Are Los Angelenos willing to give up their cars? (Los Angeles: apartment, condo)

[BRinSM]

similar to Caladium, I spent some time in my 20s without a car and had no issues. Having said that, my wife had a car, so i had access to that when it was absolutely necessary. I took the bus around for a while, but i found that quite limiting so I picked up a vespa. Although there are inherent dangers with riding scooters/motorcycles, i still feel that they are the best mode of transportation in LA. The weather here is ideal (not too cold, rain is rare), lane splitting allows for much quicker commuting, parking is a breeze, not to mention it's a total blast. my commute changed, which forced me to get a car. then i ended up moving to the valley, so i have since sold my scooter, but i would still recommend it for anyone who lives and works in the city.

[The Illusive Man]

I certainly want more rail options available and definitely want to use them as much as I can. I enjoy living car lite, but at the same time I love having a car and will likely always have one. I enjoy taking road trips and driving down the PCH.

[True Freedom]

I'm striving to live car-lite.. metro when I can, bike commute most days, etc.
However, the transit infrastructure in LA is such that it's not a viable option for most people.
There are goons in Sacramento and in every local planning department that believes if you build high density housing everywhere in LA, that people will begin to walk, bike, transit everywhere.

The reality of the high density housing boom? More cars, more congestion, more strain on local resources (water, utilities), more contention for public space, lower quality of life.

Transit infrastructure needs to be improved first. The best way would be rail, because most people have an aversion to the bus .. however, given the built out nature of LA, rights of way, etc.. rail will never be dense enough to allow most people to live car free.

[RaymondChandlerLives]

Originally Posted by munchitup

My wife had a 2 hour commute into DTLA this morning (accident on the 110). I bet she wishes she would have taken Metro.

I feel her pain, I was stuck in it too.

[hjt123]

Originally Posted by True Freedom

I'm striving to live car-lite.. metro when I can, bike commute most days, etc.
However, the transit infrastructure in LA is such that it's not a viable option for most people.
There are goons in Sacramento and in every local planning department that believes if you build high density housing everywhere in LA, that people will begin to walk, bike, transit everywhere.

The reality of the high density housing boom? More cars, more congestion, more strain on local resources (water, utilities), more contention for public space, lower quality of life.

Transit infrastructure needs to be improved first. The best way would be rail, because most people have an aversion to the bus .. however, given the built out nature of LA, rights of way, etc.. rail will never be dense enough to allow most people to live car free.

Aside from one in Glendale, I can't recall any higher density projects that are being built in areas that aren't served by rail or a future rail expansion.

And sometimes you have to put the cart before the horse. Transit expansion would be a hard case to sell to the Feds because of their ridership quotas if it passes through neighborhoods with low density housing and commercial corridors that aren't conducive to pedestrians, which is so much of LA.

[RaymondChandlerLives]

The more rail transit LA builds, the more walkable it becomes. The more comprehensive the system is, the more people will use it. If you build it (in key employment centers) they will ride.

[K 22]

It's not really about ditching your car. Hey, I live in the city with the largest transit system in the nation and I own a car myself. It's really about having more options at your immediate disposal (in my humble opinion). Yes, the rail transit network in LA isn't large enough to be dependent on but it's still in its infancy, it's still growing and (most importantly) still has to fight / will have to fight a lot of political and environmental hurdles (Ross Store explosion / BHUSD-Century City fight / Orange Line downgrade) to get where it needs to be. But at least there seems to be a priority to expanding it now unlike before.

[True Freedom]

Originally Posted by hjt123

Aside from one in Glendale, I can't recall any higher density projects that are being built in areas that aren't served by rail or a future rail expansion.

And sometimes you have to put the cart before the horse. Transit expansion would be a hard case to sell to the Feds because of their ridership quotas if it passes through neighborhoods with low density housing and commercial corridors that aren't conducive to pedestrians, which is so much of LA.

There's higher density in-fill development happening everywhere in LA... most not served by transit.

I get what you're saying about funding and the cart before the horse and all, but the problem is.. is that adding hordes of new people to LA will only increase crowding, traffic congestion, parking problems.. because the reality is that the vast majority of new residents will own and use cars. More cars == more problems. It's really that simple. The infrastructure needs to be built first.. but given right of way issues, it can never be dense enough to ease traffic to any appreciable degree. So, simply adding more and more people will just make things worse and worse.

[Ceece]

From everything I've heard or read it can be done but it's no way for most people to live for too long. If you set things up exactly right you can be close enough to a store and other services you use, you can be close enough to walk to work or have it be on a bus/BART/train line, you can ignore the weather, and develop habits so that 90% of the time you live within those boundaries. But then you have to visit an offsite location at work, get invited somewhere after work or want to hang out with a friend or hit up some spots outside your bus/BART/train line, or just want to go do some errands and not have it take all day and BAM! You drive again and wonder what the hell you were thinking.

It's possible to live without a car, just not preferable for most people.

[True Freedom]

Originally Posted by Ceece

It's possible to live without a car, just not preferable for most people.

Yeah, it's simply the reality here. I'm definitely of the mindset that I'd like to reduce my impact on this earth. I've invested in solar hot water, I bike commute when I can, I compost, I took a slightly less desirable job because it gave me a local commute, I collect rainwater and have drought tolerant landscaping, have a hybrid and a fully electric vehicle, etc...

But, I have kids and a mother-in-law that lives with us... and it would be highly undesirable for us to live without a car. Because of the car, our kids are able to be a part of soccer, ballet, gymnastics, karate, art, music classes, private school, etc. Without the car, getting all the kids where they need to go would be impossible.. so we'd have to cut out alot of it.

There are people who believe that if we build high density housing everywhere, reduce parking (some newer condos in Santa Monica are being proposed with ZERO parking), crank up the cost of parking, etc... that people will live car-free in LA. That would be great if reality didn't get in the way.