an example of public works as a source of civic identity and pride. Bottom: Political demonstration in El Zocalo, Mexico’s primary public square, located at the center of Mexico City.

7


Top: View of border fence separating Tijuana River Estuary on USA side (left) and the urban fabric of Tijuana (right). Middle: A makeshift international public space - Citizens of Mexico and the US practice yoga together across the border fence. Bottom: Porosity of border fence as it approaches the Pacific.

Paradoxically, the geographical center of this vibrant metropolis is demarcated by a fissure in the urban fabric, the US/Mexico border. While the cities that make up this binational metropolis are linked in myriad ways, the border that bisects them is a demarcation of extreme political contention and a physical reminder of the economic disparities that characterize the two halves of this community. Acting like a massive funnel in this vast bisected territory, the San Ysidro / Tijuana Port of Entry channels the majority of its population from one side to the other. This is the single busiest border crossing in the world, with over 40 million people traversing it each year. It is a bizarre circulation machine, with pedestrian checkpoints, a trolley station, freight train lines, and 24 vehicle inspection lanes in one direction, eight in the other. It is this community’s most prominent architectural ambassador, yet it speaks no language. From a functional standpoint alone, this piece of urban infrastructure is a complete failure. Pedestrians must navigate a confounding maze of switchbacks, bridges, and circuitous paths. Those who attempt to drive north across the border endure wait times of up to 5 hours, prompting many frequent travelers to store a car on each side of the border and cross by foot. Perhaps even more problematic is the affective character of this border station. It offers users an alienating experience without comparison, an incredibly pessimistic outlook of what is to be found on the other side.

8


Top: Pedestrian experience crossing border into Tijuana. Middle: Interactive public art installation by Mexican/Canadian artist Rafael Lozano-Hemmer questioning effects of surveillance technologies in public spaces. Bottom: Folk-art memorial to those who have died crossing the border.

A New Civic Suture As the busiest border crossing in the world, this site offers a unique opportunity for Mexico and the US to replace a banal and congested piece of infrastructure with a public work that is a reflection of regional/national identity and civic pride. Could this central piece of infrastructure be the locus for an architectural intervention that reflects the shared aspirations of North America’s largest bi-national community; a counterpoint to the proposed ‘Triple Border Fence’ it traverses? How can a gesture of alliance go beyond simply whitewashing a highly contentious political divide and actually improve the user experience? Should this community, in understanding of its unique relationship to the border, assert its connectedness in defiance of a divisive national rhetoric through a public work that offers new opportunities for occupation and political action? Rather than lingering in the realm of utopian illusion, the studio recognizes the continued existence of the border and seeks tactical, speculative, and timely solutions to the critical design problem of the threshold. Projects should demonstrate how this piece of infrastructure functions as part of a larger network of urban public spaces, pedestrian and transit routes, and economic flows, and students are encouraged to expand the current program of the border crossing to afford other uses and offer new public amenities.

9


10


GEOGRAPHY

Taylor Jackson Talia Pinto-Handler Maria Sviridova

11


1824

creation of the united mexican states

1836

creation of the republic of texas

TERRITORIAL EVOLUTION

1845

the us gains texas as the 28th state guatemala cedes soconusco & chiapas to mexico

canada gains the north miller county from the us the us receives the mexican cessation 1848 the yucatรกn wins independence from mexico

1898

canadian territory united states territory

ceding republics

guatemalan territory

disputed territory

mexican territory

territory of the republic of texas

over two hundred years of geographical transformation of the borders between canada, the united states, mexico, and guatemala 12

yukon territory joins the canadian provinces the republic of hawaii is annexed by the us


1840

creation of the republic of the rio grande guatemala wins independence from the frca

1840

the republic of the rio grande rejoins mexico

1853

the compromise of 1850 creates a neutral strip

1867

the dominion of canada is formed the united states purchases alaska from russia

1970

newfoundland joins the canadian provinces mexico gains rico rico, texas from the us

Source: www.wikipedia.com

present

13


coronado island

GEOLOGY AND LAND USE san diego bay

sweetw rive

pacific ocean

tijuana water shed

designated green space urban settlement geological fault

urban settlement and its spatial relationship to green space and local geological faults 16


san diego sweetwater reservoir

upper otay reservoir

sweetwater river

lower otay reservoir

otay river

rio tijuana

tijuana

Sources: SanDiego.gov, Google Maps, CDM

17


california

GROUND COVER imperial county

san diego san ysidro

otay mesa

arizona andrade

tecate calexico

puerta mesa de otay tecata mexico

mexicali

vicente guerrero san luis san luis

mexicali luis rio calexico east san colorado

tijuana

nuevo mexicali

san luis r.c.

lukeville nogales sonoyta

baja california

sasabe la garita de la ladrillera

columbus

cochise county nogales

naco

douglas

nogales naco

nogales

agua prieta

naco agua prieta

sonora

pacific ocean

low population density

grassland

high population density

scrubland

desert

coniferous forest

tropical scrubland

sister city border city

existing land biomes with respective settlement densities and border city locations 18

santa teresa

douglas

gulf of california

san jer贸nimo puerto palomas

chihuahu


new mexico

mbus

santa teresa

el paso el paso fabens

san rónimo ciudad juárez ciudad juárez

presidio presidio

texas

huahua ojinaga ojinaga del rio ciudad acuña eagle pass eagle pass

coahuila piedras negras

piedras negras

laredo laredo

nuevo leon

colombia nuevo laredo

laredo nuevo laredo

tamaulipas mcallen waslaco

gulf of mexico

roma

rio grande brownsville city hidalgo ciudad miguel progreso aleman ciudad brownsville camargo reynosa matamoros nuevo progreso reynosa rio bravo matamoros

Sources: geonova, bts.gov, epa.gov

19


colorado

PRECIPITATION gila

little colorado river

asuncion

magdalena

pacific ocean

high population density

20-40 inches

low population density

40-60 inches

0-10 inches

60-80 inches

10-20 inches

waterways border

examining differing levels of average annual rainful, local waterways, and their impact on settlement density 20

gulf of california


red river

brazos

trinity

pecos colorado

lake amistad

rio grande conchos

falcon international reservoir

gulf of mexico

sources: geonova, ag.arizona.edu, bts.gov, epa.gov,

21


* refer to hydrology map for location of the colorado river

WATER INFRASTRUCTURE

settlement

pumping equipment

water pump

proposed pump station

water treatment plant

proposed pipeline

well

potential future waste water treatment plant

aqueduct

potential future desalination plant

pipeline

solar chart The metropolitan water district of Southern California provides water for the municipality of San Diego, drawing from the Colorado River and from Northern California via one of two aqueducts in Riverside County. Pipelines terminate at the Otay Reservoir. Tijuana’s water sources are surface water from the Colorado River as well underground aquifers. diagram of as thewater suns from path on the 1st of april across 22


miramar reservoir

san vicente reservoir

el capitan reservoir

lake jennings

lake murray

loveland reservoir

municipality of san diego sweetwater reservoir upper otay reservoir sweetwater river

lower otay reservoir otay river

international wastewater treatment plan

rio tijuana

municipiality of tijuana

abelardo l. rodrigues dam

Sources: www.sandiego.gov/water, www.epa.gov, CDM

23


345°

330°

SOLAR CHART 315°

300°

1st jun

1st may 285°

1st apr 270°

1st mar

255° 1st feb

1st jan 17

16

240°

1 in

15

14

128 ft latitude: 32.54 longitude: -117.03

225°

stereographic diagram of the suns path on the 1st of april across the san ysidro - tijuana border crossing station and the surrounding buildings 24

