Cover Image

Not for Sale

View/Hide Left Panel
Click for next page ( 70

The National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine
500 Fifth St. N.W. | Washington, D.C. 20001

Copyright © National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved.
Terms of Use and Privacy Statement

Below are the first 10 and last 10 pages of uncorrected machine-read text (when available) of this chapter, followed by the top 30 algorithmically extracted key phrases from the chapter as a whole.
Intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text on the opening pages of each chapter. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

Do not use for reproduction, copying, pasting, or reading; exclusively for search engines.

OCR for page 69
Bicycle Access to Transit 69 Exhibit 8-3. Bicycle mode shares for selected transit agencies. Bike Access Number of Stations Mode Share BART Denver RTD NJ Transit b 0 2 percent 12 (28%) 18 (62%) 61 (90%) 2 4 percent 19 (44%) 7 (24%) 6 (9%) 4 6 percent 7 (16%) 3 (10%) 1 (1%) > 6 percent 5 (12%) 1 (3%) 0 (0%) Total Stations a 43 29 68 Notes: a Reflects total number of stations for which data were available. b Data are for northern New Jersey commuter rail stations. Because of the strong role of these factors on bicycle access, the extent to which bicycles are a viable access mode varies considerably by system and even between stations within individual systems. For example, BART's system-wide bicycle access mode share of 2.7 percent is over three times the mode share for NJ Transit commuter rail stations. In addition, according to BART's 2008 passenger survey, bicycle access mode share ranges from less than 2 percent at many outlying stations to over 11 percent at the Ashby Station in Berkeley. Bicycle access to stations along the MBTA rapid transit lines in the Boston area usually have 2 to 3 percent boardings by bicyclists; one of the highest rates of bicycle access is at the end-of- the-line Alewife Station where bicyclists account for more than 5 percent of the total. Exhibit 8-3 shows the distribution of bicycle access mode shares for individual stations for selected transit agencies for which data were available. This table shows that agencies differ widely in the amount of bicycle access to transit, with over 70 percent of BART stations experiencing at least 2 percent bike access mode share compared to fewer than 10 percent of NJ Transit stations. The lower bike access mode shares in New Jersey indicate several potential issues affecting bike access. First, since the New Jersey stations surveyed are all commuter rail, the stations serve suburban areas that may require longer access journey distances and discourage cycling. Moreover, difficulty storing bicycles in Manhattan, which is a major destination of commuters, may discourage riders. In addition, the lower level of bicycle access likely reflects the poorer quality of the cycling environment in New Jersey compared to the Bay Area and Denver. This is supported by the fact that New Jersey generally has lower overall levels of bicycling for all trip purposes than do the Bay Area and Denver. As a result of the wide range in the popularity of bicycle access, some transit agencies are currently dealing with rapidly increasing bicycle access and bicycle-capacity problems on-board transit vehicles (e.g., Lane Transit District [Eugene, Oregon], BART, LA Metro), while others have fewer current concerns and place less emphasis on bicycle access. Given the general growth in bicycle use, routine consideration should be given to providing bicycle facilities that accommodate 5 percent of boardings, with bike parking sufficient to accommodate 10 percent or more of total boardings in special circumstances. Bicycle Access Improvements Many cities throughout the United States and Canada have undertaken a range of measures to improve biketransit integration. The main groups of measures are: Bike paths, bike lanes, and other on-street routes leading to stations; Bike parking at rapid transit stations with varying degrees of shelter and security;

OCR for page 69
70 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Multi-functional bike stations that provide not only parking, but also a range of services such as bike rentals, repairs, and accessories; and Special accommodation of bikes on-board transit vehicles through racks, hooks, designated loading doors, or other means. These areas of improvement are described in detail below. Bicycle Access Routes Safe and comfortable bike facilities on routes leading to and from transit station are critical components to increasing bicycle access to transit stations. The following ideas serve as general principles; there are numerous design guidelines available for bicycle facilities both nationally (e.g., AASHTO Guide for the Development of Bicycle Facilities, NACTO Urban Bikeway Design Guide) and locally. The following general principles apply to developing an effective bicycle network in the vicinity of transit stations: Provide appropriate bicycle facilities that follow local best practices for bicycle design (e.g., bike lanes, shared-lane markings, and trails) on routes to and from transit stations. Provide bicycle detection at all traffic signals near stations and at station entrances. The Highway Capacity Manual 2010 procedures for calculating bicycle level of service (described in detail in Appendix B) can be used to evaluate the quality of existing routes and potential improvements. Provide bicycle wayfinding to the transit station from adjoining streets and bikeways (Exhibit 8-4). Provide area maps in the station locating surrounding streets, popular destinations, and existing bikeways. In addition to providing bicycle facilities on routes leading to stations, agencies should also establish safe and efficient routes for bicyclists to reach the station entrance or bicycle parking from adjacent streets. To the extent possible, bicycle routes through station property should be as direct as possible and should minimize conflicts between bicyclists, pedestrians, automobiles, and buses. It is also best to avoid the use of sidewalks as bicycle routes wherever possible and Exhibit 8-4. Bicycle wayfinding through station parking lot (El Monte Busway Station, Los Angeles). Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

