Palo Alto's bike-share plan takes a turn | News | Palo Alto Online |


Palo Alto's bike-share plan takes a turn

City Council committee approves plan to let multiple vendors bring their bikes to local streets

After failing to get traction in its prior attempts, Palo Alto's plan to bring bike-share programs to the city's masses is about to move into a new direction.

By a unanimous vote, the City Council's Policy and Services Committee agreed Tuesday night to launch a new pilot program that would allow various bike-share companies to bring their services to local streets with little city involvement. The new approach is a sharp departure from City Hall's prior attempts to introduce bike-share -- ill-fated ventures that focused on creating a partnership with one major bike-share company and investing significant city funding in infrastructure.

Palo Alto's first bike-share program, which was part of a larger effort known as Bay Area Bike Share, was discontinued in fall 2016 after several years of relatively meager usage. According to city data, the 37 bikes that were part of the program were rented an average of 0.17 times per day -- well below the established standard of one ride per day.

Undaunted, the city explored earlier this year a significant expansion of the program, which would now feature 350 bikes equipped with GPS technology. That program, which would have cost the city more than $1 million in upfront costs, never launched.

Now, having failed to tap into the local market for bike-share services, the council is preparing to let the market come to Palo Alto. The new one-year pilot program would create a regulatory framework for bike-share companies, allowing vendors to receive permits and potentially compete for riders in the same geographical areas.

In explaining the change, transportation officials are citing successful experiences that other cities had with different approaches. Chris Corrao, a transportation planner with the city of Palo Alto, said Seattle and South San Francisco had recently experimented with a six-month program of this sort, with promising results.

The ridership levels in Seattle, he said, far exceeded the city's projections and the problems were minimal. And according to a report from the Department of Planning and Community Environment, the South San Francisco program is also achieving some traction, with about 400 bikes currently on the street generating about 500 trips per day.

These days, vendors typically use "smart bikes" with GPS systems, which make it easy for users to find bikes with phone apps and allow for more flexibility in dropping them off. The city's prior effort, by contrast, had traditional bikes that had to be returned to a bike station. The city's report cites companies including Social Bicycles, LimeBike, Spin and MoBike as vendors that now use smart bikes.

Corrao told the Policy and Services Committee that he has been in contact with various companies that can potentially apply for permits in Palo Alto and said there is "definitely an interest in being here in large numbers."

The speed with which the bike-share trend is taking off in other cities has taken the transportation industry by surprise, Corrao said.

"The bike-share industry was turned upside down and, literally, in a matter of weeks, several bike-share vendors have emerged, in a privately funded way where the private entity would provide bicycles for free (to the city) -- a large number of bicycles -- and operate the business similar to the approach of Lyft or Uber," Corrao said.

Under Palo Alto's new regulatory program, each vendor would be required to provide at least 100 bikes, with the total number of bikes (not including e-bikes) capped at 700 to reduce chance of unused bikes cluttering sidewalks.

Given that the approach is so different from what the city has done in the past, Planning Director Hillary Gitelman said staff has decided to roll this out on a pilot basis and then re-evaluate it in a year. With the new approach, the risk and cost is all on the vendors.

"If it turns into a big mess and bikes are all over the people's lawns, we'll just pull the plug," Gitelman said.

The council committee had few reservations about trying the new approach, which Vice Mayor Liz Kniss described as a "huge departure" from what the city has been doing in the past. Councilman Tom DuBois called the pilot program "interesting" and supported the overall cap on bikes. Committee Chair Cory Wolbach agreed and noted that since these services are likely to reach Palo Alto anyway, it would make sense to regulate them.

"Staff's regulating approach is to steer this emerging market in the direction to make it more beneficial," Wolbach said.


Follow the Palo Alto Weekly/Palo Alto Online on Twitter @PaloAltoWeekly and Facebook for breaking news, local events, photos, videos and more.

What is democracy worth to you?
Support local journalism.


47 people like this
Posted by 38 year resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 15, 2017 at 11:34 am

38 year resident is a registered user.

So the first attempt at a bike-share plan failed because less than one person used the service on a daily basis. Well our brilliant city council votes to bring in up to 700 smart bikes equipped with GPS systems. That'll solve it.

When will they get it? This isn't Europe. I know they want to see everyone riding around with baguettes, some cheese and a bottle of wine in their bike baskets, but it ain't gonna happen. Why don't they fix the pot holes in the streets instead and get rid of the neighborhood road blocks that create traffic gridlock?

