Content uploaded by Emanuele Giorgi
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Emanuele Giorgi on Oct 31, 2018
Content may be subject to copyright.
ExGated: Intervention to mitigate the impact of the Mexican
gated communities over territories and cities
TANIA ASCENCIO-ANAYA, MARTHA CAUDILLO-PLASCENCIA, ERNESTO RAMÍREZ-GARCÍA,
EMANUELE GIORGI
Tecnologico de Monterrey, Escuela de Arquitectura, Arte y Diseño, Mexico
ABSTRACT
The controlled access developments have become the most popular way of living for the vast
majority in Mexico. The increasing wave of insecurity is supposedly one of the main factors
that causes the demand of these model of settlements. The proposed research focuses on
distinguishing the different features and problematics that can be found in this kind of
neighborhoods. The investigation takes as main frame the gated communities and the
implications they have on cities, societies, cultures and citizens. For the purposes of this
investigation, it is considered as “gated community” any neighborhood with restricted entry,
security personnel and surrounding walls. In León, Guanajuato (Mexico), where the
investigation takes place approximately the 30% of the whole consolidated area of the city is
currently occupied by closed communities. A significant number of them is located all around
the periphery of the municipality. The conflicts generated by the controlled access
communities in León are plenty: the most notorious ones are the social polarization and the
increasing of dependency on motorized transit to get around. In fact, the segregation of the
neighborhoods interrupts roads and prevents communication between different parts of the
city. The goal of the research is to get to a point of understanding the state of the art of the
relation between city, communities and closed neighborhoods. Afterwards, the proposal of a
radical physical set of interventions to mitigate the current problems is presented. The
methods to obtain relevant information to nourish the research were varied: from the analysis
of local papers, articles and study cases, to qualitative social research, acknowledging the
diverse perspectives that people from distinct backgrounds and neighborhood could have
about the phenomenon of Mexican gated communities.
Keywords: Gated Communities, Mexico, Urban Gating, Unlocking Communities, Right to the City
1 INTRODUCTION
The UN-Habitat defined that gated communities share a series of features, such as “separation
from neighboring land by fences, walls, or by other constructed or natural obstructions,
including symbolic barriers; and filtered or selective entry using mechanical, electronic or
human guardianship as access-control elements” [1]. Mexico possess one of the highest
concentrations of these settlements [2].The relevance of this problematic transcends way
beyond the physical implications in mobility, the expansion of the urban sprawl and the
invasion of natural spaces [3]. In addition, the built reality has an effect on the mental and
psychological sphere. The population that lives inside as well as the one that lives outside are
affected equally. The fear and resentment both parties perceive promote the use of security
corps, and this encourages an environment that generates discrimination and hatred between
social and economic classes [4] perpetuating the cycle of this social conflict.
León is one of the main metropolitan areas in México. It has an area of 22,473 hectares
[5]. The research focuses in the north zone of this locality where almost a third of the territory
that makes up this area has been privatized [6]. There is a presence of “303 neighborhoods
of which 80 are restricted access communities” [6] (Fig. 1). In comparison, the second largest
metropolis in México – Guadalajara – owns “2,500 clusters or closed urbanizations – that –
extend over 14 percent of the 65,000 hectares of the built city” [7]. The conclusions drawn
up to this point are: firstly, León has a higher agglomeration of gated neighborhoods, and
secondly, the size of these communities are larger and vaster than those in Guadalajara in
order to congruently reflect these figures.
Figure 1: Satellite view of the North Zone of León with marked gated communities
The path taken to understand the state of the art of the urban gating [2] in León was
intricate and not linear. The selection of one cluster – with the most complicate situation –
for the design proposal, faced the fact that there is not an existent method to size this. The
lack of parameters to measure the level of gatedness and also the inside-out and intern impact
in both physical and social matters gave guidelines for the development of different tools to
evaluate the conditions of these private neighborhoods. Moreover, the acknowledgement of
the causes that led to these sort of urbanizations where varied and not consistent, unlike the
consequences. The latter follow a similar pattern usually tending to tangible issues, such as
conflictive mobility and irregular occupation, and also sociological matters, like polarization
and segregation. The empirical, fact-based approach, compared to a more philosophical and
theoretical one aid the research to complement, collate and link diverse perspectives to build
a comprehensive and general reason to the problematic.
