Planning successful bike share schemes www.transport-initiatives.com Planning successful bike share schemes Provide an overview of the project. This is the second of three meeting arranged with councillor meetings. It’s aims and objectives, the current situation, initial design concepts, future plans and get your input into how best to engage both you as councillors and the local community.

Planning at scheme leve on city schemes NB Other schemes (eg Brompton Hire) with different approach – more limited number of fixed locations Successful city schemes need planning for wide range of issues Evidence from failed schemes What is success – usage, profitability? Success for whom? Public (led by public body eg council, university) Private (operator led) Mixed

Public interest success? Usage levels Part of broader transport strategy Catalyst for mainstreaming cycling Complements public transport especially rail Facilitates denser residential development Encourages active tourism Target markets Commuting: Home <-> work <-> interchange (incl. education) Business/work: meetings, site visits etc. Access to services: shops, restaurants/pubs, health Leisure: purely recreational trips (including within parks)

Private sector success? Usage levels Low capital cost (or funded externally) Low revenue/management cost High income Low risk

Key factors to consider External (to scheme, not city) ‘Bikeability’ of city / area (NB cycle friendliness, NOT training) User safety (actual & perceived) Socio-demographics Integration with public transport Internal Financial viability (capital & running costs) Operation (ownership, management, fees, redistribution, repairs) User accessibility (ease of joining & hiring, information) Design of equipment (cycle/docking hubs) Location of hubs / impact on public realm Integration with public transport – technical and practical Branding, marketing & communication

External factors Desk-top review to scope possible scheme Analysis of bike share possible markets Initial scheme extents Develop outline business case & bid for funding (if public scheme) Further detailed assessment to identify likely key areas Using range of data (e.g. 2011 census, key destinations, MOSAIC, PCT)

Analysis of possible locations Location categories Interchange Leisure/tourism Education Retail Community/Health Business/employment

Analysis of cycle hire locations Areas with low potential might be due to: Distance from city centre Effects of major roads and junctions Low existing cycle levels Low propensity to cycle Few large attractors

Planning vs reality - Brighton

Planning vs reality - Brighton

Planning vs reality - Brighton

Planning vs reality - Manchester

Conclusions Planning important at both scheme-wide & local levels Lots of types of data available – so use them Overall good linkage between planning & reality Future Links with LCWIP process? Return to docks? (dockless schemes with preferred areas) Cost to councils of private schemes Shots in the dark rarely succeed!