Vancouver councillor pushes idea
after success in European cities
BY FRANCES BULA
VANCOUVER SUNfbula@ png. canwest. com
VANCOUVER - They’ve done it in Paris. They’re promising to do it in Beijing.
Now Vancouver is jumping on the bandwagon of cities looking into a publicbike rental system for commuters.
TransLink has put out a tender call for companies to assess whether and how public bikes could work in Greater Vancouver.
It is asking the bidders to assess a system that would make bikes available in downtown Vancouver, the Broadway corridor, and in other communities.
“ I wouldn’t expect it everywhere,” said TransLink vice- chair Marvin Hunt, also a Surrey city councillor. “ I would expect them where there is a concentration of businesses. And I wouldn’t expect them at the King George Station at all or a station like Joyce.”
Hunt said TransLink put out the contract call after hearing from consumers that they’d like such a system in the region. As well, Vancouver Coun. Peter Ladner put forward a motion in October suggesting TransLink look into public bikes, which got support from the rest of the board.
“ I think this is very workable in Vancouver,” said Ladner. “ I pushed it because it’s taking off in other cities in Europe. It produces a dramatic increase in the number of people cycling and reduces car use.”
The first public- bike system started in Rennes, France, in 2001, with 250 bicycles at 25 docking stations, according to information supplied with the TransLink call for bidders.
Paris, with a fleet of flashy pink bikes, has supplied 20,600 bicycles at 1,450 docking station and Beijing ha promised it will supply 50,000 bikes in time for the Olympics.
Typically, people pay for the bikes with a smart card or credit card, picking them up in one spot and returning them to the same place or any other docking station. The bikes are frequently manufactured with different kinds of parts that don’t fit regular bikes, making them less prone to thefts.
Bonnie Fenton, the chair of Vancouver’s bicycle advisory committee and a trainer in bike skills, called the idea “ very cool.”
“ If you make it easy for people, it’s more likely to happen. All of this is fitting together really well.”
Former Vancouver city councillor and transit advocate Gordon Price also called it a “ great idea.” He had one caution, though. “ The big problem is helmets.” In Europe, helmets aren’t required or supplied. In the Lower Mainland, it’s illegal to ride without a helmet.
Could it be that this idea will be scuttled because of our helmet law, or will they take the experiences of success where this has been done without helmets and provide an exemption as transit users have an exemption from our seat belt law?
I cant comment on BC, but in the USA, a useless, ponderous rule
written by people who couldnt balance a bike on a bet would win out
over common sense and whats best for all.
I don't think think its going to happen without a helmet law. The city is going to be facing huge liability exposure if it doesn't require and provide helmets. First person that rents a bike and crashes or gets hit and becomes a vegetable is going to sue for big bucks and the plaintiff's attorney will have a good argument that the city should have provided helmets.
Even with a helmet law, the insurance premium is going to be huge because idiots who have no business on a bike are going rent the bikes, get hit and sue, no way out of it.
Edit: Nevermind. Missed that this is in BC. I don't know what negligence law is like in Canada, but if its anything like the US, then the above applies.
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace
It seems that the issue may change the way the law is seen in BC.
I just talked to Bonnie, and she said that issue has yet to be settled.
Vancouver hardly enforces the law, but Victoria does. Translink which is in line to provide the service has an exemption to the seat belt laws for their busses, they may be able to get an exemption to the helmet law if they want to put this plan through.
The upcoming Olympics may be motovation to put a plan like this in place so we can show the world that Vancouver is a world class city (whatever that means - we heard it enough during Expo 86)
Invention wanted: a foldable (inflatable?) bicycle helmet which provides convenience and protection. The old padded leather or vinyl hairnets were great for stashing in one's backpack, but even the best of the bunch, the Kucherik, did not provide much protection. Unfortunately, my Giro Xen takes up half my backpack.
I am much less concerned about the law than about my own desire to wear a helmet while riding any bicycle.
"Early to bed, early to rise. Work like hell, and advertise." -- George Stahlman
Capo [dschaw'-poe]: 1959 Modell Campagnolo, S/N 40324; 1960 Sieger, S/N 42624
Peugeot: 1970 UO-8, S/N 0010468
Bianchi: 1981 Campione d'Italia, S/N 1.M9914
Schwinn: 1988 Project KOM-10, S/N F804069
Has there been problems in Paris because they do not require helmets with these bikes?
The most serious "problem" probably is the loss of potential sales and Euros for the helmet merchants, and possibly loss of self esteem for the incessant helmet promoters/Safety Nannies.
France has a different legal system from the USA and Canada, except Quebec and Louisiana.
Anyone familiar with a legal requirement to furnish a helmet or some other safety equipment to a bike renter when there is no law requiring the cyclist to wear a helmet or safety/fashion accessory in that locale? Or aware of any successful lawsuit against a retailer/renting establishment for failure to provide a non legally required helmet? I doubt it, but I could be wrong. Please no unreferenced "I read it somewhere on the Internet" replies.
If this is your first visit to Bike Forums please take the time to register.
Registration is required for you to post on the forums. Registration will also give you the ability to track messages of interest,
send private messages to other users, and view the full contents of BikeForums.net. Registration is free and takes just a few
seconds to complete.
