International experiences and implications for Australia

During my class this week we discussed the public transport of Paris, France; and Schwerin, Germany. Then, we were asked 'what should we learn and shouldn't learn'? As in what should we take on board and what should we not take on board from these two cities.

Photo of a new tram in Paris, by: Hitomi, my teacher.

1. To start with, Paris is a large European city with building height restrictions that have pushed urban sprawl and created a wide demand for public transport. 

On top of a public bus services (that Canberra also has), are the Paris Tube Network, tram line (pictured) and a shared (Velib's) bicycle program.

I would not say that Canberra is in need of a tube network at this stage, but I have seen plans for one and it would be far more efficient/direct than the curving and weaving of the Parisian network (thanks to the 'Y Plan'). So, I guess that means shelving the tube network discussion for at least 50-100 years. Trams, however, look nice. But they're ridiculously expensive compared to buses and as my teacher told me "it can take years to just lay the track" (further cementing my opinion). 

What we could definitely incorporate in our city centre though, is a bicycle sharing program like Velib's Paris. It's cheap, healthy and causes no negative externalities (post-construction of course).

Schwerin, Germany

2. In Schwerin, the public transport network includes a tram (4 lines) and buses (16 lines) for their population (of 100,000).

Considering that the trams alone cost a million+ dollars each, and that's before maintenance and track costs are factored in, it seems that they must be thinking about the (very) long-term, the environmentally friendly and the sustainability, to make such a purchase.

Once again, however, I feel that tram's are too expensive for Canberra. And, if Canberra was the same size as Schwerin and had the money to spare, then I could see myself wanting an aesthetically pleasing tram network. But the reality is that our population is less than 400,000 and spread out over a similar area to that of London, England (pop. 8,000,000-10,000,000). And, with tram tracks being fixed, they don't have the flexibility to collect passengers from a sprawling area like Canberra's suburbs.

Let's stick with buses and maybe investigate increasing our LPG (Liquid Propane Gas) fleet.

Traffic in Phnom-Penh, Cambodia

3. After speaking about Paris and Schwerin, the class moved onto a presentation about traffic in Phnom Penh, Cambodia. 

We were then asked 'how do you improve the situation as an urban planner? Can you give 5 ideas?'

Well, to start with, Phnom Penh has a largely unregulated traffic network that is made up of motorbikes and (to a lesser extent) bicycles, cars, buses and trucks. With a population of 1 million people and highly variable seasons to consider, I came up with the following 5 ideas to improve the situation.

1. Phnom Pen's roads need adequate storm water drainage for the wet season;
2. Noise pollution is too high, so either a city roads tax will need to be applied at night to discourage twilight traffic or building codes will need to change to incorporate sound-proofed walls;
3. More trees should be lining their roads to improve aesthetics, address summer heat issues and clean (albeit a little) of the Co2 emitted from vehicles;
4. They need pedestrian friendly crossing points (e.g. pedestrian lights at intersections to stop vehicular traffic for foot traffic) as their current arrangement of just walking across the road is too dangerous; and
5. Dedicated lanes for motorbikes would further increase efficiency because if a motorbike breaks down or gets in a crash, other motorbikes can still get around it. However if it were a car or bus that crashed, then that makes things a lot more difficult. Call it risk management.

What do you think of these ideas reader? Can you add to them?