Building the Cycling City

by Melissa Bruntlett

  Roland Kager is a data analyst and transport consultant at Studio Bereikbaar in Rotterdam, and has been a key player in studying and documenting travel data related to the bike–train phenomenon in the Netherlands. During his postdoctoral studies, he took on the enviable task of analyzing bike– train records to answer two questions: Can you create an accurate model that reflects the differences between the bike–train combination and any other merging of transportation modes? And why is that relevant? Up to that point, no one had ever really taken a hard look at the synergy between cycling and public transit, and while this study started as a mere side project from a broad national research program, it quickly became a focal point because of the incredibly valuable and interesting dynamics he uncovered among public transit (in particular trains), cycling, and land use.

  “It’s quite difficult to fill in multimodal trips: short walking trips, short biking trips, or various combinations in a data survey. This whole spectrum is not really covered, and it’s mostly geared toward unimodal and longer-distance trips such as those by car,” Kager explains. “The korte ritjes, or small trips, are what makes a city function, and also why bike-train-based mobility works very different from car-based mobility. You need to be much more selective in the places you visit and how you combine modes. The primary constraint is not distance but connectivity.” Kager’s studies revealed how cycling typically offers a meaningful choice between stations and services by allowing an individual to personalize their transit system. By looking at such effects, researchers begin to understand how cities, cycling, and transit systems function together in a web of interactions that are often overlooked, either in managing the present conditions or in planning for the future.

  Thanks to his research, the national government and national rail company (NS) are now more hands-on in addressing challenges, though those issues are not always easily identified. When a car is stuck in traffic, or there is a problem with the road network, it is readily visible. This is not always the case when it comes to bicycle travel. “If a link is missing on your cycle route, you can easily adjust your trip with no drama,” Kager argues. He points out that is the inherent strength of the bicycle as a mode of transport—it can grow its modal share quickly without serious constraint or becoming a drain on the existing infrastructure. But that is also an innate weakness, keeping serious problems under the radar for a long period of time. “That changed in the early 2000s, when a new dynamic started with the urban revival,” he says. After that point, the Dutch bike–train system started to receive more attention, quickly becoming a main policy theme. The focus is on what the existing systems are, what they could be, and how to capture value from them to pay for further investments.

  According to Kager, a key strength of the Dutch approach to the bike– train combination lies in its scalability. Because the trains themselves run at capacity, there is simply no room for bikes on the carriages, and for that reason, they are not permitted on most routes. In countries such as Denmark, where investments have been made to allow passengers to bring bikes on board, there is only a finite amount of growth the system can absorb. While just 15 percent of Danish train users cycle to the train, that number has surpassed 50 percent in the Netherlands, with nearly 600,000 bikes across the network each day. When Denmark’s numbers approach a fraction of that level, they will face a serious problem: how do you scale back on something that customers have now come to expect—especially if no other alternatives are offered?

  For the Dutch, this has resulted in enormous bike-parking facilities at stations throughout the country, similar to those seen in Utrecht. “As a user, you would be happier if you could just take it for granted that your bike is safe where you left it at the station, with another bike available at the other end,” explains Kager. And with the addition of OV-Fiets in 2004, as well as third-party bike-sharing options, the “last mile” of any door-to-door trip is becoming increasingly seamless. “The strength of public transport is its efficiency,” he continues. “If you cancel out this efficiency, then it’s a dead end.”

  Adaptability and scalability aside, Kager points out the true success of bike–train is not how each mode operates in isolation, but how they perfectly complement one another. Culturally, bikes have been ubiquitous on Dutch streets for over a century, and the rail network has been transporting people from region to region as long as residents can recall, but the two modes working together to form a comprehensive system is what makes it unique. “People often claim the bike brings passengers to the station, but I also insist the Dutch rail system is a crucial factor in explaining the bike culture,” he says. “We wouldn’t have good transit if we didn’t have good bicycle infrastructure. It goes both ways.”

  Figure 8-1: A sea of bikes outside Rotterdam’s Centraal Station, a secondary overflow area to the main 5,190-space facility built below the station in 2013. (Credit: Modacity)

  Kager recalls growing up near Amsterdam, and the rate of cyclists at that time being one of the lowest in the country. The city itself was dirty and dangerous, and many were leaving urban centers for a cleaner, quieter, safer existence. But just as in regions across America, there has been a marked reversal in these migration patterns over the past two decades, with people and socioeconomic activity returning to city centers in hoards, bringing with them densification, an increase in cycling numbers, and in response, better transit options.

  “Around the year 2005, cities flipped from going downwards to a positive energy, and now into a self-reinforcing loop with cycling and transit modal shares,” Kager explains. “As cities are getting stronger economically, how do you get to the city? By train. How do you get to and from the station? By bicycle. If you live in that city, how do you move around locally? By bicycle.” He further submits that as demand increases, bike and train facilities improve, along with other sustainable modes (like public transit), and cities become increasingly attractive places to live or to set up businesses. As a result, the demand on cycling and transit options that connect to and from surrounding cities and villages increases, having a “knock-on” effect in the neighboring areas, and perpetuating the cycle.

