A CitiBike station at 74th near Columbus with a great view of the San Remo building. Photo by Steven Weiss.
Workers have gradually been filling in the CitiBike stations on the Upper West Side below West 86th street over the past couple of weeks, and more than half are now installed, according to the CitiBike station map. The stations tend to have between 25 and 60 bikes, and have been placed on all of the neighborhood’s avenues.
The stations in blue on the map have been placed, while the ones in yellow should be installed soon.
While residents have complained about the placement of some stations, we haven’t heard many fights yet over placing bikes near landmarked buildings. On the East side, by contrast, the landmarked Plaza recently lost a battle to get rid of a nearby station.
The next phase of CitiBike expansion, from West 86th to 107th street, is expected to be proceed next year.
For those using the bikes: have they been available when you needed them?
A CitiBike station on 84th just off Columbus. Photo by @5borobeer.
Walking a CitiBike on Broadway at 63rd street. Photo by M. Maas.
Getting ready to install CitiBike docks on Riverside Drive between 77th and 78th streets. Photo by Theo.
A station at Central Park West and 72nd street. Photo by Roy Strokes.
Sadly, the biggest winner$ of these Citibikes are the local parking garages. From what I’ve been hearing, they have been secretly lobbying for them and are hoping more are installed throughout all of Manhattan. Wonder why?
Huh? Who have you heard this from? Why would garages want bikes?
Each of these “stations” takes away 3-5 street parking spots.
Ad they can hold 24 bikes in that space. As far as the garages, that is barely a blip, vs. the number of cars in the city at any one time.
Drop in the bucket. And, anyway, do cars somehow have more right to use the public right-of-way for free than other users?
What a sad sight to see, I feel very sorry for anyone living on those blocks. The homeless use the stands to build shanties in colder weather.
Thanks for giving me an excuse for hating them already.
I have been a Citibike member for 2 years now and work downtown. I have never seen the homeless build anything on the docks.
I work downtown, and I see CitiBike stations everywhere. I’ve never seen any of them made into a “shanty”. Ever.
The only shanty town I’ve ever seen on the UWS was in the early 90’s just north of the sanitation facility at about 59th street at what is now the split of the bike path from the pedestrian path. There were actual shelters constructed there. All the rest of this is just hokum.
I guess NIMBYs are running out of excuses, and now they have to make stuff up.
Don’t get me wrong, I consider myself a NIMBY, however I’m all for alternative methods of transportation.
Do you have any photographs? I’ve used Citibikes throughout the city since they’ve been introduced, and have never seen a “shanty.” Furthermore, maybe the issue isn’t the bikes but NYC’s rocketing homelessness crisis?
I wonder if this is a serious comment. Firstly, the biggest winner of these Citibikes are the citizens of New York City who now have a more efficient and healthy way to move around town. Even for folks who do not use them, the revitalization of “complete streets”, the removal of folks from sidewalks, subways, and cars; we all benefit. People rightly focus on poor cyclist behavior, but this will change with time as the city evolves (and rules, regulations, and etiquette evolves). To make the point by offering another example, could you imagine folks being completely “against cell phones” and fighting to have them banned simply because some people stare down at them while they walk and don’t pay attention, to the detriment of others? Of course not. Same for cyclists – Creating a narrative that “bad actors” corrodes the entire vision is just plain incorrect.
To your point about parking garages, I don’t know enough to say that garage-operators have or have not lobbied for Citibikes. But honestly, even if they did, it would be a huge waste of time. The New York City “drivers” market is enormous and the number of spots removed for Citibikes is unlikely to materially affect demand of parking garages. Are that many people near the breaking point between street and garage parking that the loss of a few dozen spots (out of an overall market of thousands upon thousands) will make a meaningful and sustained difference? People who look for street parking are already trying to avoid paying garage fees – I would argue that the Citibike has an increased likelihood of having folks get rid of their cars altogether due to lack of “free” (tax-payer subsidized) parking instead of paying $600 per month for a spot. I doubt there’s a lot of street-parkers out there who’ve got an extra $7,200 per year to shell out to a garage. And from the perspective of managing “scarcity,” it’s a better outcome for people who can manage without a car in this City to get rid of it.
