A very handsome map of transportation services in the greater Kansas City area from 1941. A nicely subdued olive street grid is overlaid by the route lines – colour-coded by mode (black for streetcars, blue and red for bus lines, and a lovely aqua for trolleybuses). Areas of interest are called out in bright yellow, so this looks like a six-colour print job – quite a luxury in 1941!
There’s also a great downtown inset, a great ornate compass rose incorporating the logo of the Kansas City Public Service Co., and some fantastic 1940s typography throughout. What’s not to love?
Side note: Copy on the reverse of the map notes that the transportation company of 1941 “operates a fleet of 413 electric cars, 234 motor busses and 86 trolley busses, supplying service on 251 miles of street car routes, 191 miles of motor bus routes and 51 miles of trolley bus routes.”
I would like to share with you the new Metrovalencia’s network map, whose design has been updated with the opening of the new Line 10 this year. The main reason why the transit operator decided to redesign it from scratch instead of just adding the new line layout is because they wanted to start avoiding using diagonal-axis labels on it, as they think horizontal labels are more accessible for people with intellectual disability.
But there are more differences:
Tram services now are represented again with solid lines, as it was in the previous map before the 2015’s redesign, ending with the differentiation from the “metro” ones. This could be because the new Line 10 is such a mix, operated with tramway units but with underground stations in the city center. But maybe this rule could have been maintained using the two-toned line for the street-runing sections and the solid line style for traffic segregated sections, for example.
They’ve included some spatial references, such as the curves of the subway tunnel between Àngel Guimerà and Xàtiva or Ayora and Marítim, or the Pont de Fusta loop, which before they were in a straight line.
As almost all the city center stations are shared by different lines, now all of them are officially transfer stations. The map also points when in the same station different lines stop in different platforms (e.g. Alameda). The old transfer icon now represents intermodal stations where the users can change from subway to tramway lines or vice versa (except in Bailén/Alacant, maybe because they consider they’re different stations?).
It’s drawn the future underground moving walkway which will be built to connect Xàtiva and Alacant stations as the project to extend the line some meters more with a new station for Line 10 built in Xàtiva was cancelled. Now, this connection just can be done walking on the street as the woman icon pretends to explain.
In this new map version, it’s represented the stations where some routes can end when they run as partial routes, with the line icon near its label.
The transit operator decided to reduce the number of fare zones from 4 to just 2 (plus the Airport fare zone), so now there are some stations that belong to both zones represented by this background color overlap.
A similar design has been created also for the TRAM of Alicante, which is run by the same transit operator, so now both cities shares the same map style (but with different typeface: Titillium for Metrovalencia and Rotis for TRAM).
I would appreciate if you could check this version and tell us your opinion about if all these changes and new additions have been really an improvement or just unnecessary with the previous map design [from 2015; review here – Cam] as a reference.
Transit Maps says:
There’s some things I really like about this diagram and there are others I’m not so fond of… so let’s start with the good!
Metrovalencia is a bit of an odd system in that it freely combines street-running trams, a full metro including subways, and commuter rail that runs far out into the surrounding countryside, all under one umbrella. So I really don’t mind that there’s no attempt made at mode differentiation here – these lines are all part of Metrovalencia, and are all treated equally. What I really do like is that the central Zone A is presented with a good degree of spatial accuracy, and the map then gets progressively more diagrammatic the further out it gets. This condenses those far-flung lines (especially Line 1 to the south) rather wonderfully. Presumably, the way that stops are grouped along those lines reflects the different built-up urban areas along each route – though it does perhaps just end up looking a bit haphazard. I’d be interested in seeing an alternative where the stops are always evenly spaced: it might just look a little more harmonious.
The overlapping zones are drawn about as neatly as they can be, though I do think they could be a bit lighter in tone. As it stands, it seems like some of the route colours have had to be strengthened quite a lot to compete with the background – Line 1 is more of a dull gold than its previous goldenrod yellow, for example. It’s also unfortunate that the dark gold outline for Zone A passes right through the middle of the map’s legend!
The new interchange markers are definitely an improvement over the previous version, clearly indicating when passenger movement between platforms or modes is required. The weakest interchange design is at Empalme, where Line 1 takes a 90-degree turn underneath the marker, which is generally regarded as bad design practice.
