MBTA Map Contest Finalists

datadyne007 said:
Why did it win?

According to the MBTA:
- Markers for all surface Green Line and Silver Line 2 routes;
- Clearer depiction of just how the Silver Line works downtown
- All lines now have a label with their colors, in addition to just being that color (My note: this is important for colorblind people)
- A more organized re-orienting of subway lines
- Skinnier bus routes, again, making for a cleaner map
Click to expand...

there are so many problems, especially with scale (specifically forrest hills and heath street are in line, the green line distances are off, braintree is closer than Mattapan, downtown is huge) seems like it exacerbates all the geographical issues with the current map and adds a couple more for good measure.
 
The 57 bus is shown on the wrong side of the Framingham line, which will be a problem when they put the Boston Landing station on the map. Which they should have done already, since Assembly Sq is shown.
 
Another gripe I have is that this makes the SL look like the only way to get to the airport. If I didn't know Boston and was trying to get to the airport, my eyes would be drawn towards the SL. I wouldn't even look at the Blue Line to see the obviously-named "Airport" stop.
 
I agree that the SL1 loop at the airport should be fixed. I get the intent on showing that it serves the terminals in order and then goes back express, but it just looks sloppy and confusing. Other designers have fixed this issue of the loop by reversing the curve that is on the current map so that the line curves toward A and then loops around to E and down. It also doesn't clearly represent Logan Shuttle service, which the current map actually does very well.
 
That map was reviewed by the guy from Transit Maps a while ago and you can see some comments from the designer on some of the things you guys are pointing out.
 
Proposition Joe said:
That map was reviewed by the guy from Transit Maps a while ago and you can see some comments from the designer on some of the things you guys are pointing out.
Click to expand...

I read his response to the Cleveland Circle/Reservoir problem and I just don't buy it. In most cases, he's right - on a transit map it's OK to distort geography in order to make things clear along the system. The problem in this case is that people might actually want to change trains there by walking between the stations, so it isn't just a map-realism issue. It also makes clear that the "Reservoir" stop actually serves Cleveland Circle as a neighborhood and its name, while geographical and accurate, is pretty much useless. In fact, it really should be changed.
 
Im not liking the E line at all, way too long. Why not use smaller fonts like the silver line for the street stops? I like SL2 having stops now

D and C too far away at Resevoir

77 is screwed up

Downtown looks bigger than Manhattan

I like that SL downtown is clearer, but its too dominating.

Wheres the new waterfront ferry service?
 
Equilibria said:
I read his response to the Cleveland Circle/Reservoir problem and I just don't buy it. In most cases, he's right - on a transit map it's OK to distort geography in order to make things clear along the system. The problem in this case is that people might actually want to change trains there by walking between the stations, so it isn't just a map-realism issue. It also makes clear that the "Reservoir" stop actually serves Cleveland Circle as a neighborhood and its name, while geographical and accurate, is pretty much useless. In fact, it really should be changed.
Click to expand...

It really is an issue. I was talking to a coworker who lives on Warren St who was complaining about meeting people at Eagles Deli because it was such a pain to go all the way to Kenmore and back out, or deal with the 66. When I told her she could just take the B to Chestnut Hill Ave and walk two blocks her eyes lit up like I had changed her world.

Stops that are close enough to directly serve the same area need to be obvious in some way. Same with Mass Ave/Symphony and Back Bay/Copley. Or ANY of the downtown stations.
 
davem said:
Stops that are close enough to directly serve the same area need to be obvious in some way. Same with Mass Ave/Symphony and Back Bay/Copley. Or ANY of the downtown stations.
Click to expand...

This was my primary concern with the new map too. It's not enough to be just a schematic map. The map should show the important connections, even outside the system. It should function as a view of the world from the perspective of a rider.
 
davem said:
It really is an issue. I was talking to a coworker who lives on Warren St who was complaining about meeting people at Eagles Deli because it was such a pain to go all the way to Kenmore and back out, or deal with the 66. When I told her she could just take the B to Chestnut Hill Ave and walk two blocks her eyes lit up like I had changed her world..
Click to expand...

