Go Metro Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority

Metro is unique among the nation’s transportation agencies. It serves as transportation planner and coordinator, designer, builder and operator for one of the country’s largest, most populous counties. More than 9.6 million people – one-third of California’s residents – live, work, and play within its 1,433-square-mile service area.

Besides operating over 2,000 peak-hour buses on an average weekday, Metro also designed, built and now operates 87 miles of Metro Rail service. The Metro Rail system consists of the Metro Red/Purple Line subway system, and the Metro Blue, Expo, Green and Gold Lines. In total, the Metro Rail system serves 80 rail stations stretching from Long Beach to Downtown Los Angeles, Hollywood and the San Fernando Valley, from Culver City to East Los Angeles and Pasadena, from Norwalk to El Segundo, and all points in between. Under construction is the Expo Line Phase II which will stretch from Culver City to Santa Monica and the 11-mile Gold Line Foothill Extension from Pasadena to Azusa.

In addition to operating its own service, Metro funds 16 municipal bus operators and funds a wide array of transportation projects, including bikeways and pedestrian facilities, local roads and highway improvements, goods movement, Metrolink commuter rail, and the popular Freeway Service Patrol and Call Boxes.

Recognizing that no one form of transit can solve urban congestion problems, Metro’s multimodal approach uses a variety of transportation alternatives to meet the needs of the highly diverse populations in the region. The “M” logo of Metro’s System is the public symbol of this fully coordinated network.

Metro employs more than 9,300 people in a broad range of technical specialties and services ranging from Metro bus and Metro Rail operators and mechanics to construction engineers and safety inspectors, from transportation planning professionals to customer information agents.

board of directors

Mark Ridley-Thomas, Chair Don Knabe Los Angeles County Supervisor Los Angeles County Supervisor Second Supervisorial District Fourth Supervisorial District

John Fasana, First Vice Chair Paul Krekorian Council Member, City of Duarte Council Member, City of Los Angeles

Eric Garcetti, Second Vice Chair Sheila Kuehl Mayor, City of Los Angeles Los Angeles County Supervisor Third Supervisorial District Michael Antonovich Los Angeles County Supervisor Ara Najarian Fifth Supervisorial District Mayor, City of Glendale

Mike Bonin James Butts Council Member, City of Los Angeles Mayor, City of Inglewood

Diane DuBois Hilda L. Solis Council Member, City of Lakewood Los Angeles County Supervisor First Supervisorial District Jacquelyn Dupont-Walker City of Los Angeles Appointee Carrie Bowen Caltrans District 7 Director, Non-Voting, Appointed by the Governor of California

East San Fernando Valley Transit Corridor Study Project

5 GA 210 VIN BORDEN ELDRIDGE A Metro and the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), GLENOAKS SAYRE HUBBARD A O Mission B L ROXFORD College G A HERRICK IN in coordination with the cities of Los Angeles and B D N GLADSTONE SAN FERNANDO R O BLEDSOEBRADLEY H A Y N POLK A C

FOOTHILL Z SAYRE E N San Fernando, are evaluating the feasibility of a major P A O C L A G N JU TU mass transit project that would operate in the center E TL LIT 5 POLK L 210 A SAN FERNANDO or curb-lane along Van Nuys Blvd from the Van Nuys U SAN FERNANDO R E L C ARROYO YN

PORTER E Metro Orange Line to San Fernando Rd. From there N 118 OR RANCH RINALDI SB 405 VAUGHN O HERRICK the proposed alignment would proceed northwest BRAND BRADLEY SAN FERNANDO MISSION FOX LAKEVIEW 118 TERRACE along San Fernando Rd to the Sylmar/San Fernando LAUREL CANYON WENTWORTH CHATSWORTH ST GLENOAKS Hansen Dam GRANADA MISSION Recreational Area HILLS SAN FERNANDO Metrolink station – a distance of 9.2 miles. HILLS SHADOW HILLS DEVONSHIRE PACOIMA

