We really need at least a 3 county (LA Metro, OCTA, SBCTA) overlay transit district to tackle regional subway/light rail like the BART district does in the bay.
@@alexanderrotmensz the only thing is, we should not follow BART'S operation funding and fare system. Other than that, I would gladly like to see a similar system like BART in SoCal.
Never going to happen since those two other counties are more conservative and have NEVER shown any desire for public transit infrastructure other than freeways. And, no, the Santa Ana streetcar doesn't count.
Fun fact: Shanghai had a master plan for a large subway system in the 1960s. NOW most of it is being implemented today nearly 60 years later most construction didn’t start till the 2010s or 2000s.
So it took them 40 years to start building it. That seems about right. I'm sure the advantage they had is superior support from their national government.
@@alexanderrotmensz lol what are you talking about bro. What makes you say China has lower quality materials and no environmental conservation when they are a world leader in green energy and public transportation?
@@arnavsrikanth China's low quality material issue is actually quite infamous, and there have been many incidents of buildings and other works having problems with eroding materials, and of course that's with just what's known, as China is a very secretive state. And they burn more coal and oil than other other nation by far lol. Well done they have good metro systems because they can seize property whenever they please and pay workers almost nothing. I'm not falling for that trap
I don't see OC ever creating a public transit line (as someone who lived in HB and Westminster) they wouldn't want LA connected because of the "people" it would bring down. I'd love to see Rapid Busses from Orange County too LAX or SNA which is impossible to get too unless you drive a car or hail a fairly expensive rideshare app.
@@Truth-of-the-matterThis makes me think of Orange County as a more extravagant counterpart to Gwinnett/Cobb Counties in GA, which both generally have the same attitude towards Atlanta.
Having the A line branch the way you have it here would mean high frequencies in the low density foothill areas and lower frequencies in downtown. Same goes for your version of the WSAB. But I love seeing new LA Metro content!
fair point. I guess it doesn't have to have through service past Pasadena, but I think having it connect up with at least the Metrolink in Pomona could bring in riders from San Bernardino and Riverside who would prefer not to go through downtown.
Quick Google Maps tips. If you're creating this on desktop, open the map options and uncheck the box 'labels'. You'll lose the roads, but you'll lose all the other clutter too. And if you are using satellite as a base, we'll be able to see the geography like roads and hills anyway. Alternately, for your basemap, use the 'terrain' view instead of 'default' or 'satellite'. Finally, consider just showing the lines themselves - not the stations. If you're talking about the overall routing, including the station dots is more clutter than utility. Thanks for making these, though!
Just one thing, no line branches! BART due to lots of interlining (although some might have argue that BART lines are more like branches than actual lines) can be extremely vulnerable to serivice delays and limits the amount of frequency a train can have. So, that is the other thing other than making sure its grade separated subway (in or over the surface).
Perhaps. Some cities have plenty of branch lines and get away with it and have a better system for it, particularly London. Even the recently finished Elizabeth line has branches. But I also am not opposed to separating any branchlines I have in my map, it was partly done for just not making the map look too messy.
I completely agree with extending the C line to Norwalk Metrolink. I've biked that stretch of Imperial Hwy to transfer and the traffic is very uninviting. And yes, remake the Pacific Electric to Orange County lol
I'd recommend some improved editing in the form of smooth translations between parts of the map rather than jump cuts so we don't lose context and then adding what you changed after that as it's kind of hard to follow this video without knowing the names or everything else beforehand.
100%. I'm very new to this and would love to learn how to do that! I don't think I'm quite there yet but what I will do next time at least is show the before and after of each change with every zoom in. Should help out.
Have you heard of "Los Angelist" on TH-cam? He has a similar-ish fantasy map of Metro, but rebuilt from Pacific Electric. He did a three part series on it about 5 years ago. He's not active anymore (but the videos are still there), but from what I remember when I watched it, his ideas were very optimistic to say the least lol
@@alexanderrotmensz I found it, but I think TH-cam automatically deletes links in comments. It's weird, but you have to type it all one word "LosAngelist" to find it. It starts at 14th video down from newest
The northern extension of the K line should go down Fairfax instead of La Brea. There is a lot more density and shopping on Fairfax, not to mention destinations like LACMA, The Petersen Automotive Museum, The La Brea Tar Pits, The Grove, The Farmers Market, and Fairfax Highschool.
In my fantasy I think I would convert the A and E lines into a proper metro. Obviously it's super difficult since the infrastructure exists already but I think that for such long distances like the A line, it should be metro so it doesn't take so long to get end to end. Long Beach to Azusa is like the distance some commuter rail trains travel in New England where I grew up. Only two MBTA commuter rail lines are longer and those have limited service to their furthest extents.
(besides $$$) I don't see why they couldn't just throw a tunnel underneath and turn the above ground tracks into a tramway of some sort, add stops, slower speed, meet at hubs... certainly seems like the density should exist but I'm no expert.
What I think should be done for the Santa Ana branch, there’s an unused line just north of katella Ave, they should have it turn onto that branch at Beach Blvd and continue east, then going underground to serve a station at the Disneyland resort (Walt Disney himself would approve of this since he was a rail fan), then re emerge on Harbor Blvd with stops at Harbor/Katella & Harbor/Chapman to serve Anaheim resort, Harbor/Trask to serve 2 high schools, and then the Garden Grove Transit Center, while the OC Streetcar serves downtown we make a left turn onto Westminster Ave going east, turning to 17th St, we have 17th St/SAC Station serving Santa Ana College and the busy OCTA Line 57, then another stop on 17th and main making a bus connection to South Orange County (OCTA Line 83), then make an underground terminus at Santa Ana Transit center.
Oh no, no no no! I hope not. If you think Metro's planners don't know about these issues, your mistaken. They follow Board and CEO orders. No matter how stupid. Just talk to them for a bit and you'll quickly realize that they mostly get it -- they just don't have the authority. The poorly composed Board rules the $9-billion of Metro... and that's a lot of money for them to bring home to their districts, cities or buddies.
Indeed. Maybe adding more freeway BRTs like the one on the 110 with an elevated guideway in the middle. We need to start thinking more creatively in finding more efficient uses for our freeways since we probably have more than any other city in the world. Let's make what's become a negative into a positive. I've also seen ideas about running rail lines on them in some form.
This might be small potatoes but I'd add an infill station on the Metrolink San Bernardino line at Del Mar Ave. There are also some plans to add an infill station at Marengo St & N Sots St that might be worthy of inclusion. The San Bernardino line is likely to actually get 30 minute service (since it is wholly owned by Metrolink). If we are dreaming big maybe add Metrolink electrification following Caltrain.
Another line serving San Gabriel valley to the south would be good. From DTLA to Alhambra, San Gabriel, Monterey park, El Monte, maybe ending up to align with Azusa on the gold line (or whatever new name it is)!
You already have the A line and a Metrolink line down the 10. A new line down Rosemead/Lakewood could connect to the extended E line to Whittier and then down to the C line. I don't remember if the current A line has a station at or near Rosemead. If there is the Southern line could start there on the Northern end.
I like the idea, kinda... I would say, more-or-less, a subway about half underground along Valley Blvd w stops DTLA, Lincoln Park/USC LAC, Cal State LA, Atlantic/Valley, Garfield/Valley, Delta/Valley that's between Del Mar and San Gabriel, Rosemead/Valley, El Monte Bus Station, Peck/Valley, Kaiser in Baldwin Park, 7 Ave/Valley a great chance to replace some old warehouses and build some housing around the transit station, Old Town Puente, Puente Hills Mall another chance to build housing for transit make the mall mixed use hub, Nogales/Valley, Brea Canyon (Industry Metrolink), Grand /Valley, Mt. SAC, Cal Poly for now. Later, an extension to Ontario Airport along Holt
@alexanderrotmensz hell yeah D Line extension to Uptown Whittier or the La Habra or Brea. With stops Metro Center, Alameda/7th, Arts District, Sears Build on Soto perfect opportunity to convert Sears into mixed use office, retail and housing, Salazar Park, Ford/Whittier, Arizona/Whittier, Atlantic/Whittier, Garfield/Whittier, Montebello/Whittier with an underground station between City Park and Montebello Blvd, Rosemead/Whittier, Norwalk/Whittier, Philadelphia/Whittier, maybe 2 stations in Uptown one by Philadelphia/Greenleaf and another one by Whittier College, Painter/Whittier, Colima/Whittier, Whittwood Mall, 1st Ave/Whittier south along 1st Ave then merge into the ROW before Lambert and go all the way to Brea just pass the 57 to Kraemer. With stops on the tracks at Beach, Euclid, Harbor, Brea, State College and Kraemer.
As a resident of Redondo Beach, I would add more transit access to the South Bay beach cities, perhaps along the PCH corridor. It sure would be nice to be able to take a train up to LAX.
There are some supporters of transit in RB but mostly the beach cities hate transit for the same reason Beverly Hills fought the train: "Poor people on our beach! Gross." MB would fight a train like mad.
@@x--. Yeah I know they would fight it, but in my fantasy transit czar role I'd force it on them anyway lol. It would certainly make it easier for their nannies and cleaners to get there. But if we can't have trains, can we at least get some protected bicycle infrastructure? I'm tired of the nearly daily occurrence of almost getting killed by some angry mom in a suburban assault vehicle when I'm just trying to get to work. And if they don't care about me, they should at least care about the zillions of kids who get around by e-bike down here.
@@justin10054Oh man, I'm with you. If I were _Transit Czar for a Day_ I'd shutdown half of La Brea and add a train-line from Hollywood to Rolling Hills Estates and while that was being built I'd have the bicycle/ped lanes use the now blocked off lanes along the whole stretch (I'd accept any N/S street in the area but La Brea especially annoys me and is a dangerous racetrack that I want to kill dead). La Brea is not a freeway! If anyone started to complain about the lane reduction I'd say, "YOU COULDN'T MOVE ON IT DURING RUSH HOUR ANYWAY, GTFO, please" and then probably similar with SMB, Pico, Sepulveda, Huntington, and a few others that escape my brain right now. Finally, because I support local authority, I'd give local-veto over stations _but_ no road money and an additional transit tax for rejecting transit in their city. You can live in your enclave but you have to pay for the cost to society it imposes (i.e. negative externalities). Oh, and I'd probably reestablish the Metro Police with an actual mantra of Protect & Serve and start with flooding a line with Ambassadors (or whatever you want to call them) so you have a soft-touch quickly followed up by the force. And probably a requirement to immediately appear in Transit Court, catch-and-release is for chumps, for refusing to disembark when asked nicely. Using the time for assessment & case management services. I'd also eliminate the Metro Board. If only...
In fact, one of the key corridors in Southern California that could use rail service is from Irvine to Santa Monica via the coastal cities (likely a Metrolink line to serve those areas), including stations at both John Wayne Airport and LAX, with connections to existing LA Metro lines in Long Beach (A Line to Los Angeles and points east), Redondo Beach (C Line to Norwalk), and Santa Monica (E Line to Los Angeles). Part of what could be used is the K Line between Redondo Beach and Santa Monica, which would include LAX. A stop at John Wayne Airport could also serve Santa Ana via bus or light rail, while a potential stop near Westminster/Seal Beach could serve Anaheim and the eastern portion of Long Beach via bus, or light rail. Of course, anything like that would likely be decades in the future, if it ever happens.
Thank you! I don't think they really have an idea of where to go past Torrance, but yeah I think Disneyland and slicing through OC could be really popular :)
K Line probably serves CSULB and LBA, maybe even the port and arena. I’d imagine a Getty Shuttle of sorts probably. South OC would be nice though especially the Beach Cities where I live. Maybe even Costa Mesa, Irvine, connect with the Orange Line.
