Responsible Alhambrans Against the 710

On May 25 the Metro Board voted unanimously in favor of using existing funds to fix local transportation issues, and have decided a freeway tunnel is NOT the way to go. Not surprisingly, Alhambra’s legislators are still clinging on to the antiquated pie in the sky.

Front page news in the LA Times today!

• May 24, 2017: LA Times: Board Drops Support for Controversial 710 Freeway
• May 24, 2017: LA Times: The Epic and Ugly Battle over what to do about the 710 Freeway
• May 25, 2017: Pasadena Patch: RIP 710 Freeway Tunnel: Metro Pulls Funding
• May 25, 2017: Watch news clip: ABC News: Metro board to pull support…
• May 25, 2017: Alhambra Source: Los Angeles Metro Votes to Implement Alternatives…

But Alhambra’s City Council is still clinging on:

“Supporting the tunnel should be a no-brainer for the board. Our goal is to relieve congestion in our neighborhoods,” Alhambra Mayor David Mejia said.  Pasadena Patch

Pasadena Star News, Feb. 9, 2017: Chris Holden Introduces Bill to Kill 710 Freeway Tunnel: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/general-news/20170209/assemblyman-chris-holden-of-pasadena-introduces-bill-to-kill-710-freeway-tunnel-project

Alhambra Councilwoman Barbara Messina, who leads the 710 Coalition of cities and labor unions in support of constructing the gap-tunnel, took Holden’s announcement personally. She said she and Holden were in lock-step on the freeway completion for decades and had been friends since the early 1980s. “This really upsets me. I feel betrayed by him,” Messina said

Assembly Bill 287 establishes a local advisory committee to recommend a definitive solution for the State Route 710 corridor between the 10 and 210, but would prohibit this advisory committee from considering or recommending a freeway tunnel alternative.

WHO:
·        Chris Holden, Assemblymember, 41st Assembly District
·        Terry Tornek, Mayor, Pasadena
·        Michael Cacciotti, Mayor, South Pasadena
·        Damon Nagami, Senior Attorney, Natural Resources Defense Council
(NRDC)
·        Will Eley, Policy Advocate, California Public Interest Research Group
(CALPIRG)

WHEN:
Thursday, February 9, 2017
10:00 AM – 10:30 AM
WHERE:
Mission Street Metro Station
901 Meridian Ave
South Pasadena, CA 91030

Read the bill here:20170ab287holdensr-710-advisory-committee_99

1. USEFUL VOTING GUIDE FROM NO 710 ACTION COMMITTEE – PROVIDES VOTER INFORMATION FOR LOCAL RACES. CHECK IT OUT BEFORE YOU VOTE!  http://www.no710.com/voter-info.html
2. PASADENA STAR NEWS ENDORSES TWO NON-ESTABLISHMENT CANDIDATES FOR ALHAMBRA CITY COUNCIL WHO OPPOSE THE SR 710 TUNNEL ALTERNATIVE.   READ THE ENDORSEMENT HERE: http://www.pasadenastarnews.com/opinion/20161018/nisall-toh-for-alhambra-city-council-endorsement

Alhambra finally has two anti-710 candidates running for two separate open seats, and Alhambrans Against 710 have endorsed them both: Mark Nisall and Ken Toh.  Both are running against candidates who are supported by our current city council members. None of the incumbent City Councilmembers are running because they will be termed out (and the others will term out in the next election cycle.)  This is a chance to turn the 710 tide in our neck of the woods!  Please read Pasadena Star’s Sep. 23, 2016 “Is Alhambra Ready to Elect Councilmembers who Oppose the 710 Freeway Tunnel”, which also mentions our group.

Ken Toh

You can read about Ken Toh in the Sept. 26, 2016 LA Weekly article “Ken Toh Exposed a Cover-Up at the Alhambra Fire Department.”

Also, here is something written by  a community member about Ken:

Hi, all,

I just wanted to share my reasons for supporting Ken Toh.  I’m convinced that he has the residents at heart and will fight for us.

But I’m worried about the election.  I’m worried because by nature he’s modest and outwardly reserved, and it’s people like this who often get looked over.  So I’m asking for your help to spread the word that people should take notice, because deep-down this man is a fighter.  And if they feel as strongly as I do, to consider volunteering to his campaign http://www.kentohforalhambracitycouncil2016.com/

Mark Nisall

A resident of Alhambra for 16 years and with experience in law enforcement, he is opposed to building the 710 freeway toll tunnel and to overdevelopment, which causes local traffic jams. You can find out more about Mark Nisall from his campaign’s website as well as this Alhambra Source article.

