@Lv_InSaNe_vL@Malfeasant I’m happy to limit the ‘no personal cars’ to areas that are 1/4 acre blocks and below. (Remembering that a 1/4 acre block gets back a substantial amount of useful land when you delete the driveway, so blocks all become ‘bigger’ in such a system)
Places that are substantially less dense than that do benefit from cars. But that isn’t that large a % of people, while it is a very large % of the land mass.
They answered that
And truthfully, for a not insignificant part of the country, it won’t be. Population densities just wouldn’t support it.
Basically, because they have no choice. More public transportation is choice.
Yes it’s definitely 100% a reasonable choice for people who don’t even technically live in cities. Absolutely
@Lv_InSaNe_vL @Malfeasant I’m happy to limit the ‘no personal cars’ to areas that are 1/4 acre blocks and below. (Remembering that a 1/4 acre block gets back a substantial amount of useful land when you delete the driveway, so blocks all become ‘bigger’ in such a system)
Places that are substantially less dense than that do benefit from cars. But that isn’t that large a % of people, while it is a very large % of the land mass.
10% of Americans live in towns of under 10000 people.
I wouldn’t call that “insignificant” lmao
@Lv_InSaNe_vL The only person in this thread to use ‘insignificant’ is you. So who are you quoting?
And towns of less than 10,000 people still have a healthy chunk of people living in suburban density.