CityCycle articles discussion

[Sunbus610]

Is it really that bad? Why, by that argument the cars in that forecourt should be removed too.

Good point tramstrain and maybe also include the mobile stalls selling fruit and other food / drink items along with their loud music blaring.......

[#Metro]

Here is the view: http://www.nearmap.com/?q=@-27.474985,153.027451&ll=-27.474985,153.027451&z=20&t=k&nmd=20100912

Get rid of the cars, maybe pave the ashphalt and replace the car park with Cycle.
If CityCycle is that bad, then why can't it go on QUT property or in the Botanical Gardens or in a location nearby.

No need to have a special "NO BIKES HERE" act of parliament. How useless!
Can't politicians have conversations nowadays? do they know how to hold one or pick up a phone?

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail click here!

State Parliament tells Campbell Newman to rack off: We don't want CityCycle station here

State Parliament tells Campbell Newman to rack off: We don't want CityCycle station here

    * Anna Caldwell
    * From: The Courier-Mail
    * October 28, 2010 10:13AM

THE State Government will consider drafting new laws to stop Lord Mayor Campbell Newman putting his CityCycle scheme in the Parliament House forecourt.

Speaker John Mickel told State Parliament this morning that Cr Newman had plans to install billboards, lights and two CityCycle stations in the George Street forecourt.

Mr Mickel said he had always rejected proposal because it could interfere with the heritage value of Parliament house.

Mr Mickel said after several meetings earlier this year, he was under the impression Cr Newman had canned the plans to impose CityCycle material in the George St forecourt.

But, Mr Mickel said, he had just this month received correspondence from Council outlining installations that had not been agreed to, including billboards and two CityCycle stations.

"I've sought urgent clarification with the Lord Mayor,'' Mr Mickel said.

"I believe the Parliament House forecourt must be preserved and protected."

Mr Mickel said he had "no hesitation" in calling on Parliament to implement laws that would protect its own heritage, if he was unable to reach an agreement with the Lord Mayor.

He said the Parliament House forecourt ``must be preserved and protected from moves to install such structures that can seriously compromise the heritage value of the location''.

The council's Public and Active Transport chair, Margaret de Wit, said the council had reached an agreement with the Speaker earlier this year to construct one CityCycle station and associated infrastructure near the front gate of QUT.

"Council consulted with the Speaker and reached an agreement to install one CityCycle station but it now appears the Speaker has changed his mind," Cr de Wit said.

"We're happy to continue to work with the Speaker to find a suitable location as we believe it's important to provide the large number of people who commute to and from QUT each day with the opportunity to use CityCycle."

[ozbob]

From the Sunday Mail 31st October 2010 page 34

Headache over helmets

[ozbob]

CityCycle station opposite Customs House





Photographs R Dow 5th November 2010

[Otto]

Just for interest..

Since CityCycle launch day when I saw 3 persons riding CityCycles, I have not seen one CityCycle on the streets since, and I'm always looking out for them !! They are getting used as I'm keeping a tally on the number of bikes parked at 2 Cycle Stations on Adelaide Street.

[ButFli]

Otto, maybe you just aren't looking the right places? Very few people are riding on the streets of the CBD because of the (real or apparent) danger. If you look on the bikeways or around the suburban streets of New Farm there are many CityCyclers getting around.

[Otto]

Otto, maybe you just aren't looking the right places? Very few people are riding on the streets of the CBD because of the (real or apparent) danger. If you look on the bikeways or around the suburban streets of New Farm there are many CityCyclers getting around.

That's why I never see any riders .. I never go down to New Farm.. I only ever go along Adelaide, Elizabeth or Ann streets in the City and Whickham or Ann streets in the Valley..

[Jonno]

Thevsyreets of the CZbdcand inner suburbs need to become the domain of the pedestraianband cyclist not the sole domain of the car as they as today.  The failure tondo this at the same time as the schemes introduction was a very big mistake!

