Last week’s poll asking you to vote on what name L.A. Streetsblog will use to describe the 710 Extension Project was easily Streetsblog’s most popular poll to date, with 252 total votes.  Two project names got sixty votes each to move on to this final poll.  One week from today, either Art Dean’s “Golden Freight Freeway” or Joanne Nuckols’ “SR-710, L.A.’s Big Dig” will become the official name that Streetsblog uses to describe the project from here on out.

The 710 Extension has been a hot topic this week.  Yesterday at the Metro Board Meeting, staff presented an estimate on how much the project would cost if the agency decides to move forward with a tunnel alternative.  The cost?  $2.81 billion.

That number is less than 20% of the cost of the infamous “Big Dig,” despite the Dig actually being a smaller project by length.  Not surprisingly, Glendale Mayor and Metro Board Member Ara Najarian took exception.  In a spirited back and forth with Board Chair Don Knabe, Najarian questioned the ethics of senior Metro Staff Art Leahy and Richard Moliere for signing the document.

The methodology for coming up with the $2.81 billion number was somewhat convoluted. 

The Consultant has been monitoring the procurement and bid award for the Alaskan Way Tunnel (AWT) in Seattle, a project that compares technically to the SR-710 North gap concept and elements of the Westside extension project. Washington State DOT awarded the contract for the project in January 201 1, providing us with a unique opportunity to undertake comparative costing of our estimates with current market data.

We have extrapolated the data from the Alaskan Way Tunnel project and conducted two independent estimates of cost for our tunnels, with particular emphasis at this point on the SR-710 North gap project, in response to the Director’s motion. Our preliminary findings, utilizing the actual bid cost for the A W deep bore tunnel, validates the updated cost estimates for the SR-710 North gap tunnel project that we have developed at this early stage.

At the L.A. Subway Blog, Juan Matute also goes through those numbers and comes up with his own estimate: between $6.52 billion and $7.22 billion.

Why such a large difference?  For starters, both Najarian and Matute noted that the Metro estimate assumes that the proposed tunnel would be the shortest of several proposed lengths, 21,000 feet.  Some of the tunnel designs are as large as 28,000 feet.

“We have to stop the community process right now,” Najarian thundered about the numbers being used at the 710 Conversations, “We’re deceiving people!”

Najarian’s stand earned more people than just praise from gadfly John Walsh that he was “acting like John Walsh,” the Board agreed for further study of a cost estimate that assumed a 28,000 foot long tunnel and a review of how much the “Big Dig” cost per square foot.

On the last request, Knabe let out an exasperated, “You could google that, but ok…”

A new cost estimate is expected at the May Metro Board Meeting.

This isn't the first time Board Member Najarian has tried to hold up the 710 Tunnel Project. This photo is from a LA_Now article on an attempt from last May.

For a full sized copy of the route map, click here

Now that the full agenda for this week’s meeting of the Metro Board Meeting is finally online, we can focus on issues beyond the Wilshire Bus Only Lanes.

Another highlight of the meeting is an attempt by Glendale Mayor and Metro Board Member Ara Najarian to slow down the momentum that the I-710 Tunnel Project has had since the passage of Measure R. The proposed “gap closure” of the 710 and the 210 freeways would cost somewhere between $1 billion and $11.4 billion depending what estimate you believe.

Najarian’s ask, that the Board require a cost estimate for the tunnel before tens of millions of dollars are spent on environmental studies, is reasonable; but may not get a sympathetic hearing from the Board.  Even the “No on 710″ coalition understands that so far, only L.A. City Councilman Jose Huizar has supported the resolution in public.  That means they need at least five more votes to have a majority on the thirteen person Board.

Giving more momentum to the opponents of the tunnel was a new ranking of infrastructure projects that listed the I-710 expansion project as one of the most wasteful in the country.  “Green Scissors” ranking pulled no punches while calling for the road to be removed from the national network so no federal dollars are wasted on the tunnel.

Federal taxpayers should not be asked to pay for a project with a flawed EIS, nationwide opposition and a $10 billion shortfall in the local transportation funding agency. At $311 million per mile, this project is more expensive per mile than most urban freeways and the Los Angeles subway system.

The “No on 710″ coalition is also sending letters to Board Members asking for support for Najarian’s motion, and they have different letters for different Board Members.  For example, Mayor Villaraigosa will be reminded that:

In December 2009 your own City Council unanimously passed a resolution against allowing any form of the 710 North Extension to be built within city limits. That resolution CLEARLY stated No 710 in any form, be it  tunnels below ground, on ground, or in the air.

While County Supervisor Gloria Molina will be challenged on her claims that she is a champion of the poor:

Supervisor Molina, your actions on this controversial 710 North Extension tunnels, may well be seen by your constituents as a litmus test on whether you mean what you say about helping the underprivileged rather than the privileged. Because that’s what the 710 North Extension  is all about: serving the interests of a few and sacrificing those of Northeast LA.

