Toulouse and Bordeaux 'metropoles' are two semi large cities in the south west of France. The two cities are similar in size and structure – with a dense urban core and vast low density suburbs – partly reflecting urban ideas of half a century ago still implemented.
The two cities have 750-710.000 inhabitants on 465-580 sq km, or 16-12 inhabitants per hectare respectively. According to the below figure, only Brisbane has similar low densities (gross). The two cities each extend geographically approximately one third of London and one half of Berlin, but have only one twelfth and one fifth of the two latter cities' inhabitants.
Maybe one half of the historic buildings in the two city centres are stunningly restored or maintained, with one city being typically red brick set in light coloured cement and the other city typically sandstone. The latter city's skyline benefits from no obvious tall(er) buildings. While the other city contains smaller rundown central areas. Both cities benefit from vast student numbers, with many students living and/or studying in or near the centre, generating a considerable amount of social and economic suburban life.
 |
| Net densities shown in green, gross in blue. Lisboa is similar to Stockholm and Amsterdam. Toulouse and Bordeaux are similar to City of Brisbane. Sydney Eastern City = 9 of 32 boroughs |
Lisboa
Lisboa is a city comparable in size to Copenhagen/Malmö, with densities in the four inner municipalities (1m inhabitants on 200km2) comparable with Stockholm, Amsterdam and Sydney Eastern City. A dense inner city of 4x4 km is mostly surrounded by mid-density suburbs, where car is king both in the suburbs and the centre. Car ownership per household in Portugal is just below the EU average, but car commuting is the default rather than the exception in the capital. The dual and triple road and motorway system is very extensive, a small proportion with tolls.
E-bike_ Bike commuting accounts for maybe less than a tenth of a percentage – not a surprise as only e-bikes can mount the may hills – but in contrast to San Francisco. This could change – e-bike only commuting or in combination with metro or train – a trend seen in Inner London – where soon more people may commute by bike than by car.
Metro_ The three metro lines and the one orbital train line cover half the inhabitants in the inner 100 km2 area only. While the radial train lines serve selected communities along the three lines in the outer 100 km2 area, one at 10 or 20 min frequency. Covering a mid-density city by metro is challenging, maybe best proven in Amsterdam, where most of the city is served by trams not metro, in combination with a dense system of double deck trains.
Suburbs_ Stockholm and Copenhagen are two exceptions, where the post-war suburbs are typically located within walking or short cycling distance of stations along the T-banan and S-tog. These suburbs are typically a combination of apartments, retail and services near stations and dense row houses a little further away. In contrast to Lisboa where post-war detached suburban housing dominates – and most apartments blocks, retail and services are located almost randomly. Providing badly for inhabitants, pedestrians and cyclists alike – without short direct or shaded pavements, bike or pedestrian routes.
Inner city_ Lisboa could turn around it's 4x4 km inner city, allowing e-cars and e-vans only entering from inner and outer suburbs – requiring non-residents to travel by e-bike, metro, train, bus or tram. Increasing frequency and capacity, and separating bus/tram lanes from other traffic. Business may as a result relocate closer to high frequency public transport stations – maybe a long term win-win for all.
Orbital lines_ The existing 12 km inner orbital train line has the greatest potential for further retail centres and high intensity office developments. Especially if a high frequency orbital services closed the missing 2 km link along the seafront with a station at Praça do Comércio. And if the planned extension of the red metro line in the northwest also extend southwards, creating a 18 km outer orbital line from Oriente to Algés. Both orbital lines with dedicated bike carriages especially designated for bike and e-bike commuting.
We are spending the summer in Berlin, London, Oslo and elsewhere, maybe cycling along a river or a coast somewhere near you. Happy holiday!
Three times sustainability
Ecological sustainable_ It is unclear what ambitions the two cities have to mitigate the ecological footprint they generate locally and globally. Some new housing areas near tram routes have reduced stationary energy use, but their layout, location and gross density require most households to have access to a car to get to local shops and services.
