View Single Post
Old Posted Nov 20, 2019, 3:39 PM
Obadno Obadno is offline
Registered User
Join Date: Jan 2010
Posts: 3,961
Originally Posted by Pedestrian View Post
There is a difference. "No parking" means no off-street parking. In most places you can still own a car while living there and park on the street somewhere nearby if you can find a space. Not in this development. You have to foreswear having a car not only on its streets--this is not a single building but a grid of buildings with streets--but those nearby.

But the biggest difference may be that space that might otherwise be devoted to parking cars is not used, as in developments that just don't offer on-site parking, for more housing units but for the sort of amenities one finds in vibrant urban neighborhoods (but not typically in suburban developments): retail, parks and so on.

The analogy in New York, or any city, would be if you marked off a multiblock section of town and banned cars within it. A few cities have developed carless single streets--I've been to the one in Vancouver and San Francisco is about to do something similar on Market St. But not multi-street neighborhoods.
It might be a grid but it is not a big area like I said a glorified apartment building. They are completely exaggerating how "big" of a neighborhood this will be.

People living in this complex will park on neighborhood streets beyond its borders and local businesses will probably jump at the opportunity to sell parking spaces to its residents.

This is not like a European old town its a couple of apartment buildings with walkways/pedestrian mall between never more than a small block from parking and roadways.
Reply With Quote