Courier columnist Alan Garr writes about bike share in the context of Vancouver’s anti-bike history and the remarkable turnaround in attitude now occurring. Plus, he sees the inevitable tie-in to every-day utilitarian transportation, and so to bike share’s role in an increasingly dense city. Note how this view correctly pre-empts some of the concern over bike share’s effect on bike rental businesses.
Says Garr: “There are a couple of reasons we came late to this party, not the least of which is the fact that the first company we tried to do business with went belly up.But what has also undeniably slowed the process is the insistence the supplier of this bike rental system provides helmets, even though those helmets will be free, part of the rental price. That demand that riders use helmets, by the way, has been universally seen as one that has inhibited users of this system. And it may have that effect here. It is blamed for the low bike usage in Australia and, according to one report, “as a preemptive move to boost usage levels, Tel Aviv and Mexico City repealed their mandatory helmet laws.” . . . .. . . . Bike share programs are not simply a tourist attraction — they have become part of the transportation infrastructure. In many cities a significant portion of the users are heading to or from work. That will likely be the case here too as the culture continues to adapt to a more densely populated city.”
