Ever since the San Diego (405) Freeway was finished in the Costa Mesa area, we could not understand why the California Department of Transportation did not complete the expansion from the Euclid Street interchange northward to relieve the bottleneck. Now that the plans have been put forth, I am vehemently against Alternative 3 for widening the 405. I do favor the second alternative over the first.

I think the voters who passed Measure M had no idea they would be voting in favor of toll lanes for the 405 between the San Gabriel (605) and the (73) Corona del Mar freeways. After the Orange County Transportation Authority and Caltrans reassured Costa Mesa several years ago that we would not have to go through any further freeway construction, I resent that you are now proposing an alternative that would make us have to do just that.

We use the Fairview Road bridge several times each day and do not want to see it demolished once again after you (OCTA) squandered $7 million of our tax money to rebuild it three years ago. How foolish is that? You seem to have no concern about the efficient use of our money.

Also, Costa Mesa gets no benefit from the toll lanes — they are just a faster way for others to get through our city.

With California in such trouble financially, I would hope that you would drop Alternative 3 from your plans and proceed with alternatives 1 or 2.

Sue Graham

Costa Mesa


Reject Alternative 3

We are writing to provide our strongest public comments against OCTA's proposed Alternative 3 to widen the 405 and install toll lanes. We live on the flower streets in Costa Mesa and this project will impact us. In addition, the city has already added sufficient lanes to handle the flow of the 405 at the 73 (seven lanes). OCTA is only proposing six lanes total.

Costa Mesa already has more than OCTA is proposing. The project makes no sense. There are economic and social impacts to devastating our city for four years with this mess. We want to encourage OCTA to reject Alternative 3.

Phil Lesh

Costa Mesa


Carnett's proselytizing

I've tried to restrain from expressing my frustration with Jim Carnett's columns. But my impatience seems to grow with his all too frequent "cutesy" manner and religious homilies. His June 26 column (Carnett: With summer comes vacation Bible school) starts with, "It's that time of year across the Fruited Plain. Yes, vacation Bible school season!"

Fruited plain? His too-frequent Christian beliefs and ongoing proselytizing is annoying, especially when you consider his past writings. I specifically refer to his April 24 column, "I too was once an atheist (or an agnostic)." The headline alone revealed he wasn't quite sure what he was.

This column, referring to another column by Bruce Gleason on April 14 ("Time to come out, come out"), opened with "Atheists are getting to be as evangelistic as most evangelicals. They seem hell-bent — forgive the awkward reference — to exhort fellow nonbelievers to 'come out' and announce to the world their rejection of divinity."

Well, his niggling mannerisms have provoked me to encourage the Daily Pilot to give equal time and space to atheists, Buddhists, Muslims, Taoists, etc. I would also like to articulate my personal point of view: If one person is delusional, we call them crazy. If millions are delusional, we call it religion. Every religion believes that their book of fables is the absolute truth, and all are wrong. I'd like to spread that across the fruited plain.

I agree with Gleason. I encourage atheists to come out of the closet. You'd be surprised at how many others feel the same.