Bicycle registration and permits to be mandatory, but free

By August 26, 2009

BikecropBy: Kimber Wenzelburger

Bicyclists on campus will soon be required to display a UA parking permit on their bikes, but because of student input last semester, these permits will be free of charge – for now.

“You are going to be required to have a permit, but because of an overwhelming amount of students who didn’t want to pay for it … for right now there won’t be a charge,” said Andy Gilbride, program adviser for the Transit and Parking Department.

The department has yet to receive the new permits, so students won’t see any changes in bicycle parking yet. But once TPD officials have the permits, they’ll begin tagging all bicycles on campus to notify their owners that they need to visit the parking office to register their bikes, Gilbride said.

The purpose of the impending policy is to track bikes on campus and ensure they’re parked in the right areas, he said.

“We want to figure out where the bicycles are and how many there are so we can get more parking, keep them from parking in the wrong spot and keep them from tearing up the landscape,” Gilbride said.

The policy will specify that “bicycles parked in a manner that obstructs handicap access, blocks pedestrian paths or otherwise creates a safety hazard or are secured to trees and landscaping, sign posts, parking meter posts or painted light poles will be immobilized or impounded.”

According to the policy, abandoned bicycles – meaning bikes that are habitually left unsecured, or bikes missing major components like handlebars or pedals – will be impounded for 60 days before disposal.

Last semester, TPD officials considered a policy that would charge students $15 to register their bikes and receive a permit to park them on campus. Many students spoke out against the policy, and more than 1,000 people joined the Facebook group, “U of A Students Against Bicycle Parking Fees On Campus.”

The creator of that group, UA student Jon Bame, said that though he’s pleased the TPD decided not to charge bicycle owners, he still has some concerns – namely, that Fayetteville residents who bike to campus for public events will have their parked bicycles confiscated for not being registered.

“I think that this service has a good intent, but I do think there are still some kinks to work out, and I hope that this policy does not cause any nonstudent visitors to have their bicycles impounded. That’s the most important part to me,” he said.

Though Bame’s not in favor of a fee, he said he’d be open to working with university officials if the TPD decided to charge for bicycle permits in the future.

“I would say that if the university decided to honestly and seriously consult with and work with student bicycle commuters for a fee on this, there would have to be an open dialogue,” he said.

Bame said he thinks there’s a shortage of bike racks on campus, and that’s why students have locked up their bikes in other areas. He also noted that members of his Facebook group have had good ideas for installing more cost-effective bike racks on campus.

“As long as I’m going to be on this campus, I’ll be riding my bike, and as long as I’m doing that, I’m going to be very concerned about this issue and involved as best I can,” he said.

  • Toni

    “We want to figure out where the bicycles are and how many there are so we can get more parking, keep them from parking in the wrong spot and keep them from tearing up the landscape,”

    There is a simple method for “finding out where the bicycles are and how many there are”: go out and count them. In effect, the Big-Brother-esque bike registry contributes absolutely nothing to that goal. Whether the bikes are registered or not, you will still have to go out and look for them. So if the bike registrry is the solution, what actually was the problem? Bureaucratic boredness? Too much mobney to waste?

    “Tearing up the landscape”, that is a well-placed smear. Is that guy talking about bicycles or bulldozers? One gets the impression that he simply hates bikes, which is probably a good qualification for being in charge of bicycle policy at the UofA.

    Anyway, even if we bicyclists were as irresponsible and destructive as Mr. Gilbride would have it (right, “sustainability” really means keeping those awful two-wheelers off Campus, and SUV is the new green), the bike registry would do exactly nothing to prevent this. There is nothing in this policy that makes the least bit of sense.

  • Toni

    P.S. It is probably too much to ask from our student journalists to go beyond repeating word for word what University bureaucrats are telling them no matter how nonsensical it is. It is also probably too much to expect the Traveler to go out and talk to the students who are actually affected by that administration decision (a decision, let’s remember, that was rammed down our throats without any debate, consultation, or transparency, let alone democratic legitimacy). Jon is a nice enough guy but he’s not the only bicyclist on campus, and I don’t know a single one who supports this registry. No offense Kimber but there’s so much missing from this article. Apparently, we are just a flock of sheep.

  • J.D.

