Don't punish bicyclists
Adam Roberts
Issue date: 4/13/09 Section: Opinion
The Parking and Transit Committee is considering a new fee - and this time, the target is bicycles.
This is just a bad idea on its face. The committee should be bending over backwards to encourage cyclists. More bicycles means less cars. This means more parking spaces, less traffic, less dependence on foreign oil and less pollution.
Hundreds of students are already speaking out on the Facebook group "UofA Students Against Bicycle Parking Fees on Campus," started by Jon Bame, former Associated Student Government vice-presidential candidate, last week.
The committee's proposal would require a parking permit at the cost of $15. This might not seem like a lot of money to you, but you might not be a college student. The casual rider is not going to even bother to pick up a permit. I'm frightened to think of what will happen this summer. A lot of families like to visit our beautiful campus when it's warm out.
I can imagine a kid riding his brand new bike all the way up the hill to the campus, ringing the shiny silver bell and thinking how lucky he is. Then, he pulls out the chain lock his dad helped him pick out and secures his bike to a rack while he goes off to Old Main lawn to play Frisbee or maybe read a book.
He thinks that his bike is safe because the very idea of requiring parking permits for a bike rack is so ridiculous that it doesn't even cross his mind. He returns just a half hour later to find his bike missing - impounded by the UA.
Now, I don't think that the Parking and Transit Committee is some sort of malicious organization out to ruin peoples' lives. There are some real problems that exist, and the committee is made up of good people trying to do their best.
There are two problems that the proposal addresses. Fortunately, there are other, better ways to solve both of them.
The first problem is that some riders are chaining their bikes to trees and damaging them. The solution here is simple: if someone parks their bike in a way that is going to damage campus property, then impound that bike. Our trees are preserved without punishing those who park intelligently.
The second problem is that there aren't enough bike racks around campus in the first place. These racks cost money.
Sloan Scroggin, former chairman of the ASG Sustainability Committee, says that it costs $180 a loop for new bike racks. The university is getting robbed at that price. After only two minutes of searching, I found a 16-bike commercial rack for less than $30 a spot. I'm sure that labor and shipping add to the cost, but I'd volunteer to help install them.
Yes, even if we do get a deal, some funding is needed. I would suggest taking it out of the fines students pay for improperly parking cars. Last year, the Transit and Parking Department was issuing tickets at the rate of more than 200 a day. Take $1 from each of those fines, and you've got enough bicycle parking spots for everyone on campus.
It's not a perfect solution, but shouldn't we be punishing the people who are breaking rules instead of law-abiding bicyclists? Besides, it's in an impatient parker's best interest to encourage other drivers to ride their bikes.
With the way the policy is written, only a third of the fee would go toward building new racks, anyway. Another third would go toward the permit program.
The permit program seems like a good idea until you think about it - all it is is a sticker with an ID tag. That way, if your bike is stolen and the police find it, they can trace it to you.
Apparently, the committee thinks that the same thieves who can cut through your bike chain are too weak and puny to peel off your UA permit sticker!
Five dollars from each permit is going toward this ID program. These stickers had better be made of solid gold.
The final third of the fee is allocated to Razorbikes.
Razorbikes was a noble idea that failed. I did a radio story on Razorbikes last semester and completed an informal survey of the program. Another student and I checked out every bike rack in the central campus area between Maple, Garland, Arkansas and Dickson on a weekday afternoon. We found two bikes, both of them in very bad condition.
Adding funding won't really do much good. These sorts of low-tech, free bike-sharing programs have been tried across the world in places like Amsterdam, Portland and Toronto, and they flop. More than half the public bikes in Paris' widely promoted Vélib' system have already been stolen.
Unless the university finds the money to start installing a debit card scanner and GPS on each Razorbike - like London and Barcelona's bikes - it's just never going to work.
Besides, Razorbikes must be returned to campus by the end of the night. They don't replace a car for anyone and don't improve sustainability. Only personal bike ownership does that.
The committee doesn't need as much money as the members think, and they can get the money that they do need from better sources than the pockets of bike riders. We should be doing everything we can to reward bikers, not punish them.
Adam Roberts is a columnist for The Arkansas Traveler. His column appears every Monday.
This is just a bad idea on its face. The committee should be bending over backwards to encourage cyclists. More bicycles means less cars. This means more parking spaces, less traffic, less dependence on foreign oil and less pollution.
Hundreds of students are already speaking out on the Facebook group "UofA Students Against Bicycle Parking Fees on Campus," started by Jon Bame, former Associated Student Government vice-presidential candidate, last week.
