Strollers, Carts, and Other Large Items on Buses and Trains (2011)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

38 CHAPTER SIX BICYCLES LITERATURE REVIEW ON BICYCLES AND BICYCLE ACCOMMODATION POLICIES Allowing bicycles on transit extends the feasibility of taking transit by allowing riders to cover “the last mile,” when the bus or train does not come close enough to the origin or des- tination for a comfortable walk. “Transit is most effective for moderate- and long-distance trips on busy corridors, while cycling is effective for shorter-distance trips with multiple stops. Combining transit and cycling can provide a high level of mobility comparable to automobile travel” (Spindler and Boyle 1999). The 2006 TCRP Synthesis 62: Integration of Bicycles and Transit offers information regarding the history and current practices of bike integration on a variety of transit modes, including bus, rail, vanpool, and ferry. The report, partly based on a survey of 56 North American transit agencies, explores the reasoning, formulation, and implementation of bicycle policies. The section detailing bike-on-bus policies focuses primarily on external bike racks; however, the report notes that, if applicable, onboard bike policy is usually deter- mined by context and driver discretion. For rail, the focus turns to onboard policies, including a series of tables that examine transit agencies’ methods of housing and secur- ing the devices on light rail, heavy rail, and commuter rail vehicles. Table 22 consolidates the bicycle accommodation tables from the synthesis. Key passages from the document’s Summary follow: [Buses:] …The method used by most transit agencies is to mount a bicycle rack on the front of the bus. Front-mounted racks commonly carry two bicycles; however, more agencies are experimenting with racks that can hold three to five bicycles. Customers are responsible for loading and securing their bikes on the racks, and the racks can be folded up against the front of the bus when they are not in use. Some transit agencies allow bicycles to be taken on board the bus. However, many agencies restrict bicycle access in the bus to prevent overcrowding. These agencies often give bus drivers the discretion to decide whether bicycles are allowed inside the bus. Drivers are more likely to allow bicycles inside the bus when the racks are full, at night, or when service is infrequent (when the bus is the last bus of the evening on a particular route or there is a long wait before the next bus). Some commuter buses are equipped with extra storage space for luggage and other packages. Several agencies that responded to the survey allow bicycles to be stored in this space, typically located in a compartment below the floor of the bus. [Rail:] …One method of accommodation is to require bicyclists to board designated rail cars and remain with their bikes in designated areas. Agencies reported that between 2 and 16 bicycles could be accommodated per train in this manner, depending on restrictions. Some rail cars have special bike racks or hooks where bicyclists can store their bikes…. One responding transit agency provides a designated bicycle car with space for 17 bicycles in each train set (…San Joaquin Regional Rail System…). It is common for transit agencies to prohibit bicycle access on train cars during peak travel times. This is done to reduce congestion on the train and to reduce friction in boarding and exiting the train (Schneider 2006). Disputing the prohibition during peak travel times, bicy- clist advocates call for a culture of acceptance for all com- muters. A survey sponsored by the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition recommends that BART ease or eliminate bike blackout restrictions, communicate existing guidelines/pro- grams more effectively, study the feasibility of a bike car, explore installing bike hooks and priority areas on new cars that BART intends to order, and review the agency’s first-car bike prohibition policy (Vi 2009). However, even public officials who support bicycle com- muters acknowledge the conflict between crowded trains and bicyclists. On a local radio show, New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg expressed his concern about transport- ing bikes on the subway during rush hour. Mayor Bloomberg, an avid supporter of mass transit (who also carries a legacy of creating bike-only lanes and signals), prefers, for the sake of user comfort and ease, to keep the subway and bicycle modes separate (Barbaro 2009). One issue that bus operators have faced is the limit on the number of bicycles they can carry on the front of the bus. Some operators have modified the racks so that the bikes do not block the headlights, according to TCRP Synthesis 62, whereas others allow bikes only during daylight hours. In California, AC Transit sponsored successful legislation to extend the maximum rack length from 36 in. to 40 in., which

