|
|
Post by Alexis Kasperavičius on Dec 6, 2010 7:17:40 GMT -8
Actually I looked it up and the navigation in Audi is provided by Navteq (www.navigation.com). It also provides the navigation for Chrysler, Nissan, Infiniti, and many others. I get the impression they are the big player.
Also, if you go to Google maps and type "Sentous Los Angeles" it will zoom in on the La Cienega station.
While these are old names, I think this proves they are still quite in use - the fact they zoom in on station locations in every map system I have tried speaks to that fact.
|
|
K 22
Full Member
Posts: 117
|
Post by K 22 on Dec 6, 2010 8:07:22 GMT -8
Latest Expo official station names, from the new hardcopy Expo brochure I got last week at the Palms meeting: 7th St/Metro Ctr Pico 23rd St Jefferson/USC Expo Park/USC Expo/Vermont Expo/Western Expo/Crenshaw (P) Farmdale Expo/La Brea La Cienega/Jefferson (P) Venice/Robertson (P) National/Palms Expo/Westwood (P) Expo/Sepulveda (P) Expo/Bundy (P) Olympic/26th St Colorado/17th St (P) Colorado/4th St (P) Parking So it's just simply "Farmdale" as opposed to "Expo/Farmdale"? Also, I'm surprised "Olympic/26th Street" isn't officially given "Bergamot" yet. |
|
|
|
Post by Gokhan on Dec 6, 2010 8:25:11 GMT -8
So it's just simply "Farmdale" as opposed to "Expo/Farmdale"? Evidently, if there is ambiguity, they're using cross-street names. For example, the official names for the Purple and Expo Line Stations are Wilshire/Western and Expo/Western, respectively. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Dec 6, 2010 10:00:44 GMT -8
So it's just simply "Farmdale" as opposed to "Expo/Farmdale"? Evidently, if there is ambiguity, they're using cross-street names. For example, the official names for the Purple and Expo Line Stations are Wilshire/Western and Expo/Western, respectively. That's what I assumed. All the more reason to rename "National/Palms" to "Palms": not only is it the name of the neighborhood and it's shorter, but it's also unambiguous (there is not likely to ever be another "Palms" station in the system). |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 17, 2011 15:27:05 GMT -8
Metro staff has received requests from the community to rename the following stations: - "Imperial/Wilmington/Rosa Parks" to "Rosa Parks" or "Willowbrook" - Blue/Green Lines
- "103rd Street/Kenneth Hahn" to "Watts Towers" - Blue Line
- "Vermont/I-105" to "Athens" - Green Line
- "Hawthorne/I-105" to "Lennox" - Green Line
- "Universal City" to "Studio City" - Red Line
- "Venice/Robertson" to "Culver City" - Expo Line
Metro staff will set April 15 as a final date for nominating other stations for renaming, and then will engage in a public process to receive input on the newly-proposed names. In addition to these proposed name changes, Metro will also be presenting the concept of selling naming rights for stations and lines. An example they give is "The Target Red Line". Ick. Another thing to note: "Current Board policy requires requestors of station name changes to be born by the cost of the requestor. Staff recommends that station names only be changed when the entire line is being modified (extended)." and "No station would be renamed prior to a line opening and most likely on that specific alignment. The next scheduled opening is on the Expo Line." This has implications for Venice/Robertson station. The station would have to open as "Venice/Robertson", and then change its name only after the line opens. And, the requestor would have to pay for it. For more information, see the Metro staff report from this morning's Executive Management committee meeting. |
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Mar 17, 2011 17:19:52 GMT -8
Wow, I think I agree with all of the proposed changes, except Imperial/Wilmington should definitely be Willowbrook, so that the station name is a destination and not just a nickname.
You could also lose the "Towers" part of Watts, but that doesn't bother me much.
And I'm all in support of Metro selling station names (within reason of course).
For example, there's no reason why the Pico Blue Line station can't be called Staples Center/L.A. Live. It promotes the local businesses and Metro basically gets free money in the process.
