![]() The project goes above ground in Pacoima, but their area “also has a lot more underground tunneling” that would be happening, “compared to us,” Christian Rubalcava, president of the Sylmar Neighborhood Council, said.China has a vast network of high-speed rail that helps commuters and travelers traverse long distances more quickly.įor some people in the US, rail travel seems a nostalgic figment of the past. “Maybe that’s how we got nabbed on it.”īut some in Sylmar said they may not have it as bad as people in Pacoima, a working-class neighborhood just south of their community. There was no “Dave DePinto in Sylmar,” she added. ![]() “Just because we didn’t have as loud of a voice in it, is that the reason why they chose the SR14 route? Did we sabotage ourselves by just waiting and seeing?” “I don’t think our voices have been heard enough,” she said. Meanwhile, social media website frequented by Sylmar residents came alive Wednesday, with people saying they have more questions than answers, including whether they would be impacted by eminent domain or risks from the route going through “earthquake country,” Bernard said The people in Sunland-Tujunga, where a group called SAFE has been fighting the project, “must be sighing with relief,” Bernard said. Shop owner and resident Bonnie Bernard said their area has not been quite as vocal about opposing the routes, even though the Sylmar Neighborhood Council has filed a formal statement opposing all three routes. Meanwhile, the news about the preferred route has many in the Sylmar area worried. The Lake View Terrace area, as well as Sunland-Tujunga, were spared because the route going through their area was eliminated.ĭavid DePinto, a spokesman for SAFE, a group that has been actively opposing the project said the while some are “exuberant that the threat has lessened, some remain devastated and face a worsening threat …. The reaction was mixed depending on where people lived. They have criticized the authority for picking a recommended route without holding a board meeting in advance in the affected area. Some residents and business people in the northeast San Fernando Valley communities affected by the project opposed all of the three routes that were under consideration, and said they would only support a route that was entirely underground. An old mining site in the Angeles National Forest would be used during construction, and would mean that the area would be restored back to its “natural conditions” once the route is completed. The route also would go around “key” archeological sites and tribal grounds. Just because we didn’t have as loud of a voice in it, is that the reason why they chose the SR14 route? Did we sabotage ourselves by just waiting and seeing?” “I don’t think our voices have been heard enough. It would have the fewest traffic and air quality impacts in the communities that surround it during construction.”īoehm said the route would have the “shortest tunnel” of the three that would go under the Angeles National Forest and the San Gabriel Mountain National Monument, and have the least affect on water supplies above and below ground, as well as to wildlife. “We want to identify our route with the least risk so that we have the most certainty about the cost and the schedule associated with it. “This is something that’s very important,” she noted. She said the proposed route “has the lowest risk of unexpected conditions or circumstances that could impact the cost or the schedule to finish it.” The authority has done “preliminary drilling” and “based on what we know about the rock in the mountains, we believe this route represents the best place to tunnel.” “We will be able to have construction at the most locations in order to get the project built,” she added. “It has the lowest risk during construction related to the tunnels and the geologic conditions.” The route would be “the easiest and fastest to construct,” Boehm said. Michelle Boehm, Southern California Regional director with the Authority, said the recommended route represents the “best balance of all of the things we have been studying to date.” The board will be asked to begin an environmental impact review of the route, which could lead to a draft of the study’s findings coming out by late 2019 or in 2020, and a final version completed and potentially adopted by the board in early 2021. The route will be recommended to the high-speed rail authority board during a November meeting. Roughly 24 miles total are below the surface, or tunneled. More than half of the 38-mile proposed route for the Palmdale to Burbank Airport segment would be below ground, including through Sylmar, other parts of Pacoima, the Angeles National Forest and the San Gabriel Mountains. The Palmdale-to-Burbank segment would end near the Hollywood Burbank Airport. The proposed segment, between Palmdale and Burbank, is part of the 800-mile state high-speed rail project connecting San Francisco to Anaheim.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |