Readers React: Less parking and new housing for 750,000 more people in L.A.? No thanks
To the editor: This op-ed article by Nik Karalis and James Sanders gushes over the possibility of housing for 750,000 new inhabitants in Los Angeles if changes in transportation require fewer parking lots. It ignores the possibility that land for housing will not be L.A.’s major problem in the future.
The problems will be water, followed by sewage for all those toilets and landscaping, electricity for summer air conditioning, and natural gas for winter heating for all those homes and businesses.
Another recent article in the L.A. Times discussed how the reduction in Sierra Nevada snowpack due to global warming will reduce summer water supply by as much as 54% in the next 20 to 40 years, and 79% by 2100. Furthermore, that water supply will peak earlier in the year, meaning our reservoirs will not have the capacity to store it.
In addition, Colorado River flow has been decreasing, and the other states that draw water from the river are growing more assertive of their rights.
David Fink, Los Angeles
To the editor: The writers are delusional. Southern California residents will never give up their cars because they are a necessary part of our lives — and we like them.
Options listed like bikes, scooters, rail and buses have not been working, nor are they very practical. What, did these authors not read the L.A. Times’ own articles on decreasing transit ridership?
As the writers say, eliminating parking lots will free up space to build housing for about 750,000 more people. This would give us more of what we do not need — traffic and misery.
Los Angeles is not New York.
Georgia Jessup, Santa Monica
A cure for the common opinion
Get thought-provoking perspectives with our weekly newsletter.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.