32 people like this
Posted by midtown senior
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 15, 2017 at 11:39 am

midtown senior is a registered user.

This is another example of the Council's unrealistic obsession with making Palo Alto a "biking city." As long as we have commuters to work, seniors who need transportation, handicapped persons and the need for short local trips involving carrying goods(shopping, etc.) we will have cars. Whether or not they are self-driving, we will have cars. Cars need parking near offices and businesses. Shopping centers thrive in part because of available parking. The rapid turnover of businensses in downtown ia a "tribute" yto the lack of parking. The failure of the bike-share plan is not due to ownership by the city. It's due to the fact that bikers usually own their bikes and others don't want to bike (or can't).
Choking traffic by road diets has simply shifted the cross-town traffic problem to residential streets.
We need to be realistic about biking. Provide for car transport to be here for the long term by constructing adequate parking ... no exceptions, and by building high rise housing along the rail and bus corridors. For example, both sides of our rail corridor should be rezoned for high rise residential buildings that require walking paths to rail stations,limit car ownership to one car per resident unit,and prohibit overnight street parking for several blocks around the housing area.

17 people like this
Posted by Marj
a resident of Walter Hays School
on Nov 15, 2017 at 11:41 am

How many parking spaces will these bikes take up? Will they use street parking in front of people's homes? Other Cities are having these problems where folks can no longer park in front of their homes because the bikes stations pop up with little to no notice. Parking is already impossible in this City and bikes won't solve the problem. More parking garages need to be built. When companies build new buildings they should have to provide adequate parking for customers as well as employees.

22 people like this
Posted by Traveler
a resident of Professorville
on Nov 15, 2017 at 11:53 am

If you travel, you will see tons of these bike littering the sidewalks in the world. They are mostly abandoned and the bike companies had reinvested the "deposits" so that are not really interested in the outcomes and care of the bikes. Hopefully Palo Alto will limit the number of bikes, limit the deposits that these companies take from the well intentioned riders and come up with a plan to remove the bikes if they are discarded in the wrong place. Currently in downtown Palo Alto - how many of us see abandoned Google Bicycles - the distinct colouring on those bikes prove that there is a problem. Here is an interesting article on the problem in China Web Link.

5 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 15, 2017 at 12:31 pm

I am not completely against the idea because I have seen it work and been used in other places outside the popular tourist hangouts.

However, ease of use is essential. These bikes need to be available in neighborhoods and popular destinations such as parks and movie theaters.

For example, we had house guests this past summer who didn't have a car. We had on occasions to drive them to the Caltrain station, to the movie theater at Shoreline, to Stanford Shopping Center, to San Antonio shopping center and Castro Street. If these guests had been able to rent a bike within a 1/4 mile of my home and ride the bike to any of these destinations they would have been able to do that independently of our family.

Likewise, anyone in the family with a bike problem (often) could have used a bike to get to school or the station if there had been a bike station close by.

The powers that be must ask who is likely to use these bikes and how, and then provide a service that meets the criteria. Having to keep the bikes within Palo Alto and only available for rent at stations and downtown is not likely to get much use.

35 people like this
Posted by Bicycle religion
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 15, 2017 at 12:43 pm

PAForward has declared bicycle use a religion so it becomes impossible to criticize it. Like other religions, facts and data are irrelevant.

But here goes anyway:
In theory bicycle use is a good thing and we have ridden them. BUT with our overpopulation, our huge traffic problems, and parking shortages,
bikes are a hazzard, not a solution.
They make driving dangerous. And unpleasant.
At night they are a clear danger. Those bright lights blind you.

Developers, architects, and PAForward promote bikes so they can build without having to construct parking.
Apologies to religionists for introducing reality here.

14 people like this
Posted by Keith
a resident of Crescent Park
on Nov 15, 2017 at 12:51 pm

I think its a very good thing that the City promotes biking. I'm a Palo Alto resident and, like many others, do almost all my local shopping and commuting on my bike. There are several places where the bike racks are often overcrowded, especially at Whole Foods and Trader Joes. It will be pretty annoying if rental bikes are left in the bike racks and there is even less space for local folks with their own bikes. I wonder if the City will be able to help mitigate the problem.

12 people like this
Posted by Barron Parker
a resident of Barron Park
on Nov 15, 2017 at 2:22 pm

For bike-sharing to work with significant usage, a city has to have a sufficiently dense population that most people are near the bike stations. Palo Alto is spread out -- suburban -- and the average distance from your home to a bike station will require a long walk, perhaps 10 to 15 minutes. Each way. That is not practical for getting people to use these bikes.

