A Re-envisioned Denver Transit Map
 

Many months ago, I started an attempt to rethink the RTD map post FastTracks. This weekend, I was finally able to get it into a form where I thought it was worth sharing on the SSP board. I’d like to distribute this to a larger audience eventually, so I’d love to get your thoughts, feedback, and constructive criticism.

Without further ado:


http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12390248/Den...it_Draft01.png


A few notes and things to consider:

I’m likely missing or misrepresenting something
It seems like there are constantly new routes, changing stops, and other Fastracks switch-ups that I’m not involved enough to know about. Your help weeding these things out and making corrections would be much appreciated!


Light Rail, Commuter Rail, BRT and Free Buses
RTD seems poised to make a distinction between Commuter Rail and Light Rail, which I think is a shame. The overwhelming majority of people absolutely do not care what kind of train they are riding, and creating this distinction only creates confusion.

Not only have I removed these distinctions, but I have also purposefully blurred the line between the trains and the two free bus lines — the 16th Street Mall Ride and the new Downtown Circulator — which tie the entire system together for many commuters. Admittedly, this is a fairly provocative choice, but it seemed to me that it was one worth making to make the diagram of the system complete.


City versus suburbs
For better or worse, Denver’s transit system is a hub-and-spoke model, with everything leading downtown. The Achilles heel of every Denver transit map I have seen to date is that the downtown portion of the map is far too small to be useful as, you know, a transit map. The portion of the map covering the suburban areas — easily 80% of the total space — is still too small to be a useful road map or indicator of where stations actually are. As a result, the current RTD maps are failing on both accounts: not being great maps of the downtown core, and not being great maps of the suburbs either.

In my map, I have significantly enlarged Downtown Denver showing all of the relevant connections and even key attractions like Coors Field or the Museum and Cultural District. As a result, the lines leading out into the suburbs have been completely abstracted, apart from each line generally being correct in terms of where it lies in relationship to the city. In my view, this isn't a big loss since the focus is on the primary functionality: getting people from Point A to Point B effectively, ensuring that key connections downtown are illustrated.


A proliferation of lines
Compared to larger cities, the pre-Fastracks transit system in Denver is very simple. However, RTD already has established five lines (C, D, E, F, G) which in other cities would only be represented as two or three lines because the bulk of the stops on each line are the same. For example, the current F and H lines are for all intents and purposes identical, apart from minor variations at each end of the line. I have removed these distinctions, instead relying on the “X Line toward Y Station” model common throughout the world in situations like ours.


Things I know I am missing:
Car parking at each station
Bike parking at each station
Handicap accessibility information
Fare zones
Probably a lot of other stuff

Thanks in advance for your help and guidance to make this better!

— Ryan

Edit:
For reference, here is the current RTD map post-Fastracks from the website:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12390248/fastracks_map.png

And here is the current RTD map pre-Fastracks:

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/12390248/prefastracks_map.png

OMG, awesome.

I totally agree with you that the big problem with every previous Denver map has been that downtown appeared too small. They're all too geographic and not diagrammatic enough. Your solution is great.

A few thoughts:

• You ought to go ahead and include parking and the fare zones. Make it as complete as possible.
• I think your line name markers should be placed as close as possible to the end of each line (so "Golden" is next to Jeffco Gov't Center station, etc). That makes it even more clear, in case someone needs a grayscale version.
• I think a few of your line names should be rethought:
  • "Golden" should be renamed "Lakewood" since there's a possibility the Avada line could one day be extended to Golden.
  • "Mineral" should just be "Southwest" since Mineral won't be the last station for much longer.
  • "Arapahoe" should be either "Southeast" or "Tech Center" since, well, I just don't identify "Arapahoe" as a meaningful place.
  • "Flatirons" should be "Longmont" since both Boulder corridor lines will stop at Flatiron Crossing.
  • ... Or simplify and either name each line after its last station, or give it a color ("Red Line", etc).

Love it! That's a really nice and awesome map!

