TriMet’s bike policy differs from actual enforcement
Posted by Jonathan Maus (Editor) on April 20th, 2007 at 10:26 am
In the past two weeks, I’ve received three separate stories from readers about TriMet fare inspectors and security personnel pulling cyclists off trains for various reasons.
At issue is how security personnel are enforcing TriMet’s official policy governing bicycles on MAX trains. I realize that security personnel are contracted by a third-party, so I understand the challenge of educating them about specific policies. However confusion over the rules regarding bicycles on MAX has persisted for a long time and it would be great to finally do something about it.
First, I’ll share the stories from readers, then a response I received from a TriMet representative and finally, I’ll share some thoughts about possible solutions.
Here is the first story,
“A friend at work witnessed fare inspectors pulling cyclists off a train. She talked to a TriMet security officer about it and he told her that fare inspectors have no authority in that instance. He told her that as long as you make room in the aisle bikes are welcome on trains.”
And the second,
“A friend of mine was on the MAX last Friday and witnessed something rather interesting. The train was not particularly full, but all the bike hooks were in use. There was one more person on the car with a bicycle. The security guard made the bicyclist exit the train. He said that even though the train was not full, it might fill up at the next stop, and so the bicycle could not be on the train.”
And the third,
“Yesterday, April 3rd as I carried my bike down the steps and onto the platform to wait for a train I noticed a fare inspector pulling 2 cyclists off of a train and then talking to them…he was telling them they could not bring bikes onto the train unless there was an available hook…
…he cited safety concerns as the primary reason that bicycles are limited to designated spots. He said that if “something terrible happens” a bike would cause a great deal of injury to passengers and that it “would be the cyclists who would be sued for everything they’re worth…”
…he told me that there is a $94 citation for putting a bike on the train when there isn’t a hook. He told me that I would have to wait on the platform until a train came along with room or I would be cited.”
I’ve been hearing stories like this since last summer and wanted to find out the facts once and for all. I asked TriMet planner and bike issue liaison Eric Hesse about the fare inspector’s conduct and about the issue of cyclists being told to leave full trains if there is no hook available.
Here’s what he said about fare inspectors,
“I have been unable to confirm the incident with the staff who manages our fare inspectors. Given that there appears to have been some inclarity on this point for at least one of our fare inspectors, we have clarified this point with our inspectors and expect no further issues in this regard. Please let me know (hessee@trimet.org) if you here about any, so that I can remedy them.”
And about bikes on the MAX he said,
“…let me clarify that bikes are permitted on train cars as long as boarding and transport of the bike otherwise complies with the TriMet Code and Administrative Rules (see below) and that there is no specific requirement that a bike hook be available.
Hesse went on to clarify that,
“…no part of a bike can block stairways or aisles; bicycle users (and all other riders) must yield priority-seating areas to seniors and people with disabilities; and bicycles are not permitted aboard train cars that are full.”
He also sent me a copy of TriMet’s official Administrative Rules governing Transport of Bicycles (47KB PDF) which were adopted on January 7, 2007.
It seems to me that this confusion will persist until TriMet more effectively communicates their bike policies to their security personnel and to the general public. One way to do this would be a billboard campaign inside the MAX cars.
The larger issue on the table is that the amount of cyclists in Portland has outgrown capacity on TriMet buses and MAX cars. I’ve heard three-bike racks are on the way for buses, but what about MAX?
I asked former TriMet bike guy Kiran Limaye about this and he said new MAX trains are being designed in the near future and there might be an opportunity for cyclists to be involved in the process (stay tuned). In addition to capacity issues, we have also discussed how a new design might improve bike security.
One idea is to make more fold-up seating in selected areas. This would allow more room for bikes during peak hours. What are your thoughts and ideas about this?
In the meantime, I recommend keeping a copy of the rules in your wallet…just in case.
Email This Post
Possibly related posts
April 20th, 2007 10:42
I used to ride the MAX from downtown to the Sunset TC as part of my evening commute. The train would typically be near-full, or else become full as we snailed through southwest.
If people were standing nearby, I would politely warn them about the chain grease they were risking. I always made sure to move my bike to ensure that people could disembark easily.
I would hope that Tri-Met encourages cyclists to be considerate and polite, yet not discourage them from using the trains.
Multi-moding is an EXCELLENT way to travel around Portland: 1.5 miles to/from a train station may be a 30 minute walk but it's a 6 minute bike ride. (Oh, OK...ten minutes if you don't want to get sweaty.)
