Subway Faster, Elevated Rail Cheaper, Study Concludes : Transportation: A report on possible transit links reopens the debate over an underground system favored by a county commission and a line above the Ventura and Hollywood freeways.

More commuters could travel faster between Woodland Hills and downtown Los Angeles on a subway than on an elevated railway above the Ventura and Hollywood freeways, according to a study made public Monday.

On the other hand, the elevated line--carrying futuristic monorail trains or trains riding on electromagnetic fields--could be built much more quickly and inexpensively, said the report prepared for the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission.

The study comparing the two mass-transit alternatives was released as the commission gears up to oversee construction of a multibillion-dollar system for whisking people back and forth between the west San Fernando Valley and one of two Metro Rail stations planned for North Hollywood and Universal City.

The release of the report immediately reopened debate over whether the transit system should be a high-tech one rising on columns above the freeway median or a more traditional subway, running on a route following Chandler and Victory boulevards. The commission last year designated the subway option as its first choice for the system, but the new report could be used to justify changing that decision.

Homeowners in areas next to the freeways strongly oppose the elevated system, arguing it would be unsightly, could be vulnerable to earthquakes and would create noise and traffic problems in their neighborhoods.

But Los Angeles County Supervisor Mike Antonovich has pushed hard for the overhead system, saying it would cost far fewer tax dollars and could be in operation much sooner than a subway.

Last year, when the Transportation Commission selected the subway, the line was supported by several key homeowner groups along the proposed route, largely out of relief that an earlier proposal for a ground-level light-rail line was simultaneously dropped from consideration.

At the same time, the commission hired Gruen Associates, a Los Angeles consulting firm, to study an elevated line. The overhead system could carry rubber-wheeled monorail trains or high-tech “magnetic-levitation” trains, which float above tracks on an electromagnetic cushion. It also could accommodate light-rail trains controlled by computers instead of drivers.

The Gruen study, released by the commission Monday, said that following a series of public hearings, the commission could cancel its selection of the subway line as its first choice for a Valley mass-transit project and replace it with an elevated line. The commission has asked for bids from private contractors, due in January, on both routes.

The report contained no exact cost comparison, but said the elevated line would be “much less costly.” Last year, commission planners placed an estimated price tag of $2.7 billion on the subway and $2.3 billion on the elevated line.

The subway, however, could move more people more quickly, the report said.

Traveling on the subway, commuters would get from Warner Center to Union Station in 51 minutes, compared to 60 minutes for the elevated system.

By the year 2010, the study said, subway trains would be carrying 53,800 people on average weekdays, compared with 45,900 for overhead trains. There would be 10 stations for subway trains, six underground and four above ground.

The elevated line would have 15 stations, all built above the freeways.

Construction of the elevated rail would force 96 businesses and dwellings occupied by 23 people to move out of the way, the report said. Fifty-six businesses but no residential buildings would be displaced by the subway.

However, the report said the subway “has the potential for ground-borne vibration” that would be felt by people in 20 nearby homes, two apartment complexes and a religious building. It did not specify where those buildings are.

The report also noted that the subway would require digging up nearly 2.3 million cubic yards of soil, some of which might contain toxic contaminants and would have to be disposed of elsewhere.

Building the elevated rail line would be far faster, taking just two years or less for the entire 16.2-mile stretch, the study said.

The Transportation Commission has estimated that the subway will not be extended to Warner Center until 2016, although it might take less time if financed and constructed by private firms.

Both systems would need to utilize some existing park area, the report said. Three softball fields at Pierce College would be displaced by the subway, while the elevated line would push out a baseball field and parking lot at South Weddington Park in Universal City.

But both systems would be major environmental pluses for the Valley, getting enough people out of their cars to reduce carbon monoxide emissions into the air by more than three tons per day.

Reacting to the report, Gerald N. Silver, a spokesman for several homeowner groups from Woodland Hills to Studio City, predicted a political battle if the commission drops the subway as its preferred alternative.

“Even if it’s not the most cost-effective way to move people, the city and county agencies must move forward with something,” he said.

“People who have million-dollar homes” along the proposed elevated line are going to “be . . . very unhappy,” he said.

Silver said homeowners are pressing for state legislation that would force any mass-transit line along the freeways to be built underground, thereby making it far more costly and reducing its political attractiveness.

A commission spokesman noted that several developments in recent years have made the elevated line more feasible, including an agreement by Caltrans to allow station platforms to be built over the freeway.

In June, 1990, the monorail option got a big political lift when Valley voters overwhelmingly selected it from several choices that were included in a non-binding referendum placed on the ballot at Antonovich’s behest.

To Antonovich’s delight, 47.7% of the voters chose monorail, while 21.1% favored a light-rail line in a shallow trench from North Hollywood to Warner Center. Twenty-one percent voted for no rail line at all. Only 10.2% voted for the commission-approved subway extension.