Ryan, I haven't posted here in a couple of years, at least, but Dan let me know about your map and I wanted to make a couple of comments.

I could quibble with details of the execution BUT -- conceptually, this is bold stuff. I love the way you've handled the downtown "blow-up" -- this could serve as a model for maps in lots of cities with similarly focused radial configurations. I also think you're headed in the right direction in terms of blurring the lines between modes. *No one cares* about one vehicle vs. another, only the quality of service.

This is really an eye-opener in terms of what RTD *could* be doing. Their current map, frankly, is a joke. Not only that -- this is a better than a lot of agency maps in other cities. Someone should be hiring you.

Okay, for J Church to come out of a 2+ years absence just to give his opinion must mean this map is really something. So why can't I see it?!?! Damn you Chinese firewall!!! :hell:

I just glanced at it but how would you include HSR when it gets built?

Ryan, excellent map! I've been working on one of my own which has a lot in common with yours. My map is basically finished and I even recently shared it with J Church (welcome back!!).

I've been sort of waiting for a certain new blog to be launched as a companion to a certain other blog before I reveal it. I guess I don't have to wait anymore. :)

Beautiful work. Before I get into detailed comments, is it safe to assume you plan to pitch this to RTD at some point? I do not want to mention this post to friends at RTD (or show them myself) if you are planning to perfect this and then make a formal pitch (which I think you could and should).

I agree with Cirrus on some of the line names. And I would add to that that RTD is fairly married to the existing monikers used before/during Fastracks development, so except where they are nonsense, I'd stick with them. Besides, you're bound to annoy some nearby jurisdiction if you name them that way... So, that said -
Your "Golden" = "West" Line
Arvada = Gold
Flatirons = Longmont (that works)
Aurora is good, Boulder works too, Northside = North, but no biggie.
I'd call Arapahoe "Southeast" or even Tech Center or Lone Tree (worst option). Calling it Arapahoe is an obvious slight to Douglas County.

I don't particularly like it - I like your way, with or without any changes - but love it or hate it, I think RTD is going to stick with letters...

I would take a look at the latest RTD/Fastracks Service Plan (in the reports to DRCOG, easy to find online, or let me know). I know it'll clutter things up and I greatly greatly appreciate how you've simplified things. I love it. BUT...it's deceptive on the southern end. Specifically, your map makes me think I could have a one seat ride from Nine Mile to Union Station (not in the plan I don't think). Also from the Southwest through to 30th/Downing (I'd have to verify that, but it wasn't in the last service plan I looked at). Your orange line that currently ends at Nine Mile is supposed to extend to Florida (to 18th only), I believe. On that, I'd pull the downtown loop around (orange, possibly also red) to show the connection between 18th/California and 18th/Stout. The trains already switch their placards to southbound after the Convention Center, and it's become fairly standard to board on the California side and ride the loop. I don't see that changing.

As far as ongoing changes to Fastracks, of course your map assumes full buildout, which is still a vote away. But I would continue that assumption for now. No decisions have been made (final decision) that I know of on where to cut if that doesn't pan out and "permanent" cuts have to be found.

Is the station still at 38th/Inca? I though it had been moved to 41st/Fox?

A couple of naming conventions... entirely a matter of preference. But on the Gold Line, I think the "60ths" at Federal and Sheridan are unnecessary. That said, on the SW I would add C-470 to Lucent (good for the Highlands Ranch folk), and on the Airport line I would add "40th" to Airport. That's a major park-n-ride, and RTD will want it easily found. (I would add little PnR symbols to the stations that will have them (most), but Cirrus already addressed that). Last one, on the North Line, I would add "SH 7" to the 162nd Ave station - again, folks need that station to be easy to find by car. Globeville station might add "Coliseum" (and the Stock Show, as long as it's there).

I'd leave the fare zones off for now, knowing they have to be added eventually. But there is just no way on God's green earth that RTD is going to be able to retain the awful terrible zones we have now once all of this comes online.