210°

195°


n 15°

30°

10°

45° 20°

30° 60° 40°

1st jul

50°

1st aug

60°

75°

70°

1st sep

80°

90° 1st oct

105° 1st nov

1st dec

13

12

11

8

9

10

120°

135°

150°

165° sources: bing map, ecotect 180°

25


26


POPULATION

Caitlin Fisher Alexandria Stankovich Carly Leasia

27


POPULATION DENSITY

Cities are known for their density; their ability to fit and accommodate millions of people into such a small area is part of what makes them so impressive. Population density by itself does not say much about a city until it is contrasted to the population density of the surrounding area. A city whose density is much larger than the state it is associated with is much more amazing than a city whose density is similar to its state. California is a great example of this. It is a much denser state, and although the individual cities of Los Angeles and San Diego are much denser than most, California is really what is drawing people to live there.

LOS ANGELES

On the other hand, the city of Minneapolis’ population density is about a hundred times greater than Minnesota’s. This situation is much more intriguing: what factors are drawing all these people to this particular area?

SAN DIEGO TIJUANA

Proportion: City population density vs. State population density State population density City population density

City

Persons per sq. mi.

San Diego Las Angeles Austin Minneapolis Chicago Detroit Washington D.C. New York City Tijuana Mexico City

1612 8205 2558 6722 4884 6571 9776 27440 4155 15420

28

State Persons per sq. mi. California California Texas Minnesota Illinois Michigan Maryland New York Baja California Mexico City

234 234 80 65 223 179 542 409 105 1699

Proportion 1.48 3.34 3.20 5.72 2.64 3.42 2.40 4.62 2.58 1.7 Source: U.S. Census Bureau


MINNEAPOLIS DETROIT

NEW YORK

CHICAGO WASHINGTON DC Persons Per Square Mile 0 - 6.4 6.5 - 11.6 11.7 - 16.0 16.1 - 21.0 21.1 - 27.7 27.8 - 35.7 35.8 - 44.4 44.5 - 54.7 54.8 - 65.7 65.8 - 79.2

AUSTIN

79.3 - 93.0 93.1 - 106.2 106.2 - 121.0 121.1 - 138.5 138.6 - 161.2 161.3 - 189.4 189.5 - 224.4 224.5 - 270.4 270.5 - 338.9 339.0 - 432.2 432.3 - 541.1 541.2 - 709.7 709.8 - 964.4 964.5 - 1,369.0

MEXICO CITY

1,369.1 - 2,144.4 2,144.5 - 3,542.2 3,542.3 - 6,025.6 6,025.7 - 9,264.3 9,264.4 - 19,479.7 19,479.8 - 35,394.1 35,394.2 - 50,747.8

Source: Censo de Poblacion y Vivienda VII

50,747.9 - 89,565.0 29


UNITED STATES

Municipality Persons / sq. mi.

POPULATION DENSITY

San Diego Yuma Santa Cruz El Paso Brewster Webb Zapata Hidalgo Cameron

1612 35 35 712 1 58 12 363 370

State California California Arizona Texas Texas Texas Texas Texas Texas

Persons / sq. mi. Proportion 234 234 56 80 80 80 80 80 80

1.48 .62 .62 8.94 .02 .72 .15 4.56 4.64

PERSONS PER SQUARE MILE 0 - 6.4

50,747.9 - 89,565 30

Source: U.S. Census Bureau


MEXICO

Proportion

Persons / sq. mi.

State

Persons / sq. mi. Municipality

39.43 1.53 17.40 20.50 .80 9.46 21.13 2.97 3.04

105 105 34 34.2 34.2 43 99 99 99

Baja California Baja California Sonora Chihuahua Chihuahua Coahuila Tamaulipas Tamaulipas Tamaulipas

4155 162 593 701 27 408 2085 293 300

Tijuana Mexicali Nogales Juarez Praxedis Guerrero Piedras Negras Nuevo Laredo Reynosa Matamores

Note: this table is a side-by-side comparison of neighboring municipalities from each side of the border.

Proportion Municipality Population Density: State Population Density Municipality denser than state average Municipality less dense than state

Border conditions

cannot be generated by only looking at the municipalities lining this political division. A comparison must be drawn between these municipalities and their surrounding area in order to answer the question of what makes them so unique? In order to generalize the density of inhabitance along the border for the United States and Mexico, a proportion must be set up between the population densities of the municipalities and the population density of the state in which it is contained. A proportion less than one demonstrates that the state’s population is more concentrated away from the border. A proportion greater than one demonstrates that the state’s population is more concentrated near the border. For the most part, it seems that Mexico’s population seems to crowd near the border, while the people of the United State’s appear to be avoiding the border area. Of course, there are exceptions on both sides, such as Anahuac, Nuevo Leon and El Paso, Texas, but these numbers help provide an image as to how the two countries view one another and how this view affects where its people congregate.

Source: Censo de Poblacion y Vivienda VII

31


DEVELOPMENT DENSITY

Border fence between San Ysidro and Tijuana, looking East.

32

Teddy Cruz exhibit of stilt houses in Tijuana.

Sources: www.bing.com/maps, www.stephenrahn.com/.../2009/01/border.jpg, www.frederickdesignstudio.com/.../Tijuana_house.jpg


building footprint informal settlement

Development along the San Diego and Tijuana border not only displays a separation between two cultures, but serves as a division between urban strategies and building typologies. Tijuana pushes its dense city against the border, compared to San Ysidro which city center lies further north. The buildings near the border on the U.S. side are larger pieces of an infrastructure system of transportation and commerce, opposed to Tijuana where people may live and work directly along the fence. San Diego County is constantly revising its infrastructure to serve its spread of McMansions. As highways make room for larger developments, the existing fabric becomes dispensable.

Materials and sometimes even pre-fabricated houses are shipped across the border, welcomed by Tijuana’s residents. The hand-me-down houses from San Diego have created a new typology in the bottom-up growth of Tijuana’s informal settlements. Placed upon stilts, the recycled houses create new homes and new spaces below to meet arising demands of the growing community. Garage doors and recycled tires are transformed into walls, and the temporary dwellings multiply to form dense communities. These settlements strive to become permanent by profiting on the ephemeral material transported from across the border. Both San Diego and Tijuana benifit from the relationship of recycled urban growth.