Zero carbon_ Turning the two sprawling cities to zero carbon requires a mammoth effort and radical changes to the life of their inhabitants, workers and visitors alike. Zero carbon living, production and transport require homes and gardens to be shrunk, employees to live closer to work, and cars to be abandoned for e-bikes and public transit.
Economically sustainable_ The two cities are average economically sustainable as far as relative and change in employment levels are concerned (2007 to 2016). Both cities rely on producing and exporting goods and services from companies in low density and car intense suburbs. Craft apprenticeship levels are low in France, as most young people rely on academic rather than vocational education. If apprenticeship levels equalled levels in Germany, youth unemployment would maybe be half.
Commuting_ One aspect of the complexity of the two cities is that jobs are located randomly throughout the suburbs, including very large firms, sometimes adjacent to the main road network but away from transit corridors. As such, most people are required to commute by car, and only e-biking may change this. As the suburbs are too sprawling, and most roads too congested during peak hours, for traditional cycling and high capacity and frequency transit. In the long term, job intensive firms and organisations may gradually move closer to transit corridors.
Social sustainable_ Both cities offer very high quality living for maybe half their inhabitants. These are either (very) well off baby boomers, pensioners, families with children or young adults – with a permanent job and either a low rent apartment or an owner occupied dwelling. However, a large minority struggle, either because of children or parent responsibilities, expensive housing, and no job or a low paid job.
Turning the two cities into socially sustainable urban areas require the baby boomers to let go of some of their privileges, including high pensions, cheap social rents and low interest mortgages. Pensioners with debt free owner occupied dwellings with above average pensions are particularly privileged.
Environmental & ecological ambitions
Solar and wind_ It is unclear what ambitions the two cities have on becoming self sufficient with energy – electricity, gas, petrol and diesel included. There are either hills or ocean near either city to generate sufficient wind power and enough sunshine and fields to generate sufficient solar power. So both cities could be self sufficient, transport and production included, throughout the year.
The gendarmery west in one city is exemplary retrofitted with new windows and roller shutters neatly into its century old facade, reducing energy use considerably. But this is unusual, as buildings typically require energy for both heating and cooling.
Blue green_ Even though both cities share the same river – the Garonne – their approach to opening the city to the river differs. Maybe partly because the river is tidal in one and the other has several weirs. The former city has two free swimming lakes easily reached by tram, although signs state swimming is banned. The latter could maybe learn from Basel, Bern and Zürich, where outdoor swimming is widespread despite strong currents and cooler water.
Cycling almost king_ The cycling infrastructure in the two cities is extensive. A segregated cycle corridor along to the orbital rail line in one city could open up endless possibilities of e-bike commuting, including suburb to suburb trips. This city also has an extensive cycle network that reaches for tens of kilometres out of the city, mostly on former branch goods train lines. However, commuting by bike during peak hours is challenging in both cities without more road space prioritised and physically segregated from vehicles – both stationary and moving – centrally, radially and in the suburbs.
 |
| Bordeaux. A typical street scene with sandstone clad buildings of varying heights, ground floor diversity, stunning street surfaces, bollards, bikes ... and utility works. |
Public realm costs & complexity
Both cities typically present stunning streets scape with beautifully designed and executed public realm. The choice of materials is expensive and many of the designs and executions lend themselves poorly due to streets being dug up maybe every five years on average by a utility company. Further, a more neutral, simple and standard design would maybe give more prominence to the often stunning buildings and would be easier to maintain.
Switzerland and Paris typically use asphalt, laid to a very high standard, with the former supplemented with a lot of flowers, and the latter with high quality and mostly one single standard of street furniture. Berlin uses one single street and tree scape standard throughout the city – urban, suburban mixed use, residential and industrial areas included – very well and easily maintained and replaced by utility companies. Always overlaid with temporary asphalt along building sides.