April 20th, 2007 11:06
The solution is simple in my opinion: start removing seats on MAX trains to create more bike space.
Tha trains are getting more crowded but it certainly wouldn't hurt more people to stand. As for bikes being a danger (as the fare inspector stated), I also ask that, in the interest of fairness and public safety, prevent strollers, rolling lugguge, and wheelchairs off MAX trains too as they could become deadly missiles in the inspector's nightmare scenario.
April 20th, 2007 11:20
There is room for 2 hooks in the spots where there currently is only one.
I've seen other cyclists actually bring their own hook and hang their bike right next to another.
April 20th, 2007 11:22
Ok,
So it is well known that I have a dislike of Tri Met....
A couple thoughts from me on this note then:
There are already new trains purchased, as in recently.
These trains are the ones that should be redesigned for more bicycle access.
Not the trains of the future, but the trains they just bought.....
Having more bike access designed into future trains sounds to me like we will see this in like ten years, as design process, then building , is very long.....
We need more space now.....
As bad as the fare inspectors taking it upon themselves to pull bike's off a train, is rider's deciding not to let you have access to a bike hook.
I have had to force my way onto a train, due to commuter vigilantes telling me i could not get on the train..
I think the problem partially boils down to education..
If people rode the train properly, and moved back, and out of the way of the doors, there would be half the problem of room for cyclists.
Also. if Tri Met really cared about cyclists, these bike issues would have been handled in the design stages TEN FULL YEARS AGO!!!
On the note of more fold up seats for bicycle usage....
With this I do not agree.. Fold up seats are for the use of the handicapped and the elderly....
These are not places for a bicycle to go...it is as rude to put your bike in a handicapped spot as it is to bring your dog onto the train ( of course not a service dog, but it appears that Tri Met does not enforce this violation much)
We should be allowed enough bicycle storage space, with proper and effective hooks, without having to violate the space of other's...
This is what we need from supposed "public ' transportation..........If that is Tri Met's real name?
April 20th, 2007 11:44
Okay, TriMet: what's the definition of a "full" train car? Is there a fixed-definition of this term, or is it open-ended terminology left to somebody's personal discretion -and if so, whose discretion?
April 20th, 2007 12:11
Tri-Met needs to add a seperate car for cyclists (maybe during rush hour)on the Max. The number of people commuting by bike is going to increase over time. If they only add a few more spots for bikes we'll be right back where we started in a couple years.
my .02
April 20th, 2007 12:40
TriMet DOES have a design for a 2-hook hanger. About 4 years ago, there where 2 test trains, one with the 1-hook and 1 with the 2-hook hangers. TriMet decided on the 1 hook, so the story goes, in order to allow about 3 sq. feet of space next to a hanging bike for passengers going to the to airport to put luggage. I was told this by one of the TriMet fare inspectors at the time. Recently, when I asked an ispector, due to increased numbers of bikes on trains during morning commutes, there being as many as 16 bikes on a low-floor train, if there was any reason that the 2-hook hangers could be reconsidered, as almost no airport travelers use the bike space for luggage, but instead take it with them to their seats, sometimes blocking the isles. He told me that the 2-hook design allowed the inside handlebar and pedal to protrude into the walkway and was considered a hazard. The 2-hook design WAS ADA-compliant, as it still allowed more than 36" of access clearance, so I do not see what the issue was, as parts of a bike even on the 1-hook are always going to be viewed as "hazardous" by someone, even though they are behind the frontal line of the lexan divider,unless they are inside an enclosed box!
April 20th, 2007 13:01
This issue definately needs to be resolved. I share a car with my spouse and intend to ride the train with my bike to Clackamas when the new route goes in, Vs. clogging up the interstate sitting in my coffin.
It would be a nightmare for me to show up late to my shift in the Emergency Room because some fare inspector pulled me off the train because I couldn't bring my bike.
To quote Nicholson in A Few Good Men, "You put people's lives in danger. Sweet dreams, son"
April 20th, 2007 13:30
I agree that the current space allocated for bikes could easily accommodate twice the bikes. The bikes might bump against each other a little, but I think cyclists in this city are used to parking our bikes pretty close, and I know I’d rather see another cyclist be allowed to hop on the train then have the bike area all to myself.
April 20th, 2007 13:34
As we're talking about MAX being crowded, and fitting more bikes onto trains, what are folks' thoughts that a bicyle + rider (even with the bike hanging) takes up as much space as at least 3 passengers just standing...
