The MMLB Report conceded that the need for travel capacity was critically required in the 710 corridor. However, given that well-documented need, South Pasadena then proposed a plan that takes credit for thousands of person trips that will never realistically occur in the 710 Corridor or takes credit for trips in the corridor that provide absolutely no north-south travel capacity benefit. In addition, numerous increases in capacity were claimed as a result of the MMLB but the cost of many improvements were NOT included in the estimated cost of the MMLB Alternative. In this way, the MMLB Report included some ridiculous capacity and cost claims apparently intended to create a false impression that the MMLB capacity enhancements could be achieved for just the cost of Caltrans selling the state-owned houses.

Thus, the MMLB Report claimed that for an investment of between $200 and $300 million, travel capacity in the 710 corridor could be increased by 1.7 million daily person miles of travel. In contrast, the 710 Freeway was portrayed as a $940 million boondoggle that provided a mere 1.2 million daily person miles of travel at three times the cost. These claims were grossly exaggerated to the point of falsehood.

On the cost question, the MMLB Report claimed travel capacity credit for the Blue Line and its future extension and increased Metrolink service but DID NOT include the cost of those projects (or even a portion of the cost) in the estimated cost of the MMLB Alternative. This obvious omission results in a grotesque understatement of the real cost to build the MMLB Alternative.

There were numerous incredible claims made by the MMLB Report with respect to travel capacity in the 710 corridor. Many of the claimed benefits were obviously wrong or illusory. The most glaring example is claiming hundreds of thousands of daily trips on the Pasadena Blue Line at a rate of ridership never seen in the United States. In the MMLB Report, South Pasadena claimed that the capacity of the Pasadena Blue Line would add 200,000 daily person-trips to the 710 Corridor. And by just extending the length of the trains, building larger stations and extending the rail line, the capacity of the Blue Line could be increased to 290,000 daily person-trips. (MMLB p. 9) On page 24 of the MMLB Report, the cost of the additional trains, longer stations, and track extensions are not included in the estimated cost of the MMLB Alternative.

The presumption that the capacity of a transit line would carry actual ridership close to that number is preposterous. The MMLB Report cites no statistics that support such a facially dubious premise that the Blue Line trains will be filled to standing room capacity from 6 a.m. to 1 a.m. seven days a week. That is what it would take for ridership to equal capacity. Although South Pasadena makes the claim of Blue Line ridership equal to a 290,000 daily person-trip capacity, the actual ridership projected by MTA for the Pasadena Blue Line is about 30,000 person-trips per day at start up in July 2003. Over the years, this ridership could grow to about 68,000 person-trips per day by 2015. Thus, South Pasadena’s claim in the MMLB Report that the Blue Line would add 290,000 daily person-trips has no factual basis in regional studies or common sense.

The MMLB Report also took credit for daily trips of other facilities that no reasonable person looking at a map could conceive as serving the travel needs of the 710 Freeway north/south corridor. For instance, the MMLB Report claims that with more Metrolink trains and more frequent service along the I-10 rail route, 10,000 more person-trips of capacity could be added to the east/west travel capacity through the 710 corridor. (Note: The 710 runs north/south). This rail line serves a completely different segment of trips in the region, but the MMLB takes credit for these trips anyway. On page 24 of the MMLB Report, the cost of these additional trains and greater frequency of service is not included in the estimated cost of the MMLB Alternative.

The MMLB Report claimed that arterial upgrade of Figueroa Street running south from the S.R. 134 Freeway and connection of Figueroa to Broadway would increase capacity for the 710 Corridor by an additional 34,000 person-trips per day. The entire discussion of this element of the MMLB Report is as follows:

"The Figueroa Extended Multi-Mode Corridor will open an entirely new route for regional travel to/from Downtown Los Angeles." (MMLB p. 8)
"The Figueroa Extended Multi-Mode Corridor will add a capacity of 34,000 daily vehicle trips to the 710 Corridor." (MMLB p. 9)

Figueroa Street is not located in the 710 Freeway Corridor. The suggestion that 34,000 additional trips that normally go through the 710 Gap would take Figueroa Street is not credible. Figure 4-13 in the MMLB Report depicts an "Arterial Street Extension to Broadway" to create the claimed "entirely new route for regional travel to/from Downtown Los Angeles." The figure depicts Broadway nearly abutting the end of Figueroa Street. In fact, the ends of these two streets are about a mile apart. How some new arterial street could be created to link Figueroa to Broadway is not explained at all. There is a good reason there is no explanation: it is impossible within the dollars allocated to the Figueroa Street corridor in the MMLB Report.

The cost of the Figueroa Street improvements is included in the estimated cost of the MMLB at about $15 million. That is hardly enough money to install smart street improvements let alone construct a new street between Figueroa and Broadway. Although the Figueroa Street improvements were not well-described, the MMLB Report did not hesitate to claim 34,000 daily person-trips of added capacity to the 710 Corridor which is located on the opposite side of the Monterey Hills from Figueroa Street!

The MMLB Report claimed that the extension of the 710 Freeway to Mission Road will somehow add 120,000 more person-trips per day to the south end of the 710 Corridor. It is never explained how this would happen in addition to the additional capacity claimed by the arterial street improvements to Fremont, Fair Oaks and other north-south arterial streets in the Corridor. The extension of the 710 Freeway to Mission Street will accomplish one thing for sure, it will more efficiently dump tens of thousands of vehicles into the residential areas of El Sereno and Alhambra. The cost of extending the 710 Freeway to Mission Road is included in the MMLB costs shown on p. 24 of the MMLB Report.

Even a casual examination of the MMLB proposal by South Pasasdena reveals a flawed concept of transportation. A typical surface street lane has a traffic capacity of 600 vehicles per hour. A typical freeway lane has a traffic capacity of 2,000 vehicles per hour. Common sense says the MMLB proposal can never replace the need to close the 710 Freeway Gap.