The bill’s enactment will remove the segment of Route 710 between Alhambra Avenue and California Boulevard from the state freeway and expressway system effective January 1, 2024. This portion of Route 710 has faced various debates regarding its feasibility and impact on local communities. By removing it from the freeway system, the bill may open avenues for new transportation solutions and projects while reducing the expectations for maintaining this segment of highway, which some argue has become obsolete in its intended use as a freeway.
Assembly Bill No. 29 addresses significant changes to the State Highway Route 710 in California, particularly concerning the Interstate 710 North Gap Closure project. The bill stipulates that certain preliminary project alternatives aimed at closing this gap, namely Alternatives F-5, F-6, and F-7 from a 2012 analysis by the Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority, are no longer considered viable options in any environmental review process under the California Environmental Quality Act. This bill signifies a shift in transportation strategy for the region, aiming to expedite the environmental review process by eliminating less viable alternatives from consideration.
The general sentiment around AB29 seems to be one of cautious optimism among transportation planners and local government officials who perceive the bill as a necessary step towards innovative and more sustainable transport solutions in urban Los Angeles. However, there are concerns among community advocacy groups regarding potential loss of local access and the implications of abandoning this route. They argue that the closure could affect traffic patterns significantly, leading to other congested areas within surrounding neighborhoods.
Notable points of contention include the future of transportation planning in Los Angeles and the community’s ability to influence such decisions. Critics of the bill express fears related to the long-standing issues of traffic congestion and urban sprawl. They argue that simply removing this freeway segment may not adequately address the existing transportation challenges in the city, calling for more comprehensive and inclusive planning efforts before such significant infrastructure changes are made.