Historical Map: Vancouver City and Suburban Lines, c. 1930

March 3, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Historical Maps
Tags:

Via: illustratedvancouver:

A Guide to Vancouver, the complete map by Peter Hugh Page, a pamphlet by BCER circa 1930, pre-Lions Gate Bridge. “BCER Takes you everywhere!” From the VPL Special Collections, SPEMAPC 388.46 V223b 1930

A charmingly breezy little map of streetcar, interurban rail and motorbus services in Vancouver in 1930. Hand-drawn by one Peter Hugh Page (even the BCER logo!), the map features a number of crudely drawn but amusing vignettes of life in the city. These include a crowded “sightseeing car”, an amourous couple in a park, and an assortment of golfers dotted around the map (in a very similar vein to this 1941 map of Winnipeg, Manitoba).

Submission – Historical Map: The Bogue Plan For Seattle, 1911

March 2, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Historical Maps
Tags:

Submitted by SounderBruce, who says:

Of Seattle’s many, many unsuccessful attempts to build a rapid transit system, none sting more than the century-old Bogue Plan. Rejected by a landslide of 10,000 votes (out of 40,000 total cast) on March 5, 1912, Virgil Bogue’s ambitious comprehensive plan to convert the regraded remains of Denny Hill into a Beaux-Arts civic center reminiscent of European city centers would have been well served by 91 miles of rapid transit lines from as far away as Tukwila, Edmonds and Bothell. Bogue was not satisfied with the existing streetcar system, commenting that its frequent stops would not adequately serve future surburban riders; the streetcar network would be scrapped in favor of electric trolleybuses thirty years later.

Among the long list of specific routes was a subway under Third Avenue whose stations would have had entrances inside of mercantile establishments (familiar to users of Westlake Station). Other proposed corridors, such as the Ballard-U District and West Seattle lines, are now under consideration for the next expansion of Sound Transit’s Link Light Rail system, expected to be put to public vote in 2016.

Transit Maps says:

What a beautiful map! And what ambitious plans! It is to be noted here how many of the rapid transit lines were to be underground or elevated, with such lines spreading far out into the suburbs. Many of the general transit corridors seem very familiar even now, although a lot of that has to do with Seattle’s constricting geography. I’m intrigued by the split in line 5 around Green Lake (northbound to the east, southbound to the west?), while the routing of line 4 through Queen Anne just seems like the work of a madman.

Source: SounderBruce/Flickr

Historical Map: Planned Glasgow Subway Expansion Map, 2007

March 1, 2016
comment 1
Filed Under:
Historical Maps
Tags:

In the lead-up to hosting the 2014 Commonwealth Games, Glasgow and the SPT came over all excited and proposed this spectacular “East End” expansion to the Glasgow Subway, potentially throwing away over 100 years of circumrevolutionary transit perfection. 

As we now know, none of this ever came to fruition, saving everyone from having to call the expanded system “The Pair of Specs” (or something equally lame) instead of the current awesome “Clockwork Orange” sobriquet.

The map itself is nothing to write home about; a bare-bones future planning map that gets the idea across with a minimum of fuss and fanfare. It’s still very interesting because I hadn’t seen this map before, nor did I know that there was ever any thought to expanding this venerable system (the third oldest underground metro in the world after London and Budapest).

I do wonder about the service pattern for this proposed system, though: two separate circles, or a figure-eight?

Source: CityMetric article about the failed expansion

On That “Most Complex Subway Map” Article

March 1, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Miscellany
Tags:

Thanks to everyone (and I do mean everyone!) who has sent the recent “The World’s Most Complex Subway Maps as Determined by Scientists!” article to me – from various sources, including this take from CityLab. 

However, when I read the full academic paper that all these articles are based on, I think that everyone’s got the wrong end of the stick. The study is not of map complexity at all, but of network complexity. 

The methodology outlined at the end of the paper makes it very clear that a theoretical topological network has been assembled for each city based on information from Wikipedia and data feeds from the relevant transit agencies, with travel and transfer times accounted for within each model. These models are then tested mathematically – entirely with equations – to determine the complexity level of each system. 

At no point is an real official printed map used, nor are there any usability tests performed by real humans. It seems to me that the actual design of a map – which can make a simple network incomprehensible or a complex one easy to navigate – is not considered at all in this study. So while the study is interesting, and reveals a lot about the maximum amount of information that a human can reasonably hope to remember (the start point, two interchange points and the end point, basically), it really doesn’t say anything about how map design can help or hinder that process. 

In other words: According to the study, New York has the most complex transit network in the world, but not necessarily the most complex map.

