Submission – Idealised Edinburgh Tramways Map, c.1940s by Andy Arthur

September 13, 2016
comment 1
Filed Under:
Historical Maps
Tags:

Submitted by Andy, who says:

Hi, I recently got a bit over-fascinated and nostalgic about the old tramways network of Edinburgh and decided it would be fun to plot out a schematic routemap of the old system as it never quite was at some point in the late 1940s. I also had a little bit of fun trying to make it look like it just might have come out of the Corporation Tramways Department, even though they were never keen on branding much beyond the corporate colours of madder and white, the city crest and later on a rather crude “ECT” logotype (which to the best of my knowledge actually applied to Edinburgh City Transport, as it was renamed after the tram network was run down). They never actually issued a schematic map, they were quite topographically faithful. I’ve based the style loosely on Beck’s earlier designs. It’s mainly 90 degrees, but with a 30 degree added for parts of Leith which is geographically fairly correct. I feel this helps identify Leith as an area in its own right, and makes the thing a little bit more interesting, and was a fun challenge to draw. It also meant I could get away with a few non-right angles in other parts of the map to make things fit.

Given my real drive to produce this was to highlight just how much public transport has been lost in Edinburgh, I added the 1950s British Railways suburban network in too. It also meant I wasn’t hugely concerned about how difficult or otherwise it would be to actually use the map to get around if you could travel back in time to 1951!

I borrowed the idea of the daisy rings of route numbers along the way from genuine old ECT maps, and also faithfully maintained the complex system of denoting the service termini but making the reader work the actual route out for themselves by tracing along the lines looking for the correct numbers. There were a number of circular/figure-of-8 routes that had no real terminus as such, so I have indicated the main noted destinations. I’ve also included the colour lighting system that was used to help passengers identify the correct tram at night and in the notorious “Auld Reekie” smog of Edinburgh.

There are a number of geographic compromises taken to fit it to the page i.e. the right-hand line heading down the page in reality was a fairly straight E-W line along the coast.

Last, but not least, I have invented the stops for myself by placing the logical main streets neighbourhoods and landmarks along each route.

Transit Maps says:

Andy, I love this! 

It might depict a “perfect” system that – as you say – never quite existed, but it works wonderfully well as an evocative period piece. Everything – the sombre colours, the typography, the lovely rings of route numbers, the ECT monogram and even the nicely understated “old paper” texture – combine to make this quite a lovely bit of work.

There’s lots of detail to pore over as well, especially that ridiculously dense British Rail network. I particularly like the detailed explanation of the colour lighting system, which is a fascinating little solution to a problem. It initially seems quite complicated, but I guess you really only had to remember your route’s set of lights, not all of them!

If you’re not already, you should definitely try and sell prints of this map, because I think they’d be quite popular!

Cancelled Official Map – Public Transport Network Map of Sydney, Australia, 2016

September 12, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Official Maps
Tags:

I’ve often lamented that Sydney’s transit maps each seem to live in a “mode vacuum”, where each individual map steadfastly refuses to acknowledge any other mode of transit, even though they’re all operated by the same agency. So the light rail map won’t show any connections to the main Sydney Train network, and the ferry map ignores the major train station located directly behind Circular Quay… that kind of stuff.

Unfortunately, this new attempt at an integrated transit map fails so completely at presenting a coherent overview of the complete network that I really wish that they hadn’t even bothered. First off, this map seems to have more in common with the previous CityRail map than the current Sydney Trains map, which doesn’t present a very consistent branding effort. 

All the main line trains are now presented in uniform “T”-branded orange, so it’s basically impossible to work out any service patterns. However, the map resolutely clings to depicting each service as a separate line, which is just ridiculous in the context of this map. Simplifying the train services down to a single-weight route line labelling all the stations would have made more sense, and would have opened up the map, allowing the other modes to get equal visual weight – the ferry and light rail services have to be jammed into some very tight spaces!