Last thought, on the Boulder line (BRT), at the end, after the split (which you show very nicely), I'd pull it directly west, and then a jog northwest (like you have it) to the end of line in Downtown Boulder. In between, you have to add some reference to the University of Colorado at Boulder. Too many riders on that line not to tell folks boarding in Denver which line is the best way to get to CU!

Oh, I like the note under DIA. But maybe drop the "About," and just leave it at "40 Minutes to Union Station"... no transit agency wants to admit on its print map that it isn't always on time ;)

All in all, fantastic!

Welcome home, JChurch. ;)

Eyeore, as HSR is a fantasy proposal at this time without any solid layout or stations you could shove it in anyway you want to.

Ryan, that's an awesome map and I agree with Cirrus about putting in the fare zones. But, I think that the current lines should remain. Yes, you've got overrun on the SW and SE corridors but the other corridors will have one line and I like the simplistic description of the "A" train.

I see the following lines at build out:

DIA: A
West Corridor: B
SW to DT: C
SW to DUS: D
SE to DUS: E
SE to DT: F
I-225 Line: G
I-225 Line to DT: H
Gold Line: I
BRT to Boulder: J
Northeast Line: K
North Line: L

I do think that the C and D lines could be modified if the D won't be going to 30th & Downing anymore. Then have a C line DT and a C line DUS while the D line would be the streetcar line. And if you go that route go ahead and drop the F and go with a E line DT and a E line DUS.

Ryan, it's nice to see you on here again. This is a pretty bold map! I love the direction that you went with. The only thing that I have a problem with are the names of the lines, which Cirrus covered pretty well. Union Station could also use a cartoonish icon or something on top of the white rectangle.

Ryan, I don't know if you're still working at the old place, but you really ought to apply with RTD, DDP, the city, or something like that.

I'll just chime in along with everyone else here and say that map is simply awesome! :yes: Clear, concise, and very, VERY good-looking! Bold, intuitive, and just great!

Aaron (Glowrock)

RTD should have a contest for a new transit map and invite public submissions. Could get a nice new map for free.

Since intercity rail (HSR or traditional) would presumably only have a handful of stops within the service area you could very easily show it on any map. You wouldn't show the lines at all; you'd just show an HSR icon next to the stations where HSR stopped.

Just like how you'd show a park and ride, basically.

Like any European map. Think of the London tube map with the little National Rail symbol next to stations, or any German map with the little "DB" where inter-city rail connects... Little CDOT logos maybe :)

Do you think post-Fastracks, if done right, Denver can get more than a little afterthought blurb at the back of the Transit Maps of the World book (version 2)? Surely we all have that book by now...

Knocked it out of the park.


One thing I would do is state the transit time from all the terminal stations to Union Stn/Downtown.

Good, but the color scheme is kinda gay.

But seriously, good map. I think the Greyhound Station may be gone by the time the system fleshes out.

Thanks everybody for the kind words and feedback. The suggestions about naming, etc. are all super-helpful.

I'm pushing to get this map into a more finished state, do some in-car maps showing individual lines as well, mock up some station signage photoshopped onto real stations or renderings, etc. I'm planning to build a website showing all the pieces of this put together and explained — kind of like a visual/verbal essay. Once that is done, I think I'd be ready to try to pitch the idea to RTD, at least to get them thinking about alternatives to their current design plans.

I'll post another round of designs on this thread for more feedback and guidance. Thank you all so much for your help and encouragement on this — this has lived on my computer unseen and unfinished for a year so I'm glad it wasn't completely off-base.

(Also, I'm gainfully employed as a designer at the moment, but thank you anyway! :banana: )

It's brilliant... experts can quibble with the names and where the labels are and those quibbles make perfect sense but from a dumb public guy point of view like mine I could look at that and know exactly what's going on with things.

It's simplicity, utility and brilliance is going to be it's biggest setback too though. You'll probably bruise some bureaucratic egos by solving a problem so elegantly and (seemingly) effortlessly that they have done nothing but butchered since we first had more than one light rail line. I think you should propose this as an actual paid service to RTD too. Free work (even when it's orders of magnitude better than what an agency can come up with) is looked at as worthless or even somehow construed as illegal by government agencies (unless there is a fundamental difference between RTD and UCLA).

