Any chance they could put a station at Aspen Hill and Arctic Ave?

On second thought, better not, we don't want @charlie's head to esplode...

:)

by oboe on Jun 14, 2011 10:03 am • link • report

How did shady grove get CaBi before downtown Silver Spring?!argh!

by anon on Jun 14, 2011 10:13 am • link • report

You've got two network effects going on.

One is the station placement. I think the key for Rockville is setting expectations. Use the Crystal City stations as an example. That is about 2500 rides a month.

The second is the members themselves. You will already have a large number of rockville residents who are members. So joining CABI will get you rides in Rockville AND DC.

It will be interesting to see how that money is split. If I remember correctly, there are a large (over 1000) members of CABI from Montgomery County already. How do you determine where that money is going to be split?

"Annual membership and usage fees will be waived for low-income workers who meet program guidelines"

That sounds like a horrible idea, since the entire idea of bikesharing is you use it for 30 minutes. If I get to ride it for free all day, you're going to have to capacity issues.

by charlie on Jun 14, 2011 10:27 am • link • report

charlie, they have to try and meet the needs of low-income workers as that's the point of the grant.

by David C on Jun 14, 2011 10:31 am • link • report

@charlie,
I agree. Subsidizing the annual fee is one thing, but elminating usage fees would be detrimental to the system as a whole.

by cmc on Jun 14, 2011 10:33 am • link • report

@David C; I get that, and it's an interesting way of squeezing money, but the usage fees seems like a problem. I apply as a rockville resident (low-income), get the usage fees waived, then ride to my hearts content in DC?

Waiving the membership fee seems pretty easy, but I don't see how you can easily knock out the usage fees.

by charlie on Jun 14, 2011 10:36 am • link • report

There is a large men's homeless shelter on East Gude near Crabbs Branch. I hope they put a station near there. It's right between Shady Grove and Rockville metros, and there are a lot of landlocked office buildings a couple hundred yards to the west.

The location of that shelter just boggles my mind. There is no way for those guys to come and go beyond infrequent bus options. Many of them already ride bikes -- there is a bike rack in front that is often nearly full.

by ricomontoya on Jun 14, 2011 10:43 am • link • report

Hopefully the local govt will improve the biking infrastructure around that area. It seems very dangerous to ride a bike anywhere near Rockville Pike.

by Bill on Jun 14, 2011 11:07 am • link • report

I'm disappointed this didn't happen in downtown Silver Spring (or even downtown Bethesda) first, both of which I'm sure would've been very successful. But it's notable that Rockville probably has the most extensive bicycle network in Montgomery County, in addition to three high schools and a community college, and a few walkable/bikeable neighborhoods, including King Farm, the West End, and the town center. Hopefully, this pilot goes well and we'll see Capital Bikeshare make its way to other parts of MoCo.

by dan reed! on Jun 14, 2011 11:08 am • link • report

Want to give away free memberships to people who might otherwise not be able to afford it? Great! But I'm absolutely against removing the usage fees. They're there not the penalize poor people but to provide an incentive to not keep the bikes out all day, which is exactly what will happen.

I assume they're doing this because a lower percentage of lower-income people have credit cards that can be used to sign up for these types of services. But what happens when a bike is not returned?

by Adam L on Jun 14, 2011 11:29 am • link • report

If we're going to extend CaBi to the middle ring of suburbs, one strategy worth considering is just putting one CaBi station at each metro station rather than trying to build out an entire network at each location. This way, people can use CaBi in lieu of Metro when needed or to run a short errand that's not far from a metro station. This would work particularly well along the orange line since it runs parallel to the Custis/W&OD. This way, someone could bike from falls church to rosslyn/city one way in the daytime and take metro back home at night. Or someone could metro out to Dunn Loring, bike to the immigration office and back and even with usage fees, it would still be cheaper than taking a taxi.

by Falls Church on Jun 14, 2011 11:35 am • link • report

Any expansion of the system is good. Don't sweat the details. This will put more pressure on Bethesda and Silver Spring to hop on as well.

by Jasper on Jun 14, 2011 11:35 am • link • report

BTW: I happened to be in King Farm yesterday. Cute neighborhood.

by Jasper on Jun 14, 2011 11:36 am • link • report

If the idea were really to help the poor with transportation, wouldn't it make more sense to just give them free access to Metro or maybe just a little more welfare money and letting them decide how to spend it? Do you really envision welfare moms going around the county with their kids in tow ... on CaBi bikes?

