Phase 1 Bike Plan_r

Recommendations

Info

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
Sta on Density and Level of Service Table 9: Financial Models for Bike Share Programs Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ Target density: 8-16 sta ons per square half mile and is highly context dependent Target supply: 10-30 bikes per 1K residents/tourists in the program coverage area Target docking space to bike ra o: 2-2.5 docking spaces per bike in system Sta on Type and Design Manual vs. Automated: Systems can be either manual or automated. In a manual system, an a endant records the user's informa on and helps with checking bikes in and out (including payment). Automated systems allow users to check bikes in or out and make payments electronically, either at the terminal or kiosk or directly at the docking sta on. These types of systems o en use specialized key cards. Modular vs. Permanent: Modular sta ons are designed to be moved to allow maximal flexibility in network configura on. They are typically constructed on a base that is then bolted into the concrete or asphalt; many modular sta on designs include solar power. Permanent sta ons typically takes typically involve excava on and trenching to reach the power source. Capital Cost and Financing Sta ons (terminal + docking spaces) So ware Sta on Installa on Coordina on and Oversight Maintenance Opera ons (staffing) User Fees* Sponsorship Opportuni es Capital Cost Opera ng Costs Poten al Revenue Sources Bicycles (tubeless and chainless) Maintenance Depot/Control Center (annual update) Replacement/Maintenance Hardware Marke ng Insurance Adver sing Sales Private Investment Docking Styles Docking Spaces: Each space docks one bicycle. The number of spaces determines the size of the sta on's footprint, enabling sta on size to be adjusted to fit the available space. This style of dock takes up more space per bike than cycle parking areas but may be be er suited for an urban environment. Bicycles are checked out at either the terminal or at the actual docking space, depending on the sta on design. Cycle Parking Area: Bicycles are stored on racks in a secured area. Cycle parking areas are a good op on for larger sta ons (more than 50 bicycles) because cycle parking racks can hold more bikes per square meter than docking spaces. At sta ons with cycle parking areas, bicycles are checked in and out manually or through a turns le. Because these sta ons require a secure area that is fenced or walled off, they can be more intrusive in the urban landscape. So ware and Payment Mechanisms Most systems use card technology (smart cards, magne c cards, or credit cards) to check bikes in and out. Key considera ons include: Ÿ Ÿ Ÿ How customers register and pay for the system How bikes are check in and out from docking spaces How informa on is transmi ed both internally for management and externally for customers *User Fees - Depends on business model and rela ve importance of defraying system costs Op on Range ($) Hourly $2 - $8 (first 15 min. free) Individual Daily Membership $3 - $30 Individual Weekly Membership $9 - $30 Individual Monthly Membership $20 - $40 Individual Annual Membership $13 - $95 Corporate Annual Membership $35 - $50 /employee** **Corporate Annual Memberships can include unlimited free trips up to 30 minutes Sponsorship Opportuni es Indirect Savings Ÿ Whole system capital cost underwri ng Ÿ Reduced shu le opera on/costs by area hotel Ÿ Whole system opera ons underwri ng Ÿ Increased pedestrian traffic to area Ÿ Individual sta on capital cost underwri ng restaurants and retail Ÿ Individual bicycle capital cost underwri ng Ÿ Increased transit ridership Ÿ In-kind marke ng support Ÿ Effec ve expansion of CBD/tourist district Adver sing Sales Ÿ Ÿ Individual sta on Individual bicycle SPECIAL TOPICS NARRATIVE 85
