PUBLIC BIKE SYSTEMS—LOOKING AHEAD

Think sustainability—think green—think bicycles! Over twenty European

countries have had some sort of public bicycle system in place since the mid
70’s. With the ever—growing concerns over pollution, energy consumption
and consumer costs, world eyes will be watching how we, as a nation with a
new president, will step into tomorrow.

The bicycle has influenced world history in significant and sometimes

surprising ways, says Deirde Helffrich of The Green Party of Alaska. “The
improvement of metal-working techniques that lent themselves to the
aviation industry, changes in women’s clothing fashions that led to the
emancipation movement, the design of roadways and cities, the invention of
the pneumatic tire, increased mobility of the poor, and the reduction of
dependence on horses” are all key considerations. Today, there are over one
billion bikes worldwide being used by young and old alike, from all walks of
life, for an endless number of purposes.

We, as a nation, need to plan ahead for the future—to have the foresight to
protect the place we call home for ourselves, our children, and future
generations. To help us do this, we need only to look to our neighbors
overseas, and adapt a workable plan of action. It could be as easy as slipping
a comfortable old shoe on our collective feet.

Besides the obvious benefits of reducing emissions, traffic congestion, and

the ever—rising costs of owning and operating an automobile, bicycling is
good for one’s health. They are inexpensive to ride and maintain, and it’s
easy to find a parking space! Many of America’s large area campuses
already have programs of some kind in place. Helffrich points out some other
benefits to public bike systems. They can

∼ Provide on-demand transportation

∼ Allow riders to reach destinations that are not transit accessible

∼ Require less infrastructure than other modes of transportation

∼ Are less expensive to produce and maintain

∼ Decrease theft of personal bicycles

Granted, this is America, not Europe—home of wide open spaces (for now),
with endless varieties of terrain, and nearly every type of weather
phenomena known to man, but as anyone who has visited a large
metropolitan area recently can attest, we do share some of the same
problems as our European friends.

The basics of public bike systems are fairly simple. First of all, to deter theft
and vandalism, the bikes used are custom made, clunky in appearance, and
painted a variety of distinctive colors, with a plethora of advertising attached
to them. (If you were going to steal a car, you wouldn’t steal a Yellow Cab!)
The body consists of a “uni-frame” assembly to prevent disassembly and re-
sale of parts, either a code or key is needed to access the lock, and a “smart
chip” is installed to keep track of the bikes on their journeys (Brook,
“Community Bicycle Program”). They require some sort of check-out system,
either in the European style, which involves a pre-paid card or credit card for
instant access, or as some programs in America, with a type of “bike-library
card” for checkout at specific locations. All can be used for varying lengths of
time: by the hour, day, week or month (Mozer). Accessing a bike can be as
easy as finding a rental on the street , such as in the “call-a-bike” program in
Berlin and Munich: you simply look for a flashing green light on the lock
(indicating its availability) and call the phone number on the bike to get the
lock code. When you’re done with the bike, simply lock it to a permanent
structure, call the number again, and tell them where it is (within guidelines).

Another type of system operates much like the cart checkouts at airports.
You deposit money and take the bike, returning it to any coin-operated
terminal to get a refund on your deposit. Use caution when using this type of
system though, warns the International Bike Foundation, anyone can take
the bike and turn it in for the money.

The Copenhagen, Germany “White Bike” program is perhaps the most well
known and copied system worldwide. Paris, France has a similar system with
an estimated 20,600 bikes located at 1450 terminals throughout the city.
(“Love Bikes”) These programs are fully self-supporting, relying on revenues
from advertising on the bicycles themselves, and on terminals. Some are
non-profit, and some are owned by large commercial entities in partnership
with various environmental groups. In both instances, the out of pocket
expense to tax payers is nil.

The most popular, and successful, programs operating currently in the

United States revolve around the co-op concept. Cities such as Portland, OR,
Olympia, WA, and Denver, CO require you to join a co-op for a nominal fee,
depending on usage. This either provides you with a universal key or code
for all the locks, providing you furnish some personal information and sign a
liability waiver (Mozer). Another system, in Arcada, CA operates like a library,
with bikes available for checkout by the day, week or even month (Helffrich).
Many of the people taking advantage of the long term check outs need bikes,
but simply cannot afford to buy them.

There are other concerns, however, and these must be addressed and
adjusted to fit the individual user groups. Some metropolitan areas do not
have adequate bike path systems developed to fully support this plan, and
would necessitate review. Some have harsh winter weather that would
possibly require shut-downs during some months. There is also the need to
procure the “start-up” funds and sponsorship to tackle this program. Starting
small is always an option. With our ever-growing dependence on foreign
countries for fossil fuel, and rising costs, many companies are beginning to
realize the long term benefits of these programs, and becoming more
receptive to funding them.

With all the usage these bikes see, the demands for maintence can be
overwhelming. In Europe, the privately-held operations take care of their
own. Some of the others utilize inmate labor, in the hopes of rehabilitating
prisoners, teaching mechanical skills and helping them to reconnect with the
community (Helffrich). Here in the States, where things are still in the
experimental stage, maintence is handled in a variety of ways. Some cities
incorporate inner-city youth in gang-prone areas and teach them not only
mechanical, but business skills. This positive reinforcement and experience
promotes the importance of contributing to society, through the re-discovery
of neighborhoods and neighbors (Mozer). In yet another program, the “earn-
a-bike” program, maintence and other activities are performed for the
program in exchange for points to earn a bicycle.

Liability issues, while not a concern in Europe because of national health

care, are an issue here. In addressing this problem, most of the groups have
come up with the following, from the IBF Homepage Insurance and Liability:

Bike programs should be operated as a separate entity, apart from

city and other programs having just enough assets to cover their
immediate operating needs. This way, there would be nothing to lose
in the event of a lawsuit. Bikes can be placarded, no fault waivers
signed (although you can still be sued) but keep the —bank account
at a minimum.
While none of the programs can claim that they are theft and vandalism free,
the European programs have minimal problems in these areas. The
consequences of either offense are stiff fines, and/or jail time; and these are
aggressively enforced.

Eugene may be a far cry from the bustling streets of Paris or Copenhagen,
but our implementation of some kind of bike program would have some
immediate benefits. Take for example the traffic situation in and around
Autzen Stadium when there’s a Ducks game. The immediate four or five
miles is insane, and the next five to fifteen almost as bad, bleeding out onto
I-5 and other connectors. Even the busses are jam packed. Supported
properly, a type of park and ride system using bikes would ease the demand
on public transportation going to and from such civic events-and let’s face it,
you can get from home to almost anywhere in Eugene by bike quicker than
by battling the traffic leaving Autzen in a car.

Right now, Eugene has no organized community or public bike program. The
only low/no cost bikes available are through the underrated U of O Outdoor
Program, and that depends on whether the person who “does that” is in that
day. This is Track Town-we should be pioneering this system, not sticking our
heads in the sand.

Funding for these types of programs is out there, whether it is via city/county
endorsements and donations (Portland), or teaming up with a corporate
sponsor (a recycling firm in Denver, for example). Start-up funding and
grants are also available through various government agencies, such as the
Office of Environmental Affairs, and through private funding from assorted
sustainability/livability groups. A group in Charlottesville even received a
$4500 donation from The Dave Matthews Band to help them launch a
program (Bowers).

It’s up to us to look to the future and protect our home as best we can,
become as self sufficient as possible, and teach our children responsible and
sound decision making. One way we can teach them to look toward
tomorrow is by making public bike systems a “social movement with a
future” (Helffrich).

--Gail Tinkham
 Citations

Victoria Transport Policy Institute, "Public Bike Systems." Online TDM Encyclopedia. 22 July
2008. Victoria Transport Policy Institute. 12 Nov 2008
<http://www.vtpi.org/tdm/tdm126.htm>. (Table 1)

Mozer, David and Ernst Poulsen. "Community Bike Programs: Case Studies." IBF Homepage.
International Bicycle Foundation. 12 Nov 2008
<http://www.ibike.org/encouragement/freebike/details.htm>.(Mozer)

"Community Bike Programs: Issues." IBF Homepage. International Bicycle Foundation. 12

Nov 2008 <http://www.ibike.org/freebike/anti-theft.htm>.

"Community Bike Programs: International Directory." IBF Homepage. International Bicycle

Foundation. 12 Nov 2008 <http://www.ibike.org/international.htm>. (List 1)

"Community Bike Programs: Issues of Insurance and Liability." IBF Homepage. International
Bicycle Foundation. 12 Nov 2008 <http://www.ibike.org/freebike/liability.htm>. ("Community
Bike Programs: Issues of Insurance and Liability")

Ober, Lauren. "The University of Vermont-UVM Students Bike Project Gets Rolling."
Environmental Council Home: University of Vermont. 15 Apr 2008. The Burlington Free
Press. 12 Nov 2008 <http://www.uvm.edu/greening/envcouncil/?Page=yellowbikes.html>.
(Ober)

Brook, Dave. "Carsharing.US: Public Bicycle Systems." Carsharing US: Public Bicycle
Systems. 29 June 2008. Carsharing US. 12 Nov 2008
<http://carsharingus.blogspot.com/2007/06/public-bicycle-systems.html>. (Brook)

Bowers, Matthew. "Virginia Beach, VA College Tests Bicycle Transit Program." Virginian-Pilot
Norfolk, VA 27 Sep 2001 12 Nov 2008 <ephost
@epnet.com/lanecommunitycollege/eugeneor>. Bowers )
"Love Bikes, Take 2." Bicycling 48.6July 2007 5-50. 12 Nov 2008
<http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true+db=f5h&AN=25131906&site=ehost-
live>. ("Love Bikes, Take 2" )

"Community Bicycle Program." Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia. 2008. Wikimedia

Foundation, Inc.. 12 Nov 2008 <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/community_bicycle_program>.
(""Community Bicycle Program"")

Helfferich, Deirdre. "Bicycle Activism." Green Pages. 10 Nov 2008. Green Party of Alaska. 12
Nov 2008 <http://www.gp.org/greenpages/content/volume9/issue1/evergreen3.php>.
(Helfferich)

"Ve'lib'." Wikipedia-The Free Encyclopedia. 2008. Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.. 12 Nov 2008
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velib>. ("Ve'lib")