Mapmaker, Mapmaker: Regular Guy Envisions A Better Transit System for L.A.

Good effort, except it doesn't consider lines already on the drawing board, and doesn't do much for the East Side

I would have the following lines, most of which would operate on old
ATSF or PE right of way.  Three of them would go into OC, and one would
go into the Inland Empire
 

Red: Downtown Los Angeles-Hollywood-North Hollywood

Blue: Ontario A/P-(Fairplex Spur)-Azua-Pasadena-Downtown LA-Imp/Wil-Long Beach (existing
Blue Line from Downtown Long Beach, plus Regional Connector and Gold
Line north of Little Tokyo)

Green: LAX-Aviation-Imp/Wil-Norwalk Metrolink (includes existing
Green Line east of Aviation, plus extensions to the airport and Norwalk
Metrolink)

Gold: Santa Monica-Downtown LA-East LA-Whittier-Brea Mall (Expo
Line to Santa Monica, Regional Connector, Eastside Gold Line, Eastside
phase 2 to Whittier, and extension along Lambert Road and SP/PE
right-of-way to Brea Mall)

Purple: Santa Monica-Westwood-Century City-Mid Wilshire (existing + Subway to the Sea)

Orange LINER: Chatsworth-Warner Center-North Hwd-Downtown Burbank
(existing Liner, plus U/C Chatsworth Connection and extension along SP
right-of-way to Burbank)

Silver LINER: Unchanged

Brown: Terminal Market-Downtown LA-Crenshaw-LAX (Crenshaw Corridor plus shared tunnel; and a proposed 7th Street LR/Metrolink)Pink: Hwd Bowl-Hollywood-Culver City-Venice (subway under Fairfax, Santa Monica and Robertson; aerial on Venice)Aqua: Van Nuys-Westwood-Fox Hills-Aviation-South Bay-Harbor City-(Spur to San Pedro)-Willow-Huntington Beach (along Sepulveda Blvd, takes over Redondo Beach/South Bay Green Line, uses ATSF and PE rightaway)Tan: Imp/Wil-Los Cerritos Center-Stanton-(spur to Disneyland)-Santa Ana (via PE Santa Ana Line right of way)

In additional, the Downtown Streetcar from the Old Plaza to the
Theater District and South Park, and an aerial or funicular from
Chinatown to Dodger Stadium

I would also expand Metrolink, adding a second downtown terminal at
the 7th Street Metrocenter (within walking distance of LA Live, Bunker
Hill, City West, and a whole lot more); and add lines to Victorville,
Murietta, Hemet, the South Bay, Palm Springs, Disneyland/JWA, Valencia/Santa Paula, and
along the 605 and 101 Freeways

I have this in a Word Document, but I can get it on a Scribble Map image in the near future

Check out....
http://www.scsra.org/library/r...

Look and weep at the 1925 map!!! If only....

It was said earlier that it is easy to draw lines on a map, especially
when there is little correlation to actual right of ways and available space or
cost to build new lines. In many cases the “lines” drawn on the map avoid
population and ridership centers and serve areas with no population or destinations.
However some of the routes “lines” do cover needed corridors neglected by the
MTA. For someone from out of the area Lindsey did pretty good. Neglected is a
line from LAX to Whittier and east following existing rights of way, A line
form Norwalk to Santa Ana or from Santa Ana to Paramount using the PE Santa Ana
Line right of way and use the UP right of way north to the LAX Whittier Line
for accesses to LA. The “Get LA Moving” map and the I think the “LA Transit Collation”
has the best workable “fantasy” map  of
what LA transit could or should be.   

You could always go back to Damien Goodmon's first appearance on the LA Transit Scene.  He created a map which made a lot of folks go "Hmmm, interesting.  Maybe LA should do something different with transit planning.  This map was unveiled in 2006.

http://glam.fminus.com/

Hmm, looking at the map, I wonder if Metrolink should just provide more frequent and reliable service instead of blaming Metro?  The line to Covina and the grey line going through Northridge and Burbank Airport are really close/on the Metrolink right-of-way.

It also is obvious the creator of this map rarely goes into the South Bay/Long Beach/Orange County, seeing he cut of the eastern part of the Green Line (which could serve lots of people at the Norwalk Civic Center) and the possible Santa Ana ROW (which could one day connect LA&OC, and is on Metro's 30 year plan).

Well, presumably this is the suggested LACMTA system.  (Hint: the "LAC" part stands for "Los Angeles County.")

The OCTA system, that would be whole different map.

What, do you expect him to solve everyone's transit problems with just one box of crayons? :-)

Thanks for leaving out Orange County -- population 3 million, slightly larger than San Diego County. And it only goes east to Covina? You ought to get out more often, George. You have left out the worst traffic in the whole region.

