ELECTIONS : PROPOSITION A : Monorail Vote May Resuscitate Rail Debate

An overwhelming vote in Tuesday’s primary election supporting a futuristic monorail line along the Ventura Freeway--coupled with a dismal showing for the officially approved Metro Rail subway extension--threatens to reopen the once-fierce debate over San Fernando Valley rail options.

Subway advocates sniffed at the monorail Wednesday as “Disneylandish” but strained to explain why the widely supported rival plan to extend the subway from North Hollywood to Van Nuys drew only 10.2% of the vote.

On the other hand, the 47.7% vote for his plan to build a monorail system from Universal City to Canoga Park was hailed as a “repudiation of the Metro Rail boondoggle,” by County Supervisor Mike Antonovich, who hitherto has been all but alone in advocating the elevated single-rail system.

Antonovich said he will promptly ask the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, of which he is a member, to reconsider its March 28 decision rejecting both a monorail and a light-rail plan in favor of extending the downtown-to-North Hollywood Metro Rail subway westward 5.6 miles to the San Diego Freeway.

In the non-binding referendum, conducted in the San Fernando Valley, Glendale, Calabasas, Agoura Hills and Westlake Village, voters were asked to choose one of three rail plans or no rail line at all.

The “no rail” option drew 21% of the vote, and the proposed light-rail line in a shallow trench from North Hollywood to Warner Center drew 21.1% of the vote.

Since construction on the subway extension is not scheduled to begin until 1996, rail activists predicted that the debate, reinvigorated by Tuesday’s vote, is likely to go on for some time.

“It’s going to be hard for elected officials to ignore these results, although I feel it was no more than a superficial beauty contest,” said Roger L. Stanard, a Woodland Hills attorney who led the campaign on behalf of the Metro Rail extension.

“I suppose this will result in serious consideration of monorail,” said Rob Glushon, president of Encino Property Owners Assn., which endorsed the Metro Rail extension.

But Jacki Bacharach, a member of the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, predicted Wednesday that commissioners would reopen the question of Valley rail options “only if elected officials desert the coalition that has supported the Metro Rail extension.”

Because designing a rail system is an “amazingly complex undertaking and not something you can do in a few minutes,” Bacharach said, “about all this vote tells me is that a very solid majority of the Valley wants a rail line.”

Since unveiling his monorail plan two years ago, Antonovich has sought in vain to spark interest among elected officials in the plan.

Most elected officials said they were wary of a technology that is used mainly in amusement parks, although two monorail lines are operating in Japan. They also expressed reluctance to risk public ridicule by introducing a new technology to the region, in addition to the Metro Rail and light-rail systems already under construction.

And transit experts said that the monorail has failed to catch on because it has no substantial advantages over conventional rail systems.

As a last-ditch effort, Antonovich prevailed on fellow supervisors to place the issue on Tuesday’s ballot--even though the County Transportation Commission already had decided in favor of the Metro Rail extension.

Both the light-rail plan, which would run on the Southern Pacific railroad’s little-used right of way that crosses the Valley roughly parallel to Victory Boulevard, and the monorail plan are vigorously opposed by homeowners along both routes. They fear the trains will bring noise, visual blight and congestion to their neighborhoods.

With the monorail raised to the status of a serious plan by Tuesday’s results, affected residents are likely to surface, Metro Rail advocates said.

“Now you will hear the roar of homeowners along the freeway,” predicted state Sen. Alan Robbins (D-Tarzana), who led efforts last year to build a coalition of homeowner, business and civic leaders to support the Metro Rail extension. It also would use the Southern Pacific right of way but would be underground in residential areas.

Richard Close, president of the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Assn., dismissed the monorail as “Disneylandish, and everyone likes Disneyland, so they voted for it.

“But the vote means nothing because it will never be built. Homeowners will not allow it along the freeway,” he said. “It means noise, visual blight, parking congestion and increased traffic.”

Stanard, who has represented business interests during the seven-year debate over Valley rail options, predicted that the referendum results will “put a strain on the coalition that supports the Metro Rail extension.”

A small number of Metro Rail advocates “might jump ship,” Robbins said.

But both Stanard and Robbins continued to insist Wednesday that the subway extension was the only politically feasible rail plan, despite the referendum results.

The referendum also inflamed a continuing dispute over the costs of the competing plans.

County Transportation Commission staff experts say the Metro Rail extension would cost an estimated $1.1 billion, or about $195 million a mile.

Antonovich’s proposed 16.5-mile system along the freeway’s south shoulder from Universal City to Canoga Park would cost $1.6 billion in 1989 dollars, or about $100 million a mile, the staff has estimated.

But the commission’s monorail design includes 3.5 miles of subway--in Studio City, at the intersection with the San Diego Freeway, and between De Soto and Canoga avenues.

Antonovich insists the subway segments are unnecessary, although the commission staff says they are needed to bypass heavy congestion.

Without the tunnel segments, said Rosa Kortizya, Antonovich’s transportation deputy, the cost of the monorail line “could be as low as $1 billion or $1.1 billion, and that’s for a system that goes all the way across the Valley.”