April 20th, 2007 13:46
Tri-Met's focus shouldn't be fitting more passengers on MAX, it should be accommodating bikes on MAX. Once they get their priorities straight we'll be better off.
April 20th, 2007 13:50
Robin and others:
Sometimes people in uniform or otherwise representing authority will talk out their a_s because they feel that to have no ready answer would imply weakness. They are not necessarily well informed.
April 20th, 2007 13:50
BYOH... Ulock a bike to the overhead handrail
April 20th, 2007 14:21
When I lived in the SF Bay Area, I commuted via Caltrain. At the time, I didn't bike, but Caltrain does set aside an entire car for bikes (according to their FAQs, some of their cars carry 16 bikes and others carry 32).
The common practice there was to bungee the bikes to the sides of the car, and if I remember correctly, bikes were often leaned against one another several deep (any more recent immigrants care to correct me?). This necessitated a certain amount of coordination between riders to ensure that people could get their bike out, but it seemed to work reasonably well. I do remember, too, that regular commuters often just kept a printed sign with their stop name attached to their bikes.
Having a bike section on the MAX might allow a similar 'stacking' usage scenario. As a bonus, we'd be able to talk to our fellow cyclists... (okay, maybe that's not always a bonus).
Just make sure nobody mentions that a layout like that would also be more Zoobomb-friendly. ;>
April 20th, 2007 14:22
Aaron,
My thoughts are that if you are going to offer public transportation to cyclists and then discriminate against them, as if their timetables are "secondary" to everyone else, then you need to rethink strategy.
If I had my druthers, every MAX line would be accompanied by an elevated Hu-way (HPV Freeway) above the power lines. This continuous roadway would operate more efficiently with less impact on the community & infrastructure. It would also encourage entrepreneurship (PediCabs anyone?).
These have been my thoughts. The opinions expressed in this comment do not necessarily represent the views of Tri-met, city government, the taxi lobby, the oil lobby, the transit lobby, the light rail lobby or the Hummer Lovers of America (HLA).
April 20th, 2007 14:41
I'm not sure how many handicapped spaces TriMet is required to set aside per rail car, but that may also have something to do with why there's only two bikes hooks at each end of the car.
Also, with so many more bicyclists wanting to use MAX as part of a multi-modal commute, it seems that another solution would be for TriMet to count how many cyclists use the rail cars during peak hours and add another train or two during those times.
Finally, to pick up on Doug's statement (# 11), I would argue that it IS TriMet's job to get more people on MAX cars. MAX doesn't burn gasoline. Expanding the light rail system -- and combining those efforts with more development of transit-accessible, affordable housing -- will help to get more people out of cars. And isn't that one of our goals here?
April 20th, 2007 14:55
There is no easy answer to this problem.
The non-cyclist will resent any precious space being taken up by more bikes.
It is a sever nuisance for cyclists having to disembark when a train gets crowded.
The best solution would be having three Max cars instead of two, but I think this would not work due to the small blocks downtown.
April 20th, 2007 15:10
Quit bringing your bikes on MAX. Ride the darn thing to your destination.
April 20th, 2007 15:17
Has max enforcement started to increase lately? I haven't ridden the max much in the last year or so, but before that it seemed so rare to ever see an inspector that I am surprised to hear so many problems. Must be a certain time of day or something.
As I posted earlier in the other thread, I have two bikes...one which won't fit in the hooks and the other I refuse to put on the hooks. Luckily I have never had a problem so far.
Just curious, if trimet was offer some sort of bike only setup (single bike only cars, or third car whatever) would the cyclists be willing to pay a bit extra in ticket fees? I am not saying we should/shouldnt pay extra, I am just curious if people would be willing to look at something like that.
April 20th, 2007 15:19
I ride the yellow line to Expo every afternoon at around 4:30 and if I don't get on at the first stop (10th and Yamhill), there is no place to hang my bike. The MAX only has one car at that time, even though it is really crowded. I have seen fare inspectors/security kick bicyclists off the trains on a daily basis for not having it on a hook. The least Tri-Met could do is send two cars at that time of day!
April 20th, 2007 15:20
I've discovered a technique that I've been using lately to take my bike off MAX.
It disrupts far fewer other passengers and doesn't take up as much space as taking your bike down, maneuvering it around the pole, and dragging your fenders on the way out the door.
