First I would like to say that I agree with all of the comments that James made with regard to NYC bike rack competition and the winning “Hoop” design. It is a very elegant design that will make nice street furniture.

In terms of the comments made about the “Hitch-2” I would preface my comments with a note that I am an architect first and a bicyclist second and look at things from that perspective. When I originally conceived the “Hitch-2” bike rack in the 1970’s I was reacting to the current and prevalent bike rack designs that were being put in everywhere. These designs were mostly about how to lock a bike securely. This is the number one priority for a bike rack but not the only one. Aesthetics and friendliness to pedestrians did not seem to be of great concern. Looking around at what other bicyclists did and knowing what I always looked for to which to lock my bike it seemed a simple railing or post were the preferred objects. Since most people carried “Kryptonite” type locks this worked well in terms of security.

The original “Hitch-2” was never a great piece of aesthetic design as has been noted in numerous writings and comments and I would certainly agree. I think the things that have made it so popular and ubiquitous are that it works on several levels. It is simple, flexible, secure, can be easily and safely placed on sidewalks or public ways, can be clustered for multiple parking spaces, is aesthetically unobtrusive and requires no instructions on how to use it.

In terms of the new “Hitch-2”, the majority of comments seem to center around the cost of the bike rack and that it is less simple than the original. Although I do not yet know what the costs of the new “Hitch-2” will be in volume, it is likely that it will be more expensive than the original. Cost is always an issue but I would argue that these bike racks are typically a piece of street furniture in the public way and should be looked at from that perspective. Cities or towns generally do not (or should not) scrimp on park benches, bus stops, kiosks, and waste containers. Bike racks should fall into that category. They will be in place for many years (hopefully) and because of that they need to be substantial and aesthetically pleasing. This usually means that the costs will be higher but I believe the investment is worth it.

In terms of the simplicity issue, I again would agree that this new design is not as simple as the original but it still is simple and works the same way as the original design only better. The bikes are now separated so that pedals, handlebars and other protruding items on one bike will not generally conflict with the bike on the other the other side. It also offers more locations and flexibility in terms of locking options.

My last comment is regarding street furniture in general and bike racks in particular. Streets and sidewalks are vital and important elements of any city or town. These public spaces must be carefully and thoughtfully designed. Sidewalks are limited in size and any objects that are placed in that space must serve the public and their purpose well. Where possible these objects can better serve the public good if they can offer multiple uses within the same space. The re-concieved Hitch-2 attempts to do that by providing options for pubic service and/or advertising signage, street tree protection and the incorporation of parking meters. These bike racks mounted either singularly along the sidewalk or in groups also serve as a subtle form of protection for pedestrians from the vehicles on the street.

I welcome additional comments, suggestions and critiques to improve the design.

David Rulon

Thanks always for the link love.