I recently created a concept called "Modern PE: What if they never destroyed the PE?". The LA County services included: Create a 6-track alignment on the current Metro A Line between Downtown and Watts Junction, 4 tracks to Willow and 2 tracks to Long Beach. The outer tracks will be for local trains, the next tracks in (tracks 2 and 5) are used for limited stop trains and the two inside tracks (3 and 4) would be used for a rapid service. (Downtown, Slauson, Watts, Willowbrook 105 fwy, Artesia, Willow(ville)). Several lines will use this section... DEL AMO LOCAL: Los Angeles to Long Beach all stops DEL AMO LIMITED: Los Angeles to Long Beach on limited stops (mostly current A (Blue) line) DOMINGUEZ LINE: Los Angeles to San Pedro (duplicates Del Amo Limited from Los Angeles to the Dominguez branch) NEWPORT LINE: Willow to Newport Beach via 405 and 55 freeways. NEWPORT LINE RAPID: Newport to Wilow, then via Rapid to Downtown Los Angeles. MID CITIES LINE: Santa Ana to Watts Junction MID CITIES RAPID: Santa Ana to Watts Junction, then via Rapid to Downtown Los Angeles WHITTIER LINE: Whittier to the main line at Slauson making all stops, then to Downtown Los Angeles via Rapid. LA HABRA LINE: Two branches from both Fullerton and Yorba Linda, trunk starts at La Habra then local stops to Los Nietos Junction. Express to the main line then via Rapid to Downtown LA. Trackage from Los Neitos to Main Line is 4 tracks with Whitter Line local trains on the outer and La Habra Line express trains on the inner tracks. Two additional lines based on classic PE alignments that meet up with the main line but do not continue on it: EL SEGUNDO LINE: Watts Junction-South Los Angeles-El Segundo GARDENA LINE: Watts Junction-South Los Angeles-Gardena-Redondo Beach Huntington Section primarily via old PE alignment on Huntington Dr. 4 tracks from Los Angeles to San Marino (inner tracks limited service) HUNTINGTON LINE: Los Angeles-Sierra Vista-San Marino-Arcadia-Azusa-Pomona (limited from LA-San Marino) HUNTINGTON/FOOTHILL LINE: Los Angeles-Sierra Vista-San Marino-Arcadia (limited LA-San Marino) - then via Foothill LIne (see below) for Glendora (peak hour service only). SIERRA VISTA LINE: Los Angeles-Sierra Vista-San Marino-Sierra Madre (local tracks) TEMPLE CITY LINE: Los Angeles-Sierra Vista-Temple City-Irwindale (local tracks) Ramona Section - 4 tracks (inner tracks limited): RAMONA LINE: Los Angeles-El Monte-West Covina-Pomona SAN BERNARDINO LINE: Pomona-San Bernardino RAMONA LIMITED: Los Angeles-San Bernardino (limited stops via most of Ramona and San Bernardino lines, bypassing Pomona) Sunset/Glendale Section: SUNSET LINE: Los Angeles-Hollywood-West Hollywood-Beverly Hills-Century City GLENDALE LINE (FOR SYLMAR): Los Angeles-Glendale-Burbank, then via UP alignment to Sylmar-San Fernando GLENDALE LINE (FOR CHATSWORTH): Los Angeles-Glendale-Burbank, then via UP alignment to Chatsworth via Van Nuys OWENSMOUTH LINE: West Hills-Van Nuys-North Hollywood-Universal City (via Sherman Way, Van Nuys Blvd, Chandler and Vineland) FOOTHILL LINE: Chatsworth-Pierce College-North Hollywood-Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena-Arcadia-Monrovia-Glendora HIGHLAND PARK/EXPO LINE: Santa Monica-Culver City-Downtown LA-Highland Park-Pasadena-Altadena BOYLE HEIGHTS/PICO LINE: (light rail or modern streetcar) West Hollywood-Downtown LA via Pico Blvd-East LA-Montebello HOLLYWOOD HISTORIC STREETCAR: Santa Monica & Fairfax-Hollywood Blvd to Sunset Blvd (Hyperion) IMPERIAL LINE: LAX-Willowborook-Norwalk-Buena Park-Disneyland VERMONT SUBWAY: North Hollywood-Hollywood-Coliseum-Gardena-San Pedro WILSHIRE SUBWAY (for Santa Monica): Santa Monica-Century City-Downtown LA WILSHIRE SUBWAY (for Sylmar): Sylmar-Van Nuys-Sherman Oaks-Westwood-Century City-Downtown LA VENICE SUBWAY: Venice-Culver City-Downtown LA CULVER LINE: Marina Del Rey-Culver City-Downtown LA-LA Union Station AIRPORT LINE: LA Union Station-Slauson-LAX Wilshire (for Santa Monica) and Venice lines are interlined at Los Angeles Main St. On weekdays: Culver Line and Airport Lines are interlined at LA Union Sta. On weekends: Culver Line is a shuttle train between Marina Del Rey and Culver City, Wilshire Subway (for Sylmar) runs from Century City-Sylmar, Airport Line extends to Los Angeles Main St.
This is by far the most enjoyable and informative dissertation I've ever read on TH-cam! You hopefully might want to log onto a chatsite known as "Quora"; there's plenty that you can teach, if only they were willing to learn....
I applaud the inclusion of the Disneyland Resort and the 2 Sports teams/Train Station in Anaheim. I feel that the Hollywood Bowl, Griffith Observatory, L.A. Zoo, Dodger Stadium, Rose Bowl, Getty Center/Skirball Center should have access to rail lines/subways. The 210 freeway should have a line in its median and connect with a line up the freeway going to Six Flags Magic Mountain.
I would suggest that when discussing future lines or changes that you have that line blinking on the map or some other way to draw attention to it. Most of the time I could not find the location before you were moving on to the next change.
Hi could you make a video explaining the principles behind choosing where transit lines go on a map. Im inexperienced with using transit as i live in the car centric hellhole of nigeria, only recently has transit rail come online and it is not stellar (e.g abuja transit rail). It doesnt need to be about nigeria specifically but having a general idea of what an urban planner is thinking when designing a transit system would help( also rail on a regional scale and city scale )
I might be a bit under qualified for that but I definitely think its worth talking about. Generally the idea is to follow along corridors that people travel on frequently, connect dense/popular areas and places, and link transit to other transit in order to form an interconnected system
The biggest factor in developing successful service is connecting high-density areas. Density matters. This is one of the "rocket equation formula" problems of transit -- if the area is already high density it's harder to get a train line into that area. One of the big failures of LA Metro* is the Green Line (C Line) with the lowest ridership of all the train-lines on Metro (last time I checked). It runs inside the 105-Fwy most of its route until it hits the beach cities were mostly rich people live. So it can get busy bringing the nannies from inland areas into the rich areas but otherwise sits empty for most of the day because all the stations are relatively low-density. You have to transfer to a bus. If you don't own a car, you are willing to do multiple transfers but most people want one or two-seat rides. _Obviously_ a lot more goes into it than drawing a line from one high-density housing area to a jobs center or other high-density area but that is generally the biggest factor because those fares pay the bills. * To be fair, the C-Line was a court-ordered settlement demanded by people who weren't transit experts in order to get the 105-Fwy built. LA Metro have been unlikely to build it if it was their decision alone.
@@x--. I had the idea of repurposing the green line for a through service (perhaps an LA express or regional rail line to LAX) and then picking some other corridor which is not in the middle of a median for a new line that can actually be linked to population centers.
@@jpg3702 Ooooooooo, Metrolink to LAX/Aviation Station and, if you're really daring, keep an option to tunnel to LAX. That's a fascinating idea but I really doubt the aerials along the alignment could support the heavy Metrolinks so it'd be money better spent elsewhere (e.g. extending to Norwalk, fixing the power supply issues so longer/more trains should be run, enclosing the hellscape stations to prevent hearing damage and sucking fumes, and mandating high-density development around all the stations). I guess that's the thing with some of these transit dreams. Some of the best fixes are actually housing fixes.
I thought the A line and Metrolink line, with high frequency, was fine, or at least adding onto that would come after these projects imo. Maybe I'm wrong though.
The A and E Lines are already so long that when the light railways are grade separated they all will need to be upgraded to driverless automatic light metro like Vancouver's Skytrain. And the subways? They should be similarly automated using the Skytrain linear induction propulsion system. One thing you forgot: hooking up the LAX people mover with the Inglewood sports complex people mover so that they operate as one line. This needs to be done by 2028!
with all due respect, some of these options are pretty good are actually in the works, as can be confirmed by metro employees and the board of directors. One of which being the ceiling extension to Torrance and eventually Long Beach, however having a line that connects with Anaheim would not only be a little bit illogical as it pretty much removes the OCTA line 50 service that practically runs down Katella AKA Willow AKA Sepulveda. if you really want something like an East-West extension, the best you can probably do is either extended or as far as the Willow A Line Station along Sepulveda/Willow with majority of it being underground after passing the LA River. As far as making the A, E, and K lines fully grade seperated, it almost, if not, entirely makes the entire concept of it being an LRV useless. Yes, people can be stupid with grade crossings, but at the same time, putting catenary under Long Beach Blvd, or even trying to tunnel under places like the Willowbrook and Long Beach Av right of way or I-710 not only costly but a hazard for motorists or bus routes like Metro 202 (which ngl doesn't really have too much to offer now that Metro cut it back from traveling down to Wilmington back to Del Amo) and also to UP freight traffic. Also, an extension to Ontario Airport is already pointless because Omnitrans has a route and soon will have a dedicated BRT for it to give better transfers to said bus. To make matters worse, the Flower St Jct is, without sugarcoating, absolute hell to try and take make it run smoothly with no delays. And that's just the A Line. Don't even get me started on the E Line. K Line, ehh that's a hit or miss, the only issue is making it run through LAX and having on-point connections with the APM, or making the Hollywood/Highland Station work, especially since the Walk of Fame is something you'd have to build over, and then some. Speaking of Hollywood and the B Line, while I do respect your thought process on making the B Line take over the G Line, there's another process you could think of. That being the B Line instead going to Burbank Airport and also taking the Vermont Subway all the way to Harbor Gateway Transit Center. The only reason why I say this is because the G Line should actually be a streetcar instead to reduce the costs of tunneling, with the exception of advanced grade crossing protection along the entire line, followed by the Pasadena Branch being either centerline streetcar service along Lankershim/Magnolia all the way to Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena. As far as service going to 7/MC and Union, there will be a transfer at Wilshire/Vermont between the two lines. Finally, in terms of the WSAB and Whittier Extension: The Whittier project would be good as long as it goes to Whitwood Mall. And the WSAB would unfortunately probably suffer the same fate as the K Line. Having lines that go that far would more or less make routes owned by OCTA that run along the preferred section of track. It just would lead to problems down the line. TL;DR: You're trying to put Metro at a status like New York City. It's never worked. Stop trying now.
The A line extension from Pasadena to the Valley would be great. I realize this isn’t tantalizing but try taking the 134 East during rush hour. It’s insane. 45 minutes to go 13 miles is ridiculous
We need a line from Sierra Madre Villa to Long Beach via SR CA-19 aka Rosemead/Lakewood Corridor w stops at A Line, future E Line, future Pico Rivera Metrolink Station, C Line, future WSAB Line, Long Beach Airport and CSULB.
It feels like branching is being way overused here and makes the system really complicated. Based on the way you've set up the K line to go east after Torrance, it would make sense to simplify connections on the east side of the map by making it a full loop line which mitigates the whole hub and spoke problem. Then you could do the same for the C line but have it as more of an inner / western loop. In essence, have the A, B, D, E line + Sepulveda and Vermont as the backbone lines and have C and K be connector loop lines.
This was a fun romp. I wish something like this where the transit nerds could hash it out and really come up with something viable, even if out of reach. I think there are lots of great ideas out there but I wish they could be consolidated into a big Fantasy Map where people could comment and tweak. Like, I have big dreams but I also know that realistically there are cost trade-offs and I'd want to consider those in terms of staging. I think what makes movies great is details and thoughtfulness -- same with fantasy transit maps. A. They inspire discussion and debate but B. Done well they can point the way to a better future.
More service for Long Beach: A southern branch of the West Santa Ana branch along the existing rail corridor to the Long Beach Airport, a new branch of the A line from Wardlow using the old Pacific Electric ROW to CSULB, and a San Pedro-Downtown LB-Seal Beach subway (which could be an extension of your fantasy Vermont subway). Also, a direct metrolink extension from union station to LAX and extending commuter rail on the existing Santa Fe corridor into Long Beach, which existed way back in the 1920's.
