Few studies on the impacts of cycle parking facilities are found. On the whole studies on urban cycling are more focused on presenting figures on modal split in different countries, to define different characteristics of bikers and to present information of different plans, strategies and practical solutions. Only rarely do they give scientific evidence of different impacts. And if they do so it is the effects of cycle strategies or whole packages of measures they study and not the effects of single measures like cycle parking provisions.

The Bicycle masterplan for the Netherlands give some figures on the use of bicycle parking spaces, but does not comprise before/after-studies or figures on the impacts on driving (CROW 1997). Many European cities provide different kinds of bicycle parking facilities. Figures on use are focused on parking facilities at public transport terminals/stations. E.g. it is shown that;

• In the Netherlands 10-30% of all buspassengers and 30 – 40% of train passengers headed for the city center arrive at the bus station by bike (CROW 1997)
  
• In European cities with bicycle parking at public transport terminals the share of bikers can be up to 50% (Runkel 1993)
  
• At a Norwegian suburban station with cycle parking, 13% arrives at the station by bike (Kolbenstvedt et al 2000)
  But it is not documented what mode the biking commuters would have chosen if the parking area had not been at hand.

Given the documentation at hand and the minor impact on key objectives etc. for cycle parking facilities alone it does not make sense to go into details on different case studies. The tables from the Impacts section give the information needed.
The Dutch dedicated parking policy is shortly described and some examples of new types of parking facilities are shown as examples.

The 1988 Traffic and transport plan in the Netherlands set sustainable development as a goal. In 1991 this plan was followed by the Bicycle Masterplan, with the following distinguished spearheads:

• Change from car to bicycle
  
• Change from car to bicycle and public transport
  
• Safety of cyclists
  
• Bicycle parking and theft prevention
  
• Information exchange

In the nineties a Ministry of Transport, Pubic Works and Water Management project group made active contributions to making bicycle use safer and more appealing. Special focus was put on “the immobile bicycle”. Based on the assumption that biking is not only depending on an appropriate infrastructure but also adequate parking facilities, a dedicated parking policy was developed. This was, in spite of the high Dutch cycle rate, a totally new policy for the Netherlands.

The Parking policy aims at eliminating obstacles for cycling, and focuses on
fighting bicycle theft, by:

• realising sufficient bicycle parking facilities (the right facilities at the right location) which offer protection against theft and are easy to use,
  
• promoting that cyclists themselves take the necessary preventive measures,
  
• fast and adequate search for thieves, fences and stolen bicycles through close co-operation between police and judicial authorities.

The Bicycle Masterplan and the Parking policy have evidently put cycling on the agenda. In 1992 only 3 per cent out of 50 municipalities had anything on cycling in their transport or traffic plans. In 1994 this figure had increased to 40%.

The Ministry of Transport has also done a study of what kind of barriers local authorities meet in praxis. From this study CROW (1997) recommend the following elements to ensure success:

• Good examples have to be distributed
  
• Plans must be approved by local authorities and public money must be allocated
  
• Be aware of a balance between goals and realities to avoid backlashes
  
• Goals must be clear and possible to evaluate
  
• Data must be collected to evaluate the results in relation to goals

Results on the impact on thefts, modal split, cycle rate etc are not given.

Further experiences and practical solutions are found in the brochure “Bicycle parking in the Netherlands” (CROW 1997). Some examples are presented as case 2-4 below. They are taken from CROW (1997 and the CD ROM catalogue edited by the EU project ADONIS. The catalogue gives further examples of good practise with photos and diagrams as well as detailed information on layout design, dimensions and cost estimates (EU & Danish Road Directory 1998).

According to ADONIS one of the best ways of preventing bicycle theft is storing the bike under supervision or in a locked (and covered) storage facility. But bicyclists will have to pay for this type of storage. It appears that cyclists are not willing to pay for short periods of storage, e.g. on a short visit to a shop. The dutch experience is that guarded storing can only be profitable with subsidies or sponsoring.

Guarded parking facilities should attract attention, should be accessible and social safe and integrated in bicycle network. I should be located where there are many cyclists, like railway stations, shop centers and the like. Limited opening periods with reduce their use.

Insert pictures

Since guarded cycle storing seldom is a commercially viable measure, it might be combined with a repair shop and bicycle sale and rent. In case of trouble the cyclists can have their bikes repaired when using public transport, shopping or carrying out other activities. In this way they will safe time.

Insert pictures

Figure 5: Bicycle shops combining repair, sale and guarded storing in the Netherlands. Source: ADONIS.

In Gent in Belgium a limited access underground parking has been constructed for the employees of the local government, thus reducing bicycle theft. It is situated underground below the main office building. The access is given by a smart card. Guards are not necessary in parking areas with limited access. Similar provisions at work places are known from other European cities as well.

Insert pictures

Figure 6: Underground bicycle parking in Gent, Belgium. Source: ADONIS.

Context
More elaborate bicycle parking facilities are mostly found in city centres or at public transport stations/terminals. The Netherlands and Denmark are the European countries to learn from.

Impacts on demand
Managerial cycle parking provisions alone will probably have minor demand impacts. But appropriately designed facilitites might keep existing bikers on wheel, i.e. to prevent them from shift to driving.

Impacts on Supply
Managerial cycle parking provisions will not demand large urban space; road or pedestrian space etc, compared to car parking.

Financing requirements
The costs will not be large. For guarded storage users can cower the costs, or else subsidies or sponsing is needed.