No, this sounds like it was some cyclist promoter's underhanded way of taking money that was intended to help the poor to instead advance his/her agenda. That's sad.

by Lance on Jun 14, 2011 11:40 am • link • report

If they had a Cabi drop off station near the PS Business Park cluster on Crabbs Branch near East Gude, this might just get me back on the metro again. Waiting for the 59 to come was what really killed my non-car commute from DC to the burbs. It was easily an extra 20-30 minutes to go 1.5 miles.

I'm not holding me breadth though, I'm sure the King Farm development will get priority consideration.

Of course, reliable network access on the red line would have gotten me back on the metro too.

I don't agree with further subsidizing subsidized transportation. All you're doing is enhancing the bottom line of large employers so they don't have to pay appropriate wages. Decent wages are the key to political freedom, not subsidizing people's lives.

by JackOLantern on Jun 14, 2011 11:40 am • link • report

Jasper, Silver Spring and Bethesda aren't incorporated cities like Rockville. They're technically unincorporated Montgomery County. They're governed at the county level. It's up to the county to join CaBi and place stations there.

by Cavan on Jun 14, 2011 11:47 am • link • report

As a former rockville resident and now a DC resident, I think this is awesome. I am confused though about placing stations near Shady Grove, because it is a very bike-unfriendly area. I would have hoped for more bike-friendly infrastructure before CaBi came in.

by Ethan on Jun 14, 2011 11:51 am • link • report

@Lance, technically it is WORKING poor, so welfare moms might not qualify.

I do have a bit a worrying feeling your scenario is true.

by charlie on Jun 14, 2011 11:51 am • link • report

@Lance -- the point of reverse commute programs is not to give people more money for transportation, but help address a mismatch between where jobs are, where jobless people live, and transit between those places. So the point would be that Cabi allows people to get places that transit doesn't go conviently or doesn't go at the right time. Giving them more metro fare money wouldn't help transit availability.

I don't know the area well enough to know how this will work, but idea is not just to subsidize transportation, but to create new opportunities.

by Kate W on Jun 14, 2011 11:53 am • link • report

@ JackOLantern -- see my post above. There is a large men's shelter on Gude just east of Crabbs Branch. A station near that shelter and the quite large office park cluster at Gude and Crabbs Branch would serve a lot of people and would seem to comport with the purpose of the grant (serving the poor or whatever).

That location is also halfway between Shady Grove and Rockville metros; it's 2 miles to each in opposite directions. It's also right on the "Millennium Trail". Seems like a very likely station location to me.

by ricomontoya on Jun 14, 2011 11:58 am • link • report

Hopefully the local govt will improve the biking infrastructure around that area.

Rockville is a LAB recognized Honorable mention Bicycle Friendly Community. There Bicycle Advisory Committee is very commited and the City Council has been supportive of biking as well. It's a pretty easy area to bike around actually.

by David C on Jun 14, 2011 12:10 pm • link • report

Probably won't work for me. The first rule of transit is that you don't bike 3/4 of a mile past your destination to walk 3/4 of a mile back. There's a number of huge business parks with small-to-medium-to-US government sized employers *on* Crabbs Branch. That would be a more natural place to put cabi and would ensure a higher number of daily trips.

I'd really object to placing a cabi station AT a men's shelter. Cabi is a community resource, not a homeless resource. There's also nothing else out that far. Putting it out there would ensure no one but the homeless used it.
That would be a major failure if it was the case. The point of community resources is to attract a large number of regular users so that the less fortunate can also be served, not to dedicate transportation systems to the less fortunate so they can be a chronically underfunded boondoggle and politically unpopular for the average citizen.

The "Poverty First" thinking is how the country's bus service has been developed in the past 50 years and it's a large reason as to why bus transportation has lost the middle class and thus doesn't serve the poor well either.

by JackOLantern on Jun 14, 2011 12:26 pm • link • report

@ Cavan:It's up to the county to join CaBi and place stations there.

Fine. Whatever. If Rockville can show itself to be a good test case for the county, kudos to them.

It would be nice to have CaBi in Alexandria, Fairfax and PG as well. Fairfax for instance has the cross county trail from Occoquan to Great Falls that could function as a good starting point. It would also be great to have CaBi at Fairfax Metro stations and nearby locations.

by Jasper on Jun 14, 2011 12:30 pm • link • report

"Fairfax for instance has the cross county trail from Occoquan to Great Falls that could function as a good starting point."

