Bikes on METRO Trains - The next step

[kf5nd]

Bikes on trains represents the next step in the evolution of the bike - transit partnership. Currently bikes are allowed on METRO's red line, but only off-peak, and there is no special equipment available to reduce the amount of floorspace that the bikes occupy, and to secure them properly.

With the addition of simple, discreet hardware, more bikes could be put on METRO's future trains, and the peak time ban on bikes could be lifted.

Please hear more about Bikes on Trains at Houston Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee meeting, September 19, 2007, at 6:30 pm. The location is the first floor conference room at City Hall, 900 Bagby, Houston, TX.

[kf5nd]

I am going to talk to the METRO Board on Thursday, November 15, 2007, at 1:00 pm. At METRO Headquarters, 1900 Main Street, Houston TX (Downtown).

Click on this link to view my presentation.

Please join me and other BikeHouston and CTC Members.

[wakester]

Also, to have Bike lockers would be nice. Now with every 33 bus having a bike rack, I could park a bike at the NWTC and use it to get from Post Oak to/from my office (which is about a mile).

[Ian]

Also, to have Bike lockers would be nice. Now with every 33 bus having a bike rack, I could park a bike at the NWTC and use it to get from Post Oak to/from my office (which is about a mile).

Ooh, you mean like this? (link to video)

[kf5nd]

Also, to have Bike lockers would be nice. Now with every 33 bus having a bike rack, I could park a bike at the NWTC and use it to get from Post Oak to/from my office (which is about a mile).

Can you come to the meeting and ask for bike lockers? I am going to max out on my 3 minutes in front of the Board

[kf5nd]

Any CTC people who are available, please come to METRO headquarters (1900 Main St) at 1 pm on Thursday, Nov 15, for the Board meeting. Sign up as a speaker and speak in support of enhanced bicycle access to the existing and planned light rail system!

I think you have to call in advance to speak. Call (713) 739-4842 ASAP and talk to Ms. Rose Gonzalez.

Thank you.

[Bob]

Peter Wang of Bike Houston gave a great presentation today at the METRO board meeting!

Peter was followed by Woody Speer who echoed Peter's request that METRO accommodate bikes on trains all the time, not just during off-peak hours. They also urged METRO to make sure that all of the 100+ new train vehicles they buy in the next 2-4 years be designed to easily accommodate bikes on board, and to make sure that there's safe, convenient bike parking at every new rail station.

In addition to facilitating transit use by cyclists, it's critical for new rail lines not to interrupt existing adjacent bike routes. The University line will run along Westpark and Alabama which are both well-used city-designated bike routes, and it will cross several other active bike routes. The North line, East End, and Southeast line alignments cross bike routes as well. It's important for the METRO and Washington Group engineers to pay attention and not allow the new rail line to inadvertently erect barriers, curbs, or other new obstacles along the bike routes. We need "complete" streets that work for all modes -- bikes, transit, pedestrians, and cars -- and not just one mode at a time.

Great job, guys!

[kf5nd]

Dear Ms. Gonzalez:

There was some confusion over a photograph I showed to the Board today. Mr. Wilson denied it was from Phoenix Arizona. I didn't have any back-up facts with me at the time.

I have independently confirmed that it was indeed the Phoenix Arizona light rail. They begin operations in December 2008. Construction is on-going now.

The trains will be outfitted with four bike racks per LR vehicle, exactly as I described. This information may be viewed directly from Valley Metro's website, at this location:
http://www.valleymetro.org/METRO_light_ ... /index.htm

Please also see the additional PowerPoint slides. Please print them out and distribute them to the Board Members to insert into the presentation folders that I gave to them this afternoon.

I respectfully suggest that Mr. Wilson phone Valley METRO CEO Mr. Rick Simonetta at (602) 253-5000 and confer with him concerning Valley Metro's bicycles on light rail decisions.

Thank you for all of your kind assistance.


--
Sincerely,
Peter Wang
BikeHouston

[Ed Browne]

I have independently confirmed that it was indeed the Phoenix Arizona light rail. They begin operations in December 2008. Construction is on-going now.

The trains will be outfitted with four bike racks per LR vehicle, exactly as I described. This information may be viewed directly from Valley Metro's website, at this location:
http://www.valleymetro.org/METRO_light_ ... /index.htm

Portland's light rail line has had bike hangers for some time and I was amazed at how many riders were bikers. For the evening trip to southern suburbs, probably 25% of the riders were bikers. If I recall correctly, there was also a bike rack at every station stop. Morning bike commuters were everywhere.

[kf5nd]

It is extremely important that citizens make their preferences known to METRO. I am urging all cyclists, transit fans, and environmentalists to write to Mr. Frank Wilson, the CEO of METRO, to let him know that:

1. The new fleet of light rail cars needs vertical bike hangers, to hold as many as eight bikes per light rail car
2. The rush-hour bike prohibition needs to be lifted for suitably equipped train cars
3. Ample safe and secure bike parking needs to be provided at all transit stops
4. The folding-bikes policy (unlimited times, unlimited numbers, must be covered) needs to be maintained

Please write a polite letter to Mr. Wilson in your own words, preferably by hand. Do not simply send him a hardcopy of this blog with a yellow-sticky on it saying, "Yeah, what he says!" Make it personal, otherwise they will likely throw your letter away.

Please write to:

Frank Wilson, CEO
METRO
1900 Main St.
P.O. Box 61429
Houston, TX 77208-1429

Phoenix AZ light rail bike rack photos, taken November 2007

[kf5nd]

The decision to include bike racks on Valley Metro Rail’s light rail vehicles was based upon a previous decision to equip all buses in the Phoenix and Valley Metro fleets with bike racks. The decision to add bike racks on all buses was made about 15 years ago (+/-) and today all buses in the region are equipped with these racks. The addition of bike racks on buses was an immediate success, improved ridership and improved access to the bus system. Given the success of the bus bike rack program and the long standing Valley Metro and Phoenix policies to include this feature on all buses, there really was no discussion about not including bike racks on light rail. Including bike racks was a given at the beginning of the LRT design phase. By the way, we will also have bike racks at several of the LRT stations for those who don’t want to take their bike on light rail.

The only discussions we had were regarding the location of the racks on the vehicle, what type of rack to use, and how many to provide. We concluded that there would be four hanging racks per vehicle and decided to locate them in the center, articulation section, of the light rail vehicle. Our decision to use hanging racks was based upon success with similar racks in other light rail cities. (I think we first saw these racks in San Jose, but I’m not sure on this one.)

I hope this helps.

Wulf Grote, PE
Director, Project Development
METRO (Phoenix, AZ)

[kf5nd]

Here is the study, in PDF document form. It contains a wealth of information. It seems like a very good reference.

By the way, in 2006, Dallas and Denver both lifted their peak hour restrictions for bicycles, though neither of them have bike racks on their trains.

Maybe METRO should "just do it".

[Ian]

Please write a polite letter to Mr. Wilson in your own words

Okay, letter written (slow day at work today). Also forwarded to Mayor and councilmembers. Not handwritten though -- too lazy to write out 3 copies!

