Advertisement

Angelenos want to fight climate change by building more livable neighborhoods. Our leaders need to get on board.

Angelenos want to fight climate change by building more livable neighborhoods. Our leaders need to get on board.
A Metro Gold Line train photographed east of downtown in 2014. (Luis Sinco / Los Angeles Times)

To the editor: The issue isn't that our state climate change goals are too ambitious — our regional and local governments just aren't equipped for the challenge. ("California won't meet its climate change goals without a lot more housing density in its cities," March 6)

In Los Angeles County, our housing market is one of the most unaffordable in the country, and traffic crashes are the biggest killer of children. With the defeat of Measure S and the overwhelming support last November for Measure M's transportation plan, the message is clear: Our families and neighbors want more housing and more walkable communities.

Advertisement

Our leaders need to rise to the challenge.

Jessica Meaney, Los Angeles

The writer is executive director of the transportation advocacy group Investing in Place.

..

To the editor: The way this article talks about high-density housing conjures up visions of sardine tins.

I live in the densest part of Santa Monica, and I don't feel tightly packed. Admittedly, I live in a 17-story tower near the beach, and I think this kind of residence is too high. The Coastal Conservancy was founded to stop development like this.

While denser housing is the way to go, I'd hate to see the canyon-like corridor that exists on Wilshire Boulevard east of Westwood Boulevard spread across Los Angeles. If five-story buildings with some land between them were constructed, Los Angeles would have a lot more housing, and people would not feel tightly packed.

Kay Devonshire, Santa Monica

..

To the editor: A key objection by conservatives in the discussion on climate change is that the measures to fight it often require us to give up some of our freedoms.

Here, the freedoms in question are to live where we want and to drive what we want. The proposals to alter both run counter to our right to "life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness."

I submit that abandoning our fossil burners for already-existing fuel-cell vehicle technology can completely eliminate all vehicular carbon dioxide emissions without requiring us to give up our freedom to live where we wish and drive what we wish.

Show how we can fight global warming and retain our freedom, and you'll get conservatives to listen.

Craig R. Hover, Monrovia

Advertisement

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook

Advertisement
Advertisement