Geography thoughts

It seems to me that the real geographic issue with respect to a car-
free town is the nature of the boundary between it and adjacent 
roadways, and how the town might control this boundary. Any 
neighborhood in an urban core will be both limited and influenced by 
the nature of what surrounds it. 

There is a real sense in which being "car free" is a constraint as 
well as a benefit. Most people (not those here, obviously, but we 
have to think of neighbors who will influence the area) would view a 
somewhat middle ground as optimal. By living near the edge, in this 
boundary zone, they walk out their back door to the pleasant 
pedestrian "car-free" zone (or even drive to it!), and drive out 
their front when they go on a longer trip. Most likely, the car-free 
area itself would not expand beyond its initial development, and 
neighborhood businesses would focus on the boundary, relying on the 
usual road infrastructure.

That's not a bad picture. Such a neighborhood in San Antonio would be 
quite attractive. People drive for many miles to traipse down the 
riverwalk. 

To do something more radical, though, the car-free town must control 
its boundary. It is no accident that the most walkable cities are the 
ones that have boundary limitations imposed by geography. Manhattan. 
Venice. San Francisco. 

Of course, the desire to control the boundary conflicts with the 
requirement to locate this new development where there are economic 
and educational opportunities. The space around metropolitan areas is 
already laced with road infrastructure.

Someone -- maybe on another board? -- proposed somewhere on Vancouver 
Island as a possible locale. I think that would be an almost ideal 
location. The economic and educational opportunities would lie in 
Vancouver, itself a very attractive metropolis, with a very walkable 
downtown. The link would be by ferry, which has two advantages. 
First, a ferry route, unlike a subway or roadway, does not allow 
development between the new development and the metropolis. This 
helps control the boundary, and prevents the kind of "edge 
development" that turns "pedestrian, new urban" towns like Seaside, 
Fl, into tourist attractions within a strip of highway development. 
Second, commuting by ferry is more pleasant and desirable than any 
other form of mass transit. The drawback is that this is a pretty 
wide strait, and I imagine any ferry ride would be an hour and some. 

Vancouver Island is reputed to be quite beautiful. I suspect the 
chief problem would be finding a developable site. All the good sites 
likely are chockful of resorts, B&Bs, and meeting facilities, or 
permanently sequestered as parkland. (I'm just guessing -- I have 
never been to the island myself.)