No Shortage of Opinions When the Topic Is What to Do With the L.A. River

When Sen. Art Torres looks at the Los Angeles River, he dreams of turning the concrete-lined flood control channel into an oasis of open space, especially for inner-city residents craving parks.

Assemblyman Richard Katz sees the river and envisions car-pool and truck lanes to relieve freeway congestion from the San Fernando Valley to San Pedro Bay.

Meanwhile, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which maintains part of the flood control channel, is studying a proposal to earmark approximately $250 million to add several feet to the height of river levees, which now are between 20 and 25 feet high.

These differing views of the paved channel are at the center of a tug of war, which last week shifted to the state Capitol.

At a hearing of the Senate Natural Resources Committee, Torres painted a picture of the river as a mecca for joggers, hikers, picnickers, and horseback riders. “The Los Angeles River really has an opportunity to come to life again,” the Los Angeles Democrat told the committee. “Those of us who were born and raised in L.A. have an affinity for it. . . . Many of us used that river as an escape from city life.”

For Torres, the drive to establish a river park is part of a fight to turn Los Angeles into a more livable city, especially in areas he represents downtown and on the Eastside. Instead of building a roadway down the middle of the channel, Torres declared: “Let us turn back the clock and have a real river again.”

After a brief hearing, the committee, on a 7-0 vote, approved his bill to earmark $200,000 for the Coastal Conservancy to prepare a master plan to develop the river over the next two decades into a park and recreation area.

Los Angeles Mayor Tom Bradley has proposed establishing a citizens advisory committee to consider doing essentially the same thing. Bradley, who has not offered many details of how he would revitalize the river, sent a letter to Torres in January calling the river one of the city’s “greatest land assets.” The river, he said in the letter, creates an opportunity for open space, recreation and other development.

This is only the latest vision for the river.

Katz, a Sylmar Democrat who is chairman of the Assembly Transportation Committee, proposed that the river from Tujunga Wash in the East San Fernando Valley to downtown Los Angeles be reserved for buses, vans and car-poolers. Another stretch of the river from downtown south to Long Beach would be for trucks hauling cargo from the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles to rail yards.

At his urging, the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission set aside $100,000 to study the roadway concept. The study, to be finished in August, will look at the kind of transportation that should run along the river bottom, ways to protect people from floods and how to provide access to the channel.

The Army Corps of Engineers, which paved the river, has been studying a proposal to raise the height of the channel, primarily between Compton and Long Beach, to help reduce the threat of flooding.

The 50-mile waterway begins in the southwest San Fernando Valley, where Bell and Calabasas creeks come together. It flows eastward along the northern base of the Santa Monica Mountains, runs through the narrows at Glendale past downtown Los Angeles and through the industrial towns of Vernon, Bell, South Gate and Compton, finally flowing into San Pedro Bay in Long Beach. About 35 miles of the waterway are paved, while there are only about five miles of natural riverbed in the Sepulveda Basin, near Griffith Park and near Willow Street in Long Beach.

The Corps of Engineers began paving the riverbed in the 1930s--especially after a string of fatal storms in 1938. During World War II, military equipment was hauled along the channel to the ports of Long Beach and Los Angeles.

The idea of using the river as a roadway resurfaced almost 35 years later.

In 1972, the state Department of Transportation began studying whether to turn an 18-mile stretch from Willow Street in Long Beach to north of downtown Los Angeles into a roadway. But Robert Goodell, a state transportation planner, said “nothing ever happened.”

Four years later--after the Arab oil embargo highlighted the need to cut automobile trips--the state examined building a busway down the river bottom. Apparently no one thought the idea was worth pursuing, Goodell said.

But Katz dusted off the suggestion in 1988.

Before last Tuesday’s hearing on the Torres bill, Katz sent a memo to legislators alerting them to his vision of the river. He asserted that his view of the river and Torres’ are not incompatible and that he envisions “greenbelts” along his proposed motorway.

“For years, the river channel has been ignored, left to perform its primary function, flood protection for millions of people,” Katz said in the memo.

“Given the problems that confront us and the potential of the river channel, we ought to look at all the options, not just a parkway,” asserted Katz.

In an interview, Katz questioned the use of scarce water resources to maintain Torres’ proposed parkway and expressed concern about exposing people to the water, some of which has been treated in sewage plants. “The idea of people recreating in the sewage in the Los Angeles River is ludicrous,” he declared.

Torres dismissed the criticism, saying that roadways like those proposed by Katz “will be passe in the future as we provide for more light rail” and that his legislation is “a pro-river bill and a pro-environment bill.” Moreover, Torres questioned whether motorists driving down the Los Angeles River would have enough time to exit the highway in the event of a flash flood.

Indeed, county and federal authorities say that in all of the talk about the future of the river, it is sometimes forgotten that the channel is designed to reduce floods.

Jon Sweeten, a Corps of Engineer planner, said “most people don’t perceive a flood threat,” especially now because of the water shortage.

Federal officials have said that the higher levees and modifications to highway bridges also sought by the Corps of Engineers would stop a 100-year flood that would inundate most of Long Beach and all or part of 15 other Southeast and South Bay cities. The proposal is part of a federal program designed to eventually contain the river within its banks even after torrential rains and provide flood insurance for property owners.

Dan Young, the corps’ water resources branch chief in Los Angeles, said he does not believe the higher levees would affect a parkway or a highway in the channel.

But he cautioned that the corps’ overriding priority is to ensure that flood control is not undermined by any changes to the river channel. “If you go into the river and do anything to significantly impact the flood carrying capability of the river, we would clearly have a problem with that,” Young said.

Sweeten pointed out that the Corps of Engineers and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works, which maintains other portions of the river, must give the green light to any changes in the riverbed.

County officials say they have not made up their minds about the future of the river.

“As long as the flood control function is not impaired, then we’re willing to be open minded,” said Jean Granucci, head of public affairs with the Department of Public Works.

But she cautioned that with either the roadway or the park proposal “there are some serious technical problems that have to be overcome.” She cited the problem of access to the river if it is allowed to return to its natural state.

Paula Carrell, a lobbyist for the Sierra Club, said she, too, has an open mind and would like both the roadway and parkland options studied. She expressed personal doubts about the Katz proposal, saying “Los Angeles is clearly starved for parks.”

She also said that a parkway could become a way to connect rich and poor communities in the Los Angeles area. She described plants and trees which already grow in the river as bits of green in “otherwise paved-over neighborhoods.”

Proposals for Los Angeles River Among the ideas proposed for stretches of the Los Angeles River are: A roadway for vans, buses and car-poolers from the west San Fernando Valley to downtown Los Angeles. Proposed by Assemblyman Richard Katz (D-Sylmar). A roadway from downtown Los Angeles to Long Beach for trucks. Proposed by Katz. Parks, with jogging and riding trails, wildlife habitat. Proposed by Sen. Art Torres (D-Los Angeles). Expansion of levees for flood control. Proposed by U.S. Army Corps. of Engineers.