A crowd attended Metro’s Scoping meeting in La Canada last night; every single person spoke against building a 710 tunnel or freeway except 710 Freeway Coalition Leader Nat Read.
Highlights of public demands for inclusion in the Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement:
-A detailed explanation of how a public private partnership could possibly work for financing and operating a tunnel, including whether there are any viable models in California, and how such an arrangement can specifically benefit taxpayers as well as private investors
-Sharon Weisman: An analysis of all possible Native American burial sites along any route considered.
-Laura Olhasso, La Canada City Council Member: A demand that the study area include environmental impacts to all the foothill communities, including Glendale, La Canada, La Crescenta, Altadena. Olhasso said she was “appalled” that these are not included in the original study area, since major traffic and pollution impacts could result from a 710 freeway link to the 210.
-A robust cost/benefit analysis, which hasn’t yet even been attempted. The speaker said “no industry in the world would undertake a project like this without a detailed cost/benefit analysis,” and further demanded that the analysis be extended “in as much detail” for all alternatives to a tunnel.
-Increased noise level impacts. One resident who lives 1/3 mile north of the 210 and can hear trucks from his home stated that noise levels should be measured/estimated every 3 hours of each day throughout a year’s time.
-Bill Weisman, Glendale Transportation and Parking Commission Chair: Study a more efficient movement of goods, such as rail. He and others speakers mentioned the lowered friction advantages of rail transport for freight. Steel on steel reduces friction, energy required, pollution, and noise.
-Harvey (whose last name I didn’t catch), asked a question which elicited a strong round of applause from the audience: “Who is the invisible hand behind this project?” He said that these meetings couldn’t possibly be about exploring all alternatives, since all the slides and handouts are labeled “SR-710”. He and several other speakers expressed frustration that residents’ long-term opposition to this project has been ignored.
-Leon Mayer, who had just been at a Glendale City Council meeting, mentioned that the California Legislative Analyst’s office has raised questions about the legality and feasibility of the project.
Verdugoans (GCers)
Yes the Meeting was the BEST attended so far…Public >Caltrans, MTA,Consultants+hangerson
BUT
2minute restriction was BAD –
Consultants have not told the Public how to comment
DON’T ASK QUESTIONS The public can always ask questions and HAVE NO INLFUENCE ON THE EIR – that is what Caltrans wants – deflection from the Goal
If anyoe is interested – get 4 people together – spply coffee and give me 24 h notice and I will give you all a focused workshoip on how to comment to Caltrans…
Tom Williams Send email OR Give a call – 323-528-9682
<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<< I710 South > SR710 North > I-210 (=Arroyo Verdugo Improvments) > I-5/SR14 Improvements > High Desert Corridor
= Project Segmentation/Piecemealing = Growth Inducements
Demand Appropriate Studies –
Instantaneous, 1-, 5-, and 15-minute averaged Noise Levels NOT hourly Only
Air pollutant monitoring on hourly interval including PM-0.1, PM2.5, and PM10
Provide Mitigations for Study/Inclusion
Noise – Sound Walls
Air Pollution = Truck Ban = Reduce bridge clearances to <15ft
PRovide Alternatives
Zero Port Road Freight by 2035 – Get on Rails
MultiMode of FAST, Fustrated Angelenos Stuck in Traffic – Rand Study
Close the GoldLine West Gap
Closethe SR110 Gap to the I-210
Leon Meyer reference – see
http://www.thenewspaper.com/news/33/3359.asp
I have done PPPs and I usulally translate it as: Privates Plundering/Pillaging the Public