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
A two-hour debate on extending the SR 710 North was held next door to the 710 freeway stub at Cal State LA on Monday night.
Sponsored by the university and its Pat Brown Institute for Public
Affairs in partnership with the League of Women Voters Pasadena area,
the event featured two known opponents and two known proponents of the
extension.
It was moderated by Raphael Sonenshein, executive director of the
Brown Institute, who said that since the longstanding battle over
extending the 710 was relatively new to him, he could serve as an
unbiased moderator. He had learned, however, that every word in the 710
issue has meaning, and he refused to call the noncontiguous 710 a “gap.”
Traveling to the event highlighted the major issue that the 710
options are supposed to resolve: getting from place to place along the
710 corridor. Freeway extension opponents and proponents alike were
stuck in traffic along Fremont at rush hour, most probably driving solo.
Anyone traveling from the north along Fremont drove under large
Alhambra-sponsored banners urging drivers experiencing the “Fremont
Freeway” to voice their opinions at numerous public hearings. And then,
some 200 meeting attendees converged on the hilltop campus of 27,000
students on the first day of the new quarter. The parking lot adjacent
to the destination Golden Eagle building was a mad unsafe mashup of cars
and pedestrians. The Brown Institute, predicting the parking nightmare,
instructed all attendees to park at a nearby court and take a special
shuttle to the event. However, many rejected this direction and happily
claimed spots in student lots close to the building. Amazingly, resident
and freeway fighter Sam Burgess purposefully walked from South Pasadena
to Cal State LA, arriving before many motorists.
Panel members supporting the 710 extension with a tunnel were Barbara
Messina, an Alhambra City Councilmember since 1986 who said she has
worked on the 710 issue for 30 years; and John Fasana, a Duarte City
Councilmember since 1987 and a member of the Metropolitan Transportation
Agency (Metro) board. Opponents were South Pasadena Councilmember
Michael Cacciotti, a councilmember since 2001 and a member of the South
Coast Air Quality Management District board; and Ara Najarian, a
Glendale City Councilmember since 2005 and a member of the Metro board.
Written questions were solicited from attendees by League of Women
Voters volunteers, and Dr. Sonenshein posed his own questions along with
those submitted by the audience.
The debate was timely in that a voluminous environmental impact
report (EIR/EIS) had been released in March. This was the first debate
in recent history held by a neutral party, and Councilmember Najarian
said, “It was a long time coming.”
n response to a question about which of the five transportation
alternatives studied in the report each favored, Messina replied, “I
definitely support the tunnel because the tunnel is the only alternative
that addresses what the EIR is looking for … mobility, air quality, and
congestion.” She also said that the tunnel is the only alternative with
identified funding. Fasana agreed that the tunnel, along with traffic
changes, is the option “that we should be looking at seriously” to “make
the system work more effectively.”
Cacciotti took a broad historical view of the transportation needs of
the exploding population in the region, advocating for light rail in
all four directions to transport workers, 100,000 college students, and
others to and from schools, jobs, airports, shopping, and entertainment.
Why waste money on a small project, he said, “when a number of
light-rail projects can reach people in Los Angeles, Riverside, and San
Bernardino counties?” Najarian said a combination of methods like light
rail and bicycles, not a freeway tunnel, will resolve issues of
gridlock, bottleneck, and congestion. “We want a transportation system
that will get people to jobs, make the quality of our lives better, and
provide economic vitality,” he said.
Panelists’ responses elicited a number of audible reactions from
supporters and opponents, causing Dr. Sonenshein to remind the audience
on several occasions to refrain from making comments. “This is not a
political rally,” he said. Prior to entering the large ballroom,
attendees were screened for any visible signs of their political
position on the issue, e.g., buttons, clothing signage. For the most
part, the large audience, comprised of many with strongly held
positions, restrained itself. The panelists were similarly civil to each
other, while at the same time challenging opponents’ claims.
When asked which of the five alternatives voters would choose if on
the ballot today, Cacciotti and Najarian said light rail. Messina said
the tunnel. Regarding the issue of trucks using the proposed tunnel,
Najarian, representing the Metro Board, said that goods movement
transporters will be the only ones willing to pay the tolls (currently
estimated at $14 per trip he said). Fasana, also on the Metro Board,
said he opposed allowing trucks to use the tunnel. All agreed that
trucks should be diverted east, not traveling north on the 710.
