Huh? Dennis Ling's letter of April 26 has me scratching my head in confusion. He tells us that in the beginning, Caltrans surveyed the neighborhood where he lives and recommended a 12-foot-high wall to block the sound waves from the 23 Freeway.

This wasn't acceptable to Ling because, as his letter reads, he didn't want to block his view. He tells us he organized a neighborhood protest over the recommended height of 12 feet, and they won.

The direct result of their protest was the shorter sound wall that Ling and his neighbors requested.

Now, as Ling stands in his backyard and gazes at the view over the top of his wall, he seems surprised to discover that the sound waves from the freeway are still reaching his ears.

For this, he's putting the blame on Caltrans. He said, "In retrospect, considering the ineffectual wall that now stands, we made the right decision, but they dropped the ball in respect to their survey."

Huh? What kind of logic is that? By his own admissions, Caltrans did survey the site and told them that in order to block the sound waves, the wall should be 12 feet high.

He's the one who insisted it be shorter.

How then could the sound waves coming over the requested shortened wall, against Caltrans advice, possibly be the fault of Caltrans?

In other areas, where Caltrans is allowed to use their expertise and build sound walls to the recommended specifications, they are quite effective. Unfortunately, residents living next to a freeway must decide between views or lower noise levels.

Block the view or block the sound. Those are the choices--and Ling chose keeping the view.

Or you can do what I did and move away from the 23 Freeway. T.L. Hoff Newbury Park