Area Leaders Discuss Proposed 710 Tunnel

The proposed 710 Tunnel was a central focus of a on Saturday, Jan. 22, in Pasadena. The panel discussion addressed how transportation projects could further economic vitality and sustainability in Southern California and featured officials on both sides of the 710 Tunnel controversy.

Anthony Portantino, 44th California District Assembly representative, offered these opening remarks: “I’m frustrated that the Gold Line isn’t complete. It should be our number one priority. It’s no secret that I don’t support the 710 Tunnel. We shouldn’t be considering a project unless we know the total square feet, the cost and the number of people who will be using it.”

Portantino added, “It’s about policy, not personalities. Let’s not use Sacramento to subvert the local process. We need to do what’s best for the region.”

John Fasana, Duarte City Council member and MTA Board member, expressed support for the tunnel, emphasizing voters’ approval of Measure R. “Voters approved Measure R by a 64 percent margin, and that was a comprehensive package of 12 projects, including the 710 Tunnel.”

Mike Eng, 49th District representative, focused on civic input and deliberation, another theme of the forum. “Transportation is 50 percent process and 50 percent policy,” he said. “Part of the process is to build on what others have done, not reinvent the wheel.”

Frustrations with the process, and with well-organized opposition to the 710 Tunnel, surfaced during the first session. Moderated by KCET anchor Val Zavala, the topic was the future of sustainable transportation, but panelists--including MTA Board member Richard Katz, Metrolink CEO John Fenton and Transit Coalition Director Bart Reed--spent time talking about the difficulties of working with local residents who could be adversely affected by transportation projects. Reed said that many projects present a conflict between what’s best for the public and what’s best for a local community.

“The key component is that you need a very transparent process from the beginning,” said Katz. He also noted that it is easy for people to say "Not in my backyard" (NIMBY).

“They have never had a transparent process,” said South Pasadena resident Joanne Nuckols, of the No 710 Action Committee, during the break. “We’re not NIMBYs. We are trying to protect everybody and prevent a waste of public money and expensive studies on a project that’s never going to be built.”

Nuckols added, “They keep talking about it like it’s a project we need, but they ignore the fact that there’s currently a federal injunction in place that stops the project from being built and that has not been resolved.”

South Pasadena City Council member Richard Schneider said, “Labeling opponents like that [NIMBYs] is simply name calling and should be discouraged. In fact, a project really does require a purpose and need. One can have a principled objection to a project and also live close to it.”

During the second panel discussion, Metro Highway Director Doug Failing and Parsons Brinkerhoff Vice-President Dr. Eugene Kim spoke in support of the proposed tunnel, and Glendale Mayor and MTA Board member Ara Najarian spoke against the project.

“At the institutional level, I don’t think we are being transparent,” said Najarian, observing that a low-build, multimode option study mandated by federal injunction hasn’t been done. Najarian stated, “I don’t think that the 710 Tunnel is a viable project. Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) has referred to it as the missing link, but to describe it that way is a fallacy, because many local communities have stood up against other local freeway projects, and rightly so, because we are a democracy and we cherish local voices.”

Najarian also brought up the uncertain cost:  “Measure R has been very generous to the project. There is $800 earmarked so far for studies, but the big problem I have is that there is a tipping point for the cost. It doesn’t make sense as a community to spend millions of dollars on studies, only potentially to find down the road that this project is too expensive.”

South Pas Council Member Schneider said Najarian’s presentation was “clear, concise, and made sense." 

Kim said the tunnel should be for passenger traffic only, not freight movement. He addressed technical and engineering questions about the tunnel design and construction, and cited several large-scale passenger car tunnels built successfully around the world.

Kim’s technical answers did not placate audience concerns about concentrated particulate matter piped out from tunnel vents to the surface. Kim contended that “What comes out of these tunnel vents is no different than what comes out of tailpipes,” but eventually conceded that the vents would “produce localized impacts.”

Failing turned the discussion away from tunnel exhaust vents to Metro’s approach to health impacts from pollution generally, saying that “We in L.A. are setting the national standard for looking at health impacts, and finding ways to develop zero-emission freight movement methods.”