Neon Tommy - Annenberg digital news

South Pasadena's I-710 Gap Fight Roaring Again

Paresh Dave |
February 23, 2011 | 11:35 p.m. PST

Executive Producer

Passage of Measure R has revived a fight against building a tunnel to finish the I-710 freeway. (Gold Line image via Creative Commons)
Passage of Measure R has revived a fight against building a tunnel to finish the I-710 freeway. (Gold Line image via Creative Commons)

Captured by the light-rail line that quietly bisects their communities, many people living northeast of the City of L.A. are questioning why the county's public transportation agency would consider easing a traffic bottleneck with a project more befitting the 20th century.

For more than 60 years, the state of California has sought to complete a connection on a freeway now known as the Interstate 710 from Long Beach to Pasadena. A handful of lawsuits, hundreds of public hearings and millions of dollars in studies later, a stubborn six-mile gap between Alhambra and Pasadena persists. The groups and public officials who back the original vision have eyed one city for halting the project through unwavering resistance and court action—South Pasadena.

“We are hoping they'll come to their senses,” says Richard Katz, a former state Assemblyman who's remained heavily involved in the region's transportation planning.

But the problem it seems goes much beyond a single town—where Trader Joe's is one of the largest employers—and speaks to the mind-numbing difficultly of appeasing L.A. County's diverse, sprawling and gigantic population.

The debate over whether the I-710 should be completed—most likely through parallel 4.5 mile tunnels—has returned this spring with 18 gatherings scheduled by the L.A. County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro). The events are designed to ascertain public concerns ahead of a complete analysis of ways to deal with the gap.

Metro hired two public relations firms to make the meetings more congenial and to engage with community members on Facebook and Twitter. At a meeting last Saturday in Pasadena, about three dozen residents from around the region showed up. There was roughly one organizer for every two attendees.

“It's unlike anything I've ever seen before,” one of the lead consultants, Mary McCormick, said of the outreach effort's breadth.

Residents from Santa Clarita, Arcadia, Pasadena and other cities throughout eastern L.A. County pleaded with Metro to take a more “transparent,” “systemic” and “holistic” approach to planning transit projects. While some supported the idea of extending the freeway, strident opposition from residents in South Pasadena and neighboring cities continued to dominate.

The tunnel as imagined would tear through ground underneath historic homes in a city of 25,000. Locals feel it would disturb the small-town utopian atmosphere that brings acclaim to “South Pas.”

“I've been fighting for a 100 years,” South Pasadena resident Mary Anne Parada said, exaggerating only slightly. “We have been fighting for our very lives.”

Metro's Board of Directors approved moving forward with the project last year. Measure R, a half-cent sales tax increase L.A. County voters approved in Nov. 2008, allocates $780 million to fund a small portion of an I-710 gap project.

If a three-year environmental study finds closure of the gap to be necessary, Metro's board would have the final say in spending those millions. (It's unclear what happens to the funds if a project is not undertaken.) Metro hopes to charge a toll on the stretch of freeway. Such a plan could attract a private company to front the remaining billions of dollars needed for construction in exchange for a share of the toll revenues. The most recent estimate suggests the actual building of the tunnel would cost $3 billion alone.

Two in three county voters approved of Measure R. That may well have been because of the diversity of projects included in it. There were highway improvements, bus pass subsidies, bikeways, subways and light-rail lines. The measure's architects—chiefly L.A. Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa, Metro board member Katz and powerful L.A. public transit advocate Denny Zane of a group known as MoveLA—knew they needed to include both green, forward-looking projects and stalemated ideas such as the I-710 extension to ensure overall passage.

“It was a grand compromise,” Zane said. “We would have rather had all-transit, but we would have never won support.”

Now, in South Pasadena, Beverley Hills and Cheviot Hills, small groups that have long-opposed three of the largest Measure R projects threaten to undermine that same coalition's new scheme to construct those projects faster than budgeted for through a massive loan from the federal government.

Groups refusing to let go of their community's character and public agencies trying to meet regional demands for improved mobility remain locked onto each other. Many would like to see a light-rail corridor or freight-rail tracks supplement the I-710 and fill the gap. Others suggest doubling the number of freight-rail tracks along existing rights-of-way to make it easier for cargo to travel from the Port of Long Beach to industrial hubs in the north and the east.

Katz said the aggressive and open meeting process during the next several weeks would shed greater light on South Pasadena's furor.

“We have to make clear they don't like [any kind of project,]” he said.

The one issue both sides finally agree on is that this bout will be the last.

“You could probably build the freeway with all the money we've spent on studies,” Katz said with laugh.

Reach executive producer Paresh Dave here. Follow him on Twitter: @peard33.



 

Live On Twitter

Buzz

I-5 Bridge Collapses In Washington

The bridge fell into the river after a beam was hit.

Beauty Tips For Your Summer Internship

Neon Tommy breaks down the beauty do's and dont's for your summer internship.

