Construction of the Orange Line across the San Fernando Valley -- now 40 percent complete -- will continue toward next summer's opening while the MTA appeals a court decision challenging the environmental review, MTA officials said Thursday.

In fact, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board separately approved spending more than $5 million in enhancements to the busway's bike path, pavement and irrigation systems.

"We don't want this project to slow down," said county Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, the MTA board member who has championed the new line that runs through his district. "We will continue construction in the interest of residents and businesses of the San Fernando Valley."

Shutting down work now, he said, would cost taxpayers and be a disservice to Valley residents and businesses.

The MTA board voted 9-0 in closed session to ask the California Supreme Court to hear the case. The state appellate court found Monday that the environmental review failed to consider a system of red Rapid buses as an alternative to the Orange Line.

The board also agreed to immediately launch such a study of Rapid bus routes, which it expects to complete in a few months. But residents who have been fighting the Orange Line say the project should be shut down.

"Why do we have to just continue with that bad project because they put money into it?" said resident Diana Lipari, chairwoman of Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, the umbrella group of local residents that sued.

"The bottom line is they should have put it (the bus study) in to begin with, and they didn't because it was going to show up the busway."

Yaroslavsky said the MTA didn't include Rapid buses because the red buses were just a pilot project at the time.

Opponents of the Orange Line failed Friday to win an injunction to halt construction of the busway across the San Fernando Valley -- which is now 40 percent complete -- but said they will file their case with the California Court of Appeal next week. Members of Citizens Organized for Smart Transit say the MTA should not be allowed to continue work after the appeals court ruled last week that another study is needed.

"As we've indicated for a variety of reasons, we don't think the Orange Line is a good project," said COST's Tom Rubin. "We don't think they're entitled to keep building it."

But the Metropolitan Transportation Authority says halting construction now would add to the cost and inconvenience of the project, which is scheduled to be completed next summer.

"The disruption and the cost of suspending construction can be enormous, and it really hurts the citizens," said County Counsel Steve Carnevale. "The things that are disrupted will remain disrupted. All you've done is delayed the project, costing enormous amounts of money."

The $330 million Orange Line busway, being built along former railroad tracks, promises to take riders between North Hollywood and Warner Center in about 40 minutes.

COST has opposed the project, saying the MTA should have beefed up service in the Valley by adding Rapid buses rather than building the Orange Line.

Last week, the California Court of Appeal handed COST its first victory in the years-long legal battle when it ruled that MTA failed to include a study of the Rapid bus alternatives.

MTA is petitioning the appeals court for a rehearing. The MTA board last week also voted to immediately conduct the Rapid bus study while also giving the go-ahead to appeal the case to the California Supreme Court.

A state appellate court issued a ruling late Monday to temporarily halt construction of a $330 million busway across the San Fernando Valley. The California Court of Appeal ordered the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to stop work on the Orange Line until Aug. 11, pending a response from the MTA on why it should proceed with the work.

The group Citizens Organized for Smart Transit had sued for an injunction, saying construction should be stopped after the appeals court ruled last month that another environmental study was needed for the project.

John Henning, lead attorney for COST, which has been fighting the busway for three years and claims several thousand members across the Valley, called the court decision Monday a "tentative victory."

"We feel that the court of appeals is listening to our concerns, that the busway should not continue to be constructed while the MTA is complying with the court's order."

The MTA has said halting construction of the 14-mile route would add to the cost and disruption of a project that was to be completed next summer.

Supporters say the busway built atop a former rail line is needed to help provide relief to weary Valley commuters who have faced congestion on surface streets and freeways for decades.

The busway promises to whisk riders between North Hollywood and the Warner Center in Woodland Hills in 40 minutes.

Construction on the Orange Line, now 40 percent complete, has created problems for businesses along the east-west route by driving away customers and forcing at least one business into bankruptcy. Supporters have said, however, that the completed project will improve the Valley neighborhoods along the way.

In December 2002, a Los Angeles Superior Court sided with the MTA and its environmental review of the bus line.

But last month, the state 2nd Appellate District handed COST its first victory in its battle to halt the Orange Line when it ruled that the MTA had failed to include a study of expanding its Rapid bus network rather than build its busway.