If Palo Alto is serious about increasing bicycle usage, we need to provide more and better bicycle stands to lock up our own bicycles. These should be near all commercial areas, and should allow you to secure your bicycle (frame and both wheels) with a single U-lock. Installing 500 of these might cost $200K. Why are we not doing this?

25 people like this
Posted by Sam Stevenson
a resident of Duveneck/St. Francis
on Nov 15, 2017 at 2:39 pm

What is the role of government if not to protect its people from exploitation?

Why are these bike sharing companies so unexpectedly profitable? Data.

Council members should be concerned about privacy. If you look at the detailed terms of use that are sometimes included on the bike company websites, they won’t rule out the possibly of tracking people even when they are not using the bike.They sometimes say they explicitly reserve the right to sell the data to third parties...

I am sure this is part of the regulatory framework the City is creating, yes?

22 people like this
Posted by mj
a resident of College Terrace
on Nov 15, 2017 at 3:31 pm

Ad how much altogether (including consultants) has the city spent on their various bike sharing programs?

Yet we don't have a single dedicated traffic safety officer and red lights, speed limits, stop signs, are ignored with impunity.

15 people like this
Posted by Rose
a resident of Mayfield
on Nov 15, 2017 at 6:15 pm

Yes -- the City needs to enforce our traffic laws and slow down the traffic in our neighborhoods. Riding my bike all over PA (and to MP and MV sometimes) is great -- I don't have to circle around trying to find parking and I pass lots of backed up cars and go straight to the red light. I also reduce pollution, get my exercise and save money. Try it sometime, you'll like it. If you're mostly driving around PA, you'll have much more fun on a bike.

9 people like this
Posted by jim h
a resident of Community Center
on Nov 15, 2017 at 7:02 pm

As usual, immediately a lot of negativity and why this can't work. Why not just let some companies try. Citibike in NYC works pretty well. Still some problems and we may not be dense enough to work here. But that and how the company handles the region is there investors problem.

The main argument I see in this forum is that bikes will be left all over the place.
Solution - Bike companies must have each bike clearly identified and either Palo Alto can pick them up and charge the company a substantial fee. Or leave them in place and start charging the offending company ongoing fees per day.
Companies can take credit card deposits and make it clear to riders that they must return a bike to one of the stations or pay these fees plus a percentage from their credit card. Would you just abandon a bike if it would cost you a lot?
Also, what am I missing? If I leave my bike unsecured in a public place it will be quickly stolen. Why aren't discarded bikes simply stolen?

18 people like this
Posted by Local
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 15, 2017 at 7:04 pm

Biking in Palo Alto is not safe. How about waiting until PACC installs some walled off/segregated bike paths (that are not in the bay lands) and people begin to say "You know, PA is a great place to ride!"... and then invite the bike sharing services.

Because right now, it's going to fail again. Because biking in PA is lousy.

How about that underpass near Whole Foods that dumps you into wrong way traffic?! Love that one.

I wonder how much time city time was spent on this?

41 people like this
Posted by Unsafe bicyclists
a resident of Greater Miranda
on Nov 16, 2017 at 1:54 am

The winter is here and I am dreading seeing bicyclists with no reflective anything and no lights, wearing dark clothing blending with the darkness, staring at their smartphones, their ears plugged with earphones, unaware of their surroundings ...
I am afraid that one of these days I will hit one ...

32 people like this
Posted by Palo Alto
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 16, 2017 at 6:22 am

You see, everyone else is supposed to ride bikes, so the city council members can find parking spaces for their own cars.

8 people like this
Posted by Deep Dockless
a resident of Portola Valley
on Nov 16, 2017 at 9:24 am

Founder Of Chinese Bike Sharing Firm Bluegogo Fled, Millions Of User Deposits At Risk: Web Link

12 people like this
Posted by Matt Austern
a resident of Greendell/Walnut Grove
on Nov 16, 2017 at 10:47 am

On the one hand I'm all in favor of helping to increase bicycle ridership. The more people who ride the better off we'll all be in a number of ways, including safety.

On the other hand it's hard to see why a bike share program is the best way to increase ridership. Other projects, like bike lane improvements, better enforcement of automotive speed limits, and finishing bike bridges and underpasses, should be much higher priority. I don't see Palo Alto as a city where a bike share program is likely to succeed.

