GIF – The Longest Possible New York Subway Ride?

July 11, 2015
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Unofficial Maps, Visualizations
Tags:

The New York Subway is famous for having a flat fare for any ride within the system – be it for just a couple of stops, or an epic end-to-end trek. So long as you don’t pass through a fare gate, you can pretty much go anywhere!

WNYC is having fun with that fare structure to find the longest possible ride you can take without reusing a section of track. Their initial record – as shown in this mesmerising GIF – was 149.8 miles and required 55 transfers. Since then, the record has ben upped to 154.6 miles with one less transfer while still starting and finishing at the same two stations.  

datanews:

In Search of the Longest Subway Ride

We set out to calculate the longest ride you can take with one Metrocard swipe (not going over the same stretch twice), and after we posted it, someone’s browser found an even LONGER one!

Fantasy Map: St. Jacques Metro Map by “Green Kitten”

July 10, 2015
comment 1
Filed Under:
Fantasy Maps
Tags:

Um, wow? An incredibly detailed transit network for the fictional metropolis of “St. Jacques” drawn and lettered entirely by hand on what looks like 12 sheets of A4 paper. 

Obviously taking its design and geography cues from London – the symbology used is almost identical to the Tube Map, it has a river that crosses from east to west just south of the city centre, an airport to the southwest and a pretty good analog for the Hainault loop to the northeast, albeit in green and not red – this is still incredibly impressive work, requiring dedication and perseverance. I’ve seen snippets of this project on-line before, so I know that it’s gone through multiple revisions and incarnations to get to this (final?) stage.

The system shown is seriously multi-modal as well, with 18 Underground lines, 5 Overground lines, light rail, trams, buses, ferries, and – again, just like London – an aerial cable car over the river. Hopefully, the good people of St. Jacques appreciate it more than Londoners do their version!

Source: Green Kitten/Flickr 

Submission – Unofficial Map: St. Petersburg Metro, Russia by “Kilo”

July 10, 2015
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Unofficial Maps
Tags:

Submitted by the author, who says:

So, for a high school art project, I decided to make a system map for the St. Petersburg Metro. I spent about a half-month studying the system and the stations, getting some Russian friends to translate the station names, and prototyping the pipes in Inkscape (didn’t have Illustrator), eventually coming up with this design.

Now that I’m in college and in the process of trying to apply for a second major, I thought that I’d dig up some old projects to pad my portfolio. And, since hindsight is 20/20 (there are no rounded corners, I’m not sure the whole bilingual thing is working out, the lettering gets pretty tight in places, and the only font I could find with Cyrillic support was Roboto) and I now have a copy of Illustrator (and a chance to use that nifty Live Corner feature you blogged about), I was wondering if you could give me tips on how to improve upon the design.

Transit Maps says:

All in all, I think this is a pretty solid effort: nice work! Everything’s laid out nice and clearly and some good thought has gone into the general layout. One thing I would definitely encourage with any future revisions would be to try and make the style of the map a little less “generic”. As I’ve said many times before, the very best transit maps have a sense of place about them – they could only ever belong to the city they represent – but this map carries too many instantly recognisable London Tube Map elements (station ticks. “t-bar” terminus stations and “dumbbell” interchange symbols) to stand as a unique piece of design. 

A few other ideas for improvement: I think that your bilingual labels look fine on the map in most instances, but I question the value of a direct translation to English from Cyrillic. It’s never going to be written like that anywhere in St. Petersburg, and I doubt that most of the names would ever actually be said that way, even if a local was speaking English to you. Most bilingual Russian transit maps choose instead to transliterate the Cyrillic into Roman characters (i.e., it’s still in Russian, but written with English language letters). This at least gives English speakers a chance at pronouncing the name correctly, and you may find it written like that in some places as well. I’ve also seen an alternate Moscow Metro map where the secondary name is written out phonetically, to maximise the probability that English users can both pronounce the name and understand it when it’s announced over a loudspeaker on a train or in a station. Genius!