In 2015, people ought to be able to think more than one step ahead. Even if Citibikes created a short-term increase in demand for parking garages (which I highly doubt, above), this is a market-economy, and there is nothing stopping a new garage from opening in the long term. The area’s garages supply has been strained in recent years due to the high cost of real-estate (and many garages becoming condo buildings) – But this is unlikely to last forever. New garages could open, the real estate run-up could end, or garages could just become so expensive that it’s no longer more efficient to build a condo instead of a parking garage. There is an equilibrium that Citibike is a part of, but thinking that the equation exists only of a greedy garage-operator and a few dozen public parking spaces is clearly not the full story.
I think that NYC cyclists have a higher than average proportion of “bad actors” than many European cities or other “bike” cities in the USA like Denver or San Fran. That said, I am now a citi-bike member and happy to be so. I like that there are two stations I can see from my apartment and that I can go right into riverside park. For my part I intend to be a courteous cyclist and follow the examples of good cycling etiquette that I learned while a student in Boulder. The bikes are just things, it’s the people and how they act that make them a boon or a menace.
PS I am a big old NIMBY and I must positively affirm that I think the arrival of citibike is great.
James, I agree with you completely. I have been waiting for Citibike to expand uptown. It now gives me another option when I’m traveling home late at night instead of waiting for the always delayed subway in the brutally hot station.
In 2008, the city gained $578.6 million dollars in revenue from parking violations. I do not know the most recent figures, though, clearly, the city is financially benefiting from free parking as the violations are a significant source of revenue. On-street parking is “taxpayer subsidized” in the same sense that Riverside Park’s paths are a taxpayer subsidized pedestrian entitlements. Of course tax revenue is used for maintenance and upkeep, but there’s a grand distinction between the public money that’s used for private gains (stadium, real estate, bailouts), and public parking for taxpaying residents and out-of-towners who come to depart with their own money. Why do we have to be so pejorative?
Citibike is a good program that will encourage alternative means of transportation and has relevance as a public health measure. But before any grand pronouncements, let’s wait at least 6 months to see if it has any impact on motorists’ behaviors. I agree that we will eventually come to adapt to the changes, but those who depend on automobiles for their livelihood in this city and lack the resources for a garage have a right to be concerned.
I may be wrong about this, but it seems like most of the parking places being displaced are metered spots, like, for example, either on Columbus or the metered spots near the intersection of Columbus. So the people being forced into parking garages are visitors paying for a couple of hours, not residents who now park on the street and would be forced to pay hundreds of dollars at a parking garage. But like I said, I could be wrong.
There are plenty of Citibike stations where parking used to be free, like on Riverside Drive. The ones on RSD are huuuge, by the way. I don’t recall seeing 55-bike stations (which displace a good 6+ cars) in midtown.
As someone who’s spent many an hour looking for street parking, Citibike is an unwelcome new wrinkle, like a construction zone that’s not going away. But the commuter and environmentalist in me applauds the expansion.
Agreed – the RSD bike banks are ENORMOUS! They seem much, much larger than necessary, and probably take up more like 8 parking spaces.
I wonder if there will be any real analysis done, once there are meaningful measures of usage, of whether the sites are sized appropriately? I don’t have a lot of faith that those parking spots will ever return if it turns out that a 25-bike installation would be sufficient – nor that more bikes would appear if use justified it.
Well, I guess it makes sense that there would be so many along Riverside Drive. I was reading somewhere that in many parts of Brooklyn and Queens preference was given to putting them on the sidewalk, not the street, which of course is not going to work in Manhattan. But along Riverside, couldn’t they have been put in the edge of the park instead of on the street? It seems like that would have made sense.
Thanks for your thoughtful reply W,
It’s difficult to draw a line between removal of a few dozen parking spaces and the amount of revenue the City derives from all types of parking revenues. It’s unlikely that this will materially affect the number of parking violations that the city could ticket for; in fact it could make the number go up if illegal parking increases as a result of these small number of space removals. What about increased ticketing of cyclists due to the increase in bikes in the City? Your argument falls flat to me.