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 17, 2011 17:53:30 GMT -8
Wow, I think I agree with all of the proposed changes, except Imperial/Wilmington should definitely be Willowbrook, so that the station name is a destination and not just a nickname. I prefer "Willowbrook", but I could also accept "Rosa Parks/Willowbrook". As long as they get rid of "Imperial" and "Wilmington", I'll be happy. You could also lose the "Towers" part of Watts, but that doesn't bother me much. I also prefer "Watts". And I'm all in support of Metro selling station names (within reason of course). For example, there's no reason why the Pico Blue Line station can't be called Staples Center/L.A. Live. It promotes the local businesses and Metro basically gets free money in the process. Well as the document says, renaming a station costs a lot of money (300k to 500k+), and most stations couldn't fetch that amount. (BTW I have to imagine, renaming several stations all at once would cost *much* less than renaming them one-by-one. All the more reason to gather all the proposals together and do them as a group.) I'd be fine with the name "Staples Center", but I could also support "Convention Center" or "South Park". "Pico" is such a useless name for that station, it says nothing about its location. Pico is over 20 miles long. And with Expo Phase 2, we will have another station within a block of Pico (Sepulveda station). This will lead to some confusion for new Expo riders. |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 17, 2011 19:02:07 GMT -8
Read page 18...it's already internally being referred to as "Culver City station"
|
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 17, 2011 19:36:53 GMT -8
Read page 18...it's already internally being referred to as "Culver City station" Page 18 of what? Do you have a link? |
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 17, 2011 20:23:41 GMT -8
|
|
|
|
Post by wad on Mar 18, 2011 3:46:10 GMT -8
Metro staff has received requests from the community to rename the following stations: - "Imperial/Wilmington/Rosa Parks" to "Rosa Parks" or "Willowbrook" - Blue/Green Lines
- "103rd Street/Kenneth Hahn" to "Watts Towers" - Blue Line
- "Vermont/I-105" to "Athens" - Green Line
- "Hawthorne/I-105" to "Lennox" - Green Line
- "Universal City" to "Studio City" - Red Line
- "Venice/Robertson" to "Culver City" - Expo Line
I agree with most of those. Watts can go without the Towers in the station name. I oppose Studio City, which begins about a mile west of Universal City. Laurel Canyon is closer to Studio City than Lankershim and Cahuenga. |
|
|
|
Post by trackman on Mar 18, 2011 5:26:14 GMT -8
IMO, the station names should correlate to a cross street. People identify with those. So, I do not support the proposed Green Line station names for Hawthorne or Vermont. Keep them as they are. The I-105 part could be dropped.
For Pico station, I think it is fine as it is. I definitely don't like LA Live or Staples. Those are place names, which can change with an ownership change of those venues. If the station should have a name change, I'd prefer South Park over LA Live or Staples. Top choice remains Pico.
Universal City has been Universal City for so long, and attracts gobs of tourists to Universal Studios, i think it should remain as-is.
