Is it still sharing when it's renting?

Could the parks department run it the way it does the pools and tennis courts - $100 a year gets you unlimited access? But even then, you could buy your own Huffy, lock and helmet for that price - even assuming you'd lose one bike a year to theft or vandalism you'd come out even.

Really? You don't think "encourage a whole lot of people who aren't used to biking in the city to do so" plus "but don't make them wear helmets" equals "head injuries"?

That's the point -- the subways are NOT able to handle that peak flow either at GCT or Atlantic Terminal. So bikes could be a substitute for extending commuter rail directly to Lower Manhattan -- something that the 2008-13 MTA Capital Plan makes clear we could never afford.

The point about subway capacity and bikes in general, however, is a valid one. If bikes ever did get up to a 40% trip share, transit service was cut, and then everyone tried to get on the train when the weather turned bad, it would be a problem.

So widespread bike commuting might have to combine with widespread telecommuting and schedule shifts in bad weather.

http://washcycle.typepad.com/home/2007/11/dcs-bike-sharin.html

I forgive you for forgetting about DC. You are New Yorkers; it is your...way.

Why are we ignoring the casual dressing and less-time pressed errand runners, park-goers, friend-visiters, excercise-getters, urban explorers, and tourists on bikes?

In that case, the rise of warehouse stores like BJ's, Costco and Sam's Club have been a huge setback for cycling, because they're designed for people to buy more than they can carry on a bike.

I've heard from many people here in NY that they've bought a car, or kept a car, or plan to buy a car, so that they can shop in bulk at Costco or Fairway. I know that the economics of that aren't likely to pan out, but they don't, necessarily.

Also, would like to chime in that if the goal is to get more people on bikes we should stop obsessing only about commuters. Getting people on bikes at rush hour is a worthy cause, but work trips are a fraction of all trips. Why does it matter where people are going on thier bikes? Why are we ignoring the casual dressing and less-time pressed errand runners, park-goers, friend-visiters, excercise-getters, urban explorers, and tourists on bikes?

Instead of squeezing on the subway to get to lower Manhattan, suburban commuters could take a bike -- MetroNorth riders from GCT, LIRR riders over the bridge from Brooklyn.

New Jerseyites have long dreamed of a direct link to GCT, before settling for the Access to the Region's Core project, because most of Midtown's jobs are a long walk from Penn. But it's a short bike ride.

Getting from the 34th Street ferry terminals to jobs in Midtown means a slow bus ride -- or a quick bike ride.

The subway and through commuter rail service options that have been dreamed up to improve these commutes would cost tens of $billions, perhaps hundreds of $billions. So they'll never happen.

But this could actually be done at a reasonable cost, and provide exercise. It could be a substitute for a suburbanite taking a folding bike on the train. Leave your own bike at the station, and borrow one in the city. Rains gear could also be lent out, as required.

This is what I have realized about bikes -- exercise without extra time, transportation without much public money.