"I'm happy with this decision, but it's not a final decision," said Diana Lipari, chairwoman of COST. "The idea here is to make an (environmental) comparison of the busway.

"COST has always felt this was a waste of money and an unnecessary project."

Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, a champion of the Orange Line that would run through his district, was unavailable for comment. MTA Chairman Frank Roberts did not return calls.

MTA lawyers on Monday were also not available to comment on the appellate court decision.

"Our official position is we just got it (the decision) late today and we're looking it over," said MTA spokesman Marc Littman. "Obviously, we're going to comply with the letter of the law."

The MTA is petitioning the appeals court for a rehearing on its environmental review decision.

The MTA board last week also voted to immediately conduct the Rapid bus environmental study while also giving the go-ahead to appeal the case to the California Supreme Court.

In its ruling Monday, the appeals court stipulated that the MTA temporarily stop work on the busway project approved Feb. 8, 2002.

It gave the agency until next Monday to file a brief stating why the project should not be stopped. The court then gave COST attorneys until Aug. 11 to file a response to the MTA position.

The appeals court is expected to rule this month on whether the COST injunction should be further extended.

The MTA has a history of fighting court decisions regarding its transit services. The agency recently lost its battle with rider advocates to limit its bus fleet.

Members of COST said Monday's court decision is one more step toward stopping a misguided bus route.

"Everyone knows at the end of the road what the trial court has been ordered to do -- to set aside the approved busway, and to set aside the MTA (environmental review)," Henning said.

Just as the Orange Line was starting to take shape across the San Fernando Valley, work shut down Tuesday afternoon and the contractors were told not to come back today.

Officials said the shutdown under order of the state Court of Appeal could cost taxpayers $70,000 a day.

Residents opposed to the busway through their neighborhoods won at least a temporary legal victory in their fight against the project, although the Metropolitan Transportation Authority plans to challenge the ruling and officials said they would ultimately prevail.

"This is just really unfortunate," said MTA Chief Executive Officer Roger Snoble. "There's always a very small amount of people who hate progress."

Monday's court order to stop work was hailed by residents who have opposed the $330 million busway project as a waste of money, but lambasted by San Fernando Valley leaders who see nothing but NIMBY action halting efforts to relieve gridlock.

MTA officials said shutting down work until next week's court hearing would cost some $800,000 and stall the project for months.

They said if they are ordered to shut down until a court-mandated new study is completed, it could cost up to $15 million for idle manpower and equipment.

Former Valley Assemblyman Richard Katz, who headed the San Fernando Valley Transportation Strike Force that helped secure funds for the busway project, called the residents' opposition "classic NIMBY" behavior.

"They'll end up studying the Valley out of any improvement," he said. "At the end of the day, you have to make a decision to move forward."

Residents opposing the busway won the California Court of Appeal order late Monday to temporarily halt busway construction. It came after the appellate court ruled last month that more study was needed on the project.

Residents said all they wanted is for the MTA to study putting in a network of red Rapid buses as an alternative to the costly busway, a study now being done by MTA.

"We truly believe more Rapid buses is a better alternative for transportation," said Valley Glen resident Diana Lipari, chairwoman of Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, the group that filed the lawsuit.

"If they do that and the busway wins, it wins," she said. If not, she added, "It's never too late to stop spending taxpayers' money badly."

Despite the court order to stop construction, crews continued working for a while Tuesday, paving the route with a load of asphalt that arrived in the morning and covering holes and trenches that could be a safety hazard, MTA officials said.

"I wasn't about to send asphalt to a dump," said the MTA's top construction official, Rick Thorpe.

Crews, however, were told not to come back today, when construction managers would be determining possible safety fixes that need to be done during the shutdown construction that is allowed under a clarification issued by the court late Tuesday at the request of the MTA.

Among the safety concerns are 11 intersections across the Valley that remain torn up, as well as a retaining wall to support part of the San Diego Freeway.

"There's a risk out there," Thorpe said. "We'll go through. ... There may be more."

