Phase 1 Bike Plan_r

SPECIAL TOPICS NARRATIVES
1
Bike Share Programs
A Bike Share is a non-motorized transporta on service, typically structured to provide users point-topoint
transporta on for short distance trips (usually around ½ to 3 miles), that allows users to pick up a
bicycle at any self-serve bike sta on in the network and return it to another bike sta on near their
des na on. Since 2010, bike share systems have been introduced in over 30 ci es in the US and have
supported over 36 million bike share trips.
As bike share grows more common, it is increasingly becoming a key urban amenity for global ci es. Bike
share programs extend the reach of exis ng transit, make one-way bike trips possible, and eliminate
some barriers to riding such as bike ownership, storage, maintenance and concerns about the . Bike
share can provide new mobility op ons for people of all income levels and can play a key role in
improving public health by facilita ng an ac ve lifestyle.
Bike share has evolved significantly since its incep on in 1965, when Amsterdam city council member
Luud Schimmelpennink proposed the world's first public bike share system as a way to reduce
automobile traffic in the city center. He proposed that 20,000 bicycles be painted white and distributed
for pick-up and drop-off anywhere in the city center, free of charge. When the city council rejected the
proposal, Schimmelpennink's supporters distributed fi y donated white bikes for free use around the
town.
The next a empt at a bike-share system occurred in La Rochelle, France in 1993, which offered a free,
but more regulated, program that allowed the public to check out bicycles for two hours. Cambridge,
England, implemented a similar system in the same year. This type of free bicycle rental system, also
known as a “bicycle library,” reduced problems with the and vandalism since users were required to
show iden fica on and leave a deposit in order to use the bicycle. However, these bicycle libraries also
required the user to return the bike to the same place from which it had been checked out, limi ng the
usefulness of the system as a point-to-point transit op on.
In order for a bike share system to be efficient and well u lized, it must be properly planned and
designed. The density of bike share sta on and nearby des na ons is a key considera on in planning
bike share programs, which is why central business districts are o en well suited for implemen ng such
programs, par cularly in the pilot phase.
Defini ons
Ÿ
Ÿ
Ÿ
Ÿ
Bike Share Sta on: structure that holds the automated customer terminal/kiosk and docks
that dispense bikes.
Dock: mechanism that retains bikes in an upright and locked posi on.
Terminal: self-serve kiosks, like those found at transit loca ons, where users can get
informa on and make payments to check out bicycles.
Rebalancing/Redistribu on: process by which bicycles are redistributed throughout the
service area to ensure that each bike share sta on has an appropriate ra o of available docks
and bikes to ensure op mum service; typically 50% bikes to 50% open docks.
Ÿ
Sta on-less bike share: emerging technology that u lizes an electronic locking system based on
GPS and wireless communica ons (cell phone). Security and checkout infrastructure is located
on each bike to transmit usage and loca on data and monitor maintenance and unauthorized
use.
Business Models
Publicly Owned and Operated: The jurisdic on pays the up-front capital cost, and owns the
infrastructure and equipment (i.e. bicycles and bike sta ons). The jurisdic on may work with a private
contractor which handles membership management, customer service, marke ng, bicycle
redistribu on, data management, and maintenance of sta ons and bicycles. Under such an
arrangement, the government accepts financial responsibility for the program, while the private
contractor accepts liability exposure.
Nonprofit: A nonprofit organiza on manages opera ons and service. The nonprofit may be explicitly
created for the opera on of the bike share program, or bike sharing service may be added to the
purview of an exis ng organiza on. Local jurisdic ons typically par cipate in one of two ways in this
model: 1) the nonprofit organiza on receives startup funding and some funding for opera ons from
local and state governments; and/or 2) the local jurisdic on acts as a fiscal agent to request federal
funding and passes funds to the nonprofit. This model removes most of the financial liability from the
jurisdic on and places it on the nonprofit organiza on, which is responsible for both fundraising and
managing opera onal revenues and expenditures.
Private/for Profit: A private company provides, owns and operates the service; government
involvement may be limited to certain aspects of planning for the sta ons, such as the issuing of
necessary public space permits. To cover permi ng costs for the use of public space, the private bike
share company may be required to provide a percentage of profits (typically around 10-25%). To
generate addi onal profits, the bike sharing company may sell adver sing space on its bicycles and/or
sta ons. It is important to note that several successful European bike share models, including Paris and
Barcelona, use this approach.
System Planning and Design
Sta on Loca on (see-a ached map of proposed sta on loca ons)
Ÿ
Ÿ
Sta on spacing is key
Where feasible, sta ons should be located:
Ÿ
Ÿ
Ÿ
Ÿ
Ÿ
Where increased popula on and job densi es posi vely impact ridership
Proximal to transit stops or hubs to facilitate connec vity
Along exis ng network of bike infrastructure or on streets that are accommoda ng to
bicycles in scale and ac vity
In loca ons that are clearly visible from mul ple approaches and maximize pedestrian
circula on and accessibility
Between mul ple des na ons that generate ac vity at different me of day
84 SPECIAL TOPICS NARRATIVE