2015 06 11 transportation_comm agendapkt

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, if you need special
assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the SGVCOG office at
(626) 457-1800. Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the
SGVCOG to make reasonable arrangement to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
AGENDA AND NOTICE OF THE SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE
Thursday, June 11, 2015 – 4:00 PM
Garvey Center - 9108 Garvey Ave, Rosemead, CA 91770
Chair
John Fasana, Duarte
Vice-Chair
Sam Pedroza,
Claremont
Members
Alhambra
Claremont
Covina
Diamond Bar
Duarte
Glendora
Industry
La Cañada Flintridge
La Puente
Rosemead
South El Monte
South Pasadena
Walnut
First District, LA County
Unincorporated
Communities
Fifth District, LA County
Unincorporated
Communities
The Transportation Committee encourages public participation and invites you to share
your views on agenda items.
MEETINGS: Regular Meetings of the Transportation Committee are held on the
third Thursday of each month at 4:00 PM at the Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal
Water District Office (602 E. Huntington Drive, Suite B, Monrovia, California,
91016). The Transportation Committee agenda packet is available at the San Gabriel
Valley Council of Government’s (SGVCOG) Office, 1000 South Fremont Avenue,
Suite 10210, Alhambra, CA, and on the website, www.sgvcog.org. Copies are available
via email upon request (sgv@sgvcog.org). Documents distributed to a majority of the
Committee after the posting will be available for review in the SGVCOG office and on
the SGVCOG website. Your attendance at this public meeting may result in the
recording of your voice.
CITIZEN PARTICIPATION: Your participation is welcomed and invited at all
Transportation Committee meetings. Time is reserved at each regular meeting for those
who wish to address the Committee. SGVCOG requests that persons addressing the
Committee refrain from making personal, slanderous, profane or disruptive remarks.
TO ADDRESS THE TRANSPORTATION COMMITTEE: At a regular meeting,
the public may comment on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Committee during
the public comment period and may also comment on any agenda item at the time it is
discussed. At a special meeting, the public may only comment on items that are on the
agenda. Members of the public wishing to speak are asked to complete a comment card
or simply rise to be recognized when the Chair asks for public comments to speak. We
ask that members of the public state their name for the record and keep their remarks
brief. If several persons wish to address the Committee on a single item, the Chair may
impose a time limit on individual remarks at the beginning of discussion. The
Transportation Committee may not discuss or vote on items not on the agenda.
AGENDA ITEMS: The Agenda contains the regular order of business of the
Transportation Committee. Items on the Agenda have generally been reviewed and
investigated by the staff in advance of the meeting so that the Transportation Committee
can be fully informed about a matter before making its decision.
CONSENT CALENDAR: Items listed on the Consent Calendar are considered to be
routine and will be acted upon by one motion. There will be no separate discussion on
these items unless a Committee member or citizen so requests. In this event, the item
will be removed from the Consent Calendar and considered after the Consent Calendar.
If you would like an item on the Consent Calendar discussed, simply tell Staff or a
member of the Committee.

San Gabriel Valley Council of Governments
Transportation Committee Meeting
June 11, 2015
4:00 PM
Page 2
PRELIMINARY BUSINESS
1. Call to Order
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Roll Call
4. Public Comment (If necessary, the Chair may place reasonable time limits on all comments)
5. Changes to Agenda Order: Identify emergency items arising after agenda posting and
requiring action prior to next regular meeting
CONSENT CALENDAR (It is anticipated that the Transportation Committee may take action on the
following matters)
6. Transportation Meeting Minutes
Recommended Action: Approve May 21, 2015 minutes.
ACTION ITEMS (It is anticipated that the Transportation Committee may take action on the following
matters)
7. SR-710 North Environmental Impact Report-Environmental Impact Statement (EIR-EIS)
Recommended Action: Provide direction to staff regarding submittal of comments to
Metro/Caltrans regarding the SR-710 North EIR-EIS.
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (MTA) REPORT (It is anticipated that the
Transportation Committee may take action on the following matters)
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT (It is anticipated that the Transportation Committee may take
action on the following matters)
8. Oral Report
Recommended Action: For information only.
COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
ADJOURN

Unapproved Minutes
SGVCOG Transportation Committee Unapproved Minutes
Date: May 21, 2015
Time: 3:40 PM
Location: Upper San Gabriel Valley Municipal Water District
PRELIMINARY BUSINESS
1. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 4:00 p.m.
2. Pledge of Allegiance
3. Roll Call
Members Present
Alhambra B. Messina
Claremont S. Pedroza
Diamond Bar C. Herrera, D. Liu
Duarte J. Fasana
Industry T. Spohn
La Canada Flintridge T. Walker
Rosemead S. Ly
South El Monte J. Gonzales
South Pasadena M. Lin
Walnut M. Su
LA County District 1 J. Hernandez
Members Absent
Covina
La Puente
LA County District 5
Staff:
F. Delach, Executive Director
M. Christoffels, ACE CEO
M. Creter, Staff
4. Public Comment
W. Reiutmann (Day One) spoke in support of the SGVCOG’s efforts to develop an active
transportation efforts and encouraged research and outreach.
D. Rossman (Wilderness Society) spoke in support of additional research and outreach related to
active transportation.
A. Yipp (Bike SGV) spoke in support additional safety measures related to active transportation.
5. Changes to Agenda Order: Identify emergency items arising after agenda posting and requiring
action prior to next regular meeting
J. Fasana indicated that action on the Transportation Priorities would be delayed until a later
meeting.
CONSENT CALENDAR
6. Transportation Meeting Minutes
There was a motion to approve the consent calendar (M/S: B. Messina/ S. Ly).
[MOTION PASSED]
Item #6
Page 1 of 2

AYES: Alhambra, Claremont, Diamond Bar, Duarte, Industry, La Canada Flintridge,
Rosemead, South El Monte, Walnut, LA County District 1
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT: Covina, La Puente, South Pasadena, LA County District 5
ACTION ITEMS
7. Legislative Platform
F. Delach reviewed this item.
There was a motion to recommend the Governing Board approve the legislative platform
(M/S: S. Pedroza/ B. Messina).
[MOTION PASSED]
Rosemead, South El Monte, South Pasadena, Walnut, LA County District 1
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT: Covina, La Puente, LA County District 5
8. Proposed Programming of Anticipated Revenues for a Proposed 2016 LA County Transportation
Ballot Measure
M. Christoffels report on this item and reviewed the polling data.
There was questions regarding the measure development process and schedule, and the possibility
of conducting polling specific for the San Gabriel Valley.
There was a motion to continue the item (M/S: B. Messina/ D. Mahmud).
[MOTION PASSED]
Rosemead, South El Monte, South Pasadena, Walnut, LA County District 1
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT: Covina, La Puente, LA County District 5
METROPOLITAN TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY (MTA) REPORT
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR’S REPORT
9. Oral Report
COMMITTEE MEMBER ITEMS
ANNOUNCEMENTS
ADJOURN
The meeting was adjourned at 4:45 PM.
Item #6
Page 2 of 2

REPORT
DATE: June 11, 2015
TO: Transportation Committee
FROM: Francis M. Delach, Executive Director
RE: 710 North EIR-EIS
RECOMMENDED ACTION
Provide direction to staff regarding submittal of comments to Metro/Caltrans regarding the SR-
710 North EIR-EIS.
BACKGROUND
On March 6, 2015, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Los Angeles
County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) released a Draft Environmental Impact
Report/Environmental Impact Statement (EIR/EIS) on proposals regarding the 4.5 mile gap
between the I-210 Freeway in Pasadena and the end of the I-710 freeway in East Los Angeles. The
five alternatives proposed in the Draft EIR/EIS are:
• No Build option that would leave conditions as they are
• A traffic management system to upgrade and synchronize signal and improvements to local
street intersections to more quickly move traffic that exits the dead end freeway
• A rapid bus line featuring high frequency service with minimal stops and potentially a
dedicated bus lane
• Light rail to carry passengers between East Los Angeles and Pasadena, and
• A freeway tunnel that would extend the SR-710
Attachment A provides a summary of the major findings from the EIR. All of the documents
related to the EIR, including the technical appendices, can be accessed
here: http://www.dot.ca.gov/dist07/resources/envdocs/docs/710study/draft_eir-eis/. Public
comments are due to Caltrans by July 6, 2015.
BEYOND THE 710 ALTNERATIVE
Beyond the 710 is a coalition of cities and community groups that support an alternative to closing
the 710 gap via a freeway tunnel. Member agencies include the cities of Glendale, La Cañada
Flintridge, Pasadena, Sierra Madre, South Pasadena, the Natural Resources Defense Council, the
National Trust for Historic Preservation and No 710 Action Committee. In May 2015, the group
released a report outlining an alternative strategy for addressing the traffic congestion in the region.
This proposal includes a combination of transit improvements, active transportation investments,
and demand management strategies. Attachment B provides a copy of this report.
Item #7
Page 1 of 36

REPORT
SGVCOG POSITION
Closure of the 710 gap has been one of the SGVCOG’s transportation priorities since its formation
in 1994. Attachment C provides a copy of the SGVCOG’s most recently adopted priority project
list, which was adopted in January 2013. Prior iterations of the priority list had specifically
identified the project as a freeway and/or tunnel. However, modifications were made during the
most recent approval to use mode-neutral terminology.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A – 710 EIR/EIS Project Summary
Attachment B – Beyond the 710 “New Initiative for Mobility and Sustainability”
Attachment C – SGVCOG Transportation Priority Projects (Adopted January 2013)
Item #7
Page 2 of 36

