13 Jul 2010
HELPING MELBOURNE BIKE SHARE
You know, it’s very important that Melbourne’s bike share scheme is a success.
Around the world it’s been proven that these schemes have the power to turbo charge bike use in car clogged cities.
It’s obvious why. With easy to ride bikes scattered all over the streets, in Montreal the stations are every 300 meters, for example, its very tempting for people who’d normally never think of riding a bike as transport, to just have ago.
You don’t have to purchase the bike, worry about it being stolen, about the brakes and gears needing adjustment. It’s all done for you, and, as long as you ride is for half an hour or less, it’s free.
No wonder Bixis have helped transform Montreal into the 5th. city in the world for cycling, or that in the first two months of this, their second season, Bixi has already clocked up a million rentals.
Melbourne should be ideal of such a scheme. It’s not hilly in the CBD, and it already has a comparatively high level of bike use and bike consciousness.
Yarra City, close to the CBD, has the highest bike commuter use in Australia, over 10%. Amazing! (See; Councillor on a bike)
So it’ s depressing to read that in the first three weeks of the MBS, the bikes were rented only 700 times. That’s an average of 7 times per bike, one rental every couple of days.
Compare this with the overwhelming demand which met Barcelona’s Bicing schemewhen it was launched, 30,000 rentals in just over twice that time.
Of course it’s winter in Melb, and they are starting with one of the smallest number of starting bikes of any scheme, (100) These might be factors.
The name doesn’t help. Melbourne Bike Share sounds so institutional and so correctional. “Now, don’t forget to share your bike, children.”
It’s at variance with the fun and flair one usually associates with Melbourne.
Not to say that all the names of the various bike shares, which is spreading around the world with the speed of a music craze , are catchy. Montreal’s Bixi is a great name, arrived at through a popular competition. Paris’ Velib name is fine too.
Barcelona’s Bicing leaves you wondering how it’s pronounced. Bicincitta, the Italian scheme, sounds fun and feminine. The Milan version, BikeMi, sounds encouraging.
Here’s some BikeMi’s waiting for riders.
I like Ecobici, the Mexican city scheme name .
These Ecobicis look fun and don’t require helmets apparently.
and Nice Ride, Minneapolis is a name promising pleasure to come.
By the way, if you want to keep up with the latest on Bike share around the world, check out the bike sharing blog.
So whilst Melbourne might be stuck with its stuffy name as far as the bike logo is concerned, how about the nickname of Mixi?
It is appropriate because the bikes are the same bike as in Montreal, both made by a very clever Quebec company, Devinci, and so a variant on Bixi, suits.
Mixi it is?
That out of the way, the real problem is harder to solve, and that’s our stupid helmet law. I say, stupid advisedly, because this law not only may kill MBS, it has for years, stifled utility cycling in this country.
Our helmet law has acted as a selective herbicide , killing off casual utilitarian cycling and favoring, racing, mountain biking etc, all those more extreme forms of cycling which helmets naturally suit.
If you read MBS web page, you’ll find this as evidence of how important Bike share is around the world.
“As of Dec. 2009 there were over 90 (bike share) programs in approximately 136 cities.. with another 45 programs planned in 22 nations in 2009-2010 ”
What they neglect to mention is that in none of those other programs, most of which you can assume care just as much about the safety aspects of their program as do we, are adults forced to wear helmets. It’s always a choice.
Ponder that all of you with your stories of how your life was saved by your helmet, how do you explain this apparent safety everywhere but here?
How do you explain too, that for the 2009 season in Montreal when over a million Bixi Kms. were ridden, many by new riders and often without helmets, there were only 4-5 Bixi associated accidents, and none of them serious.
Should not all that extra riding by novices, have resulted in a nightmare of broken heads by your calculations?
Or is is that our drivers are worse and, as cyclists, we are much more careless? You tell me.
The safest place in the world for cycling is Holland where no one wears a helmet, not even kids.
