District sharing boxes
SmartCity App as the mobile access to services…
Smart lampposts – “Open-urban-labs”
Smart Data Platform
Two Shared district box access + (IT Integration)
Smart city app as the mobile…
4 - Munich Data management platform & smart services

E-bike sharing scheme in Simmering – 18 (SYC)

Vienna E-Mobility

General facts

Description & main goal

Introducing e-bike sharing scheme in project area with 13 bikes, 1 cargo-e-bike and stations. Goal: public transport + e-bikes cover all mobility needs, Development of new hardware and lock, and lock,

Deployment area
Simmering
Involved actors and their role

Urban planning department: participatory planning workshop
GB*: co creation process
WSTW: co creation, use cases, hard- and software definition
Upstream: software definition
Trendwerk: maintenance e-bikes
Sycube: fleet operator, locks

Key-contact person
CEO Thomas Einwögerer
Main challenges & risks
  • change mobility behaviour
  • no appropriate business model for the maintenance of the mobility stations after the project
Delivery date
M20

Specific facts

Public / private (yes/no)

Public

Shared (yes/no)

yes

Free-floating / station-based

Station-based + electronic lock integrated in the frame for intermediate stops

Terms of use (e.g. start & return)

One way – return at any station

Type & number of recharging points

2 Terminal, 13 charging and locking points

Stations in project area (#)

2 installed stations + 1-2 virtual stations

Business area beyond project (yes/no)

no

Fleet strength in project/beyond (#)

13 e-bikes, 1 cargo-e-bike

Type of vehicles (e.g. pedelec, cargo-bike)

Pedelecs and cargo-pedelec

Range of vehicles (km)

Approx. 40-70 km

Subscribers in project area/beyond (#)

online

Registration options (e.g. online)

app

Access options (e.g. app, card)

bill (monthly)

Payment options (e.g. monthly bill)

tbd

Costs for users (e.g. € cost/hour)

no

Combination with charging incentives (yes/no)
Combination with public transport incentives (yes/no)

E-bike sharing system is in close cooperation with mobility point to have sound and integrative concept.

Combination with app / electronic devices (e.g. routing)

app

Combination with other services (e.g. sensing) (yes/no)

1 additional cargo pedelec (bakfiets) in project area, which isn´t part of sharing scheme (see http://www.smartertogether.at/e-graetzelrad/). Rental platform:  http://www.graetzlrad.wien/.

Main challenges & risks
  • change mobility behaviour
  • no appropriate business model for the maintenance of the mobility stations after the project
Implementation status

In which phase is the project (Planning, Implementation, Operation or Evaluation)?
Transition from preparation phase to implementation phase
What is the current implementation status/ what is the current activity step?
The e-bike sharing station is near the first product launch.
A request for a temporary station is made to MA 46 (municipal department for traffic management, street cleaning and vehicle fleet)
The cooperation with the mobility point project is ongoing.
Is the implementation process on time or are there any deviations (time wise)? Please outline any changes and reasons.
On time.
Have there been changes regarding the planned solution? Please outline any changes and reasons.
The cooperation with the mobility point project is tighter (possibly the locations will be partly the same).
Two 2 e-bikes were changed to one cargo bike.
Which project steps were performed since the last project reporting?
The technical concept was finished (bike type, terminal type, development of a blue tooth lock system, booking system – hard and software).
 

Complete 30%

Risk and challenges

Which risks & challenges is the project currently facing?

There is the risk that the district does not approve the locations in public areas.
Another risk is that the demand for e-bike sharing is too little (not economic feasible). 
The service is exclusively useable for App users.
Vandalism in public areas could become a problem. 
The winter operation (battery and charging behavior with low temperatures) could become a challenge.

Which are critical or seem invincible? Please provide a detailed description

A rejection from the district would be the biggest challenge.

Which previously identified risks and challenges have you managed successfully and how

For increasing the economic feasibility, the bike sharing will be integrated into the mobility point. 
There is a cooperation work ongoing for integrating (stations will be visible) the e-bike sharing into the Wien Mobil App.
 

Lessons Learned and Recommendations

Which lessons learned can be derived up to this point from the implementation process?