|
|
|
|
Post by masonite on Mar 18, 2011 8:31:17 GMT -8
Metro staff has received requests from the community to rename the following stations: - "Imperial/Wilmington/Rosa Parks" to "Rosa Parks" or "Willowbrook" - Blue/Green Lines
- "103rd Street/Kenneth Hahn" to "Watts Towers" - Blue Line
- "Vermont/I-105" to "Athens" - Green Line
- "Hawthorne/I-105" to "Lennox" - Green Line
- "Universal City" to "Studio City" - Red Line
- "Venice/Robertson" to "Culver City" - Expo Line
I agree with most of those. Watts can go without the Towers in the station name. I oppose Studio City, which begins about a mile west of Universal City. Laurel Canyon is closer to Studio City than Lankershim and Cahuenga. I wish we had some of the Gold Line stations on here (Sierra Madre Village and Memorial Park) up for change as well. I do like most of the changes. I am indifferent with Watts Towers or Watts. Watts Towers is enough of a permanent landmark to warrant the name and of course if someone sees the name they'll know they are in Watts. The Studio City one seems odd to me as well. Isn't the station really more in Universal City anyway and that name works fine? I don't like that change. Pico has always been one of the worst named stations in the system. Convention Center or South Park would work just fine and help visitors know they can actually go to the Convention Center by rail and where to get off. If we just continue to use street names, we'll create even more confusion. We are going to have a Vermont station on the Green Line and then a Vermont station on the Expo Line and then of course a Vermont station on the Purple Line and also a few more Vermont stations on the Red Line. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 18, 2011 9:07:16 GMT -8
IMO, the station names should correlate to a cross street. People identify with those. So, I do not support the proposed Green Line station names for Hawthorne or Vermont. Keep them as they are. The I-105 part could be dropped. "Athens", "Lennox", "Watts" and "Willowbrook" are all well-known neighborhood names in South L.A. They are unambiguous: each of these neighborhoods has only one station. And in certain cases, the new names will distinguish the stations from other stations in the system: - "Imperial/Wilmington" from "Aviation/LAX" which is also on Imperial (on Green Line).
- "Hawthorne/I-105" from "Hawthorne/190th" (on future Green Line extension)
- "Vermont/I-105" from 5 other "Vermont" stations (on Red, Purple and Expo Lines)
|
|
|
|
Post by rayinla on Mar 18, 2011 9:41:47 GMT -8
IMO, the station names should correlate to a cross street. People identify with those. So, I do not support the proposed Green Line station names for Hawthorne or Vermont. Keep them as they are. The I-105 part could be dropped. "Athens", "Lennox", "Watts" and "Willowbrook" are all well-known neighborhood names in South L.A. They are unambiguous: each of these neighborhoods has only one station. And in certain cases, the new names will distinguish the stations from other stations in the system: - "Imperial/Wilmington" from "Aviation/LAX" which is also on Imperial (on Green Line).
- "Hawthorne/I-105" from "Hawthorne/190th" (on future Green Line extension)
- "Vermont/I-105" from 5 other "Vermont" stations (on Red, Purple and Expo Lines)
I will have to respectfully disagree. I've lived in Los Angeles for 20 years and I could not tell you where any of those neighborhoods are. I do, however, know the street grid and using the current station names, I know exactly where they are located. |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 18, 2011 10:28:56 GMT -8
"Athens", "Lennox", "Watts" and "Willowbrook" are all well-known neighborhood names in South L.A. They are unambiguous: each of these neighborhoods has only one station. And in certain cases, the new names will distinguish the stations from other stations in the system: - "Imperial/Wilmington" from "Aviation/LAX" which is also on Imperial (on Green Line).
- "Hawthorne/I-105" from "Hawthorne/190th" (on future Green Line extension)
- "Vermont/I-105" from 5 other "Vermont" stations (on Red, Purple and Expo Lines)
I will have to respectfully disagree. I've lived in Los Angeles for 20 years and I could not tell you where any of those neighborhoods are. I do, however, know the street grid and using the current station names, I know exactly where they are located. Well of course not everybody in L.A. knows every neighborhood. I don't know the Valley neighborhoods well at all, for example. But having grown up in Southeast L.A., I can say, the people I grew up with knew where all of those places are. I tend to give priority to the people who live or use the stations. The names Lennox, Athens and Watts are important and well-known to the people using those stations, so IMO that's what the stations should be called. |
|
|
|
Post by bzcat on Mar 18, 2011 10:36:04 GMT -8
"Athens", "Lennox", "Watts" and "Willowbrook" are all well-known neighborhood names in South L.A. They are unambiguous: each of these neighborhoods has only one station. And in certain cases, the new names will distinguish the stations from other stations in the system: - "Imperial/Wilmington" from "Aviation/LAX" which is also on Imperial (on Green Line).