Take a look at how relaxed and safe non helmet riding can look here in the Waltz of the Bikes
What you see here, in Amsterdam, is this not ideal? Is this not something we should be aiming for. Mixi can help us get there.
I am waiting for some stats to clinch my case, for the percentage of bike riders wearing helmet in Montreal, both for the general cycle population and for Bixi riders specifically.
Bixi itself will furnish some data and the rest I hope to get from Velo Quebec.
In any case, given that MBS Mixi could well be in danger of failing due to the helmet law, I feel quite responsible in recommending that the riders of these bikes, indeed the riders of all the slower sit-up style bike, be exempted from the compulsory helmets .
Wade Wallace of Cycle tips doesn’t understand the value of these schemes when he claims to be glad our helmet law will keep some people off Mixis.
Here’s Wade.
Wade says;
The helmet law will definitely be prohibitive in the uptake of the bike share program. Yesterday I wanted to try one of the bikes on an impulse however I didn’t have a helmet with me and wasn’t about to go and purchase another one.
The times I’ll get the most benefit out of using these bikes is exactly that – on impulse. I imagine many other people will be the same. Tourists will likely be one of the biggest users of the bikes and the helmet requirement could be the simple decision maker on whether or not to bother.
I think the helmet law is a good thing however. Very few people who don’t own a bike will be magically converted into a cyclist because of the appearance of the bike share program anyway.
The helmet law acts as a filter to sway non-cyclists away from using this program, which would be much safer for everybody. It’s dangerous riding amongst pedestrians, trams, vehicles, etc. if you don’t know what to watch out for.
If you don’t own a helmet, you probably don’t have the basic skills to ride in heavy traffic. Certainly not everyone who does own a helmet is qualified to ride in traffic, but it’s a massive first step in the right direction.
Wade, you are quite right as to why the bikes wont be used, that one cant take one on impulse, but then ponder those Montreal stats.
Ponder the huge success of Bixi in that city in your former homeland, and rethink this curse you’ve placed on Mixi with your outburst of Nanny state-ism.
I feel strongly enough about this to have done one thing and plan another. I’ve joined MBS for the year, even though I live 1000 kms from the nearest Mixi. It’s my way of being supportive.
Secondly, when I go to Melbourne very soon to hear the legendary Mikael Colville-Andersen speak, (He too is dead against compulsory helmets)
I, and at least one friend, are going to ride Mixis without a helmet and see what happens.
We’ll do so on Saturday morning, the 24th. July (Mikael speaks in the afternoon at the Design conference) most probably starting from the docking station in Carlton close to Lygon st.
Dr Paul Martin from Brisbane feels equally strongly that the helmet law is over control of our lives, and will ride with me. Sue Abbott is the one who got us going. It would be great if she turned up too.
We are ready to pay the fine of $154 to draw attention to what we feel is a very destructive law.
Indeed, we will argue, necessity, a well established civil defense. In this case, the necessity of challenging the helmet law in order to save MBS Mixi from possible failure.
If MBS Mixi fails, great damage will be done to utility cycling in Australia, since, as explained, the scheme are such a powerful energizer of that form of cycling.
Moreover, bike share is the fastest way to persuade a population, not only to ride bikes as transport, but to understand that the type of bike is important.
Go to any bike friendly city in Europe and note what they ride.
Whereas here, most riders are hunched over flat bars or drops, often in Lycra even when commuting, over there you’ll see that the way everyone rides, weekdays, is in their normal clothes, and sitting up very straight.
There, unlike here , bikes are equipped as true transport vehicles with bike racks or baskets, mudguards, lights and chain guards.
Does it matter, that the typical Aussie cyclist is hunched over on a bike with none of this gear, especially if the rider gets to work faster?
I think it does, because the head down way of riding which is fine for speed, looks aggressive and uncomfortable, discouraging others from the very idea of utility cycling. By transposing the racing mode to city streets, by combining training and commuting, other undesirable things tag along as well
With one’s shoes in the obligatory toes clips that go with these bikes, you are less apt to accept stop-and-go riding, more apt to run a red light to keep moving, or to veer onto a footpath to use a pedestrian cross-way, also to avoid stopping and un-clipping.
