Biking in Boston

I understand the desire (and to some extent need) to bring in partners for both economic and practical purposes. But does that really take 6 more months? What have they been doing all winter. I feel like that is a week worth of phone calls and one in person meeting with a street map in your pocket. The timeframe just seems unnecessarily long to me.
 
It looks like we'll have to wait a bit longer for Brookline too.

http://articles.boston.com/2012-03-01/yourtown/31114589_1_stations-docking-summer

Hubway bike sharing launch may not come until early summer for Brookline

By Brock Parker, Town Correspondent

Brookline selectmen have voted to join the Hubway regional bicycle sharing network, but local cyclists may have to wait until this summer before the rubber will hit the road.

Selectmen voted to join the regional partnership Tuesday, but the town still has to hammer out a few more details on the contract with Oregon-based Alta Bicycle Share to manage the program, said Jeff Levine, Brookline’s director of planning and community development.

Levine said he’s hoping to have the contract finalized within the next couple of weeks, but once the town orders its bicycle docking stations, it could be up to 16 weeks before the stations will be received.

The docking stations will be located in Brookline Village, at Town Hall and in Coolidge Corner and Levine said he’s hoping it won’t take the full 16 weeks before the stations can be installed.

“Realistically, I think it will probably be early summer before we’re actually launched,” Levine said.

Boston launched Hubway last summer with about 60 docking stations around the city. Brookline along with Cambridge and Somerville are expected to join in the network this year. For a membership fee, Hubway allows users to borrow bicycles for short trips and return them at any docking station in the regional network.

Levine said the program will cost the town about $400,000 over three years, but almost all of the money is coming from state and federal grants, as well as donations.
Brookline will have at least one bicycle docking station in Coolidge Corner and possibly two, Levine said.
Click to expand...
 
Alta apparently does not shuffle their experienced people from other cities in order to get things done whenever a new system launches or is too fixated on the NYC $$$ opportunities to devote equal expansion resources. It is absolutely baffling to me that none of the expansion process was negotiated over the winter shutdown. It is a matter of gross incompetence to schedule the opening of a business, heavily dependent on weather, at a point in the year when half of the best weather has already past. I do wonder if Alta is complacent due to the large corporate, institutional, and public sponsorship of the system to the point of not really bothering to get their act together.
 
"Alta apparently does not shuffle their experienced people from other cities in order to get things done whenever a new system launches"

Incorrect, they do.

"It is absolutely baffling to me that none of the expansion process was negotiated over the winter shutdown"

It was, and still is being negotiated. You want to know what is taking the longest? Boston, Cambridge and Brookline coming to their own agreement on the rules of how the system would be run. You think lawyers like doing things quickly? How would they bill hundreds of hours if they did that?

"I do wonder if Alta is complacent due to the large corporate, institutional, and public sponsorship of the system to the point of not really bothering to get their act together. "

Alta gets paid based on the number of stations on the street. Why would they not want the expansion to happen asap?

From the article "Levine said he’s hoping to have the contract finalized within the next couple of weeks, but once the town orders its bicycle docking stations, it could be up to 16 weeks before the stations will be received."

Expansion resources are irrelevant when there are no stations to deploy. Alta can't deploy what it doesn't have.

There is no launch happening in NYC until months from now. Why would Alta want to delay the Boston expansion so that it was happening at the same time as the launch in NYC? They have every reason to want this expansion to be done before NYC starts.
 
Your answers make sense at face value. Although in practice Alta isn't displaying that sense publicly. The lack of any news updates or March relaunch information on Hubway's website as of this posting only reinforces this. If they have their act together why is it often that it appears they do not?

This isn't just a Boston centric question. I spend a good amount of time in D.C. visiting one of my daughters and my wife's family and Capitol Bikeshare shares some of same issues. Why does Alta not appear to learn from previous mistakes city to city? Difference in contract? Or is each system's management significantly isolated from one-another; to the point of not sharing information on what to do and not do from their previous experience?
 
People seem to think that once the city chooses Alta and hands over the cash for the stations that Alta is left alone to run the system as it see's fit. That could not be further from the truth.

The client makes almost every decision related to marketing, communications, pricing, station locations, etc. All Alta does is execute the plan the client lays out and works to meet the service levels in their contract.

