Agenda item

Report of the Director of Environment and Sustainability.

 

This report outlines the progress made in enhancing the dockless bike hire schemes in Camden and what further actions are planned going forward.

 

 

 

Consideration was given to the report of the Director of Environment and Sustainability.

 

The Committee noted the written submission of Hamish Birchall on sustainability concerns regarding the e-scooter and e-bike hire trial and noted that Professor Kay Axhausen was present to answer questions on his paper about mode choice, sustainability and the environmental impacts of shared micro-mobility.

 

Professor Kay Axhausen gave the following responses to Committee members questions:

 

·       He was not aware of the work done by Steer and could not therefore comment on how they arrived at 8% mode shift from cars.

·       The starting point for discussion about transport modal shift in London was the London Area Transport Study which conducted a big survey of transport in London.

·       The Zurich study of the environmental impact of shared micro mobility was based on intensive observation of the impact of shared systems because each person using each vehicle could be tracked using a GPS tracking survey. It was possible for Camden to conduct similar observation perhaps jointly with other boroughs by spreading the cost.

·       The learning from the study was that it could not be assumed that shared systems would result in a beneficial environmental impact, the modes replaced, vehicles used and mode of operation needed to be looked at to determine the carbon impact.

·       Local authorities could improve its policies in this area by looking at local numbers derived from the London Area Transport Study and in collaboration with TfL looking at the mode choice behaviour for the boroughs, so they had an idea whether the numbers provided by the operators were realistic.

·       In central London, a lot of the shared systems appeared to be driven by tourists and an option would be to look at the alternative impact of a tourist on the tube or on a bus and then also consider the behaviour of the local community.

·       Linear transport studies should provide a clearer picture of what to expect.

·       The numbers provided by the operators appeared to be high, this would need to be cross checked and verified, the paper by Steer might be a good point to start from.

·       It should not be surprising that the data had indicated that mass deployment of e-bikes had little impact on car use, given that shared bicycles were mostly used as last mile, first mile modes and could not replace the car because these were not trips undertaken by car.

·       What was different was where people acquired their own e-bike or scooter which was available when and where they needed it and was a different policy. Ownership of privately owned bikes and scooters was probably more worthwhile than having big reliance on shared systems.

·       In terms of whether the figures quoted from the Dockless Bike providers about carbon emissions saved and fewer motor vehicle trips were plausible these would have to be considered in appropriate context before determining if these were plausible figures.

·       It was important for the Council to monitor the progress E-Bike Hire firms made on their life cycle analysis by requesting properly verified and audited numbers and not just accepting unverified figures, so that the numbers could be considered in a bigger context and determine whether they made a positive contribution to the CO2 balance.

 

Alex Berwin (Head of Policy, Human Forest) and Hal Stevenson (Lime) provided the following responses to members questions.

 

·       At the moment Human Forest had a buffer in place of 30 metres diameter around the parking bays which was to account for any GPS drift.

·       This was set up as a trial as Human Forest only started operating in Camden at the beginning of May/June 2023.  It would be reduced to 10 metres diameter to determine if this solved the problem of e-bikes being piled up outside parking bays.

·       Human Forest workshops received alerts when there was an accumulation of Human Forest e-bikes in an area. The team would go out to rectify the situation, the response time was about 50 minutes.

·       Lime tried to get to any location where dockless bikes were obstructing within an hour. It had 250 people working across London, of which at least 15 were in Camden and able to respond to complaints when made.

·       The accumulation of bikes piling up outside of parking bays were definitely things that could be improved and Human Forest would actively look into improving these.

·       From the Lime perspective parking compliance had gone up from under 70% to 95%, in terms of managing compliance of e-bikes becoming obstructive due to oversaturation in agreed locations, in the short-term Lime had committed to employing more van drivers to drive around the borough to remove e-bikes obstructing pavements.

·       It was very clear on the app that the red zone was where bikes could not be parked.

·       A long-term solution would be to have more parking locations spread across a wider area so that there was more capacity and places for people to park the e-bikes.