Page 1:
STRATEGIC PLAN FOR ACTIVE MOBILITY
Page 4 and 5:
Bike racks at Bayfront Park, SEA Di
Page 6 and 7:
PLAN INTENT AND OVERVIEW The MPO's
Page 8:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Decision makers in
Page 11 and 12:
Network Development Community Hotsp
Page 13 and 14:
On the basis of vehicular traffic v
Page 15 and 16:
Every RTA transit bus provides bike
Page 17 and 18:
A1 A2 K E Y MAP K2 B2 L1 L2 B1 C1 C
Page 19 and 20:
A1 A2 INFRASTRUCTURE A2 Both Off Ro
Page 21 and 22:
B1 B2 INFRASTRUCTURE B1 Both Off Ro
Page 23 and 24:
B1 C2 INFRASTRUCTURE C2 C3 Low Cost
Page 25 and 26:
C1 C2 D1 INFRASTRUCTURE D1 D2 Low C
Page 27 and 28:
C2 C3 D3 INFRASTRUCTURE D2 D3 Low C
Page 29 and 30:
D2 D3 E2 INFRASTRUCTURE E1 E2 Low C
Page 31 and 32:
E1 E2 F2 INFRASTRUCTURE Low Cost/Ra
Page 33 and 34:
F1 F2 G1 INFRASTRUCTURE G1 G2 Low C
Page 35 and 36:
F2 F3 G3 INFRASTRUCTURE Low Cost/Ra
Page 37 and 38: G1 G2 H1 INFRASTRUCTURE H1 H2 Low C
Page 39 and 40: G2 G3 G4 H3 INFRASTRUCTURE Low Cost
Page 41 and 42: H1 H2 H3 1 INFRASTRUCTURE Low Cost/
Page 43 and 44: H3 H4 3 INFRASTRUCTURE Low Cost/Rap
Page 45 and 46: 2 3 J1 INFRASTRUCTURE Low Cost/Rapi
Page 47 and 48: J2 K1 INFRASTRUCTURE Low Cost/Rapid
Page 49 and 50: K2 L1 INFRASTRUCTURE L1 L2 Low Cost
Page 51 and 52: SUPPLEMENTAL SPECIALIZED TREATMENTS
Page 53 and 54: INFRASTRUCTURE ILLISTRATIONS 1. Bic
Page 55 and 56: BUFFERED BIKE LANE Descrip on: Buff
Page 57 and 58: OFF-ROAD MULTI-USE TRAIL Descrip on
Page 59 and 60: ONE-WAY CYCLE TRACK, BOTH SIDES Des
Page 61 and 62: ONE-WAY CYCLE TRACK, BOTH SIDES 1
Page 63 and 64: SPECIALIZED TREATMENTS: HIGHWAY BIC
Page 65 and 66: SPECIALIZED TREATMENTS: RECAPTURE P
Page 67 and 68: SPECIALIZED TREATMENTS: BICYCLE ROU
Page 69 and 70: SPECIALIZED TREATMENTS: BICYCLE ROU
Page 71 and 72: IMPLEMENTATION MATRIX **Cost of Imp
Page 73 and 74: **Cost of Implementa on: Low - Pote
Page 75 and 76: **Cost of Implementa on: Low - Pote
Page 77 and 78: CASE STUDIES 1. Bikeshare 2. Accomm
Page 79 and 80: Accommoda ng Bikes on Transit Houst
Page 81 and 82: Safe Routes to School (SRTS) Rosa G
Page 83 and 84: Safe Routes To School Coali on/Task
Page 85 and 86: Safe Passage Enforcement Un l 2014,
Page 87: SPECIAL TOPICS NARRATIVE 1. Bike Sh
Page 91 and 92: 2 3 Walking School Buses and Bicycl
Page 93 and 94: Helmet Laws Most states require the
Page 95 and 96: 11 Performance Measures Periodic pr
Page 97 and 98: APPENDICES Appendix A: Stakeholder
Page 99 and 100: Appendix C: ANSWER IT! Online Surve
Page 101 and 102: Appendix C: ANSWER IT! Online Surve
Page 103 and 104: Appendix D: Presenta on Loca ons Da
Page 105 and 106: Appendix G: Interview Protocol What
Page 107 and 108: Appendix I: Sample Resolu on (con
Page 109 and 110: Appendix J: Drive Kind Ride Kind Pr
Page 111 and 112: Appendix K: Model Bicycle Parking O
Page 113 and 114: Appendix K: Model Bicycle Parking O
Page 115 and 116: SR-1 K E Y MAP SR-2 SR-3 SR-4 SR-5
Page 117 and 118: SR-1 SR-2 Appendix L: Priority Spor
Page 125 and 126: SR-11 SR-9 SR-8 SR-10 SR-12 SR-10 A
Page 127 and 128: SR-11 SR-9 SR-10 SR-12 SR-13 SR-12
Page 129 and 130: SR-11 SR-12 SR-14 Appendix L: Prior
Page 131: SR-16 SR-15 Appendix L: Priority Sp
show all

Phase 1 Bike Plan_r

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?