![\"http:\/\/latimesblogs.latimes.com\/photos\/uncategorized\/2009\/01\/05\/710map.jpg\"](\"http:\/\/latimesblogs.latimes.com\/photos\/uncategorized\/2009\/01\/05\/710map.jpg\")
<\/img><\/p>\n<\/img><\/p>\n
Glendale says it’s willing to put its money where its mouth is in the possible extension of the 710 Freeway, where officials fear an extension will worsen traffic in the city.<\/span><\/p>\n The City Council this week endorsed taking a more active role in The <\/br>The report showed
\nopposing the proposed tunnel extension of the 710 Freeway \u2014 a fight
\nthat city officials said could require significant resources, according to the News-Press.<\/span><\/p>\n
\ndecades-long controversy surrounding the proposed \u201cgap closure\u201d of the
\nFoothill (210) and Long Beach (710) freeways was reinvigorated last
\nyear when the California Department of Transportation and Los Angeles
\nCounty Metropolitan Transportation Authority released draft results of
\na $6-million route feasibility study.<\/p>\n
\ntunneling was feasible within five potential route zones, which include
\nconnections to the 210 and Glendale (2) freeways.
<\/br>
<\/br>The City
\nCouncil last year voted to formally oppose the tunnel, but on Tuesday
\ncouncil members expressed interest in furthering the city\u2019s involvement
\nin the fight against the tunnel \u2014 voting 4 to 1 to direct city
\nofficials to create an action plan, including potential involvement in
\nfuture legal challenges.<\/span>
<\/br>
<\/br><\/p>\n