Project Purpose and Need
State Route 710 North Study
Dra Environmental Impact Report/Environmental Impact Statement - 2015
Purpose
The purpose of the proposed ac on is to e ec vely and e ciently accommodate regional and local
north-south travel demands in the study area of the western San Gabriel Valley and east/northeast Los
Angeles, including the following considera ons:
• Improve the e ciency of the exis ng regional freeway and transit networks;
• Reduce conges on on local arterials adversely a ected due to accommoda ng regional tra c volumes;
• Minimize environmental impacts related to mobile sources
Need
The need for the SR 710 North Study is based on considera on of the following factors:
• Capacity, Transporta on Demand, and Safety
- Lack of north-south transporta on facili es and overall conges on within the region
• Modal Interrela onships and System Linkages
- SR 110 and I-710 terminate within the study area without connec ng to other freeways
• Social Demands or Economic Development
- SR 710 is included in the SCAG 2012 RTP/SCS, FTIP and Metro’s LRTP
• Environmental Factors
- E ects related to mobile sources associated with conges on
Congestion on Local Streets Transit System Efficiency
Regional Transportation System
• Over half of the freeway system has LOS D or worse performance
• The opera ons of the north-south freeways are worse than the east-west freeways
• There will be even more LOS E/F (red) segments in 2035
• Freeway speeds are low
and highly variable in LA
County
• The graph shows variability
in speed along I-5
• The heaviest tra c (thick red lines) is almost all on north-south streets
• The volume of tra c will further increase by 2035
• “Cut-Through Tra c”
uses local streets for
longer trips
• Trips that both started
and ended outside the
study area were counted
as “cut-through”
• The analysis looked at
tra c on 13 loca ons
(see map) from LA to
Duarte
• About 1 in 8 trips is
cut-through
• Cut-through tra c will
increase 15% by 2035
• Transit travel mes are high -
even for rela vely short trips
• The map shows travel mes
on transit to Pasadena
• The red areas are reasonably
close to Pasadena but s ll
can take 30 to 60 minutes or
more on transit
Direc on of Tra c
North-South Freeways
Level of Service (Exis ng)
East-West Freeways
Level of Service (Exis ng)
LOS C or be er
40% LOS D
23%
LOS E or F
37%
LOS C or be er
53% LOS D
24%
LOS E or F
23%
The map shows the intensity of tra c on local streets
SR 710 North Study Area
Freeway System Efficiency
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 3 of 36

Alterna ves Overview
MILES
210 4 6 N
Existing Freeway
Metro Rail
Class III Bike Routes
Existing Road
Railroad/Metrolink
City Boundary
Legend
1. No Build 2. Transportation System Management/
Transportation Demand Management (TSM/TDM)
3. Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) 4. Light Rail Transit (LRT) 5. Freeway Tunnel
MILES
210 4 6 N
Existing Freeway
Metro Rail
Signal Optimization
Transit Signal Priority
Traffic Signal Synchronization
Existing Road
Railroad/Metrolink
City Boundary
Legend
MILES
210 4 6 N
• Signal synchroniza on
• Signal op miza on
• Transit signal priority
• Arterial changeable message signs
• Speed data collec on system
• 17 intersec on improvements
• 7 local street segments
• Modify Fair Oaks/SR 110 Interchange
• Extend St. John from Del Mar to California
• Valley to Mission Connector
• Pedestrian and bike facility enhancements
to support access to transit
• Consistent with local agency plans
• Expanded peak period exis ng bus service
• 10 minutes headway during peak hours
The No Build Alterna ve includes transporta on improvement projects inside and
outside the Study Area, including all projects in the Southern California Associa on
of Governments (SCAG) Regional Transporta on Plan (RTP) programmed to be
completed by 2035. Including these projects is required by state and federal laws to
demonstrate that the SR 710 North Study need s ll exists even if these projects are
completed. For detailed informa on on proposed projects under the SCAG RTP, go
to h p://rtpscs.scag.ca.gov.
• Preliminary Cost Es mate:
$105 M (in 2014 dollars)
See display maps for more details
Local Street and Intersec on Improvements
ITS Improvements Transit Re nement
Legend
Ac ve Transporta on
• High-speed, high-frequency service between
East Los Angeles and Pasadena
• 12-mile corridor; 17 stops
• Mixed- ow and exclusive lanes (single and both
direc ons)
• 10 minutes during peak hours and 20 minutes during
o -peak
• Replaces exis ng Route 762
• Ameni es included to a ract riders
• Two bus feeder services
- Connects to El Monte Bus Sta on
- Connects to Commerce and Montebello Metrolink
Sta ons
• Preliminary Cost Es mate: $241 M (2014 dollars)
- Includes $102 M for TSM/TDM improvements
• Between East Los Angeles and Pasadena
• 7.5-mile passenger rail line on dedicated guideway
- Includes 3 miles of aerial segment and 4.5 miles of
tunnels
- 3 aerial and 4 underground sta ons
• The tunnels are expected to be constructed using
pressurized-face Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs)
- Two approximately 20-foot diameter tunnels
- Tunnels would be advanced from south end
• Design including safety elements follows Metro
guidelines
• Two bus feeder services
- Connects to El Monte Bus Sta on
- Connects to Commerce and Montebello Metrolink
Sta ons
• Preliminary Cost Es mate: $2,420 M (2014 dollars)
- Includes $52 M for TSM/TDM improvements
• 6.3-mile route connec ng I-10 and I-210
- 4.2 miles of bored tunnel
- 0.7 mile of cut-and-cover tunnel
- 1.4 miles of at-grade segments
- Approximately 60-foot tunnel diameter(s)
• The tunnels are expected to be constructed using
pressurized-face TBMs
• Design and safety elements based on Caltrans and
Na onal Fire Protec on Associa on guidelines
• Ven la on structures provided near north and south
portals
- No intermediate ven la on structures
• Opera ons and Maintenance Control (OMC) Building
provided at both portals
- Will house rst responders 24/7
• Preliminary Cost Es mate:
- Single Bore: $3,150 M (2014 dollars)
- Dual Bore: $5,650 M (2014 dollars)
- Includes $50 M for TSM/TDM elements
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 4 of 36

Tunnel Design Considera ons
Many large-diameter tunnels have been excavated successfully
around the world. Many of these shown have used similar
tunneling and excava on technologies as those proposed on
the tunnels being considered in this study.
The Tunnel Systems Fire Life Safety (FLS) components in both
the Freeway and LRT Alterna ves will comply with all federal,
state and local requirements including but not limited to the
Na onal Fire Protec on Associa on Codes 101, 130 and 502 as
well as Caltrans and Metro standards. These systems are
installed to provide convenient and safe opera on of the
tunnel environment, especially for re protec on in case of
emergencies. Some examples of the tunnel systems as well as
the FLS considera ons are shown below.
Pressurized-face Tunnel Boring Machines (TBMs) are rou nely
used to reduce the risk of ground loss during excava on. These
TBMs provide ac ve ground control at the face of the
excava on, which controls face losses. To control shield losses,
pressure can be maintained over the length of the shield by
injec ng bentonite grout. Back ll grout injected into the
annular space between the excavated ground and the lining will
control tail losses. Ac ve real- me monitoring consis ng of an
onboard monitoring system as well as geotechnical
instrumenta on is typically used to monitor ground movements
during excava on. If necessary, addi onal mi ga on measures
may be required such as compensa on grou ng to control
se lement.
Opera ons and
Maintenance Control
(OMC) Buildings and
Communica on Systems
• Co-loca on of rst
responders
• Voice communica on:
phone, radio, public
address system
• Tra c detec on
(Freeway Alt)
• Train loca on (LRT Alt)
• Ligh ng
Ven la on System
• Jet fans
• Exhaust fans
• Air ltering
• Air monitoring
• Fire detec on and
suppression system
Fire Life Safety
Systems
• Fixed re gh ng
system
• Standpipes and
hoses
• Fire ex nguishers
The LRT and Freeway tunnel alterna ves cross poten ally ac ve
faults. Depending on the magnitude of fault o set, there are
various approaches to address fault crossing design such as
u lizing an oversize vault or a exible lining to accommodate
expected fault o set/movement. A similar approach was used on
Metro’s Red Line tunnels traversing the Hollywood Fault in the
Hollywood Hills.
SEE NOTE 1
DETAIL
Note 1:
One feasible concept is to use a robust composite steel lining in the
an cipated fault zone, allowing for addi onal space for the fault
o set to be accommodated.
Tunnel Name Country
Approximate
Diameter (feet)
Brisbane Legacy ,ailartsuAyaW Brisbane 40
Brisbane Clem Jones ,ailartsuAlennuT Brisbane 40
Brisbane Airport Link East-West Tunnel Australia, Brisbane 41
New Lower Inn Valley ,airtsuAyawliaR Münster 43
,airtsuAgnilhcsreP Vienna 43
Niagara ,adanaClennuT Ontario 47
Qianjiang Under River ,anihClennuT Hangzhou 51
Guangzhou-Shenzhen-Hong Kong Express Rail Link China, Hong Kong 43
Jinping-II Hydropower Sta on Tunnels China, Jinping 41
Nanjing Yangtze River Crossing China, Nanjing 49
Weisan Road ,anihClennuT Nanjing 49
Bund ,anihClennuT Shanghai 47
Yingbinsan Road ,anihClennuT Shanghai 47
Shangzhong Road Subaqueous Tunnel China, Shanghai 49
Jungong Road Subaquueous Tunnel China, Shanghai 49
Hongmei Road ,anihClennuT Shanghai 49
Shanghai Changjiang/Chongming Yangtze River Tunnel China, Shanghai 51
4th Elbe River ,ynamreGlennuT Hamburg 47
Galleria ,ylatIovrapS Sparvo 51
Valsugana Trento ,ylatIdroN Trento 40
Trans Tokyo Bay Highway Tunnel Japan, Tokyo 46
Tokyo ,napaJorteM Tokyo 47
Stormwater Management and Road Tunnel (SMART)
Malaysia, Kuala
Lumpur
43
Groene Hart 94sdnalrehteNlennuT
Waterview Connec on Auckland
New Zealand,
Auckland
47
Slowacki Tunnel ,dnaloPksnadG Gdansk 41
Silver Forest Tunnel (Silberwald) Russia, Moscow 47
Tunnel Name Country
Approximate
Diameter (feet)
Sochi Road Tunnel No. ,aissuR3 Sochi 43
Barcelona Metro Line ,niapS9 Barcelona 40
Tuneles Urbanos de ,niapSanoriG Girona 40
M-30 By-Pass Sur ,niapSetroNlenúT Madrid 50
Seville SE-40 Highway ,niapSslennuT Seville 46
Adler ,dnalreztiwSlennuT Basel 41
Biel East ,dnalreztiwShcnarB Biel 41
Tunnel de ,dnalreztiwSeruB Bure 41
Zurich-Thalwil Zimmerberg Base Tunnel Switzerland, Zurich 40
Eskisehir Köseköy / Tunnel ,yekruT62 Basköy 45
Istanbul Strait Road Tube Crossing Turkey, Istanbul 45
Port of Miami ,ASUlennuT Miami 42
to the two
Global Large Diameter Tunnels Fault Crossing Concepts
Tunnel Systems & Fire Life Safety Considerations Settlement Control
Loca on
Tunnel
Loca on Map showing area faults in rela on to
the two Tunnel Alterna ves
TYPICAL SECTION
SPECIAL
SEISMIC SECTION
SHADED AREA CAN
ACCOMMODATE
HORIZONTAL
AND VERTICAL
OFFSET
Metro Red Line Tunnel through Hollywood Fault Zone.
Emergency
Exits/Evacua on
• Emergency egress
walkways
• Motorist/passenger aid
sta on
• Cross passages (LRT and
Dual Bore only)
TBM ShieldTBM ShieldTBM Shield Tunnel LiningTunnel LiningTunnel Lining
When necessary, provisions for
compensa on grou ng under
structures
Control Tail Losses:
Immediate Installa on
of Gas and Waterproof
Lining with Back ll
Grou ng of any Voids
Control Face Losses:
Ac ve Face Support
Pressure to Maintain
Excava on Stability
Con nuous On-Board
Monitoring of
Data inside TBM
Real Time
Ground and
Structure
Monitoring
Grout Supply Line
TBM Shield Back ll Grout
Water pressure
and earth load
Tunnel LiningTunnel LiningTunnel Lining
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 5 of 36

