The University Bike Share

The University Bike Share

            The University setting has long been a testing ground for bike shares. It represents a smaller and more easily managed population than a city or town, in addition to covering a much smaller territory. Further, universities traditionally hold an interest in reducing problems of congestion and parking, encouraging an active lifestyle in their students and faculty, and reducing their carbon footprint. These factors have motivated universities all over the United States to institute bike-sharing programs. Universities have featured first, second, and third generation systems, but due to the makeup of most universities, second generation systems have proven to be the superior choice. First generation models tend to simply fall apart due to theft and vandalism, as happened at the University of Vermont in 2005 with Ben Sarle’s Yellow Bikes program. Third generation models are very expensive, as they require an investment into automated kiosks where users can check out and dock the bikes. Second generation models are able to utilize the existing labor force of a university, avoiding any large investment in mechanized kiosks. It is this reliance on existing labor and infrastructure that I return to as a central tenet of the optimal university bike-sharing program. Now I turn to an investigation of four crucial issues that any bike-sharing program must address.

Accountability

First generation systems, with no accountability mechanism, depend on the altruism of its patrons to not steal or break the bikes. These programs have not been very successful at universities, as students often take the bikes with them upon graduation, or simply remove them from campus for personal use. Fortunately, universities already engage in tracking products amongst their students. To do this, universities typically issue students ID cards that are used to gain access to buildings and check out library books. Most universities employ librarians, resident advisors, and work-study students to swipe students’ cards in resident halls in exchange for vacuum cleaners, DVDs, and cleaning products. This ID system and the employees who operate the system represent the existing infrastructure that can be used to form the accountability mechanism for a bike share, where ID cards are swiped to check out keys to bikes locked outside the buildings. Once a student, faculty, or staff member has signed a waiver agreeing to terms and conditions of the program, they will have access to bikes at any stations around campus that have a librarian, RA, or work study student and a ID card reader. This allows operators of the program to track who checks out bikes from what hubs, where the bikes are returned, the fee accumulated if the user hasn’t returned the bike in time. As the ID cards are typically already connected to student accounts, charges can be transferred to this existing billing mechanism, just as if a student were to not return a library book. Thus, universities are an ideal space for bike-sharing programs, as they possess existing labor and infrastructure that cost cities significantly.

Risk Management

            Liability and insurance are crucial considerations for any bike share to undertake, and the university is no exception to this rule. One measure many programs have taken is to create a waiver that potential users must sign before checking out a bike for the first time. This waiver should include an assumption of all risk that comes with riding a bicycle, precluding the university from any potential lawsuits that could arise if someone is injured on a bike. The benefits of this waiver extend beyond liability, as the terms and conditions of taking out a bike can be outlined to each user before they are allowed to borrow a bike, including the cost schedule that managers wish to implement in their program. Further, a basic explanation of the program and instructions for use can be included in this document, which is typically written by the specialists in the university’s risk management department.

Maintenance

Another source of risk lies in the technicians who work on the bikes when they are inevitably damaged. Universities have traditionally relied on three different sources of maintenance for their bike share’s fleet: students, university employees, and local bike shops. As the ID card system allows for users to be charged for major damages inflicted on bikes, damages can be outsourced to local bike shops for repair, or the funds can be used to pay university workers to fix the bikes. An even more sustainable form of maintenance lies in the students of a university. Finding training for these students can be difficult, but fortunately the United Bicycle Institute has provided curriculums that can be carried out at local bike shops. By gaining experience working with professionals on a specified set of bike repair jobs, students can become certified to carry out the routine maintenance of bikes. This is ideal for the many smaller damages such as broken chains, flat tires, and lose breaks that are so prevalent in any bike share, as they can be addressed by the free labor of students. I surmise the most sustainable and cost effective programs will be at least partially supported by student labor.

Funding

            Obtaining the necessary funding to set up a bike share is another issue universities have taken many approaches to tackling. Despite the vast sums of money saved by not having to pay new employees to check out bikes or build automatic kiosks, bike shares still require the purchase of bicycles, helmets, and locks. Maintenance of the bikes requires the purchase of tools and sometimes the payment of technicians. Some universities have incorporated these costs in their Parking and Transportation Services budget, or taken the funds from another existing department on campus. Others have set up individual departments with the sole purpose of administering the bike share. Further still, other bike shares have outsourced the operation of the bike share to local bike shops in return for buying all components of the program from these shops, as well as advertising space on campus. Student groups have also participated in funding some universities’ programs that are at least partially administered by students.

Bike Share at UVM

            The program I have developed for the University of Vermont has employed the practices I have outlined above. The program was launched by Bike Users Group, a student club, which solicited funds from our Student Government Association to buy a fleet of bikes, locks, and helmets, as well as set up a student run bike shop to maintain the bikes. Students are held accountable through their ID cards, and must sign a waiver that outlines the terms of use and includes an assumption of the risk that comes with using a bike. Thus, bikes funded by students are maintained by students, checked out by students, and ridden by students. This has allowed us to keep costs low and offer the bikes free for all students, faculty and staff to use for up to two hours at a time.

            Throughout this paper I have stressed the advantages of relying in student labor to form the basis of a university bike share. I have neglected to emphasize the importance of fostering a bike-friendly culture where students and administrators can collaboratively improve the campus’ biking infrastructure. A campus landscape that reflects bike use encourages students from all different backgrounds to consider biking. Also, the student group that administers the program must have established funding avenues, technical support systems, and a well-coordinated group of students. It behooves any student run program to offer a stipend for at least one student mechanic to continuously look after the bikes throughout the year, so the bikes don’t fall out of service during finals, breaks, or summer. 

Conclusion

In the United States today, universities and municipalities on both coasts and in the Midwest have rolled out bike sharing programs, to the resounding approval of their constituents. Universities are increasingly realizing their inherent advantage of captive student audiences for their programs, as well as infrastructure on which to base their programs. Further, universities often have a vested interest in decreasing both their carbon emissions and drunk driving incidents by discouraging driving in general. Universities also wish to make the best use of their limited land, which means using less of it for parking spaces. With gas prices projected to increase and physical health of our population in decline, as well as increasing problems of automobile congestion, we can expect coming years to feature a continued expansion of university and municipal bike sharing programs across the world.