Transcript Bike share planning for the rest of us!

Bikesharing Plans for the Rest of Us!
Planning a system for a midsized Canadian City
Presented to:
Sustainable Mobility Conference
November 5, 2011
Presented By:
Peter Topalovic
City of Hamilton
905-546-2424 x.5129
[email protected]
smartcommute.ca/hamilton
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Preface: the elephant in the room
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Preface: does size matter?
0.5 million
1 million
3.4 million
5.5 million
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Preface: is Hamilton ready?
But mom, Sean has
one so I want one
too!
City of Hamilton Bike Share Demonstration, August 2010
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Outline

Evolution and Context
 Why Bike Share?
 How Did We Get Here?
 Where are we Going?
 Business Plan
 Location, Location!
 Market Analysis
 Next Steps
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Evolution of Bike Share Programs
1st generation
 1960s – Free Love, Free Bikes
 e.g. white bicycle program
(Amsterdam)
1
2nd generation
 Membership/Co-op based model
 Manual or Web-based administration
 e.g. Toronto “Yellow Bike” program
3rd






generation/4th
generation
Fee-per-use model, full public access
Focus on short trips (first 30-min free)
Smart-card or phone, pay by credit
Consists of bikes, racks, stations
High start-up/capital costs
e.g. Bixi
3
2
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Context

Next Generation Bike
share programs growing
in popularity in North
America and Canada

GTHA Wide Interest,
especially at Universities
and Colleges

All major Canadian cities
are using a Bixi-based
technology
2009
2011
0004
0020
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Why Bike Share?
TDM: Strategies and policies to reduce travel demand
WHETHER?
WHY?
WHEN?
WHERE?
HOW?
SUBSTITUTES
Telework
Teleconferencing
Online shopping
Trip chaining
PURPOSE
Work
School
Shopping
Recreation
TIME
Weekday peak hour
Weekday off-peak
Evening
Weekend
DESTINATION
Street
Neighbourhood
Community
City
MODE
Walking
Cycling
Public transit
Car driver/passenger
Bikeshare is more than just a supply issue
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Why Bike Share?

Promotes cycling by increasing access to bicycles,
raising the profile of cycling and acceptance of cycling
as a normal travel behaviour
 Can be implemented relatively quickly and at little cost
compared to other transportation systems
 Reduces Congestion, air pollution and GHG emissions
 Improves health through the promotion of active
transportation
 Contributes to a City’s menu of transportation modal
options for citizens, reducing SOV dependence
 Helps achieve Hamilton’s goals through Vision2020,
Transportation Master Plan and TDM initiatives
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Why Bike Share?
Bicycle sharing
is the perfect
mode of transit to
fill the gap between
trips that are
too far to walk &
too short to drive
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Transit Supportive Design
Minneapolis Nice Ride: users reported a 10% increase
in their transit use
Bicycle sharing
is the perfect
mode of transit to
fill the gap between
trips that are
B-Line
too far to walk &
too short to drive
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Hamilton’s Potential System - Cost
es, cost, key players
quick wins (metrolinx)
x 35
x 300
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Hamilton’s Potential System - Analysis
x 35
x 300
Where, How many, and Who?
• Population density
• Household income level
• Household age
• Household education level
• Short distance trip-making
• Already using active modes
of transportation
• Proximity to key trip
generators / attractors
• Origin-Destination data
• Existing Transit Routes,
Stations and Stops
• Market Survey
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Hamilton’s Potential System - Analysis
x 35
x 300
Is there potential?
• 80,000 residents in service
area
• 8% uptake to be profitable
• 50% of all trips made are 1-2
km in length in Hamilton
• Greater than 80% of trips
originate and end in the City
• Proposed service area is the
largest employment area
• Initial survey shows support
• Stakeholder interest is high
• Highest level of alternative
modes in the service area
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
How did we get here?
McMaster
Student’s Union
and Sustainability
Office looks at a
campus-based
bikeshare system
2009
Workshop #1
A 3rd/ 4th
Stakeholder
generation
group tests B- bike share is
Cycle and Bixi recommended
Aug. 2010
Jan. 2010
McMaster Arts &
Science students
complete a
feasibility analysis &
survey for Hamilton
Business-case
Bike Share
identifies the need Business Plan is
for a market survey
developed
and analysis
conducted by
Analysis and
McMaster MBA roadmap to develop
students
a system
Oct. 2011
Apr. 2011
Green Venture
conducts a business
case to determine
how a 3rd generation
system would be
implemented by a
not-for-profit
Dec. 2011
Mohawk
Transportation
student conducts a
station location
analysis based on
population and
transportation data
Workshop #2
Feedback on the
business plan,
station locations
and market
analysis
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
What did we learn so far

Sean?
Feasibility
 A city with dense urban areas with mixed uses should consider a
next gen system – is this a general rule? We’re not sure!

Demographics and Density
 Population density in the service area
 Station density should be considered – 400m? 500m? 800m?
 Origin – Destination: the more trips that originate and terminate in the
service area, the more potential uptake
 Level of existing cycling/walking/transit culture

Bike Lanes vs. Bike Share
 Treat them separately
 Bikes on the ground create a push for more infrastructure
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
What did we learn so far

Paying for the System
 Most successful systems cover their capital costs through grants
 Advertising and sponsorship cover operating deficits

Public Bikes vs. Public Transit
 Transit: 50% cost recovery is acceptable
 Bike Share: must be revenue neutral, which is a bigger challenge

Multi-modal and TDM
 Bike share systems can improve ridership or smooth out demand
 Help eliminate first/last mile commute issues
 Tie in to public health, air quality and GHG emissions issues
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Where do we go next?











Promoting the Business Plan
We
Are
Finalizing the Market Research
Here
HSR and Metrolinx support
Grants and funding secured
System and stations planned
Get Council Approval (Dec. 5th)
Secure land for stations
Tender a system contract
Tender an operating contract
Install the system
Promote and maintain the system
Bike sharing plans for the rest of us
ACT Canada • November 2012 • P. Topalovic • City of Hamilton
Thank-you
Peter Topalovic, M.Eng
Project Manager –
Transportation Demand Management
Program Manager –
Smart Commute Hamilton
Mobility Programs and Special Projects
Public Works Department (HSR)
City of Hamilton
Address: 77 James Street North, Suite
400, Hamilton ON, L8R-2K3
Tel: 905-546-2424 x. 5129
Twitter: @smartcommuteham
Web: smartcommutehamilton.ca