Antonovich Is on the Wrong Transit Track

* Supervisor Mike Antonovich (Letters, Jan. 8) is half-right when he says that a subway is too costly to build through the San Fernando Valley. However, he is wrong to think the monorail he favors is the right solution.

What has been ignored in the subway vs. monorail controversy is the simple fact that both options add $1 billion to $1.5 billion to the cost of building a cross-Valley rail line. The right solution for the density of the Valley is a light rail line built on the alignment of the proposed subway, extended westward to the heart of the Warner Center Development, so workers, shoppers and residents can walk to the rail line and eastward to the Burbank Metrolink station.

I know the idea of surface rail in this corridor was rejected due to opposition from adjoining neighborhoods relating to concerns over congestion, noise, crime and so on. If the line were poorly designed, all of these concerns can play out in reality.

However, light rail lines have been built on old freight rail branches through established residential areas in San Diego, Sacramento, Portland and other cities, which have successfully mitigated these problems.

If the community is intimately involved in the final design of the system and the project allows for other neighborhood improvements, neighborhood opposition will turn to support. If $100 million were used for enhancements and mitigation, that would free up at least $900 million for transit projects elsewhere in Los Angeles County and/or expanding connecting north-south bus service in the San Fernando Valley, while the rail line could be built much sooner than either of the two options now under consideration.

While the elevated alignment does not have to be a monorail, it is obvious from Supervisor Antonovich’s letter that is the technology he favors. With three different rail technologies already operating in Los Angeles County, it is imprudent to add a fourth. The monorail technology has no benefits that conventional steel wheel-on-steel rail cannot provide. In fact, because it is a single rail it is less flexible than standard rail, which is why its use is limited to single-purpose lines like amusement parks. The profitable Japanese line that Supervisor Antonovich mentions provides access to an airport. The Japanese are not planning more monorails, but they are planning several new rail lines. Monorails are the mode of the future, and they always will be.

It is time that Valley political leaders lead. We can’t afford to build either the subway or elevated line, so it is time to re-examine other ideas, look at what works in other communities and truly involve the community in developing creative ideas to solve the concerns residents have about a new rail line.

JOE CARDOZA

Santa Clarita