The end of a long road?
Tunnel proposed as answer to decades-old debate faces its demise
Few Southern California transportation projects have a longer or more tortured legacy than the 710 Freeway.
Since the 1960s, the debate over whether to close a 4.5mile gap in Los Angeles County’s freeway network has raged between preservation advocates in South Pasadena and cities in the San Gabriel Valley, where the 710’s abrupt terminus sends freight traffic spilling onto local streets.
The sparring began again last week, when a Metropolitan Transportation Authority staff report endorsed a 4.9-mile, $3.2-billion freeway tunnel as the most effective way to connect the 710 and the 210 Freeway.
The tunnel, which would be the longest of its kind in California, may effectively meet its end Thursday, when Metro’s directors will consider shifting hundreds of millions of dollars in 710 project funding toward local street improvements.
The plan, if approved, amounts to an unofficial decision on the future of the 710 corridor. Without an estimated $700-million contribution from Metro, the chances of Caltrans funding and building a multibilliondollar freeway tunnel are slim to none, officials say.
“Realistically, I don’t see the tunnel coming back,” said Metro Chairman and Duarte Councilman John Fasana, who introduced the proposal with L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger. “That’s not to say that someone can’t come up with another idea 20 years from now. But this funding will be gone.”
Another Metro official, who was not authorized to speak publicly, described the tunnel’s future as a “fait accompli.”
Fasana, a longtime supporter of the 710 extension, said his proposal was a response to Metro’s staff report supporting the tunnel. He noted that the project has scant political support on the Metro board and a funding gap of more than $2.5 billion.
“I support the tunnel, but after all these years of deliv-
ering no improvements, we owe it to these areas to pursue a different path,” Fasana said. “It makes sense to step away from our pursuit of this and see if there are other solutions.”
The 710 corridor has about $780 million in funding guaranteed through Measure R, the half-cent sales tax increase voters approved in 2008. Some of those funds have already been spent on environmental reviews and other studies.
Fasana’s proposal would allocate $105 million of the remaining funds toward synchronizing traffic lights, new meters on freeway off-ramps and capacity enhancements at three dozen intersections and local streets, as well as incentives to encourage carpooling, transit use and staggered work schedules.
The remaining budget would be dedicated to new “mobility improvements” in the San Gabriel Valley, according to the motion.
The option was among the possibilities included in the project’s environmental review.
Fasana’s proposal is a blow to San Gabriel Valley officials and advocates who have complained for decades that the freeway’s abrupt ending on Valley Boulevard causes health and air problems.
The 710 is a favored route for truckers shuttling between the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach and distribution centers in central Los Angeles County.
Alhambra Mayor David Mejia said the city will weigh its options, including litigation, after Metro votes Thursday, saying: “The tunnel is the best thing for our city. We want our problems to be taken seriously.”
The other options under consideration for the 710 corridor are a light-rail line, a bus rapid-transit route or a variety of tunnel options, including single and twin tunnels.
The so-called traffic demand management plan backed by Fasana and Barger received a lower rating overall than the tunnel options, according to the Metro staff report. Local road upgrades would do little to address congestion on surface streets and would have about the same effect as a tunnel on regional freeway traffic, the report said.