Question: why do certain railway stations get called out like major interchanges when they’re not visibly interchanging with anything? This is especially noticeable along the Southern Highlands line, where Picton, Mittagong, Bowral and more all get a peculiar “double tick” treatment with a bold label. Of course, the answer is that these stations have interchanges with country bus services, but those aren’t shown on this map at all, so the ticks no longer have any meaning.

Last time I looked, Kiama was located on the coast, not several kilometres inland. 

The depiction of light rail and ferry services are probably the least worst part of this mess, although you’d never know that the Lewisham West light rail stop is less than a 500-metre walk from Lewisham station from this map.

If those two services are shown tolerably, the depiction of bus services definitely is not. All of greater Sydney just gets covered in a light orange zone that means “buses go here.” It’s so ridiculously desultory that I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. And the label for Southern Sydney gets placed outside the shaded area, so… are there no buses there?

Finally, there’s the enormous and bizarre directional labels: “West to Dubbo” and “North to Byron Bay”. Neither of these locations have the slightest thing to do with Sydney’s transportation network and don’t even really make sense from a statewide transportation perspective. And poor old south doesn’t get a label at all.

Our rating: Very little of this makes any sense whatsoever. Poorly thought out, lazily executed and pretty much useless. Would have been much improved by showing major bus corridors and highlighting important interchange locations. The blanket “We have buses in Sydney!” shading is just embarrassing. Half a star, and that’s only because I think the little illustrative icons at the top left are kind of neat.

Source: Transport NSW “Exploring Sydney” web page – but deleted almost immediately after being posted

Official Map – Cincinnati Bell Connector Streetcar Map, 2016

September 9, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Official Maps
Tags:

Hey, the Cincinnati Streetcar – sorry, the corporate branded “Cincinnati Bell Connector” – opened today! It’ll run for free over the weekend, with fares to be paid from Monday onwards. This is notable because it really looked like this streetcar would never get off the ground, what with anti-streetcar ballot initiatives, opposition from Ohio’s Governor John Kasich, and a mayor in John Cranley who threatened to cancel the project and literally tear up a section of already-constructed tracks.

But it’s finally here, and this is the system map. It’s so… grey.

I understand that a muted background colour scheme can be desirable to enable the route to stand out, but this just ends up being oppressive and grim. It also calls undue attention to the tangled web of Interstate highways that hem the city in.

Unusually, stop names are numbered on the map and then referenced in a legend. I always find this a little unfriendly, as you have to look back and forth between the two to work out how the names and locations are related.

Points of interest are represented by an uneasy mix of simplified black architectural elevations (popular on many a wayfinding map these days), logos for the Library, Arts Center and CAC, with labelled darker grey footprints for larger buildings. It’s all a little hodge-podge, and some more thought here could have created a really nice unifying element for the map.

Our rating: Not horrendous, but not fantastic either. The legend for stop names is annoying. Two-and-a-half stars. Compare to the super clean, minimalist look adopted by the Kansas City Streetcar.

Source: City of Cincinnati website

Submission – Unofficial reworking of the UTA FrontRunner Strip Map by Jeromiah Drennan (and me)

September 9, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
My Transit Maps, Unofficial Maps
Tags:

Submitted by Jeromiah, who says:

After the post about the new Frontrunner map (August 2016, 2.5 stars), inspiration came to make one of my own.

My map has what was mentioned: TRAX connections, bus connections, and Greyhound (but not Amtrak, If you look at Salt Lake Central on my map you’ll see why) I took out the the lines and changed the north and south pointers. I made the purple line dashed between Ogden and Pleasant View to show the limited serviceThe labels for TRAX and Greyhound are based off of what the London Underground uses on their maps for transfers. I also thought It would be important to take out the legend completely, so I designed the map so it wouldn’t need it. Fonts used are Whitney Medium and Whitney Book.

I’m hoping to send this to UTA soon, but I thought I’d post it here first.

