Cycle Parking & Storage

This measure was fully updated by RUPPRECHT CONSULT in 2014 under the CH4LLENGE project, financed by the European Commission.


Where there is an aim to develop cycling as a daily transport mode, then city infrastructure needs to be adapted to ensure that riding a bicycle is safe, efficient, attractive, comfortable and convenient. Provision of both short-term bicycle parking and long-term bicycle storage is important for encouraging cycling and has long been a neglected issue. Cycle Parking and Storage within cities should ideally include the provision of: un-sheltered but secure parking in convenient locations for shops and services, which is low-cost to implement; together with Cycle Lockers and supervised Cycle Stations that provide long-term storage options and the best protection from weather and theft.

Improvements to Cycle Parking and Storage can be implemented relatively quickly and increases in the cycling trip share have been achieved, in particular, where Cycle Parking is provided: at the workplace (together with associated facilities such as showers and lockers); and at main public transport nodes such as railway stations. Ideally improvements to Cycle Parking and Storage infrastructure would be implemented as part of a city or area-wide Cycle Network that also includes measures to improve cyclist safety.

In addition to encouraging more people to cycle, so helping to reduce congestion and pollution, the provision of Cycle Parking can also contribute to creating more liveable streets. This is because in cities where cycling becomes a popular mode of transport, unmanaged Cycle Parking can result in bicycles cluttering the street and obstructing pedestrians.
Innovations in Cycle Parking and Storage include secure Cycle Locker facilities that also provide a re-charging point for e-bikes. E-bikes and pedelecs are becoming more popular and can help to broaden the appeal of cycling to different social groups such as the elderly. E-bikes are typically more expensive than conventional bicycles and therefore the need for secure Cycle Parking and Storage will become increasingly important.

Introduction

Where there is an aim to develop cycling as a daily transport mode, then city infrastructure needs to be adapted to ensure that riding a bicycle is safe, efficient, attractive, comfortable and convenient. Provision of short-term bicycle parking and long-term bicycle storage has long been a neglected issue. It is now understood that parking and storage provision is a crucial element of a comprehensive Cycling Network and strategy, which should ideally also include provision of Cycle Routes, integration with public transport and promotional activities (e.g. “cycle to school” and public health campaigns).

This measure description makes a distinction between two main types of cycle parking, namely short-term parking and long-term storage (PRESTO, 2010). In each case it is necessary to strike a balance between convenience, and security and protection, when planning infrastructure:

  • Short-term parking – Convenience is very important and a selling-point when promoting cycling in urban areas where parking a car is challenging. Proximity of cycle parking to the destination and speed of parking take priority over security and protection, although these still remain important. Cyclists parking briefly, for instance to visit a shop, will want to park in front of their destination or as close as possible. Since their activity is so short, they will also want to minimize the time need for parking. They are likely to be happy with a basic level of security, since they are less likely to be prepared to lose time using a Cycle Locker or walking to a Guarded Facility.
  • Long-term storage – A high level of security takes priority over proximity and speed, although ideally both are achieved. In some situations cyclists may leave their bicycles behind for hours, a day or a night. They may use their bicycle to travel to and from public transport for daily commuting purposes. Or they simply need to have a secure place for their bike at home; consider the difficulties of cycle storage at home in some high density city areas where many people live in apartments. Since in these situations cyclists are not able to check bicycles for long periods, they demand a high level of security and protection.

Terminology

Terms typically used to describe different forms of Cycle Parking and Storage are provided below (PRESTO, 2010; Pucher et al. 2010):

  • Un-sheltered Cycle Parking – typically used for short-term parking, these comprise structures and stands that you can lean a bicycle against or in, and also lock a cycle to. Common types are:
    • Inverted U-shaped stands (also known as “Sheffield Stands” in the UK). This is recommended as: it is stable; compatible with all types of bikes; compatible with all types of locks; robust and low maintenance; and easily integrated into public spaces (PRESTO, 2010; Sustrans, 2004). The addition of a lower cross-bar to the basic design makes it easier to also park children’s bikes and this can prevent the front wheel of bicycles from turning.
    • Front-wheel Grips (also known as “Paperclip Racks and “Butterfly Stands”). This design, which holds one wheel of the bike, is not recommended as it can damage the bicycle and it is also difficult to lock the frame of a bike securely.
  • Sheltered Cycle Parking – Provision of a shelter for cycle parking to prevent bicycles from the weather can be beneficial, but this also results in additional maintenance costs.
  • Bicycle Lockers – Bicycle lockers comprise a box or container with a locked door, which is sized to accommodate one or several bicycles. These are more expensive than Un-sheltered Cycle Parking solutions, but provide greater protection from theft, vandalism and inclement weather.
    • On-street Bicycle Drums – These are small collective Lockers for around 5 to 8 bicycles that can be provided in various places. Bicycle Drums are often sized so they can simply be installed on a car-parking space.
  • Supervised Storage (also known as “Cycle Stations”) – These are typically provided at destinations where large numbers of cyclists need to store their bicycles for prolonged periods and where there is a higher risk of threat, such as main railway stations. Additional services such as bicycle maintenance and hire are offered in some cases.
  • Unmanned Automated Storage – Performing a similar role to Supervised Storage facilities, there are now also examples of fully automated cycle storage systems. Saving on personnel costs is a potential advantage, but in the absence of human presence, special care needs to be given to personal security in terms of visibility and lighting.
    • Automated On-street Storage Systems – Innovative systems include BikeTree and Biceberg. The latter allows cyclists to feed their bike into a rotating elevator system that stores bikes underground. These limit the space required for cycle parking in public places, but the time required for storing and retrieving bikes can be relatively long.

