See Graphics Of What Metro Consultants Are Planning For 710 Fwy: Up To 14 Lanes (10 "Mixed Flow" Lanes Alongside Four Lane "Freight Corridor" Elevated For Much Of Area South of 405), Expected To Produce More Diesel Pollution Than Doing Nothing, Only Slightly Lower If "Zero Emission/Automated Guidance" Added

(Mar. 18, 2011) -- LBReport.com has obtained graphics by consultants and planners for L.A. County's Metropolitan Transportation Authority ("Metro") that indicate the visual, health and air quality and noise impacts they expect from plans to expand the I-710 freeway to as many as 14 lanes -- 10 "mixed flow" lanes alongside a four-lane "freight corridor" with its freight lanes elevated along part of the route through LB south of the 405 freeway.

Three versions of the 14 lane expansion are under consideration: Alternative 6A (10 "mixed flow lanes + 4 lane "freight corridor"); Alternative 6B (all of 6A + "zero emissions" and "automated guidance" [Jetsons style] freight vehicles); and Alternative 6C (includes all of 6A + 6B + tolling [opposed by some industry interests])

Alternative 5A is 10 mixed flow lanes without a "freight corridor" and Alternative 1 is a legally required "no build" option.

The consultants/planners' air quality/health risk analysis acknowledges that the 10 and 14 lane versions will both result in higher Diesel Particulate Emission and NOx levels than doing nothing (the "no build" alternative)...and even if "zero emission/automated guidance" systems were included, this would only reduce emissions relatively slightly (see graphs below). The consultants said pollution levels cited pollution levels "generally" and didn't disclose the locations where the LB levels are estimated and what those estimated LB levels are.

Consultants didn't quantify the increased noise that the 10 or 14 lane 710 would produce but said "sound walls" are "practical solutions" (but didn't quantify the expected results).

Alt. 6A from Willow St. bridge looking northbound

Alt. 6A "with enhancements"

In the 14 lane 710 expansion, a 4 lane elevated "freight corridor" would stretch from the southern end of the 710 (connecting to an elevated ramp from the new Desmond bridge) and would remain elevated to the PCH bridge, then gradually descend as it heads north to duck-under a reconfigured 405/710 interchange (using high "fly-away style" elevated ramps instead of current smaller cloverleafs). The representation above shows what Metro's consultants envision this would look at Willow St., looking northeastward. The "freight corridor" would remain at grade level north of the 405 freeway (not elevated as was previously considered).

Alt 6A at PCH looking west

With "enhancements"

Alt 6A at 20th St. looking west

Alt 6A at 25th Way looking west

With "enhancements"

Alt 6A at 32nd St. looking west

With "enhancements"

Metro's 710 project consultants also informed the Council's 710 Oversight Committee in January that their "noise studies" indicated that "noise barriers" (image below) "are the practical solutions" for the I-710 and are thus proposed for mainline and freight corridor alternatives. An example of a "noise barrier" is illustrated by the graphic below, followed by a chart showing preliminary contemplated sound wall locations.

Regarding Air Quality and Health Risk, the consultants' graphics acknowledge that emissions "generally" for all alternatives -- including the no-build alternative (doing nothing) -- are all expected by 2035 to be lower than they were in 2008. With that context, the consultants said emissions for the build alternatives would be "generally" less than the no-build alternative (particularly away from the I-710)...but didn't cite specific numbers or LB locations, saying only that "impacts vary among locations along the I-710." (The consultants materials didn't disclose the LB locations at which estimated the LB levels or what the estimated LB levels are at those locations.

The charts (below) prepared by Metro's consultants show:

• Alternative 6A (14 lanes, plus 4 lane "freight corridor" without zero emission/automated guidance) is estimated to produce more Diesel Particulate Matter than the "no build" alternative (doing nothing).

• Alternative 5A (10 lanes without 4 lane "freight corridor") would result in roughly the same level of Diesel Particulate Matter and NOx as the "no build" alternative.

The consultants say the sole exceptions to the foregoing would be by adding zero emission vehicles/automated guidance systems...which they say would produce relatively small decreases in emissions.

[On Monday (Mar. 19), the monthly meeting of the Wrigley Area Neighborhood Alliance is scheduled to include a presentation by a Metro consultant on the 710 project. The meeting will be held Mar. 19, 7-9 p.m., at the Veterans Park Social Hall, 101 E. 28th St.]

When Metro consultants displayed the graphics on this page at a Jan. 17, 2012 meeting of the City Council's 710 Oversight Committee (Gabelich, Johnson, Neal), Councilman James Johnson said the graphic of the elevated freightway at Willow St. was "jaw dropping" to him...and voiced concern about how the proposal might be received by residents.

Metro is currently preparing an I-710 EIR/EIS with what it calls its "partner agencies" including the CA Department of Transportation, the Gateway Cities Council of Governments (includes two LB reps (one vacant) + PoLB as ex officio member), the I-5 Consortium Cities Joint Powers Authority, the So. Cal Association of Governments, the Port of Los Angeles and the Port of Long Beach (five members Mayor chosen, Council approved).

The ultimate decision on which I-710 option(s) to pursue will be made by Metro's governing board, which consists of all five L.A. County Supervisors plus elected officials from some area cities (not currently including Long Beach; Lakewood Councilmember Diane DuBois is among Metro's current boardmembers).

Even if the Metro Board did include a LB rep, past and present LB Councils (without dissent) supported building a new Gerald Desmond Bridge that will let larger mega size ships bring larger container loads into LB's inner harbor. In September 2010, the Council voted (8-0, Andrews absent) to uphold the Harbor Commission's "Environmental Impact Report" for the bridge...despite the fact the EIR explicitly declined to consider the impacts of new expanded bridge on the 710 freeway north of 9th Street.

[An environmental group led by Jesse Marquez cited pollution and health issues, but Council attention focused on including a bicyle-pedestrian lane sought by Mark Bixby and others like minded. Councilman Robert Garcia (whose district is bisected by the 710 freeway) sought more attractive bridge lighting.]

In April 2010, LBReport.com obtained conceptual drawings (below) shown to the LB Council's 710 Oversight Committee -- marked "Preliminary Draft. Do not cite, quote or distribute" which showed elevated truck lanes alongside part an expanded 710 freeway south of the 405 freeway. LBReport.com published them...which irked some local officials who responded by indicating at public meetings that the 2010 graphics were merely conceptual and might never take place.

Like the 2012 graphics now, the 2010 graphics showed the option of 10 "mixed flow" 710 freeway lanes plus a four lane elevated truck "freightway" south of the 405 along the east side of the 710 (image looking northeastward at Willow St., taken from a larger power point slide (also below).

Metro preliminary image presented at April 27, 2010 meeting of I-710 Oversight Committee

Metro preliminary image presented at April 27, 2010 meeting of I-710 Oversight Committee

A July 15, 2010 Power Point presentation to the project's Corridor Advisory Committee also included the illustration below of Alternative 6A.

From presentation to Corridor Advisory Committee, July 15, 2010

Developing. Further to follow on LBReport.com.