Bill Text

Bill Information

PDF |Add To My Favorites |Track Bill | print page

AB-287 State Highway Route 710: advisory committee.(2017-2018)

SHARE THIS:share this bill in Facebookshare this bill in Twitter
Date Published: 04/07/2017 04:00 AM
AB287:v98#DOCUMENT

Amended  IN  Assembly  April 06, 2017

CALIFORNIA LEGISLATURE— 2017–2018 REGULAR SESSION

Assembly Bill No. 287


Introduced by Assembly Member Holden

February 02, 2017


An act to amend Section 253.1 of, and to add Section 622.2 to the Streets and Highways Code, relating to transportation.


LEGISLATIVE COUNSEL'S DIGEST


AB 287, as amended, Holden. State Highway Route 710: advisory committee.
Existing law provides that the Department of Transportation has full possession and control of all state highways and associated property. Existing law designates and describes state highway routes, and also describes the state highway routes in the California freeway and expressway system, including all of Route 710 in the County of Los Angeles.
This bill would require the Department of Transportation, in consultation with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, to establish the I-710 Gap Corridor Transit Study Zone State Route 710 North Advisory Committee, with a specified membership, to study the alternatives considered in the State Route 710 North Draft Environmental Impact Review and other transit options to improve travel in, and environmental impacts of, the I-710 Corridor State Route 710 North project area, along with alternatives not considered by the environmental review. The bill would require the advisory committee, by January 1, 2019, to make recommendations in a report to the Legislature, the Department of Transportation, and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority on the most appropriate and feasible alternative in the I-710 Corridor State Route 710 North project area to improve air quality and public health, improve traffic safety, modernize the freeway design, address projected traffic volumes, and address projected growth in population and employment and activities related to goods movement. employment, and create jobs.
The bill would require the department to implement the alternative recommended by the advisory committee, if appropriate and feasible, but would prohibit the advisory committee from considering or recommending, and would prohibit the department from implementing, a freeway tunnel or a surface freeway alternative. The bill would also limit the portion of Route 710 included in the California freeway and expressway system to the portion between Route 1 and Route 10. The bill would make legislative findings and declarations.
Vote: MAJORITY   Appropriation: NO   Fiscal Committee: YES   Local Program: NO  

The people of the State of California do enact as follows:


SECTION 1.

 The Legislature finds and declares all of the following:
(a) The I-710 Corridor is a critical artery to the state, region, and Los Angeles County for the transportation of goods and passengers by connecting the county’s ports to distribution centers and railways.
(b) The earliest iterations of I-710, former State Highway Routes 7 and 167, were designed in 1933 to improve north-south mobility in Los Angeles County extending from the harbors of San Pedro and Long Beach to the San Gabriel Valley.
(c) I-710 incorporated these former routes into the Interstate Highway System that was constructed in the 1950s and 1960s, specifically to connect the Port of Long Beach to the industrial center of Los Angeles, facilitating the transport of manufactured goods to the port.
(d) Construction of the I-710 freeway has terminated at the I-10 freeway, stopping short of its intended connections and terminations. freeway, and I-710 does not extend through to I-210.

(e)There are seven east-west freeways and seven north-south freeways in the Los Angeles Basin critical to the transportation of goods and people in the highly urbanized county.

(f)I-710 is one of two north-south freeways that terminate in the San Gabriel Valley and do not connect to other freeways, forcing traffic onto local streets or other freeways.

(g)

(e) The residents and commuters of the I-710 Corridor Corridor, north of I-10, are facing elevated levels of diesel particulate emissions and are experiencing traffic congestion, high truck volumes, and high accident rates on a daily basis.

(h)

(f) The United States Environmental Protection Agency has stated the South Coast Air Basin, which includes the I-710 Corridor, is an extreme ozone nonattainment area and a nonattainment area for small airborne particulate matter between 10 and 2.5 microns, which is commonly attributed to vehicle traffic and contributes to high rates of cancer.

(i)

(g) The highest levels of these air toxins in the Los Angeles Basin are found along the I-710 corridor.

(j)The significant residential and commercial development that has taken place along the I-710 Corridor since its initial construction, along with the negative environmental impacts, have caused significant concerns for local communities.

(k)

(h) In 1998 the Federal Highway Administration published a record of decision approving a surface freeway with six mixed-flow lanes and two high-occupancy vehicle lanes to close the 6.2-mile gap between I-10 and I-210, crossing through Los Angeles, Alhambra, South Pasadena, and Pasadena, but later in 2003 rescinded it due to litigation and community concerns. concerns and an injunction prohibiting freeway construction.

(l)

(i) The Department of Transportation (Caltrans) has conducted feasibility studies of alternatives to the surface freeway route including alternative freeway routes, light rail construction, bus system improvements, and tunnels to mitigate the environmental impacts of air toxins due to vehicle traffic.

