Public Bicycle Systems
City Council Member Editorial
The city council recently heard a proposal requesting the implementation of a public “bikes for rent” program. The details of the program have yet to be specified. The general principle, however, is that the city will provide bicycles at designated locations throughout downtown. People will be able to rent a bike for a small fee. They can then “check in” or return the bike later at the same or another location. Proponents of the program believe that the program will make downtown travel and parking more convenient and that it will cut down on noise and air pollution—making our city a more environmentally friendly place. While I am all for environmental friendliness and improved traffic flow, I must vote against such a program at this time.
First and foremost is the expense. The city must buy the bicycles and locks. Even with discounts provided by local bike shops, this requires a substantial investment that the city just can’t afford. Special bike racks also need to be installed at designated locations throughout the city. The bike racks themselves require a great expense in materials and setup. Tracking systems—which include electronic locks and magnetic striped “smart” cards—can be quite expensive to install.
In addition, there are insurance and bicycle replacement costs. Theft and vandalism are common problems with many bike rental programs. Anti-theft devices and onboard computers can be installed to help cut down on these issues. In addition to covering theft and vandalism, insurance must also cover liability for possible injury or accident. However, implementing these is very expensive and will require monitoring—an additional cost.
Yearly maintenance costs will also need to be considered. All bikes need to be tuned up, oiled, and washed on a regular basis. Chains break, tires go flat, and brakes wear down. Maintenance costs must be figured into the program’s budget.
Aside from costs, accidents are always a concern. Our city has very few designated bike lanes. Therefore, cars and bikes will be sharing the roads in an already congested city. Accidents will be unavoidable, especially during peak travel times, such as rush hour. Accidents can have serious consequences; even a minor accident can tie up downtown streets for an hour or more, take up the valuable time of police officers, and add to the stress of people wanting to get to work or back home.
Bike programs in other cities do not have good track records. Several cities have tried to implement them with good intentions and failed because of excessive expenses. Seattle, Washington, is ranked the fifth-friendliest city for bikes in the United States by Bicycling magazine. Despite this, however, the city put a stop to its bike-share program. A number of factors played a role in the halt of the program, but it is no surprise that lack of funding was a leading reason. If the fifth-friendliest city for bikes in the United States couldn't find success with this program, how can our city expect to succeed?
Our city is looking for ways to cut expenses in the annual budget. It cannot afford to take on such a major financial commitment. Where can we possibly find funding for such a program? How can we ask taxpayers to fund an expensive experiment? I agree that we need to make our city easily accessible and increase its environmental friendliness, but not at the expense of the taxpayer or of other city programs.
Our city council has been discussing the possibility of supplying bicycles for public use. I believe the students at our school should support this idea. Making bicycles easily accessible to rent at different locations around the city is a very sensible idea.
To begin with, using bicycles would cut down on the number of cars on the road, which would help the environment. The environmental damage caused by automobile pollution has been well publicized. In fact, the Environmental Protection Agency advocates the use of bicycles as a way to reduce the pollution caused by vehicles and engines. This pollution not only causes harm to the environment but also contributes to human health problems.
According to the Washington State Department of Ecology, toxic air pollutants from automobile emissions are known to cause or are suspected to cause a number of health problems and serious illnesses. The pollutants can be inhaled directly or be carried by small particles into the lungs.
Using bikes in place of cars would do more than cut down on health hazards. It would also improve the health of those who participate in the program. For most, riding a bike frequently would generally improve an individual’s health. People would feel energized, and this in turn could create a more positive community environment.
A public bicycle system would also help both individuals and the city save money. When cars are not used as often, money is saved on gas. Some people may even be able to give up their cars completely, using the public bikes and other forms of public transportation instead. Costs from car repairs and insurance would also be saved. The city would save money because fewer parking spaces would be needed for cars. A bicycle parking space certainly takes up less room than one for a car. Providing enough parking spaces for cars along streets and in parking structures is much more expensive than providing parking for bicycles.
Bike sharing has successfully been implemented in more than 100 cities across the United States. Even in cities like Seattle, Washington, where the bike program was discontinued, community support never wavered. Although Seattle discontinued its bike program, which I am sure it could resurrect again with better planning, the program never lacked sponsorship from the community and businesses. Alaska Airlines committed to sponsoring the Seattle bike program with $1,000 per bike for 5 years. This comes out to roughly $500,000 per year. Additional sponsors also quickly signed up to support the program. However, due to a lack of planning and promotion, the program could not take off as intended.
We will not face the same situation if the proper planning and promotion are put in place here. We have several large local companies that would likely be interested in sponsoring the program. Additionally, visitors to our city would enjoy having a bike system available to them because there are a number of places they could visit, such as the historic part of town, the zoo, and the art museum—all of which are fairly close together. Advertising the city’s public bike system could also be a good way to attract visitors and bring money into the city.
The city council should most certainly vote in favor of establishing a public bike system. That is the only responsible decision—a decision that considers our environment, our city, and our citizens. I encourage all the students at our school to e-mail a city council member to make our views known and to ask our parents to do the same.