Tra c Analysis Overview
DEIR
Sec on
3.5
• Regional (6 coun ver g
San Bernar o rang Ventura)
rea
• Northea n reewa etwork
v n
e rea
nter
ca
f terna ve f n
a ect r
Regional and Study Area Pa erns
(Travel Forecas
System
• VMT • Thr
• Trav (art reewa
• Thr o n
Highway
• V rv
• Tra ver to local art
t f
• Trav rov nt
Transit
• New tr
• Tr re
r r
• Tr
Freeway and Inter ysis
(Tra ra y
vel of Service ( a nter
v reewa n
• De teria (2 t c re
a re v
Multiple Traffic Analysis Study Areas
Two Types of Traffic Analysis
TTR
Sec on
4
TTR
Sec ons
5/7
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 6 of 36

Comparison of Alterna ves: Travel Forecas ng
Addi onal roadway capacity a racts tra c from local streets
(served by freeways).
Alternative/Variation
Lower
is
better
Change in VMT (Study Area) vs. 2035 No Build
Regional VMT changes are near zero, as tra c is redistributed.
Lower
is
better
Toll values ($4 and $1) are preliminary, based on
those used for tra c analysis. These tolls were
set to achieve op mized tra c volumes at high
speeds, to maximize person-throughput. Re ned
tolls (and revenues) would have to be determined
in a future, formal “Tra c and Revenue” study.
Change in VMT (Region) 2035 No Build
Study area travel me (VHT) drops as more roadway capacity is added,
even though VMT increases.
Lower
is
better
Change in VHT (Study Area) vs. 2035 No Build
All alterna ves serve more north-south travel.
Person Trips Passing East-West Screenline
Arterial tra c volume is reduced with the freeway tunnel
compared to transit alterna ves.
Lower
is
better
Volume Crossing Screenline (Arterials)
Addi onal freeway capacity serves more vehicle trips.
Higher
is better
Volume Crossing Screenline (Freeways)
Arterial VMT is reduced when freeway capacity is increased.
Lower
is
better
Change in Arterial VMT (Study Area) vs. 2035 No Build
The percent of long (cut-through) trips on local streets is reduced up to half when
freeway capacity is increased.
Lower
is
better
Use of Study Area Arterials for Long Trips
Linked transit trips (a measure of addi onal use of transit) is highest for the LRT.
The bus service improvements with the TSM/TDM provide bene ts for all alterna ves.
Higher
is better
Change in Linked Transit Trips (Study Area) vs. 2035 No Build
North-south transit travel in the study area is approximately
the same for all alterna ves.
Higher
is better
Transit Travel Across the Screenline
VMT/VHTArterials
North-South Travel
Transit
those used for tra c analysis. These tolls were set
to achieve op mized tra c volumes at high
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is the total of all vehicle trips on all roads in the area of interest.
It captures the total amount of travel by cars, trucks, and other vehicles on the road. It is
important for assessing tra c, air quality, noise, and energy impacts.
“Linked transit trips” is the way to determine the addi onal number of new transit
riders – people who elect to use transit services instead of another way to travel.
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) is the total of all vehicle trips on all roads in the area of interest.
It captures the total amount of travel by cars, trucks, and other vehicles on the road. It is
important for assessing tra c, air quality, noise, and energy impacts.
Vehicle Hours Traveled (VHT) is the total me spent on the road by vehicles on all roads
in the area of interest. It captures the me spent by the drivers (not passengers) of cars
and trucks. It is important for assessing tra c, air quality, noise, and energy impacts.
The tra c model was used to es mate how many “long trips” in the study area are
cu ng through on arterials (local streets in Alhambra, South Pasadena, and
Pasadena). “Long trips” both start and end outside of the study area.
The project Purpose and Need focuses on north-south travel in the SR 710 corridor. To assess north-south travel, the model used a de ned east-west screenline, illustrated in the
map below. The graphs around the map provide data on the number of person trips (in cars and transit vehicles), tra c volumes, and transit passengers crossing the screenline.
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 7 of 36

Key Findings - Community Impact Assessment
• Incons
General Plans; amendments required
•
•
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
TSM/TDM BRT LRT FWY (single) FWY (dual)
Business Acquisitions
Partial
Acquisitions
Full
Acquisitions
BusinessAcquisitions
Land Use
• Adverse impacts to community character and cohesion from the
displacement of 15 neighborhood-oriented businesses along Mednik
Avenue
• No adverse impacts to community character and cohesion
Community Character and Cohesion
Environmental Justice
• The study area is largely built out
• No new access to undeveloped or underdeveloped areas
Property or sales tax losses would occur as a result of property
Growth
Property and Sales Tax
Property Acquisition
Relocations and Displacements
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000
$60,000
$70,000
$80,000
RevenueLoss
Property and Sales Tax Revenue Loss
Annual Property Tax
Revenue Loss
Annual Sales Tax
Revenue Loss
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
0
10
20
30
40
50
60
70
80
EmployeeDisplacements
BusinessReloca
Business Reloca s and Employee Displacements
Business
Reloca ns
Employee
Displacements
Cascades Park - Monterey Park
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 8 of 36

Key Findings - Community Impact Assessment
Employment / Fiscal Impacts
Parking Impacts
Construc on of the Build Alterna ves would result in the crea on of construc on jobs and the genera on of employment earnings:
The opera on and maintenance of the Build Alterna ves would result in the crea on of jobs and the genera on of annual employment earnings:
The poten al temporary and permanent parking losses for each of the Build Alterna ves are displayed below:
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
Operation/Maintenance Jobs
Operation/
Maintenance Jobs
NumberofJobs
(PersonYears)
0
10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
80,000
Construction Jobs
Construction
Jobs
ConstructionJobs
(PersonYears)
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
$40
$45
$50
Annual Operation/Maintenance Employment Earnings
Annual Operation/
Maintenance
Employment
Earnings
EmploymentEarnings
(Millions)
$0
$500
$1,000
$1,500
$2,000
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
$4,000
Construction Employment Earnings
Construction
Employment
Earnings
EmploymentEarnings
(Millions)
0
50
100
150
200
250
NumberofParkingSpaceLosses
Temporary Parking Space Loss
Temporary
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
NumberofParkingSpaceLosses
Permanent Parking Space Loss
Permanent
(All Hours)
Permanent
(Peak Period)
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 9 of 36

Key Findings - Visual, Noise and Vibra on
Visual
Visual Simulations
Noise
Ground-borne Noise and Vibration
TSM/TDM Alterna ve:
• Minor physical changes or visible impacts to the environment
• A minimal increase in ligh ng in exis ng business and residen al
areas
• Limited changes in glare from changes in tra c control cycles and
addi onal travel lanes
• No shade or shadow e ects
• Approximately seven recommended noise barriers that may result
in a low to high visual impact
LRT Alterna ve:
• Noise barriers may result in a low to moderate visual impact
• Moderately low permanent visual impacts on key views
• Low permanent impacts related to light, glare, and shade and
shadows
• FHWA Noise Abatement Criteria (NAC) and FTA Criteria used to
determine when a noise e ect would occur
Receptors approaching and exceeding NAC or FTA criteria prior to
abatement:
• 27 receptors (TSM/TDM Alterna ve)
• 9 receptors (BRT Alterna ve)
• 12 moderate impact receptors (LRT Alterna ve)
• 5 severe impact receptors (LRT Alterna ve)
• 66 receptors (Freeway Tunnel Alterna ve [Single-Bore])
• 75 receptors (Freeway Tunnel Alterna ve [Dual-Bore])
LRT Alterna ve:
• Poten al opera onal ground-borne noise and vibra on impacts to
450 residen al buildings and 1 commercial o ce building
• No ground-borne noise and vibra on impacts with implementa on
of standard vibra on control measures
Other Alterna ves:
• No impacts associated with ground-borne noise and vibra on from
the opera on of the other Build Alterna ves
BRT Alterna ve:
• Minimal increase in ligh ng and glare
• Minor new shade and shadow e ects at new bus stops and signage
• Low permanent visual impacts on key views
• Approximately three recommended noise barriers may result in a
moderate to moderately high visual impact
Freeway Tunnel Alterna ve:
• Moderately low to moderate visual impacts on key views
• Minimal vehicle headlight glare from new non-tunnel segments built
below the exis ng grade level
• Minimal shade and shadow impacts
• Approximately ve recommended noise barriers for the dual-bore
design varia on may result in moderate to high visual impacts
• Approximately three recommended noise barriers for the single-bore
design varia on may result in moderate to high visual impacts
See display maps for exhibits of visual simulations.
See display maps for locations of recommended noise barriers.
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
sreirraBesioNforebmuN
Recommended Noise Barriers
Recommended
Noise Barriers for
the Build
Alternative*
*Includes
Recommended
Noise Barriers for
the TSM/TDM
Improvements
Proposed Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) Lane at
245 Fair Oaks Avenue in South Pasadena
Light Rail Transit crossing the I-10 Freeway LRT maintenance yard at Valley Blvd. Freeway Tunnel proposed northern portal Freeway Tunnel proposed southern portal
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 10 of 36

Key Findings - Cultural Resources and Paleontology
• No adverse e ect
limits. The loss of paleontological resources depending on the type of TBM used would be considered a permanen cant,
• Minor ground disturbance
•
•
• Fossil recovery during tunnel boring would be limited
Paleontology
Cultural Resources
4777 Cesar E. Chavez Avenue
Fair Oaks Avenue
Rialto Theater, South Pasadena 330 S. Fair Oaks, Pasadena
Sequoyah School, Pasadena
4777 S. Cesar Chavez, Los Angeles
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 11 of 36

