Valley Transit: Elevated Rail or a Subway?

After five years of heated debate in the community, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board will decide later this year between two rival rail lines proposed for the Valley. One proposal would be to build an elevated line over the Ventura Freeway, the other would be mostly a subway line paralleling Burbank and Chandler boulevards. Some experts say the decision will be determined by cost--an independent consultant estimates the elevated line would cost $500 million less than the subway.

*

Why do you support or oppose the elevated line?

Tom Herman, homeowner, Valley Village

“The elevated line would bring a greater ridership to the system. If you put the system along the freeway, you already have a busy corridor. It will be going above the traffic, out there in the open, where people can see it. There’s a greater ridership potential than there is on a seldom-used right of way which is the Burbank-Chandler line. It really doesn’t make sense to put in a fixed rail system where you don’t even have a current bus system.”

Gerald Silver, president, Encino Homeowners Assn.

“The elevated line would not serve transit-dependent users. It would bring rail service to people with BMWs and Mercedes. They are not the ones who would use a rail system. It’s unrealistic to expect a resident of the Encino hills to drive his BMW to a station at, say, Hayvenhurst and take the train to work. But in areas north of here, these people don’t have 450s. They need public transit.”

Councilwoman Joy Picus

“My concern about the elevated line is they have not determined what technology they will be using. Nothing has been said to address safety factors and the cost of safety factors. You have to look at the costs of thousands of businesses and homes that will be displaced. . . . The $500 million in savings is the most fallacious figure around. How can you give cost estimates when you haven’t even determined the technology?”

Don Schultz, president, Van Nuys Homeowners Assn.

“The system built on the freeway can be built faster and cheaper, would attract more riders and ultimately could connect with a rail system in Ventura County by continuing it along the freeway. With a system built on the freeway, people will see it when they’re sitting there in bumper-to-bumper traffic with the car heating up. How many people drive along the Burbank-Chandler right of way?”

Ed Edelman, member, L.A. County Transportation Commission

“It makes no sense to have a new mode of transport that doesn’t fit in with an existing mode. It would require people to get off one train and transfer to another which will reduce ridership and take more time. And it makes no sense from an environmental-impact (perspective) because it will destroy more businesses, put more people out of work, and destroy more homes. It will also impact the Ventura Freeway, which is already impacted. The Burbank-Chandler line is a continuation of the Metro. You don’t have to disrupt the freeway. It’s tried and tested.”

Dick Worth, co-chairman, Citizens Committee for Monorail:

“It is the most cost-effective system that has been presented. We could build a lot more rail and serve a lot more people by going with an elevated system. Environmentally speaking, we think it’s by far the soundest. It’s noiseless. People talk about visual. Come on, we have elevated lines in other cities. I come from Chicago, and they have an elevated. It will be going down the middle of the freeway. If anything is unsightly, it’s the freeway.”