If I am going to draw a system, I am going to ignore the meaningless lines on the map. Isn't that the point of this little exercise? Why should the Green Line end in Norwalk?

Orange County is OCTA's problem not Metro's. 

While I lived in the O.C. and miss it vaguely now and then,... yeah, I have to agree.  "Regional Transit" in theory is a wonderful idea - but in reality, unless you have a sword that will effortlessly cut through the squirmy Gordian Knot that is city/county/state/federal right-of-ways and zoning ordinances, plus maybe invent a working small fusion reactor that can be put on subway lines,.... it's gonna remain a fond, fond dream.

Which really sucks.  Because I'd LOVE to be able to take New York/east coast style public transit from way north of town all the way down to SDO.  But I doubt I ever will.  ;_;

If only transit planning were as simple as drawing lines on a map.

He's got lines in places where there are no right-of-ways.  What are they, subways?  So where do the maintenance yards go?  Where do the station boxes get dug?  And the boxes for the crossover tracks? Where do the construction staging areas go?

And where does the money to do all this expensive subway-digging come from?

Not to mention, boy, am I really tired of people who think it's not really transit unless it runs on rails.  

Yeah, yeah, we know - you'd use transit if only it didn't mean riding buses like the poor people do.

Feh.

This map isn't very good, I agree.  However, I believe that dedicated right of ways are the only public transit that is worth investing in.  Buses, even with dedicated lanes, are often bogged down by traffic and have stops far to close together and loading and unloading blocks traffic.  Rail (subways and light rail) never has to wait for a red light or a car wreck if done right.

I'm well aware of the advantages of rail transit.  But rail transit on dedicated right-of-ways is very expensive; we can't possibly afford to cover all ~1200 square miles of LA County's urbanized area with rail lines. 

Buses have to be part of the solution. At the very least, you need buses as local feeders to the rail stations.

And, fantasy maps aside, in many areas buses are what we have now.
 
People who won't ride transit because there isn't a rail line directly from their front door to wherever they want to go are part of the problem, not part of the solution.  They want their greenie credit for *wanting* to ride transit, but they always have some excuse for why they "can't", because the existing system isn't good enough for them.

 And far too often, that excuse is that "there isn't any transit" to where they want to go, because they don't count anything but rail. Only a pie-in-the-sky all-rail fantasy will do for them, because they're so special.

It's a big, crowded city, and transit riders can't always be exempted from having to deal with traffic.  Either suck it up and deal with it, or admit that, like so many others, you actually prefer your car to any possible real-world transit system.

I look at the Bay Area, and some other places, as an example of 'how it should be done'. Typically, you can hop on a bus that takes you to BART or Caltrain, and then a short bus hop to get to your final destination. BART is the backbone of the system, and you can mostly get around the Bay area with no more than a couple of transfers.

LA is very light on rail transit, and what we do have is pretty fragmented. We need at least a few more rail / subway lines to tie some of the major destinations together. Then use buses for the short hop routes that they are best at.

Who doesn't live a private speedy bubble? ;)  I never said busses shouldn't be involved.  Cities like SLC are investing in Light Rail very efficiently, and there are plenty of wide Blvds in Los Angeles that could lose a lane or two or parking to fit light rail.  But busses will always have their place.

I was in Chicago this last week for 9 days without a car, and I loved it. I primarily rode two bus lines--151 Sheridan which runs alone Lake Shore Drive, and the North Ave Bus.  And we averaged a block a minute on North Ave because of traffic.  It took us almost 30 mins to go 3 miles--whereas when I took the red or blue lines, even the brown line (all rail) trains were rapid, clean, and always on time.

Anyone who has a job knows you can't be late, and since this isn't Tokyo (you don't get a slip from the LACTA when the bus or train is late) Until I know that I will get to my destination within 15-20 minutes of my predicted time, I don't think most people will be willing to trust their employment in a shaky economy to public transit.I don't take public transit to work because I am required by my employer to have a car at work to drive to different facilities around LA (I am a post production supervisor), I tend to use transit more for leisure, like hopping the red line downtown from my apartment in North Hollywood to see a show or eat in Little Tokyo.  Downtown LA gets a lot more of my money then the Westside ever would, because I know if I arrive at the station at 11:30am, I'll be in DTLA in 30 minutes.  Can't say that about any other method of transit in LA.

Frankly, I'm tired of cost being an excuse.  Being penny-wise and pound foolish rarely works out in the end.  Investing in real, workable infrastructure is always going to pay big dividends in the form of an increase in quality of life for all residents of a city.  Busses are great for their flexibility, but that also makes them less reliable by nature.  A train station is permanent and you always know where to go.  Bus stops are routinely relocated, reconfigured, moved, or blocked by construction which makes it harder for a casual user to approach.

//rant over.  I love busses, I love trains, I love planes and cars.  Basically, I am multi-modal, and am not afraid nor unwilling to use transit.