Key Findings - Natural Environment Study
Natural Communities Wetlands
Animal Species
Threatened and Endangered Species
Plant Species
TSM/TDM, BRT, and LRT Alterna ves:
• No permanent impacts on sensi ve natural communi es
• Permanent direct impacts to ~1.09 acres of riparian habitat
• No impacts to wetlands or other waters
Freeway Tunnel Alterna ve impacts to non-wetland
waters:
• ~0.06 acres of permanent impacts (single-bore)
• ~0.5 acres of permanent impacts (dual-bore)
All Build Alterna ves:
• Disturbed/developed community
- Poten al suitable habitat for the San Bernardino
ring-necked snake
TSM/TDM, BRT, and Freeway Tunnel (Single and
Dual-Bore) Alterna ves:
• Nonna ve grasslands
- Poten al habitat for milkweed plants required for
monarch bu er y breeding
- Poten al suitable habitat for western spadefoot
toad and San Bernardino ring-necked snake
LRT and Freeway Tunnel (Single and Dual-Bore)
Alterna ves:
• Nonna ve woodlands (LRT and Freeway Tunnel)
- Poten al to contain eucalyptus trees with winter
roos ng aggrega ons of adult monarch bu er ies
• Townsend’s big-eared bats
Temporary indirect impacts through habitat loss at
bridge widenings
Temporary indirect impacts to foraging bats during
nigh me construc on
LRT and Freeway Tunnel (Single and Dual-Bore) Alterna ves:
• Riparian obligate bird species
Limited indirect temporary impacts due to proximity of
poten al nonbreeding riparian habitat to construc on
ac vi es
TSM/ TDM BRT LRT
Trees protected by
local tree ordinances
No impact 136 removed 21 removed 84 removed
Southern California
black walnut
No impact No impact No impact Permanent impact to
1 tree located ~4 feet
from the permanent
impact area
Impacts to one
Coulter’s goldfields
population
No impact No impact Indirect
permanent edge
effects
Permanent direct
impacts
Freeway Tunnel
(Single and Dual-Bore)
Townsend’s big-eared bats
Riparian system under overpass
San Bernardino ring-necked snake
Del Mar Pump Station
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 12 of 36

Key Findings - Floodplains, Water Quality, Energy, Hazardous Waste, Geology and Soils
All of the Build Alterna ves would poten ally:
• Encounter hazardous materials during disturbance of soils and
demoli on of exis ng structures
• Result in impacts from hazardous materials associated with a
number of proper es that require Phase II Site Inves ga ons
Compared to 2035 No Build Condi on in study area:
TSM/TDM Alterna ve
• Opera on: No change
• Maintenance: 0.3% increase
BRT Alterna ve
• Opera on: No change
LRT Alterna ve
• Opera on: 0.7% decrease
Freeway Tunnel Alterna ve
• Opera on: 0.7-1.0% decrease (Single-Bore)
• Opera on: No Change (Dual-Bore)
• Maintenance: 0.6-1.6% increase (Single and Dual-Bore)
• No oodplain encroachments
• Encroachment in the Laguna Regula ng Basin oodplain (Single
and Dual-Bore)
- Nominal reduc on of the oodplain boundary
- No increase in water surface eleva on
• Encroachment in the Dorchester Channel oodplain (Dual-Bore)
- Nominal reduc on of the oodplain boundary
- Minor increase in water surface eleva on
Subject
Property No.
Facility Alternative(s) Affected
1 BRT
2 BRT, LRT, TSM/TDM (I-10)
3
TSM/TDM
(Other Road Improvement T-1)
4 BRT, LRT
5 LRT
6
Hazardous Waste
Energy
TSM/
TDM
BRT LRT Freeway
Tunnel
construction
Low
Potential
Low
Potential
Low to
Moderate
Potential
Low to
Moderate
Potential
Yes Yes Yes Yes
above and adjacent to tunnel
N/A N/A Low
Potential
Low
Potential
TSM/
TDM
BRT LRT
Freeway Tunnel
Single-bore Dual-bore
3.8 ac 1.12 ac 16.5 ac 1.7 ac 13.5 ac
Area treated by BMPs 12.0 ac 37.0 ac 16.5 ac 90.0 ac 95.0 ac
Increase in impervious surface
Floodplains
Water Quality
Geology and Soils
Former Circle K Stores
Fashion Master Cleaners
Railroad ROW
Elite Cleaners
Blanchard Landfill
Mercury Die/ Mission
Corrugated
LRT, Freeway Tunnel
(Single and Dual-Bore), TSM/TDM
(Other Road Improvement T-1)
Potential for naturally occurring
oil or gas encountered during
Potential to experience fault
rupture, seismically-induced
ground motion, liquefaction,
and/or landslides
Potential for ground settlement
and differential settlement
ac=acres
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 13 of 36

Key Findings - Air Quality
2020/2025 Opening Year
• The regional criteria pollutant emissions for the No Build and all of the Build Alterna ves are lower than the Exis ng (2012)
condi on emissions. The reduc on ranges from 4 percent for PM10 to 59 percent for carbon monoxide (CO).
• When compared to the 2020/2025 No Build condi ons, the change in regional criteria pollutant emission is very small. The
change in emission ranges from decrease of 1.9 percent for reac ve organic gases (ROG) to an increase of 1.4 percent for PM10.
2020/2025 Opening Year
2035 Horizon Year
• With the excep on of PM10 for the dual-bore tunnel alterna ve varia ons, the regional criteria pollutant emissions for the
No Build and all of the Build Alterna ves are lower than the Exis ng (2012) condi on emissions. The reduc on ranges from
0.6 percent for PM10 to 66 percent for CO. The largest increase in PM10 is 0.3 percent.
• When compared to the 2035 No Build condi ons the change in regional criteria pollutant emission is very small. The change in
emissions ranges from a decrease of 1.7 percent for ROG to an increase of 1.7 percent for PM10.
2035 Horizon Year
• The Build Alterna ves would not result in any
exceedance of the 1-hour or 8-hour CO standards
• The maximum PM2.5 and PM10 concentra ons within
the project area are associated with the No Build
Alterna ves
• Through interagency consulta on, the TSM/TDM, LRT,
and BRT Alterna ves were determined not to be
Projects of Air Quality Concern (POAQC)
• Addi onal PM analyses will be conducted for the
Freeway Tunnel Alterna ve if it is iden ed as the
preferred alterna ve
Air Quality
Transportation Conformity
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2012 Existing No Build (2020) TSM/TDM BRT
2020 Opening Year
CO
ROG
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2012 Existing No Build (2025) LRT FWY (single)
with Tolls
FWY (single)
with Tolls and
No Trucks
FWY (single)
with Tolls and
Express Bus
FWY (dual) No
Tolls
FWY (dual) No
Trucks
FWY (dual)
With Tolls
CO
ROG
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
0
20,000
40,000
60,000
80,000
100,000
120,000
140,000
2012 Existing No Build
(2035)
TSM/TDM BRT LRT FWY (single)
With Tolls
FWY (single)
With Tolls
and No
Trucks
FWY (single)
With Tolls
and Express
Bus
FWY (dual)
No Tolls
FWY (dual)
No Trucks
FWY (dual)
With Tolls
2035 Horizon Year
CO
ROG
NOx
PM10
PM2.5
2025 Opening Year
ProjectStudyArea(lbs/day)
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 14 of 36

Key Findings - Health Risk Assessment and Climate Change
future years
Build vs No Build Cancer Risk Impact Overview
• Localized cancer risk increases in small areas
TSM/TDM, BRT, and LRT:
of vehicle travel routes
highways, when compared to TSM/TDM, BRT, and LRT
• Localized impacts are mostly near SR 710/I 210 and SR 710/I-10
interchanges and the portals
Small decrease in regional carbon dioxide (CO2) emissions during
Climate Change
Health Risk Assessment
Freeway Tunnel (Single-Bore)
with Express Bus
with Toll without trucks
Freeway Tunnel (Dual-Bore)
Freeway Tunnel (Dual-Bore) Freeway Tunnel (Dual-Bore)
without tolls without trucks
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
0 5000 10000 15000 20000
(meters)
-360
-100
-50
-10
0
10
100
Freeway Tunnel (Single and Dual-Bore)
TSM/TDM, BRT, LRT
8,400
8,600
8,800
9,000
9,200
9,400
9,600
9,800
10,000
10,200
10,400
2012 Existing 2035 No Build TSM/TDM BRT LRT FWY (single)
with Tolls
FWY (single)
with Tolls and
No Trucks
FWY (single)
with Tolls and
Express Buses
FWY (dual)
No Tolls
FWY (dual)
No Trucks
FWY (dual)
with Tolls
2035 GHG Emissions (CO )2
CO2
ProjectStudyArea(metrictons/day)
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 15 of 36

Construc on ac vi es have a poten al to spread invasive species
Temporary indirect energy impacts result from the manufacture of vehicles
that operate on the project and project construc on.
Energy
Invasive Species
• Construc on-related e ects on exis ng land uses
- Business and neighborhood disrup ons
- Disrup on of local tra c pa erns
- Disrup on of access to homes and businesses
- Increased tra c conges on, noise, vibra on
• Use of privately owned proper es for temporary construc on easements (TCEs)
Haul Routes
Poten al haul routes for the LRT tunnel and sta on excava ons
Poten al haul route for the Freeway Tunnel Alterna ve North Portal (Single and Dual-Bore)
Short-term degrada on of air quality may occur due to the release of
par culate emissions (airborne dust) from construc on ac vi es such as
excava on, grading, and hauling
• Temporary noise and ground-borne vibra on impacts associated with
construc on
LRT and Freeway Tunnel (Single and Dual-Bore) Alterna ves:
• Short-term ground-borne noise and vibra on from:
- Tunnel excava on
- Supply and muck train movements
- Excava on and construc on of tunnel portal and underground
sta ons
• Temporary impacts to community character and cohesion from air
quality, noise, tra c/access, and/or parking e ects to community
facili es within 500 feet of the Build Alterna ves
• Construc on tra c impacts would include minor temporary lane
restric ons to overnight closures and detours
• Hauling excavated materials from tunnel boring using freeways and/or rail
- LRT sta on excava on would use local streets
• Increase in person-year jobs and employment earnings
Temporary Construc on Easements (TCEs):
Freeway Tunnel Alterna ve (Single and Dual-Bore):
• Construc on ac vi es would encroach in the Laguna Regula ng Basin
• Land and vegeta on would be cleared, exposing soil to the poten al
for erosion and downstream transport of sediments to occur
Freeway Tunnel Alterna ve (Dual-Bore):
• Construc on ac vi es would encroach in the Dorchester Channel
Poten al for previously undocumented cultural resources or human
remains to be unearthed during site prepara on, grading, or excava on
• Low poten al for soil se lement
• Poten al for naturally occurring gas to be encountered
• Dewatering required for the LRT and Freeway Tunnel (Single and Dual-Bore)
Alterna ves
• Poten al release of hazardous materials such as lead and asbestos-containing
materials (ACMs) during soil disturbance and demoli on
• Phase II Site Inves ga ons required for 6 proper es
Land Use
Community Impacts
Cultural Resources
Geology and Soils/Hydrology
Hazardous Waste/Materials
Air Quality
Noise and Vibration
TSM/TDM BRT LRT
Freeway Tunnel
Single-Bore Dual-Bore
TCEs 16 parcels 36 parcels 13 parcels 52 parcels 47 parcels
Construc on energy in Bri sh Thermal Units (BTUs) in billions:
TSM/TDM BRT LRT
Freeway Tunnel
Single-Bore Dual-Bore
BTUs 33,600 55,300 422,000 523,000 926,000
Key Findings - Construc on Impacts
Hydrology and Floodplain
Attachment A
Item #7
Page 16 of 36