    So why exactly is bike tagging required? Counting bikes on campus? Sounds more like checking whether the bike fee is worth introducing. Sure, “for _right now_ there won’t be a charge”, but what about later?
    I am under the impression that the university is not getting enough money from the parking lots and is looking for alternative income sources. Perhaps the next logical step would be to introduce bus fees?
    The university website proudly states “students first” on the front page. I am sorry, I do not feel this way.

  • J.D.

    “We want to figure out where the bicycles … so we can … keep them from parking in the wrong spot”.

    First, it is pretty hard to park at the “right spot”, since there are just a few bike racks on campus, which are quite crowded (http://www.flickr.com/photos/42020765@N08/3868164129/). But of course putting up new bike racks will require investment, which is the last thing Parking and Transit and/or UARK want to do.

    Second, how is tagging supposed to tell them “where the bicycles are”? Will they have an RFID in them?

  • Toni

    The bicycle registry is a non-solution to a non-problem, probably unenforceable, at best a waste of money, at worst a hassle needlessly alienating people for no good reason.

    Think of someone who comes to campus to attend a concert or lecture once in a while. To require these people to jump through bureaucratic loops for the privilege of being allowed to bring their bike to campus is a great way of nurturing our University’s much touted ties with the outside world. Just wait until the first visitor complains about his bike being gone after attending that sustainability conference on campus. This is bound to happen if the reghistry is going to be enforced at all.

    This folly will cost us dear in reputation and ridicule and all for the sake of satisfying some bureaucratic control impulse. The only rationale that Andy Gilbride has offered for the registry is that “We want to figure out where the bicycles are and how many there are so we can get more parking”, which is of course a non sequitur since registering the bikes will precisely not help figuring out where parking is needed. The legitimate goals of the policy are not assisted in any way by the mandatory registry.

    I’m afraid the principle of basing policy on rational considerations is simply out of fashion, especially (I am sorry to say) in this country. I have been commuting by bike for 20 years in four countries on two continents and never heard or saw anything coming close to a “bike registry” before it was suggested here in Fayetteville. What is so different about Fayetteville, AR, that this University bureaucracy claims to be unable to deal with bicycles the way the rest of the world does?

  • Keith Webb

    I’m probably the only person who actually likes the proposal. I wish they would charge for the permits immediately. And yes, I ride my bike to campus in addition to the other 100-150 miles a week I spend on the bike.
    Here’s why I like it:
    There currently isn’t enough rack space in the right places on campus. It’s simple supply and demand that by charging to use the existing rack space, fewer people will use it. Maybe all the people who ride from the Quads to the business building will decide to walk the half mile. The new funds could be used to install more racks where they are needed. The abandoned bikes will also be cleared faster.
    It legitimizes the use of a bicycle as a form of transportation. If I have to pay fees like cars do, maybe fewer people will treat me like I’m riding a toy, and I can get a little more respect on the road.

    I really wish everyone would stop trying to push cycling as part of a sustainability plan. When people who don’t ride much, or at all, start pushing for things they think will make cycling more popular, it usually ends up making my time on the bike less convenient and more dangerous.

  • Toni

    This comment would be easy to ridicule – you think buying a sticker will get you more respect? – but there is a serious misconception in the last paragraph that needs to be adressed seriously. The number one way of improving bicycle safety, and this has been scientifically tested and proven, is to increase the number of bicyclists. It’s called Safety in Numbers. Check out for example http://www.scientificamerican.com/podcast/episode.cfm?id=46B9E06D-FC8E-9007-E864EF0B7227869B.

    You may feel like being the only one on a bike is cool but it is way more dangerous. Btw the number of bicycles on UA campus is still rather low and if the University can’t accommodate the few hundred of us, we have a serious problem and it’s not caused by two-wheeled vehicles.

  • Keith Webb

    Ridicule what you want. It doesn’t matter. Facts matter.

    Paying fees for parking my bike would remove one more motorist whine as they are stuck behind me. Or maybe they will have some empathy for another person screwed by Parking and Transit. A few less people who want to yell at me is just an added benefit.

    Also, the last time I checked, correlation does not equal causation. You also might want to read the comment by John Forrester in the link you posted. He put in parts of phone numbers into the formulas used by the study’s author and got the same results. Forrester created the training program used by the League of American Bicyclists. One of his books is in the library and is very useful for almost all things cycling related. The parts on bicycle collisions are really fascinating if you are a statistics nut.

