If there’s one thing I love, it’s a good Metro/Subway/Underground map. Some of them are design classics and really shouldn’t be messed with (London especially). Others have flaws, but are mostly tolerable (Boston not naming all stations on the Green Line really annoys me, but the rest of the diagram is quite well done).
And then there are the diagrams that I simply can’t abide.
And, at the moment, foremost amongst those is that of the Washington, DC Metro system. I know that it’s one of the most comprehensive mass-transit systems in the US. And I know that some love its broad, brightly-coloured route lines and overly-large station dots, both of which do lend sort of a child-like simplicity to the system, but I’m not one of them. My main problem is that it looks like it’s been done by an amateur – white keylines around the route lines are of different thicknesses in different parts of the map and station dots simply aren’t centred on their lines. Also baffling is the choice of an extremely ugly symbol to indicate parking at stations. There’s an international symbol for parking, and a blue circle with a white “P” inside it looks a lot more elegant than something akin to a boxy mid-1980s Volvo.
Delving further, it became obvious to me that there are also some serious inaccuracies on the current DC Metro diagram: whether these are because of space restrictions or error, I don’t know. Friendship Heights on the Red Line should straddle the border of the District, not sit well outside it, as should Southern Avenue on the Green Line. The next station out on the Green Line, Naylor Road, also sits very close to the border in reality – something not indicated at all on the current map, which just heads on out in a straight line. And why are the District/County border lines exactly the same shade of grey as the Capital Beltway road?
Another huge problem for legibility is the number of different angles that type is set at. We have station names set horizontally, at 45° degrees reading up from the left AND at 45° down from the left. And where type can’t quite fit at those angles (I’m looking at you, Foggy Bottom-GWU and Farragut West), the designer cheats and changes the angle.
I’m also not a fan of the huge call-out boxes that explain the peak hour restrictions on the Yellow and Red Lines. The one on the Yellow Line makes you work really hard to find Mt Vernon Square/7th St-Convention Center station before you can even visualise the gap in services on the map.
Most staggering of all, on the current map, the borders of the District/Arlington County don’t describe the perfect diamond shape that they should – they’ve been distorted to fit lines and stations in. On a diagram that is reduced to perfect 45° angles elsewhere, this is unforgivable.
Finally, there are big changes afoot with the Metro system. Work is already underway on the Silver Line, which will run parallel with the Orange Line from Stadium-Armory to East Falls Church before splitting and heading past Dulles Airport deep into Loudon County. If the current style of map adds another route at the thickness that lines are currently shown at, very little of the underlying “map” will still be visible. I also doubt that the current “double dot” indicator for a Transit Center will be visually viable when three lines cross one at Metro Center, or three cross two at L’Enfant Plaza.
So, this is my solution.
Fitting on the same US Letter sheet (albeit rotated 90°) as the current PDF available on the Washington Metro website, with the distinctive diamond around the District/Arlington County at exactly the same size, as well as type. All information that is shown on the current map is present on my version (plus a little more, as you’ll see below).
My first amendment was a thinning of route lines to allow the addition of the Silver Line without obscuring more of the “map” underneath the routes. Where possible, lines exit the District at the correct relative position along the border, and stations that straddle or are located very close the the border maintain that position. An added benefit of the thinner route lines is that I was actually able to show the commuter/heavy rail lines and stations in a manner that is informational, but subordinate to the main Metro lines.
Note that the Red Line runs underneath the Silver/Orange/Blue line heading south after Farragut North – this is done to denote the lines have no interaction or interchange at this point: something the current map doesn’t do a very good job of.
Line colors are now denoted by a simple single letter at the end of each line, rather than the clumsy and obtrusive “GREEN LINE”, “BLUE LINE”, etc laid alongside each line on the current map. It is absolutely necessary to denote lines in another manner than just colour alone – red/green color-blind people perceive very line apart from Blue and Yellow as very similar shades of muddy brown. Also, the peak hour restrictions on the Red and Yellow Lines are now clearly indicated by darker lines running down the middle of the route line between relevant stations, and are fully explained in the Legend on the right hand side of the diagram.
All station names are now set horizontally. Every single one of them! And very few of them overlap lines or other important elements, even with the station name overload that seems to affect so many US transit systems. I mean, “U Street/African-American Civil War Memorial/Cardozo” – really?!
The Capital Beltway and borders are now different shades of grey and much different thicknesses, and the District itself has a subtle coloured background to set it apart from the surrounding counties. Colours for the rivers and parkland are more muted than on the current map, which allows the routes themselves to stand out more.
