DOT Data: Private Bikes Still King on NYC Roads

Within the course of my daily conversations, I often get asked about the need to create parking infrastructure for privately owned bikes– the assumption being that cyclists have, or will, switch over to CitiBike, the city’s wildly popular bikeshare system.

Though I am a huge fan of the bikeshare movement, it’s worth remembering that traditional private bikes still account for the vast majority of cycling trips within the city, as well as a large segment of market growth over the years, a reality that isn’t set to change anytime soon. Cities would be best to design infrastructure for both bikeshare and personal bikes.

In space below, I will share some data, taken directly from NYCDOT’s Cycling in the City report from 2018 and 2017.

Today’s NYC Cycling Landscape


Untitled design
According to data from the NYCDOT privately owned bike account for a vast majority of bikes on city streets– a little over 91 percent of the total market.


  • In 2016, the last year that we have publicly available data for both Citibike and the number of estimated overall cycling trips in New York, there were an estimated 460,000 daily cycling trips and 38,491 Citi Bike trips. At this ratio, privately owned bicycles would account for 91.5% of cycling trips.

    Even when pairing the higher citi-bike totals from 2017 with the projected bike trip data from 2016 (2017 bike trip projections were not available) non-bikeshare trips still account for more than 91% of total bike trips.

Mode Growth

  • According to NYCDOT, there were 40,000 more average daily cycling trips in 2016 than in 2014. During the same period, citi-bike saw an increase of 16,319 rides, which account for about 40% of growth in overall cycling in the city during that period.

    One on hand, it’s amazing that 10,000 bikes accounted for such a large share of growth in the market. However, a majority of the growth in the cycling market still occurs from those who are relying on their own private bicycles.

Complimentary not Competing

Despite what some may think, privately owned bicycles are not in competition with bikeshare. The two cycling modes provide their users with very different, and complementary value propositions.

Bikeshare,  fills an important first mile/last mile gap in the public transportation network, and thus excels as a multi-modal form of transportation. For those who use subways, ferries or busses for transportation, bikeshare can reduce a 17 minute walk to the final destination into a 5 minute bike ride. Bikeshare can also be a viable option for some commuters, who are taking trips of under 2 miles. To encourage this type of usage, Citibike has a time limit of between 30 minutes (for single rides and day passes) and 45 minutes (for annual subscribers). In short, Bikeshare is for quick, short trips.

Traditional bikes, on the other hand, tend to provide a far superior cycling experience, with better handling, gears and faster speeds. Like many, I use both bikeshare, as well as my own private bicycle. Citibike is very convenient, especially when I’m walking a distance from the Subway or taking a quick jaunt across town for a meeting, but the clunky 45-lb bikes are like tanks compared to my 20-lb road bike. My bike is, through months of customizations, personalized to my height and preferences. My well-maintained frame, and pumped tires, provides a smooth, fun ride each time. Yes, I can tolerate bikeshare for short distances, but for daily commuting or longer trips, I very much prefer my own personal bicycle.

Bikeshare: A Gateway To Ownership

Formost bikeshare is a great first/last mile solution; great for quick, short trips or the first leg of a longer journey. Many cities have effectively positioned bikeshare stations in close proximity to major transportation hubs in order to maximize this advantage.

Bikeshare systems are also an effective gateway to urban cycling in general. Those who would not normally ride, are attracted by the low cost and convenience of Citibike and similar systems. After a period of regular usage, they become comfortable with the idea of urban cycling, and often decide to invest in their own high-end bike.

This “Bikeshare Gateway” phenomenon was first catalogued in Washington DC after the launch of Capital Bikeshare when the area’s bikeshops saw substantial increase in business due to renewed interest in cycling.

My own conversations with local bikeshops have also shed some light on this trend. Though sales of entry-level bicycles have stagnated or declined, sales of pricier, high end bicycles continue to grow, leading some shops to focus entirely on more expensive inventory.

More recently, startups like Superpedstrian and SmartHalo are betting big on the continued growth in private bikes.

Why does this matter?

When we think about building infrastructure for the growing micro-mobility market, it’s important that policy-makers, property owners and civic leaders think dynamically about how planned infrastructure best serves the modes of transportation that are most used by the community. Specifically, a bikeshare station is not enough to address the needs of the cycling community. Bike racks (short term parking) and secure bike parking facilities (medium and long term parking) are also required.

Featured photo courtesy of Dan Nguyen on Flickr




Four Better Ways To Raise Money For The Subway

Last week Governor Cuomo made headlines by announcing that the MTA would be seeking to implement a corporate sponsorship model for New York’s subway stations. Cuomo argues that conservancies, which are mostly funded through private dollars, worked for parks and thus could inject New York’s struggling subway system with some much needed capital. The city’s subway denizens who suffer through both chronic delays and dreary, nasty stations environments, may be inclined to agree.


Annotating Rahm Emanuel’s Subway Op-Ed

Last weekend, the MTA’s recent struggles went national when the Mayor of Chicago, published a Monday New York Times Op-Ed entitled “In Chicago, The Trains Actually Run on Time.” The haughty, headline of Emanuel’s opine earned a swift backlash from New York’s press and many ordinary citizens. New Yorkers may hate the MTA, but it’s our MTA! Beneath all of the noise, there was a rare, thoughtful and prominent critique of urban mass transit best practices.

For me, many of Emanuel’s argument’s resonated, while other’s didn’t.


Cuomo’s Initiatives Shed Light on Need For Regional Plan

Last night, the New York Times ran a local reaction story that seemed pretty typical for those who’ve grown accustomed to following development and infrastructure in the region. Times reporters questioned local residents about Governor Cuomo’s plan to replace the Sheridan Expressway with a more neighborhood friendly boulevard and, predictably, found a range of opinions. Many loved the idea, others expressed concerns. Among those who weren’t so sure, a common refrain was used: Is this the best way to spend $1.8 billion?

That’s a good question.


Selling Homeless Shelters to the Public

As homelessness rises to record highs, community opposition to proposed shelters remains deep-seated and, for local elected officials, implacable. In Brooklyn last week, residents blasted the mayor’s proposal for a shelter in Crown Heights, and in Salt Lake City, residents are pleading with the state to intervene in the city’s plan to place a  shelter near Downtown. In Los Angeles, communities are opposed to even storage facilities for items belonging to the homeless. Similar themes have cropped up in almost every city; no one wants a homeless shelter in their backyard.


Is Los Angeles Ahead of Everyone Else?

Los Angeles, long the poster-child for sprawling low density development, has quietly built a strong case for the country’s leading transit planning city. While no one would dare argue that today’s Los Angeles offers serious competition to the likes of New York, Boston or Washington DC, the city is doing what no one else has been able to: think big and build big.