Meeting_Body
EXECUTIVE MANAGEMENT COMMITTEE
NOVEMBER 20, 2025
Subject
SUBJECT: LOS ANGELES AERIAL RAPID TRANSIT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
Action
ACTION: APPROVE RECOMMENDATION
Heading
RECOMMENDATION
Title
CONSIDER:
A. SETTING ASIDE Metro’s action on February 22, 2024:
1. Approving the Los Angeles Aerial Rapid Transit Project with Design Option A;
2. Certifying the Final Environmental Impact Report;
3. Adopting the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
4. Adopting the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
AND CONSIDER:
B. RECERTIFYING, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the Environmental Impact Report (EIR), as supplemented by the Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR), if the Board concludes that it satisfies the requirements of CEQA and reflects the Board’s independent judgment following CEQA Guidelines section 15090;
C. CERTIFYING, in accordance with CEQA, the SEIR if the Board concludes that it satisfies the requirements of CEQA and reflects the Board’s independent judgment following CEQA Guidelines section 15090;
D. ADOPTING, in accordance with CEQA, the:
1. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations setting forth the reasons and benefits of approving the Project with full knowledge that significant impacts may remain (Attachment A); and
2. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Attachment B);
E. APPROVING the Los Angeles Aerial Rapid Transit Project (“Project”) with Design Option A pursuant to Public Utilities Code (PUC) section 130252 and subject to Motion: Empowering Community Through an Inclusive Community Benefits Agreement (Attachment C); and
F. AUTHORIZING the Chief Executive Officer to file a Notice of Determination (Attachment D) with the Los Angeles County Clerk and the State of California Clearinghouse.
Issue
ISSUE
Metro is the agency required by the Public Utilities Code to review all plans proposed for public mass transit projects, including fixed guideway projects, in Los Angeles County. Consideration of approval of such projects allows Metro to perform its statutory duty to coordinate the efficient operation of public transportation services within the County.
Metro, as the CEQA Lead Agency for this Project, previously certified an environmental impact report and approved the Los Angeles Aerial Rapid Transit Project on February 22, 2024. The environmental impact report was subsequently challenged in two separate lawsuits in which petitioners’ claims were rejected by the trial court and judgment for Metro was entered. Petitioners appealed, and the appellate court affirmed in part and reversed in part the Superior Court’s judgment (Court Opinion). Metro prepared a supplemental EIR (SEIR) to address the Court Opinion.
The EIR (inclusive of the Draft EIR (2022), Final EIR (2024), Draft SEIR (2025), and Final SEIR (2025) and appendices and errata to the EIR) is located at <https://www.metro.net/projects/aerial-rapid-transit/> <http://www.metro.net/projects/aerial-rapid-transit/>and completes all necessary steps to be considered for certification by the Board in accordance with CEQA and the Court Opinion. Metro’s approval at this point does not obviate the need for future Metro actions on the Project nor does it supersede or eliminate the need for subsequent approvals to construct and operate the Project required by the City of Los Angeles, State Parks Commission, Caltrans, or Metro.
Background
BACKGROUND
The Project Sponsor, LA Aerial Rapid Transit Technologies LLC (LA ARTT), is proposing the Project, which would connect Los Angeles Union Station (LAUS) to the Dodger Stadium property via a zero-emission, aerial gondola transit system along Alameda Street. The Project is a public mass transit guideway project, as it would operate at regular, scheduled operating hours and will be open to the general public, and is a fixed guideway.
Metro and the original Project Sponsor, Aerial Rapid Transit Technologies (ARTT) entered into a Memorandum of Agreement in April 2019, which outlined responsibilities for preparing environmental documents, including Metro acting as the CEQA Lead Agency, ARTT fully reimbursing Metro for all staff and consultant time, and that no Metro funds would be used for the Project. To date, Metro has been fully reimbursed for all staff and consultant time and no Metro funds have been used for the Project.
The current Project Sponsor, LA Aerial Rapid Transit Technologies (LA ARTT), was originally a subsidiary of ARTT. Under the terms of the MOA, in September 2023, Metro, ARTT, and Zero Emissions Transit (ZET) entered into an Assignment and Assumption Agreement in which Metro consented to the assignment of ARTT’s right and interest to ZET.
