DENVER | Transportation Thread

[dmintz]

Originally Posted by Octavian

In other transportation news, B-Cycle is adding 25 stations and 250 bikes in Highlands, City Park, Capitol Hill and Washington Park by next year.

any specifics about this? i keep hearing about potential expansion, but it always seems to be pushed to "next year". I would love to see developers step up and sponsor a station (the bowling alley in baker comes to mind especially).

[dmintz]

Originally Posted by Fritzdude

I guess I didn't realize how expensive it is to rent these bikes. I rode my own bike on Labor Day and rented a bike for my gf so that we could tool around town for 4 hours. I was then billed $29 for that experience.

Yeah - last time I do that.

this has been discussed ad nauseum. it is a bike share not a bike rental. short 30 minute trips (easy when staying within downtown) and the whole day costs you $5.

[bunt_q]

Don't you know, the customer is never wrong.

I do not understand why a business model as flexible as bike-sharing would want to keep its customers slavishly tied to a 30-minute radius around its (still somewhat sparse) stations. No thanks. The hallmark of successful alternative transportation - and the number one criticism of transit by "fair" would-be commuters - is flexibility, and b-cycle still fails in my book. I do not want my day's lunch to depend on my ability to hustle to the next station - which I may not even know exactly where it is - in time. Great for commuters, useless for the rest.

[Cirrus]

Funny that you think it's great for commuters and useless for the rest. The last time we talked about it here it was the other way around. Everyone said it was great for tourists and useless for residents.

I'm curious: Do you think the 16th Street shuttle is useless? Bikesharing is basically a cheap transit shuttle for the central city. Its utility is directly analogous to the 16th Street shuttle, except it goes all over downtown rather than just on one stret.

Keeping with the shuttle analogy, let's pretend that you are going to the state capitol for a day of meetings. You start your trip at Union Station, hop onto the shuttle, and ride to Civic Center, where you get off. Once you're off, the shuttle turns around and goes back to Union Station. It has to go back, because there are more riders coming and going all the time. The shuttle does NOT park at Civic Center and wait for you to get out of your meetings. The shuttle works because lots of other people are able to use it while you're busy in your meeting. If you demanded that shuttle wait for you all day rather than go about its route, you would destroy the utility of the shuttle for everyone else in the city.

Bikesharing works the same way. 30 minutes is more than enough to make a one-way trip anywhere downtown or in the immediate core neighborhoods, without hustling, even for a beginner,. That means that if you are using the system correctly you should almost never have to worry about being charged extra. The DU stations might be too far away from the LoDo stations to make that trip, but very few people are going to be doing that. You only have to worry about going over the 30 minute free period (it's not a limit) if you want to use the system in a way that hurts operations - if you want to use it as something other than a shuttle.

And holding onto a bike for long periods of time does hurt operations. The whole system is built around the idea that more than one person uses each bike each day. High turnover is the only way the system works without needing massive subsidies.

Bikesharing cannot succeed operationally or financially if it is used as long term bike rental, just as transit cannot succeed if customers demanded that buses be used as personal vehicles.

By the way, it's silly to say that the customer is never wrong. Customers who want buses to park and wait for them are wrong. Customers who want to drive on the sidewalk to get around congestion are wrong. Customers who want to use bikesharing like bike rental are also wrong, but at least bikesharing offers them the flexibility to be wrong to their heart's content in exchange for a modest additional fee.

[Cirrus]

PS: I'm a very slow, leisurely bike rider. I do not push to go fast, ever. I've been using bikesharing regularly since 2008. The one and only time I have ever gone over the 30 minute free period was the time I happened to run into a friend, and stopped to talk to them for 20 minutes before finishing my trip.

[bunt_q]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Funny that you think it's great for commuters and useless for the rest. The last time we talked about it here it was the other way around. Everyone said it was great for tourists and useless for residents.

I've always said the opposite... the only time we want to use it is for a weekend around town - essentially acting like tourists - and have never found it viable.

Originally Posted by Cirrus

By the way, it's silly to say that the customer is never wrong. Customers who want buses to park and wait for them are wrong.

That was a joke. Apparently not a very good one!