01

A Cycle Drum installed in an on-street parking bay (Source: www.cyclehoop.com)

Description

One of the attractions of a bicycle is that it is a small and light vehicle that is convenient to park close to the destination. A bike can easily be locked to a railing, a lamp post or a traffic sign. However, where a city wishes to promote cycling as a popular mode of daily transport, it is necessary to consider how the provision of cycle parking can both encourage bicycle usage, and avoid unintended side effects such as increased bicycle theft and cluttering of public spaces (PRESTO, 2010).

Encouraging cycling - In the EU project WALCYNG (How to enhance WALking and CycliNG instead of shorter car trips), people were asked to give their opinion on barriers to cycling and important measures to increase cycling. Figure 3 shows that nearly 20% of respondents mention lack of secure parking as a barrier for cycling (Stangeby, 1997).

Barriers to cycling after modal category

A=bad signing of cycle routes 
B
=bad upkeep of cycle paths 
C
=insufficient cycle road network 
D
=high speed of car traffic 
E
=non-ability of transporting heavy things 
F
=car noise and pollution 
G
=feeling of unsafety 
H
=pedestrians on the way
I=unattractive surroundings 
J
=Weather 
K
=fear of theft, lack of secure parking 
L
=ruthlessness of car drivers 
M
=badly constructed traffic lights, long waiting times 
N
=Laziness
O=Other 
Copyright © TOI

Cycle parking provision and showers at the workplace – Provision of secure cycle parking and associated changing room and shower facilities within offices, factories and other workplaces can help to promote cycle commuting. Provision of these facilities is becoming more common, in part because this is promoted by green building codes such as LEED and BREEAM (Pucher et al., 2010).   

Bicycle theft – Several studies suggest that fear of cycle theft may discourage bicycle use, and that many bicycle theft victims do not buy a replacement. Combating bicycle theft and vandalism is therefore a necessary step towards increasing the use of this sustainable mode of transport (Johnson et al., 2008). If a person is too afraid their bicycle may be stolen or vandalized, they will tend not to buy one or to use it frequently. Alternatively, a cheap older bicycle will be used, which is less efficient and comfortable and potentially less safe. Pedelecs and E-bikes provide a means for promoting cycling to wider user groups, such as the elderly, but these are typically more expensive than conventional bicycles so the potential for theft and the problems this raises are further magnified.

Bicycles and public space – A further issue for consideration is the management of large numbers of bicycles in public spaces. If there is insufficient well-organised and secure parking provision, bicycles will be parked wherever there are opportunities to lock them to posts and rails, with the result that pavements become cluttered and blocked. Bicycles then become a hazard for pedestrians and the mobility impaired and degrade the quality of public space. On the positive side, large numbers of bicycles are a sign of healthy demand and the opportunity should be seized to provide quality parking and storage.

The PRESTO (2010) guidelines conclude that city centres will need a mix of provision to satisfy the need for short-term parking as well as long-term storage. By way of indication, the city centres of mid-sized Dutch cities average a balance of around 40% bicycle parking space without stands or racks, around 40% unguarded bicycle stands and racks, and around 20% guarded parking and storage.

Why introduce cycle parking and storage?

Cycling is an environmentally friendly (clean and silent), healthy, cheap and flexible transport mode. Further information on the overall benefits of promoting cycling through the introduction or enhancement of a city or area-wide Cycle Network is provided here, as well as an overview of participation in cycling in Europe. This section focuses on the important role that Cycle Parking and Storage provision can play as a standalone measure or as part of a Cycle Network.