ARTT donated LA ARTT and the Project to ZET, a nonprofit and supporting organization to Climate Resolve, a California nonprofit public benefit corporation. ZET’s purposes include promoting and supporting zero-emissions transportation initiatives and other efforts to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in the transportation sector and to mitigate and adapt to changes in weather and climate. ARTT’s donation included ARTT’s continued support of the Project with financial support and expertise, including maintaining its commitment to both reimburse Metro in its role and its funding for the EIR and other public agency approvals. ARTT will also continue to support and facilitate coordination with the Los Angeles Dodgers on ticketing and data sharing among the Project, Metro, and the Dodgers.
Metro, as lead agency under CEQA, released the Notice of Preparation (NOP) on October 1, 2020, and the scoping period concluded on November 16, 2020. Project information was made available to the public online through a virtual “open house” accessible throughout the public review period, and an online virtual scoping meeting held on October 22, 2020.
Metro released the Draft EIR on October 17, 2022, for a 60-day public review period ending on December 16, 2022. In response to requests to extend the public review period, on November 15, 2022, Metro extended the public review period an additional 30 days for a 90-day public review period ending on January 17, 2023. During the public review period, Metro held two informational workshops and four public hearings.
Metro released the Final EIR on December 4, 2023. On February 22, 2024, the Board certified the EIR, adopted a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, adopted CEQA Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and approved the Project with Design Option A. The Board also approved a motion by Directors Solis, Bass, Dupont-Walker, Horvath and Sandoval. The motion adopts safeguards and guarantees to ensure the Project includes adequate community benefits.
The 2024 Board Report includes a detailed discussion of CEQA; the Project analyzed in the EIR; the Project Objectives; the Notice of Preparation, Scoping Meeting, and Tribal Consultation; the key determinations that were included in the Draft EIR; the Project Alternatives and Design and Use Options evaluated in the EIR; Metro’s community outreach during the Draft EIR public review period and pre-Final EIR release; and additional Project information, while not required under CEQA, was provided in response to comments and questions raised about the Project. The Project Description and Project Objectives are unchanged from the Final EIR.
The LA ART EIR was subsequently challenged in two separate lawsuits by the Los Angeles Parks Alliance (LAPA) (Case No. 24STCP00944) and The California Endowment (TCE) (Case No. 24STCP00965). On September 6, 2024, the Los Angeles County Superior Court entered judgment in favor of Metro and the Project Sponsor, rejecting LAPA’s and TCE’s arguments that the LA ART EIR was deficient under CEQA. Both LAPA and TCE appealed.
On May 1, 2025, the Court of Appeal affirmed in part and reversed in part the Superior Court’s judgment. The Court of Appeal directed Metro to (1) set aside its certification of the EIR; (2) set aside its adoption of the mitigation monitoring and reporting program; (3) set aside its adoption of CEQA findings and a statement of overriding considerations; (4) set aside its approval of the Project; (5) comply with CEQA by undertaking review of measures to mitigate the Project’s significant construction noise impacts consistent with the views expressed in the Appellate Court’s opinion; (6) comply with CEQA by requesting consultation with the Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy specifying a reasonable time within which the trustee agency must respond in accordance with CEQA; and (7) prepare and certify a legally sufficient supplemental EIR incorporating the information developed through this corrective action before taking further steps to reapprove the Project.
Discussion
DISCUSSION
With respect to the EIR’s discussion of construction noise mitigation measures, the Court of Appeal determined that (1) there was not substantial evidence supporting Metro’s rejection of a mitigation measure to retrofit buildings to further reduce interior noise levels from construction; and (2) the discussion of a noise mitigation measure was inadequate because it failed to explain whether and how certain components of the measure would be partially effective in mitigating construction noise impacts or were necessary to ensure that construction noise levels were consistent with those modeled in the EIR. In response to the Court Opinion, Metro prepared a Draft SEIR to provide additional analysis and evidence regarding the feasibility of retrofitting existing buildings as mitigation for temporary construction noise impacts and discussion regarding and revisions to the mitigation measure (MM-NOI-A) for temporary construction noise impacts.