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Bikesharing works the same way. 30 minutes is more than enough to make a one-way trip anywhere downtown or in the immediate core neighborhoods, without hustling, even for a beginner,. That means that if you are using the system correctly you should almost never have to worry about being charged extra.

I understand the formula, I just think it's a bad one, especially in the early stages. The 16th street shuttle works because it's very simple - everyone knows where it starts and ends (and even then, it still confuses boatloads of people). I believe the new "downtown circulator" will fail as a "shuttle" for exactly the same reason - it's not going to be easy-to-understand, and will only work for a smaller segment of potential riders who are knowledgeable about the system. Basically, the segment that's already comfortable with a city bus. But a bus route is not the same thing, conceptually, as a shuttle, even if they do basically the same thing.

There's a major informational gap if b-cycle is supposed to function as 2,550 (51x50, right?) possible shuttle routes. You have to know where you are relative to a station, and where your destination is relative to the next station. It's sounds basic, but that's a pretty big hurdle.

Granted, all of this can (and eventually will be) overcome. Heck, RTD could do a whole WHOLE lot better making the bus system more legible. That's how you pick up more casual riders. The 16th Street mall shuttle is a great example, because it's the only non-rail example we have in Denver of alternative transport capturing casual riders (the HOP and SKIP are the two - the only two, I think - others in the area that maybe meet that threshold). When we talk about a few branded routes in the center city connecting major destinations (Cherry Creek, Highland, etc etc), that's really what we're taalking about. Making the leap from bus to shuttle, conceptually.

I guess I don't know enough about the business side of bike sharing to speak intelligently. My instinct was, though, that bikes are relatively cheap. Cheap enough, at least, that I assumed allowing a little more flexibility early on would be net- beneficial to the system. Having a bike wait for me isn't exactly comparable, on a system cost basis, to having a bus wait for me. Same idea, exactly the same idea, actually, you're right...and we'd all want the bus to wait if that was an option (we call that PRT, or a CAR ). But bus ridership would be much higher. And bike usage would be higher too.

If the conceptual model for bike sharing is a bus, that seems pretty limiting. I'll still insist the correct model is not a shuttle - the system is not clear enough - in terms of origin, route, or destination - for that to be a valid comparison. I will concede - better information, and some good bikeways, would go a long ways toward the shuttle model there.

That's why I say it's good for commuters. It's a shuttle for you, if you're taking it the same way every day, so you know what you're doing. But for unpredictable trips, eh, not a great option.

EDIT: To come full circle - it's not a great option for tourists for the same reasons, I suppose, that rail usually is, and city buses usually aren't.

[bunt_q]

Funny actually, I was down at The Market on Larimer Square having a cup of coffee the other day, and there were these two girls at the table next to me, poring over piles of maps of the city. I asked them if they were doing a scavenger hunt or something, or if they were looking for something specific. Turns out they were from out of town, and they were touring the city by b-cycle for the day. And they were trying to map out a station-to-station sightseeing route for the day. Kind of neat. I seriously considered telling them, the way they were doing it, they'd be better off just walking. But they seemed pretty committed. So it is drawing some folks...albeit not casual tourists, I don't think.

[Cirrus]

So now we're into operational problems as opposed to problems inherent to the mode. Good.

Part of the problem, which I've said many times, is that b-cycle has too few stations spread over too large an area. Ideally bikesharing should focus on a small coverage area that is very heavily saturated with stations, so that all stations are within sight of at least one other station. Each block, or at most every two blocks, should have its own station. In principle the idea is that you don't need to know where any stations are, because they're so frequent that you're always close to one as long as you're inside the service area.

Basically, they should rip out the Cherry Creek and DU stations and put them downtown, and not expand again to those areas until they have a couple of thousand bikes to work with instead of a few hundred.

This has been a big problem with most American rollouts of bikesharing to date. Cities want to cover a large area, but aren't spending the money to get the station saturation needed to really make the system work at top efficiency.

[bunt_q]

Well this expansion, if/when it happens, amounts to a 50% increase in stations, right? Placement matters, but it's a step toward what you're describing.

