By Néstor CASTIGLIONE

The political fracas over the future of the 710 Freeway extension – to build or not to build – has been one that has pitted Sacramento against cities, and cities against cities, for the better part of the late 20th century and the entirety of the present one. But the situation may be coming to a head. A combination of a state budget deficit and growing headwinds from the federal government may lead the project’s supporters to abandon it.

Today, Thursday, May 25 the Metropolitan Transportation Agency (Metro) board of directors will vote on a motion seeking to accept a “locally preferred alternative” to the tunnel. Consisting of traffic signal improvements, enhanced public transportation service, and encouraging carpooling, among other proposals, this alternative is considered to be the only viable one at the moment.

Councilmember Ara J. Najarian, who sits on the Metro board, talked with the Crescenta Valley Weekly earlier this week concerning today’s vote and the future of the 710 Freeway. He said that with funding nowhere to be seen for this project in the near-term from Sacramento, not to mention reluctance from the federal level, that the tunnel’s future looked dim.

“There’s no more money in Measure R for it. Nobody in the private industry has been foolhardy enough to approach Metro with a private/public partnership,” he explained. ‘There’s no money for it.”

The motion for the “locally preferred alternative,” which Najarian will co-author, would also allocate $105 million Measure R monies to local municipalities to engage in their own projects to improve their traffic problems.

“The tunnel’s strongest advocate, Metro board chair John Fosana, conceded that we’ll never have money to build it and that we don’t have the Metro votes to approve it,” Najarian said.

He added he was “finally glad” that the fight against the 710 Freeway tunnel appeared to be at an end, noting that he had paid a “heavy political price” for his opposition. Nonetheless, he said he looked forward to working on a “real solution” for the region’s traffic problems.

He said that the proposed tunnel’s scope – which would run over seven miles – would entail an enormous cost, as well as the real risk of significant cost overruns. Among projects he noted that had fallen into overruns were Seattle’s Alaskan Way Viaduct replacement tunnel and Metro’s own regional connector in Downtown Los Angeles. Each project is comparatively less ambitious than the proposed 710 tunnel, with each running approximately two miles and one mile, respectively, when completed.

“That’s a huge issue right there – the amount of money that it’s going to cost. Just multiply that with the earthquake zones and the water tables that need to be drilled for this,” Najarian said. “It doesn’t make sense. That’s why nobody wants to bid on this. The government doesn’t want to do this. Private industry doesn’t want to do this.”

Caltrans, he noted, may presumably still be working on the project with an eye to moving forward with it. It is due to submit an environmental impact report (EIR) on the 710 Freeway tunnel.

“The Metro board voting to kill this tunnel should send a clear message to [Caltrans] that it needs to stop work on this EIR. The local taxpayer money used to complete this document for a project that will never see the light of day could be used in so many better ways,” he said. “[Today’s] motion will send a clear message to [Caltrans] and Gov. Jerry Brown that we don’t want this and for them to move on to projects that help the community.”

Najarian also noted that the project has not been placed among Caltrans’ priorities. The agency has expressed that it would prefer to concentrate on improving existing infrastructure, rather than build anew.

“I mean that’s the death knell for the project right there,” he said. “If people can’t see that, they need better glasses. This is really the end of the tunnel.”

  Nestor CASTIGLIONE