MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program

Program and Phase 2: Background MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Contents

This document This document provides background information Part 1 about the current status of the MTC’s ‘Regional Mapping and Wayfinding’ program. It has been Program Background supplied in January 2020 to provide context and reference for partners responding to an online Page 3 questionnaire.

Supplied separately is a six-page Outreach Summary describing the next stages of this program. Part 2 Workshop 1 Page 11

Glossary of Terms Page 23

2 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Part 1 Program Background

3 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Context

MTC initiated this effort to develop more cohesive regional transit information to encourage sustainable forms of movement, aided by improved pedestrian and transit information.

Program Goal Urban Wayfinding Transit ridership This program is designed to put the needs All stakeholders recognize the importance of Since the publication of Seamless Transit in 2015, of regional users first in the design of future walking and cycling within a more effective and overall transit ridership continues to fall, despite information products and services while bringing sustainable movement network. The region’s increases in heavy rail and light rail ridership.1 The partners together to reflect and respond to the largest cities formally entered a ‘commitment fact that on average 29% of Bay Area residents unique context and dynamics of the Bay Area. to collaborate’ with MTC to develop Bay Area cross a county boundary to get to work, highlights mapping and wayfinding. The aim is to provide the likelihood that people will need to use multiple Seamless Transit residents and visitors with multi-modal information transit providers and decipher different information that allows them to comfortably and efficiently systems to understand their public transit options.2 SPUR published Seamless Transit in 2015. The navigate through cities and the region using document identifies five barriers “that our region sustainable transportation modes. MTC saw the Furthermore, as 75% of all Bay Area commuters needs to overcome in order to improve the transit opportunity to merge this with the development of use a private vehicle each day, the need to experience for riders.” The first of these barriers regional transit mapping to initiate this program. encourage greater public transit ridership, by was “poor information about how to make a multi- supporting the use of and transfer between transit operator trip” that “deters potential riders, who This commitment has developed both the San systems, remains critically important.3 don’t want to take the risk of being stuck at a transit José Downtown and San Francisco Ferry Building station without knowing what to do next.” wayfinding pilots. Bay Area Bike Share (currently As this program evolves, encouraging transit Bay Wheels) has also made use of emerging design ridership on a regional scale – by revealing a more The proposed strategy to “help travelers language and resources. Each project supports coherent movement network – becomes an ever understand the value of the region’s transit system the broader aim of creating a more seamless more urgent goal. and how to use it” suggested that “public transit experience by enabling other partners to share services should be marketed as one system.” To and build on the design approach and resources 1 http://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/transit-ridership increase regional ridership, “MTC should lead 2 https://www.spur.org/publications/spur-report/2015-03-31/ developed. development of a commonly used region-wide seamless-transit 3 http://www.vitalsigns.mtc.ca.gov/commute-mode-choice transit map,” which MTC agreed to undertake.

4 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

The program aims to reflect the needs of Bay Area residents and visitors, as well as to respond to the specific operational and management requirements of each organization.

The future of mobility Collaboration As we enter 2020, the pace of change within the Though focused on information provision (in all As SPUR highlighted, “improvements to the region’s mobility landscape continues to present new its forms), this program aims to garner consensus maps won’t solve transit fragmentation, but they opportunities and challenges for the region’s transit from regional partners on how to address these can help us start to knit the region and its transit providers and users. challenges. Ultimately, this program could assist together and be a catalyst for stronger coordination in creating a more interconnected transit system and cooperation among transit operators.”4 The impact of ride-hailing services and micro- that encourages increased transit ridership and the mobility options on congestion and public transit reduction of vehicle miles traveled. A partnership is essential to achieving this, and the ridership remains a matter of contention. Still, the response to the first phase of this program was diversification of mobility choices and providers is Alongside changes in mobility service and overwhelmingly positive and constructive. As we clear to see and requires a regional response. technology offerings, Bay Area cities are declaring move forward with Phase 2, our focus is on building climate emergencies. Future-thinking documents - and formalizing these partnership relationships and Meanwhile, the growth of mobile technology like Plan Bay Area 2050 - are also being developed. evolving a more collaborative design process. and the emergence of Mobility as a Service All of these seek collaborative planning at a regional (MaaS) propositions raise questions about the level to make sustainable mobility options easier to 4 https://www.spur.org/publications/white-paper/2019-01-03/ likely changes in user behavior and the role of interpret, understand, and access. finding-transit regional agencies in providing clear and unbiased information to all parts of society.