LASSEN

BALBOA SEPULVEDA

WILBUR WOODLEY ZELZAH RESEDA BL TERRA BELLA ARLETA CANTERBURY L B NORTHRIDGE 5 D Where We’ve Been N A PLUMMER WOODMAN L N SHELDON U California State S University NORTH BRANFORD OSBORNE When the project began in 2011, 29 alternatives (i.e., routes of Northridge NORDHOFF HILLS ARLETA LA TUNA CANYON

VAN NUYS BL NUYS VAN GLENOAKS and modes) were given consideration. After preliminary PARTHENIA WEBB TUXFORD analysis and community feedback, in January 2013, an ROSCOE ROSCOE PANORAMA SUN VALLEY Alternatives Analysis (AA) Report recommended five initial Van Nuys STRATHERN SAN FERNANDO Airport CITY (VNY) SATICOY SATICOY SATICOY 170

TUJUNGA build alternatives be studied further through the preparation VINELAND

LANKERSHIM

WILBUR

LAUREL CANYON RESEDA BL

WHITE OAK BALBOA

SHERMAN SEPULVEDA of an Environmental Impact Statement/Environmental WOODLEY SHERMAN SHERMAN Bob Hope Airport RESEDA 405 VAN NUYS (BUR)

VANOWEN VANOWEN WOODMAN VANOWEN

WHITSETT COLFAX

Impact Report (EIS/EIR) as required by federal and state BL NUYS VAN VALLEY

Balboa HAYVENHURST Woodley VICTORY VICTORY GLEN VINELAND laws. As a result of comments received at project scoping VICTORY COLDWATER CANYON VICTORY Reseda Van Nuys LANKERSHIM NORTH

meetings and through a more in-depth corridor analysis, Sepulveda FULTON OXNARD HOLLYWOOD LA Valley Sepulveda Dam HOLLYWOOD

Woodman College MAPLE the study alternatives were refined throughout 2013 and BURBANK BL Recreational Area BURBANK Laurel 101 CHANDLER BL Canyon North Hollywood MAPLE ANK URB L B Valley College B

A MAGNOLIA MAGNOLIA 2014. Currently, there are two alternatives for dedicated bus D E VENTURA BL

S E R VALLEY 170 TOLUCA LAKE rapid transit service and two for rail service, along with the RIVERSIDE VILLAGE RIVERSIDE ENCINO 101 134 federal and state required “no build” and “transportation MOORPARK ST VENTURA BL SHERMAN OAKS WOODMAN STUDIO A D E systems management” alternatives. V CITY L P U E S Universal Public participation has been a critical part of the study Metro Orange Line & Station City Metro Red Line & Station MULHOLLAND 405 101 process and as such, Metro has hosted numerous Amtrak/Metrolink & Station Potential Project Alignment M ULHOLL community meetings to update residents, businesses, Subject to Change 14-1630 ©2014 LACMTA N E

L

G

N

Y O

L

Y

R

N elected o;cials and stakeholders on the study progress E A V C E and to encourage input on the refined alternatives. Most recently, in March 2015, Metro launched an outreach Where We’re Going campaign specifically targeting feedback from those Metro is currently in the process of evaluating the alternatives who work and/or have businesses along and near the and preparing the project’s Draft EIS/EIR document. The Van Nuys Corridor. Draft EIS/EIR will compare each alternative and identify any impacts, as well as any mitigation measures, if any, that may What We’ve Learned So Far help o=set them. There are a wide range of impacts being > Van Nuys Blvd realizes more than twice the daily studied, including transportation, parking, communities and boardings of any other north-south transit service in neighborhoods, construction, air quality, safety and security, the San Fernando Valley and is the seventh busiest bus and environmental justice, to name just a few. As part of corridor in the Metro system. this project, Metro is also coordinating with the City of Los Angeles regarding Los Angeles Mayor and Metro Board > On an average weekday, there are nearly 25,000 boardings Second Vice Chair Garcetti’s Great Streets Program. Once on Metro buses operating on Van Nuys Blvd. this document has been reviewed and approved by the FTA > Approximately 50% of the Boulevard’s boardings occur for release, the draft will be circulated for a 45-day public along a 2.8 mile stretch, between the Metro Orange Line comment period. and Roscoe Blvd. > In the same segment (Metro Orange Line to Roscoe) Funding transit users experience the slowest bus speeds – where The project has $170.1 million in funding reserved through buses slow to approximately 12 mph during the afternoon Metro’s 2009 Long-Range Transportation Plan, which rush hours. includes $68 million from Measure R, the half-cent sales tax > 35% of the study area population is transit-dependent. increase approved by Los Angeles County voters in 2008. Additional funds will need to be identified from other sources in order to cover the cost of any of the four transit alternatives being studied.

