Petition to WMATA to change their policy regarding bikes during rush hour

[5555624]

@dasgeh 16977 wrote:

I simply disagree with you. I think any functioning public transportation system should serve all of its riders. Some of those riders choose to ride bikes to and from stations, and taking the bikes on the trains just makes sense.

And Metro says that if they ride a folding bike, they can fold it up and take it on the train “during all operational hours” (and it has to be in a bag/case during rush hour).

If someone is going to chose multiple forms of transportation for their commute, then they they need to sit down and give it some thought.

[5555624]

@Tim Kelley 16588 wrote:

Just curious, but where was it that you were coming from that you couldn’t just ride home in the three hours that you were waiting?

Well, although he has not been back since he posted about his petition, I’m guessing College Park, since that’s where he says he is from, on the petition page. (I wonder if he knows how to ride from downtown DC to College Park?)

I’m in favor of keeping the current rules. Metro is too crowded during rush hour. (Of course, elsewhere, I’ve been told the rule is “silly” and a folding bike is a”drastic” solution.)

A “zone” system won’t work. The current rules don’t always work — riders can sneak through and get on — so riders will do the same or, as someone pointed out, simply not get off when the train enters the “zone.”

I’m surprised they haven’t complained about the “two bikes per car” rule. Oh, right, they’d have to reed the rules to know about it.

[Mark Blacknell]

I have to say this that the tone and direction of this discussion is kind of disappointing. The original poster proposed a solution to a need that’s facing a lot of cyclists. While the initial responses were good, it got pretty dismissive pretty quick. I understand the initial “no, this is a bad idea” reaction (as I’m sure anyone who regularly faces a crowded Metro car does). But that crowded experience isn’t universal on the Metro system, even during peak hours, and plenty of other systems seem to manage bikes just fine. I appreciate Dasgeh’s efforts to try to find a solution, instead of shooting the idea down wholesale. Washcycle’s got some similarly constructive efforts over here.

[MCL1981]

Mark, the OP’s idea/petition NEEDED to be dismissed and shot down. He was not suggesting that we find a way to alter the system over time. He was, out of anger for his own very stupid and arrogant mistake, demanding they lift a rule that is there for a very good reason. The system’s present design simply can not accommodate bikes at peak times without placing people in extreme danger or discomfort. Writing loop-holes into the law to allow some bikes in some places will not change that. Extreme danger is extreme danger. The discussion with WMATA will end right there, as it should.

[CCrew]

@MCL1981 17039 wrote:

He was, out of anger for his own very stupid and arrogant mistake, demanding they lift a rule that is there for a very good reason.

Ehh, I dunno about that. I think that classification is a tad over the top.

[CCrew]

@baiskeli 16981 wrote:

By that standard, you’d support no restrictions on bikes at any time or any place.

I’m for a bike rack on the front of the train

[MCL1981]

@CCrew 17043 wrote:

Ehh, I dunno about that. I think that classification is a tad over the top.

That’s how I interpret the OP’s post. It seems very obvious to me.

@CCrew 17044 wrote:

I’m for a bike rack on the front of the train

This would be the best way to do it as far as in-car passenger safety and rider annoyance. Unfortunately, FRA will never allow for it. They would have to make a car (or part of a car) that has a bike rack in it so the bikes are in the car. This of course would require the train to sit around waiting while you go get your bike out of the cargo car. Logistical and timing nightmare.

No matter where you put the bike, it doesn’t change the problem of the platforms.

[5555624]

@Mark Blacknell 17037 wrote:

I have to say this that the tone and direction of this discussion is kind of disappointing. The original poster proposed a solution to a need that’s facing a lot of cyclists. While the initial responses were good, it got pretty dismissive pretty quick. I understand the initial “no, this is a bad idea” reaction (as I’m sure anyone who regularly faces a crowded Metro car does). But that crowded experience isn’t universal on the Metro system, even during peak hours, and plenty of other systems seem to manage bikes just fine. I appreciate Dasgeh’s efforts to try to find a solution, instead of shooting the idea down wholesale. Washcycle’s got some similarly constructive efforts over here.

