Advocacy & Safety - Visions of an ideal cycling road

Unlimited money, unlimited resources; what would your ideal cycling road for commuting be? How would it be implimented and why would it be better than what we have today? How would it integrate or segregate from other traffic? Would you put the emphasis on safety or efficiency?

Word: This is dreamland here. No discussion about feasibility; we're going for the stars. Also, vehicular cycling can be part of the discussion, but as a cycling technique only; no ideologies. We don't need another facilities/segregation/bike lane debate here.

xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx

My idea:

I was thinking about this from another thread, and the idea of bicycle corridors, with the streets given over to cyclists (another's idea) started to become appealing. A network of such streets which would make all points of a city accessible by bikes and only intersect "car" oriented streets at controlled intersections would make cycling much easier and more prevailant as a form of transportation. In a city center area, one street every 4 or 5 blocks in both directions could be given over to bicyclists and pedestrians. It would have the dual effect of decreasing incentives for cars in the city center and increasing incentives for cyclists and pedestrians. I think something like this has been tried over in Europe already, with some success.

In a more diffuse city, this can be implemented as well. Smaller city streets can be converted into all bicycle and pedestrian streets; a few in each direction. The traffic controls don't have to change much and it might be even easier to do than in the city center. Small streets in a diffuse city don't have much impact on car travel and can still serve as a bicycle corridor, so the effect would be to increase cycling and pedestrians (though distances might be a deterent for pedestrians), and it will not have much impact on cars.

Most of the problems stemming from MUP's (Multi-Use Paths; which are kind of like bike corridors) is that the intersections are very small and have no traffic control. This creates the intersection conflicts which make up most of the danger of an MUP. The rest of the danger from MUP's is the limited width, making pedestrian/cyclist interferences more common. Adapting full size roads as bicycle and pedestrian corridors will solve both of these problems.

Isolated bike hiways crisscrossing the city in a similar fashion to auto hiways. These bikeways would have onramps and off ramps very much like auto hiways. Cyclists would be able to use these at their top speed to maximize the efficiency of their mode of travel... i.e. no annoying stops at intersections (none) thus no loss of inertia.

These would not be MUPs, but would be for bikes only.

Couple this concept with streets laid out so that there are boulevards for autos interlaced with ped/cycling boulevards. Thus motorists have access to "every other block" and cyclists/peds have direct access to the "other blocks." At worse, one (either motorist or cyclist) may have to walk a block (on a sidewalk) to a desired destination.

Parking lots would exist for bikes, and for cars, but these would be separate.

One way to do this would be to dedicate surface streets to humans, and subsurface streets to powered machines. Motorists arriving from out of town would enter a tunnel system that would lead them to the nearest parking structure to their destination.

The surface areas could be built on the motorist parking/roadways.

Throw in mass transit to move the peds and you have the whole concept.

Hey, you said dream...

ideal for commuting?

downhill both ways.

a road without cars

banish all cars from the city. perfection.

An extensive network of bike-only paths with overpass/underpass construction at intersections with motorized traffic.

Genec, I like your idea of putting the cars underground – wouldn’t a city look better without parked cars all over the place? Quieter too.

My ideal cycling road would not be shared by cars. I know what some of you are thinking, but no, that's not why.

When I ride on a bike path it just feels so sensible, so much more civilized. Not loud and dirty, clanky, large and lumbering. Riding a bike on a bike path in a city just seems sensible--the right tool for the job, quiet like sailing, friendly, human. The cars take away the quiet, friendly, human part.

So, my ideal would be much like genec described. Completely separated bikeways with onramps and overpasses and other structures to facilitate getting around the lumbering beasts and the smoggy streets.

But rather than even/odd the car/bike streets I would tuck the bikeways behind, around, above, below, and in whatever little empty places exist. An added plus is when it's possible to make the bikeways visible to those sorry, sad folks stuck in traffic in their cars. They could gaze over at all us happy cyclists tooling along at top speed with envy.

As for where to locate them, much of the time there are roads easily travelled to get from house to town. But there may also be a bike path that takes a different route, maybe along the creek, behind the houses, next to the beach, through a park, etc. That's where I'd put all these bikeways.