I think that you really need to put “M<number>” markers at each end of the route lines. At the moment, the Red M1 and the Green M3 lines would appear almost identical to each other for a colour-blind user, and there’s nothing on the map that can be used to tell them apart, except for their colour. Accessibility of your design is hugely important and shouldn’t be overlooked, even for a relatively simple system like this.

Think about how you’re going to show future expansions of the system: the M4 line is going to extend westwards from its current terminus, which could cause problems with your current layout. Similarly, the M5 will expand southwards, but this shouldn’t cause you too many problems. Draw the map with these extensions in place!

I also think you’re missing a couple of railroad termini, upon comparing your map to the official one.

Like I said, this is a solid piece of work, but I think it could be better with a little more work. I admit, it can be difficult to create something that truly represents a city that you don’t reside in, but I’d definitely encourage you – and all amateur map-makers who want to submit to Transit Maps – to push your designs out of your comfort zone to create something amazing. We already know that Tube Map symbology works well enough, but try and find a new and individual approach if you can – and make your maps truly your own!

Historical Map: New York “New Subway Routes” Map, 1967

July 9, 2015
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Historical Maps
Tags:

the-nycta-project:

“New Subway Routes” Map Possibly 1967?

Yes, this is the 1967 “New Subway Routes” map produced by the New York Transit Authority, designer unknown. The diagram was produced to show only the eight routes that had been changed with the opening of the tunnel under Chrystie Street. It’s an interesting piece because it was produced some three years before even the first draft Unimark/Massimo Vignelli diagram, but has seemingly been influenced by his approach to design. The straightening of route lines, the regular spacing of stations and the application of the famous “no dot, no stop” rule all seem to point towards Vignelli’s hand, although the non-standard angles of routes entering the Coney Island Stillwell Avenue station would never have been approved of by him.

Peter Lloyd, writing in his superb book, Vignelli Transit Maps, points to some anecdotal evidence that Unimark was advising the TA on the future direction of the subway map at the time and concludes that:

“… the connection between Vignelli’s influence and the 1967 map is not proven, but the alternative is to surmise a coincidence that strains credibility.”

GIF – Expansion of the Shanghai Metro, 1994-2014

July 6, 2015
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Unofficial Maps, Visualizations
Tags:

Wow. From nothing in 1993 to 14 lines, 338 stations and 548km (341 miles) of track – the longest rapid transit system by route length in the world – in 2015. A mere 8 million people use the system on an average weekday. Of interest is the massive expansion in the years leading up to the 2010 Shanghai Wold Expo.

See also this 1939 tram and trolleybus map of Shanghai’s International Settlement. 

Source: Wikimedia Commons/user: Terramorphous

Reader Question: Why Show the “Jog” in the DC Metro’s Red Line?

July 6, 2015
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
My Transit Maps, Questions
Tags:

Question from lukasmaps: On your DC Metro Map redesign, why do you show the little “jog” on the red line between Van Ness-UDC and Tenlyytown-AU? No offense to your excellent work, but it ruins the visual clarity shown on the rest of the map and frankly, gets on my nerves. Again, no offense to this otherwise beautiful map.

Answer: This is a fantastic question and one that I can use to illustrate how local knowledge of a transit system can help inform the design of a map. When I made the very first version of this map way back in February 2010, I did depict the eastern part of the Red Line as a straight run from Dupont Circle all the way to the end of the line at Shady Grove (as seen the first image above: I still have all the original files in my archives!). As you suggest, it seemed like a good solution to reduce clutter and enhance the clarity of the map.

However, when I released the map, the overwhelming majority of commenters from the DMV area called for the reinstatement of the “jog” between Van Ness and Tenleytown, which has always appeared on the official map. 

Why? Because the people who use the system on a daily basis use that “jog” – which occurs where the tracks shift from running under Wisconsin Avenue to under Connecticut Avenue, as seen in the Google Maps screenshot above – as part of their “mental map” of the system. It’s as much a landmark to them as any of the stations or tourist sites on the map, and its non-inclusion threw them for a loop. Other innovations and design changes in my map were widely well-received, but this one was definitely not. The very next iteration of my my map (v1.0.1) reinstated the jog, and it’s been there ever since, through four major revisions. I may be able to design a fantastic-looking map for the DC Metro, but I don’t live there – and sometimes it’s just best to bow to local knowledge and opinion when it comes to usability.

