DOCSLIB.ORG

Safe Micromobility

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text

Load more

CPB Corporate Partnership Board Safe Micromobility Corporate Partnership Board Report Safe Micromobility Corporate Partnership Board Report The International Transport Forum The International Transport Forum is an intergovernmental organisation with 60 member countries. It acts as a think tank for transport policy and organises the Annual Summit of transport ministers. ITF is the only global body that covers all transport modes. The ITF is politically autonomous and administratively integrated with the OECD. The ITF works for transport policies that improve peoples’ lives. Our mission is to foster a deeper understanding of the role of transport in economic growth, environmental sustainability and social inclusion and to raise the public profile of transport policy. The ITF organises global dialogue for better transport. We act as a platform for discussion and pre- negotiation of policy issues across all transport modes. We analyse trends, share knowledge and promote exchange among transport decision-makers and civil society. The ITF’s Annual Summit is the world’s largest gathering of transport ministers and the leading global platform for dialogue on transport policy. The Members of the Forum are: Albania, Armenia, Argentina, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belarus, Belgium, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Canada, Chile, China (People’s Republic of), Croatia, Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Georgia, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, India, Ireland, Israel, Italy, Japan, Kazakhstan, Korea, Latvia, Liechtenstein, Lithuania, Luxembourg, Malta, Mexico, Republic of Moldova, Montenegro, Morocco, the Netherlands, New Zealand, North Macedonia, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Russian Federation, Serbia, Slovak Republic, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Tunisia, Turkey, Ukraine, the United Arab Emirates, the United Kingdom and the United States. About the Corporate Partnership Board The Corporate Partnership Board (CPB) is the International Transport Forum’s platform for engaging with the private sector and enriching global transport policy discussion with a business perspective. The members of the ITF Corporate Partnership Board are: AB InBev, Airbus, Alstom, Aramco, Bird, Bosch, Cruise, ExxonMobil, Grin, Iberdrola, Incheon International Airport, Kakao Mobility, Kapsch TrafficCom, Kyyti Group, Latvian Railways, Michelin, NXP, Penta Security, PTV Group, RATP Group, The Renault- Nissan-Mitsubishi Alliance, Siemens, SNCF, Spea Engineering, Total, Toyota, Uber, Valeo, Volvo Cars, Volvo Group and Waymo. Disclaimer Funding for this work has been provided by the ITF Corporate Partnership Board. This report is published under the responsibility of the Secretary-General of the ITF. It has not been subject to the scrutiny of ITF or OECD member countries and does not necessarily reflect their official views or those of the members of the Corporate Partnership Board. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Acknowledgements The principal author of this report is Alexandre Santacreu of the International Transport Forum (ITF). Substantial contributions came from George Yannis (National Technical University of Athens), Ombline de Saint Léon (ITF) and Philippe Crist (ITF). The author is thankful for information and thoughts shared by Annie Chang (SAE International), Marko Dozza (Chalmers University), Tina Gehlert (German Insurance Association), Catherine Pérez (Public Health Agency of Barcelona), Adrià Gomila (City of Barcelona), Sophie Hamada (Inserm), Jean-Louis Martin (Ifsttar), Pernille Ehlers (Danish Road Safety Council), Candida Castro (University of Granada), Urs Walter (Swiss Federal Roads Office), Vaughn Allan (Institute for Sensible Transport), Adriana Jakovcevic (Buenos Aires City Government), Alexis Merkling and Antonin Nonis (French Insurance Federation), Valentin Löwenstein (Dekra) and AXA. The report also draws on contributions and discussions during an expert’s workshop, organised 18 October 2019 in Lisbon. The ITF wishes to thank Deputy Mayor Miguel Gaspar, Pedro Homem de Gouveia, Vasco Mora, Cristina Rocha and Pedro Machado for hosting this event. Workshop participants are listed in Annex E. At the International Transport Forum, credits go to Stephen Perkins and Sharon Masterson for contributions to the workshop and reviewing of the document. Sokob Challener supported the project and Hilary Gaboriau edited the draft. Special thanks go to the members of the ITF Safer City Streets network for their contributions and for helping to develop a better understanding of urban road safety challenges. The work for this report was carried out in the context of a project initiated and funded by the ITF’s Corporate Partnership Board (CPB). CPB projects are designed to enrich policy discussion with a business perspective. They are launched in areas where CPB member companies identify an emerging issue in transport policy or an innovation challenge to the transport system. Led by the ITF, work is carried out in a collaborative fashion in working groups consisting of CPB member companies, external experts and ITF staff. The authors wish to thank the members of the Corporate Partnership Board involved in this project: Bird, Bosch, Grin, Incheon Airport, Kapsch TrafficCom AG, Michelin, PTV Group, Toyota and Uber. The project was managed by Alexandre Santacreu and Philippe Crist. Sharon Masterson manages the Corporate Partnership Board and its activities. SAFE MICROMOBILITY © OECD/ITF 2020 3 TABLE OF CONTENTS Table of contents Glossary ............................................................................................................................................... 7 Executive summary ........................................................................................................................... 10 What is micromobility? ...................................................................................................................... 13 Micromobility definition and classification ................................................................................... 14 International vehicle classification systems .................................................................................. 15 Other efforts to classify micromobility .......................................................................................... 17 How safe are micromobility trips? ..................................................................................................... 20 Lessons from fatality data ............................................................................................................. 20 Lessons from injury data ............................................................................................................... 24 Safety through mode shift ............................................................................................................. 29 Data collection: Why do it and how to improve it ......................................................................... 33 Safe vehicles and operations ............................................................................................................. 36 Vehicle design ............................................................................................................................... 37 Type approval and technical inspections ...................................................................................... 41 Shared fleet operations: Best practice in maintenance, recharging and redistribution ................ 46 Safe road users .................................................................................................................................. 48 Experience, training and education: Will micromobility become safer over time? ....................... 48 The regulatory questions .............................................................................................................. 54 Pedestrian protection.................................................................................................................... 59 Safe infrastructure ............................................................................................................................. 62 Rethinking cycling facilities ............................................................................................................ 64 Can cycling facilities accommodate all types of micro-vehicles? .................................................. 66 Collect data to identify dangerous locations ................................................................................. 68 Finding the right regulatory balance .................................................................................................. 70 Vehicle types: Ensuring regulations are proportionate to public health and safety impacts ........ 71 Potential for self-regulation .......................................................................................................... 73 Notes ................................................................................................................................................. 75 References ........................................................................................................................................ 76 Annex A. Standing e-scooter fatality details ....................................................................................... 89 Annex B. Vehicle involvement in fatal crashes ................................................................................... 91 Annex C. Micromobility
Recommended publications
  • Motorcycle, Moped and Motor Scooter Policy

