Those things affect urban planning a lot.
But the thing is Street signs and door bells don't take up any space. There's no real benefit in removing them anyway.
Private cars are a big issue but the problem is people commuting from outside the city and shared car schemes are too expensive for that.
Its definitely, imo, to the point where it is becoming a responsibility of societies to provide its citizens access to these technologies because of their utility. That means subsidized / free phones and service, imo. Everyone really should have a baseline of digital access as a fundamental right, hopefully this decade. The COVID relief free cell service in the US I think has been an eye opener for me.
I’d always wondered what would happen if the US had a city with an UGB and very unrestrictive zoning.
And here's a nice infographic comparing the density of LA and New York, if you're interested in more than anecdotes:
https://www.its.ucla.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/2/2014/05/...
TLDR; no, LA is not mostly dense, walkable areas. Very far from it.
This one is a better list https://www.walkscore.com/CA/Los_Angeles
The real honest dense US cities, such as NYC, Boston, Philadelphia, Chicago, and a few others, were built large and dense before the advent of the car, and had entrenched public transportation system before 1930s.
Those that were not as lucky got remade for cars in 1930-1960s, and cemented in that state by zoning regulations.
Europe obviously had a large number of dense cities since medieval times. Even small cities in Europe often ended up dense due to land limitations, and the generally relatively high population density. Cities in the US very rarely faced this limitation early enough, with a few natural exceptions like Manhattan or San Francisco.