5 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Phase 1

Harmonization aims to create cohesion between different forms of information so that people can understand and navigate the region with greater ease.

Research Prototypes and pilots In Phase 1, the team researched existing user There was significant support for a greater level of The development of a prototype regional map as experience and user needs, as well as organization regional collaboration and harmonization achieved a priority exercise brought partners together and operational considerations, highlighting key areas of through a consistent, legible, and easier to use evolved a collaborative working methodology. opportunity that this program could address. system of information. However, challenges and concerns were raised about how to balance service The result is a map that represents all parts of Workshops provider identities and how to achieve consensus the Bay Area and all transit operators based on a on standardized parts. hierarchy of modes and content selection criteria. Five interrelated propositions were developed and tested with management-level regional stakeholders Deliverables Though not finalized, the prototype demonstrates through workshop activities. the potential for regional collaboration based on At the end of Phase 1, the team shared a draft new working processes. It represents a more The propositions outlined a series of high- roadmap document. It recommended a program harmonized approach to presenting Bay Area level working processes and methods to help to develop a ‘standard system’ including shared transit options. shape program direction. At the heart of these brand, products, and design resources was propositions was the need to achieve greater necessary to achieve harmonization, but flexibility This program has also supported the ongoing regional “harmonization” and operational for transit agencies and cities regarding its adoption development of the Downtown wayfinding pilot efficiencies potentially through the development of and degree of application. in San José and enhanced wayfinding at San a shared brand, products, and design resources. Francisco Ferry Building.

These pilots and prototypes present opportunities to evolve further and test emerging strategies for achieving greater regional harmonization as well as the impact improved information has on user’s mobility patterns and experience.

6 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Phase 1: Propositions Regional partners convened in San Francisco and San José in February 2018 to discuss five interrelated propositions:

1. Use an evidence-based approach to system development 2. Build together 3. Achieve greater regional harmonization 4. Achieve efficiencies and long- term sustainability 5. Communicate the program

7 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Phase 1: Regional map As a priority step, MTC, City ID, and regional partners worked on developing a regional map prototype in 2018 that was presented to the MTC’s Operations Committee in early 2019.

ealdsburg CAPITOL CORRIDOR TO So SACRAMENTO no ma ROSEVILLE C ROCKLIN ou Windsor nt AUBURN y T ran si t Piner Road Sonoma County Airport (STS) NORTH ixon r Santa Rosa o id orth SANTA rr o l C to pi T a uerneville C k A R a tr M ROSA m S A Sonoma County Transit BAY VACAVILLE Santa Rosa Santa Rosa raton Transit all TRIONE-ANNADEL STATE PARK CITY COACH Sonoma County Transit acaville SERVICE SANTA ROSA CITYBUS AREA & SONOMA COUNTY Sebastopol Sonoma TRANSIT SERVICE AREA

County Transit ss re xp E o lan Rohnert Park So VINE Fairfieldacaville SERVICE SONOMA AREA COUNTY Sonoma State TRANSIT apa Cotati SERVICE Sonoma County Transit Golden Gate AREA Sonoma Transit PETALUMA TRANSIT & SONOMA COUNTY TRANSIT SERVICE AREA NAPA FAST FAIRFIELD SERVICE PETALUMA AREA S MAR Fairfield VI NE T Sonoma County Transit

Petaluma E

N I V SuisunFairfield

GOLDEN GATE American & MARIN TRANSIT SAN PABLO r ovato Canyon o SERVICE AREA BAY NATIONAL id rr San arin WILDLIFE REFUGE FAST o l C to pi SolTrans a C k a tr m A SOLTRANS ovato SERVICE s

AREA s e r p alleo x

alleo E

Ferry o a n Terminal l G o o VALLEJO GRIZZLY nverness lden Gat S POINT are BAY REYES e SAN T sland ra S nsi o ovato amilton lT t PABLO ran CARQUINEZ s Point Reyes Station BAY BRIDGE Benicia Benicia SUISUN SAMUEL P. TAYLOR BENICIA–MARTINEZ STATE PARK BRIDGE BAY lema Rodeo arin WESTCAT Amtrak San Joaquins SERVICE AREA M Civic Center TRI DELTA a ercules TRANSIT rin COUNTY T SERVICE ra CONNECTION ns Pittsburg AREA Pittsburg

