metrolinx is an agency of the government of ontario bike share program investigation best practices,...
TRANSCRIPT
Metrolinx is an agency of the Government of Ontario
Bike Share Program Investigation
Best Practices, GTHA Context Analysis and Legal Review
Outline
Context
Phase 1: Best Practices Investigation
Phase 2: GTHA Context Analysis
Next Steps
Discussion
Context
PARIS
NEWMARKETTORONTO
Phase 1: Best Practices Investigation
Evolution of bike share programs
Types of bike share programs
Operational models
Six case studies
Benefits and Risks
Best practices
Evolution of Bike Share Programs
1st generation
2nd generation
Evolution of Bike Share (cont.)
3rd generation
Benefits of Bike Share Programs
Potential Risks of Bike Share
Safety of cyclists
Vandalism and theft
Financial and reputational risks of implementing an unsuccessful program
Types of Bike Share Programs
1. “SmartBike” third generation bike share
2. “Call-a-Bike” third generation bike share
3. Community bike share/lending libraries
4. University campus bike share
5. Employer bicycle fleets/bike share
Operational Models1. “Public” Bike Share
2. “Private” Bike Share
Case Studies Examined
Vélib (Paris, France)
SmartBike DC (Washington, DC)
Accès Vélo (Montréal, QC)
U of T Bikechain (Toronto, ON)
Buffalo Blue Bicycle Program (Buffalo, NY)
Blue Urban Bike Program (Carrboro, NC)
Case Study: Vélib
Launched July 2007 with 12,250 bikes at 450 stations
A year later 1,450 stations and 20,600 bikes and 100,000 annual memberships
City with JC Decaux
$1,650 per bike and $28,000 per station
Cycling increased by 70% within three weeks
Case Study: SmartBike DC
North American “Smart Bike” program
August 2008 launch, 60 bikes, 7 stations
Clear Channel through bus shelter advertising contract with DOT
$40 annual membership
and free use
150 daily users
Case Study: Accès Vélo
Employer bike share program
Montréal TMAs
TMAs purchase fleet, designs the program, and promotes the program to employees
Owned and operated by the employer, promoted by TMA
2,100 rentals at 13 employers
Usage is mostly for personal purposes (82%)
Phase 2: GTHA Context Analysis
Environmental scan• Community profiles and travel patterns
Plans for bike share programs in CanadaStakeholders and potential partnersIntegration strategiesPotential funding sourcesRecommended implementation strategyKey factors for successful implementationIdentifying pilot marketsCritical path for implementation and future research
Environmental Scan
Nine candidate urban growth centres (UGCs)Urban Growth Centre
Population Density
(persons per km2)
Projected Density of
Short TripsA
(km of short trips per ha)
Upper Tier Municipality Represented
Smart Commute TMA coverage
Downtown Toronto 10,395 60 City of Toronto SC Toronto-CentralYonge-Eglinton Centre 8,761 40 - 60 City of Toronto N/AEtobicoke Centre 3,028 20 City of Toronto N/ANorth York Centre 6,006 20 City of Toronto SC Northeast
TorontoScarborough Centre 3,765 20 City of Toronto N/AMississauga City Centre 2,317 20 Peel Region SC Mississauga
Newmarket Centre 1,951 10 York Region SC Central YorkDowntown Brampton 1,627 20 Peel Region SC Brampton-
CaledonRichmond Hill/Langstaff Gateway
1,613 20 York Region SC 404-7
Markham Centre 1,231 20 York Region SC 404-7Midtown Oakville 1,195 20 Halton Region SC HaltonDowntown Oshawa 972 20 Durham Region SC DurhamDowntown Burlington 885 20 Halton Region SC HaltonVaughan Corporate Centre 873 10 York Region SC North Toronto-
VaughanDowntown Hamilton 452 20 - 40 City of Hamilton SC HamiltonDowntown Pickering 379 20 Durham Region SC DurhamDowntown Milton 147 20 - 40 Halton Region SC Halton
Environmental Scan (cont.)
Cycling Policies, Programs and Infrastructure and Partners
Integration Strategies
Transit, carpool lots, pedestrians
Land use: mobility hubs and UGCs
Workplace and school-based TDM programs
Legal Review and Risk Management
Five bike share models reviewed
Main risks outlined and risk management strategies provided
Implementation Strategies
Fee for use “public system”• Large urban centres – 200,000 +• Centred on higher-order transit stations• Focus on short trips• Phased roll out• Encourage cycling as daily form of travel• Potential for GTHA-wide coordination (e.g.
branding, technology, etc.)
Implementation Strategies (cont.)
Community-based public or private system• Attract potential cyclists and introduce them to
benefits of cycling • Convert limited number of trips to bike trips• Less tangible benefits of jump-starting a cycling
culture• Provide option for integration with transit,
carpooling and walking• Centred around a major institution • Longer lending periods• Free to use or nominal membership charge
Key Factors for Successful Implementation
Thorough planning to minimize operating costs and maximize revenues
Strong domestic target market
Some tourist volumes
Appropriate logistics and technology
Sustained funding
Risk management strategies
Plans for Bike Share Programs in Canada
Next Steps
Consultation with municipalities and key stakeholders
Phase 3: Newmarket pilot feasibility study (underway)
Phase 4: Newmarket pilot implementation plan (underway)
City of Toronto Bike Share Project
Employer-based bike share programs
What are your thoughts about the potential for bike sharing
in your communities?
