I hoping the next time succeeding comes up you can let us go already. The amount of disrespect, voices heard since 2002? Clearly Los Angeles didn't listen to us at all things have gotten worse so I'm sure there will be another succeed proposal, but there's a reason why she got that seat, because she understands some of our struggles. Like how the valley is nearly a half of the los angeles population but we see about 2/10 of the development in this part of the city. For example look at the budget proposals for the subway expansions in downtown compared to our bus proposal, but I guess we should be grateful that we get anything at all right? :P
This is fantastic! Have you considered doing some kind of update every year? Surely most of the lines won’t be finished, but debate over planning certainly continues to change (things like the downtown terminal for WSAB, final operating patterns for the Crenshaw line and Downtown Connector thru-routing).
I Want this so bad. Every once in a while I get into a "city planning" kick on TH-cam. Today it's been watching a lot of the channel "Not Just Bikes" about city planning in Amsterdam, and how its very people friendly, providing great ease of foot traffic, increasing traffic to small businesses, and improving overall wellbeing. And I remembered this guy's video from four years ago. And he made an UPDATE! God I want this so badly.
Best explainer of Metro’s vision if only an unofficial one. Had to play this back at reduced speed to be able to digest all the points being presented. Also had to have the less than perfect auto generated captions because I’m hard of hearing - but it was worth it! I’ve liked and subscribed
Love the idea for the WeHo line to Venice via La Cienega. If only we could magically resurrect the tracks that used to be there when the Red Line ran we could already be halfway there.
Very nice video. But on the northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX/South Bay (K) Line can you do an alignment along Fairfax Boulevard to connect Farmer's Market/The Grove and CBS Television City with a station stop at Be erly/Fairfax (Television City/Bob Barker Station) then continues to WeHo and interlines with the Red (B) Line subway train to travel through Hollywood to Glendale and Burbank.
Another great video! I have a question: to your knowledge is a future northern extension of the W Santa Ana Branch to downtown Glendale (as shown in your "imagine this" map - 17:37) something Metro has discussed in any form?
Thanks! A long time ago, Metro included a 'yellow line' concept (which is what this general route is usually called) on a long-term aspirational map (though not as an extension of WSAB I believe). It's usually show as one of three possible routes - either what i've shown here, using the old red car subway route; going north from union alongside the existing amtrak/metrolink tracks; or as a northern extension of a vermont light rail line. I think that that long-term map had used the same route I do. The only somewhat recent discussion of the route was in the study of the glendale/burbank metrolink corridor. They made the yellow line light rail concept that traveled along the metrolink tracks one of the study options. However, this wound up not being the chosen alternative. Instead, Metrolink will add two infill stations and more frequent service. This makes it less likely that the alongside-the-metrolink yellow line will ever get built, but i would bet money that the next time Metro chooses to list long-term aspirational projects, the version that I have displayed on my map will be included. It could be soon, as the final 2020 long term transit plan will be released in (i think) the next month, and i'm *pretty* sure i read that one of the new things they're adding from the previous version is more 'aspirational' lines, thanks to community input requesting them. We'll see.
@@nandert Thanks so much! Do you have or know where I can find the concept map you mentioned? I've done quite a bit of searching without success. I'm interested in advocating for the PE route since it served (and built) our downtown.
@@elylester1178 So the 2009 LRTP ( media.metro.net/projects_studies/images/final-2009-LRTP.pdf ) is what I was thinking of. Doesn't appear to be mapped, but actually BOTH the metrolink alignment and the 'yellow line' old red car alignment are mentioned in the 'strategic unfunded' section at the end, for future consideration. In addition, it turns out that there was actually an EIR done on the metrolink alignment way back in 1992, which you can find here: libraryarchives.metro.net/dpgtl/eirs/BurbankGlendale/1992_final_eir_executive_summary.pdf . And then the recent metrolink alignment map can be seen here: urbanize.la/post/heres-what-improved-rail-service-could-look-between-burbank-glendale-and-dtla
Probably controversial, but for the Sepulveda Pass Line, I am kinda routing for elevateds in the Valley, and the Elevated on the 405. The elevated on the 405 does a much better job of splitting the corridors created by Sawtelle and Sepulveda and gets to the airport more quickly without the jaunt Sepulveda follows into Culver City, thought if that were chosen a station could be built between the proposed Venice and Fox Hills Stations.
elevated in the valley isn't a bad option at all - the only issue would be having only one transfer station with the van nuys line. the transfer station would be at risk of being over-capacity pretty much immediately. regardless of whatever benefits a 405 route would have on the west side, i have a hard time seeing people accepting another 6 or so years of 405 construction, which would probably kill the option.
@@nandert I can see that possibility on the westside, my hope for it is mainly from a cost point of view given how expensive the line will be T.T I can actually see the Van Nuys Transfer being fairly simple given the unused ROW by the UP at their Van Nuys yard, the biggest issue for transfers that I see is the Orange line connection. Though, if the Sherman Oaks Homeowners association raise as big a stink as I think they may, there could be a compromise. Maybe? All of it is so hypothetical its hard to say with certainty.
Also with all your free time, can you make a video on the history of the "Torrance Transit Center" which currently has been in preconstruction for nearly 5 years?
I watched this video and was like wow the editing is fire and it's so well planned. And then I read the description. No wonder haha. Great video, you should make more of them :D
It's speed most likely or the process of maintaining the rails. The tracks would look like a realistic game with low graphics set on the settings. I am not against them, just it would be nice to have a monorail like the one in Brazil or Japan, just not the one Russia has
@@brianna_lynch I know, but the monorail in Russia, well I can go faster than it on my bike or running. Other than that, I dont know what is so bad about a monorail. Well I guess monorails and foriegn concepts of rail travel such as a maglev or highspeed rail dont do well in America because how America does it, just look at Acela and Brightline, I think the L.A. Metro Gold Line can go the same speed as the Brightline in Florida
@@fritzyboi6390 I'm going to assume that should monorail win, either Alstom (which purchased Bombardier's entire rail division earlier this year) or BYD would win the bid, although I'd love for Hitachi to make a presence in the US.
Thanks, always, Nick, for such a comprehensive video. I've watched this countless times over the past few months. It's amazing how often the small details change, even some since you made this video! Appreciate all your ideas. :)
Love what you did. I want to make a similar video for upcoming projects in my city, Austin. Any tips or tricks you can share, such as what software you used to design your illustrations
Great video! They should really connect the Norwalk metro and metrolink stations as soon as possible considering they are only three miles apart from each other. It will really open up new connections for people coming from Orange County, especially if Metrolink increases its frequency.
As someone who was a daily rider pre-pandemic, this video read my mind (snarky commentary and all!) What a dream this would be. Fingers crossed for the senate!! Can we please have more updates just like this at some point?
Thanks for the overview. It'll be exciting to see hopefully by the end of this decade. Have you considered placing some ridership numbers + cost per rider while showing off the projects? I haven't heard anything about switching the crenshaw extension to entirely underground. That would easily triple the costs and push it back till 2060
That's interesting, maybe I can do that in an update vid. For underground on la brea/crenshaw north, here's one source on it: twitter.com/numble/status/1179462225033093125 . I know I saw the adjusted numbers from Metro at one point too, but I'm having trouble digging that up right now. If I recall, it wasn't *so* much more to completely mess up funding feasibility for the project, but it was definitely a decent chunk of change.
