The article has nothing to do with that. It's looking at the development over the past 19 years. This "car centric cities" criticism is beginning to get really old here on HN.
There's also substantial differences in suburbs, and I don't think it has to do with 'car centric cities'.
The suburb I grew up in was car centric but was still much better than the kids of developments i see today. Things are not black and white and exist on a spectrum. Being skeptical of modern subdivision-based development does not mean thinking everywhere needs to be Manhattan. It just means that we should think about adding a cafe, a park, a corner store, a library, etc, and adding things to make it easier when you don't have a car.
I am not, and have never been anti-car. If you look through my post history, you'll even see me criticize attempts by various states to limit the sale of internal combustion engine cars. I own a car and drive it when I need to. I also walk and bike and scooter and wahtever
we can keep our detached homes and cars and cozy suburbs and still have a convenience store in walking distance, I'm sure of it, if local zoning laws allow it
but this subreddit, er I mean website, might as well be r/fuckcars whenever the topic arises
If you loosen zoning, what you’re going to end up with is denser development and less room for cars.
Streetcar suburbs are an example of this. You have more room than living in the core of the city, but you don’t have enough room for 3 F150s for the family.
of coures how the lot is built is different but it isn't size.