Tools CHIPS' advise for orientation- METROLINE-TOTEM

CHIPS' advise for orientation- METROLINE-TOTEM
CHIPS recommended
Tool provider
CHIPS consortium (Joris Van Damme)
Readability tool main characteristics
CHIPS' advise for orientation- METROLINE-TOTEM
Does the readability tool encompass a certain location?
Readability tool branding strategy
Is the tool related to
Other mobility product

Slide 1
Slide 2
Slide 3
Slide 4
Slide 5
Slide 6
Slide 7
Slide 8
Slide 9
Slide 10
Readability tool description
Readability tool description

If you want to give an overview of the total route (metroline, totem), we advise to start form the improved “metroline-sign” strategy that was developed and tested in Tilburg on the F261. Some useful tips:

  • Provide the code-logo (Flanders, F261 pilot) and the brand colour on top (London). On the metroline in London, the c-code is not enough visible. CHIPS recommends to opt for the simple code-logo strategy (Flanders, Copenhagen). The F261 alternative is also a best practice: central brand colour and very visible F-code number. 
  • Choose a strategic locations for the totem along the route: at the main entrance, at a service hub, near public transport, where routes cross,...
  • You need to be able to stop easy at the sign (place to park and read)
  • The metroline can also be used to improve exposure towards potential users like car divers. Look also from te perspective of the car driver. Mabye there are big signpost for car drivers that blocks the exposure? If there is more than one good option, opt for the place where care drivers also get in touch with the brand. 
  • The sign faces the direction of the route (metrolines in London are sometimes not placed in the driving direction).
  • An abstract version of the route (metro style F3, F261) seems to be most understandable and clear for cyclists.
  • Select the most useful information for the sign (not to detailed). The F261 totem is a best practice to start from: size of the metroline and the fonts,  hierarchy in the information. But on the F261 the element of distance is missing.
  • Add distance. There is discussion among experts about the importance of travel time. The distance can also be indicated in kilometres/miles, minutes or both.  Indicating the time can be an eye-opener for a potential user (“it is only 20 minutes by bike to the centre”), but it requires making an assumption about the cyclist’s speed, which will always be valid only for a part of the users (and might be frustrating for others). Including both distance and time might make the sign more difficult to read quickly when cycling. 

Join the discussion


Contribute to the Readability toolbox!

Your idea or example might help others and feed new ideas.