See also this post where I compare and contrast the four major revisions to my DC Metro map.

Submission – Unofficial Map: MARC Commuter Rail Network by Peter Dovak

July 5, 2015
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Unofficial Maps
Tags:

Submitted by the prolific Peter, who says:

Like you, I was disappointed with the official MARC system map, but recently I stumbled on a concept while working on another project, so I had a go at turning it into a standalone map. Apologies for spamming your submissions box, but I really like how it turned out and I’d be curious to hear your thoughts!

Transit Maps says:

Peter, you can spam my submissions box all day long if you keep sending me work this good. Basically, this is everything that the official map (June 2014, 1 star) is not – clear, easy to understand and nice to look at. I particularly like the grey toned-back treatment of the Washington and Baltimore Metro/light rail systems: it looks great and works fantastically in terms of the informational hierarchy, and interchanges between MARC and those other systems are highlighted in an understated but firm way.

About the only major issue I have with this map is that Peter doesn’t show which stations offer parking, which is important information with commuter rail systems. A quick look at the official map seems to indicate that all stations have parking lots, so words to that effect in the legend might suffice. Or maybe some differentiation between free and paid lots could be made: the map is clean and spacious enough to add this little bit of extra useful information.

Minor point: The white label for Chesapeake Bay is almost illegible on the light blue background, and many of my cartographically-minded colleagues would insist in that label being set in italics.

Our rating: Should really replace the official one with immediate effect. Yummy. Four stars.

Submission – West Coast Electric Highway Map

July 3, 2015
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Official Maps
Tags:

Submitted by “Sounder Bruce”, who says:

A quasi-transit map that shows electric vehicle charging stations in Washington and Oregon, centered around the Interstate 5 corridor.

Transit Maps says:

I really like the idea behind this map – a simplified road map much in the vein of many of my own mapping projects – but I feel like the execution lets the concept down a little. 

Because of the stylised “transit map” format, the distances between many points on the map get horribly distorted, with, say, 20 miles represented by very short lines, long lines and pretty much everything inbetween. Yes, the mileage is often shown on the map by red numbers, but a quick, reliable visual aid to distances would be preferable. The distortion is so great that Ellensburg in Washington is shown far further west than The Dalles in Oregon, when in reality it is further east.

The big white circles with green keylines used to represent metropolitan areas work fine when they’re superimposed over the dark green Interstate highway route lines, but make it look like the road splits to circumnavigate Corvallis – the green stroke on the circle is exactly the same colour and width as that used for minor highways!

The placement of Tesla charging stations is a little problematic: the icon used looks much like a Google Maps location marker, complete with a little shadow where they “touch” the ground. We’re so used to this style of marker being used to point precisely to an exact location that it seems weird when its used as loosely as this. The chargers are in a nearby named town, not at the exact location shown… and even that can be a little hard to discern. Is the Tesla station on I-5 between Portland and Seattle in Centralia or Tumwater?  

I also wonder why the city of Bend in central Oregon isn’t shown: it has charging stations and is just a short distance from both Sisters and Redmond, making it a logical “end” to the route in that part of the map. For those wondering, this map really does show pretty much the full eastwards extent of charging stations in Oregon. After The Dalles on I-84, there’s another charging station in the town of Arlington… and then nothing until you hit Idaho.

Our rating: Perhaps I’m being a little hard on this map. As an introduction to the electric charging stations in Oregon and Washington, it actually does a pretty decent job. I certainly had no idea of where chargers were located outside of Portland, so I’ve definitely learned something! Two-and-a-half stars.

Source: West Coast Green Highway website

Unofficial/Future Map: Denver RTD Rail Transit by Theo Ditsek

June 29, 2015
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Future Maps, Unofficial Maps
Tags:

Having just complained about how depressingly average the new official Denver RTD rail map is (June 2015, 1.5 stars), it’s rather wonderful to see an unofficial map that raises the bar as much as this one by Theo Ditsek.