Source: Sorkin, Michael, ed. Indefensible Space: The Architecture of the National Insecurity State. New York: Routledge, 2007. 122-124

33


SISTER CITIES

San Diego, California Calexico, California Tijuana, Baja California Mexicali, Baja California

Yuma, Arizona

San Luis Rio Colorado, Baja California

Nogales, Arizona

Columbu s, Ne

Naco, Arizona

El Paso

Nogales, Sonora Naco, Sonora

Country Area Population Hispanic Foreign Born High School Income per Capita Below Poverty Line Religion Human Development Index (Rank)

United States of America 3,537,441 281,421,906 12.5% 11.1% 28.6% $21,587 12.4% No National Religion 0.956 (15/182)

Puerto Palomas, Chihuahua Juarez, Chihuahua

Ojinag

Estados Unidos Mexicanos 761,601 111,211,789 $14,300 40% Roman Catholic 0.854 (53/182)

Human Development Index: a measurement of development based on three dimensions of life relationship between life expectancy, adult literacy and GDP

City State Population San Diego California Hispanic Calexico California Foreign Born High School Income per Capita Naco Arizona Below Poverty Line Columbus New Mexico

Area (sq.mi.) Population

Hispanic

Foreign Born High School Diploma

Income per capita

Below Poverty

324.3 6.2

1,256,951 27,109

25.40% 95.3%

25.7% 51.2%

82.80% 16.4%

$23,609 $9,981

14.6% 25.7%

3.4 2.8

833 1,765

82.5% 83.3%

31.6% 45.3%

24.5% 14.4%

$9,169 $6,721

34.2% 57.1%

Presidio Del Rio Eagle Pass

Texas Texas Texas

2.6 15.4 7.4

4,167 33,867 22,413

94.1% 81% 94.9%

49.2% 24.1% 35.7%

15.6% 24.8% 20.0%

$7,098 $12,199 $11,414

43.0% 27.0% 29.0%

Brownsville

Texas

83.0

139,722

91.3%

31.5%

17.2%

$9,762

36.0%

34

Source: www.coserve.org/disc/mapsgall.html


In comparison to national averages, borders cities create unique politcal, economic and social regions where demographics are dramatically shaped by those of the bordering country. The US-Mexico border provides a clear example of this sister-city relationship. As we infer from the analysis of multiple variables including distribution of resources, employment, and economic opportunities, Mexico appears to have developed a kind of parasitic dependance on the US. If we assume that people will move towards a place of greatest opportunity, the large swells of population along the Mexican side of the border proves that proximity allows for greater access to these positive impacts and “excesses.” The opposite situation becomes evidence on the other side of the border, where the population of US sister cites are extremely small. US populations along the Mexican border consist primarily of Hispanic communities, living in poverty with limited access to resources such as education. In order to understand this relationship between to sister-cities, we look at the comparison of municipal to national average; and while Mexico, as a country, is ranked far below the US on the Human Development Index, Mexico’s border cities are doing far better than other Mexican cities. Unfortunately, the opposite is generally true for the US border cities. As you continue, keep in mind the cross-culture dynamic of these sister cities as a framework through which to assess the physical and political boundary between the United States and Mexico.

bu s, New Mexico

El Paso, Texas

a

Presidio, Texas

Ojinage, Chihuahua Del Rio, Texas Acuna, Coahuila

Eagle Pass, Texas

Piedras Negras, Coahuila

Laredo, Texas Nuevo Laredo, Tamaulipas

McAllen, Texas Reynosa, Tamaulipas

Brownsville, Texas

Matamoros, Tamaulipas

Source: www.census.gov/main/www/can2000.html

35


EMPLOYMENT

Employment

within the San Diego-Tijuana metopolitan area is higher than national averages of both the US and Mexico. This data must be compared with population information in order to produce an accurate analysis of the area. The population density of Tijuana is far greater than San Ysidro near the border crossing; therefore, while employment rates appear similar, those on the Mexican side have far more employment opportunities than those on the US side. While employment opportunities are more plentiful on the Mexico side, we must

time employments. The types of employment and associated

Employed

Diego-Tijuana region, the government is the leading employer for US citizens, while services and manufacturing make up half of the positions held by Mexican workers. Category

US (% of pop)

Mexico (% of pop)

Agriculture

<1

0.3

Retail Trade

18

17.9

Construction

<1

5.6

Services

11

30.8

Manufacturing

13

28.3

Government

22

2.7

Transport/Com

11

5.8

Finance/Real Est

3

-

Wholesale

13

-

Self-Employed

8

-

Extractive Ind

-

0.5

Employed in US

-

8.1

55% to 93% 93% to 95% 95% to 97% 97% to 98% 98% to 100%

Tijuana

San Diego

97.7% 94.1%

Corridor

US

Mexico

95.1% 89.2% 94.6%

[1] US Employment Distribution (% of pop)

On the US side of the San Diego-Tijuana metropolitan area, government, specifically the US border patrol, is the largest employer. Retail trade is the second highest, which suggests that San Diego is a high commercial ozne, perhaps due to its reputation as a tourist destination.

Retail Trade (18%)

US data from SANDAG, 1995; Mexico data from INEGI, 1997

Government (22%)

36

Source: SANDAG


Employed Less Than Full Time

Tijuana

High Income

0% to 19%

0% to 4%

19% to 22%

4% to 8%

22% to 26%

8% to 13%

26% to 40%

13% to 22%

40% to 100%

22% to 69%

San Diego

42.1% 22.3%

Corridor

Tijuana

28.2%

16.3% 13.2%

San Diego

Corridor

14.1%

[2] Mexico Employment Distribution (% of pop)

In Mexico, service and manufacturing make up over 50% of the employment distribution. It is also interesting to note that a Retail trade is similarly respresented

Manufacturing (28.3%) Services (30.8%)

Source: INEGI

37


POVERTY

LOS ANGELES SAN DIEGO

PROPORTION CITY POVERTY LEVEL: NATIONAL POVERTY LEVEL

TIJUANA

poverty level of city is below national average poverty level of city is above national average

38

CITY

% POVERTY

PROPORTION

San Diego Los Angeles Austin Minneapolis Chicago Detroit Washington D.C. New York City Tijuana Mexico City

15.0% 22.0% 14.0% 17.0% 20.0% 26.0% 20.0% 21.0% 2.34% 9.2%

1.17 1.78 1.16 1.36 1.58 2.10 1.62 1.71 .169 .67

MEXICO CITY

Source: U.S. Census Bureau


0%-10% 10%-15% 15%-20% 20%-25% 25%-30% 30%-35%

MINNEAPOLIS

35%-40%

DETROIT

NEW YORK

40%-100%

PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE IN POVERTY

CHICAGO WASHINGTON DC

AUSTIN

Urban poverty

is one of the most major consequences of living in such a dense area. The poverty level in the United States is $20,614 and 12.4% of Americans are living below this line. In all of the U.S. cities shown, the poverty level is almost double the national average. On the other hand, Mexico’s poverty level is 10.42 pesos/day which is equivelent to an annual salary of $292. The Mexican cities shown lie generously under the national line. Mexico’s poverty rate is based on the United Nation’s standards, about a dollar a day, and these standards are much less than the United State’s. Therefore, it is not reasonable to compare the Mexican percentages to the American percentages, but instead comparing the ratios of each city’s level to the national level. It is obvious that Mexico’s quality of life in urban areas is far different than that of the U.S. This is because cities offer so many more opportunities, therefore Mexico has a huge rural poverty problem that they have yet to resolve.