@@nandert Yeah the only fully underground one is the direct La Brea alignment. The other alignments only have partial underground placement. Also all the funding numbers I see are using the elevated costs. I don't think the underground approach is actually being pushed that hard. Regarding the spur line I think it'd make more sense to create a separate east-west line on Santa Monica blvd to downtown, but I do like the idea more than the weird detour idea
At 6:24, I said “Oh no” because I heard the story about the time that L.A. rejected a whole system of Monorail instead of building an expensive Blue Line (A). I don’t even live there. And edit: If the city is focused to Monorail, congratulations. If you love America so much, look at the Seattle Monorail. Or look into Europe or Asia, they have tons of municipal monorails there.
I've got a bit of a problem with what you say at 11:40. The fact is that there are many exemples out there of places where everything was planned in such a way that almost everything was built around the existing track in such a way that the realignment takes only a few days. The most extreme exemple that I know of is in Japan and was done within a very short 4 hour window. I have every reason to beleive that this is something that a city like LA could accomplish.
The issue here is that the initlal track was not built with such a junction box in place. The timeline mentioned is coming directly from a Metro estimate on how long they think it would take.
@@nandert That's exactly the kind of situation that I speak of when I talk of track realignment. You build the junction box around the existing tunnel. From there, you can cut the existing tunnel in pieces of manageable size and remove them. This can be done at night. By the time you are ready for the realignment, the only thing left of that tunnel section is the track itself and temporary supports. Assuming that everything is properly planned, the rest of the work can be done within a few hours.
aaaand east san Gabriel valley still don't have any line :( I'm still waiting for the metro to come to hacienda, rowland, diamond bar, walnut, pomona......
Changing the Expo/Blue/Gold proposed future configuration from the original North/South and East/West configuration into a bow/boomerang to connect SaMo to Pasadena not only goes against transit planning, but is an extreme division of LA County by racial and economic lines.
Great Video! What do you think about running the line from Santa Monica or Expo/Sepulvada further along Sepulvada boulevard into Lax and then connecting along W Century Blvd to the Crenshaw line or even following S. Sepulvada undeneath the Runway to connect somewhere around mariposa to the existing network and use the people mover as a linker? Wouldn't make this the connection into Lax way faster, if you don't have to use the people mover to get to the terminals, but use a metro train instead, that could even run further after Mariposa (south or east)?
AMAZING VIDEO!! When I found your first video in 2017 I was so optimistic about all these projects. As I've read more I'm still optimistic but I've gone from thinking every BRT NEEDS to be a light rail to believing most rail lines should be HRT and elevated light rail. I also agree with you the monorail plans are...stupid (especially having it run through the center of the 405 in the West side...Why is Metro even considering that?) . I wish more of theses projects were BRT. If LA Metro really wants to serve more people BRT would go much farther on less money compared to light rail. OBVIOUS RAIL PROJECTS: Purple Line Extension Crenshaw La Brea Extension Sepulveda HRT Extension of "K/Crenshaw Line" to Norwalk Vermont Ave Subway (most likely from 120th to Wilshire, unfortunately) Aside from these rail projects I think I'd be better if more of the potential rail corridors were BRT (especially WSAB and Van Nuys/Sylmar LRT). Even the proposed light rail extensions to Whittier, Pomona, and Torrance I'm not super enthusiastic about because these people don't need or use public transit despite what they say (your comments on Lawndale exemplify this BRILLIANTLY). I'd like it if the money saved by making more of these new lines and extensions high quality BRT can be spent on upgrading and improving existing service, especially the rapid lines and Expo and A Lines (Pico station NEEDS to be underground and the stations at LATTC need to be consolidated and also put underground). Great video!! What are your thoughts on more BRT? Also, as a Long Beach Poly alumni, greatly appreciate making the PCH A Line station Poly High!!!
My apologies but you are wrong! BRT is a very poor version for rapid transit. It was mooted in Leeds UK but it was scrapped because of the poor patronage. LRT gets the passengers, BRT doesn't!
@@Tonydjjokerit Bogota Columbia and Curitiba, Brazil have effective BRT systems. They're significantly less expensive and easier to expand than light rail or subways since they can utilize existing infrastructure. Even building light rail on an existing ROW requires placing new track. The Orange Line BRT in LA has performed better than expected as an example in LA alone. It's getting major improvements to speed up the line and increase capacity and will eventually be a light rail line. BRT introduces people to mass transit without the massive investment and disruptions needed when building LRT.
@@PASH3227 yes but we tried it in Leeds and it was a complete failiure! No one used it. Also China has had the same problem with BRT. Granted Karachi in Pakistan uses them but are replacing them with LRT. Also Essen in Germany had a BRT and it was replaced by a new tramway very quickly. Also in Croydon UK they are going for LRT instead of BRT because of BRT's low patronage
@@PASH3227 Bogota is now building a Metro system as for Curitiba but they have budget problems and the majority of Brazillian cities now have Metro systems. Besides Asia matters a lot more than South America. After all China built 19 tram systems in one year all within budget!
All I want is an urban rail option from Burbank to Glendale to Union Station. It can be subway, dedicated ROW light rail, or a streetcar with a shared lane/dedicated lane combination for all I care. Metrolink is nice, but we know those are commuter based, and the Glendale station is barely in Glendale, all the way on the south end riding the LA/Glendale city line. If I could choose it would be an underground HRT northbound extension of the purple line, because the I-5 corridor is a dense one and Burbank is a major commute city. It could travel to Bob Hope airport and possibly re-connect with the red line.
Great video! Call me dumb but I'd still prefer that hybrid Crenshaw and elevated Sepulveda option. La Brea would be great for cost and travel time but it would be bypassing the grove, Beverly Center and Santa Monica Blvd plus (in my silly opinion) using that hybrid option for that new line you proposed would have pleased those wanting a station at Farmers Market. Also why not use the eastern extention to your line to create a route thru South El Monte? Anyways enough me talking, this is a wonderful video, keep up the great work!
Those Metrolink infill stations for Glendale and LA (there's also one being built in the Santa Clarita valley) are on an ambiguous timeline because they're trying to secure funding and left the door open for a rail multiple unit pilot program, but it sounds like the agencies are waiting to see if hydrogen fuel cell powered trains can be put into place before implementing the pilot program. Metrolink will also need to upgrade the single track portions of the Antelope Valley Line to two tracks in order to achieve the 30 minute bi-directional headways they're shooting for, and maybe even triple track the portion between Glendale and Burbank. There were a couple other rejected options for this corridor in the 2019 study. One was for DMUs (similar to the upcoming Arrow train in San Bernardino) from the get-go which would've had 15 minute bi-directonal headways in peak hours and would've likely been operated by Metro. Those would've traveled from Union Station to Via Princessa, and would cost around $1B to add four more DMU only stations (2 in Glendale, 2 in Los Angeles) and upgrade the current Metrolink stations to serve them in addition to the double tracking mentioned above. The other and most expensive option would've been a new light rail line running from Union Station to the Burbank Airport terminating at the AVL Metrolink station. LRT-1 ($4B) had the entire line running in the same corridor as Amtrak and Metrolink except for the portion between Union Station and Cypress Park which would've shared the current L line tracks and then bridged over into the corridor at the LA river. LRT-2 ($6B) would've shifted the line away from the corridor at the Glendale transit center and sent it up through downtown Glendale then along Glenoaks through downtown Burbank along the future BRT route before returning to the corridor at Downtown Burbank station.
