An Analysis of Caltrain's Draft Bicycle Access and Parking Plan, formerly known as Draft Bicycle Master Plan.
- Key Points
- Caltrain's Bike Capacity Plan
- More Details
- Caltrain's "Innovations for Demand Management"
- Summary
Key Points
Caltrain's Draft Bicycle Access and Parking Plan focuses on the 1% of Caltrain passengers who park their bike at the stations, while acknowledging and then ignoring the needs of the 7% who bring their bikes on board the train.
Caltrain's Draft Plan states that occupancy of bicycle parking spaces is 35 to 60 percent system-wide. Yet, bike cars are over 100 percent occupancy. It's irresponsible that Caltrain intends to expand bike parking when there's already too much of it, but reduce bike capacity on trains, when there isn't enough of it.
Caltrain's Draft Plan calls for a reduction in onboard bike capacity by the year 2014 when trains will be electrified.
Caltrain received over 300 emails commenting on its Draft Bicycle Master Plan Key Findings. SFBC's BIKES ONboard project was copied on over 100 of those, and every single one asked for more bike space on trains. Caltrain responded by changing the name of its plan to Draft Bicycle Access and Parking Plan.
Caltrain claims that removing seats will decrease ridership. However, in June 2008, after taking 14 cars out-of-service for repairs, ticket sales increased, demonstrating that removing mostly empty seats does not decrease ridership.
The Metropolitan Transportation Commission awarded Caltrain a $250,000 federal grant to write a "Bicycle Master Plan" with the stated purpose "Develop recommendations to increase transit ridership by maintaining and increasing the number of cyclists who ride Caltrain. Identify ways to mitigate operating impacts that currently exist with the on-board accommodation of bicycles." Instead of developing a Bicycle Master Plan, Caltrain developed a Bicycle Access and Parking Plan. There may have been no overt deception of the federal and regional funding agencies, but this mistaken scoping of the "master planning" effort certainly wasn't what the public needed or asked for.
SFBC's Draft Plan for Bicycle Carriage on Caltrain focuses on what's really important — addressing inadequate onboard bike capacity affecting a large majority of cyclists. Caltrain's Draft Bicycle Access and Parking Plan misses the point and instead focuses on adding more already-excessive bike parking at stations for a small minority of cyclists.
SFBC's Draft Plan supports: (1) bikes on board to reduce car, bus, and shuttle trips at both ends of a commute, (2) increasing bike capacity as a way to increase Caltrain ridership, and (3) financial gain for Caltrain and transit agencies by expanding the bikes-on-board program. Caltrain's Draft Plan supports getting bikes off the trains.
Caltrain has no funding to implement its Draft Bicycle Access and Parking Plan. Tell Caltrain that no public funds, grants, or other monies be sought or allocated for implementation before and until bicycle capacity onboard Caltrain has been increased to meet current demand.
Caltrain's Bike Capacity Plan
Caltrain's Draft Plan states "By 2014, Caltrain plans to increase to a 110-train schedule, which will provide more opportunities for trains to stop at high bike-demand stations, thereby increasing onboard bicycle capacity." (p. 134) The Draft Plan then puts forth a recommendation for onboard bike capacity for future rolling stock of 5%. (p. 134) Because nearly half the trains today have two bike cars, current bike capacity is about 7%. The table below shows that even if Caltrain runs all five-car trains in 2014, the stated plan will actually decrease bike capacity.
| year | runs per day |
% bike space |
seats per car |
% five-car trains |
% four-car trains | number of bike spaces |
| 2008 | 98 | 7% | 130 | 70% | 30% | 4191 |
| 2014 | 110 | 5% | 130 | 100% | 0% | 3575 |
| Bike spaces lost per day | 616 | |||||
More Details
It's always nice to find common ground first before hammering on differences, so let's look at things that Caltrain's Draft Plan and the SFBC's Draft Plan agree on.