The busway project, approved in 2002, is the Valley's main public transit solution after decades of failed efforts to bring a train or subway across the east-west corridor that parallels the 101 Freeway.

The Orange Line, the first of its kind in Southern California, would put buses in their own lanes along a former rail right of way, with stations about every mile taking riders between North Hollywood and Warner Center in about 40 minutes.

Businesses along the route have suffered during construction, but one business owner said Tuesday that it would be better to finish the project or at least open the intersection near his delicatessen than hold the project in limbo.

"I'm just (hopeful) they can get it over with as soon as possible so we can get back to normal," said Frank Mesriani, owner of Weilers Deli, which has remained open on Victory Boulevard despite having filed for bankruptcy protection because of lost business. "When it's up and running, it'll be good for everybody."

Next week, the court will take up whether the work should remain halted while the MTA conducts the Rapid bus study, started last month by MTA staff members, along with hired consultants, and expected to take up to six months to complete.

The court is also expected to deal next week with the MTA's petition for a rehearing on the court decision mandating the study. The MTA board also approved taking the case to the state Supreme Court.

Even if the Rapid bus alternative proves to be the better choice, the board is not bound to accept it and could simply move on with the busway, MTA officials said.

"The long-term future I still see us getting the busway built," Snoble said.

Those who have watched one transportation project after another fail in the Valley, while traffic congestion increases, say it's time for the busway now nearly 40 percent complete to get built.

"I'm very disappointed in the court's decision to delay construction on the Orange Line at this time," said Assemblyman Keith Richman, R-Granada Hills. "It's important that the impacts on individuals be mitigated as much as possible and transportation infrastructure projects move ahead for the betterment of our community."

Longtime Valley transit advocate Bart Reed agreed waiting is costly.

"It's thievery (from) the taxpayers," said Reed, executive director of the nonprofit The Transit Coalition.

Halting the $330 million Orange Line busway will rob the San Fernando Valley of a much needed rapid transit corridor and lead to an unprecedented waste of taxpayer money, the Metropolitan Transportation Authority said Monday in an appeals court filing.

On Aug. 2, the California Court of Appeal ordered construction stopped until at least Wednesday so the MTA could make its case that the project should continue. Earlier the court said the MTA should also evaluate the viability of a Rapid Bus network in the Valley, a plan backed by Citizens Organized for Smart Transit.

The 60-page MTA filing says that evaluating the Rapid Bus option could take nine months and cost taxpayers up to $109 million, including rebidding the project, and result in the loss of $68 million in state funding.

The filing also notes that the MTA has already spent $100 million on the project, which is 30 percent complete. If the busway is scrapped, up to $189 million in taxpayer funds will be lost though what has already been spent and what it will cost to demobilize the project, the MTA said.

COST initially sued to block the project last year, but the case was dismissed in Los Angeles Superior Court. COST appealed, and in July the state Court of Appeal ruled that the rapid bus study should proceed.

COST must respond to the MTA filing by Wednesday, and the court is expected to make a quick decision.

Potentially making all of this moot is a bill introduced Monday by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine, D-Van Nuys, that would retroactively exempt the Orange Line from the appeals court ruling. Levine said enough study has been done on the busway.

"What you've got here is a very small group of people standing in the way of progress for the entire San Fernando Valley region," Levine said. "It's got a number of benefits for air quality in the Valley, getting people out of their cars and into clean-burning natural gas buses."

Diana Lipari, COST chairwoman, was surprised by Levine's move.

"My right to monitor my government agencies would be taken away by this legislation," she said.

The MTA's filing came several hours after Valley civic leaders and elected officials excoriated COST and the appeals court for stopping the project.

"Delays caused by the COST lawsuit and the court's subsequent action put the Metro Orange Line's August 2005 date in jeopardy and are costing taxpayers over $70,000 each day work is stopped. COST is costing us money," Bruce Ackerman, president and chief executive officer of the Van Nuys-based Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley, said during a morning rally.

"Traffic in the San Fernando Valley along the 101 corridor is a mess," said Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, chairman of the Metropolitan Transportation Authority board of directors. "The one hope we had to do something about this mess was the the Orange Line."