I think that an Orange Line LRT conversion could be used to connect to the West Santa Ana branch by using parts of the old Burbank-Glendale PE line and underground tunnels through Silverlake. That would mean scrapping the Orange Line extension to Pasadena.
Changing Line 204/754 into a heavy rail and combing it with the B Line seems pretty ideal. Is it possible? Not really, but imo having the D Line (Purple) the only train stopping from Westlake to Grand Park seems like it would make sense tho
Great stuff- I love your realistic condensing of information. I got to work on the proposal for the EIR for the South Bay Green Line extension, it was interesting to see first hand the Lawndale arguments. I'm curious, where do you do your research?
Nice! I tend to read documents as they're released to the public, and there's a group at the Transit Coalition (transittalk.proboards.com) that stays on top of everything and discusses stuff. I pretty much always hear any transit news there first a few days before it gets published in any of the press that covers it.
Oh absolutely!! The money currently earmarked for the East San Fernando LRT should be used as a BRT on the same route. The money saved can be used to accelerate construction on Sepulveda HRT.
On the point of the Single Track, since the frequency of the Crenshaw Line is already limited by interlining with the Green Line on the south side (regardless of which service pattern they choose, at some point the K line will share tracks down there), does the fact that the Crenshaw Line will share tracks with your proposed WEHO spur even matter? Theoretically speaking you can time the WEHO spur trains to run in between the Crenshaw Line trains where the C line trains ran, and this would suffice until an eastern extension is built. Expanding Crenshaw Line service would require completely rearranging the setup At LAX so that the Green line has its own 3rd track (assuming it is rearranged so that the Green Line acts as a spur down to Redondo/Torrance).
I do not live in Los Angeles. In fact, I am not even close to it. But this video is one amazing and two its just inspiring to see great transit project grow. If you ever have the desire to do another. Please do one on either rail projects in the country such as the High speed rail in Cali, brightline, Xpresswest, and more. Or what we should see from Amtrak would be an amazing video. But just know I am subscribed for this stuff.
If this sized of a project was being done in China after 4 years you would be making a video of the completed project. Its been 25 years since they built the green line and they still haven't decided on the route of the extension to Torrance. Why does everything take so long and is so expensive in the US? Even in Paris they can build 200km of new track and 68 new stations in less time.
The only reason monorail was thrown in there for the Sepulveda Pass was that they can climb steep hills, what with their rubber tires on concrete beams. Up and over keeps costs down.
thank you for this update! however i’ve been clinging to this from metro.net on the A line: “From the Metro Gold Line, passengers will be able to travel from Azusa to Long Beach and from East Los Angeles to Santa Monica without transferring lines.” i for sure don’t want that to change to E line because i want my one seat service from Monrovia to Staples Center (which is currently a two-change trip and you might as well just drive)
The "Hybrid" routing serves The Grove and the L.A. Farmers Market, along with Melrose Avenue and three stations along Santa Monica Blvd. Those are some of the most important destinations not currently served by rail or even BRT in Los Angeles. I'm already waiting with anticipation to be able to go to LACMA without a bus transfer on Wilshire.
I'm barely late to this video, but I like how you detail the proposed expansions of each rail and BRT lines for the feasible future, despite that half of them will never get built and some get altered by L.A. Metro's whims. Particularly, the Crenshaw Northern Extension should go for the San Vicente Boulevard option, as it serves many of the trendy places of WeHo, the Miracle Mile and Beverly Hills.
@@nandert Glad to hear! It's awesome that LA is finally investing in expanding the network. We're nearing the opening of our first Light Rail line here in Tel Aviv th-cam.com/video/CjGigiERjB8/w-d-xo.html
So here's why the C/K line pattern wound up as it did: 1. The number of trains passing through the C Line/K Line wye in all directions would cause quicker wear-and-tear on the points that re-align the tracks each time a train passes through, which would mean more frequent closures to repair and replace them. 2. The spur option that the Metro board wanted would mean anyone using the C Line to commute from the South Bay to DTLA and beyond would be forced to make an additional transfer at Aviation/LAX, and the South Bay wouldn't be happy about that, so the C Line will stop at the A Line now to allow South Bay residents to continue their one-seat ride transfer to both the J and A Lines and while conserving power by not sending it all the way to Norwalk. Metro wanted the C Line spur option because by sharing the portion of track between Aviation/LAX and the A Line, trains will be very frequent during peak hours. We're talking a train pulling into station every 3 1/2 minutes. This means both the C Line and K Line trains will be restricted to two cars as that's the most the LRT's power limitations will be able to handle on that stretch of track. What Metro wanted was K Line trains to be three cars, which would require the exclusive ROW and force the C Line spur. Likewise, a spur would also mean C Line trains could be upgraded to three cars as well, which is why Metro is expanding South Bay station platforms to serve three cars. Just in case they go with that option after the pilot year has passed.
I wouldn't be against the BRT on Rosemead option either, as long as it either has a stop at, or terminates at, the El Monte Transit Center to connect to the J Line.
Oddly enough, the only big objection to any of the plans is from Sherman Oaks, and it is objecting to the monorail because it's visible and going through their area without stopping.
This is so clearly explained! Thank you! I wish Metro outlined their projects as plainly as this. Two questions: What is happening from Santa Monica to LAX (at 0:45)? And are these maps available anywhere to download?
Thanks! Yep links to the maps are in the description above. That line is the Lincoln Boulevard Bus Rapid Transit line - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Boulevard_Transit_Corridor . It's slated for 2047, and isn't currently on the docket for acceleration. They want it to eventually become a light rail extension of the current green line (or whatever new line springs out of the crenshaw/green operation pattern) but that upgrade to light rail is currently unfunded.
Sadly no, it's raster not vector so I can't export anything higher-res. Still, the full-res link in the description is a pretty sizable 4800x4800 - are you sure you're zoomed in fully?
I like your idea for the weho line. I also feel like there's a huge gap in the system running east/west between the expo and green line? How come there's no talk about a line running through this area? Perhaps running along slauson from venice to the blue line
I love the update. I've watched the original I don't know how many times... including once more just before I was recommended this fantastic update. The one thing I would really like to see is the future sepulveda pass line interface with the extension of the purple line so they BOTH serve the VA hospital and then either or both could continue south to LAX. We also really need that simple three mile extension of the green line to connect with metrolink. I really hope that gets moved up. Finally, I really like the idea of switching the service mode on the regional connector so I can get from union station to Santa Monica without a transfer. A northern/eastern extension all the way to Ontario airport would be really cool to see, too.
This is so nice to see. LA is THE case study of how not to build a city yet it's the model most places in the US are trying their hardest to pursue. The appetite's clearly there so hopefully after the pandemic and Olympics and then some, it can be a model again for the right reasons.
