4 ms·
You may be right. And SF will be a natural experiment to see which model wins out. This seems a perfect example of concentrated benefits (riders being able to
by bkohlmann 9y ago
You may be right. And SF will be a natural experiment to see which model wins out.
This seems a perfect example of concentrated benefits (riders being able to park wherever) vs. diffuse costs (eyesore to most of the population).
An extremely ironic possible outcome is that given the example of uber, cities may legislate away dockless bikes as non-riders lobby their representatives to minimize eyesores.
- icantdrive55 9y agoIn SF, they will need to worry about theft of their product. I have two electric bikes, and I just don't use them. What works for myself is throwing my old mountain bike (cheap bike) into the back of my truck. Look for free parking(which is getting harder, father every year)--and bike to work. When my bike gets stolen, I don't care. I have another rusty bike ready to go. That said, since I'm in construction, it doesn't matter if I'm sweating, or my hair looks like a tornado simulation. I couldn't imagine going into a business meeting after a hard bike ride. Then again--I hear times are changing in terms of attire, hair grooming?
- smichel17 9y agoSeems like it would make sense to convert 1 in X parking spots to bike-only parking spots. Now they're off the sidewalk yet there's still the convenience of being able to park very near your destination.
- s0rce 9y agoThat is basically what the bike docks are, most of them (at least in the East Bay) have replaced a few adjacent spots. You could simply distribute more frequent smaller racks. People believe parking is a right and anything that removes it is the end of the world so there is constant pushback.