Of course, I expect to see a roll-out of Stapleton stations or some such nonsense. Which wouldn't surprise me, especially in Denver. I am not convinced that the target demographic here isn't commuters and the stereotypical "hard" and pure bicycling crowd.

Post-Fastracks, I also expect to see orbits of b-cycles around rail stations, like Stapleton, again catering to the commuter crowd. Which isn't all bad, but it's not the same operational model as what you're describing, either. I'm frankly surprised that hasn't started wholesale already, surrounding, say, the Englewood station as one example.

Any idea, back of the napkin, what the typical capital and annual operational costs are to add a single station? (say, average distance from other stations, average bike load, etc.)

[Cirrus]

Originally Posted by bunt_q

it is drawing some folks...albeit not casual tourists, I don't think.

Depends where they're from. Casual tourists who come from a city with its own bikesharing system are much more likely to see it and want to use it. Right now that's not very many Americans, but it's just about everyone from Europe.

One-day members have become a major source of ridership in most cities with large networks.

The more ubiquitous the bikes are, the more casual people get curious about them. I'm probably approached by people asking about the system about one quarter of every time I'm on a bike. And these are people who don't know what I do for a living.

[Cirrus]

Any idea, back of the napkin, what the typical capital and annual operational costs are to add a single station?

Yes. Well, for the bixi system that we use. I imagine the b-cycle costs are similar.

Capital costs for a 10 dock station, including the station, the bikes, and complete installation at the site, costs about $40,000.

Gross operating costs for that same station are about $20,000 / year. However, cost recovery for bikesharing is very high. Right now, without any advertising, DC is making a profit in the summer, needs a little bit of subsidy in the spring and fall, and a larger subsidy in the winter. Overall we're recovering about 70% of our operating costs, resulting in net operating subsidy of about $6,000 / year / station. Over time, as more members join and we begin to include advertising, we're anticipating over 90% cost recovery. In the long term we could probably make a profit if we shut down for the winter (we don't but I think Denver does).

Of course, far-flung stations increase operating cost. We are seeing that. The first stations in Maryland will be clustered around a suburban Metro station, in a bikesharing island many miles from the core of the system. We don't care, as long as the jurisdiction involved pays for it. The deal we have allows any jurisdiction in the COG to take part, but every jurisdiction is responsible for paying its own way for capital and operating. We currently have stations in two jurisdictions, but by this time next year we'll have them in 4 or 5.

[Elrod]

B-Cycle is not just for commuting IMHO.
I live downtown and use the B-Cycles a LOT.
Much more than my car.
Going to the library, going to the game, etc....
I don't get those comments at all.

But really I'm writing about the use of smart cards for transit instead of cash.
As someone said earlier I think this could be a real boon to bus usage.
I've lived here a year and come from a fairly small city.
I use the train all the time but the bus is intimidating regarding exact change and all that while people are waiting to get on.
I for one will use buses much more often once this is implemented.
Yeah, sure, I could figure it out, but just never seem to get around to it.

[bunt_q]

Sorry, I think that's funny... I don't mean to poke or anything. But you've figured out b-cycle AND light rail, each with their complicated fare sructures, plus navigating Denver streets on a bicycle, etc., but the bus is intimidating? Bus fares are flat fares. $2.25 (this week), each way, unless you want to cheat with a transfer, which everybody does. Is it because you live downtown and just aren't as familiar with the routes and the city outside the immediate core?

To each their own, I suppose.

You could just get on, too, probably. Fares? Eh, whatever. So many RTD routes are privately operated now, and I've never seen a single one of those drivers give a damn about anything. I could probably transport goats with my new city livestock permit, chickens for sure, maybe even a beehive, and those guys wouldn't even notice. I always thought the unions, in theory, made for less-eager workers... well, with RTD, the opposite seems to be the case.

[1Post2]

Blanket coverage inside a given service area is ideal, even at the expense of the size of the service area, I agree.

For example, I like taking light rail during the day along the central corridor because I know I can walk to any station and the train will arrive within 5 minutes or so. I don't have to care about the schedule. Same with the 15 bus line and the 0 broadway line.

