bike-sharing – a global urban transportation solution

“There are two types of mayors: those who have bike-sharing….

……and those who want bike-sharing”

- Gilles Vesco, Vice President of Greater Lyon.

bike-sharing (\ˈbīk-ˌsher-iŋ\) –

1: short-term bicycle rental available at a network of unattended locations;

2: bicycle transit

Bike-sharing – A global urban transportation solution

Sam Goater Transportation Geography

ContentsAbstract...................................................................................................................................................3

Introduction.............................................................................................................................................3

A history of Bike-Sharing.........................................................................................................................4

1st Generation - Painted Bikes..............................................................................................................4

2nd Generation - Municipal Deposit Systems.......................................................................................4

3rd Generation - IT-Based systems.......................................................................................................5

Technology + Investment = Today’s 4th Generation Bike-share...................................................................5

Investment from Advertizing Companies................................................................................................6

JCDecaux..............................................................................................................................................6

Clear Channel......................................................................................................................................6

Transport Agency Owned........................................................................................................................7

Bixi Systems.........................................................................................................................................7

BCycle..................................................................................................................................................7

Cost to the user...........................................................................................................................................8

Issues...........................................................................................................................................................8

Gravity.....................................................................................................................................................8

Helmets...................................................................................................................................................8

Future of Bike-share................................................................................................................................9

Simplifying the installation process.....................................................................................................9

Electric Pedal Assistance......................................................................................................................9

Bike Share in less dense areas.................................................................................................................9

Bibliography...............................................................................................................................................10

Appendix...................................................................................................................................................12

2


AbstractAs concerns grow about the economic effects of volatile energy prices, pollution, congestion, and healthcare costs, an increasing number of international, national, and local governments are actively encouraging more bike use. As part of these efforts, more than 230 towns and cities have implemented ‘bike-share’ schemes, ranging from small college campus systems, to integral components of some of the world’s largest transit systems.

Bike-sharing has introduced millions of non-cyclists to the freedom and simplicity of urban utility cycling by removing barriers to entry such as the cost of purchasing a bike, concerns about theft, and bike storage, by making it cheap, accessible, and convenient.

This paper will document the rise of bike-share from its modest beginnings to its crucial role in global cities today, and look forward to see the role it can play in less urban areas.

Introduction

What is a Bike-share program?‘Bike-share’ programs are systems that provide access to bicycles in metropolitan areas. They consist of a fleet of sturdy, utilitarian bikes that, for a nominal fee, can be borrowed from, and then returned to, ‘docking stations’, located at various locations in the area.

What are the benefits of a bike-share program?Bike-share is usually implemented with the aim of increasing bike mode share, and helping to achieve municipal goals such as; reducing congestion, travel time, pollution, and offering more opportunities for physical activity.

The data suggests that bike-share systems effectively help to achieve all these goals. In Paris for example, despite investing heavily in bike infrastructure between 2001 and 2007, bike mode share had remained around 1.5%. In 2007, Vélib, the Paris bike-share system was launched. The system was instantly popular, and in the first 12 weeks, the bikes logged 7.5 million miles (Sharp, 2007). By the end of its first year, the system had registered 3 million members, had an average daily ridership around 120,000 trips (Erlanger, 2008) and had logged 25 million trips (10% of which replaced car trips) (Press, 2008). By 2008, bike mode share had increased to 2.54%.

This increase in biking in 2007 coincided with a 6% increase in transit ridership, a 2% decline in motor vehicle traffic, which had a 2% increase in average automobile travel speed. (Paris, 2008)

3

Docking Station

Velib in action


Other systems have recorded similar results. For example, before Velo’v, an estimated 1.5% of trips in Lyon were made by bike. By 2008, the number of bike trips had jumped 400 to 500% (about 2.5% of all trips) (DeMaio P. , Does Bikesharing Have a Future?, 2010).

Cycle mode share in Barcelona increased from 0.75% in 2005, to 1.76% in 2007 (the year Bicing was introduced) (Romero, 2008)

A history of Bike-Sharing

1st Generation - Painted Bikes The first generation of bike-sharing systems were fleets of old, donated bikes that were painted a distinctive color by citizen activist groups, and dispersed around college campuses or cities for anyone to use for free.

The Witte Fietsen (White Bike) system was set up in Amsterdam in 1964. Within days, all the bikes had been thrown in canals, stolen, or confiscated by police. The Green Bike Scheme launched in Cambridge, England, in 1993, the BiCyBa White Bikes in Bratislava, Slovakia, the Yellow Bike Project in Portland, OR, and the Orange Bike Project in Tucson, AZ, came to similar ends.

The first successful system Vélos Jaunes (Yellow Bikes) was launched in La Rochelle, France. Initially bikes were placed around the city at unsecured locations for free public use. An updated, version of the program continues today.