Finally, it’s interesting to note that this diagram takes the approach of using a crossed-out wheelchair icon to indicate the one and only non-accessible station at Valencia Sud, which is fair enough.
Our final word: A definite improvement in my eyes, though still not truly outstanding. By my reckoning, this is at least the third totally different design for the Metrovalencia diagram since 2009 (when I visited the city and rode the network), which is fairly rapid turnover and doesn’t really speak to a consistent design language for the network.
Hi Cameron, thanks for the amazing work you do on this site! I just noticed that one of the maps that I see the most often in real life has not been featured here (as far as I can tell): the regional train network map of Schleswig-Holstein, Germany’s northernmost state. It can be found here [PDF link].
Looking at it after perusing your site for a while, it is easy for me to see the flaws – first of all, the map seems very messy, even if that is somewhat understandable since it covers a big area. Particularly the area covering Hamburg (which is not part of Schleswig-Holstein but still a major transport hub for the area) is confusing. I have to say that I like the way that multi-line stations indicate which train will stop and which won’t – the system itself is pretty confusing in that regard and I regularly see passengers on RE7 or RE70 that have no clue whether their train will take them to their destination or not, but at least the map is pretty straightforward on that. Other than that, I’d be curious about your thoughts!
Transit Maps says:
I pretty much agree with Jan’s assessment here in that the overall appearance of the map is a bit messy, but there are some nice design touches as well. The messiness seems to have two main contributing factors: the afore-mentioned problems with cramping (especially around Hamburg) created by the geographical layout of the map; and the uninspired labels for stations.
Lots of different angles are deployed to fit station names into the layout, and the service icons don’t really relate that well to the labels they’re attached to – perhaps being a little too large and clumsy. Worst of all is the white box around the labels when they’re on a grey background: it just looks amateur – almost like someone literally pasted them on top of the artwork. It’s been done because the type would have poor contrast against the dark grey water background, but could have been avoided if a light blue background had been used instead.
Overall, I think the routes could be simplified a little more – we don’t need to see every twist and turn the lines make on their way – and this could allow for a little more flexibility for expanding the crowded parts of the map and taking up the slack in the less dense areas.
On the plus side, the distinctive station markers where more than one service stops are – as Jan says – quite delightful, and the list of services to the right of the map are comprehensive and easy to understand.
Our final word: Could use some simplification and polishing to make it easier to use, but it’s not terrible by any means. Based on the PDF, this is meant to be printed as an A3-sized poster, a size it would work quite well at, I think.
A major factor is that Wales has a a distinctive and recognisable shape that aids in locating major towns, while the Grand Est region is very indistinct and blobby. The simplified shape used on the diagram isn’t actually much like the real world, so it’s not that useful for locating places. Highlighting major destinations like Strasbourg, Metz, Nancy and Mulhouse would help a lot, as they’re somewhat lost in a sea of identical labels. Contrast and emphasis to guide the eye to important information is a huge part of transit map design!
I also have major issues with the way that TGV services are shown. Firstly, the shade of light blue used makes them look like rivers instead of high-speed rail. Then, they have to bounce up and down across the diagram to line up with their stations, which seems an odd way to depict your fastest services – the straighter these route lines are shown, the better, in my opinion. Finally, because the route lines are really indicating the extent of the LGV Est high-speed rail lines and not the actual TGV services that run on those lines, it looks like these services end at Vendenheim and Petit-Croix instead of their actual final destinations. Ultimately, the diagram is meant to be focussing on TER services within the region, so the TGV lines should be subsidiary information, but this presentation still rubs me the wrong way.
My biggest problem with the diagram is that there doesn’t really seem to be much of an underlying grid holding it all together… as much as possible, all the vertical lines should adhere to a multiples of a constant vertical grid to give some rhythm and flow, but they just seem to be placed anywhere. The uneven placement of station dots throughout the diagram shows that there’s some room to move to get those lines spaced out a bit better, but that level of care hasn’t been taken.
Our final word: A shapeless, formless blob in need of a stronger grid and better information hierarchy. Unmemorable.
