The New Metro Map

Thanks to a Transit Coalition forum member for pointing out that Metro has released a new System Map. It's uh .... well, it's hard for me to say what I think about it because the new file almost choked my computer to death. Frankly, Metro design criticism is really the purview of Fred Camino over at MetroriderLA, but since he's on hiatus, the Bus Bench will just have to take on yet another task.

Scheduling, maps, websites. These are all big parts of how a transit system looks to newcomers and long-time riders alike. In a county with millions of people speaking different languages, it's especially important that things be clear and universal. These aren't just aesthetics, these are vital documents someone will need to use to get around town or just plain figure out where the hell they are if they get on the wrong bus or get off at the wrong stop. Let's have a closer look:

Here's a section of the new map next to its predecessor (click for larger version):

You know what, I'm not gonna pretend that two years of college newspaper design makes me a professional designer, but I do know that the new map makes me question my sanity. Look into its gaping maw and lose yourself in its intricate, labyrinthine web of labels and colors.

In its defense, the labels themselves are clearly more readable than the tiny scattered numbers of the previous map (at least they would be if I hadn't shrunk the file so much), but ... seriously, WHAT THE HELL? Your eyes can't even focus on this thing. Now maybe the problem is that I'm looking at this on a computer (silly me, that's the only way I know how to download things from Metro's website). Looking at the PDF file, we see that this new map is listed at roughly 53 inches by 45 inches at 200 dpi. The old one was 43 inches by 35 inches at 200 dpi. Here, let's take that out of gibberish and translate it into pictures:

Okay, so yes, it's obviously bigger, but a lot of the space is taken up by a giant picture of downtown Los Angeles, which is cleaner and easier to read than the previous version. But I live in the Valley, and on the old map, I can follow the streets I know. This map takes a more schematic approach, smoothing out many of the edges, compressing the distances, and just generally giving you less detail for the shapes and sizes of the places you know and love. My internal map just doesn't seem to line up with this one.

There are still more odd factors, like the fact that the previous map shows the entire county all the way to San Bernardino, while this version cuts off at El Monte. The rest of the county, everything from Duarte to Claremont, is basically disregarded. Granted, Metro has almost no service out there, but I'm not sure all the people riding Foothill Transit and being asked to vote on the upcoming Metro sales tax will appreciate that.

Compliments? Well it does provide a nicer color scheme, with different types of lines (shuttles, express, rapid, munis, and locals) all better differentiated. But where the old map had a massive timetable that told you loosely how often each line ran and which lines ran all night (very important for a lost or stranded person), this map has off-put that task to ... well I don't know. I assume many of these questions will be answered when I see the new map at a bus stop or on the red line. Maybe it'll be a treat to use in person because of the increased size and the new labels. And maybe timetables will be given their own, more generous spacing. I don't know. I hope so because the man on the street needs this a lot more than the man on a laptop.

What I do know is that I'm keeping the old map on my computer and that's the one I'll be looking to until Metro gets a competent online map system in place.

-Simon