On the third hand, the article makes it clear that this isn't a big city initiative. It's a program to "allow various bike-share companies to bring their services to local streets with little city involvement." Given that, why not give it a try? If private companies want to risk their money on for-profit bike rental in Palo Alto, let's get out of their way and let them. If I'm right and this ends up fizzling, no harm done. If I'm wrong, if bike-share takes off and these companies end up being successful, then so much the better.

22 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 17, 2017 at 9:15 am

For the love of god, stop.with.the.bicycle.worship.already

This is a delusion that the city government doesn't even question. It's a foregone conclusion to them that bikes=good and cars=bad. They can't see beyond this simplistic, collectivist groupthink and justify blowing vast amounts of resources on failed "bike-incentivizing" experiments. It is so wasteful.

To me, a bicycle is a slow and primitive form of transportation that should amount to nothing more than a hobby. We should be free of coercion to use one form of transportation over another.

Its unfortunate that those with the power of taxation have such a myopic view of reality.

9 people like this
Posted by Garden Gnome
a resident of Crescent Park
on Nov 17, 2017 at 12:33 pm

Dear 38 year resident,

Forget about the potholes!

Obviously, the answer is to provide all bike riders with "baguettes, some cheese and a bottle of wine".

3 people like this
Posted by 38 year resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 17, 2017 at 2:38 pm

38 year resident is a registered user.

@ Garden just made my day. LOL !!!

2 people like this
Posted by Brring brring
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Nov 17, 2017 at 2:51 pm

Enjoy the traffic haters. Thanks for the snacks! Haha :)

7 people like this
Posted by 20 year resident
a resident of Southgate
on Nov 18, 2017 at 10:38 am

The shift to GPS-enabled smart bikes could make a real difference for adoption. Let's give it a try! One suggestion is for these companies to actively recruit riders -- maybe a free trip, and some sign-up / info tables around town / at local events. (Bay Area Bike Share could have benefitted from some form of in-person explanation of how it worked.) Oh, and while we're at it, let's improve the existing biking infrastructure -- more bike parking at popular destinations (supermarkets), and ways to reduce theft / vandalism at Caltrain bike parking.

19 people like this
Posted by Palo Alto Resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 18, 2017 at 2:59 pm

Palo Alto’s Transportation Department needs to be reined in. They are wasting millions of taxpayer dollars on foolish, dangerous, traffic gridlock creating bicycle projects. The department is making traffic worse for the residents. Transportation Director Josh Mello obviously has a bottomless budget and he is squandering it on bike projects that will be a failure and will be quietly ripped up within five years. The city streets look like a carnival. Time to drain the city swamp.

19 people like this
Posted by Bike Lobby
a resident of Crescent Park
on Nov 18, 2017 at 3:11 pm

Cyclists frequently ride two to four abreast along city streets. The majority of the cyclists NEVER stop at stop signs. The student riders are texting and talking on their phones as they ride along city streets. You can’t ride a bike when going to the grocery store, cleaners, picking up small children or if you are an older infdividual. The small but vocal bike lobby has hijacked Palo Alto.

35 people like this
Posted by Midtown
a resident of Midtown
on Nov 18, 2017 at 7:28 pm

So I have figured it out. Why is the CC so hot on bikes? The CC is pro-development and wants to build stack and packs without parking. If they can argue everyone rides a bike then the developers can build stuff car-lite. Yes, more millions for the developers. All those car-lite developments will have their cars parked in front of the R1 residences on the street.

30 people like this
Posted by Ahem
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 19, 2017 at 1:16 am


You are correct. If you scratch not too far below the surface you will find EVERYTHING the PACC does is a thinly disguised handout for the real-estate development industry.

20 people like this
Posted by jane
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 19, 2017 at 11:56 pm

EVERYTHING the PACC does is a thinly disguised handout for the real-estate development industry.

More accurately, "EVERYTHING the PACC MAJORITY does."

Greg Scharff, Liz Kniss, Cory Wolbach, Adrian Fine, Greg Tanaka,

25 people like this
Posted by Sell Outs?
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Nov 20, 2017 at 1:09 am

I agree. It's funny - Kniss and Scharff are just blatently working for the developers; Wolbach and Fine are on some "we must help the young take from the old" mission, but the developers are delighted to help them along; and Tanaka, who knows what he is thinking.

But it is funny that Kniss and Scharff are basically just sell-outs, but get elected anyway since they've been at it so long and their names are well known.

11 people like this
Posted by Eric Rosenblum
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 20, 2017 at 6:04 am

This is a good development.

