For two weeks, I have been hiking in Germany with my sons. For once, not being in a car or on a bike but solely dependent on your own feet to go everywhere changes the perspective on space – urban public space in particular. The public and open space in most places we passed through was of sad quality. I am not talking about cities in the Ruhr area that undergo dramatic structural changes, I am referring to villages and small towns in the Black Forest, one of the main holiday regions in the country in one of the wealthiest and economically most developed federal states.
The entire space is dominated by tarmac from building to building, with the only interruption of granite curb edges – if something like a pavement exists at all. There are hardly any trees in the streets, and cars are parked wherever it seems to please their owners. Often the street surface has been patched and patched again, leaving a texture that occasionally is a welcome change to the uniformity and monochrome appearance of the streets. But it also further amplifies the feeling of neglect and shabbiness these streets radiate.
It seems that the dreadful condition of the public space has an impact on the way property owners seem to look at their own plots. In many places, the plots are covered with abandoned cars, decommissioned agricultural machinery, oil barrels, trailers or just sheet metal or wood. Many of the villages therefore rather resemble a scarp yard than the picturesque postcard place they could be if things were treated better.
My boys blamed all of that on German’s love for their cars. According to the European Automobile Manufacturer’s Association, in Germany in 2022 there were 655 motor vehicles per 1,000 inhabitants.
If we look at the Netherlands, streets and urban space looks completely different. Despite recent news that the backlog is growing, streets are typically well maintained. There is care for green, parking is organized and usually not taking over the entire curb edge, and the overall appearance is that of a much more pleasant space. One might say that’s to do with the love of the Dutch for their bicycles instead of cars. But that is not true. Dutch love cars – even more than Germans do. According to the same source, 1,000 people residing in the Netherlands own 677 motor vehicles. This number becomes even more staggering when considering that the Netherlands have a much higher population density and the majority of the population lives in the Randstad that is very well served with public transport, reducing the real need for a car.
I believe there are three aspects that lead to a much better streetscape in the low lands that are worth learning from not only in Germany but also in many other countries where the design quality of streets leaves room for more.
User perspective: In most developed countries, streets have become the space for cars. They are designed to serve cars, and all other users have to follow that. Curb edges divide the space that’s dedicated to the motor vehicle from the space left for all others. Usually, that space takes up 70% of the surface available in a street. But the land take of cars does not stop here. Technical rules and regulations define all kinds of spatial requirements that only add to their space hunger. Traffic islands, curve radii, left and right turn lanes, traffic signs, surface materials and many other requirements and installations not only eat away even more space, but they also create total visual dominance of car infrastructure. If you dare to use such a street as a pedestrian or a cyclist, then everything stops your movement for the benefit of smooth car traffic. The perspective in Dutch street design is different. Here, people off and on bicycles are seen as users with – at least – equal rights and needs. Consequently, sidewalks are wider, cyclists can enjoy dedicated paths and the smooth movement of those two user groups through the city often is prioritized. Technical rules and the choice of materials differ significantly. Bike paths are in a rusty red colour, pavements are usually covered with tiles and not paved with tarmac and the street in most cases is much greener. All of this is a direct consequence of a change in the user perspective that leads to an entirely different experience that by the way also increases traffic safety.
Political decisions: Often people think that the bike network the Netherlands have nowadays has been there ever since, but that is not true. Bikes were popular until the 1950s, but then gradually got pushed out of cities by the proliferation of the motorcar, as they did in any western country. As a result, in the 1970s, many children on bicycles died in traffic in the Netherlands. This reached a point where parents started campaigning for better road safety for their minors, who – unlike grown-ups – did not have a choice but were forced to take bicycles to school and to see friends. This protest was so successful, that is lead to a change in political thinking. From then on, safe cycling routes were promoted and they have since. Promoting cycling has a lasting effect on the political decisions in relation to cars, especially in cities and towns. Car mobility is not the priority any more. Instead, the most efficient and most suitable means is promoted. That is often the bicycle – but not only: public transport and – simply – walking are other means that enjoy preference over the cars. Since they all need space, the room that had been given to cars initially is gradually reduced. Amsterdam reduces the amount of parking spaces in the city by tens of thousands. Parking in inner city locations is prohibitively expensive for visitors, discouraging driving into the city and instead incentivizing to leave the car at home or park at the outskirts and use public transport of bicycles to get to the center. Even the beloved parking spot in front of the own house is not sacred. The former mayor of Rotterdam, Ahmed Aboutaleb, stated that he does not see it as a basic human right to have a parking space – making a case for centralized and concentrated parking where this is desirable.
Design method: In Germany and in many other countries, streets are designed by traffic engineers. They have been educated to use and apply the technical manuals. The consequence is that streets in these countries look like engineering works. They lack any inconsistency, and they solve every engineering challenge at the expense of space for others. In that view, anything that does not meet the technical requirements defined in the road design manuals is a problem. But that is a flawed definition of problem, since the problem that the engineer has in complying with norms might not be a problem for the pedestrian using the pavement there or the tree that has been growing there for 5 decades. It all comes down to finding the balance between the naturally competing interests of the different users of the street, nature and those using the space under or above the surface for utilities. To design a street, it therefore is necessary to bring all the protagonists on board that represent the diverging interests. Street design should not be an engineering task to start with, but the task to design a linear public and nature space, done with the same care and attention as square and parks are designed. This asks for multidisciplinary teams led by urban designers that integrate all the different aspects and negotiate their relevance.
One can say that all of this is not needed and that German streets just look different and there is nothing to complain about. But that position falls short of the challenges we have for the future. Climate change will force us to take a different approach by unsealing surfaces, adding more green and creating new habitat for animals. The good news is – it can be done in two or three decades. Streets need an overhaul every twenty to thirty years. Therefore, if we start now, we can get it done by 2050!
by Markus Appenzeller