For copies of all the “No on 710″ letters to the Metro Board, click here.  We’ll be live tweeting the meeting and will have a story up as soon as it’s over.

Najarian, the Glendale Mayor and Member of the Metro Board, tells the Glendale News-Press that he will ask the Metro Board of Directors to order a cost analysis to build an underground tunnel connecting the 710 Freeway, which now ends in Alhambra, to the Pasadena Freeway.  Usually, a cost analysis is part of the environmental studies, but given the potentially huge cost of the project, and the wildly different estimates given for the project over the years (see chart below); Najarian is arguing that Metro should have some hard fiscal figures before committing to spending nearly $60 million on an environmental study.

While Najarian announced the motion to the press and hinted at it on the “No 710 Freeway Tunnel” Facebook Page, the motion does not appear on the Metro Board Schedule for this month.  Given that the schedule is so packed that they moved the start of the meeting to 9:00 A.M. from 9:30 A.M., it’s possible that a hearing for the motion will be delayed until next month.

Chart Provided by "No 710 Freeway Tunnel"

Najarian’s motion and press statements echo a recent op/ed by Assemblyman Anthony J. Portantino which was subtly titled “710 Tunnel Could Devestate the Region.”  In it Portantino writes:

Despite ardent calls from the La Cañada Flintridge City Council and my office to slow this process, freeway proponents plan to charge ahead, potentially before even January. It is imperative that we continue to advocate for a valid cost-benefit analysis before hundreds of millions of taxpayer dollars are wasted on a tunnel project that will be a financial disaster and devastate Northeast Los Angeles, South Pasadena, Pasadena, La Crescenta, Glendale and La Cañada Flintridge.

Despite the momentum tunnel opponents are gaining, they face a tall task on Thursday.  In addition to the potential impact of Board Member Fatigue, there’s also the minor issue that the majority of the Board favor the project…or at least are pretending to because powerful unions are very upfront about the jobs a tunneling project would create.  Anyone that doubts the political power of unions has to look no further than last week’s press conference announcing the loan for the Crenshaw Line when two union bosses sat on stage and made speeches while Metro Board Members, City Comptroller Wendy Greuel, the Mayor of Inglewood and Denny Zane sat in the audience.

Najarian himself jokes of his proposal’s chances that in front of the Board, “They are going to want to kill it and kill me, probably, because it raises the question of the cost estimate,” but there is some hope for the “No 710 Freeway Tunnel” crowd on Thursday.  Metro Board Members always seem to have plenty of scheduling conflicts on the day of Board Meetings, and a vote late in the meeting could be missing so many board members that the motion could pass with only a handful of votes.

Last week, Metro Chair Ara Najarian penned a piece for The Source announcing that bicycle parking is coming to the Westlake/MacArthur Park T.O.D. at some point in the future.  It's not everyday that the Metro Board Chair responds to something written on Streetsblog (although Stephen Box and I are debating which one of us he actually responded to); so Streetsblog owes a response.

First, The Source, had previously understated Streetsblog's position on the MacArthur Park Development.  In their April 15 transportation headlines, it summarizes the complaints with Westlake/MacArthur Park by only mentioning one complaint: the total lack of bike parking.

The lack of bicycle parking is one issue, but Streetsblog also raised red flags about the large amount of car parking and the lack of promotion of the sites eight bus stops surrounding the development in favor of the train station.

Najarian's piece did little to debunk the non-bicycle related concerns.  Even though it spends a lot of time on the bike parking issue, it still doesn't do much to clear up that picture.  Najarian writes:

Contrary to some blog reports, the fact is that bicycle parking will be included in this development and implemented in a manner that is most convenient and accessible to our bicycle customers.

That's great!  It would have been nice if Metro had put that in any of their press releases on the development, but nobody's perfect.  I guess we'll just pat Metro on the back and go our separate ways. But...

MTA staff reports that bicycle facilities for the public were always intended at the development. Bicycle parking for the public already exists on the portal.  This project will be built in two phases, however.  The first phase is planned one block east of the Westlake/MacArthur Park Red/Purple Line Station. The first phase of the project was not chosen as the preferred site for bicycle parking because it will be located one block away from the portal, which is not convenient for bicyclists who use the Metro system.

Oh, wow.  Is it too late to take back everything i typed two minutes ago?  There's a couple of big issues with what Najarian wrote here.

The most obvious one, and one already hammered and hammered by Box, is that we're not just talking about bike commuters who are going to use the train station; but also the residents who will live, and the shoppers who will shop, at the development.  Metro and the City of Los Angeles have a duty to make certain that developments that happen on government-controlled land provide access for all users and residents.

The second issue is that there's no real timeline for Phase II of the project.  Najarian might as well have said that, "Metro is going to insure that parking goes in as part of Metro's 30/10 Plan." And is this Phase II parking supposed to work for the residents and shoppers for "Phase I?" What are they supposed to do in the meantime?  Take their bikes into the store?

