chempku

Agree with the value proposition you summarized for BCycles. More like a Uber/Lyft alternative when feasible. However most of the concerns I have when riding my own bike persist when using BCycles. e.g. security. I am very hesitant to sign up when I read BCycle users would be responsible for "$1200 plus sales tax" for a lost bike. My $300 folding bike rides better than them.

Compared to privately-owned bicycles, docked bike sharing programs like BCycle will be less cost effective for mainstream use. The policy makers should prioritize efforts make it easier for cyclists to use their own bicycles, rather than expanding the docked bike sharing programs.

I did the math already. Bike sharing like BCycle just won't be the mainstream option. Unprecedented elsewhere. There are bike share programs used as a mainstream commute option in countries like China, but the bicycles are not docked and more densely parked. No one here will like shared bicycles parked randomly in their neighborhood, blocking sidewalks. Meanwhile I am curious to know more about BCycle's financial picture, like how cost effective it can be. But I cannot find a financial disclosure or similar anywhere.

The cost IS an issue for people whose only option is to cycle to work. Yes I am talking about low income. They can easily buy a used bicycle easily for a year's membership charge. Let alone people need to walk to a station, at least lucky enough to live next to one. They also takes the risk of not finding one when they are in a rush.

Using BCycles or bike shares like this for commute will never be cheaper than riding personal bicycles, which has been proved in other nations. Similar story for cars: similar car sharing like Zipcar never compete private car ownership. No one uses a Zipcar for their daily commute. There is also a conflict of interest. The BCycle stations occupies prime locations that could have been prime bicycle parking facilities (like the ones in East Asia and Europe). I wonder what a role BCycle may have played in CoH's decision of banning escooter sharing which thrives in other cities like Austin. Simple math: now there are ~150 BCycle stations. Say in the future it grows to 500 within the loop. 10 bicyles each station. There are only 5K shared bikes for a total population of 500k, 0.01 per capita. Compare to the US bike ownership rate of 0.3 per capita, which is even on par with some nations whose citizens cycle to work a lot. The conclusion is so simple.

I always think the idea of prioritizing BCyle over other private bicycle infra (e.g. safer/more reliable bike parking) is so underwhelming, comparing to the vision from cycling advocates. There are only ~10 bicycles/e-bikes per station. Had there be massive bike commutes, BCycles will never fulfill the demand. I always don't get the idea why the city keep promoting the cost-ineffective BCycle while there is still no reliable way to track the availbaility of bicycle parking/bike racks. Anyone agrees with me?

Not true. I drive TC Jester and 11th St (West of the road diet) everday. At the construction site you mentioned, where 11th st are temporarily reduced to 2-lane from 4-lane, there is no increase in traffic west bound at all, but signicant increase in east bound traffic just after 11th st got one car lane taken away east of shepherd/durham. Before that there is way less traffic along 11th eastbound, even with the construction along 11th st between Ella Blvd and TC Jester. Many people may not realize that 11th and 20th are the only numbered streets cross TC Jester. Permanently taking away 50% of the capacity from one of the two streets is a huge impact. I don't know why planners won't consider building off-street trails along either 10th or 12th streets. There are plenty of underused ROW by open ditches. Spend less money, make everyone happy, and also improve drainage as a side benefit. Someone please educate me on this.

Now I feel that the best solution could have been building some hike and bike trails along some neighborhood streets, just like the one on Nicholson St. Way less impact to vehicular traffic in this way. Property owners along the trail should like it also. I once saw the east bound traffic west of TC Jester extend all the way to Ella Blvd during afternoon rush hours. This is even outside of the project limit. Before the road diet was applied, there were already fewer options for drivers along W-E direction than N-S direction, based on how Greater Heights is designed. This project does not affect me, but I can feel the frustration for those who have to stuck in traffic longer.

56 is not along Heights Blvd though. This stop should be for Route 40.

Floating Bus Stop

The bike lanes on Heights Blvd have no protection, poorly designed, not safe. That's the reason. Come to MKT or WOB trails to have a look.

No need to cross N Shepherd Dr at 10th. One can also walk along the west side of N Shepherd Dr from MKT trail to that plaza, only to cross some driveways. There will also be a trail extension to the Kroger plaza from MKT trail, aligning Durham Dr. All of the new businesses along the trail are great, but they are usually too expensive. I'd rather ride a bike to the "car-centric" plazas.

I agree that more funding for police is not equal to more police enforcement on motor vehicle violations against pedestrians. But I lived in East Asian cities which build the pedestrian/cyclist friendly infrastructures that our local advocates always touted about (which will never be built in cities like Houston), but transportation law enforcement is still a must to make sure the vulnerable are protected. It's so naive that you believe spending on infrastructure would solve the problem (which is also something the county seldom do for this neighborhood). The police has been consistently issuing citations for unsafe behaviors for pedestrians like speeding, not stopping at school buses, etc. They just need to be incentivized to do more.

If funding the police means more motor vehicle violations not yield to pedestrians will be caught, then why not do it? The county funding hike and bike trails does not mean the money will go where it need to: the county consistently underinvest in high density neighborhoods where hike and bike trails have more bang for their bucks nevertheless, despite more property taxes were collected in those neighborhoods.

Is cycling on the sidewalks prohibited? Sidewalks overthere are nice and wide.

HGAC don‘t fund projects.

As people may know, METRO is mostly funded by sales tax revenues from Harris county. Why would they ever bother funding the mass exodus from the inner city which shoot themselves in the foot?