STM’S new métro map draws mixed review
TRANSIT-MAP BLOGGER finds much to like in redesign, but also a few aspects that bother him
Montreal has tweaked its iconic métro map for the first time since 2007 and a transit-map blogger (yes, there is such a person) is giving it a mixed review.
The Société de transport de Montréal came up with the new look this year but only recently started posting the updated map in métro cars. They will gradually be installed in all 759 cars.
To the untrained eye, the changes are so subtle they might be missed — in station names, the first letter is no longer bigger than the rest of the letters, for example.
But to an expert, the new map provides a lot to chew over.
Cameron Booth, an Australian-born graphic design- er living in Portland, Ore., spends a lot of time thinking about and even reviewing and redesigning subway maps for his blog (www.transitmaps.tumblr.com).
He found Montreal’s previous subway map “graphically bold and clean,” giving it 3.5 out of five stars (actually, 3.5 London Underground symbols out of five).
“I love it when a map is so distinctive that it couldn’t possibly be from anywhere else in the world than the city it represents — and this is definitely all Montreal’s,” he wrote in his review of the old map. And the new version? It fixes some nagging problems, but creates some new ones, Booth said in an interview. “The new map is a slight improvement over the old, but only just.” Booth saw some positives:
The large initial letter in station names was cited as a problem in Booth’s review of the old map. He welcomes the change in the new one. “The names look neater, especially for the terminus stations, which now fit better inside their coloured boxes.” Montreal’s shoreline is simplified — the St. Lawrence Seaway dike is gone, for example. And South Shore bridges are not included. That’s “very welcome. There are enough visual cues for orientation but the background is cleaner and simpler than before.” The north-pointer and the directional arrows at the end of commuter train lines now resemble the chevron symbol in the STM’s new logo. “A nice design touch.”
Booth also saw negatives: Purple lines were used on the old map to indicate Montreal’s five commuter train lines, operated by a separate transit authority. Those lines were changed to dark blue, giving the métro the highest
“I’m glad to see that the redesign hasn’t thrown out all the elements that make (the map) so uniquely Montreal.”
TRANSIT- MAP BLOGGER CAMERON BOOTH
visual priority on the map. But the dark blue means the train routes now blend into the black background, a design flaw in Booth’s view. White squares with rounded corners now identify métro/train interchange stations, replacing purple squares. Booth laments the loss of the purple, “a distinct- ive and unusual feature of the map that imparted vital information without being too visually overpowering.”
A discussion about the intricacies of a subway map might leave long-suffering transit users grumbling about how the focus should instead be on ensuring buses and métros run on time and aren’t stuffed to the doors.
But a good transit map is also crucial, according to Booth, whose hobby has led him to redesign maps for some cities and to create subway-style maps of the United States highway network.
“It’s important to get transit maps right because people need them to plan their journey,” said Booth, 39. “The map needs to answer the question ‘Can I get from here to there?’ and it needs to do it quickly and easily. Clarity of design and a good informational hierarchy are paramount.”
The most successful transit maps “are functional and beautiful, and can become symbols of their city: the London Underground, the Moscow Metro, the New York Subway and so on.
“Montreal’s map is very distinctive (not many maps use a black background, for example), so I’m glad to see that the redesign hasn’t thrown out all the elements that make it so uniquely Montreal simply for the sake of making something new.”
As one Montrealer commented on Booth’s blog: “This map is an old friend, and aesthetically fits in perfectly with the city of Montreal itself — a charming, often strained patchwork of grit and glamour sitting atop decaying monuments to its ’60s/’70s futurist aspirations.”