If you'd like to see an actual city dominated by bike traffic you should visit Isla Vista, the community next to UC Santa Barbara. Bikes basically take over the streets and car drivers have to eek out a position among them. Bikes never stop for stop signs, but the drivers know this so they always wait. Many streets are blocked at one end so that car traffic cannot go through. But the objects blocking the streets allow for bikes and peds to go through easily. Where the bikes start to accumulate heavily on campus, they use roundabouts on the bike path to control major bikeway intersections. Sidewalks are never confused for bikeways. Pedestrians wait to cross the bikeway, knowing they would be in mortal danger were they to expect any bikes to stop for them. They never dare to walk on a bike path. It's just not done. Certainly Isla Vista isn't perfect. There are some difficult intersections where cyclists often get hurt, but they are in the places where the bikes haven't taken over the streets.

Maybe if there were enough bikeways in our hypothetical city there'd be so many cyclists who would decide to simply take over all the rest of the streets like they do in Isla Vista. Drive the cars away. Make them wish they could get out of their lumbering beasts and do something as sensible as riding a bike.

My ideal would be something along the lines of 20mph speed limiters installed in all vehicles. These would deactivate on freeways and allow motor traffic to proceed at the speed limit for that road (depending on conditions, this would vary). All lanes would be wide enough to share and all traffic (including motorized) would have to stay right unless passing. This means that on a flat/downhill road, cyclists with enough speed would be easily passing motorized traffic.

Because motorized vehicles are limited to such low speeds, their horsepower would only be sufficient to achieve those speeds. Thus, on uphill sections, they would crawl at around 2-5mph depending on the size of vehicle. You could still own an H2, but it would go uphill at 1mph.

Honking/yelling at a cyclist would get you a $100 fine, half of which would be given to the cyclist. Yeah, I like that last idea a lot.

Covered bike lanes for all-weather comfortable commuting.

Word: This is dreamland here. No discussion about feasibility;

In that case...

A complete underground road infrastructure for motorists, who never get to see the light of day. Cyclists/peds get the surface streets.

Cyclists/peds get the surface streets.
And motorcyclists! We dirtbikers, crotch-rocketers, and cruisers are the faster brethren of bicyclists. :)


But seriously, banning motor vehicles from a city would not work - how would businesses operate? How would goods be delivered? My ideal cycling road would:

be repaved once a year to get rid of all potholes and cracks
have wide outside lanes
have separate lanes for left & right turns

In a dreamland with unlimited funding and resources I would go for motorist/cyclist/pedestrian education without changing much of the existing infrastructure.

I feel like I spend half my riding time sitting at red lights, and that's on routes that I've already optimized to avoid such things.

Highways for bikes it is.

http://www.tourdafrique.com/photo_gallery_index.htm

:D

But seriously..

I think that my ideal vision of an ideal cycling road would have to do with the road and the people driving on it. I live in an area where I can go ride on really nice wide roads with more than enough space to share between cars and cyclists.

The problem?

Drivers. I feel that driver education is really needed. A lot of drivers feel that these are 'their' roads and they are very kind about letting us cyclists know that (buzzing, cursewords, forcing off the road).

In addition, even the ones who don't have malicious motives just don't have a clue (however, this is irrespective of cyclists, there just seem to be aggressive bad driving all over this state). Behavior that would result in a minor fender bender to another driver can be very serious for cyclists (changing lanes with no lights, jumping stop lights, turning left across ones path with no indicator etc). The same kind of stupidity I encounter cycling is the much the same that I encounter driving.

Within the city of Boston which is pretty dense, I feel that bike-lanes (that are not in the door zone) and enforcement of things like drivers straddling bike lanes, parking in bike lanes etc would help. At the same time I feel that cyclists who break the law (ride down one ways, jump lights etc) should also be ticketed.

I know that what would work for certain parts of Massachusetts may not work for all of Massachusetts or the rest of the country. I have been to other parts of the country where every road seems like a 55MPH highway with no side streets or smaller streets.

I really think the ideal thing is to integrate cyclists and motorists. The idealistic part for me (you said, "shoot for the stars") would be wide lanes and slow-moving traffic, with speeds closer to the average speed for motorists. For example, on my commute, the motor traffic approaches speeds of 40 to 50 mph., but the average speed is more like 25 mph. (I have timed it driving.)

With motor traffic tooling along at 30 mph., the overtaking traffic would approach me at about 10 or 15 mph., quite safely and comfortably. And the truth is that everybody would still get to work in a reasonable time.

As far as the bike paths are concerned, as long as they have limited intersections and pretty (and safe) surroundings, those can be very nice. Yet I have a soft spot for cruising through neighborhoods with "character," too.