39 TABLE 22 SUMMARY OF SURVEYED AGENCIES’ BICYCLE ACCOMMODATION FROM TCRP SYNTHESIS 62 Bicycle-on-Bus Services Front-mounted racks that can hold two bicycles AMTRAN (Altoona, PA) Ann Arbor Transportation Authority (Ann Arbor, MI) Brownsville Urban System (Brownsville, TX) Calgary Transit (Calgary, Alberta) Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX) (Orlando, FL) Central Ohio Transit Authority (Columbus, OH) Chicago Transit Authority (Chicago, IL) City of Visalia—Visalia City Coach (Visalia, CA) Clallam Transit System (Port Angeles, WA) Fort Smith Transit (Fort Smith, AR) Grand River Transit (Kitchener, Ontario) Grand Valley Transit (Grand Junction, CO) Hillsborough Area Regional Transit (HARTline) (Tampa, FL)1 Kamloops Transit System (Kamloops, British Columbia) Kelowna Regional Transit System (Kelowna, British Columbia) Long Beach Transit (Long Beach, CA) Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Los Angeles, CA) Maryland Transit Administration (Baltimore, MD) Metropolitan Transit Authority (Los Angeles, CA) New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJ TRANSIT) (Newark, NJ) Orange County Transportation Authority (Orange, CA) Penticton Transit System (Penticton, British Columbia) Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) (Clearwater, FL) Regional Transportation District (RTD) (Denver, CO) Rochester–Genesee Regional Transportation Authority (Rochester, NY) San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (San Diego, CA) Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Philadelphia, PA) Space Coast Area Transit (Cocoa, FL) Springs Transit (Colorado Springs, CO) Tompkins Consolidated Area Transit (Ithaca, NY) TransLink (Greater Vancouver, British Columbia) Tri-County Metropolitan Transportation District (TriMet) (Portland, OR) Utah Transit Authority (Salt Lake City, UT) Victoria Regional Transit System (Victoria, British Columbia) Washington Area Metropolitan Transit Authority (Washington, DC) Whistler & Valley Express (Whistler, British Columbia)2 Front-mounted racks that can hold three bicycles Broward County Transit (Pompano Beach, FL) Clallam Transit System (Port Angeles, WA) Long Beach Transit (Long Beach, CA) Pinellas Suncoast Transit Authority (PSTA) (Clearwater, FL) Oversized bike racks on the front and back of buses. Each rack carries four or five bikes Mountain Express (Crested Butte, CO) Bikes may be brought on board the bus at any time Grand River Transit (Kitchener, Ontario) Bikes may be brought on board the bus at driver’s discretion and/or under certain conditions Clallam Transit System (Port Angeles, WA) Kamloops Transit System (Kamloops, British Columbia) Orange County Transportation Authority (Orange, CA) Regional Transportation District (RTD) (Denver, CO) Space Coast Area Transit (Cocoa, FL) Utah Transit Authority (Salt Lake City, UT) Table 22 continued on p. 40

40 Bicycle-on-Commuter Bus Services Front-mounted racks that can hold two bicycles Central Florida Regional Transportation Authority (LYNX) (Orlando, FL) Central Ohio Transit Authority (Columbus, OH) Regional Transportation District (RTD) (Denver, CO) Front-mounted racks that can hold three bicycles Springs Transit (Colorado Springs, CO) Bicycles stowed in luggage/baggage storage areas Alameda–Contra Costa Transit District (AC Transit) (Oakland, CA) New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJ TRANSIT) (Newark, NJ) Regional Transportation District (RTD) (Denver, CO) Springs Transit (Colorado Springs, CO) Bicycle-on-Rail Services Bicyclists allowed to bring bikes on board and stand in designated areas Calgary Transit (Calgary, Alberta) Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Los Angeles, CA)3 Maryland Transit Administration (Baltimore, MD) New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJ TRANSIT) (Newark, NJ) Regional Transportation District (RTD) (Denver, CO)4 San Diego Metropolitan Transit System (San Diego, CA) TransLink (Greater Vancouver, British Columbia)3 TriMet (Portland, OR) Bikes stored on racks inside each rail car Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) (Santa Clara, CA) Bikes stored on hooks inside each rail car Metro Transit (Minneapolis, MN) New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJ TRANSIT) (Newark, NJ) TriMet (Portland, OR) Bicyclists allowed on board trains and to stand in desig- nated areas only during off-peak hours Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Los Angeles, CA) TransLink (Greater Vancouver, British Columbia) Bicycle-on-Heavy Rail Service Bicycles allowed on board trains only during off-peak hours and can only use designated areas in each train car Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (Boston, MA) Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Philadelphia, PA) Washington Metropolitan Area Transit Authority (Washington, DC) Bicycles allowed on board trains at any time they will fit New York City Transit (New York City, NY) Maryland Transit Administration (Baltimore, MD)5 Bicycles allowed on board trains only during off-peak hours; can use any part of the train Chicago Transit Authority (Chicago, IL) Bicyclists allowed to bring bike on board during off- peak hours and on reverse commute direction trains dur- ing peak hours Bay Area Rapid Transit (San Francisco, CA) Los Angeles Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Los Angeles, CA) Bicycle-on-Commuter Rail Services Bicyclists allowed to bring bike on board in designated areas New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJ TRANSIT) (Newark, NJ) Southeastern Pennsylvania Transportation Authority (Philadelphia, PA)3 Up to four bicycles can be tied down in each rail car Orange County Transportation Authority (Orange, CA) Bicycles stored on racks or hooks in each rail car Amtrak Capitol Corridor (Sacramento and Bay Area, CA) Caltrain6 New Jersey Transit Corp. (NJ TRANSIT) (Newark, NJ) San Joaquin Regional Rail Commission (Stockton, CA)6 Only enclosed folding bicycles are allowed on trains Maryland Transit Administration (Baltimore, MD) (MARC Train Service) 1 Bicyclists must obtain a permit to use the bus bicycle racks. 2 Racks are in place from mid-April until mid-November, when they are replaced by ski racks. 3 Bicyclists are not allowed to bring bicycles on board during peak hours. 4 Bicyclists are allowed during peak hours if traveling in reverse peak direction only (away from Denver central business district in AM; toward Denver central business district in PM). 5 Bicycles are allowed on board only in designated areas. 6 Designated cars with bicycle racks are provided. Table 22 continued from p. 39

41 Clear Channel Outdoor has 11 established bike rental schemes throughout Europe in cities, including Barcelona, Stockholm, and Dijon, and was working on a 1,200-bike scheme for Milan (Carpiet 2008). After Clear Channel’s bike-sharing program fell through in San Francisco, “three of the big bike rental shops in the city have teamed up to form ParkWide, which approached the Recreation and Park Department with a proposal to build a la carte bike rental kiosks around the city, and starting a network of pick-up and drop-off points” (West 2010). ONE AGENCY’S EXPERIENCE: KING COUNTY METRO, SEATTLE—THREE-POSITION BIKE RACKS How does an agency carry more bikes on its buses without violating the motor vehicle law or having the bikes fall off a longer rack? That was the challenge that King County Metro in Seattle, Washington, faced and solved. Metro has carried bikes on the front of buses for more than 30 years. Initially, it responded to residents living on one side of a floating bridge over Lake Washington who needed their bikes on the other side of the lake. Metro installed racks on buses serving the area and used bungee cords to secure the bikes. Over the years it used more sophisticated racks, and in 1994 it installed two-position racks on all its transit vehi- cles. However, when it responded to growing demand with a rack that could carry three bikes, it faced new problems. Six bicycles fell off the first design of a three-position rack. Bikes could bounce off the spring-loaded J-hook when the driver drove over a rough spot. Metro removed the racks and worked for a year with Sportworks, the manufacturer, on a new design. The bus operators’ union was also involved in the committee reviewing the new design. A couple of bikes had fallen off on the freeway, and drivers were concerned that they could be cited and fined by the Washington State Patrol for losing their load. The new design, called the Veloporter 3, is a ratchet sup- port arm that is pulled up and over the bicycle to secure it. The rack is 36 in. longer to accommodate three bicycles. For safety, bicyclists can load their bikes from the curb or in front of the bus, never being required to load from the street. According to the manufacturer, the energy-absorbing wheel tray leaves the bike secure and undamaged even after an emergency stop (Sportworks 2010). In the past, Metro secured a change to the Washington Administrative Code that exempted transit buses from the prohibition against mounting racks on the front or back of a vehicle. However, the three-position bike racks presented a new issue. Federal Motor Vehicle Safety Standard 108 requires that the headlights on a bus not be blocked. Metro performed photometric testing, which proved that the racks met the safety standard. will allow bus operators to increase the capacity of the racks to carry three bicycles instead of two (“Rack ‘Em Up” 2010). The California