[kf5nd]

Transit Cooperative Research Program Synthesis 62
Funded by the FTA. Published in 2005


The majority have no peak hours ban, many have racks / hooks

• Ten North American rail systems studied (8 US, 2 Canadian), Table 7, Page 26
• At the time of the study (2005), three systems had full or partial peak hour bans on bikes (LA, Denver, Vancouver (partial ban)): 70% no-ban. Then, Denver changed its policies. Bikes allowed at all times, but on a “space available” basis. So, 80% no-ban
• At the time of the study, four out of ten had bike racks or hooks inside the rail cars (Santa Clara Valley, Minneapolis, NJ Transit, TriMet (Portland): 40%
• No agency with bike racks or hooks has to resort to peak hour bike bans. Equip the trains properly and “Fahgedaboutit”


What do the customers think?

“Generally, transit agencies also reported neutral reactions from nonbicycling transit customers. Regulations that prohibit bicyclists during peak hours can also have an impact on the satisfaction of bicyclists. Although bicyclists provide positive feedback in response to bringing their bicycles aboard, they are often frustrated by regulations prohibiting their use of rail transit during peak hours” pp. 27-28

[kf5nd]

January 2, 2008

Mr. Frank Wilson
President and Chief Executive Officer
Metropolitan Transit Authority

Dear Frank:

Currently METRO allows bicyclists on board during off-peak hours. While this is helpful towards general mobility, commuter bicyclists work the same business hours as other transit customers and commuters. Restricting access during the peak travel periods significantly reduces the usefulness of this transit option.

Before long, I look forward to METRO's announcement that all light rail cars have been equipped with bicycle racks and that bicyclists will have open access during all operational time periods.


Sincerely,
Ed Emmett
County Judge

[kf5nd]

Mr. Wilson, speaking at the METRO Board meeting today, promised a detailed study and an answer for Houston bicyclists by the end of March.

[Woody]

A study?.... Why not just look at what other successful cities currently offer for accommodations for bikes on LR. How hard can this be? You order the train cars equipped with bike hangers that also offer alternative fold down seating in those areas designated for bikes. In the event that no bikes are boarded and passenger ridership exceeds current seating, you simply use the fold down seating during peak hours. Will the study incorporate future projections for bicycles on transit 15 years from now?

METRO needs to order the LR cars equipped with accommodations for bicycles. After all you can always revisit the policy of bikes on LR if ridership on the new LR lines becomes extremely congested. The new rail lines on the drawing board will not have the huge vast parking areas, such as Smith Land and Fannin to draw riders from as so many of the riders on the Main Street line cram the rail cars for a short ride of less than a mile over to the TMC. I do hope that METRO considers how people are going to get to the light rail from highly congested urban areas that offer no vehicle parking next to the light rail line. Accommodations for bicycles will greatly increase the area of capture as METRO will need to attract new riders to transit to justify the expenditures for LR.

[christof]

Woody:

I support your cause, but be careful with your arguments.

The Main Street line is not particularly park-and-ride dependent. It draws less than 1/3 of its riders from its park-and-ride lots; the majority walk to the station or take a bus. And the crowded trains are not only on the south end of the line. Passenger volumes between Downtown and Midtown are nearly equal to those south of the TMC. I ride that segment often, and I can't remember being on a rush hour train that didn't have people standing at least between Wheeler and Downtown Transit Center.

The new lines will actually have more parking lots than Main Street does: each will have parking at its outermost end, and there will be a number of intermediate lots as well. The University Line alone is planned to have 4,750 parking spots in 5 different locations. And the new lines pass through dense residential neighborhoods, putting lots of people in walking distance.

The new rail lines don't need bikes to get good ridership. But that's not the point; the goal should always be to serve as many riders as possible, and that means making provisions for bikes both at stations and on the trains.

[kf5nd]

Christof,

Once the policy is set in stone for the 2008-2012 build-out of light rail, and the vehicles ordered, it will be impossible to change it for further extensions of LR & BRT system out past Loop 610 and beyond towards the Beltway.

I am eyeing the Phase Two Gessner BRT in particular; if I can't put my bike on this vehicle during rush hour, then one of my commute options will have vanished... as this line will probably completely replace the #46 Gessner Crosstown bus.

I have to insist that the situation is different outside Loop 610, because the density goes down, down, down. In order to get to and from transit and bus lines without driving cars to them, bikes are certainly essential outside of Loop 610. The walking distances would be impractical.

[Bob]

I'm really glad to read that Harris County Judge Ed Emmett not only recognizes that bikes and transit go together in a multi-modal world, but also is willing to urge METRO to do the right thing!

Bike hangers will undoubtedly be useful both inside and outside the Loop. That's certainly how I'm planning to get to the University line. (Why would I wait as much as 30 minutes to ride the #34 Montrose Crosstown bus and transfer when I can make the 1-mile trip to Richmond on my bike in less than 10 minutes?)

The most important point is that METRO is about to buy ~100 more train cars, and we will have to live with them for a long, long time. Rumor has it that METRO is already negotiating train car configurations with suppliers -- as we speak -- so it's important to stay focused on this opportunity right now. Keep it up!

[kf5nd]

Precisely! Worse yet, what if you did not have a local resource like your #34 bus? What then? Walk an entire mile to the train? Most people would just jump in their car upon contemplating that kind of journey.

Why would I wait as much as 30 minutes to ride the #34 Montrose Crosstown bus and transfer when I can make the 1-mile trip to Richmond on my bike in less than 10 minutes?

[christof]

Here's a completely different way to do bikes on trains. This is line 10 of the Stuttgart streetcar system; it carries bikes by way of a bike rack on a flatcar. I'm not suggesting it for Houston, but I like the can-do spirit.





http://www.trampicturebook.de/tram/germany/stuttgar/zacke.htm[/url]

[kf5nd]

You'd better not suggest it, someone is going to want to drive their car up onto the flatbed.

Really, that's quite creative, and probably very cost-effective as well.

[kf5nd]

BikeHouston now has copies of letters of support to CEO Frank Wilson from Harris County Commisioners Lee, Eversole, Garcia, and Radack's letter is en route. And, Judge Emmett of course.

[kf5nd]

Today Mr. David Mincberg (D) candidate for Harris County Judge endorsed the concept of improved bicycle access to METRO light rail. He joins incumbent Harris County Judge Emmett (R) and all of the Harris County Commissioners: El Franco Lee (Pct1), Sylvia Garcia (Pct2), Steve Radack (Pct3), and Jerry Eversole (Pct4) in writing letters to METRO CEO Frank Wilson urging this important policy change. Houston City Council Member Anne Clutterbuck also wrote a letter of support to METRO, and Council Member Sue Lovell has voiced support for the concept as well, though it is not known if she has written a letter to METRO. Council Member Lovell chairs the influential Transportation, Infrastructure, and Aviation Committee at City Hall.

One would hope that Harris County METRO would listen to the stated will of the entire Harris County executive team and City officials and come to the right decision on this matter. We expect a decision within a matter of days.