- "Hawthorne/I-105" from "Hawthorne/190th" (on future Green Line extension)
- "Vermont/I-105" from 5 other "Vermont" stations (on Red, Purple and Expo Lines)
I will have to respectfully disagree. I've lived in Los Angeles for 20 years and I could not tell you where any of those neighborhoods are. I do, however, know the street grid and using the current station names, I know exactly where they are located. If you don't know where these neighborhoods are, you need to get out more ;D Using street intersections for station names is ok if you have a really small system (like using colors for rail lines). The system LA is going to build requires something more robust. It's ridiculous to have to repeat "Exposition" on every station name when you are on the Expo line. Ditto "Imperial" on the Green line; or "Wilshire" on the Wilshire line. It's redundant and silly. Using location name for station names is a part of the maturation process of metro system. People using public transportation shouldn't be burdened with learning the street grid. That's an auto-centric thinking... The station serves neighborhoods, not intersections. In the long run, your particular experience will become the opposite of norm - People in LA right now knows the street grid because we are auto-dependent. In the future, when our metro system becomes the main mode of cross-town transportation, people from East LA won't have a clue where Colorado/17th is any more than Westsides will have an idea where "Indiana" is located. |
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Mar 18, 2011 14:43:34 GMT -8
I will have to respectfully disagree. I've lived in Los Angeles for 20 years and I could not tell you where any of those neighborhoods are. I do, however, know the street grid and using the current station names, I know exactly where they are located. If you don't know where these neighborhoods are, you need to get out more ;D Using street intersections for station names is ok if you have a really small system (like using colors for rail lines). The system LA is going to build requires something more robust. It's ridiculous to have to repeat "Exposition" on every station name when you are on the Expo line. Ditto "Imperial" on the Green line; or "Wilshire" on the Wilshire line. It's redundant and silly. Using location name for station names is a part of the maturation process of metro system. People using public transportation shouldn't be burdened with learning the street grid. That's an auto-centric thinking... The station serves neighborhoods, not intersections. In the long run, your particular experience will become the opposite of norm - People in LA right now knows the street grid because we are auto-dependent. In the future, when our metro system becomes the main mode of cross-town transportation, people from East LA won't have a clue where Colorado/17th is any more than Westsides will have an idea where "Indiana" is located. I agree completely. By using locations, it feels more like the lines are hitting destinations rather than just cross-streets at every stop. A few other changes I would support (some of these are moot since several don't exist yet): Memorial Park (Gold Line): Old Town Pasadena 17th/Colorado (future Expo Line): Santa Monica Memorial Park 4th Colorado (future Expo Line): Santa Monica Pier & Promenade Wilshire/La Brea (future Purple Line): Hancock Park Wilshire/Fairfax (future Purple Line): Miracle Mile or LACMA |
|
|
|
Post by rubbertoe on Mar 18, 2011 15:38:51 GMT -8
Philip raises a good point. If a station is named after the destination that it represents, then some people might be more inclined to ride the train there. Remember, we are in the upper 99.99% of the population with respect to our knowledge of the transit system, design, etc, etc, etc. Joe/Jane Doe out there may just be wanting to go to "Old Town Pasadena". If the station is named "Old Town Pasadena", it is pretty much a no brainer. But, if the station is named "Memorial Park", then one needs to expend additional effort to figure out which station is closest to Old Town. With Google Transit now, that isn't so much of an issue as before maybe, but if you keep things dead simple, you will pick up another few % ridership based on that alone. A company named after a fruit made a pretty good business out of making things so simple to use that no instructions were often even required  RT |
|
|
|
Post by metrocenter on Mar 18, 2011 16:31:08 GMT -8
Joe/Jane Doe out there may just be wanting to go to "Old Town Pasadena". If the station is named "Old Town Pasadena", it is pretty much a no brainer. But, if the station is named "Memorial Park", then one needs to expend additional effort to figure out which station is closest to Old Town. Now imagine if that stop were called "Arroyo Parkway/Holly". LOL |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 18, 2011 17:29:34 GMT -8
I tend to give priority to the people who live or use the stations. The names Lennox, Athens and Watts are important and well-known to the people using those stations, so IMO that's what the stations should be called. I can appreciate that although I'm completely opposite. I figure that the people that use the stations daily have the least use for station names since they already know their stations. More descriptive names are for people that aren't as familiar and as LA is on a grid we should take advantage of that. That being said for some stations using community names is more descriptive than street names (universal city is a good example). If we can build that same sense of community in LA neighborhoods through station names then it's a good tradeoff. So I'm no longer opposed to using community names as station names even though I don't think that it's the best idea. |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 18, 2011 17:32:15 GMT -8
Using street intersections for station names is ok if you have a really small system (like using colors for rail lines). The system LA is going to build requires something more robust. It's ridiculous to have to repeat "Exposition" on every station name when you are on the Expo line. Ditto "Imperial" on the Green line; or "Wilshire" on the Wilshire line. It's redundant and silly. Using location name for station names is a part of the maturation process of metro system. Except that NYC uses street names for the most part. They even have multiple stations with the same name and people manage. |
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 18, 2011 17:58:39 GMT -8
Honestly, I think a case-by-case basis may work best.