DOT (Caltrans) provides an example of accommodating bicycles even during heavy commute peri- ods. Caltrans ferries up to 14 bikes on a van across the Bay Bridge from the East Bay to San Francisco during peak com- mute hours, when BART does not permit bikes on the trains. Bicyclists load their bikes into a van at the MacArthur BART station in Oakland. Although the bicyclists ride BART under the Bay, their bikes cross the bridge to the Transbay Termi- nal, where their owners can pick them up . The bike shut- tle operates during rush hours, four times in the morning between 6:20 and 8:30 a.m. and four times in the evening between 3:50 and 6:15 p.m. The one-way cost is $1 (“Queen of the Road” 2010). AC Transit District’s buses make this same trip, but the space to load bikes is more limited. How- ever, AC Transit’s Transbay buses are available all day, and a nighttime route runs from 1:00 a.m. to 5:00 a.m. With these transit options, bicyclists can have their bike to ride at each end of their trip. Only one agency that participated in the survey for TCRP Synthesis 62, HARTline in Florida, charged a fee for a bike- on-bus permit. HARTline requires a one-time training ses- sion and a $2.50 fee, renewed annually, to bring a bike onto its buses. However, a fee in the Scandinavian countries, such as Sweden and Norway, is common. Norrkoping, Sweden, charges a fee of 25 krona (about U.S.$3.50) for a single jour- ney, including transfers. Mopeds are always prohibited, and bicycles are not allowed on express buses (Östgötatrafiken 2010). In Oslo, Norway, bikes are charged the same as a child’s fare (Ruter 2008). Golden Gate Transit in Marin County, California, has pro- duced a brochure that can serve as an example of comprehen- sive guidance for bicyclists on transit. This brochure offers an overview of the agency’s bike policy—with rules and limita- tions for bike storage, as well as step-by-step picture guides illustrating how to stow bikes on buses. Its 40-foot buses have front-mounted bike racks, whereas the 45-ft models have luggage bay (under-bus) compartments. On Richmond–San Rafael Bridge routes, bikes are allowed inside the vehicle but must be secured in (unoccupied) wheelchair positions using the riders’ own straps. Golden Gate Ferry also allows up to 15 bikes on its vessels (Golden Gate Transit 2010). In attempting to solve “the last mile” in a commute by transit, bicycle rentals have begun to spring up near transit stations. For example, Bikestation, a not-for-profit company in Long Beach, California, has plans to create a network of bicycle parking facilities along the LA Metrolink line. Its 600 sq ft facility, which opened in February 2010 in the refurbished Claremont Depot transit center, includes bike rentals, bike repair, and parking (Bikestation 2010). Accord- ing to a 2008 article in Bicycle Retailer and Industry News,

42 and accommodating these devices on transit is as much a concern at small agencies as it is at large agencies. One large agency addressed the concern succinctly: it tries to “balance customer desire to bring bikes on board with the ability to accommodate them during the peak period.” FIGURE 30 If you indicated that bicycles are a very important or somewhat important concern, why is it a concern for your agency (mark all that apply)? Overview of Agency Policies Given the increasing prevalence of bicycles in urban, subur- ban, and rural areas as a means of commuting as well as rec- reation, most of the responding agencies facilitated some sort of support for the device. The extent to which each agency accommodates bicycles primarily varies based on opera- tions (i.e., bus versus rail), vehicle capacity, and the size and type of population served. Among the surveyed agencies, the oldest known bicycle policy dates from 1974, around the time of that particular system’s inception (BART); however, the policy was amended in 1998. The second oldest policy, which prohibits bicycle stowage, dates to 1980 (Ottumwa). In most cases, agencies’ bicycle policies were established, or in some cases updated, within the past 15 years. Bike Racks Table 23 shows that of the 38 agencies that operate buses, 32 (84%) reported that they feature bike racks on at least some of their operating fleet (n = 38). These agencies fea- ture external bike racks on an estimated average of 90% of their fleet, with 24 of 32 agencies (75%) reporting 100% bike rack coverage on at least fixed route services. One agency, LeeTran, carries bike racks on one supervisor vehicle as well; according to the operations manager, a rack that holds two bicycles on the supervisor vehicle allows the agency to transport bikes “if a bus breaks down or if bike racks can- not accommodate demand, particularly on the last trip of the day” (Goyette 6/2/2010). Between August and September 2007, King