Transportation represents a highly salient component of daily life, influencing an individual’s livelihood and activities he/ she can accomplish (Trafas, 2015). The County of Los Angeles has been facing its third big transport crisis within the span of a hundred years. That is, it is the third time in this period that transportation issues have topped the county’s agenda. The crisis has been viewed as a matter of great urgency by concerned authorities and has been experiencing a very high degree of public concern and awareness. Also, whilst the factors contributing to the present traffic crisis have been deemed as akin to past crises’ contributing factors, the reactions of current public policy making authorities differ from the responses of previous policy makers in the sense that, currently, traffic congestion is being dealt with using other means besides major highway expansions (Wachs, 1993). Ever since the past four decades, traffic growth rate has surpassed population growth rate. Though the traffic spurt of the 1920s may be attributed to the introduction of cars and their acquisition by a swiftly growing segment of the population, and that of the 1950s may be credited to suburban development and the pent up automobile demand depressed artificially by twenty years of war and economic depression, the increased traffic congestion during the 1970s and 1980s have been traced back to relatively different sources. Of late, vehicle ownership has augmented to such an extent that one will find two or more registered vehicles for every licensed driver within Los Angeles County (Wachs, 1993).

Most individuals in the US tend to use their private automobiles during the rush hour, for the following two key reasons: Firstly, the major part of the American population resides in areas of low population density which are not effectively served by public transit. Secondly, private automobiles are more private, comfortable, and convenient when timing...

With the growth in household incomes across the globe, an increasing number of individuals have been shifting from the cheaper but slower modes of public transport to private trucks and cars (Downs, 2004). The city of Los Angeles has been counted among the world’s most automobile- dependent cities, second (in America) only to the city of San Francisco, with regard to automobiles for every square mile (2,161) (Newton, 2010). Further, transit in Los Angeles makes up only 2% of overall trips across different modes, thus illustrating private automobiles’ total dominance (Eidlin, 2010).
Transportation network type

A careful analysis of individual areas within Los Angeles may aid one in identifying areas wherein new development ought to commence. Project plans may be formulated in such a way that they concentrate on areas associated with least effect on extant land- use patterns. Furthermore, projects have to support present uses by means of concentrating particular developments within particular regions. For ensuring effective integration of transit into the area, development needs to take into account long- term transit goals. It would be prudent to discourage land- use not in line with goals of transit sustainability to facilitate land- use efficacy maximization. Areas containing employment centers accompanied by high residential population density serve as ideal transit development prospects. With a population of 3.8 million inhabitants in the county (i.e., forty percent inhabitants), development of transit development displays a great likelihood for decreasing traffic congestion. Land- use effectiveness will serve to prioritize transit in highest employment regions, connecting residents with these regions using short, convenient transit trips. Vertical and horizontal development…