German
Spanish
French
Italian
Portuguese
Japanese
Korean
Russian
ChineseSan Francisco Planner Creates Beautiful Transit Map for LA of the Future
Steve Boland is a Northern California based transit planner who spends a fair share of his time in our fine city. He runs the website San Francisco Cityscape, which used to be a blog, but is now a repository for beautiful high resolution desktop wallpapers of the Bay Area and even more beautiful high resolution transit maps. These are basically the best non-agency transit maps I’ve ever seen. They are simply stunning.
Steve’s most recent creation is a map of what he imagines to be a realistic portrayal of the Los Angeles rail system in 2030. Subway, light rail, high speed rail, and busways are all included in his fantastic map. He developed the map before the release of the 2008 Long Range Plan, but I think it seems pretty accurate. What’s more I think the design of a map is an improvement over the current Metro Rail map, because as Steve notes, simplified Tube-style maps make sense for complex systems but not so much for our rather sparse and spread out system.
What do you think?
Discussion
Both comments and pings are currently closed.
Please keep discussions civil: exercise Troll Controll.
Steve’s maps are consistently excellent and a delight — clearer and more intuitive than the official maps used by Bay Area transit agencies. Ideally, they’d just rip down the official maps currently posted in stations and just put up Steve’s versions instead.
Wow. I jut realized that the colors of the lines kind of go in order from hot to cold, or cold to hot [whichever direction you're going] in a circular form.
Counter-clockwise:
Red, Purple, Aqua, Green, Blue, Green [again], Gold
But yeah, that map is very nice!
That map actually makes the future look pretty excellent (assuming we ever actually get the money for the Subway to the Sea), though it does make the absence of a North-South Valley to the West Side line all the more glaring.
I find the lack of a northward extension to the Crenshaw line to be just as bad. And don’t get me started on the lack of connection between the termini of the Purple and Expo lines. As Dan W. is fond of saying, we need a “Coney Island style” connection there instead of, uh, nothing.
It’s a great map and very well done, which would only be better with the Pink Line.
I would hope by 2030, the Green Line goes all the way to New York Metrolink. The lack of viable North/South lines, is jarring.
I think it’s time to move beyond naming the lines after colors and to using letters or numbers or other system. Once the primary colors are exhausted, naming after colors gets awkward. Chartreuse or Mauve Line anyone?
Yes, we need to start naming services, not routes.
The colors can stay the same, but once we get the Regional Connector built, we can start offering things like the A Train, (Santa Monica to Pasadena), B train (Pasadena to Long Beach), etc. Those are just examples of what could be offered. Of course, the Red and Purple Lines are pretty rigid. No multiple routes on the subway lines, unless of course we build an extension down Vermont avenue.
This map strikes me as very sober, and therefore, rather likely to exist in the future. The most “iffy” project noted is the Subway to the Sea. All the rest of the routes are definitely going to be built (Gold Line east side extension, Expo) or, are very likely to be built, eventually (Gold Line Foothill extension, Regional Connector, Orange Line busway extension, Crenshaw line).
The “missing pieces” to my eyes are the Green Line extension to Norwalk Metrolink (probably would be a subway), a 405 line, and a Valley-to-Valley line (North Hollywood to Pasadena). The Pink Line…well…get in line for that one. I think the cities of West Hollywood and Beverly Hills should just build a streetcar along that corridor, and not wait around for the MTA.
The map itself is a nice compromise between a diagram and a geographic map like New York has right now. I would recommend MTA take this approach on future maps. Now can people stop saying that L.A. does not have a “real” mass transit system? Great map!
[...] S.F. Planner Designs Metro Map of the Future (Metro Rider) [...]
Steve Boland’s map is superb! I wish METRO would adopt this geographically-correct style rather than the pitiful-looking thing that they’ve been using the last few years.
I hope all of this comes to fruition by 2030. If not, L.A. is in for horrific traffic problems.
And “yes” Brian, the absence of a North-South Valley to the West Side [and LAX] line sticks out like a sore thumb!
Don’t know if you meant Norwalk or Van Nuys, but I’m pretty sure that’s the first time either has been mistakenly referred to as New York
While we don’t agree on the Pink Line, we do agree on this.
