Metro to host community meetings for Crenshaw/LAX Northern Extension project on June 16 and 21

Three proposed routes for the extension of the Crenshaw/LAX Line (which will be known as the K Line when it opens).

Metro will host two virtual community meetings June 16 and 21 to discuss initial refinements to the route alternatives for the Crenshaw Northern Extension Project and encourages public participation and input.

The Crenshaw Northern Extension will extend the Crenshaw/LAX light rail line north to the D Line (Purple) subway on Wilshire Boulevard and then continue to the B Line (Red) subway in Hollywood. Metro is currently drafting the project’s Environmental Impact Report (EIR) based on the feedback received during the public  scoping period in spring 2021.

The three routes under study follow busy travel corridors, serve major destinations and employment centers and intersect with five of the busiest bus routes in the region. The routes will follow parts of San Vicente Boulevard, Fairfax Avenue or La Brea Avenue.

Under the Measure M schedule, the project is slated to begin construction in 2041 and begin service in 2047. Metro, in partnership with the cities of West Hollywood and Los Angeles, are advancing the planning work to potentially accelerate the project.

For more Information about the Crenshaw North Extension Project, please visit The project team can be reached at or by calling 213.418.3093.

The meetings will use the same Zoom link and will be held on the following dates and times:

Thursday, June 16
Noon to 2 p.m.
Zoom meeting link:

Tuesday, June 21
6 to 8 p.m.
Zoom meeting link:

Each meeting will use the same presentation. Simultaneous Spanish translation and interpretation services are available.


16 replies

  1. La Brea is best choice- straightest route on a already long and somewhat winding route down Crenshaw
    In times of money, less construction the better
    Can be cut into 2 build sections of 3 stations each like Metro likes to do – Crenshaw/Adams, Pico/Venice & Wilshire/La Brea first
    Then La Brea/Beverly, La Brea/Santa Monica Bl and Hollywood/Highland
    However, whatever route is chosen, Hollywood Bowl station needs to be included. Yes, I know there are only so many events all year at the bowl, but if you reconfigure the parking lots and properly site the station, this would make an excellent park-n-ride stop during most of the week and all year, literally right off the Hollywood Freeway. Also, that station should have a 3rd track for extra trains for Bowl events, but also for all year round easier turn backs and storage of a spare train set. Park-N-Ride, Kiss-N-Ride and Bicycle Hub as well.

  2. “Even if you’d somehow get Beverly Hills to give up some of its greenway, once you get to Bedford, you’d need to knock down a church or a parking garage and then there’s not much space from Wilshire to the Century City line to add 2 lanes and a median.”

    That’s why I didn’t include them. They have proven to be so anti-transit that they’ll have no shame using school money to stop a transit project everyone else wants.

    That being said I didn’t think about the greenway on the north side, but the small abandoned section of the PE ROW that are just being used as overflow parking lots on the century City end and the vacant lot north of city hall that believe it or not, could actually save the buses as much as 10 min even just on those 2 solo sections because I’ve been stuck on those section in the past and it has in fact taken 10-15 just to get from Crescent to Doheny at time.

    I really don’t miss commuting West of Vermont

  3. “Why isn’t this being considered?”

    Because now you are wasting taxpayer money on a rail line that will be making a U-turn detour because everyone wants to get pleased.

    Such a detour will now add to the overall travel time to commuters who will now see the alternative as an unattractive further wasting tax dollars on a project not many people will appreciate.

    This will ultimately result in a waste of resources that could have otherwise gone to other projects.

    What could be done is, in addition to making La Brea BRT ready with Bus only Lanes, you can also make Santa Monica BRT ready and actually establish a BRT line with side or center running lanes between La Cienega and Doheny and Century Park East to 405 where it can run curbside to the Ocean. Of course this won’t happen because all the NIMBYs west of La Cienega will prevent this from happening. People in LA are only liberals until liberalism becomes an inconvenience. Not sure why many people believe otherwise.

    • BRT on Santa Monica Blvd east of Century City is pretty much a non-starter. Even if you’d somehow get Beverly Hills to give up some of its greenway, once you get to Bedford, you’d need to knock down a church or a parking garage and then there’s not much space from Wilshire to the Century City line to add 2 lanes and a median.

