Here’s the first map I’ve made in some time outside the Star’s resources – it went pretty smoothly.

The map shows ridership by subway station, taken from this document, which lists ‘the typical number of customers travelling to and from each station platform on an average weekday’. The circles were sized by defining the radius as 1% of this number as metres, so that for example Union, with 102,160 passengers a day, got a 1021m-radius circle, and so forth.

I’m open to a discussion of whether this makes sense as a graphic design strategy: 1) Bloor/Yonge’s circle stretches from Eglinton to a point in the harbour about a third of the way to Ward’s Island; 2) from what I dimly remember from high school geometry, the differences between stations are probably being visually exaggerated by expressing them as circles. **update: see comment**

As for the actual data, I wasn’t aware how little traffic there actually is on the Sheppard line – you will have to zoom in four levels to see Bessarion at all clearly.

As you suspected, representing the ridership as the radius of a circle produces exaggerated results.

This is because the area of a circle is proportional to the square of its radius, so a station with twice the ridership of another would have a circle with *four* times the area of the first.

To properly represent the areas using this methodology, you’d have to set the radius to the square root of some value that’s proportional to the ridership levels.

PS: Thanks for all of your interesting maps for The Star and good luck in your future endeavours!

Bessarion is not the problem. Ellesmere is.

Also, I agree with the area thing. Another option is to use colours or dark/light in conjunction with size.