    The largest component of cycling safely is the cyclist. Following basic traffic laws will prevent most auto-bicycle collisions.

  • piglet

    “The largest component of cycling safely is the cyclist.”

    That statement is false, and dangerous. It would be true for a cyclist alone on the road but not in the real world we live in where cyclists are hurt when they are hit by some other, usually bigger and more powerful vehicle. The influence a cyclist has on her own safety is limited. Before you quote me wrong, I’m not saying there is none, I’m saying it is limited (the biggest issue in my view is visibility by night – driving without lights is suicidal). You only need a few unattentive motorists driving too fast, not used to and not expecting bicycle traffic, and you can be hit no matter how careful you personally are.

    A friend of a friend of mine just recently dies after she was struck by a car in a rather quiet subdivision in Springdale, by daylight. Claiming that the cyclist is the biggest component of bicyle security in a world of cars is absurd and defies experience. The “safety in numbers” argument is well supported by both data and common sense.

    As to your other argument, yes I find it ridiculous to think that the motorist behind you will whine less when you have a UA sticker on your bike. Most likely, he will stop whining when he starts bicycling himself. But go ahead, get your sticker if it makes you feel good. I’d have no problem with that if it were voluntary. I do have a problem with being forced to do something for no good reason just so that people like you can feel better.

  • piglet

    I thought I’d add an extra discussion on Forester. His claim that the relationship is a “mathematical artifact” is bogus, I’m sorry. There’s no reason why plotting N/C vs. C/P should by itself lead to a hyperbolic relationship. The plot he shows with random numbers looks the way it does because his random selection method produces many outliers. I’m sorry but he doesn’t understand the math (see also http://bikefriendlyoc.wordpress.com/2009/07/13/ask-the-experts-paul-l-jacobsen-and-dr-lon-d-roberts-phd/).

    “Correlation does not prove causation”, yes, but what is the alternative explanation? Forester believes that injury rates are most sensitive to the training of the bicyclist (and the data he cites in support are easy to criticize). Is there any evidence that bicyclists in countries with lower injury rates are better trained? Haven’t seen any. Would surprise me.

  • Tony

    The primary purpose of “registration” would be for tracking… no, FINING opportunities for parking and transit. I agree with their desire to stop bicyclists from chaining to trees and handicap railings, but I don’t think registration and/or fines are the answer. Of course a fine would be appropriate to repeat offenders, but registration is not necessary for that.

    I suggest that parking and transit invest in some bike locks of their own to immobilize the offenders bike (and attach instructions about the policy and give contact info) and ask for a modest fine (Say $5 to have them remove the lock). This would address the problem.

    Registration would probably involve a sticker. Stickers can devalue certain bicycles resale value, and some will find them unattractive.

    Regarding the need for more bike racks, if it is not in Parking and Transit’s budget to purchase more, I would encourage those running for senate to make it part of their platform to write a special appropriations bill allocating student funds for STUDENT funded bike racks. We have the opportunity to take initiative here.

    Registration and permits are NOT the answer. Parking and transit, please consider alternatives that are more inline with the Students First initiative.

  • Tony

    A few further comments…

    With the bike immobilization thing: First offense should be just a note requesting the offender park in designated areas. P&T can take a digital photo of the bike. Second offense should be immobilization.

    I will 2nd the comments about how bikes reduce gas usage/CO2 emmisions and are a greener option. They are an efficient and sustainable option for students living near campus.

    Yes, I am a bike rider for those wondering.

    In general, communication is the answer to concerns (such as those brought up by P&T), NOT more restrictive regulation. It appears that P&T took regulative action without adequate consultation of the student body, and without receiving their approval. I would encourage P&T to send their concerns to a public forum (such as letters to the editor (Traveler), student senate, and other stakeholders such as sustainability committees). Public relations techniques such as these will increase student buy-in to any new policy changes. Student representation and endorsement are necessary in a community environment such as the University of Arkansas.