Anyway though.. brilliant..

What if it were interactive, so when you click on an individual line, it zooms into a map of just that specific line? Then you would have more room to include more detailed individual station details (parking, frequency/train schedule, bus transfer schedule, fair zones, ect...). This would allow you to keep the main map simple, not cluttered.

So very true, gio.

Well, embarrassingly, it has been a few years since I got around to updating this map. Thankfully, RTD moves at a similarly glacial pace. I worked on my map quite a bit today, and while it needs a lot of refinement still, I'm happy with the direction that it's headed.

Any feedback would be really appreciated! I bet there are 30-50 little mistakes in here, and because it's 11:38pm and I've had a bottle of wine, I'm not seeing them. Help! :dancinghotdog:


http://rtd-map.com/images/ryan_nee_f...ap_2014_08.png

I'm a ute so I won't be able to nitpick the map, but WOW THAT IS A DAMN SEXY MAP!

SLC is plagued with the countries ugliest map. I'll show a pic of how bad our graphic design team is in an edit. This map is beautiful, and easy to understand. It feels clean and modern like your system, too.

http://i.imgur.com/Fm27AmY.jpg

Ok, so this is what we had during the Pioneer Day parade. It's like a 50 year old woman designed the thing in word. It screams unprofessional and disappointing. I keep asking them when everything gets a graphic overhaul and as the twitter responses are becoming increasingly vague and off topic (people will ask questions and get unrelated answers) from them, we will never know (soon they say, and then it's a fucking nightmare when they "do" update the maps). There are so many things with both RTD and UTA that are too small to go noticed, like the lack of canopies at major UTA stations like courthouse (sardines when it's snowing, and the twitter reps won't answer my fucking question), the awful graphic design of websites, way finders (I've found 10 different styles of fonts at use at stations, including both comic sans and helvetica. Uta also names stations things like "1940 W North temple" and "4778 West Old Bingham Highway"... Not governement, or 48th/Old Bingham, like they should be), general media (everything is shockingly inconsistent for UTA), and vehicles. We also have yet to get a much needed U-Airport line and UTA is infamous for running trains specially after service hours for RLS but before the RSL game is over... And the one train that does arrive is a fucking nightmare to use. It's the little things they ignore that drive me crazy, I almost want to go in to the planning office and punch some of the people who decide BRT is not suitable for our wide roads but heavy west valley service (where UTA is based) is absolutely necessary.

I live 5 miles from my job. My only option is UTA. it takes me an hour to take a bus to the stadium, a train to courthouse, and from there to triad.

It's a great map. So creative.

I think I'm sold on the idea of going full diagram and distorting the geography so much. It solves a lot of problems. But I still worry that people who don't have the FasTracks system permanently ingrained into their memories (ie normal people) will have trouble orienting themselves without any geographic clues. I wonder if the map would work better with some added geography. Like, maybe remove the fare zones and replace them with county borders, to help orient people.

Anyway, awesome job. But you asked for feedback :)

Great map, and a huge improvement over what RTD has currently. Can you send this to them for consideration?

A couple questions:
1. Where is the extension up Downing to 38th & Blake? Or is it not on there because it's not fully funded or could be a streetcar?
2. Is the MetroRide not eventually going to be extended south to 12th & Lincoln/Broadway?
It's correct for what is currently in service though.
3. Any way to add the time to Union Station from more end of line stations than just the airport?
4. Is the East Line really going to be A Line?

Thanks for the feedback! I'll attempt answers to your questions:

1. As I was making this yesterday, I listened to audio of the public meeting about extending the D line, and it felt pretty clear they have no clue what to do—or at least no firm plans— to extend the line to 38th and Blake. I had that connection in there in the 1.0 version, but I took it out for this one to make it a little bit more realistic as to what I picture we would actually have by 2018.

