New Version of Bicycle Access Bill Surfaces in City Council

Without a secure place to put your bike, riding to work is a lot less appealing. In fact, as multiple studies have shown, fear of theft is the number one factor that keeps New York City cyclists from commuting by bike. So you could say there’s a lot riding on the Bicycle Access Bill (Intro 871), which would make it much easier for cyclists to bring their bikes inside the workplace.

After an initial hearing in the City Council last December, the different parties — including transportation advocates and the real estate industry — headed to the negotiating table. The revised bill is now scheduled for a second hearing later this month, and you can peruse the latest version online.

This iteration of Intro 871 includes several new provisions, but the basics are intact: office building owners would have to grant access to bicycles if an employee or tenant requests it. Crucially, landlords won’t be able to skirt the requirement simply because their buildings have only passenger elevators, not freight elevators. As long as the passenger elevator is big enough to accommodate a bike, cyclists would be able to bring their rides inside.

Mayor Bloomberg’s office voiced support for the bill, which takes a page directly from PlaNYC. "It’s something we want to see move forward very quickly,"  spokesperson Marc LaVorgna said. "We’re working with the City Council on putting a final bill together that can be passed and that can work." LaVorgna confirmed that some aspects of the bill are likely to change before it comes up in committee, but declined to specify which provisions might be adjusted.

A spokesperson for Christine Quinn’s office said it’s too early for the Council Speaker to comment on the draft legislation.

One thing to keep an eye on as the bill progresses will be the exemption mechanism.

As Intro 871 is currently written, landlords don’t have to comply if their building is within 600 feet or three blocks of "covered off-street or indoor
no-cost bicycle parking." Depending on what that language actually refers to, large swaths of buildings could skirt the requirement while their tenants are left without adequate, secure bike parking. We have a request in with the City Council to clear up the definition. (One theory is that this language refers to bike parking in garages and attended parking lots, which would become much more common under Intro 780, sponsored by Council Member Oliver Koppell.)

Building owners can also obtain an exemption by providing "sheltered bicycle storage in public/private plazas," another hazy term that we’re trying to pin down.

Hearings on both the Bicycle Access Bill and Intro 780 are scheduled for the Council’s transportation committee at 10:00 a.m. on June 15.

  • Ian Turner

    “Public/Private plazas” almost certainly refers to public plazas located on private land, such as this spot.

  • anonymous

    This plus plenty of on-street card-access bike lockers and we’re good to go.

  • Sheltered parking in plazas isn’t enough, because it’s not secure. The point of this bill used to be to provide secure bike parking.

  • I don’t see the point of the exemptions. The commercial tenant should have the right to determine whether bicycles can be brought in to the space they’re leasing.

  • What good is sheltered, but unsecure bike parking? So a thief doesn’t get wet when he’s stealing my bike?

  • Brooklyn

    Put an umbrella over the U-posts at Rockefeller Center — where no one currently parks their bike because theft is certain — and you would fulfill the current language.

    With bike paths proliferating, we’re seeing an evolution in perspective of cycling as transportation. Normalizing secure parking would be the other side of that evolution.

  • Ken

    There is another basis for an exception: The building owner can simply declare that “The building’s passenger elevator and/or freight elevator is not available for the use described in this article and include[s] the reasons for such assertion.” What would prevent an owner from simply saying “we have too much elevator traffic to allow bikes”?

ALSO ON STREETSBLOG

Monday: Testify for a Bicycle Access Bill With Teeth

|
On Monday, the City Council transportation committee will hold its second hearing on the Bicycle Access Bill (Intro 871). There’s a lot at stake: For many would-be bike commuters, the lack of a secure place to lock up is what keeps them from riding to work. A law that requires landlords to let bikes inside […]

Bike-Friendly Zoning Amendment Clears City Council

|
Photo: Department of City Planning [PDF]. Yesterday the City Council approved a zoning change that mandates secure bike parking in new construction, putting the rule into effect. The amendment will help cyclists avoid the risks of locking up on-street by requiring new apartment buildings and offices to provide space for people to put their rides. […]

Bicycle Access Bill Clears City Council Transpo Committee

|
Bicycle Access Bill sponsor David Yassky, who first introduced his legislation in 2006, speaks at a press event earlier today. As anticipated, this morning the City Council transportation committee voted in favor of Intro 871, the Bicycle Access Bill. The tally was 9-0 with one absence, sending the bill to the full floor for the […]

Take Action: Tell John Liu to Support the Bicycle Access Bill

|
Last September, John Liu stood on the steps of City Hall to support bicycle access to buildings. Will he follow through on that commitment? This email alert from Transportation Alternatives just hit our inbox. The Bicycle Access Bill (Intro 871, sponsored by David Yassky), is scheduled for a City Council committee hearing tomorrow and possibly […]