  • http://asg.uark.edu Mattie Bookhout

    To all parties involved in this thread,

    Please contact me at asgpres@uark.edu or the ASG Director of Sustainability, Billy Fleming, at wflemin@uark.edu, to discuss this topic in a focus group setting. We would truly like to represent the overall student sentiment when working with TPD regarding the bicycle policy. This has proven to be a very important issue on campus this year, and please do not think that is going unnoticed. TPD showed regard for student opinion in the Spring when it opted to not charge a fee for the permits, and there is nothing saying that we cannot work with them to continue to better the policy per student request.

    A number of ASG Senate candidates for this year have expressed interest in working with TPD on this policy, and I urge you to contact them as well. Their contact information will be available online at http://asg.uark.edu once they have been inducted next Tuesday. Elections will be online at vote.uark.edu this week (Wednesday through Friday); feel free to read the candidate bios on the ASG website to find and vote for the candidates that express this interest.

    -Mattie
    ASG President
    asgpres@uark.edu

  • Billy Fleming

    Please adhere to Mattie’s post above. The issues regarding the TPD’s bike policy will be decided based in large part on formal and informal student input so we need to know where you guys stand. I bike/walk to campus everyday so I absolutely understand the frustration with registering. In fact, a listserv I ran last year for what is now called the Green Groups Guild had a rather large impact on the decision to revisit the permit fee. However, we need to be find some common ground between TPD and those of us who use alternative transportation to get to/from campus. If you want your views expressed to TPD, please contact me @ wflemin@uark.edu so we can convey your concerns.

    -Billy
    ASG Director of Sustainability
    Sustainability Council Student Chairperson
    wflemin@uark.edu

  • thomaswos

    Obama wins nobel peace prize. Why?
    Hard to believe that a U.S. President can win a peace prize while engaged in two wars.
    Can some one please inform me as to why Obama has gotten a Nobel Peace Prize when he has yet to do what he has gotten the prize for?

  • Whistle Blower

    Fellow students, especially you all like me that ride a bike. I’d like to bring it to public attention that it was HOUSING that was the main body asking Transit and Parking to come up with a policy to deal with only two bike issues: 1. Bikes chained to small trees (planted after the ice storm and destroyed by irresponsible bikers). 2. Bikes chained to handicap railways (handicap students were prevented from getting to class).

    You know, I’m not really irritated with Transit and Parking. The main beef I think we as the student body have is with Housing. Rather than come up with a creative solution, say communication (no bike parking signs, emails, Traveler articles), housing passes the buck to Transit and Parking.

    It’s reasonable to expect the department of Transit and Parking to use the tools available to them (permits, warnings, ticket writers, and fines) in the formation of a policy. They simply did their job. If you ask Transit and Parking to solve a problem, how would you expect them to come up with a different solution than they did?

    The problem is the people who asked Transit & Parking to solve a minor problem that could have been handled with better communication . The main blame goes to Housing. As far as I know, Housing never tried to discuss the problem with students or get their opinion on the best solution. The message housing is sending to students is that they don’t think students are willing or able to read a sign or listen to a “be responsible” message. Housing’s vote of no confidence in students is inappropriate, disappointing, and offensive.

    I’d suggest it is time for students to speak out against housing’s discourtesy for student dignity. We do have the capacity to be responsible, and on this issue (with just a little communication) virtually everybody will.

    Perhaps a petition opposing the bike registration policy is in order. Shall we start one?

  • egill

    I understand that the University wants to know how many bikes are on campus and where they need to add bike racks. I do not understand why they need to have students register their bikes. I feel that if the purpose of the permits is “to figure out where the bicycles are and how many there are so we can get more parking, keep them from parking in the wrong spot and keep them from tearing up the landscape,” it does not warrant bike permits. I would think that it is pretty obvious as to where there are a lot of bikes on campus; all you need to do is take a walk during the day. University officials can continue impounding illegally parked bikes without permits can't they? I don't think that a lack of permits would prevent this.
    Requiring a bike permit seems to just cause unnecessary headaches for students, officials, and community members. Maybe I am just not understanding the purpose of the permits, but as of right now, it sounds a little ridiculous.

  • Jay kinfeniumeWic

    Russian women want only your money !

  • Jay kinfeniumeWic

    Russian ladies wish only your money !

  • Jay kinfeniumeWic

    Russian women wish only your wallet!

  • Jay kinfeniumeWic

    Russian girls want only your money !