Metro to vote on Sepulveda EIR; Staff recommend modified Alt. 5
The agency is recommending the selection of a fully automated heavy rail line, albeit with a modified alignment.
According to a newly released agenda item for Metro’s Planning and Programming Committee, the agency is considering moving forward with a modified version of Alternative 5 for the Sepulveda Transit Corridor project.
The Sepulveda Transit Corridor is a planned new rapid transit line aiming to connect the San Fernando Valley and the Los Angeles Westside. The project aims to mitigate the worsening congestion along the Sepulveda Pass, including I-405, which cuts through the Santa Monica Mountains, by establishing a new way to travel between the two regions.
Environmental Impact Report summary
Currently, the project has been in the final stages of the environmental review phase. Metro evaluated a total of six alternatives for the project: Three monorail alternatives (1–3) and four heavy rail alternatives (4–6), with two of the heavy rail alternatives (4–5) being fully automated. Alternative 2 was removed from consideration early on in the process.
In June, Metro released the DEIR (Draft Environmental Impact Report) for the Sepulveda Transit Corridor, which gave an early in-depth comparison between the five remaining alternatives. Public comment was accepted on the report from June until August 30.1
Among the considered alternatives, Alternatives 4 and 5 had the highest projected ridership, alongside the highest potential frequency and the second-lowest total end-to-end travel time. Despite significant cost reductions, the monorail alternatives (1 and 3) fell far below the other alternatives in projected ridership and had far longer end-to-end travel times.2
All alternatives faced a wide variety of support as well as opposition. Transit advocates have continually pushed for Alternatives 4 through 6, citing higher ridership, frequencies, and end-to-end travel times. However, the project has also faced criticism from local Sherman Oaks and Bel-Air residents, including former Ticketmaster CEO Fred Rosen, who argue that the line alignment is ‘unfair.’3 Despite local opposition in the Valley, communities such as Culver City have voiced their support for the new line.
Modified alternative 5 under consideration
Following the public comment phase, Metro staff compiled all written and oral comments into one report. Public comments, stakeholder input, and technical reports were compared and analyzed to select the alternative that best met the project needs.4
The ‘preferred alternative’ identified by Metro is a variation on the Alternative 5 displayed above. Despite using the proposed construction method (single-bore tunneling) and automated heavy rail technology from Alternative 5, the line will follow the proposed Alternative 6 alignment. Additionally, construction will prioritize a phased approach, including an Initial Operating Segment between the G Line Van Nuys station (which will also serve the future East San Fernando Valley light rail line) and the D Line Westwood/UCLA station.
Modified Alternative 5 incorporates key elements of Alternative 5, including automated vehicles in a single-bore tunnel, a terminus at the E Line Expo/Sepulveda Station and 2.5-minute frequencies during peak travel times. It leverages the strengths of Alternative 5 – high ridership, high frequencies, platform screen doors, and shorter station construction sites, while avoiding construction of a ventilation shaft in the Santa Monica Mountains. It also offers the connectivity benefits of Alternative 6 along Van Nuys Boulevard instead of Sepulveda Boulevard, which reduces the project’s overall length and is anticipated to reduce project costs.
Source: Metro
The modified Alternative 5 also features a ‘refined alignment through the Santa Monica Mountains.’ The phased approach also allows for more flexible funding plans, as well as an earlier initial revenue service date. A modified Alternative 5 was also recommended to “facilitate direct connections to the transit network as part of the IOS, avoiding the need to transfer twice to access the project.”5
Despite the improvements, a new approach to maintenance and storage will need to be identified, as the previously identified yard location is outside of the Initial Operating Segment.
Next steps
The item is now being brought forward before Metro’s Planning and Programming Committee, which will meet on Wednesday, January 14th, at 11:00 am. Following the committee’s recommendation, the item will move to the Metro Board of Directors, which will meet on Thursday, January 22nd, at 10:00 am.
The Metro Board of Directors will select an alternative to be the Locally Preferred Alternative, or LPA for short. The LPA is “the project alternative that Metro determines best meets the project’s goals, objectives, and community needs, based on technical analysis and public input.”6 After an LPA is selected, further design and environmental review will take place, focusing specifically on the chosen alternative. A Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) must be prepared and certified by the Board before the project is approved.
A construction timeline will be shared once a preferred alternative is selected.7
If you found this article interesting, consider subscribing to The SoCal Transiteer! You can customize what topics you want to read about, and it’s the best way to support our work.
https://www.metro.net/documents/2025/10/stc_infosessionpresentation-6-23-25-english.pdf/
https://metro.legistar.com/gateway.aspx?M=F&ID=368adfb9-8db7-42b5-8e9b-83e283ea4fdc.pdf
https://www.shermanoakshomeownersassociation.com/_files/ugd/0a1b0e_325d23504d7c497191002aec63a6edb3.pdf?index=true
https://www.metro.net/documents/2026/01/english-lpa-faq.pdf/
https://www.metro.net/documents/2026/01/english-lpa-faq.pdf/
https://www.metro.net/documents/2026/01/english-lpa-faq.pdf/
https://www.metro.net/projects/sepulvedacorridor/