Sonenshein, who grew up using the Lincoln Tunnel between New Jersey
and midtown Manhattan, asked panelists to comment on the good and bad
features of tunnels. Messina said, “To say a tunnel is dangerous is
very, very lame.” Najarian said he would caution members of his family,
“Never enter a five-mile tunnel with no exits used by trucks.” Fasana
admitted that the issue of trucks adds to the safety issue but said the
technology is improving. Cacciotti opposed allowing trucks, stating that
he had seen numerous tunnel accidents while working for Caltrans.
Each response to subsequent questions was predictable. The two tunnel
opponents argued that light rail and other non-tunnel alternatives
would provide the most efficient transportation option, improve economic
vitality, create jobs, and reduce environmental and health impacts from
traffic. Proponents said the tunnel would do the same.
TRANSIT TALK-"Cars don't shop" and "If you want a better city, build bike lanes. It's an economic development strategy."
Those
were two of the takeaways from last night at the Hammer Museum in
transit-friendly Westwood. The evening at the Hammer's Billy Wilder
Theater featured former New York City Department of Transportation
(NYCDOT) Commissioner Janette Sadik-Khan and Los Angeles Department of
Transportation's (LADOT's) new General Manager Seleta Reynolds.
In
a lively conversation, the two transportation leaders spent the night
riffing on how the streets and public spaces revolution happened in New
York and elsewhere and what might be in store for Los Angeles on
Reynolds' watch.
For those of us who care about this stuff, last night was Hammer Time for
LA's streets. But as anyone who has been in Los Angeles for more than a
New York minute knows, Reynolds has her work cut out for her in
transforming Los Angeles into a city of complete streets, or Great Streets,
as LA is calling them. Complete streets are safe streets amenable to
pedestrians, bikers and transit riders as well as drivers.
Thankfully, a lot of the groundwork laid by Sadik-Khan and others will help Angelenos envision the possibilities.
The
chemistry between these two well-regarded transportation chiefs is
strong and last night both speakers deftly shared their visions for
their respective cities. They also shared a good deal about the
transportation myths that haunt us in pushing the transportation status
quo.
Sadik-Khan got
things rolling describing the widespread resistance she encountered in
New York. In sum, the myth is that, "All of those projects you are
talking about will just make traffic worse." Or, as Reynolds put it,
"What idiot came up with this plan?"
But,
as Sadik-Khan explained, the reality is, "It's not the end of days."
And during the evening she repeatedly drove home the need for data
because, "In the absence of data, anecdotes rule."
Those new metrics will need to look beyond car counts and traffic
speeds to pedestrian and bike improvements, safer crosswalks and more
business for shops along the street. Residential and commercial rents
and gentrification may be other meaningful metrics as an audience
member, a former downtown resident who can't afford to live there
anymore, pointed out.
In
a city where affordable housing presents one of our biggest challenges,
achieving more complete streets without pricing out the working and
middle class will be a challenge. Unless, as LA's Deputy Mayor for
Budget & Innovation Rick Cole said last month in The Planning Report "...revitalization was so widespread across Los Angeles that attractive neighborhoods were not a scarce commodity?
In
other words, what if the supply of attractive areas was increased to
meet the demand? Second, what if rising wages and business activity
allowed existing residents and local businesses to prosper in an
improving neighborhood? Targeting both these missing factors could
significantly reduce displacement."
I
like the sound of that. I also like what Reynolds had to say about her
vision that different streets play different roles in the city. Talking
about San Francisco from which she hails most recently, Reynolds
described how Valencia in the Mission is now a bike boulevard with
street lights timed for bikers, while Mission is a transit-focused
street thanks to its BART stations. Given the size of LA and its
diversity, LADOT can experiment with different strategies for different
areas as it has done on Broadway in downtown LA.
At
the Hammer, Sadik-Khan underscored that there is now a totally
different competition between cities for which ones can be most
favorable to "people who walk and people who bike." Reynolds meanwhile
spoke of the way small businesses tend to oppose changes even though
"businesses are exceptionally poor judges of who shops at their stores."
Citing research on Polk Street in San Francisco, Reynolds noted that
some 80 percent of shoppers didn't drive to the area, walking and taking
transit instead. Or as Sadik-Khan remarked, "Cars don't shop. Cars are
lousy consumers."
There
is a huge body of evidence that transit riders and pedestrians spend
more than those who drive to their shopping destination. Wonk alert:
see Transport for London for data on that city.
In the Q and A, Reynolds got a hard question from an audience member who pushed her on shortcomings of the LA bus system.