Hello there! The last time you reviewed a map of mine was in 2015 [See review here – Cam]. Since then I’ve moved houses, had several new jobs, and been through a pandemic. I’ve recently been reworking a map of the Welsh rail network, based on a 2:1 triangular grid, using Affinity Designer which has continued to improve.
You will see there are some clear design factors in the diagram. A large improvement from my last design is the ability to adopt a balance between map and diagram. There’s a North-South line between Manchester/Liverpool and Newport, and I finally managed to get the Valley Lines evenly spaced and visually balanced, including space for planned stations. I’ve included the Oswestry and Amlwch proposals.
I’m pleased that the South Wales Mainline gives a strong, smooth base to the diagram, and likewise the North Wales Coast line gives a clear Northern boundary hugging the coast. The Cambrian and Heart of Wales lines provide a nice balance in the centre – almost like the ‘scales’ in 90’s versions of the Lyon metro.
I’ve finally managed to incorporate large parts of the TrawsCymru bus network where it augments (rather than competes with) the railway. This means the rural heart of Wales doesn’t look as empty as it otherwise would, and there’s also some Western ‘closure’ to the map. Despite that, it’s clear that there’s less public transport in the West and North, which reflects reality. Four connecting steam railways are also included.
The map is bilingual, except for where there’s a single spelling of a location or – and this is my preference – the Welsh is so similar to the English that I’ve simply opted for the Welsh alone. (Merthyr Tydful being an example.)
Like every such diagram, there are trade-offs. This isn’t perfect and there’s a number of things I can’t quite fix:
The ruling size of the station labels the impossibly long Eneu’r-glyn a Pharc Churchill Energyln & Churchill Park. That gave a 6pt type size which is … on the small end. I could not come up with a way to make this bigger without making the Rhymni line quite a mess, or implausibly broadening the whole of the Valley Lines.
Grangetown and the future Loundon Square are close to their station dots, but not close enough for my liking.
Heath High Level and Low Level is a constant problem when it comes to managing two stations with long names in two languages whose platforms are only 70 metres apart. I’ve given it a go as best I can
Bilingual station names can vary immensely in size, and I’ve opted to evenly space the text up a route line and move the station dots to match, rather than keep the dots an equal distance but mash the text up. This is most obvious on the Merthyr, Rhymni and Ebbw Vale lines.
Finally the ‘kink’ of the Marches line approaching Newport is a pity, but avoids confusion with the SWML and reflects a number of twists the passenger goes through to get into the station.
Other than this I’m pleased with the graphic balance, the legibility, and the room for future plans to be incorporated without changing the diagram. But I’d be very interested in your own thoughts!
Transit Maps says:
When I reviewed James’ previous diagram back in 2015, I noted that it was unfortunate that it didn’t really look anything like Wales, being squished into a landscape A3 format. This new version definitely solves that problem by employing a 2:1 grid (which gives angles of 26.57° instead of the commonly-employed “isometric angle” of 30°), allowing for an excellent approximation of Wales’ shape. Note how James only uses vertical lines and 26.57° lines (no horizontal or steeper 63.43° lines), which makes the diagram very compositionally strong.
Within that shape, all the lines are arranged in a very visually pleasing way – I particularly like the way all of the Metro lines fan out evenly from Cardiff. Nothing feels too cramped, which is quite an achievement given the use of bilingual labels. I think that spacing station labels evenly instead of their dots was definitely the right choice in this instance, so well done to James for using this solution.
Inclusion of connecting bus services is most welcome and fleshes out the network nicely, and showing the heritage steam railways as well is just the icing on the cake. I think the only thing I really miss is an indication of ferry connections at Holyhead, Fishguard and Milford Haven, just to complete the transportation picture.
The legend does seem to be missing an indication that coloured station labels indicated planned Metro stations, but that’s easily fixed.
Our final word: A massive improvement from James’ previous effort (which wasn’t bad by any stretch of the imagination) – this is confident, bright and really well executed. Great work, and definitely better than the stodgy and old-fashioned official Transport for Wales effort (PDF link).
As you might know, I’ve just got back from a week in Grand Canyon National Park, with three days spent below the rim hiking from the South Kaibab trailhead down to the Colorado River and back up again via the Bright Angel trail. It truly was a challenging but wonderful experience, and there’s some photos to savour at the end of the post.
