3 ms·

Visiting the Leonardo Da Vinci museum, I saw an exhibit where Leonardo did an urban design plan. In it, he made the street level pedestrian only. Under the stre

Visiting the Leonardo Da Vinci museum, I saw an exhibit where Leonardo did an urban design plan. In it, he made the street level pedestrian only. Under the street was another level for horses and wagons (cars and busses today), where each building had an underground entrance to this level through an underground garage. This seems like an elegant solution in an urban area from the man who invented the helicopter, parachute, and painted the Mona Lisa.

pm90 8y ago
Except that it would also be ridiculously expensive. If construction costs reduce in the future due to automation though, might be workable.
- lgregg 8y ago
  It depends where you are, construction costs vary. Sure, if you're building in NYC. They built a tunnel for 2.4 billion. You can build that same tunnel elsewhere for a fraction.
- wahern 8y ago
  Tunneling costs will come down, almost certainly through automated tunneling. Not because of the demands of urban transit, but because suburbia is fundamentally not economically viable unless the cost of running utilities and paving roads drops dramatically. American society is too wedded to suburban culture to move away from it to any significant extent, so sheer necessity will drive technological innovation. It helps that the costs of suburbia are largely hidden, so either the technology emerges or America continues to descend into a paved-over hellscape. Like many things America will end up paying 10x to solve problems with sophisticated, overwrought technology that could have been solved through simple social and cultural shifts, but at least we'll get fancy new tools out it.
- eeZah7Ux 8y ago
  Le Corbusier proposed the very same idea and it's working very well in many asian cities. It's actually cheaper than alternatives and no, you don't need digging.
sk0g 8y ago
Would the more practical version of this not be base level being cars on roads, parkings etc in buildings, and a 'floating' mesh of streets for pedestrians, bicycles etc?

pm90 8y ago

Except that it would also be ridiculously expensive. If construction costs reduce in the future due to automation though, might be workable.

lgregg 8y ago
It depends where you are, construction costs vary. Sure, if you're building in NYC. They built a tunnel for 2.4 billion. You can build that same tunnel elsewhere for a fraction.
wahern 8y ago
Tunneling costs will come down, almost certainly through automated tunneling. Not because of the demands of urban transit, but because suburbia is fundamentally not economically viable unless the cost of running utilities and paving roads drops dramatically. American society is too wedded to suburban culture to move away from it to any significant extent, so sheer necessity will drive technological innovation. It helps that the costs of suburbia are largely hidden, so either the technology emerges or America continues to descend into a paved-over hellscape. Like many things America will end up paying 10x to solve problems with sophisticated, overwrought technology that could have been solved through simple social and cultural shifts, but at least we'll get fancy new tools out it.
eeZah7Ux 8y ago
Le Corbusier proposed the very same idea and it's working very well in many asian cities. It's actually cheaper than alternatives and no, you don't need digging.

sk0g 8y ago

Would the more practical version of this not be base level being cars on roads, parkings etc in buildings, and a 'floating' mesh of streets for pedestrians, bicycles etc?