I think that considering it as being 'nannied' is the wrong perspective. Cities are not inherently meant to have cars in them. In fact when cars were emerging a

I think that considering it as being 'nannied' is the wrong perspective. Cities are not inherently meant to have cars in them. In fact when cars were emerging as a transport option people had to be convinced to allow them in cities, since they would frequently run people over who were using the streets as they were designed to be used. We have purposefully made cars a central part of cities and the populations of those cities have suffered a decrease in their quality of life as a direct effect. Between pollution, constant noise, collisions and deaths and congestion, and the taking up of vast amounts of space for something that sits around most of the time doing nothing, cities have become far less livable as cars have been prioritized over people. To call it 'nannying' to backpedal a bit from this design decision is missing the fact that cities are not a natural environment -- they are purposefully designed from the sub-surface pipes and tunnels to the spires on top of the buildings. Nothing evolved naturally -- someone, sometime, decided to design cars into them, and they can be designed out.