It is possible to tackle the causes and the symptoms at once. The plan focuses in promoting
an open city plan with an inclusive and heterogeneous urban system and a diverse and
connected mobility network. Urban areas must not reflect the darkest side of the human being
but places where happiness and joy are always achievable. A truthful right to the city is vital
in order to confront other problematics in the social, cultural, economic, and physical fields.
2 WHERE DOES IT STARTS, WHERE DOES IT ENDS?
The primary step for the elaboration of the proposal was to identify and comprehend the
causes that have promoted the privatization of León. Afterwards, the method was to list and
classify all the effects this problematic provoke in different topics. Assess the implications
of these effects and their impact on agents and stakeholders involved. Ultimately, present a
set of strategies to counteract not only the effects of the urban gating but attack the main
origins of it. The research served the purpose to collect different, yet obvious stances, and
develop a justified criteria in the transformation of the city. It is important to mention that
many initial observations and perceptions of the research team conducted the investigation
to prove right or wrong these viewpoints. The reasons and consequences presented on the
following paragraphs attempt to categorize the diverse topics to be presented in a more
organized and logical manner.
2.1 Physical and Economic Causes
The appropriation of large sized parcels to develop communities for the most affluent social
classes has become the standard in Mexico. Since the eighties, the consolidated growth that
has been occurring in the city has been taking two ways. The urbanization around peripheral
and underdeveloped roads, and the occupation of distant areas of high scenic and ecological
value [3], [8]. The process of dwelling in peripheral zones are nurtured by the desire of
inhabitants to be surrounded by nature and green spaces without the incommodities of
consolidated cities [3]. Another cause is the outstanding success the business model has
showed. As declared by Cabrales [9], the gated communities and the vertical luxury
condominiums have become the most successful real estate product of recent times. The latter
has been the main motive for developers to invest in these projects.
2.2 Sociological and Psychological Causes
The tendency of past generational groups to own a suburban residence [4], was a
complementary reason to this growth. The offer of exclusivity, the perception of security,
and the aspirational lifestyle promote the wish of the population to acquire a product with a
supposed constant capital gain [9], which provides status, and differentiates themselves from
the rest. The existence of a deep and ingrain unconscious drive of polarization and social
segmentation is participant in the emergence and perpetuation of the conflict. Low [10] stated
that “the walls are making visible the systems of exclusion that are already there, now
constructed in concrete”. Under a rhetorical discourse of fear, this class-based exclusion
appears as a rational solution [10]. Furthermore, it has been pointed out that there are certain
singularities that make local municipalities to adopt and even endorse the creation of these
compounds. “The lack of planning expertise, limited budgets, short-term government
periods, incapacity to provide adequate public services and infrastructure, lack of
intergovernmental cooperation, and strong pressure from developers” [11] join the cause.
“Gated communities have been received by local authorities as a ‘convenient’ arrangement,
since developers take responsibility to provide basic infrastructure and services, residents can
assume private management responsibilities for maintenance, administration, and security,
and these developments represent higher tax income. Therefore, local governments have
directly and indirectly supported the proliferation of these housing developments with private
governments” [11].
From a sociological viewpoint there is a strong bond between the speculative
neoliberalism, the failed attempt of a social state, the individualism, the indifference and the
lack of social consciousness [12], [13], [14]. However, recognizing the three actors
involved in the equation: the private investment, the public administration and the will of
the population, it is easy to relate that each one stimulates the others. It becomes a cycle in
which all are reason and effect. On the one hand the conversion of the land into a
commodity boosts projects with greater earnings over the ones that seek for an urban
planning agenda [3]. On the other hand, local governments recognize their disability to
assure certainness and instead looks forward that people look alone their own personal
solutions to problems produced by the whole society [13].
