TTC Cartography, Signage, and Wayfinding

[44 North]

EVENT: Connecting The Dots of transit wayfinding in the GTHA

http://spacing.ca/toronto/2015/03/11/event-connecting-dots-transit-wayfinding-gtha/

Ah, what better time to air my grievances at the obscene distortion on the standard subway map. I get that the map has to fit into the narrow margin on the subway vehicles, but this level of distortion makes me view our schematic more as a misrepresentative falsehood than a descriptive diagram.

Below is the current TTC subway map. Nothing has changed, except that I added the Crosstown in to give an idea as to how off-kilter it will look if things remain the way they are. As well, I made a basic graphical representation to give a general idea where and to what degree the distortion exists respective to its actual location.

As many spatially-orientated straphangers are aware, things are not what they seem on our subway map. The distance between Bloor to Union (2km) is shown to be the same as Bloor to Lawrence (6km), and the distance between Eglinton to Sheppard (6km) is shown to be the same as Queen to Bloor (1.75km). Once the Crosstown is complete, to a casual outside observer or a tourist, one could easily think downtown Toronto is somewhere in north midtown (as I’m sure many Metro planners would’ve liked to happen). And I can’t see how the Spadina ext to VMC can fit into the current map’s styling. I didn’t dare try attempting it. The line would’ve been so crammed in that it’d appear to be mostly an E-W extension instead of N-S.

I guess distortion is somewhat of a minor issue in the grand scheme of things, but it’s one of my major gripes in the area of signage and wayfinding. Surely there’s a better way to situate the map in a subway car than to make North York seem like a black hole warping the space around it.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

The map does its job fine. The proportions are unfortunate, but ultimately take away little from the utility of the map.

 

[Johnny Au]

The distortion map looks good, except that the distance between Bloor and Queen is 2 km, given that Bloor and Queen are former concession roads, which are spaced 2 km apart.

Yes, it is unfortunate how the subway map looks distorted. On the subway map, the distance between Warden and Kennedy stations looks shorter than between Bay and Yonge. In reality though, the distance between Warden and Kennedy is many times greater than between Bay and Yonge.

 

[44 North]

Oh right, the line spacing for the grid is somewhat meaningless. I just clicked an overlay that I could tweak, and it wasn’t supposed to correlate to set distances. As well, I made the map awhile ago and IIRC used Bloor around Bay as the basis/trace to compare the TTC map with an actual map.

 

[kotsy]

Distortion is very common in most subway maps. The London Underground map was the first one to use this technique to make it easier on the eyes. It has since been adapted by many other transit systems. These maps are not supposed to give you any more information other than how to get from one station station to another. That's all people care about when they're underground. There is a reason this idea has been around for almost 100 years.

http://www.fastcodesign.com/1669080/what-if-londons-geography-were-as-distorted-as-its-tube-map

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tube_map#Beck.27s_maps

"Beck was a London Underground employee who realised that because the railway ran mostly underground, the physical locations of the stations were irrelevant to the traveller wanting to know how to get to one station from another — only the topology of the railway mattered."

http://www.smithsonianmag.com/smart...ted-subway-maps-way-too-much-17747141/?no-ist

"Look at the London subway map, and you might think you’re getting a good sense of the city’s layout. You’d be mostly wrong. The London map depicts the city center about four times larger than it actually is. The same thing happens if you look at New York City’s subway map—Manhattan is definitely not that big, and Central Park is definitely not that wide."

 

[nfitz]

The map does its job fine. The proportions are unfortunate, but ultimately take away little from the utility of the map.

Agreed. Though the one oddity I've wondered about is the Downsview (Sheppard West) location. The station is at the intersection of Dufferin and Sheppard - but it nowhere near being north of Dufferin. Finch West is unlikely to be north of Keele and Highway 407 on Jane is unlikely to be north of Jane. This lack of alignment hasn't really occurred elsewhere on the map.

 

[AlbertHWagstaff]

Agreed. Though the one oddity I've wondered about is the Downsview (Sheppard West) location. The station is at the intersection of Dufferin and Sheppard - but it nowhere near being north of Dufferin. Finch West is unlikely to be north of Keele and Highway 407 on Jane is unlikely to be north of Jane. This lack of alignment hasn't really occurred elsewhere on the map.

The pre-Sheppard maps had the Spadina line going quite far over to the left so that it was positioned much closer to Dufferin. More recent maps have pulled the Spadina line in much closer to the Yonge line.

