ITEM CA7
CABINET– 17 FEBRUARY 2009
PILOT CYCLE HIRE SCHEME FOR OXFORD
Report by Head of Transport
Introduction
1. The purpose of this report is to update Members on progress with investigating the feasibility of a cycle hire scheme for Oxford and to seek approval for the next stages in the process.
2. A sum of £100,000 was allocated in the 2008/09 Revenue Budget for the investigation of a cycle hire scheme in Oxford. Following initial exploratory discussions with a potential provider, a transport planning consultant was appointed in September 2008 to undertake the full feasibility study and produce a report by the end of January 2009. This officer report is based on the findings of the consultant’s study, a copy of which has been placed on deposit in the Members’ Resource Centre.
Background
3. Community Cycle Hire schemes have been around for many years with the general concept being to make bicycles easily available at designated hubs throughout inner city areas. The aim of such schemes is to encourage more wide scale cycling by providing bicycles for those who are not inclined to own or use their own bicycles for city centre travel.
4. The early examples of community cycle hire schemes faced very significant problems with theft and vandalism. These have been addressed to some extent by the more recent development of user electronic identification systems and improvements in the design of the bicycles. In the last few years, extensive community cycle hire schemes have been introduced in a large number of cities, particularly in mainland Europe. These more recent systems tend to be based on membership schemes with electronic systems which trace the use of a bicycle to a registered user who is responsible for returning it to one of the system hubs (sometimes referred to as docking stations).
5. Many of these new schemes use swipe card technology as part of the user identification system. The individual user is required to use a swipe card which releases the bicycle from the locking mechanism at one of the cycle parking hubs. If a bicycle is not returned to a hub following release, the registered user is liable to lose a deposit sum.
6. The costs of these cycle hire schemes vary depending on the design of the bicycles and the sophistication of the system technology including use of swipe cards and associated street furniture at parking hubs. The general approach is to encourage membership of a scheme by making all journeys that take less than 30 minutes free to registered users. The system operating costs tend to be offset by various forms of advertising and by local authority or partnership subsidy.
Potential for Cycle Hire Scheme in Oxford
7. Oxford is amongst a large number of UK cities currently looking at the possibility of introducing a community cycle hire scheme. Indeed, small-scale schemes already exist in places such as Cheltenham, Bristol and Reading. A major scheme is due to be introduced in central London in 2010.
8. In considering the case for a scheme in Oxford, it is important to understand the particular characteristics that apply to the City. One major point in favour of introducing a scheme is the existence of an established cycling culture within the City where the bicycle plays an important role as a means of transport and where cycle facilities already exist. It also has the ability to serve the City’s unusually high number of students and tourists and could expect support from several major employers thus reaching some markets that do not currently have easy access to cycle as a mode of transport.
9. A community cycle hire scheme would integrate well with Oxford’s sustainable transport measures to provide improved connectivity to transport nodes, better access to key destinations and offer greater choice. It is consistent with the Oxford Transport Strategy and the proposals for Transform Oxford.
10. However, the fact that Oxford already has such relatively high use of bicycles as a means of transport may mean that the potential to increase this through a cycle hire scheme is not as great as would be the case in other cities where the base level of cycling is much lower. It is also important to recognise that the only schemes which currently exist in the UK are on a small scale. The extent to which a more wide scale scheme would be undermined by theft and vandalism is somewhat of an unknown in the UK context.
11. The potential benefits and risks of introducing a community cycle hire scheme are summarised in Annex 1 (download as .doc file). On the basis of this summary and the discussion above, it is considered that it would be prudent to introduce any such scheme on a pilot basis, albeit that it should be on a scale which is sufficient to draw robust conclusions about whether to maintain and increase the size of the scheme. However, Oxford clearly does not compare with the likes of Paris in terms of size or population and a critical mass of usage is unlikely to be easily achieved.