I agree that their are lots of things wrong with Hubway. However you'd be better off complaining to the Mayors Office or Boston Bikes than you would be complaining to Alta.

Alta makes recommendations to it's clients all the time. Have you ever heard the saying about leading a horse to water?
 
nobody said:
The client makes almost every decision related to marketing, communications, pricing, station locations, etc. All Alta does is execute the plan the client lays out and works to meet the service levels in their contract./quote]

So essentially Alta is a hardware vendor with a maintenance & support contract and all other operations are left up to the client?
Click to expand...
 
Luker, why do you suspect that it's the private sector, not the public sector that is holding up expansion? That's not a leading question or anything - I'm just curious because I assume the opposite (and mine is a 100% ignorant assumption - I have no inside knowledge on the situation).
 
So has anybody seen any actual information about Cambridge/Somerville expansion? We do all remember those "Hubway will expand to Cambridge and Somerville when it reopens in the spring" news stories from a few months ago, right?

nobody, I hate to be one of those crotchety internet people, but I do have to commend your last reply for conveying the tamest "you're an ignorant a-hole for questioning Alta" message of your posts so far.
 
I totally agree with nobody's posts. I highly doubt Alta is to blame. I don't see why they would be sabotaging themselves and slowing the development of their system. It's all local politics at work. The City gets blamed in every other thread and suddenly Alta gets the blame here? Boston/Cambridge/Brookline says "We want bikes." and Alta says "Sure here you go." If Cambridge doesn't say "We want bikes now" then why is it suddenly Alta's fault that bikes aren't hitting the streets?

Piggiston, go back a page. Someone posted an article saying the expansion has been pushed back to at least the summer.
 
AmericanFolkLegend said:
Luker, why do you suspect that it's the private sector, not the public sector that is holding up expansion? That's not a leading question or anything - I'm just curious because I assume the opposite (and mine is a 100% ignorant assumption - I have no inside knowledge on the situation).
Click to expand...

I didn't think a company would enter into a business which would be hamstrung to accomplish the simplest things required to serve customers due to the required approval of an outside committee. It's the equivalent of having a consistently long line at one's store and not being allowed to open a second cash register without a permit. I assumed that all Alta was required to have was approval for each docking station location and the number of bikes, dispersion of those numbers, enlargement of stations within a permitted area, company communications, etc. were all under their direct control as being selected to "operate a bikeshare system". I did not realize that their contract really amounts to each municipality centrally controlling the system's operation like some unenthusiastic Gosplan administrative district and Alta merely renting them the equipment and maintenance personnel.
 
Lurker said:
I didn't think a company would enter into a business which would be hamstrung to accomplish the simplest things required to serve customers due to the required approval of an outside committee. It's the equivalent of having a consistently long line at one's store and not being allowed to open a second cash register without a permit. I assumed that all Alta was required to have was approval for each docking station location and the number of bikes, dispersion of those numbers, enlargement of stations within a permitted area, company communications, etc. were all under their direct control as being selected to "operate a bikeshare system". I did not realize that their contract really amounts to each municipality centrally controlling the system's operation like some unenthusiastic Gosplan administrative district and Alta merely renting them the equipment and maintenance personnel.
Click to expand...

Are you talking about in Boston? Or Brookline? Or Cambridge? I can think of several factors that would delay deployment across all three. Liability, for one, could take months to negotiate.
 
No I'm talking in general. I have a hard time understanding how taxis, pedicabs, and bike shops renting individual bikes are somehow far less regulated than a system whose only principle difference is occasionally occupying public property. Even with some public money involved, I assumed all liability would always fall on the private operator, and that all locations not on public property wouldn't require public review or approval. It was my understanding that once an operator was approved to run a system in a city that they would be operating as a private enterprise with a public subsidy, with the subsidies having strings attached such as a requirement to put a few stations at government dictated spots, rather than a government sponsored enterprise being operated by an outside contractor (like MBCR).
 
Lurker said:
No I'm talking in general. I have a hard time understanding how taxis, pedicabs, and bike shops renting individual bikes are somehow far less regulated than a system whose only principle difference is occasionally occupying public property. Even with some public money involved, I assumed all liability would always fall on the private operator, and that all locations not on public property wouldn't require public review or approval. It was my understanding that once an operator was approved to run a system in a city that they would be operating as a private enterprise with a public subsidy, with the subsidies having strings attached such as a requirement to put a few stations at government dictated spots, rather than a government sponsored enterprise being operated by an outside contractor (like MBCR).
Click to expand...