2.3 Urban Consequences
León like many cities in central Mexico has a notorious absence of vegetated areas. It owns
a coefficient of 5.17 square meters per inhabitant [5]. This ratio is only diminishing as more
gated neighborhoods and car-oriented infrastructure appropriate natural spaces. Likewise, if
it is considered the amount of green areas that are currently privatized the degree is even
more alarming. The residential segmentation is another key conflict. Eventhough different
social groups end up occupying lands next to each other, the procedures of polarization
become more evident. “On a large scale we can highlight a process of social mixing, while
at the micro level the segregator pattern is reinforced” [3]. These facts come together to
strengthen a car dependent reality. This is simply explained by Owen [15] “what you actually
do when you move out of the city is move into a car”. The result is a city with a conflictive
mobility and an unsatisfactory air quality that is often in an environmental pre-contingency
state [16]. “The forecast for the city in 2030 is a challenge: lack of spaces for citizens, lack
of connectivity and lack of road infrastructure” [17]. Tun [18] presented the urban dispersion
that has been happening in the city. While there was a population increase of 71%, the AGEB
density decreased from 4,399 inhabitants in 1990 to 2,724 in 2010. If it is considered that the
city will have a growth from 1,578,626 in 2015 to 1,743,000 inhabitants in 2030 [17] it is
expected that the density ratio continues falling [19]. If the city remains expanding the city
would face a financial bankruptcy and the security would become more complex [19].
2.4 Social Consequences
It is true that the discourse of fear and the rise of violence in the country fueled the residential
exclusion [3]; nevertheless, it should be noted that the reaction has the duality of being the
cause simultaneously. The inequality of opportunities has shown to be the reason of criminal
increase and sense of insecurity [3]. Additionally, the feeling of hostility [2] indifference,
contempt and envy [3] as well as the poverty [17], [18] are relative to the locking of the city.
Similarly, developers and dwellers of gated communities end up feeling entitled and with the
right to decide over cities. These urban managers assume the roles of local governments [11].
In advanced cases of segregation – such as Alphaville, Sao Paulo –, all the culture, the
government, the inhabitants and the lifestyles are replaced inside the walls with a parallel and
detached city [4]. The physical changes in the urban features end up transforming the social
life in every sphere.
The city exclusion is not a factor that only impacts diverse socioeconomic sectors but also
people from diverse demographic groups, such as infants, the elderly, and persons with
reduced mobility. In the investigation area there are about 247,433 residents from which
about 85,281 – around the 34.47% - [20] represent the individuals without the capacity to
drive and get around by themselves. It is becoming more common to accept many of these
problematics as the status quo; nonetheless, it is crucial to present solutions that are not biased
by economic interests, hostility [2], and fear [10]. The social structure has been broken. “This
can be seen in the current cities where division and privatization of much of the city's living
space, discourages the use of public space, causing a social discontent that can translate into
crime, insecurity and violence of all kinds” [17].
3 EVALUATION TOOLS
As previously mentioned, due to the troublesome to measure gatedness and urban impact it
was needed to realize a series of tools that could ease the process. Ferreti and Arreola [8]
showed a set of variables that serve as indicators of the quality of the urban fabric including:
“tissue permeability, frontality of the architectural type, community spaces/interstices, urban
fissures, and border pressures”. The latter marked a path in the development of the urban
impact tool. For the creation of the gatedness tool it was initially needed a qualitative
approach mainly because of subjective factors like insecurity and the perception of it. Just as
Low [10] found, the desire to live inside a controlled access area does not fully relate to the
safety of it rather the conditioning, acceptance and replicability of its dwellers. When people
decide to live in a gated community it becomes difficult and unlikely to go back to the open
city [10]. The level of gatedness of any neighborhood strongly influences other social
matters.
3.1 Gatedness Evaluation Tool
This tool consists of two main procedures. A quantitative one that assigns values to variables
such as: settlers association, controlled access, documented controlled access, existence of
security corps, physical enclosure, multiple physical barriers, maintenance fee, and
utilization of CCTV and the use of technology appliances to regulate the entry. In addition;
interviews conducted to internal and external dwellers to collate qualitative factors. Some of
them are the impact their everyday living has as well as the effect they perceive they have
with the context.
3.2 Urban Impact Evaluation Tool
The tool is a quantitative assessment that confirms statements on different themes. This
instrument presents inward and outward occurrences in the living of the residents and the
city. There are five major subjects that branch into 15 subtopics with a total of 31 variables:
Mobility that includes walkability, connectivity, and transportation means.
Social segmentation that includes social friction and school level.
Intensitivity that includes population density, dimension, and zoning uses.
Security that includes most of the variables in the gatedness evaluation tool.
Basic resources that includes green areas, vegetation type, and public infrastructure.