:)

I think I'd keep most of what we have but add more of it. MUP's in my dream would have nice overpasses to deal with intersections. I'd also like to see secure bike storage at all commercial, institutional and government destinations.

Please keep in mind that I am responding to the request for dreams. I am in no way actually advocating for these types of expenditures or impositions on businesses.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v510/brendantaylor/carlane.jpg
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=167724&page=1&highlight=pictures

I have two different roads on my commute that approach the ideal for a bike route. 5 lane road (centre lane for left turns) with WOL, no parking on the street and very few cross streets. Traffic speed is sometimes around 40mph. The other is the Lachine canal bike path, which has underpasses at all street crossings. The only trouble with this is the traffic density on summer afternoons and weekends. Elimination of on street parking and street edge storm drains would make most streets good cycle routes.

No cars, stoplights, curb cut outs, pedestrians, or broken pavement. Just mile upon mile of smooth uninterrupted riding.

Good ideas people! My question is to simply get people to open up their minds and get out of the VC/anti-VC arguments we get so focused on. No need for the "shoot for the stars" disclaimers either. I specifically said to shoot for the stars.

What this does is it brings out people's real concerns about cycling, free from the constraints of implementation. What I am seeing from the 19 people who responded so for is that most of our arguments really have to do with what is practical, not what is best. Now, issues of practicality are important, but what is best guides what is practical. It has been said many times that one of the most restrictive elements of the human experience is our own psycological barriers. This thread is to get people to break this wall down.

Parting thought: Did Henry Ford ever think that his dream of "a car for every person" would ever come true? Or was is just a pot shot at the stars. Well, guess what. He set the stage for his pot shot at the stars to come true, and it nearly has; the whole world over.

I am a carfree radical, I guess, but i really don't expect no cars. A few people do need cars, but only a very few in urban areas. In my utopia, busses would share special lanes with a few private automobiles, allowed to individuals who really need them, like handicapped parking stickers are regulated now. The bulk of the roadways would be reserved for bikes.

But in the real or present day world, the one attainable dream I have is for pavement that is safe and comfortable for riders. No more potholes, washboard pavement or unswept debris.






What this does is it brings out people's real concerns about cycling, free from the constraints of implementation. What I am seeing from the 19 people who responded so for is that most of our arguments really have to do with what is practical, not what is best. Now, issues of practicality are important, but what is best guides what is practical. It has been said many times that one of the most restrictive elements of the human experience is our own psycological barriers. This thread is to get people to break this wall down. Good plan, Brian. If I understand you correctly, you want "bike people" to dream big, to actively propose real changes in our infrastructure, maybe even in our economy. Now is a good time to move, since rising oil prices may be beginning to provide the impetus for changes in these areas.



Parting thought: Did Henry Ford ever think that his dream of "a car for every person" would ever come true? Or was is just a pot shot at the stars. Well, guess what. He set the stage for his pot shot at the stars to come true, and it nearly has; the whole world over

Usually social change is not planned for; it seems to happen sui generis, in an "organic" fashion. All Henry Ford did was perfect a manufacturing process, first, and begin paying his workers high enough wages that they could afford to buy the cars they were building. He probably didn't know that his efforts would launch not only the automobile age, but also the age of the working middle class or the consumer class. Ford's later attempts at deliberate social engineering (from anti-Semitism to mandated morality for workers to teaching square dancing to Michigan's schoolchildren) were pretty bizarre and pointless.

My ideal would be something along the lines of 20mph speed limiters installed in all vehicles. These would deactivate on freeways and allow motor traffic to proceed at the speed limit for that road (depending on conditions, this would vary). All lanes would be wide enough to share and all traffic (including motorized) would have to stay right unless passing. This means that on a flat/downhill road, cyclists with enough speed would be easily passing motorized traffic.

Because motorized vehicles are limited to such low speeds, their horsepower would only be sufficient to achieve those speeds. Thus, on uphill sections, they would crawl at around 2-5mph depending on the size of vehicle. You could still own an H2, but it would go uphill at 1mph.

Honking/yelling at a cyclist would get you a $100 fine, half of which would be given to the cyclist. Yeah, I like that last idea a lot.