On
Wilshire which will someday soon see the ribbon cutting on the Metro
720 Rapid bus only lane, the audience member was right to express
disappointment with our failure to create a meaningful bus rapid transit (BRT) line
because of the cutouts through Beverly HIlls, the Condo Canyon and
Santa Monica. Now that the bus lane has had its soft opening, the city
also needs to ticket and tow drivers who flaunt the no parking signs.
Reynolds'
answer included comments about the need to tell the story of bus rapid
transit in language that ensures the city embraces the Wilshire project
as well as planned BRT lines along Vermont and elsewhere.
There
is cause for optimism about what lies ahead for Los Angeles. But we
should also heed the leaders' reflections on the transportation myths
that will stand in our way. As we have already seen in
the pushback over Figueroa downtown, old myths die hard.
LA will need to show with data, that LADOT's new approaches make sense.
Late
in the conversation, Sadik-Khan quoted Gil Peñalosa, one of the heros
of the complete streets movement and the former Commissioner of Parks,
Sports and Recreation in Bogotá, Colombia: Scientists look at the health
of our rivers by counting the number of fish in a stream. We should
look at the health of our cities by counting the number of women and
children in our bike lanes.
That's sound advice coming from the guy whose team initiated Ciclovia, the
car-free Sundays in Bogotá that has become an internationally
recognized program which sees over 1.3 million people walk, run, skate
and bike along 121 kilometers of city streets. With any luck, just as
Bogotá's success inspired LA's CicLAvia, New York's achievements under Sadik-Khan's leadership will inform Reynolds' tenure at LADOT.
EAST LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — It is clear much still needs to be discussed as to how to close the gap between Alhambra and South Pasadena.
One of the longest-running freeway debates in the city’s history
continued Monday evening as sharp differences were stated and argued at
an official forum.
Four local officials with differing opinions sat on the panel of the
debate over whether to extend the 710 freeway all the way to South
Pasadena.
The forum held at Cal State Los Angeles was announced after an environmental-impact report suggested a tunnel should be dug to extend the freeway.
Among those who argued against the idea of a tunnel to extend the
freeway was South Pasadena Councilman Michael Cacciotti, who believes a
light-rail and bus system would be more appropriate.
“With the same amount of money, you can build, essentially, a massive system, and there’s many more benefits from a light-rail system,” Cacciotti said.
Others, including Alhambra Councilwoman Barbara Messina, believe the light-rail system would be insufficient.
“The light-rail that (Councilman Cacciotti) is promoting does nothing
to solve the problems,” Messina said. “(The tunnel) is the only
alternative that makes sense, and it solves all of the problems that the
environmental impact report has to address, (such as) mobility, air quality and congestion. The other alternatives do not meet those needs.”
Report estimates suggest the tunnel would take roughly five years to
construct at a cost of $3 billion to $6 billion. The tunnel would
connect the 710 freeway to the 210 and 134 freeway interchange in
Pasadena.
The report ultimately considered five options:
Transporation systems/traffic management
Bus and rail
Light rail
Freeway tunnel
No construction
Additional arguments against the tunnel suggest such a project is outdated.
Two more public debates are scheduled for April on the issue.
In this still image from video, fire and police members work near a
derailed commuter train that struck a car on Saturday in Los Angeles.
Los Angeles firefighters say nearly two dozen people suffered injuries,
mostly minor, when a commuter train struck a car near downtown Los
Angeles and partially derailed. 21 people on the train were hurt in the
crash.
LOS ANGELES >> A three-car Metro Expo Line train smashed into a
car turning onto the tracks Saturday in front of the University of
Southern California, seriously injuring the operator and leaving the
driver of the car close to death. Nineteen passengers escaped with
minor injuries.
The
eastbound train slammed into the car just before 11 a.m. when the
driver tried to make a left turn across the tracks running down the
middle of Exposition Boulevard, police said.
The crash derailed the first two cars of the light-rail train and
obliterated the silver Hyundai. The train, knocked slightly off its
tracks, somehow managed to stay upright.
“We had to use the Jaws
of Life to extricate the driver, and we transported him to a local
hospital,” Los Angeles Fire Department Capt. Daniel Curry said at the
scene. “He was in extremely critical condition.”
Neither the operator of the train nor the driver of the car have been publicly identified.
Throughout
the morning, Los Angeles firefighters attended to the stream of
passengers filing off the stricken train. Of the 19 to suffer mostly
cuts and bruises, eight were taken to nearby hospitals.
