Seattle’s Pronto bike share shutting down on Friday

Seattle Times ^ | March 28, 2017 | David Gutman

[Covenantor]

With Seattle weather and topography the intent of essentially communal property was well meant, just inadequately implemented.

Being green isn't easy.

If only they had provided a fleet of these...

At a piddling cost of only $15k the hill climbing and weather problem would have been solved with the added bonuses of car pooling (2 occupants), room for shopping bags, and in a pinch housing for Seattles army of homeless bums. As well as subsidizing an eco-friendly auto manufacturer.

Socialism works every time it's tried by the right people with sterling intentions.

Can't wait for the Car-Share Teslas to appear....whirrr...whirr... Damn, WTH pissed in the car!

[jmaroneps37]

Just something else that was killed by liberal over regulation.

[vooch]

Citigroup pays for advertising :)

Citibike runs a small profit. They even pay NYC for the street space they use for their stations.

they are expanding as fast as operationally possible.

NYC is a perfect landscape for cycling. Mild Climate, 80% of all trips less than 3 miles, shortage of roadway space, and time is of the essence ( NY minute )

My typical routes are 1-3 miles in Manhattan midtown - the bike is faster than any other mode.

[Covenantor]

Just in from Fox News...a better alternative from the Island of St. Barts.

An all electric four passenger EV, the Moke. With a top speed of 35 mph and a base price of a mere $16k Seattle should snap up a fleet of these ASAP. The added benefit of substantially reduced maintenance costs made possible by the plein air design allows for a quick hose out of "homeless deposits".

http://www.foxnews.com/auto/2017/03/27/electric-car-popular-in-st-barts-to-be-sold-in-u-s.html

[vooch]

Thanks

Yes - City Kids have more independence than their suburban counterparts for sure. My 10th grader would absolutely commit social suicide if I picked him up at school.

His 10th grade cousins in CT are driven around by Mom or Dad for everything. When they come to visit, ( UES ) they are amazed that they are free to
simply walk around without Parents hovering around them.

Funny about your daughter biking the last mile, I’ve tried to get my 10th grader to consider cycling to school ( a easy 2 miles mostly through Central Park ) but cycling is apparently something “only old people” do in NYC. LOL

[af_vet_1981]

They should transfer the bikes to some dry, warm, flat city.

Well, I hear the whistle but I can't go, I'm gonna
Take her down to Mexico, she said oh no
Guadalajara won't do

[PAR35]

The current Dallas system has two fixed stations at Fair Park so you can rent one to ride around the large, empty, fairgrounds in the middle of the ghetto 11 months of the year. $5 for 30 minutes, $50 all day. For about 3 days of rental, you could get a better bike at Walmart. https://fairparktx.bcycle.com/

[Hat-Trick]

This land-of-the-man-bun boondoggle was fraught with ethics problems and inflated revenue projections from the start. You know, it’s OK to not follow the rules as long as you have the public’s greater good in mind. Applying the left’s gun-control logic to this issue, I’m surprised they didn’t also try and sell this as a way to reduce bicycle theft.

Only in Liberal Land is the subsidizing of bicycle transportation thought to be worthy of sticking the big hand of government into the small pockets of it’s citizens.

[sphinx]

80% of all trips less than 3 miles,

This is one of the big blind spots for critics of biking in general, and bikeshare programs in particular. We all tend to overgeneralize from our own situations. I'm sure I'm guilty of it at times as well, though I bend over backwards to recognize and correct for my bias. (That's one of the reasons I tend to write long ....) Anyhow, the suburban commuter steps into a discussion about bicycling and reflexively dismisses it as irrelevant, because it usually is irrelevant to his situation. But biking isn't mostly about getting the spandexed warrior from the outer suburbs to downtown. It's mostly about people being able to move easily around their own neighorhoods, without getting run over by suburban car addicts who are perfectly willing to destroy the liveability of city neighborhoods to shave a few minutes off their commutes.

I've worked in several different locations over the last 40 years, but because I live in a centrally located neighborhood, my longest commute was about seven miles. That location was eminently metro accessible; I drove only because, at that point in my life, I had little people at home and school dropoff and pickup responsibilities. (And because my employer paid for parking. Had I been paying, I might have chosen differently.) I rode a bike for years when my commute was under a mile and a half; biking was faster than driving, and a lot more fun. I worked downtown for a number of years and took metrorail to that. Jobs change. Life circumstances change. (Parents of young kids become chauffeurs.) Exercise options and ambitions change. A balanced transportation system that offers flexible options is a wonderful thing.

The spandexed warriors are primarily an indicator species. There really aren't enough of them to build infrastructure for them. But if we do what is appropriate to make neighborhoods A, B, and C all the way to X, Y, and Z walkable and bikeable, the long distance guys can piggyback on that. The spandexed warriors are mostly using existing neighborhood infrastructure along most of their routes. They stay off arterial roads where they can. The only additional element that planners need to provide is reasonable links among these local, neighborhood systems. Planners need to be sensitive to chokepoints and barriers; can a pedestrian or cyclist get over the bridge or across the freeway? The suburban cowboys need to understand that cyclists don't want to be on busy highways any more than motorists want them there. When you enounter them, it's usually because they're transiting a gap between bike-friendly routes on both sides.