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

CityCycle privacy breach

CityCycle privacy breach
Cameron Atfield
February 4, 2011 - 5:50PM

Brisbane's CityCycle bike hire scheme has been embroiled in a massive privacy breach, with the email addresses of all its subscribers distributed in an email this afternoon.

The addresses of about 1300 CityCycle users were all included in the "to" field of an email sent to subscribers at 5.12pm today.

CityCycle later attempted to recall the email, but the damage had already been done and users took to Twitter to vent their frustrations.
Advertisement: Story continues below

"Just got an email from #citycycle in which I can see the email address of every other recipient. #screwprivacy," said one tweeter.

"At least now we have an accurate/up to date subscriber count!" said another.

Comment has been sought from CityCycle.

[#Metro]

So how much did CityCycle cost?
divide by 1306, and assuming everybody rides a bike, that's $1569 per person, per registered subscriber per year?

I don't know, somehow I don't think this initiative really worked out.
Maybe its the helmets, maybe its the lanes, the administrative hassle, can't pay by credit card, the inability to serve spontaneous trips, maybe all the above.

It was initially sold as "getting a cheap bike ride for the city" that would cost next to nothing. Well. The cost maybe might be low ($8 million vs some of the other transport projects which easily run into triple figure millions). This is low cost, but IMHO also low benefit.

I feel the scheme has a number of flaws that discourage people from using it (helmets probably being the least worry), and I feel that a BUZ bus would probably cost around the same but ferry more people overall...

Sorry. It just doesn't seem to have added up!

Lord Mayor Campbell Newman initially said the project would cost $1.5 million over three years, but budget papers reveal ratepayers will actually pay almost $8.2 million over the next four years.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/citycycle-bike-hire-scheme-rolled-out-in-brisbane-amid-opposition/story-e6freoof-1225896509788

[Golliwog]

Maye, but that was only for the permanent subscribers. What about the people who may have only signed up fro a day or anything like that?

[ozbob]

From the Courier Mail click here!

CityCycle bikes sitting idle but council plans more stations

CityCycle bikes sitting idle but council plans more stations

    * by Robyn Ironside
    * From: The Courier-Mail
    * February 26, 2011 12:00AM

ALMOST three-quarters of the bicycles available for hire in Brisbane are sitting idle every day, yet the council is pushing ahead with plans to roll out 73 more bike stations.

Figures provided to The Courier-Mail showed only 175 of the 700 bicycles available for hire were being used each day, on average, since the CityCycle scheme began in October 2010.

Despite the cool response to the scheme, BCC Public and Active Transport chair Margaret de Wit said there was "a quiet revolution occurring".

"More and more people are taking it up every day," Cr de Wit said.

"Every commuter who uses a bike instead of a car means one less vehicle on our congested road network."

Under the scheme, users are required to take out a subscription at a cost of $60.50 a year, $27.50 for three months or $11 a day and must provide their own helmets. Using bikes for less than 30 minutes is free.

So far, 3855 people have subscribed.

Since the scheme began, five bikes have been stolen or destroyed including four run over by a truck.

Cr de Wit said 77 bike stations were now operating and another 73 would be in place by the end of the year.

Council opposition leader Shayne Sutton said it was madness to spend more money on a project that was clearly not working.

"At a time when Campbell Newman is cutting community grants and services all through the city (to fund the flood recovery), this shows he has the wrong priorities," Cr Sutton said.

[#Metro]

3855 might have subscribed but only a few people would actually be "active".
Maybe 1000 use it regularly, and possibly a lot who were previous walkers or bus riders.

The problem is that it is not integrated with GoCard and you have a barrier in the form of subscription/forms (and helmet, but helmets are cheap).

[ozbob]

From the Brisbanetimes click here!

CityCycle starts with a whimper

CityCycle starts with a whimper
Daniel Hurst
March 16, 2011 - 5:07AM

Brisbane residents are making just 250 trips a day on the much-vaunted CityCycle scheme, the equivalent of two train carriages or four busloads of commuters.

Despite a slight increase in usage since last month, about 70 per cent of Brisbane's CityCycle bikes still remain untouched every day as users continue to bypass the new service.