Have external recommendations / lessons learnt from other projects (not in the WIKI) been used for the project development? 
- If yes, which ones and how?
Would this example be a good add to the Wiki?
Previous experiences from Sycube (e.g. e-bike sharing in Aspern).
Have relevant internal recommendations / lessons from the WIKI’s best practices been used for the project development? 
If yes, which ones and how?
No.
Has the project development / implementation been supported by the SMARTER TOGETHER peer-to-peer knowledge exchange and cooperative problem solving?
If yes, how?
No.
Which lessons learned can be derived up to this point from the implementation process?
Additional blue tooth locks make it possible to lock the bikes independently from the station. 
All bikes are GPS tracked which make a free floating system or a virtual station system possible.
What could be done better in comparable future projects (what needs to be done and what needs to be prevented)
Further increase of communication with future users. 
Advance test of future location and analyses of possible locations.
Financial cooperation partner for increasing the economic feasibility. 
Standard integration into new built areas.
Would you describe the project as best practice project and interesting for the WIKI? If yes, in what regard?
Yes
 

Next steps & To Do ́s

Please shortly outline the next steps planned for the implementation of the project.
Investments will be arranged.
The approval procedures for the temporary station (especially power connection) will be finished.
Are there additional steps planned due to occurred challenges? Which corrective activities have been taken?
Sycube had difficulties with the pre-financing of the investments. 
Desk researches about national possibilities for intermediate financing were carried out. 
European pre-financing was moved from one partner to Sycube. 
 

Implementation status

In which phase is the project (Planning, Implementation, Operation or Evaluation)?
Transition from preparation phase to implementation phase
What is the current implementation status/ what is the current activity step?
The examination of a fourth location at the central cemetery for a second e-bike station is ongoing.
Is the implementation process on time or are there any deviations (time wise)? Please outline any changes and reasons.
E-Bike sharing is delayed because of much higher barriers for installing an electricity connection with reasonable costs.
Have there been changes regarding the planned solution? Please outline any changes and reasons.
The cooperation with the mobility point project is tighter (possibly the locations will be partly the same).
Two 2 e-bikes were changed to one cargo bike.
Which project steps were performed since the last project reporting?
The temporary station was approved by MA46 (municipal department for traffic management and organization).
The technical concept and system was approved internally.
In addition to the station at the mobility point, three other locations were examined, but without success (Hauffgasse, Hörbigergründe, location of a municipal department inside the target area). Among others, the running costs were daunting.
 

Complete 40%

Risk and challenges

Which risks & challenges is the project currently facing?

The used product is a high quality product which results in high costs for material as well as development costs. The question is if this product is suitable for the target group. (higher running cost respectively higher tariff)

The temporary station results in high costs for the electricity connection. This is a risk because the final station isn´t approved yet.

Which are critical or seem invincible? Please provide a detailed description

A rejection from the district would be the biggest challenge. 
Due to the cost thematic the potential for a broad roll out respectively the replication is rather small.

Which previously identified risks and challenges have you managed successfully and how

For increasing the economic feasibility, the bike sharing will be integrated into the mobility point. 
There is a cooperation work ongoing for integrating (stations will be visible) the e-bike sharing into the Wien Mobil App.

Lessons Learned and Recommendations

Which lessons learned can be derived up to this point from the implementation process?

Have external recommendations / lessons learnt from other projects (not in the WIKI) been used for the project development? 
- If yes, which ones and how?
Would this example be a good add to the Wiki?
Previous experiences from Sycube (e.g. e-bike sharing in Aspern).
Have relevant internal recommendations / lessons from the WIKI’s best practices been used for the project development? 
If yes, which ones and how?
No.
Has the project development / implementation been supported by the SMARTER TOGETHER peer-to-peer knowledge exchange and cooperative problem solving?
If yes, how?
No.
Which lessons learned can be derived up to this point from the implementation process?
Additional blue tooth locks make it possible to lock the bikes independently from the station. 
All bikes are GPS tracked which make a free floating system or a virtual station system possible.
A cooperation with a company (or similar) for an e-bike station enables a win-win situation for the company (a special treat for the employees) as well as for FYC (better financing, better utilization rate).
What could be done better in comparable future projects (what needs to be done and what needs to be prevented)
Further increase of communication with future users. 
Advance test of future location and analyses of possible locations.
Financial cooperation partner for increasing the economic feasibility. 
Standard integration into new built areas.
Would you describe the project as best practice project and interesting for the WIKI? If yes, in what regard?
Yes
 

