Eliminating car use in cities

[Timsup2nothin]

1) LA had one of the best public transit systems in the country, if not the world as late as the 1930s. This system has been almost-completely eroded over the subsequent 70 years with the introduction of the California State Highway system and later the US Interstate Highway system.

That early high quality transit system probably didn't help either in the long run. LA was still nothing when a lot of major cities in the world were already huge population centers. So even the pre automobile growth of LA was done around light rail that allowed for much more sprawl than most major cities are stuck with. Admittedly those early corridors have seen light rail replaced by highways and cars, but there has never been development in LA that wasn't influenced by a mentality of 'the further the better'.

Of course that pervasive mentality in the development has echoed heavily in the mindset of the populace. I'm a native and grew up with the idea that on a Saturday afternoon a 'hey how about a movie?' spontaneous family outing might easily involve a hundred mile round trip in the car, and if we went out to dinner a restaurant choice wasn't weighted against just because it was thirty or forty miles away. Distance wasn't even brought up as a consideration. Until I was in the Navy I thought that was just ordinary, and was always astounded when someone said 'that's too far from the base', or even just when they asked how far it was...because I never knew, or even thought about it.

Bottom line, shaking LA people loose from their cars will involve completely rebuilding the city.

 

[warpus]

Yeah, Los Angeles is a horribly planned out city. It seems that millions of people are always out on the roads, honking at eachother, swearing under their breath.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Yeah, Los Angeles is a horribly planned out city. It seems that millions of people are always out on the roads, honking at eachother, swearing under their breath.

I wouldn't say 'horribly' planned...it was just planned around a particular technology. That technology was readily available throughout the major growth of the LA metro area, so it would be the hardest place to adapt to life without using that technology.

 

[GinandTonic]

Making mass transit viable in low density suburbs is not impossible. It requires developing fractionally higher density hubs within those suburbs and linking them into mass transit. This is of course massively more expensive than a naturally evolving model where existing villages get a train station then expand with there own suburbs that conurbate but it is possible. Link the lowest value areas with rail. Build medium density flats in the areas you have to redevelop around the stations, with local shops, bars and suchlike. Link the stations with local busses, especially on the orbital routes (as opposed to rails radial routes). If the area really is a car culture then build parking directly around the rail lines at the hubs. It serves the shops as well as the stations and occupies the noise-plagued region.

The higher density flats support the cafés, bars, shops and stations and if those are any good the suburban residents gain local amenities.

 

[warpus]

I wouldn't say 'horribly' planned...it was just planned around a particular technology.

Yeah, but rather badly. Traffic problems in LA are insane, at least when I was there.

 

[luiz]

Yeah, but rather badly. Traffic problems in LA are insane, at least when I was there.

I wonder how average commute times in LA compare to other major international cities. I know this data exists for the US, is there such thing for Europe and Asia?

Edit 2: Found the list I was looking for! The cities with the biggest average commutes:

Brussels, Belgium
Antwerp, Belgium
Los Angeles, USA
Milan, Italy
London, U.K.
Paris, France
Honolulu, USA
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Manchester, UK
San Francisco, USA

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2013/04/25/the-worlds-most-traffic-congested-cities/

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I wonder how average commute times in LA compare to other major international cities. I know this data exists for the US, is there such thing for Europe and Asia?

Edit 2: Found the list I was looking for! The cities with the biggest average commutes:

Brussels, Belgium
Antwerp, Belgium
Los Angeles, USA
Milan, Italy
London, U.K.
Paris, France
Honolulu, USA
Rotterdam, Netherlands
Manchester, UK
San Francisco, USA

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jimgorzelany/2013/04/25/the-worlds-most-traffic-congested-cities/

Unfortunately this listing doesn't differentiate between congestion and distance. Commute time is a function of both. At a guess, the high commute times in Belgium involve spending significant time traveling a short distance slowly, while most commute times in Los Angeles probably average out to something fairly close to a kilometer a minute...or more. My experience is that LA freeways are not really congested as compared to lots of other places I've lived, it's just that people tend to live much further from where they work.

 

[luiz]

Unfortunately this listing doesn't differentiate between congestion and distance. Commute time is a function of both. At a guess, the high commute times in Belgium involve spending significant time traveling a short distance slowly, while most commute times in Los Angeles probably average out to something fairly close to a kilometer a minute...or more. My experience is that LA freeways are not really congested as compared to lots of other places I've lived, it's just that people tend to live much further from where they work.

Yep, same with Houston. People say traffic is awful there, I tell them it's actually excellent. They just live too far away from work. In Rio I used to take from 40 minutes to 1 hour to drive 2 miles coming back from work. Which is why often I would just walk home (even though leaving the car parked at work cost a small fortune).

 

[Timsup2nothin]

I'm almost sure that I have never lived within two miles of where I worked...ever. Under ten would be a very rare exception...if I think of any...but I haven't thought of any yet.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

Please do come to southern California and then tell me how unnecessary cars are. Our public transportation options out here are a bad joke. I had a coworker at my last job who took the bus to and from work every day because he didn't have a car. In a car, it was about 15 minutes from the office to his house. By bus, it took him 2 hours each way because that's just the way the schedules worked.