[Blood of Tyrants]

I was stationed at Whidbey Island for 3 years in the 80s. I am very familiar with the weather up there.

[kosciusko51]

You can’t have bike sharing when minority groups are just going to wreak or steal the bikes.

Given this proposition and demographics, it would be more likely that it would fail in Pittsburgh than in Seattle, so it must be something else...

[Blue Jays]

I like your posting styles. Calm, courteous, and discussing advantages/disadvantages of a bicycle program.
So many folks immediately flip-out when discussing bicycles because it does not fit *their* specific transportation situation at that very moment.
To the commuter sitting in the car or bus, more folks on bicycles only decreases the road traffic they must endure. Good posts.

[lacrew]

Yikes. In my neck of the woods (Topeka, KS), its $25 a year.

I actually use it from time to time, but I’m not their target demographic. I’m actually a knuckle dragging invader from the surrounding rural area. Our mud/gravel roads and high speed highways aren’t good places to bike ride, so I can just drive into town and hop onto a bike there, and go around the park, etc.

Our system has one point (that I know of) that has a kiosk, where you pay right there. For most users, its an online subscription for the year, and you get a pass code that lets you use the bikes, which can be parked in dozens of locations.

I couldn’t help but notice that the bikes are not operated by the city of Dallas, but rather by “Friends of Fair Park”. In my experience, “Friends of” parks, zoos, etc are really organizations that provide employment for politicians’ spouses. So, I’m not surprised at the rate structure.

[PAR35]

An interesting side note - two competing groups of developers are trying to get the politicians in their pockets so they can re-develop most of the park into a private development, squeezing the state fair to a fraction of the site. Meanwhile, the fair, while losing leverage, still has some politicians on the string, so it’s a 3 way fight occasionally spilling out into public view instead of the usual back room deals.

The railroad museum space has already been cleared out (they moved to Frisco) for which ever faction ends. Meanwhile, the local Black population will have to be transported out.

The Friends of Fair Park are fronting for one of the groups. Meanwhile, you can rent a bike to ride through the ghetto.

[vooch]

indeed, balanced modes is the solution.

I spend a lot of time in Munich ( which used to be as car centric as LA ) and my obversation is how effortlessly one switches from mode to mode depending on the trip.

[Pining_4_TX]

Bikes are prized by street level drug dealers because they allow a fast getaway from cops in cars or on foot.

[Pining_4_TX]

We used to live in the area, and the constant effort to spend on ridiculous stuff drove me crazy. One of my favorites was when some lunkheads thought Tulsa should try for the Olympics. No joke.

[sphinx]

indeed, balanced modes is the solution.

Yes, balance and flexibility solve a lot of problems. To push the issue one step further: too many people in the car lobby push for car-centric solutions that preclude and even destroy alternatives. And too many people in the car lobby oppose funding for balanced transportation. This is where the battles occur.

From a bicycling perspective, my biggest pet peeves are chokepoints and barriers. I will do my best to stay off busy arterial roads. I will take quiet side streets or hop on the sidewalk to avoid traffic. But when the side roads don't connect because they're built on the cul de sac plan that forces everyone onto the main road, that doesn't work. When there is no sidewalk or bike path across the bridge, that doesn't work. When the sidewalks have been sacrificed to create another traffic lane, and no replacement is provided for pedestrian or bike traffic, that doesn't work.

My favorite example was a seven mile detour on a bike because I couldn't move 200 yards ahead along the only available road with heavy traffic, no sidewalk or shoulders, and no route via side streets. The Great Wall of China across my path was a dual barrier: the CSX Railroad tracks tracks flanked by U.S. 50, in that area a high speed, limited access commuter racetrack. The neighborhood streets didn't cross the barrier. The ONLY crossing for several miles in either direction was the above-mentioned major road, whose sidewalks and shoulders had long ago been sacrificed to create more traffic lanes. Motorists tend to be oblivious to this kind of barrier because they have access. But to anyone not in a car, it might as well have been the Berlin Wall. I rode the detour just to see how bad it would be, and I learned something about some neighborhoods I'd never seen. But I also learned that the city had basically created a several-miles long impassible strip for anyone not in a car. Of course, this was on the Anacostia side of the river, so no one much cared except the locals, who didn't count when the damage was done.

At this point, I reflexively oppose road widening in residential neighborhoods. Road widening sacrifices residents' tree plats, sidewalks, and sometimes their front yards. It eliminates on-street parking and kills neighborhood businesses. It creates noise, grime, congestion, and a safety hazard in the affected neighborhoods. The price is too high. With all respect, the suburbanites can just live closer to their jobs.

Looking ahead, intermodal movement can be designed into new development rather easily. One just has to constantly remind planners that cars aren't the only way people are going to get around, and that people should be able to walk easily around their own neighborhoods. (This includes being able to cross the street.) Sidewalks, adequate shoulders, over-and underpasses, and at grade crossings at reasonable intervals will add some cost, but they are a very small fraction of the total cost of the road itself. The point is to ensure that road doesn't become a barrier to non-motorized travel.

[pennyfarmer]

Helmet laws are horrible ideas intended to discourage cycling. They work really well at getting more people back into cars and keeping them there. Who knew that Seattle could be so much against green transportation.