Refined Alternatives Being Studied In addition to No Build and Transportation Systems Management (TSM), the following four build alternatives are being evaluated as part of this study. alternative 1: curb-running bus rapid transit (brt) Similar to the Wilshire BRT service, there would be 6.7 miles of curb-running dedicated busway and 2.5 miles of mixed flow with 18 enhanced stations. This alternative would cost $294 million (in 2014 $). alternative 2: median-running brt Similar to the Metro Orange Line, buses would run in Curb Running Bus Lanes a 6.7 mile dedicated median busway in the center of Van Nuys Blvd and 2.5 miles of mixed flow operations along San Fernando Rd and would include 17 stations. This alternative would cost $402 million. alternative 3: low-floor light rail transit (lrt)/tram Similar to San Diego, Portland and European systems, this alternative would operate in a dedicated guideway in the center of Van Nuys Blvd for 6.7 miles and 2.5 miles mixed- flow along San Fernando Rd with 28 enhanced stations. This alternative would cost $1.3 billion. alternative 4: lrt Similar to existing Metro LRT Lines, trains would operate for 6.7 miles in a median dedicated guideway with 2.5 miles Median Running Bus Lanes underground. The trains would run for 2.5 miles on railroad right-of-way adjacent to San Fernando Rd. There would be 14 stations, three of which would be underground. This alternative would cost $2.7 billion.

Low-Floor Light Rail Tram

Light Rail Transit Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2

AY W K Lincoln/ R A P Cypress RAMONA Vermont/ O C E Beverly S R O El Monte E V Y I O R R L R 10 E 101 A I

R DURFEE B

SAN BERNARDINO FWY A G

110

N A LOS ANGELES CSULA 10 S SAN BERNARDINO FWY Chinatown GARVEY GARVEY 10 Westlake/ 5 MacArthur Park Civic Center/ Union Station Wilshire/ Grand Park ROSEMEAD EL MONTE PUENTE Vermont TYLER PASS RD SOUTH TLANTIC Whittier 710 A Pershing Square MONTEREY Narrows ANITA SANTA EL MONTE PECK DURFEE GARFIELD Recreation 19 1ST EASTERN SOUTH Area SAN GABRIEL VALLEY 7th Street/ Little Tokyo/ CESAR E CHA Arts District Pico/ EAST 605 FIGUEROA Metro Center Mariachi SR-60 Alternative Aliso VEZ LOS ANGELES MONTEREY PARK Plaza Soto SANTA ANITA MILL 60 PECK Pico SAN GABRIEL WOOKMAN SR-60 North Side Design Variation ARAMOUNT 10 P SOTO 60 Maravilla Atlantic 3RD Indiana 3RD Grand 10 POMONA FWY 23rd St East LA DURFEE 60 Civic Center BEVERLY San Pedro St R POMONA FWY E

O

WASHINGTON BL INDIANA EASTERN L L E WHITTIER ARIZONA MONTEBELLO FIGUEROA B 60 E T ATLANTIC N 37th St/USC 5 BEVERLY O

LORENA WHITTIER M O SAN GABRIEL RIV Washington D EXPOSITION ROSEMEAD Jefferson/USC OLYMPIC SANTA ANA FWY RIO HON OLYMPIC Metro Rail Lines & Station Expo/ Expo Park/USC PICO RIVERA Vermont 72

