The Official MBTA System Map

TheRatmeister said:
View attachment 58013
Alright, made some updates.
Click to expand...
This is probably outside your scope, but on these line diagrams I wish there was some indication which regional rail lines a stop connects with, rather than just using the purple rectangle for all of them. I can see it would be tough to squeeze all the names in at South Station or even Quincy, and I don't have any good suggestions. This bothers me on the current full map too.

If/when the T really commits to regional rail with high frequency, all-day service, I think the regional rail lines could really use their own individual branding. Maybe with numbers, letters, or colors. But that's a pretty massive graphical redesign for the whole network.
 
ritchiew said:
This is probably outside your scope, but on these line diagrams I wish there was some indication which regional rail lines a stop connects with, rather than just using the purple rectangle for all of them. I can see it would be tough to squeeze all the names in at South Station or even Quincy, and I don't have any good suggestions. This bothers me on the current full map too.

If/when the T really commits to regional rail with high frequency, all-day service, I think the regional rail lines could really use their own individual branding. Maybe with numbers, letters, or colors. But that's a pretty massive graphical redesign for the whole network.
Click to expand...
I 100% agree but without just writing out the names of the lines there's not much I can do. As far as I can tell there's no current short-form or abbreviation for the lines.
 
TheRatmeister said:
I 100% agree but without just writing out the names of the lines there's not much I can do. As far as I can tell there's no current short-form or abbreviation for the lines.
Click to expand...
The consolidated BOS <> Readville and BOS <> Braintree schedules use abbreviations (for the origination point, not technically the line).

1732150814424.png

1732150836986.png
 
HenryAlan said:
I don't know whether you are making an editorial comment about the quality of Silver Line transfer, but the MBTA considers Chinatown to be a transfer point and shows it that way on their maps.
Click to expand...
BNRD makes Chinatown an inbound stop only without looping like the current SL4/5, so I've opted not to show it.
 
I think those look great! A few stray notes:
  • I like the walking transfers, though I agree with Van that they need to be explicitly indicated in the legend
  • I also think you have sufficient space to include some indication of the walking time; Reservoir <> Cleveland Circle basically is a direct transfer, and it seems worth distinguishing that
  • I like the first version, where the branches are indicated with their standalone icons (this also solves the problem of marking the B/C terminus at GC)
  • I'm not sure how I feel about the bus icons being on the opposite side as the labels; I think it worked pretty well on the Red Line map, but I think it's a bit less clear, especially with stations like Symphony on diagonal segments
  • I think you should mark the Winter Street Concourse or otherwise indicate an Orange transfer at Park
    • Especially for B/C riders, the Winter Street Concourse makes it possible to transfer to Orange without leaving fare control or waiting for a D/E to take you one stop from GC to Haymarket
  • You could also include a walking transfer to Back Bay -- there is precedent for its inclusion (higher res at link)
    • 1732467700416.png
  • You've marked a 39 transfer at Heath St, but haven't included a similar B <> 57 transfer at Babcock (or Packards Corner)
  • Also, and I appreciate that this is the absolute fiddliest pickiest of feedback... but technically there isn't actually an E <> 39 transfer at Heath
  • Fascinatingly, a lot of the E <> 39 transfers are actually pretty poor
    • South of Brigham Circle, Green Line trains run far away from the curb -- not ideal for transfers
    • Brigham Circle's eastbound Green Line platform is right next to the 39's stop at Wigglesworth (good) but its westbound platform is notably farther from the corresponding 39 stop (less good)
    • Longwood Medical Area seems to have the strongest transfer point -- the 39's stops are directly across the street from the Green Line platforms, immediately accessible via crosswalk
    • MFA and Northeastern each have one E <> 39 transfer that requires crossing the street twice (unless scramble signaling is in place)
    • Symphony straight-up does not have a 39 stop
    • Prudential's eastbound stops align well, but its westbound 39 stop is about 300 feet from the subway entrance, on the opposite side of Belvidere St
    • There's a good eastbound 39 <> E transfer at Copley, but going westbound the 39's stop is 380 feet form the subway entrance, on the far side of Copley, requiring two street crossings
(Well, the rabbit hole of E <> 39 transfers was not one I expected to fall down today!)
 