Here is the text of Mr. Mincberg's letter:

Mr. Frank J. Wilson
President and CEO
MTA
PO Box 61429
Houston TX 77208-1429

Dear Frank,

I am writing to express my total support for the full inclusion of bicycle facilities within the Metro rail system. The Citizen's Transportation Coalition briefed me on the need to include bike racks on the new light rail cars. I believe that sturdy bicycle racks at rail stops would also be a beneficial feature of the light rail transit system.

There are two good reasons to accommodate bicycles. First, Harris County is a federal, non-attainment area for air quality. Leadership requires us to do everything possible to help our region meet its target. Bicycles are cost-effective and pollution-free.

Second, bicycle-friendly transit systems exist in many other cities around the world. If Harris County is going to maintain its world standing, we must build a light rail system that is world-class in every way.

I would like to reiterate my support for the full inclusion of bicycle facilities within the Metro rail system.

Sincerely,
David

[Ian]

Second, bicycle-friendly transit systems exist in many other cities around the world. If Harris County is going to maintain its world standing, we must build a light rail system that is world-class in every way.

This kind of feels like a lemming argument, but hey, I appreciate the bicycle-supporting sentiment!

[kf5nd]

4/28/08 - Dr. Renu Khator, Chancellor of the University of Houston, writes a letter to METRO in favor of bike racks on trains

[Ian]

4/28/08 - Dr. Renu Khator, Chancellor of the University of Houston, writes a letter to METRO in favor of bike racks on trains

Huzzah! Victory is ours!

Well, if Metro listens, anyway.

[kf5nd]

Is anyone from CTC going to attend the Transportation Infrastructure and Aviation Committee meeting at 10:00 am on Tuesday 5/13/08 at City Hall concerning the METRO Consent Agreement?

If so, could you put in a brief statement of support for bicycle racks onboard the trains and bicycle access during peak commute hours?

Thank you, I'm unable to attend, I am finishing up a major project at the office (which is located at Beltway 8 ).



Sincerely,
Peter Wang

[kf5nd]

Council Member Sue Lovell
Chair, TIA
City Council Chambers
901 Bagby, 2nd Floor
Houston TX


May 15, 2008

Dear Council Member Lovell:

Subject: METRO-City of Houston Consent Agreement

Bicycles are a legally recognized part of the City of Houston's traffic mix. For many Houstonians, a bicycle is the only or chosen means of personal transportation, particularly in neighborhoods such as Gulfton, Near North, Third Ward, and the East Side. More effective, affordable, and equitable transportation options for these residents and all Houstonians can be created by integrating bicycles and public transit.

METRO has spent many tens of millions of dollars over the years building parking lots for motor vehicles at Park & Ride locations through the region. A bicycle traveling from an urban residence to a light rail stop is making a journey highly analogous to that of the suburban motorist traveling from their residence to a Park & Ride. Only the scale is different. Therefore, bicycles deserve ample, safe, and secure bicycle parking at all METRO transit centers and rail line stops, just as cars receive the same consideration at Park & Rides. BikeHouston calls on the TIA Committee to write a bicycle parking requirement into the Consent Agreement.

Many of the immediate approaches to proposed METRO transit stops currently contain street, bike lane, or pathway configurations that are hazardous or inconvenient to bicycle operators. BikeHouston calls on the TIA Committee to require in the Consent Agreement that METRO devise approaches to the transit stops that are safe for bicyclists.

METRO does not yet have a plan in place improve bicycle access to the light rail vehicles themselves. We spoke to the METRO Board on November 15th, 2007 and January 17, 2008 but haven’t heard of any policy changes since then. Their current policy is highly restrictive, and very rare in North America. Regular (non-folding) bicycles are currently banned from Houston's light rail trains during the all-important weekday commuter rush hour. Los Angeles is the only other light rail operator that we know of that has such a rush-hour ban. Furthermore, only two bikes are allowed on per train car off-peak, which are as many as are allowed on the bus bike racks, but each rail car holds many more people than the bus, so there is a serious bike-to-passenger ratio mismatch between buses and trains. The light rail and bus components of the system do not blend together seamlessly as far as bikes are concerned.

BikeHouston calls on the TIA Committee to insist on peak-hour bicycle access to light rail vehicles, at passenger-to-bike ratios similar to the buses, and to write these requirements into the Consent Agreement.

Thank you very much for your time and consideration.


Sincerely,

THE BIKEHOUSTON BOARD

cc:


Vice Chair TIA, Council Member Jarvis Johnson
Council Member Wanda Adams
Council Member Peter Brown
Council Member Adrian Garcia
Council Member Ronald Green
Council Member Pam Holm
Council Member Jolanda Jones
Council Member Melissa Noriega
Council Member James Rodriguez
Council Member Mike Sullivan

[MikePH]

METRO does not yet have a plan in place improve bicycle access to the light rail vehicles themselves. We spoke to the METRO Board on November 15th, 2007 and January 17, 2008 but haven’t heard of any policy changes since then. Their current policy is highly restrictive, and very rare in North America. Regular (non-folding) bicycles are currently banned from Houston's light rail trains during the all-important weekday commuter rush hour. Los Angeles is the only other light rail operator that we know of that has such a rush-hour ban. Furthermore, only two bikes are allowed on per train car off-peak, which are as many as are allowed on the bus bike racks, but each rail car holds many more people than the bus, so there is a serious bike-to-passenger ratio mismatch between buses and trains. The light rail and bus components of the system do not blend together seamlessly as far as bikes are concerned.

BikeHouston calls on the TIA Committee to insist on peak-hour bicycle access to light rail vehicles, at passenger-to-bike ratios similar to the buses, and to write these requirements into the Consent Agreement.
Thank you very much for your time and consideration.

When CTC had their recent tour of the MetroRail facility, the rail manager, a Mr. Grogan, had a short discussion about the light rail line. I didn't see you there. Grogan's Power Point display had a shocking table from Passenger Transport Journal. This was a list ranked by number of passengers per rail vehicle by US city in descending order. Houston was at the top of the list at 682,000 boardings per light rail vehicle per year.

Put that into perspective. A Houston LRV carries more passengers per year than subway cars in New York, Chicago or Los Angeles. Just three MetroRail vehicles carry more than the equivalent of the entire population of the city of Houston in one year. Houston outranks every light rail system in the USA in boardings per vehicle.

With only eighteen cars, MetroRail has seventeen, and sometimes all eighteen, cars in service at rush hour. The ridership of Houston's Red Line has far exceeded the forecasts that justified building the line in the first place. Metro will again try to expand their fleet to 24 vehicles just to service the existing line.

Yesterday, Saturday, I boarded MetroRail around 3:00 PM at Preston station and rode all the way to Fannin South. Between the Downtown Transit Center and Wheeler, the single light rail car was at its capacity of around 180 people. There were no bikes on board. Getting one bicycle on that car yesterday would have been extremely difficult. One wrong move and a cyclist trying to board could have gotten himself punched out.