While I was in the park, I was heartened to see that the National Parks Service is attempting to relieve chronic traffic congestion along the most popular section of the South Rim by promoting the use of free shuttle buses to move between popular locations. Indeed, during summer some parts of the rim are only accessible by bus, foot or bike. However, for this approach to work, the communication about the buses needs to be clear, concise and easily accessible – and for the most part it is. Upon entering the park, all visitors receive a leaflet that outlines the routes, with typically lovely NPS house-style maps (the Village-area map is shown below).
These maps are further supported with simple “read-down” strip maps, which help make clear that there are often different stops in either direction: the Red Line makes all stops westbound on Hermit Road, but only four out of nine on the return trip, for example. The Blue Line takes a fairly direct route from the Visitor Center to the Village, but a far more circuitous one on the return journey.
Also useful, but seen less often are simple “loop diagrams” for each route that also clearly show the different stops in each direction, and also make it clearer which stops easily allow a change in direction by use of a bi-directional arrow interchange symbol. A rider getting on the Blue Line at Mather Campground who wishes to go to the Village should get off the eastbound bus at the Market Plaza stop to meet a westbound Blue Line bus there, rather than continuing all the way to the Visitor Center, for example.
As well as the brochure, these maps appear at the major bus stops and in the buses themselves, so information is always at hand for riders. Best of all, service is frequent (10–15 minute headways), so no timetable is needed. However, in the middle of the day, demand on the Blue and Red lines still exceeds capacity so riders may have to wait for the next bus, or even the one after it!
A few quibbles: naming the routes after colours maybe isn’t ideal for the park’s international audience: numbered designations might be better. And the early-morning “Hiker’s Shuttle” bus from the Village to the South Kaibab trailhead via the Backcountry Office and the Visitor Center never shows up on any maps… it’s like a little secret that you just have to be in the know about.
Our final word: As visitation numbers to National Parks continue to grow, shuttle bus services like this are going to be increasingly important to reduce strain on facilities and the natural environment. Communication about these services need to be clear and easily understandable, and – for the most part – they succeed in Grand Canyon.
The Watchtower on the eastern edge of the parkSwitchbacks on the South Kaibab trail. Going down!Sunrise of the South Kaibab trailFollowing the ridgelineA waterfall along Garden Creek below Indian Garden campgroundThe Devil’s CorkscrewA turkey vulture riding thermalsWindblown selfie at Plateau PointAlpenglow in the desertHeading up the Bright Angel Trail; looking back down the way I cameGolden light at sunsetA rare view of the Colorado River from the rim
Frustrated with illegible service patterns and a pretty ugly system map (viewable here – Cam), I made my own line map for the Caltrain regional railway along the SF Peninsula. Curious what you think!
Transit Maps says:
This is a great example of how a transit diagram doesn’t need to be flashy or over designed to be successful – just clear and easy to understand. Similar in execution to Japanese service diagrams that I’ve seen, there’s very little ambiguity here: each service has its own route line with stops clearly shown and interchanges with other regional transit lines denoted, all backed up by a clear legend. It’s not rocket science, but it’s nice to see a simple concept executed so clearly.
A couple of minor comments: I’d probably move the San Francisco station label up so that the “4th & King” text lines up with the station dots, just to give a bit more breathing room before the next label down. Similarly, I’d probably shift the connection lozenge for the “B” line at Tamien over to line up vertically with the others, just to keep all that similar information in its own column.
Our final word: A simple concept, but executed well. Definitely a step up from official efforts.
I’m sure you would find it interesting, as you have attempted to do the inverse of what Sean is doing.
Transit Maps says:
This map is indeed the exact inverse of my project from 2019 to show the New York Subway in the style of the London Underground diagram, and arguably more successful as it actually works as intended (mine looks great, but is ultimately flawed as it cannot show service patterns).
First things first – Sean has absolutely nailed the New York Subway map style, and perhaps even improved upon it in places – I note with pleasure that all of his station labels are set horizontally, instead of the many varied angles used on the official NYC map.