Partners for a Pilot Scheme
12. The identification of partners for a pilot scheme has been based on looking at the potential user groups and key organisations that would need to be involved. Oxford University has already considered the possibility of a cycle hire scheme in partnership with Oxford Brookes University. Clearly there is a strong potential market generated by the movement of students and staff between the Oxford colleges and University departments as well as between the various Oxford Brookes campus sites. Representatives of both organisations have therefore been contacted and have indicated that they are keen to join the County Council in developing a pilot scheme.
13. One important aspect of any successful scheme is to ensure integration with key public transport interchanges such as the park and ride car parks and in particular the Railway Station. First Great Western is keen on becoming an active member of the Oxford scheme partnership. Indeed, the Train Operator is currently involved in the cycle hire schemes at Reading, Cheltenham and Bristol.
14. It is important for the pilot to have backing from major employers and it is suggested that a key partner should be the Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals Trust. Discussions with the ORHT have centred on the need to encourage cycle hire movements between the John Radcliffe and The Churchill as well as other destinations including the City centre. The Oxfordshire Primary Care Trust has also expressed support for the scheme.
15. On the basis of the above discussions it is therefore concluded that a formal Steering Group covering these key organisations would form an appropriate basis for progressing the project.
· County Council · Oxford University · Oxford Brookes University · First Great Western · Oxford Radcliffe Hospitals Trust · System supplier
Other Partners
16. Initial discussions with the City Council have concerned the planning and design issues associated with the introduction of the parking hubs in and around the City centre. These issues need to be addressed even as part of a pilot scheme. While it may not be necessary for the City Council to be a formal partner (in the sense of making a financial contribution) it will be necessary to seek the City Council’s input, including providing clear advice on any permissions which would be required.
17. If the scheme is to be successful over the longer term it is important that it has the support and involvement of a more broadly based partnership including for example other major employers, representatives of the tourism industry, foreign language schools and the bus companies. One important part of the pilot scheme will be to encourage further partners to become involved as the pilot develops
Cycling Groups
18. The Oxford cycle campaign group Cyclox has submitted its views on the proposed cycle hire scheme (see Consultant’s Feasibility Study). While stating that a cycle hire scheme is not at the top of the group’s priorities, it is nevertheless supportive of proceeding with a trial and making the trial as large as feasible within the available budget. The point Cyclox makes most strongly is that the cycle hire parking hubs should not be created by using existing conventional cycle parking spaces (where it feels that there is already under-provision in Oxford).
19. Sustrans, the national cycling organisation has also expressed support for the cycle hire scheme. It shares Cyclox concerns about wanting to avoid any loss of existing cycle parking and feels that cycle hire schemes should be accompanied by a full range of supporting measures to make cycling easier and safer.
Thames Valley Police
20. Thames Valley Police have been consulted about the potential pilot scheme and their representative has been generally supportive. It is suggested that the selected system use bicycles that are robust and resistant to vandalism while also using a design which makes it difficult to remove bicycle components and also uses an effective locking system. The police also suggest that the cycle parking hubs should be in overlooked locations and away from pubs and nightclubs.
21. These issues are already being addressed in the systems being developed by the main suppliers. Clearly they are important matters that would need to be covered in the tendering process.
System Suppliers
22. Preliminary discussions have been held with a number of system suppliers to see if a suitable supplier would be interested in conducting a pilot scheme. Meetings with these suppliers have also included discussions on the form and scale of a pilot. The suppliers that have been contacted have been JCDecaux (Vélib scheme in Paris), Clear Channel Outdoor (Bicing in Barcelona), Hourbike (Bristol) and OyBike (Reading, Hammersmith, and Cheltenham). Brief details of each system are provided in Annex 2 (download as .doc file) with more information contained in the Consultant’s feasibility report.
23. All of the systems described above include the ability to monitor usage so that it is possible to identify movements between the various hub locations and link that data to the category of user (e.g. Student, visitor etc). Further details of the system approaches offered by the four suppliers and other companies, who may be interested in the Oxford pilot, will need to be explored more fully as part of the procurement process. At this stage, however, it is clear that there are suppliers who have expressed strong interest in providing the system and running a pilot scheme in Oxford.
