I think a lot of cities with truly good public transit developed as walking cities. The population was first, and the transit came after. Not always true - look at Barcelona - but my city (Melbourne Australia) is pretty cleanly defined into the part that developed before everyone had a car (radiating train lines serviced by trams), and areas that came after (radiating train lines serviced by buses, or not serviced at all).
How about we just build apartments?
Would really like more rail. It’s the only reason I’m a bit nimby about apartments, too many cars on the road.
Is there not a strong correlation between apartments and rail? I.e. China, Spain, Korea?
Good point, but is it chicken or egg?
I think a lot of cities with truly good public transit developed as walking cities. The population was first, and the transit came after. Not always true - look at Barcelona - but my city (Melbourne Australia) is pretty cleanly defined into the part that developed before everyone had a car (radiating train lines serviced by trams), and areas that came after (radiating train lines serviced by buses, or not serviced at all).
There’s already enough living space. No need for more infrastructure.
Depends where. Not generally true.