He vowed that the project will be finished, regardless of cost, and will take the issue to the California Supreme Court if the appeals court decision goes against the MTA.

Lipari, who attended the rally, said officials were simply dispensing "platitudes and half-truths." She disputed claims that the busway would take 20,000 cars off the road. The Rapid Bus system makes more sense because it will move more people around more of the Valley, she said. And she doubts that the cross-Valley buses will get all the traffic-signal priority officials promise.

"The real facts are that it's a safety hazard, and I think it's going to do horrible things to north-south traffic," she said.

The state Court of Appeals on Tuesday denied the MTA's request to reconsider its order to study alternatives to the Orange Line, but didn't rule on whether work on the $330 million busway can resume while the study is being done.

The decision delivered a setback to the Metropolitan Transportation Authority and its efforts to build a 14-mile busway across the San Fernando Valley - a project that is 40 percent complete.

The court is expected to rule today whether construction can resume. MTA officials estimate that the shutdown is costing taxpayers $70,000 a day.

Representatives of Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, the residents group that mounted the legal challenge to the Orange Line, declined to comment on the court's decision.

But Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who has championed the busway, said the MTA will fight to save the project.

"We're going to leave no stone unturned to try to salvage this project," said Yaroslavsky, who also sits on the MTA board.

"The San Fernando Valley has waited for decades to get a transit line built," he said. "This is a project which has broad support. The opposition is limited and transparent, and that opposition is holding the entire 101 (Freeway) corridor and its future transit options hostage to a technicality."

COST filed suit in spring 2002, challenging a variety of issues in the environmental impact report. A Superior Court judge ruled in favor of the MTA, and COST appealed to the higher court.

The appellate ruled July 19 in favor of COST, saying the MTA had erred in failing to consider a system of Rapid buses as an alternative to the Orange Line. Two weeks later, it temporarily ordered construction of the Orange Line halted while the study is conducted.

The MTA is now conducting the Rapid study, which it says could take up to nine months to complete. It also is appealing the busway shutdown, which officials estimate could cost up to $100 million and delay the project's August 2005 opening by two years.

Even if the study shows Rapid buses to be a better alternative to the busway, the MTA board could simply decide to continue with the Orange Line project.

Yaroslavsky warned that if the work shutdown continues and the Orange Line's costs balloon by $100 million, the MTA may have to scale back on planned amenities along the route.

California's Court of Appeal failed to deliver an expected ruling Wednesday on whether construction could resume on the Orange Line, leaving both the MTA and busway opponents in limbo. Work on the $330 million busway was shut down Aug. 2, and both sides had expected the court would issue a decision by Wednesday on whether construction could resume while the MTA completes a months-long study on an alternative transit system.

"We fully expected to hear from the court today, and we're sort of mystified that we didn't hear from them," said Metropolitan Transportation Authority spokesman Marc Littman. "We're not going to resume construction until we get some clarification from the court.

"We don't feel comfortable, from a legal standpoint, moving forward."

Acting on a suit filed by Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, the Court of Appeal ruled July 19 that the MTA had erred in not studying whether Rapid buses would be a viable alternative to the busway. The court then ruled two weeks later that construction should be temporarily halted.

COST's attorney said he believes the temporary order to halt work stands until the state Court of Appeal issues a final ruling.

"Our position is, the temporary stay remains in effect," COST attorney John A. Henning said. "We're awaiting a ruling on the final stay."

MTA estimates the shutdown is costing as much as $70,000 a day.

MTA has started a new EIR but said in court documents filed last week that it could take up to nine months to complete the report. It also said that shutting down work for that period could cost up to $100 million and push the opening of the busway -- scheduled for 2005 -- back two years.

"We're anxious to get this resolved," Littman said. "We ask that the stay be lifted. We'd like some decision on that."

The MTA also has not yet appealed the initial case to the state Supreme Court, which it has said it would do.

Legal experts said the two sides may have erred in believing the Wednesday deadline -- when the court no longer has jurisdiction over the initial case -- applied to this decision.

One law professor suggested that even if the order to shut down work was dissolved, it's not a green light for MTA to resume construction.