Cycle Parking Hub Locations
24. Evidence from the community cycle hire schemes introduced elsewhere is that parking hubs need to be placed at key destinations if a scheme is to be successful. In the case of Oxford, it is clear that there are a large number of destinations within the central area that need to be accessible as well as the key public transport interchanges and locations that serve the movements generated by (and between the sites of) the project partners e.g. Oxford Brookes and the John Radcliffe Hospital.
25. One of the main attractions of using a bicycle as a form of transport is that it allows you to travel very close to your destination compared with a bus or car. Successful cycle hire schemes therefore seek to provide parking hubs that are ideally no more than 300 metres apart throughout the City centre. Such schemes are also based on a provision ratio of 1.7 stands to every bike. This helps to reduce the likelihood of arriving at a parking hub to park your bike and finding there are no spare spaces.
26. The introduction of sufficient cycle parking hubs in Oxford represents a very significant challenge both in terms of overcoming potential conflicts with design and conservation issues as well as the competing demands on highway space from other user groups. The criteria which have been used to help identify appropriate locations for parking hubs are set out in Annex 3 (download as .doc file). On the basis of the criteria, the annex also identifies a list of the key locations where it is considered that cycle parking hubs should be provided both for a pilot and in an expanded scheme.
27. The list of locations set out in Annex 3 is subject to revision as part of the ongoing development of a pilot and is partly dependent on which supplier is selected (some require more space and a power supply). However, an initial highway engineering assessment is being conducted and it is clear that there are sufficient viable locations from those identified in the Annex to provide the capacity needed for a pilot. However it is likely that the total number of locations taken forward will be lower and will be determined to some degree by the scale and cost of any pilot scheme.
Scale, Cost and Duration of a Pilot scheme
28. The schemes that have been introduced elsewhere in the UK are currently at a modest scale with around 60 bikes being used for the pilot in Bristol and only 30 or so bikes in Cheltenham and Reading. The proposed scheme for London in 2010 is of course at a much greater level with an initial allocation of 6,000 bicycles proposed which is still well below the 20,000 bikes in Paris.
29. There has been some discussion with the potential system suppliers about the appropriate scale of a pilot scheme in Oxford. The problem with a small-scale pilot is that very few destinations are served and the scheme lacks credibility which tends to result in low take up. Most of the providers advise that a pilot should have a minimum of 100 bicycles and preferably around 200 to provide good coverage between destinations along a certain corridor or serving particular target groups.
30. Given the partners who have expressed support for involvement in a pilot, a scheme which involves at least 100 bicycles is felt to be appropriate. This would provide for a key west to east corridor starting at Seacourt Park and Ride and taking in the railway station, and a range of City centre locations before going on towards The Plain and Cowley Road / the hospitals.
31. A pilot scheme with 130 bicycles would require around 220 cycle parking spaces at the designated parking hubs. The cost of a pilot scheme of this size would vary depending on which system supplier is selected. The schemes with sophisticated parking hubs or docking stations require a power supply and involve greater cost than those that rely on a keypad on each stand. However, a general estimate in the middle range of figures quoted by suppliers appears to be around £1000 per bike per year. Therefore, a pilot scheme for Oxford based on 130 bikes would cost somewhere around £130,000 for 12 months.
32. However, a one-year pilot to test the feasibility of the concept will provide little opportunity to involve additional project partners or seek further funding. It is therefore considered that if the pilot scheme is to provide a reasonable test of the community cycle hire concept, it should take place over a longer period. Should a pilot be progressed, it is proposed that, based on a potential implementation date of Spring 2010, it should take place over an 18 month period up to Autumn 2011. This will cover two summers and allow the study of usage by different target markets including summer visitors, tourists, students and staff. It will also mean that it will be possible to monitor use of particular parking hubs and to increase or reduce capacity or include new locations.
