Paolo's first envisioned solution, Mesa City, evolved in his drawings into sketches for mega-cities sans autos he called 'arcologies' ('architectural ecology,' please, not 'ecological architecture' - the difference is important), which made cars w/in the urban form unnecessary. The idea was more than a little radical in an already deeply car-crazed, car-dependent economy.
Cosanti, already a magnet for artists, architects, craftsmen and poets, became a kind of Mecca for social critics, philosophers and idealists. It also attracted people in transition - students and scholars alike. Some of them were activists, in a way, yet for some reason the connection between arcology and transit did not immediately galvanize even transient people into taking that particular bull by the horns, evincing the political will required to effect a collective change in transit policy.
This, it seems to me, is a flaw in the overall plan.