3.3 Social Impact Tool
As the gatedness assessment tool, this impact values both qualitative and quantitative issues.
On the latter the first instrument comes useful, for the reason that most of those variables
have a direct relation with social subjects. The quantitative section is complemented with an
interview conducted on the same matters. There are seven main aspects that comprise 19
subtopics:
Gatedness that includes all the variables in the gatedness evaluation tool
Civic education that includes the school level and the urban signage.
Ecological consciousness that includes water and wastes management and the
vegetation species
Social Behavior that includes coexistence and social friction variables.
Normativity that includes internal regulation and agreements.
Security that includes both delinquency facts and the perception of inhabitants.
Urban Image that includes the existence and state of public infrastructure and green
spaces, human presence, and urban typology, trace and morphology.
4 DESIGN APPLICATION FOR THE INTERVENTION
The design proposal – based on the conclusions drawn from the literature; in addition, to the
areas of opportunity resulting in the evaluation tools – approach synthetized, abstracted and
combined all these bases. It is essential to propose a solution that promotes coexistence
among the whole society [22] and ameliorates the urban and environmental scenario.
Therefore, the most conflictive gated neighborhood in León – El Molino Residencial & Golf
– was selected as the area of intervention. With an approximate area of 6,080,000 square
meters El Molino Residencial & Golf is equivalent to the size of 60 Forum Cultural
Guanajuato, the major cultural center in the metropolis. Although it only has a population of
113 inhabitant in the 50% already built area of the community [23].
4.1 Analysis and Diagnosis
El Molino Residencial & Golf is an upper-class restricted-access community located in the
north sector of the research area in between the protected area of the mountain range – Sierra
De Lobos – and the principal body of water – Presa Del Palote – [24] making it an important
natural corridor. Its site is next to low income neighborhoods like Alameda de la Presa, Valle
de los Castillos and La Lagunita among others; moreover, it shares limits with a development
polygon named Popular Maya and is close to one of the largest irregular settlements in León
called Los Castillos [24]. It is crucial to keep in mind that “the slums and the gated
communities are a profoundly united reality, perpetuating and reinforcing each other’s
existence” [25]. There are planned only three roads that have or would have access to El
Molino Residencial & Golf putting it in a critical situation in terms of mobility. Right beside
the south side of it, is situated the biggest park in the city – Parque Metropolitano – which
every year hosts the main hot air balloon festival in Mexico with an estimate of 354 thousand
attendees in 2017 [26]. As many others high status residential communities in Mexico, it
possess an entire golf course currently under construction and a country club.
The key problematics that this development owns can be encompassed in mobility, social
cohesion and environmental impact. It sounds ironic how the customers knowing this handful
of conflicts would be willing to pay around 230,000 USD per lot – this price was obtained in
an interview with a real estate agent. The work of sale is straight forward in the sense that it
promotes a class-based exclusion and an aspiration for residential segmentation. This latter
incentives an undesirable atmosphere. “When this unfairness takes root in the population, it
can create a sense of fear, a sense that we don't trust each other. The outcome is that the urban
pattern becomes more segregated, more differentiated. This is not socially admirable or
economically productive" [2]. As shown on their website, the expected population density of
El Molino Residencial & Golf is anticipated to be about 11.4 house units per hectare, meaning
that there would be approximately 6,100 residences in the whole complex. The common
reaction of investors facing the conflicts above-mentioned is the introduction of “private
infrastructure like “shopping centers, multiplexes, hypermarkets, as well as offices and
schools” [4] turning into “artificial alternatives of public spaces” [3]. The neighborhood will
count with 30 hectares of first level education institutes, 23.1 hectares of commercial and
service areas, and 20 hectares of semi-public parks. All this will be network with 14
kilometers of six lane primary roads. The forecast seeks to create an environment dependent
on the golf cart and automobile.
