I would love bike-share stations at Franconia-Springfield and the Mall. Yes, there is a shuttle. But only every 15 minutes. And yes, you can walk, but that takes a good 10-15 minutes as well. Way too much for a quick pick-up.

by Jasper on Oct 5, 2011 3:54 pm  

This is a great post. Fairfax County has many of each the nodes you identify. George Mason University is exploring a bike sharing program, and the county tried to get bike sharing at the Metro station areas undergoing TOD as part of the TIGER grant. I think it is part of the Tysons bike master plan but to my knowledge it's not a done deal there. One big issue is how do the bikes get across the monstrous arterial roads which seem to get actually less bike-friendly with more urban development -- such as Route 7 in Tysons, and Route 29 in Merrifield.

by Douglas Stewart on Oct 5, 2011 3:56 pm  

I think the issue for CaBi expanding to the suburbs is there are going to be a lot of places where the flow of traffic is even more on directional then it is in the areas CaBi already serves (thanks to more single use areas). This will probably be most stark in areas where that last mile is to a residential area. Not saying that this will be an insurmountable problem for CaBi, just noting it will be an issue.

by Steven Yates on Oct 5, 2011 4:11 pm  

I agree with this in premise, but the success of bikeshare programs in the suburbs will depend on how well it can be implemented into the overall transit framework. My biggest complaint with Capital Bikeshare is that it originally focused too much on downtown stations. While it certainly helped generate support for the system, there never really was a huge problem getting downtown from most areas of the city. But CaBi's real success came from filling in those gap areas where transit access isn't available or is too much trouble to be useful. Perfect example: the explosion in bikeshare traffic between Dupont Circle and U Street.

So CaBi would work great in Alexandria to get between the metro stations and the core business areas further to the east. Capital Bikeshare stations at the University of Maryland would likely also be a huge success given the expansiveness of the campus and the time it takes to get from where students live to the main academic core as well as the Metro.

I am more concerned about plans like those in Rockville. Touting bike share as a better alternative for poor people to get to work is a noble plan, even though it's not very well thought out. There first has to be several transit points, conducive to amateur bicyclists, that is not well served by other forms of transit in order to be successful. I just don't see that happening in a large way in Rockville anytime soon.

As for "middle and elementary schools could all provide fertile ground for bike sharing" no no no no no no no no no. I can't repeat that point enough. The legal problems and liability issues that would arise from offering a bike sharing service to children should be enough to dissuade even the most avid promoter.

by Adam L on Oct 5, 2011 4:28 pm  

Can CaBi actually scale such a wide area affordably? Suburbs would most certaintly suffer bike imbalacing (from suburb nodes to single suburb metro) to an even greater degree than DC does. Does that mean a larger number of bikes and docks to move less people than DC? This would also mean a significant number of rebalancing vechiles which will encounter traffic issues at rush hour. Unfortunately on a highway, you cannot easily route around a traffic jam as easily as you can on a city grid.

I'm just not sure it makes sense.

Expanding may work on the fringes of the city or even a self-contained group of nodes, but density is CaBi's friend both in people and in bikes/bike stations.

by cmc on Oct 5, 2011 4:29 pm  

"Obviously, CaBi is a great approach to addressing the "last mile" problem of commuter transportation systems."

It gets better than that -- bikeshare can be an excellent first and last mile solution.  A subscriber can use Metro in effect as a bridge between suburban and urban bikeshare stations, without taking up space in the subway by bringing their bike along and without taking on the (considerable) risk of theft or vandalism to their own bike left at the boarding station. 

What it comes down to is that network effects can happen even without direct connections. 

With plenty of suburban commuters already using the system downtown, an existing subscriber base is already in place.  Reverse commuters who might already be using bikeshare to get to their Metro station are another component of this easy-to-tap market segment and provide built-in rebalancing. 

by cabi addict on Oct 5, 2011 4:31 pm  

Hmm. not so sure. I don't see bikesharing do well in more suburban areas. Let's be honest: Arlington, old Town Alexandria and Bethesda would be called "cities' in most places - or at least urban.