What are your thoughts? Do the bus route numbers make the map cluttered? What improvements do I need to make?

Transit Maps says:

Nice work, Jeromiah! I think your solution is well thought out and nicely executed overall. Your station name labels are perhaps a little too close to their respective dots for my liking, and I have a feeling that you’ve given yourself too much extra vertical space compared to the original map, which is a little cheaty. However, the original photo shows the map on a very curved surface, so it’s a little hard to tell for sure. I think your north and south indicators are better than the original: the grey visually separates them from the route line, and the arrows work well to define them as compass directions. 

I’m not so sure about the dashed line indicating the limited service to Pleasant View – without a legend, it could be misinterpreted as meaning “under construction”. Destination signs and announcements should let riders know where the last stop is: a map like this is for locating where you are and counting the number of stops until you get off, not explaining the minutiae of the operating schedule.

You’re on the right track with the connecting services information: located below the route line to separate it from the station name, and ordered logically. The bus numbers are perhaps a little small, and still run into each other a little bit – so they can still look like a long string of random numbers rather than distinct bus numbers.

Underneath your map is one that I independently developed almost immediately after my original post and shared on Twitter. You can see that it has a lot of similarities to yours, but I’ve explicitly placed each bus number inside a box, which is then arranged in a grid to help visually separate all those numbers from each other. Also, all my type is horizontal, because it takes up less vertical space (more room for the bus numbers!) and it reads more easily. I really should add the UTA contact information as Jeromiah has done, though – a useful touch, though perhaps the Facebook/Twitter/Instagram icons are less useful without their associated handles.

Official Map: Beta Version of the Los Angeles Metro Website/Trip Planner

September 7, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Official Maps
Tags:

The Los Angeles Metro opened up a new beta version of its website for public review today. The first noticeable thing is that the interactive system map is front and centre on the home page – the very first thing that you see upon entering the site. No having to click through to the deepest depths of the website just to find a map here, something too many agencies still insist on doing.

It’s still a little rough around the edges at the moment – I can’t get it to accept a starting or end point in the trip planner! – but this definitely looks very promising. At the moment, the map only shows Metro data, but they hope to add data for 24 other LA-area transit agencies by the end of the year when the new version of the site goes properly live. Now there’s something to look forward to – a unified trip planner that integrates the myriad transit options available to travellers in this sprawling metropolis, regardless of who is supplying the service.

More details about the website redesign can be found on Metro’s “The Source” blog.

Official Maps: Sound Transit Link Federal Way Extension Alternatives

August 31, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Official Maps
Tags:

Here’s some interesting isometric-style maps that crossed my desk the other day. They’re part of a series of maps from the Sound Transit Federal Way Link Extension Draft Environmental Impact Statement (DEIS) Summary that outline all the proposed potential alignments from the soon-to-be-completed Angle Lake station south to Federal Way. 

I believe that the maps were produced by HDR as a consultant to Sound Transit, and they do quite a nice job of comparing and contrasting the different alignments in a simplified, visually interesting form. Each map shows the main route in its own distinctive colour, with “optional extras” shown in yellow. Elevated and below-grade track is easily shown because of the isometric format – an advantage over conventional “top down” maps, which have to resort to modifying the stroke of the route line and then explaining those changes with a legend. Remember: show, don’t tell!

Of course, I-5 and SR 99 don’t really run as neatly parallel as this map would suggest (they’re really quite close near the proposed Highline College stop), but for quickly comparing all the alternatives and reaching a diverse public audience – there are four maps like this in the DEIS summary – I think this format does an excellent job.

For the record, the I-5 Alternative with the Highline College station option – as seen in the second map above – became the Preferred Alternative for this project back in January 2016.

Source: Sound Transit project website

Data Visualization: “London Heartbeat” by Oliver O’Brien

August 26, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Visualizations
Tags:

I’m loving this interactive map by Oliver O’Brien that uses entry and exit data direct from TfL to build a picture of how the Tube across the course of a typical day – with around 5 million rides or so. (The data doesn’t yet include the newly-introduced Night Tube, so things wrap up as the last “day” trains finish their journeys at the moment.) 

