Here’s a quick link to an article in the Washington Post by Martine Powers about a study that shows how tinkering with Washington, DC’s Metrorail map influences rider’s perceptions of the system and which path they should take to reach their final destination.
In the image above, for example, the Blue Line has been altered to look less desirable than the Yellow Line when coming into DC from the south… and in testing, there was a 9.5 percent increase in people choosing the Yellow Line over the Blue for their trips based on this map when compared to the official one. Even experienced local commuters were influenced by edits like this to the map, which is kind of astounding.
It’s a fascinating insight into human psychology – we know that this is not a literal geographical representation of the system (MAP NOT TO SCALE!), and yet we still use it to make judgment calls about distance and time. As the author of the study, Zhan Guo, says,
“The conclusion is that people trust the map more than their experiences. Even for people who have used the system for many years, the map still matters.”
I don’t know if you’ve seen this one yet, but here’s the page for the upcoming Oklahoma City Streetcar, featuring probably my favorite official streetcar map that I’ve ever seen. The color scheme is calm yet visible, the map doesn’t feel cluttered despite identifying every street and countless landmarks, walking times are included in relevant places, and the position of the station marker indicates the side of the road where the platform can be found. I personally think this is a perfect example of how a streetcar map should be designed, and I was wondering about your thoughts on the matter!
Transit Maps says:
Yes, this really is quite lovely, and any problems I have with it are very minor: The redundant second shield for I-235 that’s half cut-off on the right hand side of the map, and the way that the Bricktown Canal looks a little too similar to a road are the most obvious flaws for me.
And while the color palette is generally very pleasing, I would have perhaps leveraged the distinctive magenta colors from the streetcar’s logo for the actual route lines, just to help them pop out a little more from the background.
Our rating: Really quite lovely, and hopefully an indicator of the quality of the streetcar project as a whole. It certainly gets me excited for the future! Four stars.
Here is a map I made using the current Translink maps as the base-line. I decided to include trams and commuter rail as trams are in the process of being deployed in Surrey and by Granville Island, and I firmly believe we should invest in commuter rail more than just the WCE. As well, I made a lot of references to Vancouver’s and Canada’s histories, from recognising our Coast Salish peoples on whose lands we illegally live to recognising other Indigenous talent to recognising a milestone in the trans community and a milestone for North American Deaf peoples.
Due to the clutter, I increased the size of certain, important transfer stations and made sure to note trains, airports and ferries. Unfortunately, I could not figure out a better way to place some text aside from over the tram lines. As well, I got lazy and decided to not add green to the North Shore by Capilano and Cypress (that will be my first update).
Transit Maps says:
This is definitely a fun project that David’s taken on here, and he’s done a good job of building on the ever-improving Translink corporate style to create it.
However, I will note that he’s using his allowable space incredibly inefficiently. By my rough calculations, the title and two legend blocks take up over 29 percent of the space contained within the blue border around the map. The wide open spaces around Langley, which contains just five stations, uses another 11 percent or so. This means that over 40 percent of the entire map is doing very little work, while everything else is crammed into the remaining 60 percent (or less, as there are some other large empty spaces).
Here’s what I’d do to to balance things a bit better. Reduce the size of the legends (and the type in them, which is too large) and combine them into one box that’s no deeper than the right-hand one on David’s map. This should free up enough space to enlarge and respace the cramped downtown area of the map. The outlying areas could also be compressed more to help with this, although I understand that David is trying to indicate how the commuter rail services reach far-flung parts of Greater Vancouver.
Routes on David’s map are only indicated by colour, and a few of them are quite similar, making it tricky to work out which is which sometimes. He’s using a frequency-based system where a thicker route line means more service, but this should be made explicit on the map. Skytrain = thick weight line; trams = medium weight line; commuter rail and other services = thin weight line. Indicating the termini that each line runs between in the legend could also be helpful when there’s this many different routes.
I’m also intrigued by the use of Squamish othographic notation to represent the First Nation names used for the commuter rail lines. Personally –as a non-local – this makes the names almost impossible to read or pronounce, and I’d much rather a transliteration of the names into standard English characters. I know that some local First Nation people prefer this notation to capture sounds in their language that aren’t normally present in spoken English, but I do think it would present a comprehension barrier to any tourists visiting Vancouver. I’m genuinely interested in what others think of this approach when it comes to information design for the widest audience possible.
