I think this is a great. She came up with her own question and then an answer to it.

There is a picture of it here, with a summary from the book below:

https://secure.flickr.com/photos/justincormack/256217251/

In 1938 the inhabitants started to protest about the rising death toll on Western Avenue, the "Avenue of Speed and Death". They petitioned the Ministry of Transport to impose a speed limit of twenty-five or thirty miles an hour. The ministry said that would be an "ingenious provision" to save lives, but it would be against "the whole object of constructing a road free from congested traffic".

On 21 July 1938 the protestors filed across Western Avenue from the Approach, and then back, causing a huge tailback. The next day the Ministry arranged to build two bridges, one here and one by Gipsy Corner, much to the disgust of the protestors, who thought it would encourage cars to drive faster and to force pedestrians off more roads onto bridges and subways. A week later a thousand people demonstrated again for "their right to cross on the level".

In September the hastily erected bridge was complete, and five hundred people demonstrated against it again. The bridge became a tourist attraction and it was "quite usual to see people from other districts coming to look at it".

In October torchlight processions were held on the road every evening for a week, with a dog with a red light attached to it and four bearers carrying a coffin, and placards saying "We want crossings not coffins".

Sounds legit. In contrast, I have no idea what your complaint is even about.

You're applying sarcasm to the idea of a ten year old?

Sorry, I don't want to sound mean, but

But you do sound mean. Since you don't want to, why don't you edit the meanness out of your comment? It would be easy. Though you might want to do it twice to be sure.

As a bonus, your point would then come across better.

I don't see it as an an insult to the ten year old; it's an insult to all the people pretending it's a unique idea because of that.

Because, that's pointless. You should only stop when someone is waiting to cross at a crosswalk. This is a distinction people forget. Standing at a crosswalk does not mean you want to cross. Furthermore, wanting to cross at a cross walk does not mean you have the right of way to do so.

Regardless of where you live and the laws, these are problems.

With underground streets you could even collect the pollution the vehicles emit and store it instead of releasing it into the atomsphere.

But the huge downside which I have no idea how I could make this practical with is the construction costs. Maybe the first city to do this could get an increase in tourism thus offsetting the costs?

When self-driving cars are common, there won't be a need for street-side parking, which will give more walking area in urban centers. And the lidar navigational system will be far safer for pedestrians, so it won't be a safety issue to mingle cars with people.

1. a circular rotating peripheral parking in which you can get a car (or your car) in around 5 to 30 minutes.

2. incredible discounts using public transport.

3. huge taxes to ride the city by car, except for service transports (taxis, ambulances, distribution, ...).