"I'd be careful if I was MTA," said James Kushner, a law professor at Southwestern University School of Law in Los Angeles.

"The technical lifting of the stay would be problematic if MTA assumes it can go full-speed ahead. Then you're inviting real problems," he said. "To proceed when an appellate court has said you're not in compliance would be a big mistake."

He adds that if the case is returned to lower court, the judge faces a decision "like Solomon" -- weighing the costs the shutdown poses to the MTA and community versus the need to address the opposition's concerns in new environmental documents.

"The trial judge has the biggest problem," he said.

The MTA kept work halted on the Orange Line busway across the San Fernando Valley at a cost of hundreds of thousands of dollars because its lawyers didn't understand that an appeals court order stopping construction actually ended a week ago, officials said Wednesday.

Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials said they had become increasingly convinced that the order no longer was in effect, but feared mistakenly violating the court's intent -- despite having lost $1.5 million during the 23-day shutdown and leaving a construction mess that has been a hardship to Valley residents and businesses across the 14-mile route.

It was not until the Daily News contacted the court's assistant administrator in Los Angeles directly Wednesday afternoon that it was clear the temporary stay was dissolved when the court's jurisdiction over the case ended last week.

"(The) stay order has been lifted by virtue of the case being final to us," said Daniel Potter, assistant court administrator for the 2nd District Court of Appeal in Los Angeles.

"They didn't decide today the stay was lifted. Their intent all along was that the stay would remain in effect as long as we had jurisdiction over the case. The court assured me today it knew what it was doing. It was clear in their minds. They thought it was a given."

Informed of the court's position, officials said the MTA board likely will decide today whether to resume construction on the $330 million busway, which was nearly 40 percent complete before the shutdown over whether a review was needed on the alternative of using Metro Rapid buses instead of a dedicated busway.

"This is great news," said Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, the MTA board member who has championed the busway through his district. "I only wish the court had just said so when it issued its ruling last week.

"If it holds, and I assume it will hold, that would mean that the MTA could proceed to resume construction, which has been our objective since the stay was issued."

The clarification came as legislative efforts to overrule the court by Assemblyman Lloyd Levine of Van Nuys failed to muster support in Sacramento.

Yaroslavsky hoped Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, the residents group fighting the Orange Line, would quit fighting the project.

"COST has done enough damage to this project. They should leave it alone," Yaroslavsky said. "Let this project be completed."

COST Chairwoman Diana Lipari declined to comment.

The group won a temporary shutdown from the Court of Appeal on Aug. 2 after the court agreed that the MTA's environmental review of the Orange Line failed to consider a system of Metro Rapid buses as an alternative.

COST attorney John A. Henning said the group's intent is to stop busway construction until the new study is completed.

"We believe the busway should not be built while the MTA is going through that process. We also feel the busway should not be built while the MTA is exhausting its final, remaining appeal on that question."

He declined to say whether the group would seek further court action.

The busway is a buses-only route being built along a former rail line between North Hollywood and Warner Center. It is expected to open next summer.

COST sued the MTA over the environmental review shortly after the project was approved in 2002, but lost in trial court later that year. It appealed to the state Court of Appeal, which agreed July 19 that the MTA failed to study the Rapid bus alternative.

The MTA is now conducting that study, which could take nine months. MTA officials said a delay that long could cost $100 million.

Both sides expected the court to rule Aug. 18 on whether the temporary work stoppage would remain in place while the new study was being conducted. But when the court failed to issue a decision last week, both sides scrambled to understand the court's intent.

Court clerks for the 2nd District in Los Angeles said at the time that the court no longer had jurisdiction over the case as of Aug. 18.

On Tuesday, the MTA's outside attorney sent a letter to the court asking for clarification.

The clerk notified the MTA on Wednesday that there would be no further orders or clarifications coming from the court, said the MTA's attorney, County Counsel Steve Carnevale.

What that meant was clarified when the Daily News inquired. The MTA said it would have been difficult for its hired attorney to press the court for such clarification because of court etiquette, as well as ethics rules that require both sides to be present.