Lurk -- I don't understand your initial premise " how taxis, pedicabs, and bike shops renting individual bikes are somehow far less regulated than a system"

Taxis are so regulated that the number (# of medalions is fixed) type of vehicle, coverage, fare, etc., are all determined by the city. Certainly taxis are more constrained by the City than is the Hubway system -- where the City sets the location of the stations and pricing for the rental. i'm not sure about pedicabs or horse drawn carriages Each method of transportation from Segways to Buses and Swan Boats must petition the City to receive a permit for operations, and then in exchange the City feels compelled to make rules for the different modes -- ostensibly to protect life and limb.
 
All other forms of transportation have a set series of rules with the license and thereafter one is free to operate their business within the rules. My question is why Hubway supposedly has to go through review prior to making any business decisions. It seems like there aren't really regulations, but more of a negotiation process for every aspect of operation, which seems onerous to the point of me wondering why any company would willingly get into such a venture.
 
Lurker said:
... which seems onerous to the point of me wondering why any company would willingly get into such a venture.
Click to expand...

Why does any company get into any venture? because they think they can make a profit.
 
Lurker said:
So essentially Alta is a hardware vendor with a maintenance & support contract and all other operations are left up to the client?
Click to expand...

The hardware vendors is bixi (ie, government of montreal if you follow the lines all the way back...), Alta buys the bikes from them and is in charge of installing, maintaining and operating the system. Theoretically, Alta could ditch Bixi and buy their hardware elsewhere, but apparently they've got a tight relationship going.

The time frame is a concern which I brought up when NYC announced they also picked Bixi. Bixi has a limited production ability, and their number 1 focus will be NYC, just like they went all out to get London stocked and ready to go 2 years ago.

Having their hardware in NYC sells (their brand to future cities). Boston? Not so much.

Ditto with Alta. DC is great. Boston is nice. But NYC is where the showtime is.

Im concerned that if Boston wants 40 stations, those wont be delivered until NYC gets the 500 they order.

Arlington, VA said as much last fall when asked why they didnt get the stations out in the Fall as they said they would. Arlington claimed they wanted to, but there was a production backup and hardware wouldnt be ready until spring.

Arlington has installed 7 stations in the past 2 weeks.



I am also concerned with the timeline and don't buy the excuse. Remember, MAPC (Metropolitan Area Planning Council), not Boston, was in charge of the RFP, and that was announced way back in fall 2009 for a spring 2010 deployment. The reason MAPC was in charge was exactly to avoid all the legal stuff nobody is talking about. The contract was signed on a regional basis to cut red tape.

So this talk of Boston and boston bikes being in charge isn't fully true. Yes, Nicole and such were part of the team that picked the winner, but Boston is just one member of the MAPC.



It's 2012 now. 2 years after the original planned launch date, and they still havent been able to ink deals to get stations placed in hassle free locations like plazas and parks....?

Back in 2009, Cambridge was SUPER excited to get on board. Somerville and Brookline were excited, but wanted to see Boston and Cambridge do stuff first.

Choo -- i'm guessing Cambridge wants to arrange a number of major employers to sign-on and be on the "team" when things are formally unveiled:
MIT, Harvard, Novartis, Biogen, Amgen, Genzyme, Draper, Volpe, Google, Microsoft, Edu First, MOS, EMC, SAO, Lesley -- would be a good start -- note this list did not include anything near to Alewife
Click to expand...

Thats right, having corporations and schools buy in is a big deal, because it gives access to land, and lowers costs (if the institution "buys" a station).

But it's not required. The only one that has to sign off on placing a station in a useless plaza or park is city hall.

And of course, we know Harvard is fully on board, because they sponsored the 4 allston campus stations....stations which are somewhat useless on their own. To make those stations work, they need stations in cambridge.


Now lets imagine for a second that its Cambridge throwing up red tape, which is odd because they were so eager to get the system. Whats stopping Harvard from placing a station on private land in their campus?

I dont buy nobodys story that the roadblock is everyone else. The one constant is Alta.


Mind you, it's march 4th.

The system was supposed to launch again on March 1. And yet we have not a word on whats going on, neither on their facebook page nor their website.