What can I do?

Get to know the candidates before you vote on November 8! There will be a candidates’ forum where you and your family and Alhambra friends and neighbors can engage with all four candidates, and ask questions and get to know their positions.

• When: Wed. Oct. 5  moderated by the League of Women Voters, hosted by Alhambra Preservation Group.
• Where: Almansor Court, 700 S. Almansor Street, 7-9pm. Free refreshments with RSVP before Oct. 5.

Volunteer! You can volunteer to do phone banking or canvassing to help them get elected. please fill out this volunteer sign-up sheet.

Request a lawn sign: You can request lawn signs directly from Nisall’s and Toh’s campaigns.

Know your voting status! Check that you’re registered to vote at  your current address: https://www.lavote.net/vrstatus/  You can also register to vote at that site if you’re not registered. The deadline to do so is Oct. 24.

[Current] Alhambra Councilmember Barabara Messina continues to push her 710 Freeway Tunnel agenda, despite only 3.9% of polled Alhambra residents wanting the 710 connector addressed (see City of Alhambra General Plan 2015 Survey Results).  According to the Pasadena Star News, she supported Rosemead Councilman Stephen Ly, proponent of 710 freeway tunnel, to be on the South Coast Air Quality Management District governing board, but supporters and the majority of the AQMD members preferred green-going Michael Cacciotti.

Perhaps Ms. Messina should carefully read 710 Facts History Dangers.

Businesses, Environmentalists and the 710 Tunnel Collide in AQMD Board Member Battle (Pasadena Star News, 2/12/16)

The headline says it all.

The 710 Tunnel is now considered 1 of 12 highway boondoggles in the country.  No surprise there.

A double-bore tunnel would be the most expensive, most polluting and least effective option for addressing the area’s transportation problems, reported CALPIRG on Monday.

•  CALPIRG report, summary and  press release  
• Pasadena Star News article “710 Freeway Tunnel Included in Report’s Top 12 Boondoggle Highway Projects” Jan. 19, 2016

After spending  $40 million on the EIR of March 2015  (of the $780 million set aside from Measure R), and with most of the cities in the San Gabriel Valley against the project (Alhambra  City Council being one of the odd-cities-out that is still supporting an underground freeway), when will CalTrans/Metro finally take this project off the table?

As you know, the 710 Freeway Tunnel would have drivers pay a toll of $6-12/car one-way to use it. The Pasadena Star News reports: “Metro is exploring a public-private partnership, known as P3 funding, meaning the idea is to secure private funding for at least a portion of the freeway tunnels. The investors would be paid back by tolls charged to motorists using the tunnel.”

According to the CALPIRG report, an extension to an existing toll road in southern California is getting shut down on the grounds “that it, and a future additional extension, would threaten local water resources. Other toll roads in the region have failed to attract enough traffic to meet revenue expectations, and data suggest traffic is not growing as quickly as officials had projected.”

Would YOU want to pay $6-12 to drive 4.5 miles underground, with no exits, with the high potential for stand-still traffic at the 210/134 connector? Most drivers currently exiting the 710 in Alhambra  would not even benefit from the tunnel, as they are not all heading straight up to the 210 freeway, but rather are also heading east and west, going to San Marino, South Pasadena, Alhambra and lower Pasadena.  Drivers will continue to use city streets with or without an extension of the 710 for these reasons.

“The 710 project does not offer comprehensive relief, it costs too much, it creates new environmental problems, and it is not going anywhere. The proposal should be dropped!” wrote former Pasadena Mayor Bill Bogaard in reaction to the study.

One part of the EIR places the cancer risk of the project at 149 chances per million people exposed to pollutants, well above the district’s standard threshold of 10 chances per million. Yet, the report concludes that the cancer risks are “less than significant” based on faulty data….

The eight-page letter from Ian MacMillan, the anti-smog district’s planning and rules manager, says the lack of basic air quality analysis renders the draft EIR useless to the agency or those deciding on a tunnel or other transit options.

A letter from Alhambra supports the tunnel alternative as not only the best way to move traffic but to improve air quality. Alhambra comments that a tunnel project would reduce the higher cancer risks currently experienced by residents of Alhambra and nearby communities from traffic gridlock at the 710 terminus on Valley Boulevard and along arterial streets.