As Najarian is wrapping up his piece, he throws this bone to the bicycling community:

I’m personally heartened that MTA has now established a quarterly series of Bicycle Roundtable meetings that provide the forum for public input on these and other bicycle-related issues within the agency’s purview. In fact, the next roundtable coming up May 12 will discuss bicycle parking issues.

No offense to the roundtable, but Los Angeles' cycling community deserves transportation agencies that know how to do proper bicycle planning.  A roundtable should be addressing special amenities, not spend their time telling professionals "don't forget to require bike parking as part of your "T.O.D.'"  But I guess relying on volunteers is better than relying on magic.

A traffic analysis published by the City of Glendale projects that the "completion" of the I-710  by building a tunnel under South Pasadena would cause an increase of 30,000 vehicles daily on the I-210 north of SR-134.  The report was included as part of a packet to Glendale City Council Members with a resolution affirming the town's traditional opposition to the project.  In one of the non-surprises of the year, the Council, which includes Metro Board Chair Ara Najarian, voted to oppose the project.

So, how does the state propose to deal with all of these new vehicles, less than 10% of which would be trucks?  The report quotes the Draft Traffic Study for the plan that stating:

"Consider additional capacity on 1-210 between SR-134 and SR-2, if the Missing Link is constructed, to preserve the operation conditions on this freeway segment. Construction of the fifth lane in each direction may he considered."

If widening of the I-210 is going to be needed after the completion of the tunnel, Caltrans shouldn't study the environmental impacts of the two road projects separately but together.  If the 710 Tunnel is going to necessitate the I-210 widening we shouldn't treat them as separate studies.  If the studies are done separately, we're going to hear from Caltrans officials about all of the increased traffic "requiring" a widening of the I-210 and this second project would end up being a foregone conclusion.  Thus, the sprawling wheel of highway capacity enhancements would continue to turn.

Glendale joins the towns of La Cañada Flintridge in opposing the project.

Every year on July 1, the Chairmanship of the Metro Board of Directors changes hands.  This year, Glendale City Councilman, and former Mayor, Ara Najarian takes the helm.  While outgoing Chair Villaraigosa is rightly proud of his steering of the Board during the Metro debate, he often seemed bored at meetings and liked to skip "open comment" and just show up to vote.

Najarian’s ascension could be good news for bicycle and pedestrian advocates.  Recently, the City of Glendale has forged a partnership with the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition to make Glendale streets more safe for everyone and Coalition staff has nothing but good things to say of the Councilman.  Also, Najarian is one of the few Metro Board members to take time out for events such as "Bike to Work" week kickoffs.

Regionally, Najarian isn’t one to make waves; but recently he did earn headlines for his opposition to the I-710 Tunnel Project.  As a matter of fact, a search of the Streetsblog archives only reveals three stories that mention him by name.

With Najarian officially in the Chairman’s seat, it will be interesting to see what, if any, changes occur at the policy level or in the way Board meetings are run.  If anyone has any more information on Najarian or wants to give the new Board Chair some advice, feel free to use the comments section as a forum.  Since it wasn’t available online at the moment of publication, you can find Metro’s press release after the jump.

GLENDALE CITY COUNCILMAN ARA NAJARIAN
BECOMES

NEW CHAIR OF THE LOS ANGELES
COUNTY METROPOLITAN
TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY

Glendale City Councilman Ara Najarian takes over as chairman
of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority’s Board
of Directors effective today, July 1. He replaces outgoing Board Chairman, Los
Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa.

“As the new Board Chair, I look forward to
providing the leadership necessary to enhance transportation options throughout
the region,” said Najarian. “This next year will be both
challenging and rewarding as we move the agency through difficult financial
times while at the same time, begin implementing transportation improvement
projects voted by the public with the passage of Measure R, the half-cent sales
tax initiative.”

Najarian was elected to the Glendale City Council in
2005 and served as Mayor from 2007 to 2008. He is currently Chair of the
Glendale Housing Authority and previously served as Chair of the Glendale
Redevelopment Agency. He also served on the Glendale Community College Board of
Trustees from 2003 to 2005 and was Chair of the Glendale Transportation and Parking
Commission.  Najarian has served as a director since 2006 and also currently
serves on Metrolink’s Board of Directors.  

Najarian
has been an attorney in private practice in Glendale
for 20 years and attended Occidental
College where he received
a BA degree in Economics and later earned his JD from USC School of Law.

        Metro
is the third largest public transportation agency in the United States.
It has a $3.9 billion annual budget and more than 9,000 employees. It operates
approximately 200 bus routes serving a 1,433 square mile service area and five
subway and light rail lines that crisscross Los Angeles County.
Metro’s total annual bus and rail ridership exceeds 400 million boardings.