    Motorcycle, Moped and Motor Scooter Policy

    Motorcycle, Moped and Motor Scooter Policy Definition Mopeds and scooters are one and the same in the eyes of North Carolina's Division of Motor Vehicles (DMV). Mopeds and motor scooters are defined as a vehicle with two or three wheels with a motor of no more than 50 cubic centimeters of piston displacement and no external shifting device. Legally, a moped's top speed cannot exceed 30 mph on a level surface. Although some mopeds on the market have top speeds higher than the 30 mph limit, they are illegal for use in North Carolina. If a moped does not fit the above requirements, it must be registered as a motorcycle under North Carolina law. Parking Permit A parking permit is required for all motorized motorcycles, mopeds and motor scooters parking on the Wake Forest University Campus. o The cost of an annual on-campus parking permit is $50. o The cost of a permit is waived if a customer has already purchased an annual vehicle permit at regular price. Motorcycles, moped and motor scooters are required to be registered at the Parking and Transportation office, not on-line. Parking Designated moped and motor scooter parking areas are located in parking lots A, M and P. o Mopeds and motor scooters can also park in motorcycle spaces. Motorcycles can only park in designated motorcycle spaces, not moped / motor scooter spaces. Motorcycle spaces are located in lots G, H, J, L, P, Q, S, T, W-1, Z, and Jasper Memory Lane. Parking is authorized only in spaces marked by signs or ground markings.
  • Written Comments