1
Transit – Building out the area’s rapid transit network (particularly some missing north-south
options) will make car ownership an option rather than a necessity – potentially improving life
quality and household finance.
Active Transportation – Every trip starts by walking, and the people of this community
deserve to be able to walk safely and comfortably. What better use of dollars is there than
those spent to reduce injuries and deaths while taking cars off our congested roads?
Managing Demand – Sometimes it costs less to convince people not to drive than it does to
accommodate driving with more road construction. Five-Hundred Million well spent dollars
can take more cars off the roads than could be carried on a comparably priced new facility.
Congestion – While spending to create more choice, we can’t lose sight of the fact that
sometimes you just need to drive. Dollars spent smartly can help make those drives less
miserable without encouraging the development sprawl that can result from less focused
projects.
The San Gabriel Valley is an area of diverse cities and neighborhoods that trace the history of
Southern California. New homes mingle with historic downtowns and educational institutions to
create a lively sub-region. All of that activity, however, creates demand for ever-increasing mobility
and access. The economic might of our region means we will continue to have opportunities to invest
in transportation. Doing so in ways that serve our economy and environment, while supporting our
health and quality of life, will require sound decisions. This initiative is a starting point that changes
the conversation to focus on the transportation needs of the area and the opportunities that may be
explored by the local community as they develop their vision for community mobility.
SUMMARY
NEW INITIATIVE FOR
MOBILITY AND
COMMUNITY
www.nelsonnygaard.com
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 17 of 36

2
For many years, the idea of a 710 freeway
connection has been misleadingly touted as
a solution to the transportation woes of the
San Gabriel Valley. The publication of the 710
Environmental Impact Report has made clear,
however, that this 50-year old project is no
solution. It does not help a community craving
transit access. It does not address east-west
mobility problems. It prohibits trucks, bikes,
pedestrians and charges tolls for cars. Perhaps
most importantly, it will consume all of the
available financial resources for this area.
Problems with the tunnel proposal include:
• The tunnel does not “pay for itself” through
tolls as some have asserted.
• According to the EIR, the tunnel does not
address congestion issues in Alhambra.
• The tunnel bypasses the very destinations
people want to go to.
The San Gabriel Valley is a community of diverse
people, with widely varying commute patterns.
Employees need to make short commutes
to Pasadena and long commutes to Burbank
(Metro has found that 70 percent of study
area vehicle trips start and end within the San
Gabriel Valley). Students attending Cal State LA
and East LA College need ways to make short
commutes to school. Communities need to be
able to walk safely to transit and want to be able
to invest in ways that can improve air quality.
The set of ideas outlined in the pages that
follow are intended as a starting point for
the development of a real, community-based
transportation vision. This is a compilation
of many good ideas that have emerged from
community and agency processes over the
years. This diverse set of solutions should
be refined based on community input and
community needs in order to accommodate
community aspirations. A community-based
solution represents the best investment of our
transportation dollars to connect and create
community in the San Gabriel Valley.
DIVERSE COMMUNITY,
DIVERSE SOLUTIONS
Analysis by Metro indicates the greatest population growth
in the San Gabriel Valley will be in Pasadena - a community
that has passed a resolution against 710 tunnel.
The addition of a 710 freeway linkage could bring the same
level of environmental risk to local residents as that faced by
residents in corridors such as I-605.
It strains credibility that,
despite holding scores of
public open houses filled
with community comment,
no changes of substance
have been made to any of the
alternatives under evaluation.
The 710 tunnel is not a
community solution.
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 18 of 36

3
This vision of
reconnected
streets supporting
redevelopment
would bridge
the gap between
downtown and
West Pasadena.
THE NORTH STUB
OPTION A:
FILL THE DITCH
OPTION B:
RETAIN CURRENT GRADES
QUICK COMPARISON
East-West Connections
Reducing Traffic Impacts
Developable Land
Grade Issues for Buildings
Grade Issues for Access
Maintaining Bridges
Front/Back/Servicing
Civic Open Space Plan
Costs
MORE VALUE
X
+
+
+
+
+
+
+
? ?
For fifty years this community has been held hostage
to the wrong-headed idea of a freeway extension – an
idea which has precluded all sensible solutions. Allowing
these “complete street” connections to happen would
improve access and reconnect neighborhoods as the land
relinquished by Caltrans is put back into productive use.
As an example of the kind of solution that can be
developed from the grass roots community, this vision
of Pasadena’s future stands in stark contrast to the
710 tunnel envisioned by planners (not influenced by
community input).
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 19 of 36

4
The 710 freeway stub north of the 10 is over-
scaled, and dumps all its traffic onto Valley Blvd,
creating a congestion bottleneck. Converting
the freeway into a boulevard allows us to solve
its traffic problems by providing direct access
to Cal State LA, and a 2-lane complete street
connection to Alhambra Ave/Mission Rd,
allowing traffic to be distributed into the arterial
grid while protecting residential neighborhoods.
A complete street connection through the
emerging “Biotech Triangle” can reduce traffic at
Fremont/Mission and cut-though along Concord
Ave.
These changes also allow the restoration of
Arroyo Rosa de Castilla, the year-round creek
that runs alongside and under the 710, and the
creation of over 30 acres of new parklands,
three regular soccer fields, and a 2.5 mile bike
path connecting Alhambra, El Sereno, and South
Pasadena.
The boulevard also allows the creation of a new
front door for Cal State LA, including 6.7 acres of
flat, developable campus land.
Changing the disconnected south 710 Freeway
stub into a connected boulevard would free up
space for Cal State LA campus expansion, more
efficiently disperse area traffic, provide space
for premium transit including the opportunity to
expand Dash service to El Sereno and Cal State
LA. Perhaps more importantly it would connect
communities, provide needed greenspace.
Campus Gateway :
15.5 Acres
Net New Campus Land:
6.7 Acres
South Park :
15.4 Acres
Middle Park :
9.8 Acres
North Park :
6.9 Acres
3 Regular Soccer Fields
1.0 Mile Creek Daylighting
1.8 Miles Creek Restoration
New street
connection to
Fremont St
2.5 Mile Bike Path from
Fremont St to Cal State LA
Metrorail
New Rapid Bus:
- Pasadena
- South Pas
- Alhambra
- Cal State LA
- East LA College
- Atlantic
- 3 Metrolink Lines
- Gold Line
- Green Line
- El Monte Busway
THE
SOUTH
STUB
New Rapid Bus
Restored Aroyo Rosa de Castilla
Golden Eagle Boulevard
Complete Street
Bike Path
LEGEND
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 20 of 36

5
CONGESTION RELIEF
DISAPPEARING TRAFFIC
By replacing the freeway stub with a connected local street, “Golden Eagle Boulevard” would allow drivers to reach their
destinations sooner – reducing traffic on the northern connector so much that a two-lane complete street (potentially ending
in a traffic calming roundabout) could handle the reduced traffic. Measure R tax money was set aside for improvements to this
corridor, but has gone unused so that the idea of a tunnel wouldn’t be harmed. The citizens have already paid the taxes – it’s
time to get the benefit.
SCALE OF GOLDEN EAGLE BLVD/ MISSION RD
tate LA Traffic
vd
on
CAL STATE LA TRAFFIC
SCALE OF GOLDEN EAGLE BLVD 45,000 VEHICLES PER DAY
Currently, a query to Google would send a driver on a round about
trip to Cal State LA, adding miles to the roads and congestion to local
streets.
Changing the Freeway stub to a connected street and adding a
complete street link to Mission Road is the real solution to area
congestion.
10
MISSION RD
VALLEY BLVD
CAL STATE LA
5,000
5,000
10,000
35,000
45,000
10
MISSION RD
VALLEY BLVDVALLEY/
ALHAMBRA
COMPLETE
STREET
CAL STATE LA
5,000
25,000
5,000
10,000
35,000
45,000
VALLEY/
ALHAMBRA
COMPLETE
STREET
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 21 of 36

6
Rebuilding the stub as a
complete street would allow
the restoration of the Arroyo
Rosa de Castilla – a natural
waterway that was piped and
channelized to make room
for the freeway stub.North Park :
6.9 Acres
3 Regular Soccer Fields
1.0 Mile Creek Daylighting
1.8 Miles Creek Restoration
Golden Eagle
Blvd Connec-
tion to Fremont
SouthFremont
Biotech
Triangle
The new street connection will provide a link between the University and the
emerging “Biotech Triangle.” Connecting these minds to the investment outcomes
of their thinking allows this cycle of creativity to happen in the San Gabriel Valley.
The new network along “Golden Eagle Boulevard” can reduce traffic at Fremont/
Mission and cut-through traffic along Concord Ave. The resulting complete street
intersection on Mission will have such an manageable level of traffic entering that it
could likely be handled by a single lane roundabout.
BIOTECH TRIANGLE
RESTORATION
Restoration of the Arroyo Rosa de Castilla will provide local residents with increased
open space, beautiful vistas, opportunities for active mobility, areas for community
gatherings and overall improved quality of life.
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 22 of 36

7
WALKING
700 estimated
pedestrians are killed
in California every
year, the most of any
state.
200of those
fatalities are in Los
Angeles County alone.
5,000collisions involving
pedestrians, in an
average year in LA.
County
SUPPORTED BY ENHANCED PRIORITY CROSSINGS
23%
California14%
NationalIn 2014, 23% of those killed in car crashes in
California were pedestrians – well above the
national average of 14%.
This budget could improve safety for pedestrians throughout the San Gabriel Valley.
Crossings of major arterials, accessibility improvements to intersections and dignified
transit stops could all be achieved.
CAR CRASHES AND PEDESTRIANS IN CALIFORNIA
PEDESTRIAN FATALITIES IN CALIFORNIA COLLISIONS IN LA
23%
$25 M
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 23 of 36

