Germany's Second Largest City To Ban Cars By 2034

Would you be in support of an automobile ban in your locality ?

  • Yes

    Votes: 0 0.0%
  • No

    Votes: 0 0.0%

  • Total voters
    0
less cars = less oil consumption

idt the powers that be would ever allow this. otherwise we would've been whipping flying cars since the 90s.
 
 
London has already passed a tax for all cars entering the city. It's not that surprising that it would be proposed if a city is facing that much congestion. L.A. has been trying to discourage people from driving their cars for years.
How's the public transportation in LA? I know they have buses but how is their train systems? My friend moved to cali and he said people don't like taking taxis because it feels beneath them.
No idea. I don't live in LA, so I've never taken the public transit, so I can't tell you the quality. However, I took the Amtrak through LA once on a Sunday afternoon and it was without a doubt the worst experience I've ever had. From the time I got on in Santa Barbara it was standing room only to San Diego. Literally no room to move or sit down for 7 hours! and they were rejecting handycapped people from getting on too until the next train 45 minutes afterwards. From the sound of it, that was standard operation too.

But as far as cars are concerned, they're definitely a status symbol in So. Cal. It's not just good enough to have one. If you want to get noticed, you at least need a large SUV, sports/muscle car or luxury car.
 
Last edited:
european cities generally stress more population dense designs (although i can't speak on Hamburg since I've never been there but assuming it is since they want to do something like this).





considering the mass focus from urban to suburban living following WWII, most American cities and municipalities, outside of Chicago, NY, Phila, SF, DC, Seattle (maybe a few others I'm forgetting), were designed to be sprawled out, requiring some form of motor transit.






i really have no idea what I'm talking about...
:rofl: :rofl: :rofl:
 
less cars = less oil consumption
idt the powers that be would ever allow this. otherwise we would've been whipping flying cars since the 90s.

Yup oil companies will fight tooth and nail for this not to pass or ever happen. Same people who pushed la into freeway programs and destroyed our train system.
 
 
No idea. I don't live in LA, so I've never taken the public transit, so I can't tell you the quality. However, I took the Amtrak through LA once on a Sunday afternoon and it was without a doubt the worst experience I've ever had. From the time I got on in Santa Barbara it was standing room only to San Diego. Literally no room to move or sit down for 7 hours! and they were rejecting handycapped people from getting on too until the next train 45 minutes afterwards. From the sound of it, that was standard operation too.
That has nothing to do with Los Angeles and everything to do with Amtrak though. Also, I wouldn't consider Amtrak to be labeled as a form of public transportion in the conventional way that other methods are.
 
i really need to learn to read more...
mean.gif


i missed the key word "downtown." i thought they were going to ban all cars throughout the entire city...had me like 
eek.gif
 thats bold 

doing it for the heavily congested downtown areas makes much more sense than what i thought from my initial reading comprehension fail 
 
I wouldn't say L.A. has discouraged drivers at all, but have finally taken steps to offer an alternative. We aren't a city that's known for our public transportation because of how spread out things are. With how long it takes for a freeway project to be complete we definitely need to take other measures. This is an interesting direction for a major city to go in; I wonder if it will happen.
The city was built based on private transportation. Everything is so far and spaced out.

I'm not sure how feasible a subway system would be since it is earthquake country here.

I took the bus in high school and it was horrible. Travel time for 10 miles was about an hour. This required two buses.

I think this is a problem common in larger states that are not so densely packed like NYC or Boston. I would love to reduce carbon footprints and environmental impacts.
 
Idk if a lot of you know this but we had a small nothing to big type of subway system but was abandon once the freeway was planned. If you dig into it. You can see how corporations killed it.
 
 
 
No idea. I don't live in LA, so I've never taken the public transit, so I can't tell you the quality. However, I took the Amtrak through LA once on a Sunday afternoon and it was without a doubt the worst experience I've ever had. From the time I got on in Santa Barbara it was standing room only to San Diego. Literally no room to move or sit down for 7 hours! and they were rejecting handycapped people from getting on too until the next train 45 minutes afterwards. From the sound of it, that was standard operation too.
That has nothing to do with Los Angeles and everything to do with Amtrak though. Also, I wouldn't consider Amtrak to be labeled as a form of public transportion in the conventional way that other methods are.
Ya, i know it's not exactly the same, but Amtrak is publicly subsidized, so I consider it another form of public transportation. Considering we've been talking about HSR for the past 7 years though, it's not a good look for people when this is the type of service offered.

I think the main reason most people want to take their car (besides status) is because they want privacy too. Otherwise carpools would be more popular since they've been pushed for the past 20 years too.
 
sucks to be on the westcoast

out here on the east coast **** is nice

dc public transportation system for the win

i can get from maryland to virgina with no car
 
Back
Top Bottom