What you do is this:
When you're about to get off, stand next to your bike facing away from the glass (towards the upstairs.)
Grab hold of your frame with one hand and grab hold of your handlebars with the other.
You'll find that the bike manuevers quite easily off the hook, and then you can walk off the train while holding your bike vertically right next to your body.
Then when you are out of the train and well out of people's way, you can set the bike down and ride away.
I'm not sure that's clear, but it really is kind of slick.
April 20th, 2007 15:32
Molly, I ride out past Expo everyday, all on very nice bike friendly streets and lanes. It really is a good intermediate ride...takes about 30-40 minutes. Try it and you can relieve that stress of catching the line with a bike hook.
April 20th, 2007 15:48
I seem to recall that there used to be two hooks on each side... so eight per car. It'd be nice to have that capacity again.
Unfortunately we do take up more room than a bike-less rider... so it'll always be tough at peak times.
Thanks for opening a dialog with TriMet, Jonathan.
April 20th, 2007 17:36
Are you sure the officers were the
tri-met fare inspectors ?
Or were they the officers that Tri-Met
rents from PPD ?
Might not really matter.
There are different groups that "patrol" the Max. My experience is that the
Wackenhut guys and the actual tri-met
people are fine with the bikes (which
backs Hesse's statement), but the PPD
rentals are the ones that want a crack down.
April 21st, 2007 05:57
Several people have commented about adding a third car to a train. Just to clear that issue up: Due to our 200' block lengths in downtown, we cannot expand to a three car train, without blocking a perpendicular avenue at a stop.
Having said that, I have no idea why Tri-Met doesn't add a second car to that afternoon yellow line to the Expo Center. I have seen that car many times. Typically, if I wait for the train after it 15 minutes later, it will be a double car train with hardly anyone on it. --Seems silly. ...and yes, you will probably get there quicker if you just get on the bike and start heading up interstate.
...or hopefully someday, you will prefer to ride the npGREENWAY trail along the Willamette instead!
Scott
npGREENWAY.org
April 21st, 2007 07:00
To those of you with flexible shifts and reasonable bosses, try adjusting your shift to avoid crowded times. I moved my 8-5 shift to 7-4 and it has certainly helped access to bike spots. Also, one hour of work in the morning with no distractions is a plus. To person who suggested bicyclists should pedal 100% of their journey and stay off Max is closed-minded to people who 1) are not in that kind of shape, for any number of reasons, but wish to make an immediate difference, 2) people whose commute is too long to allow for the time. Bicyclists who ride on the platform and across the tracks should have their privileges revoked. Perhaps the bike permit policy should be reinstated, I still have mine.
April 21st, 2007 08:59
Not discounting the problems people have with bikes on Max (myself included - I do this twice a day, every day), we're actually kind of lucky to have the bike access we do have. In Tokyo, they have no bike access on trains at all, except if the rider disassembles her bike and puts it in a bag. (!) Most European cities don't allow anything but folding bikes.
One of the reasons that kept me driving to work in my car for years (in spite of the fact that my home and my work were closer to a Max station than they are now) was the uncertainty of whether I could get a place on the train with my bike. At the time, there were no hooks and you could only put a bike in certain places in the tall-floor train cars. Since then, it's much improved, but still confusion persists. I have a friend who still believes that bikes are not allowed on the Max, all evidence to the contrary.
As for Tri-Met's focus, it should be to serve the most people as possible. They can do that by balancing the needs of bike people and non-bike people in proportion to the makeup of their ridership. Since that percentage changes at different times of the day and year, Tri-Met needs to make more flexible spaces in their cars. They could put in more flip-up seats (separate from the handicapped ones, Dabby), or entirely eliminate some seats, because standing space accommodates more people anyway. The last thing they should want to do is turn a customer away!
April 21st, 2007 09:20
Bikes on transit may be an unusual North American innovation, but that doesn't mean it's a bad idea. In Europe and Japan, distances are shorter and transit is better, so there is less need to take your bike on transit.
What many people do do in other countries (well, at least Japan), and which might work better here, is to ride their bikes to the station and leave them there. If you live one and a half miles from the station but work five blocks away, do you really need to take your bike on the train? Do we have data on origin and destination for bike riders? Maybe it's time for a survey of bike-on-MAX users. If we find a significant number of them don't have to go far from the station to their destination, perhaps another (contributing) solution to the bike capacity problem would be more bike lockers at stations.
April 21st, 2007 10:01
Seems like the new Bike Friday tikit could be just the ticket to ride.