Just saying "NYC does things this way" or "London/ Tokyo/ Paris/ Montreal..." isn't going to be enough.
Some neighborhoods have well-defined and easily-recognizable names. "Little Tokyo" for example. "Chinatown" for another.
Some neighborhoods have huge landmarks, easily recognized landmarks nearby. This gets trickier, and so far we have "Union Station" (the exits are inside the station, helloooo) "Pershing Square," "Mariachi Plaza" and not much else. Deciding what is a landmark and what isn't can start arguments!
(Then, there is the "Mitsukoshi-mae [the neighborhood near a famous department store]" or even "Swiss Cottage [old fashioned ale house and inn, now a whole part of town]" principle. "Universal City" is named for the movie studio, but it includes more than studio property.)
"Hollywood/ Vine" is a landmark intersection in and of itself (except that the entrance is not at the intersection, but across from the Pantages).
Koreatown is huge (if somewhat ill-defined boundaries), so we really do need "Wilshire/Western", "Wilshire/Normandie", "Wilshire/ Vermont" as the neighborhood encompasses all three.
The less well-known a neighborhood or neighborhood nickname is, the more likely that people are going to want an intersection in the name.
And of course, local community input should always be highly valued....
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 18, 2011 18:37:29 GMT -8
Using street intersections for station names is ok if you have a really small system (like using colors for rail lines). The system LA is going to build requires something more robust. It's ridiculous to have to repeat "Exposition" on every station name when you are on the Expo line. Ditto "Imperial" on the Green line; or "Wilshire" on the Wilshire line. It's redundant and silly. Using location name for station names is a part of the maturation process of metro system. Except that NYC uses street names for the most part. They even have multiple stations with the same name and people manage. And London and Paris name it after neighborhoods. So? By the way, ask a Londoner how to get to Edgeware from Hendon (districts in London a la Watts, Athens, etc..) and they won't know by roads, but they can easily tell you the tube because the stations are by neighborhoods. I significantly prefer neighborhood naming convention over streets. I feel the Gold Line goes through more neighborhoods because of it's naming compared to the other rail lines. Heck, I didn't know we had a Maravilla neighborhood until the Gold Line. It's kinda cool. I'd much rather say I'm taking a train to Pershing Square station than 5th/Hill. Get the point? |
|
|
|
Post by bluelineshawn on Mar 18, 2011 18:39:11 GMT -8
Just saying "NYC does things this way" or "London/ Tokyo/ Paris/ Montreal..." isn't going to be enough. It's enough to show that his statement that only smaller systems use street names to be incorrect. That's all that I meant. |
|
|
|
Post by James Fujita on Mar 19, 2011 0:17:19 GMT -8
Another factor to consider is how large the station is.
Certain stations on the Tokyo subway are absolutely HUGE and they link to JR or private railway stations which are even bigger. The station is a neighborhood in and of itself. Therefore, the intersection name wouldn't work, because one exit might lead to one street and another exit might lead to other street.