    Written Comments

    Written Comments 1 2 3 4 1027 S. Lusk Street Boise, ID 83706 [email protected] 208.429.6520 www.boisebicycleproject.org ACHD, March, 2016 The Board of Directors of the Boise Bicycle Project (BBP) commends the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) for its efforts to study and solicit input on implementation of protected bike lanes on Main and Idaho Streets in downtown Boise. BBP’s mission includes the overall goal of promoting the personal, social and environmental benefits of bicycling, which we strive to achieve by providing education and access to affordable refurbished bicycles to members of the community. Since its establishment in 2007, BBP has donated or recycled thousands of bicycles and has provided countless individuals with bicycle repair and safety skills each year. BBP fully supports efforts to improve the bicycle safety and accessibility of downtown Boise for the broadest segment of the community. Among the alternatives proposed in ACHD’s solicitation, the Board of Directors of BBP recommends that the ACHD pursue the second alternative – Bike Lanes Protected by Parking on Main Street and Idaho Street. We also recommend that there be no motor vehicle parking near intersections to improve visibility and limit the risk of the motor vehicles turning into bicyclists in the protected lane. The space freed up near intersections could be used to provide bicycle parking facilities between the bike lane and the travel lane, which would help achieve the goal of reducing sidewalk congestion without compromising safety. In other communities where protected bike lanes have been implemented, this alternative – bike lanes protected by parking – has proven to provide the level of comfort necessary to allow bicycling in downtown areas by families and others who would not ride in traffic.
  • Vehicle Type Codes

    Vehicle Type Codes

    VEHICLE TYPE CODES Specialized Vehicles Passenger Vehicles 41 - Ambulance 01 - Passenger Car, Station 42 - Dune Buggy Wagon, Jeep 43 - Fire Truck 02 - Motorcycle 44 - Fork Lift 03 - Motor Driven 45 - Hwy. Construction Equip. Cycle/Scooter 46 - Implement of Husbandry 04 - Bicycle 47 - Motor Home 05 - Motorized Bicycle 48 - Police Car 06 - All Terrain Vehicle 49 - Police Motorcycle 07 - Sport Utility Vehicle 50 - Mobile Equipment 08 - Mini-vans 51 - Farm Labor Vehicle (Certified) 55 - Two-Axle Tow Truck Buses 56 - Three-Axle Tow Truck 09 - Paratransit 57 - Farm Labor Vehicle 10 - Tour Bus (Non-Certified) 11 - Other Commercial 58 - Farm Labor Transporter 12 - Non-Commercial Bus 59 - Motor Home > 40 Feet 13 - School Bus Public Type I 14 - School Bus Public Type II Trailers 15 - School Bus Private Type I 28 - Semi Tank Trailer 16 - School Bus Private Type II 29 - Pull Tank Trailer 17 - School Bus Contractual Type I 30 - Two Tank Trailer 18 - School Bus Contractual Type II 31 - Semi 19 - General Public Paratransit 32 - Pull Vehicle 33 - Two Trailers (Includes Semi 20 - Public Transit Authority & Pull) 63 - Youth Bus 34 - Boat 64 - School Pupil Activity Bus Type I 35 - Utility 65 - School Pupil Activity Bus Type II 36 - Trailer Coach 37 - Extralegal Permit Load Trucks/Truck Tractors 38 - Pole, Pipe, or Logging Dolly 21 - Two Axle Tank Truck 39 - Three Trailers 22 - Pickups & Panels 40 - Federally Legal Semi 23 - Pickup w/Camper 52 - Federally Legal Double 24 - Three Axle Tank Truck Combo Over 75 Feet 25 - Truck Tractor 53 - Fifth Wheel Travel Trailer 26 - Two Axle Truck 54 - Container Chassis 27 - Three or More Axle Truck ANNEX C 3-C-1 HPM 110.5 Miscellaneous Hazardous Material 60 - Pedestrian 71 - Passenger Car, Station 61 - Second or Additional Wagon, Jeep Enforcement Action(s) 72 - Pickups and Panels 62 - Passengers 73 - Pickup and Camper 94 - Go-ped, ZIP Electric 75 - Truck Tractor scooter, Motoboard 76 - Two-Axle Truck 95 - Misc.
  • City of Del Mar Staff Report