WASHINGTON BL BEVERLY ALAMEDA

5 Metro Silver Line & Station VERNON LOS ANGELES RIV Vernon COMMERCE WASHINGTON BL Metrolink & Station WHITTIER 110 ER

ATLANTIC GREENWOOD AV TURNBULLRegional CANYON Connector BELL (under construction) WHITTIER SLAUSON PARAMOUNT SLAUSON 710 605 BEVERLY Slauson Slauson Eastside Transit Corridor Phase 2 SLAUSON ROSEMEAD BL LONG BEACH FWY HADLEY

PHILADELPHIA At-Grade Option ATLANTIC EASTERN NORWALK BL BELL WHITTIER Aerial Option FLORENCE GARFIELD

Florence Washington Bl Alternative PICKERING PENN AV WASHINGTON FLORENCE At-Grade/Aerial Option BELL WASHINGTON BL A GARDENS MAR VISTA SLAUSON SR-60 North Side

FIGUERO HARBOR FWY 5 Design Variation

ROSEMEAD BL SLAUSON MANCHESTER CUDAHY FLORENCE WHITTIER Potential Station Firestone Manchester LAMBERT Potential Maintenance GARFIELD Yard Site FIRESTONE SANTA FE MULBERRY DOWNEY SANTA ANA FWY SPRINGS Project Area Boundary LAKEWOOD SANTA FE SPRINGS RD within72 Study Area SAN GABRIEL RIVER FWY FLORENCE 605 103rd St/Watts Towers 19 Subject to Change 13-2355 ©2013 LACMTA

FIRESTONE

Metro is studying alternatives to extend the first phase of the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension farther east from where the line currently ends at Pomona Blvd and Atlantic Blvd in East Los Angeles. The Phase 2 project area includes portions of eight cities and portions of Unincorporated Los Angeles County. The project area is home to approximately 720,850 residents, representing 7% of the Los Angeles County population. Over the next 25 years, the population is expected to grow by 12%, with a 7% employment growth projected during the same period. The project area includes a number of highly congested freeways and arterials, including I-5, SR-60, I-10, Beverly Blvd, Whittier Blvd and Washington Blvd. Every day, approximately 55% of commuters leave the project area bound for Central Los Angeles, Gateway Cities, West San Gabriel Valley and other regions; 45% make local trips within the project area itself.

Communities within the Project Area

Commerce Santa Fe Springs Montebello South El Monte Monterey Park Unincorporated Los Angeles County Pico Rivera Whittier Rosemead Goals of the Project Project Alternatives There are four main goals to the project: In 2007, Metro began the Alternatives Analysis study 1. Identify alternatives that provide a transit connection (AA) that analyzed how to extend transit services to the Metro Gold Line Eastside Extension farther east from the terminus of Metro Gold Line 2. Link cities and communities farther east of Los Angeles Eastside Extension at Pomona Blvd and Atlantic Blvd. with the regional transit network Initially, 47 alternatives were considered in various 3. Improve mobility in the project area by enhancing combinations of alignments, technologies, and transit options configurations. Throughout the AA process, evaluation 4. Plan for projected growth in a sustainable manner criteria and community input were used to refine and reduce the alternatives. In October 2009, the Metro Study Process Board approved two light rail transit (LRT) alternatives The project development process is defined by federal for further environmental analysis in the Draft EIS/EIR: and state environmental requirements. The flow chart > SR-60 LRT below highlights the major milestones in the process from > Washington Blvd LRT beginning to end. The project is currently in the Draft Environmental Impact Statement/Report (Draft EIS/EIR) study phase. 16-0922bg ©lacmta 2015 Project Development Process

final environmental impact statement/ draft environmental report impact statement/ (final eis/eir) alternatives report (draft eis/eir) start-up/revenue analysis final design construction operations completed in process

preliminary engineering

public involvement