Hello everyone. In the first course of the previous module we described the hardware manufacturing machinery of tissues and public spaces under the action of first level operators, and of second and third level operators. We agreed that each urban technical network corresponds to a specific technology. This is both the technology of the line and the vehicles running through it. A network also corresponds to a specific manner to take mesure of the territory. This lesson has allowed us to highlight two major themes urbanism networks: the issue of sharing of public space between lines increasingly specialized and that of the action on the nodes. In today's course, we will insist on the systemic effect of these questions and how they arise, not only locally, one where the design of public spaces to think, but also and simultaneously at different scales of large territories. We will review different approaches of networking cities in a territory which is dominated by the regime of metropolization but where, despite metropolisation, countries do not disappear under the influence of urbanization. Secondly, we show the impact of speed and scale on the way which these figures coexist in space and simultaneously restructure as they deconstruct reality of territories. The physical structuring process of large territories are multiple and variable in time, as also the reasons that presided over the birth and the development of cities. We need history to understand the evolution of territorial regimes in the long term. But in general, we can still trace the evolution time. For various reasons, a road crossing, the occupation of shores, control of a ford across a river, balancing the population, that whatnot ... For various reasons, therefore, agglomerations of men and activity centers are formed in a place. Soil occupations are defined, paths are traced, projects of any order materialize in the landscape. The grid and the center are the two regulatory figures of this first stage of the territorial structure wide place. So it's roads or paths used by men walking or animal-drawn vehicles. The development of mobility fits into the landscape and contributes to the complexity of the relationship between town and country without destroying its continuity. Over time, the town expands, becomes a city, starts trading relationship with other places. The facilities of the local mobility adds that the mobility required by exchanges at greater distances. So far as roads and paths used by men walking or by animal-drawn vehicles ... The establishment of this communication network settled by the pedestrian metric helps cohabitation of network figures in the territory. Yet operators can follow very different strategies: the search of political centralization, military control, opening of markets, that whatnot. The logic of centralization coexist with strategies of isotropic distribution. And these strategies can vary with geography and may vary in time. Regionalisation is a complex process always changing. The technology package that allowed the development of ailway then of the combustion engine has gradually given priority to railways and road as supporting structures of territorial development. Speed technologies allow to consider it at other scales than the scale of the room. They help reduce the distances but also contribute to fragment space. The first train lines were mostly drawn away from cities and were connecting them by terminus stations who are often also the engines of the city extension and the creation of new districts. Until the advent of high-speed lines at the end of the 19th century, it is very rare that a city rips, as we have seen do in Brussels, to the junction between two stations and to create a central station. This is the industrial growth of cities who truly created the rupture of the urban-rural relationship. In London, Berlin, Vienna or Paris, industrial development product the expansion of cities and the emergence of big cities. In Belgium, the fear of the big city leads the young government to adopt quickly a policy of urbanization distributed throughout the country. In Belgium, in 1900, the railway reached nearly 8,000 km, not counting some 5000 km of local railway. It was an extremely dense network, the densest in Europe. There was at that time almost 33 km of national railroad or vicinal 100 km² of territory. And trains traveling at a maximum of 90 km / hour. Much of this network was dismantled in Belgium when the political decision is made to give priority to individual car mobility and develop a comprehensive network of roads of high speed: highways. The high speed technology no longer allows the same grip, or the same interactions with the territory. Highways pass as the train, usually away from cities and lead the implementation of new connection devices with knots, ring roads, interchanges, which take a long time to negotiate as long to build. These devices generate new fractures in the territorial matrix and their structuring effect in the territory is far from proven. The development of high-speed rail took off after the 1974 oil crisis. Faced with energy dependence of Europe and threats which arose in terms of mobility, several European countries plan to develop a new rapid transportation and little greedy in fossil energy. The first line is made in Italy in 1977. The following follow in France in 1981. Germany and Spain followed in the 1990s. The system deployed on the territory of a new configuration scale network which is this time continental scale and whose logic follows that of Hubs and spokes model applied to aeronautics and that is based on a few centers servicing burden. In 2010, 33 years after the start of the high-speed operation, Europe has 6214 km of high speed lines on which trains can travel at over 250 km / hour. In some countries such as France or Spain, which have a capital located in flat areas and more or less in the center, and have placed major cities to national boundaries and were further subjected to a territorial system rather centralized, the network is configured naturally in a star-shape, with a corollary weakness of inter-regional links. The route selection in these countries gives rise to a debate between firstly the economic rationality: go to market, confirm the star network; and secondly land: provide a comparative advantage in marginalized areas. In Germany, where the culture of governance is decentralized, the network is organized differently. There is no true central node but a net whose nodes are cities of all sizes themselves backed to rural, dense regions and highly urbanized. In Italy on the contrary, the development of high-speed rail led until today to a linear network. The result of these dynamics is a complex territory, where each new restructuring company generates new specializations and new hybrids. It follows that we can not consider the play of interactions between scales like a set of Russian dolls, where scales fit into each other. This is what we typically did. Today, all the territory of scales can be near in one place and we simultaneously need to analyze the work of a local output at different scales. I propose to retain the three elements of this lesson. First, a mode of transport is not structured in itself. The European example shows, moreover, that any restructuring of a new online technology drives both a destructuration and a reconfiguration of space assets defined at other levels. Secondly, the speed is a factor of distances resorption but it is also a territorial fragmentation factor. And processes of metropolization the world are only accentuating. For a network to become structuring in the long term, it must meet multiple conditions. They are economic, political, social. The third conclusion is that the potential of structuring of a network comes from the quality of the service offer but especially of the close articulation between mobility planning and land use planning. We have seen that the support of governments, the mutation of the crossed areas, the strength of the property market, quality of service and ownership of the service by users are all engines needed for production of a dynamic of restructuring that is anyway to address as a phenomenon and a systemic project. I thank you and wish you a good result of course.