How can nobody blame lawyers and Boston in such for an organization not meeting their launch date...for the second year in a row? The exact same locations are going in right, so there's no red tape.


Back in November (11/12/2011)
According to their facebook page, Hubway stations are being removed for winter starting November 21st and will return March 1st. The removal will happen over a ten day period.
Click to expand...


As recently as last week:
Hubway The system was LIVE until Dec.1st and plans to go LIVE Mar.1st - Here in NE weather is a factor. We're hoping tomorrow's snow isn't too bad.
February 28 at 12:40pm · Like
Click to expand...


....so what happened?

And how can nobody blame Boston for having terrible PR? The contract states that Alta is responsible for advertising and such. Why would Boston, masters of the unvierse, clamp down on a social media campaign along the lines of "get ready guys, we launch in 3 days!!!!"
 
jass said:
The hardware vendors is bixi (ie, government of montreal if you follow the lines all the way back...), Alta buys the bikes from them and is in charge of installing, maintaining and operating the system. Theoretically, Alta could ditch Bixi and buy their hardware elsewhere, but apparently they've got a tight relationship going.

The time frame is a concern which I brought up when NYC announced they also picked Bixi. Bixi has a limited production ability, and their number 1 focus will be NYC, just like they went all out to get London stocked and ready to go 2 years ago.

Having their hardware in NYC sells (their brand to future cities). Boston? Not so much.

Ditto with Alta. DC is great. Boston is nice. But NYC is where the showtime is.

Im concerned that if Boston wants 40 stations, those wont be delivered until NYC gets the 500 they order.

Arlington, VA said as much last fall when asked why they didnt get the stations out in the Fall as they said they would. Arlington claimed they wanted to, but there was a production backup and hardware wouldnt be ready until spring.

Arlington has installed 7 stations in the past 2 weeks.



I am also concerned with the timeline and don't buy the excuse. Remember, MAPC (Metropolitan Area Planning Council), not Boston, was in charge of the RFP, and that was announced way back in fall 2009 for a spring 2010 deployment. The reason MAPC was in charge was exactly to avoid all the legal stuff nobody is talking about. The contract was signed on a regional basis to cut red tape.

So this talk of Boston and boston bikes being in charge isn't fully true. Yes, Nicole and such were part of the team that picked the winner, but Boston is just one member of the MAPC.



It's 2012 now. 2 years after the original planned launch date, and they still havent been able to ink deals to get stations placed in hassle free locations like plazas and parks....?

Back in 2009, Cambridge was SUPER excited to get on board. Somerville and Brookline were excited, but wanted to see Boston and Cambridge do stuff first.



Thats right, having corporations and schools buy in is a big deal, because it gives access to land, and lowers costs (if the institution "buys" a station).

But it's not required. The only one that has to sign off on placing a station in a useless plaza or park is city hall.

And of course, we know Harvard is fully on board, because they sponsored the 4 allston campus stations....stations which are somewhat useless on their own. To make those stations work, they need stations in cambridge.


Now lets imagine for a second that its Cambridge throwing up red tape, which is odd because they were so eager to get the system. Whats stopping Harvard from placing a station on private land in their campus?

I dont buy nobodys story that the roadblock is everyone else. The one constant is Alta.


Mind you, it's march 4th.

The system was supposed to launch again on March 1. And yet we have not a word on whats going on, neither on their facebook page nor their website.

How can nobody blame lawyers and Boston in such for an organization not meeting their launch date...for the second year in a row? The exact same locations are going in right, so there's no red tape.


Back in November (11/12/2011)



As recently as last week:



....so what happened?

And how can nobody blame Boston for having terrible PR? The contract states that Alta is responsible for advertising and such. Why would Boston, masters of the unvierse, clamp down on a social media campaign along the lines of "get ready guys, we launch in 3 days!!!!"
Click to expand...

Jass __ MAPC Can not sign anything which has financial obligations of tax payers -- I t has no money of its own -- it has no legal existence -- it is strictly advisory and consultative

You might own a business and lack technical expertise -- so you hire someone like me -- a technical consultant -- I can write your RFP, conduct negotiations and even select the winning vendor on your behalf -- but I don't have the legal authority to sign the contract for you.

This is the reason why many years ago, I suggested the creation of a Metropolitan County -- roughly everything inside I-495 which would be gifted by the Commonwealth with all the various M's e.g. T, Port, Parking, Convention, etc. and the power to tax -- in exchange the voters would get to elect officials with regional authority.

