Transit and Micromobility (2021)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

2021 T R A N S I T C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 230 Research sponsored by the Federal Transit Administration in cooperation with the Transit Development Corporation Subject Areas Pedestrians and Bicyclists • Public Transportation Transit and Micromobility Colin Murphy Shared-Use Mobility Center Chicago, IL Terra Curtis Evan Costagliola Nelson\Nygaard San Francisco, CA Regina Clewlow Stephanie Seki Ruoying Xu Populus Technologies, Inc. San Francisco, CA

TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 230 Project J-11/Task 37 ISSN 2572-3782 ISBN 978-0-309-67437-9 © 2021 National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FTA, GHSA, NHTSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. NOTICE The research report was reviewed by the technical panel and accepted for publication according to procedures established and overseen by the Transportation Research Board and approved by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research and are not necessarily those of the Transporta- tion Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; and the sponsors of the Transit Cooperative Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names or logos appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM The nation’s growth and the need to meet mobility, environmental, and energy objectives place demands on public transit systems. Cur- rent systems, some of which are old and in need of upgrading, must expand service area, increase service frequency, and improve efficiency to serve these demands. Research is necessary to solve operating prob- lems, adapt appropriate new technologies from other industries, and introduce innovations into the transit industry. The Transit Coopera- tive Research Program (TCRP) serves as one of the principal means by which the transit industry can develop innovative near-term solutions to meet demands placed on it. The need for TCRP was originally identified in TRB Special Report 213—Research for Public Transit: New Directions, published in 1987 and based on a study sponsored by the Urban Mass Transportation Administration—now the Federal Transit Administration (FTA). A report by the American Public Transportation Association (APTA), Transportation 2000, also recognized the need for local, problem- solving research. TCRP, modeled after the successful National Coop- erative Highway Research Program (NCHRP), undertakes research and other technical activities in response to the needs of transit ser- vice providers. The scope of TCRP includes various transit research fields including planning, service configuration, equipment, facilities, operations, human resources, maintenance, policy, and administrative practices. TCRP was established under FTA sponsorship in July 1992. Pro- posed by the U.S. Department of Transportation, TCRP was authorized as part of the Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). On May 13, 1992, a memorandum agreement outlining TCRP operating procedures was executed by the three cooperating organi- zations: FTA; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, acting through the Transportation Research Board (TRB); and the Transit Development Corporation, Inc. (TDC), a nonprofit educational and research organization established by APTA. TDC is responsible for forming the independent governing board, designated as the TCRP Oversight and Project Selection (TOPS) Commission. Research problem statements for TCRP are solicited periodically but may be submitted to TRB by anyone at any time. It is the responsibility of the TOPS Commission to formulate the research program by identi- fying the highest priority projects. As part of the evaluation, the TOPS Commission defines funding levels and expected products. Once selected, each project is assigned to an expert panel appointed by TRB. The panels prepare project statements (requests for propos- als), select contractors, and provide technical guidance and counsel throughout the life of the project. The process for developing research problem statements and selecting research agencies has been used by TRB in managing cooperative research programs since 1962. As in other TRB activities, TCRP project panels serve voluntarily without compensation. Because research cannot have the desired effect if products fail to reach the intended audience, special emphasis is placed on disseminat- ing TCRP results to the intended users of the research: transit agen- cies, service providers, and suppliers. TRB provides a series of research reports, syntheses of transit practice, and other supporting material developed by TCRP research. APTA will arrange for workshops, train- ing aids, field visits, and other activities to ensure that results are imple- mented by urban and rural transit industry practitioners. TCRP provides a forum where transit agencies can cooperatively address common operational problems. TCRP results support and complement other ongoing transit research and training programs. Published research reports of the TRANSIT COOPERATIVE RESEARCH PROGRAM are available from Transportation Research Board Business Office 500 Fifth Street, NW Washington, DC 20001 and can be ordered through the Internet by going to https://www.mytrb.org/MyTRB/Store/default.aspx Printed in the United States of America