Maybe the future will bring such speed controls... I question why any vehicle has to do over 45 within the actual bounds of the city. In my area for instance, there are city surface streets marked at 50, 55 and even 65MPH. In ALL cases these same roads are paralled by freeways, so the high speeds on surface streets should NOT be needed. Many of these same routes are also the only way for a cyclist to connect to other areas. None of these areas are pleasant to walk, simply because of the noise of motor traffic accelerating from lights to get up to the ridiculous speeds.

Back to what I was saying about the "speed controls..." why not hybrid vehicles that run on electric motors in city and are power limited by those motors. Then when these drivers hit the hiway, the vehicles switch to higher power fueled engines. This would help keep noise down, reduce emmisions in the cities, and control the speed within city bounds. At the same time, the long trips between cities can be done at high speeds on the interstates. The current hybrids may allow just this sort of thing to happen.

In that case...

A complete underground road infrastructure for motorists, who never get to see the light of day. Cyclists/peds get the surface streets.

Bravo... I didn't think you would "play."

And motorcyclists! We dirtbikers, crotch-rocketers, and cruisers are the faster brethren of bicyclists. :)


But seriously, banning motor vehicles from a city would not work - how would businesses operate? How would goods be delivered?

speed limited electric vehicles for these services in the city... see post 22.

What I am seeing from the 19 people who responded so for is that most of our arguments really have to do with what is practical, not what is best. Now, issues of practicality are important, but what is best guides what is practical.
I am a cyclist who uses his bike to get to work, travelling about 2 hours a day on the road. I am also a motorist who uses his car for other business, and my wife and children use the car to get to work and school. Therefore, what is "best" for me and my family is to integrate cyclists and motorists. I want to use the same streets with my car and my bike. I stand by my previous quote:



I really think the ideal thing is to integrate cyclists and motorists. The idealistic part for me (you said, "shoot for the stars") would be wide lanes and slow-moving traffic, with speeds closer to the average speed for motorists. For example, on my commute, the motor traffic approaches speeds of 40 to 50 mph., but the average speed is more like 25 mph. (I have timed it driving.)

With motor traffic tooling along at 30 mph., the overtaking traffic would approach me at about 10 or 15 mph., quite safely and comfortably. And the truth is that everybody would still get to work in a reasonable time.

As far as the bike paths are concerned, as long as they have limited intersections and pretty (and safe) surroundings, those can be very nice. Yet I have a soft spot for cruising through neighborhoods with "character," too.

:)

I don't think I'd want a bicycle freeway, restricted to bikes only. I like riding through changing scenery and neighborhoods, and speaking to people sometimes. I think the worst thing about my occasional out-of-town car trips is the long hours on a monotonous freeway.

This is a great thread! For me it really is riding without automobiles all around me. But I'm not keen on sharing my ideal cycling road with Ipod wearing joggers, baby strollers, roller bladers etc. I don't mind seeing them off on their own little stretch of pavement colliding with one another just for the entertainment value but for me a nice smooth stretch of pavement with plenty of room to pass and be passed by other cyclists would be great.

There are sections of rail trails I've been on early in the day before they are crowded with the pedestrian set that wind into New England towns and link with quiet village streets that are amazing and often give me that utopian "world without cars" feeling that I really love.

And I could almost retract my nice smooth pavement requisite because some of the most extraordinary cycling roads I've been on have been unpaved fire roads in deep wilderness. So for me it really is the sans car experience.

Sorry guys, but the ideal is the teleporter road. No roads, no cars, no cycles, no pollution and no wait.

Just me and my teleporter with built in GPS. :) ;))


If need to move closer to reality, HOV lanes with physical barriers except for at merging points restricted to only cycles.

If want to encourage more biking, have a special lightweight signal generator that when attached to a moving bike, will set traffic lights as green for the approaching bike, except when another bike already has priority, in which case it would have second priority. Cagers waiting at red lights for high priority bikes to clear the intersection. How's that for generating a "I've got to get that" response?

my ideal road is, as has been said by many others, a car/pedestrian/intersection/stopsign-free bike freeway. good luck making that actually happen though

my ideal road is, as has been said by many others, a car/pedestrian/intersection/stopsign-free bike freeway. good luck making that actually happen though

Some sections of the bike paths beside the Los Angeles and San Gabriel rivers come pretty close. E.g. very rare pedestrians, impossible to have none as if a bike can get in a ped can for sure.

But you left off one other feature. It has to go where you want to go.