Seems to me that riding this way, head down, one also sees less well .
The hunched rider can’t look back over a shoulder without losing balance so one perfects a sort of under arm look which is not nearly as effective
Thus this rider is, I suggest, much more likely to have nasty surprises in traffic, compared with the slower sit-up rider.
More likely too, to get angry with motorists whose careless moves have not been predicted, such as opening the door of a parked car, such as cutting one off at a corner.
I realize this is contentious but think it’s true. When I ride upright, I see very well and am seen well in turn. I easily make eye contact with drivers when necessary, both to warn them I’m around and maybe flash a smile if they are courteous, which they often are. I also make my displeasure known, eye to eye, when they do stupid things.
With my rear vision mirror, I am constantly monitoring what’s coming up behind me and how they’re behaving.
I guard against my greatest fear, the driver who, not paying attention, cuts across me with a left turn. Indeed, I’m waiting for signs this might happen. If a passing car is about to turn left, I note the flicker, and I’m ready for evasive action.
Is it not also true that rider of a light weight bike is much more concerned than I am about his/her wheel going into a pothole than I am with my thick sturdy tires?
Is it not true that his/her attention is much more fixed on the fragile front wheel, than on the road as a whole? Does this not make for a less safe ride, especially at speed?
No bike shop in Australia will suggest that the sit-up bike is safer and more practical for commuting. No one asks if these are the reasons why most people such bikes in Europe during the week, keeping their lightweight bikes and Lycra for the weekends
We badly need to ride these MBS Mixis to find out for ourselves how much safer and more comfortable casual riding can feel when you sit up straight.
There are negatives. Having no rear vision mirror on these Bike share bikes is not good in my opinion. , And the three gears on a Mixi may not be enough for such heavy bikes. In Montreal, the Bixi has switched to 7 gears.
If you want to support our Mixi ride, please leave a message.
Mike Rubbo
Hi Mike
I rode the Bixi in Montreal earlier this year and it was fantastic.
I think a great part of its success lies in the great number of bikes and stations that exist. It is not only popular with tourists but also with locals. You are never far from a bixi station, and it is very easy for anyone to hop on one to run errands in the city. Montreal doesn’t have mandatory helmet laws so that isn’t an obstacle.
Montreal has also invested heavily in bicycle infrastructure. The bixi has contributed to creating a real cycling culture in Montreal. I found Montreal drivers to be very good with cyclists.
Toronto is due to start the Bixi system next spring but with a smaller number of bikes. I hope it has the same success.
Best of luck with the Melbourne system.
Kevin
July 14th, 2010 at 6:35 ampermalink
Hi Mike,
Looking forward to seeing you there. I will of course be bringing my own… mirror
Dr Paul Martin
Brisbane, Australia
Paul Martin
July 14th, 2010 at 4:48 pmpermalink
Kevin, you’ve identified many of the reasons why Bixi is such a success. Mixi, (Our nickname for the Melb. Bike share scheme) has it hands tied by our helmet law, and the related matter of having so few bikes on the streets. One can understand them not putting put more with the situation so unsure, but if they don’t, they help to doom the thing anyway. What a dilemma!
Mike
Mike Rubbo
July 14th, 2010 at 7:11 pmpermalink
Good you are bringing a mirror, Paul, a more important safety item than a helmet, I’d argue. Mike
Mike Rubbo
July 14th, 2010 at 7:13 pmpermalink
Mike,
You can read my review of the Melbourne bike share scheme on my blog ‘slow-RPM.blogspot.com/’. Its a big thumbs up from me.
cheers,Ian
Ian Menzies
July 14th, 2010 at 8:54 pmpermalink
Hi all!,
Have none of you ever been in hospital? Those electronic thermometers that go under your arm, they are ‘sterilised’ between patients with an alco wipe. Can we not supply helmets, and alco wipe stations(like doggy scoops and bags in parks:) with the bikes? Come on apart from nits how many extra germy things are you picking up from the helmet that you havn`t already got from the handle bars???
