Much attention is paid to many of the needs of bicycle riding, such as trails, paths, wide curb lanes, etc., but often parking, another key element, is overlooked. The following quotation is somewhat dated, but it still rings true today "The availability of bicycle parking is a prerequisite to any urban bicycle trip, yet there is a pervasive deficiency in the amount and/or security of bicycle parking facilities throughout urban areas." (Bicycle Forum Magazine, 1978)

Polls and surveys attest to the truth of this situation. In fact, results of a 1990 Harris Poll conducted for Bicycling Magazine showed that 17 percent of adults surveyed would sometimes ride to work if secure storage and showers awaited them. A poll conducted in the Washington, D.C. area provided similar numbers--20 percent of the people who were willing to ride bicycles to the Washington Metro system stations but didn't were concerned about secure bicycle parking. These people revealed that knowing where good bicycle parking is located would provide the greatest encouragement to riding bicycles to Metrorail stations, surpassing all other single factors by 250 percent.

Secure bicycle parking is especially important in the U.S. because bicycle theft rates are higher there than in many other countries where bicycle usage is considerably higher--five times higher than in Japan and twice the levels found in Denmark and Germany. In fact, bicycle thefts in the U.S. are three times more common than auto theft.

Figure 1a: Bicycle Locker (Class I) Advantages: maximizes security and weather protection; accommodates all styles/sizes of bicycles Disadvantages: more costly than other facilities

Figure 1b: Ribbon Rack (Class II) Advantages: offers adequate security; more attractive design; accommodate different styles/sizes of bicycles and locks Disadvantages: does not permit locking of both wheels and frame for all bicycles

Figure 1c: Clamp Rack (Class II) Advantages: permits locking of both wheels and frame with certain sizes/styles of bicycles; offers more adequate security Disadvantages: may not accommodate different sizes/styles of bicycle and locks; protruding parts may present hazards to pedestrians; moving parts are less durable

Figure 1d: Hitching Post Rack (Class II) Advantages: accommodates different styles/sizes of bicycles and locks Disadvantages: does not permit locking of both wheels and frame; supports bicycle by the wheel not the frame; offers less security

Types of Bicycle Parking Facilities

Bicycle parking facilities may be classified by the type of parking and level of security offered in a two-tiered system.

Class I. Class I facilities provide the highest level of security--fully protecting the entire bicycle, its components and its accessories from theft and weather. Enclosed lockers, with or without locks, or indoor, controlled-access areas are the best types, but Class I facilities may also include guarded areas in garages that use check-in systems or have covered, attended parking. Class I facilities are generally used for longer-term storage but also provide more security for short-term storage in high-theft areas. Sometimes lockers are assigned and a nominal fee is charged for their use.

Class II. Class II facilities consist of racks that support bicycles, some of which permit locking of both wheels and the frame. Class II facilities offer less protection than Class I facilities, protecting the bicycle itself, but not necessarily the accessory parts such as the seat, air pump, water bottle/cage or tool kit. Weather protection in the form of an existing overhang or secondary roof structure and locking mechanisms may or may not be provided. Often, if locks are provided they are coin or key operated and users are charged a nominal fee. Overall, Class II facilities are less durable, but offer convenient short-term storage and minimal protection from the weather. These facilities are designed for repeated use and are suitable for high-volume areas. The various types of racks found within such facilities may not accommodate different types of bicycle styles and sizes and/or types of locks.

Some typical examples of Class I and Class II bicycle parking facilities and the advantages/disadvantages associated with each are shown in Figure 1.

Design Considerations

Minimum standards for design of bicycle parking facilities depend on the setting in which the facilities will be located and whether they are intended for long-term or short-term use. The factors discussed below must be considered when designing and locating parking facilities to ensure that they will be useable.

Security. Bicycle-parking facilities need to be secure from theft and vandalism. Ideally, they should be visible from nearby buildings or adjacent to highly traveled pedestrian paths, sidewalks, roadways, parking lots or building entrances. These areas must be well-lit from either adjacent sidewalk lighting or secondary sources. In some instances, bicycle facilities can be guarded, as in a garage, or patrolled by security personnel.

Accessibility. Bicycle parking should be convenient to the street and to main entrances of nearby buildings. The parking area should be paved and be either no farther than 15 m (50 feet) from the building or no farther than the closest vehicle parking space. Parking facilities should be on the ground floor or located near elevators so bicycles do not have to be carried up or down stairs.

Weather Protection. Weather protection is especially critical for long-term storage but, where possible, all bicycle parking facilities should be protected from the weather including sun, precipitation and gusty winds. For weather protection, bicyclists prefer indoor parking facilities, space under roofs or overhangs or lockers that offer protection from the elements.

Visibility. The bicycle-parking area should be easy to find and visible from all approaches. If the facility is not readily recognizable, signs directing bicycle traffic are needed. Signs should be installed in accordance with the prescribed practice of the U.S. Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) to mark such facilities and to direct cyclists to them.

Space. Bicycle-parking facilities should not interfere with pedestrian or vehicle movements, and cyclists must be afforded sufficient room to use the parking facilities provided. Bicycle-parking spaces should:

• Be centered in a space at least 0.6 m by 2 m (2 feet by 6 feet)
  
• Have at least 0.6 m (2 feet) of their space between the rack and any wall or other obstruction
  
• Provide a 2-m (7-foot) overhead clearance
  
• Include a 1.5-m (5-foot) aisle between each row of bicycle parking
  
• Be surrounded by 1.5 m (5 feet) of open space
  
• Have a barrier or post that separates bicycle parking from motor vehicle parking.

Short-Term Use vs. Long-Term Use. Short-term parking must be convenient and easily accessible to destinations, which are likely to be shopping centers, libraries, post offices, etc. For longer-term parking, the primary consideration is security, followed by protection from the weather. Long-term bicycle parking facilities are often used by commuters at their job locations, apartment buildings, schools, universities or points of access for other modes of transportation (transit centers, park-and-ride lots, etc.). General Guidance For Bicycle Parking Requirements Bicycle parking provisions are often part of comprehensive efforts by governments, bicycle advocate groups, etc., to encourage and support the use of bicycles. The following discussion provides general technical guidance for determining bicycle-parking requirements and for setting up a parking ordinance. This discussion also presents requirements of a model ordinance that may serve as an example.

Standards. Like automobile parking requirements, bicycle parking requirements are usually based on standards, such as a certain number of spaces per dwelling unit; square footage of retail, commercial, or office space; number of students or employees; etc. Sometimes, bicycle-parking requirements are a percentage of vehicle-parking requirements, such as 10 to 20 percent.

Often, the numbers of parking spaces and users change-increasing or reducing parking requirements and frustrating providers and users alike. To combat this problem, many local ordinances may use percentages for some uses and apply standards for other uses in a comprehensive fashion. Whatever method or combination of methods they use, however, their aim is clearly to provide the appropriate parking facilities (racks and/or lockers) and not discriminate against or pose hardships on particular uses.

Land Use Issues. Different land uses require different amounts of parking. Destinations such as schools, shopping centers, libraries, employment centers, residential complexes, dorms, colleges/universities, parks, ball fields or playgrounds all generate more bicycle trips than, for example, restaurants, theatres, hospitals or assisted living facilities, and they may require more bicycle parking than what might be calculated by traditional methods. It may be necessary, therefore, for ordinances to require minimum standards based on the popularity of the land use and not necessarily on the number of occupants or a percentage of parking. This method of using the popularity of land use is similar to the combination method described above, except that it sets minimum standards that ensure parking facilities are provided in a manner consistent with demand for parking generated by the land use.

Model Ordinance. The best bicycle parking ordinances apply to all land uses, buildings and facilities and include provisions to allow non-conforming land uses a sufficient "window" of time to become compliant. Some exceptions may be made for uses/buildings that may not generate many bicycle trips. Employees at any business may be potential bicycle commuters, however, and should be considered by the ordinance.

Bicycle parking should be encouraged and permitted to occupy land devoted to setbacks for rear, front, and sideboards. Doing so:

• Makes suitable use of otherwise unused land
  
• Precludes the acquisition and cost associated with additional land for facilities and rights of way
  
• Makes it easier to incorporate bicycle-parking facilities into existing lot and building designs and footprints.

Placement of facilities in land devoted to setbacks should not, however, compromise security, accessibility or visibility. Some cities that can offer specific examples of bicycle-parking ordinances, guidelines and requirements include Eugene, Oregon; Gainesville, Florida; Houston, Texas; Madison, Wisconsin; Palo Alto, California; Portland, Oregon; Santa Cruz, California; Seattle, Washington; and Watertown, Massachusetts.