Eventually I realized that what I was familiar with from German and other European cities seems not to exist in American cities. Of course, each major U.S. city has its "downtown," complete with financial districts and high-rise buildings. But this is not comparable to the inner city of a European town, where everything flows together, creating a vivid and lively atmosphere.

During my residence in San Francisco, I've found it intriguing to compare my adopted city to my hometown of Reutlingen, Germany. Even though the two cities are in many respects incomparable, examining how the physical structure of a typical European city differs from that of a U.S. city may lend insight into current San Francisco urban planning concerns. After considering what works well in European cities, San Franciscans might decide to incorporate these advantageous features into their own city. In particular, I encourage San Francisco's residents and urban planners to consider whether the benefits of vital city cores, bustling with activity-schoolchildren playing after school, youth skateboarding and gathering to socialize, adults meeting for dinner or shopping at neighborhood establishments-could be enjoyed by San Franciscans, perhaps by adopting car free zones.

Before comparing Reutlingen and San Francisco's downtown areas, I will give a brief history of how the core of Reutlingen developed and what it is like today. Reutlingen is a city of a little more than 108,000 inhabitants in southwestern Germany. It is situated about 40 kilometers (25 miles) south of Stuttgart. Reutlingen was first settled in the late Paleolithic Age. Between 1220 and 1240, King Friedrich II declared Reutlingen to be a city, and as a consequence, its townspeople built walls, ditches, and towers, in order to clearly distinguish the urban area from its rural environs. By the 14th and early 15th centuries, Reutlingen had grown to the point where it enveloped seven surrounding villages; however, the city only covered about 44 square kilometers (Gemeinhardt and Loeffler 2000).

In 1726, the city was almost totally destroyed by a fire, which lasted for three days, burning down 80% of all residential houses, destroying almost all public buildings, and leaving 1,200 families homeless. Restoration and rebuilding began almost immediately, and due to the sense of urgency, the rebuilding of Reutlingen was conducted rather randomly, without a clear plan. As a result, streets in Reutlingen's inner city are narrow and often crooked.

Today, city walls no longer limit Reutlingen's urban boundaries. Yet the remains of them, including two former city gates, the Tuebinger Tor and the Gartentor, mark the core of the city: the so-called Innenstadt, or in American terms, "downtown." Thus, the old medieval town of Reutlingen is the city center of 'modern' Reutlingen.

The main characteristic of Reutlingen's downtown is the marketplace that lies in the heart of the Innenstadt. The marketplace is a large square area in front of City Hall. There are several benches and steps, a few trees, and a huge fountain called the Marktbrunnen. Three times a week this square is used for a farmer's market. Throughout the year it serves as a stage for city festivities and various cultural events, including the Christmas Market in December. Most importantly, it is in constant use by various groups of people - school kids meeting after school, little kids running around, skaters practicing new moves, homeless people gathering, members of the punk scene hanging out, tourists taking pictures, shoppers resting in the sun, people meeting each other, and so on. The marketplace offers an important public space. Kevin Lynch, who was a noted professor of Urban Studies and Planning at MIT, calls this a node: strategic spots "in a city into which an observer can enter, and which are the intensive foci to and from which he is traveling" (Lynch 2000).

The most significant channel crossing the plaza is the Wilhemstrasse, a promenade for pedestrians only. Along this boulevard are numerous mixed-used houses. Typically, the first floors of these buildings are used as shops, boutiques or cafés, while the remaining floors (usually between three and five) are used for housing. On each side of this walkway are benches that provide "sittable space" for pedestrians (Whyte 2000). During the summer, café owners put out chairs and tables for their customers, encouraging patrons to linger and observe the passing crowds.

Cars are prohibited in the city center. And last year, the 'pedestrian only' area was expanded, with the banning of cars and other motorized vehicles in an even wider area surrounding the Innenstadt. Most residents welcomed this decision. Now, many of the streets leading to and away from the marketplace are pedestrian friendly. Exceptions are made for residents, and for delivery drivers, though these few cars and trucks don't disturb the peaceful and relaxed atmosphere of the whole pedestrian area. And of course, there are not only pedestrians, but also many bicyclists, skate boarders, and inline skaters who take advantage of the traffic free zones.

What is true for Reutlingen is certainly true for most European cities. The car- free zone in the city core creates a safe and pleasant environment for people of all ages, and is thus a strong magnet for people. The question is "Would the same be possible for San Francisco?"

