They're not inherently car-centric. They may often be built in a car-centric way but this is a picture of a few blocks of houses - this kind of housing is perfectly compatible with good bus/train service and safe bike routes.
Can you point to any examples of this type of urban planning that aren’t car centric?
Regardless, it’s not practical to house large amounts of people like this. Providing public transit to a suburban sprawl is far more costly than high density. And don’t even get me started on lawns.
This isn't sprawl, or if it is the photo doesn't show that it is. This is literally just some small, densely packed homes and you can find examples of these kind of homes across the world that are close to train lines.
These homes are neither small nor is what is pictured in any way densely packed. Like not even for a suburb unless you go by purely by post robert moses north american standards
I don't know about the history of these places or anything I just think this circular design greatly increases the efficiency. I should have just linked the pic
Why would you expect them not to have cars? Like, it really doesn't matter how walkable the place they live in is, people with some basic financial stability are probably gonna have cars or bikes.
I don't really understand this reply, like, the fact you can see cars in the picture of the Danish town doesn't mean it isn't walkable or doesn't have good PT. There seems to be a little bit too much space between the houses and, you know, perhaps it is far from a city so who knows, it may really not be walkable, but just seeing cars isn't evidence of that. People won't give up their cars as long as they can afford them even if they live in a very walkable community. There may be more people who chose to do without them but you'll still see many, many cars. They may just drive less. There's many reasons why they may want to still have cars even if the community is walkable/has great PT.
You don’t need cars if you’ve got good public transport networks.
Good public transport will greatly reduce need to drive and poorer/younger people will opt to not buy cars yet. But even in places with stellar PT wealthier and older people have cars, because they're always gonna be far more convenient in some situations. For instance, maybe you don't want to change between buses over and over. Or maybe your knees hurt and don't want to be standing up in a crowded bus/subway. Or maybe you are a woman and you want to avoid getting sexually harassed by creeps. Or maybe the weather is shite and don't want to be outside waiting for buses. Or maybe you want to go somewhere outside the city. People here sometimes overestimate PT and think it is a silver bullet where if PT is good enough then no one will want to have a car any more. That is not the case, it's just that they will use them far less, and specific groups of people will opt to not buy them, but it's not gonna be many of the people who are comfortable or above.
Small and narrow individual gardens are ugly and claustrophobic; a large communal ‘village green’ would be prettier.
No they're not. Small gardens are fine. People want their privacy. They're not comfortable with neighbours being able to see every side of your house and yard.
They're not inherently car-centric. They may often be built in a car-centric way but this is a picture of a few blocks of houses - this kind of housing is perfectly compatible with good bus/train service and safe bike routes.
deleted by creator
Can you point to any examples of this type of urban planning that aren’t car centric?
Regardless, it’s not practical to house large amounts of people like this. Providing public transit to a suburban sprawl is far more costly than high density. And don’t even get me started on lawns.
This isn't sprawl, or if it is the photo doesn't show that it is. This is literally just some small, densely packed homes and you can find examples of these kind of homes across the world that are close to train lines.
These homes are neither small nor is what is pictured in any way densely packed. Like not even for a suburb unless you go by purely by post robert moses north american standards
I actually can, and I say this as a suburb hater
https://www.lonelyplanet.com/articles/broendby-haveby-denmark-from-above
deleted by creator
Oh yeah totally but that model of neighborhood could totally be used in a carless urban or suburban environment
I don't know about the history of these places or anything I just think this circular design greatly increases the efficiency. I should have just linked the pic
Why would you expect them not to have cars? Like, it really doesn't matter how walkable the place they live in is, people with some basic financial stability are probably gonna have cars or bikes.
Why?
oh, well, I'm glad things just are the way they are.
I don't really understand this reply, like, the fact you can see cars in the picture of the Danish town doesn't mean it isn't walkable or doesn't have good PT. There seems to be a little bit too much space between the houses and, you know, perhaps it is far from a city so who knows, it may really not be walkable, but just seeing cars isn't evidence of that. People won't give up their cars as long as they can afford them even if they live in a very walkable community. There may be more people who chose to do without them but you'll still see many, many cars. They may just drive less. There's many reasons why they may want to still have cars even if the community is walkable/has great PT.
deleted by creator
Good public transport will greatly reduce need to drive and poorer/younger people will opt to not buy cars yet. But even in places with stellar PT wealthier and older people have cars, because they're always gonna be far more convenient in some situations. For instance, maybe you don't want to change between buses over and over. Or maybe your knees hurt and don't want to be standing up in a crowded bus/subway. Or maybe you are a woman and you want to avoid getting sexually harassed by creeps. Or maybe the weather is shite and don't want to be outside waiting for buses. Or maybe you want to go somewhere outside the city. People here sometimes overestimate PT and think it is a silver bullet where if PT is good enough then no one will want to have a car any more. That is not the case, it's just that they will use them far less, and specific groups of people will opt to not buy them, but it's not gonna be many of the people who are comfortable or above.
No they're not. Small gardens are fine. People want their privacy. They're not comfortable with neighbours being able to see every side of your house and yard.
deleted by creator