 

[44 North]

Distortion is very common in most subway maps. The London Underground map was the first one to use this technique to make it easier on the eyes. It has since been adapted by many other transit systems. These maps are not supposed to give you any more information other than how to get from one station station to another. That's all people care about when they're underground. There is a reason this idea has been around for almost 100 years.

Distortion is definitely common. But with London’s Tube map it seems the distortion is more or less city-wide, and evenly distributed outside of the inner city. This is somewhat evident after following that sites’ video showing the transformation between real distances and the schematic. Whereas with the TTC’s map, the distortion seems to be solely located north of St Clair, and to a lesser extent east of Vic Park.

Obviously readability, simplification, and “topology of the railway†aren’t issues with the simple barebones grid-like system we have. So what is the TTC’s reason? Seemingly that the map had to conform to a rectangular space above the doors. As is evidenced by the 1965 image below, Eglinton was the top of the rectangle. But rather than the map expanding proportionally with our extension to Finch; the 1973 image shows that the N/S axial distortion that is the current standard was set by having Finch take Eglinton’s spot – with everything below squeezed to make it fit. Naturally things will get worse once the Spadina ext to Hwy 7 opens. But with the Yonge extension to RHC another 3km (and three more stations) further north than VMC, how will that work? Will Finch have to move to where Eglinton currently is, and Eglinton to where Rosedale is?

For what can be argued is the de facto map of Toronto that a good proportion of the city’s population relies on to get their bearings, being confined to a predetermined rectangle is not a good reason for mapping our system and its future. It skews perceptions, makes large distances look insignificant, and will get much worse the further out we expand.

 

[gweed123]

I think the TTC will need to abandon the "whole system map above the door" concept, and start using that space for line-specific maps, with the full system map in the ad space beside the door. Boston's Green Line does a great job with this. Above the door is a line diagram of the line and all of it's branches, which easily shows what route branches off where. It also highlights transfer points by showing a different colour line bisecting the line you're currently on. If you want more detail, consult the system map.

East-west lines like Bloor-Danforth and Eglinton would be pretty easy to fit into that space, seeing as it's natural to view them that way relative to north. The Yonge-University line would need to be turned on its side in order to fit though, which may be confusing at first, since north would either be to the left or the right on the image, instead of the top.

 

[nfitz]

I think the TTC will need to abandon the "whole system map above the door" concept, and start using that space for line-specific maps, with the full system map in the ad space beside the door.

Ultimately perhaps, but as we've already seen prototypes that include completed Lines 5, 6, and 7, along with the Line 1 and 2 extensions, I doubt this would happen for many decades.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Line 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 fit fine on the map since they're relatively straight longitudinal or latitudinal lines. However I suspect they'll be some challenges fitting in both SmartTrack and the Relief Line (line 8 & 9???) especially in the downtown core, because of their overlapping routes.

 

[christiesplits]

I think the TTC will need to abandon the "whole system map above the door" concept, and start using that space for line-specific maps, with the full system map in the ad space beside the door. Boston's Green Line does a great job with this.

Agreed. Many systems do this, including Paris, New York and Madrid.

 

[gweed123]

Ultimately perhaps, but as we've already seen prototypes that include completed Lines 5, 6, and 7, along with the Line 1 and 2 extensions, I doubt this would happen for many decades.

The overhead maps in the new TRs are literally just a fancy Light Bright with a sheet over top. Switching that to a line diagram and creating poster-sized system maps wouldn't be too hard to do. The full system maps could also conceivably show the streetcar routes on them, since there would be enough room (even if the stops aren't shown). I may just take a stab at that, to see what it could look like. Does anyone know what the standard poster space size is in the subway cars?

Line 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 fit fine on the map since they're relatively straight longitudinal or latitudinal lines. However I suspect they'll be some challenges fitting in both SmartTrack and the Relief Line (line 8 & 9???) especially in the downtown core, because of their overlapping routes.

Especially considering the future integration between GO REX and the TTC, showing these lines will be essential to proper navigation.

 

[nfitz]

Line 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7 fit fine on the map since they're relatively straight longitudinal or latitudinal lines. However I suspect they'll be some challenges fitting in both SmartTrack and the Relief Line (line 8 & 9???) especially in the downtown core, because of their overlapping routes.

Relief line phase 1 isn't until 2030s at learliest - and may only include 3/4 new stations that would easily fit. SmartTrack might well be GO which isn't shown on subway map. I wouldn't worry about it ... by the time that happens, perhaps all the advertising will be electronic displays, with a touch screen for the map.

Let's worry about reality, not some possible far-off future fantsy. TTC said n the 1960s that they'd deliver the DRL by 1980.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

Where are you getting this 2030 date from?