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence-based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of transportation. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 8,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR TCRP RESEARCH REPORT 230 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Lori L. Sundstrom, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs Gwen Chisholm Smith, Manager, Transit Cooperative Research Program Mariela Garcia-Colberg, Senior Program Officer Emily Griswold, Program Coordinator Natalie Barnes, Director of Publications Heather DiAngelis, Associate Director of Publications Doug English, Senior Editor TCRP PROJECT J-11/TASK 37 PANEL Field of Special Projects Mauricio Hernandez, Alta Planning, Oakland, CA (Chair) John C. Andoh III, County of Hawai’i Mass Transit Agency, Hilo, HI Alexandra Baca, Greater Greater Washington, Washington, D.C. Dave Fotsch, Valley Regional Transit, Boise, ID Lauren Grabowski, Los Angeles County Metropolitan Transportation Authority, Los Angeles, CA Robert C. Hampshire, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI Kimberly Lucas, City of Pittsburgh, Pittsburgh, PA Jennifer K. McGrath, University of Utah, Salt Lake City, UT Louis Pappas, Electric Avenue LLC, Brooklyn, NY Prachi Vakharia, Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA), Washington, D.C. Natalie Marie Villwock-Witte, Western Transportation Institute (WTI), Nashotah, WI Matthew Lange, FTA Liaison Elliot Sperling, FTA Liaison Matthew Dickens, APTA Liaison AUTHOR ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The researchers wish to acknowledge the following local jurisdictions for providing permission to use shared-scooter data collected from their programs: • Arlington County, VA • City of Baltimore, MD • City of Cleveland, OH • City of Indianapolis, IN • City of Oakland, CA The researchers also acknowledge the shared-scooter operating companies that provided permission to use aggregated data from their scooter operations in the applicable regions: • Bird • Lime • Lyft • Spin The data used in this report are for the sole purposes of this research and cannot be used for any other non-project-related research or products without permission from the jurisdictions and operators.

TCRP Research Report 230: Transit and Micromobility (Project J-11/Task 37) provides an analysis of the full benefits and impacts of micromobility on public transportation systems in transit-rich markets as well as in medium-sized and smaller urban areas. The report includes case studies and lessons learned from different collaborations among cities, transit agencies, and micromobility companies. This report will provide public transit agencies with a reference on the benefits, impacts, and opportunities of micromobility to transit ridership and the built environment. The report was developed for public transit systems of all sizes and their stakeholders, including policymakers, transit board members, and elected officials who are seeking better understanding of the micromobility environment and their options. The report will also be useful to DOT officials who regulate and manage micromobility. Micromobility refers to small, low-speed vehicles intended for personal use and currently includes station-based bikeshare systems, dockless bikeshare systems, electric-assist bike- share, and electric scooters. Before the COVID-19 pandemic, micromobility was evolving rapidly, and new types of devices were being introduced to the market every year. Bikeshare companies had indicated an interest in increasing cooperation with transit agencies, and some transit systems were operating their own bikeshare systems. Further, micromobility services like bikeshare and scooter sharing had helped provide first- and last-mile connec- tivity to transit, further supporting a multimodal lifestyle. This symbiotic relationship meant micromobility had the potential to increase the number of transit trips by expanding the reach of multimodal transportation, but it also could replace transit trips. This research had four key objectives: identify the impact of micromobility on bus and rail transit ridership, identify the economic impacts of micromobility for the community and the transit agency, identify the impacts on the built environment (e.g., bike lanes and parking spaces) of the implementation of micromobility, and identify ways to strengthen the relationship between micromobility and transit to maximize sustainable trip modes. The report uses survey and trip data to help transit agencies understand their role in the growing micromobility market. The report also presents information and lessons learned from transit collaboration with micromobility companies. The report is organized into seven chapters; the initial chapters define micromobility and the business models and operational arrangements of the market and provide an overview of the policy and regulatory environment surrounding micromobility. Subsequent chapters describe micromobility users’ characteristics, implications for transit agencies, and different partnership approaches. The report concludes with a toolkit that provides action items that a transit agency can follow in order to make decisions on these micromobility partnerships. The appendices provide several valuable resources public transit agencies can use to expand their understanding of digital policy and compliance and make informed decisions on how best to incorporate the available resources into their strategies going forward. F O R E W O R D By Mariela Garcia-Colberg Staff Officer Transportation Research Board

1 Summary 10 Chapter 1 Micromobility Devices and Business Models 10 Defining Shared Micromobility 18 Business Models and Industry Trends 22 Chapter 2 Regulatory and Policy Review 22 The Range of Local Regulatory Approaches 28 The Transit Agency’s Regulatory Role 29 Micromobility and the Built Environment 44 Chapter 3 Micromobility Users and Utilization 44 Grouping of Metro Areas by Density and Transit Use 44 User Characteristics 59 Chapter 4 Implications for Transit Agencies 59 Micromobility Usage Patterns and Impacts 69 Funding/Financing Impacts, Civil Rights, and Other Agency Concerns 76 Chapter 5 Agency–Micromobility Partnership Approaches 76 Transit Agency–Led Operation or Integration of Services 79 Subsidizing Specific Ride Types or Creating Connections 79 City–Transit Agency Policy Collaboration 82 Chapter 6 Suggestions for Further Research 83 Chapter 7 Partnership Toolkit 83 Toolkit 89 Key Case Studies and Pilot Examples 91 References 97 Appendix A Data Methodology 99 Appendix B Digital Policy and Compliance C O N T E N T S