The Tucson Pima County Bicycle Advisory Committee passed a motion supporting the City of Tucson’s revision to regulations governing bicycle parking around businesses and encouraged flexibility in the regulations.
The new regulations will base the number of parking spots for bikes on the square footage of the building rather than basing it on the number of parking spaces provided to cars.
The change is necessary because the city is looking at requiring less parking for automobiles, meaning less parking for bikes.
Tom Thivener the City of Tucson’s bike and pedestrian program manager said the new parking regulations will prevent unused parking lots like those at El Con Mall.
TPCBAC member Larry Robinson said in the past, businesses were easily able to appeal the regulations and become exempt from the bicycle parking regulations.
According to Thivener, that option is going to be removed. Businesses that physically can’t install bike racks because of space issues can pay a fee to the city that will be used for other bicycle parking around the city.
Adam Smith, a principle planner for the city’s planning and development services, said businesses can request an exemption from the city, but it can’t be for reasons like the business owner is out of money.
“Economic reasons cannot be [a reason] — or merely because you would rather put something else in front of the store rather than a bike rack — is not a defensible rationale to pursue a variance,” Smith said.
TPCBAC member Eric Post said he was concerned the requirements would be unrealistic for some businesses.
An example is Costco, which recently put in space for 70 bikes. Post said it was unrealistic for cyclists to use that many spaces at a bulk-item store. He also noted that smaller businesses may not have enough parking if it is solely based on square footage.
“Isn’t a little obnoxious, though to have 70 bike parking spots at Costco?” Post said. “Is there a way to revise that so the business owner isn’t put out for no reason?”
Thivener said Costco went above and beyond and put in more spaces than were required of them.
Post recommended there be flexibility to require businesses to build reasonable parking areas for cyclists.
TPCBAC member Rich Corbett said he wanted to see some flexibility in the ordinance as well.
“I think flexibility is key,” Corbett said. “I’ve seen many bike parking spaces that are unused and I’ve seen many spaces that are overused.”
TPCBAC chairman Brian Beck said he wanted to make sure there was uniformity in where the parking would be located. He said he would like to see the parking up front and visible, rather than forcing cyclists to hunt for parking.
“Fundamentally I would like the bike parking ordinance to legitimize bicycles,” Beck said. “Too often, bike parking is around the back and riders don’t see it.”
Thivener said the regulations will require bicycle parking to be located within 50 feet of main entrances and will require parking to be spread out when there are multiple businesses using the same parking lot.
Other changes in the regulations will require more short-term bicycle parking and less long-term parking for employees, which the city says is underutilized.
Developers will also be allowed to put the bicycle parking in a the car parking lot if they make it safe for cyclists.
The changes will be sent to the City Council for approval in the fall.
Download a draft copy of the new bicycle parking regulations.
Law enforcement an issue for Mt. Lemmon cyclists
Matt Zoll, Pima County’s bicycle and pedestrian program manager, said he received a call from a deputy requesting the county install signs along Catalina Highway indicating cyclists ride single file. Zoll said they agreed to post more “Share the Road” signs.
According to Post, cyclists are allowed to ride two abreast, but have a responsibility to allow cars to pass if five or more vehicles are waiting.
Zoll also mentioned a danger to cyclists coming down if a driver has to cross the yellow line to pass.
Also discussed was a rider who was struck on the GABA Mount Lemmon Hill Climb on Friday.
GABA president Jim Harms said Tuesday that the rider was taken to the hospital but released the same day.
According to Post, the cyclist was mailed a citation for not being as far right as possible — but Post said the driver actually passed two cars and then clipped the cyclist while trying to get back into the lane.
TPCBAC elects new chairwoman
Starting June 1, the BAC will be led by Karen Berchtold.
Berchtold moved to Tucson from Massachusetts four years ago and has served as the committee’s secretary and worked with the facilities and outreach subcommittees.