33. The funding levels identified above would only allow for an 18-month pilot of around 90 bicycles, unless further funding can be secured to meet the additional project costs. This would either need to be identified by the core project partners (including the County Council) and/or the system provider could be responsible for developing the scheme including seeking financial support from sponsorship or advertising.
Next Steps
34. The feasibility study has identified the appropriate partnership to help develop proposals for the pilot and shown that there are sufficient locations to accommodate the required cycle hub parking. The next step therefore is to formalise the Steering Group to oversee the project, secure the funding for the project, and for the Group to then work towards appointing a system provider for the pilot.
35. The outline timescale for further developing and, subject to approval, implementation, of a pilot – subject to confirmation and change – is set out below: · March 2009 – Steering Group Formed · May 2009 - Funding, Tender specification and documentation finalised and agreed · Summer 2009- Tendering / Shortlisting / possible selection of preferred supplier · Autumn 2009 - report back to Cabinet for decision · Winter 2009-2010 – Selection of system supplier and commencement of finalisation of hub locations and securing necessary approvals · Spring 2010 - System up and running · Autumn 2010 - 6 month review · Spring 2011 - 12 month review · Autumn 2011 - completion of pilot and decision on way forward
36. The EU Public Procurement directive sets out the procedures for the appointment of contractors to provide services and identifies a threshold limit of £139,893 above which the procurement process is required to be opened up to full European Union competition. It is considered that the pilot scheme will fall below this threshold limit but nevertheless there are strict rules on the procurement process that need to be followed. The timescale for the preparation of the appropriate documents, advertising, tender submission and selection process is likely to take approximately 3 months.
37. Following the selecting of the system supplier there will need to be a mobilisation and installation process. The delivery period for installation of the cycle parking hubs could vary depending which system provider is selected. The more sophisticated parking hubs with a terminal and power supply may need to go through the planning process whereas more conventional parking stands with an integral keypad could be delivered through the standard Traffic Regulation Order system used for conventional cycle parking The timescale implications for the various systems will need to be considered as part of the procurement process by which time we will have a clearer view on whether any of the particular systems will require planning permission. At this stage it is estimated that around 3 months should be allowed for mobilisation and delivery following the selection of a provider.
Financial and Staff Implications
38. It is expected that the consultant time spent on scheme feasibility (including the establishment of the project partnership) and tendering, will cost no more than £20,000 from the £100,000 allocated for feasibility work during 2008/09, with a further £10,000 required for scheme development work during 2009/10, bringing the total for this part of the project to £30,000. It is therefore proposed that the difference be carried forward to 2009/10 to form the County Council’s partnership contribution to the cost of setting up the pilot scheme. If the pilot project costs £130,000, the County Council’s minimum £70,000 input will need to be supported by a combined contribution from the other project partners of around £60,000.
39. As previously indicated, unless the scheme is scaled down to match the funding available, further funding will be required if the pilot is to continue in to the second year and the aspiration of the project will be to seek funding via sponsorship and advertising as a means of minimising any ongoing revenue support needed from the project partners.
40. The procurement process including the selection of the system provider will require staff input but this can be covered from within existing resources.
RECOMMENDATION
41. The Cabinet is RECOMMENDED to
(i) authorise officers to proceed with establishing a Project Partnership / Steering Group and for the Cabinet Member for Transport to represent the Council on this project partnership;
(ii) seek necessary commitments and financial contributions from partners to help finance the pilot scheme; and
(iii) subject to (ii) above, for the partnership to commence the procurement process (with a view to selecting a system provider to operate the pilot scheme) and to report back to Cabinet for a decision on whether and how to proceed with the scheme.
STEVE HOWELL Head of Transport Environment & Economy
Background papers: Nil
Contact Officer: John Disley, Tel. (01865) 820577 or john.disley@oxfordshire.gov.uk
28 January 2009
|