Here is a link to an article in today's Internation Herald Tribune.  This is a bit off topic, but it is an interesting urban planning issue.

http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/12/science/earth/12suburb.html?_r=1&ref=europe

The solution proposed here requires density (multi-family housing), public transportation and local retailing....things that the USA typically lacks in all but the largest cities.

To give you an additional flavor for Germany, in some cities you will see traffic signals that advise you when to turn off your engine and when to restart it at stoplights.  Some cars are being equipped to automatically stop/start engines.

I live near the center of Milan; driving is not pleasant and parking is non-existant or very expensive, so we walk and rely on public transportation because it is more convenient to do so.  We have adequate shopping and good restaurants within walking distance, although we will occassionally make bulk shopping trips to the hypermarkets by car.  My 3.5 year old car has 20,000km on it....90% of the milage on holiday trips.  Privacy does become an issue and you need to enjoy (or at least tolerate) living closely with others.

This is not a bad lifestyle, but it would be a LOT nicer if there were not the noise and pollution from cars and motorinos (the swarms of noisy 2-stroke scooters), so what they propose has some appeal.

How many out there would be willing to give up their cars and single family mc-mansions? 

Bruce
(who plans to retire to a rural environment and have a big garage for my motorcycle collection).

I think it's a great idea. When I lived in NYC I never missed not having a car. If they banned all passenger cars from NYC (and the noise and polution they create) I never would have left.

However, I don't think it will fly in America. People are two addicted the their SUV's and McMansions.

This is a good concept and could be implemented in large urban centers. I live in Canada and this would not go over well here. Canada is huge and very spread out. We don't have the population density to make public transportation an effective alternative to personal transportation. I have no problem walking to the corner store to buy some milk, but if I would like to go for a business meeting in Calgary from Edmonton, It would take me 2 days to walk the 300Km. Now I could take a bus to Calgary, but then I would not have a car to go to my appointment. The bottom line is that if everything is not accessible to you within a 10 block radius, you need to have a car.

I really like the concept, and admire those who choose not to drive a vehicle. I won't be trading in my car for a bus pass anytime soon and I don't think that to many contractors will be trading in their work trucks to take the buss.

No thanks. I lived in Baltimore for 8.5 years and Nurenburg Germany for two years. and could never move back. I'll just hang on to the lower crime rate, less stressed living of the country life.

I live in NYC and I'm an avid cyclist, yet I'm in no way anti-car. The subways are festering sewers, but bike commuting is not practical in climate where you get rain. The city is so hostile to cars that I have a long term parking spot in Poughkeepsie, (100 or so miles from home), and only use my car when I, (frequently), visit friends in upstate NY.

I long to build a house out of the city.

I think the reoccurring theme is that car control is only practical and necessary in large urban centers.  Everyone else needs their cars and is happy that they don't live in a metropolis where this is a problem.

Just my thoughts.

I used to live in a place where you didn't need a car to get by. You could walk to the market, to the doctor, museum, department store, bakery, butcher - absolutely everything you needed. If you needed to go a little farther there were excellent bike lanes and trails.

Now that I live in the United States that would be impossible. They don't even have sidewalks where I live now. For America it would take a radical re-design to make car free living work, which I don't see happening.