Patch Blog: Why I Oppose the 710 Extension

I oppose the extension of the SR 710 in any form, surface or subsurface.

Los Angeles County has a large latent demand for mobility. That latent demand grows when people want to travel somewhere but can’t or won’t due to traffic congestion. Attempts to relieve congestion by new highway construction are always foiled because latent demand is converted to actual usage. 

New or expanded highways reach capacity shortly after opening. This phenomenon is not a theoretical possibility. It is the factual historical experience of every highway in Los Angeles County. For this reason, even Caltrans acknowledges that we cannot build our way out of congestion.

During my term in office, I have consistently opposed the extension of the SR 710. When I was mayor in 2010, I was able to get the City’s position on the 710 extension strengthened and clarified. In November, 2010, , surface or subsurface, to extend the 710. This clarified the City’s position—meaning that we unequivocally opposed the tunnel.

My opponents obscure their support for the tunnel by simply claiming that they oppose the surface route. But they cannot explain why the tunnel would be in the best interests of the City.

A tunnel will not solve the mobility nor goods movement problems in Los Angeles County, because it cannot accommodate the volume of automobile and truck traffic. Heavy rail is the best way to move the containers from the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.

Commuters require different solutions; they want viable alternatives to driving automobiles. For the amount of money it would cost to build a 4.5 mile tunnel, we could build a network of light rail lines covering Los Angeles County that would provide the connectivity needed for people to get to and from work.

An electrified heavy rail system would get tens of thousands of diesel trucks off LA County highways, reduce congestion, reduce pollution and improve health. Every recent study on air pollutants, especially particulate matter, has shown its widespread harmful effects on people of all ages.

Proponents of a tunnel say it is better than a surface freeway, but they fail to understand its true construction and maintenance costs, inherent dangers (like fire), limited vehicle capacity and increased health risks.

The truth is that a tunnel would actually increase surface traffic. The expected diversion rate from tunnel to surface streets (especially when tolls are planned) is 35% because no one wants to be stuck 150 feet underground in bumper-to-bumper traffic breathing thick exhaust fumes.