Anyone familiar with a legal requirement to furnish a helmet or some other safety equipment to a bike renter when there is no law requiring the cyclist to wear a helmet or safety/fashion accessory in that locale? Or aware of any successful lawsuit against a retailer/renting establishment for failure to provide a non legally required helmet? I doubt it, but I could be wrong. Please no unreferenced "I read it somewhere on the Internet" replies.
Unreferenced "I wrote it on the internet." As a lawyer I can tell you that it would be very easy to bring a negligence claim for a bike rental's failure to provide a helmet. All it would take is a renter with a serious head injury that was not wearing a helmet because the renttal did not make one available and an expert witness that could testify that the head injury would have been less if the renter were wearing a helmet. That would be ebough to get the case in front of a jury. Whether the plaintiff wins is another question.
Also, any good insurance company would require that the rental agency provide helmets.
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace
Unreferenced "I wrote it on the internet." As a lawyer I can tell you that it would be very easy to bring a negligence claim for a bike rental's failure to provide a helmet. All it would take is a renter with a serious head injury that was not wearing a helmet because the renttal did not make one available and an expert witness that could testify that the head injury would have been less if the renter were wearing a helmet. That would be ebough to get the case in front of a jury. Whether the plaintiff wins is another question.
Also, any good insurance company would require that the rental agency provide helmets.
Easy as finding a lawyer who thinks there may be buck to be made out of it. Which applies to any lawsuit isssue.
Why not mouthguards, eye protection, knee pads, etc. etc? And why restrict the quest to just bicycle renters? How about the far richer fishing grounds of car rental agencies that do not provide helmets to the renters? Would not the same rationale for a lawsuit fishing expedition prevail? Let us know your take on what the insurance companies' mandates are on that.
Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 12-01-07 at 08:24 AM.
There is an exemption to the helmet law here that says pedi-cab operators and their pasengers do not have to wear helmets. Maybe a possible exemption for these bikes as well?
Of course if there is an exemption made and the system works well, that would leave the door open for critisism of the law itself and it's possible that those in charge who don't want people riding around without helmets may oppose the whole project to avoid looking wrong.
I'd love to see it go through with an exemption and it to do well. Vancouver is very progressive in its traffic management and this has all the perception points of good PCness plus if there are few problems and better traffic management with the project, it'd be an example of how helmetless riders make things better for everyone.
My bet is that the project is nixed or run in a limited capacity with the helmet requirement resulting in problems that cancels it.
I wonder how all these scooter shops up and down the coast of S.Florida can
rent scooters to fat, dumpy, drunk tourists and not have to provide
helmets ?
I would assume a scooter with said operator is a much more accident prone entity.
Just have a helmet permanantly attached to each bike with a chain or cable. People can choose to wear it or not.
Paul
helmets would be lost or damaged, resulting in charges to the deposit credit card, elimininating the point of the program of free public bikes. No one is going to want to take one if it's going to cost $50 because they forgot the thing in Starbucks or they dropped it while trying to do something.
Plus there's the important point of fit and adjustment. if someone wants to go 2 miles down the street are they going to have one that had just been used by someone else that fits their head properly?
I wonder how all these scooter shops up and down the coast of S.Florida can
rent scooters to fat, dumpy, drunk tourists and not have to provide
helmets ?
I would assume a scooter with said operator is a much more accident prone entity.
I'm pretty sure they make helmets available, not mandatory since there is no helmet law in Fl., thats the difference. As long as the rental agency provides the option of a helmet, and if there is a mandatory helmet law, makes the renter sign a disclosure they are aware of the helmet law, then the rental agency could avoid some liability.
Il faut de l'audace, encore de l'audace, toujours de l'audace
Ok, I see.....
Strange too...Of all the states Ive lived/visited FL. should have a full body armour law
for cyclists based on the car driving , errr... 'assaulting' that takes place here
I'm pretty sure they make helmets available, not mandatory since there is no helmet law in Fl., thats the difference. As long as the rental agency provides the option of a helmet, and if there is a mandatory helmet law, makes the renter sign a disclosure they are aware of the helmet law, then the rental agency could avoid some liability.
Here is a news flash. With a few local exceptions, there are no MHL's in the US or Europe for adults. How many minor renters of anything do you encounter?
BTW when car rental agencies rent a car to an adult are they responsible for providing several car seats in every car just in case the renter might transport small children sometime during the rental period?
Here is a news flash. With a few local exceptions, there are no MHL's in the US or Europe for adults. How many minor renters of anything do you encounter?
BTW when car rental agencies rent a car to an adult are they responsible for providing several car seats in every car just in case the renter might transport small children sometime during the rental period?
Avis has Child Safety Seats available.
Budget too.
Location: Green grass and high tides forever, Beaufort, SC USA
When I ran a bike rental busniess, I provided helmets to all renters. Less then 1% took them. In the 7 years I was employed, there were two customers that sustained head trauma while not wearing a helmet, but both times they had a helmet in the basket and not on the head.
You can require renters to provide their own safty equipment. I've seen boat rentals, SC State Parks does, require the customer bring his/her own life jacket.
The general public's acceptance of Lycra bicycle shorts decrease exponentially every yard or meter away from a bicycle.
Avis has Child Safety Seats available.
Budget too.
The issue isn't making helmets or other accessories available to rental customers, it is mandating through an alleged law or insurance company fiat, that the rental agency furnish to the renter additional personal protective equipment not legally required. Or mandating that rental customers wear non legally required equipment.