County Metro conducted a survey to estimate the number of bicy- cles carried by its fleet. The results showed that Metro buses, trolleys, vans, and vanpools carried an estimated 14,779 bicycles per week during this period (King County Metro 2007). According to this report, transporting bicycles on its vehicles is an essential part of Metro’s commitment to inter- modal transportation and its contribution to the region’s air quality goals (M. Lemeshko, King County Metro, personal communication, May 18, 2010). SURVEY RESULTS Challenges and Concerns Figure 29 shows that accommodation of bicycles on transit vehicles, as with other large items, is viewed primarily as a concern (36%). Frequencies of the other three responses hovered around 20% (and two agencies answered that they did not know to what extent bicycles were of concern). Many agencies also added comments in response to this question, clarifying their bicycle policies and limitations. FIGURE 29 Indicate whether bringing bicycles on your vehicles is considered an issue/concern/challenge for your agency. One medium-sized agency commented on the appropri- ateness of the question, deeming it “a ‘good concern’ – [we have] more bikers than we have racks for at times!” In con- trast, a small agency admitted that it has “very few requests for bicycles,” but even so, “new vehicles, when purchased, will come with racks on them.” Figure 30 shows specific agency concerns over accom- modating bicycles in or on their transit vehicles. Limited capacity was of greatest importance—49% of all agencies identified it as a problem (or 87% of those that indicated accommodating bikes was at least somewhat of a concern). Bicycle usage has steadily increased throughout the nation,

43 TABLE 23 DOES YOUR AGENCY OFFER BICYCLE RACKS ON THE EXTERIOR OF BUSES? Yes 84% (32) No 16% (6) n = 38. Most agencies (approximately 80%) employ bike racks that handle two bikes at a time; only six bus-operating agencies feature bike racks of different sizes. Las Cruces RoadRUNNER noted that the agency has “experimented with 3-bike racks on two buses, but are finding issues with headlight interference.” Two other agencies responded that some buses in their fleet carry three bicycles. One small agency, Downeast Transportation, which operates the Aca- dia National Park Island Explorer, reported that some of its buses “carry four bicycles, [and] the rest carry six bicycles,” to accommodate the significant recreational demand. Although the survey did not query the different possible locations of bike racks on vehicles, one agency noted that some buses “have bike storage under the vehicle.” One of the agencies profiled in the bicycle literature review, Golden Gate Transit, has a similar storage system. Bicycles Aboard Buses Twenty-five of 38 agencies (66%) currently do not allow bicycles to be brought aboard their buses (Table 24). Las Cruces RoadRUNNER noted that “prior to two years ago, the policy allowed bikes on buses at driver discretion. This was changed to ‘no bikes’ because of safety concerns. We are again looking at options for allowing bikes on buses due to capacity problems with the exterior racks.” TABLE 24 DOES THE AGENCY HAVE A POLICY THAT ALLOWS BICYCLES TO BE BROUGHT ON BOARD (INSIDE) BUSES? Yes 34% (13) No 66% (25) n = 38. The transit administrator elaborated on the survey com- ments, noting that now “passengers are stranded” if the bike racks are full. The agency’s Transit Advisory Board will be considering the issue of whether to allow bikes on the buses again. An informal review by staff “didn’t find agencies that allow bikes on the buses.” The city is also looking at “invest- ing in bicycle lockers at some location where there might be higher demand, to let people park bikes” rather than bring them on the bus. He noted that the city’s risk management office has expressed interest in removing all bike racks from the exterior of buses, which is of concern to the tran- sit administrator because he “strongly believes in the modal connection between bikes and buses” and acknowledges the transit operation may “eventually need to look at sacrificing seating space for bikes on the vehicles” (M. Bartholomew, Las Cruces RoadRUNNER Transit, personal communica- tion, Apr. 12, 2010). Size Limits Of the 13 agencies that currently accommodate bicycles aboard buses, six require that the bikes be foldable. New York MTA’s policy includes an exception to the rule: “Fold- ing bicycles are permitted on local buses provided that they are folded and do not obstruct the aisles or doorways. Full (non-folding) bicycles are only permitted on board when buses are being used to replace train service.” Three agen- cies that allow bicycles on board buses describe this as an informal practice: in these cases, accommodating the bike is usually left to the