Letters to the Editor: Massive Vincent Thomas Bridge upgrade isn’t ‘vital’ for the harbors’ future

To the editor: It would be useful for all concerned to note that there are many bridges accessing Terminal Island and the Los Angeles/Long Beach harbors (“A bridge too far? Vincent Thomas plans put Port of L.A. at odds with locals,” Sept. 20).

It would also be useful to note that the goal of bridge construction at the harbor is to move containers to and from their ships. In their collective wisdom, the Los Angeles/Long Beach harbor departments, Los Angeles County and the railroads built a freeway for containers, known today as the Alameda Corridor. This rail channel, parallel to the 710 Freeway, offers nonstop, no-grade crossing access to and from the harbor. Coupled with the enormous improvements to rail and vehicular traffic flow on Terminal Island, the presently underutilized Alameda Corridor can expedite container traffic while reducing the pollution plaguing the harbor area.

Stevedoring and trucking interests, however, have the ear of city hall, shaping important economic decisions in their favor despite the voters’ wishes. We supported the Alameda Corridor with our tax dollars with the hope that it would reduce freeway and bridge traffic. Instead, we see hand-wringing uptown and wild schemes that will cost even more money (yours and mine).

The Vincent Thomas Bridge is not “vital.” It needs to be kept in good shape — and even raised in the long run — but separate that issue from the political actions necessary to truly resolve the harbors’ problems. The tools are already there.

Joe Strapac, Bellflower