Bremen: Urban district planning without cars

Abstract:

In the 1990s, the City of Bremen designed a district without cars. The project was stimulated by a sociological study which outlined the positive effects of a lifestyle without car use. In co-operation with the municipal building association, the Department of Environmental Protection and Urban Development and the Department of Building established a project for car-free living in the Hollerland area. At the end of 1995, the offer of the first 22 terraced houses did not get the expected demand due to the recession in the housing market, and the project came to a standstill. Nevertheless, the planning and the implementation of the project revealed some important issues on the best practice of a new planning area. The following themes are of importance:

• the project has been conducted with an integrated planning approach;
• the project has challenged the traditional pro-car planning requirements;
• the project has involved a housing association and stimulated new thinking;
• the project has revealed a multitude of possible restrictions;
• the pre-project research has offered new insights into car-free living.

Concept and aims

The concept to design a car-free area in an urban district is an attempt to alter the planning of urban infrastructure at the neighbourhood level, and to create a new quality of urban lifestyle. The original idea overturns the dominant principles of an automobile society. It is a rejection of the conviction that modern urban life is almost impossible without a car. Furthermore, it assumes that the ownership of a car shapes the decision to travel by car instead of using other transportation modes in most cases. However, little was known on the actual implications of car-free living. Therefore, the examination of the behavioural structures of this lifestyle should indicate how people react to such a concept, and if they are willing to accept the change in daily routines.

At the beginning of the 1990s, the idea of "Living without cars" was born in a seminar at Bremen University. In 1992, six families from different types of residential areas in Bremen participated in a research project and agreed to refrain from car use for a period of four weeks. In addition, they agreed to keep a record of their travel and of their the modes of transport. All families have little children, and they considered themselves as low-level car users. The results from the experiment showed that none of the six test households felt restricted in its mobility, that a change of transport mode affects other behavioural patterns (e.g. shopping), and that the non-availability of a car leads to replacement activities (e.g. bicycle tours instead of car trips to the countryside). The experience of such effects make up the core elements of a new lifestyle, in a car-free residential area. If people deliberately opt for such a lifestyle they have to accept that this includes other qualities and quantities in mobility. In particular, this applies to the travelling times, travelling as a social space, and the sensory perception of self and the environment.

Although the households without car use will need more time for some journeys, they will not necessarily regard this as a waste of time. Whereas, in most cases, a car journey is undertaken to get quickly from one place to another, the decision to travel by alternative modes contains a number of quality factors and criteria of convenience (e.g. can I read while travelling, can I have a conversation on public transport, what route will I select for safe cycling, how interesting is the area where I travel, what kind of aesthetic attractiveness does the urban or rural area offer, what kind of transportation modes can be combined, etc.). In consequence, it is likely that the people will see travelling as a mostly pleasant way of spending time, which can also have relaxing side effects.

Another outstanding result of the experiment was phrased as, "the path to a social place". In connection with the new combination of travel routes and modes, the participants stressed that it often happened that they met people whom they had not seen for some time, that they made new contacts, and that they had interesting conversations while waiting for the bus or making a trip by bicycle, or on foot. Although there had also been some unpleasant encounters, they emphasised that the social dimension of not using a car is mainly regarded as an extra bonus.

The third important experience is related to sensory perception. Travelling by modes other than car often imply travelling under circumstances that include new experiences of weather conditions, smells, sounds, speed, and distances. This also adds a new dimension to urban life, as one’s own physicality becomes a conscious factor of locomotion (e.g. using muscular power for cycling or walking in the rain). The participants pointed out that they started to like walking, or discovered new areas of the city where they would not normally go if they had travelled by car. In general, self-perception was viewed as deeply satisfactory.

An unintended and unexpected result of the experiment was that five of the six families got rid of their cars, and from that it can be assumed that with more insight into this lifestyle the acceptance among urban residents is likely to increase. In addition, one has to mention that a number of German cities (including Bremen) offer car sharing schemes as an additional option.