  Kager does note that while the bike–train arrangement operates in a loop, cycling plays a vital role—which he refers to as the “magic hand”—in that it has the potential to self-organize “thick” transit streams in between an existing cluster of stations. Public transit on its own operates on fixed corridors—a train or tram can only operate on existing tracks, buses mainly on major streets where passengers are more likely to gather. The only way to deliver quality service is by having a method to feed people into that fixed stream from a larger area, something that the bicycle does exceptionally well.

  As seamless as this seems, complications arise when looking at the urban– rural divide emerging across the country. Only 20 percent of the Netherlands is considered urban—now with strong socioeconomic growth, increased housing prices, and stronger connections within city limits and surrounding centers. However, this leaves the other 80 percent of the country faced with the choice of either connecting to the existing system at a pace matching current trends, or transforming their own systems in a way that meets the needs of local residents and businesses.

  “The question becomes: How do we connect or transform that 80 percent to fully participate in emerging urban lifestyles and economies?” Kager says. “Bike–train is the toolbox that can help, because it delivers urban accessibility.” Growing municipalities such as Amsterdam, Rotterdam, and Utrecht can absorb only so many new inhabitants. By making selective investments in bike–train infrastructure, officials can help the remaining 80 percent to participate in the expanding urban system in a more balanced way, and—at the same time—deliver a more robust, complete, and nationwide option, available to everyone.

  Solving the “Last-Mile” Journey

  Narrowing the urban–rural divide by providing better mobility options will take years, and because of the sizeable scope, the effects wi
ll likely not be felt for a generation. In the more immediate future, a tangible solution will be to solve the dilemma at the destination station: how to make it easy for passengers to make the “last-mile” journey by bicycle. As Kager noted, while stations of departure see upwards of half of their passengers arrive by bike, fewer than a third of those same people leave the station on the other side in the same manner.

  Kees Miedema, program manager of transport integration at NS, admits that the importance of this final link was only realized in the early 2000s, coinciding with the explosion of growth in urban centers. “We learned 15 years ago that choosing the train as a mode of transport is only worthwhile when you look at the complete perspective of the trip from door to door, not only from station to station,” he explains. “A big reason why people don’t choose the train is because they think it’s a hassle to get to the station, and an even bigger hassle to get from the station—in a town you may not know—to your destination.”

  By surveying their passengers, NS learned that while they were mostly quite comfortable while on the trains, offering positive feedback of their experience, their encounters before and after that rail travel were not commensurate. Because so many people were arriving by bicycle, bikes were stacked nearly everywhere: sidewalks, railings, and filling up countless outdoor lots. The average person worried their bike would be damaged, stolen, or even lost in the endless sea of machines. Some Dutch cyclists even reported the practice of taking a picture of their bike and those surrounding it, in order to locate it at the end of the day—and that’s if they found space in the racks at all, with many stations becoming home to thousands of orphan bikes. At Utrecht Centraal Station, an amazing 23 percent of bikes in their parking facilities have been abandoned, often by students leaving town and seeing more value in leaving their bike behind and purchasing another used one wherever they’re heading to next.

  “That was the reason for the Dutch railway and ProRail to begin investing in mobility,” Miedema maintains. “Next to walking, bikes are one of the biggest modes for getting to and from the station. So for us, the bike is a very important mode to develop.” Improving the quality of the bike-parking experience was the first step in achieving this goal. In 2000, NS worked in partnership with ProRail and the national government to begin a massive program to build a number of new parking facilities, both indoor and outdoor, with initial funding for 580,000 new spaces across the country. But, as has been noted in Utrecht, the initial predictions are already falling short of the stock needed to accommodate demand, and they are planning to add another 150,000 spaces nationwide in the coming years. The main challenge—as with any bike- or transit-related project around the globe—is budget.

  “The problem,” Miedema notes, “was from a big program developed in 1999, the government had already provided about €400 million [$494 million USD], and they wanted to end funding.” In their own words, the national government said, “Let the local governments do it. We’ve done enough and we think it’s a problem for local governments and Dutch railways.” But NS, ProRail, and the local governments pushed back, pointing out that if funding stopped altogether, they would no longer be able to address the mounting difficulties. They noted that getting more people on bikes was actually solving many of the car-related issues affecting each station—largely around environmental impact and traffic. It was an easy sell. “We were able to get an agreement between all parties to start a new program over the next 15 years, with new solutions for the big problems we face,” states Miedema proudly. “We want to innovate on the solutions we have. We want to search for how we can make it more profitable, and find how we can finance it together.” And while there is still a €400-million shortfall for future projects, for now, they can keep moving on current initiatives.