I was just about to write this. I live car free in downtown Long Beach (which is awesome), and we need faster options than the bus to get to the airport and CSULB. Also, can we just remove the 105 freeway and reroute the Green line through some actual urban centers?
I don't know about whether topography is a limiting factor, but I feel like there needs to be a line connecting the East LA area from the northern blue line south thru the orange and purple lines and then west thru the yellow darker blue line, and even further connecting to the pink line where Downey is. Then riders coming in from the east can reach Anaheim for example without first going to downtown LA. Sorry, I'm describing them by color because I don't know the alphabetical names of any existing lines.
Im not sure if heavy rail is same as light rail. an east or south ward extension of the B line would pop out on the very east edge of the arts district along the river, not down Alameda. would be good to use this to make a Boyle hights station. also the gateway line is being planned! also after shared trackage w the K and C lines, the S line can go down the old Santa Fe alignment to the beach cities. The S line should also go under the airport (underground stations because they already building the people mover) before going down century east and then turning south to sharing trackage w the K/C line until forking off toward the beach cities. I would say end End the east side of the V line at Griffith Park observatory. Id rather see the Pasadena/north Hollywood line be heavy rail (B) instead of light (A) but realistically the N extension of B line that we all want will have to be light rail anyway due to Nimbys. also maybe take the e line all they way to Yorba Linda.
1. All the Orange County stuff is out. They ain't gonna pay for it, and Los Angeles money should stay within Los Angeles County. 2. All the "take existing slow lines and grade separate them" is out. The MTA clearly prioritizes expanding the system over re-doing existing lines at great expense. And, except on the most used corridors, they go with cheaper light rail over more expensive heavy rail subway to get more areas served. 3. You didn't include either people mover (LAX and Inglewood). Both should be up and running before the Olympics, like them or not. 4. Using the Olympics as a stopping point, the only new stuff will be the people movers, the A line extension (only to Pomona), the D line extension (opening in three phases), and the K line extension (the C line will also go to LAX). Maybes include the Arts District Station on the B/D lines (just one station; any project larger than that goes from "couch cushion freebee" to a real project with real costs), The Dodger Stadium skyway (provided the NIMBYS can be defeated), and maybe the South Bay C line extension if the politics of that can be straightened out. The Sepulveda Pass project should be under construction but not finished in time for the Olympics.
1&2. None of what I have proposed passed what is actually under construction will likely not happen, at least in the foreseeable future. And I would assume Orange County would pay for their bit. And while your second point is true, I've made it clear that I do not share this philosophy. 3. They're people movers lol. Unless you're at the airport or going to SoFi, you're not using them, so they're irrelevant in this context.
@@alexanderrotmenszYou should include the APMs and the Union Station gondolas too. Ironically, there not FANTASY, they're reality. And they are rail transit projects. If I use the E line to get to the K line to get to the LAX APM, how do two lines count and one doesn't? That makes no sense. It's all public rail transit to get you where you need to go. BTW, the Inglewood APM will be used to get to SoFi, The Forum, Intuit Arena, Hollywood Park, and shopping areas..
@@mrxman581 Airport people movers are usually never included in transit maps as a standard. Once you get off at LAX station, the people mover is simply just a part of the airport. Maybe the Inglewood one should get included, but I'm still not sold yet honestly. I don't really care if it's rail or not, it's still a APM, basically a bus without rubber tires lol.
@@alexanderrotmensz What? Your logic makes no sense. It's a fully grade separated automated public rail transit. In my real world example how is it not just as important as the E and K line to get to LAX? Without it, I would have to take some other vehicle for my final leg to the airport as would be the case with either the K and E line. Your argument would be slightly more valid if the APM ONLY was for passengers who has already gone through security where it wasn't accessible to the general public. My argument is much more valid and should be included as a rail line which directly connects to a light rail line on a shared station. C'mon, they even share a station.
Just doing the extension of the K line from Redondo beach to Torance looks like its going to take 20 years. And this is along an existing rail ROW which should be a slam dunk. And now that we have finished building the Torrance train station conservatives have taken over the Torrance City Counsel and are trying to kill the extension. If we are going to get anything done we need a constitutional amendment that strips power from the NIMBY cities and gives it to the counties or to the state over all mass transit projects.
would like to see a overlay of this and the p.e at its height. would like to see fully integrated with para transit, bus lines metrolink and so fourth.
Nice seeing this. Glad to see someone making videos like this. I have some critiques from what I see though. 1. I think the next line to Santa Monica - the subway to the sea idea is very unnecessary. They should just make the Expo line a subway once it enters Santa Monica. I think it is a huge waste of money to build a second line so close to the expo. 2. You should extend the Vermont line down all the way to San Pedro 3. This is already on the books but I do think that the West Santa Ana branch below the green line is a massive waste of money. It will be slow because it will go through people's backyards and goes into very suburban parts of LA. That is a very long and slow ride through a bunch of very sleepy suburbs to Santa Ana. I think this is path dependency because LA owns the ROW. That area needs a complete rethink on how to go about it. 4. I think it is a bit much for that loop up there in the valley. I don't think it needs two lines so close together. 5. The gold line east should extend to Whittier. I don't know why it isn't in the plans. The destination should be somewhere around Philadelphia & Greenleaf. 6. There should be an extension going east of the blue line near DTLB to CSULB. How about shifting down the green line extension from Sepulveda/Willow to the PCH until it hits CSULB. Then it can shift upwards to Willow afterwards and go towards Disneyland/Anaheim. 7. I think a spur off of Lincoln to the beach at Playa del Rey is a good idea. 8. Something completely different but the metrolink needs to be brought into the same system as the LA metro. Use the same tap card & everything. Just my 2 cents
1. Interesting. You're actually the first person I've seen make this claim. No hate though, you bring up a fair point. To make my case, I'd say Santa Monica has extremely high demand. Traffic is usually crazy, parking is impossible and expensive, tourists are everywhere, and its one of the more dense parts of the city. Currently, the E line hasn't put a dent into that, both because the system isn't extensive enough for it to be convenient, and because it's damn slow, but I think even if those two things are solved, it wouldn't solve the problem. Having another line will likely be necessary, and a line that connects to Wilshire/Fairfax rather than downtown I believe is a more relevant travel corridor for Santa Monica residents (westside people tend to stay in the westside). 2.true 3.perhaps there's a way around that to make everyone happy and keep service quick? 4.Even though it's a LRT, it will essentially function like a streetcar, so I don't think it's a big deal 5.could go all the way to Yorba Linda 6. you're onto something
I think this map is pretty good though one think I don't like about a lot of hypothetical Metro Maps is a lack of investment into the San Gabriel Valley leaving a pretty big gab in the North eastern corner. I simply feel that the San Gabriel Valley could use more lines and service then just the A line and Metrolink especially with the distance between all of those options.
@@alexanderrotmensz Maybe, but a more natural and logical option would be some kind of water taxi or ferry that would connect the beach communities. Maybe expanding the various city piers to dock the boats. Then maybe your extension of the E line to the pier would make more sense.
I was thinking about the Pacific Coast Highway being used with the K Line, as it's shown on the map that the K Line passes through Signal Hill, would it make sense to put the old Pacific Coast Highway as the main line, and then have a split that goes back the other way.
I will say connecting the A to the D line in Santa Monica Makes sense on paper, along the beach-but i do wonder about the practical use of it. It is basically a series of Hotels, with that the only way to do it at grade would take out one of the great parks in Los Angeles(the palisades) and tunneling it seems a lot on rock thats not the stabelest in the world. . I would argue doing a seperate line at say Lincoln or centinella trhough central santa monica to the D would make some sense, pehaps going to playa vista but doing a line right along the beach i donno. (point of order-The current metro station is walking distance to the pier-making it less walking distance isn't a terrible idea, but i am not sure makes sense from a budget stand point)
Transit for tourists and beach is very useful too. Rentals cars wouldn't take up as much of the road, and the insane parking situation in these places would be mitigated(impossible to find parking and its very expensive, and parking takes up a lot of high demand areas), so if anything it would actually increase the amount of visitors to the area. It's would only be light rail afterall too, so it's no biggy. You also have to remember the LAX connection too. The pier station I think is a weird idea from me yes, but would get riders, would split large crowds between those who want to go to downtown and those who just want to go to the pier (a bit of future proofing if the metro ever becomes super popular), and it could be a great marketing opportunity for metro to have a station right there. Throw in some restaurants, food stands, art walls, it could be a hit.
The problem is LA is not conducive to mass transit. It needs something else. A magical formula due the high hurdles. 1. Low population density. 2. High crime. 3. Single family homes (this can’t be changed by government fiat). 4. LA transit continues to believe everyone wants to go through Union Station and Downtown LA, which has disintegrated into skid row. 5. Homeless population. 6. Unwalkable cities from all issues described above. Instead, focus on popular venues, work areas that primarily are the cause for traffic. 7. High tax cities drive people out so potential benefits from higher density are no longer realized.
extremely minor nitpick, and I'm not not sure if it's been pointed out or not, but the K line actually won't connect to Aviation/Imperial (currently Aviation/LAX)
this could easily be half a trillion dollars in todays money. Think the economy in totality needs to be fixed for progress to be made in any field. Sad times.
@@alexanderrotmensz"In today's news: national highway funding has been forfeited this year by congress in order to address the nation's public transportation funding shortfall."....
Never get rid of the orange line! Just look at the purple line opened in the early 2000’s and will not finish until the 2030’s! Especially since people rallied against monorail for some dumb reason
I don't think that the A,E, and K need to be fully grade seperated, just giving full right of way against cars so that they do not have to wait for cars, and this should be this way by now
I get why you put lines where they are but the colours are all messed up. You have to consider depot locations at the ends of lines to serve trains on those lines. Lines shouldnt merge into a new line. They can overlap stations or cross but they shouldnt just stop being one colour and change to another. Its inefficient.
This is a really nice network. The only problem I really see is that so many of the routes are just really long. Too long for typical metro trains. Maybe something closer to BART would be more appropriate, with higher speeds and more comfortable seats.
@x--. It works to an extent, but the longer a line, the more likely there are to be cascading delays and bunching. And light rail citytrains aren't really designed for long stop spacings and high speeds that facilitate the kind of long trips that you might see on certain parts of the system. The Hollywood to Disney route comes to mind. That would be very popular with tourists if it was fast and relatively comfortable.
@@kirkrotger9208 And the actors, for that matter... I hear ya, I just think building a system with redundancy for when trains break down is the better option.
LA Metro (formally LACMTA) is run by a board that includes the County Board of Supervisors (5), the Mayor of LA & designees (4), and other powerful LA cities that can change out (4). They rule all.
Them, the city council, and district councils. And no unfortunately. Money is tight in the year 2023 for the individual and the public sector and the economy seems to be getting increasingly broken. Definitely a much bigger problem than just transit.
I second this motion! We desperately need a line on what is now CA-19 (bus route 266). Just I would add that line should also be connected with Long Beach Airport and Cal State Long Beach.
I proposed something similar because we need a N/S route on that side of town So take it all along Rosemead/Lakewood and connect to a future E line station at Washington then further to the C line station on the 105 and then down to LB airport and CSULB. I forgot does the A line have a station at Rosemead? If so, it can connect there too. It would become a hugely important line connecting to possibly three other lines. One of which already exists and the other has already been approved.
It would be nice if one of the metro lines would take you to Six Flags and other locations in Santa Clarita. I know there's metrolink, but it's on the opposite end of where most people want to go. Maybe a BRT would suffice? Then again, I don't want to use metro link cause it costs wayyy too much just to get to that area.
Perhaps there should be a Santa Clarita LRT or something. I agree not having a Metrolink station next to Six Flags is such an L. This kind of thing doesn't happen in Europe or Asia.
@@mrxman581 how though? There are no metros that directly take you there. The only way to get to Six Flags, is to take the Metrolink, then take a bus that will take you to the park. Sure, you can take the metro buses to reach the closest metrolink station to save on money, but that will take an hour to do so. My point being, that having a light rail connecting to where Six Flags or have a BRT system in the existing stations to Six Flags would help out a lot.