2. I think there are still plans to extend the MetroRide, but I left it off for now. It's also in the 1.0 version.

3. I put the time to the airport only for the Airport line just because I think it will help people plan a little bit better as they try to use transit to make a connection as a part of a larger trip. It felt like one of the rare situations where a lot of people would be going from one end of the line to the other. Plus, I travel for work a few times a month and I thought this would be helpful for out-of-towners especially. I'll see if I can add it to the other lines without it getting too cluttered. Thanks for the suggestion!

4. As far as I know, the reason the current naming convention for light rail lines starts with "C" is because they wanted the A line to stand for "Airport" and the B line to stand for "Boulder." Who knows if the B line will ever actually make it to Boulder. Unfortunately, RTD is ridiculously bad at naming lines with any consistency. The A, B, and W lines will all carry some kind of meaning (Airport, Boulder, West), but the other ones will not mean anything. It's needlessly confusing: W stands for West but E does not stand for East.

http://www.rtd-map.com/images/ryan_n...ap_2015_05.png


I updated my map! The key changes:

— Revised to match the new (proposed) RTD fare structure
— Removed zones and added county lines instead
— Modified a lot of information to match the new Flatiron Flyer service
— Added the L-Line, which is now no longer a D-line extension
— Changed colors around so that Flatiron Flyer could be dark blue
— Other minor cleanup, typo fixing, etc.

If you notice any other screw-ups or have any other suggestions, let me know. I lost the original files for the map in a computer theft and had to remake it from a really old version, so I may have introduced new errors. I'm planning to write an article and publicize this a bit within a few weeks, so I'd be grateful for your criticism. Thanks everyone!

As a side note, I'm thinking about removing the county lines in favor of time-based zones. (e.g. a zone for 10 mins from downtown, 20 mins from downtown, etc.). Does anyone have any thoughts about that? I feel like it would be more helpful than the county lines.

Terrific map...just makes way too much sense for RTD to ever use. I like the idea of time "zone" based contours, especially since it is scale the way it is geographically.

Excellent, excellent stuff. Really dig it.

A few edits/thoughts:

1. Civic Center Station is a bit off. I think if you were to move it a little more SW, you could then include a nice transfer "oval" between it and the Free MetroRide. Anything to emphasize its importance as it will be and is, the second busiest station in the system (bus-wise, I think - may be Boulder Junction in future...).
   
2. The fare structure section is a great touch, but it's ever evolving and the latest iteration is recommends a consolidation of of Express and Regional into a REX service. Rail also changes from 4 zones to two. So, basically there will be 3 zones for bus (local, REX, and Airport) and 3 zones for rail (local, REX-ish, and Airport). Airport Rail/Bus is recommended to cost $9.00. Also, some recommended changes in monthly/yearly rates.

Check out the latest from the RTD Board worksession (thanks Zmapper)

Awesome, thanks for the feedback! I'll make updates tonight and re-post with changes.

Denverryan, here is the central rail extension study should you need any more info on the new 'L' line.

http://www.rtd-fastracks.com/cc_54
https://www.dropbox.com/s/t5xa8hx9yj...eport.pdf?dl=0

To save you the trouble, they settled on alternative 3A/3B, which will need to be studied further *again* to determine which one they go with. They are essentially the same as far as your diagram is concerned though.

denverryan, your map is amazing.

How do we get this in front of RTD?

Double check the N Line station names To ensure they match RTD's new names.

Still wish that every terminal station had the estimated time to downtown, not just the A. Line.

Overall, still wonderful.

Really, really nice. I actually kind of like the county lines. I worry if you try and incorporate "times to downtown" it'll either be confusing or throw the scales completely out of whack. Be interested to see where those lines fall.

Along with pulling Civic Center Station down a little, I wonder if a similar note as you have at Union Station would help? ("Transfers to local and express buses" - or whatever. Especially if one of the Boulder buses actually terminates there.). I know it's a rail map so I think it's helpful to have some explanation of what this other station is, that isn't connected to the rail system. Also might allow you to take out the "some" from the Union Station note, which reads clunky.