I think bikesharing would do better to concentrate on smaller cities. Someplace like Grand Rapids, MI -- or better yet, Grand Haven -- could be fertile ground for expansion.

At some point, you've got to admit that bikesharing isn't great as car replacement. It is, however, an excellent supplment to transit.

by charlie on Oct 5, 2011 4:46 pm  

I'll echo Adam L's points. Conceptually, this is great - but operationally, I'd be very concerned.

The same 'rules' for bikeshare success still apply - relatively high station density, large aggregate size of the network, relatively easy biking routes nearby.

Even so, there are operational issues with rebalancing that need to be addressed, as well as operational cost.

As it is, Crystal City is more or less a satellite system to the rest of the network in DC. Eventually with expansion in North Arlington, the distance will grow relatively seamless, but the operational issues remain. You can't just have a random 3-4 stations at some commuter rail stop and expect that to be successful. You might be able to get a large institution (say, UMD in College Park) to help finance a satellite system of Crystal City's size, but I would be hesitant about anything smaller than that in scope (or much larger than that in area).

by Alex B. on Oct 5, 2011 4:49 pm  

@cmc "...density is CaBi's friend both in people and in bikes/bike stations."

• Silver Spring CBD: already built
• Bethesda CBD: already built
• White Flint: in planning
• Shady Grove: approved for development at Bethesda CBD density
• Gaithersburg: see today's post in this space

by cabi addict on Oct 5, 2011 4:49 pm  

@cabi addict

Yes, but that assume equal densities. Taking CaBi once you get to the urban core is one thing, but I'm certainly not going to ride CaBi home from Grosvenor Metro on Tuckerman Lane crossing both Rockville Pike and Old Georgetown Road. There's also a very small likelihood that there would be enough people the neighborhood who would be willing to make that journey to make putting a station in worthwhile (especially since there's a RideOn bus that can take me the same distance). And Lord help someone if I ride all that way just to be dockblocked (and without any other nearby stations to boot!)

I agree with cmc. The economics of bike share without needed densities just don't make sense in many suburban areas. There's also a problem in that CaBi started as a pilot by a few forward-thinking transit bureaucrats. And it worked! The problem now is that politicians (even those in the suburbs) are now starting to demand CaBi as a matter of principle even if the actually utility of the service is questionable. That's a recipe for disaster.

by Adam L on Oct 5, 2011 4:50 pm  

I agree with charlie, in that Bikeshare seems well-suited for more, well, urban suburbs. I would argue that small-to-medium -sized towns are also a good target (though the scaling of cost is tough).

Counties like Fairfax or Howard, defined by cul-de-sac McMansion developments where you have to walk 200 feet just to get two doors down, probably less helpful.

I do think that bikeshare (or biking in general) actually is great as car replacement, but only to the extent that most of one's travel is within 3-4 miles of home (or of the nearest transit stop).

by Jacques on Oct 5, 2011 4:53 pm  

Dave, you made an attribution error:

"CaBi's success has sparked bike sharing networks in Denver..."

This is not true, and the timeline bears it out. In 2008, Denver, hosted the first large scale (1,000 bike) bike-sharing system as a pilot during the DNC convention in August. Minneapolis did the same for the RNC convention in September. They were both called "Freewheel!n" and sponsored by Bikes Belong and Humana. My organization, BikeDenver provided about half the volunteers for the system over the week.

On the heels of the success of Freewheel!n, Denver began planning a permanent system, Denver Bcycle. Denver worked with Trek, Humana and ad agency Crispin Porter Bogusky to develop the Bcycle system now in production, and created "Denver Bikesharing" as a nonprofit 501c3 to manage the system for the city. The launch of Denver Bcycle was on April 22nd, 2010, it started with 42 stations and 500 bikes, and now has 51 stations.

The District's own Smartbike was launched in September of 2008, with 10 stations and 100 bikes, followed by CaBi's launch in September 2010 with 48 stations, now 118.