“They are still triaging patients from the train; it’s still
uncertain the condition of the driver of the car,” said Ramon
Montenegro, a spokesman for the sheriff’s Transport Policing Division,
early in the day.
Metro spokesman Jose Ubaldo said the car and
train were heading east, with the train running down the center of
Exposition Boulevard when the car swung a left turn toward a USC side
street that dead-ends into a campus parking lot. It was struck by the
nose of the train.
The train hit the car at a traffic signal
between USC and the Museum of Natural History at 934 Exposition Blvd.,
where it was knocked slightly off its tracks near Vermont Avenue,
according to witnesses.
Metro supervisor Diljiat Sandhu said it looked like the car’s
driver was trying to turn left at a grade crossing and didn’t see the
approaching train. What was left of the vehicle was still partly wedged
onto the tracks Saturday afternoon.
Drivers attempting to make
such left turns are normally regulated by a left-turn arrow and flashing
alarms for approaching trains, which encounter signals to stop if cars
turn across the grade crossing.
It wasn’t immediately clear if the signals flashed before the crash.
After the collision, a photo shot from a USC office building across
the street and posted on the Internet showed a crushed car on the
westbound tracks at the Watt Drive signal. The eastbound train rested on
the tracks linking Culver City to downtown Los Angeles.
Metro
cars are designed to be pulled or pushed from the front or back. The
wrecked train was being pulled, officials said, with the train operator
perched in the front of the leading car.
Expo Line service in both
directions was cut, and firefighters were warned about a half-hour
after the crash that the train line’s overhead power supply could not be
immediately cut off. The train’s electric arms had been retracted, but
firefighters were warned that low voltage batteries might still be a
hazard.
Police shut down several blocks of Exposition Boulevard while the Metro crews worked to remove the train.
While
service through the area was suspended, Sandhu said the transit agency
formerly known as the Metropolitan Transportation Authority was
providing shuttle buses to get riders around the wreck. A “bus bridge”
was set up to ferry Expo Line passengers between the Expo/23rd stop and
the Expo/Vermont station, Montenegro said.
Metro spokesman Ubaldo
said the agency was working to restore rail service by Saturday evening.
That’s when an estimated 90,000 people were expected to fill the
stands of the nearby Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum to watch a sold-out
soccer game.
The train was back up and running by 3:30 p.m. up to the
Exposition Park station, according to news reports. The full line was to
reopen by 8 p.m.
Especially for those of you that live in Pasadena. Please
email the Pasadena City Council Members and City Manage asking
them to notify all Pasadena residents via email or snail mail,
about the release of the SR-710 Draft EIR, the public hearings
and the special Pasadena City Council meeting on Monday April 13.
Here is a sample letter and an April Events Calendar
Dear
Councilmembers and City Manager,
RE:
Notice to Pasadena Residents of the
SR-710 Draft EIR and upcoming events.
The
Draft Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact
Statement (EIR/EIS) for the
SR-710 North Study was released
on March 6, 2015 by the
California Department of
Transportation
(Caltrans). The
public is highly encouraged to
submit written or electronic
comments prior to July 6, 2015
There
has not been enough notification
by the city of
Pasadena to the
residents that the SR-710 DEIR
has been released and that
Caltrans is now accepting public
comment.
Most
residents don't know about any
of the events in April.
Each Council member
should send to their district's
constituents a list of the upcoming
SR-710 events taking place in April.
In
particular the events that are taking
place in Pasadena. The meetings
should be heavily advertised and each
Council Member should send out via
email or via snail mail to their
District households the list of
upcoming SR-710 events.
If this slips
by without proper notification to the
public, the residents of Pasadena will
know that the City and their
representatives did not do enough outreach
for this very important issue.
Attached is a
Calendar of SR-710 Upcoming Events for
April and Information on how to give
public comment.
Include
your name and address
SR-710 Upcoming Events
Mark your calendar
Host:DateTimeLocation
Public
Hearing #1 on SR710 Draft EIR
CalTransSaturday, April 11, 201510 am – 4 pmEast Los Angeles College
Rosco Ingalls Auditorium
Map
Viewing 10 am – 11 am1301 Avenida Cesar Chavez
Public
Hearing 11 am – 4 pm
Monterey Park, CA91754
Now Accepting Public
Comment for the SR-710 Draft EIR/EIS:
The
public is highly encouraged to submit written or electronic comments prior to
July 6, 2015
The Draft Environmental
Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) for the SR-710 North
Study was released on March 6, 2015 by the California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans).
An artist's rendering of a high-speed train station.