Source:

Censo de Poblacion y Vivienda VII

39 11


UNITED STATES

POVERTY

Municipality

% Poverty

Proportion

San Diego Yuma Santa Cruz El Paso Brewster Webb Zapata Hidalgo Cameron

12.4% 13.9% 24.5% 23.8% 18.2% 31.2% 35.8% 35.9% 33.1%

1.0 1.12 1.97 1.91 1.46 2.51 2.88 2.89 2.66

PERCENTAGE OF PEOPLE IN POVERTY 0%-10%

40%-100%

40

Source: U.S. Census Bureau


MEXICO

Proportion

% Poverty

Municipality

39.43 1.53 17.40 20.50 .80 9.46 21.13 2.97 3.04

2.34% 2.76% 3.02% 2.98% 8.52% 5.25% 5.49% 5.24% 5.76%

Tijuana Mexicali Nogales Juarez Praxedis Guerrero Piedras Negras Nuevo Laredo Reynosa Matamores

Note: this table is a side-by-side comparison of neighboring municipalities from each side of the border.

PROPORTION MUNICIPALITY POVERTY LEVEL: NATIONAL POVERTY LEVEL municipality’s poverty level more than national poverty level municipality’s poverty level less than national poverty level

The border

represents both the best and the worst in terms of poverty. On the Mexican side, some of the country’s richest people live in the municipalities lining the border. Almost every municipality’s poverty level is less than that of Mexico. On the other hand, the poorest municipalities in the United States are along the US/Mexican border. When comparing the municipality’s poverty level to the national poverty level, all municipalities lie below the national, with the exception of San Diego, whose poverty level is equal to the national. Starr county in Texas is over four times larger than the national poverty line. The border provides Mexicans opportunities that are not available elsewhere in their country. Unfortunately, the border offers Americans poverty and hardship.

Source: Censo de Poblacion y Vivienda VII

41


Native Citizens

MIGRATION

0 - 58.4% 58.5 - 72.1% 72.2 - 78.8% 78.9 - 84.8% 84.9 - 89.7% 89.8 - 100%

city park or protected land

Foreign Born, Naturalized Citizens 0 - 4.8% 4.9 - 7.2% 7.3 - 9.2% 9.3 - 11.5% 11.6 - 15.4% 15.5 - 100%

city park or protected land

Foreign Born Non-Citizens

0 -.7% 0.8 - 1.6% 1.7 - 3.1% 3.2 - 6% 6.1 - 13.8% 13.9 - 100%

city park or protected land

Migration to the United States has always been an influential factor on its population. The largest percentage of these immigrants live on the coasts, and this is especially evident near the U.S.-Mexico border. This relationship is also reflected in San Diego County. Near the busiest border crossing, San Ysidro, the native U.S. population is less than 58%. Immigrants from other countries, citizens or non-citizens, make up 25% of the total U.S. population. 42

To estimate this percentage, the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service takes data from the Census and from its own INS statistics to compare numbers of legally-resident populations and census-based foreign-born populations. This provides residual data to derive the number of unauthorized residents living in the United States.

Source: Office of Policy and Planning U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service: Estimates of the unauthorized immigrant population residing in the United States: 1990 to 2000


Native Citizens

45.6 - 93.6% 93.7 - 96.7% 96.8 - 98% 98.1 - 98.7% 98.8 - 99.2% 99.3 - 100%

Foreign Born, Naturalized Citizens 0 -0.4% 0.5 - 0.7% 0.8 - 1.1% 1.2 - 1.9% 2 - 4% 4.1 - 29.4%

Foreign Born Non-Citizens

0 -0.4% 0.5 - 0.7% 0.8 - 1.1% 1.2 - 1.9% 2 - 4% 4.1 - 29.4%

Census U.S. Citizenship Criteria: 1. Born in the United States 2. Born in Puerto Rico, Guam, or the U.S. Virgin Islands 3. Born abroad of U.S. citizen parents 4. U.S. citizen by naturalization 5. Not a U.S. citizen

Source: Census Track 2008 Estimates, 2008 Census Subject Definitions

43


Estimated US Born Hispanic Population 0-100 thousand 101-250

HISPANIC ORIGINS

251-500 501-1,000 > 1,000

Over time, the number of San Diego county citizens with Hispanic origins has increased. With each decade there is a visible increase in the Hispanic population with relation to the total population due to both legal and illegal migration in addition to the growth of settled Hispanic families. Since 2003, the Hispanic population has grown faster than any other group in the U.S. However, these individuals still represent a small percent of the population in downtown San Diego. Other variables such as education and income must be considered to make any further conclusions as to why the Hispanic population is primarily concentrated in rural regions of San Diego County, especially along the Mexico and New Mexico borders.

Percent of Population of Hispanic Origins 0% to 11.3% 11.4% to 18.2% 18.3% to 33% 33.1% to 57.6% 57.7% to 100% US data from SANDAG, 1995; Mexico data from INEGI, 1997

44

1980

1990

2000

2008

Source: Source: U.S. Censuswww.epa.gov/border2012 Bureau (National Research Council)


US Population According to Race with races subdivided into Non-Hispanic and Hispanic (H/L)

41.90%

White

6.00%

(H/L) White

1.97%

African American/Black

0.03%

(H/L) African American/Black

1.10% 0.10%

American Indian/Alaska Native (H/L) American Indian/Alaska Native

0.25%

Asian

0.05% 0.05%

(H/L) Asian

0.05% 36.90%

According to the 2000 US Census, 12.5% of the population is of Hispanic origins. Source: (image) www.mauricesherif.com/blog/ Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2000

Some Other Race

5.30% 5.50%

(H/L) Some Other Race

0.80%

(H/L) Two Races

Two Races 45


DIVERSITY INDEX

49 to 73

1. San Francisco, CA (74.9)

30 to 48 7 to 29

2. Los Angeles, CA (74.0) 7. San Diego, CA (56.9) CA (62.0)

US (49.0)

60 to 77

High Diversity

49 to 59 40 to 48 30 to 39 15 to 29 1 to 14

Low Diversity

#. City, State (Diversity Index of City)

46

Source: http://www.census.gov/population/cen2000/atlas/censr01-104.pdf


Eight groups were used for the index: 1. White, not Hispanic 2. Black or African American 3. American Indian and Alaska Native 4. Asian 6. Two or more races, not Hispanic 7. Some other race, not Hispanic 8. Hispanic or Latino According to the US Census, Hispanic or Latino is considered an ethnicity not a race.