8
This option would be different from
the transit alternative shown in
the EIR. Rather than a disruptive
aerial structure, this would be a
fast, surface, community-serving
alternative.
This area’s great east-west transit
connectivity could be supplemented
by a north-south corridor that would
connect both legs of the Gold Line,
MetroLink’s San Bernardino, Riverside
and Orange County Lines, the El
Monte Busway, the Green Line and
the Blue Line. In addition to all those
transit linkages, activity centers along
the line such as Huntington Hospital,
Cal State LA, East LA College, St.
Francis Medical Center and the
communities of Bell, Maywood and
Southgate and Long Beach would
all become better connected. As
ridership continues to grow, the
community may explore the possibility
of a light rail option that could further
enhance the existing transit network.
NORTH-SOUTH CONNECTIONS
The community supports an enhanced,
surface transit solution that connects
to employment centers, recreational
opportunities and educational
institutions, not a disruptive aerial
structure as proposed in the EIR.
This option would be different from
the transit alternative shown in
the EIR. Rather than a disruptive
aerial structure, this would be a
fast, surface, community-serving
alternative.
This area’s great east-west transit
connectivity could be supplemented
by a north-south corridor that
would connect both legs of
the Gold Line, MetroLink’s San
Bernardino, Riverside and Orange
County Lines, the El Monte Busway,
the Green Line and the Blue Line. In
addition to all those transit linkages,
destinations along the line such as
Huntington Hospital, Cal State LA,
East LA College, St. Francis Medical
Center and the communities of Bell,
Maywood and Southgate and Long
Beach would all become better
connected.
NORTH-SOUTH
CONNECTIONS
This option would be differentfrom
the transit alternative shown in the
EIR. Rather than a disruptive aerial
structure, this would be a fast,
surface, community-serving
alternative.
Activity Centers
LEGEND
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 24 of 36

9
DEMAND MANAGEMENT
CAN TDM SOLVE THE PROBLEM?
YES
COST
$500 M
VEHICLE TRIP
REDUCTION ESTIMATE
20%
33,600 TRIPS
SAVED PER DAY
302,400 TRIPS
SAVED PER YEAR
$73.00
COST PER YEAR PER
RIDER - MARGINAL
30 YEAR COST AT MARGINAL COST RATE
0 500000000 1000000000 1500000000 2000000000 2500000000
$498,960,000
CASE STUDY: CAL STATE LONG BEACH
RESULTS
LONG BEACH TRANSIT RIDERSHIP 07-08
TOTAL
84,000
CAL STATE LA
STUDENTS
23,000
EAST LA
COLLEGE
STUDENTS
35,000
PASADENA
CITY COLLEGE
STUDENTS
26,000
CASE STUDY:
Cal State Long Beach has offered unlimited free rides on Long Beach Transit to all faculty,
staff and students since 2008, achieving great results.
98,860
1,114,709
LONG BEACH TRANSIT RIDERSHIP 09-10
1,015,849
ANNUAL RIDERSHIP INCREASE
COST PER
AVOIDED TRIP
PER YEAR
$0.52
ANNUAL
PROGRAM COST
$525,000
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 25 of 36

10
WHAT CAN HAPPEN NOW?
Rosemead Boulevard is the main north-south street in the San
Gabriel Valley, connecting the City of Rosemead to Temple City,
East San Gabriel and East Pasadena. It is also served by Metro
Lines 266 and 489, and a segment in Temple City features the
region’s first protected bike lanes.
Remove the South Stub and build “Golden Eagle Boulevard,”
including a connection to Mission Road, as a “complete street.”
(bus lanes and separated bike path included)
$200 M
Rebuild street connections to stitch together the North Stub $95 M
Expanded DASH service to CalState LA $15 M
Add 30 safe, pedestrian arterial crossings, 10 miles of new
sidewalks and build the planned network of bike lanes and paths
within one mile of either side of the 710 alignment
$25 M
Deliver real Rapid Bus (Improved Route 762) north-south service
to include greater frequency, longer hours, weekend service and
some dedicated bus lanes
$170 M
$200 M
Transit passes for 10 years for students of Pasadena City
Collage, Cal State LA and East LA Collage $170 M
FUTURE PHASES: Moving forward the sale of surplus Caltrans properties could
generate up to an additional $250 million to fund effective approaches such as student
transit passes in the corridor:
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 26 of 36

11
With an initiative such as Measure R2, the following projects can
address the regional transportation issues throughout the area.
WHAT COULD HAPPEN WITH
MORE FUNDING
Premium Transit to connect the network. Pasadena-Hollywood
BRT and Valley Boulevard BRT.
$13 M
Metrolink upgrades to Burbank Airport and San Bernardino.
Providing 30 minute all day service.
$400 M
Gold Level Active Transportation. Safe and comfortable bike and
pedestrian networks throughout the Valley.
$275 M
Extension of the Foothill and Eastside Gold Line.
$2.3 B
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 27 of 36

12
NOHO-PASADENA
VALLEY
MISSING LINK
• North Hollywood to Pasadena BRT
(including Burbank and Glendale)
• Valley Boulevard BRT (Downtown LA to El
Monte Transit Center)
Rapid Bus Transit along the sub-region’s key
corridors can connect communities that are a bit
farther from the rail network. These corridors
involve more than just buses. Improvements
to transit stops/stations can assure that all
riders have a safe and dignified experience.
Improvement of sidewalk connectivity and
quality can assure people can get to the system
and safely cross streets at stations. Once the
sidewalks are improved, consolidating stations
can make the ride much faster and more reliable.
$13 M
PREMIUM TRANSIT CONNECTIVITY
As illustrated in this 1990
Metro Rail Plan, there has
always been a “V” shaped
missing link in rail planning
that bypasses Glendale
and Burbank. The time
has come to bridge the
missing link and connect
communities.
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 28 of 36

13
The long-planned completion of the Gold Line will connect the eastern San
Gabriel Valley into the rest of the region’s rapidly expanding transit network.
GOLD LINE
COMPLETION
Premium Transit Access for the east end of the San Gabriel
Valley will connect many more residents to jobs throughout
Los Angeles County.
ATLANTIC
EAST LOS ANGELES
PASADENA
UNION
STATION
HIGHLAND
PARK
LAKE
DOWNTOWN
ASUZA
MONTCLAIR
METROLINK
EL MONTE BUSWAY
TO EL MONTE BUS
STATION
RED LINE TO
NORTH HOLLYWOOD
PURPLE LINE TO
WILSHIRE/ WESTERN
WHITTIER
EASTSIDE TRANSIT
CORRIDOR PHASE
2 (Remaining
Alternatives)
FOOTHILL
EXTENSION
PHASE 2A
FOOTHILL
EXTENSION
PHASE 2B
SOUTH EL
MONTE
SAN GABRIEL VALLEY
$1.2 B
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 29 of 36

14
BURBA
N
K
A
IRPO
RT
CA
L
STATE
LA
SA
N
BERN
A
RD
IN
O
LA
UN
IO
N
STATIO
N
Upgrades to service on the Ventura County Line could provide 30 minute all
day (and evening) service to the Burbank Airport. Improvements to the San
Bernardino Line could provide hourly reverse commute and mid-day service.
Both would represent a tremendous improvement to the usability of these
valuable existing systems.
$400 M
METROLINK
UPGRADES
All day, frequent service to Burbank Airport, San Bernardino
and points between will represent a significant improvement
to quality of life.
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 30 of 36

15
GOLD LEVEL ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION
SGV ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION FRAMEWORK
BIKING
NETWORK PRINCIPLES
SEPARATED BACKBONE - EVERY 1 MILE
D
IRECT
LEGIBLE
EXPERIENTIA
L
CO
M
FORTABLE
SAFE
CONNECTED
AN “ALL AGES
ABILITIES” ACTIVE
TRANSPORTATION
NETWORK
NEIGHBORHOOD GREENWAYS EVERY 1/2 MILE
This budget would be enough to create a premier, nationally-competitive bike network connecting the entire San Gabriel Valley.
This system would focus on “low-stress” facilities that are comfortable to a wide range of potential users.
Major pathway
Dedicated bikeway
Neighborhood greenway
SGV Node
LEGEND
$275 M
75%
In its first year, a protected bike lane
increases bicycle traffic on a street by an
average of 75% 96%
Most people riding in protected bike lanes
feel safer on the street because of the
lanes
Attachment B
Item #7
Page 31 of 36

Category Project Description Cost Status
Goods Movement ACE Project The ACE Construction Authority is a single purpose construction
authority created by the SGVCOG in 1998 to mitigate the impacts of 70
miles of mainline railroad in the San Gabriel Valley. The ACE Project
consists of multiple construction projects including near-term, low
cost mobility improvements that encompass safety upgrades and
grade separations. The project components are as follows:
(1) Safety improvements at 39 crossings; and
(2) Grade separations at 22 rail crossings, including the 2.2 mile San
Gabriel Trench project.
Safety improvements and grade
separations - $1.61 billion.
The ACE Project is included in the Baseline Section of the 2009 LRTP. ACE has
completed Jump Start safety improvements at 39 crossings. Construction is
complete for the first seven grade separations, and underway or funded for
the next 6 grade separation projects. In addition, five projects are in design or
will be beginning design in the near future.
Highway - Carpool Lane
Completion
I-605 Carpool Lanes This project is intended to provide a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)
Lane in each direction along the I-605 Freeway from I-10 to the I-210
(approximately 5.5 miles).
To be determined This project is in the Strategic (Unfunded) section of the 2009 LRTP, and is in
the pre-planning stage. A Project Study Report is yet to be initiated on this
project.
Completion
SR 60 Carpool Lanes
(US-101 to I-605)
This project is intended to close a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) Lane
Gap along the SR-60 Freeway and provide continuous HOV lanes from
downtown Los Angeles to SR-57. The project widens the freeway to
construct one HOV lane in each direction. The project length is
approximately 12.0 centerline miles.
To be determined. This project is included in the Strategic (Unfunded) Section of the 2009 LRTP.
The project is in the preplanning phase, and Project Study Report is yet to be
completed. There may be consideration to phase the project in two segments
(US-101 to SR-710 and SR-710 to I-605) to accelerate delivery of a segment.
Completion
SR-57 Carpool Lanes This project is intended to provide a High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV)
Lane in each direction along the SR-57 Freeway from SR-60 to the I-
210 (approximately 7.1 miles).
TBD. This project is in the Strategic (Unfunded) section of the 2009 LRTP, and is in
the pre-planning stage. A Project Study Report is yet to be initiated on this
project.
Completion
I-10 Carpool Lanes
(I-605 to Puente Avenue)
This project is intended to close the 11 mile High Occupancy Vehicle
(HOV) Lane Gap along the I-10 Freeway and provide continuous HOV
lanes from downtown Los Angeles to the San Bernardino County Line.
168.6 Million
This project is included in the 2009 LRTP Constrained list, and the project has
been in construction. Caltrans is scheduled to open the HOV lanes to traffic in
January 2013.
Completion
I-10 Carpool Lanes
(Puente Avenue to Citrus
Avenue)
$182.8 Million
This project is included in the 2009 LRTP Constrained list and is in design.
Construction is scheduled to begin mid 2013 and continue for about three
years.
Completion
I-10 Carpool Lanes
(Citrus Avenue to SR-57)
$170 Million This project is included in the 2009 LRTP Constrained list and is in design
Construction is scheduled to begin in mid 2015 and continue for about three
years.
SGV Transportation Priority List (Adopted January 2013)
Page 1 of 5
Attachment C
Item #7
Page 32 of 36