A breakdown of subscription figures supplied to brisbanetimes.com.au shows 1975 people have signed up for annual subscriptions since the bike hire scheme was launched nearly six months ago on October 1.

However, just 302 of the 1013 three-month subscriptions issued since the scheme began are still active.

Some of the 250 daily trips could be double-ups, with people making one trip to and one trip from work each day.

There are currently about 800 CityCycle bikes in operation.

The release of the latest figures coincides with Bicycle Queensland's Bike Week, which includes Ride2Work Day today.

Robert Dow, from commuter lobby group Rail Back on Track, said the number of daily trips would equate to no more than two train carriages or four busloads of commuters.

"I think they're not very high at all – when you look at it relative to the City Train network carrying 170,000 a day, it's fairly negligible," he said.

"Nonetheless, it's a start, and we're broadly supportive of the initiative, but we think they need to be a bit smarter [with integration and bicycle helmet availability]."

CityCycle appears to have been a fizzer with tourists and occasional users, with a total of 132 people taking out one-day subscriptions last month, down from 261 in October.

However, Brisbane City Council has pointed to the impact of "the wettest summer in Brisbane's history", with the scheme suspended during January floods.

The council's public and active transport committee chair, Margaret de Wit, said the average number of daily trips taken was increasing as cooler weather began kicking in.

"As more stations go live daily trips are increasing with the weekday average of 180 in February rising to over 250 in March so far and we expect this to continue with the onset of cooler weather," she said.

When the scheme is fully operational, 2000 bikes will be available from 150 CityCycle stations.

Cr de Wit said 86 bike stations were currently in operation, more than half of the planned total, and more journeys were taking place each month.

She said each commuter using a bike instead of a car was one less vehicle on the congested road network.

"CityCycle is a great commuter transport option for those living in or near the inner city and there is a quiet revolution occurring with more and more people taking it up every day," Cr de Wit said.

She said a total of 28,000 trips had been taken on CityCycle bikes since October.

Bicycle Queensland chief Ben Wilson said CityCycle usage "should increase ten-fold when it is fully installed and understood by the public".

[ozbob]

Media release 27 February 2011

SEQ: Integration the key to unlock CityCycle potential

RAIL Back On Track (http://backontrack.org) a web based community support group for rail and public transport and an advocate for public transport commuters suggests that integration and an expert review are the keys to unlocking the potential of the CityCycle scheme.

Robert Dow, Spokesman for RAIL Back On Track said:

"The Courier Mail recently highlighted the state of Brisbane's flagship CityCycle scheme and plans for expansion. A review into the scheme by external transportation experts would be prudent and helpful for finding ways to make the scheme more accessible and better patronised before further expenditure on expansion (1)."

"What appears to be missing is proper integration and supporting policies, and we note striking parallels of similar experiences overseas (2). RAIL Back on Track really would like to see more people use the scheme and integration with TransLink and go card could be considered for the CityCycle scheme and the existing bicycle cages (3). Co-ordination and integration is necessary to avoid cycling becoming a competitive mode, taking people off buses and off footpaths rather than out of cars. Bicycle-bus and bicycle-rail integration may be something to consider."

"We note blog comments to the Courier-Mail's article, which integration with go card could potentially solve, as well as other low-cost 'soft' measures such as helmet vending at key locations and greater ability to access the scheme 'at will' (4). It is worth printing out and reading. Comments to the Courier-Mail have questioned why go cards are not accepted, the lack of ability to use 'at will', the lack of helmet access within proximity and credit card use and pricing scheme."

"Perth has recently integrated their SmartRider public transport card to open and close bicycle cages (5). If the authorities take some time to listen to the people who do NOT use the scheme they will find solutions to change the CityCycle 'product' to get more customers."

