Tag Archives: micro-mobility

Seattle Contemplates On-street Bike, Scooter Parking

Users love the convenience of dockless, shared bikes and scooters, but not everyone is quite as enamored with the clutter they can create on sidewalks and curbs in between uses. Seattle, Wash., is considering establishing on-street parking spaces for the vehicles to help combat that.

The city council this week authorized the Seattle Department of Transportation to come up with a budget to create on-street parking zones for shared micro-mobility vehicles. The department was also asked to create a budget to establish on-sidewalk parking areas for scooters and bikes on every city block. And they’re talking about what fines could be established for user non-compliance.

Seattle joins a list of other cities debating how to offer shared micro-mobility without creating sidewalk crowding and pedestrian hazards. Read the whole story here. Has your organization had these discussions? Let us know on Forum.

A Different Fee Structure for E-scooters to Solve Curb Clutter

By Nathan Donnell

We live and die by supply and demand in the parking and mobility industry. We are challenged by the public, stakeholders, and business owners to have enough parking  while keeping the price at a reasonable level so as to not deter people from using the curb space. Obviously, I just defined supply and demand! I apologize for the elementary schooling but I have a method to my madness.

I spent a few days in three of the top 15 cities in the United States recently and because I’m a mobility geek, I couldn’t help but focus on the overall curb management in each city. The one thing all three cities had in common was that the supply and demand theory of micro-mobility vendors was way off. In one city, there were seven e-scooter vendors, each fighting for space on the curb. There wasn’t a street I walked down where I couldn’t find an e-scooter to ride. In fact, there was on an average of 20 scooters on each side of the street throughout each city, waiting for potential riders.

Cities and campuses have more control over micro-mobility vendors [vs. ride sharing as an example] by licensing each e-scooter and charging fees per ride; they also have access to data that should help make better policy decisions. Unfortunately, the supply outweighed the demand in all three cities to the point of cluttering the walkways and making it difficult to navigate without tripping hazards.

Why not charge each vendor a fee per scooter for the time it’s taking up curb space instead of a flat fee or per-ride fee? This may cause scooter vendors to be more selective in the number of scooters they drop off in hopes of getting more customers. Don’t get me wrong, I’m all for first- and last-mile mobility solutions. But we must find the sweet spot of supply and demand or all we’ve done is create another problem in our cities and on our campuses.

Nathan Donnell is director, western U.S. and Canada sales, curbside management solutions with Conduent.

Google Maps Adds Mixed Modes to Navigation Options

Google Maps

It’s not unusual anymore to get from point A to point B using a bus, a train, and bike- or scooter-share in a single journey. Google Maps announced yesterday it will soon add all those options and more to its trip navigation options, so commuters can plan their routes mixing everything from walking to micro-mobility to mass transit.

The new “mixed modes” option will shortly roll out under the site’s transit tab. Mass transit options will remain the primary mode of transportation there, but the site will figure in walking, ride-share, and micro-mobility options for those first and last miles, offering true door-to-door navigation for those not driving their own cars (it’ll still show parking options for those folks as well).

Read the whole story here.

D.C. Launches Shared Mopeds

Bikes, scooters, and now a new entry into the shared micro-mobility space: The shared moped has arrived. Washington, D.C. will welcome up to 400 mopeds this weekend into its growing micro-mobility system.

The battery-powered vehicles will each come with two helmets, hold two riders, and travel at speeds up to 30 mph. Users will register with the system and hitch their rides, so to speak, with an app; operators must be 21 years old, have valid driver licenses, and pass a background check, but do not need motorcycle licenses. The company will offer free daily lessons and the vehicles must operate only in roads but can park on sidewalks outside the downtown area. The operation will employ about 30 people.

Read the whole story here.

Looking Ahead: Moving Faster

The changing mobility ecosystem and its effects on the parking industry.

By Nathan Berry

THE TRANSPORTATION INDUSTRY has been transformed in the past few years, and 19-08 Looking Ahead: Moving Fasterinnovation shows no signs of slowing down. There are many new forms of transpor­tation, and citizens have dozens of options at their fingertips—public transit, electric scooters, dockless bikes, ride-hailing services, personal and shared vehicles—and autonomous vehicles are on the horizon. All of these modes are competing for valuable curb space, creating new challenges for cities to manage.
With all of these unprecedented changes and the As new modes of mobility are introduced, a new set fast pace of innovation, private companies, cities, and of challenges is forthcoming that expands beyond the universities are striving to stay on top of the trends traditional parking environment. Through conversa­and lead the industry by implementing more technolo-tions with city and mobility leaders, I have identified gy to improve and better manage their complex mobil-a few common themes organizations are trying to ad­ity ecosystems. dress as they strive to decrease congestion and create
more livable communities:

  • Managing the curb.
  • Collaborating among modes (parking, transit, micro-mobility, etc.).
  • Dealing with the introduction of scooters and dock-less bikes.
  • Leveraging technology for mobility management.

