Board to consider contract for 710 gap environmental document

The 710's terminus at Valley Boulevard as seen on Google Maps.

The Metro Board will consider Thursday awarding a $37.3-million contract to CH2M Hill to prepare the environmental impact reports and preliminary engineering for a potential project to help improve traffic congestion in the area of the gap in the 710 freeway between Alhambra and Pasadena.

Here’s the staff report from Thursday’s full Board meeting.. Metro held 20 public meetings this past spring called “710 Conversations” to generate ideas from the public on what type of project — if any — those who live and work in the area would like to see.

The staff report to the Board says the project “may include, but not be limited to: surface and subsurface highway/freeway construction, heavy rail and bus/light rail systems, local street upgrades, traffic management systems and a no build alternative.”

There is a 4.5-mile gap in the 710 between Valley Boulevard on the Alhambra/Los Angeles border and Del Mar Boulevard in Pasadena. The Measure R sales tax increase approved by L.A. County voters in 2008 included up to $780 million for a 710 project to be defined through the environmental study process.

The 710 opened between Long Beach and Valley Boulevard in 1965. Here’s a post from last year with some history of the issue — and it’s an issue with a long history!

7 replies

  1. The 710 stub in Pasadena actually terminates at Caifornia Blvd, about a 1/4 mile south of Del Mar… though I suppose that the actual freeway construction (minus the ramp to California) does terminate at approximately Del Mar.

  2. I don’t see anything other than a Toll Tunnel being the solution for completing the gap, i love in the area and it seems that would be what people would accept.

    Personally i’d like to see a Rail link through this area from the Gold Line in South Pasadena to East L.A. and eventually further south. We need to start the ideas of filling in the gaps with metro to get a more comprehensive system like the ones around the world. Though i’d much rather see the money thrown behind other projects.

  3. Actually what they are doing is approving the design engineer – only one of the subcontractors to CH2MHill is qualified for EIS/EIR preparation but MTA is combining the project development with the engineering and costing – we know where that will go…..

    We need MTA to separate the two functions in order to get a “ROBUST” EIR and EIS documents – OBTW the proposal only requires “a project document” but EIR/EIS have to have two????

    The MultiMode (SoPas) and TransMode (ElSer) will eventually be proven to be the right choice

    Central Issue for the WHOLE THING is
    Trucks or NO Trucks which still has not been answered…

    OBTW the ExecSummary for the Scoping Report is included for some reason…but not the full report and no one that went to the Scoping Meetings has been informed by CT or MTA that it is available since mid August??? What are MTA/CT afraid of…even the ExSum reaks of white wash paint…LA isn’t even mentioned as opposing or supporting???Huizar???

    Tom

  4. So does this mean they have decided on the route through South Pasadena? It is looking more and more like the final decision to connect the 710 fwy. They have as Tom says chosen their engineer but have not come clean with a full disclosure on the EIR/EIS documents that the public has a right to see. And what about the scoping report for Los Angeles areas? Again, we should be having a public meeting at this point so that we can all see the results.

    • Hi Tina;

      They haven’t decided anything other than the fact they’re going to study many different types of transportation improvements. They still need to do both a draft and final EIR — a long, long process — and it will ultimately be up to the Metro Board to decide what, if anything, to build. And they will also need to fund it.

      Steve Hymon
      Editor, The Source