Freeway Needs S. Pasadena’s OK, Judge Says : Courts: He rules that Caltrans must get the suburb’s permission before extending the Long Beach route. Backers of the project, which also needs federal approval, say they will appeal.

Another chapter in the decades-long fight over the proposed extension of the Long Beach Freeway concluded Thursday when a judge decided that state officials must get South Pasadena’s permission to build the road through the tiny suburb.

Citing aesthetic concerns, South Pasadena has been steadfastly against the project.

Although Superior Court Judge Earl Warren Jr. declined to block all work on the project, he said that cities along the proposed route must grant permission before construction can start.

South Pasadena is one of four cities on the proposed 6.2-mile extension, to run north from the San Bernardino Freeway on the Los Angeles-Alhambra border to the Foothill Freeway in Pasadena. Pasadena, Alhambra and Los Angeles already have given permission for the thoroughfare.

During the last decade, opposition to the project has been centered in South Pasadena and has grown increasingly intense there. It is a city of tree-shaded streets, with many houses built around the turn of the century. Preservationists nationwide have made the freeway fight a cause celebre.

Freeway opponents called the judge’s ruling a key victory, occurring just a day after the California Department of Transportation announced its proposed recommendations of how to best protect historic structures and minimize any trouble prompted by building the road.

“Today marks the beginning of the end of the freeway,” South Pasadena’s freeway attorney, Antonio Rossmann, said Thursday. Rossmann, who made the city’s arguments in court, called it “a watershed event” in the half-century of controversy over the proposed roadway.

South Pasadena City Manager Kenneth C. Farfsing said, “We feel we’re vindicated.” The city, he said, again has control over its destiny.

Caltrans officials called the ruling a minor setback because construction was not expected to begin for at least six years. The freeway has not yet received final approval from the Clinton Administration.

“We intend to pursue the project and appeal the judge’s decision,” said Ronald Kosinski, the chief environmental planner for the regional Caltrans office in Los Angeles.

With equal certainty that the road will be built, another freeway proponent, William V. Wells of Pasadena, said:

“Reports of death of the 710 Freeway have been grossly exaggerated. This is just another bump in the road.”

Wells heads the 710 Freeway Coalition, a group of nine municipal governments and nine chambers of commerce from Long Beach to Azusa, building industry associations, construction labor unions and transportation organizations.

South Pasadena filed suit in Sacramento Superior Court this year, contending that a 1982 law that allowed a freeway to be built without city permission had lapsed.

The legislation was essentially designed for the Long Beach Freeway situation and introduced by then-Assemblyman Matthew G. Martinez of Monterey Park. Martinez is now a congressman.

Freeway proponents, including Caltrans officials, said they will pursue new legislation, if necessary, to allow state highway officials to override freeway opposition by local city councils.

Alhambra City Manager Julio Fuentes said it is wrong “for any opponent to believe: ‘Hurray, it’s over with.’ This matter is far from being over.”