4. New York, NY (63.4) 6. Chicago, IL (57.3) 3. Washington, DC (64.2)

5. Houston, TX (62.4)

Diversity Index

This thematic map summarizes racial and ethnic diversity in the United States. The index shows the likelihood that two persons chosen at random from the same The index ranges from 0 (no diversity) to 100 (complete diversity). Diversity in the U.S. population is increasing. The states with the most diverse populations are California, New Mexico, and Texas. 47


LA PAZ AGREEMENT

Laz Paz 1983

Border 2012

The La Paz Argeement was created to unify the environ-

mental goals and policies of the United States and Mexico in the border region. Established almost 30 years ago, this document represents one of the primary political relationships between the two countries outside the realm of the often prioritized defense and trade issues. While political boundaries have been made obvious to people, environmental conditions such as air, water and soil quality do not stop at the fence. the other. This document represents a cooperation between US and Mexico, and while it is limited to the borderline of New Mexico and Texas, it has become a model for similar missions. For example, Border 2012, is a region wide initative to improve the quality of life, culture and environment within the border region which extends 100 miles into both countries. Border 2012 deals with a broader range of topics including emergency preparedness and response. It is important to continue this open dialogue where both sides are represented equally.

48

Source: (image) Alexandria Stankovich, TCAUP 2010


United States - Mexico La Paz Agreement

TREATIES AND OTHER INTERNATIONAL ACTS SERIES 10827 ENVIRONMENTAL COOPERATION Agreement Between the UNITED STATES OF AMERICA and MEXICO Signed at La Paz August 14, 1983 NOTE BY THE DEPARTMENT OF STATE Pursuant to Public Law 89-497, approved July 8, 1966 (80 Stat. 271; 1 U.S.C. 113)- ". . . the Treaties and Other International Acts Series issued under the authority of the Secretary of State shall be competent evidence . . . of the treaties, international agreements other than treaties, and proclamations by the President of such treaties and international agreements other than treaties, as the case may be, therein contained, in all the courts of law and equity and of any further proof or authentication thereof." For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, US Government Printing Entered into force February 16, 1984. AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA AND THE UNITED MEXICAN STATES ON COOPERATION FOR THE PROTECTION AND IMPROVEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENT IN THE BORDER AREA The United States of America and the United Mexican States, RECOGNIZING the importance of a healthful environment to the long-term economic and social well-being of present and future generations of each country as well as of the global community; RECALLING that the Declaration of the United Nations Conference on the Human Environment, proclaimed in Stockholm in 1972,['] called upon nations to collaborate to resolve environmental problems of common concern; NOTING previous agreements and programs providing for environmental cooperation between problems in each country; ACKNOWLEDGING the important work of the International Boundary and Water CommisREAFFIRMING their political will to further strengthen and demonstrate the importance attached by both Governments to cooperation on environmental protection and in furtherance of the principle of good neighborliness; Have agreed as follows: 1 Department of state Bulletin July 24,1972, P. 116.

STRUCTURE AND ORGANIZATION The Committee will consist of 20 persons, ten of whom are to be selected by each The ten U.S. representatives invited to serve on the Committee will include (i) one representative of the federal government; (ii) one representative from each of the governments of the States of Texas and New Mexico; (iii) one representative from local government in El Paso, Texas; (iv) one representative from local government in Do単a Ana County, New Mexico; and of a non governmental organization, a major portion of whose activities concerns air pollution. The ten Mexican representatives invited to serve on the Committee will include (i) one representative of the National Institute of Ecology (INE-SEMARNAP) ; (ii) one representative of the Federal Attorney for Environmental Protection ; (iii) one representative of the federal health and welfare agency (SSA) ; (iv) one representative of the environmental authorities of the State of Chihuahua (v) one representative of the environmental authorities of the Municipality of Ciudad Juarez; and non governmental organization, a major portion of whose activities concerns air pollution, at least one will be a representative of the academic institutions of Ciudad Juarez, and at least one will be a representative of the Consulting Council for Sustainable Development in the Northern Region.

Source: www.epa.gov/border2012

49


50


ECONOMY

Ryan Giles Dennis Knoff Joshua Hendershot

51


TRADE GEOGRAPHY

 

 

 Otay Mesa, CA



Calexico, CA

Nogales, AZ El Paso, TX Laredo, TX

52

Source: CIA World Factbook: United States + Mexico


Top US States Trading With Mexico Busiest Trading Ports of Entry

Modes of Transportation for US-Mexico Trade

 



 







    

Border Trade Volume Comparisons



     53


IMPORTS AND EXPORTS

[1] Transportation Equipment

[2] Computer + Electonic Products

[3] Oil and Gas

[4] Electrical Equipment + Appliances

[5] Apparel and Accessories

[6] Machinery

[7] Fabricated Metal Products

[8] Miscellaneous Manufactured Commodities

[9] Agricultural Products

[10] Chemicals

54

Source: Woodrow Wilson Foundation - Mexican Institute


Top Products and Services Traded Across the US-Mexican Border

Computer + Electronic Products [1]

Transportation Equipment [2]

Chemicals [3]

Machinery [4]

Electrical Equipment + Appliances [5]

Plastics + Rubber Products [6]

Food Manufacturing [7]

Fabricated Metal Products [8]

Agricultural Products [9]

Primary Metal Manufacturing [10] Many of the materials and products that are traded between the United States and Mexico are servicing Mexicoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s substanial maquiladora industry, where raw materials are exported from the US to be assembled with cheaper labor, and then subsequently exported by Mexico, resulting in the overlapping import-export rankings you see here. 55


BORDER TRAFFIC

Pedestrian Crossings

1. Nogales, AZ 2. San Ysidro, CA 3. El Paso, TX 4. Laredo, TX 5. Calexico, CA

56

Personall V P Vehicle hii Crossings

1. San Ysidro, CA 2. El Paso, TX 3. Brownsville, TX 4. Hidalgo, TX 5. Laredo, TX

$

Trade Crossings

1. Laredo, TX 2. El Paso, TX 3. Otay Mesa, CA 4. Hidalgo, TX 5. Nogales, AZ

Source: UN Global Data Source, May 2006


57


58

i i

e e

e e

1-USA 2-Guatemala 3-El Salvador

USA-1 El Slavador-2 Honduras-3 1-USA 2-United Kingdom 3- Cote dâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;Ivore

e e

USA-1 El Slavador-2 Costa Rica-3

USA-1 Canada-2 Germany-3 1-Canada 2-Mexico 3- China

e e

1-USA 2-Netherlands 3- China

USA-1 Canada-2 Germany-3

1-Canada 2-Mexico 3- China

e e

USA-1 Netherlands-2 Costa Rica-3

1-China 2-Canada 3-Mexico

Costa Rica Panama USA-1 China-2 Japan-3

i i 1-China 2-Canada 3-Mexico

Honduras Nicaragua USA-1 China-2 Japan-3

i i 1-China 2-Canada 3-Mexico

Belize Guatemala USA-1 Mexico-2 China-3

i i

1-USA 2-Guatemala 3-El Salvador

United States Mexico

USA-1 Venezuela-2 Mexico-3

i i

1-USA 2-Mexico 3-Venezula

Canada United States

USA-1 Costa Rica-2 China-3

P P GD GD

TRADE BALANCE Legend pe %

a

Be

low

i

r ve Po

e 1-USA 2-France 3- India

pit

a rc

1-China 2-Canada 3-Mexico

North American Borders s s er e er tn rtn rad r a P T Pa rt al rt po utu po x m I M E