Curbside Management
In the past, parking departments have had a primary focus on managing the rates and rules for parking and making sure drivers had a way to pay. But changes in the industry now require parking leaders to think about the bigger picture and how their operations can better manage the curb. It is no longer just about on-street parking and the choice of paying with a meter or a mobile phone; today’s leaders are facing challenges with electric scooters crowding the sidewalk and ride-hailing vehicles stopping at the curb to pick up and drop off riders. To make cities more livable for their citizens and continue driving economic growth, city and parking leaders need a way to understand and manage their unique mobility ecosystems.
As cities make way for the future of mobility, it will be critical to consider autonomous vehicles and other innovations that will require digital systems for operations. Currently in many areas, the curb is managed offline as rules, rates, and regulations live on physical signage or on non-connected systems, which can lead to confusion for drivers and enforcement officers. As new modes of transportation use the curb, centralized digital man­agement is becoming a necessity. Cities can better understand what’s happening on their streets and make decisions to im­prove congestion and centralize the issuance and validation of access to the curb (parking rights, essentially) in order to make the city more livable, efficient, and equitable.

Coordinating this exchange of information, which often requires collaboration with private companies, requires the city to play a new role. To ensure access without stalling in­novation, municipalities have to start leveraging technology to centralize data across modes of transportation so they can make data-driven decisions about how to provide equitable transportation options.

One successful example of effective curbside management is a pilot program with Lyft in San Fran­cisco, Calif. Riders who requested a Lyft on Valencia Street—one of the busiest When cities and parking leaders areas in the city—were directed to a have more control, they can side street to meet their rides instead of manage a complex mobility
blocking the curb on the main street. As a result, average vehicle speed on Valencia
increased, improving the flow of traffic. This small behavior shift for each indi­vidual, amplified across the thousands of people using Lyft in this area, has creat­ed a larger positive outcome for the city.

Mix-modal Collaboration
With so many possibilities for getting around a city, citizens can use multiple modes of transportation to get from point A to point B, but they are forced to manage each mode separately. Agencies are recognizing this trend and shifting from mode-oriented to user-oriented services.
The shift to mix-modal is well-demonstrated by Miami-Dade’s Department of Transportation and Public Works in Florida. In 2016, Miami-Dade reorganized its entire trans­portation system under one umbrella agency to embrace the idea of mobility management and improve the transportation experience for citizens. More cities are considering a similar consolidation and approach as they understand that when parking, transit, and micro-mobility are managed collectively, it leads to more collaboration and provides a holistic view of mo­bility challenges and opportunities. With more data available, leaders can make better decisions for positive city outcomes.
We’re also seeing a convergence of transportation options that focus on the user journey, especially when it comes to first mile/last mile solutions. In April 2018, the Charlotte Area Transit System (CATS) in North Carolina, announced a partner­ship with Lyft to offer subsidized rides for users of its CATSPass app. Passengers who originate or terminate a trip at specific sta­tion locations receive a contribution toward their Lyft fare. With this partnership, CATS was able to increase public transit usage in the city by providing options to use multiple forms of trans­portation in a single journey, streamlining the user experience.

Scooters and Micro-mobility
In 2018, scooter companies dropped thousands of scooters in cit­ies across North America, creating great excitement and debate among citizens, city leaders, and mobility companies. With both Lime and Bird boasting more than 10 million scooter rides taken to date and the continued expansion into more cities in the U.S. and abroad, micro-mobility management has risen to the top of challenges that city and parking leaders face.
Many cities responded initially by implementing systems and rules intended to minimize disruption by limit­ing access to their curbs and streets. But by focusing on the challenges, cities risked missing the opportunity to incorporate new modes of transportation to make their cities more equitable and livable. In the subsequent months, cities have begun the process of building systems to co­ordinate fleets of micro-mobility vehicles, including the creation of data standards and data-sharing agreements with scooter pro­viders. As those initiatives mature, cities will need to use shared data to ensure the alignment of incentives between public and private sector participants.

Cities and micro-mobility companies have an interest in creating a system in which all parties—end-users, the city, and the micro-mobility companies—can benefit. With a shared data system that can help scooter companies balance supply and demand, citizens will have greater access to transportation op­tions, cities can better control and manage the scooters on their streets, and micro-mobility companies can optimize the number of vehicles available.

