SF Supervisor proposes law requiring bikes be allowed in all offices.

[RandySF]

"Many bicycle commuters have felt it: The hostility and sidelong stares as they wheel their vehicles among quiet cubicles, the shame of leaving a valuable bike locked curbside to a teetering street sign. But help could be nigh: Supervisor John Avalos has proposed a city ordinance that would relieve bicyclists of their status as second-class commuters.

This week Avalos introduced legislation that would make it illegal for businesses to ban employees from bringing bikes into the office. New York City already has a similar law on the books.

"One of the ways that we can really assure our bikes are safe from theft is to be able to bring them into our buildings," Avalos told Streetsblog SF.

The devil, of course, is in the details: As currently written, the law contains some exemptions that might require explication.

Offices in buildings where "substantial safety risks" exist from bringing a bike into an elevator or where "secure alternate covered off-street parking or secure alternate indoor no-cost bicycle parking" is available elsewhere within three blocks can still tell their employees to check the wheels at the door."



http://blogs.sfweekly.com/thesnitch/2011/09/bike_parking_legislation.php

[frazzled]

1. I wonder if they've thought this through

and I wonder what the fire department will say about it in terms of safety. Some offices simply don't have the appropriate space. ALL offices? Even ones in buildings without freight elevators or with insufficient or improper storage space?

The New York Law is different. It does not require bikes to be allowed in offices for anyone who wants to bring one--that is, it doesn't mean anyone can bring their bike to work. The employer (not employees) may request from the office building owner/management to allow its employees to bring their bikes. And then the request must be granted unless there is no freight elevator, it poses a safety risk, etc. http://www.nyc.gov/html/dot/downloads/pdf/bib_factsheet_101909.pdf

Why doesn't the city simply require parking garages to provide secure storage for bicycles? It can be very crowded in office lobbies, and having 100 people schlepping bicycles through the lobby can be very annoying to those most ecological of commuters: pedestrians.

I'm a big fan of bikes, but I'm not a fan of the particular version of this law.

[LeftyMom]

2. Wouldn't it make more sense to make bike lockers more plentiful?

I can't think of too many places I've worked that had secure out-of-the-way space for bike storage, and square footage is at much less of a premium out here in the valley.

[TheMadMonk]

3. Not the way to do it. Even if it's not dangerous per se, I still don't...

...want to be sharing an elevator with a bike at 5 mins to clock on, or 5 past knock off. Chain oil if nothing else.

The proper entity to wear the onus on bikes vs the inner city, is the building owner, and it could be as simple as requiring that 5-10% of car parking space be devoted to secure bike parking AND cutting a break on town rates or better, adding services to the area.

It's ludicrous to cart a bike up into the sky.

BTW I am a cyclist (e-bike these days with my lungs)