@@5K00O True, I guess it depends on where you live. But it's much more likely to have a direct rail connection to Disneyland and Knott's Berry Farm first than Magic Mountain due to their respective locations. Magic Mountain is a tough one because it's out there by itself. A dedicated bus to magic Mountain from Union Station would be good though. I would take that. I prefer Magic Mountain to Disneyland because of the fantastic rollercoasters.
In an ideal world Santa Clarita would have it's own terminus at the mall with several subway lines in the city (lord knows it needs it with the increasing traffic)
Why not combine all metrolink, amtrak and la metro companies altpgether? And make us able to take the light rail straight to San Bernardo and to relands like pacific electric once did? Dumb!
You should have capitalized the word FANTASY in your description. It's fun to see this, but it's a fantasy map that doesn't make sense in a lot of ways. Especially any rail extensions into orange county. IT'S A DIFFERENT COUNTY! Those FANTASY lines belong in your Orange County fantasy transit rail map Way too much focus around Santa Monica. The E line is about two blocks from the current terminus. You can actually see the pier when you get off the station. Not enough focus on East LA. It should get an extension of the B/D line underneath Whittier Blvd to Atlantic where it could connect to the already approved E line extension underground station there. Why remove an existing station on the E line in East LA.? Removing one station helps very little with the efficiency and you remove station access to a local neighborhood. You would have to keep the one in the middle of the 3 because it connects to county offices including courts and the biggest Library in all of East LA. Makes no sense. The SGV and Southeast LA should also get a N/S line conbecting the A Foothill line section with the extended E line to Whittier to the extended C line to Norwalk. Very difficult now to travel efficiently N/S with public transit on the East LA/unincorporated area. Not sure what would be the best parh but following the 605 might be good. It would basically be like the Sepulveda line for the East region of the city.. Another option could be along Rosemead/Lakewood. You would have been better served to do a more realistic fantasy (oxymoron) map that viewers could genuinely excited about and not simply dismiss as a joke. Maybe do a deeper dive on what has been proposed before by the various agencies before LA Metro existed. Including taking a look at how the over 1,000 miles of red and yellow car trollies were laid out.
In terms of Santa Monica, everything I included, except for the pier extension, is in Metro's plans. So there's reasons there for that and I will respect those. Orange County doesn't have a wall between themselves and LA. They are a part of our metro area, have thousands upon thousands of commuters and visitors into LA every single day, and therefore contribute to a lot of traffic, and make for potential riders. Yokohama is integrated with Tokyo's system, Sabadell with Barcelona, Gebze with Istanbul, I can go on. I'm not going to fixate on arbitrary lines when it's connections and lines that would generate ridership, and a train to Disneyland would be a win for everybody. And those 3 stations in East LA are all way too close together by all accounts and it's not even in a dense area. Pretty sure it's just the way it is now because its where the line terminates. There are parts of the E line that go through far denser areas and have stations much farther apart. Why not make the line slightly more efficient when these stations are just painfully crammed together. It's low hanging fruit. Yeah that line in SGV and East LA would be a very good line to add. Maybe I'll make a part two, and if so will certainly add it in. And if you want realism, just stop watching halfway through the video or something lol.
@@alexanderrotmensz Well, the extension of the D line to Santa Monica is not on LA Metro"s plan anymore. It was originally before the 20 moratorium and that was also before the E line was in the picture. It's basically what happened in East LA too. They were supposed to get a subway under Whittier Blvd, but got the Gold line instead. But this is your fantasy map so the extension to Santa Monica would make an original promise come true. As my idea of extending the subway to East LA along Whittier Blvd. Trading more neighborhood access for a couple of minutes of efficiency by removing an EXISTING station is ludicrous. It's not always about density but important locations people need to get to like county courts and parks.
@@alexanderrotmensz Oh, and those examples you give about agencies crossing jurisdictions are not applicable here. The main reason are the funding schemes for LA Metro transit projects. A new transit agency would have to be created apart from existing agencies and new funding schemes would be to be approved. Maybe your next FANTASY map should be of Orange County and leave LA County out of it. It would be interesting to see what you come up with. You'll basically have a clean slate. LOL!
At one time in human history, it was a total FANTASY of humankind to land on the moon; the FANTASY became a REALITY more than fifty years ago.... In an electronics class in high school in the mid-70s, I blurted out to the teacher, who had to be in Long Beach from Glendora: "Take the trolley!"; at the time, everyone thought I was outlandish; several decades later, it's now a possibility, although the teacher, Mr. Misenhimer, has long since been deceased.... I'm now speaking HIGH SPEED RAIL into existence.
@@CraigFThompsonGoing to the moon was an actual goal by the USA, not a fantasy. More of a realistic goal, I can get behind. Even one as challenging and as ambitious as the CAHSR. It's comparable to going to the moon for today's generation.
Map summary: goofy wtf? Actually fantasy maps make sense this just to me doesn't knowing the densities and travel patterns. Like goofy terrible idea to take the G line Busway. But second to say that the connection light rail of Valley to NoHo to Burbank/Glendale is not large compared to valley to NoHo to DTN Honestly I'm surprised you didn't say STC should be monorail. (Even though I do this trip it doesn't bother me)
More people take the 101 over the hill than the 134 to burbank, glendale, and pasadena. That's just a fact. And it's not just downtown. The B line goes through Hollywood and Koreatown, which are near other destinations like Melrose, Fairfax, Sunset, etc, especially when the D line extension opens and other lines like the ones I propose make the urban core more transit friendly. LA is the urban core, and where all the traffic is, not the foothill cities. Metro should provide as many one seat rides as possible, and if there is ever a case where it has to choose between two routes, it should go with the one that's more important and popular.
@@alexanderrotmensz BRTs are cheap and can run incredible headways (Silver line I'm looking at you) and it's just a waist of money to replace the orange line BRT with the heavy rail especially if underground. May I remind you that when the northern part of the red line was being planned a Hollywood Bowl station option was taken down because it would be the least used station. Also Burbank to Glendale connection is Insanely necessary. Also the current A line suffers from overcrowding due to it being 1hr and 42 minute ride single ride trips would need much longer cars. Look at Nandert's videos on possible projects after measure M. He made a goofy idea of having the G Orange light rail take Memorial Park to Pomona part of the A line
@@imtotallynathan7564 Yeah I still think Noho should connect up to the A line, it's in my map lol, maybe you stopped watching or something, but I just think the transfer should be for riders going east of NoHo, and a one seat for those going south. And when I talk about popularity, I don't mean the Hollywood Bowl, just the simple fact of which route is the most popular corridor out of the two.
* Sad Lakewood noises * :( Needs a eastern North-South line from Pasadena to Long Beach via Alhambra, Monterey Park, Montebello, Downey, Paramount, and Lakewood to link up all those lines without needing to go downtown to transfer. Right now all the North-South connections are west of (or through) Downtown
Most of these lines have stations every mile or so, sometimes almost 2 miles. Even mainline trains like the RER and Elizabeth line don't do that. LA is just huge lol. I can only see maybe another one or two metrolink style lines to put in. Perhaps something like a Line 14 in Paris or the Victoria Line in London would be more fitting at this point in the fantasy map, basically a line that connects major intersectional stations.
one thing i would add is a rail line along san vincente boulevard. that was its original purpose and it's also kind of an empty and confusing road anyways
The one in Santa Monica or the one near Wilshire Blvd? If it's the one in SM and Brentwood, a LRT from the VA is a good idea because it could have an underground connection to both the D subway and Sepulveda lines. Once it's out of the VA area it could go back at grade level to the beach. It would be a more cost efficient way to get to the sea from the D line provide rail transit to the Northern region of Santa Monica. I'm sure students and staff from UCLA would use it to get to the beach too.
Density is too low along San Vicente in SM. Just extend the subway on Wilshire to downtown SM, and while they are at it, just turn L and take it to Venice Beach, then it could join the Sepulveda/405 subway in MDR.
this is a fine video, i just dont understand your insistence on full grade separation. rebuilding a line is costly and hurts ridership, sometimes even more than it can help (just look at the A). as i write this im riding the LIRR, which even in the sticks of montauk runs at a smooth 60mph because of full signal priority. in the end that’s all that really matters, and you can make a hundred mile journey in under two hours.
Well it is a fantasy map. I extended the K Line to Disneyland lol. But basically the A line especially and the other LRTs were built wrong and have already fallen behind while Metro is still in its relative infancy. And while I'm glad signal priority in Montauk can ensure 60mph, in LA, top speed through a gated intersections is 25mph (so combined with station stops, line speed would be way too low), and crashes with vehicles and pedestrians are way too common. To reach competitive speeds and frequency, grade separation is the only way. It's not always necessary, but we're talking about some of the denser corridors of a megalopolis.
If we can get more public support it can happen. There is already a lot of it but not enough to fight the small but loud group of NIMBYS; I went to a metro meeting and they were spouting BS; they outnumbered us even though the majority want more transit. So yeah. Go to metro meetings. Spread the word. Maybe it can be here faster.
@alexanderrotmensz sad, but that's the reality. Anyway, you should do a video on each segments of future light and heavy rails. For example: the Sepulveda heavy rail, K line northern extension, West San Ana Branch.
We really need at least a 3 county (LA Metro, OCTA, SBCTA) overlay transit district to tackle regional subway/light rail like the BART district does in the bay.
Yes, we need a similar service like BART in the bay. I think it's called a regional metro o S-bahn.
I'm a big believer in the U-Bahn/S-Bahn, Metro/RER sort of system
@@alexanderrotmensz the only thing is, we should not follow BART'S operation funding and fare system. Other than that, I would gladly like to see a similar system like BART in SoCal.
Never going to happen since those two other counties are more conservative and have NEVER shown any desire for public transit infrastructure other than freeways. And, no, the Santa Ana streetcar doesn't count.
@mrxman581 San Bernandino has shown interest in public transit! OC not, but that does not mean we cannot have a system/district like BART.
Fun fact: Shanghai had a master plan for a large subway system in the 1960s. NOW most of it is being implemented today nearly 60 years later most construction didn’t start till the 2010s or 2000s.
masterplans work. same thing in Santiago and many others
So it took them 40 years to start building it. That seems about right. I'm sure the advantage they had is superior support from their national government.
@@mrxman581 But an evil totalitarian government. Low wages, no property rights, no environmental conservation, lower quality materials. Can't compare.
@@alexanderrotmensz lol what are you talking about bro. What makes you say China has lower quality materials and no environmental conservation when they are a world leader in green energy and public transportation?
@@arnavsrikanth China's low quality material issue is actually quite infamous, and there have been many incidents of buildings and other works having problems with eroding materials, and of course that's with just what's known, as China is a very secretive state. And they burn more coal and oil than other other nation by far lol. Well done they have good metro systems because they can seize property whenever they please and pay workers almost nothing. I'm not falling for that trap
I wish we could see a plan drawn up for Orange County; we really need good public transit over here.
That should be his next fantasy transit map
Same
I don't see OC ever creating a public transit line (as someone who lived in HB and Westminster) they wouldn't want LA connected because of the "people" it would bring down. I'd love to see Rapid Busses from Orange County too LAX or SNA which is impossible to get too unless you drive a car or hail a fairly expensive rideshare app.
@@Truth-of-the-matterThis makes me think of Orange County as a more extravagant counterpart to Gwinnett/Cobb Counties in GA, which both generally have the same attitude towards Atlanta.
Having the A line branch the way you have it here would mean high frequencies in the low density foothill areas and lower frequencies in downtown. Same goes for your version of the WSAB. But I love seeing new LA Metro content!
fair point. I guess it doesn't have to have through service past Pasadena, but I think having it connect up with at least the Metrolink in Pomona could bring in riders from San Bernardino and Riverside who would prefer not to go through downtown.
Quick Google Maps tips. If you're creating this on desktop, open the map options and uncheck the box 'labels'. You'll lose the roads, but you'll lose all the other clutter too. And if you are using satellite as a base, we'll be able to see the geography like roads and hills anyway. Alternately, for your basemap, use the 'terrain' view instead of 'default' or 'satellite'. Finally, consider just showing the lines themselves - not the stations. If you're talking about the overall routing, including the station dots is more clutter than utility.
