The graphs at the very end of the plan are the most telling. They are basically admitting that their plan will have almost no impact on average traffic speeds or air quality. It’s pretty sad.

I sure hope this isn’t a missed opportunity. Ditch the Car, Take the Metro has me drooling over the possibilities. And my own experience has changed the way I’ve been getting around lately. With gas prices headed off the charts, maybe more people will take action. It certainly motivated me.

I think that with energy prices in crisis, this issue calls for a serious march. I’ve seen Angelenos come out in the tens of thousands to demand an end to war and in defense of the rights of immigrants, both important national issues, but isn’t it about time we started getting righteously angry about the crises facing our city itself?

I wrote them weeks ago, even before I posted about the Gold Line here on 4/1.

The problem with the various plans is so much of it is going to be LA Centric and leave too much of the LA area out or small area specific it won’t have the impact needed. The major E/W and N/S corridors simply aren’t being addressed and therefore won’t have the impact needed.

The sad part is that is on the books won’t do me any good which leaves me with needing a car, or on show days a light truck (I rent as needed won’t own one of those beasts).

I do support many of the elements and asked that they once and for all take a broad approach to regional needs so it works.

don’t forget to ask for a monorail system.

It could be put in on wide median streets where the Red Car used to run, costs less per mile than light rail/subway/busway, and is faster than surface street busses. Mumbai, India can have monorail by 2010, why can’t Los Angeles?

I also couldn’t find anywhere on their plan that actually said *where* they plan on putting in new bike paths, and if they have any intention of making some major street bike lanes separated from traffic.

Monorails over the rivers. Use that space.