ty

Source: CIA World Factbook


e e i i

i i Germany-1 Belgium-2 Italy-3

1-Netherlands 2-France 3-Belgium

i i

1-Germany 2-Italy 3-France

1-Germany 2-France 3-Italy

Germany-1 Slovakia-2 Poland-3

1-Germany 2-Russia 3-Italy

i i

Germany-1 France-2 China-3

Germany-1 France-2 Italy-3

Germany-1 France-2 Netherlands-3

1-Germany 2-Belgium 3France

Netherlands-1 Germany-2 France-3

1-Germany 2-China 3-Belgium

i i

1-China 2-India 3-USA

1-France 2-USA 3-United Kingdom

Germany-1 Norway-2 Denmark-3

1-United Kingdom 2-Germany 3-Netherlands

Germany-1 Denamrk-2 Norway-3

1-Sweden 2-Germany 3-Denmark

i i

Germany-1 Slovakia-2 Poland-3

e e Germany-1 Italy-2 Spain-3

e e

1-Germany 2-USA 3-Italy

e e

Germany-1 France-2 Spain-3

e e

1-Japan 2-South Korea 3-India

e e

USA-1 Japan-2 South Korea-3

Top International Borders

Norway Sweden

Netherlands Belgium

Poland Czech Republic

Germany France

Switzerland Italy

U.A.E. Saudi Arabia

59


GROWTH RATES

Sacramento: 21.3% 1,796,857 Las Vegas: 83.3% 1,563,282

San Francisco: 12.6% 7,039,362

Dallas: 29.3% 5,221,801

Los Angeles: 12.7% 16,373,645

Aus 1,24

San Diego: 12.6% 2,813,833 Tijuana: 64.4% 1,148,681 Phoenix: 45.3% 3,251,876 Ciudad Juarez: 50.3% 1,187,275

San Antonio: 20.2% 1,592,383 Monterrey: 4% 1,110,909

Rural Growth Rates

2000

2020

2005

2030 > 3.00 2.99 - 2.50 2.49 - 2.00 1.99 - 1.50 1.49 - 1.00

2040

2010 Historic 60 10

.99 - .50 .49 - 0

Projected http://esa.un.org/unup/index.asp?panel=2 http://www.census.gov/population/www/cen2000/briefs/phc-t3/index.html


Top 50: Largest Cities in 2000 Chicago: 11.1% 9,157,540

Population Growth Population

The United States and Mexico and the countries that border them will see dramatic urban growth in the next few decades. As a result of urban growth, rural areas will start to dissipate as urban sprawl increases. Many of the fastest growing cities are located around the U.S. - Mexican border, some of which are Tijuana, Las Vegas, Phoenix, Ciudad Juarez, San Antonio, Austin, and Houston.

Austin: 47.7% 1,249,763 Houston: 25.2% 4,669,571

Urban Growth Rates

2000

2020

2005

2030

2010

2040

> 1.50 1.49 - 1.00 .99 - .50 .49 - 0 (-).01 - (-).50 (-).51 - (-)1.00 (-)1.01 - (-)1.50

Historic http://www.citypopulation.de/Mexico-Cities.html

Projected 61 11


PRODUCTION Mexico exports cars.

U.S. exports parts for a safety harness.

Safety Harness gets assembled and shipped to be installed in cars.

Maquiladora factories are located in Mexico, generally close to the border with the United States. Maquiladora factories import materials and equilpment and assembles the products to be exproted back to The United States without every paying any duties.

Maquiladora Trading

Employees by Industry Sectors Other: 565,000 Chemicals: 135,000 Services: 135,000 Electronics: 125,000 Machinery: 115,000 Furniture & Transportation: 108,000 Textiles: 75,000

Lower wage rates than China one million in labor costs More competitive in world market

Companies on average save

Employment opportunities Import foriegn components Commercial deficit is

created

without paying duties

reduced with The United States

Economic Attractiveness of Maquiladoras 62

Source: http://www.dallasfed.org/research/swe/2006/images/0605c_b1.gif


Unemployment Rate: California Arizona New Mexico Texas Mexico

   

While the unemployment rates look deceivingly in favor of Mexico, their underemployment is 26% while that of California's is 11%. California has one of the worst unemployment and underemployment rates in the United States.



Minimum Wages (daily): California Arizona New Mexico Texas Baja California Sonora Chihuahua Coahuila Nuevo Leon Tamaulipas

         

There is a large discrepancy between the minimum wage in Mexico and The United States. This is not directly linked to the cost of goods and services

Cost of Goods and Services: United States Mexico

 

Companies Using Maquiladoras (in thousands): Delphi Lear Corporation General Electric Jabil Circuit Visteon Whirlpool Emerson Electric Motorola Honeywell Plantronics Bose Mattell

           

Sources: http://www.thecuttingedgenews.com, http://www.globalpropertyguide.com/Latin-America/Mexico/currency-value

This is just a short list of the many companies that use Maquiladoras in Mexico for their cheap labor.

63


TOURISM

2003

2005 Business Vacation Other

2006 Inbound

2004

Hikers Previous Costs

International Inbound

= 64%

+ +

+

= 36%

Visitors abroad - destination - 1998-2007 - national (Thousands of People)

1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007

64

Total 9,775 10,214 10,591 10,151 9,883 10,353 11,553 12,534 12,608 13,010

United States 8,118 8,634 9,235 8,964 8,717 9,254 10,305 10,944 10,914 11,039

Canada 519 502 477 375 361 292 336 366 436 593

Europe 477 563 401 362 479 443 0 0 0 0

Latin America 297 218 187 174 272 297 0 0 0 0

Other 365 297 291 276 54 67 912 1,224 1,258 1,378

Source: INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Geografia)


2005

2004 Business Vacation Other Hikers

2006 Domestic

2003

International Outbound The INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Geografia collects and studies data recorded each year on tourism across the United StatesMexico border, breaking it down according to points of origin, reasons for crossing, and means of transportation. About 2/3 of all travel into Mexico is done over land, between passenger vehicles and pedestrian travel. The remainder of visitors arrive either by air, train, or public transit. According to data collected over the past 10 years, it appears that most Americans crossing the border in passenger vehicles are doing so for vacation or

Outbound Tourism Total United States 5,177 4,789 5,543 5,119 6,200 5,717 6,423 5,915 6,492 5,984 6,603 6,085 7,399 6,811 8,000 7,360 8,486 7,801 9,220 8,464

Canada 20 22 25 26 26 27 0 0 0 0

Source: INEGI (Instituto Nacional de Estadistica y Geografia)

tourism, with the bulk of the business traffic inbound being done by truck and other cargo transport. However, most of the traffic north into the United States is a mix between American citizens returning home and Mexican citizens look for work. This unique balance of reasons for travel sets up a symbiotic relationship between the two countries; toruism and truck trade exits the US in high volume, as finished goods from the maquiladoras and migrant works cross north, creating staggering levels of traveling individuals each day across the border.