discretion of the driver. One noted that the practice “is discouraged because of passenger safety, but still tolerated” if the driver deems it allowable; and a few noted that in practice, bicycles are allowed only if the exter- nal racks are full and there is available space on the vehicle. Philadelphia’s SEPTA has specific regulations regarding allowable bicycle size: bikes are not allowed inside buses unless they are collapsible and fold to the size of a standard piece of luggage. Folding bikes with a tire size greater than 20 in. are too large to accommodate on the bus and could be placed on the bike rack. Managing Bicycles Aboard Vehicles Overall, seven of 13 agencies (54%) allow bikes (foldable or all) to be brought inside on all routes and vehicles at all times (Figure 31). However, some agencies (four of the 13 allowing bikes on board in general, or 31%) noted that bicycles could be brought on buses only during specific times of the day. One stated that bicycles are allowed on board “usually only in emergency situations or last trips.” Two agencies provide a designated storage area or parking spot for bicycles inside all buses; another two have such a location on some vehicles. The two agencies with dedicated spaces on all vehicles also allow bicyclists to use unoccupied wheelchair spaces for their bikes, as do the other agencies that allow bicycles on the vehicles. The agencies that reported a dedicated spot on some vehicles either have an onboard parking spot on “com- muter rail” (SEPTA), or “interior vertical racks for three bikes” (Community Transit’s Swift BRT). Another agency maintained that “folding bikes only” “must remain in the same space as the customer.” Six of 14 agencies (43%) limit the number of bicycles allowed inside a bus or train when wheelchairs are already secured in the vehicle (Table 25). SEPTA stated that there are no limits on rail vehicles, but buses are limited to two standard bikes per bus if wheelchairs are already aboard. MARTA also

44 FIGURE 32 Bicycles: Which of the following is true about drivers providing assistance (buses) (n =14)? FIGURE 33 Passenger prepares to load a second bicycle on an exterior bus rack in Honolulu (courtesy: J. Goldman, Nelson\Nygaard). Bicycles Aboard Paratransit Agencies that operate paratransit services, in addition to reg- ular bus or rail services, generally have policies in place that prohibit bicycles from being brought on paratransit vehicles. It is presumed that bicycles are not considered mobility aids by most paratransit providers—and likely few paratransit rid- ers use them. Of 24 agencies that have policies about bringing large items on board paratransit buses, 16 (67%) expressly prohibit bicycles aboard vehicles, about the same proportion of agencies that do not allow bicycles aboard regular fixed route buses. For more information about agency policies gov- erning bringing items other than wheelchairs and mobility devices aboard paratransit vehicles, see chapter seven. has no regulations on rail if wheelchairs are present, but will not allow bicycles on a bus if wheelchairs are present. FIGURE 31 When may bicycles be brought on board vehicles (n = 13)? TABLE 25 DOES THE AGENCY LIMIT THE NUMBER OF BICYCLES ALLOWED INSIDE A VEHICLE WHEN WHEELCHAIRS ARE SECURED IN THE VEHICLE? Yes 43% (6) No 57% (8) n = 14. Bicycle Fees and Permit None of the agencies surveyed charges a fare to bring a bicy- cle on a transit vehicle. Similarly, 15 of 16 agencies that allow bicycles do not require inspection or approval. One small agency, LeeTran, requires approval “for folding bikes when they are being placed inside the bus.” LeeTran also issues a bicycle permit. According to staff, the permit is a sticker that is placed on approved bikes so bus operators know the bike can be transported. No fee is charged for the bicycle permit. Driver Assistance Not one agency reported that its bicycle accommodation pol- icies required bus drivers to provide assistance (Figure 32). Indeed, half of respondents to this question indicated that the policy explicitly instructs drivers not to provide assistance. Four agencies do not have a policy in place regarding the driver assistance in bicycle accommodation. Three agencies noted that their policy holds that drivers may provide assis- tance, if requested (see Figure 33). Among these last three agencies, drivers are allowed to provide a few types of assistance. All of the agencies allow drivers to wait in their seat while the bicycle is secured on the exterior or interior, providing verbal instruction to the passen- ger. Two agencies allow drivers to disembark from the vehicle and provide physical assistance with exterior bike rack opera- tion. Only one agency allows drivers, if requested, to get out of their seat and assist with bicycle storage on board the bus.

