The Bike- Share Planning Guide
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
THE BIKE- SHARE PLANNING GUIDE Introduction Sub 1 Introduction Sub 2 THE BIKE- SHARE PLANNING GUIDE Introduction Sub 3 The Bike-share Planning Guide Cover Photo: Mexico City's Ecobici has helped to increase cycling mode share in Mexico City. Cover Photo By: Udayalaksmanakartiyasa Halim 9 East 19th Street, 7th Floor, New York, NY, 10003 tel +1 212 629 8001 www.itdp.org Introduction Sub 4 Authors and Acknowledgements The writing of this report was a collaborative effort across ITDP and our partners. Contributing authors include: Aimee Gauthier, Colin Hughes, Christopher Kost, Shanshan Li, Clarisse Linke, Stephanie Lotshaw, Jacob Mason, Carlosfelipe Pardo, Clara Rasore, Bradley Schroeder, and Xavier Treviño. The authors would also like to thank Christopher Van Eyken, Jemilah Magnusson, and Gabriel Lewenstein for their support in the creation of the guide. ITDP is especially grateful to the following people for providing comments on and contributions to sections of this report: Alison Cohen, Director of Bike Share Services, Toole Design Group (with many thanks to Shomik Mehndiratta and the World Bank for their support of Ms. Cohen’s research) Dani Simons, Director of Marketing, NYC Bike Share Matteo Martignoni, International Human Powered Vehicle Association and former ITDP board member Jeff Olson, Alta Planning and Design Chris Holben, former Project Manager for Capital Bikeshare District Department of Transportation. Introduction Sub 5 Contents 1 INTRODUCTION 8 1.1 The Benefits of Bike-share 14 1.2 History of Bike-share 19 1.3 New Developments and Trends 25 1.4 Building Political Will 26 1.5 Elements of Bike-share 27 2 THE PLANNING PROCESS 28 AND FEASIBILITY STUDY 2.1 Overview of Planning Process 30 2.2 Feasibility Study 32 2.3 Bike-Share Metrics 40 2.3.1 Basic Context Data and System Metrics 40 2.3.2 Performance Metrics 41 2.4 Coverage Area 43 2.5 System Sizing: Three Basic 44 Planning Parameters 2.6 Financial Analysis 48 3 DETAILED PLANNING AND DESIGN 52 3.1 Station Location 57 3.2 Station Sizing 63 3.3 Station Type and Design 64 3.3.1 Manual vs. Automated 65 3.3.2 Modular vs. Permanent 68 3.3.3 Docking Styles 71 3.4 Information Technology Systems 74 and Payment Mechanisms 3.5 Bikes 76 3.6 Marketing 82 3.6.1 System Identity 83 3.6.2 Internal Marketing 83 3.6.3 External Marketing 83 4 BUSINESS MODEL 86 4.1 Organizational Structure 90 4.1.1 Implementing Agency 90 4.1.2 Operator 91 4.2 Asset Ownership 94 4.3 Contracting Structure 95 4.3.1 Publicly Owned and Operated 97 4.3.2 Publicly Owned and Privately Operated 97 4.3.3 Privately Owned and Operated 98 4.3.4 Types of Operators 101 4.4 Managing Contracts Through Service Levels 102 Introduction Sub 6 List of Figures 5 FINANCIAL MODEL 106 Fig. 1 Growth of Bike-share Worldwide 13 5.1 Capital Costs and Financing 109 Fig.2 Bike-Share System Performance 39 5.1.1 Bicycles 110 Fig. 3 Bike-share market penetration and usage 43 5.1.2 Stations 110 Fig. 4 A Comparison of Systems: Bikes-per-Population 44 5.1.3 Software 111 and System Performance 5.1.4 Control Center, Depot, and Maintenance 112 Fig. 5 A Comparision of Systems: Operating Cost 48 and Redistribution Units per Bike and System Performance 5.2 Operating Costs 114 Fig. 6 Cycling Infrastructure Implemented 61 5.2.1 Staffing 115 Alongside Bike-share Systems 5.2.2 Redistribution 116 Fig. 7 Conceptual Organigram of Communications 73 5.2.3 Maintenance 117 System between User, Control Center, 5.2.4 Control and Customer Service Center 118 and Station 5.2.5 Marketing and Customer Information 119 Fig. 8 Table of Names of Bike-share Systems 83 5.2.6 Insurance (Anti-Theft, Accidents, Vandalism) 120 Fig. 9 Bike-share System Implementing Agencies 90 5.3 Revenue Streams 125 and Operators 5.3.1 Government Funding 126 Fig. 10 Comparison of Strengths and Weaknesses 99 5.3.2 Loan Financing 126 of Types of Operators 5.3.3 Sponsorship 127 Fig. 11 Bike-share System Costs 107 5.3.4 Private Investment 127 Fig. 12 Bike-share System Annual Operating Cost 112 5.3.5 User Fees 127 Per Trip 5.3.6 Advertising Revenue 129 Fig. 13 Comparison of Subscription Fees 128 6 IMPLEMENTATION 132 7 CONCLUSION 138 APPENDIX A: Key Resources and Publications 144 APPENDIX B: Bike-share System General Information Metrics 148 APPENDIX C: Bike-share System Performance Metrics 150 Introduction Sub 7 section one INTRODUCTION Introduction Sub 8 Former Mayor Adrian Fenty takes part in the launch of the Washington, D.C., Capital Bikeshare system. Photo by DDOT DC. DDOT (CREATIVE COMMONS) Introduction Sub 9 Bike-share has taken many forms over the course of its development, from free bikes left for a community to use at will to more technologically