In addition to making surrounding streets no-parking perhaps there should be some assurance of public transit nearby? If not, no one is going to rent or buy in

In addition to making surrounding streets no-parking perhaps there should be some assurance of public transit nearby? If not, no one is going to rent or buy in that location -- if they can't have cars and they can't use transit easily, then the location becomes unattractive. Question is -- can the local government ensure that? I think one thing everyone is missing is that having the freedom to have cars has an economic benefit that is not easily factored in otherwise. Like in this example, if the location makes in more difficult to have cars, then it's likely that the rents here will have to be lower to attract people. Or in the other example where someone was car-less in Chicago's Hyde Park area -- over a period of time he seems to have optimized to reduce going out because it was a chore. Maybe that is a good thing in the long run :-), but it sort of indicates depressed economic benefits for everyone.