I love transit maps.
For people who are real transit fans, the next time you are in London, go to the London Transport Museum. It even puts the New York museum to shame. There is an entire room devoted to the history of London’s famous tube maps and how it evolved. I love transit maps and for any transit enthusiast, the London Transport Museum near Covent Garden is a must.
Consider it the most positive of Freudian slips. I meant Norwalk Metrolink.
If I really dream big, I would have a “Union Station West” where Metrolink goes directly from Union Station to the “Bradley” (or whatever name) Station, the Green Line, the Crenshaw LRT, the Sepulveda LRT, the Lincoln LRT, and a Pink Line extension all the way down La Cienega from Santa Monica Blvd., all meeting up with the LAX Air Tram People Mover and a major bus terminal.
That’s me really dreaming big!
Thanks, folks, for the compliments. And thanks to Fred for his kind words.
Scott–The very last thing I added to the map was the last leg of the Subway to the Sea. My guess is that it never goes any farther west than the 405 (especially if Expo continues out the Expo right-of-way and not down Venice), but the study area includes the full corridor, so I included the complete line.
I’m curious what folks think about the Gold Line Whittier extension alignment. It’s one of 16 being studied. Beverly and Garfield to Whittier Blvd. struck me as most logical, but then I don’t know the terrain.
Reineck and Reineck, move over
Seriously, Steve I hope information graphics is your principle occupation.
Steve,
I love how you show the busways on the map!
It’s not heaven, but it’s leagues ahead of what we have. I only hope I live to see the Wilshire Line get built… too bad I probably won’t still be living in this apartment next to what could be a Wilshire/Federal stop. (Or the VA, whatever.)
In any case, I think this would be a fantastic base system to build a strong ridership. Especially if we really get that high speed rail going, our subway system would finally rank with other good systems in the nation (excluding New York of course). Let’s get this going!
[...] reading this post over at metroriderla.com made us realize what could have been in LA, had public rail developed here [...]
I’m hoping you are all familiar with this book.
The best thing about this map is that it finally makes sense out of the Downtown connector in a way that the existing map couldn’t.
Unfortunately, it still sticks in my craw that I’ll be able to take a light rail to Ontario Airport before I can to Burbank. That seems so fantastically backwards to take Metrolink to Bob Hope, but the Gold Line to friggin Ontario.
My GF picked it for me last week, it’s really amazing. To me it’s like the ultimate book, a combination of my two favorite things: transit and graphic design. I love it!
i’m personally not a fan. it sounds nice and all, u know a connector to an airport, woohoo, but it’s ontario, so it’s just not necessary right now. the money needs to go to funding rail to LAX and the purple line extension. not to mention the dt connector, pink line, and some sort of rail to mirror the 405. i’m also for the orange line extension east, especially since the right of way is already there in the form of a HUGE bike path, which is great, but there’s still more than enough room for the busway to make it to burbank. (at the future north hollywood way stop burbank airport could have their own fly away to and from the stop and the airport.)
so yeah, a gold line extension to ontario airport sounds like a “why not” but the priority for it is so low it shouldn’t even been considered yet.
What I don’t like about the Gold Line Extension to Ontario Airport is that there’s already Metrolink that goes right near the airport. Metrolink would just have to increase service and add a shuttle or Station Link from the Ontario Metrolink Station to the terminals and problem solved! That’s gotta be cheaper than building and more effective than building a 60 mile light rail line through suburban areas. That area is made for commuter rail.
Sorry, fellas, I should’ve made clear: I was asking about East L.A. Gold Phase II, to the City of Whittier. I don’t know the territory, so I don’t know if the alignment I’ve shown makes any actual sense.
The *northern* Gold Line extension to Montclair strikes me as somewhat wasteful, but also more or less inevitable given the politics. At least it’ll only suck up low ten figures.
Preaching to the chior here, but while the Gold Line is inevitable, I wouldn’t call the Gold Line “wasteful”, for it will still be used.
