Just a thought

I've been brought up on a dose of wide streets for the grandeur of such boulevards, but so am I a fan of intimate laneways like those found in Melbourne. The 40' local street has always been debatable due to off-street parking by residents that one needs to meander around to reach one's detination.

And then I learnt about transit-oriented developments and walkabout cities; and Peter Newman and Jeff Kenworthy who talked about automobile independence. Personally, I am still two hearts about it because of the need for personal mobility, but I recall the design briefs for houses back home are always for dual parking, and then 4-cars parking would be highly marketable products. 

But what if you took that out of the equation, and increased your usable (Read: Sellable) area by eliminating that car park spaces, and then narrow the streets ==> walkable cities ==> increased density / public domain ==> increased net sellable area ==> profit. But really, maybe I'm being too simplistic about it, because there's always the public realm for activities to consider as well...but... isn't this walkable city a good way to make the enviros and developers happy?

Okay, this is just one layer of thought, there's still many other overlays, but this is a starting point, both sides just have to understand each other's points of view.