L.A. Council Members Ask Governor to Sign Subway Bill

Citing broad public support for the proposal, Los Angeles City Council members on Wednesday urged the governor to sign into law a bill that requires future rail transportation to go underground in the east San Fernando Valley.

Subways would “completely protect residences from the adverse impacts that rail can bring,” said Councilman Zev Yaroslavsky, the bill’s latest supporter. Yaroslavsky added that he wanted to send a message to Gov. George Deukmejian that “the coalition of people who support this bill is virtually wall-to-wall.”

Councilman Marvin Braude, who wrote the bill with state Sen. Alan Robbins (D-Tarzana), said he was “just thrilled that the developing consensus has occurred.”

The bill is intended to prevent the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission from building a ground-level light-rail system across the East Valley. Instead, the bill’s backers want the downtown-to-North Hollywood Metro Rail subway extended west from North Hollywood to the Sepulveda Basin.

After passage by the state Senate and Assembly, the legislation went to Deukmejian. It must be signed by Oct. 2 to become law.

One year ago, the governor vetoed a Robbins bill that would have set up a separate fund for a Valley rail project, citing his long-standing objection to legislation that intervenes in local disputes.

At Wednesday’s City Council meeting, representatives of North Hollywood and Sherman Oaks homeowner associations spoke in favor of the bill.

But some longtime opponents of the bill later said the politicians had overstated public sentiment.

“We still have a number of concerns,” said Tom Herman, chairman of the Eastern Sector Transit Coalition, which has turned out large crowds to protest ground-level rail proposals. “The bill really doesn’t go far enough. It doesn’t give the kind of protection needed for the entire Valley.”

Herman and other opponents say that although the bill requires that any rail line in the East Valley be underground, it mandates that the line be at least 25 feet deep only between Laurel Canyon Boulevard and Woodman Avenue. Elsewhere, it could run just below the surface--perhaps covered by a grate--and that could be noisy and ugly, they say.

In Reseda and Woodland Hills, members of the Western Sector Transit Coalition, another large group of residents along the Southern Pacific right of way, continue to oppose Robbins’ bill because they say it would not protect them if the rail line is extended through their communities. The Transportation Commission has objected to the bill because it gives the state control over a local project’s design.

Asked about the opposition later Wednesday, Braude and Yaroslavsky said complete agreement can never be reached on projects of such magnitude.

“What we have here is significantly more consensus than we’ve ever had before on any big public project,” Braude said.

Braude also questioned whether many people actually remain opposed. He said Rabbi Marvin Sugarman, an original member of Herman’s coalition, now backs the bill. At the council meeting, Sugarman said the governor’s signature on the bill would be a fitting new year’s present for Valley Jews. The Jewish new year, Rosh Hashanah, begins Sept. 30.

The Transportation Commission is studying the feasibility of either light rail or a Metro Rail extension on two cross-Valley routes: the south shoulder of the Ventura Freeway and the Southern Pacific railroad right of way that parallels Chandler and Victory boulevards. Both routes would end in Warner Center.

The commission’s $2.1-million study, expected to be completed in November, is to serve as a basis for picking a route and also determining what rail technology to use.

Because of Metro Rail’s steeper per-mile cost, Robbins and Braude acknowledged that there will only be enough money to extend Metro Rail west about seven miles to Balboa Boulevard.

From there, travelers would continue to Warner Center on express buses, Robbins and Braude said.

Robbins told the council that Councilman Ernani Bernardi had become a bill supporter. But Bernardi said later that was not exactly accurate.

“I told Alan my position is I’m opposed to fixed rail of any kind, but if there’s going to be fixed rail, then it should be subway,” Bernardi said. “I’m not in favor of bringing the streetcars back.”

Times Staff Writer James Quinn contributed to this story.