Supplemental EIR
In accordance with the Court Opinion, the SEIR considers the feasibility of implementing acoustical retrofitting in buildings along the Project alignment as mitigation for the Project’s significant construction noise impacts. The SEIR identifies the legal and practical considerations and constraints associated with an acoustic retrofit program. Implementing acoustic retrofits would require substantial construction activities within occupied buildings, potentially lasting weeks or months, and in some cases necessitating temporary displacement of residents or occupants. Implementation would also require case-by-case consent from property owners, tenants, and occupants, and permitting or other approvals depending on building condition. Because Metro lacks authority to compel such work, the program would depend entirely on voluntary participation. Moreover, any resulting noise reduction may be limited, contingent on windows remaining closed, and implementation of such retrofits would involve invasive construction within occupied buildings possibly requiring relocation of occupants. Given these considerations, the SEIR concludes that acoustic retrofitting to address temporary construction noise along the Project alignment is not a feasible mitigation strategy.
The SEIR also responds to the Court Opinion’s concerns regarding Mitigation Measure (MM) NOI-A by explaining the effectiveness of MM-NOI-A’s various components. Some components, such as maintaining equipment and limiting idling, were already assumed in the LA ART EIR’s noise modeling or required by law and therefore did not provide additional noise reduction. Others, such as using on-site electrical sources instead of diesel generators, or locating equipment away from sensitive receptors, could have some mitigating effect, but the LA ART EIR did not adequately explain their effectiveness. Accordingly, the SEIR refines MM-NOI-A by retaining as mitigation only those components expected to provide partial noise reduction from modeled noise levels, and reclassifying the remaining components as Project Design Features (NOI-PDF-B). NOI-PDF-B would be included in the Project’s Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) to ensure the requirements are enforceable and that construction noise levels do not exceed those assumed in the LA ART EIR.
The SEIR was limited to the discrete construction noise mitigation issues identified by the Court Opinion and consideration of whether any changed circumstances since certification of the Final EIR required further supplemental environmental review. The EIR’s analysis of all other environmental topics was upheld by the Court of Appeal and remains unchanged. Furthermore, there are no substantial changes to the Project, substantial changes to the circumstances under which the Project is being undertaken, or new information of substantial importance that would require additional major revisions to the Final EIR.
Community Outreach During Draft SEIR Public Review Period and Pre-Final SEIR Release
Metro released the Draft SEIR on September 29, 2025, for a 45-day public review period ending on November 13, 2025.
During the Draft SEIR public review period, Metro held a virtual informational workshop on October 9, 2025 to inform the public of the key analyses and conclusions of the Draft SEIR, and a virtual hearing to receive testimony on the Draft SEIR on November 6, 2025. The informational workshop and public hearing offered Spanish, Cantonese, Mandarin, and Taishanese interpretation. Metro also provided materials in English, Spanish, Chinese (Traditional), and Chinese (Simplified) electronically on Metro’s project webpage and the SB 44 website.
An estimated 195 attendees participated in the two public meetings (26 attendees joined the informational workshop and 169 attendees joined the public hearing). Metro received numerous comments during the Draft SEIR public review period via U.S. mail, the project email address, voicemail, and verbal comments submitted at the public hearing. Final SEIR Appendix A, Public Comments on the Draft SEIR for Which an Individual Response Was Prepared, Appendix B, General Public Comments on the Draft SEIR, and Appendix C, Public Hearing Transcript, of the Final SEIR, include copies of all public comments received on the Draft SEIR.
Final SEIR Section 3.0, Responses to Comments, includes responses to all comments received on the Draft SEIR.
Santa Monica Mountains Conservancy
On July 30, 2025, Metro sent a consultation request to SMMC and asked that the SMMC respond within 30 days if it wished to consult. SMMC did not respond to the consultation request.
Determination_Of_Safety_Impact
DETERMINATION OF SAFETY IMPACT
The requested action in this report will have no direct impact on the safety of Metro’s employees or customers.
Financial_Impact
FINANCIAL IMPACT
Metro is reimbursed for all its time and consultant costs through advanced deposits made by ARTT. Metro staff from Countywide Planning and Development, Community Relations, and County Counsel have worked on the Project on an as-needed basis. ARTT has met its obligations under the MOA to reimburse Metro for its expenses in connection with the Project. In addition, it has committed all funds needed to complete the Project’s environmental review and entitlement process. No Metro funding will be used for the Project. If the Project continues to move forward, Metro time will continue to be reimbursed.
Impact to Budget
There is no impact on the Budget.