Folders (any brand) seem like a good solution to both commuting and space issues.
April 21st, 2007 10:13
Instead of dealing with the frustrations of trying to get a space on the MAX for a bike, particularly at times when the max is full, wouldn't is be great if we could get Tri-Met to provide safe and secure bike parking or storage at all of the Max stops. It seem like it would make much more sense (at least for folks that work downtown or really close to a stop) to be able to just ride to the Max station, lock up there bike in a *SECURE* bike locker of parking area, jump on the train to finish their journey, and just walk the rest of the way. This would definitely reduce the amount of bicycle that are on the Max. Of course, this is all dependent on Tri-Met suppling a place to store bikes with absolutley no fear of theft of damage.
April 21st, 2007 12:04
1. It is my understanding that the handicapped flip-up seating spots are available to cyclists as long as no disabled people in wheelchairs are using them.
2. TriMet has resisted adding single-use bike lockers near or on station platforms because of 'security concerns', e.g, they could be used to conceal bombs or some such. Providing Lockers that allowed visual survey of the contents could eliminate this concern.
April 21st, 2007 12:20
ME...
I live in Vancouver, that is why I take the MAX. I do ride all the way when I can, but it is 12 miles door-to-door. The weather is not always conducive.
April 21st, 2007 13:06
I would like to see more discussion regarding secure lockers at the Max stations. I have a long ride to my Max stop and a short walk to my destination once I depart the train. It would be a huge help to have a safe place to leave my bike. Right now I bring it on the train with me for fear of leaving in locked to a pole all day.
April 21st, 2007 13:58
Chris (#28):
Of course American commuter trains must be different than Japanese or European trains, mostly because the infrastructure is so poor. I mean, Portland is considered a model of public transport because it has three lines? And those lines overlap on much of their routes? So, more people have to mix bikes with Max just to make it useful. There'd be less need for this if we had more lines and they were arranged better.
April 21st, 2007 19:16
What's wrong with the bike lockers that TriMet provides? And what about the downtown ones put in by the City? These aren't secure?
April 21st, 2007 22:02
Here is a simple solution...Ride your bike and not the MAX.
April 21st, 2007 22:27
N. - The downtown lockers are limited - many of them have a waiting list. Also, where does Tri-Met provide bike lockers? I know that PDOT provides bike lockers at some Tri-Met locations - does Tri-Met even provide any locker facilities?
April 21st, 2007 22:39
There are Tri-met lockers at all Yellow Line MAX stops north of Rose Qtr.
(Sadly all the Rose Qtr bike lockers were removed out of fear of terrorist bombing post Madrid...but the same cannot be said for the underground car/ truck bomb parking still avaliable!)
April 21st, 2007 22:55
Molly - thanks for bicycling in from Vancouver to Portland and bring a friend each month and show them the way across.
I know it can a bit confusing to cross the bridge the first few times. (We will be running the guided tours across the bridge by bike this summer again: RU Bridge Curious?!/ RU Couver Curious?! rides.
There are plans underway now to discuss how the 5 Bridge can be designed better for bicycle crossings as part of the CRC: http://www.columbiarivercrossing.org
There used to be 2 cars per Yellow Line train, but Trimet shifted that resource over to the Red line as the Yellow Line traffic north of Lombard was lower than expected. I am not sure when they will add cars back to the Red Line - perhaps it is time?
Remember that the CTRAN 105 express is another option...if you are running short of time to get to work in the morning but would like to ride your bike home at night.
The other option for you to cross the 5 Bridge in the winter will be C-TRANs new 44 limited [stop bus] - think poor man's bus rapid transit (skips stops to travel faster). This bus will stop at the VanPort MAX stop once the Trimet #6 stops running. CTRANs 44 service will run much later than service does now. This is a proposal now and may be affected by the fare increase. They are also working on re-establishing transfers again too.
April 21st, 2007 23:48
You mean the downtown bike lockers that have disappeared in order to build the useless and waste of money new Train through downtown?
Tri Met pulled them out.... Am still waiting to see them put up somewhere else, since this project is going to take a very long time....
Oh, and what about the hundred or so bike locking spots removed from downtown for construction?
On another, ironic note, Right outside of Transerv, the bicycle messenger company, the bike locking was removed, and put in down the street a little ways, instead of being left right outside the Messenger company as they should be....
I said it once, and I will say it again,
SCREW TRI MET AND THE GREAT WHITE HORSE THEY RODE IN ON!!!!!
