Hey, there! Log in / Register
Proposed re-do of the MBTA system map
By adamg on Mon, 03/12/2012 - 8:49am
Some people just complain about things. Not Cameron Booth. He followed up his complaint about how cluttered the current T map is with a proposed overhaul.
Topics:
Ad:
Support Universal Hub
Help keep Universal Hub going. If you like what we're up to and want to help out, please consider a (completely non-deductible) contribution.
Comments
Wow. His redesign is
Wow. His redesign is stunning. I didn't exactly agree with his criticisms of the current map (besides the circle starting at Logan), but he resolves all of his peeves flawlessly in his new maps. I was worried he would axe the key bus routes, ferries, and geography, but he really didn't at all. I was also worried he would shorten the Braintree line too much (it is a really long line geographically), but that turned out fine as well.
Also Adam, the link to the proposal doesn't go to his proposals.
http://www.cambooth.net/archives/850
Link fixed in original post
Thanks!
I like what he does, but
my criticism of the existing map regards something he doesn't fix, which is that the key routes concept is not properly implemented. What the map actually shows is key bus lines, rather than routes. The distinction is similar to the distinction in New York between, say, the Lexington Ave. subway and the 4, 5, and 6 lines.
We have some high frequency bus corridors that are not represented on the map because the frequency derives from multiple lines running on the same route. Each individual line is not frequent enough (or used enough by passenger total) to count as a "key route," but the route if viewed as the sum of all buses running it, is indeed a key route. Washington St. in Roslindale is a primary example of this phenomenon, but there are others that are likewise under represented.
The other annoyance I have is that the map key covers over a section of the city with significant transit utilization. Again, this is not the fault of the transit map blogger. He is only trying to represent the same data as the official map, but in an easier to read format. Now it's time for somebody to fix the missing data issues.
The distinction is similar to
Ah... now that you've made a reference to New York City, we in Boston all understand now.
How about LA then?
oh, sorry, thought that was a good example. Maybe LA works better for you? The purple and red lines share a section of tunnel for several stops. Or even better, since it deals specifically with multiple bus lines, would be the El Monte Busway.
How about
The Green Line central subway and the B, C, D, and E trains?
I don't think ....
... NotWhitey can resist dickishness.
Just wish he'd throw the A
Just wish he'd throw the A line back in there.. you know, just for wishful thinking purposes.. :)
This is exceptionally well
This is exceptionally well done, thought I would point out that Copley/Back Bay and Mass. Ave/Symphony are also very close together.
The day I stopped going to DTX to change from northbound Orange to westbound Green changed my life.
Also..
..the Silver Li(n)e should probably be removed from the rapid transit map, at least on Washington St, as it is not anything even resembling rapid transit. It is a chronically late, overcrowded and slow bus. Painted silver.
We call the chronically late,
We call the chronically late, overcrowded, and slow streetcars on the B line rapid transit too.
Do we?
I often hear people talking about the transformation of what is now the Blue Line as "streetcars converted to rapid transit." Similarly, people speak of future plans to extend the Blue Line to Riverside as "rapid transit conversion." The Red Line was designed from the beginning to be "rapid transit only." Also I have heard people distinguish between the Green Line trolley and the "rapid transit" lines (Orange, Blue, Red). So maybe it's fair to represent the Silver Line on the map as firmly as we represent the Green Line, and just accept it as idiosyncratic.
Yes, we do!
When people speak of the Blue Line, they say heavy rail conversion, not rapid transit conversion. I do agree with you that the Red Line's original marketinbranding emphasized that it was rapid transit, which would imply that what preceded was not. But today's Green Line is is definitely considered to be light rail rapid transit (even the B).
It was only after the
It was only after the color-coding was adopted in the mid-1960s that the surface portion of (what we now call) the B, C, and E lines were considered rapid transit on maps. If you can find an old MTA or Boston El system map from the 30s/40s/50s/early 60s, dark blue is used to identify "rapid transit" which was defined as the Cambridge-Dorchester Tunnel (today's Red Line), The East Boston Tunnel and Revere Extension (today's Blue Line), the Forest Hill-Everett elevated and Washington St. Tunnel (today's Orange Line), and only the underground portions of the Tremont/Boylston/Huntington Ave subway (part of today's Green Line). A red line was used to identify all "surface lines" and different shapes for route numbers were used to identify the surface line mode type (circle for streetcar, square for bus, triangle for trackless trolley). So what we now call the B Line was shown as surface line 62 (the number displayed in a circle for streetcar), a thin red line from Boston College to Kenmore where it then entered the Boylston St, subway (shown as a thick blue "rapid transit" line from Kenmore to Lechmere).
A link to the 1954 MTA map at Ward maps:
http://www.wardmaps.com/viewasset.php?aid=11012
Rapid Transit??
Considered by whom? If you look at the timing on the B and C lines from the end of the line and Kenmore Square, you get an average speed that's almost identical to the speed of a bus, and much slower than the Red, Orange and Blue lines.
De facto vs. Official
I agree, it's not very rapid, and I think a map like the one from 1954 would be more honest. But the MBTA and regulatory agencies consider light tail on a reservation to be rapid transit. The failure of the 'T to actually run it that way is a separate matter.
I think that's why he made it
I think that's why he made it thinner than the other lines...
Square format might be very hard to ditch
The trains and buses have dedicated square spots to hold the map. I think on the green line they're recessed into the plastic wall. It's a nice map, not sure it could be implemented without cropping something.