When preparing a cycling strategy for a city or area, it is expected that an overarching aim will be to encourage increased levels of cycling, helping to reduce road congestion, air pollution and noise pollution. As described above, the provision of cycle parking and storage can contribute to this aim by the following:

  • Ensuring cycling is convenient by enabling the bicycle to be parked close to the destination.
  • Providing reassurance that bicycles are secure, to reduce concerns of theft and vandalism, and well protected from the weather when stored for longer durations.

Demand impacts

Where there are currently low levels of cycling, it is not expected that provision of Cycle Parking and Storage will result in large modal shifts (if implemented as a standalone measure). Nevertheless, provision of improved Cycle Parking and Storage is likely to be popular with existing cyclists and a small modal shift can also be achieved. Evidence suggests that two of the most successful strategies are:

  • Bicycle parking at work – Analysis of the UK National Travel Survey found that, compared to the base bicycle mode share of 5.8% for work trips, outdoor parking increased the modal share to 6.3%, indoor secure parking to 6.6% and the provision of indoor parking and showers increased the share to 7.1% (Pucher et al., 2010 citing Wardman et al., 2007).
  • Bicycle parking at railway stations – A large number of studies have found that provision of good bicycle parking at Public Transport (PT) stations increases both PT use and levels of cycling (Pucher et al., 2010 citing: Rietveld, 2000; Martens, 2004 & 2007; Brunsing, 1997; Hegger, 2007; McClintock and Morris, 2003; Pucher & Buehler (2009) and Netherlands Ministry of Transport, 2009).  

As reported within Cycle Networks, an international review of infrastructure, programmes and policies by Pucher et al (2010) found the most compelling evidence of increased modal shift came from communities that have implemented a fully integrated package of strategies to increase cycling.

Responses and situations
Response Reduction in road traffic Expected in situations
For shorter journeys, limited change to departure time is anticipated due to ease of parking a bicycle when compared with a car. For longer journeys, longer journey durations would be expected, unless travel is along very congested routes. 
The provision of Cycle Parking will not alter a cyclist’s route or destination, with the exception of the last part of a route if high quality secure Cycle Parking is provided in the vicinity of the destination.
Improved cycle parking at local centres may encourage greater use of local shops and services and thus shorter shopping trips in the long term.
The total number of trips made is unlikely to be reduced as a result of providing Cycle Parking.
Evidence shows that provision of cycle parking at stations can encourage both increased cycling levels and increased public transport usage.
As cycling does not substitute longer car journeys selling the car is unlikely. Improvements to cycling infrastructure are more likely to affect the purchase of a second household car and may delay or prevent people from buying their first car.
Provision of Cycle Parking and Storage does not induce a change of location.
= Weakest possible response = Strongest possible positive response
= Weakest possible negative response = Strongest possible negative response
= No response

Short and long run demand responses

It is expected that the relatively small modal share effects of introducing Cycle Parking and Storage would mainly occur within a year of implementation. Other factors, such as the implementation of Cycle Routes as part of a Network would further increase useage of Cycle Parking and Storage, but this cumulative effect is not expressed in the table below

Short and long run demand responses
Response - 1st year 2-4 years 5 years 10+ years
-
  -
  -
  -
  -
  -
  -
= Weakest possible response = Strongest possible positive response
= Weakest possible negative response = Strongest possible negative response
= No response

Supply impacts

Where cycle parking is provided and this is successful in increasing the numbers of cyclists, this could result in increased demand for associated measures. Examples include safety improvements for cyclists at nearby junctions, such as the provision of Segregated Cycle Facilities.

In terms of space requirements, cycle parking takes up significantly less space than the equivalent for car parking, and therefore provision of cycle parking should not prove problematic in instances where modal shift is achieved. In one ordinary car parking space it is possible to provide parking racks for six bicycles.

Financing requirements

Cycle parking and storage options can vary from the provision of: Un-sheltered Cycle Parking outdoors, which is relatively cheap to install, has low maintenance costs, and is normally provided free to the user; through to Supervised Storage (Bike Stations) that require more significant initial investment and will have continued staffing costs. Many cyclists will be prepared to pay for the use of Supervised Storage facilities, so a revenue stream towards maintaining the service can be generated.

A study conducted by the Austrian Federal Ministry for Transport, Innovation and Technology sets out cycle infrastructure measures that can be implemented with a budget of €50,000 (BMVIT 2011 from NRVP, 2012). This study provides examples of the Cycle Parking measures that can be implemented with a cycling budget of €50,000.

Measure

Per unit cost

Purchasing 600 cycle stands

Approx. €85 per stand

Providing 50 covered cycle-parking spaces including lighting

Approx. €1,000 per space

Expected impact on key policy objectives

As a standalone measure it is not expected that the provision of Cycle Parking and Storage will realise large modal shifts. Nevertheless, it has been shown that Cycle Parking provision in key locations, such as workplaces and railway stations, can encourage increased levels of cycling and therefore a contribution to the alleviation of problems.