California's high-speed rail project has plenty of critics: nearly half the state, in fact, according to last year's polls. Its $68 billion
price tag has most people anxious in the shadow of the state's
foreboding "wall of debt." Others are baffled by the starting segment in
the San Joaquin Valley (SJV), between Madera and Fresno, calling it a "train to nowhere." And some are upset that the mega-project is "drought intolerant."
"Man cannot live without water, but he can certainly survive without ever-growing density," wrote Linda Roberts in an Los Angeles Times "Reader's React" column last week. "How
can anyone take the drought seriously when the developers and
politicians approve constant, frenzied building of malls, gigantic
hotels, condos, businesses and residential communities, all of which
will impact the water supply?"
Downtown Fresno. Roberts
was one of several to write in to frame high-speed rail, and the
development that is certain to accompany it, in the context of the the
state's historic drought. The American Farmland Trust and agricultural representatives in the SJV have made similar arguments. The drought is likely to last for years,
foreshadowing even more devastating dry spells in the future. Does
high-speed rail—a money-hungry, high-intensity mega-project—spell
sustainability, from a water perspective?
Yes, it does. To pan high-speed rail (HSR) on the basis of the
drought is short-sighted. Low-density development uses more water than
high-density development does. HSR will encourage the latter, and not
just in terms of accommodating induced growth.
Those millions of people coming to the SJV are going to set roots
somewhere. No matter what, hundreds of thousands of acres of land that
are currently used by agriculture are going to be sold to developers and
become urbanized. And if California had no big infrastructure project
planned, and merely allowed historical patterns to unfold, urbanization
of the Valley would continue in its current shape: sprawling,
low-density development, with greater quantities of farmland swallowed
up. Think "ranchettes," the bane of every SJV farmer's existence: non-farming, suburban-style homes on ten-plus-acre parcels. A 2005 report from the Public Policy Institute of California projected
an idea (not a precise forecast) of what urbanization might look like
by 2040, if the SJV developed in business-as-usual form:
Compare this, on the other hand, to how they projected urbanization
patterns as they'll be shaped by HSR. Development will be more
concentrated around train stations in existing city centers. Less land
will become urbanized overall.
Fresno, where HSR construction broke ground, adopted a new "smart growth" general plan in December that will corral half
of the city's future growth within the existing city limits, supporting
more people per acre. Fresno is the SJV's largest city, and will
hopefully set a precedent for other towns by tightly regulating how
development unfurls. But according to research from the HSR authority, market forces will also help encourage increased density and a mix of land uses near rail stations.
Urban sprawl, intuitively, affects water consumption. Typically,
low-density development (with the large lot sizes and more landscaping) results in higher total water use as well as higher per capita water use.
And not only does sprawl contribute to traffic, air pollution, and
lower health outcomes, it also threatens the quality and availability of
water itself. A report from Smart Growth America writes,
"As the impervious surfaces that characterize sprawling
development—roads, parking lots, driveways, and roofs—replace meadows
and forests, rain no longer can seep into the ground to replenish our
aquifers."
Gov.
Jerry Brown speaks to the crowd during the California High Speed Rail
Authority ground breaking event on Tuesday, Jan. 6, 2015 in Fresno,
Calif. It may have
struck you by now, though, that in the grand scheme of water
consumption, urban and industrial use don't amount to much.
Agriculture—the core activity of the San Joaquin Valley—guzzles about 80
percent of California's overall supply.
So I don't disagree with those LA Times letter-writers that California could be doing more in response to the drought, even given Governor Jerry Brown's $1 billion emergency bond package last week. Legislators should be working to establish a stronger water market for agricultural and environmental purposes. They should be mandating restrictions on farm water use instead of only on residential use. And they should be embracing a big, long-view project that will bring new jobs to a struggling region that's already losing agricultural dollars to the drought, and take up less farmland than sprawl-as-usual. Oh wait, actually, that project is high-speed rail.
Outgoing Metro CEO Art Leahy, center, with the Metro Board of Directors.
Art was given both proclamations by the city of Los Angeles and Los
Angeles County at today’s meeting. It was Art’s final Board meeting as
Metro CEO; he takes over as Metrolink CEO in mid-April.
Item 17. The Board approved a motion by several Board Members (Don
Knabe, Eric Garcetti, Jacquelyne Dupont-Walker, Mike Bonin, James Butts
and Mark Ridley-Thomas) directing Metro staff to report back on a cost
and schedule comparison of building a rail station at Aviation/96th as
part of the Crenshaw/LAX Line versus building it after the Crenshaw/LAX
Line opens.