Not sure if I want to take a bikeshare bike on a singletrack....

by charlie on Jun 14, 2011 12:34 pm • link • report

A system centered on the two Metro stations with a handful of stations 1 to 4 miles away would allow users to get to traditional transit

and create a messy redistribution problem.

by jim on Jun 14, 2011 12:50 pm • link • report

JackOLantern--why wouldn't you just get a bike now for your commute, what's stopping you?

Just get a beater bike for your transit to work/back leg of your journey. That's what I did in Baltimore for my trip to and from Towson (it was an old 10 speed of an office mate's son). It was 7.5 miles to Towson, but a bike allowed me to control my time better and not have to rely on the bus in order to not miss the train and therefore have to wait another hour for the next train. (It wasn't a problem so much taking the bus to work, it was coming back to Penn Station--where the service, on the QuickBus was erratic and the 8 was pretty slow, although I could have taken a bus up to Lutherville and the light rail from there, but it would have still relied on the bus.)

WRT this proposal in general, the real problem is a lack of a network and the need have dispersed stations (docks) to securely lock the bikes in the places where people are going. But then there is the issue of getting the bikes back to places where people will use them--it's a system that is supposed to be collaborative consumption remember, not a way to provide people their own personal bike for $75/year It's not unlike the problems in DC but worse. (jim mentioned this before me.)

It'd be better to provide people with bikes directly, and to set up a program at the shelter that someone mentioned.

The Community Cycling Center of Portland has a good program to promote bike usage by low income commuters. It includes a bike for people who finish the program.

by Richard Layman on Jun 14, 2011 1:16 pm • link • report

@Richard

I can't speak for JackOlantern, but you ask what's stopping him - and then you list several items that would obviously be tripping points, such as:

Buying a beater bike
Buying a lock for it
Managing the whole system
Risking leaving your beater locked up at the Metro station all night, all weekend.

That's the beauty of bikeshare - it lowers all of those barriers to entry to the biking world to the simple process of getting a membership.

If Jack is reverse commuting from DC, perhaps he already has a CaBi membership, too.

by Alex B. on Jun 14, 2011 1:28 pm • link • report

I agree about bikeshare, but you also need to have a station at your endpoint.

Not every trip is best captured by bikeshare, from the standpoint of the system. Like transit, it does some trips very well, others good, some ok, and others not very well at all.

It ain't hard to buy a beater bike at a yard sale, craigs list, etc., and you can get a lock pretty easily too. If you can't manage the "system" for biking to and from, then you're probably not capable of taking a shower or putting on your clothes. It's not hard. Although, I agree that there needs to be quality long term parking at transit centers for bicyclists too. (That's my business after all...)

by Richard Layman on Jun 14, 2011 1:44 pm • link • report

I'm not saying that it's hard, exactly - but it's harder than signing up for CaBi is.

And yes, the locations need to be strong enough to support a station. I don't know if JackOLantern's destination has enough use to support one, but maybe it does.

by Alex B. on Jun 14, 2011 1:45 pm • link • report

I don't know about you, but the people I see riding CaBi are yuppies and college kids (I'm a member so I'm not bashing it). I doubt this is going to be popular with the target low income crowd. More likely, the same crowd of people who are already using the system will work this to their advantage.

by Greg on Jun 14, 2011 1:51 pm • link • report

@Alex @Richard,

I'm not sure the location would support a cabi either. Someone would need to do some market research, but we have a number of large offices (Red Cross, Aggregate Industries, some division of the FDA) and a huge number of small offices. Clearly the success would depend on how many local people would switch to ride-on, metro or cabi for their commute. I'm guessing not many because there's no financial, parking or traffic reason for the middle class to take public transportation out here. Driving is easy and parking is plentiful.

However, if the option is "park it buy the homeless shelter" or "park it buy the business center" I think the business center wins hands down for having an opportunity to expand ridership.

Why don't I buy a bike? As Alex mentioned, I could get a beater which isn't too big of a problem, but I have to deal with the likely scenario that it will either get stolen (functional beaters get stolen, not just "nice" bikes), get messed with by bored youth, or pay $200 a year for secure parking. None of these options meets the trifecta of cost effective, reliable and simple. I've certainly considered it though.

by JackOLantern on Jun 14, 2011 2:14 pm • link • report

@Lance-

Your point is well taken, but the rules that accompany the grant program under which this project would be funded do not permit federal money to purchase transit passes.

by BNS on Jun 14, 2011 3:18 pm • link • report

JackOLantern -- you raise some interesting points. Through no fault of my own, I am involved in some bike policy development in Montgomery County, including opportunities that present themselves on Rockville Pike. (It came up in the context of the MoCo Bike Summit that was held last month.)