As the results from the experiment had been quite encouraging, the planners from the City Department for Environmental Protection and Urban Development started to promote the idea within the institutional framework. The project site had to meet three conditions: adequate connections with public transport and two-wheeled vehicle networks, diversity of adjacent urban functions, and proximity to substantial natural open spaces. The planning philosophy had to break new ground as the planning of an area without cars was not aiming to adopt a strategy for the exclusion of cars. On the contrary, the focus is on an enabling strategy for non-car users. In the first place, this means that the area should offer no car parking facilities, with the exception of car parks for visitors and car sharing organisations. This single planning measure has a number of self-evident implications:

• the disturbance from noise and exhaust would be minimised;
• there would be no ecological, spatial, or aesthetic impact;
• safety would increase;
• the absence of car parks and garages offers additional space for other uses;
• the absence of car parks is a cost saving factor;
• cost savings are due to the absence of road upgrading;
• walking, bicycle use, and public transport is encouraged;
• the position of local retailers is strengthened;
• a closer community identity is generated by a common attitude, and this could lead to other positive effects (e.g. in the area of child care or caring for the elderly and handicapped);
• energy is saved.

However, the planning of a car-free area is also a new legal concept. Due to the German Garage Code, which dates back to the Reichsgaragenverordnung of 1939 (National Garage Order), the Bremen Building Regulations say that a new housing estate of 220 units needs to have 180 to 220 individual parking spaces. The underlying problem is that parking space attracts traffic, which would be counterproductive for the car-free project. Therefore, the City of Bremen commissioned a legal review into the problem. According to this study, the usual obligation to provide parking space applies to the model project only to a limited extent, as the number and the size of mandatory car parks depend on the number and types of cars that can be expected. It is estimated that, for the project, the intended number of 30 spaces would be sufficient. In order to strictly limit the number of potential cars and potential car users, the project managers intended to make it obligatory for the tenants to sign a life-long contract with a commitment to not buy a car. Under these circumstances, it was assumed that the project will have the following impacts:

• The Hollerland project saves nearly 20% of space (2.6 hectares) if only the 30 intended  car parking spaces are built.
• Due to the restriction of parking space, the investors will save approximately 2.5 million DM, which in consequence, will reduce the development costs by 3-10% per housing unit.
• The road network and the parking spaces will represent only 17% of the total area, compared to the usual 40% in a traditional urban area. The area will have no roads, but only passable paths which offer access for dustcarts, fire engines, or removal vehicles.
• The Hollerland area will get a new infrastructure for public transport. The tramway link to the city centre will be extended to the area. Currently, the existing bus link offers a connection with 18 minutes travelling time.
• The Hollerland area will get a new infrastructure for bicycle use, as this alternative mode already has a prominent share of 22% in the City of Bremen.

Implementation

A favourable political precondition at the time of the project initiation was the red-green coalition government in Bremen (along with Berlin and Hamburg, Bremen is a city with its own federal government, the Senat, which is the governing body of the regional territorial state). The Green party was in charge of the environment department, and the building department, which was run by the Social Democratic Party, supported the idea. The responsible housing association (GEWOBA) lost its scepticism after administrative and legal barriers had been removed.

In 1992, the project, which would be located in the Hollerland area 7 km from the city centre, was made public via the press. Within a short time, 300 enquiries from interested parties had been received. The results of questionnaires showed that interests came from a great range of people of differing ages and incomes, but those questioned generally welcomed the idea of a car-free neighbourhood. The most significant point of divergence to the average Bremen population structure was that 72% of the applicants did not have their own car, and the system was also conceived to cater to those for whom ‘one car is too much and no car would not be enough.’ Fifty-five percent of the interested parties would like a rented flat. There was an equal share of single households, as well as households of two, or more than three persons. The interested parties joined the new association, "Car-free Hollerland e.V." which acted as contact for GEWOBA. At the end of 1992, the district parliament approved the project unanimously.

At the end of 1995, the first 22 terraced houses of a planned 220 went on offer. However, as they consisted of owner-occupied flats at a price of 386,000 DM, the demand remained modest and only four families were willing to buy a flat. Due to this setback, the 50 million DM project has been stopped, as the housing association is not currently expecting a change in demand.

Results and Impacts

Although the actual Hollerland project offers little concrete results, the project has helped to trigger off a number of similar projects. In Germany, there are planning groups in Cologne and Berlin which are co-operating with the municipal authorities. Other cities like Münster, Essen, Düsseldorf, Aachen, and Bielefeld have also shown interest. The Ministry for Urban Development, Culture, and Sport in North Rhine-Westfalia is currently setting up a support programme for car-free living. In Hamburg, there is the demonstration project at Barmbecker Stichkanal designed for 250 housing units within an area of 3 hectares. The target is to allow one parking space per ten houses. In the Netherlands, there is the project in Amsterdam Westerpark.

Finance

The European Commission co-financed the planning study on the model of a car-free housing project with 140,000 DM spread over three years. The same sum had been granted by the City Department for Environmental Protection and Urban Development.