    City of Del Mar Staff Report

    City of Del Mar Staff Report TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Clem Brown, Environmental Sustainability/Special Projects Manager Via Scott Huth, City Manager DATE: May 6, 2019 SUBJECT: License Agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC to Operate the North County Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Del Mar REQUESTED ACTION/RECOMMENDATION: Staff requests that the City Council approve a license agreement with Gotcha Ride LLC (Attachment A) to operate the North County Coastal Bike Share Pilot Program in the City of Del Mar and authorize the City Manager to execute the agreement. BACKGROUND: The City of Del Mar is committed to reducing local greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions to limit the effects of climate change, while also offering viable transportation alternatives to driving. Del Mar has adopted a Climate Action Plan (CAP) that establishes a number of strategies to meet GHG emissions reduction targets, including facilitating safe, convenient, and affordable alternative transportation options. Specifically, Goal 14 in the CAP includes a strategy to “explore implementation of a bike share program…to provide another transportation alternative for traveling in town.” Transportation, especially travel via single occupancy vehicles, is a major source of GHG emissions in Del Mar and the other north San Diego County (North County) coastal cities. Offering and promoting programs like bike share, that replace vehicle trips with bike trips, is one way Del Mar can help to reduce emissions while offering more efficient and more affordable transportation modes for residents, employees, and visitors. Bike share is a service by which bicycles are made available for shared use to individuals on a very short-term basis, allowing them to borrow a bicycle at one location and return it either to the same or an alternate location within a defined geographic boundary.
  • Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances

    Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances

    Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances November 2011 i iv . Pedestrian and Bicycle Friendly Policies, Practices, and Ordinances November 2011 i The Delaware Valley Regional Planning The symbol in our logo is Commission is dedicated to uniting the adapted from region’s elected officials, planning the official professionals, and the public with a DVRPC seal and is designed as a common vision of making a great region stylized image of the Delaware Valley. even greater. Shaping the way we live, The outer ring symbolizes the region as a whole while the diagonal bar signifies the work, and play, DVRPC builds Delaware River. The two adjoining consensus on improving transportation, crescents represent the Commonwealth promoting smart growth, protecting the of Pennsylvania and the State of environment, and enhancing the New Jersey. economy. We serve a diverse region of DVRPC is funded by a variety of funding nine counties: Bucks, Chester, Delaware, sources including federal grants from the Montgomery, and Philadelphia in U.S. Department of Transportation’s Pennsylvania; and Burlington, Camden, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) Gloucester, and Mercer in New Jersey. and Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the Pennsylvania and New Jersey DVRPC is the federally designated departments of transportation, as well Metropolitan Planning Organization for as by DVRPC’s state and local member the Greater Philadelphia Region — governments. The authors, however, are leading the way to a better future. solely responsible for the findings and conclusions herein, which may not represent the official views or policies of the funding agencies. DVRPC fully complies with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 and related statutes and regulations in all programs and activities.
  • Scooter Range Scooter

