Vauban, the Car-Free Suburb in Germany
I enjoyed this read in the New York Times about Vauban, a “no-cars-allowed” suburb in Germany. Thanks to Matthew Harding for the link!
If you haven’t heard about it, Vauban is one of those ‘buzzy’ places that people in the urbanist community love to talk about. I think the concept it interesting, but it relies on the existence of Frieburg, a transit-accessible and walkable urban center, for its existence.
There’s very limited potential for any kind of car-restricted development in the US until we see significant improvements in the transit service and walkability of our major urban centers, and we probably need quality high-speed rail linkages between them as well. While our airports do a great job of connecting far-off destinations, it’s too pricey to justify flying from Houston to Austin or Dallas, let alone mid-size stops in between like College Station or Waco.
The moral of the story here is that we need to invest in alternative transportation, to build that additional network layer, so that people have more options about how to get around. Then we’ll see those who really are sick of driving creating the demand for “no-car” zones here and there, and that’s when developers in the US might think about building a few.
The article is interesting, you should take a look!
5 Comments
Permalink
I like this idea, but I have a question–how do people move in and out of their houses? They certainly can’t bike their refrigerators in. So there must be some provision for moving vans, delivery trucks, garbage trucks, fire trucks, ambulances, police vehicles, etc. Right? Likewise, can non-resident cars enter the town?
I am not asking these questions to challenge the notion of a car-free neighborhood, but rather to ask about practical details.
This reminds me, by the way, of a single block in Tampa’s Hyde Park neighborhood (a beautiful old neighborhood). The “street” is called South Bungalow Terrace, and what is bizarre about it is that the street is just a sidewalk. The bungalows on either side of the sidewalk look similar to any other bungalows in the neighborhood–they just don’t have street access. (They do have automobile access–like pretty much all the houses in this neighborhood, there are rear alleys that cars can park in.)
Permalink
I’m sure that they have an allowance for special use vehicles etcetera. I think the restriction, specifically, is that residential units are not allowed to have driveways or garages or any kind of parking space. The article says that residents use a garage if they want to have a car, and that they buy a space in the garage when they buy the home. There are two garages, one at either end of the property. I’m sure visitors park there too, or else on-street on the one ‘thoroughfare’ that provides access.
I found more information here: http://www.vauban.de/info/abstract.html, but it’s not the most useful thing in the world if you don’t speak German
There’s English text, but no English maps or diagrams.
Permalink
Nice article and thanks for bringing it to my attention.
When comparisons are made of the development patterns in the US as compared to many places in Western Europe, one often hears excuses based on how much older many of the cities are in Europe as compared to the US. This is an example of how European cities are using smart growth policies in new developments; something that is sorely needed here in the US. We can’t blame our current predicament solely on history; our current policies give us what we have.
Would it work in the US? Perhaps. In certain areas it probably would work perfectly. Many older suburbs in the North East (for example) already allow for a lifestyle where auto dependence is much less when compared to suburbs like Katy. It is the difference between a village and a housing subdivision.
But I agree that the biggest weakness for the US at this point is our woeful transportation infrastructure. In the vast majority of places in the US, people are completely reliant on their automobile or the airplane. There simply isn’t any other option. Sadly, in some areas, even the airplane doesn’t seem a viable alternative. Try flying to, for example, Biloxi, MS from Houston. The price is outrageous. And yet this would be a perfect distance for a regional rail connection. Unfortunately, because this country has completely neglected our rail transportation infrastructure in the past 50 years, such a trip is not a viable alternative. As a test, go to Amtrak’s website and look into taking a train from Houston to New Orleans (again, a reasonable distance for such a connection). It’s simply not realistic
Permalink
You can, however, takes the bus from Houston to Biloxi. With a 7-day advance purchase, the ticket is $62.00. People always seem to forget that there is a bus option–indeed, I wouldn’t be surprised if more of the country is served by bus than by plane.
Permalink
Charles Kuffner over at Off The Kuff just reported on some bills passed in the Texas senate regarding Cycling safety.
http://www.offthekuff.com/mt/archives2/2009/05/013767.html