Neat to-scale graphic of urban rail (and trolleybus as well, shown in purple) in Germany, last updated in June 2016. The length and breadth of some of the S-Bahn networks is quite astounding – look at Leipzig’s!
QDo you know any official London Underground map that shows the Metropolitan Line/stations beyond Aylesbury (i.e. the Brill and Verney Junction branches) and not just mentions them in a ‘To’ box?
ANo, I haven’t ever seen a map with “Underground” branding that shows the entire network and the Metropolitan Railway’s fullest extent out to the far reaches of Brill and Verney Junction, some 40-odd miles from London.
The closest I can find is a Metropolitan Railway map (first image above) that was produced in slightly different versions from the mid-1920s up to 1933, after which all the railways merged to become the London Passenger Transport Board, the precursor to today’s Transport for London. This map shows the Metropolitan Railway’s routes in red and all the other “tube and district railways” in blue, so it does show the whole network, but not in a very equitable way!
The other map that I know of that includes Brill and Verney Junction is the famed “Metro-Land” map (second image), but it only shows Metropolitan Railway lines, and only as far east as Baker Street.
There’s no Harry Beck tube map that shows these branches, either: the 1932 proofing map only goes out as far as Rickmansworth, and any “To:” boxes he later added to the Metropolitan Line only ever went to Aylesbury. The Brill tramway closed in 1935, with Verney Junction’s branch following in 1936, so there wasn’t that much cross-over with the “Beck and beyond” design period.
The other day, long-time correspondent Edward Russell tweeted a photo of a strip map he’d seen while on the Dallas Streetcar (left). It depicts the DART light rail system, telling riders that they can make a connection with that service at Union Station (at one end of the short streetcar line).
However, the execution of the map is almost comically poor: wobbly route lines, clashing labels, uneven spacing of stations and more. One of the longest routes on the map – the Trinity Railway Express (TRE) commuter rail to Fort Worth – is inexplicably scrunched up into the tiniest of spaces, making it look for all the world like it’s the streetcar line! While I acknowledge that fitting an entire rail system into a narrow strip map format can be challenging, I knew instantly that there had to be a better solution than this.
So here’s a quick two-hour reworking of the map to the same dimensions (as best as I can tell) and with type at the same size. The map now uses a very simple four-column grid, which allows all labels to be placed to the right of their corresponding route line: no clashing type here! The map is now also strictly diagrammatic. It’s impossible to even attempt to show geographical relationships in a distorted diagram like this, so why even try? All vertical elements are now placed the same distance apart from top to bottom, which nicely lines up all the stations into neat little rows. The one and only concession to geography was to place the TRE Medical/Market Center station along the horizontal part of its route in order to get it closer to the DART Orange/Green Line Market Center station, as they’re in close proximity in real life.
What else? I put on a DART logo, added a disclaimer that the map is not to scale (just in case!) and removed the redundant north pointer. I could probably work this up a little more, but I think I get this definitely gets the idea across. What do you think?
Over the Christmas break I was inspired by your E-Road Network Map, and wanted to create my own map. I chose the Asian Highway Network, a similar system to the E-Road network, as there seemed to be very few maps of the whole network, and the only ones I could find were either too high-level or too vast to easily read. This is my take on the network.
However, one thing I was not sure how to represent on the map was international borders, which I think would be more important in Asia than Europe, as without Schengen any route-planning would have to involve considering visas for travelling between countries. There is also the problem that some borders are completely closed, such as the North Korea | South Korea border on AH1 and AH6: how would you suggest that I show this?
Another issue I had while developing the map was fitting 45° angles into the grid system. I rounded these distances to the nearest ¹⁄₈ of the line width, but this did mean that it became harder and harder to stick to the major divisions of the grid as I developed the map further, and any diagonal distances are slightly different to the horizontal/vertical distances. Do you have any advice about this?
Transit Maps says:
Wow – you’ve certainly nailed the look and feel of my E-Road map, Xsanda! As a result, this makes a great companion piece to my previous work. I find it especially interesting that the two systems overlap somewhat to the west: Turkey, Russia and the Caucasas region would seem to have many roads that would be designated as both an E-Road and an Asian Highway, though signage as both would probably be pretty intermittent.