Riverside said:
Also, and I appreciate that this is the absolute fiddliest pickiest of feedback... but technically there isn't actually an E <> 39 transfer at Heath
Click to expand...
I am aware of this, it's an error on the official map as well. However, a goal of the E-Branch transitway extension project is to also be used by the 39, I'm betting that the new Heath St stop will serve both.

Your other points are all good and I'll take them into account with a new revision.
 
Riverside said:
I think those look great! A few stray notes:
  • I like the walking transfers, though I agree with Van that they need to be explicitly indicated in the legend
  • I also think you have sufficient space to include some indication of the walking time; Reservoir <> Cleveland Circle basically is a direct transfer, and it seems worth distinguishing that
  • I like the first version, where the branches are indicated with their standalone icons (this also solves the problem of marking the B/C terminus at GC)
  • I'm not sure how I feel about the bus icons being on the opposite side as the labels; I think it worked pretty well on the Red Line map, but I think it's a bit less clear, especially with stations like Symphony on diagonal segments
  • I think you should mark the Winter Street Concourse or otherwise indicate an Orange transfer at Park
    • Especially for B/C riders, the Winter Street Concourse makes it possible to transfer to Orange without leaving fare control or waiting for a D/E to take you one stop from GC to Haymarket
  • You could also include a walking transfer to Back Bay -- there is precedent for its inclusion (higher res at link)
  • You've marked a 39 transfer at Heath St, but haven't included a similar B <> 57 transfer at Babcock (or Packards Corner)
  • Also, and I appreciate that this is the absolute fiddliest pickiest of feedback... but technically there isn't actually an E <> 39 transfer at Heath
  • Fascinatingly, a lot of the E <> 39 transfers are actually pretty poor
    • South of Brigham Circle, Green Line trains run far away from the curb -- not ideal for transfers
    • Brigham Circle's eastbound Green Line platform is right next to the 39's stop at Wigglesworth (good) but its westbound platform is notably farther from the corresponding 39 stop (less good)
    • Longwood Medical Area seems to have the strongest transfer point -- the 39's stops are directly across the street from the Green Line platforms, immediately accessible via crosswalk
    • MFA and Northeastern each have one E <> 39 transfer that requires crossing the street twice (unless scramble signaling is in place)
    • Symphony straight-up does not have a 39 stop
    • Prudential's eastbound stops align well, but its westbound 39 stop is about 300 feet from the subway entrance, on the opposite side of Belvidere St
    • There's a good eastbound 39 <> E transfer at Copley, but going westbound the 39's stop is 380 feet form the subway entrance, on the far side of Copley, requiring two street crossings
(Well, the rabbit hole of E <> 39 transfers was not one I expected to fall down today!)
Click to expand...
The only reason I can think of to show a “walking connection” between Brookline Village and the E is all the crazy transit pitch hopes to eventually have overlapping green line tracks so D can become E and vice versa for some trips, one all the other GL redesign stuff is implemented. However, I just can’t imagine anyone in their right mind utilizing the connection unless they were truly desperate. I lived in Brookline Village for many years as a youth, and walking to and fro all over this area was how we used to spend a lot of time. This is not a walk anyone would want to do as part of a commute. It’s not convenient. It’s not pleasant. You are talking about traversing pearl st, then route nine, then crossing it, and then getting to the E. Between the multiple crossings and stoplights you have to wait at, coupled with the fact that it’s not a very pleasant walk anyway, I think most people would choose to just ride the train into Boston and switching, or just getting off in the D and walking a little farther south to reach what might have been served by the E. The technical distance doesn’t really matter here; walking between back bay and Copley stations is no big deal, because you’re in the middle of the city and the walk consequently is aesthetically and urbanistically more pleasant.

Think of who would use this: 1. Inbound D traffic going to JP — they’d take the 39, and if going to the VA, by the time you hit Joseph’s pizza you may as well walk; nobody is gonna walk to Mission Hill and then take the E one stop to Heath (I know there are two more stops but it’s really just one stop). 2. Inbound D needing to get to E line areas, ie Huntington or prudential: for most people it would make sense to stay on the train and switch at Copley, or just get off at hynes and walk a little farther south to Huntington. 3. Outbound D to outbound E—they would have taken the E to begin with. 4. Outbound E to outbound D—same, they would have mostly been from downtown and gotten on the d instead. 5. Inbound E to outbound D — at this point you might as well just have walked from Heath to Brookline village. 6. Inbound E to inbound D— again I think for most people it would make sense to either just get off on Huntington and walk a little farther, or ride the train into town and switch.
 