In cities and locations where cycling is already a popular form of transport, the provision of Cycle Parking and Storage can help to de-clutter public places and avoid conflict with property owners and businesses that do not wish to have bicycles locked to their fences and railings.

Contribution to objectives

Objective

Scale of contribution

Comment

  Provision of Cycle Parking can encourage an increase in the modal share of cycling, contributing to a reduction in congestion and an increase in the efficiency of the transport network.
  Provision of formal Cycle Parking helps to de-clutter public spaces and avoid conflicts with property owners and businesses, in particular in cities where there are high levels of cycle use. Where modal shift is achieved, cycling will help to reduce noise and air pollution.
  Where car use is reduced as a result of the introduction of Cycle Parking and Storage, there will also be a reduction in the levels of air and noise pollution, including reduced CO2 emissions.
  Some groups of people with lower incomes may benefit from the improved low cost mobility option that Cycling provides. Provision of secure Cycle Parking and Storage is important to remove the concern of bicycle theft.
  Provision of Cycle Parking and Storage will not affect safety levels.
  The provision of quality Cycle Parking Facilities in a local centre may encourage greater use of shops and services in the local area.
  In many instances, public funding will be necessary to implement Cycle Parking and Storage. In some cases funding by businesses (workplace parking) and cyclists (residential cycle storage; Supervised Storage) is possible, although public subsidy may still be necessary or beneficial to accelerate provision.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Expected impact on problems

The main problems listed are often the result of high levels of car use. Cycle Parking and Storage provision is ideally implemented as part of a comprehensive Cycle Network, which provides the greatest potential to achieve modal shift.

Contribution to alleviation of key problems

Problem

Scale of contribution

Comment

Congestion A small modal shift to cycling can be achieved through the introduction of Cycle Parking and Storage in key locations, helping to reduce traffic volumes.
Community impacts Increased levels of cycling can have a host of benefits for communities, including: increased opportunities for social interaction, when compared to car travel; more liveable streets; and reduced community severance by decreasing traffic volumes.
Environmental damage Modal shift to cycling can help to reduce CO2 emissions, air pollution and noise pollution. Cycling is also more space efficient than roads, and therefore, loss of green space and environmental damage is comparatively limited.
Poor accessibility For people without cars, the provision of Cycle Parking and Storage can help to provide an attractive form of mobility, particularly for shorter trips. 
Social and geographical disadvantage Provision of Cycle Parking and Storage would benefit all social groups.
Accidents Provision of Cycle Parking and Storage will not help to prevent accidents or increase the likelihood of accidents.
Economic growth The provision of quality Cycle Parking Facilities in a local centre may encourage greater use of shops and services in the local area.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Expected winners and losers

Provision of Cycle Parking and Storage does not force anybody to change their travel habits and there is expected be more potential for winners than losers. One potential situation where controversy could arise is where proposed cycle parking would result in the loss of space for car parking. In such an instance, it is important that the provision of Cycle Parking is seen in the context of a broader Sustainable Urban Mobility Plan that seeks to reduce congestion and the need  regularly to use a car.

Winners and losers

Group

Winners/Losers

Comment

Large scale freight and commercial traffic

Potential for a small reduction in congestion where modal shift is achieved through provision of Cycle Parking and Storage in key locations such as workplaces and railway stations.

Small businesses

Cycle parking provision in a local centre may help increase use of local facilities, due to shorter trips being preferred by cyclists.

High income car-users

Car-users will benefit from the small modal shift to cycling and reduced congestion that can be achieved through the provision of Cycle Parking and Storage.
Low income car-users with poor access to public transport Car-users will benefit from the small modal shift to cycling and reduced congestion that can be achieved through the provision of Cycle Parking and Storage. In addition, cycling provides an affordable means for accessing local facilities and public transport.

All existing public transport users

Reduced congestion may increase the reliability of existing public transport.

People living adjacent to the area targeted

People living closer to the location where Cycling Parking is installed will benefit more, as cycle trips are typically relatively short.

Cyclists including children

All cyclists will benefit from the provision of secure Cycle Parking and Storage. The benefits are magnified where implemented as part of a Cycle Network.