 


Comments

Anonymous (not verified) on February 27, 2011 7:46 AM

Kanabe's 710 B-B-Q Pit:
What the freeway means for us:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w3DA36sXT3A

Your rating: None
JRider (not verified) on February 25, 2011 2:26 PM

Transit advocate here. I vigorously support the expansion of our transit system and generally support the end of freeway expansion.

The 710 Gap, however, is gap in an otherwise comprehensive system of freeways. The rest of the network was planned and constructed with the completion of the 710 expected. Without it, the surrounding network performs more poorly than it should.

The construction of new freeways generally no longer makes sense in the Los Angeles area. The 710 Gap Closure project, however, will involve only a few miles of construction to yield great benefits to many more miles of roadway throughout the area. Every

Your rating: None Average: 5 (3 votes)
YankeeFlasher (not verified) on February 25, 2011 9:26 PM

Need BETTER TRansit ADVOCATES - We have thenm now and will go for MULTI-MODE ALTERNATIVES for FREIGHT and PASSENGERS at about 1/3 costs and completed within 5-7 years...many now available for "Call-For-Projects"

I will do a point-by-point - IN CAPS

Transit advocate here. I vigorously support the expansion of our transit system and generally support the end of freeway expansion.

WE DO TOO AND ARE ALL FOR PARK-N-RIDES IN THE NORTH/EAST PERIMETERS OF LA AND HAVE CONGESTION DISTRICT PRICING OF SAY $20/DAY FOR A CAR PASSING FREMONT/HUNTINGTON DRIVE INTO DOWNTOWN WITH MONEY GOING TO IMPROVED BUS/RAIL TRANSITS

The 710 Gap, however, is gap in an otherwise comprehensive system of freeways. The rest of the network was planned and constructed with the completion of the 710 expected. Without it, the surrounding network performs more poorly than it should.

MANY GAPS EXIST IN THE "SYSTEM"
OLDEST GAP - SR110-I210, SR2 - I405, SR90,91,92, SR1, SR19
SO WHAT'S WITH THE GAP

The construction of new freeways generally no longer makes sense in the Los Angeles area.
FULLY AGREED INCLUDING I-710 NORTH EXTENSION

The 710 Gap Closure project, however, will involve only a few miles of construction to yield great benefits to many more miles of roadway throughout the area. Every
BASED ON REASONABLE ENGINEERING - I10 TO I210 MORE THAN 30,000FT 5+MILES AND LOSING 500 HOUSES IN PASADENA, PERHAPS SOPAS AND ALHAMBRA/ELSERENO

NO GREAT IMPROVEMENTS - NOT ONE CHANGE OF LOS-F AND DUMPING TWO MORE LANES OF TRAFFIC ONTO THE I210 EAST BOUND IS INSANE...PROJECTED LOS F IS FOR THE TUNNEL SYSTEM

Tom

Your rating: None Average: 1 (1 vote)
Interurbans (not verified) on February 25, 2011 12:20 PM

Just because some engineer at Caltrans years ago drew a line on a map does not mean that 50 plus years later that this freeway must be built. Good for South Pasadena for wanting to save their city and the general area surrounding it. Freeways have not always been a good thing for the for the city that is built to “serve” It has been voted on and decided that this “gap closure” is not wanted or needed many times, yet Caltrans keeps reviving it form the dead. This is a huge boondoggle like the Big Dig in Boston that cost many times the estimates and is still troublesome and costing Boston taxpayers millions every year in bond money and maintenance money to keep it from caving in. For less than half the cost of this closure a Heavy Rail line like the Red Line from LAX to Burbank Airports serving Westchester, Culver City, Westwood, Van Nuys and the airports etc. could be built.
Let’s stop throwing money away on this long dead project and put this scarce funding where it will do so much more.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (1 vote)
YankeeFlasher (not verified) on February 25, 2011 8:39 AM

Your article is in many ways off-base.
Nine LACity Neighborhood Councils representing more than 300,000 residents have voted against the SR710North Extension Tunnel in any form and have supported a mutli-Mode system of artieral improvements throughout NELA and western San Gabriel Valley. The MM also provides for more first/last miles vans, shuttles, and feeder buses for really making the transit work. As the 710 tunnel or freeway does not deal with the NE>SW commuters of the 134/210, 110, Colorado-EAgle Rock, Figueroa, Huntington Dr, and Valley arterials all it will do is dump two more lanes of traffic onto the Eastbound 210 at 3-7pm which won't help the situation. The MM would provide equivalent of 3-5 lanes of arterial commuter capacity and perhaps even reduce the congetion on the 110...210 and 10 are hopeless with or without 710.

The included PPP estimate of $3B is error ridden - 21000 ft doesn;t buy anyone anything - and would require removal of 500 houses in LA, El Sereno NOT South Pasadena...get facts straight in the future... Also the Portal $$ do not even cover the costs of excavating 200+ x 200+ x 5000+ft holes in LA and Pasadena for the entrances to the "tunnel". The Tunnel estimate is also without any trucks and thereby who can pay $15 tolls each way to go less than 4mi as included in the $$report.