      In West Hollywood, west of La Cienega, the median is very narrow in spots and could not fit 2 more lanes. Overcrowded sidewalks and bulb outs on every intersection in this section take away the option to move traffic adjacent to the curb.

      From La Cienega to La Brea, businesses rely on street parking as there’s little off street parking available. Dozens of bulb-outs in this section also preclude the parking lane from being used as through traffic.

  4. My vote is for Fairfax. Its the Goldilocks option or the following reasons:
    – The Crenshaw line is already circuitous, but Santa Monica Blvd doesn’t gain anything over Fairfax route
    – More nodes along Fairfax than La Brea (LACMA, Grove, Melrose)
    – La Brea is mainly low slung with some options for redevelopment (I could be wrong about that but that is my impression)
    – More likely to build Fairfax route first then add La Brea later than the reverse
    – Finally anyone taking Metro from the Valley to LAX is already committed to a long ride.

  5. If the Northern Extension simply went up La Brea and turned left at Beverly (continuing with the hybrid A alternative) you would have stops at ALL 4 of the original line route proposals. Why isn’t this being considered? If people are split between the La Brea option and the hybrid option this satisfies both camps. It also yields a stop at Fairfax. The key to satisfying ALL of these proposals and covering a much larger swath of West Hollywood is a longer run on Beverly Blvd.

    • La Brea and Beverly would be the lowest ridership station of all those proposed, and in terms of overall time/distance traveled the route you’re proposing would be even longer than the current Hybrid. The core problem here is that we really need a north/south route AND an east/west route but because there’s no money or plan for a proper east/west line, we’re forced to try to accomplish both with a single project. It’s a mess — and one we wouldn’t be in if Metro hadn’t axed the WeHo branch of the Purple Line a decade ago.

    • One of the main problems with the hybrid version is the circuitous path it takes to get to a terminus at Hollywood & Highland. It tries to accomplish what really should be done with 2 different lines. The LaBrea to Beverly then west concept you propose would be even more exaggerated than the Hybrid.

  6. It seems like Metro does prefer the Fairfax alignment to be honest. The noted that the Wilshire/Fairfax could be one of the highest ridership stations in the system.

    The question is how much money will be available to build the slightly longer alignment and weather there is enough political capital in west Hollywood to support expediting the Fairfax alignment if the it is determined the hybrid alignment is too costly.

  7. I’m fairly amazed San Vincente/Fairfax is actually being considered. circuitous, meandering routes are not good for ridership.

    • That’s simply not true. Most of the busiest rail lines around the world meander to some extent, especially subways like this that can keep the curves wide and high speed. Just look at DCs Red Line, which is a narrow U shape. It’s DCs busiest and most used line, even though it doesn’t offer a direct straight path between certain stations.
      Connecting the busiest places in Central LA together, bookended by Hollywood/Red Line and LAX, will attract high ridership because it will still be faster than driving at busy times.

  8. The MTA hoodwinked the residents and leaders of West Hollywood into voting for a tax increase that in part would finance the extension of the Crenshaw Line thru West Hollywood with the majority going down Santa Monica Bl. to either La Brea or Highland before going north to the Red Line Station at Hollywood and Highland. In my opinion its not going to happen. The MTA preferred route is north on La Brea into Hollywood and yes it will pass thru West Hollywood as promised but not the route that was eluded to in the MTA’s promise. Just look at the facts. If the line were to proceed underground via San Vicente the Wilshire and La Cienega Purple Line Station would have to be upgrade at a great expense since the current box, the station, is not being built to accommodate the Crenshaw Line. In addition with the Santa Monica Bl. route major bus routes, 212 on La Brea, 217 on Fairfax and 105 on La Cienega would cross the Crenshaw Line twice, once at San Vicente and again on Santa Monica. This short token Santa Monica Bl. Light Rail proposal will do nothing to relieve traffic or increase public transit ridership. Yes, we need Light Rail on Santa Monica Bl. but not this. What is needed is a Light Rail Line from Downtown Los Angeles, via Sunset Bl. to Santa Monica Bl. continuing to the beach. This is what we should be demanding. Let us not forget Governor Jerry Brown cancelled the extension of the Glendale Freeway to the Westside. And at that time large developments were bing built in anticipation of the freeway. Property along some of the route had already been acquired and the Hollywood(101) Freeway initial construction had included space for the freeways to interchange at Vermont (see large gap between north & southbound lanes). With that said, the MTA should free up some of the money dedicated to none public transit projects and start construction on a much needed east-west line that would alleviate the grid lock we see each day on Santa Monica Bl. and Sunset Bl. from the beach to Downtown L.A. And instead of using the slow, inefficient construction techniques the MTA is so fond of, revert to Henry Huntington’s Pacific Electric techniques that were far more efficient and cost saving. It took the MTA predecessor three years to build the Blue Line to Long Beach. It took Huntington six months utilizing horse and wagons to transport materials.