I hate to quibble about the details, but having worked on the Freewheel!n, Denver Bcycle and Capital Bikeshare systems, I think it's important to write the history correctly.

I would phrase it as follows:

Denver, Minneapolis and Washington were all working on a 3rd generation bikesharing system around the same time between 2007 and 2010, mostly inspired by the success of Velib in Paris. DC launched the first pilot system, Smartbike in September 2008. Denver launched the first citywide system, Denver Bcycle in April 2010, followed by Minneapolis' Nice Ride in June 2010, and DC followed with the largest system to date, Capital Bikeshare in September 2010. Each system has been very successful, and all have convinced other U.S. cities to seriously consider implementing their own bike sharing systems.

by Will Handsfield on Oct 5, 2011 4:53 pm  

"and DC followed with the largest system to date, Capital Bikeshare in September 2010."

Until NiceRideMN overtook it back a couple weeks ago...

To Adam L/Alex B: your concerns are understandable, but I don't think it'll be an issue in the Old Town/Carlyle areas of Alexandria....if anything, those areas would potentially be more balanced than DC during the week as you have folks coming in on Metro heading to work in those areas countering the folks living there heading to the Metro to work elsewhere.

by Froggie on Oct 5, 2011 4:59 pm  

@Froggie

I can definitely see Alexandria being the next place for CaBi to go. It has the density, walkable neighborhoods, and transit oriented development that foster CaBi, but I'm not so sure the same holds true in reverse.

by Adam L on Oct 5, 2011 5:03 pm  

The thing is to think about bike sharing within areas, more like pods within an extended network, and not so much as an extended contiguous network.

In areas with the right conditions, like people mentioned, bike sharing can work in suburbs, specifically in suburban towns-conurbations-cities. But not all of them. E.g., I think the proposal for the Rockville stuff is wacked. But it's not my money...

Charlie and I and others discussed this within comments when it came up before in a separate blog entry. The basic issue is that within a certain area bikeshare makes sense, but outside of it not, because the cost of bikes and docks and kiosk is so high, and you can't have docks at every building along I-270 and expect anything other than one trip to and one trip back.

If you're going to some office park west of Rockville from the Metro, get your own bike, but have WMATA-Rockville put in great secure bike parking so you can leave your bike overnight.

Disclosure: I do (or am attempting to do) bikesharing too.

by Richard Layman on Oct 5, 2011 5:14 pm  

@Alex B. "...I would be hesitant about anything smaller than that in scope (or much larger than that in area)."

NUBIJA in Changwon, Korea is about twice our size (223 vs 115 stations) and covers well more than twice the area (412 sq km vs 39 sq mi) - a lower overall density but spread out into central and remote clusters separated by hilly terrain.  Compared to Capital Bikeshare it has a <"http://www.codeline-telemetry.com/maps/bus-depletion_summary.htm">lower dock and bike depletion rate and a slightly higher peak utilization.

What can't be seen directly from periodic sampling of its public data is the relative usage in central and outlying areas, nonetheless the pattern seems reasonably encouraging.

by cabi addict on Oct 5, 2011 5:15 pm  

@Froggie

I agree about Alexandria, but then again I don't know that I'd really call that Suburban. It may be suburban in jurisdiction, but that's about it.

Part of the problem here is the assumption that 'suburban' is an effective descriptive term. It isn't, really.

by Alex B. on Oct 5, 2011 5:22 pm  

It would be nice for Bikeshare to focus its expansion plans on urban neighborhoods that are so far underserved, such as the neighborhoods in upper Ward 4.

(Then again, once Silver Spring and Takoma Park jump on the Bikeshare train, it will be a huge benefit to upper Ward 4.)

by The Brightwoodian on Oct 5, 2011 5:45 pm  

It seems like in theory some level of imbalance in single-use suburban areas might work out ok, because the bikes move where the people are at any given time. So maybe people all move the bikes to a suburban office building for working hours, but then they're available there for lunch trips, errands, etc. Same with home trips- once riders bring the bikes back to more residential areas, there would be more available for evening and weekend trips.