2nd Generation - Municipal Deposit SystemsIn 2005, Copenhagen launched the first large scale municipal system, when their City Bikes system became operational. To deter theft, these were the first bikes to be specially made of parts that are incompatible with regular bikes, such as solid rubber tires, and heavy disc wheels. The bikes are released anonymously by a coin deposit (more usually seen on European supermarket trolleys) and theft remains a serious problem. The system is still active, but relies on police to strictly enforce fines on anyone seen riding outside the city center.

Originally the plan was to fund the operation through advertizing in the bikes, but the cost of replacing the bikes, and police enforcement, means that today it is heavily subsidized by the municipality.

3rd Generation - IT-Based systems

Smart-cardsThe first system to employ technology to protect against theft and vandalism was launched by the University of Portsmouth, England, also in 1995. Bikes were stored at secure locations, and members swiped a ‘smart card’ to unlock the bike. This reduced the anonymity associated with the coin operated Danish model, and theft was not a major issue. Vandalism was also reduced by the placement of security

4

Copenhagen City Bike


cameras at docking stations. Users were now accountable, and hefty fines were levied for any missing or damaged bikes.

Although the Portsmouth system ultimately failed, (in part due to the limited numbers of bikes and docking stations), important steps had been taken to make bike-sharing feasible.

Slow Growth 1995-2005Growth happened slowly over the next decade, with one or 2 small systems opening annually, such as Rennes’ ‘Vélo à la Carte’ (1998) and Germany’s docking station-less ‘Call a Bike’.

German Rail SolutionThe German ‘Call a Bike’ system is unique in that it does not require docking stations. Seen as extension of the rail service, and owned and operated by the German Rail operator, Deutsche Bahn(DB), bikes can be picked up or dropped off anywhere, and are released through cell phone activation codes. Initially the system was unreliable because it was hard to track down the bikes, but bikes are now equipped with GPS transmitters, and can be located through mobile devices.

Technology + Investment = Today’s 4th Generation Bike-shareImplementing a bike-share can be expensive. A recent feasibility study by New City Department of City Planning estimates the costs to be between $3,000 and $4,000 per bike. (NYCDCP, 2009), and to be effective, it is thought the system should have one bike for every 200-300 people in the city. (Press, 2008).

Today’s 4th generation of bike-share was made possible by investment from private business, but this investment would be wasted if theft and vandalism caused the failure of the system. The development of GPS tracking devices was a major breakthrough that increased the value of this investment.

Investment from Advertizing Companies

JCDecaux Velo’v was launched in Lyon in 2005. The Velo’v system was financed largely by advertising giant JCDecaux, in exchange for exclusive rights to advertise on the cities bus shelters.

The computerized, 4th generation system not only tracks bike locations, but also monitors operational condition of the bike – such as the condition of the brakes and lighting system, and in this way is able to effectively request repairs.

Similar to Velo’v, Vélib (a contraction of Vélo for Bike and Liberté) was also financed by JCDecaux, which paid $140 million to set up the system, and an additional $5.5m annually for maintenance, in exchange for advertizing space on the city’s transit shelters. (Baume & Erlanger, 2009).

5

DB bike. Photo by Ralf Roletschek 1


The Paris system is currently the 2nd largest bike share project in the world (behind Hangzhou, China) with 20,600 bicycles and 1,450 docking stations spaced no more than 300m apart.

Velib Docking Station Locations

JCDecaux also sponsors the world’s most popular bike-share (in terms of memberships per capita). DublinBikes has only 450 bikes and 40 docking stations, but has over 40,000 paid annual subscribers (Portland Department of Transportation, 2010). The system will expand to 5,000 bikes and 300 docking stations by 2015. (DublinBikes, 2010)

Clear Channel Clear Channel, another advertizing company, also has a bike-share subsidiary, SmartBike, which currently operates 11 bike-share systems, worldwide. Clear Channel subsidizes the systems, and rents advertizing space on the bikes, as well as on billboards.

SmartBike operated the original Washington D.C. system, and continues to run systems in Mexico City, Milan, Barcelona (Bicing) and multiple locations in France and Norway.

Transport Agency OwnedMany bike-share companies now offer turnkey bike-share systems that local governments can have installed. There is also an option of sponsorship to help finance the system. The London scheme is sponsored by Barclays Bank, who paid £25m (18% of the total cost) for the official naming rights to the

6

London Mayor Boris Johnson and Former California Governor, Arnold Schwarzenegger take a ride on ‘Boris Bikes’


scheme, ‘Barclays Cycle Hire’ (Coward, 2010), although the bikes are colloquially known as ‘Boris Bikes’ after London Mayor Boris Jonson, who launched the system.