People at higher risk of health problems exacerbated by poor air quality

A modal shift to cycling can contribute to reducing emissions within a city, to the benefit of people with health risks exacerbated by poor air quality.
People making high value, important journeys Potential reductions in congestion will benefit those using public transport or private motorized vehicles to undertake high value, important journeys.
The average car user Car-users will benefit from the provision of Cycle Parking and Storage provision should they use bicycles for some purposes, such as shopping or leisure purposes.
= Weakest possible benefit = Strongest possible positive benefit
= Weakest possible negative benefit = Strongest possible negative benefit
= Neither wins nor loses

Barriers to implementation

In some countries there are relatively strong cultural and political barriers to the implementation of cycle routes and other cycle facilities. While the provision of Segregated Cycle Facilities can lead to a reduction of road space for motorized traffic and conflict with interest groups, the provision of Cycle Parking can provide a less controversial initial option for intervention.

Scale of barriers
Barrier Scale Comment
Legal In most instances there are no obvious legal barriers to the provision of Cycle Parking and Storage. Where there are proposals to introduce Cycle Storage such as Cycle Drums on parking spaces or the public highway, the legal position should be checked.
Finance As explained above, the provision of Cycle Parking and Storage options can vary significantly, but the simplest forms of Un-sheltered Cycle Parking provide a relatively low cost intervention measure.
Governance Governance arrangements for the planning and implementation of a Segregated Cycle Facility could provide for the involvement of public authorities, relevant transport providers, and potentially businesses, cycling charities and other interest groups. It is not expected that very complex arrangements would be necessary to implement a Cycle Parking measure.
Political acceptability Measures relating to cyclists and pedestrians often have less priority than measures relating to motorized vehicles, although Cycle Parking provision is less likely to be controversial than the provision of Cycle Lanes for instance.
Public and stakeholder acceptability There is expected to be support from a range of groups, as well as pro-cycling lobbies, however, there will also be those that oppose significant investment in cycling, particularly if this is at the expense of other transport modes or other public services.
Technical feasibility With the exception of automated Cycle Storage solutions, Cycle Parking and Storage technical requirements are not complex.
= Minimal barrier = Most significant barrier

Case Study 1: Measures to promote combined use of bicycle and train: Cycle Parking and Cycle Centres at stations in the Netherlands
Case study 2 - Cycle Parking planning through social media, Poland
Case study 3 - “Radhouse” – an innovative form of bicycle/e-bike parking and storage, Austria

 

Case study 1 - Measures to promote combined use of bicycle and train: Cycle Parking and Cycle Centres at stations in the Netherlands

Context

Facilities enabling the combined use of bicycle and train have been an element of the Dutch transportation system for a long time and the high share of the bicycle in access trips can at least in part be attributed to this (Martens, 2007). By the beginning of the 1990s virtually all main train stations were equipped with specialized cycle centres that included guarded parking, bicycle hire and maintenance facilities, while bicycle lockers and covered parking facilities were usually available at smaller train stations.
From the end of the 1980s a growth in the number of train passengers, partly as a result of the introduction of a free public transport pass for students, resulted in problems in the quantity and quality of bicycle parking facilities at many train stations. Since the early 1990s a number of initiatives have been launched to cope with problems relating to the quantity and quality of bicycle parking facilities, including “Space for the Bicycle”. Launched by the Ministry of Transport, this programme had the aim to upgrade Cycle Parking facilities at all 380 train stations in the country by 2007, and sought to implement the following guidelines:

  • Bicycle parking places are available for regular and incidental train travellers.
  • A mix of secure (Supervised Storage and Lockers) and regular Cycle Parking is available at all stations.
  • The maximum walking distance between secure parking facilities and the station entrance is 200m.
  • Regular parking facilities should be visible from busy areas so as to reduce bicycle theft and vandalism.

A key element of the quality standards is that an overcapacity of 20% for both secure and regular parking facilities should be provided. This is to make sure cyclists can easily find a free parking space, even during days and hours of peak demand.

Impacts on demand

The Netherlands has an exceptionally high level of bicycle use with around 30% of trips made by bicycle (Flash Eurobarometer, 2011) and figures from the 1990s show that the bicycle share of trips to access rail services was broadly equivalent to this (29.3% in van Goeverden and Egeter, 1993, cited by Martens, 2007). A survey at five smaller stations, undertaken following the implementation of the “Space for the Bicycle” programme, showed a jump in user approval ratings from 5.3 to 7.1 (on a scale of 1 to 10). Around 11% of the respondents indicated that the improved Cycle Parking facilities were a reason to travel more often by bicycle to the train station, suggesting that an even higher cycling modal share will result from the improvements.

Impacts on Supply

The experience of The Netherlands demonstrates that the implementation of policy measures for one transport mode can have important implications for another. In this case, increasing numbers of public transport users resulted in a cycle parking problem at stations. Based on evidence, it is also reasonable to suggest that an improvement in cycle parking facilities, making cycling a more attractive and convenient prospect, can also help to increase the number of public transport users.

