
A week or so ago, I blogged about how the thefts and vandalism that have plagued the Velib bike-sharing program in Paris ought to be a cautionary tale for San Francisco officials intent on replicating that program here. But let's assume that San Francisco cyclists won't toss their fleet of 50 bikes in the bay, or that they won't trash the bikes by shooting YouTube videos of each other trying to ride down the Filbert Steps. Let's, in other words, assume the best.
That still leaves us with bicycles that, according to the mayor's office, are going to cost about $20,000 each. Isn't that a little bit insane in these economic times? No wait: wouldn't that be ridiculous if the economy was on fire?
Yes. So here's another question: Is it too late for Mayor Newsom and his staff to consider other, less-expensive and more community-oriented models? There are dozens of small bike shops all over the city that could benefit financially by the task of managing one of the bike-sharing program's five bike stations. Instead, the best city planners can do is throw almost half-a-million bucks at Clear Channel to handle those duties. Has no one in the mayor's office seen the grassroots program in Fort Collins, Colorado? There must be dozens of other programs around the country that San Francisco could choose to replicate, but we have chosen to copy the most expensive, most problematic solution on the planet.
To be clear, the idea of bike sharing, and the fact that San Francisco is taking seriously the importance of cycling as a part of its overall transportation needs, is heartening. But the Velib model that's about to be put into practice in San Francisco is too expensive by a long shot. The mayor's office would be wise to reconsider it and replace it with a model that is less costly and does more for the existing cycling community.