There's supposed to be a meeting this week or next, and maybe I will try to bring some of this up.

One of the things we said is that we need more action meetings, to continue to build the capacity and the agenda. Maybe doing a focused effort on the Pike, in light of this CaBi thing is something I will suggest.

White Flint, Twinbrook, and Rockville stations should have better long term bike parking than they do. Although it's tougher because it involves 3 agencies, WMATA, MCDOT, and MNCPPC-MoCo, all with various priorities.

by Richard Layman on Jun 14, 2011 4:42 pm • link • report

JOL: oops, specifically related to your issue... is why when I would park my bike at Union Station at 7:10am (usually on the 1st. St. NE side) I would use two U locks (and I have a cable lock for my seat). In Baltimore, there is a parking area inside the parking structure, next to the office. Because it was in a reasonably surveilled area, there I only used one lock.

by Richard Layman on Jun 14, 2011 4:44 pm • link • report

If they can spend so much on CaBi in Rockville, why not spend a fraction of that and clear the damn CCT when it snows.

by SJE on Jun 14, 2011 6:40 pm • link • report

totally and completely different funding sources. CCT snow removal wouldn't have anything to do with access to jobs on the part of low income people now, would it?

by Richard Layman on Jun 14, 2011 7:50 pm • link • report

Governments seem to be able to cite the "funding source" argument when they DON'T want to do something, but its not a barrier when DO want to do something. Count me skeptical. As for access to jobs, there are plenty of poor people (including a lot of immigrants) in Silver Spring who might appreciate a faster route to jobs in Bethesda and/or the other side of the Red Line so that they can get out to upper MoCo. With BRAC, you have all of those jobs from Walter Reed (not far South of SS) going to Naval Medical Center, for which the CCT is a natural link at least part of the way. You can't look at the new Discovery Building and downtown Silver Spring and assume that decades of relative poverty has been erased.

by SJE on Jun 14, 2011 8:53 pm • link • report

I also see a number of people using the CCT to come East to work in the Silver Spring area, including in the body shops, landscaping and other light industries near Lyttonsville.

by SJE on Jun 14, 2011 8:55 pm • link • report

when I would park my bike at Union Station at 7:10am (usually on the 1st. St. NE side) I would use two U locks (and I have a cable lock for my seat).

I remove the front wheel, and lock it with the rear through the frame around the bike rack using a tempered Kryptonite chain w/ a Kryptonite padlock. My seat doesn't have a quick-release, so a determined thief could steal it using an allen wrench, though it hasn't happened yet.

I'm curious, why two u locks?

by oboe on Jun 14, 2011 9:28 pm • link • report

@oboe

If Richard's bike frame is anything like mine, it can be awkward to secure the entire bike with a single U-lock (unless the U lock is enormous, which creates its own problems).

I use a U for the frame and rear wheel, a cable for my front wheel, and figure that my non-quick-release seat isn't an attractive target for thieves.

by andrew on Jun 14, 2011 10:21 pm • link • report

I don't like to remove the wheels unless I really have to. The second U lock goes from rear wheel to the frame, not to a bike rack frame. The traditional hoop rack isn't wide enough to allow for affixing locks at the front and rear of the rack, but the so called "staple" rack is (in the UK they call these "Sheffield" racks). They have these racks in front of Kaiser Permanente on 2nd St. NE, but I haven't uploaded photos I have of them.

by Richard Layman on Jun 15, 2011 5:29 am • link • report

SJE -- I'm not arguing that you're making a bad argument. But funding streams, sources, and agencies do make a difference.

The biggest problem is when "parks" departments run trails that are used for transportation. Transpo agencies have very different missions from Parks agencies (not that they do any better, generally, on snow removal from trails).

IMO, this is a big issue in Montgomery County, and my sense of this is that it is only going to get "worse" from the standpoint of bicycling for transportation, at least there. Parks departments have two missions: conservation and use. They consider conservation the primary mission. So many places where there are trails now, they'd rather the trails weren't there.

As far as snow removal goes, I've argued that a "friends" organization should pilot snow removal, see how it works, and then work to get the dept. to take the mission on, or to deal with it through a MOU with the MCDOT. Alternatively, the parks dept. could contract with the Bethesda Urban Partnership to do it (if they are allowed to do fee for services, and fee for services outside of their specific service area--I would argue that because the trail serves Bethesda, even the trail sections outside of their specific service area are relevant to their mission).

by Richard Layman on Jun 15, 2011 5:37 am • link • report