I live in the path of the Freeway, so obviously I'm biased. I would prefer no freeway, but I realize at some point something is going to happen. What I do know, is that if you want this 710 corridor completed, it will have to be with a tunnel. Politically, that is the only way it's going to happen. Arnold should have signed SB 545, and if he had, you would have your tunnel that much sooner. As long as the surface route option is on the table, the lawsuits will continue into infinity, and you will never have anything. It isn't just South Pasadena fighting the 710 anymore, it's El Sereno, Glendale, and La Canada. All I here is South Pas this, and South Pas that, but lawsuits have been filed from the other communities I have mentioned. The combined power is formidable. Taking the surface route off the table would have been a major advance in bringing the corridor completion to a close. It was a mistake for the Governor not to sign that bill. Gill Cedillo was the author (or at least claimed credit) for SB 545, and he is a major proponent of closing this freeway gap. He saw the handwriting on the wall, that the only way to get the gap closed was through a tunnel, and thus he drafted this bill. I really believe Arnold vetoed it for political reasons, he wasn't getting the support he wanted on his water projects, and this was his punishment. It was a stupid political move, in my opinion.

Just for the record Mayor Ara Najarian is the temporary Chair of the MTA, the positon rotates on a iterim basis. He is also one of the 5 members of the 15 member MTA Board elected from the smaller cities in LA County. Remember 5 seats go to LA County government on a permanent basis and 5 to LA City government on a permanent basis with the other 5 elected at large from throughout the County. Do the math! If he take s a position the County Board or LA City Council / Mayor oppose, he and 4 other mebers are out voted.

As for water Phylis, all underground projects have dewatering systems built into them. How do you think all the tunnels get built. Look at the BART Trans BAy Tunnel, the English- French Chunnel, both are built underwater and remain water proof. The Bay t unnel even went on operating during the Loma Preita Earthquake in SF Bay area. There are several tunnels that go into NYC from Jersey and other parts of NY City. There are two tunnels under the Harbor in Baltimore, one old, one new. There is a very long tunnel from the southern tip of Maryland to Virgina and countless amazing tunnels throught the Alps and in Scandanavia.

The Europeans have extensive safety systems in place in case of fire or other natural disasters. The Japanese and Chinese have built long rail and auto tunnels to new airports in the water to provide for expansion. They do it all the time. Question is why don't we compete any longer in these areas.

The reason that foreign companies will probably do the work, is that they are the world leaders in this technology. Think about any big inovative public projects in the country in the last 10-15 years, not many. Either we can not do it, are told we can't by citizens or are NIMBY'ed into stopping neeeded public improvements.

The 710 will get built, great stimulus job and if CA was still the US leader in creativity, they'd tunnel the 2 Freeway under the mountains to Palmdale.

Just imagine a rail auto tunnel straight from the Palmdale Airport to downtown LA. Think of the pressure it would take off the westside and LAX. These types of projects are possible and done throughout the world. Progress continues

If a public agency does not use the property for the intended purposes, unless they are allowed by their state or local charter or geenral law provisions, they generally have to auction off the land tothe highest bidder. This is to recoup as much of the public funds as possible used to acquire the property. They can sometimes with an action by the state sell the property to a local government for a public purpose.

In the case of Caltrans, their main charge is to produce and improve the state and regional transpotation grid. I would think the renters would be given an opportunity to bid on the land along with any other public interest.

Hopes that helps

You will notice that the 210 eastbound is way below surface level of surrounding communities as well as the 210 northbound through La Canada, Glendale, Flintridge and Tujunga. They are also extra wide, in order to allow for heavy truck traffic and wide loads.

My personal option is not to build a tunnel at all but to complete the freeway as originally designed and be finished with it. It is the shortest most direct route and would not leave the southern portion of the 210 in Pasadena in limbo forever.

One only has to look at the vegitation in the Northeast LA & Glendale area to realize there are a lot of undergound water sources, not to mention the five earthquake faults that crisscross this area these are the best reasons not to build a tunnel. If a tunnel is built we the residents would be the first responders available if anyone survived. The same is true for a freeways but not 300ft below ground level with potential water accessing the tunnels. On my property alone water comes to 3" below the surface and is 12ft deep.

I am the daughter of the County Road Dept. Supervisor in charge of this project and many others. He spent every weekend (with his family in tow)traveling the areas and surveying the land before deciding which would leave the least impact on a community and still move vehicles. County Engineers do this planning well in advance of final maps.

Back then well before the 1960's the 710 was designed for Port of Los Angeles domestic trucks both inbound and outbound. We used to export products back then.

Why are we considering spending stimulus money to build tunnels made by a foreign country?

I live in Alhambra, and I'm tired of driving in the freeway traffic that has dumped out onto Valley and Fremont. It's getting as bad as Bundy in West LA.

I say, dig the tunnel! Just be sure to build and on/off ramp at Huntington!

Ara Najarian was not as opposed as the coverage makes out - not at all.

Melanie Hicken, while nice enough to heed my request to not be quoted, saw things at the public meeting somewhat differently than I. She wrote three articles.

The professional freeway fighters were there in relative mass. Sadly they commented annoyingly long - up to a 10 minute monologue. The long monologue was an odd bent about freight trains. (I would love to see a fright train run right through South Pasadena and all. Though I believe that he was impling that no addition rail line would be needed - non sequitur.)

Caltrans might know what they are doing but as they mentioned ad nauseum it is too early in the project to comment. I asked one of the Caltrans employees, privately, why every option was not currently focused down to what seeming makes some logical sense ie rejecting the possible route that navigates through a superfund site (hazardous waste) as it would surely reduce the cost and effort of the project. The reply was enlightening in that it rejected the big brother mentality that I thought Caltrans subscribed to; "Fiduciary responsibility." Neat.

Show me the freeway on-ramp/off-ramp in LA that doesn't induce massive amounts of car traffic.

Sincerely,

Somebody

Those people with that concern haven't been down Fremont St., Atlantic, Garfield, or Valley Bl. in Alhambra (where the 710 currently ends). They'd realize that's happening either way.

by the way, I'm opposed to completing it all the way to the 210...I think it'd be better off ending at Huntington, which is a major street that actually has capactiy for that type of traffic.