Ethically speaking, I don’t agree that we should defend an economic system that relies on people’s misbehavior generate revenue, let alone have one to begin with. Should we fine people for parking violations? Sure. But arguing that we ought to be protecting a revenue source for the city by not supporting cycling and supporting increased free parking for drivers (so that they break the rules?); that seems totally unethical.
To argue your point, you state that “On-street parking is “taxpayer subsidized” in the same sense that Riverside Park’s paths are a taxpayer subsidized pedestrian entitlements.” I actually don’t disagree with this. There is a fixed amount of space in this City and decisions are made how to allocate this scarcity. The same long-term view which holds that a public park, greenspace, and nice pedestrian walkways help support other revenue sources such as property taxes and health of the citizenry, would support that it is not economically efficient to protect free parking spaces. Offering a resource that certainly has a material value for free is certainly lost income. Additionally, supporting cars in this way contributes to increased driving which creates more maintenance needs for the roads, more need for traffic cops, more pollution, increased risk of accidents, and on and on.
It’s refreshing to have a civil discussion.
A lack of clarity in my previous post made it seem that I was arguing against Citibike in order to protect ticket revenue. My intention was a bit narrower — I wanted to offer that rather than conceptualizing on-street parking as “offering a resource that certainly has a material value for free,” there is actually substantial revenue gained by the city through its current parking arrangements. And this helps to pay for programs that we all benefit from. This is in spite of the fact that since 1959, the entire city has been a tow-away zone (as opposed to narrowly defined places in other cities), and coupled with the stiff penalties, the tough parking system is in itself a disincentive to park in the city. Yet people still park and it does make us revenue.
Like you, I very much doubt that Citibike will have a substantial impact on scofflaw derived revenue, and I imagine that this calculation went into the decision making process (as it does for protracted ASP suspensions).
Speaking about citibikes themselves, I am looking forward to using it to get about the neighborhood. Finally, I can skip the 30 minute wait for the M5 on RSD and not have to walk 13 blocks home from fairway. I do drive into and out of the city, but it’s not for transportation within it. Besides, driving is a passion of mine, and we true motorists will always find a way. Sorry….
Great! And the less “free” parking, blocking pedestrian views of the street, causing accidents and pollution as people who own a car but are too cheap to pay for parking drive around looking for tax payer funded spots, the better.
Cars block the view more than the bikes. The bikes are smaller and lower than cars. Personally, I think the bikes are more attractive than a car parked on the side of the road.
Bill C, if you read Effy’s comment again, I think you will see you are in agreement…
Finally! The one issue I had the first time I used it was getting the bike do dock again, with the green light on. But I couldn’t get the bike back out again to try another dock either. I noticed other people were having the same issue, so I called. They said they were aware that there was an issue at that station, and unfortunately my ride wouldn’t be shown as complete until the technician came, but they would make sure I wasn’t charged, and I wasn’t. Hopefully they did the same with all the bikes at that station, whether people called or not — hopefully. So my advice is make absolutely sure your bike is not only locked in place, but that the green light actually comes on. You can also log into your account and make sure the ride is shown as completed. That said, I haven’t had any problem since, and they were quite helpful on the phone. But something to keep an eye on.
Other than that, it has been great. I love it! Now if we could just get that protected bike lane on Amsterdam. For me, that’s the final piece in what would make this a great way to actually use these bikes as an alternate means of transportation. I don’t do unprotected roads, and I don’t go the wrong way on a bike path, so for now it’ll be north on subway/bus, back home on the Columbus bike path, unless I have the extra time to meander and take the park. (I don’t do Central Park West either, it’s a horror.)
Just a suggestion: to get back home, you might want to try riding north on the bike path along the Hudson and then cutting east when you get near your residence.
I notice that around 7 or 8pm (when I am normally coming home from work) the rack at 70th and Amsterdam is full. So in spite of how attractive staying out of the subway seems, if I can’t park it, I can’t use it.