Bixi SystemsThe first large scale bike share in North America, Bixi, (half bike, half taxi) was launched in Montreal in May 2009. Since then, the company has provided the bikes, docking stations and operational assistance for fleets in London, Melbourne, Washington D.C. and Minneapolis. Bixi systems will be operational by 2012 in Toronto, Ottawa, and Boston.

BCycleBCycle systems are an affordable option for pilot projects. So far, BCycle locations have been installed in 10 US locations, including Chicago, San Antonio, Denver, and Hawaii, although these systems are small in comparison to Bixi and advertising company systems – the Chicago system currently has only 6 locations.

Cost to the userAfter buying a membership – either for a day, a week or a year, the bikes are generally free to use for the first half hour, after which, the price increases exponentially.

As one might expect, systems that are paid for by private companies in exchange for advertizing rights are cheaper to use than the government run operations. For example, annual membership for Bixi systems ranges from to $50 (Melbourne) to $95 (Toronto), while sponsored system membership such as Lyon’s Vélo'v is currently $20, and Vélib cost $40. When compared to annual transit passes these costs seem insignificant. (See table below). Some transit agencies, such as Lyon, offer extra free bike rental time, and lower rates to transit pass holders to encourage bike-transit transportation.

City Annual Bike-share Subscription (USD)

Annual transit pass (USD)

Paris (JCDecaux) $40 Up to $1,500 (depending on zones covered)Lyon (JCDecaux) $20 $804 (12 months @ $67)

D.C. (Bixi) $75 $712 (365 days @ $1.95London (Bixi) $71 $3,300 (Annual Oyster Card)

Denver (BCycle) $65 $2,112 (for 12 months of regional service @$176)

7


Issues

GravityBy design, bike-share bikes are heavy, and a common phenomenon in bike-shares is that the bikes tend to accumulate at lower elevations (Parast, 2010). This can mean some docking stations at higher elevations may often be empty, and parking slots may be limited at lower elevations. To relieve this problem, fleets must be managed so that there are bikes and empty docks at all elevations. This is achieved through re-assigning bikes using trucks – (although the author thinks incentivizing uphill pedaling with free transit passes may be a more efficient solution).

HelmetsSince Mexico City repealed its helmet law in 2010, the Melbourne Bike Share system is the only one operating in a country that mandates helmet use for all cyclists. Similar in size to the Dublin system (Melbourne has 400 bikes, Dublin 450), and operated by Bixi, which has huge ridership at all its other locations, the Melbourne project has seen very light average daily ridership – as little as 136 riders per day, (Lucas, 2010) compared to Dublin’s 4,000. (DublinBikes, 2010)

To encourage use, the city installed helmet vending machines at some docking stations, and is subsidizing the purchase of helmets at stores close to docking stations. However, ridership is still under 200 trips per day (Lucas, 2010), and the system, which costs taxpayers $5.5m annually is seen as wasteful.

Future of Bike-shareAs with all new technologies, the cost associated with bike-share will decrease with time, and we can expect to see systems being built and expanded at a rapid rate. Recent developments include solar powered docking stations, and electric pedal assist bikes.

Simplifying the installation processEarly 3rd generation bike-share systems, although much less disruptive than other transit modes, did require costly construction to install electric wires. New docking stations are now self-contained technical platforms that utilize wireless technology. They can be bolted straight into the ground, and are powered by solar with a battery backup. This also builds flexibility into the system, because these new stations are simple to install, replace, or move if needed.

8

Bixi re-locating truck

Bike Helmet vending machine, Melbourne


Electric Pedal AssistanceBicincitta has recently included ‘pedalec’ (pedal electric) bikes in its fleets in Genoa and Monaco. This feature further reduces barriers to entry, and allows those who consider riding too difficult or are physically unable a way to experience the system. (DeMaio P. , Bike Sharing: History, Impact, Models of Provision, and Future, 2009)

Bike Share in less dense areasTransit systems are most effective and efficient when they serve densely populated areas. As the service areas become more fragmented, maintaining accessibility becomes more difficult and expensive.

Cities that were built before the automobile age were built to provide walkable access to traditional transit systems such as subways, streetcars and light rail to a large percentage of their population, and most continue to do so. However, the development of the last 50 years has resulted in the creation of many auto dependent urban areas in which completing ones daily tasks is possible only through the use of an automobile. These areas would be financially and spatially impossible to retrofit to be foot and transit accessible by providing service within a walkable distance of people’s homes. Bike-share is a tool that can be utilized by urban planners and transportation engineers to extend the service range of transit systems to serve a large percentage of less dense areas within budget, construction, and traffic disruption constraints.