Oh that should be scrapped. LA Metro already operates a popular bus line connecting Dodgers fans to Union Station on game day. Just as effective, WAY WAY CHEAPER.
Japan truly embraced trains! One can visit the whole country by train! Of course with the exception of the faraway islands like Okinawa. And to put the cherry on top, their trains are on time... lol
This was very very well done! You haven entered the league of "elite transit video producers" unintentionally. There are a LOT of more popular channels with lesser quality videos that you could be more frequently ucerping if you applied this format and quality to other cities and projects!! ✔💯
Hello! Great video. I'm a resident of the Seattle metro area, and personally I can assure the good people of Sepulveda that trains in elevated tracks that are constructed well with the the proper sound-dampening tech are virtually silent and don't provide much of an interruption to daily life. Much of our light rail system that has been/will be constructed is above-grade, and if we're being honest it's not that big of a deal so long as METRO makes plans to mitigate interference with local businesses during construction.
Hey man decent video! You mentioned a lot of projects that even a local transit fan like me wouldn't know about. Just a quick advice on the video: your voice is fading out often when you're making backhanded comments so it can get hard to hear you at various points. Try to edit up the audio when you're doing that or simply be bold and make those comments loud haha. As to the future plans and the politics behind them, it's pretty clear you're coming from a West LA Angeleno standpoint (seeing that you're surprised by Claremont and Montclair lol, I live near these far-flung suburbs). Yes, by now LA Metro is probably more efficient at building transit than any other cities in the US, but it is far from certain that most of these projects (aside from Regional Connector, Purple Line, and Crenshaw) are gonna happen anytime soon, let alone by 2030. People are counting way too much on Biden and Democrats taking Congress (most Democrats aren't AOC). Green New Deal is not even on the platform this year. Given how expensive transit projects are in US, even building a new heavy rail line through Sepulveda is already prohibitively expensive. I wish this isn't so, but I just want to give you a reality check having studied city planning back in college. Also, Expo line doesn't look good and is too close to blue. I'm all for blue and gold going through downtown (Go Bears hehe).
Weho line connect to Venice on the west side is a good idea. To the east it could go down santa Monica Blvd till it turns into sunset Blvd and then Cesar Chavez Blvd in to East LA.
Things have changed in the past 25 years, since I moved north to the SF Bay Area. Great to see that accelerating. Oh the trouble that could have been with a Centinela/Venice-UCLA-WeHo line!
I loved this. Such a great explanation of it all, and the commentary is so fire (but I fucking agree!) Can't wait to see more updates, fully expecting them to be disappointing news
I love this. Really interesting and well explained both from the technical and political challenges we're facing, and make no apologies for a political rant - I frikkin LOVE it :)
Can You Create A New Line Called The Beach Line From Mailbu To Newport Beach via Santa Monica, Venice Beach,Marina Del Rey,LAX Airport,Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach,Redondo Beach,Rancho Palos Verdes,Palos Verdes Estates,San Pedro,Long Beach,Seal Beach,Huntington Beach And Newport Beach.
I just noticed this video even though it’s been up for 3 months. I forgot to subscribe before. Your previous video in 2016 was excellent. This video is even more thorough. One technical observation in this video, and the one from 2016, is that you have been calling San Vicente Blvd. San VINcente when it is San VIcente. There’s no N before the C....I’m not sure why you don’t think the purple line should be the choice extended down Centinela to LAX. It’s by far the best option and gives a one seat ride from LAX to downtown and would hit the Westside, Westwood, Beverly Hills, Mid-Wilshire and Koreatown on the way. I think there’s a reason that the track starts to curve as it head into the VA terminus.
Oh my god my brain has been editing in that 'N' for ten years now. I somehow never noticed that. Thanks for catching it! And thanks for the kind words. As for the purple line extension, I'm more of a skeptic of using Centinela as the north-south route, which the purple extension would require. If I remember the original analysis, Sepulveda or Overland performed much better I think. I believe you're correct though in that it still has higher pure ridership numbers because of the additional ridership captured from the purple line without having to transfer.
I like the idea of a single subway between LAX and Downtown via Culver City, Westwood, Century City, Beverly Hills, and Koreatown. But, if 2 separate lines are built the Purple Line could one day be extended farther west to Santa Monica (very densely populated already and seeing lots of new transit oriented development), while the Sepulveda Line can venture further north in the San Fernando Valley (alleviating congestion on the Sepulveda Pass) and possibly be one day extended to Sylmar.
"Lets stay in the Valley, something you dont normally hear."
I spit my coffee
I hoping the next time succeeding comes up you can let us go already.
The amount of disrespect, voices heard since 2002? Clearly Los Angeles didn't listen to us at all things have gotten worse so I'm sure there will be another succeed proposal, but there's a reason why she got that seat, because she understands some of our struggles. Like how the valley is nearly a half of the los angeles population but we see about 2/10 of the development in this part of the city.
For example look at the budget proposals for the subway expansions in downtown compared to our bus proposal, but I guess we should be grateful that we get anything at all right? :P
great video! It's like you took everything in my head and put it on here, man!
This is fantastic! Have you considered doing some kind of update every year? Surely most of the lines won’t be finished, but debate over planning certainly continues to change (things like the downtown terminal for WSAB, final operating patterns for the Crenshaw line and Downtown Connector thru-routing).
I-I've been staring at this for five hours now.
It's glorious.
I Want this so bad. Every once in a while I get into a "city planning" kick on TH-cam. Today it's been watching a lot of the channel "Not Just Bikes" about city planning in Amsterdam, and how its very people friendly, providing great ease of foot traffic, increasing traffic to small businesses, and improving overall wellbeing. And I remembered this guy's video from four years ago. And he made an UPDATE! God I want this so badly.
Living in London, one thing I've learnt is while straight direct lines are always useful, Paris and Barcelona shows a shit tonne of curves works too.
man I loved your video from 2016 and I'm not even from the us or living anywhere close to it, but you are presenting this topic amazingly
I've never seen a transit video so high quality and information-packed
This is excellent! What software did you use to do the animation?
thanks! it was all photoshop/after effects
The la metro is the same age as me 28 years old it opened in 1992
@@miriammurillo1317 It was opened when my brother was born
Best explainer of Metro’s vision if only an unofficial one.
Had to play this back at reduced speed to be able to digest all the points being presented. Also had to have the less than perfect auto generated captions because I’m hard of hearing - but it was worth it!
I’ve liked and subscribed
Great job with this video, explanations and visioning. I'm moving from NYC to LA and just wish that all these projects were already completed!!!
I know this is a dumb request but can you do another update of this?
Yup, another update would be appreciated.
As a driver I still call out the trains by the colors or names they were given.
Love the idea for the WeHo line to Venice via La Cienega. If only we could magically resurrect the tracks that used to be there when the Red Line ran we could already be halfway there.
This video was beautiful!
Very nice video. But on the northern extension of the Crenshaw/LAX/South Bay (K) Line can you do an alignment along Fairfax Boulevard to connect Farmer's Market/The Grove and CBS Television City with a station stop at Be erly/Fairfax (Television City/Bob Barker Station) then continues to WeHo and interlines with the Red (B) Line subway train to travel through Hollywood to Glendale and Burbank.