Next steps & To Do ́s

Please shortly outline the next steps planned for the implementation of the project.
It will be decided if the temporary station is reasonable or if the e-bike station will be realized directly together with the mobility point.
Are there additional steps planned due to occurred challenges? Which corrective activities have been taken?
For potentially increasing the utilization rate the project team is looking for at least a second e-bike sharing station.
 

Implementation status

In which phase is the project (Planning, Implementation, Operation or Evaluation)?
Transition from implementation phase to operation phase
What is the current implementation status/ what is the current activity step?
One station was installed at the central cemetery in April 2018. 

The tests for equipment and technical solutions (card, app, lock, bike etc.) are finished.
Is the implementation process on time or are there any deviations (time wise)? Please outline any changes and reasons.
E-Bike sharing is delayed because of much higher barriers for installing an electricity connection with reasonable costs.
Have there been changes regarding the planned solution? Please outline any changes and reasons.
The cooperation with the mobility point project is tighter (possibly the locations will be partly the same).
Two 2 e-bikes were changed to one cargo bike. Hopefully more e-bikes will be realized in comparison to the initially planned amount.
Which project steps were performed since the last project reporting?
Cooperation partners for additional stations were unsuccessfully searched. 

The temporary pilot location was not realized due to too high costs for the power connection.
 

Complete 50%

Risk and challenges

Which risks & challenges is the project currently facing?

As the system covers only a small area (isolated application) the user acceptance could be too small. Also vandalism, susceptibility to errors respectively the economic feasibility are risks.

Which are critical or seem invincible? Please provide a detailed description

A rejection from the district would be the biggest challenge. 
Due to the cost thematic the potential for a broad roll out respectively the replication is rather small.

Which previously identified risks and challenges have you managed successfully and how

For increasing the economic feasibility, the bike sharing will be integrated into the mobility point. 
There is a cooperation work ongoing for integrating (stations will be visible) the e-bike sharing into the Wien Mobil App.

Lessons Learned and Recommendations

Which lessons learned can be derived up to this point from the implementation process?

Have external recommendations / lessons learnt from other projects (not in the WIKI) been used for the project development? 
- If yes, which ones and how?
Would this example be a good add to the Wiki?
Previous experiences from Sycube (e.g. e-bike sharing in Aspern).
Have relevant internal recommendations / lessons from the WIKI’s best practices been used for the project development? 
If yes, which ones and how?
No.
Has the project development / implementation been supported by the SMARTER TOGETHER peer-to-peer knowledge exchange and cooperative problem solving?
If yes, how?
No.
Which lessons learned can be derived up to this point from the implementation process?
Additional blue tooth locks make it possible to lock the bikes independently from the station. 
All bikes are GPS tracked which make a free floating system or a virtual station system possible.
A cooperation with a company (or similar) for an e-bike station enables a win-win situation for the company (a special treat for the employees) as well as for FYC (better financing, better utilization rate).
What could be done better in comparable future projects (what needs to be done and what needs to be prevented)
Further increase of communication with future users. 
Advance test of future location and analyses of possible locations.
Financial cooperation partner for increasing the economic feasibility. 
Standard integration into new built areas.
Would you describe the project as best practice project and interesting for the WIKI? If yes, in what regard?
Yes.
 

Next steps & To Do ́s

Please shortly outline the next steps planned for the implementation of the project.
12 e-bikes will be at the mobility station. 

The interface to the data platform is under construction. The data will be transferred automatically (in an anonymous form) – frequency of usage, charging status, driven kilometers, energy demand etc.
Are there additional steps planned due to occurred challenges? Which corrective activities have been taken?
For potentially increasing the utilization rate the project team is looking for at least a second e-bike sharing station.