Originally Posted by
2seven0
I need to add that my original response on this thread was not intended as a rebuttal to or a dig against your post as it may have seemed. I was responding to the statement cited in the bill, not your reply which is why I didn't include it in the quote.
Sorry for any misunderstanding.
West
no sweat no bad. los angeles is the 800 lb gorilla in terms of vehicular hegemony. just happy to see that there are potentially significant thought processes involved regarding
other forms of low-tech transportation vs just resubscribing to the same old. i wouldn't say that i'm not appreciative of the particular automotive sway/influence that socal has
exerted for the last seven plus decades. i am and i understand it. time tho for other voices to be heard, believed, planned for and valued vs being summarily dismissed because...
well...cars. the la basin has been full for quite some time. as neighborhoods start to reemerge, so should "small" transportation. the days of living in long beach and driving up to hollywood
for lunch, then over to santa monica/wilshire district for shopping or museums, then down to palos verdes to catch the sunset are (generally) long gone. the new model needs to imagine
freeways still conveying (hundreds of) thousands of people daily but also light rail, subways, buses, bike lanes, ped corridors, scooters to either connect people to that destination
or get them closer. automobiles are both the solution and the problem but are no longer (and should not be) the only factor in the equation.