This was so good! I hope that another 4 years later you might be willing to do another update to see how progress is going with the LA metro.
Also, a minor quibble. Metro is projecting that with a PPP, WSAB can be built from Artesia to Slauson in one go and then connect to DTLA as a Phase 2.
Another great video! I have a question: to your knowledge is a future northern extension of the W Santa Ana Branch to downtown Glendale (as shown in your "imagine this" map - 17:37) something Metro has discussed in any form?
Thanks! A long time ago, Metro included a 'yellow line' concept (which is what this general route is usually called) on a long-term aspirational map (though not as an extension of WSAB I believe). It's usually show as one of three possible routes - either what i've shown here, using the old red car subway route; going north from union alongside the existing amtrak/metrolink tracks; or as a northern extension of a vermont light rail line. I think that that long-term map had used the same route I do. The only somewhat recent discussion of the route was in the study of the glendale/burbank metrolink corridor. They made the yellow line light rail concept that traveled along the metrolink tracks one of the study options. However, this wound up not being the chosen alternative. Instead, Metrolink will add two infill stations and more frequent service. This makes it less likely that the alongside-the-metrolink yellow line will ever get built, but i would bet money that the next time Metro chooses to list long-term aspirational projects, the version that I have displayed on my map will be included. It could be soon, as the final 2020 long term transit plan will be released in (i think) the next month, and i'm *pretty* sure i read that one of the new things they're adding from the previous version is more 'aspirational' lines, thanks to community input requesting them. We'll see.
@@nandert Thanks so much! Do you have or know where I can find the concept map you mentioned? I've done quite a bit of searching without success. I'm interested in advocating for the PE route since it served (and built) our downtown.
@@elylester1178 So the 2009 LRTP ( media.metro.net/projects_studies/images/final-2009-LRTP.pdf ) is what I was thinking of. Doesn't appear to be mapped, but actually BOTH the metrolink alignment and the 'yellow line' old red car alignment are mentioned in the 'strategic unfunded' section at the end, for future consideration. In addition, it turns out that there was actually an EIR done on the metrolink alignment way back in 1992, which you can find here: libraryarchives.metro.net/dpgtl/eirs/BurbankGlendale/1992_final_eir_executive_summary.pdf . And then the recent metrolink alignment map can be seen here: urbanize.la/post/heres-what-improved-rail-service-could-look-between-burbank-glendale-and-dtla
Probably controversial, but for the Sepulveda Pass Line, I am kinda routing for elevateds in the Valley, and the Elevated on the 405. The elevated on the 405 does a much better job of splitting the corridors created by Sawtelle and Sepulveda and gets to the airport more quickly without the jaunt Sepulveda follows into Culver City, thought if that were chosen a station could be built between the proposed Venice and Fox Hills Stations.
elevated in the valley isn't a bad option at all - the only issue would be having only one transfer station with the van nuys line. the transfer station would be at risk of being over-capacity pretty much immediately. regardless of whatever benefits a 405 route would have on the west side, i have a hard time seeing people accepting another 6 or so years of 405 construction, which would probably kill the option.
@@nandert I can see that possibility on the westside, my hope for it is mainly from a cost point of view given how expensive the line will be T.T
I can actually see the Van Nuys Transfer being fairly simple given the unused ROW by the UP at their Van Nuys yard, the biggest issue for transfers that I see is the Orange line connection. Though, if the Sherman Oaks Homeowners association raise as big a stink as I think they may, there could be a compromise. Maybe? All of it is so hypothetical its hard to say with certainty.
Also with all your free time, can you make a video on the history of the "Torrance Transit Center" which currently has been in preconstruction for nearly 5 years?
I watched this video and was like wow the editing is fire and it's so well planned. And then I read the description. No wonder haha. Great video, you should make more of them :D
What do you have against monorails? Monorails are awesome.
It's speed most likely or the process of maintaining the rails. The tracks would look like a realistic game with low graphics set on the settings. I am not against them, just it would be nice to have a monorail like the one in Brazil or Japan, just not the one Russia has
Fritzyboi Monorails can go really fast and they hardly take up any space.
@@brianna_lynch I know, but the monorail in Russia, well I can go faster than it on my bike or running. Other than that, I dont know what is so bad about a monorail. Well I guess monorails and foriegn concepts of rail travel such as a maglev or highspeed rail dont do well in America because how America does it, just look at Acela and Brightline, I think the L.A. Metro Gold Line can go the same speed as the Brightline in Florida
Fritzyboi The monorail in Las Vegas goes really fast
@@fritzyboi6390 I'm going to assume that should monorail win, either Alstom (which purchased Bombardier's entire rail division earlier this year) or BYD would win the bid, although I'd love for Hitachi to make a presence in the US.
This is a fantastic video. I hope you are able to make more.
Thanks, always, Nick, for such a comprehensive video. I've watched this countless times over the past few months. It's amazing how often the small details change, even some since you made this video! Appreciate all your ideas. :)
Love what you did. I want to make a similar video for upcoming projects in my city, Austin. Any tips or tricks you can share, such as what software you used to design your illustrations
Basically, the GOP makes building transit impossible.
Great video! They should really connect the Norwalk metro and metrolink stations as soon as possible considering they are only three miles apart from each other. It will really open up new connections for people coming from Orange County, especially if Metrolink increases its frequency.
Thanks! It'd also be amazing for orange county folks headed to LAX.
As someone who was a daily rider pre-pandemic, this video read my mind (snarky commentary and all!) What a dream this would be. Fingers crossed for the senate!! Can we please have more updates just like this at some point?
Thanks for the overview. It'll be exciting to see hopefully by the end of this decade. Have you considered placing some ridership numbers + cost per rider while showing off the projects?
I haven't heard anything about switching the crenshaw extension to entirely underground. That would easily triple the costs and push it back till 2060
That's interesting, maybe I can do that in an update vid. For underground on la brea/crenshaw north, here's one source on it: twitter.com/numble/status/1179462225033093125 . I know I saw the adjusted numbers from Metro at one point too, but I'm having trouble digging that up right now. If I recall, it wasn't *so* much more to completely mess up funding feasibility for the project, but it was definitely a decent chunk of change.
@@nandert Yeah the only fully underground one is the direct La Brea alignment. The other alignments only have partial underground placement.
Also all the funding numbers I see are using the elevated costs. I don't think the underground approach is actually being pushed that hard.
Regarding the spur line I think it'd make more sense to create a separate east-west line on Santa Monica blvd to downtown, but I do like the idea more than the weird detour idea
The amount of production quality in this is amazing, Good job!
I’m so excited about the expansions!
At 6:24, I said “Oh no” because I heard the story about the time that L.A. rejected a whole system of Monorail instead of building an expensive Blue Line (A). I don’t even live there. And edit: If the city is focused to Monorail, congratulations. If you love America so much, look at the Seattle Monorail. Or look into Europe or Asia, they have tons of municipal monorails there.
