A Threefold 'Thank You' to Los Angeles
-thumb-110x110-213475.jpg)
A Photo Gallery of the Things I am Grateful for This Year
Canter's & Ice Cream Sandwich Could Live in Perfect Harmony
Dear Los Angeles: I'm Thankful For...
I LOVE L.A.! My Thanksgiving Thanks
At yesterday’s Metro meeting, officials said they may do with the current rush-hour bike-on-rail ban to accommodate the system’s growing cyclist ridership, but they’re also considering implementing a two-bike-per-car rule. During their 6 p.m. meeting, which was considerably quieter than their earlier one at noon, officials said they also want to improve signage that directs cyclists and clearly state the rules (no blocking doors or walkways).
In the agency’s proposal, presented by Metro Administration and Financial Services Manager and fellow cyclist Hector Rodriguez, the expected cost to “develop additional signage to direct bicycles to designated locations” will be about $25,000, and it will also run the agency $20,000 per rail vehicle to put up heavy-duty colored wall coverings and decals (similar to the ones they currently have posted on railcars) that outline bike and safety rules.
They’re also proposing to paint lines indicating where bikes are allowed, along with 18” high poles at platforms so riders know exactly where to board the cars.
The current Metro policy bans bikes from 6:30 a.m. to 8:30 a.m., and 4:30 p.m. to 6:30 p.m., and also does not allow bicycles on lines running between Wilshire/Vermont and Union Station, but in their proposal yesterday, Metro says even they are no longer able to keep track of who’s following the rules because of the rail system’s growth.
One cyclist who attended the evening meeting said “convenience is a big factor” in whether or not he’ll use the rail service.
Metro officials said they are encouraging cyclists to attend their July 16 meeting next week, when the discussion on their bike-on-rail policy continues.
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I've never seen them enforce any type of bike measures on the train, so I'm not sure why they're trying to make it so newsworthy that they plan on throwing the rule out.
Not once have I ever been bothered for having a bike on the Red Line...However, I've only taken my bike occasionally on weekday evenings or weekends, so perhaps I'm just missing the rush-hour crowd. To be honest, I didn't even know they had a rush-hour bike ban or that bicycles weren't allowed on the Wilshire/Vermont to Union Station stops. Either I just manage to ride at the right times and miss enforcement, or it's just not a priority to regulate those rules.
I've been commuting on the red line lately (that part of my trip is just Universal City to Hollywood and Highland - one stop, but a lengthy one) and people bring bikes on the train everyday. Not a ton. It doesn't get in my way. I se maybe 1-2 each trip I make.
I'm curious how that 2 bicycle per train car rule would work and be enforced. Let's say I get on the train car and I'm the first bicycle. Then the next stop another cyclist comes on and now we are at the max.
Now at the 3rd stop, another bicyclist enters, see me and the other cyclist and decides to knowingly ignore the rule. At the 4th stop, a sheriff enters and says you are all breaking the rule and one of you has to leave or I'm citing you. But he doesn't know the truth of the matter.
Also, what is the cyclist supposed to do when a train arrives? Run from train car to train car on the platform checking for cars with less than two bicycles on it? Trains don't stick around at stations that long and if its crowded, you're not going to make it far.
I think the pair of bicycles per car rule is interesting in theory but won't work in practice. Please mark an area for bikes and put decals on the doors that are most near that area. Portland did a nice and simple job without too much infrastructure. I do like their hanging bike rack on their light rails, though.
Exactly. Usually the very first car is quite empty, even during rush hour. Why not designate that for bikes, and pull out most of the seats? (However, this would probably only work during rush hour - off-peak I think the purple line only has 2 or 3 cars as it is.) I thought of the same thing you did, re: number of bikes and order of boarding. Unless the metro cop wanted to check and see everyone's pass and exactly where they got on the train.
They should re-purpose 1 car per train as a bike car. Pull out all the seats (or most) and let bikes and riders use that car only. That way more bikes can be on a train and people will not have to worry about heading to work with chain grease rubbing onto their clothes.
James
(a bike person)
20K per rail vehicle for safety signs?
i maybe wrong but that seems like a waste of money to me.
i doubt anyone is going to follow the rules unless it is being enforced.
as james said above, i think AT LEAST one car should be a bike car and not only that, have roof hanging hooks to use as a bike rack of sorts.
in minneapolis and portland, the light rail systems have bike racks available for use.
here is an example
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2138/1990346508_3b22120d8b.jpg?v=0
i think that funds should be utilized for something that is tangible and useful, not just signs giving us a heads up on safety tips.
