Your original comment asserted that cars are essential for getting around and accomplishing tasks that an average person needs to do. My comment was refuting that assertion. Now you are talking about what constitutes a walkable city which is a different discussion.

> So what are these busses and ambulances driving on, exactly?

Roads. I never proposed getting rid of those! I want to get rid of parking which again, is a different discussion. But it is surely one informed by our original topic which was whether cars are required for daily life.

> I think you are describing lots of places where walkability has been achieved while maintaining perfectly functional road networks.

Of the three I listed, only The Netherlands fits that description. There are disincentives to owning a car there, like limits on parking spaces. I believe true walkability and livability is only achieved when we modify traffic signaling and road infrastructure to prefer pedestrians, transit, and bikes over personal vehicles. Or if space allows, provide completely separate road networks for the modes so there are no conflicts, with more direct routes given to transit, peds and bikes. We also need to remove parking. The Netherlands has done these things.

Pittsburgh and Toronto are not there yet. They are car-oriented cities with a transit system grafted on top. I'd be happy to go into more detail but we've outgrown the original topic of our discussion.