Metro Throws Out Highland Park Route, Narrows 710 Freeway List to Five

By Elizabeth Hsing-Huei Chou, EGP Staff Writer

A hotly protested highway route through Highland Park and other parts of Northeast Los Angeles is not among the five possible 710 Freeway extension project options still under consideration by Metro, the transportation agency announced last week.

Those who opposed the route said it would destroy local communities and tear up neighborhoods with historical homes. It turns out engineers were not so excited about the route option either. The Highland Park route was taken out because it was “poor performing from an engineering and financial standpoint,” said Metro spokesperson Marc Littman.

The five routes eliminated from the list of 12 possible options are:

—F-2: Route from SR 2 (Glendale Freeway) between Verdugo Road and SR 134 with a new interchange.

—F-5: Route to SR 134 at a new interchange—just north of the intersection of Colorado Blvd/Avenue 64.

—F-6: Route from north and south terminus of the existing SR 710 to SR 210

—H-2: Route from Concord Avenue, Fremont Avenue, Monterey Road, Ave 64, Colorado Blvd.

—H-6: Route between the termini on Huntington Drive, Fair Oaks Avenue, Columbia Street, Pasadena Avenue and St. Johns Avenue.

The five remaining proposals include routes using bus rapid transit, light rail, or freeway tunnel and intelligent traffic systems (which includes strategies such as ride sharing and encouraging off peak traffic).

Pictured here Bus Rapid Transit route (BRT-6), one of several options still on the table.

The remaining alternatives are:

—“No build” option.

—Bus rapid transit route (BRT-6): from Los Angeles to Pasadena.

—Light Rail (LR-4): route from East Los Angeles to Pasadena.

—Intelligent traffic systems option: is considered a “low build” alternative (TSM TDM), for example light synchronization; enhanced bus line enhancements.

—F-7: tunnel alignment, although it has depressed and at-grade sections at the north/south ends. Route would go from the north and south terminus of the existing SR 710, to north terminus the 210 freeway.

Littman said Metro staff has not yet determined a route for the freeway tunnel option, and added that rumors about the tunnel alternative have exaggerated its costs. He said recent studies conducted in Seattle and other cities put the cost of a tunnel at around $3 billion, rather than the $15 billion figure floating around.

Since the route has not been decided, the exact cost is still unknown, he said.

Details about these alternatives were presented at a technical advisory meeting on Wednesday, and a Stakeholder Outreach Advisory Committee today, Aug. 30.

Print This Post Print This Post

August 30, 2012  Copyright © 2012 Eastern Group Publications, Inc.


One Response to “Metro Throws Out Highland Park Route, Narrows 710 Freeway List to Five”

  1. Rouja on September 7th, 2012 10:26 am

    this is good news. southern california needs to put more money into public transit. for all of you who are opposed to this, let me point out a few simple long term benefits of how this is great for los angeles. For starters, less smog in la (as we know very harmful to our health) is always a plus. Then think about this…public transit equals you dont have to drive, which then in turn means if the trains went towards nightlife, it means you get to drink and dont have to drive which means alot more fun. Lots of people doing this equals tons of revenue for bars and restaurants in the city. Which then in turn means that more restaurants, bars, services, retail, you name it will be built near every stop, which means more places to go and things to do in la! this then leads to more competition which forces businesses into pricing reasonably to attract customers. More things to do means more places cheaper prices which equals A BETTER LOS ANGELes.

    thank you

Comments are intended to further discussion on the article topic. EGPNews reserves the right to not publish, edit or remove comments that contain vulgarities, foul language, personal attacks, racists, sexist, homophobic or other offensive terminology or that contain solicitations, spam, or that threaten harm of any sort. EGPNews will not approve comments that call for or applaud the death, injury or illness of any person, regardless of their public status. Questions regarding this policy should be e-mailed to

 characters available

Copyright © 2019 Eastern Group Publications/EGPNews, Inc. ·