Watching the day progress is mesmerising enough – especially the flow during the two major peak periods – but you can also drill down to see detailed information for individual stations, which is kind of amazing. Interestingly, while the map uses a heartbeat as a metaphor for the flow, I almost see it as breathing: inhaling (inbound) for the morning peak, and exhaling (outbound) in the evening. Either metaphor works to describe how vital the Tube is in making London a living city. This is really lovely work by Oliver, and definitely worthy of detailed perusal! 

Go explore by clicking here.

Submission – Official Map: UTA FrontRunner Commuter Rail, Salt Lake City, 2016

August 25, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Official Maps
Tags:

Submitted by Mike Christensen, who says:

The Utah Transit Authority (UTA) recently added strip maps to its FrontRunner commuter rail trains. At first glance, the maps looked adequate to me. But after a few moments of thought, I have the following critique. First off, the N and S denoting north and south at the end of the route is a bit confusing. However, the biggest criticism I have is the lost opportunity to show connecting bus routes at FrontRunner stations.

UTA has been trying to find ways to encourage riders to make greater use of its bus system, and I feel that UTA really missed out on an opportunity to do so using the strip map. The strip map does show the three stations featuring transfers to UTA’s three TRAX light rail lines, but the map completely fails to specify which TRAX lines can be transferred to. Additionally, the strip map could have also highlighted non-UTA connections, such as Amtrak at Salt Lake Central and Provo and Greyhound at Salt Lake Central and Ogden, and should have highlighted the connection to the Salt Lake City International Airport via the TRAX Green Line at North Temple.

I took a few moments to mock up the map with my suggestions (second image above – Cam). Hopefully, UTA will give more thought to the maps they produce in the future.

Transit Maps says:

Mike’s summary is pretty astute – the official map does the bare minimum to be functional, but misses out on opportunities to be more useful. Visually, it’s simple enough, though I’ll never understand why the UTA feels it necessary to add leader lines between station symbols and their associated labels. On a simple strip map like this, there’s very little chance of mixing stations up.

The legend is a bit odd: it gives the full official name of the FrontRunner line (line 750), when it’s already completely obvious that this is what the map shows – the giant “FrontRunner” logotype is a dead giveaway, don’t you think? The legend also indicates that the “T” indicates a transfer to TRAX, without explaining what that is. You can’t just assume that everyone riding knows that “TRAX” equals “light rail”! And Mike is definitely right in saying that the colours of each connecting light rail line should be denoted, as well as other alternate modes of transport. I especially like his suggestion to add Amtrak and Greyhound connections, and an indication of the airport connection should be vital.

Mike’s own map is very obviously a quick and dirty mockup, but it does show how more useful information could be added to the map. It also shows how tricky it can be to add a lot of bus route numbers to a map like this: they can end up just looking like a long string of random numbers pretty quickly. I’d probably suggest that connection information be moved below the route line and be set horizontally, as reading that amount of small text with your head at an angle while riding a train is going to be hard work! The north and south arrows are a good idea, but I think that Mike’s implementation of them could be interpreted as further extensions of the line off the edge of the map. A good old-fashioned north pointer could actually do the job a little better here.

Our rating: The official map is about as average as you can get. Does the job and very little more. Two-and-a-half stars. Mike’s mockup is imperfect, but definitely food for thought on how the official map could be improved.

Historical Map: “Futuroute” Route Selector for Picc-Vic Rail Project, Manchester, 1970s

August 24, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Historical Maps
Tags:

Everything about this rather fabulous mechanical route selector – a unique piece created to build interest and publicity for the eventually-cancelled rail project – just screams early 1970s modernist design. From the gaudily coloured stripes on the case, to the tightly-spaced sans serif typeface, to the very name itself: “Futuroute” – literally the route for the future! Although I keep wanting to pronounce it as “futuro-route” rather than the intended “futu-route” for some reason…

The unit is now part of the permanent collection at the Museum of Transport, Greater Manchester, and is apparently every bit as clunky to operate as it looks.

