TL;DR
Get travel and outdoor gear delivered free — and shop member deals
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Access to Prime Big Deal Days deals on October 6–7
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
A web tool called Flatten SF lets people compare routes between San Francisco locations, from the shortest option to routes that involve less climbing. Its creator says the tool uses USGS one-meter lidar elevation data and Overture and OpenStreetMap street graphs, with route calculations performed in the user’s browser.
Flatten SF, a web-based route planner for San Francisco, lets users compare paths between two locations by distance and cumulative climbing. The tool’s creator, Drew Edwards, says it calculates routes in the browser using more than 160,000 street segments and USGS one-meter lidar elevation data, giving users an option to favor less climbing over the shortest distance.
Users enter a starting point and destination, then move a slider across the available trade-off between shorter routes and routes with less elevation gain. According to the site, the options shown represent routes that are not beaten by another route on both distance and climbing. Moving the slider toward flatter routes does not shorten the route or add climbing, the site says.
The elevation measure is cumulative gain—the total climbing along a route—not simply the difference in elevation between its endpoints. Flatten SF says its network combines USGS one-meter lidar elevation with street data from Overture and OpenStreetMap. Route calculations run locally in the user’s browser, and faint map lines show alternatives between the shortest and flatter options.
The site also describes limitations and mode-specific rules. Its location search works offline because San Francisco intersections, places and addresses are built into the page. Stairways are included for walking and excluded for bicycle routes. The site describes its flattest-walking trade-off by assigning a foot of climbing a cost of 200 feet of walking; it says routes beyond that point stop being treated as routes.
Choosing Between Distance and Climbing
Flatten SF presents route options by both distance and cumulative climbing. The tool allows users to compare routes according to those measures, but the supplied material does not establish how many people use it or whether it has been independently evaluated.
The slider displays routes along the distance-and-climbing trade-off. Users can select an option based on their preferred balance between route length and elevation gain. The tool’s rules differ by travel mode, including its handling of stairways, so users should check that the selected mode matches their trip.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Flatten SF Builds Routes
Flatten SF says its network contains more than 160,000 street segments and draws on both elevation and street-network data. The use of one-meter lidar is intended to support elevation calculations at fine spatial resolution; the supplied description does not specify the date of the elevation collection, its coverage limitations or how the tool handles every street-level feature.
The route planner is credited to Drew Edwards. Its description links to source data and a fuller analysis, but the source material provided here does not include those underlying documents. The stated method is enough to explain the basic comparison: routes are evaluated for both length and accumulated climb, with users selecting a point on that trade-off.
“Routes are computed in your browser over 160,000 street segments, using USGS 1 m lidar elevation and the Overture / OpenStreetMap street graph.”
— Flatten SF website
Limits of the Route Data
The supplied description does not give a launch date, independent accuracy testing, or details on how often the street and elevation datasets are updated. It also does not explain how the tool treats temporary closures, construction, accessibility barriers, surface conditions or other changes that may affect a route. Users should not assume that a route labeled flatter is necessarily accessible, open or suitable for every traveler.
The site identifies its data sources and links to further analysis, but those materials were not included in the supplied reporting basis. Its stated figures and method are therefore descriptions from the project itself, rather than independently verified performance findings. No user numbers or measured effects are provided.
Testing a Route Before Travel
Users can enter two San Francisco locations on the Flatten SF website and adjust the slider to compare distance with cumulative climbing. The creator points readers to the project’s source, data and full analysis for further methodological detail. The supplied material does not announce a future release, update schedule or additional feature, so any next development remains unknown.
Before traveling, users should check current street conditions and confirm that a selected route fits their needs, particularly if they are cycling or require step-free access. The tool’s own description says stairways are allowed on foot and excluded on a bike; it does not claim to provide a full accessibility or live-closure service.
Key Questions
What does Flatten SF do?
It compares routes between locations in San Francisco, allowing users to weigh travel distance against cumulative climbing.
What data does the tool use?
Flatten SF says it uses USGS one-meter lidar elevation data and a street graph from Overture and OpenStreetMap, covering more than 160,000 street segments.
Does the tool calculate elevation difference between endpoints?
No. The site says its measure is cumulative gain, or the total climbing along the route, rather than the net elevation difference from start to finish.
Are stairways included?
According to the site, stairways are allowed for walking and excluded for bicycle routes. The description does not establish whether routes are suitable for people needing step-free access.
Are the route results independently verified?
The supplied material contains the project’s description of its data and method but no independent accuracy assessment. How often its data are updated is also not specified.
Source: hn
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