Eighteen light rail cars carrying more than eleven million riders per year is not sustainable over the long term. Perhaps this will change when MetroRail expands its fleet. Maybe a political paradigm shift will occur at the federal, state and local level where governments accord a higher priority in investment in electric rail transit than they do now.

What are you doing about this obvious underinvestment in light rail? How many times have you contacted officials to increase capital funding for rail transit in Houston?

Maybe you have specifically addressed this issue with the powers that be. I can't recall from any of your posts on this board that you have done so.

As far as I can tell, you are creating an unfunded mandate and letting others worry about the little detail of securing the funds for capital costs.

Unless you really are a transit activist as much as you are a bicycle activist, you are putting the cart before the horse.

[kf5nd]

MikePH,

BikeHouston & CTC are trying to overturn the "one size fits none" sweeping policy of METRO, which is to say: no bikes on the the train from 9 am - 3 pm weekdays.

As your own example brilliantly points out, their policy is inappropriate during the time you rode, which was 3 pm Saturday. Bikes are allowed, but there was no room. On the other hand, a BikeHouston Board member was thrown off of an empty train by the operator at 3:01 pm on a weekday. Gee, thanks. Not a very good policy.

Other transit agencies have a much more nuanced and well thought out approach towards letting bikes on trains (or not). Example: more tightly-focused "no bikes allowed" hours, equipment that allows bikes to be brought on board and stowed safely, better cabin layouts (METROs layout is just weird, IMHO), "no bikes allowed" on certain sections of certain lines but allowed on other places in the system.

And if you do have points where cyclists are required to leave their bikes, you have to have really good bike parking; tough racks out of the weather, security cams / guards, bike lockers, etc. None of that exists in the METRO system. Our recent letter to the TIA calls for that.

I acknowledge the crowded conditions at times on the Red Line. I am aware of the boardings data that you cite (family & child obligations don't allow me to go to every CTC event or tour). However, if BRT were to be installed on Gessner, and this is on the METRO Solutions map, wouldn't it be stupid for the "one size fits none" policy to be enforced on Gessner BRT, a line which would have much lower ridership than the Red Line? METRO needs to think in terms of policies for an entire future system, not just for the current one under-equipped over-utilized single train line.

We are trying to get METRO to not just do the easy, bureaucratic thing and implement one stupid, simple-minded rule that leaves lots of opportunity for good customer service around the entire service area on the table. We are trying to get them to think about the problem, using detailed data that they possess, and optimize the policy, and continually improve it.

I will answer your questioning my partisan devotion to cycling vs. my devotion to transportation in general by reminding you that I have been duly elected by CTC Members to the CTC Board, and I use METRO six times a week or more in order to get to work and to recreation... and I live 10 miles outside the METRO service area, as we have discussed (near Langham Creek High School, where my son attends). I bicycle into the METRO service area, at night, in the rain, when it has been as cold at 25 deg F or as hot as 100 deg F, then I put my bike on transit.

Yes, I am devoted to bikes and to transportation.

[jboyd]

Eighteen light rail cars carrying more than eleven million riders per year is not sustainable over the long term. Perhaps this will change when MetroRail expands its fleet. Maybe a political paradigm shift will occur at the federal, state and local level where governments accord a higher priority in investment in electric rail transit than they do now.

What are you doing about this obvious underinvestment in light rail? How many times have you contacted officials to increase capital funding for rail transit in Houston?

Maybe you have specifically addressed this issue with the powers that be. I can't recall from any of your posts on this board that you have done so.

We are doing what we can to shift the paradigm in our little part of the universe.

This discussion really indicates how far Houston has come in transit. The bike restrictions exist because the trains are full. Applications for federal aid are much easier when there is a history of success.

The success of the Red Line has national implications. Every successful transit project is another piece of evidence that transit deserves a greater share of the transportation pie.

* CTC advocates greater capital spending on transit and rail transit.
* CTC advocates improving transit service.
* CTC advocates for new rolling stock equipped with bike racks.

What are the funding sources?
* 2009 Re-authorization of the Federal Transportation Bill - there are a lot of ways funding formulas can change
* Harris County Commissioners' Court - we need to convince them to spend differently
* State Legislature - if there is anything positive about a funding crisis, it's an opportunity to convince our legislators that adding lane capacity to solve congestion problems is not a sustainable program. Message: spending on rail will be more cost effective.
*City of Houston - providing capital (e.g. wide sidewalks) which complement transit.

We can't expect any one person to do all of these things.

[kf5nd]

Another thing, Mike... it's not about me... the letter was sent by the BikeHouston board, and I am not a member of the board of directors of BikeHouston.

[MikePH]

MikePH,

BikeHouston & CTC are trying to overturn the "one size fits none" sweeping policy of METRO, which is to say: no bikes on the the train from 9 am - 3 pm weekdays.

As your own example brilliantly points out, their policy is inappropriate during the time you rode, which was 3 pm Saturday. Bikes are allowed, but there was no room. On the other hand, a BikeHouston Board member was thrown off of an empty train by the operator at 3:01 pm on a weekday. Gee, thanks. Not a very good policy.

Maybe not a "good" policy, but given the resources available, it is the only viable one.

Don't get me wrong Mr. Wang, I have been a "new urbanist" since the 1960's before the term was invented. I read Jane Jacob's The Life and Death of Great American Cities six years after she published it in 1961. I was profoundly impacted by her viewpoint more than forty years ago and her works have influenced me ever since. My fervent desire for excellent public transportation, intercity passenger rail, multi-use development and a pedestrian- and bicycle-oriented living environment likely exceeds the total lifespan of many members on this forum.

Do I want safe, extensive bike paths covering, not just Harris County, but the entire metropolitan area? Silly question. Of course I do. Would I like to see more bicycles on MetroRail? Most certainly.

The problem, to restate it, is that the capacity for carrying cyclists and their bicycles simply isn't there, often even when bicycles are specifically allowed.

Repeating myself again, we need a paradigm shift where the private and public sector is willing to find the capital funding to make your (and ultimately, my own) desire to fully integrate cycling with public transit a reality. I see no fundamental conflict between you and me. What I do see is that you are demanding precious floor space which is not currently available on MetroRail. You want more floor space for bikes on Houston light rail? Start with getting more funding for light rail from the federal transit administration by making a pest of yourself with your moronic TX 7 representative, Culberson. Going to the Houston City Council and the Harris County Metropolitan Transit Authority is a waste of time until you can show them the money.

Other transit agencies have a much more nuanced and well thought out approach towards letting bikes on trains (or not). Example: more tightly-focused "no bikes allowed" hours, equipment that allows bikes to be brought on board and stowed safely, better cabin layouts (METROs layout is just weird, IMHO), "no bikes allowed" on certain sections of certain lines but allowed on other places in the system.

It is obvious from your Phoenix illustration that this bike rack is indeed taking up space. The bike may be hanging on the wall, but it precludes the floor space from being used by standing passengers.

It looks like Phoenix plans to buy 50 cars on a 20-mile route for an initial ridership of 26,000 increasing to 48,000 and 100 cars by 2020. Apparently, Mr. Wang, based on the number of cars to be deployed and the projected boardings, the Phoenix light rail cars will have a lot more extra space to accommodate bicycles than Houston. Surely you can see this.