Japan and China yes other places ehh
I've got a bit of a problem with what you say at 11:40. The fact is that there are many exemples out there of places where everything was planned in such a way that almost everything was built around the existing track in such a way that the realignment takes only a few days. The most extreme exemple that I know of is in Japan and was done within a very short 4 hour window. I have every reason to beleive that this is something that a city like LA could accomplish.
The issue here is that the initlal track was not built with such a junction box in place. The timeline mentioned is coming directly from a Metro estimate on how long they think it would take.
@@nandert That's exactly the kind of situation that I speak of when I talk of track realignment. You build the junction box around the existing tunnel. From there, you can cut the existing tunnel in pieces of manageable size and remove them. This can be done at night. By the time you are ready for the realignment, the only thing left of that tunnel section is the track itself and temporary supports. Assuming that everything is properly planned, the rest of the work can be done within a few hours.
Thank You for this video! The initial 16 minutes and 35 seconds were quite informative and entertaining.
aaaand east san Gabriel valley still don't have any line :( I'm still waiting for the metro to come to hacienda, rowland, diamond bar, walnut, pomona......
Changing the Expo/Blue/Gold proposed future configuration from the original North/South and East/West configuration into a bow/boomerang to connect SaMo to Pasadena not only goes against transit planning, but is an extreme division of LA County by racial and economic lines.
Time for an update
Great Video! What do you think about running the line from Santa Monica or Expo/Sepulvada further along Sepulvada boulevard into Lax and then connecting along W Century Blvd to the Crenshaw line or even following S. Sepulvada undeneath the Runway to connect somewhere around mariposa to the existing network and use the people mover as a linker?
Wouldn't make this the connection into Lax way faster, if you don't have to use the people mover to get to the terminals, but use a metro train instead, that could even run further after Mariposa (south or east)?
AMAZING VIDEO!! When I found your first video in 2017 I was so optimistic about all these projects. As I've read more I'm still optimistic but I've gone from thinking every BRT NEEDS to be a light rail to believing most rail lines should be HRT and elevated light rail. I also agree with you the monorail plans are...stupid (especially having it run through the center of the 405 in the West side...Why is Metro even considering that?) . I wish more of theses projects were BRT. If LA Metro really wants to serve more people BRT would go much farther on less money compared to light rail.
OBVIOUS RAIL PROJECTS:
Purple Line Extension
Crenshaw La Brea Extension
Sepulveda HRT
Extension of "K/Crenshaw Line" to Norwalk
Vermont Ave Subway (most likely from 120th to Wilshire, unfortunately)
Aside from these rail projects I think I'd be better if more of the potential rail corridors were BRT (especially WSAB and Van Nuys/Sylmar LRT). Even the proposed light rail extensions to Whittier, Pomona, and Torrance I'm not super enthusiastic about because these people don't need or use public transit despite what they say (your comments on Lawndale exemplify this BRILLIANTLY).
I'd like it if the money saved by making more of these new lines and extensions high quality BRT can be spent on upgrading and improving existing service, especially the rapid lines and Expo and A Lines (Pico station NEEDS to be underground and the stations at LATTC need to be consolidated and also put underground).
Great video!! What are your thoughts on more BRT?
Also, as a Long Beach Poly alumni, greatly appreciate making the PCH A Line station Poly High!!!
My apologies but you are wrong! BRT is a very poor version for rapid transit. It was mooted in Leeds UK but it was scrapped because of the poor patronage. LRT gets the passengers, BRT doesn't!
@@Tonydjjokerit Bogota Columbia and Curitiba, Brazil have effective BRT systems. They're significantly less expensive and easier to expand than light rail or subways since they can utilize existing infrastructure. Even building light rail on an existing ROW requires placing new track. The Orange Line BRT in LA has performed better than expected as an example in LA alone. It's getting major improvements to speed up the line and increase capacity and will eventually be a light rail line. BRT introduces people to mass transit without the massive investment and disruptions needed when building LRT.
@@PASH3227 yes but we tried it in Leeds and it was a complete failiure! No one used it. Also China has had the same problem with BRT. Granted Karachi in Pakistan uses them but are replacing them with LRT. Also Essen in Germany had a BRT and it was replaced by a new tramway very quickly. Also in Croydon UK they are going for LRT instead of BRT because of BRT's low patronage
@@Tonydjjokerit What about in South America????
@@PASH3227 Bogota is now building a Metro system as for Curitiba but they have budget problems and the majority of Brazillian cities now have Metro systems. Besides Asia matters a lot more than South America. After all China built 19 tram systems in one year all within budget!
All I want is an urban rail option from Burbank to Glendale to Union Station. It can be subway, dedicated ROW light rail, or a streetcar with a shared lane/dedicated lane combination for all I care. Metrolink is nice, but we know those are commuter based, and the Glendale station is barely in Glendale, all the way on the south end riding the LA/Glendale city line. If I could choose it would be an underground HRT northbound extension of the purple line, because the I-5 corridor is a dense one and Burbank is a major commute city. It could travel to Bob Hope airport and possibly re-connect with the red line.
Great video! Call me dumb but I'd still prefer that hybrid Crenshaw and elevated Sepulveda option. La Brea would be great for cost and travel time but it would be bypassing the grove, Beverly Center and Santa Monica Blvd plus (in my silly opinion) using that hybrid option for that new line you proposed would have pleased those wanting a station at Farmers Market. Also why not use the eastern extention to your line to create a route thru South El Monte? Anyways enough me talking, this is a wonderful video, keep up the great work!
NIMBYS can't keep getting away with this!
Those Metrolink infill stations for Glendale and LA (there's also one being built in the Santa Clarita valley) are on an ambiguous timeline because they're trying to secure funding and left the door open for a rail multiple unit pilot program, but it sounds like the agencies are waiting to see if hydrogen fuel cell powered trains can be put into place before implementing the pilot program. Metrolink will also need to upgrade the single track portions of the Antelope Valley Line to two tracks in order to achieve the 30 minute bi-directional headways they're shooting for, and maybe even triple track the portion between Glendale and Burbank.
There were a couple other rejected options for this corridor in the 2019 study. One was for DMUs (similar to the upcoming Arrow train in San Bernardino) from the get-go which would've had 15 minute bi-directonal headways in peak hours and would've likely been operated by Metro. Those would've traveled from Union Station to Via Princessa, and would cost around $1B to add four more DMU only stations (2 in Glendale, 2 in Los Angeles) and upgrade the current Metrolink stations to serve them in addition to the double tracking mentioned above.
The other and most expensive option would've been a new light rail line running from Union Station to the Burbank Airport terminating at the AVL Metrolink station. LRT-1 ($4B) had the entire line running in the same corridor as Amtrak and Metrolink except for the portion between Union Station and Cypress Park which would've shared the current L line tracks and then bridged over into the corridor at the LA river. LRT-2 ($6B) would've shifted the line away from the corridor at the Glendale transit center and sent it up through downtown Glendale then along Glenoaks through downtown Burbank along the future BRT route before returning to the corridor at Downtown Burbank station.
I think that an Orange Line LRT conversion could be used to connect to the West Santa Ana branch by using parts of the old Burbank-Glendale PE line and underground tunnels through Silverlake. That would mean scrapping the Orange Line extension to Pasadena.