Toulouse has typically curbless city centre streets with endless high bollards, with unpredictable speed and priority rules. Whilst Bordeaux has retained curbs of varying heights and designs and more predictable speed and priority rules, except where they change throughout the day. Both cities use remotely controlled bollards to keep cars out of central neighbourhoods. But the amount of car traffic is still considerable in many pedestrian and shared streets, and cars, motorbikes and bikes proceed at unpredictable speeds and directions throughout most of the centres. In Amsterdam by contrast, cars are typically designed out through a maze of car lanes – physically separated from the more direct bike lanes – with more predictable priority, speed and parking rules.
Service & retail sprawl
French towns and cities have typically protected their centres from post war redevelopment and retained residential apartment buildings. But rather than locating most larger retail on the peripheral of the historic centre, retail and services are typically located randomly throughout the (outer) suburbs. With unclear long term thoughts on how the centre and the suburbs function as a whole. In contrast, the dominance of large surface superstores is reclining in the UK, and has never taken less hold in Germany, where smaller (discount) stores are typically located within walking distance of households within the denser city.
The two city centres have an endless number of smaller boutiques for the (upper) middle class to enjoy, as well as endless drinking, eating and cultural establishments catering for locals and tourists alike. However, the total number of smaller establishments appear relatively high, and both centres would maybe benefit from a bigger share of larger shops typically located in the suburbs.
 |
| GSG Pankow. A new light industrial estate in the suburbs of north Berlin. In contrast to typical post-war suburban sprawl – this is urban high density in an suburban neighbourhood – two to four times denser than elsewhere. |
E-mobility revolution due?
City centres_ Both city centres are very car intensive, despite almost excellent bike, bus, tram, traffic calming and free P&R, as well as an automatic metro in one city. However, decision makers and the suburban elite embrace their (luxury) cars and the extensive but expensive underground parking facilities – many of which are located deep into (semi) traffic calmed central neighbourhoods – adding to the gridlock.
Both city centres are very intensively used. One maybe a little more than the other, maybe because of more tourists, its larger size, fewer bridges crossing the river and only one inner ring road. The other centre is a little less intense, maybe because of more bridges and two inner ring roads.
Suburbs_ Most adults cannot typically remain mobile without a car, either to get to work, shops, nursery and/or school. It is hard to see how the car culture may change in the near future. Not least because the suburbs are sprawling with retail facilities, light industry, logistics and offices, typically along peripheral roads. And sometimes more intense the further out one gets from the centre.
Further, because of the sprawling suburban housing neighbourhoods, including apartments, where distances are just a little too long or maze-like to walk. Similarly, both cities have extensive areas of detached housing with generous gardens and swimming pools. Maybe in contrast to neighbouring countries, where suburban housing is typically denser and more transit orientated. Shifting to electric vehicles may not in itself change the status quo.
Transit_ The transit systems in Bordeaux and Toulouse account for one in five and one in four journeys respectively. With further investment in the transit systems and a one half increase in capacity – one in three or more journeys could be by transit.
Bike commuting_ Cycling levels are high in both centres, but low in the suburbs. In contrast to Berlin, where one in four commute by bike (almost half a million people daily), a doubling from one in eight during the last fifteen years. If residents embrace e-cycling rather than car ownership and use in the future, particularly in the suburbs, car use could fall, be less accommodated and/or encouraged within a decade. Especially if households typically sacrificed one of their many cars and replaced it with two e-bikes.
London
We are approximately halfway between Tower Bridge and Canary Wharf, with 300º uninterrupted views clockwise from south-west to south-east – halfway between Bermondsey and Rotherhithe stations – close to the Norwegian, Swedish and Finnish churches, Southwark park and Canada Water.
Where we can cycle off-road east along both sides of the river towards Greenwich, Woolwich, City Airport and the North Sea; north along the Lee and Regent's Canal canals towards Victoria Park, London Fields, Angle, Stratford and Hertfordshire; and west and north-west along the river and the Grand Union canal towards Oxford and Birmingham.