T Antioch it SERVICE AREA R artinez Bay Point Center r INE GOLDEN GATE SAN o V M A d ri & Pinole & MARIN TRANSIT S r T o ST A TRI DELTA SERVICE AREA RAFAEL l C A C BART o F t C Tri Delta Transit Fairfax it s s akley TRANSIT p e ou a uin W n Antioch SERVICE A GOLDEN GATE q t m San San Rafael k C a T y AREA NATIONAL a o El Sobrante A C tr r J o a Anselmo Transit Center t n C n k RECREATION m a n San A S est e AREA c orth Concord n G k W t t o i ra io ti J old t ANTIOCH s o n artinez c aquin en m n A San Pablo a r

G onne T

s ate C Pleasant ill County Connection y nt l t a Tra RICHMOND Concord MOUNT TAMALPAIS ns D e Richmond Cou i

it Pleasant ill r

El Cerrito del orte T Larkspur Contra Costa Centre CONCORD RICHMOND – Clayton Brentwood Corte SAN RAFAEL BRIDGE Richmond Bolinas adera El Cerrito Plaza Walnut Creek Stinson Beach Strawberry AMTRAK TO Gol orth LATHROP/MANTECA d UC Berkeley en Berkeley TRACY ill alley Gat STOCKTON e T owntown ra Marin Transit n s BERKELEY Berkeley it rinda Lafayette MOUNT DIABLO Tiburon MUIR arin Berkeley WOODS City Angel Rockridge sland Ashby arin eadlands Sausalito EAST Emeryville acArthur OAKLAND Treasure Alcatraz 1th Stakland GULF OF THE sland sland anville i n FARALLONES u West 12th Stakland City Center Fishermans M Wharf SF Ferry akland BAY olden C Terminal A o C EAST BAY u ate Bridge BAY T REGIONAL nt ra y Embarcadero BRIDGE akland Lake ns PARKS C MUNI Golden Gate it on SERVICE Transit ack London erritt WHE ne Salesforce c AREA t ontgomery Suare EL io Lands End Transit S n Center Eastmont SAN Muni Alameda akland SAN RAMON Fruitvale AC TRANSIT Civic Center Powell St AT&T Park ain St SERVICE AREA oo COUNTY Webster St CONNECTION San Ramon San Francisco SERVICE AREA FRANCISCO t th & ing St ALAMEDA akland Muni Metro ransi cean Coliseum T 1th St C Beach A o ission n

r n o n s t i i

e t a 21st St r

r a San i M 2th St c l t n e a u n 22nd St Leandro S

i arbor OAKLAND COLISEUM SF oo ission n C a m T M L n

SAN o E S & ORACLE ARENA u

Bay C E

M y B LEANDRO t len Park A R W H SF State T u n o

University Bay Fair C Balboa Park akland MUNI ublin SERVICE nternational Castro West ublin Pleasanton WHEELS AREA Airport (A) SERVICE alley Pleasanton AREA aly City Sunnydale Bayshore DALY WHEELS asco BART Road CITY Colma Farallon San Lorenzo slands South San ACE Livermore ACE TO Francisco ayward SAN AC Transit Cal State WHEELS LATHROP/MANTECA B A South SERVICE R East Bay AREA PLEASANTON TRACY T San Francisco FRANCISCO A STOCKTON m Pleasanton South San t BAY ra E k LIVERMORE Francisco A C HAYWARD C a IDG p T it South ayward R ransi o B l C San Bruno San Francisco D t or R r nternational Airport A id

n s o AC TRANSIT r

r a (SF) YW SERVICE T SAMTRANS A SERVICE H AREA a m – Union City ACE

S AREA EO T A M SamT This map shows principal connections Pacifica N SA ra between popular destinations. ns For detailed Bay Area transit information, dial 5-1-1, or visit 511.org. Sa illbrae m Tran s s Fremont s res n a xp Clipper Card is a convenient way to pay r Foster E