Berchtold said she plans to work hard on the BAC’s role with the application for platinum from the League of American Bicyclists, as well as defining the mission for each of the subcommittees and the committee as a whole.
The vote was 9-6.
Editors note: Lastly (for Scott) I got the final word on the Ride of Silence and helmet use. If you show up without a helmet, you will be turned away. The organizer said it was because of an insurance rule.
I LOVE the 50 foot rule. Read my thoughts on that: http://project.stevevance.net/appendices/level_of_service#bicycle_parking_phenomenon_a
I LOVE the 50 foot rule. Read my thoughts on that: http://project.stevevance.net/appendices/level_of_service#bicycle_parking_phenomenon_a
Could the no smoking within 20 feet start outside the bike zone? Seems that bicyclists shouldn’t be penalized and have to walk through that pollution when they are reducing pollution. Just a thought.
Could the no smoking within 20 feet start outside the bike zone? Seems that bicyclists shouldn’t be penalized and have to walk through that pollution when they are reducing pollution. Just a thought.
Steven, thanks for posting that link.
Scott, I had the same problem as a grocery store I ride to. The employees were smoking right next to the bike rack.
I spoke the manager and they moved the smokers and installed bike racks even closer to the door and away from the smoke.
Would be nice if there was a city ordinance, though. It is really annoying to have to walk through a cloud of smoke.
Steven, thanks for posting that link.
Scott, I had the same problem as a grocery store I ride to. The employees were smoking right next to the bike rack.
I spoke the manager and they moved the smokers and installed bike racks even closer to the door and away from the smoke.
Would be nice if there was a city ordinance, though. It is really annoying to have to walk through a cloud of smoke.
Great comments about the smoking issue. I too have dealt with it.
Great comments about the smoking issue. I too have dealt with it.
That’s too bad the cyclist was clipped on Catalina Highway and completely ridiculous that the cyclist was mailed a citation for not being far enough to the right. Was law enforcement there as a witness to this supposed infraction or did they take the motorist’s impressions of the event, automatically assume the cyclist was wrong and pop that thing in the mail. I think the latter.
Of course, there is never glass or other debris in the uphill bike lane that might cause the cyclist to take the traffic lane, legally, right?
That’s too bad the cyclist was clipped on Catalina Highway and completely ridiculous that the cyclist was mailed a citation for not being far enough to the right. Was law enforcement there as a witness to this supposed infraction or did they take the motorist’s impressions of the event, automatically assume the cyclist was wrong and pop that thing in the mail. I think the latter.
Of course, there is never glass or other debris in the uphill bike lane that might cause the cyclist to take the traffic lane, legally, right?
Good for Brian Beck. He makes a great point about legitimizing bike use through the placement of the racks. I was at a meeting the other day held at Kingfisher’s on Grant and finally found the bike racks tucked away in the back by the service entrance. There’s something about being forced to park a $2000.00 bike around back where it is completely hidden from view that made me not really want to go back to that restaurant very much.
As for my own business, I would sure welcome the City to compel me to install a bike rack out front. I already tried to do so once, but my landlord forced its removal, apparently because he hates the City and thinks they were behind it. I hope that particular fight is not over yet.
Note to City: Tucsonbikelawyer, a thriving downtown business with steady bike-related traffic, has no bike racks within two blocks of his business establishment. Please have your enforcers pay him a visit.
Finally — the calls for “flexibility” are, in my opinion, risky, because “flexibility” will always result in fewer, not more, bike racks — it will always only flex one direction. What exactly is the problem with allocating bike racks by square footage? Is there a better way to do it? Of course it will result in some bike racks not being used, and others used more, but that will always be the case with any system. The point is to have adequate parking for bikes, and given how little that parking costs compared to putting in a car space, businesses don’t have much cause to complain.
Good for Brian Beck. He makes a great point about legitimizing bike use through the placement of the racks. I was at a meeting the other day held at Kingfisher’s on Grant and finally found the bike racks tucked away in the back by the service entrance. There’s something about being forced to park a $2000.00 bike around back where it is completely hidden from view that made me not really want to go back to that restaurant very much.
As for my own business, I would sure welcome the City to compel me to install a bike rack out front. I already tried to do so once, but my landlord forced its removal, apparently because he hates the City and thinks they were behind it. I hope that particular fight is not over yet.
Note to City: Tucsonbikelawyer, a thriving downtown business with steady bike-related traffic, has no bike racks within two blocks of his business establishment. Please have your enforcers pay him a visit.
Finally — the calls for “flexibility” are, in my opinion, risky, because “flexibility” will always result in fewer, not more, bike racks — it will always only flex one direction. What exactly is the problem with allocating bike racks by square footage? Is there a better way to do it? Of course it will result in some bike racks not being used, and others used more, but that will always be the case with any system. The point is to have adequate parking for bikes, and given how little that parking costs compared to putting in a car space, businesses don’t have much cause to complain.
Oh one other thing. On the Mt. Lemmon issue, for some reason Pima County Sheriff’s Dep’t has changed their view of the whole “two abreast” business on Mt. Lemmon, and they now say riders must not only ride single-file, they have to ride to the right of the fog line. It’s a completely renegade reading of the statute. I am currently representing two riders who are fighting this. I’d be interested to know how many more there are.
Oh one other thing. On the Mt. Lemmon issue, for some reason Pima County Sheriff’s Dep’t has changed their view of the whole “two abreast” business on Mt. Lemmon, and they now say riders must not only ride single-file, they have to ride to the right of the fog line. It’s a completely renegade reading of the statute. I am currently representing two riders who are fighting this. I’d be interested to know how many more there are.
Is that really that big of a problem that we need more law? We are talking about outdoors here – it’s not like we’re cooped up in an enclosed stuffy room with ’em, or even stuck next to ’em for long periods of time – at worse, it’s only for as long as it takes to lock up – to think of that as posing even a fraction of the health risk as cycling in traffic seems a little out of perspective.
Here I am being the devil’s advocate again, I might be the only one here who feels this way. I’m not a smoker myself, but it sometimes seems like we’ve gone a little overboard with the anti-smoking extremism when we’ve come to expect that we should never have to even catch a momentary faint whiff of the stuff when outdoors, or heaven-forbid smell the scent lingering on someone’s clothing. A little like living in the city but expecting to never have to briefly endure the noise of a leaf-blower or loud cell phone conversation – or a motorist thinking that they should never have to be inconvenienced by slowing down for a minute until it’s safe to pass, wanting instead to banish all bicycles away from “real” traffic. We live in a free society comprised of people who engage in all manner of personal habits that we may not like, it just seems more civilized, graceful, and dare I say it – American, to politely endure the occasional brief annoyances that a free society presents than to continually demand that the government force others to cater to your particular world view.
Is that really that big of a problem that we need more law? We are talking about outdoors here – it’s not like we’re cooped up in an enclosed stuffy room with ’em, or even stuck next to ’em for long periods of time – at worse, it’s only for as long as it takes to lock up – to think of that as posing even a fraction of the health risk as cycling in traffic seems a little out of perspective.
Here I am being the devil’s advocate again, I might be the only one here who feels this way. I’m not a smoker myself, but it sometimes seems like we’ve gone a little overboard with the anti-smoking extremism when we’ve come to expect that we should never have to even catch a momentary faint whiff of the stuff when outdoors, or heaven-forbid smell the scent lingering on someone’s clothing. A little like living in the city but expecting to never have to briefly endure the noise of a leaf-blower or loud cell phone conversation – or a motorist thinking that they should never have to be inconvenienced by slowing down for a minute until it’s safe to pass, wanting instead to banish all bicycles away from “real” traffic. We live in a free society comprised of people who engage in all manner of personal habits that we may not like, it just seems more civilized, graceful, and dare I say it – American, to politely endure the occasional brief annoyances that a free society presents than to continually demand that the government force others to cater to your particular world view.
Although I haven’t done it lately, I’ve had good luck in the past from just talking to a business owner and *asking* that they consider putting in a rack. Most don’t consider lack of bike parking an issue only because none of their customers have expressed a desire for it; and many are happy to do something relatively inexpensive that will add value and make customers happy. Again – seems like an issue that shouldn’t require a one-size-fits-all law to remedy.
Although I haven’t done it lately, I’ve had good luck in the past from just talking to a business owner and *asking* that they consider putting in a rack. Most don’t consider lack of bike parking an issue only because none of their customers have expressed a desire for it; and many are happy to do something relatively inexpensive that will add value and make customers happy. Again – seems like an issue that shouldn’t require a one-size-fits-all law to remedy.
Erik,
Not to be nosy, but when you explained to your landlord that the bike parking was a needed business improvement that will help you stay competitive, and that allowing you to make that improvement cost him nothing, but is beneficial to him in that it reduces the likelihood that he will have to go to the expense of finding a new tenant when your lease is up, he *still* said no? That seems contrary to his best interest and maybe even a little vindictive. Have you suggested something that doesn’t *look* like some cheap bike rack, like a couple of wrought iron hitching posts, or a bench with those big loopy armrests like they have in University main gate?
Erik,
Not to be nosy, but when you explained to your landlord that the bike parking was a needed business improvement that will help you stay competitive, and that allowing you to make that improvement cost him nothing, but is beneficial to him in that it reduces the likelihood that he will have to go to the expense of finding a new tenant when your lease is up, he *still* said no? That seems contrary to his best interest and maybe even a little vindictive. Have you suggested something that doesn’t *look* like some cheap bike rack, like a couple of wrought iron hitching posts, or a bench with those big loopy armrests like they have in University main gate?
Scott,
I agree with you about just talking to the business owners. I had a similar experience with a new coffee shop on Campbell that my wife and I liked.
They didn’t have bike racks and suggested I lock my bike to the gas main in the back of the building.
We talked about how that really was a terrible option and he said he would put a rack in. I’ve seen that rack filled often.
Scott,
I agree with you about just talking to the business owners. I had a similar experience with a new coffee shop on Campbell that my wife and I liked.
They didn’t have bike racks and suggested I lock my bike to the gas main in the back of the building.
We talked about how that really was a terrible option and he said he would put a rack in. I’ve seen that rack filled often.
I really ought to get back in the habit of doing that – I haven’t for years mostly because it’s pretty rare that I can’t find *something* secure on the property to lock to. And if I really can’t find something, I’ve had no problem just wheeling the bike in with me like I own the place, ready to cheerfully reply to any challenge with something like “yeah, I’d *rather* leave it outside – I hate having to drag it around with me in these narrow isles, but I looked and looked and for the life of me I just couldn’t find your bike rack. Could you please show me where it is?” But for some reason on the few occasions I’ve done that nobody’s ever said a peep about it. I’m not really all that scary looking, so it’s probably just because it’s a rare enough occurrence that it’s easier to let it go – if they started getting 10 to 20 people a day dragging their bikes through the store you bet your ass they’ll be likely to see the light and put in a rack without even being asked.
I really ought to get back in the habit of doing that – I haven’t for years mostly because it’s pretty rare that I can’t find *something* secure on the property to lock to. And if I really can’t find something, I’ve had no problem just wheeling the bike in with me like I own the place, ready to cheerfully reply to any challenge with something like “yeah, I’d *rather* leave it outside – I hate having to drag it around with me in these narrow isles, but I looked and looked and for the life of me I just couldn’t find your bike rack. Could you please show me where it is?” But for some reason on the few occasions I’ve done that nobody’s ever said a peep about it. I’m not really all that scary looking, so it’s probably just because it’s a rare enough occurrence that it’s easier to let it go – if they started getting 10 to 20 people a day dragging their bikes through the store you bet your ass they’ll be likely to see the light and put in a rack without even being asked.