So that argument earlier has lead me to wonder, do people understand that trains do not cause suburbanisation, trains promote dense Walkable environments around stations so that people are able to walk to the train station. There are railroad suburbs yes, but those tend to be much more walkable than the modern american suburb because railroad suburbs were built as towns that connected to larger cities rather than something that wholly relied on the larger city for all needs like a car based suburb requires
Let us compare a railroad suburb and a car based suburb, on the left is Media PA, and on the right is Levittown PA. Both are suburbs of Philadelphia
Levittown was built with the assumption of cars and as a result has little walkability or commercial shops, making it much harder to live there without a car.
Meanwhile Media has a downtown, and functions as its own town, you could live and work here and have all your needs met, making it a much more sustainable and healthy community
Basically my point is trains are not the cause of the issues with suburbs that we see today, but rather a solution, we can use them to redesign spaces to be more community oriented and dense, making the community more sustainable. The idea that trains perpetuate and worsen the suburbs is nonsense to me