advanced and secure systems. In every iteration, the essence of bike-share remains simple: anyone can pick up a bike in one place and return it to another, making point-to-point, human- powered transportation feasible. Today, more than 400 cities around the globe have their own bike-share systems, and more programs are starting every year. The largest systems are in China, in cities such as Hangzhou and Shanghai. In Paris, London, and Washington, D.C., highly successful systems have helped to promote cycling as a viable and valued transport option. Each city has made bike-share its own, adapting it to the local context, including the city’s density, topography, weather, infrastructure, and culture. Although other cities’ examples can serve as useful guides, there is no single model of bike-share. Introduction 10 Vélib’, in Paris, France, is one of the largest and most successful public bike-share systems in the world. LUC NADAL Introduction 11 However, many of the most successful systems share certain common features: • A dense network of stations across the coverage area, with an average spacing of 300 meters between stations • Comfortable, commuter-style bicycles with specially designed parts and sizes that discourage theft and resale • A fully automated locking system that allows users to check bicycles easily in or out of bike-share stations • A wireless tracking system, such as radio-frequency identification devices (RFIDs), that locates where a bicycle is picked up and returned and identifies the user • Real-time monitoring of station occupancy rates through wireless communications, such as general packet radio service (GPRS) • Real-time user information through various platforms, including the web, mobile phones and/or on-site terminals • Pricing structures that incentivize short trips helping to maximize the number of trips per bicycle per day Introduction 12 Fig. 1: Growth of Bike-share Worldwide (January 2000–July 2013) When the first bike-share 700,000 opened in the 1960s, bike- share growth worldwide 600,000 was relatively modest. It wasn’t until after the 500,000 turn of the century and the launch of Velo’v in Lyon, France, in 2005 and 400,000 Vélib’ in Paris in 2007 that growth in bike-share 300,000 exploded. CASA BIKE SHARE MAP BY OLIVER O'BRIEN, SYSTEM WEBSITES, PUBLICBIKE.NET 200,000 100,000 Year 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 This guide is meant to bridge the divide between developing and developed countries’ experiences with bike-share. It should be useful in helping to plan and implement a bike-share system regardless of the location, size, or density of your city. Introduction 13 1.1 The Benefits of Bike-share The reasons for implementing a bike-share program are often centered on goals of increasing cycling, reducing congestion, improving air quality, and offering residents an active mobility option. Bike-share has two key advantages when compared to other transportation projects: implementation costs are comparatively low and the timeline is short. It is possible to plan and implement a system in one mayoral term (i.e., two to four years), which means that benefits to the public accrue more immediately than in most transportation projects. Bike-share has become a significant trend worldwide, including in Seville, Spain. CARLOSFELIPE PARDO Bike-share systems can benefit a city in a number of ways: • Reduce congestion and improve air quality • Improve the image of cycling Bike-share offers an alternative means of Bike-share systems project a hip, modern transport for short trips that might otherwise image and can help transform the cycling have been made by car. As of November culture in a city. 2011, Washington, D.C.’s 22,000 bike-share members had reduced the number of miles • Provide complementary services to public driven per year by nearly 4.4 million (LDA transport Consulting 2012). Bike-share offers an alternative for short trips that people would have otherwise made on • Increase accessibility transit. Implementing a bike-share system gives local users greater access to places that are • Improve the health of the residents beyond their reach on foot. Bike-share offers an active transport choice, providing both physical and mental health • Increase the reach of transit benefits. Studies have shown that spending Bike-share fills that critical gap between the twenty minutes every day on a bike has a station or stop and the final destination for significant positive impact on mental health the passenger. Since cycling is more efficient (Obis 2011, p. 41). than walking, bike-share enhances mobility and is much less expensive to the city than extending public transport service. Introduction 14 top Washington, D.C.