T on m City for transit. The reloadable card stores cash Broadway rt a a value and transit passes to pay fares. S mb FREMONT u Fremont isit clippercard.com for details. Burlingame SAN D Centerville MATEO ewark San ateo E G AC Transit D r

ayward Park I o

R d

SAMTRANS i

B r Warm Springs SERVICE r

N o O South Fremont AREA C T illsdale R l

A i

B p A C E M a Belmont U D

REDWOOD ak C

t ans BART a ea a a m Tr CITY A m San Carlos Sa A

Caltrain C V T Redwood City a lt ra in PALO East SART aa ea a a Atherton ALTO Palo Alto alf oon Bay enlo Park Long-distance & commuter rail a MOUNTAIN Palo Alto ilpitas Light rail e VIEW reat America Stanford LEVI’S STADIUM Stanford PACIFIC Lick Regional bus connections California Av ountain reat ill reat all eage ee e e e iew America ain St San Antonio San os Transit Regional bus connections Airport Center Lawrence (SC) Alum Rock eea e Sunnyvale etro MOUNT HAMILTON V STANFORD Airport TA OCEAN L UNIVERSITY VTA ig h Eastridge VTA t R TA SERVICE a V Transit Ferry SUNNYVALE i AREA l Center Frequency of services may vary during the week or depending on time of day. JOSEPH D. GRANT Santa Clara SAN JOSÉ COUNTY PARK Please check operator schedule for more details. A STATE

T V UNIVERSITY VTA s

n SERVICE a

r SANTA College Park

T AREA m a CLARA SAP S PENINSULA CENTER Convention Center Cupertino San os iridon

PORTOLA VTA SAN JOSÉ Stop Bullet stop Limited stop STATE PARK Tamien Regular services Regular & Infrequent services Winchester express services Pescadero Campbell l

i Capitol a R

t h

Connecting stops g i

hlone L Connections may be Walking transfer A up to 5 min walk Chynoweth T Transfer may be V 5–15 min walk Blossom ill

Almaden Santa Teresa

Cal BIG BASIN VTA t STATE PARK ra SERVICE in AREA

SERVICE AREA HENRY W. COE STATE PARK organ ill Bus service area

San artin aor parks SOUTH

BAY ilroy Prototype ap ersion 1 Updated anuary 21 ea aa 21 8 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Phase 1: Related pilots In parallel, this program has supported the ongoing development of the Downtown wayfinding pilot in San José and enhanced wayfinding at San Francisco Ferry Building.

9 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Phase 2

The key question for Phase 2 is: How do we build a program that can be adopted by all stakeholders and supported across the region?

Outreach approach Benefiting everyone Phase 2

Answering this requires further outreach with transit The team has proposed that the harmonization of The first workshop of Phase 2 demonstrated agencies and cities across the region. information should benefit everyone. that there is an appetite for a greater level of harmonization amongst stakeholders. Feedback 1. For the user, harmonization should provide The experience of using the regional network is during this session also highlighted that the more reliable, predictable and familiar considered fragmented. Still, the City ID team program needs to assess the value and benefit of information suggests that multiple transit operators are not harmonization to gain public buy-in, as well as MTC the problem. Other places around the world 2. For the providers, harmonization should and Agency board support. demonstrate alternative models whereby various provide common parts, applications, and providers implement information that results in a standards that support better ways of working Following this feedback, refined Phase 2 stages more harmonized user experience. include more outreach with stakeholders, focus 3. For the region, harmonization should support group feedback sessions, and the development of a better social, environmental and economic The City ID team proposes that part of the solution Business Case for future growth. outcomes is the need for a flexible blueprint for harmonization. This blueprint may specify optimal and alternative The following section provides a summary of the requirements to achieve the alignment of activities and discussions from the first workshop in information across a variety of existing, as well as Phase 2. A summary document provided separately future, environments and situations. Through further describes the immediate next steps in more detail. outreach, the aim is that a shared vision for optimal harmonization and opportunities for incremental change will emerge.

10 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Part 2 Workshop 1

11 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Workshop 1 Achieving Visual Harmonization

Workshop 1: Achieving Visual Harmonization Level 1 In August 2019, partners explored five potential levels of harmonization (shown right) that could Update apply to the design of future transit and wayfinding Maps information.

The levels spanned from a low degree of Level 2a harmonization – updating maps only in Level + 1 – through to a high degree of harmonization – Update Standard updating maps and using standard displays and Maps Displays products in Level 3. Level 2b Two of these levels could include a Regional + + Bay Graphic Identity specially developed to aid navigation across the Bay Area. This identity could Update Standard Regional be shared by MTC, Transit Agencies, Cities, and Maps Displays Graphic potentially private transportation providers in the Identity* future. Level 3a + + The collective graphic identity could harmonize all modes, services, and journeys. The name ‘Bay’ was Update Standard Standard used as an example to describe the potential of a Maps Displays Products shared visual identity. Level 3b + + + Bay

Update Standard Standard Regional Maps Displays Products Graphic Identity*

*Endorsed by provider brands

12 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Activity questions Following a presentation of the levels of visual harmonization, partners divided into five groups. Each group had a journey stage to consider and then asked to respond to the following questions:

1. What are the typical “pain points” at this journey stage? 2. Which level of harmonization has the most benefit to customers in this situation, and why? 3. What are the challenges with delivering greater harmonization? 4. What support does your organization need to participate in regional harmonization?

