Debate on L.A. Transit Choices
It was refreshing to read the insightful July 22 commentary by Gloria Ohland on the “rail vs. bus” debate. It was another indication that there really are people in this area who understand transportation from a systems concept. It is unfortunate that no one of this caliber has been able to rise to an authoritative position and provide leadership to the MTA projects.
Sadly, I feel that vested interests have so ingrained us with the joys of the private automobile that any meaningful alternate method faces overwhelming odds. Furthermore, efforts to that end face such a fractionalized political arena that a practical, technically feasible project can’t get off of the drawing board. Happily, there is an effort to diffuse L.A. County Supervisor Zev Yaroslovsky’s proposition (“Yaroslavsky Foes Offer Own Curbs on Subway,” July 21). Maybe there is hope.
HUGH A. BARNWELL
* Let me see if I can restate Ohland’s two main points:
* We said if they put in rail lines it would revitalize communities. They did and it didn’t. So now they should provide incentives (give away money) for revitalization so if it happens we can claim that it was rail that did it.
* Too few people ride buses because they are slower and more inconvenient than cars using the same roads. So take away the roads from cars so they are slower and maybe more people will ride buses.