Yaroslavsky said the MTA had been hesitant to resume construction in recent days for fear of mistakenly going against the court's order.

"They were treading gingerly on that conclusion," he said. "The last thing the MTA wants to do is fly in the face of a court order. That's why our lawyers have been cautious in the extreme of doing anything that could have this agency and the board of directors in contempt of court."

Yaroslavsky wants the busway completed. "It makes no sense to stop this project because this project is going to be finished one way or another," he said.

"This project is extremely important to the 101 corridor. It's extremely important to air quality and congestion management."

After a 23-day shutdown, construction of the Orange Line busway across the San Fernando Valley resumed Thursday, but a residents group fighting the $330 million project vowed to go to court as early as today to try to get it stopped again.

Under orders from the Metropolitan Transportation Authority's CEO, crews were back on the job a day after an appellate court clarified that a ruling that temporarily halted construction had actually been lifted last week.

But the MTA's plans to ramp up construction -- with work concentrated on torn-up intersections -- could be cut short by Citizens Organized for Smart Transit. The busway opponent won the court-ordered shutdown as part of a ruling requiring the MTA to study Rapid buses as an alternative to the Orange Line and plans today to seek a court order to halt the project again.

"It's bad enough they've gone this far, but to go further is worse," said COST attorney John A. Henning.

"Our view is you can't build a busway while you're deciding whether to build a busway. To be building the busway while that's going on is going to corrupt that decision."

COST wants construction halted while the MTA conducts the required study on Rapid buses -- a process that could take nine months. Even if that study finds that Rapid buses would be better, the MTA could opt to proceed with the busway.

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who has fought for the $330 million busway that is the Valley's main mass transit project, urged COST to halt its legal challenges.

"The disruption has been inconvenient for some and an economic disaster for others," said Yaroslavsky, who also is a county supervisor.

"It needs to stop. Nobody wins by this and a lot of people get seriously hurt."

But the MTA plans to mount its own legal challenge today, asking the California Supreme Court to overturn the appellate court's order to conduct the environmental study.

The MTA estimates it has lost $1.5 million during the 23-day shutdown, keeping crews on standby and paying overhead costs, and said that figure could skyrocket to $100 million if it has to halt construction for nine months while the full study is being done.

Already, the busway's planned August 2005 opening is in doubt, officials said.

In addition to the MTA's losses, businesses along the 14-mile route have complained of economic hardship because of the loss of street and parking access for their customers.

During the MTA board meeting Thursday, Yaroslavksy asked staffers to consider a plan for compensating businesses hurt by construction.

The board also heard a separate report about a pilot busway project running along a mile-long stretch of Wilshire Boulevard in West Los Angeles. Initial results show dramatic improvements in on-time performance for the buses.

As construction ramped up Friday on the San Fernando Valley's Orange Line busway, the state Supreme Court considered a request to overturn an order requiring the MTA to conduct an environmental study of an alternative bus system, officials said.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority filed a request late Thursday with the Supreme Court as its crews got back to work following a 23-day shutdown.

And an expected legal challenge by Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, seeking another stop-work order from a Los Angeles County Superior Court judge, was postponed until Monday. COST, which sued over the project's initial environmental review, says work shouldn't be allowed to continue during the nine months it would take to study a Rapid bus system.

The MTA has said a nine-month shutdown could add $100 million to the $330 million cost of the busway. And even if the study shows Rapid buses to be a better alternative to the 14-mile busway, the MTA board could still choose to build the Orange Line.

The state Supreme Court on Thursday refused to overturn a lower-court order that requires the MTA to do a new environmental study on the San Fernando Valley Orange Line busway and also turned down a separate request by opponents to halt construction of the project.

The case now returns to Superior Court in Los Angeles, where residents from the group Citizens Organized for Smart Transit will press to stop construction of the $330 million project.

The busway was shut down for 23 days this summer after the state Court of Appeal agreed with COST and ordered the Metropolitan Transportation Authority to study a Rapid bus system as an alternative to the busway.

MTA launched the required study, which is expected to cost up to $650,000 and take a year to complete. It also appealed the ruling to the high court.