Tri Met has caused more trouble for cycling in this town than the scofflaws, tweak mxers, and motorcycle police cmbined.......
Tri Met needs to be knocked down a notch, or just off their High Horse....
April 21st, 2007 23:49
pardon my typo's, I have a number of fingers taped together...
Stupid fun bike polo...
April 22nd, 2007 10:36
The amount of bike parking downtown has not been satisfactory since the city removed all the parking meters a few years back. The bus mall has always been deficient in bike parking. The city has added a lot of new car parking, on the south Park Blocks, for example, to replace all the parking removed for the light rail construction, but they have not done the same for the bike parking they removed for construction. This is Rusty Steel, not Platinum behavior.
April 22nd, 2007 20:29
Aaron (#36), Thank you for encouraging us to ride our bikes and not the max, but for many of us this is not the best solution. I live in SE and work in Hillsboro. In an ideal world I would live & work in the same neighborhood (or at least the same county), but for now that's not the way it is. If I were to ride my entire commute, it would be 20+ miles one way, and would take 3+ hours total out of my day. For me, MAX makes my commute only 1 hour and my total bike mileage 9 miles one way.
I've been riding the MAX twice a day, 5 days a week for the past 3 years. As mentioned in a previous comment, changing your work schedule to 7-3:30 makes a world of difference, but there are still several times a week when all the hooks are taken.
I have always wondered why the Blue Line often only has one low car (with bike hooks) & one high car (with inconvenient & not secure bike space), while the Red Line to Beaverton TC has 2 low cars. While waiting for the MAX downtown, I will see the Red Line to Beavo go by nearly empty (maybe 1 or 2 bikes & several open hooks), and then my Blue Line to Hillsboro train arrives with only one low car that is already packed with cyclists. Does TriMet give any consideration to which cars they put on which trains? If so, the Blue Line would always have 2 low cars.
TriMet could drastically increase ridership if they started catering to cyclists. Like mentioned in a previous post, the distance to a MAX stop can be covered in a few short minutes by bike, whereas walking can take much longer. A commuter might decide to use TriMet if they know they can quickly get to a stop by bike and have easy access aboard a bus or the MAX.
I have spent many days dreaming about which seats to remove/rearrange to make more room for bikes, so if there is ever a chance for the public to offer input on these designs, I will be the first one at that meeting!
April 22nd, 2007 20:53
Bikes on the MAX are not compatible with rush-hour crowds. There's just not enough room. If an individual without a bike has to shift the time they travel the MAX 30-60 minutes in order to avoid rush-hour, I see no reason why a bicyclist can't shift his commute time by that amount also. It's simple, courteous, and improves the ride for everyone.
April 23rd, 2007 00:33
As for missing bike parking along the mall project...I was kinda shocked at how little short term bike parking was down by the South Waterfront/ aerial tram versus all the new surface car parking lots. I did not see too many racks or signs telling visitors where to find underground bike parking.
April 23rd, 2007 20:43
Joe, maybe some of the MAX commuters should adjust the time that they commute to make more room on the trains. Do you think people should avoid taking their luggage to the airport during peak commute times? How about the Moms and Dads with strollers (maybe they just picked up their kids at day care after work) should they adjust their commute times (extra hour of day care, that's not expensive)? How about no wheelchairs during rush hour?
If it is too crowded on the trains, the only answer is MORE TRAINS.
April 23rd, 2007 21:58
Interesting. In places like Amsterdam, not only is the city small enough to cycle across in 30 minutes, but your bike would be too heavy to pick up, let alone put on a rack.
Road bikes last about 10 minutes or less in that city, so everyone rides the bulky cruisers, with a 30 pound lock.
April 24th, 2007 08:31
Molly...o.k., sorry that you live in Vancouver. Eventually you guys will get on board with some more bike lanes and access.
April 24th, 2007 11:48
In response to people's questions about the availability of bike lockers around TriMet's system, I would refer you to the current list available online at:
http://www.trimet.org/howtoride/bikes/bikelockers.htm
For plans regarding the Portland Transit Mall and downtown, I would refer you to Jonathan's related blog entry at:
http://bikeportland.org/2007/04/02/update-on-bike-parking-during-bus-mall-project/
I would also say that we are exploring additional expansion of bike parking facilities throughout the system, recognizing that capacity for an increasing number of bikes on trains and buses may be an ongoing challenge and one that might substantially be addressed by expanded parking opportunties on one end or other of riders' trips.