Also of interest is the numbering system: unlike E-Roads and US Interstates (which arrange numbers into a continent-spanning grid), the Asian Highway network uses numbers 1-9 to represent cross-continent routes, with two- and three-digit numbers grouped by region, as Xsanda explains:
Numbers 10-29 represent Southeast Asia, with 10-19 on the mainland, and 20-29 on the islands of Indonesia and the Philippines. Numbers 30-39 are located in Northeast Asia, and 40-59 are in South Asia, the Indian subcontinent. Numbers 60-69 are in Central Asia, 70-79 are in Iran and Afghanistan, and 80-89 are in Turkey and the Caucasus region.
Design-wise, international borders do present an interesting challenge, and I’m not afraid to admit that I intentionally left them off my map simply because it seemed like too much hard work. I also liked the idea of presenting a Europe unified by this network of highways, even though the Schengen Zone is much smaller than the total area of the map. You can take the plunge and add them, but be aware that the distortion of the landforms to fit the stylised look of the map will carry across to borders, which could result in some very odd-looking countries!
Regarding closed borders, they could be pretty easily indicated with an appropriate icon that’s explained in the legend – this could be a solid black bar or “X” across the highway at that point, or some other appropriate yet graphically simple symbol.
As for the grid, I wouldn’t worry too much about breaking it. On a map like this, it should really act as a guideline only: the more important thing is to make a map that feels balanced, and I think you’ve done a pretty good job! Now, what other continent-spanning highway networks need mapping?
This map is based on voter-approved expansions to the Seattle area’s light rail network and represents what the system should look like in 2041 when the extensions are finished. The light rail, which currently has two separate lines (one runs from the University of Washington area through downtown Seattle and on to the airport; the other is a short segment in Tacoma), will grow to a sprawling system connecting the entire region. Sound Transit’s plans do not indicate how many separate lines there will be so I made guesses based on the information they’ve made available (I did make a silly guess in my first draft where I included something of an express line…before realizing that there isn’t track capacity to support that). Existing commuter rail lines, express buses, and a proposed Bus Rapid Transit line will help connect spots that the light rail won’t quite reach.
The map is stylistically based off of a “stylized system map” hidden away on Sound Transit’s website. It is from that that I included the ST Express bus lines with their route call-outs at each station, something I didn’t intend to do originally but something that seemed very useful on Sound Transit’s map and I like how it turned out on mine. The line colors are also based on the colors of Sound Transit’s map to give a sense of continuity… although I do really like Oran Viriyincy’s choices on his Seattle Transit Map (which shows detailed current services); he went for colors based on local culture.
This is my second transit map and the first made using a real graphics design program (although you might notice that I’m not exactly proficient at curves in Inkscape…I’ll just claim for now that it was a stylistic choice; my first map was a Budapest system map made in PowerPoint so I think I’m doing better). I’m really glad that there’s a place to send these where there’s opportunity for viewing and feedback; thanks!
Information about the expansions here. And Sound Transit’s current, albeit hidden, map here (link no longer active).
Transit Maps says:
For only your second map (and first with a real graphics program!), this is really good, Zachary! Definitely work on adding curves to route line corners: it always helps a map flow better, in my opinion. Hard corners like you have here create a jerky, staccato effect, where your eyes stop and start while following route lines. However, apart from the lack of curves, you’ve done a great job following the style of the official Sound Transit schematic you reference above – I can definitely see this as a future progression of that map!
Now for the bad news.
Unfortunately, you’ve interpreted the plans for the downtown segment incorrectly. You’ve drawn your map as if all the lines will be routed down the current Downtown Seattle Transit Tunnel (DSTT), but they’re actually going to dig a whole new tunnel to carry the Ballard extension. The new tunnel will start between the Smith Cove and Seattle Center stations, and will interchange with the existing station at Westlake before crossing over to 5th or 6th Avenue (final routing TBD) and the new Midtown station (probably at around Madison Street). Ballard trains can’t stop at University Street or Pioneer Square, simply because they’re over in the DSTT.
The new tunnel will join back to the main trunk at International District/Chinatown station, where trains from Ballard will continue down to the Airport and beyond, while trains from Everett/UW will now go to West Seattle – Zachary gets that new service pattern correct on his map. I believe that East Link trains will use the DSTT in the future as the infrastructure currently being built ties into that tunnel.
