DOCSLIB.ORG

Tucson Bike Share Report

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Tucson Bike Share Report TUCSON BIKE SHARE Feasibility Study Report July 2015 Tucson Bike Share Feasibility Study CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION ......................................................................................................................................... 3 2. BIKE SHARE SYSTEM REVIEW .................................................................................................................... 5 What is Bike Share? .................................................................................................................................. 5 Elements of Bike Share ............................................................................................................................. 8 Peer Programs ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Potential Benefits and Risks .................................................................................................................... 23 Summary of Benefits and Risks ............................................................................................................... 31 3. GOALS AND OBJECTIVES ......................................................................................................................... 33 4. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND DEMAND ANALYSIS ................................................................................... 36 Physical Conditions ................................................................................................................................. 37 Demographics ......................................................................................................................................... 38 Employment ............................................................................................................................................ 44 Education ................................................................................................................................................ 47 Visitors and Tourism ............................................................................................................................... 48 Transportation ........................................................................................................................................ 50 Bicycling .................................................................................................................................................. 57 Bike Share Suitability Analysis................................................................................................................. 58 Summary of Community Analysis ........................................................................................................... 60 5. COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT AND SYSTEM PLANNING .......................................................................... 63 Public and Stakeholder Engagement ...................................................................................................... 63 Online Survey and Crowdsourcing Map ................................................................................................. 63 Stakeholder Engagement ........................................................................................................................ 70 6. PRELIMINARY SYSTEM PLAN ................................................................................................................... 72 System Phasing Plan ............................................................................................................................... 74 Initial System ........................................................................................................................................... 77 Station Siting Guidelines ......................................................................................................................... 79 7. PLANNING, LIABILITY, ORDINANCE, AND POLICY REVIEW ...................................................................... 83 Street Furniture Sponsorship and Advertising ........................................................................................ 83 Site Planning............................................................................................................................................ 84 Other Considerations .............................................................................................................................. 84 8. TRANSIT INTEGRATION ........................................................................................................................... 86 July 2015 1 Tucson Bike Share Feasibility Study Current Management Structure of Tucson Transit Services ................................................................... 86 Fare Payment Technology ....................................................................................................................... 86 Potential Transit Integration with Bike Share ......................................................................................... 87 9. IMPLEMENTATION CONSIDERATIONS AND FRAMEWORK ..................................................................... 91 Procurement ........................................................................................................................................... 91 Public and Stakeholder Outreach ........................................................................................................... 91 Marketing ................................................................................................................................................ 92 Operational Considerations .................................................................................................................... 98 Implementation Timeline ..................................................................................................................... 100 Evaluation Methods .............................................................................................................................. 102 APPENDIX A ............................................................................................................................................... 104 Online Survey Form ............................................................................................................................... 104 July 2015 2 Tucson Bike Share Feasibility Study 1. INTRODUCTION The City of Tucson (City) engaged Toole Design Group (TDG) to investigate and determine the feasibility of a bike share system in Tucson, Arizona. TDG was also tasked with identifying an appropriate scale and operational model to implement an effective system that complements the existing transit network, including the recent investment in Modern Streetcar, and Tucson’s increasing investment in on-street and off-street bicycling infrastructure. The intent of this study is to provide a comprehensive “The intent of this study is to planning effort to investigate what a bike share develop a guiding document that system would look like in Tucson and to develop a can be used as an implementation guiding document that can be used as an implementation blueprint for the City and partner blueprint for the City and its agencies to attract funding and support for the partner agencies to attract funding system. and support for the program.” This feasibility study follows the process outlined in Figure 1. It includes phases for information gathering, goal setting, community analysis, evaluation of feasibility, system development, and implementation considerations. The completion of each phase resulted in the chapters described below. Chapter 2 introduces the concept of bike share and Information Gathering examines several peer cities that have implemented bike share programs. It also explores potential benefits and risks in terms of mobility and transportation, economic and financial performance, health, environment, and Goal Setting safety. Chapter 3 outlines the system goals identified by the Community & project team, local stakeholders, and the Technical Environmental Analysis Advisory Committee. These are important as they set the parameters for how the system will be set up and what will constitute success. Assess Feasibility Chapter 4 presents the results of a community analysis that explores the preparedness of the region for bike share and these results are combined with feedback System Development obtained through the public and stakeholder engagement process summarized in Chapter 5 to develop a preliminary system plan and phasing strategy Implementation that is outlined in Chapter 6. Considerations Implementation is considered in in several chapters. Figure 1: Feasibility Study Process Chapter 7 includes a summary of local policies and July 2015 3 Tucson Bike Share Feasibility Study ordinances to determine how bike share fits into these and what changes may be needed. Chapter 8 explores how bike share could be integrated with transit and transit payment structures in Tucson. Chapter 9 includes an implementation flow chart and summary of the steps required to move towards integration including descriptions of the required procurement process, public and stakeholder outreach, marketing needs, operational considerations, and evaluation metrics. July 2015 4 Tucson Bike Share Feasibility Study 2. BIKE SHARE SYSTEM REVIEW This section provides an overview of modern bike share in the United States and summarizes the
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Exploring the Relationship of Bikeshare and Transit in the United States of America
    Portland State University PDXScholar Civil and Environmental Engineering Master's Project Reports Civil and Environmental Engineering Summer 2018 Exploring the Relationship of Bikeshare and Transit in the United States of America David Soto Padín Portland State University Follow this and additional works at: https://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/cengin_gradprojects Part of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Commons Let us know how access to this document benefits ou.y Recommended Citation Soto Padín, David, "Exploring the Relationship of Bikeshare and Transit in the United States of America" (2018). Civil and Environmental Engineering Master's Project Reports. 52. https://doi.org/10.15760/CCEMP.51 This Project is brought to you for free and open access. It has been accepted for inclusion in Civil and Environmental Engineering Master's Project Reports by an authorized administrator of PDXScholar. Please contact us if we can make this document more accessible: [email protected]. EXPLORING THE RELATIONSHIP OF BIKESHARE AND TRANSIT IN THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA BY DAVID RAFAEL SOTO PADÍN A research project report submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirement for the degree of MASTER OF SCIENCE IN CIVIL AND ENVIRONMENTAL ENGINEERING Project Advisor: Kelly J. Clifton Portland State University ©2018 Final Draft ACKNOWLEDGMENTS I would like to express my gratitude for the academic guidance provided by my advisor Dr. Kelly J. Clifton. This project would not have been possible without the support and feedback of my fellow graduate students in the transportation lab of Portland State University. Any errors or omissions are the sole responsibility of the author. The author would like to thank bikeshare operators for making their data available, including Motivate and Bicycle Transportation Systems.
    [Show full text]
  • License Agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC to Operate the North County Coastal Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Encinitas
    MEETING DATE: April 17, 2019 PREPARED BY: Crystal Najera, CAP DEPT. DIRECTOR: Karen P. Brust Program Administrator DEPARTMENT: City Manager CITY MANAGER: Karen P. Brust SUBJECT: License Agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC to operate the North County Coastal Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Encinitas. RECOMMENDED ACTION: 1) Authorize the City Manager, in consultation with the City Attorney, to execute a license agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC (in substantial form as attached) to operate the North County Coastal Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Encinitas (Attachment 5). STRATEGIC PLAN: This item is related to the following Strategic Plan focus areas: • Environment—promotes the use of emissions-free bicycles as an alternative mode of transportation. • Transportation—supports a transportation mode that accommodates more people with minimal impact on the community. • Recreation—promotes active lifestyles and community health. • Economic Development—addresses the “last mile” gap between public transit and local businesses and promotes tourism. FISCAL CONSIDERATIONS: There is no fiscal impact associated with the recommendation. Gotcha will bear the sole cost of deploying and operating the bike share program. Minimal City staff time will be needed to coordinate with Gotcha to ensure that the program operates in a manner beneficial to the City. BACKGROUND: Bike share is a service through which bicycles are made available for shared use to individuals on a very short-term basis, allowing them to rent a bicycle at one location and return it either at the same location or at a different location within a defined geographic boundary. Transportation, especially travel via single occupancy vehicle, is a major source of greenhouse gas emissions in Encinitas and the North County coastal region.
    [Show full text]
  • DATE: January 4, 2019
    DATE: January 4, 2019 TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Daryl Grigsby, Director of Public Works VIA: Derek Johnson, City Manager ENC: NACTO Guidelines for the Regulation and Management of Shared Active Transportation (Version 1: July 2018) PREPARED BY: Greg Hermann, Interim Deputy City Manager Adam Fukushima, Active Transportation Manager SUBJECT: SHARED ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION DEVICES The purpose of this memorandum is to respond to inquiries about the proposed operation of shared active transportation devices, such as scooters and bicycles. This memo provides pertinent background information, an overview of relevant City ordinances, policy and safety considerations and potential next steps for City Council consideration. Background In September 2018, the City was informed that Bird, an electric scooter sharing company, had unannounced plans to launch in San Luis Obispo without the proper permits or licenses. City staff reached out to Bird representatives and invited them to take part in a dialogue before beginning a “rogue launch” similar to the company’s practice in other cities. Bird responded favorably, traveled to San Luis Obispo and met with City staff to discuss their business model and has so far agreed to follow City policy and procedures relating to their business. Since then, four other scooter share companies have also inquired about operating in the City. They include Lime, Spin, Gotcha, and Uscooter. Staff has been in discussion with these companies and has informed them that a memo would be distributed to the Council outlining issues and potential paths and that no City actions would take place until such time as Council provided direction on whether to proceed with any ordinance changes and provide input on outreach, vendor selection, etc.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Del Mar Staff Report
    City of Del Mar Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Clem Brown, Environmental Sustainability/Special Projects Manager Via Scott Huth, City Manager DATE: May 6, 2019 SUBJECT: License Agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC to Operate the North County Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Del Mar REQUESTED ACTION/RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests that the City Council approve a license agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC (Attachment A) to operate the North County Coastal Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Del Mar and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. BACKGROUND: The City of Del Mar is committed to reducing local greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to limit the effects of climate change, while also offering viable transportation alternatives to driving. Del Mar has adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that establishes a number of strategies to meet GHG emissions reduction targets, including facilitating safe, convenient, and affordable alternative transportation options. Specifically, Goal 14 in the CAP includes a strategy to “explore implementation of a bike share program…to provide another transportation alternative for traveling in town.” Transportation, especially travel via single occupancy vehicles, is a major source of GHG emissions in Del Mar and the other north San Diego County (North County) coastal cities. Offering and promoting programs like bike share, that replace vehicle trips with bike trips, is one way Del Mar can help to reduce emissions while offering more efficient and more affordable transportation modes for residents, employees, and visitors. Bike share is a service by which bicycles are made available for shared use to individuals on a very short-term basis, allowing them to borrow a bicycle at one location and return it either to the same or an alternate location within a defined geographic boundary.
    [Show full text]
  • CONNECTING the RARITAN HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rutgers University Bloustein School of Policy and Planning | Fall 2016 Graduate Studio
    RUTGERS UNIVERSITY BIKE SHARE CONNECTING THE RARITAN HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rutgers University Bloustein School of Policy and Planning | Fall 2016 Graduate Studio ABOUT THE STUDIO This studio project is an analysis of the health impacts of the We met with Bloustein professors, with planning professionals, potential new Bike Share program planned for the Rutgers-New and with the organizers and staff of bike shares across the coun- Brunswick community. It builds upon our client’s – the Rutgers try in order to ask questions and gain invaluable advice on how University Department of Institutional Planning and Opera- to proceed with our analysis. We used this collected knowledge tion (IPO) – Internal Bicycle Share Proposal. The IPO report to build impact projections and develop a list of actionable rec- highlighted existing bicycle infrastructure, robust public trans- ommendations targeted at maximizing positive health outcomes portation infrastructure, and the high concentration of bicycle while mitigating health concerns. commuters in the study area as support for their proposal. This studio expanded on that analysis by examining the physical, This studio course is intended to advance the goals of Healthier mental, social, and economic health of the users and residents New Brunswick, a network of partners in the City of New Bruns- of Rutgers campus and the surrounding areas. Our targeted wick that are working together to ensure that all residents have audience for this analysis was people who currently do not bike; equal access to the services and conditions that allow for good we paid close attention to equity issues and vulnerable popula- health and well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • City of Reston Bike Share Feasibility Study
    City of Reston BikeReston Share Bike Feasibility Share Feasibility Study Study Fairfax County Final Report FinalJune Report2011 PREPAREDJune 2014 BY: Alta Planning + Design PREPARED BY: AltaPREPARED Planning FOR: + Design Metropolitan Washington Council of Governments PREPAREDon behalf of FOR: MetropolitanFairfax County Washington Department Council of Transportation of Governments on behalf of Fairfax County Department of Transportation TABLE OF CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ......................................................................................................................... 1 1 INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................ 3 2 WHAT IS BIKE SHARING? ............................................................................................................... 5 2.1 DEVELOPMENT OF BIKE SHARE TECHNOLOGY .......................................................................................... 5 2.2 SYSTEM ELEMENTS ............................................................................................................................. 6 2.3 LOCAL BIKE SHARE SYSTEM .................................................................................................................. 8 2.4 FUNDING AND PRICING OF BIKE SHARE SYSTEMS ..................................................................................... 9 3 BIKE SHARING IN RESTON ..........................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • BIKE SHARE in LOS ANGELES COUNTY an Analysis of LA Metro Bike Share and Santa Monica Breeze
    BIKE SHARE IN LOS ANGELES COUNTY An analysis of LA Metro Bike Share and Santa Monica Breeze visit us at scag.ca.gov ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Prepared for Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) On behalf of Los Angeles Country Metropolitan Transportation Authority (Metro) BY ALTA PLANNING + DESIGN Jean Crowther, AICP Michael Jones Mike Sellinger WITH MOORE & ASSOCIATES Jim Moore Erin Kenneally Kathy Chambers SPECIAL THANKS TO City of Los Angeles Department of Transportation City of Santa Monica City of West Hollywood Bicycle Transit Systems CycleHop And the many community members who gave their time and energy to participate in our outreach efforts and whose insights added to the value and relevance of this study and its recommendations. TABLE OF CONTENTS 01 PROJECT PURPOSE AND GOALS ..............................1 02 A TALE OF TWO SYSTEMS ..........................................3 03 WHAT THE DATA TELLS US ........................................5 04 WHAT COMMUNITY MEMBERS TELL US .................19 05 RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE FUTURE .................27 APPENDICES A - Technology Integration Memo B - Statistical Analysis Methodology and Find- ings C - Agency & Operator Interview Questions D - User Survey E - Survey Results LA BIKE SHARE STUDY 01 PROJECT PURPOSE AND GOALS The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG), in The study centered on five core phases of analysis: partnership with Los Angeles Metro (Metro), commissioned a • User Survey: An online and intercept survey targeted existing study to better understand the role of bike share within the Los bike share users, available for 2 months in spring of 2019, Angeles regional transportation system. The results are intended which garnered 351 valid responses (201 from Metro users to guide decision-making related to future system investments and 150 from Santa Monica users) and provided a 95 percent and new shared mobility programs in the region.
    [Show full text]
  • April 30, 2014 Bicycle Sharing in the USA – State Of
    April 30, 2014 Bicycle Sharing in the U.S.A. – State of the Art (Session 3A) By: Robert Kahn, P.E. RK Engineering Group, Inc. Introduction Bike Sharing in the United States (U.S.A) has been on the rise for the last several years. In September 2012, I published an article in the ITE Journal that summarized the latest status of Bike Sharing in the U.S.A. At that time, there were less than 20 programs, but since that time, the number of programs has more than doubled. Bike sharing programs are expanding in the east, mid-west and western portions of the U.S.A at an astounding rate and more are planned in the near future. I first got interested in Bike Sharing in the Fall of 2007, when I visited Paris, France, and I was introduced to the Vélib' Bicycle Sharing System. At that time, the Vélib' program included approximately 10,000 bicycles with 750 docking stations. Since then, it has expanded to include over 20,000 bicycles with 1,451 docking stations covering the entire City of Paris. Bike Sharing is a short-term bicycle rental system that allows users to make relatively short trips of 30 minutes to an hour, instead of using other modes of transportation (i.e. auto, public transit, taxicab, walking, etc.). Bicycle sharing is not geared towards longer distance recreational trips and generally serves local trips to work, shopping, and nearby destinations. In an April 2008 article published by WesternITE – a publication of the Western District of the Institute of Transportation Engineers – I provided a detailed discussion of the Vélib' program.
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Share's Impact on Car
    Transportation Research Part D 31 (2014) 13–20 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Transportation Research Part D journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/trd Bike share’s impact on car use: Evidence from the United States, Great Britain, and Australia ⇑ Elliot Fishman a, , Simon Washington b,1, Narelle Haworth c,2 a Healthy Urban Living, Department Human Geography and Spatial Planning, Faculty of Geosciences, Utrecht University, Heidelberglaan 2, 3584 CS Utrecht, The Netherlands b Queensland Transport and Main Roads Chair School of Urban Development, Faculty of Built Environment and Engineering and Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety (CARRS-Q), Faculty of Health Queensland University of Technology, 2 George St GPO Box 2434, Brisbane, Qld 4001, Australia c Centre for Accident Research and Road Safety – Queensland, K Block, Queensland University of Technology, 130 Victoria Park Road, Kelvin Grove, Qld 4059, Australia article info abstract Keywords: There are currently more than 700 cities operating bike share programs. Purported benefits Bike share of bike share include flexible mobility, physical activity, reduced congestion, emissions and Car use fuel use. Implicit or explicit in the calculation of program benefits are assumptions City regarding the modes of travel replaced by bike share journeys. This paper examines the Bicycle degree to which car trips are replaced by bike share, through an examination of survey Sustainable and trip data from bike share programs in Melbourne, Brisbane, Washington, D.C., London, Transport and Minneapolis/St. Paul. A secondary and unique component of this analysis examines motor vehicle support services required for bike share fleet rebalancing and maintenance. These two components are then combined to estimate bike share’s overall contribution to changes in vehicle kilometers traveled.
    [Show full text]
  • Poised for Pedaling: Comparing Bicycle
    POISED FOR PEDALING: COMPARING BICYCLE INFRASTRUCTURE IN COPENHAGEN, DENMARK AND PORTLAND, OREGON by SEAN VERMILYA A THESIS Presented to the Department of Planning, Public Policy, and Management and the Robert D. Clark Honors College in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Bachelor of Science June 2020 An Abstract of the Thesis of Sean Vermilya for the degree of Bachelor of Science in the Department of Planning, Public Policy, and Management to be taken June 2020 Title: Poised for Pedaling: Comparing Bicycle Infrastructure in Copenhagen, Denmark and Portland, Oregon Approved: Marc Schlossberg Primary Thesis Advisor This thesis investigates the following question: how can Portland learn from Copenhagen’s policy successes and failures to better develop, implement, and utilize bicycle infrastructure going forward? The thesis begins by addressing each city’s mobility history and how that history contributes to current transportation networks. Historical cycling support helps explain Copenhagen’s strong network today, while the US’s embrace of the automobile prevented Portland from fully embracing the bicycle. The thesis then deconstructs the differences between bicycle infrastructure in Copenhagen and Portland along five focus areas: design, municipal control, societal values, current politics, and equity. Copenhagen’s cyclist-friendly design, egalitarian societal values, and strong social safety net contribute to its superior cycling network and bring more cyclists to the streets. These advantages serve as models for Portland for emulate. However, the cities’ common struggles with municipal infrastructure control and mobility politics demonstrate cycling’s divisive nature regardless of locale. They also show that improvement remains well within Portland’s reach.
    [Show full text]
  • Unlicensed Dockless Bike Sharing
    UNLICENSED DOCKLESS BIKE SHARING – COMMON POSITION PAPER – INTRODUCTION This common position of the International Association of Public Transport (UITP), the European Cyclists’ Federation (ECF) and its Platform for European Bike Sharing and Systems (PEBSS), recognises that there are currently significant changes happening in the operation, technology and business models of bike sharing systems. Over the past decade, station-based bike sharing has been successfully introduced to many cities worldwide, encouraging more cycling and promoting more healthy and liveable cities. While the environmental benefits of docked bike sharing is clear, the high implementation and operation costs have deterred some cities from embracing these schemes that promote the benefits of active travel. The introduction of smart bikes allows for dockless operation, which involves lighter infrastructure at a lower cost. We have recently seen the emergence of privately funded dockless bike sharing systems, operating without public licensing. This has a variety of implications for a city’s transport policy. This paper provides a framework and recommendations for cities and relevant authorities to ensure dockless bike sharing schemes contribute to the objectives of a wider sustainable urban mobility policy and efficiently complement public transport. Active mobility such as cycling and walking is crucial to any sustainable urban mobility strategy based on a high quality public transport system for more liveable and healthier cities. New wave of unlicensed dockless bike parking areas so that another rider can find share operators or locate it for the next ride. Since spring 2016, there has been a dramatic increase, primarily in China, of un- anchored, free-floating and app-controlled private bike share operators.
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Update to Nice Ride Nonprofit Business Plan
    2018 Update to Nonprofit Business Plan This Business Plan Update has been approved by the Nice Ride Board of Directors. It is subject to approval by the City of Minneapolis and is incorporated by reference in the proposed Third Amendment to Grant Funded Agreement by and between the City of Minneapolis and Nice Ride Minnesota. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Since its launch in 2010, Nice Ride has followed the core elements of the December 3, 2008, Nonprofit Business Plan for Twin Cities Bike Share System (“2008 Business Plan”). Core elements included: station-based bike share; capitalized through combination of public funds and title sponsorship by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota (“Blue Cross MN”); operated by nonprofit staff with costs covered by sales revenue plus station sponsorship. In 2010, NRM and The City of Minneapolis entered into a Grant Funded Agreement (“GFA”), which expires in August of 20211. In that Agreement, Nice Ride agreed to operate “the Program” using the grant-funded equipment. “The Program” was the 2008 Business Plan. Core goals included: establishing bike sharing as a convenient and reliable form of transportation, increasing bicycle mode share, and increasing cultural acceptance of active transportation. The 2008 Business Plan was successful. NRM has achieved public goals, expanded using funds from multiple public sources, and become a model for over 50 similar nonprofits in other cities. In 2017, the market and technology assumptions underlying the 2008 Business Plan fundamentally changed. Over $3 billion in private capital flowed into the bike sharing industry worldwide. Over 20 million bikes were deployed in cities worldwide.
    [Show full text]