45 Bicycles Aboard Rail Of the 42 surveyed agencies, 16 offer rail service and 14 operate rail in addition to buses. Given the many distinctions between the two operations, a summary of respondent agen- cies’ bicycle policies on rail service alone follows. In some cases, an agency operates multiple forms of rail service; the accommodation of bicycles solely among these vehicles can vary greatly. Rail-Only Agencies Two surveyed agencies provide rail service only. Since its opening in 2004, the Las Vegas Monorail has allowed bicy- cles to be brought on its vehicles at any time. Several of the hotels and destinations it serves have bicycle racks. BART features bike racks at some of its station locations. The agency notes that it has an “extremely large bicycle parking program” with “facilities at almost every station.” Systemwide, it “can currently park more than 4,000 bikes in racks, lockers, or attended facilities.” BART’s current policy for bringing bikes on rail vehicles was established in 1998. The original policy was established in 1974, but it “initially” required “people…to get permits to bring bikes on board and bikes were only allowed off peak and in one car/train.” The current policy “allows bikes in all but [the] first car and [has] fewer time restrictions.” More information about BART’s bicycle policies is included at the end of this chapter. Rail/Bus Agencies Fourteen agencies offer both bus and rail services, and five of these noted that their rail bicycle policy differed from their bus bicycle policy. TriMet has a comprehensive light rail bicycle policy that outlines bike accommodation differ- ences between low-floor and high-floor light rail vehicles. MARTA’s rail vehicles have “no restrictions or limitations,” and Capital Metro’s rail policy is that “bikes occupy the same space as wheelchairs and can remain in the aisles.” In response to a question asking for the official policy for accommodating bicycles on rail service, seven of the 14 agencies offered a variety of regulations (and one, OC Transpo, replied that it had no such policy). WMATA posted its official Metrorail bicycle policy (Appendix C); other responses follow: • CTA, Chicago: Bicycles may be brought on board a rail car during non-rush/off-peak hours only (see Figure 34). • Miami–Dade: Bicycles must use the last car. • NJ Transit: Bike are allowed off-peak only in the ves- tibule areas when trains are not crowded. • NCTD, San Diego County: Four bicycles are allowed per car. • STM, Montreal: Bicycle areas are designated during specific hours. • UTA, Salt Lake City: Two bicycles may be inside the rail vehicle in the front and two bicycles in the rear. The bicycle passenger must remain standing with the bicycle and hold it upright for the safety of the other passengers. FIGURE 34 Folding bike and a stroller share the space in the doorway on a rail car in Chicago (courtesy: CTA). Bicycle Policy Effectiveness A minority of agencies (9 of 40, or 23%) indicated that they had considered a bicycle policy but not implemented it, or that they had considered revisions to their bicycle policy (Table 26). One large agency considered “total prohibition during peak hours” but rejected the idea because “a more finely graded system of permitted times/trains allows for use of off-peak directional capacity.” By contrast, another large agency sought to “allow bicycles on rail during peak peri- ods,” but the policy was “not implemented due to existing and growing congestion.” One large agency admitted that “Bicycle advocates would prefer more bicycles on board, especially on streetcars and LRVs.” TABLE 26 HAVE ANY REQUIREMENTS/RESTRICTIONS/ RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING BICYCLES BEEN CONSIDERED BY THE AGENCY, BUT NOT IMPLEMENTED? Yes 23% (9) No 77% (31) n = 40. A handful of small agencies explored changing regula- tions regarding their bus bike racks. One “considered put- ting bike racks on new bus purchases, however, the number of riders who bring bikes on board over a year’s period is insignificant—maybe 8–10 times.” Another agency is “wait- ing for grant funding to be available” to install bike racks,

46 FIGURE 36 Bicycles block doors and seats on a BART train (courtesy: BART). The mode share of BART riders who are bicyclists, although still small, has increased from 3% in 1998 to 4% in 2008 (BART 2008). The 1% increase is the same as prior BART studies, which showed an increase from 1% to 2% in the period 1987 to 2002. The bicycle mode share varies at the 43 stations, with a Berkeley station achieving the highest at 12%. The 2002 “BART Bicycle Access Parking Plan” attributes this upward trend “to be the result of the increased amount of bicy- cle parking available at stations, improved outreach and major changes in bicycle policies” (Wilbur Smith Associates 2002). Since the 1980s, when BART ran test programs that eventu- ally loosened bicycle policies, bicycling has become part of the agency’s strategies to achieve “a 10% shift in the access mode split by reducing the percentage of parked Single Occupant Vehicles relative to other modes...” (Wilbur Smith Associates 2002). Some BART innovations include the following: • A Stair Channel (Figure 37) at one of the San Francisco