Highway - Congestion Relief SR-710 Transportation
Improvement Options
The I-710 freeway serves as a major north-south link in the Los
Angeles County transportation network. Currently, this freeway
extends from its southern terminus in the City of Long Beach to Valley
Boulevard, just north of the Interstate 10 (I-10) freeway. Beyond this
northern terminus is a 4.5 mile unconstructed segment, referred to as
State Route (SR) 710, until the freeway resumes at Del Mar Boulevard,
in the City of Pasadena.
The California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), Federal
Highway Administration (FHWA), the Southern California Association
of Governments (SCAG), Metro and SGVCOG support the completion of
Route 710 to relieve regional and local traffic congestion and to
improve regional air quality. Over the past forty years, alternative
concepts have been proposed and evaluated to complete the I-710
freeway. In order to address both, regional mobility needs and
community/environmental concerns, Caltrans and Metro are currently
considering a subterranean freeway tunnel concept, Light Rail Transit
(LRT), Bus Rapid Transit (BRT), Transportation Systems
Management/Transportation Demand Management (TSM/TDM), and
surface freeway and highway options. The failure to implement a
transportation improvement project has contributed to growing
congestion on nearby freeways and local arterials.
The more recent geotechnical studies conducted by Los Angeles
County Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) and the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) to address the
problem found tunneling to be a viable option, subject to appropriate
mitigation measures and funding.
To be determined. At its June 2010 meeting, the Metro Board of Directors accepted previous
tunnel study findings and adopted motions to initiate the environmental
review phase of the project, with the understanding that a full range of multi-
modal alternatives and mitigation measures would be studied. Scoping, the
first step in the process was completed in 2011. In October 2011, the Metro
Board approved staff’s recommendation to approve CH2MHILL as the prime
technical contractor to conduct engineering and environmental studies
leading to a DEIS/DEIR by winter 2013 and a FEIS/FEIR by winter 2014. In
January 2012, Metro Board approved staff recommendation to approve
Consensus, Inc. as the prime contractor for public outreach efforts.
Highway - Gap Closure SR-71 Completion -
(Interstate 10 to Mission
Boulevard)
Beginning at its northern terminus at the Kellogg Interchange complex
in San Dimas to a short distance south of Holt Avenue in Pomona, SR-
71 is a traditional four-lane freeway. From that point and through
most of Pomona (for approximately 1.8 miles), it becomes a four-lane
expressway with at-grade intersections, which are signalized. Just
north of the Rio Rancho Road exit, all aspects of the highway return to
freeway standards in its alignment, lane width, pavement, barriers,
access, etc. This project is intended to close this existing gap in the
freeway system by converting this section of SR-71 to a traditional
freeway.
To be determined. The LRTP includes a
total budget of $115 Million (escalated).
This project is in the Constrained (Funded) section of the 2009 LRTP. The
project is in the design phase but design has been suspended when it was
determined that construction funds were scheduled for the later years of the
2001 LRTP. Metro is supportive of City of Pomona’s efforts for Caltrans to
revise the project report with an alternative that could save costs and possibly
advance the project schedule. The project is scheduled for opening in 2027
per the 2009 LRTP. To advance the project schedule, the project is included in
the Highway Goods Movement Public Private Partnership Bundle Project. A
request for qualifications is scheduled to be released in early 2012 with the
start of contract in mid 2013.
Highway - Gap Closure SR-71 Completion -
(Mission Boulevard to Rio
Rancho Road/State Route
60)
Beginning at its northern terminus at the Kellogg Interchange complex
in San Dimas to a short distance south of Holt Avenue in Pomona, SR-
71 is a traditional four-lane freeway. From that point and through
most of Pomona (for approximately 1.8 miles), it becomes a four-lane
expressway with at-grade intersections, which are signalized. Just
north of the Rio Rancho Road exit, all aspects of the highway return to
freeway standards in its alignment, lane width, pavement, barriers,
access, etc. This project is intended to close this existing gap in the
freeway system by converting this section of SR-71 to a traditional
freeway.
To be determined. The LRTP includes a
total budget of $330 Million (escalated).
This project is in the Constrained (Funded) section of the 2009 LRTP. The
project is in the design phase but design has been suspended when it was
determined that construction funds were scheduled for the later years of the
2001 LRTP. Metro is supportive of City of Pomona’s efforts for Caltrans to
revise the project report with an alternative that could save costs and possibly
advance the project schedule. The project is scheduled for opening in 2029
per the 2009 LRTP. To advance the project schedule, the project is included in
the Highway Goods Movement Public Private Partnership Bundle Project that
is in the development stages. A request for qualifications is scheduled to be
released in early 2013 with the start of contract in mid 2014.
Page 2 of 5
Attachment C
Item #7
Page 33 of 36

Highway - Interchange
Improvements
SR-60 / I-605 Mixed Flow
and HOV Direct Connectors
The project proposes improvements to the mixed-flow connectors and
two sets of High Occupancy Vehicle (HOV) direct connectors
Westbound SR-60 to Southbound I-605 (and reverse move) and
Westbound SR-60 to Northbound I-605 (and reverse move). HOV
Direct connectors would lessen the mainline weaving moves of
vehicles that have to transfer from one freeway to another helping
lessen congestion in the vicinity of freeway to freeway interchanges.
The total project cost is yet to be
determined.
The Project Study Report (PSR) that was
completed in 2003 estimated the
Westbound to Northbound (and reverse
move) HOV direct connectors at $130-280
million depending on the alternative
configuration that would be selected.
The Westbound SR-60 to Southbound I-
605 HOV direct connectors have not been
studied but are likely to be even costlier as
the existence of one set of connectors will
require more complicated and longer
structures for the second set of HOV
connectors.
The HOV direct connector projects are included in the Strategic (Unfunded)
section of the 2009 LRTP. The mixed flow connector improvements have not
been identified and are not included in the 2009 LRTP. While funding has not
been identified for these projects, this interchange was included in the
Gateway COG’s study of “605 Hotspots.” As part of Measure R, $590 million
has been identified to address these “605 Hotspots”; however, the specific list
of projects to be funded through this program is yet to be determined. A new
PSR which takes into account all the potential improvements at this
interchange should be produced.
Improvements
SR-57 / SR-60 Interchange Routes 57 and 60 share a common alignment for a distance of about 2
miles and within this shared alignment area is the Grand Avenue
Interchange. Severe congestion occurs in the confluence area and cut
through traffic on local roads is evident. The Grand Avenue
interchange, situated in the middle of the confluence area, reduces the
freeway lane capacities due to lane drops when Route 57 traffic
merges with Route 60 traffic at the connectors and significant weaving
of freeway traffic to ingress or egress Grand Avenue.
To be determined based on the design
alternative that is selected. The LRTP
includes a budget of $475 Million
(escalated) for this project.
This project is included in the Constrained (Funded) section of the 2009 LRTP.
The 57/60 interchange Improvements Feasibility Study evaluated three
alternatives for improving the interchange. A system of collector roads with
freeway to freeway HOV and mainline connectors appears to be the consensus
alternative. The project will move to the Project Study Report phase at the
appropriate time. The LRTP has $475 million in escalated dollars for the
project however if all elements of the collector road project alternative are
constructed, the project budget will have to be increased.
In order to satisfy environmental mitigation issues associated with
development north of the freeway and adjacent to Grand Ave, the City of
Industry has proposed a project that improves Grand Ave and the 57/60
interchange operations. Their project is a subset of the collector road concept
in the Study. The 2009 LRTP scheduled this interchange project to be
completed in 2029.
Improvements
I-10/I-605 (Southbound
(SB) I-605 to Eastbound
(EB) I-10 Transition
Connector (mixed flow))
The project will construct a flyover connector from Southbound I-605
to the Eastbound I-10 which would replace the existing shared at-
grade connector.
$71.0 Million. This project is being funded by State Transportation Improvement Program
(STIP) and State Highway Operations and Protection Program (SHOPP) funds.
State may bond the SHOPP revenues via Grant Anticipation Revenue Vehicles
(GARVEE) bonds to deliver the project faster than if the SHOPP funds are not
bonded. The project will be constructed through a design-build contract and
is anticipated to begin construction in mid 2012. This schedule minimizes
duo contractor work in the same work area as the I-10 carpool lanes project
currently in construction should be complete before this contract begins.
Improvements
I-10/I-605 Interchange
(Southbound I-605 to
Eastbound I-10 Transition
Connector - Mixed Flow)
The existing I-10 / I-605 interchange has congestion levels and
accidents rates that are significantly above average when compared to
comparable interchanges, due to the configuration of this interchange.
This two-level interchange lacks two flyover connectors and traffic
utilizing the interchange weaves in short distances to move from one
freeway to another as the connectors share common alignments. This
weaving over the joint segment results in queuing on the outer lanes of
the freeways and weaving and congestion-related accidents in the
vicinity of the interchange. Also, while HOV lanes exist on I-10 and I-
605 and additional lanes will be constructed on I-10 to close the HOV
gap between I-605 & SR-57, HOV traffic has to weave out of the HOV
lanes across mixed flow lanes and then back into the HOV lanes to
switch freeways.
$71.0 Million (1) This project is being funded by State Highway Operations and Protection
Program (SHOPP) funds. The State may bond the SHOPP revenues via Grant
Anticipation Revenue Vehicle (GARVEE) bonds to advance project delivery.
The project will be constructed using a design-build contract that began
construction in mid 2012. This schedule minimizes duo contractor work in
the same work area as the I-10 carpool lanes project currently in construction
should be complete in this area before this contract begins.
Page 3 of 5
Attachment C
Item #7
Page 34 of 36

