Mooney: Good for a couple of angry letters |

Mooney: Good for a couple of angry letters

Letter to the editor
Letter to the editor

If I lived where Bill Guth lives, I’d be against the Preferred Alternative and the straight shot, too. He thinks another new study by national or international transit experts is needed. That’s good for a couple of angry letters to the editor about the government wasting some six-figure amount on — yet again — another study delaying the inevitable.

His idea of a new three-lane bridge where the old one sits with the center lane reversing direction twice a day comes with consequences. When that white stuff starts covering up the lane markings, people slow down, they don’t know where to go, four lanes become three, and three lanes become two, and lanes often shift left or right.

A new four-lane straight shot being more efficient is the answer. To throw away all of the work analyzing the 43 alternatives for both pros and cons means starting all over again, and that’s a great delay strategy. 

The council should take a cue from Italy: They have banned cruise ships from Venice Lagoon, and that’s the reason why from 7th Street west there should be two lanes exclusively for buses and two lanes for private vehicles, and this configuration exists until either Truscott or Owl Creek Road. That’s about three miles before the bus lanes turn into HOV lanes.

Transit experts know that two parallel systems are best. Whether you ride RFTA or not, know that this valley runs on RFTA.

Tom Mooney