Unlike the real map, this one has a pleasingly compact shape, compressing the outer reaches of the map while expanding the central part. It’s a classic diagrammatic transit map device, but it’s employed particularly well here, with very little “dead space” throughout the map.

There’s some nicely understated mode differentiation as well: while all the route lines share the same stroke width, light rail uses black station dots and commuter rail uses white dots. The line letter designations also get different treatments – solid colour with white letters for light rail, keylined white boxes with coloured letters for commuter rail. It works well, although the similar circled “P” symbol for parking could perhaps be initially confused as a line designation. Perhaps this is one time where a car pictogram could be more effective at immediate communication of an idea.

The absolute best part of this map, however, is the treatment of Union Station: a “so simple, I can’t believe I didn’t think of it!” diamond of station symbols that allows all the route lines to head off in the required direction with a minimum of fuss. It’s a lovely little visual device that works incredibly well; a fantastic solution to a very difficult design problem (believe me, I’ve toyed with a few Denver map redesigns (see here, for example) and Union Station is definitely one of the hardest parts to represent well).

A few minor problems… some of the line colours used seem unnecessarily similar to each other. While part of this problem is the Denver RTD’s choice of colour designations, I think Theo could have made some better choices to differentiate lines from each other. In particular, the “G” line should be far more “gold” than “orange”, especially as it’s right next to the traditionally orange “C” line at Union Station. My old-school CMYK breakdown for “gold” (taught to me by a senior designer at my very first job way back in 1993) has always been C0 M30 Y80 K20, which I think would work well here. I also prefer RTD’s lime green for the “R” line to Theo’s apple green.

I also think that the station labels are sometimes just a little too close to the route lines, with descenders actually hitting them on occasion.

Some people might also say that the decision not to show fare zones allows Theo a lot more design freedom than the official map allows, but I think it’s a fair trade here: the loss of a secondary or even tertiary piece of information for a much clearer, more legible map. I’ll take that!

Our rating: I may or may not have squealed like an excited child when I first saw this map. Great stuff! Four stars.

Source: Theo Ditsek’s website

Submission – River Rail Streetcar, Little Rock, Arkansas by Peter Dovak

June 28, 2015
Leave a comment
Filed Under:
Unofficial Maps
Tags:

Submitted by Peter, who says:

Ages ago, after you posted a tutorial on highway interchanges on your McKinney Ave streetcar map, I was inspired to try and practice the technique on what ended up being a very very similar project–definitely too similar to take any credit for.

I left it incomplete for so long because it was just uncomfortably reminiscent of your map to finish, but for the sake of completion and appreciation for the guide, I thought I would make it presentable and share, perhaps only just to add a new city to your collection!

Transit Maps says:

Peter, I wouldn’t worry so much about any perceived similarity between the two maps. A base map is just that – a base upon which the important information is overlaid. Your route lines, station treatment, typography and legend are all very different to my McKinney Avenue Streetcar map, so the two end up looking completely dissimilar. 

Your map is also certainly better than the official map, which contains a lot of extraneous visual detail and hides important information in the verbose text to the left of the map. Your concise legend contains all the same information, but in a much more digestible, easy to understand format. Nice work there! 

About the only addition I’d really like to see to your map is a scale, so that people can get an idea of the area they’re looking at. A problem with this streetcar system – as with many others in the US – is the wait time. While the two lines combine for an acceptable average headway of 12 minutes (assuming properly timed operations) in the shared loop section south of the Arkansas River, they’re running 23 to 25 minutes apart in North Little Rock and out to the Presidential Library. This basically means that if you just miss a streetcar in these areas, you’d probably be better off walking than waiting for the next one. Having a scale that lets people know that it’s perhaps only a quarter-mile or so to the stop they were intending to get off at could be very helpful.

All in all, I think this is a neat little map, and it certainly illustrates my technique for drawing highway interchanges nicely – just look at that tangle of on/off ramps for I-30! Thanks for sharing!