Thanks for making these, though!
Thank you! Do you know where that setting is in MyMaps? I can't find any option having to do with labels :(
I apologize, that might only be a thing in Google Maps, not MyMaps. I hadn't realized the interfaces were so different now.
Just one thing, no line branches! BART due to lots of interlining (although some might have argue that BART lines are more like branches than actual lines) can be extremely vulnerable to serivice delays and limits the amount of frequency a train can have. So, that is the other thing other than making sure its grade separated subway (in or over the surface).
BART can be deinterlined but it involves extreme extensions of the yellow and a rerouting of the blue line it can turn the SF line into a giant loop.
Perhaps. Some cities have plenty of branch lines and get away with it and have a better system for it, particularly London. Even the recently finished Elizabeth line has branches. But I also am not opposed to separating any branchlines I have in my map, it was partly done for just not making the map look too messy.
I completely agree with extending the C line to Norwalk Metrolink. I've biked that stretch of Imperial Hwy to transfer and the traffic is very uninviting. And yes, remake the Pacific Electric to Orange County lol
I know it’s a different county, but I wish Ventura County had more connection with the metro, since the metrolink doesn’t reach every town there
I'd recommend some improved editing in the form of smooth translations between parts of the map rather than jump cuts so we don't lose context and then adding what you changed after that as it's kind of hard to follow this video without knowing the names or everything else beforehand.
100%. I'm very new to this and would love to learn how to do that! I don't think I'm quite there yet but what I will do next time at least is show the before and after of each change with every zoom in. Should help out.
Have you heard of "Los Angelist" on TH-cam? He has a similar-ish fantasy map of Metro, but rebuilt from Pacific Electric. He did a three part series on it about 5 years ago. He's not active anymore (but the videos are still there), but from what I remember when I watched it, his ideas were very optimistic to say the least lol
I'm struggling to find the videos. Would love to watch tho
@@alexanderrotmensz I found it, but I think TH-cam automatically deletes links in comments. It's weird, but you have to type it all one word "LosAngelist" to find it. It starts at 14th video down from newest
The northern extension of the K line should go down Fairfax instead of La Brea. There is a lot more density and shopping on Fairfax, not to mention destinations like LACMA, The Petersen Automotive Museum, The La Brea Tar Pits, The Grove, The Farmers Market, and Fairfax Highschool.
In my fantasy I think I would convert the A and E lines into a proper metro. Obviously it's super difficult since the infrastructure exists already but I think that for such long distances like the A line, it should be metro so it doesn't take so long to get end to end. Long Beach to Azusa is like the distance some commuter rail trains travel in New England where I grew up. Only two MBTA commuter rail lines are longer and those have limited service to their furthest extents.
(besides $$$) I don't see why they couldn't just throw a tunnel underneath and turn the above ground tracks into a tramway of some sort, add stops, slower speed, meet at hubs... certainly seems like the density should exist but I'm no expert.
What I think should be done for the Santa Ana branch, there’s an unused line just north of katella Ave, they should have it turn onto that branch at Beach Blvd and continue east, then going underground to serve a station at the Disneyland resort (Walt Disney himself would approve of this since he was a rail fan), then re emerge on Harbor Blvd with stops at Harbor/Katella & Harbor/Chapman to serve Anaheim resort, Harbor/Trask to serve 2 high schools, and then the Garden Grove Transit Center, while the OC Streetcar serves downtown we make a left turn onto Westminster Ave going east, turning to 17th St, we have 17th St/SAC Station serving Santa Ana College and the busy OCTA Line 57, then another stop on 17th and main making a bus connection to South Orange County (OCTA Line 83), then make an underground terminus at Santa Ana Transit center.
Very interesting video. Let’s hope you get appointed as LA’s next urban metro planner
Oh no, no no no! I hope not. If you think Metro's planners don't know about these issues, your mistaken. They follow Board and CEO orders. No matter how stupid. Just talk to them for a bit and you'll quickly realize that they mostly get it -- they just don't have the authority. The poorly composed Board rules the $9-billion of Metro... and that's a lot of money for them to bring home to their districts, cities or buddies.
I like your plan. maybe throw in some BRT for some more less important lines and to eliminate service gaps in the metro
good point
Indeed. Maybe adding more freeway BRTs like the one on the 110 with an elevated guideway in the middle. We need to start thinking more creatively in finding more efficient uses for our freeways since we probably have more than any other city in the world. Let's make what's become a negative into a positive. I've also seen ideas about running rail lines on them in some form.
This might be small potatoes but I'd add an infill station on the Metrolink San Bernardino line at Del Mar Ave. There are also some plans to add an infill station at Marengo St & N Sots St that might be worthy of inclusion. The San Bernardino line is likely to actually get 30 minute service (since it is wholly owned by Metrolink). If we are dreaming big maybe add Metrolink electrification following Caltrain.
Great ideas!
Another line serving San Gabriel valley to the south would be good. From DTLA to Alhambra, San Gabriel, Monterey park, El Monte, maybe ending up to align with Azusa on the gold line (or whatever new name it is)!
perhaps as an eastward extension of the d line?
You already have the A line and a Metrolink line down the 10. A new line down Rosemead/Lakewood could connect to the extended E line to Whittier and then down to the C line.
I don't remember if the current A line has a station at or near Rosemead. If there is the Southern line could start there on the Northern end.
I like the idea, kinda... I would say, more-or-less, a subway about half underground along Valley Blvd w stops DTLA, Lincoln Park/USC LAC, Cal State LA, Atlantic/Valley, Garfield/Valley, Delta/Valley that's between Del Mar and San Gabriel, Rosemead/Valley, El Monte Bus Station, Peck/Valley, Kaiser in Baldwin Park, 7 Ave/Valley a great chance to replace some old warehouses and build some housing around the transit station, Old Town Puente, Puente Hills Mall another chance to build housing for transit make the mall mixed use hub, Nogales/Valley, Brea Canyon (Industry Metrolink), Grand /Valley, Mt. SAC, Cal Poly for now. Later, an extension to Ontario Airport along Holt
@alexanderrotmensz hell yeah D Line extension to Uptown Whittier or the La Habra or Brea. With stops Metro Center, Alameda/7th, Arts District, Sears Build on Soto perfect opportunity to convert Sears into mixed use office, retail and housing, Salazar Park, Ford/Whittier, Arizona/Whittier, Atlantic/Whittier, Garfield/Whittier, Montebello/Whittier with an underground station between City Park and Montebello Blvd, Rosemead/Whittier, Norwalk/Whittier, Philadelphia/Whittier, maybe 2 stations in Uptown one by Philadelphia/Greenleaf and another one by Whittier College, Painter/Whittier, Colima/Whittier, Whittwood Mall, 1st Ave/Whittier south along 1st Ave then merge into the ROW before Lambert and go all the way to Brea just pass the 57 to Kraemer. With stops on the tracks at Beach, Euclid, Harbor, Brea, State College and Kraemer.
As a resident of Redondo Beach, I would add more transit access to the South Bay beach cities, perhaps along the PCH corridor. It sure would be nice to be able to take a train up to LAX.
There are some supporters of transit in RB but mostly the beach cities hate transit for the same reason Beverly Hills fought the train: "Poor people on our beach! Gross." MB would fight a train like mad.
I'm with you
@@x--. Yeah I know they would fight it, but in my fantasy transit czar role I'd force it on them anyway lol. It would certainly make it easier for their nannies and cleaners to get there.
But if we can't have trains, can we at least get some protected bicycle infrastructure? I'm tired of the nearly daily occurrence of almost getting killed by some angry mom in a suburban assault vehicle when I'm just trying to get to work. And if they don't care about me, they should at least care about the zillions of kids who get around by e-bike down here.
@@justin10054Oh man, I'm with you. If I were _Transit Czar for a Day_ I'd shutdown half of La Brea and add a train-line from Hollywood to Rolling Hills Estates and while that was being built I'd have the bicycle/ped lanes use the now blocked off lanes along the whole stretch (I'd accept any N/S street in the area but La Brea especially annoys me and is a dangerous racetrack that I want to kill dead). La Brea is not a freeway!
If anyone started to complain about the lane reduction I'd say, "YOU COULDN'T MOVE ON IT DURING RUSH HOUR ANYWAY, GTFO, please" and then probably similar with SMB, Pico, Sepulveda, Huntington, and a few others that escape my brain right now.
Finally, because I support local authority, I'd give local-veto over stations _but_ no road money and an additional transit tax for rejecting transit in their city. You can live in your enclave but you have to pay for the cost to society it imposes (i.e. negative externalities).
Oh, and I'd probably reestablish the Metro Police with an actual mantra of Protect & Serve and start with flooding a line with Ambassadors (or whatever you want to call them) so you have a soft-touch quickly followed up by the force. And probably a requirement to immediately appear in Transit Court, catch-and-release is for chumps, for refusing to disembark when asked nicely. Using the time for assessment & case management services.
I'd also eliminate the Metro Board.
If only...
In fact, one of the key corridors in Southern California that could use rail service is from Irvine to Santa Monica via the coastal cities (likely a Metrolink line to serve those areas), including stations at both John Wayne Airport and LAX, with connections to existing LA Metro lines in Long Beach (A Line to Los Angeles and points east), Redondo Beach (C Line to Norwalk), and Santa Monica (E Line to Los Angeles). Part of what could be used is the K Line between Redondo Beach and Santa Monica, which would include LAX. A stop at John Wayne Airport could also serve Santa Ana via bus or light rail, while a potential stop near Westminster/Seal Beach could serve Anaheim and the eastern portion of Long Beach via bus, or light rail. Of course, anything like that would likely be decades in the future, if it ever happens.
K LINE TO DISNEYLAND INSANE PERFECT IDEA, I was thinking just to LB but you got my vote!!! Which is priority today?
Thank you! I don't think they really have an idea of where to go past Torrance, but yeah I think Disneyland and slicing through OC could be really popular :)
@@alexanderrotmensz streight logic!
K Line probably serves CSULB and LBA, maybe even the port and arena.
I’d imagine a Getty Shuttle of sorts probably.
South OC would be nice though especially the Beach Cities where I live. Maybe even Costa Mesa, Irvine, connect with the Orange Line.
How about some kind of ferry or water taxis between the various beach communities?
@@mrxman581 probably could work but would need to have a public dock for each city
@@gbalph4 That's true. I wonder if they could expand existing piers to dock them
I recently created a concept called "Modern PE: What if they never destroyed the PE?". The LA County services included:
Create a 6-track alignment on the current Metro A Line between Downtown and Watts Junction, 4 tracks to Willow and 2 tracks to Long Beach.
The outer tracks will be for local trains, the next tracks in (tracks 2 and 5) are used for limited stop trains and the two inside tracks (3 and 4) would be used for a rapid service. (Downtown, Slauson, Watts, Willowbrook 105 fwy, Artesia, Willow(ville)).
Several lines will use this section...
DEL AMO LOCAL: Los Angeles to Long Beach all stops
DEL AMO LIMITED: Los Angeles to Long Beach on limited stops (mostly current A (Blue) line)
DOMINGUEZ LINE: Los Angeles to San Pedro (duplicates Del Amo Limited from Los Angeles to the Dominguez branch)
NEWPORT LINE: Willow to Newport Beach via 405 and 55 freeways.
NEWPORT LINE RAPID: Newport to Wilow, then via Rapid to Downtown Los Angeles.
MID CITIES LINE: Santa Ana to Watts Junction
MID CITIES RAPID: Santa Ana to Watts Junction, then via Rapid to Downtown Los Angeles
WHITTIER LINE: Whittier to the main line at Slauson making all stops, then to Downtown Los Angeles via Rapid.
LA HABRA LINE: Two branches from both Fullerton and Yorba Linda, trunk starts at La Habra then local stops to Los Nietos Junction. Express to the main line then via Rapid to Downtown LA.
Trackage from Los Neitos to Main Line is 4 tracks with Whitter Line local trains on the outer and La Habra Line express trains on the inner tracks.
