Box Office Review: American Teens Are Morons
Will This Go to Trial and Move to L.A., too? BART Cop Smashes Drunk Guy's Head through Window
Books for L.A. Nerds: Saints of California
Map of the Day: Outdoor Skating Rinks in Los Angeles
Shag's New Show 'Autumn's Come Undone' at the Corey Helford Gallery
Governor Arnold Scwharzenegger last night vetoed a bill that would have limited the options of completing the 710 Freeway, which is considered the missing link of the regional freeway system, according to the L.A. Times. If signed, the bill would have stopped any possibility of a surface route, therefore increasing chances of a 4.5-mile tunnel under South Pasadena, connecting to the 134/210 freeway exchange.
"There is absolutely no need to enact statutory restrictions that would mandate certain project design options or remove others from potential consideration," Schwarzenegger said in the veto letter. "In addition, several properties belonging to the state would be subject to sale for less than fair market value as a result of this bill, resulting in the loss to the state of hundreds of millions of dollars."
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
The tunnel would not automatically go under South Pasadena or Pasadena, nor would it automatically connect with the 136/210.
Soil testing (cores & sound waves) in 5 areas (encompassing all of NE Los Angeles: Eagle Rock, El Sereno, Highland Park, etc) and statements from those overseeing the tests AND Caltrans both speak to 5 areas under consideration.
The various permutations would include the tunnel connecting (somehow) with SR2 in the Eagle Rock area, and other less-than-direct freeway connections. In various meetings in effected communities local residents/concerned parties were told that they HAD to consider all options (5) and no practical issues had even been considered (where it starts, where it ends).
The bill the governor vetoed could have allowed the State to take control and override all usual procedures (EIRs/EISs).
The tunnel as considered does not include ANY safety features (venting&cleaning air from the tunnel, special fire control devices, etc) so 'estimates' are woefully underdeclared.
Even at that, planners say the City/County/State/other towns could not afford the bill (some of the money WOULD probably come from the last voted approved MTA funding bill) and the Feds would not kick in enough either. Hence, they are looking at involving private industry (think: selling the parking meter franchise?) and repaying the costs with a toll.
Most of the traffic generated on the 710N is coming from the harbor, i.e., import containers on big trucks [who would supposedly pay high tolls to avoid the 5 through downtown] and if it dumped it on the 2 it would still require transition south to the 5 or north to the 210/134, all said freeways are already at their max. Bypassing downtown LA on the 101 or 5 is not the be-all end-all solution to commerical truckings problems in Los Angeles.
Cedillo who authored the bill is going off to Denmark (?) because "Cedillo, for instance, wants to engage officials on shipping issues in Denmark, because that country's ports do a lot of business with the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach" (Dan Savage, Cedillo's chief of staff). While Maersk/Sealand have a large presence in the LA/LB harbor, there are no ships which bring cargo directly from Denmark to LA/LB. Cedillo is also going on a fact-finding trip to Spain because they have a lot of tunnels. Perhaps there are also tunnel-drilling companies in Spain who want to be BFF with Cedillo?
The main groups who would benefit from the tunnel (and it would have to be two tunnels/one 'tunnel system') would be: Caltrans, construction companies and tunnel companies. Yes there are people who would like to have a direct route from the 710@60 to Pasadena & Glendale. Funny thing, Glendale City Council has already voted against the tunnel idea...
The focus of those opposed to the tunnel is alternate transportation options for both cargo and passengers (rail, light rail, etc).
I'm not an official spokeperson for any of the groups who oppose the tunnel, but since I am a LAist reader, I wanted to comment.
At a recent conference to determine the most necessary infastructure concerns (for stimulus funding, etc), this potential extension of the 710N was not even on the list.
South Pasadena doesn't need additional protection from a ground route, they already have that. The rest of it is smoke, mirrors and more big business+politics.
There is a website with more info and links:
http://stopthe710.org/
thanks for listening/reading.