They just installed the one on Columbus between 71st and 72nd. It goes the entire block, must be 60+ bikes. I just went by it, and it’s almost empty.
Also as Citibike becomes more popular uptown, more stations with be added giving you more options of where to dock.
The CitiBike app will tell you which bike rack has room for more bikes, so you could just drop it at another rack.
i live on one of those blocks and im hyper- happy to finally see them in the UWS. it was time!
i own a car which i only use for weekends drive to the country. i park it in a garage and i dont feel that bikes are taking away my parking spot.
i would get rid of cars in manhattan if i could and make it all pedestrian/bycicles and electric buses!
Wonderful to have the Citibikes on the UWS! They seem to have placed them everywhere I need them.
From my observations on W63rd and area
Bikes riding on sidewalk up 10 fold
Almost getting hit by a bike blowing a red light-twice this week
Citi bike’s going down W63rd street against the traffic and on the side walk-all day long
On top of that the new traffic pattern on Broadway has increased the traffic congestion in this area and the boxes are continuously blocked at peak hours with no enforcement.
Bad drivers are a huge problem, whether they are in a car or on a bike.
Punk bloomberg’s nightmare blossoms. I so look forward to the sane amongst us rising up and demanding the end of this madness.
Or maybe the illegal aliens who are gonna get binged by President Trump, will take them back to their third world back waters as consolation prizes.
Exactly how is this a “nightmare”?
Besides that, your post makes absolutely no sense.
That’s a total troll post by “off duty”. Don’t feed it.
Don’t engage OffDutty, he/she is a troll.
@ zoo lu-lu – You only see me as a “troll” because you haven’t yet grown up and out of the loony-leftist nonsense which you were inculcated with in school.
@ Bill C. – HOW does my statement make no sense? Do you ever THINK before you write?
Personally, I stand by my assessment that Officer Krupke is a complicated performance art piece. I admire its purity.
Got it. Thanks.
I don’t have a problem with these kiosks and for people who want to use them it fosters alternate transportation and some exercise.
That said, I do have a few questions:
– Why isn’t the use of helmets promoted more aggressively as this program expands?
– Why isn’t the use of the new bike lanes promoted and enforced more aggressively as this program expands?
– How much use do these bikes actually get between late November and the end of March? Are the bikes kept in the kiosks as temperatures dip and ice and snow piles up on the city? If so, when plows come through, are the bikes buried until the big thaw comes? Does a service come and dig them out?
And, as much as I realize these bikes aren’t speed demons, those in Central Park certainly are. When is someone going to do something to make it prohibitive for cyclists “training” along those roadways? Even small, low speed bumps would do wonders to protect pedestrians crossing the park drives.
Helmets- While helmets are a truly excellent idea, their actual effectiveness is not quite as overwhelming as has been promoted in the media (85% reduction comes to mind). Probably more like 10-40%. Which is still significant, but not quite as effective as, say, seatbelts. And there are all sorts of unexpected factors:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/do-bike-helmet-laws-really-save-people/2013/06/03/6a6532b4-c6df-11e2-9245-773c0123c027_story.html
I, for one, use a helmet whenever possible, but I don’t let it stop me from riding a citibike 10 blocks.
Winter riding- One of the Citibike email newsletters commented that people use the bikes in the winter, even in bitter cold, because a 5 minute bitterly cold ride is a lot shorter than a 20 minute bitterly cold walk. I couldn’t agree more. Just wear gloves.
– Helmets – Couldn’t agree more.
– Bike lanes – They are. I personally saw a a bike get a ticket for not yielding the right of way, essentially running a red light, in the bike lane on Columbus Ave. Someone I know saw a cop give a delivery guy a ticket for not using the bike lane on Columbus .
– Where I work, in Chelsea, they are used far less in the winter and also on bad weather days, but they are still used by a lot of people.
And your argument against central park cyclists… really? This tired thing again?
I was kind of hoping after yet another year of cyclists in central park coexisting with runners and other pedestrians peacefully this might go away.