  NS and ProRail’s more innovative work focuses on the various shelters they’ve built over the last 15 years, beginning with the question: How do you get people with less financial means—especially students—to use these facilities? “From the studies we did, we came up with a ‘first 24 hours free’ concept,” explains Miedema. “Only people who stay in the shelter longer than 24 hours have to pay.” Passengers check in with their OVChipkaart: a single smart card that provides access to the entire nationwide mobility system (train, tram, bus, OV-Fiets, etc.). It then tracks how long a bicycle is stationed in the lot, and, if more than 24 hours, charges a modest amount to the card. However, for smaller locations where paying for attendants was too expensive, they had to be more forward-thinking in their approach.

  Figure 8-2: Utrecht Centraal Station’s spectacular 12,500-space bike-parking facility, which, when complete, will be the largest such structure in the world. (Credit: NS)

  “We needed a new, user-friendly concept,” Miedema concedes. To appeal to as wide a customer base as possible, they are rolling out a self-serve concept at 50 locations in the next few years, as well as a “fast-lane check-in” that aims to speed up the process during peak hours. The end goal is to reduce strain at stations, where they currently need several staff with handheld scanners to manage the sheer numbers entering and leaving the facilities during rush hours. Like the self-serve concept, the fast lanes are accessed via a secure gate opened by swiping the OV-Chipkaart, and the cyclist’s account is charged right after checking out.

  Undoubtedly, the most visible initiative in assisting the “last-mile” challenge is OV-Fiets, the rental scheme that provides passengers with a bike at their destination, for just €3.50 ($4.30 USD) per day. Started as a pilot program by NS, ProRail, and the government, the program has been growing in leaps and bounds each year, and as Lotte van Grol, product development manager with NS, explains, “OV-Fiets is really the ‘last-mile’ concept, and not a bike-share scheme, where you can pick up and drop off your bike at different places in the city. Primarily, we focus on the journey from the train station to the final destination and back to the station again. From our perspective, we are also a train operator; it is our goal to make the journey by train and public transport as fast, easy, and comfortable as possible. Furthermore, most Dutch people are really attached to their own bikes, so the people you reach with OV-Fiets, we presume, are not the people you reach with bike-share.”

  The success of OV-Fiets is also one of its greatest challenges. In 2010, the program boasted 800,000 rentals per year across 220 locations. Nowadays, that looks more like 3 million rentals per year across 310 locations, and—while that seems like a success story—supply meeting demand is an issue at some of the bigger train stations with limited space. For bikes arriving at the station, it is anticipated numbers will reach between 60 percent and 65 percent in the coming years. In order to accommodate such projected growth on that end of the journey, OV-Fiets would have to expand to 60 times its current size. “The biggest issue we have for OV-Fiets is that it is so successful, we don’t have the space we need to park the bikes at the busier locations,” confesses Van Grol. “There is simply not enough space to park more bicycles.”

  Despite the presumed shortage of rentals, residents are largely satisfied with the program. When surveying users, 89.6 percent of respondents gave OV-Fiets a 7-out-of-10 or higher. “It’s high when you compare it to the Dutch railways itself,” Van Grol points out. “People like to complain about the trains a lot. But when it comes to OV-Fiets, it’s a positive thing we have.” So positive, in fact, that Van Grol and Miedema are hosting an increasing number of international delegations seeking to learn about the Dutch bike– train model, particularly OV-Fiets.

  While still not a perfect fix, NS and ProRail have recognized that to solve the “last-mile” problem they need to think creatively to provide an equitable, sustainable model that works for everyone. Coupled with the fact that NS recently made a 100 percent transition to renewable, wind-powered energy for their entire rail network, millions of Dutch residents now have access to a “green” carbon-free transportation solution—from the moment they step outside their front door to the moment they arrive safe
and sound at their destination. Bringing the entire family along for the ride is made easier with the “Railrunner” fare, which allows children under the age of 11 to travel anywhere in the country for just €2.50 ($3.10 USD).

  “The time is really here to get more attention on the fact that it’s green,” declares Van Grol emphatically. “Before, it was just that people were using a bike because that’s what they do. Now you see the tendency that it’s also sustainable. But still I doubt that people are using OV-Fiets primarily because it is green. I think the main reason people in the Netherlands use OV-Fiets is that it’s a great concept for your “last-mile” journey: it’s fast, flexible, healthy, and it gives you a sense of freedom in a city other than your hometown.”

  Replicating the Dutch BiTiBi Model

  There’s no doubt that the Dutch desire to promote bike–train intermodality over private car use is garnering a great deal of international attention. The growing number of organizations examining their system in further detail, in an attempt to reproduce it and address typical gaps and problem areas, is a clear demonstration of this awareness. Perhaps the most ambitious of these studies is the European BiTiBi (“Bike-Train-Bike”) Project—funded by the European Union’s Intelligent Energy Programme and 10 partners in five different countries. Beginning in 2014, they launched four different pilot projects over a three-year period—in England, Italy, Spain, and Belgium—with the aim of decreasing car use by several million kilometers per year, as well as carbon emissions by several hundred tons.