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page iii "Passengers with bicycles are very appreciative of Caltrain's onboard bicycle program, yet it also is often a source of frustration." |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 11 "With the success of the onboard bicycle program come challenges. As more cyclists use Caltrain, the system strains to keep up with demand, and paying passengers are left standing on the platform with their bicycles, even when there are plenty of empty seats." |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 127 "Large numbers of peak period passengers with bikes are unable to board due to capacity constraints." |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 8 "In the one-year period ending June 2007, 64% of bicyclists reported having been bumped, most of them repeatedly [3]." |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 138 "A train's onboard bike capacity can vary between 16 bicycles (one Bombardier bicycle car) and 64 (two Gallery cars)." |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 15 "When a baby bullet train that generally has 32 or 64 spaces arrives with only 16 spaces, many bicyclists will be bumped during that run. Such randomness and lack of information leads to frustration and an intolerable unpredictability that forces some cyclists back into their cars." |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 130 "Bumping is the primary source of frustration among passengers with bikes, due to the unpredictability and uncertainty of being bumped. Twenty-five percent of online survey respondents who formerly used bicycles in conjunction with their Caltrain trips quit doing so due to bumping concerns." |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 8 "Routine bumping discourages bicycle commuters from using Caltrain at all, because 80% of bicycle commuters rarely if ever take Caltrain without bringing their bicycle on board [3]. They find other ways besides the train to get to their destination, and the majority of them drive alone [3]. Routine bumping causes frustration, missed appointments, unreliable service, and wasted time standing on the platform, all of which compel the cyclist to find other commute options, resulting in lost revenue for Caltrain." |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 34 "Train sets are assembled and scheduled for runs the night before service, so information regarding the type of train, number of bike cars, and location of the second bike car is known at that point. ... this information would be invaluable to cyclists. If posted on the Internet, cyclists could find out before leaving home what the bicycle capacity is likely to be for the train they plan to take" |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 21 "Recommendations ... Immediate (<3 months) • Post train assignment each morning on Caltrain's website to help distribute the load by alleviating the uncertainty in the number of bike spaces on each train." |
OK, that's about it. Now let's go on to the erroneous assumptions and misinformation.
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 131 "Removing more seats to accommodate increasing demand from passengers with bicycles has been considered; however, standees during peak periods are expected leading up to electrification in 2014 and beyond, even with an increase from 98 to 110 weekday trains. Therefore, removing seats would be counter to Caltrain's primary mission to accommodate more passengers." |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 20 "Caltrain staff has repeatedly stated that seats cannot be removed to make space for bikes, because Caltrain would lose passengers. This assumption has been invalidated by a case study inadvertently conducted by Caltrain in June 2008. ... There were on average about 1800 fewer seats (out of nearly 60,000) each weekday the month of June compared with May, yet ridership increased over 5% in June." |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 5 "Standees during peak periods are expected in the years leading up to 2014, when a number of changes will increase the system's effective capacity" |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 19 "There is a fundamental difference between standing inside the train as a walk-on passenger and being denied boarding as a bicyclist. Bicyclists with paid tickets are left standing on the platform, not knowing if they will get on the following train either, while the walk-on passenger is being transported to their destination." |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 134 "A committee of bicyclists has already developed preliminary bicycle-car recommendations, including to maintain onboard bicycle capacity at five percent of the number of passenger seats, which is similar to the ratio of bicycle spaces to passenger seats on a five-car, single bike-car Gallery train set." |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 16 "Caltrain formed a Bicycle Technical Advisory Group (TAG) in January 2007 for public input on the Bicycle Master Plan. When the group was instructed that bikes on trains would not be addressed, the group repeatedly demanded that attention be directed to this issue. In response, Caltrain formed the Bikes on Cars Subcommittee in June 2007. No meeting minutes were published, and Caltrain staff running the meeting drove the group to make a recommendation of >5% bike capacity in 2014. This recommendation is alarming, because 5% is a reduction compared with the 7% bike capacity on the existing system, which is already severely under capacity." |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 130 "The current practice is for passengers with bicycles to board after passengers not carrying a bike, even when boarding the bicycle car, which can add to bicycle related dwell time." |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 18 "Because bicycles are required to board last, any delay, no matter who causes it, gets blamed on bicycles. Caltrain is arbitrarily assigning bicycles as the number one cause of delays with no supporting evidence. Caltrain was unable to supply dwell time statistics when requested." |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, no page No reference list. |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 23 A list of 26 references, and additional references shown in appendix D for the financial model. |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 7 "Passengers with bumped bicycles can either quickly park their bike at the origin station and board without it or wait for the next train." |
