Metro, Your New Rail Line Names do not Work - Where is the Innovation?

The world looks at our city as the free thinking and innovative center of the United States. But even with the sense of innovation and creativity embedded here, Metro is moribund in its buttoned-down, constricted thinking. It remains a “master of communication-confusion,” despite its “Office of Extraordinary Innovation.” 

And Metro continues to create a confusing mess with the naming its rail lines. 

They had a blank slate with the first light rail, the Blue Line, which they should have called the “A” Line when the first trains started rolling. But they didn’t. They decided to use color codes for the lines. And as more lines were opened, each received its own color. 

Leave it to Metro to have two separate lines sharing the same tracks using two colors very close in hue that the distinction between the two is difficult to determine, particularly for those new to riding the rails. Even seasoned riders in a hurry can mistakenly board the wrong line and get on the wrong train. 

There are Metro Subway Lines Red and Purple, which are close in the color wheel. And depending on the printing job, the lighting quality, or if the posters have faded in age, the two colors can look too similar. This causes confusion and has caused me, and others, to board the wrong train. While they share tracks and some stations, at Wilshire and Western, they diverge and go different ways. 

It is tremendous time waster, not to mention an anxiety creator, to get on the wrong train because the color looked right. At night it is worse when you realize after a stop or two, you are on the wrong train. Then you have to get off at the next stop, wait for the next train going in the opposite direction, go back to the original station and wait for the next train in the correct direction. 

There are the Metro Light Rail Lines Blue and Expo. Here the two lines and stations share different shades of blue. I as an experienced transit rider, along with others I have spoken to, have boarded the wrong train because the color distinction was not clear. 

Do Metro and its governing Board of Directors want to reduce our carbon footprints by asking people to get out of their cars and ride transit? Does Metro want to attract new riders? If so, this color scheme for trains does not help entice riders. 

To add to this confusion, a transit APP I use, “Transit•” Ver 5.9.11, gives wrong information. I don’t know if this is Metro-owned or a sponsored APP, but there is confusion here, too. Was there no proofreading of the APP before it was launched? Is there no ongoing quality control from Metro to ensure the information is correct? Because it is not. 

For Culver City Bus No. 6 on Sepulveda Blvd, the APP lists a crossing point, and transferring to a light rail: “Sepulveda B. . .Station.” What is that? Among the Metro’s new names of light rail lines, B is the Metro Red Line 802. The CC No. 6 does come within probably ten miles of the B Line. Or could it be the former name of the now A Line -- the Blue Line with B for Blue? But here the CC No. 6 is probably more than ten miles from a Blue Line Station. 

Imagine someone new to riding transit trying to do their part to reduce their carbon footprint (which will reduce air pollution and global warming carbon gases) who must use this APP to try and navigate the transit system spread out in Los Angeles? Add to this problematic APP the confusing color codes of Metro Rail, and this person may not be riding transit in the future.  

The taxes and bonds that pay for transit will be wasted unless Metro and its Board of Directors, and others who oversee transportation in Los Angeles (SCAG comes to mind) do the obligatory customer service and concentrate on providing basic rider satisfaction, such as clear and accurate information. That would be true innovation. 

Building light rail and subways is not enough. Thought, effort, and deed must also combine in understanding what transit riders experience when riding buses and trains in Los Angeles. 

If Metro is serious about “extraordinary innovation,” they should completely scrap their names for light rails and trains and start anew. Instead of letters for each line, Arabic numbers would make more sense. They are the same for any European Language, and in the Arab speaking world, and are also used more frequently in Asian countries. 

Tourism, pre- and hopefully post-COVID pandemic, is a large financial driver in Los Angeles. Tourists ride transit. I see them when I ride. To serve our guests, as well as the city’s residents, how much better it would be to name each line with a number which can easily be read and understood by most of the world? 

As a longtime Los Angeles transit rider, I find the new Metro lettering system exasperating. For instance, when thinking of the Blue Line, the B in Blue is forefront in mind. To make the switch to the A Line is confusing, there is no connection between A Line and Blue Line. Those of us who have been riding Metro Rail automatically default in thinking to the Blue Line. Letter A has nothing to do with Blue. 

If Metro needs to innovate like someone from Los Angeles. Let’s start with the end of the alphabet. And change the colors so two lines sharing the same tracks are not close in color. 

My suggestions. 

The Blue Line becomes the Z Line. This grabs attention, and what other subway line in the nation, or the world, has a Z Line? It is slick, attention grabbing, it jumps from the mind. Innovate in an extraordinary way. That is Los Angeles. 

The Red Line should become the R Line, and the Purple Line could change its name to the Green Line. This way Red and Green Subway Lines, R and G Lines, which share tracks and stations, would easily be separated visually when posted together on information boards. And since red and green are Christmas colors, it could be Christmas year-round. G Line sounds serious. 

The now Green Line become the Purple Line, or P Line, which flows off the tongue. 

The Expo Line with its X would become the X Line. It sounds mysterious, exciting, and so LA. 

The question is what to do with Gold Line, which Metro changed to the nonsensical L Line. How about the E Line because it goes to East Los Angeles, and eastern parts of Los Angeles County with construction underway to go even farther to the east? 

Climate change caused by global warming is increasing along with its existential threat to humanity. Since driving is a major source of climate change inducing carbon gases, the fastest, indeed immediate, way to reduce our carbon gases it to drive less and ride transit more. But transit agencies and their affiliates must provide riders with clear communication and understandable information to enable them to navigate the maze of sprawl of transit in LA.