Scoping meetings in April for upcoming Arts District Station environmental report

With the draft environmental report set to begin for an Arts District/6th Street Station for the B and D Lines (Red and Purple), Metro is holding two virtual scoping meetings in April.

Metro is also issuing the formal legal notice today (March 29) that it’s launching the draft environmental report (DEIR). Metro still needs to secure funding to build a station but the city of Los Angeles agreed to fund the legally-required DEIR. So this is a positive step forward.

Those with long memories may recall that many residents and stakeholders in the Arts District have pushed for a station adjacent to the street level rail yard that serves the subway. The Arts District has grown considerably in recent years with many new residences and businesses — and a station would make getting to the subway a lot easier. Otherwise, the closest direct subway access to the Arts District is either at Union Station or Pershing Square.

The proposed project would be generally bounded to the north by the 6th Street Bridge, to the south by 7th Street, to the east by the Los Angeles River, and to the west by Mesquit Street.

With the proposed station nearly surrounded by active rail tracks, one big issue to be resolved is how to get people to and from the station. At this time, it’s anticipated that access will be from the north side and the study will explore providing access to the station from Mesquit and Santa Fe Avenue, the city of L.A.’s future 6th Street park and the future Metro’s L.A. River Path Project. There may also be an opportunity to coordinate secondary access and/or emergency access with adjacent developments.

As part of a separate project, Metro is currently expanding the rail yard and entrance to the subway tunnel’s portal to/from Union Station — which will allow Metro to run more frequent trains on the subway.

Here are the dates and times for the virtual meetings:

Virtual Scoping Meeting #1

Wednesday, April 14, 2021
 5 p.m. to 7 p.m.

Link: bit.ly/3bEuF24


Passcode: 358321

Phone: 213 338 8477

Webinar ID: 979 0722 3534

Virtual Scoping Meeting #2

Saturday, April 17, 2021
 11 a.m. to 1 p.m.

Link: bit.ly/3bEioL5


Passcode: 535774

Phone:  213 338 8477

Webinar ID: 973 3346 6750

Spanish and Japanese interpretation, including closed captioning, will be available during the virtual scoping meetings. All Metro meetings support needs associated with the Americans with Disability Act (ADA). Other ADA accommodations and translations are available by calling (213) 418-3423 or California Relay Service at 711 at least 72 hours in advance of the meeting.

A 45-day comment period for this NOP will be accepted beginning on March 29, 2021 through May 12, 2021. Written comments on the scope of the Draft EIR, including the Project area and description, the impacts to be evaluated, and the methodologies to be used in the evaluation, will be accepted during the comment period and should be received by 11:59 pm PST on May 12, 2021 at the postal address or e-mail address below.

Written or electronic (e-mail) comments may be sent to Brian Lam, Metro, One Gateway Plaza, Mail Stop 99-22-7, Los Angeles, CA 90012, via email at artdist6thstation@metro.net, or via an online comment form at metro.net/artsdist6thstation.net.

For more information, please visit metro.net/artsdist6thstation

5 replies

  1. When I think of how the original Red Line subway should have gone out Whittier Blvd into East LA, I see this as a possible second chance. Bringing the line south to the point where a station is at Whittier Blvd (somehow to interface with with new bridge, the new bridge park and future LA river parks) is good, now design it to turn east, go under the LA River and even if only to Soto for a start. Lets try to make up for a huge mistake from the past. Whittier Blvd is the Wilshire Blvd of the east and this line should have worked its way out through East LA, Montebello, Pico Rivera and actually get to Whittier.

    • While I agree with most of your statements, I also believe that this could help with the environmental study that they were doing on the San Gabriel Valley. There’s already a plan that’s been in the works to extend the gold line further east to Whittier via Washington Blvd. Personally, I still feel that the red line should have been prioritized to extend south for the WSAB but that’s another issue. If the B line was to get further extended east, then it could potentially solve some of the issues with the need for more transit in the San Gabriel Valley. Perhaps a junction box could be made where both lines intersect. As for a terminus for the red line or b line for that matter, maybe Cal Poly Pomona. Stops would include City of Industry, Walnut, Mt. San Antonio College and Cal Poly as the terminus. Idk, just some food for thought. It’s easier said than done but one can only hope right? As for this Arts District station, I dig it. I saw that there was a possible 3rd street station that got scratched from the plans. Would be nice to have both options!

      • If I’m correct, the box underneath Union Station already contains a Y junction. You can see the North “stub” dead-end in a literal brick wall.

  2. Is not the West Santa Anna line also proposed to (maybe) have a stop in the Arts District or two? Some of the options on stops there seem very close, how are these two projects being considered for their impact on each other?

    • No. The West Santa Ana Line will either have no stops between Washington and Union Station (Little Tokyo connection is only optional) or it’ll have a Fashion District station between Washington and 7th/Metro.