SFBC's Draft Plan, page 7 "Many cyclists need their bicycle at both ends of their commute, because their starting point and final destination are not near the train station. The bicycle commuter needs their bicycle to complete their intermodal trip, because public transportation is either nonexistent, or riding their bicycle is faster and/or more reliable than the available public transportation." |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 132 "The Bombardier fleet includes seven bicycle cars" |
Fact: The Bombardier fleet includes seven cab cars, only five of which have been converted to bike cars. |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 6 "Every train has a guaranteed 16- or 32-bike capacity" |
Fact: On August 6, 2008, trains 134 and 211 ran with no bike car, hence no bike capacity. |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 133 "Caltrain's fleet is very small, with 20 train sets and a spare car ratio of ten percent." |
Fact: Caltrain's fleet consists of 110 cars, about 94 of which are normally in service for a spare car ratio of nearly 15%. |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 8 "Drafts of the Plan were reviewed by the TAG, internal Steering Committee, and senior Caltrain management." |
Fact: The TAG did not see the Draft Plan until Caltrain posted it on its website on August 11, 2008. |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 8 "Comments made at all meetings were incorporated into the public review draft Plan before its release." |
Fact: There was no public review of the draft Plan before its release. |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 134 "Some conductors permit more bicycles onboard than the rated capacity" |
Fact: We love those conductors. |
| Caltrain's Draft Plan, page 138 "The [2007 online bike] survey was not intended to be a scientific sample of Caltrain passengers who bicycle to access the train; rather, it was a tool for Caltrain staff to gain a greater understanding of the habits and motivations of cycling passengers in order to encourage more people to bicycle to Caltrain (and fewer to drive or bring their bikes onboard) and design bicycle parking that is responsive to and accommodates more bicyclists." |
Fact: Caltrain didn't like the results of that survey, because it showed how important the bikes-on-board program is. The survey results didn't fit nicely within Caltrain's predetermined goal of getting bikes off the train, so Caltrain buried the survey and never produced a final report of survey results. |
Caltrain's "Innovations for Demand Management"
Onboard Bicycle Capacity Information
Real-time information systems may help distribute the load,
but they will not solve the bike capacity problem. We strongly
support sharing real-time information about the number of bike
cars on each train and the number of available bike spaces. The
former should be implemented immediately by posting the train
assignment on Caltrain's website each morning, and the latter
should be implemented via electronic signage at stations and
via standard web and mobile messaging channels.
Fees for Bike Boarding
Caltrain's Draft Plan states "For Caltrain, such a fee could
reduce onboard bicycle demand and encourage bicycle parking
at stations." (p. 35) Reducing demand by raising prices until
the customer goes away is unacceptable. We do not support
additional-fare or fee ideas as a "demand management" strategy
for onboard bike service. Even a nominal fee is discriminatory,
and won't effectively distinguish real need for the service from
affordable discretion -- "those who need it most" may still be
left behind while those who can/are willing to pay the premium
get onboard. Bicyclists place the least burden on transit overall,
because they don't require parking lots or parking garages or
shuttles or buses. Caltrain is very shortsighted to attempt to
eliminate such an environmentally favorable commute option.
Bike Sharing
Caltrain's Draft Plan states "Bikeshare programs are a concept
whereby bicycles can be rented and returned flexibly in a wide
area. They are usually designed to encourage occasional, short
bike trips where car traffic and parking, and transit are
inconvenient." (p.37) Yes, and there's reason for that.
Caltrain's linear route is not readily amendable to a bike
sharing program. Bicycle sharing at Caltrain stations may be
interesting as a tourist feature, but it's not a solution for
commute trips using Caltrain. To the extent that a shared bike
is borrowed from a station to complete a trip, and sits unused
and unshared in an office for 8 hours (or at a home for 12-14
hours) before returning to the station, it is not truly shared
and does not serve the system well. Further concerns with
scalability, technology, and administrative complexity preclude serious consideration of bike sharing as a real element of Caltrain's commute service.
Folding Bike Subsidy
Caltrain's Draft Plan states "Nonetheless, folding bikes are not widely used, in part due to cost, efficiency and comfort, and limited availability." (p. 38) Yes, so why does Caltrain want us all to buy one? We do not support subsidies for folding bikes. Apart from administrative complexities and the questionable equity of such a program, it leads quickly to the same question of sufficient capacity: Bicyclists with folding bikes are already being bumped from trains, because there is not enough space for all the folding bikes.
Feasibility Studies
Caltrain's Draft Plan states "Caltrain is committed to
conducting feasibility studies of at least two of the potential innovative projects and programs discussed in Chapter 5." (p. 40) There is no statement about which ones, but only Onboard Bicycle Capacity Information is worth any further consideration.
Summary
Caltrain spent $250,000 of public money to create a Draft Plan for something it knows its customers don't want. A passionately dedicated group of bike/train commuters at the SFBC donated their time to create a Draft Plan for something Caltrain's customers do want. Bikes-on-board serves the system's and region's goals more perfectly than almost any other trip type and should be supported and enhanced by Caltrain with energy and focus. Tell Caltrain not to spend any more money on bike parking until and after it expands onboard bike capacity to accommodate all the cyclists who need to bring their bike onboard the train.
More bikes, no bumps!