Central America 71 81 93 97 97 101 0 0 0 0

South America 35 38 43 45 45 46 0 0 0 0

Europe 217 234 266 281 281 285 0 0 0 0

Asia 14 15 17 18 18 19 0 0 0 0

Other 31 34 39 41 41 41 588 640 685 756

65


Top Attractions by Annual Visitation

TOURIST DESTINATIONS

Port CA:San Ysidro CA:San Ysidro CA:San Ysidro CA:San Ysidro CA:San Ysidro CA:San Ysidro CA:San Ysidro Total

Year 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009

Month Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul

Bus Passengers 48,366 36,592 36,827 36,790 31,893 29,852 37,206 257,526

Personal Vehicles 950,322 931,800 1,131,661 1,106,902 1,145,423 1,144,827 1,187,060 7,597,995

Passengers (Personal Vehicles) 1,805,612 1,584,060 2,036,989 1,881,734 2,061,761 2,060,688 2,136,708 13,567,552

Pedestrians 493,914 448,213 526,949 527,158 532,523 518,873 567,444 3,615,074

Total 3,298,214 3,000,665 3,732,426 3,552,584 3,771,600 3,754,240 3,928,418

25,038,147

San Diego Zoo 3.5 Million

Gaslamp District 3 Million

Centro Cultural 1 Million

Avenida Revolucion 300,000 / Day

66

Source: City of Oceanside Official Website (www.ci.oceanside.ca.us) RITA Bureau of Transportation Statistics (http://www.transtats.bts.gov/BorderCrossing.aspx)


INSERT TITLE HERE?

San Diego Zoo

San Diego Zoo

Gaslamp District

Gaslamp District

Avenida Revolucion

Over 60 million people cross the border into Mexico every year. Based off of advertisements and popularity of tourist attractions in both San Diego and Tijuana, several of the most major attractions have been highlighted. Both cities have a large tourist draw that plays a significant role in their respective economies. This element factors heavily into the strange relationship that exists between the metropolitan area and their countries.

Centro Cultural Tijuana

67


68


MOBILITY

Julia Gankin Diana Berry

69


TRANSIT ROUTES

Regional Traffic from north of San Diego Country to Rosarita Major Regional Highways San Diego Trolley Line Greyhound Bus Line Greyhound Mexican Affiliate Mexicoach Line

70

Source: San Diego Transportation www.sandag.org


San Diego Trolley Line Mexicoach Pedestrian Path Commuter Vehicle Path

Traffic Across the Border

With the exception of private commuter vehicles, most regional traffic stops at the border and switches to another source. Mexicoach is a service that actually drives across the border from Mexico, then stops shortly after and drops off near the trolley station. 71


1 PEDESTRIAN ROUTE: US-MX

2

Pedestrian Path

Crossing into Mexico from the United States involves a series of switchbacks and surveillance cameras, but no passport checks and minimal border patrol. Once one crosses the turnstile into Mexico, a very different atmosphere is revealed.

72

Source: Tijuana Tourist Information tijuanamexicoinsider.com


Going through the turnstile

8

Crossing the Tijuana River

73


PEDESTRIAN ROUTE: MX-US Pedestrian Path

8

7

6 3 5 2 4 1 The route into the United States from Mexico requires fewer switchbacks but significantly more time. Entry into the United States requires proper identification, a series of questions from the border official, as well as putting your belongings through an x-ray machine.

74

Source: Tijuana Tourist Information tijuanamexicoinsider.com


1

On Avenida Revolucion

2

Back across the Tijuana River

3

Benches for shops on the ramp back to the border

4

Go past the taxi stand on the way

5

7

6

Turnstile into the border station

8

Into the security cave

75


TAXI TRAFFIC Pedestrian Path Taxi Stand

Many choose to get around the city using the Tijuana taxis. Two types of taxis are available. The Yellow taxis have no meters, the price of the trip must be negotiated before one gets in the vehicle. These are generally more expensive, but the drivers are also much more likely to speak english. The second type of taxi, taxi libre, do have meters and are generally cheaper than Yellow taxis, however drivers speak less English and you need to have a specific address to reach your destination.

76

Source: www.tijuanataxico.com


77


PRIVATE MOBILITY

SAN YSIDRO

9,880,509

EL PASO

9,318,273

Land port of entry Passenger vehicles per year.

78 10

Source: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


200 ft

200 ft

200 ft

200 ft

The San Ysidro/Tijuana land port of entry has the greatest amount of passenger vehicle traffic of any of the border crossings with a total of 9,880,509 per year. There is no commercial traffic at this port. All commerical traffic in the area must use the Otay Mesa Port of Entry.

The

El Paso/Juarez

land port of entry has the second

greatest amount of passenger vehicle crossings at 9,318,273 per year. This crossing is also busy for the same reason as San Ysidro/Tijuana. El Paso and Juarez are both big cities and many people commute to work across the border.

The San Ysidro/Tijuana crossing is busy because two large cities are on either side of the border so many of the passenger vehicles are people commuting to work.

Source: Hyperborder. New York: Princton Architectural, 2008 Source: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

79 11


PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC

SAN YSIDRO

4,194,627 NOGALES

4,327,212

EL PASO

4,139,292

Land port of entry Pedestrian crossings per year.

80 10

Source: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


200 ft

200 ft

200 ft

200 ft

The San Ysidro/Tijuana land port of entry has the second largest number of pedestrians crossing the border per year at

4,194,627.

The Nogales, Arizona/Nogales, Mexico land port of entry has the greatest quantity of pedestrian traffic at 4,327,212 crossings per year.

This is a busy crossing for pedestrians because many people This is a busy border crossing because the city of Nogales is on work on the opposite side of the border than where they live. It is both sides of the border. The border itself runs down the middle faster to get across the border on foot then in a car so many of a main street in Nogales. choose to cross on foot.

Source: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Source: Hyperborder. New York: Princton Architectural, 2008

81 11


COMMERCIAL TRAFFIC

OTAY MESA

427,994 EL PASO

448,552

LAREDO

876,051

Land port of entry Commercial vehicles per year

82 10

Source: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx


200 ft

200 ft

200 ft

200 ft

The Laredo/Nuevo Laredo land port of entry in Texas has

The

Otay Mesa

land port of entry in California is the third

the most commercial truck traffic with 876,051 crossings per largest amount of truck traffic with 427,994. year. Since there is no commercial traffic allowed through the San Laredoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s enormous quantity of commercial traffic is due to its Ysidro port of entry, all commercial traffic in the area is directed location along the NAFTA corridor on Interstate 35 which travels here. all the way into Minnesota.

Source: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Source: Hyperborder. New York: Princton Architectural, 2008. Print.

83 11


400

PEDESTRIAN ITINERARIES

NUMBER OF PEDESTRIANS

TOTAL NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND

300

200

100

0

12a

6am

12p

6p

Most people travel to Mexico from the U.S. at this border entry to take advantage of the tourism in Tijuana which includes a vibrant nightlife and a legal drinking age of 18. Some others (mostly locals) cross the border here to take advantage of the cheaper services offered in Mexico such as vehicle repair and doctors, along with cheaper and easier to obtain prescription drugs. A smaller number of people cross into Mexico for work.