Regarding the extension of trains to make room more space for bikes and other riders, many commenters are accurate to point to the length of downtown blocks as a constraint. Concerns voiced about the single car trains not meeting capacity needs on the Yellow Line are helpful and have been shared with our rail planners.
May 13th, 2007 12:08
I love my Dahon folder!!!!!!!! Full size bikes do take up so much room :P
May 25th, 2007 06:30
Eric, my impression of what you're saying seems to be in conflict with what the policy says. I read your statement as saying that the absence of a specific requirement for there to be a hook available means that cyclists may put their bikes anywhere so long as the movement of other passengers is not encumbered. But the actual policy document still reads "one bicycle per space." I would think that based on that stipulation a low-floor car has a capacity of four bikes, and one or two on a raised-floor one. Confusingly, the policy also states that cyclists must yield priority seating. Why does it make that stipulation if priority seating areas aren't "spaces" to begin with? What exactly does it mean by "space"?
I ask for clarification because just yesterday I got into an exchange with an inspector who insisted that I was not allowed to bring my bike onto a MAX car that was virtually empty except for four tiny BMX bikes propped up against the walls in the four designated spaces. I cited this document, saying that it was permitted since I would not be blocking anyone's access whatsoever. He insisted -- correctly, it turns out -- that I was mistaken and needed to wait for another MAX since the car had reached its "one bicycle per space" capacity.
July 10th, 2007 19:01
[...] course, one of the discussions on bikeportland.org led to a commenter telling me that TriMet shouldn’t be trying to carry more people, only carry more bikes. I guess [...]
August 7th, 2007 22:02
I got on the MAX downtown several weeks ago, specifically entering the one door where there was an open bike hook.
Standing in that space was a guy working a crossword puzzle who refused to move, claiming that the law said he had to get out of the handicapped area for someone in a wheelchair, but he didn't have to get out of the bike hook area for a bike.
I disagreed, as did several bystanders, but since I wasn't willing to grab him and pitch him out at the next stop [he got off a couple of stops later anyway], I let it go with some speculation about the possible causes of his dislike of bicycles--did he get his lunch stolen in kindergarten by a kid on a Big Wheel? Did his prom date ditch him for someone on a Schwinn? And so on.
Does anyone know what the rules--if any exist--are regarding whether passengers or bikes have priority in the bike hook area on MAX?
Meanwhile, since available bike hooks do seem to be getting more scarce on the MAX, I'm fabricating a modified S-hook so I can hang my bike next to one that's already on a provided hook and still keep it out of everyone's way.
bn
August 8th, 2007 17:36
RE: nothstine #53:
This has recently been reviewed by our legal department, and passengers are not required to move from the bike hook area to make way for bikes, though we encourage them to do so. This is why we instruct passengers wishing to bring bikes onboard to courteously ask the other rider(s) to move and make that room available, and in most instances the other rider(s) will do so without any issue (providing space is available for them to move). I am very sorry to hear that this was not your experience recently, and trust that this was unusual in your general experience. Please let me know if not.
September 25th, 2007 16:45
I was riding on bus 17 on September 11, 2007 at approximately 17:30 hours (5:30pm) we stopped on Center Street when we were boarded by Fare Inspectors. OFC John (can't read last name) asked me for valid fare, I showed him my Honored Citizen Bus Pass and was about to show him my Medicare Card and he calls me off the bus, asks me for my Photo ID and never asked for my Medicare Card.He called Trimet and due to an error in the computer database, my file was lost. I did not have my Honored Citizen Card on me that day, I am glad I didn't because he may have accused me of 'forgery', but my Medicare Card is Validation enough and so is my Bus Pass. I found out from other Trimet Security, that I should have never been Cited for "invalid Fare". I went to Trimet the next day and J.S.#104 fixed the issue and copied the Honored Citizen form, the Citation and other proof of my innocence as a solid paper trail, in case the database errs. I did some investigating and it proved to me that OFC John did not make an honest mistake, it was on purpose. I am facing a huge fine and more. OFC John says that he will appear with me at Community Court on October 5, 2007, 1:00pm at Justice Center Courtroom #1 and I am afraid he will have me sent up the river as it were. I want the case dismissed and I have wrote the Judge with copies of everything and still no reply. I told the Judge that it was not OFC John's fault THEN come to find out it was a deliberate act. Women have no rights and am facing Jail because I cannot pay the fine because women are automatically guilty, no matter if Trimet and Fare Inspectors has no case. I was not charged for the 'new' Honored Citizen Card. I am awaiting the preliminary trial and I will plead innocent so they will set a new trial date then Jail. I which I was a man, I would have never been cited! Can you help me? Signed, Grace Messenger.
