Purpose

To consolidate, disseminate, and gather information concerning the 710 expansion into our San Rafael neighborhood and into our surrounding neighborhoods. If you have an item that you would like posted on this blog, please e-mail the item to Peggy Drouet at pdrouet@earthlink.net

Sunday, August 19, 2012

San Rafael Neighborhoods Association Meeting

Logo 


 San Rafael Neighborhoods Association
(SRNA)
Presents 
Community Activation
TOWN HALL MEETING
On
*The 710 Freeway Extension*
&
*San Rafael School Update*
      

Wednesday, August 22nd
6:30 pm
Church of the Angels
"On the Lawn"
1100 Avenue 64, Pasadena
                                                                       
Efforts to Preserve Our Neighborhoods Move Forward!

The Fight to Stop the 710 Freeway Continues!


Issues and Speakers


The Future of San Rafael School 
  Scott Phelps
PUSD Board Member
 

710 Extension: Historical Perspective
Claire Bogaard
NO-710 PAC


710 Tunnel Proposal
Dr. Bill Sherman
Metro TAC Member-South Pasadena


710 EIS/EIR Schedule-The Fight Continues 
 John Shaffer
Attorney, San Rafael Resident


Volunteer sign-ups start at 6:30 P.M.
Light refreshments served
Please walk or carpool
Chairs for 200
(bring lawn blankets/chairs, just in case)


Logo 
For more information: www.srnapasadena.org





© 2012 EarthLink, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
 SR 710 North Tunnel Cost Analysis, Final Report

Posted by Peggy Drouet: Am I not understanding something here? From the Metro Finance, Budget and Audit Committee, Sept. 14, 2011. Subject: Public-Private Partnership Program. Action: Receive and File SR-710-North Gap Costing Information.

http://www.metro.net/board/Items/2011/09_September/20110914F&BItem25.pdf

The concept design is specifically based on the following:
Description
Project Limits for South Portal: Hellman Avenue to Valley Road.
0 Project Limits for North Portal: Palmetto Drive to Del Mar Boulevard.
Phase 1
o Construction of a single bored tunnel carrying 2 northbound (NBPl) and 2 southbound (SBPl)
lanes in a stacked configuration.
a lncludes construction of an off ramp from NBPl to Valley Boulevard.
lncludes on ramp from Valley Boulevard to SBP1.
o lncludes partial reconstruction of Valley Boulevard to allow for NBPl and SBPl underpass.
o lncludes an off ramp from NBPl to Pasadena Avenue.
lncludes an elevated on ramp from Del Mar Boulevard to SBP1.
It is assumed that existing access from 1-210 Foothill Freeway southbound to West California
Boulevard to remain as is.
Phase 2
Construction of a second single bored tunnel carrying 2 northbound (NBP2) and 2 southbound
(SBP2) lanes in a stacked configuration.
o lncludes partial reconstruction of on ramp from Valley Boulevard to SBP2.
o lncludes partial reconstruction of Valley Boulevard to allow for NBP2 and SBP2 underpass.
lncludes partial reconstruction of on ramp from Del Mar Boulevard to SBP2.
o It is assumed that existing access from 1-210 Foothill Freeway southbound.

From what I am reading in the SR 710 North Tunnel Cost Analysis, Final Report, is that this is the tunnel route that has been decided on. Then why were other routes through Highland Park and the San Rafael Neighborhood been presented as well. Can anyone figure this out or does anyone have updated information? Were there other final SR 710 North Tunnel Cost Analysis, Final Reports done?
Opinion Section, Pasadena Sun, August 18, 2012

Don't extend 710 through San Rafael

As a new resident in the San Rafael neighborhood of Pasadena, I studied the history of the ongoing 710 Freeway saga, recently made more dramatic by the announcement of new route options — some of which would go through the beautiful San Rafael area.

As a first step, the Pasadena City Council needs to show support to those neighborhoods dealing with the surprise new route scenarios by opposing any 710 expansions to the 134 Freeway.


While some say that Measure A, passed by Pasadena voters in March 2001, forbids the City Council from opposing completion of the 710 Freeway, they are missing an important distinction in wording and context. Measure A specified between the 210 Freeway and the 10 Freeway, referring to the gap closure through Pasadena Avenue — which had been in plans for more than 60 years — and was the context in which Pasadena voters passed Measure A.

Some of the newly proposed routes would instead join at the 134 Freeway — literally amounting to highway robbery of the uniquely picturesque and quiet San Rafael neighborhood.

My husband and I chose Pasadena over other L.A. communities because it was a veritable oasis amid a vast desert of concrete, littered and crumbling roadways, screaming noise of freeway traffic and overcrowding. Clearly, the freeway network that has already been created cannot be maintained as it is. It's bad enough that Metro wants to add more to their mess, but to do so while stealing the unique jewel that is San Rafael is as nonsensical as it is tragic.

Jennifer Gomes

Pasadena


Two 710 proposals especially frustrating

 There is a new development in the ongoing saga of the 710 (Long Beach) Freeway extension. Caltrans recently released 12 proposals that will go into environmental study.

Two of those proposals include new proposed routes, H-2 and F-5, that would go through Pasadena in the San Rafael/South Arroyo neighborhoods.