    Scooter Range Scooter

    Scooter Range Scooter A history in scooters No one knows scooters better than Honda. We’ve been leading the market in two wheeled transport for more than sixty years, and we’ve learnt a thing or two in that time. It’s our absolute passion for excellence that leads to our unrivalled standards of quality, reliability and performance. And given our commitment to bringing you the latest in technology at the best possible value, Honda will continue to be the brand of choice in the scooter market. *Overseas model shown TODAY50 NSC110 Dio PCX150 Scooter The future is scooter We’ve only got one planet. That’s why Honda is passionate about developing technology that delivers today while minimising the impact on our environment - now and into the future. The Honda scooter range provides the perfect solution to many of the environmental and transport issues that affect us all today. Not only are scooters efficient, clean and green but they represent a safe, economical and fun mode of transport. More and more switched on commuters are embracing the exciting pragmatism of owning a Honda. Whatever shapes our world one thing will never change; Honda’s commitment to intelligent, future-focussed technology. We call it the Power of Dreams. *Overseas model shown NSS300 Forza NC700 Integra Scooter specifications TODAY50 Engine Type 50cc forced air cooled 4-stroke OHC mono-cylinder Bore and Stroke 37.8mm x 44.0mm Compression Ratio 10.1:1 Carburation CV (Constant Velocity) 18mm bore Ignition CDI type, battery powered Starter Electric Transmission V-Matic Want
  • London Taxicard Scheme

    London Taxicard Scheme

    LONDON TAXICARD SCHEME The Taxicard scheme is for permanent residents of the 32 London boroughs and the City of London, who find it difficult or impossible to use mainstream public transport such as buses and tubes (due to permanent or long-term mobility or visual impairments), and provides subsidised transport in taxis (Black Cabs) and private hire vehicles (mini-cabs). If you have short-term mobility impairments such as a broken leg, or live outside of the London boroughs, you are not eligible for a Taxicard. London Councils manages the Taxicard scheme on behalf of London’s local authorities, and CityFleet manages the taxis and mini-cabs used by Taxicard holders. Full details of the Taxicard scheme can be found on the London Councils website: www.londoncouncils.gov.uk/services/taxicard There are six pages to the attached application form. To ensure that your application isn’t delayed, read the form carefully, and complete it in full. PAGE 1 is where you enter your personal details. All applicants must supply proof of their identity and address, along with a recent colour photo. Further details on the documents and photos we accept can be found on PAGE 6. PAGE 2 asks about your health and mobility, and why you need a Taxicard. Please attach copies of medical evidence that supports your statements, as these will help to assess your application. We also ask about physical aids to your mobility, such as walking sticks and wheelchairs, to help us understand your mobility difficulties outside of the home. PAGE 3 is for wheelchair and mobility scooter users ONLY.
  • Delivering Justice: Food Delivery Cyclists in New York City

    Delivering Justice: Food Delivery Cyclists in New York City

    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 9-2018 Delivering Justice: Food Delivery Cyclists in New York City Do J. Lee The Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/2794 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] DELIVERING JUSTICE: FOOD DELIVERY CYCLISTS IN NEW YORK CITY by DO JUN LEE A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Psychology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York 2018 ii © 2016 DO JUN LEE All Rights Reserved iii DELIVERING JUSTICE: FOOD DELIVERY CYCLISTS IN NEW YORK CITY by DO JUN LEE This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Psychology to satisfy the dissertation requirement for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Susan Saegert Date Chair of Examining Committee Richard Bodnar Date Executive Officer Michelle Fine Tarry Hum Adonia Lugo Melody Hoffmann Supervisory Committee THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iv ABSTRACT Delivering Justice: Food Delivery Cyclists in New York City by Do Jun Lee Advisor: Dr. Susan Saegert In New York City (NYC), food delivery cyclists ride the streets all day and night long to provide convenient, affordable, hot food to New Yorkers. These working cyclists are often Latino or Asian male immigrants who are situated within intersectional and interlocking systems of global migration and capital flows, intense time pressures by restaurants and customers, precarious tip-based livelihoods, an e-bike ban and broken windows policing, and unsafe streets designed for drivers.
  • Guidelines for Regulating Shared Micromobility Section 1

