A massively untapped opportunity for people-first transportation
In a well-functioning transportation system, bicycling punches above its weight. It’s cheap, space-efficient, and pollution -free. For trips a few miles or less, the kind that make up most of daily life, it is often faster than driving once parking is factored in. Cities that have invested seriously in bicycling infrastructure have seen real shifts in how people get around, with broad benefits for congestion, public health, and household budgets.
But to use a bicycle for transportation, you need somewhere to put it — somewhere convenient, secure, and reliably there. Poor parking drives up theft, creates anxiety around trip-chaining, and quietly pushes people back to cars. Good parking does the opposite: it makes bicycle trips feel like a complete, trustworthy option rather than an improvised one. For bicycling to genuinely flourish, parking needs to deliver a consistently good experience across a wide range of users — commuters and occasional riders, children and older adults, people with cargo, and people who simply can’t afford to lose a bike to theft.
E-bikes raise the stakes. They expand access for people who couldn’t or wouldn’t otherwise ride — those with longer commutes, hillier terrain, physical limitations, or households trying to shed a car. But e-bikes are heavier, bulkier, and significantly more valuable than conventional bikes, making them harder to park casually and more attractive to thieves. Losing one to theft can end someone’s car-free experiment for good.
Opportunities are ripe. Cities across the US are eliminating parking minimums for cars, liberating enormous amounts of urban real estate. That logic applies directly to bicycles — and bicycle parking is far cheaper, more space-efficient, and more flexible than its car counterpart.
Wrinkle
Bicycle parking is chronically under-prioritized. It sits in the gap between transportation planning, building codes, and private property decisions — and tends to get shortchanged by all three. The result is a patchwork: a few good racks near a transit station, nothing usable at the grocery store, nowhere to put an e-bike that actually locks the frame and the wheel.
The problem compounds because bad parking is often invisible to the people who set policy. Those who ride regularly have already adapted — they know which destinations are worth the hassle and which aren’t. The trips that never happen, the people who never started riding, the e-bike that stayed in the garage after one theft: these don’t show up in the data.
Car parking has well-developed design specifications, enforcement mechanisms, and legal requirements. Bicycle parking largely doesn’t. What gets installed is often whatever was cheapest or easiest — racks that don’t support the frame, placement that blocks pedestrians, facilities that feel unsafe after dark. Until bicycle parking is held to a comparable standard, the gap between aspiration and experience will persist.
Way forward
Provide parking and storage to make using bicycles convenient and stress-free, which is a foundation to increasing the use of bicycles, supporting an efficient multimodal transportation system, and reducing bike thefts.
1. Great bicycle parking systems
Create bicycle parking at all that provides the same high standard of coverage, quality, and reliability as with cars at all scales, from facility sites to city-wide, More…
2. Bicycles in parking reform
Extend the logic, goals, and strategies of parking reform to bicycles.
3. Parking in bicycle network design
Incorporate bicycle parking into general bicycle network design.
Reference
Here are articles on bicycle parking.
Moreworks 