Contact:

Robert Dow
Administration
admin@backontrack.org

References:

1. CityCycle bikes sitting idle but council plans more stations
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/citycycle-bikes-sitting-idle-but-council-plans-more-stations/comments-e6freoof-1226012270739 Robyn Ironside, The Courier-Mail

2. Cycling and Public Transport: The Legacy of the White Bike
Transport for Suburbia, Dr Paul Mees, pp.188-193

3. Integrating Bicycling and Public Transport in North America
http://policy.rutgers.edu/faculty/pucher/PUCHER_BUEHLER.pdf

4. Cheap helmets could be sold and the commuter could just keep them for future use.
If it were integrated with GoCard, people could visit the newsagency, activate their GoCard with
bicycle access, pop down and ride. Newsagents could sell helmets to keep if there was demand.

5. Lock and Ride bike shelter upgrade
http://www.transperth.wa.gov.au/UsingTransperth/BikesonTransperthservices/LocknRideBikeShelterRegistration/tabid/485/Default.aspx

[#Metro]

I wonder if the Cycle Scheme is Greenwash?

The sustainability rationale for this project is pretty weak. To the extent they are used at all, these bicycles will be a substitute for trains, trams and walking, not cars. People who use taxis are time-poor so I think they are the least likely to use them.

I can't see that Melbourne Bicycle Share has much potential for tourism, either. The bikes are too heavy, it costs $80 for 4 hours riding and tourists have to provide a use-once helmet. But if it were to be used primarily by tourists, why should it be subsidised by taxpayers?

http://melbourneurbanist.wordpress.com/2010/06/02/is-melbourne-bicycle-share-all-spin/

Radical changes to CityCycle are required before 1c is spent on it. Symbols of sustainable transport policy must not be confused with actual sustainable transport policy.

[#Metro]

However, Brisbane City Council has pointed to the impact of "the wettest summer in Brisbane's history", with the scheme suspended during January floods.

The council's public and active transport committee chair, Margaret de Wit, said the average number of daily trips taken was increasing as cooler weather began kicking in.

It has NOTHING to do with the weather. This is a smokescreen. Look at Montreal which has BIXI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal

Montreal's summers are warm, at times hot and humid with average high temperatures of 26°C (79°F) and low of 16°C (61°F), temperatures frequently exceed 30°C (86°F). Winter in Montreal usually brings very cold, snowy, windy, and at times, icy weather, with an average high temperature of -5°C (23°F) and lows of -13°C (9°F). However, some winter days rise above freezing even at times allowing for rain, while others dip well below -20°C (-4°F) [53]

CityCycle MUST come under external professional review! The mode share impacts must be analysed- I think it has no impact on PT mode share and if anything substitutes existing walking and bicycling because the trips are so short (due to the fare structure).

[#Metro]

She said each commuter using a bike instead of a car was one less vehicle on the congested road network.

There is no evidence for this claim. The trips are so short that they must be coming from walking, public transport and existing cycling.

[ButFli]

However, Brisbane City Council has pointed to the impact of “the wettest summer in Brisbane's history”, with the scheme suspended during January floods.

The council's public and active transport committee chair, Margaret de Wit, said the average number of daily trips taken was increasing as cooler weather began kicking in.

It has NOTHING to do with the weather. This is a smokescreen. Look at Montreal which has BIXI:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Montreal

Montreal's summers are warm, at times hot and humid with average high temperatures of 26°C (79°F) and low of 16°C (61°F), temperatures frequently exceed 30°C (86°F). Winter in Montreal usually brings very cold, snowy, windy, and at times, icy weather, with an average high temperature of -5°C (23°F) and lows of -13°C (9°F). However, some winter days rise above freezing even at times allowing for rain, while others dip well below -20°C (-4°F) [53]

Brisbanites do not deal with poor weather well. While the folks in other cities may head out on their bicycles when it is cold and icy, Brisbanites will refuse to leave their homes or offices at the hint of rain. Just because weather has "NOTHING" to do with in Montreal does not mean the same can be said for Brisbane.

Also, CityCycle was never meant to take passengers from public transport, reduce traffic congestion or be green. It was always aimed at providing a positive lifestyle choice for the residents of Brisbane. Sure, certain people touted its environmental friendlieness, but that was never its primary purpose.

[ButFli]

She said each commuter using a bike instead of a car was one less vehicle on the congested road network.