In a dreamland with unlimited funding and resources I would go for motorist/cyclist/pedestrian education without changing much of the existing infrastructure.
+1

In a dreamland with unlimited funding and resources I would go for motorist/cyclist/pedestrian education without changing much of the existing infrastructure.

Well since it's mostly motorists killing motorists out there... let's start with them.

I haven't had time to post on this yet (busy work week!) but I have to say I already have several streets I use that I consider ideal cycling streets. Well, ideal with less snow, anyway.

The Queen Elizabeth Driveway. As an NCC parkway, no commercial vehicles are allowed. One wide lane in each direction, few intersections, traffic is moderate and at moderate speeds. Trees on one side, trees and heritage buildings on the other. If I decide I want a carless experience there are parallel MTUs, including some along the historic Rideau Canal. Great ride.

Conroy Road. Big road, 2 or 3 lanes per direction. Wide, clean, well marked bike lanes. Turn lanes at all important intersections. While not scenic enough to be a "nice" ride, its a great and hassle-free way for high-speed cycling.

Finally the NCC pathway system - runs through most areas of Ottawa, travels through beautiful greenspace, and is usually well maintained. Can get really busy during peak hours, though.

To be honest, the only cycling roads I find less that "close to ideal" are the ones that see heavy and/or fast traffic while having neither bike lane nor parallel pathway.


PS - how could I forget? The western Ottawa River Parkway, which has two full lanes closed to cars and open to bikes only on Sundays mornings during the summer.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v510/brendantaylor/carlane.jpg
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=167724&page=1&highlight=pictures

Bump.

In dreamland it would be downhill in every direction, cars would be made of sponge and be speed limited to 2 mph, the roads would be lined with victoria's secrets catalogue models offering me a slice of pizza with one hand (double mozzarela ofcourse) and a cold brew with the other hand. They would be so impressed with my ability to do front wheelstands at 50mph with fully loaded panniers that they'd all want to date me.

My skin would be totally immune to road rash, my legs would put out 2,000watts for days at a time nonstop and my tires would never puncture.

I have no idea what this has to do with advocacy & safety

I specifically said to shoot for the stars.
Ohh! I thought you said, "Shoot the cars!"

I guess me and Dick are both in the dog house.

Already have the ideal cycling road - Beach Drive in Washington DC on a weekend.
30 foot wide, paved, no cars, little cross traffic, wooded park setting.

Here is one my favorite routes, The road on the left gets used by the hammer heads and lycra lizards, Those of us wanting a more visual experince use the path. with a few miles of breaks this trail continues west almost 50 miles with an adjacent signed on-road route

Picture is from today, 61 degrees! a record.

http://home.nycap.rr.com/richboat/path1.jpg

I think just dedicating significant amounts of pavement specifically for bicycles would be a big plus....every four lane could become a two car lane two bike lane roads with parking, buffers, etc. and good intersection planning. Give us a full travel lane and the rights to use the rest of the road whenever necessary as well or when there are no preferential lanes.

They'd be the untimate HOV lanes, HPV lanes bypassing all the motorized congestion.

In dreamland it would be downhill in every direction, cars would be made of sponge and be speed limited to 2 mph, the roads would be lined with victoria's secrets catalogue models offering me a slice of pizza with one hand (double mozzarela ofcourse) and a cold brew with the other hand. They would be so impressed with my ability to do front wheelstands at 50mph with fully loaded panniers that they'd all want to date me.

My skin would be totally immune to road rash, my legs would put out 2,000watts for days at a time nonstop and my tires would never puncture.

I have no idea what this has to do with advocacy & safety
Makes lots more sense and has more to do with safety and advocacy and real world usefulness than dynamic alpha dog yapping or steely eyed staredown techniques.

I like this, velo.
http://home.nycap.rr.com/richboat/path1.jpg

How would goods be delivered? My ideal cycling road would:

be repaved once a year to get rid of all potholes and cracks
have wide outside lanes
have separate lanes for left & right turns

I'll add to this: Speed limits set to 30mph. Busses, delivery trucks permitted in urban center, but some restrictions on cars, perhaps 2 per car unless with permit.

As to an ideal city - as pointed out above, all motor vehicles underground. High speed bicycle roads
(i.e. with proper light controlled intersections) and sidewalks for peds.

Al

A road on which gas stations charge the actual price of gas
(http://www.distributiondrive.com/Article4.html).