Is my approach perfect? No. My map probably exchanges some of the individual charm of the original in search of clarity and accuracy, but it definitely shows a different approach to the problem… which, to me, is a fascinating thing.
Also, a good change would be to make it “Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority” rather than using “Metropolitian” they have on the current maps.
Ha.
Nice job!
Love the redesign. I haven’t had the pleasure of deciphering the DC Metro map before, but looking at these side by side, your version seems much more legible and accessible.
Being a foreigner.. your version would see my comprehension both of the stations and of their relevence to their surroundings amplified somewhat.
I believe you interpretation is very well executed and a testament to the attention to detail that your style of design exudes. These types of public facility demand but do not always receive the level of thought that you have lent it here in your re-interpretation.
I would though, challenge your use of colour. I believe the bold choices of the original are more prone to quick and easy comprehension amidst the hustle and bustle of day-to-day public transportation chaos. Your point on colour blindness is noted and perhaps a wider spectrum of colour (whilst retaining the boldness of choice) could be adopted. I find it outstanding that this was a consideration of yours… I am sure that many designers would not consider this at all.
Overall, I am once again seriously impressed at your designing abilities……
Your thoughts on CityRail map? 🙂
Love the redesigned map. I’m not a graphic designer, but the current map always made me uneasy, and it think it’s the childish qualities you described. The only thing I don’t love about the new one is using London’s indication of dots next to each other for transfer stations. To the unfamiliar, that can make it seem like you’re walking a block or two underground to transfer from one train to another. That may be true on some systems, but not on Metro (so far).
I’ve also been wondering how they’ll handle the silver line, and why some of the stations at the district border were so far off from their district line.
Your map is a huge improvement over WMATA’s. My one complaint is that the Foggy Bottom Station could be confused for Farragut West if you are looking just below the track lines. If there were a way to make that more clear, I think the map would be just about perfect.
Also, West Falls Church could easily be mistaken for East Falls Church.
I find it difficult to decipher the names of the stations downtown with the names all horizontal. I agree that it balances the map—many of the suburban lines run at an angle and most of the geographical borders are angular, but downtown on your map looks a little chaotic.
Also, this is the one place where many of the lines are streets aren’t angular; would changing station names here throw off the balance of the entire map? I find that angling the names helps differentiate one station from another, especially here.
That is the only point on which the WMATA map exceeds over your map.
Froggy Bottom! Typo?
Whoops! I obviously thought that was a slightly less ludicrous name… or something :-/
some of the locals call it Froggy Bottom…
The reason the old map works is that it’s so big that it’s easy to read. Scale is very important and should not be underestimated.
This is one of those cases where I’d rather it be big and bold so that 6-year-old kids who are just learning their ABCs, people with faulty grasp of the English language, and 80-year-olds with bad eyesight can read.
So yeah, I appreciate the cleanup, but I feel like it misses the point.
I agree that the simplicity of the current map makes it initially accessible, but after I feel that things start to go rapidly downhill. Everything just gets in everything else’s way and there’s very little order to the map – type set at different angles and overlapping the route lines. Ugly parking symbols, huge callout boxes for peak hour service restrictions. Everything is screaming for attention and there’s no hierarchy to the information at all. As a point of interest, the type on my map is at exactly the same point size as the current map, just a lighter weight… except for Transfer Centers, which are bold to differentiate them from normal stations. See: hierarchy!
Spacing of stops along the Orange line doesn’t do a good job of implying that Rosslyn-Ballston stops are all tightly packed, while it’s a long ride out to East Falls Church.
It does no worse a job than the current map, which squeezes all stations on the western part of the Orange line extremely close together! At least there’s a bit of breathing room for the outer stations on my map.
I would rather see the hierarchy done visually rather than with font weights (which, despite what you say, the current map did). The connected lines thing – I know the CTA does it along with some others, but I just think the differentiation needs to be stronger.
Perhaps an iconic approach? This London Underground map doesn’t have to rely on font weights and instead focuses on iconic approaches (or small boxes)
http://www.tourstolondon.co.uk/london-underground-map.gif
And big fat lines > thin, noise-allowing lines any day of the week. If I’m on WMATA, I want to see my line, not scenery.
If I had my way, I probably wouldn’t put any scenery on a transit map apart from rivers/coastlines either… but this is a reworking of the content of the current map (plus the Silver line), rather than a completely new interpretation.