There is no evidence for this claim. The trips are so short that they must be coming from walking, public transport and existing cycling.

Uh... "each commuter using a bike instead of a car" is not "coming from walking, public transport or existing cycling". Look at the words she used - "bike instead of a car". There is no need for any evidence. The statement is a truism. Every commuter who chooses bike instead of car is taking a car off the road. The (perhaps unintended) implication is that each commuter using a bike is taking a car off the road which is presumably incorrect and would need evidence to back up. She didn't actually say that, though.

[#Metro]

Brisbanites do not deal with poor weather well. While the folks in other cities may head out on their bicycles when it is cold and icy, Brisbanites will refuse to leave their homes or offices at the hint of rain. Just because weather has "NOTHING" to do with in Montreal does not mean the same can be said for Brisbane.

Also, CityCycle was never meant to take passengers from public transport, reduce traffic congestion or be green. It was always aimed at providing a positive lifestyle choice for the residents of Brisbane. Sure, certain people touted its environmental friendlieness, but that was never its primary purpose.

There is no convincing evidence that weather, bar the natural catastrophe of a flood which interrupts all transport modes, has that huge an impact on cycling. The poor patronage of the CityCycle scheme has more to do with the structure and access issues of the scheme than it has to do with the weather.

The CityCycle scheme must be sent for review before more money is put into it. The actual, not percieved or assumed, reasons for the low patronage should be looked at.

[#Metro]

Uh... "each commuter using a bike instead of a car" is not "coming from walking, public transport or existing cycling". Look at the words she used - "bike instead of a car". There is no need for any evidence. The statement is a truism. Every commuter who chooses bike instead of car is taking a car off the road. The (perhaps unintended) implication is that each commuter using a bike is taking a car off the road which is presumably incorrect and would need evidence to back up. She didn't actually say that, though.

Point taken, but this presumes that all trips are "naturally car trips". Does everybody walking in Queen St Mall take a car off the road? How would you even do that physically with car down the mall? Many people also go cycling before work and then take car to work, and many tourists and students also are likely to not have car in the first instance anyway, their trips would probably be done on PT.

Even if the scheme took cars of the road, the number is absolutely negligible. And coming from the same administration that is the proponent for so many car tunnels all across the city...

[ButFli]

Uh... "each commuter using a bike instead of a car" is not "coming from walking, public transport or existing cycling". Look at the words she used - "bike instead of a car". There is no need for any evidence. The statement is a truism. Every commuter who chooses bike instead of car is taking a car off the road. The (perhaps unintended) implication is that each commuter using a bike is taking a car off the road which is presumably incorrect and would need evidence to back up. She didn't actually say that, though.

Many people also go cycling before work and then take car to work, and many tourists and students also are likely to not have car in the first instance anyway, their trips would probably be done on PT.

None of those people are "using a bike instead of a car". They are using a bike and they are not using a car. There is a difference.

[Golliwog]

She said each commuter using a bike instead of a car was one less vehicle on the congested road network.

There is no evidence for this claim. The trips are so short that they must be coming from walking, public transport and existing cycling.

I would warn against making such blanket statements like that. They MUST be whatever they want to be. I know someone who lives in Newstead and drives to work in the CBD. I don't quite understand why, but thats a fact. That would easily be a trip that could be done with CityCycle, or PT but isn't.

[#Metro]

Some food for thought- cycling can be a competitive mode if not integrated properly!!!  

"Evaluation of King George Square cycle station"
Matthew Burke, Neil Sipe and Emily Hatfield, Griffith University.

The Cycle Centre has led to a VKT saving of approx. 56,000 km p.a.

(my comment: not sure about this- anything that frees up slots during peak hour allows other people to drive during peak hour because like on trains, demand always exceeds supply at peak hour).

6% of surveyed members shifted mode from the car to bicycle commuting. 73%
shifted from public transport to bicycle commuting. These shifts appear to be directly due to the Cycle Centre.

http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/208368/urp-rp30-burke-et-al-2010.pdf

OUCH, a disproportionate effect on PUBLIC TRANSPORT mode share!!!