Again, get Metro the capital funding to buy the extra cars they need to make what you want a reality.

It's funny that you mention that Los Angeles restricts bikes. They, like Houston, also have heavy passenger ridership. From what I can tell, the larger mass transit systems, e.g. NYC, Chicago, Toronto, Boston, Washington DC and Philadelphia are not allowing bicycles on their subways and elevated railways. Prove me wrong, but I think the heavier the passenger loads, the more difficult it is to bring bicycles on rapid transit cars.

And if you do have points where cyclists are required to leave their bikes, you have to have really good bike parking; tough racks out of the weather, security cams / guards, bike lockers, etc. None of that exists in the METRO system. Our recent letter to the TIA calls for that.

Worthwhile endeavour. Note that my previous note took no exception to any of those points. Having, said that, please note that light rail has many enemies, some of whom are on this board. Implementing your list in the above paragraph will increase capital cost somewhat and square footage devoted to storage. I would support such innovations, as long as you commit to supporting the increased funding needed.

I acknowledge the crowded conditions at times on the Red Line. I am aware of the boardings data that you cite (family & child obligations don't allow me to go to every CTC event or tour). However, if BRT were to be installed on Gessner, and this is on the METRO Solutions map, wouldn't it be stupid for the "one size fits none" policy to be enforced on Gessner BRT, a line which would have much lower ridership than the Red Line? METRO needs to think in terms of policies for an entire future system, not just for the current one under-equipped over-utilized single train line.

As noted before in previous posts, fuel costs for internal combustion buses are soaring into the stratosphere. In Houston, where bus miles have decreased by 15%, fuel costs have increased 172%. This chart is now out of date, so the real cost is higher now:

I am at odds with just about everyone on this forum on the subject of motor buses. My contention is that to continue to provide public transit service, transit agencies will need to get out of bus transportation and into electric rail as quickly as possible. Over the next ten years, large bus transit systems will be nailed to the wall. Just like automobiles, trucks, aircraft and diesel railroads, bus systems will face stratospheric costs for motor fuel, followed by outright shortages.

If Metro can put bike racks on "BRT," I've no objection. But I doubt BRT will be there when people really need it.

We are trying to get METRO to not just do the easy, bureaucratic thing and implement one stupid, simple-minded rule that leaves lots of opportunity for good customer service around the entire service area on the table. We are trying to get them to think about the problem, using detailed data that they possess, and optimize the policy, and continually improve it.

I think Metro's stance has less to do with bureaucracy than with the essential fact that transportation funding in the Houston region, Texas and the USA is completely lopsided toward roads and airlines and away from public transit, particularly light rail, and intercity passenger trains. Metro are trying to get light rail implemented at the lowest possible cost. The lowest bid is what is implemented, not the best solution. If the opposite were true they'd build some subways in downtown Houston to get the new light rail lines completely off the streets.

Plus, you're just mentioning Metro's service area. The idea of just providing service to Harris County, and not the entire region, is straight out of the 1970's. Regional public transit is needed. This goes for protection for cyclists for that matter. Maybe you live in Harris County, but what about people that need to use public transit or wish to use bikes without getting killed by homicidal motorists in Conroe, Sugar Land, Richmond, Friendswood, etc.?

I will answer your questioning my partisan devotion to cycling vs. my devotion to transportation in general by reminding you that I have been duly elected by CTC Members to the CTC Board, and I use METRO six times a week or more in order to get to work and to recreation... and I live 10 miles outside the METRO service area, as we have discussed (near Langham Creek High School, where my son attends). I bicycle into the METRO service area, at night, in the rain, when it has been as cold at 25 deg F or as hot as 100 deg F, then I put my bike on transit.

I didn't get a driver's license until I was 23. I lived in the northern part of a northern state with steep hills everywhere and snow and ice for many months out of the year. I cycled in temperatures much colder than 25º F and can handle 100º here. That's not the problem. The problem is 1) there is nowhere here in Pearland to safely use a bicycle that takes me to a destination where I would need to go and 2) the distances involved are too great for bicycles for most of the trips I am forced to make. I have a bike that I don't use because I am not suicidal and cycling is impractical beyond ten miles. It is likely that there are tens or hundreds of thousands of people outside of Harris County who would use bicycles, but the transportation infrastructure and living arrangements need a massive retrofit before that can happen.

Yes, I know you were elected. But I didn't vote for you precisely because I can tell that you haven't thought the entire energy / infrastructure / transportation issue through. Nothing personal, believe me. Even the board members I did vote for have, at best, in my opinion, a superficial understanding of exactly how deeply we are into resource overshoot and how little time is left for making other living and transportation arrangements.

It's ironic that you live near FM 529 and Barker Cypress. I lived within a mile of there for 17 years through most of the 1980's and 1990's. Assuming you can use the closest commuter bus lines, the distance from that intersection to the nearest park and rides is too far for a bicycle to bridge the gap, even if there were decent, safe bike lanes. Maybe you don't mind cycling 12 miles to the nearest bus line, but the average person like myself who would otherwise use a bicycle is not about to pedal 24 round-trip miles each working day. Five miles by bike is fine. Ten miles is really pushing it. Beyond ten miles is completely impractical and few people have the extra time to get up extra-early and get home extra-late to do that.

Yes, I am devoted to bikes and to transportation.

Bikes are fine. Transportation is too vague. We've got plenty of transportation. But it's the wrong kind.

[kf5nd]

MikePH wrote:

"Again, get Metro the capital funding to buy the extra cars they need to make what you want a reality...

I would support such innovations, as long as you commit to supporting the increased funding needed."

I think it's a bit silly to expect BikeHouston, a bicycle advocacy organization with about as many volunteers as CTC to devote itself to the task of trying to get more rail funding for METRO. METRO has lots of people who are trying to get more funding for METRO, starting with Mr. Frank Wilson, and I'm sure the BikeHouston people will be voting in November and trying to get people elected who will be supportive of more funding for METRO than Mr. Culberson et. al.

Also, how can you expect BikeHouston to carry water for METRO when METRO made many false statements concerning our bikes-on-buses proposals, made up all kinds of ridiculous excuses, treated our organization with little respect for many years, before suddenly seeing the light and installing them last year, and lo, the program is working just as we said it would! Do you honestly expect there to be that much love between BikeHouston and METRO?

BikeHouston is doing as much as it can just by pointing out places where METRO can make things better for bicyclists, goodness knows there's a lifetime of work to be done along those lines. The BikeHouston people are trying to plug the holes left by METRO not having a full-time bike person like other agencies have (Denver, San Mateo County come to mind). BikeHouston is a niche organization with niche expertise, and I think we're comfortable with a scope that is narrow and deep.

BikeHouston joined CTC as a supporting organization specifically to support the broader approach to transportation, while not diluting our power by trying to be a general-purpose organization.

[MikePH]

Point well made. I understand your frustration much more clearly now.