Thanks for doing this. It’s really, really interesting.
I posted a review at BeyondDC.
I really like this map, it simplifies things. Especially when/if more light rail and heavy rail lines are built it will make it easier to add them.
However there will be no 5A when the Silver Line is built. After the first phase is completed service will be handed over to Fairfax County and become route 981 from Wiehle Ave Station to Dulles Airport. After the second phase is opened all bus service to the airport will be suspended.
I suspected as much, but thought I’d put the bus route in for an “apples with apples” comparison with the current map.
Beautiful map. I ride the Metro everyday, and I love your rendition of the Metro map. Would highly suggested Metro adopted a better map such as yours.
I like the general idea, but I’ll offer one specific piece of constructive criticism: the additional color added to the no-peak-service portions of the Yellow and Red lines gives a visual indicator of more, and not less. I would address that by leaving solid color for each line but breaking the lines themselves with hairlines, either perpendicular or hashed depending on what ended up looking better. Removing visual weight would much more clearly indicate that the lines are there, just not always in use. The issue would then be one of differentiating partial service from planned routes or lines under construction, but for that purpose I would investigate using solid lines with faded colors, with a different style of hashing applied as an alternate.
I don’t think including the MARC and VRE lines is a good idea. It implies that those lines offer a level of service comparable to Metro, when in fact, some of them only run a handful of trains per day (and none at all on weekends). Someone unfamiliar with the area trying to get from, say, Takoma to Rockville might be tempted to take the Red Line to Silver Spring and transfer to MARC – a route that would only work at specific times during the PM rush hour.
Also, as another commenter pointed out, having separate dots for each line at a transfer station implies that you have to walk from one platform to another to change lines. In fact, any time two lines run parallel (green/yellow and orange/blue in DC, blue/yellow in Arlington), they use the same platforms.
The London tube map does use single white dots spread over as many as three lines to denote interchange stations where the lines run together. The clearest example on the current map is Farringdon.
Minor revision to fix all those pesky typos. I’ve also addressed the MARC/VRE service issue as outlined by Johanna above, by adding a line advising readers to check with the relevant services for schedules, then referencing all their websites.
This looks lovely. The original rather looks like a can of worms.
Couldn’t you use a rectangular link with round ends over the common stations, rather than linked dots?
Linked through unsuckdcmetro.blogspot.com
A fantastic map, many great improvements. I expect you aren’t profiting from this, but a number of tourist maps/guide books use poor facsimiles of the WMATA map… I’d definitely market to them.
I’ve long had complaints about Metro compared to other systems (beyond the service issues that aren’t relevant here)… the map, poor station signage, aesthetic blandness of the stations, etc… this could be a big improvement.
A few suggestions/reactions to previous comments.
I second the already suggested modification of re-spacing the Arlington Orange Line stations to give a better sense of actual distance. Sure, it’s no worse than the current map, but isn’t the point to be better?
I think I would increase the font weight on transfer stations more than it is currently, or increase the size/weight of the icons. Though it looks a heavier font would possibly create problems at Metro Center…
I would add BWI Airport as a destination to the note on the MARC Penn Line beyond New Carrolton.
I understand Johanna’s concerns about using a dot for each line at transfer stations, but using larger dots for shared track lines would disrupt the flow of the map. Lynn C Booth’s suggestion of ovals for shared tracks might work.
The only station icon I really have an issue with is L’Enfant Plaza. I would reorganize the icon into an inverted T – dots for Yellow, Green, VRE across the bottom, then Blue, Orange, Silver going straight up (above Green Line dot). The way it’s structured now really does suggest a real walk from G/Y to B/O/S, when it’s actually just a different level.
I would also extend all connections to the Amtrak/MARC/VRE lines as these are not accessed from within the Metro stations. They’re really more just in the vicinity of each other – adjacent in some cases, a few blocks away in others. The current connections look no different than switching within the system.
Re: MetroRider – Farragut West, Foggy Bottom & other multi-line, non-transfer stations have a small break on the edge of the color toward the station name. Viewing this at “Original size” on Flickr, the association is much clearer than on the smaller version posted here. I think this is a good feature and would suggest doing this for all non-transfer stops (would help with the West Falls Church station issue mentioned by kidincredible).
Re: scenery… this is one thing that makes Metro different from other systems I’ve traveled. I think this is a more striking feature to make the map unique than are the fat lines and it does help orient tourists trying to move about town.
By and large, this is a very good design – and a significant improvement over the current map, in my opinion.
Bravo!
This is an excellent job – I have been wondering how the silver line could be accommodated once it comes online, and you have made real strides toward that, though of course the map will have to be extended far west eventually. Also I appreciate your point about showing the Red line going under the Blue/Orange near Farragut North but that prompts a question: at the transfer stations can the lower level lines be shown as going under the upper level lines? (As you have it, I think each is shown as the opposite of the reality.) On a more basic level, do you thing this is even useful? Thanks
I actually prefer the original map’s 1 dot per station system. Unlike in New York or London where train services don’t necessarily stop at every station, in DC the line will generally stop at every station on its route. The focus is on the actual stations rather than the lines you’re riding. That’s why the regular metro map has single dots for each station, it’s showing how to follow the flow to get to the station you want to be at rather than communicating information about the line itself. At the end of the day how to get where you want to be is more important than information about the thing getting you there.
Your map has many positives. I would not use it on our Metro trains or inside Metro stations. I think it would be a great map in things like visitors’ brochures. It is more informative in many ways than the WMATA one. However, it is much harder to see the very basic information of which order the stations are on the lines. The WMATA map is designed so anyone can quickly see what order the stations are on the lines. It’s designed so that it can be quickly interpreted as someone walks by. Your map requires a couple of seconds of analysis. It would be more suitable for a piece of paper that a visitor folds up in their pocket and references during their stay.
I think that your map was also designed with the visitor/tourist in mind. As locals, we don’t really care exactly where the border between the political jurisdictions is. It’s not like the world magically changes at Eastern Avenue. We cross those borders every day without thought. The local wants to know what line to take and where to transfer to get to a certain station. The WMATA map is designed for that question. It’s not really designed to address any questions about how to get around after leaving the Metro.
I like how your map is much better for future expansion. Future visitors to our region will need to know about the Purple Line and maybe the MARC trains if they want to go to Baltimore. I think your map is very successful, but at something other than replacing the existing WMATA map.
I have always been a huge fan of Metro’s map, with the huge, easy to see lines and stops. I have long disliked other systems for their chaotic layout; having a line that has two termini on one end, for example, annoys me no end. I’m starting to comprehend why they do that, but that doesn’t mean I like it. London’s is, of course, perfect.
So I was surprised when I saw this map and after my initial shock, realized that I really, really liked it. Some comments, based in part on other comments I’ve read:
* I agree with an earlier comment, L’Enfant Plaza definitely needs to be in an upside-down T configuration. And you shuold look into using ovals or ‘squircles’ to have a single station cross multiple lines.
* I too share your revulsion at the name inflation. Back when I first started riding Metro in the early 90s, the names were far saner.
* Your map is missing something that the official map lacks as well – a note stating that Arlington Cemetery closes earlier than the rest of the system.
* I think including the VRE and MARC lines may be a good idea, however I don’t think you should include the non-Metro stations along those, unless this were a map designed for a brochure or at a VRE/MARC station. But for a map for within Metro stations or trains, that seems superfluous information; it’s a case of “You can’t get there from here”, so don’t include ‘there’.
* An in-line indicator of the peak hour services was a great idea.
* You were exactly right about dropping the red line under blue/orange/silver; I’d never thought of that aspect.
* Perhaps you could try borrowing an aspect from the London map and have a little tick in the direction of the station name, to help with the more difficult ones like around Farragut West and Gallery Place? Not that I’d suggest removing the dots. We aren’t trying to duplicate London altogether.
* I agree with keeping the river, district, and beltway; while a subway map can of course ignore all surface geography, Harry Beck was wise to also include the single major surface aspect of London: The Thames. Washington has several of these. The borders of the district are very well-defined, and the river is one of those borders; the beltway is also highly relevant for commuters. These three aspects definitely belong in the map. I’m not so sure if the parkland and monuments need to be mentioned, however; I’m guessing the Metro argument was, people will be looking for the Capitol, White House, Washington Monument, and Lincoln Memorial, and we might as well include the [Metro-inaccessible] Jefferson Memorial as well.
* Thank you for remembering that Virginia doesn’t own one drop of the Potomac. 😉
All in all, I think this is a great map. A major thing is that Washington, compared to other major cities, does not have a complex rail network. Lines cross a mere four times, 9 if you include divergences. So it hasn’t really needed a complex map to deal with this. I mean, heck, zone 1 of London alone has well over 20. However, based on the shortcomings you’ve described, and the issue of the Silver Line coming up, it may be time for the map to ‘grow up,’ so to speak.
PS: got here from Unsuck DC Metro too.
Love the map – while the thick lines of the current metro system map do stand out and help create an image of the overall system, anyone not already familiar with the stop layout will need to lean in and take a closer look, so keeping information clean and legible seems to be a better priority than keeping the visible colorful lines – it’s not that complicated a system, after all; cities with far more complex systems get by with much skinnier lines (London, Paris and Berlin, for example). For those of us who already know the system, this is a clean new look that will remain informative while making space for the system as it expands. For people looking at the map for the first time, this map allows the viewer to read pertinent information without over-crowding the page.
Although some may find the inclusion of major parks and monuments distracting, it is important to remember that one of the major functions of this system is to carry tourists to key sites in the city. Including the Capitol building and the mall will help them identify, for example, the 5 metro stops other than the Smithsonian station that serve the mall (Federal Center SW, Capital South, L’Efant Plaza, Federal Triangle and Archives).
Curiously, the thinner lines also manage to highlight just how underserved certain parts of the city remain – particularly east of the Anacostia and west of Rock Creek Park. When/how/why these should be better served is another discussion, though.
v1.1 update
Moved Capital Beltway to run to the west of Tysons Corner East station (actually looks much better that way!)
Reworked and simplified station symbology (a definite improvement – thanks to all for the suggestions)
Made font denoting Transfer Stations one level bolder
Reintroduced kink in line between Van Ness and Tenleytown stations
Lengthened gap between stations on the Red Line between Grosvenor-Strathmore and Shady Grove
Aligned New Carrolton and College Park stations on a diagonal axis – preparatory work for the Purple Line!
Increased gap between Ballston and East Falls Church
Removed landmarks from map – just to see if reduces visual clutter
Listed all Amtrak services (not the random few I had before!)
What about the Purple Line, which will run from New Carrolton to Bethesda?
Any plans to make a poster/print of this map available as you have done with your Interstate map?
Chris,
probably not at this stage. The current version of my diagram uses some elements lifted directly from the WMATA map – the prohibition symbols as well as all the other transit system logos – VRE, MARC and Amtrak: none of which I’m authorized to use commercially.
I like the changes you made, a few more comments 🙂
* On the one hand, the lower Green Line, in a proper pure schematic map, should be a straight line; however, since we’re dealing with things like the District border and the beltway – things that should be on the map – it is much preferable to make it accurate (as it is here) than simple. It would require a lot of distortion to fit a straight line in.
* L’enfant Plaza might benefit from having a wide area as well (what a previous commenter called an ‘upside-down T’) to show that this includes the Yellow and Green lines. A very minor quibble.outes.
* Still, IMO, needs a note saying Arlington Cemetery closes early. Similarly, you need to see how the spacing will work on the Silver Line if and when the Wolf Trap station is built (it’s a possible infill station between Wiehle Ave and Tysons West); if it will distort or compress the line, the line should be redesigned accordingly, just as you prepped the northeast part of the system for the possible Purple Line.
All in all, I really like this map. It just feels so much more professional than the current one, and I really liked the current one. But as the system grows up and becomes more complex, it can’t afford to have the broad strokes anymore.
Version 1.2
• Made gap between Ballston and East Falls Church even closer to reality
• Made gap between Airport and Braddock Road closer to reality – leaves space for Potomac Yard fill-in station
• Changed blue/orange line configuration east of Stadium-Armory so that both lines cross the Anacostia River together – as (I think) they do in real life. Slight respacing of Minnesota Ave and Benning Road to accommodate this.
• Moved Southern Ave station to just outside the District boundary and after the 90° curve that brings the track onto the eastern side of Southern Avenue. Moved Naylor Road station to accommodate this.
• Spaced stations from Silver Spring to Glenmont a little further apart. Added “turn back” stripe to this section of track, added notes to explain this to the legend. I hope I got this right… the timetables on WMATA’s website aren’t the most helpful… no timetables for peak hours because there’s too many trains??
• Added early closing times for Arlington Cemetery station
• Italicized station names for VRE/MARC-only stations to differentiate them from normal stations a bit
• Added a white keyline behind type where it crosses the Capital Beltway.
Phew! That’s about it. Probably the last revision for a while, I think…
Looks great. 🙂
Great readable design. I can’t wait until the Tyson’s Corner portion is finished.
Your map is a much tighter design and I have no problem reading it (of course I am familiar with the metro system already), BUT as a designer working for a firm focused on mature consumers, I can say that older people generally prefer the ‘fat, happy, easy to see’ version.
When something like this is in public, for a specific purpose, the main question should be “does it work for the audience?” I have dealt with mature consumers enough to say with some confidence that your version is “too thin to see” for many of us less sighted people to see well.
This is a brilliant map and makes the current WMATA map look beyond childish. I honestly was about to set out on a similar design quest but you covered all the bases I had the most problem with. I hope that your design can get some traction as a real replacement to our current map!
Love the maps. I’d echo some of the earlier comments about downtown being unclear, and I wanted to point out that the MARC Camden Line doesn’t actually go to BWI Airport.
Neither it does. As I’ve said before, can you tell I’m not actually from DC? 🙂
Great diagram (it’s not a map). A designer who cannot make all the type horizontal is a loser. Glad you sorted that one straight away.
BTW: i was responsible for the Berlin Transit diagram back in the early 90s. (http://www.bvg.de/index.php/en/index.html)
Erik,
thanks for the words of encouragement – coming from a designer of your stature, it certainly means a lot! And yes, I totally agree that it is a diagram, not a map, but it’s hard to fight against common usage sometimes. For most people, it’s “the Tube Map”, not “The London Underground Diagram”…
Part of the problem is the explosion in the length of station names. I know this will never happen, but I’d like to see the maps return to the original station names, when they were much more readable, and limit future stations to 15 characters or so. No more “Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport” or “U Street/Cardozo/African-American Civil War Memorial” – these names are just absurd.
Mike,
I couldn’t agree more and say as much in my commentary. “U Street/etc.”, in particular, is just ridiculous. Apparently, there are lobby groups who petition to get names/locations added to station names – bizarre!
Love it. My only comment or correction would be to fix the curve between Court House and Rosslyn. It’s misleading. Those Orange line stations in the Ballston-Rosslyn corridor are all on Wilson Blvd, pretty much in a straight line albeit a gently northward sloping one from west to east.
I see what you’re saying, but there’s a couple of reasons why it’ll stay as is. Firstly, “gently sloping” lines don’t exist in rectilinear diagrams – it’s 45 degrees or nothing. Secondly, I really, really like the horizontal axis that the Orange and Silver lines make across the map – if you look closely, you’ll see that these lines are aligned on either side of downtown. It’s a conscious compositional choice to have them like that, and the curve between Court House and Rosslyn is the trade off – which isn’t too dissimilar to the way the current diagram treats it.
I like the redesign, too. Very thoughtful–any map involves trade-offs of some kind. I still think it requires some mental effort to find the names of some of the downtown stations, but probably no more than the original.
The centerlines you’ve used to indicate reduced service frequency for portions of yellow and red lines are graphically fairly elegant, but semantically suggest the opposite to me (darker color suggests positive, supplemental service). Wouldn’t it be simpler and graphically even lighter weight to use a white centerline–a kind of hollowing out of the line where service frequency isn’t full or full-time?
David,
I definitely tried a white centerline, but then the (also white) station dots get lost and hard to decipher. Tints of red and yellow just look wishy-washy (pink and cream, yuk!), so that’s why I ended up darkening the centerline instead. Interesting that you have that response to the darker color… and you’re not the first. I could just as well argue that a darker color suggests an absence of a service.
For all the emphasis you put on being “geographically accurate” you messed up a bit on the silver line. The route goes much further away from the city than it appears on your map and you shrunk Fairfax county to fit Loudon in. Also the direction of the silver line route turns hard 90 degrees into dulles airport then turns again to go east- west, north- south again, and finally assumes the approximate diagonal direction that you depict. It also turns off considerably off the airport access road into tysons
Love the redesign of the map. Didn’t see anyone mention it but the reason that the original map has the Red Line crossing over the Blue and Orange Lines is because that is how they cross over each other in the real world. If you were to go to Metro Center the Red Line is on the upper level while the Blue and Orange Lines are on the lower level. It’s kind of nitpicky I know but I like maintaining that link with the actual system. Besides with the way that the original map and your map denote transfer stations it seems to be a non-issue. Thanks again for the great effort!
Love the redesign. I noted that the poster print in your store only is for the main map — any chance of making a poster with the geographically accurate rail lines overlaid available as a buyable poster as well? I’m looking for some new wall art, and think that would be a great option.