The committee's proposal would require a parking permit at the cost of $15. This might not seem like a lot of money to you, but you might not be a college student. The casual rider is not going to even bother to pick up a permit. I'm frightened to think of what will happen this summer. A lot of families like to visit our beautiful campus when it's warm out.
I can imagine a kid riding his brand new bike all the way up the hill to the campus, ringing the shiny silver bell and thinking how lucky he is. Then, he pulls out the chain lock his dad helped him pick out and secures his bike to a rack while he goes off to Old Main lawn to play Frisbee or maybe read a book.
He thinks that his bike is safe because the very idea of requiring parking permits for a bike rack is so ridiculous that it doesn't even cross his mind. He returns just a half hour later to find his bike missing - impounded by the UA.
Now, I don't think that the Parking and Transit Committee is some sort of malicious organization out to ruin peoples' lives. There are some real problems that exist, and the committee is made up of good people trying to do their best.
There are two problems that the proposal addresses. Fortunately, there are other, better ways to solve both of them.
The first problem is that some riders are chaining their bikes to trees and damaging them. The solution here is simple: if someone parks their bike in a way that is going to damage campus property, then impound that bike. Our trees are preserved without punishing those who park intelligently.
The second problem is that there aren't enough bike racks around campus in the first place. These racks cost money.
Sloan Scroggin, former chairman of the ASG Sustainability Committee, says that it costs $180 a loop for new bike racks. The university is getting robbed at that price. After only two minutes of searching, I found a 16-bike commercial rack for less than $30 a spot. I'm sure that labor and shipping add to the cost, but I'd volunteer to help install them.
Yes, even if we do get a deal, some funding is needed. I would suggest taking it out of the fines students pay for improperly parking cars. Last year, the Transit and Parking Department was issuing tickets at the rate of more than 200 a day. Take $1 from each of those fines, and you've got enough bicycle parking spots for everyone on campus.
It's not a perfect solution, but shouldn't we be punishing the people who are breaking rules instead of law-abiding bicyclists? Besides, it's in an impatient parker's best interest to encourage other drivers to ride their bikes.
With the way the policy is written, only a third of the fee would go toward building new racks, anyway. Another third would go toward the permit program.
The permit program seems like a good idea until you think about it - all it is is a sticker with an ID tag. That way, if your bike is stolen and the police find it, they can trace it to you.
Apparently, the committee thinks that the same thieves who can cut through your bike chain are too weak and puny to peel off your UA permit sticker!
Five dollars from each permit is going toward this ID program. These stickers had better be made of solid gold.
The final third of the fee is allocated to Razorbikes.
Razorbikes was a noble idea that failed. I did a radio story on Razorbikes last semester and completed an informal survey of the program. Another student and I checked out every bike rack in the central campus area between Maple, Garland, Arkansas and Dickson on a weekday afternoon. We found two bikes, both of them in very bad condition.
Adding funding won't really do much good. These sorts of low-tech, free bike-sharing programs have been tried across the world in places like Amsterdam, Portland and Toronto, and they flop. More than half the public bikes in Paris' widely promoted Vélib' system have already been stolen.
Unless the university finds the money to start installing a debit card scanner and GPS on each Razorbike - like London and Barcelona's bikes - it's just never going to work.
Besides, Razorbikes must be returned to campus by the end of the night. They don't replace a car for anyone and don't improve sustainability. Only personal bike ownership does that.
The committee doesn't need as much money as the members think, and they can get the money that they do need from better sources than the pockets of bike riders. We should be doing everything we can to reward bikers, not punish them.
Adam Roberts is a columnist for The Arkansas Traveler. His column appears every Monday.
Viewing Comments 1 - 4 of 5
Theresa Sims
posted 4/13/09 @ 8:21 AM CST
I think that Parking and transit is going a little bit too far with this permit thing. Some Universities who claim to go "Green" provide rental bikes to students and do not charge to park them. (Continued…)
Jeremy
posted 4/15/09 @ 12:09 PM CST
Parking and Transit also should sell bench permits. I'm so tired of seeing people sitting on benches, sometimes on the backs of them, sometimes carving their sweetie's initials in them. (Continued…)
JT
posted 4/15/09 @ 2:31 PM CST
So, who would one contact in the Transit and Parking Office to express disapproval of the idea? Their administrative director? Parking permit admin office supervisor? Maybe it's just me, but their organizational setup seems confusing at best. (Continued…)
Andrew
posted 4/16/09 @ 10:49 PM CST
Scooters and mopeds get charged for parking.
why should bikers take up space (sometimes elevator space in the dorms) without paying for it? $15, give me a break. (Continued…)
Post a Comment