Considering how precarious the state of energy resources has become, there are too few individuals who are even remotely aware of the grave danger all of us are in. However, pressure coming from private citizens will scare, impress and influence politicians much more than Metro can. I doubt if anything Metro says or does will have any influence on Culberson. Personally, I have contacted Culberson twice in the past five years, complaining about his stance against light rail. But since I am not in his district, he won't pay attention to me.

Since I live in CD 22, I've campaigned for Nick Lampson. I am not particularly impressed with the guy, but he's been okay with MetroRail and, considering the stance of his predecessor, Tom DeLay, and the nut case Lampson's running against this year, he's the best us southsiders (and the rest of you, since he has a say in Metro's funding) can hope for in TX 22.

Believe it or not, I was starting to get a dialog going with Delay's transportation specialist in DC on the benefits of light rail. Then the Texans for a Republican Majority and Jack Abramoff scandals blew up and there was no point in continuing to try to win Delay over.

Having conceded that, I stand by my particular complaint in this thread of cyclists demanding that Metro allow unlimited access to bicycles on board the light rail cars when the cars are obviously jammed with passengers. If you want your bikes on MetroRail 20 hours a day, seven days a week, then you simply will have to swallow your pride and do whatever you can to help Metro get the funding for the additional cars that they need. As it is, you're getting dangerously close to branding the Red Line a failure, which it most certainly is not.

Constituents of TXCD 7 have a particular responsibility on this subject because you can stir up a lot more trouble for Culberson than I can down here in Pearland. It's not "carrying water for Metro." I think unlimited bike access on MetroRail would be a great idea. Let's help Metro get about 20 million dollars from the FTA for six more cars, and then take your case to them. I understand that Metro will try again this summer for additional cars. I'll send a note to Lampson asking that he recognize this need. The House of Representatives is where this pressure needs to be applied.

If I see that the additional equipment is forthcoming, I will do whatever I can within my limited means to influence Metro and Lampson to increase the numbers of cars in service, thereby freeing up space for cyclists. I don't live in Harris County, so Metro's probably not going to pay as much attention to me as the rest of you CTC members, although I also have communicated with them in the past.

It's one of those good news / bad news predicaments. The good news is that the Red Line is a resounding success, reliably and efficiently carrying a huge number of riders every day of the week, far exceeding anyone's expectations. The bad news is that, since they have only eighteen cars, they are operating pretty close to 100% capacity, and the cars are often wall-to-wall people. Based on the talk Grogan gave, the interval between vehicles could be cut in half from every six minutes to every three minutes.

And as many rail stations as possible should have bike racks, not just the three they have now.

And you're right that Metro should have installed bike racks on buses long before they did. A bicyclist liaison at Metro is long overdue.

Metro is far from an ideal transit agency. But public transit in the USA has been poorly run for a lot longer than I've been alive. Just compare public transit in a large European city like Paris with the decrepit, antique New York City system. I've just gotten used to a public-be-damned attitude when dealing with transit agencies.

First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win.

[kf5nd]

Mike, we have to ask for 100% bicycle access all the time. We may have to settle for less. But the current situation is just plain unacceptable.

Bikes are now allowed on 9 am - 3 pm weekdays. But...

How about 12:01 am - 5 am weekdays?

How about 7:30 pm - Midnight weekdays?

And taking out seats and putting in bike hangers still leaves standing room if no bikes are there.

All kinds of good options that preserve room and avoid conflict with other passengers have been bypassed by the silly "one size fits none" current policy, and failure to buy very simple, inexpensive hardware.

Ask for the Galaxy, settle for the Solar System. That's how you have to negotiate.

[kf5nd]

Metro’s Mike Williams gave a presentation at this week’s HPBAC meeting on their plans for the Uptown (Galleria area) light rail line. The discussion raised two key areas of concern for me.


* Bikes on Trains - Mike said they are finalizing their specs for the trains, and they are NOT planning to include any provisions for bikes. Connie Roebuck repeated their previously stated concern that the bikes would get in the way of other riders. Apparently we need to once again provide evidence of how other cities are making this work on their trains. Leaving bikes off disenfranchises a major constituency from using the soon to be extensive light rail system, and limits the benefits that Houston could derive from it.
* Westpark – Metro is planning major changes on Westpark to tie the Uptown line into the University line. I think the changes are generally good, but there is no provision for restoring the bike lanes or providing a wide outside shared lane. Mike said there isn’t room.
* Post Oak – similar concern as Westpark. Metro’s plans retain 3 traffic lanes in each direction, 11 feet outside, 10 feet middle and 11 feet inside (I think).



Any ideas for addressing BoT? What can we say that we haven’t already, repeatedly? Who else can we enlist for support?

[Woody]

Any ideas for addressing BoT? What can we say that we haven’t already, repeatedly? Who else can we enlist for support?

I guess a better question to ask is who haven't we already asked to support this and who is against this initiative other than METRO itself? METRO has had direct feedback from the public as well as various representatives of government on including bikes on LR and yet they seem to be choosing a path other than what the public desires. Behavior like this would never work in the private sector as most in the private sector work towards meeting the demands of the customer base.

One possible reason why bikes may be looked upon as unfavorable on rail is that the current rail cars are not designed to easily handle bike boarding’s. Instead of a bicyclist being able to hang a bike on a hook and out of the way, the cyclist normally has to stand with the bike on the rail car as passengers try to move around the bicycle and the center pole.

METRO only seems to be driven by the internal preferences of METRO management as opposed to public demands. METRO does respond to what it takes to gain federal funding, as the current taxpayer base is not sufficient to build out the rail w/o federal dollars. In my mind, a LR car in a congested city without accommodations 24/7 for bikes is an incomplete system and is not worthy of federal funding.

[MikePH]

In my mind, a LR car in a congested city without accommodations 24/7 for bikes is an incomplete system and is not worthy of federal funding.

Freeways and most roads don't accommodate bikes. By that reasoning, they shouldn't be eligible for federal funding either.

[kf5nd]

That was a cheap shot, Mike. Here's the reply.



Throw those pesky baby carriages off the trains, too? And walkers and wheelchairs, and any kind of luggage?

[kf5nd]

For over a year, BikeHouston and Citizens Transportation have worked to get bike racks installed on the coming METRO light rail trains, which would make bikes + light rail an unbeatable intermodal combo.

Despite letters from Judge Ed Emmett, all four Republican and Democratic Harris County Commissioners, and other public officials, METRO is going to place orders for the new trains on Christmas Eve 2008... without any in-cabin racks for bicycle. Our contact at the FTA, the funding agency for the trains, is extremely concerned, but FTA cannot compel METRO to order trains with bike racks.

It looks like we've failed at this point.

If the cycling community cares enough about this, then you can make one final effort on Monday or Tuesday next week. Call METRO CEO Frank J. Wilson's office at (713) 739-4832. Don't send an email. Make someone pick up the phone and spend the energy to talk to you. Also call the VP of Procurement, Paul Como, at (713) 739-4887. Tell him to not order the trains without bike racks.

