« Tuesday Morning Commute - Speeding alone will not produce criminality | Main | Spring blossoms »


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

I think you make a good distinction -- which wasn't apparent in GGW post -- between using a model to predict demand and where to place stations.

The "heat-map" DDOT and Arlington have been using isn't very good. This is at least a step up.

If anything, makes the argument for larger stations in high density areas. Would it be insane to CABI on every other block downtown -- no.

re your point that bicycle sharing planning should be highly customized, the reality is that isn't how it's done.

Basically the rule is based on (1) the Paris experience of stations about 300 meters apart, so about 28 stations per square mile and (2) a set of factors common to higher use, "using a raster based GIS analysis"

- http://trb.metapress.com/content/18877j0146643041/

2. WRT Charlie's comment, NYC is breaking up the service area into 1000x1000 sq. foot grids, identifying major activity points, transit stations, obstacles, and working to have one station per.

One of the prime reasons for major vandalism in the Paris bike share system is disenfranchisement of a major segment of the population from the system. The bike stations were located only in the inner core of the city and not in the outer rings where poor(er) people live. As a result, those on the outskirts view the bikes as "rich people's toys" and destroy them to make a statement/have fun. They have no investment in the bike system therefore see no reason to not destroy it. Vandalism of the bike system there is a huge problem and we are very lucky not to have that problem much at all.

viser i detalj utformingen på sinnet, Produkttype UGG færre og noen sko, sluttet ull å bygge, men å tilbringe i sålen bit land, en sterk stil av UGG.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Banner design by creativecouchdesigns.com

City Paper's Best Local Bike Blog 2009


 Subscribe in a reader