One curious thing to note is that only West Seattle trains will call at Stadium once these lines are finished; Airport trains will skip this station. (Though I wonder if that will still hold true on game days for the Sounders, Mariners or Seahawks – it seems strange to not provide direct light rail service on both lines to Stadium station then.)
The configuration described above is shown in the ST3 map Zachary references above, but it’s not drawn particularly clearly. I only understand it because I’ve had it explained to me in great detail by transit engineers.
I’m not as familiar with the Issaquah extension, but I think that what Zachary has drawn is right. I feel sure that followers from Seattle will be quick to point out any other errors…
So Zachary’s challenge is to take what he’s done and reconfigure and improve upon it. I look forward to seeing the next version!
QHi, I want to make a map of my home city’s bus system, but as I am a ‘starter’ I have some problems with developing it. In our city centre, there is one bus stop with 24 routes and another with 22 (excluding the night routes). Between these two stops, the lines run along two streets with 10 and 11 routes , respectively. What would you advise me to do to not have a big mess in the middle of the map? I’d really appreciate an answer.
A That’s quite a problem, Anonymous, and probably one that’s not able to be resolved in a way that gives you an attractive, usable map: it’s just too many routes in a confined space to be practicable. For an example of how terrible your map might look, check out the old bus map for Luxembourg City before Jug Cerovic made a far superior one for them. You simply can’t run that number of bus routes in parallel with each other and expect your map to work.
So you need to think of a way to group like services together on your map to reduce the number of route lines passing through your densest area. This can be by service type (local, express, limited, long-distance) or by destination (buses to the north as one group, buses to the south as another, etc.). For good examples of this type of map, check out the current Luxembourg City bus map and the new Utrecht bus map (both by Jug Cerovic) which group routes by destination, and the bus map for Spokane, Washington by CHK America, which groups by service type. The new Muni map for San Francisco (which I haven’t actually written about on the blog) is also a great example of mapping a bus network in a modern style.
Submitted by Fabian Wegewijs, Coordinator of Travel Information for U-OV, who says:
In 2018 a new streetcar will run between the Central Station of Utrecht and the university area of Utrecht (De Uithof). This Uithoflijn will have 7 intermediate stops, and its termini will be the Central Station on one end and a major park + ride on the other. Twenty seven new trams have been ordered from CAF, the first of which has arrived at the depot in Nieuwegein in December 2016 for testing. All vehicles will be 32 meters long. During daytime they’ll run coupled, with a total capacity of some 550 passengers per run. We’ll provide a frequency of 16 runs per hour, creating a capacity of almost 9.000 passengers per hour in each direction.
For this new line we’ve made a strip map. One will be placed above every other door in the vehicles, alternating with our house rules. Icons show some information about each stop. We’ve followed your often repeated advice to place the stop names horizontal, to make them easy to read. The colours (red and orange) at the lines termini are shown on all U-OV transit information, including stop signs, brochures, digital information screens and the vehicles destination display. With this system people can see by colour (eight in total) which way the tram or bus is going, or they can (intuitively) filter out all lines that do not go in their direction.
I’m very curious as to what you think of this map.
Transit Maps says:
As always, I love getting maps directly from transit agencies for review, so thanks to Fabian for sending another map my way! This is a solid, no-nonsense strip map here: no bells and whistles, just clear communication of information.
The use of colour to quickly and visually denote the tram’s final destination is interesting (U-OV’s site explains this here in Dutch), though I do wonder why it doesn’t carry across to the directional arrows at the bottom of the map? It seems like the “Centrum” arrow and text could be red and the “De Uithof” arrow and text could be in the same shade of orange as the label on the map. If the arrows are meant to stand alone, then perhaps grey would work better than a non-committal colour.
My only other comment is in regard to the “hospital” and “park-and-ride” icons, which exhibit something I’m seeing a bit more of lately – a curious need to place an icon in a shape that’s inside another shape. The “H” for “hospital” is in a rounded-edge box which sits inside another box (which just seems unnecessarily recursive to me), while the “P+R” is in a circle in a box. Both would be graphically simpler if the symbol sat within one shape only, and the P+R icon could even just be a circle to quickly visually differentiate it from the other “destination” icons. The icons do their job as they are, but I always think that simpler is better for this kind of thing.
Our rating: Solid work that fits within an overall wayfinding strategy without being spectacular. Three stars.