But the Supreme Court, which hears only a slim margin of cases, declined the review. It also declined COST's request for another shutdown.

COST said it believes the Superior Court will decertify the MTA's initial environmental report and shut down the project as the Court of Appeal ruled.

MTA officials did not immediately return a phone call.

The Orange Line is a 14-mile buses-only route now under construction between North Hollywood and Warner Center that had been scheduled to open next summer.

Most of the construction crews are back at work on the Orange Line busway across the San Fernando Valley after a court order shut down work for 23 days last summer, officials said Monday.

The $330 million, 14-mile busway project is now 45 percent complete, but it remains five months behind schedule. The delay likely will jeopardize the August 2005 opening, although MTA officials are looking for ways to expedite the project and open it as planned.

But Citizens Organized for Smart Transit will take the Metropolitan Transportation Authority back to court next week, trying to get construction halted again while the transit agency conducts a court-ordered environmental study of an alternative system.

"Obviously the MTA does not take the court ruling seriously," said COST Chairwoman Diana Lipari. "They're supposed to examine an alternative to the busway, and yet they're still building the busway.

"I feel they're wasting the taxpayers' money ... because the alternative could end up being the better, cheaper and more effective solution to this."

But MTA officials said they hoped there would be no further work stoppage since it took a full six weeks to get all crews back on the job after the first interruption.

"The previous shutdown was disruptive to the project," said project manager Roger Dames. "We're hopeful we will see no further shutdowns."

The busway had been taking shape between North Hollywood and Warner Center until the state Court of Appeal halted construction on Aug. 2 and ordered the MTA to study a network of Rapid buses as an alternative to the busway.

Construction resumed more than three weeks later and the MTA started the new study.

The report will cost an estimated $650,000 and take nine months to complete, although the MTA hopes to get it done sooner.

Construction crews now are pouring concrete and laying landscaping pipes along the line, and the first station is expected to take shape in coming weeks at Laurel Canyon Boulevard. By November, crews should be landscaping along Chandler Boulevard.

Fifteen major intersections have been reconfigured, nine more still need to be improved, and work on seven others is under way.

The MTA also continues to negotiate with Boeing Co. for property on the east side of Canoga Avenue, between Victory Boulevard and Vanowen Street, for a planned Park and Ride lot and bus station.

The Orange Line busway would be faster and more cost-effective than creating a series of Rapid buses crisscrossing the San Fernando Valley, transit planners concluded in a court-ordered environmental review released Friday.

The report -- a three-month study mandated when busway opponents temporarily got the project stopped this summer -- was released as Los Angeles Superior Court Judge David P. Jaffe ordered transit officials to throw out the original environmental review used in approving the busway project.

Metropolitan Transportation Authority officials plan to continue building the $330 million project although opponents said the judge's ruling opened the possibility they could win another order halting construction.

The new environmental report found that the busway would trim several minutes off the trip from North Hollywood to Woodland Hills and would generate thousands of new transit users, supporting the MTA's contention that the busway -- now halfway built -- is the best transit option for the Valley.

"I think common sense dictates that a grade-separated rapid transit line is more efficient, more cost-effective and quicker than a system that has to fight traffic," said Los Angeles County Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, an MTA board member and avid supporter of the Orange Line. "This is the environmentally superior alternative -- it always has been."

Busway opponents were skeptical of those findings Friday and asked how the $330 million busway could be more cost-effective when Rapid buses that travel on existing streets have proved cheap and popular. "At first glance some of their numbers sound questionable," said Diana Lipari, chairwoman of Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, whose successful lawsuit forced the MTA to temporarily halt busway construction and study an alternative system of Rapid buses.

Lipari also charged that the MTA was trying to skew the numbers and public opinion by releasing the report to the media but not giving a copy to COST.

"This is supposed to be for public education, not MTA spin," she said.

The MTA board of directors will decide Thursday how to respond to the judge's new order. They are likely to vacate the approval of the original environmental study and then consider the new environmental review, including analysis of Rapid buses.

Assistant County Counsel Steve Carnevale said the MTA could keep on building, while COST attorney John Henning said the judge has essentially thrown out the review on which the busway approval is based.