1343013433597_4682600.png


Not even the world's greatest map could undo that level of stupid. Schematic transit maps certainly have their place, and should be highly informative, but still... actual street maps exist for a reason too. And most of us now have that capability in our pockets or handbags. Getting all your knowledge of a city's layout from a transit map is like learning everything you know about nutrition from the back of a cereal box.
 
It's a balance. Even the new map has geographic elements. For one thing, it shows the rivers and the relative orientations of the lines. And some of the lines have more geographic content than others, for whatever reason. Look at the Needham line. It curves northward, even though that's almost completely irrelevant from the perspective of the system. The Cleveland Circle conjunction is far more important.

Even in this day of smartphones, the transit map represents the image of the city from the perspective of a rider, and that puts an onus on the designer to approximate the system the way people imagine it, because their map will become the new mental image for many others.

more comments
 
Shepard said:
Not even the world's greatest map could undo that level of stupid. Schematic transit maps certainly have their place, and should be highly informative, but still... actual street maps exist for a reason too. And most of us now have that capability in our pockets or handbags. Getting all your knowledge of a city's layout from a transit map is like learning everything you know about nutrition from the back of a cereal box.
Click to expand...

True, but it's not just an issue with that one person. The B is under capacity west of Harvard Ave, and massively over east of it. With thousands of new idiots arriving into our city twice a year, one has to speculate how many redundant trips would be saved with little no brainer adjustments.

I mean, when I came here back in 06 I rode the green line from Hynes to Haymarket to transfer to the orange to go to Mass Ave and walk a block south, because on the system map that seemed the logical thing to do. Obviously there are at least three better ways to do that.


Edit: Matt, you should put your blog in your signature. I've just been enjoying reading it!
 
Last edited:
Matthew said:
It's a balance. Even the new map has geographic elements. For one thing, it shows the rivers and the relative orientations of the lines. And some of the lines have more geographic content than others, for whatever reason. Look at the Needham line. It curves northward, even though that's almost completely irrelevant from the perspective of the system. The Cleveland Circle conjunction is far more important.

Even in this day of smartphones, the transit map represents the image of the city from the perspective of a rider, and that puts an onus on the designer to approximate the system the way people imagine it, because their map will become the new mental image for many others.

more comments
Click to expand...

Really, one should begin a transit map by figuring the key waypoints around which the entire map needs to rotate. It seems that the T encouraged designers to use the downtown "diamond" as their central point and just make everything at regular angles outside of that, which is really unfortunate. Great comments, btw. I agree with everything you wrote there, although I don't really have a problem with the curving commuter rail lines.

I hate to say it, but not understanding which stations are located next to each other is what happens when a guy from Moscow designs a map of Boston. I certainly couldn't make a map of the Moscow Subway that he'd be totally happy with...
 
Thanks Dave!

Equilibria, I don't have that much of a problem with the curving commuter rail lines either, but it was an example of overuse of geography in a place where it didn't matter, vs, underuse in a place where it did. Actually, I'd rather just omit the commuter rail lines mostly, and just put the stations down on the edges of the map, along with some hints about how they connect ... where useful. But from a rider's perspective, the "line"-character of the commuter rail is almost useless. And they are low frequency and do not deserve to be highlighted more than the buses.

I spotted some feedback from Mikheil on the web and it seems that he is actually quite wise to some of these comments, and is interested in making more of the "walking connection" aspect, so I sent him some tips that he will hopefully receive and be able to incorporate.
 
Matthew said:
I spotted some feedback from Mikheil on the web and it seems that he is actually quite wise to some of these comments, and is interested in making more of the "walking connection" aspect, so I sent him some tips that he will hopefully receive and be able to incorporate.
Click to expand...

I noticed that too, he seems to be really involved in making a great map. Which is awesome, because even though he's in Russia, we are getting more constructive feedback from one guy on the other side of the world then if the T was handling this.

All I can hope is that the MBTA actually accepts his fixes, and also doesn't mess it up further.
 
Right. What I find surprising is that the press releases around the winner of the contest made it sound like the T was just accepting the map as submitted. Which just seems idiotic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top