Evening star., 1962-10-16
Rubber VS.. Roll

The generaliZed conclusions OF the
Meyer-Kain- Wohl report, which was
commissioned by the White House as
an aid in the development of national
urban transportation policy, should not
be interpreted as the last word on the
perplexing transit problems Of the Wash
ington area. It's cautious and objective
findings on the merits of express bus
operations as against massive rail rapid
transit systems nevertheless have a
particular pertinence in view OF the
forthcoming recommendations OF the
National Capital Transportation Agency,
and it is no wonder that this interesting
study has created great interest in local
planning circles.
Essentially, the view of the three ur-
ban-expert authors (none of whom has
a vested interest in one form Of urban
transportation over another) is that
American cities today are too blithely
prone to conclude that modern high
ways ruin cities and that extensive rail-
transit systems are essential to save
them. Their studies indicate Ito their
satisfaction, at leaSt) that SubwayS not
only are more expensive than express
buses which would provide the same
service on exclusive freeway lanes, but
that they are proposed on the question
able assumption that large numbers OF
commuters would use them. This, in the
view of the report, ignores the element
of "free consumer choice" in our soci-
ety-that the human freight" involved
might well choose, for reasons OF its
own, to pay the higher price Of using
automobiles. In any event, 1t proposes
that cities, before investing in expensive
rail systems, consider an alternative
capable of operating efficiently at
relatively low density, and with consid-
erable ubiquity and flexibility." One Of
it's studies showed that in only few
cities do the evening peak-hour traffic
volumes leaving the central business
district exceed 10000 persons. Actually,
it said, "250,000 persons per hour easily
could be accommodated in buses using
only eight lanes Of street or highway,
and 10000 could be accommodated
using less than five lanes"
On the subject of the much-ma-
ligned Los Angeles expressway system,
the report produced statistics showing
that while Los Angeles freewayS are
severely crowded, their use has substan-
TALLY reduced congestion and utiliza-
ton of paralleling arterials and has thus
significantly improved general traffic
flow" It added:
Another assertion often made Is that
freeway construction can under mo circum-
stances catch up with urban growth and the
expansion of automobile ownership. and that
therefore the construction Of rail transit IA
cilities is an absolute necessity. The point is
illustrated by pointing to the congestion exist
ing on urban expressways during peak hours.
.. . The observation that as soon as the
freeway is open it invites more traffic is
certainly correct. The conclusion that 1t re-
suits in the same pattern OF congestion and
delay on larger scale is just as certainly
incorrect.
All of these comments, we think,
tend to support the Washington Area
Mass Transportation Study Of 1859,
which proposed balanced system OF
freeways, express bus service and new
rail transit. It preserved the element OF
1leXlDlIlGy, 1Or cAdIuplc, III pAOpOSAIS
that the median strips Of several new
freeways, reserved initially for express
buses, might be converted later to rail
transit use when and If the demand
arose.
The National Capital Transporta-
tion Agency has interpreted its legal
obligation, however, to be the formula
ton of an entirely new scheme. In the
process, and most unfortunately so, its
attack on highways has contributed to
a rubber-verSus-ral SchiSm which may
seriously have jeopardized both forms of
transportation. The recommendations of
the 1859 report in regard to the neceS-
sity for certain amount of rail transit
were persuasive. In its proposals to the
President next month for an expanded
rail-tranSit program, however, the Meta
will have to take full cognizance Of the
questions raised and the conclusions
reached by the Meyer-KainW Wohl report.