Yes, there will always be aholes. As a cyclist and runner, I yell at them too. But overall… its not an issue.
I’ll take a stab at answering your questions.
-On the topic of helmets
In cities were helmets have been required the popularity of the program has suffered. The idea is to have transportation available at the drop of a hat. If you are required to carry a helmet around in the off chance that you will be needing a bike ride sometime during the day, then most people will be put off by that and choose the bus or the subway instead or a cab.
Bike Lanes- Yes, more are needed for sure. Amsterdam Av. needs a bike lane badly. There have been talks about it but nothing has materialized yet. Let’s hope they install one soon.
Winter Use – I read somewhere that citibikes were used more than expected during the winter months (I need to find the source). When a big storm is expected they pick up the bikes and store them.
As far as training rides in the parks, yes they can be a problem. Particularly when it’s crowded. The problem is not as simple as banning the activity or installing speed bumps. There are a lot of transgressions and entitlement from both pedestrians and cyclists alike.
I’d take a look at this article here: https://www.washingtonpost.com/posteverything/wp/2015/04/15/dont-make-bicyclists-more-visible-make-cars-stop-running-them-over/ for a nice little explanation on why helmet laws arent necessarily the best idea.
LL;DR: They dont work that well at actually preventing injuries, they really dont protect against major accidents, and the onus should be on the driver of the car not to hit the cyclist.
As far as number 2: right now the bike paths are a mess. Columbus is dangerous depending on the street, with it being used more for parking and pedestrians than bicycles. Its also a bit of waiting game. Wait for more cyclists to use citibikes, and for enforcement to improve, and the bike lanes will improve.
As far as number 3: I’d be curious, as well. We have data. We know what happens during winter. This program isnt new. I dont know, since i never had access to the bikes!
Great news, just in time for the Pope to use one in Central Park!
Lol, now I have a picture of that in my head, and I’m rather liking it.
I can’t believe 6 parking spots are taken up on west 84th street where no one is going use these things. That area already has limited parking due to the proximity of two schools, a police station, a fire station, a post office, and most outrageously, a church. Freeing up parking in some of these areas would have made sense as a trade off for the poorly planned placement of these bikes that no one will ever use.
I can’t believe they finally put a dock on that block just over a year after I moved. I would have been grabbing a bike there every day!
i live on 84th street and those “things” were all used today around noon. i repeat: all bikes were gone and used.
i own a car and i park it in a garage.
If my Citibike app is correct, right now between the two stations on 84th, there are 10 available bikes out of possible 82. They’re being used. It’s a beautiful day. You should take one out and try it. 😉
You tell her MEF!
The loss of 6 cars spots means countless people everyday can run errands and travel to work on a bike. Maryjane, you should really rent one for an hour and maybe, if you can get over yourself, you’ll see just how great the system is.
I can’t wait til the roll-out expands further up the west side.
I’m still waiting to see if the bike lane down Columbus Avenue gets any additional (real) use when the bike racks appear. My assumption all along has been that people would rather ride down or through Central Park, in clean air, and not down a heavily trafficked bus and truck avenue; except at night.
So happy to see citibikes expanding to the UWS! Just in time for the beautiful fall weather. I own a car and haven’t noticed any material difference in available parking spaces either.
I find the posts from those who are convinced “no one will ever use” these large stations hilarious. Maybe give the stations a bit more time to gain users before determining if the size of the station is warranted
What they mean to say is nobody that I know will use them. The only exercise that they get is from pushing a cart around Fairway.
Losing parking spaces is a hardship on those of us that live in the boroughs. This is our city too. It is almost impossible to drive into Manhattan on weekends or to tend to our small businesses around town. The bikes are for Manhattanites and tourists. It feels discriminatory towards those of us who are native born and raised New Yorkers who live in the outer boroughs. The loss of meters affects businesses as well. This is not a good thing. We have always been a gritty city. This attempt at cleaning up congestion, etc is negatively affecting those of us who were born here and will die here. We should be able to park here.