ndmckinney|net

Much hoopla has been made over the launch of Washington DC’s new bike sharing program. Often compared to similar programs in Paris and Barcelona, the program is on a path to failure. In fact, I’m predicting that it has six months to live.

Why such doom and gloom? Three simple reasons:

1. Poor distribution of stations
2. Limited number of bicycles
3. An open hostility to bicycles in the District.

Hey Sailor. New in Town?

The target audience for the bike program seems to be resident commuters. The program requires an advance annual subscription of $40 (+ tax). This alone prevents those visiting the city from accessing the system, unlike comparable systems in Europe. While the cost of the program is quite low, the poor implementation of the service does not justify the price.  Bikes are only available for three hours, hardly long enough to appeal to commuters who do not work near the sparsely-distributed stations.  Workers downtown who already take Metro will not likely be persuaded to change, since SmartBike stations are only by Metro.

Water Water Everywhere?

There is also a very poor number and distribution of stations. Compare, for example, a small portion of the system map from Vélib’: with the entire system map for SmartBike:

The bike rentals are restricted to 3-hour intervals. As noted before, the stations are few and far between. This means that a morning commuter could not take a bike from Foggy Bottom to Judiciary Square and reasonably expect to park the bike upon arrival, since each station only appears to have a few extra parking spaces.

No Room to Share

Finally, there is the omnipresent conflict between DC motorists, largely commuters from Virginia and Maryland too dense to be courteous to their two-wheeled brethren and the cyclists too cool to follow the rules of the road. Putting more bikes into the hands of less-experienced riders will only (A) increase the animosity between car and bike, or (B) put more bikes on the sidewalks, in contravention to their prohibition in the central business district. Given the programs onerous user agreement, it is pretty clear that lawyers Clear Channel, the media leviathan that funded the program, has already foreseen the inherent problems with the system and have sought to distance themselves from any liability connected to the program.

Other Pitfalls

I would like to note that I have also ignored another potential pitfall: the maintenance of the bikes. While I doubt they will receive the proper care from their owners (and most definitely not receive the proper care from their riders), there is nothing to base that decision on other than a gut feeling. After a few weeks of being out in the elements, I’ll have a peek at one of the bikes and report back.

Theft of bikes is another concern of mine, despite the measures taken to prevent this. According to an International Herald Tribune article, 3,000 bikes have been stolen from Vélib’, about 15% of the total. I suspect the proportion here to be much, much higher.

In short, the DC bike sharing program is an ill-conceived mess that has sown the seeds of its own destruction. While I am all for the increase of cycling in the city, this program does not do anything to serve the needs of those who come to the city to work. Unless the program expands rapidly, it will only cater to a few hipster condo residents in Dupont and U St as they peddle downtown to their various unpaid internships at NGOs and law firms.

[From Clear Channel Smartbike Washington DC]