Granted, you'd have a less efficient dock-bike ratio. And if it's sunny in the a.m and rainy in the p.m., the imbalance will be way worse without mixed land uses. Lastly, you'll still need bike-friendly infrastructure and some density, which are the really big challenges.

by RichardatCourthouse on Oct 5, 2011 8:40 pm  

As a general rule of thumb, Cabi would probably not work very well at Metro stations with large parking lots--or more than a handful of commuter rail stations. In Prince Georges County, College Park is the only promissing location, though possibly a few stations would also be worthwhile at National Harbor once Alexandria has established a dense network.

Better parking is a higher priority. There needs to be something between locking a bike to a pole at an unguarded lot and paying an annual fee for a bike locker

by Jim Titus on Oct 5, 2011 9:54 pm  

I agree with the others that CaBi would work better in just the urban suburbs like Arlington, central Bethesda and parts of Alexandria. I don't see the system being that popular in less densely-populated areas, or those that are quite a hike from the nearest current CaBi stations.

Let them focus on filling in DC and building out in Arlington and hopefully Alexandria first. (Maybe Friendship Heights/Bethesda and Silver Spring too.)

Another problem with some of the more distant suburbs is the lack of bike infrastructure and safe conditions in the central business districts. Many of the suburbs have high-speed roads running right through the middle. Side streets don't offer useful connections in some suburbs. It's hard to see CaBi working in every suburb. I say this as a fan of CaBi in central DC and Arlington.

by Michael H. on Oct 5, 2011 10:09 pm  

I do think 'pods' of bikeshare services could work in some areas well apart from the rest of the network - College Park is one such potential place with a strong anchor in UMD. I also think that you could expand the current core system in a somewhat leapfrogged pattern (i.e. you could set up a pod of such bikes in Bethesda right now and it could work), but each of those pods would almost need to be self-sufficient.

by Alex B. on Oct 5, 2011 10:49 pm  

@Adam L "...but I'm certainly not going to ride CaBi home from Grosvenor Metro on Tuckerman Lane crossing both Rockville Pike and Old Georgetown Road".

Nor did I suggest that you do so, which is why Grosvenor was omitted* from the list of up-and-coming bikeshare candidate places in which that density is well on its way to happening. 

-----
* but if you ever do consider biking it, check out the tunnel under Rockville Pike into the Grosvenor Park complex.

by cabi addict on Oct 5, 2011 11:26 pm  

@Adam L "As for "middle and elementary schools could all provide fertile ground for bike sharing" no no no no no no no no no. I can't repeat that point enough. "

+1.  And then some.

I couldn't figure out why Montgomery County's bikeshare heat maps included schools as a potential demand source. 

by cabi addict on Oct 5, 2011 11:33 pm  

'Suburbs are the next frontier for bike sharing

Why stop at the suburbs? Why not go straight to the 'ultimate' next frontier .... space ?

Space, the last frontier ...

I'll kick in a couple bucks for the journey ... if it helps ...

;)

by Lance on Oct 5, 2011 11:33 pm  

The original DDOT heat map used to plan the rollout of Cabi showed that close-in Montgomery County (from downtown Bethesda to downtown Silver Spring) was at least as suitable (in terms of density, existing bike infrastructure, etc.) for bike sharing as all but the core of DC and more so than any part of Alexandria or Arlington.

by Casey Anderson on Oct 6, 2011 12:58 am  

re: last mile. I agree!

I live in Woodridge in NE DC. I live about a mile from the Brookland Metro, around which there are THREE CaBi stations. But I never use it because those are the closest stations and it's inconvenient to have to walk a mile to get to the bike.

I've been thinking for a while that it would be great if they had stations set up about a mile in each direction from the cluster around Brookland. This speaks directly to the 'last mile' stuff and opens the entire network of bike sharing to all those people who are geographically just outside of it being useful to them.

by Nolan on Oct 6, 2011 7:34 am  

I live in the same block as an elementary school AND a high school within the district, yet there isn't a CaBi station within 4 blocks. Great opportunity to expand ridership beyond young professionals (and to convince me to join!)

by Mike on Oct 6, 2011 10:09 am  

I would like to point out that fairfax has quite a few bicycle oriented facilities of different flavors - The W&OD, the MVT, the CCT, various smaller trails, some multi use paths heavily used by cyclists, some on road striped bike lanes, as well as some roads relatively heavily used by cyclists.

