Top reasons why no car-free hoods in the U.S. 2010… yet
It’s a simple idea and the demand is certainly there, but why aren’t there any car-free neighborhoods in the U.S… yet?
First, overcoming either of these two reasons would have resulted in a car-free neighborhood:
1. No developer has the guts. Honestly, it really does only take one person with money to make it happen. It’s amazing, but no one in the last 80 years has stepped up. Until Joe Mellett of Bicycle City in Columbia, South Carolina. He’ll soon receive recognition for being one of the most influential people of the 21st century just because, and doing it starting with under a half a million $. Millions of homes cost more than that. The first Bicycle City will be greenfield, so who’s going to be the first to do one within an urban area?
2. The market hasn’t demanded it as a market. If you ask enough people, especially creatives who live in cities, you’ll soon find that there is more than enough demand for such a place. However, they haven’t organized themselves as - and this is extremely important - as a market that a developer or investment group can easily market to. It helps to be willing to move. This is where crowdsourcing comes in. It starts with 20 people, anywhere in the U.S., that want to start such a campaign. Are we there yet? If at least 20 people comment below with a yes (and email me at so I can contact you all) we’ll start there. Make history. Otherwise, see reason #1, and we’ll revisit this next year or wait for someone else to take the lead.
Second, these reasons haven’t helped, but they can all be overcome with either of the first two:
3. It’s illegal in the U.S. to have a car-free neighborhood. That’s right. Zoning doesn’t allow it. It’s a long story, starting with home builders and rising car manufacturers who lobbied the government in 1934 to establish a financing program that made it cheaper to buy homes in newly created auto-required suburban zoning than to rent an apartment in the city. Non-whites were explicitly excluded from the program. True story. This is why to this day any new building requires parking, and only rehabbing buildings pretty much pre-1934 don’t. Zoning exceptions can be made.
4. The internet is still relatively new. Before the internet, it wasn’t exactly the easiest thing to organize all those individuals that wanted to live in a car-free neighborhood. Today, it is. However, well-organized social networks have only existed for a few years, and it hasn’t caught up yet to organizing one for car-free neighborhoods, in part because people have been intimidated by the top three reasons. It will. However, this can be expedited.
5. Our financial markets aren’t designed for this scale. As we’ve all recently seen, the economy has largely become finance companies investing in other finance companies, to the point where 99% of the financial capital out there is completely out of touch with, well, how we actually live day to day. Wall Street won’t invest in anything less than a $15 million project. This results in only 19 possible product types they can invest in, and none of them represent anything you or I want to live or work in, from strip mall complexes to mobile home parks. Try these 19 instead. This isn’t anything reason #1 or #2 can’t overcome, but works well with perpetuating reason #3.
- Enjoy this post? Share it with others.
-
-
-
-
-
-
I don’t think you can stress enough the legal issue. Parking requirements and required road infrastructure along with codes specific to emergency services have made it impossible to recreate the Victorian urban form, let alone an innovative car-free zone.
Thanks Robin,
The irony is that resorts in the U.S. are car free, that is, parking is located on the outskirts of some rather expansive pedestrian-only areas. See this previous entry, Why are resort towns so pedestrian-oriented, so cool?
So, it’s possible. It just hasn’t been a priority when you’re not on vacation.
In Nashville, we recently adopted a form-based code for Downtown that requires no parking. That’s right. None. Anxiously awaiting a development that takes advantage of it!
Joni, that’s great! Do you have a link for that? That sounds like it belongs in the Government Policy Innovation category.
Yes, you can see the document at nashville.gov/mpc/dtc/default.asp
The note is at the top of page 80.
Excellent. How did that come to be? Do you know of any other city that’s waiving the parking requirement, or is Nashville pioneering this? I’d like to use these responses for a future article.
Roosevelt Island is carfree, and the best place to raise kids in NYC by some reports.
It’s not just parking. I believe that most jurisdictions require that every house have an address (and sometimes a certain amount of front feet) on a street (presumably a car street; certain one wide enough for fire trucks). This has some logic in terms of addressing and fire access, though those issues could probably be dealt with in alternative ways. And of course they are gotten around in certain context like resorts or theme parks. One way to get around this might be condo associations or cooperatives. If the whole thing has one address, like an apartment building, I think the rules may change.
Alys Beach is shy of a resort in the full-service, ‘disneyland’ sense. It is also shy of car-free but it has an armature of car-free streets.
Great blog. The car-system is heavily subsidized. Because it is a system, it has a tipping point. Only one force is powerful enough to move the needle to that point: fare-free buses. If you watch “taken for a ride” you will see how we got here. The path back is pretty much the reverse.
“Car-free” is a negative statement—what fills the vacuum that car-centric transportation formerly occupied? Streetcars? Bicycles? Pedestrian paths? The mode (or modes) of transportation are a more important factor in urban form than zoning. If you plan a “car-free” development but don’t include another form of transportation, people will wedge their cars into the space, just as the car has been wedged into existing pre-automobile neighborhoods.
It looks like you can watch the entire Taken for a Ride on YouTube.
Well, the principle behind car-free means that cars are actually legally prohibited. It’s nothing for car enthusiasts to get upset about either. The movement is about allowing people to live in car-free neighborhoods that truly want them, rather than taking cars away from neighborhoods that already depend on them.
Bicycle City is a great example of branding.
It will take more than people interested in such a community. They will have to come to the table with cash also. Today’s market aside, banks won’t touch it. They have to look for resale.
You are correct with the statement that Planning and Zoning would require parking. Even with its roots (which is interesting), the regulations have been placed so that enterprising developers would not skimp on parking while increasing unit density.
It’s kind of funny that the rules to keep developers honorable make it impossible to innovate.
It seems that the best transitional approach would be to have the ability to have parking and have the residents agree not to use it - ever. Now you are on to something.
The idea has merit in the right location.
Jon, crowdfunding is a necessary part of crowdsourcing places. That’ll be the case with Bicycle City - it will be built upon whether or not people will buy homes in a car-free neighborhood.
A lot of progressive urban developers, and there are a few of them in every city, will tell you the parking requirements are what kills the financial viability of the project. Developing parking spaces in the city isn’t only exorbitantly expensive (especially if you’re talking about underground parking), but it takes up housing space as well. It’s pretty silly considering I live in a beautiful 45-unit building with zero building parking, and the units sell for as much as any in the city. Demand is certainly not the problem - ability to change to evolving times is.
I’d mention Mackinaw Island… not just a neighborhood, though. (Bikes and horse-drawn carriages only). Perhaps its resort-town, seasonal status doesn’t quite qualify it for car-free neighborhood.
Also, if I may brag, Grand Rapids adopted a zoning ordinance in 2007 which stipulates a maximum number of parking spaces, as well as allowing a number of waivers or reductions of minimum parking requirements. These waivers are available in a number of ways, including:
* Being within 300 ft. of a rail/BRT stop or 100 ft. of a bus stop.
* Having signed & enforced parking for HOVs and/or electric/ULEVs, or by exceeding the minimum bike parking requirements.
* Use of nearby on-street or district parking lots to fulfill minimums, paying in lieu of providing, coming up with shared parking agreements, or reducing minimums for mixed uses.
* Deferring until future need is proven.
Admittedly, I’m biased since I wrote the provisions… but I think they’re pretty great, and the Planning Commission and City Commission deserve some credit for allowing them to become law. If you want to check them out, they’re buried in Chapter 10 of the ordinance text, available here: http://www.grcity.us/index.pl?page_id=5831. Feel free to email me at with questions or comments!
Post a comment