Except that the original poster was not trying to find a solution. All he wants is Metro to eliminate the rule and allow bikes at anytime, anywhere. While I disagree with Washcycle that the rule is “silly” (and that a folding bike is a “drastic solution”), the discussion on his site is looking at solutions. I might not think the zone system will work, but that’s better than simply saying the rule is bad and needs to be done away with. Neither Washcycle nor the original poster has even mentioned Metro’s rule about the number of bikes allowed on the trains — two bicycles per car on weekdays and four bicycles per car on weekends (and most holidays). If there are truly a lot of cyclists that need to take their bikes on the subway, this is going to be the next subject of a petition.

A better idea is for WABA and WMATA (and others?) to get together and look at ALL the rules concerning bikes on trains and buses (and at bus stops and subway stations) and discuss alternatives.

[vvill]

The simple answer is folding bikes! I reckon most people willing to commute by metro during peak hours would be well served by a folding bike. Those who want to ride full size bikes full speed would probably not find it worthwhile taking metro in the first place.

If there were more trains more frequently around “core” areas during core hours, they could perhaps relax the rules a little (reduce the no bikes allowed hours).

[mstone]

The whole conversation is surreal. A vanishingly small percentage of metro users is asking for a disproportionately large resource expenditure for studies, rule making, enforcement, etc., from an already under-resourced and overstressed system. There have been proposals like “well, only the first and last cars, which aren’t as crowded”. So we’re going to expend all that effort over, at most, 4 out of 1000 people on the train. And the entire concept only works as long as it’s not particularly popular, because if too many people do try to do it there’s no way they can fit even under ideal circumstances. All because someone didn’t pay attention to the rules and couldn’t avoid the 3 hours. It might be worth looking at the numbers and seeing if 7 is the right time, maybe 6 would be adequate. But trying to come up with a system of zones and directions? If metro has the time to spend on that, I’d rather see them working on making the trains run on time.

[MCL1981]

@vvill 17055 wrote:

If there were more trains more frequently around “core” areas during core hours, they could perhaps relax the rules a little (reduce the no bikes allowed hours).

That would help reduce the platform and car crowding problem. However, they’re already only every 3-4 minutes. I don’t think they can get them any close together than that. Longer trains, maybe 10 cars instead of 8, would be a good start. But the platforms aren’t long enough for that.

[CCrew]

@vvill 17055 wrote:

The simple answer is folding bikes! I reckon most people willing to commute by metro during peak hours would be well served by a folding bike.

But then I’d have to start a thread about where to keep my circus bear suit when I get to the office!

[mstone]

@MCL1981 17061 wrote:

That would help reduce the platform and car crowding problem. However, they’re already only every 3-4 minutes. I don’t think they can get them any close together than that. Longer trains, maybe 10 cars instead of 8, would be a good start. But the platforms aren’t long enough for that.

They still don’t have enough cars to run 8 car consists during rush hour, and won’t even with the new cars on order because of the retirement of the 1000 series. If they could do exclusively 8 car consists at peak that would help a lot. (If for no other reason, it would encourage people to spread out and use the entire platform instead of just the front end.) They could run 2 minute headways, but again there simply aren’t enough cars. They also don’t have the capital to fix that problem; even the financing for the 7000 series is shaky. The 8000 series is scheduled for maybe the 2023 timeframe, to give some idea of how slow changes will take (even those will be to replace cars at end of service life, not expand service).

[MCL1981]

Lets pretend they had enough cars to make 8 car trains running 2 minutes apart during the rush. It would become an absolute cluster*(&$. All it takes is ONE train to get held up for a minute because of a door, mechanical problem, sick person, etc and we’d have even more of a bottleneck than we have now. The entire infrastructure is over-capacity. It can’t be made larger without boring all new tunnels for “track 3” and larger platforms. Lord knows they can’t afford to fix an escalator, let long dig a new tunnel.

[mstone]

The design capacity is 90s headways…

[Author]

Posts