For all we know, CityCycle could be emptying more bus seats and existing bicycle user seats than car seats.

[ButFli]

You seem willing to accept that if a bicycle takes a car off the road it will be replaced by another car. Is it not also possible that if a bicycle takes a passenger away from public transport, they will be replaced by another passenger? After all, "demand always exceeds supply at peak hour". One extra bicycle should mean one less person stranded at a station or stop.

Also I don't think the 73% figure is at all appalling or surprising. What is the mode share for peak hour trips to and from the CBD? I expect it is far higher han 73%, especially for those people who live within cycling distance.

[#Metro]

You seem willing to accept that if a bicycle takes a car off the road it will be replaced by another car. Is it not also possible that if a bicycle takes a passenger away from public transport, they will be replaced by another passenger? After all, "demand always exceeds supply at peak hour". One extra bicycle should mean one less person stranded at a station or stop.

Probably not true during the off-peak, when PT must scrape all the $$ it can get. Peak hour- after I have seen 199 etc, yes, I think it might help there. But so would a proper bus service improvement due to capacity, and people who didn't or couldn't ride could benefit from that.

Also I don't think the 73% figure is at all appalling or surprising. What is the mode share for peak hour trips to and from the CBD? I expect it is far higher han 73%, especially for those people who live within cycling distance.

73% of cyclists were former PT users. I'm not sure what mode share has to do with this. The point is that Cr Margaret de Wit's comments that this is going to put a dent into car useage (yeah right, let's keep rolling those car tunnels out in the background) are unconvincing. It's likely that they simply would have re-organised existing walking, cycling and public transport trips. What the goal was to reduce car mode share. And it's probably not doing that at all.

CityCycle can work, but it needs radical changes.

[Jonno]

Our active and public transport mode share is so low and the road-centic transport mistakes of the last 40 years are about to blow up in our politicians faces that any capacity across active and public transport is critical even IFC there is canabilisation at this stage.  Those car trips will convert to active and public transport but not because of city cycle.  Peak oil, worsening traffic congestion and financially broke Governments will.

[#Metro]

Our active and public transport mode share is so low and the road-centic transport mistakes of the last 40 years are about to blow up in our politicians faces that any capacity across active and public transport is critical even IFC there is canabilisation at this stage.  Those car trips will convert to active and public transport but not because of city cycle.  Peak oil, worsening traffic congestion and financially broke Governments will.

If the problem is public transport capacity during peak hour, wouldn't more public transport then be the solution? Run 4 extra buses during peak hour.

I'm not arguing against 'a cycle scheme' I am arguing against the current implementation of it. That's the difference. Not much different to people arguing that they want single paper tickets retained for access purposes or that they are unhappy with the PT fare structure. These people aren't arguing against PT, they are arguing against the current implementation of it.

[Golliwog]

Some food for thought- cycling can be a competitive mode if not integrated properly!!!  

"Evaluation of King George Square cycle station"
Matthew Burke, Neil Sipe and Emily Hatfield, Griffith University.

The Cycle Centre has led to a VKT saving of approx. 56,000 km p.a.

(my comment: not sure about this- anything that frees up slots during peak hour allows other people to drive during peak hour because like on trains, demand always exceeds supply at peak hour).

It may free up slots during peak hour, that is semi-irrelevant. The fact is if people hadn't shifted to cycling then there would just be more people on the roads and on PT clogging up the system. I'm yet to hear of bicycle jams.

6% of surveyed members shifted mode from the car to bicycle commuting. 73%
shifted from public transport to bicycle commuting. These shifts appear to be directly due to the Cycle Centre.

http://www.griffith.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0009/208368/urp-rp30-burke-et-al-2010.pdf

OUCH, a disproportionate effect on PUBLIC TRANSPORT mode share!!!

For all we know, CityCycle could be emptying more bus seats and existing bicycle user seats than car seats.

Has patronage been dropping? It may be taking people out of them, but there are more still switching to PT to take those freed up seats, and more. That said however, CityCycle is only used by a rather small number of people. I know if I lived in the inner city I would probably use it, at least for the main trip to/from work/uni if that were possible. After that I would probably use PT if I had to go anywhere during the day or after work/uni.