4.2 Strategies
Figure 2: Perspective view of the design proposal masterplan
The intervention procedure take the current masterplan of the neighborhood as a canvas
to take the proposal to a comprehensive and social cohesive level (Fig. 2). All these tactics
present a concrete change in the context with the belief that this kind of transformations
would transcend to a social term. There are three main approaches that make intricate
crossings to establish a holistic response. Firstly, on the population density, the urban
compactness and diversification of land uses all linked to the strengthening of the urban fabric
[8] and the utilization of public transportation [6]. When people is spread dispersedly the
social interactions cease to happen but when they are put together a significant amount of
advantages flow naturally [15]. The second one is about permeability, street life and the
intensity of activities in an area. Explained simply by Jacobs “A well-used city street is apt
to be a safe street. A deserted city street is apt to be unsafe [27]. The absence of people is
usual in roads that interconnect gated communities to the rest of the city. When streets are
tightly woven and the space between buildings presents a small scale, the quantity of human
contacts increase and so the social relationships [28]. The last method consists in the
introduction and ungating of public spaces, an open city concept, and the increase in the
supply of public services and infrastructure. An evident bond exists between the will of
appropriation, sense of belonging, desire of participation, and the involvement in the
maintenance of it. “It seems that our idea as a society is for each family to solve its own
housing problem. But this ends up not being the case, due to costs that we pay among all”
[29]. The individual life must exit the buildings to become more fulfilling. Public life should
end as a constant decision making in urban terms. The mayor’s office of Bogotá presented
the right to the city as a mean and goal in which by creating spaces where social practices
could be carried out through self-government and citizen self-management, and converge in
the strengthening and democratization of public space [30] (Fig. 3).
The public administration in parallel with society has to assure the existence of these
places; nonetheless it is “above all the responsibility of all urban citizens to create spaces
where collective solutions to common problems can be imagined and realized” [25]. The
latter encourages the reason to keep certain features of the original master plan and expand
the opportunities of it. Private, public and particular investment is required.
The list of strategies is shown below:
1. The linking of the private primary road system to the rest of the city to facilitate
social cohesion, and rise connectivity.
2. The diversification of transportation systems and implementation of cycle paths that
follow the local administration proposal design of green corridors [31].
3. The completion and widening of the sidewalk network in the neighborhood.
4. The regularization in terms of municipal normativity and signage.
5. The use of diameters of 400-meters as a module to provide basic equipment, promote
compactness, walking distances [6], [32] and heterogeneous zoning.
6. The application of the normativity and regulations of urban equipment presented in
SEDESOL plans [33].
7. The preservation, dignifying and maintenance of the two archeological zones in the
closed community [23].
8. The establishment of a protected natural federal reserve on the north side.
9. The adaptation of the golf course into a compound of urban agricultural fields.
10. The inducement of local and native flora low-maintenance species.
11. The increment in the proportion of green areas per inhabitant to accomplish the
World Health Organization objective.
12. The decrease in extent and increase of urban permeability in blocks to promote social
interactions [6], [27].
13. The offer of places that support the three levels of trust – in oneself, in other human
beings and in institutions – presented by Alain Peyrefitte in Bauman [13].
14. The adoption of a verticality idea in housing, employment and recreational models.e
introduction of high intensity mixed-use equipment and zoning.
Figure 3: Plan view of the design proposal masterplan with location of the strategies.
5 DISCUSSION
It is recognized that the research process confronted several limitations in time, economic
and human resources to excavate deeper and collect first hand data. Eventhough this effort
used qualitative surveys and interviews, the sample size was not big enough to represent a
trustworthy analysis. Notwithstanding, the investigation sums up significant evidence that
gives support to the intervention proposal and serve as a platform for future information on
the subject. The methodology to develop the project presented has the potential to be
replicated, escalated and tropicalized. This problematic is current on many nations worldwide
and mainly in Latin America. Therefore, the focus implemented in this work would provide
several similarities to the one that could be utilized in these countries. It would be needed to
8
7
1
10
11
13
12
2
3
9
6
t
7
t
15
14
13
4
t
5
t
continue the research and make an emphasis in two point in particular. The first one would
be a compilation of qualitative social research methods to have a reliable and fact-based
stance on the matter. The second one is an examination and study in economics, with topics
such as the surplus value of housing compared to inflation, and also the true cost that the
creation of this sort of infrastructure generates for the city.
