The two-wheel challenge
New transportation startups, fueled by the ubiquity of smartphones, are changing the way we move through the city. As they commence, revolutionary business models have run into resistance from cities skeptical of their promises and worried about their impact. We’ve heard this before – Uber anyone?
The bet with bike share systems was they would get folks out of their cars thus reducing the negative environmental and logistical effects of vehicles. There is tremendous potential here, but not all cities are the same. In less dense cities for example, (Los Angeles, California) which are highly car-dependent, how do bikes gain traction when summoning an Uber is so easy?
On the logistical side, bike sharing also has its challenges. Established smart-bike and smart-dock systems spend considerable money to make sure bikes get back to the places where people most desire to start their trips. Another model, free-floating bikes, tend to gravitate toward central businesses or tourist districts. This model is not without its detractors, however.
“Bikes are all over San Francisco right now, and they haven’t cleaned up their mess yet,” comments Heath Maddox, a planner and project manager for the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency. “It’s going to be a tall order for them to get a permit, based on the behavior we’ve seen so far.”
Limited, supportive infrastructure (i.e., docking stations, bike lanes), theft, high technology costs, funding considerations, and safety issues are just a handful of the principal obstacles to scaling bike sharing. A better understanding of the conditions in which the model thrives – operational understanding, advanced technology applications, etc. – and the role of public policy to spur on development is critical.
But even more important, on the demand side (the client), is Quality. Bicycles need to be durable, attractive and practical (a front basket to carry bags, packages or groceries, etc.). Bicycles should also have specially designed parts and sizes which discourage theft. The real-time monitoring of occupancy rates (to track whether more or fewer bikes are needed per station) should be implemented to avoid disappointed users who are trying to find a bike.
At its core – a bike user wants/needs a bike in good condition, and at the exact time he/she desires. Here is where it gets interesting. Geme.io is a free community map and information sharing app that allows users to explore, create and connect with the city in innovative ways. Within this large sphere of exploration and connection, one will be able to crowdsource the quality of bikes in a given location so future users have the real-time information necessary to make an informed decision.
If a bike shows up as “No good,” said user doesn’t need to waste their time in traveling across town to check it out. Geme.io already features every bike sharing location in the world (you read that right) in its virtual map and provides directions to them. The larger mission – create a crowdsourcing rating system to give users a voice, create a demand-orientated community, and provide data to city specific decision-makers so they can make informed decisions based on real data.
City administrations tend to create exclusive contracts with docking providers for extended periods of time. This by nature prevents other companies from entering. Bikeshare systems must reflect the needs and requirements of each community in which they operate, and a community that consists of people with a voice is what we all desire – city administrators included.
You want to have a say in your community? Join us in the ride.