If the helmet situation is the downfall think of a creative solution around it… Go Mixi! Melbourne needs bike share!
Julie Moore
July 15th, 2010 at 6:24 ampermalink
Hi Mike,
Great article, good responses to a range of issues. You are right about the low initial take up. It is the coldest month of the year here and few of the bikes are actually out. I would expect to see more activity in this area in October.
U
urbanbicyclist
July 15th, 2010 at 4:06 pmpermalink
It was a ride on a Bixi in Montreal last Summer which led me to ditch my hybrid sport bike for a Bixi-like upright three speed. I biked a lot before – I bike everywhere now.
Here’s my new imported Dutch baby, Wilhemina …
http://www.flickr.com/photos/moylek/4491083601/
Kenneth Moyle
July 15th, 2010 at 6:37 pmpermalink
Julie, it’s not that simple, apparently. For legal reasons a helmet has to be not only sterilized but inspected after each use. Don’t you think individual choice would be better like virtually everywhere else? Come ride with us sat 24th. and explore all options. Mike
Mike Rubbo
July 16th, 2010 at 5:05 ampermalink
Thank You, Mike for posting the Waltz of the Bikes on Flickr. This was absolutely wonderful to watch!
I live in Ontario, CAN and although it is not a requirement to wear a helmet if you are over 16 it’s been drummed in to my head that it isn’t safe to ride without one.
Well, my dear … today I did and it felt wonderful to have my hair blowing in the wind. I felt like a young girl again. (I’m just about to turn 50 in Aug.)
I plan on riding without one from now on except perhaps at night when I commute home from work. (I work till 11:30 pm) It’s not as easy to see the road/path at that hour and I’m often dodging animals on the trail section. This is quite possibly leftover irrational fear.
I right an upright comfort bike … nothing fancy … it’s a Canadian built Raleigh that I bought several years ago. It has 5 speeds, fenders, baskets fore and aft, chainguard … in short, it’s a perfect bike for commuting and running errands and being a free spirit. ☺
The city in which I live is gradually becoming more bike-friendly with more off road paths and bike lanes being installed yearly.
Thankfully, as I mentioned, it is NOT a requirement for an adult to wear a helmet. There are too few cyclists out as it is. I think many people regard cycling as dangerous and they just couldn’t be more wrong. It’s such a wonderful activity to engage in. I’m running more and more of my errands on my bike, I commute to work and I also meander the trails around here for pure pleasure. I’m trying to encourage people to get out and ride by example. ♡
Ride On!
Karen
July 16th, 2010 at 1:36 pmpermalink
As my band isn’t rehearsing that weekend, I’ll possibly be free to join in the fun. What time at Lygon St?
Helmets are a daft idea, if cyclists are endangered by motor traffic lower the speed limits instead.
Crunchy Steve
July 16th, 2010 at 4:15 pmpermalink
@Julie
I can assure you that a little isopropyl alcohol does very little to sterilise anything… in hospitals they use sterile sheaths for the thermometers and they are wiped with chlorhexidine if required.
More importantly, as Mike has pointed out, there is more to it than whether the helmets are ‘clean’ or not.
To comply with the mandatory helmet legislation the helmet must conform to the Australian Standard (like the heart foundation ‘tick’); must be undamaged (not a single crack); must be appropriately sized; and worn correctly.
I find it odd that the police only care if you don’t wear. They should be inspecting all helmets to ensure they conform to all of the above points if they really think it is a sensible road safety strategy! Every second cyclist I pass is not wearing their helmet correctly, particularly children where I see the straps loose and the helmet tilted back so that their entire forehead is exposed. It is safer to not wear one at all than to wear one incorrectly.
Did you know that it costs a helmet importer $20,000 AUD to have a helmet approved to the Australian Standards and receive a little sticker?
Regards,
Dr Paul Martin
MBBS, FANZCA
Dr Paul Martin
July 16th, 2010 at 9:25 pmpermalink
@ Kenneth Moyle
Fantastic bike!
