710 tunnel issues

The extreme faction in South Pasadena still opposes any solution to the 710 controversy. Most South Pasadena residents opposed the surface freeway option because of the damage to their community. South Pasadena has spent over $14 million in legal fees to feight the surfacea route.

Now a compromise is offered, which tunnels under South Pasadena, leaving intact and unharmed, and the extremist faction still wants to fight on? The tunnel will be paid for by tolls, and financed by foreign investment, freeing up billions of local funds for Transit. Just the opposite of the argument of this writer. Local traffic will actually be reduced, but some extreme "freeway fighters" apparently like crawling down Fair Oaks? So let's not look at this alternative and spend more monies of lawyers to protect us from the boogey man of the 710

It is time for more individuals to speak out on this critical issue. The only solution is an increase in public transportation options and routes as there is no solution for traffic without a decrease in the number of cars in the road. This extension will just create more congestion at a monetary and enviornmental cost that the San Gabriel Valley cannot afford.

Then just shove the South Pas residents out of the way and extend the 710 to the 210 on surface streets, as has been the case for residents of El Serreno, East LA and Inglewood amongst other "poorer" cities with freeways going through those communities. Why accomodate South Pas "special" residents with a tunnel? For heaven's sake...enough with this older than me battle...Contemplating this issue alone is expensive

The time is well overdue for the gap to be closed and the freeways connected.

Just pave over South Pasadena and be done with it! Selfish Nimby egoist have been ruining SGV traffic since 1969.

yes, let CAL Trans finish buying up those silly lil houses and move(the gems) and bull doze the rest (rocks). make it a proper freeway. i would not want tobe stuck in a tunnel for an hour. not even 20 minutes. awful. take those homes and be done with it. i cant beleive that this issue has persisted since the 60's.

it makes sense. even if you think it does not.

the 5 cut east los
the 105 cut thru south LA
let the 710 cut thru where it needs to.

we dont get adequate public trans
we dont get adequate roadways

why such favorism for s. pas and pas?

they got the gold line before ELA, which they rallied against, and now they get to block movement for the whole region?

boo!!!!

Don't include Real Pasadena with south pas. We were all for the Gold Line, SoPas tried to block it even after it was completed!

The Last time it was put to public vote Pasadena voted 70% to complete the 710.

Boycott South Pasadena! Residents have twisted any plan for a traffic solution since 1950! They complain about smog and traffic and bi-secting their little community. Phooey! Much of their smog comes from traffic sitting and idling on the I-5. The prevailing winds come from the south.
They used to have a state highway run through town on Fremont, Huntington and Fair Oaks. The state should re-instate that highway and do as they did in Santa Barbara... stop cross traffic for 5 minutes at a time to allow through traffic to move. Santa Barbara relented to improvements to Highway 101. Santa Barbara is a far more fancy and deserving area for special favors than Mini-Pasadena. No ramps for South Pasadena! Let them remain the little back-water community that they wish to be.

Time all traffic lights in adjoining communities to back up traffic into south pas. Station traffic enforcement from other cities at all egress routes from south pas for enhanced enforcement.

What an absolute waste of money.

By the time this thing is built, gas will either be so astronomically high so as to reduce vehicle use by half, or carpooling will become MANDATORY.

I don't live in South Pasadena (I'm an ALhambran), but I fully support their No on 710 stance. I know first-hand what a freeway plowing through a community can do (even IF this thing is underground).

Here's an idea...since the oil industries were responsible for killing mass-transit in L.A. way back when, how about taxing the oil companies to fund these projects?

I mean what's a couple of billion dollars to their record-breaking profits they've made since BushCo. and his Merry Robber Barons took over?

...why should I as a taxpayer fund a bunch of selfish, one-person-per-vehicle idiots? Just for their convenience?
If you really want to end the traffic mess, make sure your local politicians stop kowtowing to developers by saying NO to high-density and retail projects.
Want an eye-opener? Go to your city hall and ask to see the campaign contribution records of your councilmembers.
I guarantee they were bought and paid for by developers.

1) Would you like to be stuck in a tunnel in traffic for up to (or more than 1 hour)?
2) South Pasadenans "elitists"? Pro 710'ers want to charge you a toll to use this tunnel - this on top of the nearly $4/gallon you're currently paying to drive your car. Hey, what about those people who can barely cover gasoline expenses? Do they get to use the tunnel for free or pay a discounted toll? Otherwise, isn't this tunnel a form of elitism? You can only use it if you can pay for it.
3)$3 billion?$10 billion? What happens if these estimates are significant underestimates, as they usually are? Are you still going to be cheerleading for this stupid project?
4) Are you concerned about the infrastructure of your public schools?
5) Are tired of your kids and you having to sell pies, giftcards, and chocolates to help keep your schools' music and sports programs intact?
6) Are you tired of your kids not having adequate textbooks, books for your schools' libraries (including journal & magazine subscriptions), computers and internet access in their schools?
7) Are you tired of driving over potholes in your city's streets?
8) Would you like to have more cops, firemen, or paramedics on your city's squads?
9) Would you like your public library to be open more hours and have more books?
10) Can you think of any better ways to use $3-$10 billion than to build a tunnel to connect 2 freeways?
Can a tunnel be built to merge these 2 freeways? Yes.
Would YOU want to have a tunnel dug under your city's streets? And, these "exhaust stacks" ought to enhance the health and beauty of your city and its residents as well, eh?
Personally, I would never drive through a tunnel unless I absolutely had to, e.g., the tunnels near LAX, in the mountains, etc. And, I certainly would not pay a toll for the opportunity to drive through one either. We do have earthquakes, and I fear ever being trapped in a tunnel during one.
AND, I cannot imagine how much pollution you'll be sucking in while driving through this tunnel, esp. during rush-hour traffic.
Bad, bad idea.