Looking at downtown San Francisco, particularly lower Market Street, I find it difficult to imagine successfully limiting car traffic. The physical structure of the city's downtown is not suitable for creating an inviting pedestrian area; the blocks are too big and streets are too wide, and promenading through gray walls of concrete doesn't seem very inviting to me. What is there to attract people to walk around squeezed between gigantic concrete buildings? Perhaps uninviting downtowns are the cause of shopping malls' popularity in the USA, though it might be the case that shopping malls are the cause of people's withdrawal from the streets.

The way land was developed in San Francisco's downtown seems to make it impossible to create a vivid "pedestrians only" zone. However, I can imagine creating enjoyable pedestrian zones in other areas of the city. For example, on the western end of Haight Street, near the entrance to Golden Gate Park, the physical and social environment seems well suited to creating a pleasant car-free zone. In physical structure, Haight Street is comparable to Reutlingen's Wilhelmstrasse. Both streets are narrow, and mixed-used buildings are located on either side. And perhaps more importantly, pedestrians already outnumber cars.

Banning motor vehicles on upper Haight Street would create a safer environment for pedestrians, who could cross the street to go from one shop to another without being hindered by cars driving by at dangerous speeds, or by drivers fighting for parking spaces. Without cars, the atmosphere would become more slowly paced, leisurely and comfortable. The possibility of bumping into other people is not as frightening as being hit by a car since collisions with our own species don't usually result in severe injury or death.

Excluding cars, and at the same time providing more room for people, would also make more room for creativity. On Reutlingen's Wilhelmstrasse, for instance, you can always find local and international street musicians and entertainers, as well as artists doing portraits or chalk paintings on the ground. The car lanes on Haight Street could similarly be transformed into usable public space - space made by people for people, not for their machines. Members of the community could unleash their creativity, participating in the design of their immediate environment in the form of murals or other works of art.

Instead of car lanes, designers could construct sittable space in the form of benches and steps. This would encourage people to stop and rest, and give them a chance to relax and muse. Trees and other plants could further beautify the promenade and contribute to a pleasant atmosphere. This kind of environment would serve an important social function: hanging out in public space enables people to meet and interact more easily with others, as they are no longer isolated and kept apart by cars. People would be in more intimate contact with each other, able to gain a sense of human connectedness, which I consider to be a basic human need.

To improve access to the area, bus lanes could be routed in a manner that would guarantee fast, convenient transportation to and from the pedestrian zone. Additionally, bike lanes and bike racks could be provided to encourage people to use their bikes more. Moreover, a connection for pedestrians and self-propelled vehicles from Haight Street to John F. Kennedy Drive in Golden Gate Park would be desirable. Particularly on Sundays, when the Park is closed to automobile traffic, and is used heavily by bicycles, in-line skaters and pedestrians, a connection between these two car-free zones would create an attractive social environment. People would then have the option of moving quickly between Golden Gate Park and Haight Street.

Banning cars would also reduce noise and pollution. This would benefit not only those recreating on Haight Street, but also regular residents of he area. No longer having to dodge speeding cars, breathe in their toxic exhaust, nor be disturbed by blaring horns and roaring engines, would make the environment more enjoyable for everyone. Moreover, the car fumes would no longer be dirtying the facades of the unique Victorian houses in the Haight.

While some business owners on Haight Street might balk at this idea, feeling that their establishments might be harmed by the elimination of auto traffic, the European experience shows that they have much to gain from such an arrangement. Leisurely activity in the area would increase; as would the amount of walk-in business produced by having more people spending more time in and near shops. Additionally, following the example of the Wilhelmstrasse, delivery vehicles could still have access to the zone on restricted hours and for a limited duration to facilitate the movement of goods. And finally, residents could get special permission for parking in nearby side streets.

As I’ve tried to explain, creating car-free zones in San Francisco, accessible by public transportation, would enhance the quality of life in the city. Banning cars in certain areas would create islands for recreation and relaxation, while at the same time maintaining, if not improving, retail activity in those zones. Of course, I am not proposing changing San Francisco into a European city. However, I think we could make incremental, positive changes, in areas where pedestrians already dominate the scene.

References

Baca, Matt and Judith Espinosa. (December 1999). "New Thoughts from the Old World." Progress (A production of the "Surface Transportation Policy Project, Washington, D.C.).

Gemeinhardt, Dr. Heinz Alfred and Anette Loeffler. (2000). "A Short History of Reutlingen." (A production of the Public Relations Department, Reutlingen, Germany).

Lynch, Kevin. (2000). "The City Image and Its Elements." The City Reader. New York, Routledge.

Whyte, William. (2000). "The Design of Spaces." The City Reader. New York, Routledge.