Unfortunately this listing doesn't differentiate between congestion and distance. Commute time is a function of both. At a guess, the high commute times in Belgium involve spending significant time traveling a short distance slowly, while most commute times in Los Angeles probably average out to something fairly close to a kilometer a minute...or more. My experience is that LA freeways are not really congested as compared to lots of other places I've lived, it's just that people tend to live much further from where they work.

o_O You've been on the 101 or 405 during rush hour, right?

 

[GinandTonic]

I'm almost sure that I have never lived within two miles of where I worked...ever. Under ten would be a very rare exception...if I think of any...but I haven't thought of any yet.

Then blame zoning laws. If you legally mandate housing and commerce to be in separate areas it's not surprising they are.

 

[luiz]

I'm almost sure that I have never lived within two miles of where I worked...ever. Under ten would be a very rare exception...if I think of any...but I haven't thought of any yet.

In Rio it's normal to live near work. A lot of people walk to work, such as my brother. He works about 0.5 mile away from where he lives. Generally speaking, poor people in Rio have huge commutes while rich people have short ones (distance-wise).

 

[luiz]

Then blame zoning laws. If you legally mandate housing and commerce to be in separate areas it's not surprising they are.

That's a good point, but it's not the sole explanation.
Houston has no zoning laws, so it's perfectly legal to have commerce and residential areas together (even in the same building). But a a lot of people just like to live in huge suburban properties, away from everything. It's the American Individualist Dream.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

o_O You've been on the 101 or 405 during rush hour, right?

Yeah...usually for the last fifteen-twenty minutes of my seventy-five minute commute, and still traveling fifteen to twenty mph for the most part...this after most of my commute being done at eighty mph. In most cities I've lived in the rush hour pace of the 405 or 101 would be considered amazingly good flow, and the entire concept of hitting eighty on a freeway other than in the dead of night on a Sunday is totally unimaginable.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Then blame zoning laws. If you legally mandate housing and commerce to be in separate areas it's not surprising they are.

Zoning law in what city? The vast majority of people I know don't live in the same city they work in, so zoning has nothing to do with the situation.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

Strange, every time I've been on the 101 in the evening it's bumper to bumper. I live in San Diego though and only go to LA sometimes for concerts so maybe I've just had bad luck.

 

[GinandTonic]

But developers want to do that to maximise profit, without regard for the long term community of the land they redevelopment. For the last two decades in London developers have had to pay lip service to "liveable mixed use blah bla". And where there have been strong enough local planners, and enough profits to splash around, its been transformative.

Edit - At luiz

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Strange, every time I've been on the 101 in the evening it's bumper to bumper. I live in San Diego though and only go to LA sometimes for concerts so maybe I've just had bad luck.

Bumper to bumper can be rolling along together at a slow steady pace, or it can be sitting in your car thinking maybe you should put it in park and shut it down. LA has the former, many places have the latter.

Note that the next US city on that list is Honolulu. The H-1 freeway runs the length of the metro area, and when I lived there the three miles of it that I traveled every day never broke thirty mph, ever. Maybe late at night it would have, if I'd been out. In three years I am sure I never covered that three miles in a car faster than I could have run it. And that was twenty years ago. I guarantee it hasn't gotten better.

 

[Wolfbeckett]

Bumper to bumper can be rolling along together at a slow steady pace, or it can be sitting in your car thinking maybe you should put it in park and shut it down. LA has the former, many places have the latter.

Note that the next US city on that list is Honolulu. The H-1 freeway runs the length of the metro area, and when I lived there the three miles of it that I traveled every day never broke thirty mph, ever. Maybe late at night it would have, if I'd been out. In three years I am sure I never covered that three miles in a car faster than I could have run it. And that was twenty years ago. I guarantee it hasn't gotten better.

Either way, I think we can both agree that SoCal traffic sucks. I'd be a lot happier if didn't have to commute 35 miles each way to work, but in San Diego you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. There aren't any decent jobs in the areas where it's cheap to live, and I don't make enough to live in the areas where the decent jobs are. So it's commuting as the only option.

One of the only good things about having cancer and going through chemotherapy was that I was allowed to work remotely during that time period. not having to spend 2 hours a day commuting was GLORIOUS. If only my boss would allow me to do that again now that I'm well I'd be a much happier person.

 

[Timsup2nothin]

Either way, I think we can both agree that SoCal traffic sucks.

I don't really agree...

I'd be a lot happier if didn't have to commute 35 miles each way to work, but in San Diego you're damned if you do, damned if you don't. There aren't any decent jobs in the areas where it's cheap to live, and I don't make enough to live in the areas where the decent jobs are. So it's commuting as the only option.

...because I think that is the part that sucks.

The drive itself isn't bad compared to a lot of places, but the fact of life in SoCal is that there are very very few people who have any realistic alternative to commuting by car.