don't complain about traffic you make worse. pave so pas over and connect to both the 210 & 110.

It doesn't matter what they say south pasadena doesn't want the 710 to go thru period. the traffic and environmental arguments are just red herrings for their nimby-ism. Be honest and tell the rest of the SGV to go F*** themselves and don't pretend you care about anyone or anything else.

stop the excuses wrote:

... don't pretend you care about anyone or anything else.

With such talk as pave over So. Pas., force the freeway thru So. Pas., and your name calling, who and what, by chance, are you pretending to care about?

south pas or bust wrote:

don't complain about traffic you make worse. pave so pas over and connect to both the 210 & 110.

That's just it: I am NOT complaining about the traffic, you are.

And ANOTHER thing- wrote:

...why should I as a taxpayer fund a bunch of selfish, one-person-per-vehicle idiots? Just for their convenience?

If you really want to end the traffic mess, make sure your local politicians stop kowtowing to developers by saying NO to high-density and retail projects.
Want an eye-opener? Go to your city hall and ask to see the campaign contribution records of your councilmembers.
I guarantee they were bought and paid for by developers.

I agree with you wholeheartedly. You won't, however, be able to trace the money that is currently lining these politicians' pockets, or the larger sums to follow once they've rammed this project down So. Pas. residents' throats.

There are a couple of idiots on the So. Pas. City Council that I am directing this comment to. Hint: One ran and lost for a higher office just a year or two ago. I guess he believes that HIS (self-) interests will be served by having the freeway running under the city. Freakin' sell-out -- always have their agendas.

end the madness wrote:

Time all traffic lights in adjoining communities to back up traffic into south pas. Station traffic enforcement from other cities at all egress routes from south pas for enhanced enforcement.

This is a great idea! The public interest is definitely served by political action/statement! I'm sure all the commuters will be equally thrilled to participate in this!

John Hedblom wrote:

No ramps for South Pasadena! Let them remain the little back-water community that they wish to be.

Burbank, right?'nuff said.

BOB2 wrote:

The extreme faction in South Pasadena still opposes any solution to the 710 controversy. Most South Pasadena residents opposed the surface freeway option because of the damage to their community. South Pasadena has spent over $14 million in legal fees to feight the surfacea route.
Now a compromise is offered, which tunnels under South Pasadena, leaving intact and unharmed, and the extremist faction still wants to fight on? The tunnel will be paid for by tolls, and financed by foreign investment, freeing up billions of local funds for Transit. Just the opposite of the argument of this writer. Local traffic will actually be reduced, but some extreme "freeway fighters" apparently like crawling down Fair Oaks? So let's not look at this alternative and spend more monies of lawyers to protect us from the boogey man of the 710

I am adamant about not having the 710 running above or below So. Pas. But, that aside, Bob, I genuinely believe that many (most?) commuters will NOT want to use the proposed tunnel. Nobody likes the sensation/reality of being essentially trapped underground for any length of time due to traffic or slow-downs related to accidents, flat tires, etc., especially given all the publicity that some mines have received over the past couple of years.

Has anybody spoken about how much this toll would actually be? Please correct me if I'm wrong, but I thought I read/heard that the toll roads down near Mission Viejo were being travelled very lightly by commuters. Although they offer unfettered alternate routes for commuters, why is this?(if this is the case) Do some commuters resent having to pay additional fees?(since they're already being taxed once for freeways and for their maintenance)

And, despite someone's post contending that I am only behaving in my own selfish interests, I work with disenfranchised populations of people and do care about social justice and how difficult a time many Americans are having with paying nearly $4/gallon. Proponents of the 710 tunnel clearly are not thinking about this group of people. And, I've been accused of only thinking about myself here -- not so.

And, are you folks telling me that nobody in Alhambra and El Sereno disapproves of an above-ground freeway project? Hard to believe. Will they embrace the idea of having to move elsewhere for an above-ground freeway? The latter is not the most well-off community and has its share of social ills. Has anybody asked them if their priorities are having a freeway versus spending money on more badly needed programs and services in their community?

Re "foreign investors," what's in it for them? Would we again be borrowing more foreign money to finance our projects? How would this free up billions for transit? What transit are you referring to?