Okay, I'm going to take a bit different track on this one. I'm going to dream of what we could do in the future, not just be confined to what is here today. So here are my "bullet points" for a bicycle lifestyle:

--Cars confined to the outskirts of all major cities. Transport to shopping areas would be either via light rail, bicycle, or walking.

--Roads would be normal sized (now for cars), but that 8 feet either way would be for bicycles.

--Whenever a bicycle/pedestrian road went across a car road, there would be an overpass/underpass so the two did not interact. Pedestrian areas would be wide too. This is important for pedestrians in major centers too. There needs to be an engineered way for pedistrians and bicycles to get over major roadways without interacting at all with the autos below. I have seen these work in places like Hong Kong, and they would be wonderful here.

--Roads for cars would all be one-way, with different routes into and out or the city outskirts.

--Paved paths, with a minimum of 6 feet wide, would be made for pedestrians and bicyclists in residential areas. These would connect major shopping centers, schools, theators, etc. Walking would be encouraged for the entire population.

--In critical areas, especially where there are disabled persons, powered walking surfaces would also be provided so those with mobility problems would be accomodated.

This is what I can think of right now. Perhaps other factors will come to mind later.

John

In that case...

A complete underground road infrastructure for motorists, who never get to see the light of day. Cyclists/peds get the surface streets.

Actually it would make more sense to put bicyclists underground. No rain, snow. Plus when cars are put in tunnels, the air has to circulated on a more regular basis.

Actually it would make more sense to put bicyclists underground. No rain, snow. Plus when cars are put in tunnels, the air has to circulated on a more regular basis.

Ahhhh... let em choke.

OK, there is a practical aspect to what you say... but the flip side is that motorists are "caged" anyway... don't need sunlight and fresh air... and their headlights will easily light the way down in the caves.

Cyclists and peds need sunlight and fresh air. Riiiiiiight...

Oh well... it was worth a try. Putting peds and cyclists in a climate controlled envionment with lots of skylights does make more sense... it would encourage year round walking and cycling. But the "caves" would have to made such that there was lots of natural light and gardens and such, so they would not feel so cave like. Actually a number of cities do have underground malls and walkways already.

My ideal cycling road is about 32-40 feet of asphalt, no striping, posted 25-35 mph max, no on-street parking, and no debris. Sharing with cars is just fine. Stop signs and red lights, if present, are only at the tops of hills, never at the bottom.

-Steve Goodridge

My ideal cycling road is the system of frontage roads and highway shoulders that cyclists use to get from the top of San Gorgonio(sp) Pass down to the outskirts of Palm Springs. Forty+ MPH tailwinds, 1-2% downgrade, and often zero traffic. I coasted 26 miles in one hour with no pedalling. Next would be either side of Loveland Pass. On the west side I peaked at 45MPH with a full touring load. On the east side I was able to take the outside land and pass a semi that had not been allowed to go thru the tunnel.

On the serious side some of the fantasy roads already exist. They are called freeway shoulders. Six to eight feet wide with no cars and a tailwind from the passing motor vehicles. Once you get west of Kansas most of the states allow cycling on freeway shoulders where there are no reasonable alternatives. I have used large chunks of I-15, I-80, I-76, I-70 and the 101 in California. A friendly California Highway Patrolman stopped me in the Mojave Desert in Baker. Said he had seen me earlier and wanted a closer look at my recumbent. He said he was not worried about cyclists that far out. "They know what they are doing. Once we were called about a cyclist going the wrong way. Turned out to be a developementally challenged boy who was lost."

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v510/brendantaylor/carlane.jpg
http://www.bikeforums.net/showthread.php?t=167724&page=1&highlight=pictures

I like the look of this!
:beer:

The ideal solution? Cost not an issue?

Bury the cars. Dig tunnels beneath all streets and force cars down there. Access tunnels at frequent intervals to get access to the cars from the streets. Lifts at some points to get cars up and down. Where tunnels are highly impractical or even impossible, motorised traffic should be banned.

Let bikes (and emergency vehicles) have the regular streets, narrowed down slightly to allow for wider sidewalks.

In addition to that, public transport should occupy the "top" layer. The only kind would be electric trams (maglev, if practical), running on several parallel, multi-directional tracks on a raised structure above the regular streets. Access from street level would be via regular stairs and lifts (for the elderly and the disabled).

This is actually perfectly doable in most places, but car people would never accept it, so it will never happen, of course.

I live on this one.