The agency which has just put racks on its trains, Phoenix, goes live with its trains on December 27, 2008. We put a picture of their equipment on our blog, biketrain.blogspot.com I'm happy for them, and I'm disappointed that we have such entrenched and unresponsive people in charge of our public transit agency. But, I'm not the only person to make that observation; just go to any METRO board meeting, and listen to the public complaints.

[MikePH]

That was a cheap shot, Mike. Here's the reply.

How, exactly, was that a cheap shot? Let's repeat the quote.

In my mind, a LR car in a congested city without accommodations 24/7 for bikes is an incomplete system and is not worthy of federal funding.

So it's okay build streets and roads without bikes and pedestrian access? No, you go after Metro. That's any easy target. In my opinion, the cheap shot is yours.

If you had any cojones, you'd go after the city, the county, TxDOT and US DOT.

I've got a 10-speed bike, and you know what, I don't ride it. Why? Because Houston motorists are psychopaths and using your bike in this town is pure hubris. If Peter chooses to ride a bike on Houston biker-deathtraps, that's his death wish.

I would love to take my bike on MetroRail. But my chances once my bike hits the streets are not promising. I wouldn't even consider riding my bike outside of my subdivision.

I give bikers a lot of room here in Pearland, passing them with as much room as possible or patiently waiting until oncoming cars clear before doing so. The problem is, a large majority of drivers are sociopaths, and I can't count the number of times I've seen drivers literally run cyclists off the road here. Harris County drivers, are, if anything, worse, particularly on the west side.

That's why you don't see a lot of bikes on Houston and regional streets. Not because of some silly, esoteric accusation that it's because "Metro won't allow bikes on their rail cars at peak hours," but because Houston and the metropolitan area streets and roads are so friggin' dangerous to cyclists, and pedestrians, for that matter.

You're barking up the wrong tree. Instead of a pretty insignificant issue of a transit line (the above photograph was taken on a Sunday in Houston, where and when was yours taken?), why don't you take on the agencies that designed a transportation system that makes biking tantamount to suicide in Houston, Texas and most of the US?

And that photo of yours, those bikes are still taking up room. I don't see any standing-room-only crowd like I usually see on MetroRail, even on weekends. I just got off MetroRail about an hour ago. My favorite pizzeria is downtown and I often go there on Sundays for takeout. Today was a Sunday, get it?, the "lightest" day for MetroRail, one of the times when bikes are permitted. And you know what, the car was standing-room only between Downtown Transit Centre and the Medical Center. You couldn't have got a bike on that car today with a gallon of vaseline. On.A.Sunday.

You want more space on light rail cars for bikes? Fine, go out and raise a couple of hundred million dollars from government and the private sector to fund the extra space light rail cars will need to accommodate bicycles. Instead of acting like a over-indulged child that has a tantrum because his parents won't buy him something that they can't afford, through no fault of their own, why don't you help do something about making it possible for Metro to add this feature? Oh, that's right, I forgot, you said "I don't carry water for Metro."

You can't take bikes on subways in New York in Chicago. Why do you suppose that is, Peter?

Stop slamming Metro. They're doing the best they can with the limited resources they have. Sheesh!

[kf5nd]

Don't broaden the argument to streets in general, Mike. That's absolutely not what's under discussion here. I'm not going to let you blur this thread up by letting you sit there and blame me and BikeHouston and CTC for not doing enough to get Complete Streets built in this region. We work toward Complete Streets goals every single damn day. Ask any CTC or BikeHouston Board members, if you know any. If you still think we're not doing enough, why don't you get yourself off of this board which we are personally and collectively paying for and find somewhere else to play, huh?

It's so easy to criticize the apparent failed activism efforts of about ten or twenty dedicated people out of a population of four million sheeple, isn't it Mike. Does it make you feel GOOD?

METRO could easily have ordered bike hangers for trains cars, for a tiny additional amount (probably a few extra thousands dollars per car, which cost how many million each?)

Then they still could've carefully limited the bike hours to contain the kind of congestion you observed... but during the shoulder periods off of the peaks, the bikes would be safely and conveniently accommodated.

But no.. it's all too much trouble for them to do what so many other transit agencies have done. Other agencies in smaller cities have full time bike / ped people figuring things out for those agencies. METRO, on the other hand, hits new heights of bike / ped incompetence and neglect daily. By not having the right equipment in the cabins, they make it damn hard to safely have any bikes on at any time.

[Ed Browne]

In my mind, a LR car in a congested city without accommodations 24/7 for bikes is an incomplete system and is not worthy of federal funding.

Freeways and most roads don't accommodate bikes. By that reasoning, they shouldn't be eligible for federal funding either.

Good Point, Mike, and one of the reasons that CTC supports Complete Streets, which calls for more bike and pedestrian access. The Hempstead Highway project actually includes bicycle lanes in the design.

Peter and Woody have my support in this argument. I saw many suburban riders on the MAX line in Portland that rode their bikes from neighborhoods that would otherwise have required a car or bus at both ends of their commute. Similarly, most MAX stops had bicycle racks and Portland has a "borrow a bike" program. It's a smart thing for Metro to do, regardless whether people your and my age will ever use it.

[MikePH]

METRO could easily have ordered bike hangers for trains cars, for a tiny additional amount (probably a few extra thousands dollars per car, which cost how many million each?)

Not Peter. it's a bad argument. It is not a "tiny little additional amount." You should get off your bike and ride MetroRail more. You'll see that this will not be an easy retrofit. I've ridden Houston LRV's 3 or 4 hundred times. I could do it blindfold. Look at the interior of the cars. The only place you can put bike hangars, assuming you could squeeze the bikes through the standing-room only crowds, is by removing the single, horizontal-aligned seats.

That would go over big, wouldn't it? Let me repeat: there are no places to put bank hangers in the MetroRail cars without totally retrofitting them, which means removing seats.

If you westsiders would ride MetroRail more, instead of just pontificating about it, maybe you could understand what I'm talking about. What part about not enough room don't you understand? And what part about standing room only crowds during off-peak weekday hours and weekends don't you understand? To save money, Metro run only one-car trains on weekdays during the midday hours and at night, as well as on weekends.

I was in midtown, downtown and Herman Park for a total of four hours today. I saw two whole bikes in Hermann Park and not one bloody bike on any street. It was a cool, blustery day. So, to accommodate bicycles, and there are sadly very few bike commuters in Houston because of the lack of complete streets, you want to, although you obviously haven't thought the implications through:

Run two car trains seven days a week
Increase the service frequency at rush hour, necessitating buying new rolling stock.
Retrofit the Avanto 70 cars by ripping out the single seats to accommodate bike racks.

Okay, rip out the single seats and double the fleet to run two-car trains all throughout week.

It's so easy to criticize the apparent failed activism efforts of about ten or twenty dedicated people out of a population of four million sheeple, isn't it Mike. Does it make you feel GOOD?

You really don't get it, do you? You don't want to get it. Join the reality-based community, try. If I never had to drive again and could walk, cycle and use public transit it couldn't happen soon enough to suit me. I think the idea of bikes on MetroRail is great, which I've repeated over and over and over! No, it doesn't make me feel "good" that Metro can't accommodate bikes on their rail cars.