Leveraging Technology
The new innovations in our industry have the potential to posi­tively affect cities and their citizens, but the missing piece is of­ten having the right technology to implement desired solutions. Organizations are looking to implement technology that creates simpler and more efficient systems for drivers, enforcement officials, and city leaders, while providing unprecedented access to data about parking trends, behaviors, payments, enforcement officer routes, and more, all in real time. This information is the key to tackling broader city initiatives, such as ensuring equi­ty, reducing congestion, and fostering innovation, and allows transportation leaders to make data-driven decisions for better mobility management.

Parking and transportation leaders understand the impor­tance of technology, but there are many options to consider. The first step is to help leaders better understand mobility trends by leveraging technology to manage all forms of trans­portation in one place. A mobility platform is the solution, al­lowing cities to connect multiple mobility services (mobile pay for parking, digital permits, parking enforcement, meters, mi­cro-mobility, ride-hailing services, and more) in a centralized hub. Cities then have real-time access to data to help identify trends, make informed policy decisions, and effectively code the curb. The platform can also house information about rates, rules, and regulations, which can then be pushed out to all of the connected services.

With a more connected system, it becomes easier for cities to make adjustments, big and small, that will influence the daily decisions citizens make about how to travel throughout the city. When cities and parking leaders have more control, they can manage a complex mobility ecosystem and ultimately, provide a positive experience for their citizens and promote economic growth in a sustainable way.

The bottom line is that cities, universities, and agencies are facing many of the same challenges, regardless of their organi­zation’s size or location. Innovation is not slowing down, and the changes that will affect our industry this year and in the years to come are unknown, which is why there needs to be an estab­lished system of collaboration between private and public sec­tors. Private and public organizations will lead the way with new technology and developments, making it critical that the public sector has the tools necessary to keep up and stay on pace. With greater collaboration, organizations can share best practices that can help everyone be successful.

Read the article here.

NATHAN BERRY is regional sales director at Passport. He can be reached at nathan.berry@ passportinc.com.

 

Mobility and Societal Considerations: What’s Happening?

More people than ever are enjoying the convenience of shared-mobility services: transportation network companies (TNCs–Uber, Lyft, etc.), bike-share, scooter-share, and other easy ways to get around. Eric Haggett, senior associate with DESMAN and a member of IPMI’s Planning, Design, & Construction Committee, found himself pondering this recently and wondered if there isn’t more to it all than meets the eye:

  • While there are real and potential benefits to society of increasing mobility options, how do we ensure these benefits are available to everyone?
  • Do we care if these options are not available to some groups?
  • If the trend in society is toward mobility-as-a-service, what happens to the segment of society that can’t afford those services or are not physically capable of using them? Will this be yet another way in which the “haves” separate themselves from the “have nots”?

In this month’s The Parking Professional, Haggett breaks down these concerns along with others. How will underbanked or unbanked people use these systems? What about disabled people? And what is our industry’s responsibility, especially while mobility is young?

It’s a great, thought-provoking read: check it out here. And then share your thoughts on Forum: Are these challenges ones our industry should address? And how?

Parking Spotlight: Mobility and Societal Considerations: What’s Happening?

By Eric Haggett

I WAS THINKING ABOUT HOW CONVENIENT IT IS to be able to request an Uber, Lyft, or Via at any time from my smartphone—even at 4 a.m. to catch the first flight of the day out of Chicago’s O’Hare airport. Then I thought about how much fun it was to be able to pick up an electric scooter lying in the sand at Venice Beach, Calif., download an app on my phone, and zip off along the 2.5-mile oceanfront path to Santa Monica Pier, passing a suited 20-something scooting the other direction, presumably on his way to work. Eventually, my thoughts strayed to the cost of these on-demand mobility options and how little thought I gave to paying that cost, whether for a work-related trip to the airport or for a quick scoot down the beach while on vacation.

Fortunately, I have the luxury of con­sidering these costs only briefly in my decision-making, but what about people who must agonize over every penny they spend? Or what about people with phys­ical limitations? Are these new mobility options even an option for them?

More questions came to mind:

  • While there are real and potential benefits to society of increasing mobility options, how do we ensure that these benefits are available to everyone?
  • Do we care if these options are not available to some groups?
  • If the trend in society is toward mobility-as-a-service, what happens to the segment of society that can’t afford those services or are not phys­ically capable of using them? Will this be yet another way in which the “haves” separate themselves from the “have-nots”?