Contribution to objectives

Contribution to objectives
Objective Scale of contribution Comment
  In the case of The Netherlands the combined use of cycling and public transport modes is a popular option, resulting in a significant reduction in road congestion. Cycle Parking forms an integral and important part of the Cycle Network.
  Cycle Parking contributes towards a modal shift to cycling, which in turn can provide opportunities for social interaction and help to reduce noise and air pollution. Well planned Cycle Parking and Storage also reduces the potential for bicycles to clutter and block pavements.
  In the case of The Netherlands the combined use of cycling and public transport modes is a popular option, resulting in a significant reduction in levels of noise and air pollution, including reduced CO2 emissions.
  Use of Bicycle Parking and Storage is not restricted and therefore all groups are able to benefit from cycling as a cheap and convenient travel mode.
  Cycle Parking provision has neither a positive or negative impact on safety.
  In those locations where Cycle Parking has been provided, there may be a benefit for local shops and services, although the case study does not present evidence confirming this.
  Public funding is utilised to provide Cycle Parking and Storage facilities and there is a substantial cost difference in the provision of Un-sheltered Cycle Parking and Supervised Storage.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Case study 2 - Cycle Parking planning through social media, Poland

Context

One of the main problems for cyclists in Poland has been the lack of Cycle Parking and Storage, and the fact that existing facilities are impractical or located in the wrong places. The Allegro All For Planet foundation (AFP) has been trying over recent years to make urban spaces more cycling-friendly. For this purpose a nationwide public campaign was launched in 2010 and took place for the third time in 2012.

The action “Cycle for kilometres, park in an atmospheric/pleasant place” is a competition for both individual participants and state provinces. The participants collected cycled kilometres either through an online application (on the website), or directly using their own bike equipment. For this purpose, a mobile application has been designed (for iOS and Android operating systems), which counts the distance cycled based on GPS signals. This application also allows participants to identify sites for new bicycle racks and add proposed cycling routes to a database.

During the campaign, participants indicated sites and specific locations where bicycle racks were most needed.  Based on this information, the foundation chose the most relevant sites and took care of the formalities required to install new bicycle racks. The cost of each bike stand was on average €250, half of which was paid for by AFP and the other half by an investor. Costs include the design, manufacturing, transport, installation and coordination process. Maintenance of bike racks (such as painting, repairs etc.) is based on the same 50/50 cost share principle. Stands are owned by the foundation, who also pay for insurance. The bicycle stands are original designer racks, created by young artists so that their shape always makes reference to their location.  In some Polish cities, bikes are parked in racks in the form of a sunbather on the beach (the city of Sopot), a kangaroo and elephant (the city of Poznan) or the Dragon of Wawel Hill (Kracow).

Impacts on demand

By 2012, participants of the scheme had already ridden a total of 80,000 kilometres. As a result more than 685 new Cycle Parking stands and 1,170 parking spaces for cyclists at 77 locations in 7 major cities were installed up to 2012. Based on the cyclists’ recommendations, more than 1,000 new potential Cycle Routes have also been identified (ELTIS, 2013).

Impacts on supply

This case study demonstrates that it is possible to deliver significant Cycle Parking improvements over a short-time frame (2010 to 2012). As Cycle Parking is more space efficient than Car Parking and the technical requirements are relatively limited, the process of identifying sites and installing infrastructure is a comparatively rapid process.

Further information on whether the cycle parking improvements have helped to achieve a high modal shift would be useful. Nevertheless, the case study provides an example of how mobile technology and social media approaches can be utilised to simultaneously promote cycling and receive input to Cycle Network planning.

Contribution to objectives

Contribution to objectives
Objective Scale of contribution Comment
  There is no information available on whether the Cycle Parking provision achieved a modal shift towards cycling, however it is considered that overall the campaign increased cycling levels and the profile of cycling as a transport mode.
  The public art element of the campaign, whereby distinctive cycle stands were designed, demonstrates that Cycle Parking can contribute positively to the streetscape, as well as reducing the cluttering of a street that can arise from the random parking of bicycles.
  There is no information available on whether the Cycle Parking provision achieved a modal shift towards cycling, however it is considered that overall the campaign increased cycling levels and the profile of cycling as a transport mode.
  Use of Bicycle Parking is not restricted and therefore all groups are able to benefit from cycling as a cheap and convenient travel mode.
  Cycle Parking provision has neither a positive or negative impact on safety.
  In those locations where Cycle Parking has been provided, there may be a benefit for local shops and services, although the case study does not present evidence confirming this.
  In this case a foundation and investors are financing the provision and maintenance of the bicycle stands, providing an example of how third parties may be attracted to assist public authorities with the implementation of such schemes.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Case study 3 - “Radhouse”: an innovative form of bicycle/e-bike parking and storage, Austria

Context

The “Radhouse” provides an example of a secure cycle storage system that could be utilised both in dense residential areas, where cycle storage in apartments is challenging and inconvenient, and at public transport interchanges where bicycles are used as a feeder form of transport. It also demonstrates a type of secure cycle storage that can be provided to reduce concerns over the theft and vandalism of expensive bicycles, in particular e-bikes.