Two additional lines based on classic PE alignments that meet up with the main line but do not continue on it:
EL SEGUNDO LINE: Watts Junction-South Los Angeles-El Segundo
GARDENA LINE: Watts Junction-South Los Angeles-Gardena-Redondo Beach
Huntington Section primarily via old PE alignment on Huntington Dr.
4 tracks from Los Angeles to San Marino (inner tracks limited service)
HUNTINGTON LINE: Los Angeles-Sierra Vista-San Marino-Arcadia-Azusa-Pomona (limited from LA-San Marino)
HUNTINGTON/FOOTHILL LINE: Los Angeles-Sierra Vista-San Marino-Arcadia (limited LA-San Marino) - then via Foothill LIne (see below) for Glendora (peak hour service only).
SIERRA VISTA LINE: Los Angeles-Sierra Vista-San Marino-Sierra Madre (local tracks)
TEMPLE CITY LINE: Los Angeles-Sierra Vista-Temple City-Irwindale (local tracks)
Ramona Section - 4 tracks (inner tracks limited):
RAMONA LINE: Los Angeles-El Monte-West Covina-Pomona
SAN BERNARDINO LINE: Pomona-San Bernardino
RAMONA LIMITED: Los Angeles-San Bernardino (limited stops via most of Ramona and San Bernardino lines, bypassing Pomona)
Sunset/Glendale Section:
SUNSET LINE: Los Angeles-Hollywood-West Hollywood-Beverly Hills-Century City
GLENDALE LINE (FOR SYLMAR): Los Angeles-Glendale-Burbank, then via UP alignment to Sylmar-San Fernando
GLENDALE LINE (FOR CHATSWORTH): Los Angeles-Glendale-Burbank, then via UP alignment to Chatsworth via Van Nuys
OWENSMOUTH LINE: West Hills-Van Nuys-North Hollywood-Universal City (via Sherman Way, Van Nuys Blvd, Chandler and Vineland)
FOOTHILL LINE: Chatsworth-Pierce College-North Hollywood-Burbank-Glendale-Pasadena-Arcadia-Monrovia-Glendora
HIGHLAND PARK/EXPO LINE: Santa Monica-Culver City-Downtown LA-Highland Park-Pasadena-Altadena
BOYLE HEIGHTS/PICO LINE: (light rail or modern streetcar) West Hollywood-Downtown LA via Pico Blvd-East LA-Montebello
HOLLYWOOD HISTORIC STREETCAR: Santa Monica & Fairfax-Hollywood Blvd to Sunset Blvd (Hyperion)
IMPERIAL LINE: LAX-Willowborook-Norwalk-Buena Park-Disneyland
VERMONT SUBWAY: North Hollywood-Hollywood-Coliseum-Gardena-San Pedro
WILSHIRE SUBWAY (for Santa Monica): Santa Monica-Century City-Downtown LA
WILSHIRE SUBWAY (for Sylmar): Sylmar-Van Nuys-Sherman Oaks-Westwood-Century City-Downtown LA
VENICE SUBWAY: Venice-Culver City-Downtown LA
CULVER LINE: Marina Del Rey-Culver City-Downtown LA-LA Union Station
AIRPORT LINE: LA Union Station-Slauson-LAX
Wilshire (for Santa Monica) and Venice lines are interlined at Los Angeles Main St.
On weekdays: Culver Line and Airport Lines are interlined at LA Union Sta.
On weekends: Culver Line is a shuttle train between Marina Del Rey and Culver City, Wilshire Subway (for Sylmar) runs from Century City-Sylmar, Airport Line extends to Los Angeles Main St.
This is by far the most enjoyable and informative dissertation I've ever read on TH-cam! You hopefully might want to log onto a chatsite known as "Quora"; there's plenty that you can teach, if only they were willing to learn....
I applaud the inclusion of the Disneyland Resort and the 2 Sports teams/Train Station in Anaheim.
I feel that the Hollywood Bowl, Griffith Observatory, L.A. Zoo, Dodger Stadium, Rose Bowl, Getty Center/Skirball Center should have access to rail lines/subways.
The 210 freeway should have a line in its median and connect with a line up the freeway going to Six Flags Magic Mountain.
A line connecting Union, Dodger Stadium, and the Ventura Corridor. Also convert the some of the light rail to regional rail and automated metro.
I would suggest that when discussing future lines or changes that you have that line blinking on the map or some other way to draw attention to it. Most of the time I could not find the location before you were moving on to the next change.
Hi could you make a video explaining the principles behind choosing where transit lines go on a map. Im inexperienced with using transit as i live in the car centric hellhole of nigeria, only recently has transit rail come online and it is not stellar (e.g abuja transit rail).
It doesnt need to be about nigeria specifically but having a general idea of what an urban planner is thinking when designing a transit system would help( also rail on a regional scale and city scale )
@@jpg3702 thx man
I might be a bit under qualified for that but I definitely think its worth talking about. Generally the idea is to follow along corridors that people travel on frequently, connect dense/popular areas and places, and link transit to other transit in order to form an interconnected system
The biggest factor in developing successful service is connecting high-density areas. Density matters. This is one of the "rocket equation formula" problems of transit -- if the area is already high density it's harder to get a train line into that area.
One of the big failures of LA Metro* is the Green Line (C Line) with the lowest ridership of all the train-lines on Metro (last time I checked). It runs inside the 105-Fwy most of its route until it hits the beach cities were mostly rich people live. So it can get busy bringing the nannies from inland areas into the rich areas but otherwise sits empty for most of the day because all the stations are relatively low-density. You have to transfer to a bus.
If you don't own a car, you are willing to do multiple transfers but most people want one or two-seat rides.
_Obviously_ a lot more goes into it than drawing a line from one high-density housing area to a jobs center or other high-density area but that is generally the biggest factor because those fares pay the bills.
* To be fair, the C-Line was a court-ordered settlement demanded by people who weren't transit experts in order to get the 105-Fwy built. LA Metro have been unlikely to build it if it was their decision alone.
@@x--. I had the idea of repurposing the green line for a through service (perhaps an LA express or regional rail line to LAX) and then picking some other corridor which is not in the middle of a median for a new line that can actually be linked to population centers.
@@jpg3702 Ooooooooo, Metrolink to LAX/Aviation Station and, if you're really daring, keep an option to tunnel to LAX.
That's a fascinating idea but I really doubt the aerials along the alignment could support the heavy Metrolinks so it'd be money better spent elsewhere (e.g. extending to Norwalk, fixing the power supply issues so longer/more trains should be run, enclosing the hellscape stations to prevent hearing damage and sucking fumes, and mandating high-density development around all the stations).
I guess that's the thing with some of these transit dreams. Some of the best fixes are actually housing fixes.
I’d love for this to become real one day.
You missed like the entire SGV lmfao
I thought the A line and Metrolink line, with high frequency, was fine, or at least adding onto that would come after these projects imo. Maybe I'm wrong though.
@@alexanderrotmenszWith Metrolink, they MUST first grade separate, then electrify....
@@alexanderrotmensz One or more lines from SGV to OC would be a game changer
The K Line extension to Anaheim via Disneyland would be amazing!
The A and E Lines are already so long that when the light railways are grade separated they all will need to be upgraded to driverless automatic light metro like Vancouver's Skytrain. And the subways? They should be similarly automated using the Skytrain linear induction propulsion system.
One thing you forgot: hooking up the LAX people mover with the Inglewood sports complex people mover so that they operate as one line. This needs to be done by 2028!
Automation tends to put people out of work....
with all due respect, some of these options are pretty good are actually in the works, as can be confirmed by metro employees and the board of directors. One of which being the ceiling extension to Torrance and eventually Long Beach, however having a line that connects with Anaheim would not only be a little bit illogical as it pretty much removes the OCTA line 50 service that practically runs down Katella AKA Willow AKA Sepulveda. if you really want something like an East-West extension, the best you can probably do is either extended or as far as the Willow A Line Station along Sepulveda/Willow with majority of it being underground after passing the LA River.
As far as making the A, E, and K lines fully grade seperated, it almost, if not, entirely makes the entire concept of it being an LRV useless. Yes, people can be stupid with grade crossings, but at the same time, putting catenary under Long Beach Blvd, or even trying to tunnel under places like the Willowbrook and Long Beach Av right of way or I-710 not only costly but a hazard for motorists or bus routes like Metro 202 (which ngl doesn't really have too much to offer now that Metro cut it back from traveling down to Wilmington back to Del Amo) and also to UP freight traffic. Also, an extension to Ontario Airport is already pointless because Omnitrans has a route and soon will have a dedicated BRT for it to give better transfers to said bus. To make matters worse, the Flower St Jct is, without sugarcoating, absolute hell to try and take make it run smoothly with no delays. And that's just the A Line. Don't even get me started on the E Line. K Line, ehh that's a hit or miss, the only issue is making it run through LAX and having on-point connections with the APM, or making the Hollywood/Highland Station work, especially since the Walk of Fame is something you'd have to build over, and then some.
Speaking of Hollywood and the B Line, while I do respect your thought process on making the B Line take over the G Line, there's another process you could think of. That being the B Line instead going to Burbank Airport and also taking the Vermont Subway all the way to Harbor Gateway Transit Center. The only reason why I say this is because the G Line should actually be a streetcar instead to reduce the costs of tunneling, with the exception of advanced grade crossing protection along the entire line, followed by the Pasadena Branch being either centerline streetcar service along Lankershim/Magnolia all the way to Burbank, Glendale, and Pasadena. As far as service going to 7/MC and Union, there will be a transfer at Wilshire/Vermont between the two lines.
Finally, in terms of the WSAB and Whittier Extension: The Whittier project would be good as long as it goes to Whitwood Mall. And the WSAB would unfortunately probably suffer the same fate as the K Line. Having lines that go that far would more or less make routes owned by OCTA that run along the preferred section of track. It just would lead to problems down the line.
TL;DR: You're trying to put Metro at a status like New York City. It's never worked. Stop trying now.
The A line extension from Pasadena to the Valley would be great. I realize this isn’t tantalizing but try taking the 134 East during rush hour. It’s insane. 45 minutes to go 13 miles is ridiculous
We need a line from Sierra Madre Villa to Long Beach via SR CA-19 aka Rosemead/Lakewood Corridor w stops at A Line, future E Line, future Pico Rivera Metrolink Station, C Line, future WSAB Line, Long Beach Airport and CSULB.
Ive had a fantasy system for the LA area for years.
I change it whwn reality governs.
I use the color & letter system.
It feels like branching is being way overused here and makes the system really complicated. Based on the way you've set up the K line to go east after Torrance, it would make sense to simplify connections on the east side of the map by making it a full loop line which mitigates the whole hub and spoke problem. Then you could do the same for the C line but have it as more of an inner / western loop. In essence, have the A, B, D, E line + Sepulveda and Vermont as the backbone lines and have C and K be connector loop lines.
alex, you’re riding along the urbanist channel growth on youtube, that’s how i got your video on my youtube home recommend!
thank you for the reassurance! love the support :)
This was a fun romp.
I wish something like this where the transit nerds could hash it out and really come up with something viable, even if out of reach. I think there are lots of great ideas out there but I wish they could be consolidated into a big Fantasy Map where people could comment and tweak.
Like, I have big dreams but I also know that realistically there are cost trade-offs and I'd want to consider those in terms of staging. I think what makes movies great is details and thoughtfulness -- same with fantasy transit maps. A. They inspire discussion and debate but B. Done well they can point the way to a better future.
More service for Long Beach: A southern branch of the West Santa Ana branch along the existing rail corridor to the Long Beach Airport, a new branch of the A line from Wardlow using the old Pacific Electric ROW to CSULB, and a San Pedro-Downtown LB-Seal Beach subway (which could be an extension of your fantasy Vermont subway). Also, a direct metrolink extension from union station to LAX and extending commuter rail on the existing Santa Fe corridor into Long Beach, which existed way back in the 1920's.
Definitely for the part 2
I was just about to write this. I live car free in downtown Long Beach (which is awesome), and we need faster options than the bus to get to the airport and CSULB. Also, can we just remove the 105 freeway and reroute the Green line through some actual urban centers?
