Submitted by Erik – a Transit Service Planning Supervisor at GoTriangle – who says:
GoTriangle, a regional bus system in the Research Triangle region of North Carolina, just updated its system map from a mostly geographical map to this schematic version. There aren’t a lot of systems like ours in the US, so we ended up doing somewhat of a hybrid between a subway-style map and a local bus map (for example, we used thicker solid lines to denote all-day routes since we don’t really have a frequent network yet). This is our first stab at this type of map, so we are very much open to ideas for how to improve it – I am not the designer, but had some input into the map. Let us know what you think!
Transit Maps says:
Overall, this is a very competent and visually pleasing system map, Erik – you’re definitely on the right path here!
While schematic in style, the main hubs maintain a good spatial relationship to each other and to the real-world geography of the area, which makes the whole thing easier to understand. Generally, labelling of major streets – another important part of helping user locate themselves on the map – is well done, although the highway numbers could perhaps be a little larger and some of the more crowded areas are missing street names.
The numbering of routes on the routes themselves helps in following paths across the map, but it can look a little awkward when many routes run in parallel. The number boxes all sort of scrunch up next to each other and have to be offset from their lines to make things fit. I’ve seen people solve this problem by staggering the number boxes along the line, which could work here, although the section to the north of the GoRaleigh station would need some careful attention.
On the other hand, my personal preference is that county names should sit directly across the boundary line from each other. This is so that an immediate comparison between the two names can be made, rather than having to slide your eyes along the line to find the next county name.
However, there’s a lot to like about the map – the large circular hub stations work well to indicate their importance, and the literal “link” icon for connections is both archly self-aware and effective. (As a regional-scale map, it might be an idea to also indicate connections to Amtrak rail services at appropriate stations). The three levels of service are denoted clearly, and I especially like the little directional arrows to indicate the direction of travel along routes during the AM and PM peaks where appropriate.
The use of icons throughout is nice, though the Park-and-Ride circle in particular seems a little too small. Could RDU use an airport icon to help it stand out a bit more?
The route notes are a good idea to provide further detail, but the “speech bubble” format could be a little confusing. Traditionally, the tail of such a bubble points to the thing of interest (e.g., the speaker in a comic book), but here it doesn’t really point at anything. Instead, the reader has to follow a thin line to find what the note is referring to. I don’t mind the smaller icon at the point of interest, but I’d suggest the larger note lose its tail. A point of consistency: the note about “PART Route 4” to the left edge is presented in a different visual style to all the other notes. While it’s referring to the route of a different company, I believe the note should really follow the style of all the others.
Our rating: Despite the detailed critique, I think this is actually quite lovely. It’s clean, modern, easy to read and follow. Most of what I discuss is sweating the small details to really make the map shine. Great work – three-and-a-half stars!