Really great, though.

Do we know anymore about the lettering/route identification on the "Flatiron Flyer" - is it going to be BX, BV, etc. Or is 1, 2, 3... or what they are going with?

Can we add Bustang to Union Station now? Service starts in July, right?

I'm surprised nobody has asked you to label Stapleton I would support that, if only to not confuse visitors who get off at the least-central Central Park in the history of park naming. ;)

I love this map and the opportunity to once again point out how infuriating RTD's current map is design-wise. Great job, man.

As mentioned by others, I think that both Union and Civic Center Station should be identified as being key transfer centers to go from rail to bus. Simple language like, "Transfers to local, regional, and express buses" with Amtrak also mentioned for Union Station.

We probably don't need to mention Greyhound at Union Station- it's a minimal number of buses and the space on the map could be better suited for mentioning Bustang in all it's glory.

This is an awesome map! My one suggestion is to adjust Welton so that it's perpendicular to the numbered streets. I have no idea how you'd do it, but to me it's a bit confusing since it looks like it goes NW when it actually runs NE.

But this map is so much better than what RTD is putting out. Great job.

Hi folks, just popping up to ask Ryan, I guess, whether the new RTD map is in any way his doing ...

http://www.rtd-denver.com/LightRail_Map.shtml

So once the G and N Lines are operational who wants to take bets on the next line to open or be extended? My guesses in order of when they open:
1. E/F/R line extension to Ridgegate and Lone Tree Town Center
2. B line extension to Downtown Westminster, possibly Church Ranch?
3. D/C line extension to E-470/Lucent
4. L line extension to 38th & Blake
5. G line extension to Downtown Golden

http://www.rtd-denver.com/img/map/rail-fare-map.jpg

I'll play. Here are my guesses:

1. E/F/R line extension to Ridgegate and Lone Tree Town Center (2019)
2. L line extension to 38th & Blake (2021)
-I can see Denver ponying up $10-20M for this project to get the initial connection to 38th & Blake and a longer term goal of adding another train loop downtown.
3. B line extension to Downtown Westminster, possibly Church Ranch? (2025
4. N Line extension (2025)
4. D/C line extension to E-470/Lucent (2075)
- I think that RTD will just go with putting a big-ass parking garage at the Mineral Station and call it good. Highlands Ranch doesn't seem terribly eager to put up a significant amount of funding to extend the line.
5. G line extension to Downtown Golden (2075)

Cirrus, do we have to be nice to the new mod?

Wong, how do your projections take into account rail from Pueblo to Ft. Collins? I have Front Range Rail being a reality in 2118 with an updated Hyperloop.

My guess would be that they would want to take care of elements that are obligations under Fastracks to check them off the list - the L line extension seem like the most likely because of the cost. I suppose anything is possible if RTD is approached by a private contractor as on the last few lines.

Looking at that new map, I can't help but wonder if an L line extension up and down 19th was ever considered. It sort of jumps off the page as a logical way to get higher capacity transit to Union Station, and seems more useful than the extension to 38th and Blake (which of course they are on the hook for either way because of Fastracks). It seems like it would make that entire L-line more useful by providing connections to the G, N, and other bus connections rather than just the A line at its 38th and Blake connection, and still provide all of the other connections at 19th and California. It would also take away the need for the MetroRide. It might require the removal of a turn lane, but the one-block stretch between California and Welton already shows how a 2-way light rail cross section can fit onto 19th Street.

By 2118 Pueblo should be the global capital of Earth and the global Hyerploop network will have it's central node there. Denver will be too unimportant to be integrated.

Let me tell you my reactions to this comment, in the order they entered my brain:

First reaction: LOL

Second reaction: OMG it's been 10 years

Third reaction: LOL we should de-mod him

Fourth reaction: LOL nah

Cirrus didn't say we had to be nice, and his reactions imply that we should be mean.