As noted earlier, during peak times it's nigh impossible to even squeeze onto the trains sometimes, let alone do a bike headcount. I think a combination plan: Bike Racks (as kimsoner listed) AND a Designated "Bike" Car for Rush Hour use.
If even a dozen people show up to that meeting and put forth these solutions, it could very well help to spur them onto a sensible pathway . I guarantee you none of the MTA individuals bicycle, thus the lack of practicality in their suggestions.
IE: Their seemingly inept suggestions may *not* be entirely sinister, merely misinformed. Here's to the vision of steering them onto thew path. (P.S. A print out of the other cities bike racks might indeed be an awesome visual aid.)
regarding the light rail bike racks,
i have definitely seen these and have used them in minneapolis. ive heard they have them in portland.
does anybody know of anyway to get maybe the manufacturing info for these racks?
do u think itd be best to contact the light rail people there?
In the presentation they had compared other cities' bike-on-rail storage (including Portland)...Rodriguez had gone out to the light & heavy rails with his bike to check out possible spaces to install bike racks. The problem was the width of the light rail cars - handlebars would be obstructing the walkways if placed perpendicular to the wall, and they wouldn't fit parallel.
I like the idea of a bike-only car (and obviously non-cyclists would be allowed if it was unoccupied by bikers), but Metro definitely needs to work with cyclists and round up the bike communities' responses and ideas.
My bad, skimread missed the notation of the MTA cyclist. Oops.
If racks are not feasible with the L.A. version of rail cars, maybe a strap with a buckle could be used in it's stead. (ala: maybe a slight mod or repurposing of the handicap/wheelchair straps they have on the bus system)
Also, since something tells me they won't be thrilled with the idea of an entirely seatless car - maybe they could install some fold up seats - ie: the seats could be folded up for rush hour usage - and be the "designated bike area".
Regarding ideas from Portland, I did a post last year June about what they do:
http://laist.com/2008/06/04/metro_could_imp.php
Cool Zach.
Looks like they incorporate a strap with a buckle. (I don't think it would necessarily have to be suspended off the ground though.)
I like that even back then, people were all for a "bike only" car.
They need to designate on car as the bike car, either the first car or the last one. Rip out most of the seats to accommodate the bikes.
Also only allowing two bikes on a car is ridiculous. Should we only allow two strollers on a car too?
Good point. Strollers are way more annoying than bikes. Possibly because they contain tiny, screaming things and are pushed by people with a sense of entitlement.
The 2 bikes per car limit is pure dumb, and if this were to become policy, even with the rush hour ban, I would see it as a huge step backwards. There is no rule for an airport or Amtrak bound traveler on how many bags they can carry, there is no limits on how many strollers are allowed or any number of other larger objects people carry which can be even more cumbersome than a bicycle. The real problem is inconsiderate cyclists who block exits or don't make room for others, but instead of attack the real problem it seems to me they really wish they could just get rid of cyclists all together. Why did I bother helping promote measure R again? What is the logic of removing seats to make it easier to fit bikes and than severely limit the number of bikes allowed.
I often do long multiday bicycle tour trips with my girlfriend and we use the MTA for the first leg or for a connection to Amtrak, but if we board that would block any others, and if a single rider were on board first we would have to scramble to another car and likely be stuck waiting for the next train as the door shuts in our face. Waiting for another bus because the bike rack is full is part of the reason I never ride the bus. But at least there is some concession in the fact that Metro doesn't actually enforce any of it's rules.
Why don't they just stop playing with our heartstrings feigning supportive words and just be honest. They could instead spend some money posting signs that says Metro hates cyclists, why don't you go home or ride the whole trip instead.
meant to say even *without the rush hour ban, see it as a huge step backwards.
"But at least there is some concession in the fact that Metro doesn't actually enforce any of it's rules."
Several years ago, they used to check for tickets, at least. Every other or third time I rode metro there would be a cop, asking for tickets. I have a friend who got a fine for not having a ticket. I've commuted by metro probably 10 times in the last 3 weeks and have yet to be stopped and asked for a ticket. Is is because the TAP cards are too hard to check? Because the don't want to pay for enforcement? It seems 1 $250 citation would more than make up for the cost of an office. Do they not enforce rules at rush hour, when there's maximum ridership? I've noticed that bus drivers don't enforce rules. I've seen multiple people get on the bus with food and drink, play loud music, chew gum (which makes me gag), etc. All it takes is the bus driver saying, "Sorry, you have to finish your coffee before you get on the bus." I've also never seen a metro cop at the train platform level, only near the station exits.
In the past few months, the officers have become EXTREMELY aggressive about checking passes, however I have only seen this at Union Station. I can guarantee at this point that my TAP card will be checked multiple times in a single day and multiple times a week when riding the Red and Gold line during rush hour. Frequently they check your ticket coming off the Red/Gold Line and then again when you get on the Red/Gold Line (3 minutes later).