FK4 said:
The only reason I can think of to show a “walking connection” between Brookline Village and the E is all the crazy transit pitch hopes to eventually have overlapping green line tracks so D can become E and vice versa for some trips, one all the other GL redesign stuff is implemented. However, I just can’t imagine anyone in their right mind utilizing the connection unless they were truly desperate. I lived in Brookline Village for many years as a youth, and walking to and fro all over this area was how we used to spend a lot of time. This is not a walk anyone would want to do as part of a commute. It’s not convenient. It’s not pleasant. You are talking about traversing pearl st, then route nine, then crossing it, and then getting to the E. Between the multiple crossings and stoplights you have to wait at, coupled with the fact that it’s not a very pleasant walk anyway, I think most people would choose to just ride the train into Boston and switching, or just getting off in the D and walking a little farther south to reach what might have been served by the E. The technical distance doesn’t really matter here; walking between back bay and Copley stations is no big deal, because you’re in the middle of the city and the walk consequently is aesthetically and urbanistically more pleasant.

Think of who would use this: 1. Inbound D traffic going to JP — they’d take the 39, and if going to the VA, by the time you hit Joseph’s pizza you may as well walk; nobody is gonna walk to Mission Hill and then take the E one stop to Heath (I know there are two more stops but it’s really just one stop). 2. Inbound D needing to get to E line areas, ie Huntington or prudential: for most people it would make sense to stay on the train and switch at Copley, or just get off at hynes and walk a little farther south to Huntington. 3. Outbound D to outbound E—they would have taken the E to begin with. 4. Outbound E to outbound D—same, they would have mostly been from downtown and gotten on the d instead. 5. Inbound E to outbound D — at this point you might as well just have walked from Heath to Brookline village. 6. Inbound E to inbound D— again I think for most people it would make sense to either just get off on Huntington and walk a little farther, or ride the train into town and switch.
Click to expand...
What about say, Hyde Square to Kenmore? Or Monument to Kenmore?

These are distances of 2 to 3 miles that takes 35 to 50 minutes to travel via transit.

Brookline Village really ought to be a major bus terminal/transfer point since all the bus routes converge through there (60, 65, 66, 39), but it's not doing a good job at being a bus hub (The 14 should really be extended from Heath St to Brookline Village).

I once had a crazy transit pitch where I'd flip the 39 and the 60's routings and send the 39 to Kenmore and a Huntington Ave short turn of the 60 terminating at Cypress St/Brookline Hills <--> Copley. However, the T39 rerouting in BNRD was unpopular, so it wouldn't really work. The idea was to make all the bus routes into straight lines converging on a single transfer point.

1732820975675.png
1732821054022.png

1732821651391.png
 
Delvin4519 said:
What about say, Hyde Square to Kenmore? Or Monument to Kenmore?

These are distances of 2 to 3 miles that takes 35 to 50 minutes to travel via transit.

Brookline Village really ought to be a major bus terminal/transfer point since all the bus routes converge through there (60, 65, 66, 39), but it's not doing a good job at being a bus hub (The 14 should really be extended from Heath St to Brookline Village).

I once had a crazy transit pitch where I'd flip the 39 and the 60's routings and send the 39 to Kenmore and a Huntington Ave short turn of the 60 terminating at Cypress St/Brookline Hills <--> Copley. However, the T39 rerouting in BNRD was unpopular, so it wouldn't really work. The idea was to make all the bus routes into straight lines converging on a single transfer point.

View attachment 58324View attachment 58325
View attachment 58326
Click to expand...
Im just saying (and sorry for being so long winded) that the pleasantness of a walk matters greatly to people’s perceived distance. That’s why some pseudo-transfers work better than others, but the specific Village to Mission Hill walk is a crappy one, so it feels longer.

I love the idea of extending the 14 to Brookline Village. I have no idea how many people taking it would use it or need that, but it makes sense and it could produce new travel patterns.

As for something Hyde Sq, as in a future E line, yeah, maybe. At a certain point it does become worth it. But my point was just that *perceived* distance often distorts people’s experience and influences whether they choose to transfer in one place vs another.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top