Cost increase postpones, might shrink, CaBi in College Park

I don't know how I missed this story from the Diamondback, but it's kind of a bummer. 

The launch of a new bike share program on the campus, originally scheduled for this semester, has been tentatively pushed back to the fall because of unexpected costs, DOTS officials said.

Alta Bicycle Share, the company that manages the Capital Bikeshare programs, has proposed additional launch expenses of $60,000 to $100,000 that were not part of the initial contract.

And more bad news. 

Alta Bicycle Share has changed its pricing system for the bikes and docks, Malone said. To avoid a higher annual membership fee, the university will have to consider building only three bike share stations on the campus instead of a planned four, Malone said.

Monica Hernandez, an official from Washington’s District Department of Transportation, said the costs of maintaining bike sharing in College Park are higher than in Washington because the system is smaller and the locations of the stations would be farther from the main operation.

Not surprisingly, some people are suggesting they should spend the money on something else. And UMD is looking into not using CaBi

DOTS will consider alternative contractors for the bike share project to avoid higher costs

Comments

[Ken]

Does seem like the same system used by a major metropolitan area is not likely the one for even a largish university. Whether it is simply a lack of the economics of scale or not, you'd think a home grown - home administered program would fit well with a college campus...

[Jon Renaut]

This is one of the places where I wish the DC, VA, and MD DOTs worked more together. As a DC resident, my Bikeshare membership becomes more valuable as there are more places I can go with it. It would be nice to see the core of the system doing a little more subsidizing of the outer reaches, at least at the beginning, to benefit all users.

Having a separate system for the college would probably work for the college, but it can only get so big. There's not much of a limit on what CaBi could eventually become.

[Jacques]

Generally, agree with Jon here.

I think it's possible for a small home-grown system to work on campus, but it's only useful to the extent that that system reaches.

If College Park is installing 4-6 stations, and the university is installing 3 (or ideally 4 or more), there is a fairly limited utility of any system, but the big benefit is being able to hop onto the Metro and then access all of the additional 200+ stations in DC, Arlington, Alexandria, and MoCo, without having to pay a separate fee.

While a self-contained system might work well for students on campus, it will run into growth constraints very quickly.

[oboe]

@Jon,

And yet...the more diffuse the system, the less likely it is to survive. As far as "the core of the system...subsidizing the outer reaches" obviously that's a balancing act.

Right now the core already subsidizes virtually unused stations EOTR. (And that's a good thing) But at least those stations EOTR are contiguous to the system.

As far as DC subsidizing College Park, you might just as well subsidize a bikeshare station in Frederick. It would marginally increase the value of existing CaBi users' fobs, plenty of existing users visit Frederick, and it would be about as contiguous with the existing system as a system in College Park.

Anyway, the trend is towards more self-contained systems in the core. Think the DC streetcar system versus Metro.

[eevee]

@oboe

I now feel really out of things, because I totally missed the announcement that Frederick had a Metro station.

[Jonathan Krall]

Hmmmm... In relation to the 8-station pod in Alexandria, I was told that Alexandria gets the revenue from those stations (casual memberships) and from online memberships from Alexandria residents (long-term memberships). I'm not sure how bike-time overage fees are handled.

- If there are CaBi members who live in College Park but use CaBi downtown, it sounds like College Park would get their money when they renew.

- I agree with Jon that it would be nice if there were more of an all-in-this-together pricing scheme instead of separate contracts between Alta and each jurisdiction. Right now, DC is breaking even on operating costs while Arlington and Alexandria are not. And, with one contract, it might be easier to negotiate sponsorship for the entire system.