13 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Workshop 1 Feedback Summary

Workshop 1: Achieving Visual Harmonization Key topics for further consideration and Pre-journey, Traveling Regionally, Transferring at a exploration Hub, and First & Last mile information should be harmonized to a high degree with a new network 1. Political support identity. When Traveling Locally, information should ideally feature standardized map and displays and that a Regional Graphic Identity may not be most 2. Funding beneficial in these situations. 3. Planning Additionally, the activity brought up ten key topics that require further attention and exploration through a more collaborative design development 4. Resourcing process. 5. Responsibilities

6. Commissioning

7. Design processes

8. Value/benefits

9. Identity

10. Future readiness

14 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Pain points User pain points identified at each Workshop 1 journey stage are listed below. Feedback – Question 1

Journey stages Pre-journey Transferring Traveling Traveling First mile/ planning at hubs regionally locally last mile

1. What are typical Knowing where to go for the Physical separation and Determining fares Different types and levels of Lack of information “pain points” best information? 511.org? distance between stops and and transfers information based on local generally Moovit? Apps/websites stations agency at this journey stage? Anticipating transfers Multiple operators and Lack of service alerts Not all agencies follow best Unclear payment methods information systems practices

Over reliance on user Lack of transfer information Different definitions for same Unclear options owning a smart phone term (E.g. express, rapid)

Anticipating last mile mode Fare inconsistencies Definition of high frequency 511.org is no longer options between agencies in one area is different from operating – there is no trip others planner on the app

Lack of integration with Schedule alignments destination information

destination integration

15 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Workshop 1 Feedback – Question 2

2. Which level of harmonization has the most When traveling locally, a flexible approach allowing For first/last mile, a harmonized information system benefit to customers in this situation for either the adoption of harmonized information including the use of a regional graphic identity (3b) and why? (Level 2) or a harmonized information system (Level would be most beneficial to the user. 3) would be most beneficial to the user. The groups determined that for pre-journey, transferring, and traveling regionally, a harmonized “Having less things to learn is probably better” information system including the use of a regional “When traveling locally, we thought 2a made the graphic identity (Level 2b/3b) may be most most sense, it doesn’t take away from the other beneficial to the user. benefits of graphic harmonization for other kinds of travel” As determined through pilot projects, local flexibility will allow for local expression through the use of “It’s easy for me to use. I’m in San Francisco but colors and graphic styles. I’m going to Concord. Oh look, it (information) Therefore, at a local level, the degree of is the exact same in both locations, so it is harmonization may mean: A summary of the results of the levels is on the next probably going to tell me the same.” page. a. A common mapping style b. Neutral map color scheme Therefore, at a regional level, the degree of c. Standardized maps, formats & sizes (where harmonization may mean: possible) a. A common mapping style The use of a regional graphic identity for local b. A common identity, endorsed by provider brands service providers may not be beneficial, though this c. Standardized maps, formats & sizes could be explored further. d. Applies to all information (not just maps)

“If your brand isn’t particularly liked, or hasn’t got a good reputation then [a regional identity] could be a good thing, but if that’s not the case then that’s an opportunity cost.”

16 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Levels of harmonization Each group selected the level of Workshop 1 harmonization that they felt would have most benefit to customers. Feedback – Question 2 In some groups, two levels were considered.

Pre-journey Transferring Traveling Traveling First mile/ planning at hubs regionally locally last mile

Level 1

Level 2a Selected by Group 4

Level 2b Selected by Group 1

Bay

Level 3a Considered by Group 4 Considered by Group 5

Level 3b Selected by Group 2 Selected by Group 3 Selected by Group 5

Bay MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Workshop 1 Feedback – Question 2

Indicative approach These results indicate a potentially workable approach to harmonization that will help inform the next stage of development. Feedback points to a method of achieving harmonization where consistency is most needed when transferring or traveling across jurisdictions. More flexibility is allowed where agencies have responsibility for a specific jurisdiction.

