The Draft EIR/EIS’s short term analysis has provided misleading interpretations that the Tunnel Alternative will relieve congestion and improve air quality.
Analysis of the long term impacts of induced demand(extending the analysis to 2050) would show that the Tunnel Alternative would increase vehicle miles traveled and result in the freeways becoming congested again.
Ultimately, the Tunnel Alternative would merely shift congestion to other areas.
90% of motorists would receive no travel-time savings, or their travel time would worsen, with the Tunnel Alternative.
The few who would benefit from the Project would receive a travel-time savings of just 2.5 minutes.
These nominal changes do not justify the Freeway Tunnel Alternative’s $5.6 billion price tag.
The Southern California Association of Governments has even called the Tunnel Alternative “the worst case scenario”.
The Draft EIR/EIS did not include a Traffic and Revenue Study.
The Draft EIR/EIS’s use of a $4 toll in their analysis is unrealistic because of the reliance on a PPP to cover over 50% of the cost of the Tunnel Alternative.
The Purpose and Need Statement for the Draft EIR/EIS is outdated and focuses on the solely on the movement of cars instead of the movement of people.
Recent legislation, including AB 32/SB 375/SB 743, has shifted the focus of transportation planning to the improvement of mobility for individuals across all modes of transportation.
Experts including the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and South Coast Air Quality Management District have determined that the Draft EIR/EIS’s analysis is deficient.
The San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments has identified significant numbers of “Transit Dependent Populations” in the cities of Alhambra, Monterey Park, San Gabriel, Rosemead, Temple City, and El Monte that would not be served by the Tunnel Alternative.
The Tunnel Alternative would ignore these individuals and create an inequitable mode of transportation that is only accessible to those able to pay the toll.
The Draft EIR/EIS showed that the Light Rail Alternative would result in the greatest number of long-term jobs of all of the build alternatives.