Sepulveda Transit Corridor scoping deadline approaching – share your comments by Feb. 11, 2022

Next Friday, February 11, is the deadline to provide input on scoping for the Sepulveda Transit Corridor project. Scoping is the first phase of the environmental study that is evaluating rail alternatives linking the San Fernando Valley and Westside providing a fast, reliable alternative to slogging through traffic.

Six alternatives are being studied for this project that would impact hundreds of thousands of people who work, attend school, access medical care and enjoy culture and recreation in Los Angeles and throughout Southern California. 

Scoping is your opportunity to comment on the alternatives, their routes, the destinations they would serve, benefits and costs, impacts, mitigations and other issues that may be important to you for consideration.

Imagine a train trip designed to be faster than driving the 405 Freeway or Sepulveda Boulevard during peak times!

Here’s more information about the study. Scroll down for information on how to provide comments.

Here’s a link to the Metro online project overview and a video:

Metro has held three virtual scoping meetings over the past two months and is eager to solicit additional public input through Friday, Feb. 11. The first scoping meeting presentation can be viewed below in English and Spanish. 

Here’s how to submit comments:

Online Comment Form:

By mail:Peter Carter, Project Manager

LA Metro

One Gateway Plaza, 99-22-6

Los Angeles, CA 90012


By phone: 213.922.7375

The Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project is funded in part by Measure M, the transportation sales tax approved by 71 percent of L.A. County voters in 2016. The Measure M funding plan includes $5.7 billion for the Valley-Westside segment and $3.8 billion for the Westside-LAX segment.

Metro’s funding plans include assumptions of federal, state, and local revenue — including discretionary grants that Metro must secure through a competitive process. The $1-trillion Infrastructure Jobs and Investment Act signed by President Biden last year might supply funds for this project as could the $2.2-trillion Build Back Better bill that was approved by the House of Representatives but has not yet been approved by the U.S. Senate.

To potentially reduce taxpayer costs, the Metro Board awarded contracts to two private sector teams to dopre-development (PDA) workon two different potential types of transit for the project. LA SkyRail Express is developing proposed monorail alternatives, while Sepulveda Transit Corridor Partners (STCP) is developing heavy rail alternatives.

11 replies

  1. Doubling the light rail down Van Nuys seems like a total waste, and prevents the line from easily being extended in the future to Burbank Airport. Build HRT down Sepulveda and turn southeast onto the Metrolink tracks. Phase 3 can connect Burbank Airport directly to LAX! A connection with the Purple Line should also be studied to allow a one-seat ride to DTLA.

    Of course we’re all obsessed with one-seat rides only because the headways in LA are so poor. A transfer is perfectly acceptable if there’s a train every 3-5 minutes. I fear continuation of the 10+ mins headways will continue however even after this mega project is completed. C’mon Metro!

    There should also be a master plan for the entire system rather than this piecemeal silliness:

  2. Just think if didn’t waste the time and money studying the monorail and yet another expansion of traffic lanes on the 405 and put all that money to expediting the subway from Van Nuys to the Expo Line because right now, I don’t see anyway this will get done before the Olympics.

    • 2035 at the earliest methinks. The tunnel digging alone will take 4-6 years and can only occur after all of the enviornmental studies have concluded and funding sources found. No way it gets done by 2028. Transit in LA is a lost cause this century. We should keep building but transit won’t be a viable “use every day” thing until my grandchildren come of age (50+ years from now). The only way is to cover the LA area with fast, reliable rail (30 mph avg end-to-end, traffic signal pre-emption for at-grade intersections): then solve first-mile last-mile with short headway buses (5-10 mins max) and possibly Uber/Lyft style rideshare to fill in the gaps (for an extra fee). My 2¢

  3. The heavy rail option should be chosen because of the number of connection points that can be made with Metrolink, the Purple Line, the Expo Line, and ultimately the airport in Phase 2 of the project. The Sepulveda line is a funnel, and the monorail doesn’t fulfill that purpose well because of the lack of connection points and lack of additional capacity offered by the automated metro. This isn’t even mentioning that UCLA would be included in the heavy rail option, something that I’m sure UCLA students, faculty, and staff would greatly appreciate. Overall, the heavy rail alternative will benefit more people and grant the most bang for the buck being spent.

  4. Please DO NOT build the monorail. It’s going to end up costing more while being less efficient. Please

  5. Already placed my response. Stick to Light Rail and Heavy Rail technology. This is literally the best way to go.

    My only issue with interlining the Purple Line and Sepulveda Line is the fact that would give Metro the stupid idea that the Purple Line should end at Westwood as “well, people can just transfer at the Expo Line where frequency can barely hold any gripe and further contesting the line beyond its capacity.”

    . . . This is why I am so glad this is a PPP effort. The main reason for being so passionate about this line is that it is one of the pieces of the puzzle that can transform LA from the dystopian it has become.

  6. While the MTA has pursued “one line, one destination” concept for the majority of rail lines it builds and operates, a heavy rail line with several destinations is a viable solution to Los Angeles varied travel patterns. Only because the MTA was pushed into having two destination for the Red and Purple Lines do we have the two destinations. And yes, the shared trackage for the Blue and Expo Lines have proved to be a failure only because the Blue Lines Seventh and Flower Station was not built to accommodate two separate lines. A one seat ride from Downtown to LAX has been discarded where an easy alternative on the Blue Line regular route whereby some trains physically inter-connect with the Green Line and proceed to the airport. Another alternative again discarded was the physical connection between the Expo Line and the Crenshaw Line providing a one seat ride to LAX. Now the MTA is pursuing a “Heavy Rail Line” from the San Fernando to Westwood and LAX. Not only for passenger convenience but also the ability to better utilize equipment the proposed “405 Freeway” rail line should be physically interconnected with the “Purple Line” in Westwood but also provide those on the Purple Line the ability to travel to LAX and for those on the “405 Freeway Line” the ability to travel eastbound and perhaps Westbound on the Purple Line if ever pursued. The stupidity of isolating each MTA rail line is not only beyond belief in this modern age of rail transit but in it self turns the MTA back on the great transit we once had in Los Angeles where alternate routes were the norm as opposed to the exception. We did it then with the Pacific Electric and L.A. Railway using primitive by todays standards in their operation.

    It might be noted that the proposed Southbay Line is not be planned using the Blue Line tracks but instead separate tracks paralleling the current Blue Line tracks. All these cases of isolating rail lines is reminiscent of the multiple independent streetcar lines operating on Market Street in San Francisco at one time.

    Were living in the Twenty-First Century, hopefully the MTA can move into the Twentieth Century!

    • Exactly, I’ve been saying this alot about this project. It needs to be built to allow trains to run to multiple end points. It’s truly bizzare that Metro is about to build two sets of heavy rail tunnels that pass perpendicular to one another without even connecting the two. It makes no sense. Imagine the utility in being able to have the flexibility of trips that would be possible with such a connection. Metro lacks vision, and it literally lacks a masterplan. Everything else flows from that unfortunately.