(m)

(j) In 2015, Caltrans and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority completed an a draft environmental impact report, the State Route 710 North Draft Environmental Impact Review, that studied the impacts of these alternatives, including a cost-benefit analysis, that evaluated the travel time benefits, capital expenditures, vehicle operating costs, system operations and maintenance costs, safety effects, emissions effects, employment benefits, and residual values.

(n)

(k) There continues to be significant community and local government concern about the safety and efficacy of the proposed tunnel alternative and its $2 $3.1 billion to $3 $5.6 billion cost.

(o)Caltrans states that the purpose of the I-710 Corridor Northbound Freeway Project is to improve air quality and public health, improve traffic safety, modernize the freeway design, address projected traffic volumes, and address projected growth in population and in employment and activities related to goods movement.

(p)

(l) An advisory committee should be established by Caltrans, in consultation with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, to resolve the transportation problems caused by the I-710 gap in the State Route 710 North project area while fully considering the concerns of local communities.

(q)

(m) The advisory committee should review the transit options proposed in the State Route 710 North Draft Environmental Impact Review and also consider all other alternatives, other than a tunnel, tunnel or surface freeway, including alternatives not included in the review, and recommend a proposed solution.

SEC. 2.

 (a) The Department of Transportation, in consultation with the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, shall establish the I-710 Gap Corridor Transit Study Zone State Route 710 North Advisory Committee to study the alternatives considered in the State Route 710 North Draft Environmental Impact Review and other transit options to improve travel in, and environmental impacts of, the I-710 Corridor State Route 710 North project area.
(b) The advisory committee shall consist of all of the following:
(1) Three representatives of the Department of Transportation.
(2) Two representatives of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, appointed by the authority.
(3) Two representatives each from the City of Alhambra, the City of Los Angeles, Angeles City Council District 14, the City of Pasadena, and the City of South Pasadena, appointed by the applicable city.
(4) Two Three members of the Assembly that represent the I-710 Corridor State Route 710 North project area or their designees, appointed by the Speaker of the Assembly.
(5) Two Three members of the Senate that represent the I-710 Corridor State Route 710 North project area or their designees, appointed by the Senate Committee on Rules.
(c) Participation on, and appointment of members to, the advisory committee by the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority and the cities shall be at the option of each local agency. Members of the advisory committee shall serve without compensation that is specific to serving on the committee. The Department of Transportation shall provide staff to the advisory committee.
(d) On or before January 1, 2019, the advisory committee shall make recommendations in a report to the Legislature, the Department of Transportation, and the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority on the most appropriate and feasible alternative in the I-710 Corridor Gap for the State Route 710 North project area to improve air quality and public health, improve traffic safety, modernize the freeway design, address projected traffic volumes, and address projected growth in population and employment and activities related to goods movement. employment, and create jobs. In conducting its study, the advisory committee shall take into consideration the input of residents living in the I-710 Corridor State Route 710 North project area. The committee shall consider development of open space, light rail options, and traffic calming options, and may consider alternatives not considered in the State Route 710 North Draft Environmental Impact Review. The report to the Legislature shall be submitted pursuant to Section 9795 of the Government Code.
(e) The advisory committee shall not consider or recommend the freeway tunnel alternative proposed for implementation in the State Route 710 North Draft Environmental Impact Review, or the surface freeway alternative, and the department shall not proceed with implementation of that alternative. those alternatives. The advisory committee shall have no authority to make recommendations regarding the properties acquired for the I-710 freeway.
(f) If appropriate and feasible, the Department of Transportation shall implement the alternative recommended by the advisory committee in its report submitted pursuant to subdivision (d) in a manner consistent with applicable laws.

SEC. 3.

 Section 253.1 of the Streets and Highways Code is amended to read:

253.1.
 The California freeway and expressway system shall include:
Routes 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, 18, 24, 28, 32, 34, 37, 40, 44, 47, 48, 50, 51, 52, 53, 54, 55, 56, 57, 59, 60, 61, 63, 65, 67, 68, 70, 71, 73, 74, 78, 80, 81, 83, 85, 87, 88, 89, 90, 93, 97, 100, 102, 103, 105, 107, 108, 118, 121, 122, 124, 125, 126, 134, 136, 139, 140, 145, 148, 149, 154, 156, 161, 163, 164, 179, 181, 183, 184, 199, 205, 210, 215, 217, 221, 223, 230, 232, 234, 235, 237, 238, 239, 241, 242, 247, 249, 251, 257, 258, 259, 261, 280, 330, 371, 380, 405, 505, 580, 605, 680, 710, 780, 805, 880, and 980 in their entirety.
The California freeway and expressway system shall also include Route 710 from Route 1 to Route 10.

SEC. 3.SEC. 4.

 Section 622.2 is added to the Streets and Highways Code, to read:

622.2.
 The department shall not implement a freeway tunnel or surface freeway for Route 710 between Route 10 and Route 210.