• SGV Tribune (8/13/15): AQMD: 710 Freeway Tunnel Would Raise Cancer Risk to Unacceptable Levels

Read for yourself  Alhambra City Council’s Comment Letter (Attachment A  +Attachment B), drafted especially by their  pro-710 tunnel lobbyist, paid for by our tax dollars.

Who’s facts would you believe: a lobbyist’s or a governmental agency (Air Quality Management District)?

Leland Dolley, pro-710 lobbyist, sitting with guess who?!

2 Letters to Pasadena Star News, Aug. 6, 2015:

710 tunnel proposal not proven fiscally sound

Alhambra Vice Mayor Barbara Messina’s letter (Aug. 2) is right about one thing: The city should not be accused of being “imploded by humans.” Rather, it is being imploded by over-development and the increased traffic congestion and pollution resulting from that over-development. Messina claims that Alhambra has been overrun by cut-through traffic. The truth is that Alhambra suffers no more cut-through traffic than any of the neighboring cities. Traffic studies by independent transportation planners have consistently shown that 87 percent of that traffic is local.

When Alhambra residents learn that the proposed tunnel will have no entrances or exits for its entire 4.5-mile length; that it will not be a freeway because tolls will be charged; that it will be virtually impossible to rescue people when there is a fire in the tunnel, they are overwhelmingly opposed.

The proponents of the tunnel have not been able to prove that it is fiscally sound. Let’s use our resources more responsibly to build a mass-transit system that will provide commuters with viable options. That will reduce traffic congestion on local streets as well as on all of the region’s freeways.

— Janet Ervin, Alhambra

No ‘virgin air’ from the 710 

Barbara Messina seems to be for selling out our city’s residents. She claims opponents are non-Alhambran wealthy people. Poor Alhambrans belong to Responsible Alhambrans Against the 710. We are witness to Messina’s destructive development. Her City Council demolished houses in favor of eight-unit condominiums, which changes allowing two autos per house to the new 24 to 36 cars for each conversion. She demolished our historic Main Street in favor of monstrous 3- to 8-story mixed-use buildings that equal “imploding with humans.” She caused thousands of additional cars on Main Street. If the terrible tunnel is built, per Metro’s EIR, Alhambra residents would experience increased pollution and nightmare traffic with closed streets and lanes during construction. That we deserve to live without harmful toxic emission is true, so why did she irresponsibly overdevelop? Contrary to her inference that the tunnel will affect emissions, the EIR says all options, including no build, will not provide “virgin air.”

— Gloria Valladolid, Alhambra

Proposed: Six 50-ft tunnel exhaust stacks at the entrance to Old Town Pasadena

Yes, indeed, they’ve been talking about the above-ground freeway for years, since the 1950s. More recently, there’s been a push for a tunnel. How many commuters would actually use the tunnel, or is the tunnel for freight trucks coming from Long Beach? (The 710 freeway is, after all, called “Alt. Truck Route”.)  Now that the Environmental Impact Report is out, it’s time for the public’s voice to be heard. Did you know:

• For those exiting the 710 at Valley, 80% of drivers would not reach their destination via proposed tunnel.
• Metro/CalTrans expects to charge a $6-12  toll per car one way.  People will  avoid the tunnel and use surface streets, exacerbating the traffic on our streets.  (CalTrans Metro estimates 60,000 more cars a day on the streets.)
• For Alhambrans to actually take the tunnel, we would have to catch it south of the 10 freeway, NOT at Valley which is 4 miles further north.  Please read Fact v. Fiction and make up your own mind about the tunnel.
• There would be two air ventilators at either end of the tunnel, none in the middle. Since the ‘scrubbers’ cannot clean the cancer-causing fine particular matter from diesel trucks, Alhambra would directly bear the brunt of that pollution .
• The City of Alhambra spent $141,726 on its 2015 and 2014 “Close the Gap” days (aka: Gridlock Day). Find out more of how Alhambra is spending taxpayer money on  promoting the tunnel, even before the draft of the $42-million-dollar, 26,000-page Environmental Impact Report came out.
• The City of Alhambra has spent $133,714 on the banners on Fremont so far.

CalTrans/Metro is asking the public what they want.  Read this page about the Environmental Impact Report and the posts below, then submit your comment to them before Aug. 5. After that, CalTrans/Metro will make its decision of its alternatives to the above-ground freeway to build. When you comment on the EIR, be sure to address issues, problems or questions about the document, and ask questions, which will be answered back to you. Check here for tips on how to do this most effectively.