OCR for page 69
Bicycle Access to Transit 71 Exhibit 8-5. Bicycle facility through the Rose Quarter Transit Center (Portland). Source: 2011 Google avoid requiring bicyclists to ascend and descend stairs. Where cyclists must navigate stairs, stair channels allow riders to wheel bicycles up and down stairs. While some level of conflicts between bicyclists and transit vehicles near station entrances may always occur, design options should be sought to minimize them. TriMet's 2008 redesign of its Rose Quarter Transit Center to improve bicycle conditions and increase safety is a good example of redesigning an existing facility to better accommodate bicycles. Exhibit 8-5 depicts the new bike facility, which reduces bikebus conflicts by allowing bicycles to travel through the center of the facility while buses serve passengers on either curb. Bicycle Parking and On-Board Accommodation On-Board Accommodation Policies for bicycle access also need to address whether bicyclists park their bicycle at the station or take their bicycles on-board transit vehicles. Agencies that permit cyclists to bring their bicycle on-board the transit vehicle can encourage bicycle access. Allowing bicycles on-board can significantly expand the reach of a transit system as riders can use their bicycle for both access and egress. However, space constraints on transit vehicles during peak periods causes many agencies to restrict bicycle access during those hours or prohibiting it altogether. If bicycles cannot be brought onto the vehicle, safe and secure parking must be provided. On-board policies can affect the need for bicycle parking at stations. For example, if bicycles are permitted during rush hours, fewer riders may want or need to park their bicycles at rail stations. Eugene's LTD EmX BRT buses are designed for level boarding so bicyclists can walk their bikes on board. Bicyclists board through the rear door of the vehicle, and up to three bicycles can be

OCR for page 69
72 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations accommodated per vehicle. Eugene has very high levels of bicycle ridership, and in many periods demand to bring bicycles on-board exceeds capacity. Most agencies allow bicycles on-board rapid transit vehicles, and all of the rail agencies interviewed as part of the research allow bicycles on-board during non-peak periods. On-board accommodation during peak periods varies by agency and is largely dependent on overall demand. Where agencies allow bicycles on-board transit vehicles, vehicles should be designed to efficiently store bikes without blocking doors or creating a nuisance for other passengers. Several design options for accommodating bikes are available, such as exterior bicycle racks on buses (Exhibit 8-6), and bicycle hooks and bicycle holding areas inside rapid transit vehicles (Exhibit 8-7). On many systems with high bicycle access mode shares, there is a desire to encourage more riders to park their bicycles at stations rather than bring them on-board vehicles. To achieve this goal, bicyclists must perceive parking at rail stations to be safe, which requires that the parking be located appropriately and of an acceptable type (e.g., lockers in addition to racks). To deal with increasing numbers of bicycles on its system, LA Metro promotes both bicycle parking to encourage patrons to leave bicycles at stations when possible, and the use of folding bikes for those passengers that do bring their bikes on-board. Metro is in the early stages of a program that will partner with a local company that promotes green technology, to promote folding bikes and potentially subsidize folding bikes for transit passengers. Note that there may be equity impacts associated with prohibiting bicyclists from taking bikes on-board vehicles. A survey of over 2,000 bicyclists conducted by LA Metro showed that low- income bicyclists were more likely to bike to transit, and that many of those who bike to transit require use of their bikes on both ends of their transit trip, requiring them to bring their bicycles on-board transit vehicles (39). Bicycle Racks Bicycle racks are the most common method of bicycle parking. Most agencies stated that bicycle racks are relatively cheap and can be installed as needed to meet demand, except where space constraints prohibit additional racks. However, bicycle racks may be less secure than other forms of bicycle storage, making some bicyclists hesitant to use them. The following are general Exhibit 8-6. Exterior bicycle rack on BRT vehicle (Los Angeles). Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