This was a surprise to the Pasadena City Council and residents of these neighborhoods.

We own a home on Annandale Road in Pasadena and would be affected by either of these two new proposed routes for the freeway extension.

After years of research and support, our neighborhood was approved as a historic district. Our home was included as a Mills Act property due to its historic elements. The proposed routes through that neighborhood would not only defeat efforts to save historic Pasadena properties but also reduce the economic viability for any residence or business in the affected corridor.

Even the disclosure of these two possible routes through the San Rafael area will have an impact on our home value and resale viability. Proceeding with these plans will financially jeopardize families in Pasadena who were lucky enough to make it through the real estate and financial downturn.

This is a frustrating situation for residents and small-business owners and will culminate in some fiery City Council and Caltrans meetings in the coming months.

Jerri Johnson
 710 Freeway Fight on MSN Video

710 Freeway Fight. Hundreds packed the Pasadena City Council Meeting to sound off about the 710 Freeway extension. Share. Related Videos. My Playlist ...
video.app.msn.com/watch/video/710-freeway.../1d2106zc1

 

 

Ron Kaye: A seat at the table of power (from the Burbank Leader, Aug. 19, 2012)

It was a triumph of citizen activism — the Pasadena City Council's unanimous repudiation last week of plans to extend the long-stalled Long Beach (710) Freeway through town.

Someday, we might look back at what happened Monday night as a historic moment in the battle for Los Angeles and the quality of all our lives.


It was the first test of strength for members of a brand-new community group that sprung to life this summer after word got out that their lovely west Pasadena community was the target of a possible 710 extension. It would mean long-term disruption, destruction of dozens of homes, noise, pollution, etc.

People I know, such as Dr. Ron Paler and attorney John Shaffer, came together with their neighbors and went to work acquiring facts, getting on the same page, contacting hundreds of neighbors who might never have known what could happen until it was too late to do anything about it.

So began the San Rafael Neighborhoods Assn., which in just a few short weeks, got the Pasadena City Council to call a special meeting to handle what was expected to be a large crowd.

Monday night, more than 500 people showed up and they all had something to say, but they spoke in one voice: Not in my backyard, or my neighbor's, either. These are not NIMBYs, they are preservationists, ordinary folks fighting for their homes, their neighborhoods, the quality of their lives.

Through four hours of enthusiastic hoots, hollers, jeers and cheers Monday night, there was a lot of tough questioning of Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials about their proposals to close the 710 Freeway gap — and, more importantly, about whether the agency was trying to create the appearance of public participation without really engaging the public, the art of political illusion.

For Michelle Smith, the MTA's project manager for the 710 extension, it was a tough crowd to face — unhappy people from Eastside L.A. communities like Highland Park and historic Garavanza, to South Pasadena, Pasadena and La CaƱada-Flintridge.

These people came from different communities and backgrounds, but were united in saying that while they want public transit to work, they don't want to see an unneeded highway destroy their neighborhoods just to benefit the trucking industry and bail out the ports, which are facing a lot of tough years ahead with increased competition from the Panama Canal to every port north.

Smith seemed shaken by the intensity of emotions when she defended the MTA's feeble, if costly, efforts at community outreach, saying things like, “we'll be interfacing with the public throughout the process,” and in the end, conceding to the City Council she will “retool” the outreach program.

The meeting came just days after the county Board of Supervisors and the MTA board of directors decided to put Measure J on the November ballot to extend for another 30 years — until 2069 — the one-half percent sales tax increase narrowly approved by voters in 2008 known as Measure R.

MTA is borrowing against the estimated $40 billion that Measure R will bring in with the intent of spending the money in 10 years to speed construction of the subway-to-the-sea and dozens of other transit, highway and bike-path projects throughout the county. When that money is gone, they want to mortgage Measure J's billions so they can actually complete the projects they promised four years ago.

In theory, if there was real planning for healthy and sustainable communities and a transit system with great connections and high frequency of service, what is being undertaken would actually live up to the hyped promises that have been made.

But that isn't true.

This is, first and foremost, about creating union construction jobs, feeding the contractors, consultants and political operatives who profit at the public expense, and creating opportunities for densification of our neighborhoods. It is not about building an efficient system that serves the transit-dependent and gets others out of their cars because they can get where they want to go efficiently by bus and rail.

Even as $1 billion is being spent to add a single HOV lane northbound through Sepulveda Pass on the San Diego (405) Freeway, and the subway-to-the-sea is costing $1 billion or more a mile, the MTA is cutting bus services and deferring maintenance on existing rail lines, which may have a lot to do with terrible safety record of the heavily-used Blue Line from Long Beach.

The Expo line just opened, years late, with massive cost overruns. It has serious engineering problems and is the target of lawsuits. Plans for the Crenshaw light-rail line has caused sparks in South L.A., and Beverly Hills is in an uproar over the subway running under a high school with active oil and gas fields.

The extraordinary organizing skills displayed by the people of the San Rafael neighborhood in recent weeks is hopefully just the beginning of forming a coalition to bring together the people whose lives are most affected and get them a seat at the table of power where decisions of great public importance should be made.

The fate of Measure J — the sales tax extension — may hang in the balance.

RON KAYE can be reached at kayeron@aol.com. Share your thoughts and stories with him.