    Guidelines for Regulating Shared Micromobility Section 1

    Guidelines for Regulating Shared Micromobility Section 1 Guidelines for Regulating Shared Micromobility Version 2 September 2019 1 Guidelines for Regulating Shared Micromobility 1. Regulating Shared Micromobility 5 a. What is Shared Micromobility? 5 b. City Authority for Regulation 6 c. Options for Regulation 7 2. General Terms and Conditions 9 a. General Provisions 10 b. Insurance, Bonds, and Fees 11 c. Enforcing Permit Terms 12 3. Scope & Operations Insight 15 a. Fleet Size 16 b. Fleet Removal/Relocation 18 c. Rebalancing & Fleet Distribution 19 d. Equipment and Vehicle Maintenance 20 e. Customer Service 23 f. Staffing and Workforce Development 24 g. Pricing 25 4. Public Engagement 27 a. Staffing & Events 28 b. Outreach Materials & Campaigns 28 c. Pricing & Discount Programs 29 5. Mobility Data & User Privacy 31 6. Infrastructure 35 a. Shared Micromobility Parking 36 b. Providing Safe Place to Ride 40 c. Restricted/Limited Access Areas 41 7. Current State of Practice 43 a. Vehicle Requirements 44 b. Fleet Requirements 45 c. Data Requirements 48 d. Fees 49 e. Employment Requirements 51 f. Adaptive Device Requirements 52 g. Discounted Pricing Programs 53 h. Multi-Language Requirements 54 i. Parking Requirements 55 2 Cover credit: San Jose Guidelines for Regulating Shared Micromobility About Developed for cities, by cities, this guidance outlines best practices for cities and public entities regulating and managing shared micromobility services on their streets. While many of the issues covered are applicable to all forms of shared micromobility, this document is explicitly meant to help cities establish guidelines for formal management of public-use mobility options that are not managed through traditional procurement processes (the management mechanism for most docked bike share programs in North America).
  • Electric Bicycles Are Coming on Strong and Wisconsin Law Needs to Catch up with Celebrate Them

    Electric Bicycles Are Coming on Strong and Wisconsin Law Needs to Catch up with Celebrate Them

    MARATHON COUNTY FORESTRY/RECREATION COMMITTEE AGENDA Date and Time of Meeting: Tuesday, June 4, 2019 at 12:30pm Meeting Location: Conference Room #3, 212 River Drive, Wausau WI 54403 MEMBERS: Arnold Schlei (Chairman), Rick Seefeldt (Vice-Chairman), Jim Bove Marathon County Mission Statement: Marathon County Government serves people by leading, coordinating, and providing county, regional, and statewide initiatives. It directly or in cooperation with other public and private partners provides services and creates opportunities that make Marathon County and the surrounding area a preferred place to live, work, visit, and do business. Parks, Recreation and Forestry Department Mission Statement: Adaptively manage our park and forest lands for natural resource sustainability while providing healthy recreational opportunities and unique experiences making Marathon County the preferred place to live, work, and play. Agenda Items: 1. Call to Order 2. Public Comment Period – Not to Exceed 15 Minutes 3. Approval of the Minutes of the May 7, 2019 Committee Meeting 4. Educational Presentations/Outcome Monitoring Reports A. Article – Report Says Wisconsin Forestry on the Upswing B. Article – Wisconsin Tourism Industry Generates 21.6 Billion C. Article – May 2019 Paper and Forestry Products Month D. Articles – Electronic Assist Bikes 5. Operational Functions Required by Statute, Ordinance or Resolution: A. Discussion and Possible Action by Committee 1. Timber Sale Extension Requests a. Tigerton Lumber – Contract #642-15 b. Central Wisconsin Lumber – Contract #644-15 2. Discussion and Possible Action on Ordering a Second Appraisal for Knowles-Nelson Stewardship Funding on Property in the Town of Hewitt B. Discussion and Possible Action by Committee to Forward to the Environmental Resource Committee for its Consideration - None 6.
  • Power Operated Vehicle (Scooters) (Excluding Motorized Wheelchairs)

