This week's issue of Time Out New York features several articles that provide strategies to navigate New York City. One of the articles describes an alternate map of the New York subway system - the Kick Map.
- A Subway Map of the Future? (TONY)
New York's subway network is extensive, which makes it a challenge to represent on a single map. Most lines were developed independent of an overall plan by separate public and private interests (as opposed to implementing a single regional transit plan) with most major routes served by multiple trains (primarily for matched express and local service, in which some express services alternate direction or drop off depending on the time of the day) that do not always "fit" as well with other lines as we all may like.
Overall, it's sort of a patched together system… a darn good system, but not always intuitive.
The Kick Map adds some interesting elements to mapping the NYC subway network. The designer of the Kick Map claims it "celebrates the city" by showing multiple lines on routes (rather than identifying a single path for multiple lines), better representing the city's topography (i.e. better neighborhood definition), improves the transfer/connection information between lines, and it simplifies station information.
I cannot recall ever being truly dissatisfied with the official MTA subway map. In fact, I really sort of enjoy reading the MTA map - it contains an incredible amount of information that challenges the reader to "figure it out". You can glance at the MTA map, but it offers the opportunity for reading and study. There is a simplicity of the single-line depiction of routes but complexity within the text that resembles the actual experience of riding the trains. And I find the map still yields new transit information that surprises me.
That being said, I want to be cautious not to simply embrace the familiar. I enjoy the stronger neighborhood definition of the Kick Map but get lost in the actual train data (the multiple lines on a single route). The Kick map reminds me of several other subway maps (such as the London, Washington DC, Montreal, Boston, and 1972 NYC Subway maps) which simplify the train's voyage through the city through bold, colorful pathways that focus on stations rather than how the train relates to the city's actual form. These types of maps make for excellent design, but may neglect a purpose I employ maps for - to better navigate, understand and depict the actual environment.
Map courtesy of nycsubway.org
These types of "simple maps" provide strong information for getting from point A to B on the train but lose much of some functionality in terms of actual city navigation. The distances between stations often look standardized, which may, at times be misleading and inaccurate (e.g. I remember walking the far distance between Mont Royal and Frontenac stations in Montreal even though they look relatively close on the Metro map). I think the MTA map does a better job of providing data which allows one to estimate the distances between stations, and their relation to other mapped features.
I guess the "best" subway map depends on what you are using it for. If you're using the map to get from one station to another (like any normal person typically does) the "simple map" is exactly what you need. However, is the "simple map" an accurate representation of the environment, and if not, is that a problem?
Another post for another time - pros and cons of the MTA subway map.
Filed under Transit and Transportation with 1 Comment
|One Response to “The Purposeful Mass Transit Map”
Leave a Reply
November 13th, 2007 at 12:16 am
I like both. The current map is probably easier to read for people who are familiar with both transit and New York geography, but the Kick map would be much easier to read for everybody else. There are a lot of tourists in NY that have never been in a small city, forget transit experience. It is a much prettier map. I'd much rather look at that.