[#Metro]

The fact is if people hadn't shifted to cycling then there would just be more people on the roads and on PT clogging up the system. I'm yet to hear of bicycle jams.

The question is shifted from what? The purpose of these initiatives is to make a dent in CAR mode share. If it is making a dent in walking and pre-existing cycling and bus then that really isn't an overall gain- it is just a re-arrangement of the deckchairs IMHO. For $8 million dollars over 4 years, I would hope for more than just deck chair re-arrangement.

Has patronage been dropping? It may be taking people out of them, but there are more still switching to PT to take those freed up seats, and more. That said however, CityCycle is only used by a rather small number of people. I know if I lived in the inner city I would probably use it, at least for the main trip to/from work/uni if that were possible. After that I would probably use PT if I had to go anywhere during the day or after work/uni.

I'm not sure if there is enough information to say either way. But that is a pretty convoluted way to get people to switch to PT. Why not just run more buses (four?) and train in the shoulder peak? You would have a greater impact on PT mode share that way.

The intentions behing CityCyle are good. But the results are not. That's why it needs modification IMHO.

[Golliwog]

Where has it been stated that the purpose of these initiatives is to make a dent in car mode share? I see it as more of a capacity solution. The thing with PT is that it is the nature of any route to have less space on the service, the closer you are to the common destination, and the opposite in the pm peak. Given the capacity on the central section of these networks is also what restricts the overall capacity of the network, its not going to be efficient to add extra short running services, and if you add more full length services, then you would expect less pax/service to begin with before passenger number grow with time. But those passenger number would be growing over the whole length of the line. By providing easy access to bicycles in the inner city, people there have access to transport and won't need to wait for a bus that isn't full or crowded.

I don't see it as convoluted, actually I see it as kind of efficient (well, more so if the take up of CityCycle had been higher) as there on no ongoing emissions for riding a bike, and you free up capacity on the network. Yes running more services in the shoulder peak would probably have a greater impact on PT mode share, but whats wrong with providing another option for inner city trips?

[#Metro]

"This is not so much designed for casual users or tourists, it's designed for people who are using it as a part of their daily commute," Cr Newman said.

The scheme, operated by the company behind Paris's bicycle revolution JCDecaux, aims to transform the way people travel around the city to cut traffic congestion and pollution.

http://www.brisbanetimes.com.au/queensland/council-still-getting-heads-around-helmet-plan-20100812-120v6.html

Where has it been stated that the purpose of these initiatives is to make a dent in car mode share?

Right here-From the website of the BCC:
http://www.brisbane.qld.gov.au/traffic-transport/cycling/citycycle/index.htm

CityCycle is an active and sustainable public transport option aimed at reducing traffic congestion and parking pressures in the inner city, as cars are replaced by cycle trips. Once complete, CityCycle will offer up to 2,000 bikes at 150 stations from Newstead to West End and Toowong.

If 4 buses were put on you would have the same impact as CityCycle. 4 buses probably do not cost $8 million dollars.
In fact you could probably achieve the same goals through an alternative means- simply increase the level of bicycle parking around the
city!

I don't see it as convoluted, actually I see it as kind of efficient (well, more so if the take up of CityCycle had been higher) as there on no ongoing emissions for riding a bike, and you free up capacity on the network. Yes running more services in the shoulder peak would probably have a greater impact on PT mode share, but whats wrong with providing another option for inner city trips?

IMHO it is not efficient under any definition of efficiency. Transporting air parcels on the PT network is bad. In peak there may be a benefit, but there would also be that same benefit if 4 buses were put on. If the problem is capacity, you do that by increasing PT supply IMHO. The Cycle Scheme is simply not designed in a way that will feed PT or allow uptake by car users.

I like to separate the like for cycling from the goals of mode share/sustainable transport/mobility goals. My issue is with how the scheme has been set up and the results due to that. For the cost, I think people would have expected more useage. The value of something is related to its utility. With some fixes more people would use the cycling scheme and it could also feed PT.

