CB HI

It is still not a mountain.

FBinNY 

It's all relative.

Here in Westchester we have a number of cities with "mountain" names, ie. Mount Vernon, Mount Kisco, and Mount pleasant. There are very tall "mountains" in the range of a few hundred feet (far less than 700).

In any case it doesn't what you call it, or how high it really is. If 100' is a barrier, it doesn't matter if it's 101, 1,001, or 10,001. It's sort of like diving. Friends ask me how I can be willing dive to 100+ feet, and my standard response is that after 5'9" it's all the same to me.

CB HI

Some of you guys sound like my Kansas relatives talking about their mountains.

When they visited in Colorado, we would take them on a picnic in the Rockies, an extra 5,000 feet above Denver. We would take the narrowest road with a 300' to 400' straight down drop off on their side of the car. After that, we never heard another word about their mountains again.

What is the big deal with a 100+ foot dive as long as you watch your bottom time?

FBinNY 

Absolutely nothing. As I said, after 5'9" it's all the same. But I was referencing the worries of non-diver friends and relatives who can't conceive of jumping off a boat in the middle of an "ocean".

However, whatever you call them, they don't have to be high to be barriers to large numbers of bicyclists. I see many, many people walking up anything steeper than about 5% and being totally frustrated by climbs of less than 100'. For these people, the other 9,900' don't matter because they'll never get there.

I-Like-To-Bike

Better service is called for since "the system is in service from only April 15 to November 15. The stations are removed for the winter" IAW their website.

Presumably other bike share systems might do better if they only serve isolated locations and restricted times when there is positive cash flow. Presumably every other publicly owned transportation service in Montreal runs year round.

FBinNY 

I don't have any problem with locals deciding to run the system seasonally. There's a cost in maintenance and staff to keeping the system open, and if usage drops below critical mass, running seasonally is smarter than going broke to meet some idealistic or political agenda.

There's also a safety issue when there's ice on the roads.

How one looks at this depends on whether they believe that half a loaf is better than none, or not.

BTW - their Metro system shuts down nightly. As a New Yorker, I used to find this very disconcerting.

fietsbob

IDK the big city on the Puget Sound, tourism, renting bikes , demand is zero in the winter , in the oldest town on the west coast.

Dave Cutter

It was a foolish waste of time and money. Any government program without an effective plan... is just corruption... with a fancy name. This program [Pronto] never had an effective plan.

“It’s not like the end of biking or anything,”
~ Tom Fucoloro, Editor of Seattle Bike Blog

kickstart

Judging by the number of cyclists I see without helmets....a wild guess of around 40%.... its obviously rarely enforced.

genec

Yeah, but still, it's on their books... You bike, you HAVE to wear a helmet. Period. Full mandatory.

Rollfast

Is Seattle covered in snow anyway? Too messy and potentially dangerous...transit busses skate away now and then like the last big winter.

kickstart

I was just pointing out that through observation and personal experience there seems to be little if any enforcement. In the context of the subject, I doubt it had any meaningful impact on the bike share program. I suspect Seattles weather and topography are the major factors.

jon c. 

I think mandatory helmets would be certain death to any bike share program. I always wear a helmet. Except when I'm visiting another city and taking advantage of their bike share service.

CB HI

Makes an easy excuse for a legal Terry Stop in an effort to search for drugs. It would be interesting to find out how many of the helmet wearers do so just to avoid such a stop.

kickstart

Obviously one can't make accurate assessments by looks alone, but very few of those who appear to be "homeless" or substance abusers wear helmets, and looking at the bigger picture with whats going on in regards to the homeless epidemic in Seattle, perhaps that's precisely why its not being enforced.

I don't look like the typical middle class cycling enthusiast, and the thought never entered my mind until you brought it up.

I-Like-To-Bike

Also depends if one considers a half a loaf (half-assed) operation a "going concern." Operations that do not meet the agenda/objectives of its political/financial backers are not likely to continue to receive that support.

FBinNY 

Yes, that's obvious. But my outlook as a customer is less concerned with ultimate viability. If you were to ask me to invest, that would be a different story.

But my half a loaf analogy wasn't about economic viability, it was a response to your objection over Montreal's system being closed in the winter. You see the winter closing as a negative and cause for criticism, while I see the existence of a working (at some level) program in the summer as a positive, and an improvement over no program at all.

MMACH 5

From a completely selfish standpoint, I wonder if the Pronto bikes will go up for sale to the public. I'd use one as an errand bike around my house.

mr_bill

Estacade du pont Champlain is closed from 15 November to 15 April.

-mr. bill

RomansFiveEight

I guess I don't understand why the ride share program and the helmet law make the two incompatible. Why isn't it a simple case of making rental helmets available, and frequent users just bringing their own helmet?

Imaging a scenario where I'd use the bike share, it'd almost definitely be while traveling TO Seattle, but not bringing my bike. Clip a helmet to my bag and I'm good to go. In fact, that's what I'd do anyway. Law or not.

mr_bill

In flatland you all pony up the public bucks for Arrowhead. Your choice, not mine.

But yes, people using bikeshare bikes make up a considerable fraction of commuters in some cities. Montreal for example.

Do keep guessing. You are doing so well.

-mr. bill

mr_bill

That's what I've done. Law or not. In Seattle even.

As far as West Coast Capitalists - timbuk2 started their "bikeshare" in San Francisco and Seattle before Bay Area Bikeshare and Pronto were up and running. Don't know if they'll bring it back in Seattle now. (I think they had three bikes back then.)

-mr. bill

Dave Cutter

Did they BUY those bikes? I would have guessed they were a lease deal. I would also guess they will be reconditioned and worked into some other municipality's bike least contract.

genec

Well the bikes are available out on open racks... so you want the helmets in the same place? Of course that means ill fitting helmets and gawd only knows who wore it last...

We have a free program where I live now... couple of beater bikes in a rack, with a "free, but bring it back" sign. Seems to be working OK... for the moment.

I-Like-To-Bike

"We all" in flatland are not paying for KC's stadium any more than the residents of Beantown for the locally financed stadiums in numerous cities across the U.S.

Can YOU provide those percentages of commuters who regularly use bikeshare as part of their commute in the cities where bikeshare programs exist?

My guess is the percentage runs from zero (Montreal in the winter) to insignificant in every U.S. city.