> As a concrete example: to build a building for 100 people, one must have 100*500 = 5 hectares of space around the building, reserved for a green space only, not parking lots or such.
As others have said this density is just way too low. It's an improvement on the status quo that exists in many areas (low density sprawl with individual private green spaces, but essentially no public green space) but this density is just not good enough to create walkable communities.
The only city I've visited that seems to get this right is Chicago, which has massive tracts of public land that are accessible to everybody by walking, cycling, or public transit.
Not everybody will be able to live right next to a park, but nobody will live very far from one, either.
As others have said this density is just way too low. It's an improvement on the status quo that exists in many areas (low density sprawl with individual private green spaces, but essentially no public green space) but this density is just not good enough to create walkable communities.
The only city I've visited that seems to get this right is Chicago, which has massive tracts of public land that are accessible to everybody by walking, cycling, or public transit.
Not everybody will be able to live right next to a park, but nobody will live very far from one, either.