    Power Operated Vehicle (Scooters) (Excluding Motorized Wheelchairs)

    UTILIZATION MANAGEMENT GUIDELINE– 1.01.527 Power Operated Vehicles (Scooters) (Excluding Motorized Wheelchairs) Effective Date: Feb. 5, 2021 RELATED MEDICAL POLICIES: Last Revised: Oct. 13, 2020 1.01.501 Wheelchairs (Manual or Motorized) Replaces: N/A 1.01.519 Patient Lifts, Seat Lifts and Standing Devices 1.01.526 Durable Medical Equipment Repair/Replacement 1.01.529 Durable Medical Equipment Select a hyperlink below to be directed to that section. COVERAGE GUIDELINES | DOCUMENTATION REQUIREMENTS | CODING RELATED INFORMATION | EVIDENCE REVIEW | REFERENCES | HISTORY ∞ Clicking this icon returns you to the hyperlinks menu above. Introduction A power operated vehicle, also called a mobility scooter or scooter, can run either on batteries or electronically. There are many different types of scooters based on use. They may be made for use in the home, outdoors, when traveling, indoors and outdoors, and for shopping or other activities. Scooters may be used by people who have problems with movement and may be helpful to those who have a hard time using a manual wheelchair due to lack of strength or flexibility. To use a scooter, the user must be able to sit upright without support and be able to control the steering. This policy outlines when scooters may be covered. Note: The Introduction section is for your general knowledge and is not to be taken as policy coverage criteria. The rest of the policy uses specific words and concepts familiar to medical professionals. It is intended for providers. A provider can be a person, such as a doctor, nurse, psychologist, or dentist. A provider also can be a place where medical care is given, like a hospital, clinic, or lab.
  • FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide

    FHWA Bikeway Selection Guide

    BIKEWAY SELECTION GUIDE FEBRUARY 2019 1. AGENCY USE ONLY (Leave Blank) 2. REPORT DATE 3. REPORT TYPE AND DATES COVERED February 2019 Final Report 4. TITLE AND SUBTITLE 5a. FUNDING NUMBERS Bikeway Selection Guide NA 6. AUTHORS 5b. CONTRACT NUMBER Schultheiss, Bill; Goodman, Dan; Blackburn, Lauren; DTFH61-16-D-00005 Wood, Adam; Reed, Dan; Elbech, Mary 7. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION NAME(S) AND ADDRESS(ES) 8. PERFORMING ORGANIZATION VHB, 940 Main Campus Drive, Suite 500 REPORT NUMBER Raleigh, NC 27606 NA Toole Design Group, 8484 Georgia Avenue, Suite 800 Silver Spring, MD 20910 Mobycon - North America, Durham, NC 9. SPONSORING/MONITORING AGENCY NAME(S) 10. SPONSORING/MONITORING AND ADDRESS(ES) AGENCY REPORT NUMBER Tamara Redmon FHWA-SA-18-077 Project Manager, Office of Safety Federal Highway Administration 1200 New Jersey Avenue SE Washington DC 20590 11. SUPPLEMENTARY NOTES 12a. DISTRIBUTION/AVAILABILITY STATEMENT 12b. DISTRIBUTION CODE This document is available to the public on the FHWA website at: NA https://safety.fhwa.dot.gov/ped_bike 13. ABSTRACT This document is a resource to help transportation practitioners consider and make informed decisions about trade- offs relating to the selection of bikeway types. This report highlights linkages between the bikeway selection process and the transportation planning process. This guide presents these factors and considerations in a practical process- oriented way. It draws on research where available and emphasizes engineering judgment, design flexibility, documentation, and experimentation. 14. SUBJECT TERMS 15. NUMBER OF PAGES Bike, bicycle, bikeway, multimodal, networks, 52 active transportation, low stress networks 16. PRICE CODE NA 17. SECURITY 18. SECURITY 19. SECURITY 20.