That does not answer the density issue, but there are pockets of density already, and more in development.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Oct 6, 2011 10:37 am  

I'm curious if bikeshare makes sense if being deployed along some of the rail-trails in the area - the Capital Crescent, W & OD trail, etc. You already have a well-used facility that connects a number of suburban activity centers AND may be seen by people afraid of biking on busy arterial roads as a safer alternative. Then again, both trails are really heavily used as it is, and I worry about unleashing a number of novice bikers on them.

@The Brightwoodian

Run bikeshare all the way up Georgia Avenue to downtown Silver Spring. When I lived in Petworth I biked to DTSS often; for the most part, the ride is comfortable and safe and the corridor has a number of activity centers so people are always going back and forth. Now, if only we could get some bike lanes in MoCo that actually go somewhere . . .

by dan reed! on Oct 6, 2011 11:48 am  

I don't see the point of putting stations along trails unless you have a sufficient 'pod' of stations at the key destinations along the trail. One station in Bethesda and one in Silver Spring isn't going to be that effective, no matter how much people like the Capital Crescent Trail. However, if both Bethesda and Silver Spring had sufficient numbers of stations within those areas, then it would make sense.

In short, all of those major trails are predominantly linear in nature, while the strong suit for bikeshare is in a more diffuse network.

by Alex B. on Oct 6, 2011 11:53 am  

Alex B, I actually disagree with your specific example - but it may be the only one. Putting one station in SS and one in Bethesda would allow someone to go from one end of the red line to the other without dipping into DC and getting some exercise. I think it might be faster and so it would become like a really long virtual tunnel (ideally one wouldn't have to pay a fair on the second red line leg - but that is just a pipedream). Or if one is in SS and headed to Shady grove, biking to Bethesda and catching the train there is probably faster. But in almost any other case I agree.

by David C on Oct 6, 2011 12:05 pm  

fare, not fair. D&^%HCK!!!!!!

by David C on Oct 6, 2011 12:06 pm  

I think that some of the older MoCo suburbs would support CaBi stations. For instance, I live in Silver Spring, which has a metro and a downtown core with jobs and entertainment. Further, midway between it and Takoma Park is a branch of Mongomery College.

Also, Silver Spring's demographics skew young unlike some burbs like Kensington or Bethesda, so I think there would be ample demand. Finally, some of the northern DC neighborhoods like Brightwood and Pentworth are developing so CaBi could link them to surrounding neighgborhoods.

by Adam on Oct 6, 2011 12:08 pm  

@AlexB; not so sure about linear.

Take this is as thought exercise. Put in a line of bikeshare stations -- in fact the same amount we have now -- on M, Penn, and K st from Georgetown to Union Station.

Then take out the circulator.

What would the result be? I've said before, bikeshare is comprable to a mid to large sized circulator line in costs and ridership. I actually think a linear model might work better there.

by charlie on Oct 6, 2011 12:11 pm  

+1 to Alex B. - the network effect is what counts.

Much of the existing trail infrastructure seems to be more about recreation than transportation.  Riding CaBi from downtown to Crystal City yesterday evening I was once again impressed (though not favourably) by the extent of circuity imposed by the segment from the S end of the 14th St Bridge to the destination. A pretty ride, to be sure, but a more direct connection would have far greater utility.

by cabi addict on Oct 6, 2011 12:11 pm  

@David C "Or if one is in SS and headed to Shady grove, biking to Bethesda and catching the train there is probably faster."

Fastest by far is MARC to Rockville and Red Line to Shady Grove, but only if your trip coincides with their sparse service.

Second fastest is J series Metrobus to the Bethesda or Medical Center Metro and transfer from there.

