Proposal: Bike Parking

I would like to open a discussion about adding a bike_parking field to the stops.txt file.

This would be a simple field where transit providers could indicate whether or not any bike parking is available at each transit stop, similar to the way that the field wheelchair_boarding is defined:

For parentless stops:
0 or empty - No bicycle parking information for the stop.
1 - Some bicycle parking is available at this stop.
2 - Bicycle parking is not possible at this stop.

For child stops:
0 or empty - Stop will inherit its bike_parking behavior from the parent station, if specified in the parent.
1 - There exists some bicycle parking between the station and the specific stop/platform.
2 - There exists no bicycle parking between the station and the specific stop/platform.

For station entrances/exits:
0 or empty - Station entrance will inherit its bike_parking behavior from the parent station, if specified for the parent.
1 - Station entrance has bicycle parking.
2 - No bicycle parking between station entrance and stops/platforms.

Having this field would be invaluable for multi-modal trip planning and (from a research and investment perspective) for identifying gaps in transit infrastructure connectivity (e.g. where a lack of bike parking could be a barrier to multi-modal travel). It also makes sense to have the field given that there is already bikes_allowed in trips.txt.

There has already discussion about a separate stop_amenities.txt file, however this variable makes sense to be included with the standard text files for consistency with other transit-related variables (i.e., bikes_allowed).

There are obviously complexities with bicycle parking that may not be expressed by a simple field (e.g. maybe parking is not always available or requires a pass to access), there are also a wide range of bicycle parking infrastructure that is available (e.g. simple bike rack outside, protected bike shed, elevated storage with security, etc.). However, the same is true for the wheelchair_boarding variable. In general, having imperfect information is more useful than having no information at all.

Any feedback on this proposal would be appreciated.

Note: [Transcollines](http://transcollines.ca/) has volunteered to be the producer when this goes into voting

J. Rapson
Infrastructure Canada