This has several positive benefits one of which is that a Hubway could be implemented with the stroke of one pen for the whole region
 
from what I've read elsewhere, the system is supposed to start up again on March 15. Maybe they are hedging their bets on publicity until they can be more sure that weather will not interfere.
 
Piggiston: I apologize for coming off that way. I do not think anyone on this board is an ignorant person and I definitely don't think anyone is an asshole. I'd be happy to sit in a bar with any of you and have a beer while discussing these topics. I have knowldedge of these systems and I am/was trying to share that with people who seem genuinely interested about it. I can accept your criticism and try to do better.

Lurker: There is an important distinction here as far as who the customer really is. Alta's customer is the city, not the Hubway members. Alta's revenue/profit comes from their operation of the stations, it is only loosely tied to actual system revenue. The more stations they operate the more they get paid (assuming they meet all their SLA's). If the city decided tomorrow to give away memberships for free Alta wouldn't care one bit, they will make money per their contract either way. Whether the city comes up with that money through sponsorships or through member revenue makes no difference.

So while these delays and 'red tape' type issues slow the growth of the system, they don't keep Alta from profiting.

You say "It was my understanding that once an operator was approved to run a system in a city that they would be operating as a private enterprise with a public subsidy, with the subsidies having strings attached such as a requirement to put a few stations at government dictated spots, rather than a government sponsored enterprise being operated by an outside contractor (like MBCR). "

I would say Alta's situation is closer the MBCR situation than to a private enterprise.


Jass: The delay in bringing on the other jurisdictions is completely unrelated to the initial RFP. Before the other jurisdictions could come on they all (plus Alta) had to agree on a whole range of issues. All of these issues were included in something called a Memorandum of Agreement. That agreement took many many months to get signed. This is a fact. Without that agreement in place the new jurisdictions could not place their equipment order.

This agreement is a really important part of a multi-jurisdiction system and Alta gave extensive insight on how it should be constructed but ultimately each jurisdiction had to fight for what it saw as it's own best interests.

Let me speak to one of your examples and try to provide insight. You say "Now lets imagine for a second that its Cambridge throwing up red tape, which is odd because they were so eager to get the system. Whats stopping Harvard from placing a station on private land in their campus?"

Here is a brief explanation.

The station itself belongs to Cambridge, not Harvard. Harvard cannot buy the station from Alta, it can only give sponsorship money directly to Cambridge. If Cambridge cannot place its station order (because it has no rights to own a Hubway station due to not having yet signed the memorandum of agreement) then even though Harvard might be ready for a station Cambridge cannot yet provide it.

Additionally, Alta cannot provide a Hubway station to a jurisdiction it does not have a contract with. And per it's contract with Boston it cannot enter into a contract with another Jurisdiction without approval from Boston. Which they won't give until the MOA is signed.

Even though the MAPC was involved in the RFP process Alta has a contract with the City of Boston, not MAPC. And Alta will have entirely separate contracts with each jurisdiction. The MOA is in place for system wide issues such as general policies, prices, liability and how the revenue is distributed.

Say Boston wants to raise the price and Brookline wants to lower it. How do you settle that issue without hammering out an agreement that provides structure to making those decisions?

I'm am sorry if I sound like Alta is perfect. No company is perfect. All I am trying to do is provide insight into the fact that Alta is simply a contractor. Could they do a better job of updating the website? Sure they could, can they decide exactly when the stations go out? No, not even close.

You mention that the contract says Alta is responsible for advertising and such. This is true in so far as they have to do the work and bear the costs of the advertising the city wants done. If the city decides to partner with Groupon Alta has to do all the legwork to make that happen. It's like being in charge of permitting. Alta has to file the paperwork, pay the fees, submit the drawings, keep the permits on file, etc. But that doesn't mean they get to site the stations.

Now NYC will be a completely different ball game because Alta will be in a position for the first time where it's customers are the people riding the bikes and the city will just provide guidelines that Alta has to work within. It will truly be the first time that a large scale bike share system will be run like a private business. It will be interesting to see how they fare, and how they are able to keep all their balls in the air. This bikeshare thing is just getting started, there will probably be 3-5 more cities choosing a vendor this year and it's likely Alta will win at least half of those.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top