How does "not enough street parking" creating legal problems? Most of the north side of Chicago is mixed-use, medium-density, and street-parking reliant; it works fine (these are some of the most valuable and economically vital in the city).
there is a common conception in America that there is a 'right' to parking availability, which is not really a thing anywhere else.
in practice, 'not enough parking' often means 'not enough parking, that I am personally willing to pay for, in a location that I am willing to park in'. which could mean anything from 'all the spots are taken within a half mile' to 'I don't really want to pay for a $2 garage one block over because the street parking is free'
There's some sort of idea that everyone has to like what I like. Personally, I dislike paying for parking, and I dislike being in a setting thick with people and buildings... So I'm going to be out in the suburbs or exurbs or semi-rural and not bother you all in the urbs.
Sometimes there is some reason for me to go into the city, and I'll try not to drive the whole way, because it will upset me when I have to pay for parking when I get there. But if that works, I think that's part of the point.
I don’t think this is an issue of everyone needing the same preferences so much as a straight forward economic one. In the US we dramatically subsidize cars.
One of those subsidies is free parking. That preference might not even be obvious if you don’t point out what are negative outcomes from that subsidy (for instance many progressives will demand parking mandates to get housing built, trading 1 real preference, equitable housing for one that they don’t prefer, cheap ice ownership).
Taking parking minimums out of the zoning code is about not hoisting people's desire onto developers and people who buy or rent those units without using it, and requiring car owners to put their money where their mouth is.