Changing Line 204/754 into a heavy rail and combing it with the B Line seems pretty ideal. Is it possible? Not really, but imo having the D Line (Purple) the only train stopping from Westlake to Grand Park seems like it would make sense tho
Great stuff- I love your realistic condensing of information. I got to work on the proposal for the EIR for the South Bay Green Line extension, it was interesting to see first hand the Lawndale arguments. I'm curious, where do you do your research?
Nice! I tend to read documents as they're released to the public, and there's a group at the Transit Coalition (transittalk.proboards.com) that stays on top of everything and discusses stuff. I pretty much always hear any transit news there first a few days before it gets published in any of the press that covers it.
I think the Sepulveda Line should replace the East Fernando LRT in the future for 1 line.
Oh absolutely!! The money currently earmarked for the East San Fernando LRT should be used as a BRT on the same route. The money saved can be used to accelerate construction on Sepulveda HRT.
On the point of the Single Track, since the frequency of the Crenshaw Line is already limited by interlining with the Green Line on the south side (regardless of which service pattern they choose, at some point the K line will share tracks down there), does the fact that the Crenshaw Line will share tracks with your proposed WEHO spur even matter? Theoretically speaking you can time the WEHO spur trains to run in between the Crenshaw Line trains where the C line trains ran, and this would suffice until an eastern extension is built. Expanding Crenshaw Line service would require completely rearranging the setup At LAX so that the Green line has its own 3rd track (assuming it is rearranged so that the Green Line acts as a spur down to Redondo/Torrance).
I do not live in Los Angeles. In fact, I am not even close to it. But this video is one amazing and two its just inspiring to see great transit project grow. If you ever have the desire to do another. Please do one on either rail projects in the country such as the High speed rail in Cali, brightline, Xpresswest, and more. Or what we should see from Amtrak would be an amazing video. But just know I am subscribed for this stuff.
If this sized of a project was being done in China after 4 years you would be making a video of the completed project. Its been 25 years since they built the green line and they still haven't decided on the route of the extension to Torrance. Why does everything take so long and is so expensive in the US? Even in Paris they can build 200km of new track and 68 new stations in less time.
US needs to emulate Grand Paris Express in many major cities. Boston Subway hasn’t been extended since 1985.
The only reason monorail was thrown in there for the Sepulveda Pass was that they can climb steep hills, what with their rubber tires on concrete beams. Up and over keeps costs down.
thank you for this update! however i’ve been clinging to this from metro.net on the A line: “From the Metro Gold Line, passengers will be able to travel from Azusa to Long Beach and from East Los Angeles to Santa Monica without transferring lines.”
i for sure don’t want that to change to E line because i want my one seat service from Monrovia to Staples Center (which is currently a two-change trip and you might as well just drive)
Since the staples center is a shared station on both lines, you'll have a one-seat ride to it no matter what!
I've rewatched this three times today hoping for updates. Im too excited for this. Yes its a decades long project but Im so excited.
The "Hybrid" routing serves The Grove and the L.A. Farmers Market, along with Melrose Avenue and three stations along Santa Monica Blvd. Those are some of the most important destinations not currently served by rail or even BRT in Los Angeles. I'm already waiting with anticipation to be able to go to LACMA without a bus transfer on Wilshire.
I'm barely late to this video, but I like how you detail the proposed expansions of each rail and BRT lines for the feasible future, despite that half of them will never get built and some get altered by L.A. Metro's whims. Particularly, the Crenshaw Northern Extension should go for the San Vicente Boulevard option, as it serves many of the trendy places of WeHo, the Miracle Mile and Beverly Hills.
Please do a 2021 update!
Just started working on one!
@@nandert Glad to hear! It's awesome that LA is finally investing in expanding the network.
We're nearing the opening of our first Light Rail line here in Tel Aviv
th-cam.com/video/CjGigiERjB8/w-d-xo.html
So here's why the C/K line pattern wound up as it did:
1. The number of trains passing through the C Line/K Line wye in all directions would cause quicker wear-and-tear on the points that re-align the tracks each time a train passes through, which would mean more frequent closures to repair and replace them.
2. The spur option that the Metro board wanted would mean anyone using the C Line to commute from the South Bay to DTLA and beyond would be forced to make an additional transfer at Aviation/LAX, and the South Bay wouldn't be happy about that, so the C Line will stop at the A Line now to allow South Bay residents to continue their one-seat ride transfer to both the J and A Lines and while conserving power by not sending it all the way to Norwalk.
Metro wanted the C Line spur option because by sharing the portion of track between Aviation/LAX and the A Line, trains will be very frequent during peak hours. We're talking a train pulling into station every 3 1/2 minutes. This means both the C Line and K Line trains will be restricted to two cars as that's the most the LRT's power limitations will be able to handle on that stretch of track. What Metro wanted was K Line trains to be three cars, which would require the exclusive ROW and force the C Line spur. Likewise, a spur would also mean C Line trains could be upgraded to three cars as well, which is why Metro is expanding South Bay station platforms to serve three cars. Just in case they go with that option after the pilot year has passed.
I wouldn't be against the BRT on Rosemead option either, as long as it either has a stop at, or terminates at, the El Monte Transit Center to connect to the J Line.
Make a 2021 update i would really want to see the updates on the Vermont BRT Line
Why the hate for monorails? Looks like the cleanest choice, visually speaking. Might please some NIMBYs.
Oddly enough, the only big objection to any of the plans is from Sherman Oaks, and it is objecting to the monorail because it's visible and going through their area without stopping.
Great production value and editing! Good job!
This is so clearly explained! Thank you! I wish Metro outlined their projects as plainly as this. Two questions: What is happening from Santa Monica to LAX (at 0:45)? And are these maps available anywhere to download?
Thanks! Yep links to the maps are in the description above. That line is the Lincoln Boulevard Bus Rapid Transit line - en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lincoln_Boulevard_Transit_Corridor . It's slated for 2047, and isn't currently on the docket for acceleration. They want it to eventually become a light rail extension of the current green line (or whatever new line springs out of the crenshaw/green operation pattern) but that upgrade to light rail is currently unfunded.
Do you have higher quality versions of your long range plan? I have trouble reading it.
Sadly no, it's raster not vector so I can't export anything higher-res. Still, the full-res link in the description is a pretty sizable 4800x4800 - are you sure you're zoomed in fully?
@@nandert For whatever reason, it only comes up as 640x640, even when downloaded. Perhaps its something with Imgur.
@@ganginfr4923 oh weird. try this dropbox link: www.dropbox.com/s/m9clfo0gi0obzwt/BASE_04_LongRange.png?dl=0
Fantastic video! Your narration is informative and hilarious all at the same time. So glad I stumbled upon this video. More please!!!
I like your idea for the weho line. I also feel like there's a huge gap in the system running east/west between the expo and green line? How come there's no talk about a line running through this area? Perhaps running along slauson from venice to the blue line
I'd love to see a BRT line on Slauson or Manchester/Firestone!!!
7:23 this has to be one of the weirdest renderings I've ever seen. NYC subway car in California??