I don't know about whether topography is a limiting factor, but I feel like there needs to be a line connecting the East LA area from the northern blue line south thru the orange and purple lines and then west thru the yellow darker blue line, and even further connecting to the pink line where Downey is. Then riders coming in from the east can reach Anaheim for example without first going to downtown LA. Sorry, I'm describing them by color because I don't know the alphabetical names of any existing lines.
Im not sure if heavy rail is same as light rail. an east or south ward extension of the B line would pop out on the very east edge of the arts district along the river, not down Alameda. would be good to use this to make a Boyle hights station. also the gateway line is being planned! also after shared trackage w the K and C lines, the S line can go down the old Santa Fe alignment to the beach cities. The S line should also go under the airport (underground stations because they already building the people mover) before going down century east and then turning south to sharing trackage w the K/C line until forking off toward the beach cities. I would say end End the east side of the V line at Griffith Park observatory. Id rather see the Pasadena/north Hollywood line be heavy rail (B) instead of light (A) but realistically the N extension of B line that we all want will have to be light rail anyway due to Nimbys. also maybe take the e line all they way to Yorba Linda.
1. All the Orange County stuff is out. They ain't gonna pay for it, and Los Angeles money should stay within Los Angeles County.
2. All the "take existing slow lines and grade separate them" is out. The MTA clearly prioritizes expanding the system over re-doing existing lines at great expense. And, except on the most used corridors, they go with cheaper light rail over more expensive heavy rail subway to get more areas served.
3. You didn't include either people mover (LAX and Inglewood). Both should be up and running before the Olympics, like them or not.
4. Using the Olympics as a stopping point, the only new stuff will be the people movers, the A line extension (only to Pomona), the D line extension (opening in three phases), and the K line extension (the C line will also go to LAX). Maybes include the Arts District Station on the B/D lines (just one station; any project larger than that goes from "couch cushion freebee" to a real project with real costs), The Dodger Stadium skyway (provided the NIMBYS can be defeated), and maybe the South Bay C line extension if the politics of that can be straightened out. The Sepulveda Pass project should be under construction but not finished in time for the Olympics.
1&2. None of what I have proposed passed what is actually under construction will likely not happen, at least in the foreseeable future. And I would assume Orange County would pay for their bit. And while your second point is true, I've made it clear that I do not share this philosophy.
3. They're people movers lol. Unless you're at the airport or going to SoFi, you're not using them, so they're irrelevant in this context.
@@alexanderrotmenszYou should include the APMs and the Union Station gondolas too. Ironically, there not FANTASY, they're reality. And they are rail transit projects. If I use the E line to get to the K line to get to the LAX APM, how do two lines count and one doesn't? That makes no sense. It's all public rail transit to get you where you need to go.
BTW, the Inglewood APM will be used to get to SoFi, The Forum, Intuit Arena, Hollywood Park, and shopping areas..
@@mrxman581 Airport people movers are usually never included in transit maps as a standard. Once you get off at LAX station, the people mover is simply just a part of the airport. Maybe the Inglewood one should get included, but I'm still not sold yet honestly. I don't really care if it's rail or not, it's still a APM, basically a bus without rubber tires lol.
@@alexanderrotmensz What? Your logic makes no sense. It's a fully grade separated automated public rail transit. In my real world example how is it not just as important as the E and K line to get to LAX? Without it, I would have to take some other vehicle for my final leg to the airport as would be the case with either the K and E line.
Your argument would be slightly more valid if the APM ONLY was for passengers who has already gone through security where it wasn't accessible to the general public.
My argument is much more valid and should be included as a rail line which directly connects to a light rail line on a shared station. C'mon, they even share a station.
Just doing the extension of the K line from Redondo beach to Torance looks like its going to take 20 years. And this is along an existing rail ROW which should be a slam dunk. And now that we have finished building the Torrance train station conservatives have taken over the Torrance City Counsel and are trying to kill the extension. If we are going to get anything done we need a constitutional amendment that strips power from the NIMBY cities and gives it to the counties or to the state over all mass transit projects.
This is great but my only ask is that there is at least one limited stop express subway line, similar to how they’re used in NYC.
i'm with it
Now all we need is some passengers!
I would highlight the specific lines you're talking about, kinda confusing without
would like to see a overlay of this and the p.e at its height. would like to see fully integrated with para transit, bus lines metrolink and so fourth.
great video! thanks
Nice seeing this. Glad to see someone making videos like this. I have some critiques from what I see though.
1. I think the next line to Santa Monica - the subway to the sea idea is very unnecessary. They should just make the Expo line a subway once it enters Santa Monica. I think it is a huge waste of money to build a second line so close to the expo.
2. You should extend the Vermont line down all the way to San Pedro
3. This is already on the books but I do think that the West Santa Ana branch below the green line is a massive waste of money. It will be slow because it will go through people's backyards and goes into very suburban parts of LA. That is a very long and slow ride through a bunch of very sleepy suburbs to Santa Ana. I think this is path dependency because LA owns the ROW. That area needs a complete rethink on how to go about it.
4. I think it is a bit much for that loop up there in the valley. I don't think it needs two lines so close together.
5. The gold line east should extend to Whittier. I don't know why it isn't in the plans. The destination should be somewhere around Philadelphia & Greenleaf.
6. There should be an extension going east of the blue line near DTLB to CSULB. How about shifting down the green line extension from Sepulveda/Willow to the PCH until it hits CSULB. Then it can shift upwards to Willow afterwards and go towards Disneyland/Anaheim.
7. I think a spur off of Lincoln to the beach at Playa del Rey is a good idea.
8. Something completely different but the metrolink needs to be brought into the same system as the LA metro. Use the same tap card & everything.
Just my 2 cents
1. Interesting. You're actually the first person I've seen make this claim. No hate though, you bring up a fair point. To make my case, I'd say Santa Monica has extremely high demand. Traffic is usually crazy, parking is impossible and expensive, tourists are everywhere, and its one of the more dense parts of the city. Currently, the E line hasn't put a dent into that, both because the system isn't extensive enough for it to be convenient, and because it's damn slow, but I think even if those two things are solved, it wouldn't solve the problem. Having another line will likely be necessary, and a line that connects to Wilshire/Fairfax rather than downtown I believe is a more relevant travel corridor for Santa Monica residents (westside people tend to stay in the westside).
2.true
3.perhaps there's a way around that to make everyone happy and keep service quick?
4.Even though it's a LRT, it will essentially function like a streetcar, so I don't think it's a big deal
5.could go all the way to Yorba Linda
6. you're onto something
I think this map is pretty good though one think I don't like about a lot of hypothetical Metro Maps is a lack of investment into the San Gabriel Valley leaving a pretty big gab in the North eastern corner.
I simply feel that the San Gabriel Valley could use more lines and service then just the A line and Metrolink especially with the distance between all of those options.
new vid fixes this
Extend the Metro C Line from Santa Monica to Malibu Beaches 🏖️⛱️
The C line doesn't go to Santa Monica.
that would be the natural next step
@@mrxman581 in my map it does
@@alexanderrotmensz Maybe, but a more natural and logical option would be some kind of water taxi or ferry that would connect the beach communities. Maybe expanding the various city piers to dock the boats. Then maybe your extension of the E line to the pier would make more sense.
@@mrxman581 Yes I agree 💯% the C Does go to Santa Monica Pier and Malibu via Lincoln Blvd and Pacific Coast Highway California 1
I was thinking about the Pacific Coast Highway being used with the K Line, as it's shown on the map that the K Line passes through Signal Hill, would it make sense to put the old Pacific Coast Highway as the main line, and then have a split that goes back the other way.
I will say connecting the A to the D line in Santa Monica Makes sense on paper, along the beach-but i do wonder about the practical use of it. It is basically a series of Hotels, with that the only way to do it at grade would take out one of the great parks in Los Angeles(the palisades) and tunneling it seems a lot on rock thats not the stabelest in the world. .
I would argue doing a seperate line at say Lincoln or centinella trhough central santa monica to the D would make some sense, pehaps going to playa vista but doing a line right along the beach i donno.
(point of order-The current metro station is walking distance to the pier-making it less walking distance isn't a terrible idea, but i am not sure makes sense from a budget stand point)
Transit for tourists and beach is very useful too. Rentals cars wouldn't take up as much of the road, and the insane parking situation in these places would be mitigated(impossible to find parking and its very expensive, and parking takes up a lot of high demand areas), so if anything it would actually increase the amount of visitors to the area. It's would only be light rail afterall too, so it's no biggy. You also have to remember the LAX connection too.
The pier station I think is a weird idea from me yes, but would get riders, would split large crowds between those who want to go to downtown and those who just want to go to the pier (a bit of future proofing if the metro ever becomes super popular), and it could be a great marketing opportunity for metro to have a station right there. Throw in some restaurants, food stands, art walls, it could be a hit.
Missed the opportunity to do transport by boat
The problem is LA is not conducive to mass transit. It needs something else. A magical formula due the high hurdles.
1. Low population density.
2. High crime.
3. Single family homes (this can’t be changed by government fiat).
4. LA transit continues to believe everyone wants to go through Union Station and Downtown LA, which has disintegrated into skid row.
5. Homeless population.
6. Unwalkable cities from all issues described above.
Instead, focus on popular venues, work areas that primarily are the cause for traffic.
7. High tax cities drive people out so potential benefits from higher density are no longer realized.
extremely minor nitpick, and I'm not not sure if it's been pointed out or not, but the K line actually won't connect to Aviation/Imperial (currently Aviation/LAX)
True, but maybe it should haha
I'm down with it! Now, we need to get more funding...
this could easily be half a trillion dollars in todays money. Think the economy in totality needs to be fixed for progress to be made in any field. Sad times.
@@alexanderrotmensz"In today's news: national highway funding has been forfeited this year by congress in order to address the nation's public transportation funding shortfall."....
Why not a direct route from LAX to LA UNION. Your plan still shows basically 3 lines to get to LA Union.
Never get rid of the orange line! Just look at the purple line opened in the early 2000’s and will not finish until the 2030’s! Especially since people rallied against monorail for some dumb reason
I don't think that the A,E, and K need to be fully grade seperated, just giving full right of way against cars so that they do not have to wait for cars, and this should be this way by now
We need a Vermont Subway into the South Bay!
How about a branch connecting the Rose 🌹 Bowl in Pasadena?
"AAARRRRGGGGHHH!! Devil's Gate Dam just broke! "!
Don’t forget the J Line!
Please connect Knott's Berry Farm on the route heading to The Disneyland Resort
I get why you put lines where they are but the colours are all messed up. You have to consider depot locations at the ends of lines to serve trains on those lines. Lines shouldnt merge into a new line. They can overlap stations or cross but they shouldnt just stop being one colour and change to another. Its inefficient.
you should do a video like this for chicago!!
Potentially! I would have to learn Chicago first, but that would be fun
Great ideas. But I’m sorry to see all three of my neighborhoods - Northridge, San Pedro, and Tujunga- left out
Northridge got the Reseda LRT and Metrolink. San Pedro and Tujunga for part 2
This is a really nice network. The only problem I really see is that so many of the routes are just really long. Too long for typical metro trains. Maybe something closer to BART would be more appropriate, with higher speeds and more comfortable seats.
Idk, they decided to connect the Blue and Gold lines into one long mega-line... which baffles me, if that works, why not others?
Kind of inevitable in such a big city
@x--. It works to an extent, but the longer a line, the more likely there are to be cascading delays and bunching. And light rail citytrains aren't really designed for long stop spacings and high speeds that facilitate the kind of long trips that you might see on certain parts of the system. The Hollywood to Disney route comes to mind. That would be very popular with tourists if it was fast and relatively comfortable.
@@kirkrotger9208 And the actors, for that matter... I hear ya, I just think building a system with redundancy for when trains break down is the better option.
@@kirkrotger9208 Stops are spaced out enough that full metro service upgrades could be on the cards
hey reallly long inter county k line would need limited express line service.
truth
Can the mayor of LA approve the system or the transit authority? Also Is there enough money to fund it long term?
LA Metro (formally LACMTA) is run by a board that includes the County Board of Supervisors (5), the Mayor of LA & designees (4), and other powerful LA cities that can change out (4). They rule all.