Evaluation and Statements

Michael Glotz-Richter, the head of the Section for Ecological Urban Design at the Bremen Department for Environmental Protection and Urban Development, had been one of the co-initiators of the Hollerland project. As the current standstill of the project is likely to stop further development in Bremen in the near future, he is evaluating the lessons from the project:

• the worsening of the economic situation can be given as a general reason for the low demand in the property market;
• the obligation to a self-commitment for a life-long car-free living has met with certain reservation, as there is no comparable self-commitment in other areas of living;
• the legal regulation of a self-commitment seems to be counter-productive, and the latest experience for a Dutch car-free area in Amsterdam-Westerpark has revealed that no such obligation is required as a condition of success;
• in general, the discussion on the project of car-free living in Germany is preoccupied with the question of car possession and car use, as well as with the fixing of new regulations which are diverting attention from other aspects of the new lifestyle;
• the advertising campaign and the published booklets are mainly arguing for banning of cars, instead of showing the positive elements of the project (e.g. green and calm living place, benefits for children);
• the housing association had overestimated the demand for owner-occupied flats; the latest interest survey has shown that approximately 160 parties are interested in rented flats.

• parking space should be evaluated as an economic asset
• the obligation to provide parking spaces should be removed from the planning regulations
• land-use planning should encourage higher urban densities (incorporating the new urban lifestyle) instead of encouraging low-density development on the periphery
• model projects which reduce the need to own and use a private car should be subsidized

Source of Information

Glotz-Richter, Michael / Viets, Renate 1993: Das "Bremer Modell" - Wohnen ohne (eigenes) Auto, in: Wolfgang Münst, (Hg.), Stadt statt Auto. Neue städtebauliche Qualitäten mit weniger Autos, Darmstadt, S. 61-78

Glotz-Richter, Michael / Schwarz, Joachim 1993: MobilitätsBeratung als Beitrag zur Verminderung des Kfz-Verkehrs. Vorbilder sowie Ansätze und Erfahrungen aus Bremen, in: Wolfgang Münst, (Hg.), Stadt statt Auto. Neue städtebauliche Qualitäten mit weniger Autos, Darmstadt, S. 111-124

Krämer-Badoni, Thomas 1994: Life without the car: an experiment and a plan, in: International Journal of Urban and Regional Research, Vol.18, No.1, pp. 347-355

Glotz-Richter, Michael 1994: Wohnen ohne eigenes Auto - aus den Planung für die Modellsiedlung Bremer Hollerland, in: Institut für Städtebau der Deutschen Akademie für Städtebau und Landesplanung Berlin, (Hg.) Verkehr und Städtebau. Beeinflussung des Stadt- und Stadtumlandverkehrs durch städtebauliche Massnahmen H. 58, Berlin, S. 99-107

Glotz-Richter, Michael 1995: Housing without cars: Ideas and experiences fom Bremen-Hollerland, in: EA.UE, (ed.), The Urban Environment in Europe, Environmentally Compatible Urban Transport and Traffic, Berlin, pp. 14-17

Enquete Comission the EarthAtmosphere of the German Bundestag, (ed.) 1995: Mobility and Climate. Developing Environmentally Sound Transport Policy Concepts, Bonn

Glotz-Richter, Michael 1996: Der rosa Elefant des autofreien Wohnens - Gedanken zum Stand des Modellprojektes Wohnen ohne eigenes Auto, in: KlimabündnisRundbrief, Nr. 9, S. 8/9

Witt, Andreas 1996; Keiner will mit Auto wohnen, in: fairkehr, Nr. 1, S. 24-26

http://www.cities21.com

Contact:

Cities:

Bremen :

Bremen is located on the lower Weser river in the northern part of Germany; together with the city of Bremerhaven it forms the smallest of the sixteen states which comprise the Federal Republic of Germany. The harbour and port area combine to make this an important maritime trade location. Large seagoing vessels have been able to travel up the River Weser as far as Bremen ever since the river was regulated in 1886. The city has modern container terminals and railway facilities available. The most important economic factor is shipbuilding; in addition, the city's economy comprises electronics, aircraft and space industries, brewing, tobacco and the food industries.

Bremen is the seat of the state (Land) government and also the headquarters of official bodies and administrative organisations. The university, which consists of twelve faculties or subject areas, was founded in 1971; Bremen also has numerous other tertiary educational establishments.

Population:

Project was added at 21.06.1996
Project was changed at 21.08.2001

• SURBAN home
• Search cases
• See a list of all the cases
• Order the SURBAN database
• Back to the EA.UE homepage