But apparently I'm the only person on this forum who understands that you can't carry 800,000 riders a month with a mere 18 light rail cars, and somehow magically expect to accommodate bicycles 20/7 without spending big bucks. Metro has to operate on a shoestring now. Just imagine the fun Don Gallagher would have if Metro suddenly started jacking up their costs for cyclists who may or may not even ride MetroRail in appreciable numbers!

You're shooting the messenger. Metro isn't banning bikes during peak service hours, because they have an attitude against cyclists. THEY'RE BANNING BIKES BECAUSE THEY DON'T HAVE THE BLOODY ROOM FOR THE BLINKIN' THINGS.

That's not so hard to understand, even for people that live in the West Houston division of the National Automobile Slum.

And as I've said before, OVER AND OVER AND OVER again, I think MetroRail should have bike racks at all their stations, because, unlike your other complaint, that would be an extremely modest investment. Could you possibly explain to me why I have to keep repeating myself ad-nauseum when you and I are corresponding? Bike racks would work well with Dallas Area Rapid Transit's Policy for bikes on trains:

Bicycles that are clean are permitted on DART Rail and on Trinity Railway Express vehicles when space is available.

Cyclists must consider the number of passengers on the vehicle and the impact the presence of the bicycle will have on the safety of other passengers before bringing the bike on board.

Cyclists may not block the operator's cab when it is occupied.

DART staff, including vehicle operators, DART Police, Fare Inspectors and supervisors may relocate or remove any bicycle that obstructs or has a negative impact on DART operations or passengers.

I've agreed with you on bike racks and both Metro and I have PROVED to you that they can't accommodate bikes on their rail cars 20 hours a day, seven days a week, without a substantial investment in new and retrofitted rolling stock. "Tiny additional amount," my foot. To quote from Gone With the Wind, "askin' ain't gittin'."

If you check the transit systems that have unlimited restrictions on bicycles on-board, you'll find that they carry modest passenger loads. Take subways and light rail in the mega-transit systems: San Francisco, Boston, NJT, New York, Philadelphia, DC, Toronto, Chicago. Bicycles are no-go there because there simply is not enough room. MetroRail and DART rail fall somewhere in between.

Peter and Woody have my support in this argument. I saw many suburban riders on the MAX line in Portland that rode their bikes from neighborhoods that would otherwise have required a car or bus at both ends of their commute. Similarly, most MAX stops had bicycle racks and Portland has a "borrow a bike" program. It's a smart thing for Metro to do, regardless whether people your and my age will ever use it.

I'd use bike racks and take my bike on MetroRail if the facilities were available. I'm 56 and never get sick, chain smoking and occasional heavy drinking notwithstanding. Just chalk it up to my northeastern lower class, blue collar roots. It's ten PM right now. I could get suited up and walk thirty miles clean through to daylight tomorrow morning without a problem. At my age, you get a physical every year. I never have any problems, although I've taken mega-doses of vitamins since Nixon was president to counteract the ill effects of smoking. They work. And I enjoy being politically incorrect, anyway.

Bikes are great. But biking in Houston sucks. And it's not METRO's fault.

[kf5nd]

Rail Life said...

I am sorry to hear that there are no bike racks there. We are fortunate that METRO has been good to the bike community in Phoenix. We do have bike racks on the trains, bike racks at the "park and ride" stations and even a large "Transportation Center" with great facilities in Tempe serving as a "transportation hub" for pedestrians, bus, rail etc featuring bike racks and shower facilities. Good luck with your fight. Bikes are a HUGE piece of the puzzle.

[Ian]

Bikes are great. But biking in Houston sucks. And it's not METRO's fault.

Mike, there are definitely obstacles to cycling in Houston (I would have to argue that things aren't as dire as you imply) and we should be doing everything possible to mitigate those obstacles. That includes holding all transportation agencies (the City and TxDOT, as well as METRO) accountable. But just because METRO has had its share of struggles these last couple of years doesn't mean we can just let them off the hook. You've used the same kind of argument (ie, if we present any challenge to METRO, we might derail LRT expansion) against other projects CTC members have worked hard on, and I really just don't see the point. Nobody here is "against" METRO -- we all very much want our transit agency to succeed. What we're focusing on are the details to ENSURE that success.

A lot of us strongly feel that bicycles will be a very important piece of making mass transit work in a sprawling city like Houston. Hell, I dedicated a large part of my master's thesis to that very idea. We should be doing EVERYTHING WE CAN to make Houston a better place for bicycles so that we can simultaneously make Houston a better place for transit. I see them going very much hand-in-hand.

[MikePH]

Mike, there are definitely obstacles to cycling in Houston (I would have to argue that things aren't as dire as you imply) and we should be doing everything possible to mitigate those obstacles. That includes holding all transportation agencies (the City and TxDOT, as well as METRO) accountable. But just because METRO has had its share of struggles these last couple of years doesn't mean we can just let them off the hook. You've used the same kind of argument (ie, if we present any challenge to METRO, we might derail LRT expansion) against other projects CTC members have worked hard on, and I really just don't see the point. Nobody here is "against" METRO -- we all very much want our transit agency to succeed. What we're focusing on are the details to ENSURE that success.

A lot of us strongly feel that bicycles will be a very important piece of making mass transit work in a sprawling city like Houston. Hell, I dedicated a large part of my master's thesis to that very idea. We should be doing EVERYTHING WE CAN to make Houston a better place for bicycles so that we can simultaneously make Houston a better place for transit. I see them going very much hand-in-hand.

First, start by adopting a complete streets program. That doesn't mean painting lines in the street. Houston has to be be bike-friendly, and it is an extremely dangerous place for cycling now. I see much more cycling in Pearland than I do in Houston because Pearland doesn't have any mass transit. Face it, bicycles are pretty rare in Houston. Ripping out seats on the 18 MetroRail cars to put in bike racks is not going to do much to encourage cycling. The infrastructure throughout the entire metropolitan area is too messed up to accommodate cyclists.

If you want bikes on MetroRail, then buy another half-dozen cars for the existing line. You can complain all you want, but the funding for that just isn't there. All the F-heads at TxDOT think about is building more roads.

Put it another way. Three MetroRail cars in one year carry the equivalent of the entire population of the City of Houston. A MetroRail car carries more riders in one year than any rail transit car elsewhere in North America.

Askin' ain't gittin'. MetroRail is under-capitalized. The cyclists' problem is that MetroRail has been so successful. When I can't find a seat on a MetroRail car at noon on a cold, blustery Sunday for a line that runs every twelve minutes, we're not talking about your average run-of-the-mill light rail line. We're starting to get into European-level transit ridership levels on the Red Line.

Go look at the Metro Rail Operations Center at rush hour. There are no "spare cars." The yard is empty.

The only real solution is to stop thinking like Houston and start thinking like Portland. The problem is not Metro, it's Houston and its auto-centric approach. We've got to reverse 60 years worth of damage that the automobile has done to this city.