Conclusion - The ‘Last Mile’ becomes the ‘Last 4 miles’Planners often site ‘the last mile’ as the biggest obstacle to providing transit service. This is the distance people are assumed to be willing to walk to a transit access point, given the proper pedestrian facilities, and has resulted in many transit nodes being surrounded by hectares of surface parking lots.

Walking and low-intensity cycling both require 75Watts of human energy. For most people, walking one mile takes less than half an hour (given a pleasant, safe, continuous pedestrian network), and uses about 100kJ of energy. The same amount of time and energy is required to propel oneself 4 miles on a bike. (Juden, 2003).

As energy prices increase and urban areas continue to gain population; the urban areas that are most successful in creating and sustaining equitable, livable, economically viable places will have a common trait: a multimodal transit system that effectively serves areas out of comfortable walking distance from conventional transit stops.

Bike-share systems can meet this municipal need by providing a form of personal mass transportation that can be seamlessly integrated into existing and future conventional urban transit systems. Unlike the construction of other modes, bike-share can be implemented with minimal construction, funding, infrastructure and real estate issues, and can provide a service to the user for a negligible cost. This means that, with a little technological tweaking, the200 year old bicycle is going to become a cornerstone of urban transportation well into the future.

Bibliography

9


Baume, M. d., & Erlanger, S. (2009, 10 31). New York Times. Retrieved 4 24, 2011, from http://www.nytimes.com/2009/10/31/world/europe/31bikes.html

Coward, L. (2010, October 10). Boris, Barclays and the Big Blue Branding. Retrieved April 25, 2011, from CorpComms.com: http://www.corpcommsmagazine.co.uk/features/1114-boris-barclays-and-the-big-blue-branding

DeMaio. (Nov 2008). The Bike-sharing Phenomenon - The History of Bike-sharing. Carbusters magazine #36 .

DeMaio, P. (2009). Bike Sharing: History, Impact, Models of Provision, and Future. Journal of Public Transportation Vol. 12 , 52.

DeMaio, P. (2010, May 19). Does Bikesharing Have a Future? Retrieved April 24, 2011, from ShareableCities: http://shareable.net/blog/does-bikesharing-have-a-future

DublinBikes. (2010, August 18). dublinbikes to be extended. Retrieved from DublinBikes: http://www.dublinbikes.ie/Magazine/News/dublinbikes-to-be-extended

Erlanger, S. (2008, July 13). A New Fashion Catches On in Paris: Cheap Bicycle Rentals. Retrieved April 24, 2011, from New York Times: http://www.nytimes.com/2008/07/13/world/europe/13paris.html

Juden, C. (2003, February). Why Cyclists won't stop. Retrieved 4 24, 2011, from Cambridge Cycling Campaign: http://www.camcycle.org.uk/newsletters/46/article9.html

Lucas, C. (2010, November 29). Helmet law hurting shared bike scheme. Retrieved from The Age: http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/helmet-law-hurting-shared-bike-scheme-20101128-18cf2.html

NYCDCP. (2009). Bike-Share Opportunities in New York City, 2009 . Retrieved from nyc.gov: http://www.nyc.gov/html/dcp/html/transportation/td_bike_share.shtml

Parast, A. (2010, April 19). Seattle Bike-Share, A Few Comments. Retrieved from Seattle Transit Blog: http://seattletransitblog.com/2010/04/19/seattle-bike-share-a-few-comments/

Paris, C. o. (2008). Les déplacements à vélo. Retrieved from http://www.paris.fr: http://www.paris.fr/politiques/Portal.lut?page_id=7627&document_type_id=4&document_id=26324&portlet_id=17647&multileveldocument_sheet_id=15780

Portland Department of Transportation. (2010). Bicycle Sharing. Retrieved from portlandonline.com: http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=50814

Press, E. (2008, July 15). Velib. Retrieved from streetfilms.org: http://www.streetfilms.org/velib%E2%80%99/

Romero. (2008). Retrieved from http://spicycles.velo.info/Portals/0/FinalReports/Barcelona_Final_Report.ppt/

10


Schwartz, J. D. (2010, October 5). DC’s CaBi Out-Styles World of Bike Sharing. Retrieved from The Urban Country: http://www.theurbancountry.com/2010/10/dcs-cabi-out-styles-world-of-bike.html

Sharp, R. (2007, October 6). Velib Ridership Exceeds 7.5 Million in First 12 Weeks. Retrieved 4 11, 2011, from TransitMiami : http://www.transitmiami.com/miami/velib-ridership-exceeds-75-million-in-first-12-weeks

The Bike-sharing Phenomenon - The History of Bike-sharing", P. D. (n.d.).

11


Appendix

Bike Mode Share in Paris

12

bike-sharing – a global urban transportation solution

Documents

municipal

bike mode

dense areas

urban areas

docking stations

sam goater

based systems

share program