CaBi would take longer than that; times would probably be a wash as against riding all around the J (I have done all of these, though the latter obviously on my own bike).

by cabi addict on Oct 6, 2011 12:21 pm  

@dan reed

There are already plenty of novice bikers on the trails. Where are novice bikers supposed to learn - on the arterials? If we are going to increase the biking population, I think casual use on the trails is probably a good thing.

@dan and alex.

I dont suppose a line of cabi spots along the W&OD alone would be a good idea. But Arlington already has a network, and one growing denser. Adding a couple along the WOD out through Falls Church, near Tysons, and into Vienna could complement that. Combine that with Cabi spots at the EFC, WFC, Dunn Loring, and Vienna metro stations. Theres already a designated bike "route" from the Vienna metro through Vienna to the WOD. Plus a connection through blake park (soon through metrowest?) to the Cross County Trail. As well as a CCT/WOD connection just west of Vienna. And the WOD/Custis connection heading back into Arlington.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Oct 6, 2011 12:23 pm  

@AWalker

I dont suppose a line of cabi spots along the W&OD alone would be a good idea. But Arlington already has a network, and one growing denser. Adding a couple along the WOD out through Falls Church, near Tysons, and into Vienna could complement that. Combine that with Cabi spots at the EFC, WFC, Dunn Loring, and Vienna metro stations. Theres already a designated bike "route" from the Vienna metro through Vienna to the WOD. Plus a connection through blake park (soon through metrowest?) to the Cross County Trail. As well as a CCT/WOD connection just west of Vienna. And the WOD/Custis connection heading back into Arlington.

I don't think that's nearly enough. You'd need a full network on both ends of such a connection. You can't just have a line of stations separate from the rest of the network with no other network to connect to. That would be a pretty low utility system.

If Falls Church sprinkled 20 or so stations around town, then that could be an anchor to connect to the rest of the Arlington network via the W&OD.

by Alex B. on Oct 6, 2011 12:50 pm  

Here here! They need stations around the Fairfax area where a few friends of mine work.

by Avocadoinparadise on Oct 6, 2011 1:54 pm  

Not all "suburbs" are alike. There are clusters in Va. and Md. that are at least as dense and multi-use as are most DC neighborhoods outside of downtown. The District isn't really that dense as cities go, after all.

In Virginia, the Towns of Vienna and Herndon, the cities of Fairfax and Falls Church (plus Seven Corners), the northern part of the Rte. 1 corridor, and parts of Reston all lend themselves to bikeshare stations spaced 0.5 to 1 mile apart.

In Fairfax City even just a network of a 12-15 stations focused on the GMU campus, Kamp Washington, downtown Fairfax, Fairfax Circle, Fair City Mall, the "gateway" at 123 & Lee Hwy. and Vienna Station would facilitate a lot of short trips that right now are only reachable by car, the (very infrequent) CUE bus and long walks, especially if the city made a commitment to add bikelanes on currently bike-unfriendly streets like Old Lee Hwy and Pickett Rd.

I think a lot of people get hung up on Capital Bikeshare needing to be contiguous geographically. The goal should be to create useful networks anywhere they work as standalone system.

I live in Fairfax City and work in downtown DC. I belong to Capital Bikeshare because it's useful when I'm in the District. By adding stations in Fairfax City and gaining members there, more people would be willing to leave their car behind in Fairfax for trips in to DC once they have the bikeshare fob in their pockets.

If funding can be found for these "suburban" nodes, I see it as a win all around for everyone in the region.

by c5karl on Oct 6, 2011 2:35 pm  

could we find 20 or so stations in that part of Fairfax? Beyond Falls Church? I suppose one barrier the current layout of Tysons, which otherwise is the logical place.
Could twenty or so stations across Vienna, down towards Fairfax City and GMU work? enough density? To seperated from Falls Church?

