LA TIMES (Editorial/Opinion): Forget the monorail. L.A. needs a real transit line through the Sepulveda Pass

The 405 Freeway through the Sepulveda Pass is one of the nation’s most traffic-clogged corridors. For workers, students and anyone else trying to go between the San Fernando Valley and the Westside during rush hour, the route is a slog, with cars inching over the Santa Monica Mountains.

Unlike most congested routes in urban L.A., there’s no public transit alternative to sitting in traffic. Yet. After years of discussion and plans, the Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority is expected to hire contractors next month to develop plans for either a subway or a monorail line through the pass.


This is likely to be the biggest, most impactful transit project on the horizon for Los Angeles. It’s the most important missing link of the regional transit system, and done well, it could enable the next generation of Angelenos to work, play and travel without a car.


So why are we even considering a monorail?


Sure, monorails were cutting-edge transportation technology — 50 years ago. In 1968, Metro’s predecessor agency proposed a network of electrified trains on skyways. Sketches from the plan show trains that look like Disneyland’s monorail pulling into elevated stations connected to offices by elevated walkways.


These days, monorails are mostly seen shuttling tourists around amusement parks or airports, though the technology is used for mass transit in China.


Supporters of a monorail argue it could be built faster and more cheaply than a subway. That’s an argument for expediency, for getting something, anything built — no matter whether it’s the right project. But Los Angeles has made that mistake before, sacrificing the long-term needs of riders and the transit system for political expediency. That’s one reason why you can’t take a train directly to LAX today.


And there’s no guarantee that a monorail would be cheaper or easier to build than a subway. The proposal from LA SkyRail Express, a partnership that includes the Chinese company BYD, puts the price at $6.1 billion. It’s unclear how much more it might cost to connect a monorail on the 405 with key destinations, like the UCLA campus.


Haven’t we learned the fallacy of putting rail lines in the middle of a freeway? It is an unpleasant experience for passengers, who have to wait for their train on a noisy, exhaust-choked platform. And a monorail built over a 10-plus-lane freeway surrounded by buffers and surface streets would be hard for commuters to reach. The most successful transit lines drop people off close to their destinations.


There is understandable reticence about tunneling a subway through the Santa Monica Mountains instead of using the highway’s path through the Sepulveda Pass. It’s pricey. At an estimated $10.8 billion, or more, it would be one of the most expensive transit infrastructure projects in the country.


However, a subway would be a faster ride for passengers. It could stop on the UCLA campus and could connect to the D Line extension (formerly known as the Purple Line) now under construction. Riders could take a single train from downtown to the mid-San Fernando Valley. Metro couldn’t do that with a monorail, which wouldn’t integrate with existing rail lines.


Several regional leaders have expressed skepticism about a monorail. Nevertheless, Metro’s governing board is expected to approve two agreements to explore the competing ideas — a $63.6-million contract with LA SkyRail Express for the monorail concept and a $69.9-million contract with Bechtel and partners for the subway concept.


The idea of paying for predevelopment plans for both a monorail and a subway is novel. Metro Chief Executive Phil Washington wanted to shake up the agency’s usual project development process, which tends to suffer from delays and cost overruns. Metro decided to solicit ideas from the private sector on how to best build the Sepulveda Pass line, and the agency committed to study two different modes of transit. The competition between firms and modes could help identify obstacles and opportunities early in the process — and perhaps save money and time.


There may be a logic to the idea of paying more now for additional study and analysis to avoid pitfalls later. Still, as long as monorail remains an option, there is a risk that the region’s political leaders will be wooed by expediency and the shiny new object. We prefer they take the long view: If L.A. is going to invest billions of dollars to build transit lines for the next century, let’s build the fastest, most useful and rider-friendly system possible. That’s rail, not monorail.