So your entire article falls apart and was a waste of time for anyone who knows anything about freeways and transport.

Highways don't work anymore but the MTA/Caltrans enigneers and admin want to keep working til they retire.

What ahppens when gasoline and diesel reach $4.50/gal???

Your rating: None Average: 1 (1 vote)
Anonymous (not verified) on February 24, 2011 1:21 PM

I wish all the fat old ladies opposing the 710 completion would keel over already. Seriously, you are already house- if not bed-ridden, what do you care what happens outside your home? Forget the tunnel, which WOULD BE FINE but is a completely pointless waste of money. Raze the houses in the way, pay the people fairly, and give the rest of the state what it wants. To the clueless other poster, connecting the freeway eases congestion by removing the 110 bottleneck, and is an improvement to the entire region. Apparently you do not understand anything in the least about traffic flow control.

Your rating: None Average: 5 (3 votes)
YankeeFlasher (not verified) on February 25, 2011 9:41 PM

FROM A THIN OLD gentleman who has opposed this project for 20+ years...may I object...point-by-point in CAPS below

I wish all the fat old ladies opposing the 710 completion would keel over already.

ACTUALLY THE OLD ONES ARE BEING REPLACED BY YOUNGER ONES WHO ARE TRYING TO PROTECT THE VALUES GENERATED BY 50 YEARS OF STRUGGLE - I WORKED IN TAHRIR SQUARE FOR SEVERAL YEARS AND KNOW SOME OF WHAT THEY WENT THROUGH - CALTRANS/MTA AIN'T MUCH DIFFERENT.

Seriously, you are already house- if not bed-ridden, what do you care what happens outside your home?

AFTER 65 WE DON'T COUNT BUT THERE ARE MANY FROM 40 TO 90 AND SOME EVEN COMING IN BELOW 30...BUT I WOULD RATHER BE BED OR HOUSE RIDDEN THAN CAR RIDDEN - I AM BUS RIDDEN, WE DON'T HAVE GOLD LINE IN EL SERENO BUT WITHOUT THE RIDERSHIP OF EL SERENO/EAST LA BUSES 45, 70, 71, 76, 78, 79, 252, 256, 258, AND OTHERS WOULD NOT BE "PRODUCTIVE" AND WE WOULD CLOGGED THE CAR-RIDDEN LANES OF HUNTINGTON SO THAT THE 40000 CAR/DAY OF LESS THAN 5% MULTIPLE OCCUPANCY WOULD HAVE TO BRAVE THE METROLINK OR GOLD LINE IF THERE WAS ANY SPACE LEFT...

Forget the tunnel, which WOULD BE FINE but is a completely pointless waste of money. Raze the houses in the way, pay the people fairly, and give the rest of the state what it wants.

WE ARE READY FOR THAT ONE IN EL SERENO AND NOW ALHAMBRA FOR THE TUNNEL OR SURFACE FREEWAY

To the clueless other poster, connecting the freeway eases congestion by removing the 110 bottleneck,

THE 110 BOTTLENECK GOES BACK TO THE FIGHT IN THE 1930S WAGED BY PASADENA TO KEEP THE 110 FOR CONNECTING TO COLORADO AND TO FOOTHILL/NOW THE 210...

and is an improvement to the entire region. Apparently you do not understand anything in the least about traffic flow control.

WE DO AND EVEN CALTRANS/SCAGS/MTA STUDIES CANNOT FIND A "SIGNIFICANT" IMPROVEMENT TO LEVELS OF SERVICE AND TALK TO THE DRIVERS ON THE 210 EASTBOUND FOR THEIR OPINIONS REGARDING DUMPING ANOTHER TWO LANES OF TRAFFIC ONTO THAT MESS - EVEN HOV LANES ARE STOP-N-GO/LOS F...

WE DO HAVE SOME WAYS WHICH WILL COME IN TO THE "ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVES" AND FOR SURE WILL BOUNCE THE SURFACE FREEWAY AND THE "TUNNELS"....

Your rating: None
Anonymous (not verified) on February 24, 2011 5:58 AM

This project is a disaster. How does connecting the freeway ease congestion. You are only continuing and already over-crowded highway system through historic small town communities that have shown time and time again that such a project would create havoc. Instead we should look at alternatives such as light rail options and extending freight travel options to get large trucks off of the 710. The tunnel's construction, based on past projects, will no doubt be over budget and fraught with problems, not to mention saftey concerns in a highly active seismic region. Furthermore, the enviornmental consequences of a tunnel and its accompanying "vent" which will spew exhaust over the san gabriel valley are absurd. Take a stand and push MTA to look for alternatives to this terrible project.

Your rating: None Average: 1 (2 votes)

Leave a comment

Name
E-mail*
URL
Comments*