None or few of those options are particularly accessible (EDIT: for people who cannot walk/cycle long distances). Public transportation often is quite inaccessible while still claiming to be accessible (like the London Underground and the New York Subway). Central management of driverless cars could solve the problem in a more inclusive fashion and isn't just more of the same idea. We should still reduce the size of the vehicles, though.
EDIT clarification: Accessibility for wheelchair users, blind people, and anyone with ambulatory restrictions. Most stations are not wheelchair accessible to the train and having to go on much longer routes to compensate is not equal access. And many 'encouraging other use' initiatives block all cars, leaving these people in the lurch. Something that gave door-to-door access to everyone, equally, via a fleet of cars, could be superior.
If we could reduce car infrastructure to the point where only people who need a car for the transportation to be accessible would use it that would be a dream.
I don’t get the accessibility angle at all. It’s a non-issue because you will have a very hard time finding people who have issues with exceptions for accessibility. That would still reduce the need for car infrastructure massively.
The thing is, we need to start building the future right now, right here and massively. That means public transportation centric development (= building public transport to nowhere and letting the area develop alongside the walksheds with appropriate mixed use zoning) and actually being brave enough to re-structure existing solutions along those lines. That all isn’t magic, we just need to do it. We know it works, it doesn’t require any technological breakthroughs.
>> None or few of those options are particularly accessible.
At the moment, neither are self-driving cars sufficiently capable to replace human drivers.
We're chasing a future tech dream when we already have technology that can solve the problems we are facing right now.
Edit: What do you mean by "accessible"? The London underground and generally public transport in the UK works very well. Speaking after having lived there for 15 years, studying and working in London and a smaller town, and never having owed a car.
I can tell you've never tried to use the Underground with a wheelchair, tho if you're questioning what accessible means in that context—because it's really bad. cars are very accessible for those with mobility disabilities & for many others.
I don't use a wheelchair and I don't know about the London underground but I can tell you that public transport in the small town I lived for 15 years were eminently accessible, as evidenced by the continuous presense of passengers with obvious (and varied) mobility issues on them.
In any case improving accessibility on public transport also does not require any new technology that we don't know how to create. It just requires political will.
This is a common refrain, that things must be accessible because you see people with mobility issues using them. But it's not true - the people you see are the people who are coping with it, either all the time or on that day. You don't see all the people for whom it is not accessible. It's well-known in disabled circles that most public transport is hit and miss at best and exclusionary/ableist/injuring at worst.
Actually solving the problem does involve new technology, because the worst cases need door-to-door access and most cannot afford taxis (nor do welfare systems provide them).
What makes it all harder though is the continual fight to persuade every last person that it is a significant problem, because they're so sure it can't be.
Just going with the parent comment and I'm asking when did you last use the Underground and what station do you think has accessibility issues? I found that the London system is pretty much accessible with aggressive retrofitting on older stations, but I'll acknowledge that if you have used it say more than 10 years ago then I understand.
I've used it plenty and still use it. It is getting better in places, but just look at the tube map - large parts of the system still lack step-free access, let alone the problems the system has in other ways (overcrowding and people not giving up their seats or making space appropriately); we should be trying for (in-city) transport systems that don't require such congregation.
The last time I travelled the tube with a wheelchair user with a pain condition, the (non-strike) closures hit in such a way that we couldn't reach our destination without going on a detour that was so long (more than an hour) that the system assumed we'd forgotten to swipe out and back in and charged a penalty fare. The people manning the help-intercoms were unable to assist in finding a route that didn't have closures. And it's normal to have to find alternative, slower routes than the ones everyone else can take.
+1 on London underground being very accessible. Although I only lived there for a few months, it was insanely easy to get around relative to American cities I've lived in (San Diego, SF, DC) although I think Berlin's combination of train and tram was even better
Surely it would be easier to make public transportation more accessible in a non-car oriented city than making driverless cars, which then have large amounts of continuous infrastructure costs, health care costs from less exercise, social costs, and also the fact its still not known if this is even entirely possible.
As a thought experiment, we have no cars other than emergency vehicles and some commercial vehicles occasionally. Everyone is able to walk to 90% of destinations, and bike or public transport the last 10%. It would be easier to have people who can't walk well in small electric personal transport devices (wheel chairs, segway, electric bikes, motorized scooters seen at walmart) that if they crash do not pose any threat to anyone. Surely adding wheel chair accessible elevators to train stops for public transit, is easier than building out entire car centris highway infrastructure that requires continuous expensive maintenance. Public transit and walking is already more accessible to the blind than automobiles, that is a nil point.
EDIT clarification: Accessibility for wheelchair users, blind people, and anyone with ambulatory restrictions. Most stations are not wheelchair accessible to the train and having to go on much longer routes to compensate is not equal access. And many 'encouraging other use' initiatives block all cars, leaving these people in the lurch. Something that gave door-to-door access to everyone, equally, via a fleet of cars, could be superior.