Alternatively could Baileys fit into the Arlington network?

by AWalkerInTheCity on Oct 6, 2011 2:44 pm  

Does anyone know when the stations along the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor are supposed to be installed. Seems like I heard "the Fall" but I have yet to see evidence of anything beyond the station on Rhodes.

by Juanita de Talmas on Oct 6, 2011 4:34 pm  

In what world is Arlington a "city" while Old Town (which is the only portion of Alexandria getting CaBi) is a suburb? Especially because Alexandria is actually "The City of Alexandria" while Arlington is a county and DC a district.

And if either Alexandria or Rockville are suburbs, so's Arlington. And Arlington actually had CaBi FIRST so the suburbs are hardly the "next frontier".

I am SO TIRED of people acting like DC is the end all be all, cutting edge on everything for hundreds of miles and everything outside the tiny tiny box is instantly The Dreaded Suburbs, full of dragons and all that.

by twitch on Oct 6, 2011 4:48 pm  

dan reed -- in the deployment patterns that we (BicyclePASS) recommend for bike sharing, we highlight the opportunity to include trailheads as bike sharing station sites.

I did that in the draft draft for the Western Baltimore County Ped and Bike Access plan too, although all that stuff was excised from the posted draft -- the sections covered infrastructure and facilities, and in this case, transit (one trailhead for the Gwynn Falls Trail will be co-located with a Red Line light rail station when built; Falls Road station is proximate to R.E. Lee Park and the future extension of the Jones Falls Trail, etc.)

by Richard Layman on Oct 6, 2011 5:10 pm  

Great article, but check your facts, Denver was the first city in the U.S. to launch a bike sharing system April 2010 with 500 bikes. I wouldnt say CaBi can claim to "spark" or "inspire" other cities - bike sharing has been wildly popular in many cities around the world for quite some time now.

by Tyler on Oct 6, 2011 5:10 pm  

Tyler, SmartBike - the predecesor to CaBi - open in August 2008. The author was incorrect that CaBi inspired Denver, but it is correct that DC bikesharing played a part in that.

by David C on Oct 6, 2011 5:23 pm  

@Alex B.

The Purple Line will also run along the Capital Crescent Trail and there's supposed to be TOD at the Connecticut Avenue/Chevy Chase Lake station, so that would be a pretty substantial node, not to mention the NIH/Walter Reed complex, which can also be reached by the trail (sort of). So there are things between Bethesda and Silver Spring that a trail-oriented bikeshare could be useful for accessing.

by dan reed! on Oct 6, 2011 11:18 pm  

Dan,

That's certainly true, but then that means more stations. You probably want more than just one station at each of those stops along the way - which all gets back to one of the fundamental principles of bikeshare - go big or go home.

If you can't get critical mass within your network, then it's not going to work as well as it could. So, you can expand into suburban areas (defined here solely as those areas substantially separated from the current core bikeshare network), but each one of those 'pods' needs to essentially operate and survive as its own bikeshare mini-system.

The trail is just the route - the network of stations still has to make sense for it all to work well.

Which isn't to say that it can't be done, but you probably can't do it on an incremental basis of adding a few stations at a time here and there. That kind of incrementalism only works if you're adjacent to the existing network.

by Alex B. on Oct 7, 2011 12:15 am  

I noticed a couple people mentioned universities and/or College Park/UMD specifically as potential options for bikesharing. UMD actually has some bike stations already--by weBike--at least one of which is integrated into a large student housing complex.

by Laura on Oct 7, 2011 12:38 am  

Yup- As someone that lives less than 2 miles from a metro station in the suburbs (Prince George's county), and has nice, wide, four lane streets with speed limits of 30-35 all around me, I would love to have bike share near me (and bike lanes!). Also within the the 2-3 mile radius: three grocery stores, a library, a post office, a community college, and a large shopping center. I typically take my car to all of these, because the bus doesn't come often enough.

by cybrbanana on Oct 7, 2011 6:46 am  

@ alex

forgive me, I just checked the map - I didnt realize that the arlington Cabi sites were almost all in eastern arlington at this point, I assumed they already reached almost to Falls Church.

by AWalkerInTheCity on Oct 7, 2011 10:51 am