I feel that there is a categoric misunderstanding here: there is no "natural" conversion rate between "parking footage" and "abitable footage", the claim from t

I feel that there is a categoric misunderstanding here: there is no "natural" conversion rate between "parking footage" and "abitable footage", the claim from the book is just saying "There are a lot of parking! More than you think! The parking surface is bigger than the abitable surface", it is about conveying a sense of scale not about "the ratio is 1.2 but should be 0.7". As you have pointed out it could also means "The car in your driveway has 11 theorethical empty parking spots built for it, maybe there is an overallocation of resources" Some relevant resource might be: https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJp5q-R0lZ0_FCUbeVWK6OGLN69ehUTVa https://www.youtube.com/playlist?list=PLJp5q-R0lZ0_FCUbeVWK6... from Not Just Bikes based on research from Strongtowns