"The bottom line here is this project needs to have an approval at all times while it's being built. What happened is the court said the approval has to evaporate," Henning said.

"And yet the MTA wants to continue building it anyway. (Jaffe) hasn't told them to continue building the busway. We feel that continuing construction of this busway after (Thursday) when the MTA sets aside the approval is against the law."

The judge's order is the latest in the complicated legal battle over the busway.

Shortly after the busway's original environmental impact report was approved in 2002, COST filed a lawsuit, saying the MTA had erred when it failed to consider Rapid buses as an alternative. Rapid buses only stop about every mile and have signal priority at intersections.

MTA officials said they never considered the Rapid bus alternative before because the new, red buses had only been launched as a pilot program in 2000 when the busway's environmental review was under way.

Busway construction began, but was shut down Aug. 2 when the state Court of Appeal ordered the MTA to study a network of Rapid buses as an alternative to the busway. Construction resumed 23 days later and the MTA started the new study at an estimated cost of $650,000.

The new review looked at computer models and found that Rapid buses from North Hollywood to Warner Center would take up to 45 minutes. The 14-mile busway trip would take up to 40 minutes.

Rapid buses would cost between $64 million and $127 million versus $330 million for the busway.

But the busway is more cost-effective in the long run, MTA officials said Friday, because it will entice 4,000 commuters out of their cars and into transit versus a maximum 1,300 new transit riders with expanded Rapid bus service. The busway costs $27 per new rider, while Rapid buses cost between $34 to $294 per new rider. "You spend fewer dollars to get riders," said James de la Loza, MTA executive officer of countywide planning and development.

The MTA board Monday unanimously approved the revised court-ordered environmental study for the Orange Line through the San Fernando Valley, although opponents vowed to continue their legal battle to stop the $330 million busway.

The Metropolitan Transportation Authority also approved spending nearly $8 million to get the project -- about halfway complete, but six months behind schedule -- finished in time for the scheduled August 2005 opening.

Supervisor Zev Yaroslavsky, who has pushed for the Orange Line, welcomed the vote, especially after an appellate court ruling halted construction for nearly a month last summer.

"This is something that's been long in coming," said Yaroslavsky, who also is an MTA board member.

"It's going to integrate the San Fernando Valley into the rest of the transportation network. If it works -- nothing succeeds like success -- we're going to be looking at it in other parts of the region as well."

Citizens Organized for Smart Transit, which has opposed the project since it was approved in 2002, plans to file an objection when the plan goes to court for approval.

COST maintains that a system of Rapid buses in the San Fernando Valley would carry more riders than than the busway, a 14-mile buses-only route between North Hollywood and Warner Center.

COST also says the MTA skewed the results of the environmental report and didn't allow for adequate public review, since the final report was released just days before Monday's vote.

"MTA can do what they want to do. Whether they've done enough is a decision to be made by the courts," said COST attorney John Henning. "This was a kind of rush to judgment ... This was a predetermined result."

Transit advocates urged the board to move forward with approval, as did representatives for Councilwoman Wendy Greuel and the Economic Alliance of the San Fernando Valley.

Many said that even though the Orange Line was not their first choice, it remains the best mass-transit project under consideration in the Valley.

Bart Reed, executive director of The Transit Coalition, said the busway will be a better option than putting more Rapid buses on city streets.

"Any time there's traffic, it's just a stuck Rapid bus in local traffic. This is a fixed-schedule type of busway that's going to benefit the Valley."

The Orange Line, once expected to make the cross-Valley trip in 28 minutes, now is expected to take about 40 minutes. The MTA said Rapid buses would take just a few minutes longer but that the Orange Line would attract more new riders and be $10 million cheaper to operate.

The board also approved paying the contractor $7.9 million to put crews on overtime to finish by August -- though landscaping will probably not be done by then.

Instead of offering a $1 million bonus to finish on time, as had been discussed in October, the MTA will now withhold $2 million if contractor Shimmick Construction Co. Inc./Obayashi Corp. misses the deadline.

The MTA said if work is not accelerated, the opening would be pushed to January, at a cost of $8 million to $10 million.