Equity_Platform
EQUITY PLATFORM
A major purpose of the Project is to reduce congestion from existing vehicle trips in connection with Dodger games and special events at the Stadium, leading to reduced GHG emissions and improved air quality. By taking vehicles off the road, the Project would reduce VMT, providing GHG emissions benefits and increased access in the area between LAUS and Dodger Stadium. The Project would increase transit access in a community burdened by pollution, offering emissions reduction benefits for an area that includes disadvantaged communities identified by the state’s CalEnviroScreen 4.0 as in the top 90 - 100 percent of California communities burdened by pollution. The Project can also provide additional access to recreation and parks. In addition to benefiting the immediate area along the alignment, these reductions in VMT and GHG emissions would further the objectives to reduce carbon emissions to benefit the region.
The Project would provide a daily, high-capacity aerial rapid transit connection between the regional transit system at LAUS, Dodger Stadium, Los Angeles State Historic Park, Elysian Park, and surrounding communities via the intermediate Chinatown/State Park Station. The ability to use the vast majority of the Park would not be affected by the Project. The Project has been designed to provide additional benefits to the Los Angeles State Historic Park, including pedestrian improvements between Metro’s A Line and the Park, and integration of the Chinatown/State Park Station into the southern boundary of the Park with hardscape and landscape enhancements, a mobility hub, and other park amenities including concessions, restrooms, and a breezeway connecting the concessions and restrooms. The Project’s Community Access Plan will allow residents and employees located within the Community Access Plan Area (see Attachment E) to utilize their Metro system access pass or individual fare to also utilize the system at no additional cost, outside of game and event-day periods. This will increase convenience for first/last mile connections for nearby residents and employees. Some communities within the Community Access Plan Area, including William Mead Homes, have families with a median household income of less than $20,000 per year.
The Project will not displace housing, prevent planned housing, or preclude the development of future uses, including housing, grocery stores, and/or healthcare facilities in the surrounding communities.
The Project partnered with several community organizations for successful information sharing and feedback. As a privately proposed project, there was no requirement for the Project to utilize Metro’s Community Based Organization Partnering Strategy, but the Project Sponsor adopted the goals and spirit of the policy.
The Project is also subject to a motion. This motion included several directives including one establishing a Community Advisory Committee (CAC) composed of representatives from the community and relevant agencies. The CAC was tasked with negotiating a Community Benefits Agreement (CBA) with a focus on the needs of the most vulnerable and addressing historical harms.
Project Commitments above what is required by CEQA are contained in Attachment F and include convening stakeholder groups to ensure adequate vetting and consensus around community features; support for local business and nonprofits; pedestrian access enhancements along the Project alignment, including mobility hubs; Los Angeles State Historic Park amenities; design and art inspired by adjacent neighborhood culture and history; an interpretation plan to develop a program that would provide all riders with an engaging and informative experience that would enhance their understanding and appreciation of the culture and history of the adjacent neighborhoods, including El Pueblo, Chinatown, Mission Junction, the Los Angeles State Historic Park, the Dodger Stadium property and its history as it relates to Chavez Ravine, and Elysian Park; a parking management plan; a goal of utilizing at least 35 percent MBE/WBE/SBE/DVBE/LGBTQ-owned businesses during the Project’s construction phase; and a Business and Community Support program during construction. The entitlement and permitting process will continue to help define potential community benefits.
Vehicle_Miles_Traveled _Outcome
VEHICLE MILES TRAVELED OUTCOME
VMT and VMT per capita in Los Angeles County are lower than national averages, the lowest in the SCAG region, and on the lower end of VMT per capita statewide, with these declining VMT trends due in part to Metro’s significant investment in rail and bus transit.* Metro’s Board-adopted VMT reduction targets align with California’s statewide climate goals, including achieving carbon neutrality by 2045. To ensure continued progress, all Board items are assessed for their potential impact on VMT.
*Based on population estimates from the United States Census and VMT estimates from Caltrans’ Highway Performance Monitoring System (HPMS) data between 2001-2019.