In Austria the number of owners of e-bikes is increasing which brings with it some specific infrastructure needs. Protection against weather and theft, and the opportunity to recharge batteries are the most important needs of e-bikes. To meet this demand, an Austrian business has invented the bicycle storage “Radhouse”. This occupies the same area as one car parking space but provides separated spaces for five e-bikes along with some equipment. Electricity for charging the e-bikes is produced with photovoltaic cells assembled on the roof. In winter the “Radhouse” can also be furnished with a system that warms the bike battery in order to avoid loss of power.

02Source (ELTIS, 2011)

Two “Radhouses” are being piloted for a test period in Frohnleiten, close to Graz, which is an area well suited to the trial because of the high number of commuters that travel to Graz by train for work. The ratio of use to the number of parking spaces provided is around 75% and implementation costs range from between €10,000 to €15,000 per unit, depending on the location.

Impact on demand

Results from the “Radhouse” pilot are not yet available, however, it is anticipated that the provision of such storage facilities can help increase the popularity of e-bikes. In turn, this could help increase the modal share of cycling, by attracting people that do not enjoy or are not able to participate in regular cycling (for instance older age groups). Weather and theft protection is of great importance for e-bikes, which are typically more expensive than regular bicycles.

Impact on Supply

Cycle Parking and Storage Lockers such as the Radhouse could impact on the supply of car parking spaces and public transport provision. In some instances, the best available space for the provision of Bicycle Storage lockers in residential areas and at stations could be existing car parking spaces. While cycle parking provision is considered more space efficient, the loss of car parking opportunities can be a controversial issue.

With respect to public transport, evidence from other case studies (see The Netherlands case study above) shows that the provision of high quality cycle parking can encourage cycling to public transport nodes. In turn this can also increase public transport user numbers as access to a station becomes more convenient.

Contribution to objectives

Contribution to objectives
Objective Scale of contribution Comment
  There is no information available on whether Cycle Parking provision achieved a modal shift towards cycling, however it is considered that provision of the Radhouse could encourage the use of both conventional bicycles and e-bikes, thereby contributing to a reduction in motorized traffic and congestion.
  Cycle Parking contributes towards a modal shift to cycling, which in turn can provide opportunities for social interaction and help to reduce noise and air pollution.
  Where car use is reduced through the provision of good Cycle Parking and Storage facilities, there will also be a reduction in levels of noise and air pollution, including reduced CO2 emissions.
  By encouraging the use of e-bikes as well as conventional bicycles, the Radhouse solution helps to broaden the appeal of cycling as a mode of transport.
  Cycle Parking provision has neither a positive or negative impact on safety.
  The Radhouse provides an example of an innovative Cycle Parking product, designed in Austria to solve a particular cycling-related situation. As such it provides an example of how increased cycling levels can foster economic activity, from supporting local bike shops to product design and manufacture as part of a Green Economy.
  The Radhouse is a relatively expensive Cycle Parking and Storage solution, designed to encourage use of e–bikes and high quality conventional bicycles.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Contribution to objectives

Contribution to objectives
Objective Cycle Parking at Rail Stations, The Netherlands Cycle Parking planning and provision, Poland Radhouse e-bike storage, Austria Comment
  An exceptionally high cycle share of trips to railway stations in The Netherlands means that a higher efficiency rating is awarded.
  Provision of Cycle Parking helps to de-clutter public spaces where there is already a high modal share (e.g. The Netherlands) and as cycling becomes more popular. In Poland, cycle parking has been treated as a form of public art.
  An exceptionally high cycle share of trips to railway stations in The Netherlands means that a higher rating is awarded.
  By enabling e-bike parking and storage, the Radhouse could help to encourage cycling amongst different groups of people (e.g. the elderly).
  Cycle Parking provision has neither a positive or negative impact on safety.
  The Radhouse e-bike parking and storage solution provides an example of where a high-tech cycle parking solution can foster design and manufacturing activity as part of a Green Economy.
  Cycle parking can be implemented as a relatively cheap measure, although Supervised Storage and the Radhouse would be more costly to implement.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

 