This has caused me to miss trains because the officers don't pay attention to the rush of people until they are directly in front of them and the TAP card readers are somewhat sensitive.
The aggressiveness with checking TAP cards has actually caused me to consider no longer riding Metro as to me, it is seen as a huge waste of time and resources. I already paid for a monthly pass. At this point, every time they make me pull out my TAP card for someone, they are not going to get any more money, so it is a waste of resources to catch a tiny % of people that aren't paying or aren't tapping their cards every time they get on a train/bus. Another way I can view it is that they are waiting for me to fail -- to forget my card one day, not get the 100% correct signal from the TAP station or losing my card someplace on the train (very likely since I commonly have to pull it out and wave it on little card readers 4 times within a 30 minute period!) before they try to check it. So essentially they are waiting for me to have a bad day or have some unfortunate situation so that they can ticket me for $250. Awesome. And yet another way to view this aggressiveness is that they are trying to gather data to change their pricing structure to maximize their profits or to track people. None of the reasons leave a good taste in my mouth.
The whole TAP fiasco seems rather sinister. It has been hinted in several newspapers (ie: search the Weekly/Times archives) that it is a result of an alleged no-bid contract from a hawkish agency (I wish i was joking). A *large* portion of the MTA yearly operating budget is going into the TAP program.
The master plan, as suggested by the news agencies a few months ago, *is* supposedly tracking purposes. Eventually they are aiming to *require* that TAP cards are purchased by *credit card only* and they are to be new york style turnstiles at which one swipes the unique RFD chip TAP card to enter the station.
I guess they're banking that the ACLU's Los Angeles branch is either asleep or ineffectual. Or that everyone is zombie enough to accept it.
so it is a waste of resources to catch a tiny % of people that aren't paying or aren't tapping their cards every time they get on a train/bus.
I know. The mere fact that you HAVE a TAP card shows that you are a frequent metro rider. I also wonder about the readers. Usually once every day or two I have to re-swipe because the reader didn't get the pass info the first time. If I was seriously rushing to get a train, I might miss the "not valid" message. Can they honestly ticket me $250 if I HAVE a monthly pass on my card but don't validate? I assume they can, but that's ridiculous.
I've only been to Union Station once in the past month, and that was on a Saturday. I ride between Highland and Universal (then get on an express bus), and I haven't noticed cops there at all or had my TAP card checked. They need to spread the cops out and look for the people without single tickets or day passes!
the measures they are taking seem a bit contradicting.
whats the point of putting up safety posters when folks on bikes are running in between cars to find an open space?
and having signs up is not going to enforce anything.
any decent designer/planner should that you never rely on people's judgement. things like this have to be engineered to the people.
someone should print out these comments and bring to the next meeting.
I think they could be edited and gussied up, you know to look more official and stuff.
agreed hahaha
Last night on the gold line ~9:30 there were 7 bikes at one time on the single car they run, and about maybe 10 other people. It's often like that late. There was no problem, everyone fit just fine. Two bikes per car sounds like a bad idea to me.
I agree with the whole one cab for cyclist only..Other then that two bicycles per cab come on...like someone said during rush hour are we really gonna take a head count...Most people make it close enough to jump on the train. I know im not going to peek my head in and take a count for a cyclist on the same cab(theres no time)..I just want to get to my next destination. Problem is the people making most of these decisions aren't bicycle riders they are lexus and beamer drivers.
Garyse7en>>>>>"Metro hates cyclists, why don't you go home or ride the whole trip instead." hahaha luv it~!
At the Metro Board - Operations Committee. The proposed limit of two cyclists per car came up.
I suggested that they look at the Metro as an actual "Transportation System" that services all modes.
Fasana suggested Congestion Pricing but Antonovich countered with a motion to investigate the larger issue of the movement of bikes, carts, strollers and luggage. He moved that the process include the LAFD, the LASD, ADD folks. I pointed out that the cycling community should be included. Rita Robinson amended and the motion to restrict the number of cyclists was tabled til September 30.
I spoke to LAFD Battalion Chief Quintanar and LASD Capt Jordan.
Lobby them on fair access for cyclists and a balanced approach to safety that addresses everybody, not just cyclists.
LAFD Chief Quintanar quintanarj@metro.net
LASD Capt. Jordan pjjordan@lasd.org
copy me at Stephen@ThirdEyeCreative.net and I'll carry them in to committee.
Ultimately, today would be considered a victory. The motion to restrict didn't succeed and staff have been instructed to include the cycling community in the process.