Improvements
I-10/I-605 Interchange
Northbound (NB) I-605 to
Westbound (WB) I-10
Transition Connector
(Mixed flow)
switch freeways.
Up to $230 Million depending on
alternative configurations.
This project is not currently included in the 2009 LRTP. A Project Study
Report for this project was completed in 2008.
Improvements
I-10/I-605 Interchange -
(Partial HOV connector -
from Westbound to
Southbound and Eastbound
to Southbound)
switch freeways.
To be determined. This project is in the Strategic (Unfunded) section of the 2009 LRTP. A Project
Study Report that was completed in 2003 estimated the eastbound to
southbound (and reverse move) connectors at $130-210 Million depending
on the alternative configuration that would be selected. However, the
estimates are dated. The westbound to southbound connectors have not been
studied but are likely to be even costlier as the existence of one set of
connectors will require more complicated and longer structures for the
second set of HOV connectors. A new PSR which takes into account all the
potential improvements should be produced.
Rail Regional Connector The Metro Regional Connector is an approximate 2 mile light rail
project that will connect the Metro Gold, Metro Blue and Metro
Exposition light rail transit systems through downtown in Los Angeles,
providing through service across Los Angeles County. In October
2010, Metro Board designated the fully underground alternative as its
Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). The LPA would add three
underground stations located in Little Tokyo/Arts District
(1st/Central), Broadway (2nd/Broadway) and Bunker Hill
(2nd/Hope).
The project Cost for the Regional
Connector is estimated to be $1.3 billion
(Year of Expenditure). Measure R provides
$160 million for the project.
The Final EIS/EIR was completed and released for public review in January
2012. The Federal Transit Administration authorized the Regional Connector
to begin Preliminary Engineering (PE) in January 2011. PE is anticipated to
be completed in October 2012. The Record of Decision (ROD) was received
on June 29, 2012. This project has been included in the American Fast
Forward program, which was initiated by the City of Los Angeles and is
intended to accelerate LA County Metro rail and highway projects. The
Regional Connector is included in the Constrained (Funded) section of the
2009 LRTP. This project is scheduled to be completed in 2019.
Rail Gold Line Foothill Extension
- Phase 2A
The project will extend the Gold Line’s double track light rail line from
Sierra Madre Villa Station in the City of Pasadena to the City of Azusa, a
distance of 11.34 miles, with 6 new stations (Cities of Arcadia,
Monrovia, Duarte, Irwindale, Azusa Downtown and Azusa Citrus). The
projected ridership when completed to Azusa is estimated to be 9,004
by 2025 per the EIR.
$741 Million This project is included in the Constrained (Funded) section of the 2009 LRTP.
Measure R provides $810.5 Million (escalated) with a $32 Million local match
to fund the Project. A light rail maintenance facility will also be constructed in
Monrovia as part of the project. Construction of the I-210 bridge in Arcadia is
currently underway and is expected to be completed by the end of 2012. This
phase is currently projected to begin revenue operations in 2016.
Rail Gold Line Foothill Extension
- Phase 2B
This project would extend the Gold Line Foothill extension double
track light rail line from the City of Azusa Citrus station to Montclair
Station, a distance of 12.57 miles, with 6 new stations (Cities of
Glendora, San Dimas, La Verne, Pomona, Claremont and Montclair).
The projected ridership when completed from Azusa to Montclair is
estimated to be 17,770 per day in 2035 per the EIR.
$764 Million This project is included in the Strategic (Unfunded) section of the 2009 LRTP.
A draft EIR for this project was released for a 45 day public comment period
on August 21, 2012.
Rail Gold Line Eastside Phase 2
Transit Corridor
This project proposes to extend the Gold Line Eastside Extension via a
double track light rail line from its current terminus at Atlantic
Boulevard /Pomona Boulevard Station to either the City of South El
Monte via an alignment mostly adjacent to State Route 60, or to the
City of Whittier via Washington Boulevard.
When completed, the projected ridership to the City of South El Monte
or the City of Whittier is estimated to be 18,300 to 20,800 average
weekday daily boardings.
$1.3 billion to $1.7 billion (2010 dollars),
depending on which alignment is selected
and other variables.
This project is included in the Constrained (Funded) section of the 2009 LRTP.
Measure R provides $1.27 billion to fund the project, which would be
available beginning FY 2022-2024. This project is not expected to be
completed until FY 2035, and matching funds could be required to fully fund
this extension. The administrative DEIR/DEIS is currently under review by
the Federal Transit Administration and three Cooperating Agencies. If
Measure J passes, the completion date of the project can be accelerated to FY
2022.
Page 4 of 5
Attachment C
Item #7
Page 35 of 36

Regional Corridor Studies Arrow Highway Arrow Highway traverses 53 miles of Los Angeles and San Bernardino
counties. The demonstration project focused on the 8.5-mile stretch of
Arrow Hwy within the Valley, through the cities of Baldwin Park,
Irwindale, Azusa, Covina, and Glendora, and County unincorporated
communities of Charter Oak, the Covina Islands, and East Irwindale.
Located at the edge of several cities, and often functioning as a
jurisdictional boundary, the north and south sides of Arrow Hwy are
often subject to different policies concerning zoning and streetscape
design. The planning and development of properties along the
highway are considered a low priority within each jurisdiction,
including some of the unincorporated area. For these reasons, the land
along Arrow Hwy is largely underutilized and suffers from a high level
of blight.
Since the initial study was completed, the corridor working group has created
a database consisting of parcel information for the properties within a ¼-mile
radius of Arrow Highway. In May 2010, the participating agencies were given
a Compass Blueprint Award by SCAG for the initial 2008 study effort.
Previously, Supervisors’ offices and the LA County CEO’s office were
researching the feasibility of creating a multi-jurisdictional redevelopment
project area in order to improve this area and have hired special legal counsel
to assist with this effort. However, future efforts related to this corridor are
on hold due to the Statewide dissolution of redevelopment agencies.
Regional Corridor Studies Ramona-Badillo This study focuses on an approximately 10-mile stretch along Ramona
Blvd. and Badillo St. that begins at the El Monte Bus Transit Station
and runs through the cities of El Monte, Baldwin Park, West Covina,
and Covina and unincorporated neighborhoods in Los Angeles County.
A major feature of the project area is the concentration of major
regional transportation hubs. The El Monte Bus Transit Station is the
busiest metropolitan bus station west of Chicago, with approximately
5,700 average daily boardings. In addition, the nearby El Monte,
Baldwin Park, and Covina stops along Metrolink’s San Bernardino line
provide additional opportunities to better link the corridor to the
region’s transit network.
The cities of Baldwin Park, Covina, El Monte, West Covina, and the County of
Los Angeles partnered to complete a study that explores the need for a Bus
Rapid Transit line along the Ramona-Badillo corridor and recently received
MTA Call for Projects Funding for Bus Signal Priority. Building upon the
findings and recommendations of that study, the cities received funding from
SCAG’s Compass Blueprint Program to complete a corridor study to develop a
vision for future land use and transportation investments, exploring land use,
traffic circulation, and design changes that could be used to improve the
image, function, and economic performance of the corridor.
Regional Corridor Studies Valley Boulevard Valley Boulevard has a great deal of regional significance in the San
Gabriel Valley, especially the eastern portion of the Valley. It is the
primary east-west corridor in the south East San Gabriel Valley, and is
used daily by an overwhelming number of commuters and residents,
as it serves as an arterial alternative to SR-60. Currently, the cities of
La Puente, Industry, West Covina, Walnut, and Pomona, as well as the
County of Los Angeles are engaged in joint planning efforts focused on
improving mobility along this corridor.
This Corridor Working Group is focused on prioritizing transportation
investments and creating a cohesive vision for the corridor. A study is
planned in the near future to create an initial planning document for this multi-
jurisdictional effort. The scope of work for this study includes an analysis of
the corridor’s function, its relationship to adjacent land use, and the impact of
the land uses within the corridor. This study will result in a comprehensive
list of transportation projects and investments to be implemented along the
corridor, as well as criteria for ranking and prioritizing projects.
Regional Corridor Studies Rosemead Boulevard Rosemead Boulevard is a former State highway that reaches from the
San Gabriel Mountains in the North to Long Beach. This corridor study
area includes the portions of Rosemead Boulevard in the cities of
Pasadena, Temple City, Rosemead, El Monte, and South El Monte, as
well as LA County Unincorporated. One of the overarching issues
affecting potential planning projects along Rosemead Boulevard is the
ongoing divestment by Caltrans. Currently, only the County of Los
Angeles and the City of Temple City have accepted relinquishment.
Divestment issues notwithstanding, jurisdictions along Rosemead
Boulevard are working to develop a corridor-wide vision that
incorporates pedestrian and retail-friendly planning, while addressing
capacity needs.
Currently, the working group for this corridor is reviewing options related to
mobility, beautification and other enhancements to improve this important
North-South Corridor. Currently, the group is reviewing options to fund an
initial assessment study, including grant applications, SCAG funding and self-
assessment. The County of Los Angeles has completed improvements along
the northern section of the corridor, and the City of Temple City is currently
finalizing a plan for their section of the corridor.
State Routes Highway 39
State Route 39 (SR-39) was a state highway, traversing Orange and Los
Angeles Counties. Caltrans had relinquished all of SR 39 in LA County
to local jurisdictions except this last segment within the US Forest
Service. In January 2009, Caltrans approved the Environmental
Impact Report/Environmental Assessment (EIR/EA) for SR-39 (SR-39
San Gabriel Canyon Road) Rehabilitation/Reopening Project SR-39, in
the Angeles National Forest, from just south of Snow Spring to State
Route-2 (Post mile 40.0 to 44.4). This portion has been closed to the
public since 1978 due to a massive rock and mudslide caused by heavy
rains and floods.
In September 2009, the CTC approved for future consideration of funding this
project, which was described as a “project in Los Angeles County that will
rehabilitate, re-open, and construct roadway improvements on Route 39
within the Angeles National Forest north of the city of Duarte.” However, in a
letter to the US Forest Service dated August 31, 2011, Caltrans stated that it
had determined it is “not realistic or cost effective to continue pursuing the
implementation of this reopening project.” In February 2012, the SGVCOG
took a position to oppose any efforts by Caltrans to abandon State Route-39
and to request that Caltrans continue their efforts to complete the reopening
Project.
Page 5 of 5
Attachment C
Item #7
Page 36 of 36

2015 06 11 transportation_comm agendapkt

Recomendados

Recomendados

Más contenido relacionado

Similar a 2015 06 11 transportation_comm agendapkt

Similar a 2015 06 11 transportation_comm agendapkt (20)

Más de peggydrouet

Más de peggydrouet (20)

2015 06 11 transportation_comm agendapkt