For more information on the Picc-Vic project, check out the Wikipedia entry, or Chapter 3 of the Infra_Manc exhibition catalogue (PDF).

Source: Tim Dunn/Twitter

Historical Map: New York City IND Subway Planning Map, 1927

August 23, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Historical Maps
Tags:

Via: hyperrealcartography:

New York City IND Subway planning map from 1927.

I don’t have any information about this map other than what’s on it but it appears to be an early version of the Independent Subway System which was built by the City of New York to force the existing private subway companies to sell their lines to the city (”recaptured” as is labeled on the key) .  The plan clearly shows the first section of the 8th Ave Subway, the A/C/E trains, but the 6th Ave Subway, Queens Blvd Subway, Concourse Subway, Crosstown Subway, South Brooklyn Subway and the Fulton St (Brooklyn) Subway are shown only as “Projected”.  

What’s most interesting about this map is that it shows alternative routes for the Brooklyn and Queens lines; the Queens Blvd Line does in fact split under Northern Blvd but there is a plan here to have the express and local tracks split once again along 69th St.  While no explanation is given I can only asume this had to do with the proposed Windfield Spur, a local branch of the Queens Blvd Line which was to zig zag through Maspeth and Middle Village beforeheading to Rockaway Park.  A station and tunnel provisions were built at Roosevelt Ave station for this line so this original alignment could have been related.

The South Brooklyn Line, the F/G trains, shows that it was originally going to run as a straight shot from 7th Ave in Park Slope to Prospect Ave in Windsor Terrace.  This would have dove under Prospect Park and private property until it reached Prospect Ave.  The IND planners (wisely) added a station at 15th St-Prospect Park which required bending the local tracks off from the express tracks which do make the direct path under Prospect Park but are rarely used.

The Crosstown Line, G train, has the most interesting path as it seems planners had not yet found a suitable route south of Broadway.  The path appears to be a straight shot down to Fulton St and, even more puzzling, appears to terminate around Clinton Ave.  Early proposals for a crosstown line by the BMT would have connected it to the Franklin Ave Shuttle and extended service to Brighton Beach; however this line was to be built as an elevated line which residents and business owners along the route opposed.  It was not until the city stepped in with their own subway was a crosstown line reimagined as a subway.  The Crosstown Line was eventually built along Marcy Ave, turning west under Lafayette St to connect with the Fulton Line at Hoyt-Schermerhorn station.

The Concourse Line, the B/D trains, appears to terminate at Bedford Park Blvd (where the local trains do currently).  The right turn the D train makes was added later as a provision for a future extension to Burke Ave and Eastchester which was never finished.

Lastly the Fulton St Line, the A/C in Brooklyn, is only planned until Broadway Junction.  It would seem that planners had not yet decided a suitable route past Broadway Junction at the time.  Given that there were two elevated lines headed into Queens they would have still been determining which one made sense to replace.  Eventually it was decided to continue the line under Pitkin Ave (with further plans to extend lines to Rockaway and Cambria Heights).  At Grant Av the subway rose to connect with the end of the Fulton St elevated line.  But another alternative exists where the Jamaica Line could have connected to the Fulton St Subway.  Bell mouth portals were built just past Broadway Junction station in the tunnels should it ever be decided to reroute the J train along Fulton St.

Planners didn’t stop tinkering with their new subway because in just two years they had devised an even grander scheme; what they were building would only be phase one of a two phase plan, what has famously been remembered as the Second System where new lines like the 2nd Ave Subway and Utica Ave Subway were formally proposed.

Not really a lot to add after such a detailed summary…

Source: spicker613/Flickr