6 CONCLUSION
Inspired in Bauman’s [12], [13], [14] ideologies: Why are we still trying to solve the
insecurity, social frictions and differences, the isolated way of living, the unsustainable
practices, the lack of hope in society, and the mediocre lifestyles with what on the first place
started this conflicts? Individualism, physical and cultural obstacles, the dependency on
exclusive transportation, technology surveillance, hostility and unjustified entitlement have
shown to be obsolete and irrational means to transform and progress into a more integrated
society. It is needed to change the status quo that pretends to solve socially produced
problems with one-person approaches [12]. The cooperation of government and society is
essential to search and implement solutions that transcend. It should not be expected that the
government nor persons carry the whole weight of assuring security [3], bring economic
progress and incentive social cohesion development.
To sum up, it has been proved that “Building isolated housing is not building a city.
Building walls is not making community” [7]. On the actual state, it has become necessary
to deepen the research to find solutions that are economically viable, that bring benefits to
the natural environment and in which various groups can support this evolution. It must be
encouraged the design of interventions that opens the city in order to transform ourselves and
form an inclusive society. While there are a series of crisis, in health, economy, housing,
environment and society, the right to the city and the renovation of it has occupied the place
of one of the must indispensable and resilient reactions human existence could utilize.
REFERENCES
[1] Urbanizations and Development Goals: Emerging Futures. World Cities Report 2016;
United Nations Human Settlements Programme, 2016. Online www.unhabitat.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/03/WCR-%20Full-Report-2016.pdf. Accessed on: 05 May 2018.
[2] Provost, C., Gated communities fuel Blade Runner dystopia and ‘profound
unhappiness’. The Guardian International Edition, 2014. Online
www.theguardian.com/global-development/2014/may/02/gated-communities-blade-
runner-dystopia-unhappiness-un-joan-clos. Accessed on: 05 May 2018.
[3] Pfannenstein, B., Anacleto, E. & Sevilla, S., ¿La ciudad cerrada y exclusiva? El impacto
y la expansión territorial de las urbanizaciones cerradas residenciales en el Área
Metropolitana de Guadalajara (México). Presented at Contested Cities, Madrid, Spain,
2016.
[4] Laverde, O., Gated Communities en Latinoamérica. Los casos de Argentina, México,
Colombia y Brasil. Revista de Arquitectura, vol. 5, pp. 44–53, 2013. ISSN: 1657-0308.
[5] Diagnóstico Municipal León, Guanajuato. Diciembre 2017; Instituto Municipal de
Planeación de León, Guanajuato, 2017. Online www.implan.gob.mx/
downloads/Diagostico_ Municipal_2017.pdf. Accessed on: 01 May 2018.
[6] Charles, C., Gutiérrez, P. Giorgi, E., Gutiérrez, H., Barquero, V., Who decides the city?
Mobility, public space, social fabric and wellbeing: Street privatization in Northern
León. Entretextos, 9(26), pp 58–74, 2017. ISSN: 2007-5316.
[7] Del Castillo, A., La Guadalajara amurallada domina 14% de la ciudad. Grupo Milenio,
2017. Online: www.milenio.com/region/Guadalajara-amurallada-domina-ciudad-
Zapopan-Cotos-murtalla-Milenio_Noticias_0_885511475.html. Accessed on: 30 Apr.
2018.
[8] Ferreti, M. & Arreola, M., Del tejido urbano al tejido social: análisis de las propiedades
morfológicas y funcionales. Nova Scientia, Nº 9 vol. 5 (1), pp. 98–126, 2012. ISSN:
2007-0705.
[9] Cabrales, L., Tendencias recientes de las urbanizaciones cerradas y polarización
residencial en Guadalajara. Programa en Gestión de la Ciudad, 2006. Online:
www.cafedelasciudades.com.ar/carajillo/4_art3.htm#mexico. Accessed on: 05 May
2018.
[10] Low, S., The edge and the center: Gated communities and the discourse of urban fear.
American Anthropology, New Series, vol. 103, pp. 45–58, 2001.
[11] Morales, E., Urban Governance and Residential Privatism: the challenges of managing
large-scale gated communities in Mexico. The Sheffield Institute for International
Development, 2015. Online: www.siid.group.shef.ac.uk/blog/urban-governance-
residential-privatism-challenges-managing-large-scale-gated-communities-mexico/.
Accessed on: 16 Apr. 2018.
[12] Bauman, Z., New Frontiers and Universal Values. Public Space, 2004. Online:
www.publicspace.org/en/text-library/eng/a025-new-frontiers-and-universal-values.