I'm hoping that future Los Angeles Metro stations will be the same way. Century City certainly has the potential to be larger than our "usual" station and the Regional Connector stations have the same potential. Multiple subway entrances would be possible at Bunker Hill, for example, or even the possibility of adding 555 Flower to the "7th/ Metro" complex.
I'll know that Los Angeles has truly arrived as a subway city when people use subway station names the way they do in London or Tokyo. Sad to say, we're not quite there yet.
[ Side note: Tokyo's station names are complicated by the fact that few streets in Tokyo have names... but there are districts. So, Aoyama Itchome, the Fujita family's "home station" is named for Aoyama-Dori, a major street, but also references the 1st "chome" (district) of the Aoyama neighborhood. It's not an intersection, but it's the closest thing Tokyo has... ]
|
|
|
|
Post by wad on Mar 19, 2011 4:31:49 GMT -8
I wish we had some of the Gold Line stations on here (Sierra Madre Village and Memorial Park) up for change as well. I think in another thread it said the public can nominate any other station for renaming. (I'm pitching for Pico/Rimpau to be renamed Crackton, but that's another day.) Sierra Madre Villa should be renamed, as it refers to a street that isn't a part of the public consciousness the way Colorado, Lake, Orange Grove or Fair Oaks are. Plus, it implies that the city is nearby -- it's not. Hastings Ranch might be a better name, plus it's associated with the nearby mall. A new name for Memorial Park would be tough, though. |
|
|
|
Post by crzwdjk on Mar 19, 2011 8:49:44 GMT -8
NYC does use street names for stations, and the result is a bit of a mess. There are quite a few cases of duplicate station names not just in the system but on the same line, for example 7th Avenue on the B, or 36th Street on the R. The worst one of these is 23rd St on the E and V lines, which are only a few stops apart and quite close to Midtown, and so is very likely to cause confused tourists to unwittingly end up in Queens. It's enough of a problem that the Queens Station is called "23rd St/Ely Ave", which is a bit confusing in it itself because it implies that the station is at the intersection of 23rd Street and Ely Avenue. Not only is that not the case, but there is no such intersection, and in fact no Ely Avenue at all. Ely Avenue is actually the old name of 23rd Street, from before Queens streets got numbered, which happened sometime before the subway opened in the 30s, and this name has been obsolete for well over half a decade, used only in the name of the subway station.
|
|
|
|
Post by LAofAnaheim on Mar 19, 2011 9:03:43 GMT -8
In London, it's much easier. The stations are named after Leicster Square, Piccadilly Circus, St. James Park, etc... You know where you are going. As a tourist, the London/Paris systems are much easier to navigate because of the station naming convention, New York is not.
For LA, it's easier for non-normal or tourist transit riders to identify Pershing Square, Civic Center or Union Station. Imagine if those stations were called 5th/Hill, 2nd/Temple and Los Angeles/Alameda. You think that would be better? That doesn't tell me I'm going to Pershing Square, Civic Center or Union Station.
By the way, 7th street station is unique because the name is 7th street / Metro Center / Julian Dixon. Let's ignore Dixon for now. But people refer to the station as "7th and Metro" or "Metro Center", but not 7th/Flower. See how destinations play more of a role than street names?
|
|
|
|
Post by carter on Mar 19, 2011 9:31:49 GMT -8
Even with tourism being a big industry in Los Angeles, I'm still embrace the philosophy that you should plan your transit system first and foremost to local commuters, giving only marginal consideration to tourists, because they make up such a small number of trips.
As for the Culver City station debate, I'm partial to "Culver Junction," because I like how it's evocative of the region's rail past, in the same way that Sunset Junction is. Plus, the fact that it has "Culver" in it -- even without the "city" part -- makes it legible enough for people who just want to get to the Expo stop in Culver City.
Plus, if you brand that whole area "Culver Junction" -- the presently underused space between Helms Bakery area and downtown Culver City -- I think you create some interesting and coherent opportunities for commercial and residential development.
|
|
