Why introduce Cycle parking provision?
The primary objective of cycle parking facilities is to provide cyclists with proper storing possibilities. Bicycles are flexible vehicles with special advantages in urban traffic. They do not demand much space, can use the streets optimally and can reach every place at the door. To achieve these advantages the cyclist must have possibilities to store the bike close to their destination.

A secondary objective can be to stimulate urban cycling. To achieve this many different measures are necessary, among those are good and secure parking facilities.
In the EU project WALCYNG (How to enhance WALking and CycliNG instead of shorter car trips, and to make these modes safer) people were asked to give their opinion on barriers to cycling and important measures to increase cycling. Figure 3 shows that nearly 20% of “walcers” (walkers an cyclists) mention lack of secure parking as a barrier for cycling (Stangeby 1997). Among commuters 13 % responded that secure bicycle parking is the most important measure to make people start using a bike, cf. table 1.

Figures from the Netherlands show that theft prevention is a great challenge. Each year as many as 900.000 bikes are stolen in the Netherlands and only 6-7 % are returned to the owner (CROW 1997). The fear of bicycle theft risk induce bad maintenance and may thus have a negative effect on the image of cycling.

Figure 3: Barriers to cycling after modal category. Attitude surveys in Austria, Finland, Italy and Spain. Per cent.( Walcer= walkers + cyclists) Source: WALCYNG Stangeby 1997

Table 1: The most important improvements that can make people start using a bike. Per cent. The Norwegian Marketing/SP-survey among commuters. Source: WALCYNG Stangeby 1997

The above figures clearly show that cycle lanes, cycle routes, cycle road network and less car traffic are considered as more important measures than parking to increase cycling.

Demand impacts
Questions related to the demand impacts of cycle parking facilities can be put at different levels:

• Will they be used by cyclists?
  
• If so, will this contribute to an increase in cycling?

The first question can be answered with yes, if the parking facilities are located close to the destination wished. For the second question the answer is no. Managerial cycle parking provisions alone will probably have minor, if any, demand impacts. At least this is true if impacts only refer to decrease in todays vehicle trips or kilometres by car. And furthermore walking and public transport are shown as the most common alternatives to cycling, cf. Cycle routes.

To make urban people cycle instead of using their car, one need more than cycle parking provisions. A fully coherent bicycle infrastructure system, including cycle routes and cycle lanes (cf. 3.3.a and 4.3.a), a public transport system as well as restrictions on car use (cf. xx and yy) are crucial prerequisites to get any effects of cycle parking provisions. Also, climatic, topographic and cultural conditions in different countries will have an impact on the possible modal shift in different seasons (Solheim 1997, WALCYNG 1998).

It is however important to consider the impacts for the existing cyclists. To keep this group on wheel, i.e. to prevent them from shift to driving, will also save car kilometres. In this perspective cycle parking provisions might have some positive impacts.

Short and long run demand responses
The minor effects of managerial cycle parking provisions alone will not change significantly over time. Given a broad urban cycle strategy including different measures, the habits might change over time.

Supply impacts
Managerial cycle parking provisions will not demand large urban space; road or pedestrian space etc, compared to car parking. In one ordinary car parking place one could put cycle parking racks for six bicycles.

Financing requirements
The costs will not be large. For some measures, like lockers and guard, the users can cower the costs.

Expected impact on key policy objectives
Again, managerial cycle parking provisions will not have major impacts, if any, on the key policy objectives. Impacts might be found when parking facilities are put together with other measures to stimulate cycling and to make cycling more attractive than car use. But given the perspective of preventing existing cyclists to start driving, some impacts may be found.

Health is not mentioned as an objective. When discussing broader cycle strategies this must be included as an important factor.

Expected impact on problems
Managerial cycle parking provisions will not contribute essentially to the alleviation of key problems. Cycle parking provisions must be put together with other measures to stimulate cycling for it to have any noticeable impacts on the problems listed.
But keeping the existing cyclists on wheel can contribute to avoid still larger problems. Also managerial cycle parking provision can be of importance in this perspective.

Expected winners and losers
The minor effects of managerial cycle parking facilities at large must be taken into account also when looking at winners and losers. The single clear winner group is existing cyclists.

Barriers to implementation
The primary barrier is found at the political level. The succeed in establishing cycle parking facilities it is important to create support at the governmental, official and social level, cf. Case 1.