Palo Alto was ill-suited for "bike- dependent" bike sharing (which was previously tried). There are simply not enough dense areas in Palo Alto where destination docks would be used consistently. Plenty of people get on and off of Caltrain carrying a bike, so clearly there is demand for a bicycle as a last mile solution. However, the previous iteration of the system didn't permit people to go anywhere useful with a bike.

The new system completely changes this dynamic... the bikes have a flexible destination (they don't have to be parked in docks) and range. The most obvious use case is Stanford: how many people would get off at Caltrain, and ride the 1.1 miles to central campus, rather than walking or waiting for a Marguerite shuttle? I suspect that we're about to start seeing a lot of these bikes all over campus.

Similarly, how many students would come to downtown Palo Alto if they didn't have to worry about getting their bikes stolen?

The dockless nature of the program definitely leads to other challenges (bikes illegally parked all over the sidewalks, for example). However, provided we can help solve this problem, the dockless design enables a successful network.

12 people like this
Posted by Online Name
a resident of Embarcadero Oaks/Leland
on Nov 20, 2017 at 8:48 am

Online Name is a registered user.

@Eric, I'm missing your logic when you say "Similarly, how many students would come to downtown Palo Alto if they didn't have to worry about getting their bikes stolen?"

Why wouldn't these $3300 bikes we're providing also get stolen? There have been lots of articles about the problems with stolen, lost and/or simply discarded bikes from Google and elsewhere.

Are we that rich that we can afford to waste all this money?

How about instead working to prevent bike thieves in the first place?

7 people like this
Posted by Eric Rosenblum
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 20, 2017 at 11:26 am

@online name

"we" aren't buying any bikes (ie., Palo Alto doesn't pay for this). 3rd party companies are providing the bikes. Their business model is charging a fee per ride (usually ~$1/hour... see Web Link for an example of one of these companies).

This model has a significant effect on thievery. These bikes are simply not stolen (they are extremely heavy, go relatively slowly, and are GPS enabled). There is literally no resale value. Destruction or vandalism is probably a problem, though.

6 people like this
Posted by Eric Rosenblum
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 20, 2017 at 11:33 am

@online name

"Why wouldn't these $3300 bikes we're providing also get stolen?"

I'm a bit confused by this question? Are you reading this article or something else?

To summarize:
1) this program doesn't cost Palo Alto anything
2) the cost-per-bike isn't mentioned in this article (although it's not super relevant... again, we're not paying)
3) theft of bikes should go way down. These bikes are totally different from Google bikes (which are light weight and more theft-attractive)

4 people like this
Posted by Annette
a resident of College Terrace
on Nov 20, 2017 at 1:09 pm

Annette is a registered user.

"Midtown Senior" probably hit the nail on the head: people have their own bikes. And if Eric R is correct and these bikes are heavier than the Google bikes, that might discourage ridership. When I have considered using a shared bike I have been deterred by the access process and concluded that it wasn't worth it for a ride or two. Is it possible to have a quick-use system similar to the parking meters in SF so that borrowers can quickly swipe their payment card and ride away?

Palo Alto is pretty bicycle friendly as is although sometimes bicycling feels perilous. I've told my family that if I ever don't make it home, they should look for me on campus. At dusk during the commute hour, campus cycling can be a gnarly experience, especially with how the new roundabouts funnel bicyclists into the same lane as autos. Even so, I am glad I can still bike b/c it beats the heck out of driving around town.

9 people like this
Posted by Elizabeth
a resident of Downtown North
on Nov 20, 2017 at 2:57 pm

@Bike Lobby: You can’t ride a bike when going to the grocery store, cleaners, picking up small children or if you are an older infdividual.

Tell that to the Whole Foods customers fitting a bag of groceries in a basket, the Addison parents picking up their children with child seats, and the elderly women parking their bicycles in front of Reach gym. Heck, you can bicycle with a newborn if you kludge a baby car seat into a bike trailer.

29 people like this
Posted by Ahem
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 20, 2017 at 10:24 pm

The bicyclists shot themselves in the foot twenty years ago when they drank the developer cool-aid and foolishly started believing a denser Palo Alto would be a more bike-friendly Palo Alto.

Density has unintended consequences. The congestion that accompanies density makes it unsafe for bicyclists to share the roads with motor vehicles. Density and its evil Siamese twin congestion are destroying bike-able infrastructure 10x faster than Palo Alto's developer corrupted government can create it.

No amount of bike-only infrastructure construction will ever makeup for the loss of bike-safe streets. The hippy dream of a bicycle utopia in Palo Alto is dying from a self-inflicted wound.

