For nearly 60 years, cities in the west San Gabriel Valley were defined by their pro or con positions on extending the 710 Freeway — a line in the sand that created tensions but little progress.

On Wednesday, these same cities came together with the united purpose of doing something about the horrible rush-hour traffic stretching from the 710 terminus at Valley Boulevard along the streets of the defunct freeway route from Alhambra to Pasadena.

With the possibility of a freeway extension — either surface, tunnel or otherwise — shot down by a 12-0 vote of the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority in May, both sides came to a meeting led by Supervisors Hilda Solis, Kathryn Barger and former LA Metro board chairman and Duarte City Councilman John Fasana to talk about nonfreeway, surface route improvements.

“I walked into the room a little nervous. Truthfully, I didn’t know what to expect,” said Barger. “I walked out of there feeling good. It was a grand slam.”

State Sen. Anthony Portantino, D-La Cañada Flintridge, a longtime freeway opponent, praised the two supervisors for getting the warring cities to sit down in the same room.

“This was a historical detente in which the cities came together to work in their collective best interests,” he said.

Never before had Alhambra representatives agreed the freeway option is dead, and instead, wanted to join hands with Pasadena, South Pasadena and Metro to advance innovative projects that may help unclog local traffic backups and restore green space.

Alhambra Mayor David Mejia had soured on a last-minute bill by Assemblyman Chris Holden, D-Pasadena, that would’ve created a committee of local mayors plus six members of the state Legislature to figure out how to spend $730 million in Measure R money earmarked for the north 710 Freeway project. Also, the bill would have prohibited extending the 710 Freeway from the 10 to the 210 freeways by tunnel or surface route.

He was set to send a city staffer to Sacramento to oppose the bill because he felt Sacramento was crowding out local voices until Holden withdrew it. The bill is dead but may return next year, officials said.

“If we all sit down like adults in a room, we can solve a lot more problems than if we have to involve Sacramento,” Mejia said the day before attending the meeting. “This is a good opportunity to get things done.”

South Pasadena City Councilwoman Marina Khubesrian said the cities against a freeway tunnel, part of the Connected Cities and Communities Coalition, is extending an invitation to Alhambra, as well as other former tunnel proponent cities, including San Gabriel and San Marino, to join their group.

“It was an historic meeting. It was a new chapter,” Khubesrian said. She attended the two-hour meeting at Barger’s office with Mejia and City Councilman Jeff Maloney from Alhambra, and City Council and staff members from San Gabriel, Monterey Park and San Marino.

A cooperative meeting between pro and con tunnel cities had never happened in the past. South Pasadena led a successful fight against a 4.5-mile surface freeway in the 1990s that would’ve taken out hundreds of homes. In the past 10 years, South Pasadena also opposed a sub-surface tunnel that would’ve cost between $3 billion and $5 billion, a cost deemed prohibitive by Metro.

“There is a general sense that putting the 710 battle behind us is a good thing and moving forward with projects we can actually do and agree on,” she said.

Added Barger: “I want the cities to tell me what their needs are.”

Some of the projects discussed at the meeting included:

• Synchronizing traffic signals on Fremont and Atlantic avenues

• Building a two-lane “Golden Eagle Boulevard” from the south stub at Valley just north of the 10 Freeway to Mission Road that could include bus lanes and a separated bike path.

• Adding a “hook ramp” to the 110 Freeway (Arroyo Seco Parkway) at Fair Oaks Boulevard in South Pasadena to eliminate left-turns that cause traffic to back up.

Staff Writer Christopher Yee contributed to this report.