As part of these ongoing efforts, this project is expected to contribute to further reductions in VMT. Metro conducted a preliminary analysis to show that the net effect of this project is to decrease VMT. Average trip length data was acquired from Teralytics for trips to and from Dodger Stadium and Union Station. The number of vehicles traveling to these locations was multiplied by the average trip length to obtain the total VMT. This method resulted in an estimated Daily Weekday VMT of 576,600 miles, Daily Weekend VMT of 750,900 miles, and Annual VMT of 53,549,000 miles in the existing year (2019) without the project. The future calculations projected a total Daily Weekday VMT of 550,800 miles, Daily Weekend VMT of 719,200, and Annual VMT of 51,115,000 miles in 2026 with the Project, which is a net decrease of 25,800 miles, 31,700 miles, and 2,434,000 miles, respectively. In 2042 with the Project, the Daily Weekday VMT is projected to be 523,300 miles, the Daily Weekday VMT is projected to be 685,000 miles, and the Annual VMT is projected to be 48,482,000 miles a net decrease of 53,300 miles, 65,900 miles, and 5,067,000 miles, respectively. In all these scenarios, this is a beneficial net decrease in VMT.
Implementation_of_Strategic_Plan_Goals
IMPLEMENTATION OF STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS
The Project aligns with Strategic Plan Goal 1: Provide high-quality mobility options that enable people to spend less time traveling without utilizing Metro funding. The Project has the potential to provide an efficient mobility alternative for people to travel to Dodger Stadium car-free.
Alternatives_Considered
ALTERNATIVES CONSIDERED
The Board must recertify the EIR and certify the SEIR before approving the Project. It is recommended that the Board recertify the EIR and certify the SEIR as they have been completed in compliance with CEQA and represent the lead agency’s independent judgment and analysis. If the Board does not recertify the EIR and SEIR, it cannot re-approve the Project. If the Board recertifies the EIR and certifies the SEIR, the Board could choose to approve another project alternative analyzed in the EIR. The three alternatives considered in the EIR include the No Project Alternative, The Spring Street Alignment Alternative and the Transportation Systems Management (TSM) Alternative. The Spring Street Alignment Alternative would connect Dodger Stadium to LAUS with three stations, one non-passenger junction and four cable-supporting towers. While meeting most Project Objectives, this alternative would require a larger footprint than the Project within the Los Angeles State Historic Park. Under the TSM alternative, the Project would not be constructed, and instead, the existing Dodger Stadium Express would be enhanced to carry more passengers similar to that of the Project. Choosing one of these alternatives is not recommended as the Project best meets the Project Objectives while minimizing environmental impacts. Alternatively, the Board could choose to disapprove and reject both the Spring Street Alignment Alternative and the TSM Alternative and instead approve the No Project alternative. This is not advised since the rejection of all build alternatives might impede the Project Sponsor’s ability to obtain required approvals from other government agencies and would not advance Metro’s Strategic Plan Goal 1 to provide high-quality mobility options that enable people to spend less time traveling without utilizing Metro funding.
Next_Steps
NEXT STEPS
Metro Board’s recertification of the Final EIR, certification of the Final SEIR and approval of the Project would provide the environmental clearance needed by the Project Sponsor to seek the potential discretionary entitlements, reviews, and approvals required for the implementation of the Project. The Project Sponsor would commence the public processes for these additional discretionary entitlements, reviews, and approvals from the City of Los Angeles, California State Parks, and the Caltrans, each of which includes additional community outreach and engagement. Metro’s involvement in that process would be minimal and related to its real estate rights for Union Station and the A Line. The MOA remains in effect, including reimbursement of Metro time and expenses, until all Metro/LA ART transaction documents are completed (including rights at Union Station).
The Project Sponsor anticipates that community benefit agreements will be developed in connection with these additional governmental discretionary entitlements, reviews, and approvals. The Project Sponsor would then commence the permitting process for the Project, including permits required from Metro, the City of Los Angeles, California State Parks, Caltrans, Cal/OSHA and/or other agencies with jurisdiction.
Following all discretionary entitlement, review, and approval processes, the Project Sponsor would return to the Board at a later date to update the Board on the Project’s resultant community benefit agreements through all processes and address the additional Metro approvals required for LA ART to construct and operate the Project, including the necessary real property and operating agreements required for the Project.
Attachments
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
Attachment B - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
Attachment C - Motion 12.1
Attachment D - Notice of Determination
Attachment E - Community Access Plan
Attachment F - Project Commitments
Prepared_by
Prepared by: Cory Zelmer, Deputy Executive Officer, Countywide Planning and Development, (213) 922-1079
Anthony Crump, Executive Officer, Communications Community/Construction Relations, (213) 418-3292
Reviewed_By
Reviewed by: Ray Sosa, Chief Planning Officer, (213) 422-7359
