> Separated crosswalks aka raised paths inside cities are terrible for pedestrians
I agree, which is why I personally prefer the solution of burying the roads and keeping the pedestrian walkways at what is currently "street" level. That's a major challenge for existing infrastructure, but I've seen more than a few public transportation proposals that have similar "much easier when one from scratch" problems, and I think it's worth designing the ideal before settling for something worse.
> Again, properly designed public transport is faster than cars. You are thinking about public transport in current car designed setting.
No, I'm thinking about ideal public transport versus ideal car transportation. It's not reasonable to compare the best case of public transport to deliberately worsened car transportation and declare public transport the victor. I would love to have public transport that's actually better than the common case of car transportation, but proposals like what you're describing don't go far enough to get there.
I would love to have a world where we have 300km/s trains between every city (major or minor), and automated point-to-pointno-transfer underground transportation within cities. And I'd love to see incremental steps in a direction like that.
What I don't want to see is "if we make cars much worse, we can have public transit that sucks less but is still worse than cars used to be".
Best case of car transport would be if few ppl use it which is achieved by giving priority to public transport and bike paths. If this (car) mode is prioritized, car transport by definition will be a worse experience than an ideal bus because you don't get traffic with the bus.
Burying cars under is a good idea in theory but not that great in practice. It's extremely expensive to do it(and also build all the underground destination infra) and in the end you still will end up with traffic, the difference being that all the drivers will be trapped with their fumes/microplastic tire wear underground.
You don't need to make cars much worse, just make pub transport and bike/pedestrian infra as good as possible and give what's left to cars
I agree, which is why I personally prefer the solution of burying the roads and keeping the pedestrian walkways at what is currently "street" level. That's a major challenge for existing infrastructure, but I've seen more than a few public transportation proposals that have similar "much easier when one from scratch" problems, and I think it's worth designing the ideal before settling for something worse.
> Again, properly designed public transport is faster than cars. You are thinking about public transport in current car designed setting.
No, I'm thinking about ideal public transport versus ideal car transportation. It's not reasonable to compare the best case of public transport to deliberately worsened car transportation and declare public transport the victor. I would love to have public transport that's actually better than the common case of car transportation, but proposals like what you're describing don't go far enough to get there.
I would love to have a world where we have 300km/s trains between every city (major or minor), and automated point-to-point no-transfer underground transportation within cities. And I'd love to see incremental steps in a direction like that.
What I don't want to see is "if we make cars much worse, we can have public transit that sucks less but is still worse than cars used to be".