    • Any potential line down either Sunset or Santa Monica Blvd would have to be predominantly underground for a majority of the route. There are significant earthquake fault considerations at Century City, so a terminus at the Wilshire/ Rodeo station would be as far west as it would likely go.

      Using Huntington’s techniques would get you an out-dated streetcar- not something that could move large quantities of people in a speedy manner. There would’ve been significantly less ROW issues in the time Huntington built his system.

      By law, Measure M requires some investment in roadway improvements. Metro does not have the authority to shift that to mass transit.

      Your point about the never-built Beverly Hills Freeway is correct. Had that not been on drawing board in the early 60s, Century City, as we know it, would never have been approved.

      • “Your point about the never-built Beverly Hills Freeway is correct. Had that not been on drawing board in the early 60s, Century City, as we know it, would never have been approved.“

        Honestly, racism from that era aside, this city REALLY had extremely poor planning post-WW2 and it seems to continue to be plagued with it to some extent.

        Who on earth would agree to building a mini-Metropolis like Century City BEFORE the freeway and transit needed to get there was actually built? Literally non-coordination between the private and public sector for them to even think people in Beverly Hills of all places would simply bend over and yet “yes masters, separate our city in half and built a freeway here.”

        So glad Pasadena is getting its 710 land back from the state, on a somewhat related note.

    • A full Santa Monica Blvd rail line will never happen for a few major reasons:
      1) an earthquake fault along Santa Monica through Beverly Hills and century City
      2) Purple Line already serves Beverly Hills, Century City and even West LA, with its future extension to downtown Santa Monica within only a couple blocks of Santa Monica Blvd
      3) Santa Monica Blvd is only 0.75 mile from Hollywood Blvd through Hollywood- the board will never allow for so much investment in just one area (central LA), with several other multi billion dollar projects with higher priority under Measure M
      4) Measure M can barely cover a northern extension of this line to Wilshire! Dreaming of anything beyond this project for the same exact area is simply dreaming. If it’s not in Measure M, it’s not happening, until the year 2070 or later, at a minimum.

    • You’re comparing a at-grade Trolley Line and a modern Rail Line built on really outdated standards to technology used today?

      Make no mistake, Metro deserves the new hole everyone is proudly ripping. But putting the agencies failures aside, the technology being used today, no matter how expensive it might get. Also, the key here isn’t even delays, but rather building it right from the start.

      Look at the failure of the Expo Line for not simply waiting until the financial resources were there to built it with more Grade Separation. The street running and constant stops every 0.25 to 0.75 miles without the Express Trains makes the line a failure IMO because the car is still faster outside of rush hour.

      The Crenshaw Line is now another example. Politicians swearing they are right will now result in the rail line closing again less than 2-3 years after opening. What kind of idiocy is that? A fine example of build it right or not at all.

      I refuse to vote for an at-grade rail line down Santa Monica Blvd just because traffic problems need to be solved there. It’s already been proven that building a Subway line along a Earthquake fault can be prohibitively expensive. At this point a BRT project AND a North-South rail line will suffice unless you want want to spend Trillions In Real Estate and the impending lawsuits to fight just to built yet another rail line between Downtown LA and Santa Monica that may not even end up solve the problem you’re describing as residents in this area have already proven they don’t like transit.