Most people that cross the border into the U.S. at this point are traveling to work. Many people who work in the San Diego area live in Mexico because it is much cheaper than San Diego. There are also quite a few studetns that go to school in San Diego that live in Tijuana.

84 10

Source: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Source:San Ysidro Land Port of Entry Expansion Mobility Study. Rep. no. JA82077. U.S. General Services Administration, 30 Apr. 2009. Web. 31 Jan. 2010.


TIJUANA SAN DIEGO SAN YSIDRO LOS ANGELES OTHER

RESPONDENTS BY ORIGIN

TIJUANA SAN DIEGO SAN YSIDRO LOS ANGELES CHULA VISTA OTHER

RESPONDENTS BY DESTINATION

HOME WORK SCHOOL SHOPPING TOURISM BUSINESS MEDICAL NO RESPONSE

ORIGIN OF PEDESTRIANS CROSSING THE BORDER

HOME WORK SCHOOL SHOPPING TOURISM BUSINESS MEDICAL NO RESPONSE OTHER

DESTINATION OF PEDESTRIANS CROSSING THE BORDER

Source: xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

85 11


86


SECURITY

Antoinette Delvillano Melissa BonďŹ l

87


Tijuana Beach

Colinas del Mediterraneo

Tijuana

Tecate

Lukeville

Tecate

Lukeville

Douglas

FENCES + PORTS

Tijuana 88

Otay Mesa


Douglas

El Paso

Acuna

Matamoros

KEY Border New fence Old fence Border crossing

El Paso Source: www.panoramio.com

Brownsville

The purpose of the fence dividing the United States and Mexico is to secure the border and reduce illegal immigration. After the terrorist attact of September 11, the gaps along the US-Mexico border became a concern. Therefore, a new fence was proposed. The fence extends more than 600 miles along the border. The fence is not continuous, so in between the fences there is a â&#x20AC;&#x153;virtual fenceâ&#x20AC;? which consists of cameras, sensors, and Border Patrol agents. 89


NEW FENCE INFRASTRUCTURE Barbed Wire

Ditch to prevent Road for Surveillance Metal vehicles from border patrol Camera Fence reaching the vehicles fence

12’

“Triple Border Fence”

120’ Tecate, California

Tecate, Mexico

90

Source: www.vivirlatino.com


The triple border fence was proposed in 2005 as a result of the terrorist attacks on September 11, 2001. The new fence is to replace obsolete existing fences such as this one that separates Tecate, California and Tecate, Mexico. 91


BORDER TUNNELS

1 Lynden, WA

December 30, 2009 30’ Nogales, MX

Nogales, AZ

December 2, 2009

1000’ San Diego, CA

Tijuana, MX January 25, 2006 Tijuana, MX February 25, 2005

600’

Calexico, CA

Mexicali, MX February 27, 2002

1200’ Tierra del Sol, CA

Tecate, MX May 31, 1993

1450’ Otay Mesa, CA

Tijuana, MX

Calexico, CA

6 29

Naco, AZ

1

2

San Luis, AZ San Diego, CA

1

53

Douglas, AZ

Nogales, AZ

92

Source: http://archives.signonsandiego.com/uniontrib/20060126/news_7n26tunnel.html http://subtopia.blogspot.com/2009/03/tunnelizing-migration-1-border-tunnel.html


Tijuana

Tijuana

2600â&#x20AC;&#x2122; Otay Mesa, CA

Otay Mesa

Otay Mesa

110 cross-border tunnels have been discovered since 1990. The number of tunnels found has increased as security along the border has increased. The tunnels greatly vary in length and materi als. Some of the tunnels are made using w ood or metal , while others are extenstions of already existing infrastructure. The entrances of the tunnels also vary, some examples being hidden in walls, while others are openings in floors. These tunnels are used to smuggle people and drugs across the border.

Nogales

93


Tunnel Infrastructure

BORDER TUNNELS 20 feet

1.2 m

1.2 m

Ventilation tubes

Electric light

On February 28, 2002, US drug agents discovered the entrance to a tunnel behind a false door covered by a large safe in a closet at Johnsonâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s pig farm located in Tierra del Sol, California. The tunnel spanned 1,200 feet and ended in the fireplace of a home in Mexico. The tunnel included electric lights, ventilation ducts and wood walls. This tunnel found in Mexicoâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Baja California included a lighting system and a small cart. The tunnel reached a ranch in Southern California and was used to smuggle drugs and illegal immigrants across the border

94

Source: http://a188.g.akamaitech.net/f/188/920/1h/www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/images/I20363-2002Feb28


Underground Barrier

Tunnel

Underground Barrier

Border fence

300 feet

Reinforced concrete 1.5 to 2 feet thick

The underground barrier was put in place to prevent tunnels from being built across the US - Mexico border. So far, it has been implemented in Nogales, Arizona, where it has prevented more tunnels from being built.

Source: http://www.visalaw.com/09apr1/4apr109.html

95


INTERNATIONAL BORDER SECURITY

5,525 miles

Canada

Mexico

1,952 miles

= 500 Patrol Workers Most common drug entry points into the United States 96

Source: www.usdoj.gov/ndic/pubs10/10330/


Drug War Related Deaths

2,280 DEATHS

JAN. 1, 2007 - DEC 31, 2007

3,760 DEATHS

JAN. 1, 2007 - MAY 30, 2008

7,499 DEATHS JAN. 1, 2007 - JAN 2, 2009

9,903 DEATHS Source: http://projects.latimes.com/mexico-drug-war/#/interactive-map

JAN. 1, 2007 - MAY 15, 2009

97


Northwest Angle, MN

NATIONAL INSECURITY

In contrast to the heavy surveillance on the border between Mexico and the United States, the border between the United States and Canada is at some points very loosely secured. One example of an insecure border crossing is at the Northwest Angle in Minnesota. When visitors arrive to the Northwest Angle, they are supposed to enter a small building called Jimâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Corner, where they are estimated that only 30% of people entering the Northweset Angle from Canada actually stop and check in at Jimâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Corner.

Source: http://www.notbored.org/times-square.html

98

http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0606/05/acd.02.html


New York, NY

Surveillance In Public Space The number of surveillance cameras in Manhattan increased by 500% between 2001 and 2005. There are currently more than 15,000 surveillance cameras in Manhattan, 604 of which are in Times Square alone. These cameras include privately owned security cameras, military cameras, tv cameras, city owned cameras, and foreign embassy cameras. Only 12 of the cameras in Times Square are police cameras, but these cameras can clearly document up to 15 blocks away.

Surveillance Camera

99


100


SITE PHOTOS

101


102


103


104


105


106


107


108


109


110


111


112


113


114


115


116


117


118


119


120


121


122


123


124


125


126


127


128


129


130


131


132


133


134


135


Borderline Personality  

Borderline Personality was a studio at the University of Michigan Taubman College of Architecture and Urban Planning led by Steven Christens...

Advertisement
Read more
Read more
Similar to
Popular now
Just for you