OCR for page 69
Bicycle Access to Transit 73 Exhibit 8-7. Interior bicycle storage examples. (a) Bicycle Hook (Portland) (b) On-board Storage Area (Metrolink) Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. principles for providing bicycle racks at transit stations (the Association of Pedestrian and Bicycle Professionals' Bicycle Parking guidelines provides detailed guidance on bicycle parking): Provide adequate bicycle racks to meet demand, wherever space permits. Locate bicycle parking in secure, well-lit locations along bicyclists' "desire lines" from major bikeways to the station entrance(s). If it is not possible to site bicycle parking within view of station personnel (if present), parking should be located in areas with high pedestrian flows or where other informal surveillance is possible. However, racks or lockers should not impede pedestrian flows. Locate bicycle parking where weather protection exists (such as a roof or awning), where possible (Exhibit 8-8). Consider providing covered parking in other locations. Locate bicycle parking so that bicyclists do not have to dismount and walk to access it. This means that bike routes should continue as close as possible to the station entrance. Signs requiring bicyclists to dismount generally have limited effectiveness. Locate bicycle parking in proximity to station entrances wherever possible. Design parking garages to avoid major conflicts with bicycle traffic at structure entrances and exits. Where bicycle routes must cross garage entrances or exits, provide additional traffic control or calming devices to alert motorists to the bicycle crossings.

OCR for page 69
74 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Exhibit 8-8. Bicycle racks located beneath overpass (MacArthur BART Station, Oakland). Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Secure Bike Parking There are a variety of options for bike storage that provide more security than bike racks. Exhibit 8-9 summarizes the primary methods of secure bike storage. Bicycle lockers rented through individual subscriptions are the most common method of providing secure bicycle parking, and are in use at many transit agencies (Exhibit 8-10). Lockers are typically rented either annually or semi-annually for a small fee (typically less than $100 per year). Transit agencies may manage the subscriptions and maintenance themselves, or partner with other organizations (e.g., a local bicycle advocacy organization, a regional MPO) to manage larger parking operations. While subscription lockers are relatively easy to install and manage, the experience at many transit agencies has been mixed: locker subscriptions tend to sell out quickly but utilization is very low on a daily basis. This suggests that the low price of a subscription encourages occasional bicycle commuters to rent a locker even if they use it infrequently. As a result, many agencies are exploring more effective options for providing secure bike parking. For example, BART is moving toward hourly payment for bicycle lockers through electronic cards to improve utilization. Similarly, LA Metro recently piloted an unmanned bicycle storage module with electronic entry at the Covina Metrolink station. The facility cost approximately $100,000 to install. Metro is currently monitoring use to determine whether such facilities make sense in other locations as well. Attended bicycle parking (Exhibit 8-11) has also proven popular among patrons, but the costs of operating attended bike parking often limit its use within a system to only a few locations. Typically, attended bike parking is combined with other services, such as bicycle repair or rentals, to generate some revenue to pay for operations. Bike Sharing Bicycle sharing programs are expanding rapidly around the country, many of which are focusing on expanding the reach of transit. Boston and Washington, D.C., for example, have both recently implemented wide-spread bike sharing programs. Bike share stations are placed near MBTA and WMATA stations allowing riders to ride between home and work and the nearest transit station.

OCR for page 69
Bicycle Access to Transit 75 Exhibit 8-9. Summary of secure bike storage options. Bike Lockers: Bike Lockers: Self-Service Bike Bike Stations Subscription Shared System Cage Description Provides valet Metal or plastic Metal or plastic Bicycle racks attended parking. crates for storing crates for storing behind a locked Other services bicycles. Self- bicycles. Self-serve. door. Free-standing (lockers, changing serve. cages, or fenced-in rooms, showers, room. bicycle repair, etc.) optional. Method of Electronic key Subscribers Electronic key Electronic or other Access access, must assigned a specific accesses network entry through door purchase locker. of lockers on first- for subscribers. membership. come, first-served basis. Typical Fees Monthly/annual Deposit and Fees charged Monthly/annual subscription. monthly/annual electronically by subscription. fee. use (several cents per hour). Benefits High level of Users guaranteed Higher utilization Lower operating service and a spot. than subscription costs than attended security. More secure than lockers. parking. racks. Users pay only for More secure than what they use open racks More secure than High potential racks. utilization. Cons High capital and Potential for Potential for Additional agency- operating costs. patrons to store patrons to store owned Additional agency- items other than items other than infrastructure. owned bicycles. bicycles. Lower security and infrastructure. Waitlists for Electronic payment service to patrons subscriptions system increases than attended common. operating costs. parking. Low utilization. Exhibit 8-10. Rental bicycle lockers (Oakland). Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc.

OCR for page 69
76 Guidelines for Providing Access to Public Transportation Stations Exhibit 8-11. Attended bicycle parking (Berkeley, CA). Source: Kittelson & Associates, Inc. Large bike sharing stations are located outside South Station in Boston and Union Station in Washington, D.C. Bike sharing is attractive especially to commuters and visitors who can often reach destinations more quickly than by connecting to another transit service. Providing for bike share access to transit has many of the same considerations of other types of bicycle access, including the quality of the surrounding bike network. However, effective bike sharing has the potential to reduce the need for dedicated bike parking. Agencies should work closely with bike share providers on the placement of bike share stations and on choosing which stations may offer the greatest benefit.