·       In terms of Lime pricing for e-bike journeys, the first 10 minutes were free, then it cost 23pence per minute and 25pence to park in a bay. Human Forest had different options for one off users and regular users, such as a bundle costing £3.99 as well as monthly subscriptions costing £1.50 a day where you could have two 30-minute trips.

·       Human Forest tried to make the service as accessible and affordable for people as possible for those commuters that wanted to switch to using the bike.

·       Part of the revenue share generated, Lime put back into the borough to reinvest in active travel and cycling schemes.

·       Lime needed to make sure it was pricing its services in a way that was affordable, accessible, sustainable and financially viable.

·       The hacking issue had been fixed with the exception of a few bikes that Lime were unable to retrieve.

·       Lime rolled out a hardware and software update across the whole of the London fleet that was put into place at the end of October 2023.

·       This had been a huge factor in improving parking of dockless bikes in Camden and across London.

·       On drink riding both e-bike companies had similar measures in place such as sobriety test.

·       Of the 200,000 trips a month, 5% of those that did not end up with the e-bike parked properly had warnings and or fines attached to them.

·       If there was an issue with any of the e-bikes, there were clear contact details as well as a QR code where a team could be contacted to respond to any issues raised.

·       There were also conditions and clear instructions requesting that patrons check the bike thoroughly before using.

·       There was an app available where any issues with the bike could be reported.

·       Both Lime and Human Forest worked with the Council to promote the use of helmets when riding e-bikes. Discounts on trips were provided if a photograph was taken showing the customer wearing a helmet.

·       The Police and other Enforcement agencies had raised security concerns about having closed compartments storing helmets because there was the potential to put other dangerous things in compartments, particularly given parking locations proximity to major transport infrastructure.

·       The other issue was that for health reasons riders did not like using shared helmets.

·       Lime had its own in-house specific fleet of vehicles which transported the bikes. The fleet was transitioning to a fully electric fleet.

·       Both operators also had apps where any issue with the bike could be reported.

·       Human Forest sent a lot of educational emails to customers reminding them about how to use the bikes and to park responsibly. There was generally high compliance not only in Camden but across the whole of London.

·       Human Forest had also produced artificial intelligence into the app which could detect if a bike was parked inappropriately and this had improved parking compliance.

·       Camden had some of the highest parking compliance in London, the scheme had come a long way from when it was initially introduced.

·       The key performance indicators were quite rigorous, with Human Forest also reaching a 95% compliance rate. The company was always seeking improvements but did not believe that increasing the KPI would fix a lot of the issues.

·       Similarly latest compliance figures from Lime were 95% which the company had shared on a monthly basis with officers and where happy to share with the Committee in an easily understandable form.

·       Lime used similar technology to Human Forest and operated in more boroughs, having parking agreements with 15 boroughs.

·       9 of the boroughs had the same parking rules as Camden and were located in central London which was progress from the previous situation.

·       Lime also operated in a number of outer London Boroughs which required customers to leave bikes in marked locations such as the high street or a transport hub outside the tube station or if in a residential area able to leave the bike as long as it was not left obstructively.

·       Lime was holding itself to the standards it had been able to deliver and had no intention to let this slip.

·       The figure for mode shift from cars London wide was 8%.

·       Lime could work with Human Forest and Council Officers to provide borough specific evidence to the level of mode shift and the wider sustainability impact of e-bike shared micro mobility. Lime were happy to commit to this.

Action By: Lime and Human Forest/Principal Transport Planner

 

·       Lime would have liked to have had the opportunity to discuss the study with Professor Axhausen, it appeared however that the Professor had acknowledged that since the study had been written shared providers had made changes and improvement to e-bike hardware that negated the findings from the study relating to the vehicle’s life span.

·       Lime’s GEN 4 bike which was deployed in Camden and across London had a certified life span of 5 years. This could be verified and shared in some form with the Committee.

·       The Committee’s main concern in May last year was around parking compliance this had improved, however there appeared to be concern around the sustainability impact, if there was more Lime could do to address that it was something it could work towards.

·       Human Forest would continue to encourage customers to use the parking bays, it would also look to reduce the parking bay buffer and monitor this to ensure compliance increased.