There’s great attention to detail as well – all of the Tube route line colours have been swapped out with their closest MTA equivalents, meaning the Metropolitan Line has the 7’s purple instead of its traditional burgundy (strangely officially called “Corporate Magenta”). Similarly, all the deep tube lines get letters for route designations, while the shallower cut-and-cover lines get numbers – which emulates the letter/number distinction between the old divisions of the New York Subway.
A couple of minor things: I like to change the background colour in insets just a little bit to help differentiate them from the main map: just a little lighter or darker can work wonders. Also, I see that Sean is selling prints of this map… so he might want to reconsider that Underground Roundel in the bottom right, as TfL are known to come down hard on any unauthorised use of it.
One final thing to note is that this map (as awesome as it is) really emphasises just how amazingly compact and space-efficient the Tube Diagram is – it fits legibly onto tiny Journey Planners, while this map seems to need at least an 11″ x 17″ canvas to work.
Our final word: One of the best style mash-ups I’ve seen: technically excellent, well-researched and actually really informative. Wonderful!
This is a map I designed of the The New York City Elevated System, a proposed automated-rapid-transit system for the five boroughs, to be owned and operated by the City of New York. The 88-mile, 72 station network would run above the city’s major streets and freeways, connecting with 26 subway routes, LIRR and Metro-North commuter railroads, PATH train, a revised LaGuardia AirTrain, and over 120 city buses. The system would have three routes, two of which provide continuous loop services through four of the city’s boroughs, while one provides a radial service stretching from the West Bronx to the North Shore of Staten Island. Its routes focus on growing access to rail service outside of Manhattan, specifically serving neighborhoods in some of the city’s largest transit deserts. The El would operate services that resemble rapid transit in frequency, but with speeds and station spacing akin to suburban rail, filling the current gap in New York’s transit modes.
The map took me a few years working in my spare time. Was my first big illustrator project and it’s intended to be both familiar and striking. The design takes inspiration from several subway maps, namely the most recent 1979 iteration, which has been digitally simplified to an ugly and unnecessarily boring degree, in my opinion.
Transit Maps says:
Oh, I like this! It seems to be envisioning a New York City that never tore down the Third Avenue El, but instead modernised and expanded it to serve all five boroughs. In this alternative vision, many of the old stops in Manhattan have been closed to turn the El into an express service – and if you look closely, only the cyan Roosevelt Line makes all stops in Manhattan, meaning the two loop lines would rocket along on the main trunk line!
Stylewise, the map definitely draws from the rich heritage of New York transit maps: the original 1979 Hertz/Tauranac map is definitely the biggest influence, but the legend box is subtly reminiscent of 1940s Hagstrom subway maps. with less stations to label than a normal subway map – which is wisely relegated to thin route lines with unlabelled dots – the typography can be made larger and more stylish. The comprehensive services box at each El station are clear and well thought out, showing which subway services can be accessed at each point.
Our final word: Successfully draws on previous New York maps to create something that looks like it belongs to the city while also being fresh and new. Nice work!
I would want to share with you the railway diagram I made of the Asturias Principality (Spain), in case you are interested in comment it in your blog. The main advantage of this diagram is that I take into account the whole Principality, not just its central commuter area, as all the other maps of Asturias do. In addition, I have included the new station names that Renfe is trying to implement (it has taken many years for them to decide to do so) in order to take into account the Asturian nomenclature instead of the Spanish one.
Transit Maps says:
Wow, this is fantastic work from Tubal here – clear and clean design with heaps of information encoded into the design, all supported by a comprehensive and easy to read legend. I particularly like the yellow shading that indicates urban areas (which could then be shown with more detailed maps if this overview diagram was part of a larger graphic system).
Any quibbles I have are very, very minor: the labelling could perhaps be a bit larger throughout – particularly for the names of those urban areas and then for the names of the rivers. These are placed within the rivers at the moment, which severely limits the size of the type. Placing the label alongside the river would allow them to be bigger.
Only one part of the diagram strikes me as being perhaps a little too detailed when compared to the rest: the tiny little right-angle jog that the R1 line takes between Valdredo and San Cosme. All the other lines are straightened out as much as possible, so this little kink really stands out. Even if the line takes such a turn in real life (and a quick look at Google Maps suggests that it does), I think such a detail is unnecessary on a large-scale diagram like this.
