Scooting the Boundary: An Analysis of E-Scooter Policy - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

George Mason University PUBP 722 TPOL Practicum May 13, 2020

Scooting the Boundary:

An Analysis of E-Scooter Policy Harmonization

Agenda

Team Introduction Project Context Methodology Analysis Findings Recommendations

Team Introduction

Aleksandr Grinshpun – MA, TPOL Houda Ali – MA, TPOL Ellie Larson McCurdy – MA, TPOL Jephthah Nti – MA, TPOL Sid Rayaprolu – PhD, Civil and Infrastructure Engineering Sterling Wiggins – MPA and MA, TPOL

Project Context

u E-scooters as shared mobility devices (SMDs) u Research question u Policy development: Pilot or Permanent u Policy harmonization

u Benefits u Challenges u Feasibility

u COVID-19 update

Methodology

u Data collection

u Preliminary analysis of permit statutes from 22 cities across the U.S. u Literature review

u Peer-reviewed articles u White-papers u Popular media and blogosphere

u Personal interviews and brief conversations with

u Federal/state/regional/local regulatory body members u Public and private planning practitioners u Third party aggregators u Transportation planning researchers

u Case study selection

u Urbanized areas encompassing multiple jurisdictions

Analysis: Case Study Areas

u

Washington, DC, and Northern Virginia

u

Miami and Coral Gables, Florida

u

Boston, Brookline, Somerville, and Cambridge, Massachusetts

u

Minneapolis-St. Paul, Minnesota

u

Los Angeles and Santa Monica, California

u

Oakland and Berkeley, California

Analysis: Key Elements of Permit Ordinance

u

Device specifications

u

Right-of-way specifications

u

Safety standards

u

Insurance and financial liability

u

Data sharing and compliance

u

Geo-fencing requirements

u

Permit fee structure

u

Fleet specifications

u

Equity and environmental justice

Analysis: Key Elements of Permit Ordinance

u

Device specifications

u

Right-of-way specifications

u

Safety standards

u

Insurance and financial liability

u

Data sharing and compliance

u

Geo-fencing requirements

u

Permit fee structure

u

Fleet specifications

u

Equity and environmental justice Similar regulatory language between neighboring jurisdictions, but different implementation

Analysis: Factors Influencing Policy Harmonization

u Geographical context

u Average trip distance and

border length

u Operator selection

u Decision scorecards

u Road rules

u Unknowingly breaking rules

Analysis: Factors Influencing Policy Harmonization

u Safety standards

u Helmet use u Sidewalk bans

u Geofencing u Fee structure

Analysis: Levels

• f Harmonization

u

Federal-level governance

u Seat-belt regulation (IIHS)

u

State-level governance

u Preemption of ride hailing service

regulation

u

Local/Regional governance

u Capital Bikeshare u Boston area dockless bikeshare

Analysis: Levels

• f Harmonization

u

Local collaboration

u City of Charlottesville, University

• f Virginia, and Albemarle County

u

Customized harmonization

u Centralized/Decentralized u A-la-carte/spectrum

Findings: Potential Benefits of Harmonization

u Users and non-users

u Consistency of information u Improved accessibility for cross-border trips

u Regulatory bodies

u Constant feedback loop

u Service providers

u Increased market size u Economies of scale

u Reduced costs u Ease of operations and compliance

u Others – Transit agencies, VCs, and MaaS aggregators

Findings: Potential Barriers to Harmonization

u Low cross-border activity

u The percentage of internal trips is higher than cross-border trips u 10 percent of trips from Arlington County to DC

u Resistance to collaborative efforts

u Disparate policies allow local customization

u Inhibited agility to update regulations u Reduced opportunity for start-up operators

Recommendations

u

Policy harmonization does not need to take a stance of All-or-Nothing

u Tailored harmonization can eliminate potential barriers

u Role of partnering jurisdictions

u Clearly defining priorities and equity goals u Travel demand surveys & community outreach activities u Actively collaborating in operator selection u Seeking mediation from MPOs for state or federal funding

u Role of Bird and other operators

u Actively complying with local regulations u Build robust government relationships through consistency in service

Moving Forward

Schar school press release Peer-reviewed conference presentations and journals

Thank you Questions?