Cities, organizations and individuals that make up Beyond the 710 have come together to find the best way to relieve traffic, connect communities, promote smart growth, and help people get to their jobs, schools, shopping, and recreation.
Beyond the 710 is about connecting communities, increasing everyone’s quality of life, and putting scarce transportation dollars to their best use. This ever-growing coalition is comprised of the Cities of Glendale, La Cañada Flintridge, Pasadena, Sierra Madre, South Pasadena, plus the Natural Resources Defense Council, the National Trust for Historic Preservation and No 710 Action Committee.
A Better Alternative to the Tunnel
Beyond the 710 believes that the proposed 710 Tunnel would not only devastate communities, it would be a massive waste of money that could be much better spent on different projects. It is a poor and expensive solution to a problem that doesn’t really exist. Caltrans’ and Metro’s own studies show that the billions of dollars would not appreciably improve anyone’s commute, and would further add congestion on already overloaded freeways.
To enhance the movement of both people and goods, these billions would be better spent on east-west connections rather than north-south. Examples include extending the Gold Line in both directions, enhancing east-west freight networks, connecting the Orange and Red Lines in the San Fernando Valley to the Gold Line, improving the Transportation System and Demand Management strategies through road improvements and traffic synchronization, and providing north-south Bus Rapid Transit service to connect communities and important destinations.
Beyond the 710 believes that there is a better alternative to the Tunnel. Land currently occupied by the north and south freeway stubs and the land in between could be developed sustainably, and provide local transit connections, more housing and recreation, and better access to an expanded Cal State Los Angeles.
Unfortunately, the current Caltrans Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) does not adequately consider these alternatives. It seems stuck in 20th Century thinking, is designed to favor the tunnel project, gives short shrift to other alternatives, and presents a light rail alternative that would actually harm communities and not provide needed connectivity. The DEIR needs to be revised to reflect modern planning priorities and recirculated for further comment.