Transportation Network Companies
Transportation network companies (TNCs) provide a transportation alternative to those of us (like me) who choose not to own a car and for whom public transportation is not always a viable option. Additionally, research con­ducted by Anne Brown, presented in her dissertation “Ridehail Revolution: Ride-hail Travel and Equity in Los Angeles” (2018), suggests that “hailing shared rides was common in low-income neighborhoods” as well, and “ridehailing provides auto-mobility in neighborhoods where many lack reliable access to cars.”

For the lowest income individuals who perhaps cannot afford a smartphone, ride-hailing or renting a shared scooter are not mobility options.

Whether serving someone who chooses not to own a car or someone who cannot afford to own a car, TNCs serve a need. However, what happens when market forces dictate that the cost of each ride with a TNC must increase?

According to Uber’s financial results, the company lost $2.8 billion in 2016, $2.2 billion in 2017, and $1.8 billion in 2018. On top of that, New York, N.Y., recently became the first city to require that drivers working for ride-hailing companies be paid a minimum wage. A representative of New York City’s Taxi and Limousine Commission stated that this increase would raise the average driver’s earnings by $10,000 a year.

Put into context, for the approxi­mately 80,000 drivers in New York City working for a TNC, this would translate into an additional $800 million in wages or, put another way, $800 million in additional fares for ride-hail users. You could see how this New York rule change might make its way into the rules gov­erning TNCs across the U.S. and the world. To become profitable it seems TNCs will have to raise the cost of their rides, making them a less viable mobility option for low-income people.

The Smartphone Factor

All of this assumes that people have access to a smartphone with the ability to download and use ride-hailing apps. According to the Pew Research Center, while only 5 percent of adults in the U.S. do not own a cellphone, 23 percent do not own a smartphone—about 58 million people. Of the adults in the U.S. making less than $30,000 per year, 92 percent own a cell­phone, but only 67 percent own a smartphone; this com­pares to 98 percent cellphone ownership and 93 percent smartphone ownership for those making over $75,000 per year. For the lowest income individuals who perhaps cannot afford a smartphone, ride-hailing or renting a shared scoot­er are not mobility options.

The Population with Disabilities

People with disabilities have even less access to ride-hail­ing services, let alone micro-mobility options such as shared scooters or shared bikes. A report by New York Lawyers for the Public Interest says that “Uber, Lyft, and other ride-hailing services are virtually ‘useless’ for people with disabilities because of the relative lack of vehicles equipped to handle wheelchairs and motorized scooters.” The report also says “when riders summoned wheelchair-accessible vehicles from Uber and Lyft—the only ride-hailing companies to offer such a service—the wait time was more than four times longer than for regular service.” When it comes to micro-mobility options, certain segments of the population will not be able to use these services due to their physical limitations, let alone the cost of these mobility options.

On top of the equipment issues reducing the usefulness of ride-sharing and micro-mobility to people with disabili­ties, the cost of these services is another important factor. According to the 2017 Disability Statistics Annual Report produced by the Rehabilitation and Training Research Cen­ter on Disability Statistics and Demographics, “the median earnings of people with disabilities ages 16 and over in the  U.S. was $22,047, about two-thirds of the median earnings of people without disabilities, $32,479.” Additionally, ac­cording to the same report, the percentage of people with disabilities who were in poverty was 20.9 percent in 2016, versus 13.1 percent for people without disabilities. These statistics indicate that not only are people with disabilities unlikely to be able to take advantage of advancements in new mobility options due to equipment issues, they are also less likely to be able to afford the costs associated with these services.

The Big Picture

In today’s world, where more and more people are feeling marginalized, both the private companies developing mo­bility technology and services and the public agencies re­sponsible for governing their use need to consider not only the positive impacts of these new mobility options but also their potential to leave a significant portion of the popula­tion behind.

Read the article here.

ERIC HAGGETT is senior associate with DESMAN. He can be reached at ehaggett@desman.com.

New Model Brings Shared Micro-mobility to Small Communities

Micro-mobility can be tough to bring to smaller or economically challenged communities, whose populations may not use shared bikes or scooters enough to generate providers’ minimum required monthly per-ride charges. But a startup with a new model is emerging as a possible solution.

Koloni, a new provider of shared bikes, scooters, and even sports equipment, charges communities $35 per-bike, per-month rather than using a per-ride fee model. The towns then choose their own per-use rates  and offer users an app, just like the bigger companies. The different model circumvents larger companies’ complaints that low ridership doesn’t justify the cost to keep cycles in those areas, where they sometimes launch and quickly leave.

Kolani says it’s operating in about a dozen towns, including some Midwest cities whose harsh winter weather discourages micro-mobility use for months at a time–which has discouraged other operators from launching.

Read the whole story here.