P.S.
If I can I will contact the Americans with Disabilities Act and get their help as well.
September 26th, 2007 11:17
I rode cal-train into SF for about 4+ years,, we had a " bike car " this really helped with isssues in regards to
not enuff room.. also non bikers had to sit else where.. This works.. the signs and bungies are kinda a cluster.. but works.. I remember friday nights were a mess ;-)
I just moved here and already seem worried about using this system..
Joe
November 30th, 2007 22:22
Here is a more detailed account and update, written to Civil Rights Groups among many others:
My name is Grace Messenger and I am Disabled. I use a walking stick to help me. I went to Tri-Met in early September as I do every month and bought my Honored Citizens Bus Pass. I had valid fare, because I had my Medicare Card. On September 11, at 5:30 PM Bus 17 stopped at Center Street. We were boarded by Fare Inspectors. Fare Inspector John Coryell (#1394) came to me and asked to see my bus pass, he then said "Get off the bus!" I got up and he was behind me pushing me out the back door. He asked to see my ID, I asked him, "Don't you want to see my Medicare Card?" He ignored me. I asked and tried to show him three times. He said "You don't look disabled enough to have an Honored Citizen bus pass!" He called Tri-Met, and due to a computer error, I was not in the database. I didn't need the Honored Citizen Card. 'ANYONE WITH A VALID MEDICARE CARD IS AUTOMATICALLY AN HONORED CITIZEN' Even though I had valid fare, he wrote a $94.00 Citation and told me to be in court on October 5. I instead mailed my 'not guilty' plea. The trial date was set. Caryell was mad that I didn't show up. I ruined his chances to railroad me and make him look good to his Supervisors. He was getting his 'quota' of Citations, and I was an unwitting Victim of discrimination, harassment and undue stress. I was put on several Meds to help me. On October 29, he sent a Cop to arrest me, the Cop was a friend of mine, and Caryell didn't know it. He said that Caryell threatened harassment and blacklisted from Tri-Met. When I told him my side, he was angry and threw up his hands and said " I want NO part of this mess, I pray you win!" He huffed off, got in his Cruiser and sped off. I was served a court paper, and on it was "Arrested/Cited on Sept. 6" He lied about the date and said that he arrested me for another violation. The Court cannot find that report!!! Nov. 30 Criminal/(Felony) Court. He had pushed for Criminal Court instead of Traffic Court. We went up before the Judge and Caryell said "Grace had invalid fare- I cut him off with Evidence and Facts including Tri-Met fliers on the Honored Citizen Policy and the Americans With Disabilities act. The Judge said "Case Dismissed!" Caryell, when faced with the Truth, looked like a fool. Good! Chalk it up for the Disabled! Yee-hah! I want everyone to be warned about this man and others who condoned his actions. Please keep me anonymous due to continued harassment, thank you.
December 1st, 2007 18:40
Grace....kudos for that moxie. You've got my admiration for sticking up for your rights. A lot of people, have a hard time doing that sometimes, including me. It seems weird that the fare inspector would make such an erroneous accusation.
A complaint that people seem to frequently express is that fare inspectors are too rarely on the Max, and when they are, they don't even check for fare payment.
Maybe the fare inspectors are all goofing off in some out of the way place, then getting on the buses once in awhile to, shake down disabled people with crutches as well as others that perhaps represent some hidden objections to them.
Well now, thanks to your persistence, they have the conspicuous incompetence of John Coryell(#1394), Tri-Met Fare Inspector to offer as an example of their fine work.
June 26th, 2008 13:37
[...] http://bikeportland.org/2007/04/20/trimets-bike-policy-differs-from-actual-enforcement/ [...]
June 26th, 2008 15:10
Rise!! Rise from the dead, you long dead story!
June 26th, 2008 15:39
Tri-met security is contracted out to Wackenhut corporation. Security personnel therefore do not answer to Tri-Met or Tri-Met's employees. Passengers and even drivers can whinge and cry like we do, but at the end of the day, a private security officer will do as a private security officer feels. Why be exactly sure of the regulations when you can interpret them roughly as you see fit on any given day.