Having less parking has nothing to do with “living in tiny apartments with barely space”. That doesn’t make any sense and those two things aren’t related at all. You can have less parking - like removing giant surface lots and not having mandatory parking minimums and have space. This isn’t an either-or scenario. In fact, it was the default for many places for a long time. In cities that got a start before cars became dominant you’d see tree-lined streets, beautiful large houses (along with smaller homes, townhomes, apartments, shops, and parks) and backyards for fun. In fact, this is still the default in Europe where so many Americans love to vacation to and talk about how great the towns and cities are.
It’s funny because we would literally have more space if cars and their infrastructure took up less of it. So, in a way you’re advocating for cramming people together.
> People should have backyards with enough spacing where they can have solitude from other people.
> People should live far enough apart that you don't hear your neighbors.
I think that sounds just fine. And you can do that in America today. What does that have to do with living in the city or in nearby residential suburbs?
> That doesn’t make any sense and those two things aren’t related at all
Sure it does, if you have a normal sized house, then you have space in front of the house, on the street where you can park. You also might have a driveway.
And there are no "giant surface lots" needed.
> you’d see tree-lined streets, beautiful large houses
And in front of those houses is a place to park. If the house is properly separated from the neighbor you can even park along the side of the house (if you always put two driveways together from neighboring houses, then driveways save space relative to parking on the road).
> It’s funny because we would literally have more space if cars and their infrastructure took up less of it.
The car is far to useful a tool to get rid of. Why do you think that even people in dense European "utopia car-free cities" still have cars?
I've tried it both ways - I'll never go back. I'll never live in a dense city.
> Sure it does, if you have a normal sized house, then you have space in front of the house, on the street where you can park.
Yes. That’s not really under debate here.
> You also might have a driveway.
You could do that so long as you wanted to waste that space on your lot, but you don’t need that because you can park on the street near your house instead or in your garage behind your house (where the alley is). Personally I’d rather have more green space, or just to have a bigger house since I live at my house and my car is just some random machine that is fine sitting out all day and night in all weather conditions.
> And there are no "giant surface lots" needed.
Right… yet that’s what mandatory minimums and car-first public transit are creating. That’s what we are complaining about.
> The car is far to useful a tool to get rid of. Why do you think that even people in dense European "utopia car-free cities" still have cars?
I’m confused about this statement. Where did I suggest we needed to get rid of cars?
> I've tried it both ways - I'll never go back. I'll never live in a dense city.
I think that’s great! You can totally live in the country. I find it very appealing myself. Just stop the continuous public transit subsidies of highways when we already have more than enough for all future needs for the next 50 years. It doesn’t make sense for people who live 5 miles outside of downtown to have to drive a quarter mile down the road each way to get a gallon of milk. We can’t afford it and we are going to bankrupt ourselves and the planet with this asinine waste of energy. It also has personal benefits for you living in the country because you’ll have fewer people driving.
It’s funny because we would literally have more space if cars and their infrastructure took up less of it. So, in a way you’re advocating for cramming people together.
> People should have backyards with enough spacing where they can have solitude from other people.
> People should live far enough apart that you don't hear your neighbors.
I think that sounds just fine. And you can do that in America today. What does that have to do with living in the city or in nearby residential suburbs?