I have been converted to the proper upright dutch bike and there’s no going back. I too don’t think twice about whether to take the bike based on what I’m wearing – it is the bike all the 99% of the time.
If I want to enter a race I’ll use a racing bike but for getting around, nothing beats a proper city utility bike.
Dr Paul Martin
Brisbane, Australia
Dr Paul Martin
July 16th, 2010 at 9:31 pmpermalink
We’ve had an automatic bike rental stations in Krakow for years now and they are proving extremely popular and useful.
The helmet law indeed is going to hinder the rentals in Melbourne as one would obviously have to plan ahead using the bike and bring the helmet with them – b o r i n g …
Now, Wade, the genius: “If you don’t own a helmet, you probably don’t have the basic skills to ride in heavy traffic.” Spoken as a true idiot, well done Wade!
In most of Europe you can ride without a helmet, bicycle use is massive and most people seem perfectly fine in the heave traffic in narrow streets.
Vrais
July 17th, 2010 at 1:13 ampermalink
I’ve mentioned my own views on helmet laws a time or two on here, so I won’t go over that ground again.
But I will take some issue with the idea that it is not hilly in the CBD. True enough, if you ride “across” the city along, say, Swanston St from St Kilda Rd to Carlton, it is a pretty flat run. Or along Elizabeth St in the Parkville direction.
But once you get off the mini-plain bounded by those 2 streets, the city area undulates significantly, both “across” the grid (e.g. along Queen St) and end-to-end (e.g. up Bourke St). I’ll admit that these aren’t exactly category 3 climbs, but I reckon they might put off the odd potential casual picker-up of a Mixi, dressed in business gear.
Scott McIntyre
July 17th, 2010 at 11:32 pmpermalink
Changing drivers attitudes is far more important in getting people riding rather than tilting at windmills with attempting to repeal helmet laws in Australia. You have all completely missed real issues that concern riders and instead continue to get caught up in ephemeral side issues.
But hey, enjoy your groupthink!
Sit up and get a clue
July 18th, 2010 at 4:30 ampermalink
@ Sit up and get a clue
So do you have any magical suggestions for changing said driver behaviour?
Firstly, vehicular cycling (ie. on roads with cars) is a complete failure and is dangerous – it will never, ever encourage ‘everyday’ folks onto bicycles for transport. Mixing cyclists and pedestrians with cars travelling over 30km/h is dangerous and a helmet will offer no protection whatsoever.
I can assure you that if we don’t change direction soon, this is where we will be heading, and we don’t want to end up like London: Why Integration is a bad idea
To all those folks that want to ‘train’ on the roads, go for it, if you think it is worth pushing the point that everyone must ‘share the road’. There is no point being right if you’re going to get hurt.
Car drivers’ attitudes have not been getting any better over the last few decades so I don’t know why you think their behaviour will be easy to change, if at all. There is only one way to guarantee a change in their behaviour – make sure they all ride bicycles for utility every day, if not then at least weekly.
By pointing out the ridiculousness of bicycle helmets as a serious safety strategy I would hope that we will see safety initiatives directed at things that DO work: separated infrastructure, eduction (cyclists & motorists). This is what works: Three types of safety . You cannot argue that this is not the way to go.
Regarding the hills: nobody is saying you have to race up these slopes as if it were a Tour de France stage. If you can walk up it without breaking a sweat then you can cycle up it without breaking a sweat. I do this everyday in my normal clothes on my 20kg dutch bike. A weak excuse.
If you really think I’m talking nonsense, picture this:
A road with two lanes of traffic moving at a mere 60km/h. Immediately to their left is a 1m wide ‘cycle lane’ with a row of cyclists travelling at 15km/h. Now imagine these people are not on bicycles but are instead walking, single file in the same painted cycle lane on the road, still wearing helmets. Is that safe? Even if we drop the speed to walking speed and drop the car speed accordingly to 50km/h, I would not want to be walking next to cars travelling at 50km/h…
Surely this highlights how 1) helmets are a smokescreen, and 2) that proper separated infrastructure is required if cars are travelling faster than 30km/h.
What the ‘weekend racers’ don’t realise is that if this sort of decent infrastructure for cyclists was built – properly, not silly narrow cycle paths on the road – then they would have a fantastic place to train as well – separated from cars on a smooth path with priority at intersections. Surely this is a win for all cyclists?
Dr Paul Martin
Brisbane, Australia
Dr Paul Martin
July 18th, 2010 at 12:49 pmpermalink
“Changing drivers attitudes is far more important in getting people riding rather than tilting at windmills with attempting to repeal helmet laws in Australia.”
The helmet laws are part of what makes the attitude of the drivers. Helmets (and fluoro clothing) are accepted apparel in activities which carry a high level of danger – ergo cycling must be a dangerous activity. And as long as cycling is viewed as a dangerous activity, then drivers will (consciously or subconciously) believe that the onus on keeping cyclists safe lies entirely with the cyclists.
Cars travel much quicker than bikes, and many more people die or suffer head injuries each year in car accidents than on bikes, and yet there is no helmet law for cars. This leads car drivers to believe that they are engaging in a safe, normal activity, while cyclists are engaging in an unsafe, aberrant one.
Scott McIntyre
July 19th, 2010 at 1:08 ampermalink
“Regarding the hills: nobody is saying you have to race up these slopes as if it were a Tour de France stage. If you can walk up it without breaking a sweat then you can cycle up it without breaking a sweat. I do this everyday in my normal clothes on my 20kg dutch bike. A weak excuse.”
I do it everyday myself on my (perhaps even heavier) Indian bike. I wasn’t offering an excuse for myself. I was pointing out why people who don’t do it everyday might not be inclined to do it on a casual basis. It is simply not the case that the city centre of Melbourne is flat. You need to get out of your own shoes and put yourself in the shoes of a non or at least non-regular bike user if you want to figure out why the take-up is so poor. You don’t win converts to a cause by berating non-participants for being weak.
Scott McIntyre
July 19th, 2010 at 1:16 ampermalink
I rode everywhere on CityBikes on Stockholm. It was easily the best way to see Stockholm. There was no need for a helmet as the Swedish law makes the driver more liable than here in an accident and you feel very safe and respected by the drivers.
Peter Robinson
July 19th, 2010 at 4:32 ampermalink
@ Scott McIntyre
You don’t win converts to a cause by berating non-participants for being weak.
Scott, it is the excuse that is weak; I thought that sentence was quite clear. The reason why more people don’t use bikes for transport is that it hasn’t been made convenient enough to make the switch for ‘ordinary folk’; it is easier for people to just make an excuse.
If my 60 year-old mother can cycle up hills, albeit very slowly – still faster than walking – in normal clothes on her new dutch bike then anyone can. She hasn’t ridden a bicycle for 40 years…
Dr Paul Martin
July 19th, 2010 at 2:34 pmpermalink
I would have used the bike sharing in melbourne so many times already if i hadn’t needed a helmet.
I’m glad you’re doing this. I heard about your protest today and would have liked to come but really could not afford the fine at all.
I have mentioned the bike sharing and you protest on my blog too.
http://thequietmelbournite-alexandrapearl.blogspot.com/
Good luck and I hope the law is revoked!
Alexandra Pearl
July 24th, 2010 at 6:18 ampermalink
A fantastic analysis of the situation and bike culture in Melbourne in general.
I’ve done my own bit of analysis on the Melbourne Bike Share system’s very poor implementation.
http://www.ikaink.net/blog/?p=696
It’s a pity that the Victorian Government has managed to get this system so very very wrong when there are so many glorious examples of success they could (and should) have learned from.
Julian Wearne
July 25th, 2010 at 9:09 pmpermalink
Great blog! These are great informations about the bike sharing in Melbourne and how is it important to the lives of people there. Love to read blogs about bikes.
hector
October 19th, 2010 at 7:06 ampermalink