To the editor: What is the difference between residents of Malibu who want to deny the public access to the beach and homeowners along Beachwood Drive near Griffith Park who want to deny the public viewing access to the Hollywood sign, another tourist sight. Absolutely nothing. Both are selfish and intent on preserving only their right to visit these tourist attractions. ("In the forefront," July 7, and "A path of lost resistance," July 3)
Both state that there is not enough access for emergency vehicles.
Both claim increased traffic and congestion.
Regarding the Hollywood sign, former Los Angeles City Councilman Tom LaBonge had a vista point cleared of brush for fire prevention, so those neighbors keep citing increased traffic and narrow roads. Fine.
That sign was there long before most of the homeowners bought their homes.
The trail and the park and the drive belong to the public. And that means public access. Period.
Murray Levine, Encino
To the editor: Surely the most puzzling aspect of the battle between residents near the Hollywood sign and thronging tourists is why anyone would travel from a distance to peer momentarily at nine giant white letters stuck into the dirt near the top of a barren hill.
Bill Canup, Westlake Village
To the editor: If only the new Expo Line had gone to Malibu rather than to downtown Santa Monica, where we tens of thousands of residents are forced to endure millions of beachgoers, tourists and other visitors annually.
Rather than fine property owners for restricting beach access, perhaps the California Coastal Commission should pay us for the enthusiastic, unbounded hospitality that our city council and planners think Santa Monicans want to extend.
Bruce R. Feldman, Santa Monica
To the editor: It's great that the rich now must allow the rest of us to use the beach.
But the pathways to the sand aren't much good without adequate parking.
What insider info is needed to find a legal parking spot along Pacific Coast Highway?