4 people like this
Posted by Yes yes
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Nov 21, 2017 at 12:06 pm

I get around totally fine in Palo Alto on my bike. I've been doing it for about 30 years so tat may come into play, but I feel very safe when I ride through PA, with the rare exception of coming across a lunatic driver now and then(rare though)

I think the above poster is taking great liberties with reality to craft his opinion. PA is a great place to bike...has been for decades IMO and only seems to be getting better.
It's a terrible town to drive in though.

8 people like this
Posted by Outraged in RWC
a resident of another community
on Nov 25, 2017 at 11:14 am

Redwood City had a couple of those "bike scam" stations and I personally witnessed (at the Caltrain station) how day after day, for years, not a single one of those bikes ever even moved. ZERO usage. MASSIVE gravy train payments (via MTC and the City) for the infrastructure and to the "Motivate" company who ran the show. The entire project was a rip-off, probably with falsified statistics to sell it in the first place.

We really need a formal investigation of that entire project -- and of all the similar, spectacular boondoggle failures in other cities, like PA.

We need to completely pull the plug on any and all similar projects that take the label "public-private partnerships". Translation: the public pays, and the private partners wallow in gravy with no motivation whatever to deliver a working solution.

12 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 26, 2017 at 12:06 am

Interestingly, The Guardian just did a report with SHOCKING photos about China's lack of demand for their bike share program.
As was mentioned in another thread, Asians and Indians come to America to drive cars on our nice roads, not ride bikes. Conservation was not instilled into their way of thinking during childhood. And we will need to think about this when we plan programs, and housing since our demographics are changing.

Additionally, bikes expose one's skin to the sun, and the darker or more freckled your complexion, the "lower class" one might appear.
It's a cultural thing.
Owning and driving a car is a state of status to people coming from developing countries.

These peoples parents and grandparents rode bikes, and took buses. Most will not never use public transit. It is too dirty with "our germs".
Here is the article and SHOCKING photos from the Nov 24th Guardian Paper:

"Chinese bike share graveyard a monument to industry's 'arrogance'
Future of dockless bicycles under a cloud amid concerns there are too many bikes and not enough demand".

Web Link

8 people like this
Posted by Stop the Insanity
a resident of Another Palo Alto neighborhood
on Nov 26, 2017 at 5:59 pm

Resident ... thank you for exposing the international concerns. Outraged in RWC ... you are 100% right, we really need a formal investigation of that entire project. "Scam" is an understatement. Shut them down!

6 people like this
Posted by Resident
a resident of Old Palo Alto
on Nov 27, 2017 at 9:26 pm

As environmentally nice of an idea it may be to have bike share program, I'm afraid it will be a waste of time and money.
Demographics have changed, and biking is not what people want.
The mountain of unwanted discarded bikes in China attest to this.
Cycling is not popular in developing countries.
too dangerous - too dirty - too much sun exposure.
America is portrayed on television in their countries as a place with great open roads. They want to drive.

Like this comment
Posted by Been there lately?
a resident of Adobe-Meadow
on Nov 28, 2017 at 2:36 pm

As all the people with eyes know, the number of cyclists over the past 20 years has exploded around here. Bike share or not.

I guess things are different in China where nobody rides a bike,...what?!?! hahaha.
Obviously they don't do bike share in China but I can promise you, they ride the hell out of every pedaled contraption you could imagine. Picture pedal powered delivery trucks. If it can be pedaled, it's on the road in Beijing.

Don't miss out on the discussion!
Sign up to be notified of new comments on this topic.


Sorry, but further commenting on this topic has been closed.

Stay informed

Get daily headlines sent straight to your inbox.

Pluto's appears to close after more than two decades in downtown Palo Alto
By Elena Kadvany | 14 comments | 7,282 views

What Local Teens are Saying
By Sherry Listgarten | 19 comments | 2,961 views

Plastic vegie bag ban: Pragmatic? -- or simply politically correct?
By Diana Diamond | 35 comments | 2,175 views

Edible Education – Free Course - UC Berkeley Online
By Laura Stec | 0 comments | 1,529 views

Letting Christmas Linger
By Cheryl Bac | 5 comments | 686 views


Palo Alto Weekly Holiday Fund

For the last 26 years, the Palo Alto Weekly Holiday Fund has given away more than $7 million to local nonprofits serving children and families. When you make a donation, every dollar is automatically doubled, and 100% of the funds go directly to local programs. It’s a great way to ensure your charitable donations are working at home.