Them, the city council, and district councils. And no unfortunately. Money is tight in the year 2023 for the individual and the public sector and the economy seems to be getting increasingly broken. Definitely a much bigger problem than just transit.
A line from Sierra Madre to LBC via Rosemead/Lakewood!!!
I second this motion! We desperately need a line on what is now CA-19 (bus route 266). Just I would add that line should also be connected with Long Beach Airport and Cal State Long Beach.
Same!!
Just to clarify, you mean along basically the 710 corridor? I can get behind that
@@alexanderrotmenszNo. It's actually closer to the 605.
I proposed something similar because we need a N/S route on that side of town So take it all along Rosemead/Lakewood and connect to a future E line station at Washington then further to the C line station on the 105 and then down to LB airport and CSULB.
I forgot does the A line have a station at Rosemead? If so, it can connect there too. It would become a hugely important line connecting to possibly three other lines. One of which already exists and the other has already been approved.
It would be nice if one of the metro lines would take you to Six Flags and other locations in Santa Clarita. I know there's metrolink, but it's on the opposite end of where most people want to go. Maybe a BRT would suffice? Then again, I don't want to use metro link cause it costs wayyy too much just to get to that area.
Perhaps there should be a Santa Clarita LRT or something. I agree not having a Metrolink station next to Six Flags is such an L. This kind of thing doesn't happen in Europe or Asia.
You can also take a bus.
@@mrxman581 how though? There are no metros that directly take you there. The only way to get to Six Flags, is to take the Metrolink, then take a bus that will take you to the park. Sure, you can take the metro buses to reach the closest metrolink station to save on money, but that will take an hour to do so.
My point being, that having a light rail connecting to where Six Flags or have a BRT system in the existing stations to Six Flags would help out a lot.
@@5K00O True, I guess it depends on where you live. But it's much more likely to have a direct rail connection to Disneyland and Knott's Berry Farm first than Magic Mountain due to their respective locations. Magic Mountain is a tough one because it's out there by itself. A dedicated bus to magic Mountain from Union Station would be good though. I would take that. I prefer Magic Mountain to Disneyland because of the fantastic rollercoasters.
In an ideal world Santa Clarita would have it's own terminus at the mall with several subway lines in the city (lord knows it needs it with the increasing traffic)
YEAH PLAYA DEL REY ❤
How do you draw on Google maps?
Why not combine all metrolink, amtrak and la metro companies altpgether? And make us able to take the light rail straight to San Bernardo and to relands like pacific electric once did? Dumb!
A line to rancho Cucamonga Brightline station
facts
And then INCREMENTALLY EXTEND BRIGHTLINE INTO LOS ANGELES UNION STATION.
Lot of lines
Im in support of Pasadena
I’ll take this as progress
I would say better transit between OC and the IE. And better transit between IE and LA. That drive sucks as it is.
Gotchu in the part 2 that's up
You should have capitalized the word FANTASY in your description.
It's fun to see this, but it's a fantasy map that doesn't make sense in a lot of ways. Especially any rail extensions into orange county. IT'S A DIFFERENT COUNTY! Those FANTASY lines belong in your Orange County fantasy transit rail map
Way too much focus around Santa Monica. The E line is about two blocks from the current terminus. You can actually see the pier when you get off the station.
Not enough focus on East LA. It should get an extension of the B/D line underneath Whittier Blvd to Atlantic where it could connect to the already approved E line extension underground station there.
Why remove an existing station on the E line in East LA.? Removing one station helps very little with the efficiency and you remove station access to a local neighborhood. You would have to keep the one in the middle of the 3 because it connects to county offices including courts and the biggest Library in all of East LA. Makes no sense.
The SGV and Southeast LA should also get a N/S line conbecting the A Foothill line section with the extended E line to Whittier to the extended C line to Norwalk. Very difficult now to travel efficiently N/S with public transit on the East LA/unincorporated area. Not sure what would be the best parh but following the 605 might be good. It would basically be like the Sepulveda line for the East region of the city.. Another option could be along Rosemead/Lakewood.
You would have been better served to do a more realistic fantasy (oxymoron) map that viewers could genuinely excited about and not simply dismiss as a joke.
Maybe do a deeper dive on what has been proposed before by the various agencies before LA Metro existed. Including taking a look at how the over 1,000 miles of red and yellow car trollies were laid out.
In terms of Santa Monica, everything I included, except for the pier extension, is in Metro's plans. So there's reasons there for that and I will respect those.
Orange County doesn't have a wall between themselves and LA. They are a part of our metro area, have thousands upon thousands of commuters and visitors into LA every single day, and therefore contribute to a lot of traffic, and make for potential riders. Yokohama is integrated with Tokyo's system, Sabadell with Barcelona, Gebze with Istanbul, I can go on. I'm not going to fixate on arbitrary lines when it's connections and lines that would generate ridership, and a train to Disneyland would be a win for everybody.
And those 3 stations in East LA are all way too close together by all accounts and it's not even in a dense area. Pretty sure it's just the way it is now because its where the line terminates. There are parts of the E line that go through far denser areas and have stations much farther apart. Why not make the line slightly more efficient when these stations are just painfully crammed together. It's low hanging fruit.
Yeah that line in SGV and East LA would be a very good line to add. Maybe I'll make a part two, and if so will certainly add it in.
And if you want realism, just stop watching halfway through the video or something lol.
@@alexanderrotmensz Well, the extension of the D line to Santa Monica is not on LA Metro"s plan anymore. It was originally before the 20 moratorium and that was also before the E line was in the picture. It's basically what happened in East LA too. They were supposed to get a subway under Whittier Blvd, but got the Gold line instead.
But this is your fantasy map so the extension to Santa Monica would make an original promise come true. As my idea of extending the subway to East LA along Whittier Blvd.
Trading more neighborhood access for a couple of minutes of efficiency by removing an EXISTING station is ludicrous. It's not always about density but important locations people need to get to like county courts and parks.
@@alexanderrotmensz Oh, and those examples you give about agencies crossing jurisdictions are not applicable here. The main reason are the funding schemes for LA Metro transit projects. A new transit agency would have to be created apart from existing agencies and new funding schemes would be to be approved. Maybe your next FANTASY map should be of Orange County and leave LA County out of it. It would be interesting to see what you come up with. You'll basically have a clean slate. LOL!
At one time in human history, it was a total FANTASY of humankind to land on the moon; the FANTASY became a REALITY more than fifty years ago....
In an electronics class in high school in the mid-70s, I blurted out to the teacher, who had to be in Long Beach from Glendora: "Take the trolley!"; at the time, everyone thought I was outlandish; several decades later, it's now a possibility, although the teacher, Mr. Misenhimer, has long since been deceased....
I'm now speaking HIGH SPEED RAIL into existence.
@@CraigFThompsonGoing to the moon was an actual goal by the USA, not a fantasy. More of a realistic goal, I can get behind. Even one as challenging and as ambitious as the CAHSR. It's comparable to going to the moon for today's generation.
Map summary: goofy wtf?
Actually fantasy maps make sense this just to me doesn't knowing the densities and travel patterns.
Like goofy terrible idea to take the G line Busway. But second to say that the connection light rail of Valley to NoHo to Burbank/Glendale is not large compared to valley to NoHo to DTN
Honestly I'm surprised you didn't say STC should be monorail.
(Even though I do this trip it doesn't bother me)
More people take the 101 over the hill than the 134 to burbank, glendale, and pasadena. That's just a fact. And it's not just downtown. The B line goes through Hollywood and Koreatown, which are near other destinations like Melrose, Fairfax, Sunset, etc, especially when the D line extension opens and other lines like the ones I propose make the urban core more transit friendly. LA is the urban core, and where all the traffic is, not the foothill cities. Metro should provide as many one seat rides as possible, and if there is ever a case where it has to choose between two routes, it should go with the one that's more important and popular.
@@alexanderrotmensz BRTs are cheap and can run incredible headways (Silver line I'm looking at you) and it's just a waist of money to replace the orange line BRT with the heavy rail especially if underground. May I remind you that when the northern part of the red line was being planned a Hollywood Bowl station option was taken down because it would be the least used station.
Also Burbank to Glendale connection is Insanely necessary. Also the current A line suffers from overcrowding due to it being 1hr and 42 minute ride single ride trips would need much longer cars. Look at Nandert's videos on possible projects after measure M. He made a goofy idea of having the G Orange light rail take Memorial Park to Pomona part of the A line
@@imtotallynathan7564 Yeah I still think Noho should connect up to the A line, it's in my map lol, maybe you stopped watching or something, but I just think the transfer should be for riders going east of NoHo, and a one seat for those going south. And when I talk about popularity, I don't mean the Hollywood Bowl, just the simple fact of which route is the most popular corridor out of the two.
Stimulates Conversation, gives a goal -- Metro doesn't have that so makes sense people would fill in with their hopes and dreams. It's fun.
Nothing will get done with the lazy Democrats ,Just drive around and see LA
* Sad Lakewood noises * :(
Needs a eastern North-South line from Pasadena to Long Beach via Alhambra, Monterey Park, Montebello, Downey, Paramount, and Lakewood to link up all those lines without needing to go downtown to transfer.
Right now all the North-South connections are west of (or through) Downtown
the people have spoken, I shall provide
I think these local lines are kinda on long side fo urban Transit.
I would be in favor of having more Metrolink service to cover larger distances.
Agreed. The A line is long enough as is and takes 2 hours from end to end, and it's going to get longer.
@@mrxman581 With my grade separation upgrade to the A line, travel times would be reduced.
Most of these lines have stations every mile or so, sometimes almost 2 miles. Even mainline trains like the RER and Elizabeth line don't do that. LA is just huge lol. I can only see maybe another one or two metrolink style lines to put in. Perhaps something like a Line 14 in Paris or the Victoria Line in London would be more fitting at this point in the fantasy map, basically a line that connects major intersectional stations.
@@alexanderrotmensz True. For a fantasy map that is reasonable.
one thing i would add is a rail line along san vincente boulevard. that was its original purpose and it's also kind of an empty and confusing road anyways
Oh interesting. Perhaps an LRT from VA Hospital?
The one in Santa Monica or the one near Wilshire Blvd? If it's the one in SM and Brentwood, a LRT from the VA is a good idea because it could have an underground connection to both the D subway and Sepulveda lines. Once it's out of the VA area it could go back at grade level to the beach. It would be a more cost efficient way to get to the sea from the D line provide rail transit to the Northern region of Santa Monica. I'm sure students and staff from UCLA would use it to get to the beach too.
Density is too low along San Vicente in SM. Just extend the subway on Wilshire to downtown SM, and while they are at it, just turn L and take it to Venice Beach, then it could join the Sepulveda/405 subway in MDR.
I'm telling ya man, you should be running stuff in this state! Do you currently have any involvement in local government or any plans to?
this is a fine video, i just dont understand your insistence on full grade separation. rebuilding a line is costly and hurts ridership, sometimes even more than it can help (just look at the A). as i write this im riding the LIRR, which even in the sticks of montauk runs at a smooth 60mph because of full signal priority. in the end that’s all that really matters, and you can make a hundred mile journey in under two hours.
Well it is a fantasy map. I extended the K Line to Disneyland lol. But basically the A line especially and the other LRTs were built wrong and have already fallen behind while Metro is still in its relative infancy. And while I'm glad signal priority in Montauk can ensure 60mph, in LA, top speed through a gated intersections is 25mph (so combined with station stops, line speed would be way too low), and crashes with vehicles and pedestrians are way too common. To reach competitive speeds and frequency, grade separation is the only way. It's not always necessary, but we're talking about some of the denser corridors of a megalopolis.
They've very creative, but unfortunately not all of these future light and heavy rail projects will occur in our daily lives.
:(
If we can get more public support it can happen. There is already a lot of it but not enough to fight the small but loud group of NIMBYS; I went to a metro meeting and they were spouting BS; they outnumbered us even though the majority want more transit. So yeah. Go to metro meetings. Spread the word. Maybe it can be here faster.
@alexanderrotmensz sad, but that's the reality. Anyway, you should do a video on each segments of future light and heavy rails. For example: the Sepulveda heavy rail, K line northern extension, West San Ana Branch.