As soon as I saw the story, I improvised this response in the comments section of the article:
"It's very important to remember two things:
1) There are purposes for transit besides traffic reduction
2) Traffic is a function of many things that we could change if we wanted to
Purposes for transit besides traffic reduction include improving the quality of life of those people who cannot drive or choose not to drive, reducing pollution and greenhouse gas emissions, creating new opportunities for badly needed new housing and jobs and giving people real transportation choices besides driving. In cities with good transit systems, traffic congestion isn't as important because PEOPLE HAVE CHOICES about how to get around.
Traffic is a function of many things including the price of gasoline, the price of parking, the amount of required parking spaces for new development, whether or not we decide to price road space, and the amount of money society decides to invest in one mode of transportation or another. There are things we could do to reduce traffic. We could build neighborhoods that mix land uses so that people can walk in them. Basically you have to make it easier to use the alternatives and harder to drive. This is a matter of will on our part.
LA has more than enough road space. What we badly need is a commitment to a multi-modal transportation system that puts the environment and human safety above the ease of driving."