And, if the Gold Line to Montclair and Whittier is the price to get the Purple Line to Santa Monica, I think it’s a price worth paying. In order to get the high-density projects we really need, every part of Los Angeles is going to have to get something, not necessarily in order of need. That’s just the nature of political deal making. Look at all the bridges that Ted Stevens and Robert Byrd had built that weren’t exactly “high priority” infrastructure projects.
Build the Gold Line to Montclair and to Whittier if that is the San Gabriel Valley portion of the “deal” necessary to get the Purple Line to Century City and then to Santa Monica. It may not be the highest priority, but that’s the nature of the beast.
The funny thing about Metrolink is that, having actually lived in LaVerne a lifetime ago, is that many people there probably have never even heard about it or considered it an option. If Metrolink ran its trains every 10-15 minutes during rush hour and every 20-30 minutes during the afternoon between and the evening later, it would transform those areas.
Job patterns change. Not everyone works 8-5 or 9-6. My boss was willing to take Metrolink to a meeting in San Bernadino, but there wasn’t the service mid day to allow that to happen.
Commuter rail is so important to New York, London, Paris and Berlin, it’s important to expand the frequency of that service and run the trains later into the night.
I imagine if you went to San Dimas and said, “you do realize that there are already Metrolink trains going to Union Station,” many people would say, “Really?”. However, this is a case where the Purple Line and Downtown Regional Connector will create more ridership on Metrolink and the Gold Line.
Expanding rail service isn’t just a lateral gain, it’s an exponential gain, because it increases the number of transfer options and the number of travel possibilities exponentially.
I imagine light rail to San Pedro, that Janice Hahn has been advocating, and extending the Green Line south is what will bring the South Bay’s aboard.
Maybe I’m waaaaaay off here, but I always thought that the Whittier Extension was like the Eastside Extension Phase II. After all, the ROW from the Sierra Madre Villa Station goes nowhere near Whittier. It sounds like everyone is talking about the Foothill Extension as including Whittier.
This line can work as light rail all the way to Azusa, but that’s about it. After there, it should run like Commuter Rail. But that would have to be run by Metro. I mean, can you get light rail vehicles to run like commuter rail (with the speed)? This would be great for the people who ride on the 210 everyday to Pasadena; I’d really like to see it built, but not at the expense of the Purple Line.
If I understand it, not to get too off topic, but there are two Gold Lines we are talking about or really a hairpin shaped Gold line anchored into Union Station. The northern leg would go to Montclair. The southern leg would go to Whittier. Then there is the Metrolink train many people don’t even know about.
I don’t think that it is at the “expense” of the Purple Line. I think its the deal that is going to keep Antonovich from obstructing the Purple Line forever.
I wonder, if instead of the Montclair extension of the Gold line, there was half-hour all-day service on the Metrolink SB line–would that go any distance toward placating Antonovich and Co.?
Personally, I’d like to see much greater use made of the core of Metrolink. I’ve seen somewhere the idea of DMUs to Glendale and Burbank.
Whoa there, you’re injecting rational urban planning into politically based public policy decisions of how infrastructure dollars spent. Those are two very different things.
I forget you are from northern California. You don’t know Mike Antonovich. No, there is never any placating him. He’s a coattail holdover from Reagan’s 1980 landslide. Also, support for the Gold Line in the San Gabriel Valley is bipartisan. Getting Antonovich to go from being actively hostile to the Purple Line to just being neutral will be part of the process and the Gold Line is what he wants.
Unfortunately, infrastructure projects are rarely decided purely on merit.
Trust me, I work in planning–I know how it goes (same here, there and everywhere). I just thought there might be some *political* appeal in using the existing tracks to provide service on par with what a billion dollars’ worth of new track would pro … OK, never mind. You’re right
The beauty of that is there is a right of way that was used for freight that is off of the San Bernadino line in Baldwin Pak that connects to the Foothill Gold Line 3 track right of way. This would enable the increase of 30 minute service to replace the single track section through Covina and allows better connectivity and more all day ridership opportunities using the existing Metrolink equipment.
As for the 30 minute Metrolink service, Transit Coalition is running a campaign to do just that to get 30 minute service on Metrolink.