It looks pretty similar to the purple/red line trains
@@HotDogLaws Nah, definitely looks like an R160
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/R160_(New_York_City_Subway_car)
I love the update. I've watched the original I don't know how many times... including once more just before I was recommended this fantastic update. The one thing I would really like to see is the future sepulveda pass line interface with the extension of the purple line so they BOTH serve the VA hospital and then either or both could continue south to LAX. We also really need that simple three mile extension of the green line to connect with metrolink. I really hope that gets moved up. Finally, I really like the idea of switching the service mode on the regional connector so I can get from union station to Santa Monica without a transfer. A northern/eastern extension all the way to Ontario airport would be really cool to see, too.
Chevy Chase?
Awesome video. I wish you would do the same for transit in Seattle and the Puget Sound metro area.
Return of the King.
I live in Redondo.....
Why not a simple (North/South - East/West), (Hollywood Bowl/Redondo - Norwalk/LAX)?
This is fantastic. Fingers crossed for the election this fall. Also,
I take issue with that Central Valley reference. We're looking to change that!
rooting for you!
This is so nice to see. LA is THE case study of how not to build a city yet it's the model most places in the US are trying their hardest to pursue. The appetite's clearly there so hopefully after the pandemic and Olympics and then some, it can be a model again for the right reasons.
The latest development to pay attention to: Metro's proposed gondola line from Union Station to Elysian Park/Dodgers Stadium.
Oh that should be scrapped. LA Metro already operates a popular bus line connecting Dodgers fans to Union Station on game day. Just as effective, WAY WAY CHEAPER.
Awesome video. A ray of optimism. Please give us another update in a few years.
great video, always loved following mass transit developments ever visiting Japan as a kid and was fascinated with their train system.
Japan truly embraced trains! One can visit the whole country by train! Of course with the exception of the faraway islands like Okinawa. And to put the cherry on top, their trains are on time... lol
This was very very well done! You haven entered the league of "elite transit video producers" unintentionally.
There are a LOT of more popular channels with lesser quality videos that you could be more frequently ucerping if you applied this format and quality to other cities and projects!! ✔💯
Are you planning on doing an update this year?
Once the infrastructure bill drops, assuming I have the time. I’ve been keeping track of all the updates in the last year to go through.
The K Line should go along the Veterans Parkway from Manhattan Beach down to Redondo and Hermosa.
And terminate at a closing power plant?
Hello! Great video. I'm a resident of the Seattle metro area, and personally I can assure the good people of Sepulveda that trains in elevated tracks that are constructed well with the the proper sound-dampening tech are virtually silent and don't provide much of an interruption to daily life. Much of our light rail system that has been/will be constructed is above-grade, and if we're being honest it's not that big of a deal so long as METRO makes plans to mitigate interference with local businesses during construction.
What app did you use to draw the metro lines?
What are the interchanges at stations with the bus network like?
You can see artist renderings at the Metro site, but it depends on where the bus lanes are. Some are in the center, and some are on the side.
Wow I dont know anything about LA but it looks like there’s not a lot of Metro??
Hey man decent video! You mentioned a lot of projects that even a local transit fan like me wouldn't know about. Just a quick advice on the video: your voice is fading out often when you're making backhanded comments so it can get hard to hear you at various points. Try to edit up the audio when you're doing that or simply be bold and make those comments loud haha.
As to the future plans and the politics behind them, it's pretty clear you're coming from a West LA Angeleno standpoint (seeing that you're surprised by Claremont and Montclair lol, I live near these far-flung suburbs). Yes, by now LA Metro is probably more efficient at building transit than any other cities in the US, but it is far from certain that most of these projects (aside from Regional Connector, Purple Line, and Crenshaw) are gonna happen anytime soon, let alone by 2030. People are counting way too much on Biden and Democrats taking Congress (most Democrats aren't AOC). Green New Deal is not even on the platform this year. Given how expensive transit projects are in US, even building a new heavy rail line through Sepulveda is already prohibitively expensive. I wish this isn't so, but I just want to give you a reality check having studied city planning back in college.
Also, Expo line doesn't look good and is too close to blue. I'm all for blue and gold going through downtown (Go Bears hehe).
Is there anyway to block or ban these NIMBY lawsuits? Or make it hard to do so?
Southbay should extend all the way to pch to LB, all these damn ppl fkg up progress!!!
I just wish there was better service in the south bay area and a direct rail towards Knotts and Disneyland.
Wow watching this a few years later, we were all WAY too optimistic with our predictions
Weho line connect to Venice on the west side is a good idea. To the east it could go down santa Monica Blvd till it turns into sunset Blvd and then Cesar Chavez Blvd in to East LA.
Things have changed in the past 25 years, since I moved north to the SF Bay Area. Great to see that accelerating. Oh the trouble that could have been with a Centinela/Venice-UCLA-WeHo line!
What is public transport’s share of all trips in LA County?
In a decade it will be much higher due to new lines
I loved this. Such a great explanation of it all, and the commentary is so fire (but I fucking agree!)
Can't wait to see more updates, fully expecting them to be disappointing news
Really fantastic and in depth content. Please keep it up!
Great video. See you in another 4 years!
lol the R160s riding on LA Metro infrastructure.
I love this. Really interesting and well explained both from the technical and political challenges we're facing, and make no apologies for a political rant - I frikkin LOVE it :)
Can You Create A New Line Called The Beach Line From Mailbu To Newport Beach via Santa Monica, Venice Beach,Marina Del Rey,LAX Airport,Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach,Redondo Beach,Rancho Palos Verdes,Palos Verdes Estates,San Pedro,Long Beach,Seal Beach,Huntington Beach And Newport Beach.
How exactly?? PCH doesn't even serve all of these communities.
Green new deal baby! Get that Santa Monica line!!
They should extend the red line to San Fernando
I just noticed this video even though it’s been up for 3 months. I forgot to subscribe before. Your previous video in 2016 was excellent. This video is even more thorough. One technical observation in this video, and the one from 2016, is that you have been calling San Vicente Blvd. San VINcente when it is San VIcente. There’s no N before the C....I’m not sure why you don’t think the purple line should be the choice extended down Centinela to LAX. It’s by far the best option and gives a one seat ride from LAX to downtown and would hit the Westside, Westwood, Beverly Hills, Mid-Wilshire and Koreatown on the way. I think there’s a reason that the track starts to curve as it head into the VA terminus.
Oh my god my brain has been editing in that 'N' for ten years now. I somehow never noticed that. Thanks for catching it! And thanks for the kind words. As for the purple line extension, I'm more of a skeptic of using Centinela as the north-south route, which the purple extension would require. If I remember the original analysis, Sepulveda or Overland performed much better I think. I believe you're correct though in that it still has higher pure ridership numbers because of the additional ridership captured from the purple line without having to transfer.
I like the idea of a single subway between LAX and Downtown via Culver City, Westwood, Century City, Beverly Hills, and Koreatown. But, if 2 separate lines are built the Purple Line could one day be extended farther west to Santa Monica (very densely populated already and seeing lots of new transit oriented development), while the Sepulveda Line can venture further north in the San Fernando Valley (alleviating congestion on the Sepulveda Pass) and possibly be one day extended to Sylmar.
Nice! This gets me excited for Metro’s future