·       Measures Human Forest used to enforce compliance included fines and suspension leading ultimately to banning customers for non-compliance.

·       Human Forest had banned 2 people since it started to provide its services in Camden.

·       Lime had a similar policy to Human Forest, had banned more people mainly because it had operated in Camden over a longer period.

·       Lime’s biggest focus now was to reduce overcrowded parking locations as these were creating more obstructions.

·       In the short term more resources were being deployed to move large numbers of bikes causing obstruction. In the long term the solution would be to work with the Council to identify and fund the implementation of more bays.

·       Another solution, although previously receiving a mixed reception and rejected was to access existing bike racks for parking of e-bikes. This could be an effective way of solving the parking problem.

·       Use of GPS on bikes in some instances was an effective tool to prevent some behaviour and in other contexts was inappropriate and could create serious safety concerns. For example, it would never be accurate enough to stop a customer riding on the pavement because of the close proximity to the road.

·       Some of the benefits of shared service were that the hardware and the maximum speed was limited to 15.5mph in the UK.

·       However, if residents were able to provide a time and a place where the pavement ride occurred this could be investigated and the user could be identified.

·       The operators cared about the issues raised by Councils and residents around parking management of dockless bikes, each operator had full responsibility for management of its fleet.

·       Unfortunately, a small number of people behaved anti-socially in relation to the bikes and e-scooters.

·       Climate change and global warming was having a massive impact on cities like London one of the causes of which was transport emissions. Cities like London were car dominated and an aim was to reallocate that space to reduce these emissions.

·       Lime had a fleet of 1000 and Human Forest 750 which had been agreed with Camden, the amount of parking space provided was not sufficient for the number of bikes. There was the need to provide more space for the existing bikes to accommodate the level of usage.

·       The bike operators had a very clear SLA with Camden to collect bikes being left outside the parking bays within an hour, on average for Human Forest the bikes were collected within 15 minutes.

·       With regards to hazards of bikes becoming trip hazards as a result of weather conditions such as high winds yesterday evening, the operators had teams out the entire day repositioning the bikes causing obstruction due to the weather. As indicated the operators had clear service level agreements with regards to parking compliance and collection of vehicles causing obstruction it was required to meet.

·       The level of regulation and oversight provided in the contract with the Council exceeded what was in the Dockless Code of Conduct document.

 

Answering a further question from Hamish Birchall on the availability of carbon life cycle analysis data from Lime and Human Forest, Hal Stevenson (Lime) and Alex Berwin (Human Forest) commented that:

 

Human Forest would be publishing its next sustainability report in the next couple of weeks. Human Forest scheme was fully climate neutral and transparent about emissions which was verified by independent experts. Lime had nothing to hide on sustainability and reported annually on their productions.

 

The Chair asked that both operators made the information on carbon life cycle analysis data available as requested.

Action By: Lime and Human Forest

 

The Director of Environment and Sustainability, the Transport and Travel Planning Manager and Principal Transport Planner made the following comments in response to members questions:

 

·       Both operators operated a no parking zone in the borough, although it worked slightly differently.

·       Since the last report to the Committee in May 2023 Dockless hire parking compliance had improved.

·       The Council carried out a mystery shopper exercise with regards to parking compliance and similar results in terms of compliance were achieved for both operators.

·       The Council had put some bays on a high priority list because of increased demand and the more likelihood of overflow. The operators were asked to monitor these more carefully, the Council also monitored these through mystery shopping and an Enforcement Officer.

·       The responsibilities of the Enforcement Officer did cover the operators’ compliance with the contract but also looked at other local environment issues such as highway obstructions and other things the Council received complaints about.

·       The Council used the Enforcement Officer to look at wider complaints and how it could create revenue to invest back into services to improve local communities.

 

A Committee member queried whether officers were rigorously and properly examining the carbon case for the Dockless Bike Hire Scheme (DBH) and whether the concerns raised about the life cycle assessment and mode shift to shared micro mobility had been considered.

The Chair asked that officers provided a written response to the Committee member.

Action By: Principal Transport Planner

 

The Committee thanked the operators for attending the meeting.

 

RESOLVED –

 

THAT the report be noted.