Contribution to problems

Contribution to alleviation of key problems
Objective Cycle Parking at Rail Stations, The Netherlands Cycle Parking planning and provision, Poland Radhouse e-bike storage, Austria Comment
Congestion An exceptionally high cycle share of trips to railway stations in The Netherlands means that cycling makes a greater contribution to reducing congestion.
Community impacts Alleviation of community impacts is considered to be similar for all case studies.
Environmental damage An exceptionally high cycle share of trips to railway stations in The Netherlands means that cycling makes a greater contribution to protecting the environment.
Poor accessibility By enabling e-bike parking and storage, the Radhouse could help to encourage cycling amongst different groups of people (e.g. the elderly).
Social and geographical disadvantage Provision of Cycle Parking and Storage would benefit all social groups. The Radhouse could help to encourage cycling amongst different groups of people (e.g. the elderly).
Accidents Provision of Cycle Parking and Storage will not help to prevent accidents or increase the likelihood of accidents.
Economic growth In Poland, cyclists were able to recommend particular locations for cycle storage, potentially helping to boost use of local shops and services. The Radhouse e-bike parking and storage solution provides an example of where a high-tech cycle parking solution can foster design and manufacturing activity as part of a Green Economy.
= Weakest possible positive contribution = Strongest possible positive contribution
= Weakest possible negative contribution = Strongest possible negative contribution
= No contribution

Appropriate contexts

Appropriate area-types
Area type Suitability
City centre
Dense inner suburb
Medium density outer suburb
Less dense outer suburb
District centre
Corridor
Small town
Tourist town
= Least suitable area type = Most suitable area type

Adverse side effects

The main side effect identified is that of cost for the public authority. It should be noted that Unsheltered Cycle Parking can be implemented at relatively low cost, allowing for beneficial impacts upon cycling levels to be monitored. Some of the greatest benefits are shown to arise from the provision of a combination of unsupervised and Supervised Storage at public transport interchanges, ideally as an element of a Cycle Network. While supervised parking and storage options are more expensive, there is also the potential to charge a small amount for high quality parking, providing a revenue stream to help recoup some costs.

Brunsing, J. (1997) Public transport and cycling: experience of modal integration in Germany. In Tolley, R. (ed) The greening of urban transport. Wiley, Chichester, UK, pp. 357-373

ELTIS (2011) “Radhouse” – a new type of bicycle storage, Austria. ELTIS Case Studies: http://www.eltis.org/index.php?id=13&study_id=2965

ELTIS (2013) Cycle for kilometres, park in an atmospheric place – cycling action in Poland. ELTIS Case Studies: http://www.eltis.org/index.php?id=13&study_id=3753

Flash Eurobarometer (2011) Future of transport – analytical report. EC

Hegger, R. (2007). Public transport and cycling: Living apart or together? Public
Transport International 56 (2), 38-41

Johnson, S.D. et al. (2008) Bicycle theft. Problem-oriented guides for police series. US Department of Justice, Office of Community Oriented Policing Services

Martens, K. (2004) The bicycle as a feedering mode: Experiences from three European countries. Transp. Res. Part D 9, 281-294

Martens, K. (2007) Promoting Bike and Ride: The Dutch experience. Transp. Res. Part A 41, 326-338

McClintock, H., Morris, D. (2003). Integration of cycling and light rail transit. World Transp. Policy Pract. 9 (3), 9–14

Netherlands Ministry of Transport (2009) Cycling in the Netherlands. Ministerie van Verkeer en Waterstaat, The Hague. Accessible at: http://www.fietsberaad.nl/library/repository/bestanden/CyclingintheNetherlands2009.pdf

Presto (2010) PRESTO cycling policy guide, cycling infrastructure. EU Intelligent Energy Europe

Pucher, J., Buehler, R. (2009) Integration of bicycling with public transport. J. Public Transp. 12 (3)

Pucher, J. et al. (2010) Infrastructure, programs, and policies to increase bicycling: An international review. Preventative Medicine 50 (2010) S106-S125

Rietveld, P. (2000) The accessibility of railway stations: the role of the bicycle in the Netherlands. Transp. Res. Part D 5, 71-75

Stangeby, I. (1997) Attitudes towards walking and cycling instead of using a car. WALCYNG WP6. T0I report 370/1997. Oslo, Institute of Transport Economics

Sustrains (2004) Cycle parking information sheet FF37

van Goeverden, C.D. & Egeter, B. (1993) Gecombineerd gebruik van fiets en openbaar vervoer: verwachte effecten op de vervoerwijzekeuze van optimale fietsbeschikbaarheid in voor- en natransport. Delft, TU Delft, Faculteit der Viviele Techniek

Wardman, M et al. (2007) Factors influencing the propensity to cycle to work. Transp. Res. Part A 41, 339-350