Now, apply that to bike sharing. I'm not going to sit at a computer and plan which station I'm going to bike to each time I'm going to take a trip out of fear that I won't find a destination station. If I have to do that, I'm much less likely to use the system. It's much better to know that I can take a bike on a whim and spot a station just about anywhere if I'm in (very) central denver than to be able to bike over a larger area and have to plan ahead to find a station.

Sorry if I'm just repeating what's already been discussed, but i'ts all about frequency of bike stations, just like it's all about frequency of transit service.

[Wizened Variations]

Originally Posted by 1Post2

Blanket coverage inside a given service area is ideal, even at the expense of the size of the service area, I agree.

For example, I like taking light rail during the day along the central corridor because I know I can walk to any station and the train will arrive within 5 minutes or so. I don't have to care about the schedule. Same with the 15 bus line and the 0 broadway line.

Now, apply that to bike sharing. I'm not going to sit at a computer and plan which station I'm going to bike to each time I'm going to take a trip out of fear that I won't find a destination station. If I have to do that, I'm much less likely to use the system. It's much better to know that I can take a bike on a whim and spot a station just about anywhere if I'm in (very) central denver than to be able to bike over a larger area and have to plan ahead to find a station.

Sorry if I'm just repeating what's already been discussed, but i'ts all about frequency of bike stations, just like it's all about frequency of transit service.

If you had a large network of stations run by independent operators, part of the rental should cover moving the bicycles back to their owner operators. Any network that has 'packets' (LOL) with the freedom of choice, will have nodes that are net exporters of bike packets, and, nodes that are importers. Station nodes that are exporters are destinations more than beginning points of bicycle travel while nodes that are net bike sources would import bicylcles (this is assuming the bike network is not origin/destination defined by the point of rental). If eventually bicycle stations could gross enough to have dedicated human operators, such facilities could be combination bicycle parking and bicycle rental facilities, and, the bikes themselves could be owned as an LLC comprised of the set of owner operators much in the car rental manner. Loyal customers might be able to pay virtually nothing to take bikes from net destinations to net sources (which in my estimation such a fare scheme should be used on buses as well where empty buses going out of the destination end to the feeder end of their commuter routes during rush hour should charge $2.00 on express lines to build reverse flow patronage).

[dmintz]

Originally Posted by Cirrus

Capital costs for a 10 dock station, including the station, the bikes, and complete installation at the site, costs about $40,000.

B-cycle asks $30,000/year or 20k/year over 3 years to sponsor a new station. Not bad when you consider that's the same cost to build just 1 or 2 parking spaces in a structured garage. It seems that our system is not as effective in recruiting private dollars as DC and Minneapolis which continue to expand. Or maybe Denver companies are just not willing to step up to the plate.

[DenverInfill]

Originally Posted by dmintz

B-cycle asks $30,000/year or 20k/year over 3 years to sponsor a new station. Not bad when you consider that's the same cost to build just 1 or 2 parking spaces in a structured garage. It seems that our system is not as effective in recruiting private dollars as DC and Minneapolis which continue to expand. Or maybe Denver companies are just not willing to step up to the plate.

Huh? We're talking about a 50% expansion of the Denver system in its 3rd year of existence. How does that indicate failure of the Denver business community to support B-Cycle?

[PLANSIT]

Originally Posted by DenverInfill

Huh? We're talking about a 50% expansion of the Denver system in its 3rd year of existence. How does that indicate failure of the Denver business community to support B-Cycle?

Do we know this expansion is business community driven?

[DenverInfill]

Originally Posted by PLANSIT

Do we know this expansion is business community driven?

I don't know, but I'm sure some of the proposed new 25 stations are sponsored by local businesses.

I guess I just didn't understand dmintz's negative attitude and out-of-the-blue comparison to DC and Minneapolis with no data provided to support it. Denver B-Cycle is in its second year of existence and has just announced a 50% system expansion. I don't see how dmintz can get "It seems that our system is not as effective in recruiting private dollars as DC and Minneapolis which continue to expand. Or maybe Denver companies are just not willing to step up to the plate." from these facts.

[bunt_q]

He's just channeling his inner-Matt. The Denver business community doesn't do *anything* right. Come on, Ken, we've all known that for years.

No worries, based on past discussions, I am sure dmintz is an unabashed b-cycle supporter.