stations, where bicyclists wheel their bicycles onto ramps marked up or down alongside the stairs. The ramp takes the weight off the shoulders, providing assistance for bicyclists who must otherwise carry their bikes at other stations or use the elevator. Bikes are not permit- ted on escalators; according to the manager of access programs, violators have caused severe accidents to themselves and other passengers, as well as wedging the bike into the escalator while it keeps running. The Stair Channel was funded by a grant; more are planned as additional funds become available (L. Timothy, per- sonal communication, Apr. 9, 2010). • Bicycle Priority Area inside the train door marked with an outline of a bicycle (Figure 38). These bicycle areas, installed on 41 cars as a demonstration project with grant funds, have a leaning bar so that multiple bikes can be stacked against the rail. The area was created by removing seats and windscreens by the door. A message is posted allowing strollers and luggage if no bikes are present. Each special car has a decal on the outside and has additional spaces for wheelchairs inside. and another looked into “replacement of two-bike bike racks with three-bike bike racks,” but that would have been “cost prohibitive.” Despite these reconsiderations, Figure 35 shows that most agencies are pleased with their existing policies. Overall, 17 of 35 agencies (49%) rate their bicycle policy as “very effec- tive.” The few agencies that give themselves low effective- ness ratings primarily cite overcrowding as a concern. One small agency sees revising its bicycle policy of utmost impor- tance owing to capacity problems with exterior racks. One large agency explained that “accommodating cyclist demand for space during peak hours is often a challenge”; another addressed demand: “We have an overwhelming number of passengers wanting to take their bicycles on the trains. It overcrowds the trains and is unsafe for other passengers.” Expanded use of bicycles will only demand further policy measures to counteract overcrowding. One case stands out as a lesson for future accommodation of bicycles on rail. FIGURE 35 How effective do you think the agency’s bicycle policy is (n = 35)? ONE AGENCY’S EXPERIENCE: BART, SAN FRANCISCO BAY AREA—INNOVATIONS FOR BICYCLE ACCESS ON RAIL Policies about bicycles on the San Francisco Bay Area Rapid Transit District (BART) have moved from limited and temporary permission to active encouragement. In Octo- ber 1974, two years after the opening of the BART system, bicycles were allowed in the rear of the last car only during off-peak hours. Permits were required, and no more than five bicycles were allowed per train. Today, the permits have been done away with, and bicycles are allowed on all cars except the first one on any train. (The first car is kept clear for the operator to exit in an emergency.) However, bicycles are still not permitted on most trains in the peak direction during the “peak of the peak” commute hours, defined as “approximately 7:05 to 8:50 a.m. and 4:25 to 6:45 p.m.” The exception is folded bikes, which are allowed on the trains at all times. The prohibition of bicycles during commute hours recognizes the conflict caused by large items taking up space on crowded trains (see Figure 36). Nonetheless, an online survey by the San Francisco Bicycle Coalition reported that lifting the blackout period rated high on the improvements its 523 respondents favored (Vi 2009).

47 Bicycle advocates have been instrumental in shaping BART’s bicycle policies. A bicycle advisory committee has been in existence since BART service started in 1972. The current BART Bicycle Advisory Task Force reviews pro- posed bicycle policies and offers suggestions for improve- ments; discusses problems and complaints regarding bicycles on BART; makes recommendations to BART staff and the Board of Directors; and acts as a liaison between BART and bicycle advocacy groups and associations. The Task Force meets every other month and includes six appointed mem- bers, two people from each county BART serves. • Electronic Bike Lockers programmed for “pay as you go” (Figure 39). Bicyclists buy a $20 access card to insert into the electronic locker, which deducts 3 cents an hour to rent it. Electronic lockers will eventually replace keyed lockers to free up available secure bike parking for those on a waiting list. The agency plans to increase the current 200 electronic lockers to 900, and the 1,300 traditional bike racks will also remain. • Bike Stations, which offer indoor secure parking, are operated at three heavily used stations for bicyclists. One of the largest in the nation is located in a Transit Village and features a full-service bike repair shop. This and one other are staffed by attendants. The third is a self-service parking system featuring an electronic smart-card access lock system. FIGURE 38 BART is experimenting with bicycle priority areas on its trains (courtesy: Adrienne Johnson: http:// changeyourliferideabike.blogspot.com). FIGURE 37 Bicyclist uses a stair channel to exit one of BART’s stations (courtesy: BART). FIGURE 39 BART passenger swipes her card and places her bike into an electronic locker (courtesy: BART).