Accessed on: 01 May 2018.
[13] Bauman, Z. Vidas Desperdiciadas. Paidós Ibérica: Barcelona, 2005.
[14] Bauman, Z. Zygmunt Bauman: el individualismo vs el ser social. Online:
www.youtube.com/watch?v=PJbf1HXYcD0. Accessed on: 06 May, 2018.
[15] Owen, D., Green Metropolis. Why living smaller, living closer, and driving less are the
keys to sustainability. Riverhead Book: New York, 2009.
[16] SEICA Guanajuato, www.seica.guanajuato.gob.mx
[17] Jaramillo, V., Prevén para León un porvenir difícil. Periódico AM, 2017. Online:
www.am.com.mx/2017/08/13/leon/local/preven-para-leon-un-porvenir-dificil--
369789. Accessed on: 05 May 2018.
[18] Tun, J., Tendencias de la segregación residencial en León, Guanajuato (1990-2010).
Teoría y Praxis, no. 20, pp. 37–67, 2016. DOI: 10.22403/UQROOMX/TYP20/02
[19] Rizo, H., Crecimiento de mancha urbana, causaría quiebra financiera en León. Grupo
Milenio, 2018. Online: www.milenio.com/leon/mancha_urbana-quiebra_financiera-
desarrollo-milenio-noticias-leon_0_1121887903.html. Accessed on: 30 Apr. 2018.
[20] Directorio Estadístico Nacional de Unidades Económicas; Instituto Nacional de
Estadística y Geografía, 2015. Online: www.beta.inegi.org.mx/app/mapa/denue.
Accessed on: 06 May 2018.
[21] Cohesión social: balance conceptual y propuesta metodológica; Consejo Nacional de
Evaluación de la Política de Desarrollo Social, 2015.
[22] Barrera, A., Asegura cierre de calles perjudica a todos. Periódico AM, 2017. Online:
www.am.com.mx/2017/12/20/leon/local/asegura-cierre-de-calle-perjudica-a-todos-
410194. Accessed on: 06 May 2018.
[23] Inventario Nacional de Vivienda 2016; Instituto de Estadística y Geografía, 2015.
Online: www.beta.inegi.org.mx/app/mapa/inv. Accessed on: 05 May 2018.
[24] Plataforma León; Instituto Municipal de Planeación de León, Guanajuato, 2017. Online:
www.plataformaleon.gob.mx/. Accessed on: 30 Apr. 2018.
[25] Deneulin, S. & Maconachie, R., Gated Communities lock cities into cycles of inequality.
The Conversation UK, 2014. Online: www.theconversation.com/gated-communities-
lock-cities-into-cycles-of-inequality-33516. Accessed on 20 Apr. 2018
[26] Velázquez, F., 354 mil personas asistieron al Festival Internacional del Globo.
Noticieros en Línea, 2017. Online: www.noticierosenlinea.com/354-mil-personas-
asistieron-al-festival-internacional-del-globo/. Accessed on 06 May 2018.
[27] Jacobs, J., The death and life of great American cities. Random House, Inc.: New York,
pp. 34-35, 1961.
[28] Gehl, J., Life between buildings. Using public space. Island Press: London, 1987.
[29] Morán, R., Casa propia, problema de todos. Letras libres, 2017. Online:
www.letraslibres.com/mexico/economia/casa-propia-problema-todos. Accessed on: 30
Apr. 2018.
[30] Espacio público y derecho a la ciudad. La política del espacio público físico y la venta
informal en Bogotá; Alcaldía Mayor de Bogotá. Secretaría Distrital de Gobierno & UN-
Habitat: Bogotá, 2008
[31] Cartera de Programas y Proyectos 2015-2018. Infraestructura y equipamiento para el
desarrollo; Instituto Municipal de Planeación, León, Guanajuato, 2015. Online:
www.implan.gob.mx/downloads/cartera/Infr_y_Equip_para_el_Desarrollo_Cartera_de
_proyectos_2015-2018.pdf. Accessed on: 23 Apr. 2018.
[32] Espinosa, E., Distancias caminables. Redescubriendo al peatón en el diseño urbano.
Trillas: Mexico, 2013.
[33] SEDESOL, www.normateca.sedesol.gob.mx/es/SEDESOL/