[Gazza]

I don't think the intention is to "feed" PT.....The idea is that the entire trip is done on the bike....The entire CityCycle region is small enough to be traversed end to end by bike.

[#Metro]

Surface PT works best along fast arterial roads / main avenues and roads.
But the people are living in the cul-de-sacs and the roads branching off from that. Using CityCycle to bridge the gap in that way would be useful that way IMHO.

[#Metro]

I don't think the intention is to "feed" PT.....The idea is that the entire trip is done on the bike....The entire CityCycle region is small enough to be traversed end to end by bike.

Integration... does not seem to have been built into it...

Integrating Bicycling and Public Transport in North America
John Pucher, Rutgers University
Ralph Buehler, Virginia Tech

Journal of Public Transportation, Vol. 12, No. 3, 2009

Coordinating bicycling with public transport is mutually beneficial, enhancing the
benefits of both modes and encouraging more bicycling as well as more public
transport use (Brons et al. 2009, Givoni and Rietveld 2007, Hegger 2007, Martens
2004 and 2007, TRB 2005, U.S. DOT, 1998). Bicycling supports public transport
by extending the catchment area of transit stops far beyond walking range and
at much lower cost than neighborhood feeder buses and park-and-ride facilities
for cars. Access to public transport helps cyclists make longer trips than possible

The problem-- it has been designed to run in competition with PT and is not integrated as well as it could be.

More strategic placement and integration with GoCard.

[Gazza]

^But if you are only cycling say 7km (Toowong to New Farm) then why would you bother changing to a bus or train?

[#Metro]

If a person wants to cycle 7 km then nothing is stopping them from doing that.
However there would be many people I think that would like to do a short trip to the train or bus station/stop. CityCycle (and just plain old boring bike racks!) would do that job.

If I lived in Indooroopilly and wanted to get to Indooroopilly (train or bus) station I could get a bike there, and then go to Ipswich or Brisbane CBD or wherever. If I lived in Toowong I could ride to Toowong station and get a train or a bus. Swipe and go.

The fact that someone might want to ride 7km Toowong to New Farm has no bearing on someone who might want to just ride it so far to make a connection. I don't see why both can't be accommodated. Public Transport is likely to be much faster, and the way the fares are the connection costs nothing, and its faster than walking. And not everybody is going to the CBD.

Bicycles can be used to extend the catchment zone around stops. So lets use them for that. If someone wants to ride further than that, let them. But the connection with a PT service is likely to be much faster.

[Gazza]

The trips are so short that they must be coming from walking, public transport and existing cycling.

Why 'must' they be taking trips away from these modes. What about things like nipping down to the supermarket or post office etc. It might be too far to walk (especially if you are pressed for time) but too short a trip to make PT cost effective or time effective (The time spent in the vehicle could well be less than the time spent waiting, even on high frequency routes). Its these short car trips that need to be deferred, especially in the inner city, and CityCycle could help.
Fact is, even people in the inner suburbs own cars, and will use them!

PS, why would CityCycle be shifting people away from "Existing Cycling"...If cycling was your chosen mode to regularly get around then why would people pay to use a public bike, when they could use their own, better bike, for free.

Bicycles can be used to extend the catchment zone around stops. So lets use them for that. If someone wants to ride further than that, let them. But the connection with a PT service is likely to be much faster.

But they already do! Every single bus/ferry/train station in the City Cycle area has a station nearby. Go look here: http://www.citycycle.com.au/All-Stations/Station-Map

If 4 buses were put on you would have the same impact as CityCycle. 4 buses probably do not cost $8 million dollars.
In fact you could probably achieve the same goals through an alternative means- simply increase the level of bicycle parking around the
city!

I think 4 buses would cost more to run and service though.

PS, I don't understand what is wrong with cycling (of any form) taking mode share from PT.

If they say spent money on cycle paths/lanes into the city (Which by their nature are going to mirror bus routes, and hence compete/canibalise some passengers) would you be opposed to that?