VIEW FULL ARTICLE >

29 Jan, 2024
After recognizing the benefits offered by Alternative 6, the Editorial Board also endorses Alternative 5 as a tangible solution for reduced transit times and more efficient travel.
a sign that says westwood next to a sign that says metro meeting entrance
29 Jan, 2024
The article discusses a presentation by Los Angeles Metro about the Sepulveda Transit Corridor, which could offer travel times of 12 to 39 minutes from the San Fernando Valley to UCLA campus. Six rail alternatives were presented, with heavy rail options being favored due to shorter travel times and higher ridership projections. Students, including members of the Undergraduate Students Association Council, attended to advocate for heavy rail options. Public feedback is considered important in the decision-making process, and further events will be held to gather input. The article also includes comments from a graduate student supporting the heavy rail alternative.
an aerial view of a highway going through a city surrounded by mountains .
29 Jan, 2024
The article discusses the transportation challenges in Los Angeles and the proposed Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project, aiming to connect the San Fernando Valley and the Westside. It compares the advantages and disadvantages of heavy rail and monorail alternatives for the project. The article highlights the influence of wealthy homeowners' associations and private companies in the decision-making process. It emphasizes the importance of prioritizing the needs of working-class riders and upholding commitments to equity in public transportation projects. Additionally, the article includes a donation plug, appealing for support to keep the newspaper independent and accessible.
a highway with a lot of cars driving down it
29 Jan, 2024
The LA Metro is planning a rail project to connect the San Fernando Valley with the Westside, and the choice is between an overhead monorail and an underground subway. A recent report revealed that 93% of respondents prefer the subway, while only 7% support the monorail. The project aims to alleviate heavy traffic on the 405 freeway, with over 400,000 daily car trips. The main debate revolves around the potential visual impact, cost, and safety of the two options. Proponents of the subway argue that it provides better transfer options and faster travel times, while monorail supporters emphasize its lower cost and minimal noise. The project is still in the early planning stages, with an estimated completion between 2032-2035. The next steps involve conducting an environmental impact study and further public consultation before the LA Metro Board makes the final decision on the preferred route and mode.
an aerial view of a highway with mountains in the background
29 Jan, 2024
The LA Metro released data on the proposed Sepulveda Transit Corridor Project, comparing six alternatives for connecting the San Fernando Valley with the Westside. An underground subway is projected to carry more riders and offer faster travel times compared to an aerial monorail. The subway options would directly connect Van Nuys to UCLA, while the monorail options require transfers, adding to travel time. The completion of the chosen alternative is estimated between 2033-2035. Proponents of the monorail argue for its lower cost, while supporters of the subway emphasize its potential to ease congestion and reduce pollution. Various groups, including student associations and nonprofit organizations, have voiced support for the heavy rail alternative.
a woman waiting for a train at a subway station
01 Dec, 2023
Sepulveda Transit Corridor Partners is committed to collecting local input and clarifying community concerns and/or misconceptions that could affect our proposals to provide an alternative to the 405 with fast, green and connected rail transit with stakeholders from the Valley, the Westside and across Southern California and beyond.
By Rob Stofer 22 Feb, 2023
LOS ANGELES – Sepulveda Transit Corridor Partners (STCP) announced today it has selected a world-class automated rail provider, RATP Dev, to develop the operations and maintenance component of its rail transit proposal to ease congestion on the I-405 (Sepulveda) corridor between Los Angeles’ San Fernando Valley and Westside.
By Yusef Robb 02 May, 2022
Providing opportunities for DBE firms is a critical part of Metro’s goal to enhance communities through mobility and access to opportunity. Sepulveda Transit Corridor Partners' team includes multiple disadvantaged business enterprises (DBEs) that will play critical roles in the project, including architectural design, traffic analysis and system engineering. Additionally, the team has selected four DBEs to mentor during the initial phases of the PDA.
By Yusef Robb 04 Aug, 2021
Following Metro’s official Notice to Proceed, private-sector consortium will begin development of its transit concept
By Sepulveda Transit Corridor Partners 25 Apr, 2021
$69.9 million contract to advance high-speed, high-capacity rail proposal to connect San Fernando Valley to West Los Angeles & relieve I-405
More Posts
Share by: