In-Car Light Rail Map, Portland, Oregon
I have to say that I’m not a huge fan of these in-car maps from my town of Portland. While they serve a purpose and fit in a very awkward vertical space, they’re neither elegant or match the design of the full light rail map. I particularly dislike the station symbol, which makes every stop - regardless of importance - look like an interchange station.
(Source: localmn/Flickr)
27th May 2012
Notes: 9
Fantasy Map: Columbus, Ohio Light Rail by Michael Tyznik
It’s been a good week for fantasy maps here on Transit Maps. Hot on the heels of the superb Freshwater Rail map comes this beauty from Michael Tyznik of his hometown of Columbus, Ohio. There’s an undoubted Massimo Vignelli 1970s New York Subway map vibe to this - Michael told me that this project actually began as an update of that map, but then morphed into another city altogether - but it still manages to look fresh and new, thanks to some subtle touches like updating the ubiquitous “subway map” geometric sans font with Akzidenz Grotesq and Gotham Black. If you have time, I’d definitely pay a visit to the map’s project page on Michael’s website where you can see the progression of his thoughts on transit in Columbus - from a fairly generic and bland concept that looks like it could be any city in the world, through an elegant-looking light rail system that utilises existing freight-rail right-of-ways, to this (final?) considered and intelligent piece.
Have we been there? No.
What we like: Looks great! The concept also looks plausible (to the eyes of someone who has never been to Columbus, at least!), and the amount of thought put into this map really shows.
The blocking out of localities is something that could look heavy-handed and forced, but comes across quite well. It definitely gives context to the routes. The dashed line treatment for the express routes is quite beautifully done: I especially like how there’s a neat little box around stations where the dash doesn’t show. Adding street names along the streetcar routes is a nice usability touch, especially when the routes convert from light rail to streetcar, reinforcing the differences between the services offered by the two modes.
What we don’t like: I’d like to see more differentiation between local and express stations than just whether the name is set in bold or regular text. I don’t think that this is enough of a visual clue for a transit map by itself - maybe a black station dot for express, and a white one for local could work.
While I understand why individual stops on the streetcar lines aren’t shown (stops are closer together and thus “beneath” the scale of this map), I think it would be useful to indicate where transfers between light rail and streetcar can be made. Examples of this include the 2, 3 and 4 where they cross the light rail lines at Union Station, the 2 and 3 at Morse Road on the “A” line, and the 3 at Easton/Stelzer Road on the “E” line. A simple line linking the lines may be enough to indicate that a transfer can be made.
Apart from these thoughts, there’s just a couple of minor quibbles: some of the rounded edges on the localities don’t seem to nest well with the curves of the river (look at the north east corner of Franklinton, for example), the letter designation circles for the “A” line are a different blue to the line itself (C75 M33 Y1 K0 compared to C67 M35 Y2 K0), and the gaps at the directional arrows in the one-way sections of the streetcar routes area a little wide for my liking.
Our rating: Excellent. Well-considered and thought out, stylish and attractive. A couple of usability issues that can be easily corrected. Thanks for sharing your map with us, Michael. 4 stars!
(Source: Michael’s website)
Metro Light Rail Network Map, Sydney
Can you call it a network map when it consists of one line and a soon-to-be defunct (and despised) monorail? A north pointer would really help here as well… West is at the bottom of the map.
(Source: Michael “Comeng301M” Coley/Flickr)
Tyne & Wear Metro In-Car Map
If anything, I actually like this elongated layout better than the actual official system map (reviewed here) - the removal of the geography and the addition of zone information makes the design both cleaner and more useful. Great use of an awkward space.
(Source: LiamC1995/Flickr)
Official Map: Metro do Porto, Portugal
Porto, Portugal’s Metro light rail system is only ten years old, but is already a comprehensive and far-reaching network. With such a modern transit system, it’s important to have a map to match, and in most respects, this one certainly fits the bill. But does everything have to be so small?
Have we been there? No.
What we like: Some beautifully crafted elements, especially the bespoke icons for connecting services (bus, train, airport, etc.) Too many maps use the standard and dated ESRI icons for these, but these match the light, airy feel of the map perfectly.
The curves in the route lines are also beautifully executed, being wide and flowing throughout. I especially like the little s-curve from the Aeroporto station at the north end of the “E” (purple) line through to Verdes station.
What we don’t like: While beautifully designed, at anything but the actual poster size of 48x68 cm (around 19x27 inches), many of the elements are just too small. The route lines become very lightweight and spindly, while the “superscripted” parking symbol becomes almost invisible. As the map is downloadable as a PDF from the agency’s website, I feel better thought has to be given as to how the map displays on screen.
Our rating: A stylish and modern map to match a stylish and modern light rail system. Let down slightly by the smallness of some elements. Three-and-a-half stars.
(Source: Metro de Porto website)
Official Map: Hong Kong MTR
Opened in 1979, the Hong Kong MTR (Mass Transit Railway) has a very clean, easy to understand map that visually owes a debt to its previous colonial owners - the UK - via the London Tube map.
Have we been there? No (the airport by itself doesn’t count).
What we like: Clean and elegant, even with the bilingual requirements of the map. Some unusual but lovely colours for some of the routes, especially the teal used for the Airport Express line.
What we don’t like: The light rail network, which comprises some 69 stations, is relegated to a few random-looking lines with only stations that interchange with the MTR shown. I’m not sure what the meaning of the coloured marks inside interchange stations is: some are straight, others are curved, others cross over each other. An indication of platform layout, perhaps… but it all seems a bit unfathomable to me without any indication in the map’s legend.
Our rating: Simple, clean, effective. An excellent map. Four stars.
(Source: MTR website)
Official Map: Maryland Transit Administration Regional Transit Map
Here’s a large-format multi-modal map from the Maryland Transit Authority, centered on Baltimore. Contrast it against this previously reviewed map of similar scope from the Los Angeles Metro, and it can be seen that the MTA map has got a far better balance of design and usability, and is actually a quite superb and comprehensive map.
Have we been there? No.
What we like: Incredibly legible for such a dense map. It shows light rail, Metro, commuter rail (MARC services) and varying levels of bus service from multiple transit agencies, all overlaid on a nicely stylised street grid. Unlike the LA map, colors are used effectively to differentiate bus routes, meaning the routes themselves are much easier to follow. Bus route termini are also clearly marked, which helps immensely.
What we don’t like: CMRT Transit seems to get short-changed, with all nine of its routes sharing the same magenta colour, making the south-west corner of the map very pink, and those routes harder to make sense of.
Our rating: Shows how important the use of colour is to help people differentate between different routes of a similar service, especially in densely served areas. The palette used is fairly limited, but is used judiciously. Not a map for casual use, but provides a comprehensive and visually appealing guide to services in and around Baltimore. Four-and-a-half stars.
(Source: MTA website)
Official Map: Metro de Madrid, Spain
Another map that asks the question: how much abstraction and geographical simplification is too much? From what I understand, this map of the Madrid Metro system has proved somewhat controversial since its introduction in 2007. Unlike most other diagrammatic maps, this one completely eschews even 45-degree angles: reducing the map to its most basic form - and one even further removed from the city’s underlying geography.
Have we been there? No, but would love to!
What we like:Clean, light and airy look. Definitely a map for a city that wants to place itself at the forefront of modern design and technology.
I absolutely love the way that interchange stations that have long walking distances between platforms are shown, and the estimated time is even indicated on the map (nine minutes to walk between the 4 and 6 lines at Diego de León station, for example). There are other systems - like New York and Barcelona - that could really use this on their map!
Limiting the colours denoting fare zones to the immediate area around the affected lines helps to keep the map clean and airy instead of having a big rainbow of concentric zones filling up the entire background of the map.
Symbology used on the map is very clear and distinctive. Available in separate Spanish and English (seen here) versions.
What we don’t like: Generally, the idea behind a diagrammatic presentation of a transit map is to smooth out the lines and evenly space the stations (wherever possible) so that a journey can be quickly and easily plotted by a user. Here, we have a strictly enforced 90-degree design and very unevenly spaced station names (the map is very empty in the centre, and extremely crowded out in the suburbs), both of which create a very stop-start, staccato feeling to the map. Any sense of relation to the actual geography city is lost - only the river and parks give any indication of that, and they aren’t particularly accurate either.
No accessibility information on the map, even though many of the older stations in the network are inaccessible due to their age.
Our rating: Visually bold and exciting, with some very nice ideas, but a lot of hard work to actually use. Two-and-a-half stars.
(Source: Official Metro de Madrid website - English version)
Official Map: Los Angeles Metro Bus and Rail Services
I really, really don’t know what to think about this map. On one hand, it looks amazing, with a solid and well applied design theme. On the other, it’s so rich with information (with around 200 Metro-run routes plus those of Municipal bus operators!) that’s it’s almost impossible to make anything out clearly.
Maybe this is a case of form over function, or maybe it needs to be viewed at it’s actual poster dimensions (which, according to the original PDF are 47 inches along each side).
So a question to my LA readers - have you ever actually used this map? Is it helpful, or does it make your head spin?
Have we been there? Yes, but haven’t caught a bus or a train there.
What we like: Lovely looking design, tying in well with Metro’s whole corporate look. Incredibly comprehensive.
What we don’t like: The limited colour palette (one colour for each type of service) makes it hard to follow routes in complex areas - you have to rely on finding the next instance of the route number you’re trying to follow, which isn’t always easy. Route termini need to be marked more clearly.
Our rating: ?????
(Source: LA Metro website)