The issue: the Aviation/96th Station will be the transfer point to an
Automated People Mover to be built by LAX that will allow Crenshaw/LAX
Line and Green Line passengers to reach the airport terminals. The
station is not formally part of the Crenshaw/LAX Line since it was just
approved by the Board last year with an environmental study now
underway.
The concern among Board Members is that if the 96th Street Station is
built after the Crenshaw/LAX Line is completed, it may cause some
previous work to be redone in order to accommodate the new station. To
put it in plain English, the Board is trying to determine whether it’s
best to do the work now — with perhaps some delays to the Crenshaw/LAX
Line construction schedule — or later at perhaps a far higher cost. Staff report on the issue
•Item 10. The Board approved spending $8 million in Measure R funds
on three Metrolink projects, including grade safety improvements at
Ramona Boulevard and Citrus Avenue on the San Bernardino Line and track
improvements at Control Point Soledad on the Antelope Valley Line to
improve speeds on an existing siding from 20 mph to 40 mph. Staff report
•Item 8. The Board approved a motion
by several members (Eric Garcetti, Paul Krekorian, Ara Najarian, Hilda
Solis) asking Metro to develop an “action plan” to improve ridership,
which is up over the past five years but has declined since last April.
The Board also approved an amendment by Michael D. Antonovich asking
Metro staff to review and include suggestions from past motions asking
for improvements to bus and rail service, transfers and schedules and
customer safety and experience.
•Item 51. The Board approved a motion by several members (Eric
Garcetti, Mark Ridley-Thomas, Sheila Kuehl, Hilda Solis, Mike Bonin and
Jacquelyne Dupont-Walker) directing that Metro’s joint development
policy be amended so that 35 percent of the units built on Metro-owned
land qualify as “affordable” units. (Of the 2,077 units developed thus
far, 33 percent qualify). The motion also asks Metro staff to report
back on the feasibility of starting a $10 million affordable housing
fund.
An amendment by Board Members Don Knabe and Diane DuBois directs
staff to consider a number of sources for that funding, including
non-operations funds.
The Dubai tramway is the first tram in the
world able to run in temperatures of up to
50 °C (122 °F) and to withstand harsh
climate conditions. Equipped with APS
ground-level power supply, the system is
also the first in the world to be
catenary-free all along the line, enabling
perfect integration of the tramway into the
cityscape.
Nitrogen dioxide is a by-product of diesel engines
Air pollution is linked to an increased risk of stroke, a large global study in the British Medical Journal suggests.
Scientists
say even short-term spikes in pollution were mirrored by a rise in
strokes - particularly in low and middle-income countries.
The work builds on earlier studies linking pollution to cardiovascular risk.
UK experts say although pollution is lower in the developed world, it may still pose a significant risk.
Pollution peaks
Parts of the UK are breaching pollution limits set by the European Union in 2010.
And the UK government says some major cities may well continue to do so until at least 2025.
The European Environment Agency warns that air pollution can lead to major illness and contribute to premature deaths.
The
latest study looked specifically at the risk of stroke. Scientists from
Edinburgh University scoured the results of 94 studies covering 28
countries across the world.
They say the trends were consistent -
a short-term rise in pollution was associated with a rise in the number
of people admitted to hospital for strokes and in stroke deaths.
The link was the strongest in low and middle-income countries and on the day people were exposed to high pollution.
The
review looked at a range of possible pollutants - from gases such as
sulphur dioxide, nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide to fine soot
particles known as PM 2.5.
Dr Anoop Shah, lead author of the
study, said: "This study now demonstrates that even short-term exposure
to air pollution can trigger disabling strokes or death from stroke.
"One
of the key differences between risk of stroke due to air pollution and
other risk factors such as smoking or high blood pressure is that the
whole general population is exposed.
"As such, this increased risk of stroke is in the general population and not just those previously thought to be at high risk."
But
Dr Shamim Quadir at the Stroke Association said more work was needed to
establish how strong this link is and whether or not air pollution
could be considered as a risk factor for stroke.
Level check
The
British Heart Foundation, which funded the study, says there is an
urgent need for the UK government to meet pollution targets.
It
says failure to do so could be putting hundreds of thousands of people
at risk - though further research is needed to confirm this estimate.
The charity suggests people with heart conditions or lung disease should monitor air pollution where they live and work.
was announced after an environmental-impact report suggested a tunnel should be dug to extend the freeway.
March 25, 2015