First and last mile transport discussion is outdated. The Dutch national transport model shows that once passengers can rely on a bike hire system at the activity end of the trip, the attractiveness of transit soars. A new, interdependent! modality, bike-transit has been established that is more attractive and more socio-economical that the (automated) private car.

1. Forget last mile!
- A new modality rising
Peter Biczok, M.Sc.
Why the dock-to-anywhere scheme prevails!
Instead first and last mile travel:
- proper integration of bike shares to transit create a new interdependent modality.
- Cheaper, more reliable transport and has a much bigger market!

2. First we had the docked systems. Great for short trips in town. Expensive to deploy.
These were improved when dockless appeared. Still expensive, also requires
rebalancing, and both require a daily usage of 4-5 trips. Nevertheless the bike share
market grew from some 800,000 in 2008 to 18 million in 2018

3. Now we also have electricscooters. Fun, but less accessibility: geographic and social!
great questions about public space use and building safe infrastructure for riders. However
what neither of these services and their business models do, is attracting long-distance
commuters!

4. Let’s see these 2 systems on the map with an urban transport and market perspective!
Here’s a typical European city with emerging cycling culture. In this case my native Budapest.
Docked stations need many expensive installations. Requires multiple daily use, so inner city
to inner city travel only.

5. Catchment area is essentially the vicinity of these docks, since the business model
requires them to be returned in 30 minutes. So unless your origin or destination is
within 5 minutes walking to a docking station you are unlikely to use them. And again,
you cannot rely on a return trip!

6. The dockless is not that much different. The convenience of dropping it off at your
destination means that either the company needs to relocate them back to busy areas for
pick ups or other users are hindered with lower reliability to pick up conveniently. Equally
you cannot rely on a return trip.
When it comes to target area, these business models do not distinguish from bikes and
scooters.

7. How does OV fiets work? Trust!!
Reliability is key. Reliability that you have a bike at the pick up point, the reliability that
you can go wherever you want from the pick up point, and the reliability that the bike will
also take you back to the hub!
Dock-to-anywhere or A-B-A trips!

8. Credit: (Kager, Harms,
2017)
Great potential to attract travelers further from transit hubs:
cycling is at least 3 times faster than walking, providing cycling facilities means
that 9 times more people can reach the transit station with the same convenience
and flexibility as if they walked. Similarly, 9 times more places can be reached
when egressing the station with a bike instead of walking.

9. Let’s see if we deploy the OVfiets
model to the same city, essentially a
bike hire scheme:
1. deploy stations to transit hubs,
where people egress from suburbs,
eg. the ones who are most likely to
drive otherwise
2. Charge more since user gets a
dedicated bike for entire day, say
two local transit ticket trips - 3-4
EUR
3. Cheap deployment, but as reliable
as docked at pickup and as reliable
as private car at return!

10. Given that there is no destination
restriction, you can cover vast areas,
and we can calculate with 15 min
cycling distance coverage. There is no
need to redistribute as commuters
return bikes at hubs at return leg.

11. Let’s quickly compare. The catchment area
of 28 sqkm vs 196sqkm.
But what's best is that you do not need
dense living areas: any suburban transport
hub could run an economically sustainable
model.

12. More importantly, when coordinated with
high-level transit operator, the additional
passenger numbers result in more
frequent service, increased property values
around the hubs and of course a more
liveable environment for all.
Can also be deployed in suburbs, as 1-1.5
usage per day is equal to 3-4 trips on
”share” model

13. Credit: (Kager, Harms,
2017)
It works best with high level transit, train, metro or even BRT, because cyclists would
rather cycle to a higher level hub than to a local service and then change to a higher
service. If there is choice, they will take the faster, more direct service.

14. Credit:
OpenRouteService
For example, in a outer area of a megalopolis, the increased catchment area results in
more choices, here we see 4 Moscow metro lines and two train lines. Accessibility for
resident 15 min walking vs 15 cycling. With more customisation users will choose the
faster or more direct route e.g. The trainline that stops less frequently.

15. Credit: (Kager et al, 2016)
This is where we also see a big difference between bikes+transit vs scooter+transit. It is
convenient to cycle for masses, with kids, with groceries, old, young etc. The higher level
transit you can reach, the more competitive you are with car travel, reaching similar speed
and accessibility levels as with a car.

16. Scooters might make accessing/egressing lower level transit more comfortable, but does
not have the geographic and social range that cycling can provide.
So, while both have a viable place in transit feeding, cycling and electric assisted cycling
is the one that makes the entire system more efficient.

17. Metro Catchment
Area
See here Moscow, with all
the blues showing a 1km
radius from Metro
stations. These indeed
could be improved with
scooters, or bicycles,
since these are often
covered on foot or slow
local transit.

18. Rail Bike Access
But when you are already on a
bike, riders tend to spend
another 10 minutes cycling to a
higher level hub, instead of
changing transit services. The
potential catchment area is
shows here with green circles,
that depict 3km radia from train
hubs.

19. This is the model that the
Dutch use in higher and
higher numbers and
ultimately the only modality
that is growing in the
Netherlands (5-15%
annually since 2010). More
interestingly, this could be
the answer how a big city or
megalopolis could also
integrate cycling to its daily
mobility mix and attract car
commuters.

20. Sources
Kager et al: Characterisation of and reflections on the synergy of bicycles and public
transport, Transportation Research, 2016
Kager and Harms: Synergies from improved cycling-transit integration, OECD-ITF, 2017
Harms et al: Bike-train travelers: who are they and what behavior do they exhibit?, KiM
Netherlands Institute for Transport Policy Analysis, 2018
blog.bicyclize.com
@bicyclize
peter@mobilock.nl
So far I found only Mobilock whose software +
hardware ideally fits to automate this model.