I don't think 90,000 deaths over two years, which impacted mostly older people, has had a measurable impact on population growth in California.

This is similar to how I interpreted it. I thought he meant that the larger lot sizes means it takes longer to feel like you've gone a distance.

Will this help or make it worse...?

https://news.yahoo.com/california-pr...115448808.html

There should be no gas vehicles being sold new by 2035. So that isn't very aggressive legislation, IMO.

In Europe, gas/diesel vehicles are already in a death spiral, and are now outsold by electric. In five years, gas/diesel sales in Europe will probably be near zero.

If you're buying a gas vehicle today, it will probably be your last.

There is absolutely no way this can possibly be true.

E vehicles have been the #1 seller in Europe since December 2020:
https://www.cnet.com/roadshow/news/e...an%20countries.

The Model 3 is now the best-selling vehicle in Europe.

More important, if you look at long-term trends, diesel will be gone within about five years. Diesel had total market domination until about five years ago, and purchases have collapsed. And auto companies have basically halted any R&D on non-E vehicles, so the gas car you have now basically has everything it will never have.

EV sales have overtaken diesel sales in Europe, but not gasoline. Diesel cars are a fairly large market in Europe so this is not insignificant, but it will be a while before they overtake gasoline.

Well that isn't what you initially said, but yes, EV has indeed overtaken Diesel.

Right, I knew EV overtook Diesel, but EV sales are very far behind Gasoline sales in Europe

I'm not sure what all of you mean by "slow". Fast walking is not necessarily better as you are less inclined to enjoy the street scape and more likely to pushed, bumped, glared at, or cussed at by someone else in a rush. Just the fact that there is street life in a sprawling city like LA in quite few areas is a triumph. I actually think walkability may be increasing in LA from my last visit this March as downtown, neighborhoods near Hollywood/West Hollywood had many walkers. Many cities, especially some of the booming places, have hardly any street life - just cars driving from strip mall to strip mall, and to gated communities and single family houses. In some of those cities, you actually endanger your life if you try to walk in many places.

I may have read too much into his comment, but I thought the gist of it was that people can get places more quickly by foot in NY than LA.

I think it's fairly obvious why people walk faster in NYC than LA. Walking in NYC is a primary mode of transportation and not a leisure activity. If you compare NYC to any other city (globally) where walking is a primary mode of transportation, you'll see that people walk at similar speeds.

I think I know what you mean here, and it has nothing to do with the walking speed of people in LA. It's simply a nature of the sheer size of LA and how spread out the city is. Walking for two hours in a city like San Francisco can get you almost from one side of the city to the other. I recently had a lovely walk from Pac Heights down to the Ferry Building on the Embarcadero. Took a couple hours, and I passed through many distinct neighborhoods, points of interest, parks, etc. Never passed a freeway, and only had to cross one or two wide, busy streets, but traffic around me was never moving too fast.

Contrast that to LA where you can walk for a couple hours and more or less stay in the same area. The vehicular traffic is much more intense, and you're much more likely to encounter freeways. I could walk west from my place in Los Feliz, and after a couple hours still just be in the Hollywood area. Even if you're covering the same mileage, the city is so vast that it makes it feel like you're not really covering much ground.

This image helps show how huge LA is, and how walking there can feel somewhat futile compared to smaller, more compact cities. Looking at this, it's easy to see why this is. The entire city of Boston fits into the greater Downtown LA area!
https://archinect.imgix.net/uploads/...Cformat&w=1200

:previous:

Yes, Los Angeles' municipal boundaries cover a huge area. The length of Wilshire Boulevard is longer than the whole island of Manhattan.

Here's LA proper superimposed over Paris, with Paris proper being inside the Périphérique:
https://media.timeout.com/images/103481145/image.jpg

All the tourist sites within Paris proper are in a tiny area compared with Los Angeles; it's like no WONDER it's so easy to get around Paris by their Metro! It covers a tiny area. Central Paris to Versailles is like downtown LA to Culver City, yet when I first went to Paris, they made it out to be really far, hehe.

And now throw in LA COUNTY or the whole GREATER LA and it blows paris out the water and most cities./

Can you also overlay this map over Manhattan? Just out of curiosity. Manhattan is half the size of Paris proper I believe - so this would be even more pronounced with the same comparison.

Okay, but walking for two hours straight isn't what we mean when we talk about cities being 'walkable.' San Franciscans (and New Yorkers, Bostonians, etc.) living their ordinary daily lives simply do not walk for two hours straight to get somewhere essential. People in walkable cities almost always take a car, bus, train, taxi or Uber to cover that kind of distance, just like they would here in LA.

Yea, honestly. My commute to downtown Santa Monica with the expo line isn't that different than when I worked in downtown Chicago. Walk to a bus stop, take the train, walk to work etc.

I could walk longer in downtown Chicago but I'd have to go out of my daily routine to do it. Most people in downtown Chicago aren't wandering around the loop at lunch or rush hour. They're usually going straight home.

What should LA's real borders be? Sacramento has the same issue with unincorporated areas and LA's Sphere of Influence might be the true borders.

Also, a couple of hours and you're still in the same area?

It's what, 15-20 minutes to walk a city mile for most people? And yes, that's true for LA. I've done it.
So 6 miles.