.

710 Tunnel Forum at the San Gabriel Valley COG's Wednesday Meeting

The SGV Council of Governments meets Wednesday morning to discuss transportation issues and funding, including SR710. There will be time for public comments.

The SR710 completion is one of the agenda items at the San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments transportation forum, Wednesday, Oct. 3, 9 a.m. to noon.  The forum will be held in the Duarte Community Center, 1600 Huntington Dr., Duarte.

Other items include status of various projects, the federal perspective, funding strategies, and future projects.

Scheduled to be present are Barbara Messina, President SGVCOG; Director John Fasana of the MTA Board of Directors; Supervisor Michael Antonovich; Doug Failing, Executive Director, Highway Project Delivery; Congresswoman Judy Chu; and representatives from Countywide Planning, Metro Gold Line Extension, Alameda Corridor East Project, Southern California Association of Governments, and Metro.

There will be a panel discussion and time for public comments.

Ivan G October 03, 2012 at 04:14 AM
Congestion on Pasadena Avenue is only a small part of the problem. Streets in Alhambra and South Pasadena have more serious problems.
GK October 03, 2012 at 04:23 AM
Cost projections for the tunnel have run as high as $18 billion dollars. The entire state deficit is $19 billion. A foreign investor would need to be brought into the project as a funding partner and twould have to charge high tolls to recoup their investment. Who is going to pay $3-15 dollars each way? Seattle is finding that a $3 toll will cause significant traffic diversion onto surface street. If the toll is over $4 no one will use it. California has several toll roads that have failed and sit empty because people won't pay. This would be the largest tunnel in the U.S. iIt would actually be two tunnels running 6.3 miles in each direction. The double decker lanes would be five stories underground with only ladders as the emergency exits. The air pollution concentrations inside the tunnel would be 5-10 times more concentrated. All of the tunnel emissions would be released at the tunnel portals and would sit over the region. The opponents to the tunnel want Metro to study the other options. Heavy rail for cargo and light rail for people are the preferred alternatives. There is also an option that contains over 40 street improvements Metro could do to relieve traffic congestion. This isn't a NIMBY discussion. It's a common sense approach to really looking at the other options that truly will get cars off the roads and deliver air quality benefits at a price that doesn't threaten to bankrupt the taxpayers.
Peter October 03, 2012 at 06:02 AM
Let's finish the freeway above ground like every other freeway in SoCal. If South Pas fights it, then build it right up to South Pas city limits and dump the traffic out right there. They'll be begging us to finish it in a week.
GK October 03, 2012 at 03:50 PM
Metro pulled the freeway proposal off the table along with six other alternatives. Michael Antonovich (Chair of the Metro Board) referred to the seven alternatives as "non-sensical". Metro has yet to concede that the tunnel proposal is "non-sensical." Alll communities and taxpayers of LA County deserve a solution that truly solves a problem and is a prudent investment of public dollars. It's time to invest in greener altenatives (light rail, heavy rail for cargo, bike lanes, traffic lane improvements).
Ivan G October 03, 2012 at 09:55 PM
Excellent idea. Dump all the traffic onto Huntington Drive or Glenarm.

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »