The Carl’s Jr. at Congress Street and the I-10 frontage road received a visit from a code enforcement officer from the City of Tucson’s Housing and Community Development Department on Friday instructing them to replace their bike parking.
Carl’s Jr. manager, Alejandra Maldonado, said the restaurant’s corporate office instructed them to remove the bike parking to replace it with a Red Box DVD rental system about three months ago.
According to Maldonado, they had not been instructed to install the bike racks in another location on the property and had no plans to do so.
Repeated phone calls to the Carl’s Jr. corporate offices in Phoenix were not returned.
Carlos Portillo from the Housing and Community Development Department said determining whether a business was in violation of the bike parking code wasn’t something he had encountered before.
“This is a new one to me,” he said in response to Tucson Velo’s question about the Carl’s Jr. bike parking.
After researching the development plans, Portillo determined the restaurant is in violation of the land-use code and would be required to return the bike parking they removed.
Tom Thivener, the city’s bike and pedestrian program manager, said it is often complicated to determine whether a business is in compliance because the land-use codes have changed often throughout the years.
For many cyclists, the biggest complaint is businesses that do not have bike parking at all. Thivener said he believed the land-use code has required bicycle parking for about the last 2o years. Buildings built after that 20-year cutoff should likely have bike parking. Businesses built before that period were not required to have bike parking. If cyclists want to see bike parking at those locations they have to lobby the business directly.
Portillo said cyclists could email him with requests to check to see if businesses around Tucson are in violation of the land-use code. Portillo can be reached at CarlosR.Portillo@tucsonaz.gov
Any businesses you think might be in violation?
Yes, pretty much every Subway in Tucson. What’s up Subway?
What happen to freedom? I am a cyclist and feel if Carl’s Jr. wants to remove their bike parking that is their choice. The government should NOT be allowed to force them to have it. And people also have the choice not to eat there – that is freedom folks!
What about the freedom for the public to manifest its collective will by electing representatives and petitioning the government to enact rules desired by the majority, even if it only affects a minority? What do you think about handicap access? Food safety regulations? Should those be mandated or not?
I weep for the day when the only way we can express our freedom is by voting with our pocketbooks.
Bad movies and unhealthy food… and who is MALLIS DORLEEN?
“What about the freedom for the public to manifest its collective will by electing representatives and petitioning the government to enact rules desired by the majority, even if it only affects a minority?”
Ah-yes. The situation that this country’s founders referred to as “the tyranny of the majority” and “mob-rule,” and the very thing that they originally tried to design our system of government to avoid. That’s not freedom – that’s two wolves and a sheep voting on what to have for lunch.
I wanted to comment on this story to remind readers that lobbing the business directly for bike parking should always be the *first* course of action anyone should consider under any circumstance – businesses make money by making their customers happier than the compitition does, and in most cases the business is merely unaware that any of their customers want bike parking.
Unfortunately, bike “advocates,” like the American public in general, have been trained since birth to demand and expect a government-force solution every time a business owner disagrees with how we think they should run their own business or manage their own property. What if the “majority” of Tucsonans, to help relieve parking congestion, voted to require all homeowners in congested areas install in their front yards public-use parking spaces for at least three cars, at their own expense? Still sound like freedom to you? Don’t try to argue that its a different thing – it’s still the majority “voting” to use government force to curtail the rights of the minority.
So…it’s wrong for the majority to force regulations on the “minority” corporations. We can just complain directly or not patronize them anymore? Can you think of any instances where that doesn’t really work? Can you think of any reasons why a business might do something not in the best interests of its customers? Nope? Then congratulations, you’re a libertarian!
So…it’s wrong for the majority to force regulations on the “minority” corporations. We can just complain directly or not patronize them anymore? Can you think of any instances where that doesn’t really work? Can you think of any reasons why a business might do something not in the best interests of its customers? Nope? Then congratulations, you’re a libertarian!
We just discussed in a design workshop the concept of free parking. It does not exist and, really, no one is entitled to the accommodation. ‘Parking’ has evolved over a very long period of time. No one has to mandate in Lancaster, PA. that store owners have hitching post for the horse and buggies of the Amish. Partially because the Amish aren’t parking their rigs on the sidewalk. The minority can usually get what it wants if presented in a palatable way to the majority. That requires some thought and skill, usually lacking in government agencies. If bicycle use evolves the way we would like it to and the way government seems at times to advocate, ‘by the door’ parking will be impractical. There are some places that have already answered the situation, no muss, no fuss; meeting the land use codes and more importantly the needs of the group that they deal with.
There might be some instances where that may not work (although nearly all of those can be traced back to gov’t meddling and dampening of free market forces – not the lack thereof), but whether a local store can roust-up a few hundred bucks and four square feet of sidewalk space to sink a loop of steel pipe ain’t one of those instances. Do you seriously believe that there is some worldwide corporate conspiracy to prevent you from engaging in commerce because you ride a bike? Have you ever taken the time to ask a store owner or manager in a rational and non-accusatory tone to please provide bike parking for their customers? Or even just writen a letter or email asking for what you want? Or is the gov’t force solution the only one you’re able to think of?
“Have you ever taken the time to ask a store owner or manager in a rational and non-accusatory tone to please provide bike parking for their customers? Or even just writen (sic) a letter or email asking for what you want?”
Have you, Scott?
Tell us…
As a daily transportation cyclist in Tucson since the late 80s, I have yet to ride anyplace where lack of any sort of bike parking has been enough of a problem to warrant it – which is why I find it hard to empathize with people who whine that there’s not a bike rack right next to every door. I ride and take responsibility for doing so because I enjoy it – not because I revel in the victimhood status of being part of some supposed oppressed class that needs the government to ride in and protect me from the big bad local merchants that don’t seem to be able to read my mind and automatically know what I want. But yeah – if I should ever encounter a *real* problem (as opposed to a rack or signpost or fence that’s merely not as convenient as I’d prefer), you bet I’d talk to the owner – I certainly wouldn’t go crying to the city about it.
[…] Janette Sadik-Khan says the movement is unstoppable. A Tucson fast food joint is ordered to replace bike parking it removed for a DVD stand. If biking is going to succeed, we need to make it work for everyone […]
Hi Scott,
Just wanted to provide an alternate viewpoint to the issue of location/convenience of bike parking. As you state you’ve been commuting in Tucson for many years and I suspect are very confortable/skillful in riding in most any situation. Likewise it sounds like you’re pretty flexible in where you lock your bike at your destination.
The alternate viewpoint I’d like to offer for your consideration is that of a newbie bicyclists, let’s say a female. As I’m sure you’re aware, many studies show that to get bike commuting rates up, she is the type of person we need to be designing for.
Like you, I’ve locked up to trees, trash cans, around back by the dumpster etc. I think the bike parking regs (especially the newly proposed ones) aren’t really about you and me, they are designed to attract/encourage my fictitious female newbie rider.
Just a thought – have a great week!
Will all the former female newbie riders please chime in and tell us how they overcame the lack of parking, the heat, the wind, flat tires, how heavy the bike is, how to carry stuff……I’m looking through the land use code.
Hi ZZ,
I hope you didn’t take my post to be demeaning to females…it certaintly wasn’t intended that way. The bicycling gender imbalance is real and may or may not be related to infrastructure and perceived safety of parking areas at a destination. Maybe I should have stuck with a generic newbie rider.
Cheers.
The thing that activists and advocates seem to keep forgetting is that people, male or female, who want to ride are going to ride, without the need for any red carpets or engraved invitations – people who don’t want to ride will not, even as we shovel increasingly larger piles of money at unused infrastructure, and petition the local gov’t to curtail more and more property rights in the holy quest to eliminate the excuses those non-riders gave yesterday, they’ll just find new excuses today. “If you build it they will come” doesn’t really work to promote cycling, it’s just a convenient excuse to get our way. Tucson currently features far more un-utilized bike parking than it apparently needs. Don’t believe that? Get at least two miles from either the University or downtown and just count all the empty bike racks – nearly all of them are that way all day every day – some might get used once a week at the most. No wonder local merchants just don’t see bike parking as a priority.
Not at all…and I’m glad you made the specific point because I’ve often wondered what causes ridership to go up or down. I am not comfortable making the presumption of what will motivate someone to become a rider and am really uncomfortable with the government doing that. Current riders have addressed the needs as they see them and the results will serve future riders as they come on, but it has not been done with the objective to create more riders.
I see no benefit in creating an ‘ADA’ class of rider, in fact, if there are any parallels to make a comparison, maybe the high percentage of empty ADA parking spaces is one. Admittedly, that’s a loose one, but those spaces are not free….everyone pays….all the time.
If anything on the other end of the spectrum motivates, we might look to El Grupo. The bicycle community itself, encouraging, enabling a new group of riders through private effort and contributions. Much more effective and beneficial than any number of parking spaces.
The funny thing is – if you are a serious cyclist you are most likely health conscience and probably wouldn’t be eating at a Carl’s Jr anyway.
Scott, is voting whining?
Depends – are you talking about voting away somebody elses rights and/or property to get benefits that you personally won’t have to pay for directly? Goes directly to what I mentioned above about the USA’s founders warnings about “mob rule.”
“Tucson currently features far more un-utilized bike parking than it apparently needs. Don’t believe that? Get at least two miles from either the University or downtown and just count all the empty bike racks – nearly all of them are that way all day every day – some might get used once a week at the most. ”
Scott, do you have any valid studies supporting your claim?
Scott, what’s a mob?
Voting…a conditional thing according to some personal Scott formula?
Not my formula or even my phrase – as mentioned above the views and words of this country’s founders. I realize that this is applying national governance principals to local issues but the concepts are the same. The authors of our Constitution wrote extensively on the dangers that a pure democracy posed to our new hard-won liberty, and tried very hard to design a system of government that shielded a political minority from being plundered by the majority. We know in retrospect that they didn’t succeed all that well; and have our proof that given the opportunity, the majority can be counted upon to use their superior numbers to eagerly strip the minority of their rights, property, even their lives in some extreme cases, with no moral qualms whatsoever. And those already ineffective protections have been watered down over the years until this practice is quite commonplace. Whenever you see an issue on the ballot that ultimately will strip someone somewhere of rights and/or property to the unearned advantage of the larger group, I would hope that you possess the introspective ability to see that action for what it truly is.
I have eyes – do you?
FYI people, this is NOT the first time the city, especially Carlos Portillo has been approached about this kind of problem. The McDonald’s at Ft Lowell and Swan did the same thing. He ordered an inspector to ignore the issue and write it off. The only reason he’s doing something now is that there is media attention. This type of issue is an easy fix, if it was on the site plan and it’s not now, then it is a violation. No matter if it is a bike space, parking space or jungle gym. Just warning those who think he’ll actually do his job if you contact him.
I live more than 2 miles from campus and I have to wait for bike parking at least once a month. How many times do cars have to wait for parking? The places I wait for parking to open up, the parking lot is usually half full.
I don’t think there is an easy answer to this situation because businesses need to make money. Sometimes, I think it is a lack of respect for cyclist. Businesses don’t always know how much of their business is from cyclist. I try to let people know that I am on my bike.
Another crazy thing I see is people using bike racks for non-bike uses. In the past month, I have seen dogs tied to bike racks & a scooter parked in between the racks.
It’s worth pointing out that the vast majority of the code under review right now is actually about *mandating* car parking, but no one ever seems to complain about that part of the code. Let’s assume that the statistics are right and that at least 2% of rides to stores/work/etc. are made by bike. Doesn’t it make sense to say that in addition to a set number of car parking spaces, a business should provide a set number of bicycle spaces proportional to the expected use? Last, if you look at the cost of a bicycle locking post — $120? — and compare that to the cost of the average car parking spot — $3000-6000 (surface, parking structures are vastly more costly) then why are we not furious about the car parking requirements which are proportionately so much more expensive?