Source: ScienceAdvances Journal

Sidenote: If you’d like to read a proper usability test paper for transit maps, check out this one that Max Roberts did for the Paris Métro, comparing “standard” octolinear maps to his curvilinear version. [PDF]

Historical Map: Pneumatic Mail Tube Network, Paris, 1967

March 1, 2016
comment 1
Filed Under:
Historical Maps
Tags:

Paris’ other underground transportation system. This is a fantastic and detailed map of the once-extensive network of pneumatic tubes used for whisking messages, post and telegrams from one side of the city to the other. Established in 1866, the system remained in use until 1984, when it was finally supplanted by “modern” technology like fax and telex machines. At the system’s apogee, there were over 460 kilometres (285 miles) of tubes running beneath the city.

Notable on this map are a few hand-drawn additions and deletions, suggesting that this map actually represents the system a few years after its nominal date of 1967. A small inset at the bottom right shows the (presumably separate and secure) governmental pneumatic tube network.

See also this map of New York’s similar network. 

Source: Eupalinos Ugajin/Flickr

Submission – Official Map: Weekday Rail Service Map for Belgian Rail

February 29, 2016
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Official Maps
Tags:

Submitted by Jim, who says:

I came across this horrendous mess of lines and angles. Its the Weekday Service map for Belgian Rail – the national rail company for Belgium. Sorry its only in French/Dutch, but I think the drawing speaks for itself. I know making a map for a whole country is no easy feat but I feel like there must be some improvements to be made, especially around Brussels.

Transit Maps says:

Yep, that’s pretty awful, alright. The chaotic tangle of thin lines in and around Brussels is almost impossible to decipher, with lines criss-crossing at all angles without any attempt to layer or order them effectively. The insipid labelling doesn’t help either – local trains get a green number slapped on top of a green route line, with a low-contrast drop shadow between them – and the massive, sprawling map legend is pretty unattractive as well.

About the only thing I really like from this map is the “wide” station dot used to show where a single route number bifurcates (or joins together, depending on direction of travel). See route 4 at Kortijk, which splits to go to either Poperinge or Lille, France.

Our rating: Cheap and nasty; almost impossible to use in the area around Brussels. One star.

If you want to see pretty much the same map, just executed a heck of a lot better, check out Arne Nys’ unofficial map of rail in Belgium (November 2014, 3.5 stars).

Source: Belgian Railways website (PDF)

Submission – Official Map: CapitalMetro LRT Pre-Construction Map, Canberra, Australia

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

Submitted by Mitch, who says:

Canberra’s CapitalMetro light rail project will (apparently) commence construction this year. The community is still fairly divided over whether it’s a good idea – I wonder if a more appealing transit map would increase support?

Transit Maps says:

It’s not exactly exciting, is it? But that’s always a problem with a single-line light rail project: just exactly how do you make it look more impressive? I’ll give this one a pass for now as it’s obviously more of a planning/corridor map – complete with 750-metre-diameter walking distance circles – than a real transit map. Basically, it’s designed to introduce people to the project and its general trajectory, rather than act as a navigational tool. Hence the emphasis on the names of Northbourne Avenue and Flemington Road, as well as the calling out of the City, Dickson and Gungahlin as major destinations along the route.

One interesting thing about the map is the choices it makes for the stop names along the way. Street names often change when they hit Northbourne Avenue, so there’s a choice between two names for the map. Here’s what they chose, compared to the other option:

  • Elouera Street (east of Northbourne) over Gould Street
  • Condamine Street (west of Northbourne) over Ipima Street
  • Macarthur Avenue (west of Northbourne) over Wakefield Avenue

As they’ve chosen names from either side of Northbourne, I’d say that the decisions are very deliberate, picking the more evocative name each time. All part of the psychology of gaining acceptance for the project!

Our rating: A perfectly average planning map. Hoping for something more exciting upon the project’s completion! 2.5 stars.

Source: CapitalMetro project page – link no longer active

Submission – Official Map: Paris RER/Transilien Zone Map (and a mystery station!)

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

Submitted by Lucas K., who says:

Hello, I know this is an odd question but I figured that if anyone would know this, you would: So I was browsing a map of Paris’s Transilien railway services when I spotted an oddity: A terminal station directly below Gare Montparnasse: Paris Vaugirard. I look all over the Internet but no trace of any Paris Vaugirard station can be found. Do you know what is going on here?

Transit Maps says:

It totally exists, Lucas, although it took me a while to track it down! 

It’s also known as Montparnasse III, and it’s a glorified side entrance to the main Gare de Montparnasse complex as well as housing platforms 25-28 separately to the others (1 to 24 are in the main station). Here’s a Google Street View image of its rather unprepossessing entrance on the Rue du Contenin: the main station is behind us to the left.

And here’s a PDF showing how it all fits together: Vaugirard is “Hall 3″ on this map. French Wikipedia says it’s mainly used for long-distance trains coming from Granville or Argentan, but I guess that some Transilien services can call here on occasion, hence its inclusion on the map.

