After several years of preparation, on June 2, Metro released its draft environmental impact report (DEIR) on the Sepulveda Transit Corridor project. The DEIR has been eagerly anticipated by local homeowners and transit advocates who are either in favor of one of the five proposed mass transit routes that would connect Los Angeles’ Westside to the Valley, or wish to cancel the project altogether (known as the “no-build” option). Metro is now accepting public comments on the DEIR until August 30, 2025.
Currently, ALTs 1 and 3 propose a monorail built along the median or on the side of the existing 405 freeway (ALT 2 was eliminated early on in the process). ALTs 4, 5, and 6 feature a heavy rail option that would travel primarily within subterranean tunnels. While the DEIR reaffirms transit advocates’ claim that the monorail options have longer commute times and less efficient connections to existing transit, two homeowner associations are actively opposing the heavy rail options.
Former Ticketmaster CEO Fred Rosen, one of the most outspoken members of the Bel Air Association, has claimed that the heavy rail tunneling process would threaten his home, despite the fact that Metro has a proven track record of safely tunneling beneath skyscrapers, residential neighborhoods, and even the La Brea Tar Pits. Likewise, the Sherman Oaks Homeowners Association has also objected to the heavy rail because they claim that ALT 4, which is widely favored by transit advocates to be the best of all of the options, would create “extreme noise for Alt 4 elevated steel-wheel trains in Valley.”
Currently, commuting over the Sepulveda Pass in a private car takes between 40 and 80 minutes depending on the amount of traffic on the 405, whereas the transit options would provide a reliable commute time between 18 to 32 minutes. The DEIR also notes that the Sepulveda Transit Corridor project would “increase economic output in the Los Angeles region by $25.5 billion to $42.9 billion, generating $7.3 billion to $12.1 billion in additional wages.”
The DEIR notes that proposed public transit options are faster than the majority of likely commute times between a variety of beginning and ending points in the city, as this table demonstrates:
The five current proposed alternatives, and the major takeaways from the report, are as follows:
ALT 1: Monorail with a 15.1 mile length route
Cost: $15.4 billion
End-to-End Travel Time: 27:54 minutes
Report Takeaway: This alternative would have no direct connection to UCLA, relying on an electric bus to transport riders to the university. It also has relatively lackluster ridership projections (63,000 daily boardings) compared to all the other alternatives.
ALT 3: Monorial with a 16.1 mile length route
Cost: $20.8 billion
End-to-End Travel Time: 32:35 minutes
Report Takeaway: Designed with a peculiar curving track to avoid most of Bel Air, this alternative would have a projected ridership of 81,842 daily boardings.
ALT 4: Automated heavy rail with a 13.9 mile length route
Cost: $20 billion
End-to-End Travel Time: 20:10 minutes
Report Takeaway: Widely favored by transit advocates, this alternative would have the best connections with existing transit, such as the E and D lines, in terms of total project cost. Projected daily boardings are 122,775.
ALT 5: Automated heavy rail with a 13.8 mile length route
Cost: $24.2 billion
End-to-End Travel Time: 19:36 minutes
Report Takeaway: Projected daily boardings are 123,551.
ALT 6: Driver-operated heavy rail with a 12.9 mile length route
Cost: $24.4 billion
End-to-End Travel Time: 18:20 minutes
Report Takeaway: Projected daily boardings are 107,092.
