Wednesday, October 26, 2016

Public asked for direction on how to fill the 710 Freeway gap

High-speed bus ways, new light rail lines and a freeway tunnel under Mt. Washington. These are some of the many alternatives – including doing nothing at all – being considered to complete the 710 Freeway, which ends  in El Sereno near Cal State L.A.  The public will get a chance to find out more about the issue – which has been a hot topic for more than 40 years – and learn more about the alternatives being considered on Thursday night during a SR-710 Study Open House in Eagle Rock.

Much of the traffic congestion blamed on the 710 freeway gap jams the streets of Alhambra and South Pasadena, which has waged a decades long way against the freeway extension. But some of the most recent proposals to close the gap have drawn attention and alarm across Northeast L.A., including an alternative labeled F-2 (check out map below), which would extend the 710 northwest from El Sereno through or  under portions of Highland Park and Mount Washington before linking  to the 2 Freeway with a new interchange in Glassell Park.

Metro and Caltrans emphasizes that Thursday’s open house, which will be held from 6 p.m. to 8 p.m. at Eagle Rock Elementary,  is not a public hearing. Instead it is an opportunity for residents to get more information and provide feed-back to the options being presented. The open houses are part of a process to complete a full environmental impact report, which could take another two years to complete.

Alternative freeway routes

Related Links:

  • 710 Extension will be discussed in NELA on Thursday. Patch
  • 710 Open House Materials. Metro/Caltrans

Eastsider Advertising


  1. Why are we still catering to cars?

  2. A freeway tunnel under Mount Washington? That’s the first I’ve heard of that idea. I thought the point of a 710 extension would be so traffic could more easily flow east to the 210. Funneling it towards the 2 seems stupid.

  3. @Bill that’s the NIMBY’s in La Cañada, they don’t want the extra truck traffic and are pushing to dump it to NELA and Glendale

  4. I’m glad it’s too expensive to dig a tunnel through those mountains. What a crazy idea!

  5. Tunneling under Mt. Washington sounds easy. I’ve heard it doesn’t have much bedrock.

  6. Let it be! Don’t bother the rest of us. Since South Pasadena has fought the extension for decades, it only fair that they should continue to absorb the traffic congestion and associated pollution. “Ya pays yer money, ya takes yer choice!”

  7. South Pasadena doesn’t get the traffic congestion and pollution. It all gets dumped on Valley Boulevard in Alhambra.

  8. Why are they asking for anyone (other than the civil engineers) for an opinion is beyond me.
    The answers are all so predictable. Who is going to want a freeway running through their back yard?
    And who actually believes that this broke state can afford to tunnel through anything?

    The fact is that LA doesn’t have sufficient public transportation and until we do, we have to have freeways and lots of them.

    If you live in the path of a projected freeway, It is your responsibility to know that. And if you don’t want the freeway in your back yard then move or never live there in the first place.

  9. There are enough freeways already. Making more will just make more traffic. Let’s spend the money making other ways to get around more convenient … more light rail and busses for example.

  10. I don’t think the freeway extension will make more cars magically appear out of nowhere. More likely, the 210 will see a serious increase in traffic volume; especially large trucks, the 5 will see less traffic, and the city of Alhambra will see a major easing of their congestion. In my opinion, caltrans should have just pushed it through in the 1960’s. Presently, I don’t think the benefits outweigh the tremendous costs.

    • Actually, freeway extensions often do make cars magically appear out of nowhere. If the road is really fast, then some people who would have gone to a local restaurant will drive five or ten miles to go to one in the next town. There will be some decrease in congestion on nearby surface streets, but new road capacity often increases the total number of cars on the road.

  11. Well we know that you can’t go through the neighborhood because the residents won’t stand for it. It looks like going under is too expensive, leaving it alone just doesn’t work, so how about going over with an elevated freeway?

  12. reality check5

    The 710 Freeway is being built for use by the LA/LB ports for “goods movement”.

    Do you know why proponents of the 710 freeway are now fighting to build this toll freeway (that will clog our streets with diverted traffic from trucks/cars unwilling to pay the tolls required to finance this tunnel), INSTEAD of supporting alternatives like the GRID and electric train systems for goods movement?

    It’s about lining the pockets of the few. There is BIG money involved in freeway construction and the trillion-dollar business at the ports.

    TRAFFIC and POLLUTION is what this freeway will bring to this area. This pollution has been shown to travel far and affect the health of all residents – this puts all of us in the LA basin at risk. Contrary to the false claims that completing the 710 will reduce traffic on other freeways, the truth is no freeway will see any reduction in traffic because the ports are expanding and they will soon have 92,000 daily trucks traveling on all our freeways, which is a tripling of what now exists.

    Wouldn’t it be better to have a much smarter and LESS COSTLY way of moving goods like the MegaRail system which are non-polluting flexible (CNG/electric) trams that travel on both roads and rail lines?

Post a Comment

Please keep your comments civil and on topic and refrain from personal attacks. The moderator reserves the right to edit or delete any comments. The Eastsider's Terms of Use and Privacy Policy apply to comments submitted by readers. Required fields are marked *