Mystery solved! 

Now, onto the map, which once again proves that zone/tariff maps are the ugly step-sister in the transit map world. 

Seriously, this is easily the worst of the many Ile-de-France maps, with possibly the worst attempt at concentric zones I’ve ever seen, wobbling unconvincingly around all over the place to “join the dots” between stations. The green bands clash with a lot of the route line colours, and they’re especially horrid when combined with the magenta terminal station labels (Why?!).

The route lines aren’t much better, as they adhere to standard 45-degree angles until it all just gets too difficult for the designer: then they go off in any direction that they please – curves, wiggles and kinks in the line! They’re also pretty sloppily drawn, with lots of examples of parallel routes going out of alignment as they round a curve together.

The less said about the awful, messy station labelling the better, and the blobby interchange symbols that branch out in so many random direction are no more worthy of discussion!

Our rating: Almost embarrassingly bad, especially when it’s presented on the same web page as the superb Paris Region transit map (January 2014, 4.5 stars), which would work for calculating zones just as well – if not much better – than this visual atrocity. Half-a-star and into the Transit Maps Hall of Shame for representing Paris so poorly!

Source: SNCF Transilien website 

Submission – Unofficial Map: Chicago Urban Rail by Kara Fischer

February 23, 2016
comment 1
Filed Under:
Unofficial Maps
Tags:

Submitted by long-time correspondent, Kara, who says:

Here’s a project I’ve been working on for a while now—quite possibly one of the most difficult maps I’ve ever made. You and I hold similar opinions of Chicago’s RTA system map, namely, that it’s decent, but it could be better. So I’ve been working on optimizing a unified map of Chicago’s urban rail, showing the CTA and the inner regions of the Metra. My goal was to prioritize the CTA routes while still making the Metra routes usable. I think my favorite feature is the black arrows in the loop—I love how those turned out—and I think my least favorite feature is how crowded the labels get around Jefferson Park. I also still wish I could find a way to bring the western parts of the Green and Blue lines closer together. Overall, I’m pretty happy with how it turned out, but I’d love to know what you have to think about it!

Transit Maps says:

This looks pretty good, Kara, and is a strong indicator of growing confidence in your map-making skills. Keep it up! The map utilises the same technique as the Boston MBTA rapid transit map in that it shows commuter rail within the urban core, but uses destination arrows to point towards far-off terminus stations. This allows for a more even scale throughout the map, which works quite nicely here. 

I do think that the northern part of the map seems a little more crowded and tightly spaced than the southern half: maybe a bit of judicious respacing of stations could even things out a bit. I’m especially looking at how tight the stations along the northern Red and Purple lines are compared to the Red and Green lines to the south of the city. As Kara mentions, the triangle of lines around Jefferson Park also creates some spacing problems, but I think some minor tweaks can fix a lot of that – nudge the Brown Line up a bit higher, flip some labels to the other side of their route line, and so on. The too-far-apart western Blue and Green lines are an unfortunate byproduct of the expanded Loop area: the official map’s Loop inset mitigates this problem.

Some other minor thoughts: I think that there could be a small space between the northbound and southbound lines at Union station, just to emphasise that no services are through-running. I also think that the treatment of all the LaSalle stations overcomplicates things: it would better reflect reality if it went Loop LaSalle, Blue Line LaSalle and then the Metra LaSalle Street station. Its passenger entrance lies to the south of Congress Parkway, which the Blue Line station sits beneath. Blue Line LaSalle should also sit slightly to the right of the other stations, not the left. I also wonder whether the double-headed directional arrow on the Green Line through the Loop is truly necessary, as bi-directional travel along a route line is always assumed unless shown otherwise on a transit map. Finally, Kara’s forgotten to italicise three Metra station names – Rosemont, Schiller Park and Franklin Park–Belmont Ave.

Now onto the big issue, and one that’s sure to raise the ire of true-born Chicagoans: the non-adherence of Kara’s stations to the city’s well known and incredibly regular street grid. To take but one example: there are four Pulaski stations on the CTA: on the Green, Blue, Pink and Orange lines. These are all located on the same arrow-straight, north-south running thoroughfare, the eponymous Pulaski Road. Hence, they should all line up in one neat column, but on Kara’s map, they’re not aligned at all. It’s the same for all the Kedzies, Ciceros, etc. Obviously, this is a stylistic decision that Kara has made, and it ultimately doesn’t affect navigation as the lines don’t interact with each other, but it also doesn’t fit with how Chicagoans perceive their city – and that can be a very important element for a map to consider.

Our rating: Definitely illustrates Kara’s growing confidence in map-making, but could use some tweaks and rethinking to really make it shine. Three stars.