Pre-journey Transferring at Hubs Traveling Regionally Traveling Locally planning Level 3b E.g. Rail & Rapid Transit E.g. Light Rail Level 3b Level 3b Level 2a or 3a

18 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Indicative approach (continued)

Journey Traveling Locally Transferring at Hubs First/Last Mile First/Last Mile Planning E.g. Bus Level 3b E.g. Bike Share E.g. City Wayfinding Level 3b Level 2a or 3a Level 3b Level 3b (with Fix & Flex)

19 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Challenges & support A wide range of subjects were Workshop 1 discussed in response to these two questions. The table shown below Feedback – Questions 3 & 4 and on the following page organizes key areas of discussion into ten topics.

1. Political support 2. Funding 3. Planning 4. Resourcing 5. Responsibilities

3. What are the Gaining top-down Cost of Development Staff time Differing capacities challenges with political support harmonization levels opportunities Staff time is needed, both between agencies delivering greater “Top-down political support “The benefit is very marginal “Every transit agency locally and regionally. “The frequency levels in harmonization? [is needed] in order for this between level 3 and 4, but is at different stages of different areas are different. to get as far in the system the cost is extreme.” infrastructure life-cycles” What is a very high as we might want it to.” [so region-wide change is frequency in Santa Rosa is difficult to implement] a very low frequency in San Technical support Francisco.” Agency board buy-in Funding responsibilities Reliable and accessible “The buy-in from the board Update and pathways to help maintain Updates and is often down to that local “[We need] funding to maintenance cycles current information for maintenance identity, that system that the update signage and public access board created 30-40 years harmonization” “Who will update all these “Who updates all these ago, they’re losing that signs?” signs?” identity.”

4. What support does MTC coordination Board approval Coordination Staff support Collaborate your organization “It would be great if we had “[Getting board approval] Coordination is needed Regional support “The agencies would have need to participate a standard, more than just gets complex depending at a regional level to find and coordination for to come together in a truly in regional guidelines” on what you ask, and how opportunities for alignment. harmonization. collaboratively manner and much money is involved. individual agencies would harmonization? need to be willing to make individual trade-offs for the Board champions common good to make this successful.” “[We need] stakeholders who are external to board working with our board members to really advocate for this cause and demonstrate the potential benefit we can get from it.”

20 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Challenges & support A wide range of subjects were discussed in response to these two questions. The table shown below and on the previous page organizes key areas of discussion into ten topics.

6. Commissioning 7. Design process 8. Value/benefit 9. Identity 10. Future readiness

3. What are the Procurement Avoiding design by Return on Integration of new Retaining agency challenges with processes committee investment mobility identities delivering greater “The procurement “We’ve got 28 agencies, “we acknowledge there’s “Micro mobility is changing harmonization? process, is not necessarily there’s the trade-off benefit going down [to level “You risk agencies rapidly so what’s happening straightforward even between customization and 5b] but you can’t ignore the losing their individual right now might not be within a single agency, let harmonization.” cost in how much return on accountability where people what’s happening 5 months alone across 28 different investment you’re getting.” become broadly critical of from now, definitely not 5 agencies.” ‘the Bay’, when maybe they years from now. How do Maintaining quality should be critical of a single you plan for that?” operator.” “Some agencies may Weighing value, pros not provide or follow best and cons of options practice” “Proof of value for people. Is it actually worth it to do this? Weighing the pros and cons of that [is required]”

4. What support does Design Standards Business Case Flexibility Readiness your organization Detailed design standards A Business Case is needed “We still covet our own “In our current economy need to participate are needed to maintain to gain support. brand identities.” and our current in regional design quality. environment, we need more dynamic options for getting harmonization? around”

21 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Intentionally blank

22 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Glossary of Terms

23 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020

Intentionally blank

24 MTC Regional Mapping and Wayfinding Program City ID | January 2020 Glossary of terms

Harmonization Creating cohesion between different forms of information so that people can understand and navigate the region with greater ease.

Pilot An initial phase of implementation that may require review and refinement before establishing a standard.

Prototype Temporary implementation for facilitating feedback and testing with users. Prototypes are typically developed before a pilot.

Standardization The use of consistent (standard) design elements, including anything from colors and line weights, to products and placement.

Note: Levels of harmonization presented in Workshop 1 require the standardization of various design elements.