DOCSLIB.ORG

Regional Transportation Commission Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Regional Transportation Commission Technical Advisory Committee Meeting Agenda REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE MEETING AGENDA Wednesday, December 6, 2017 at 9:00 am Regional Transportation Commission 1st Floor Conference Room 1105 Terminal Way, Reno NV 89502 I. The RTC 1st Floor Conference Room is accessible to individuals with disabilities. Requests for auxiliary aids to assist individuals with disabilities should be made with as much advance notice as possible. For those requiring hearing or speech assistance, contact Relay Nevada at 1.800.326.6868 (TTY, VCO or HCO). Requests for supporting documents and all other requests should be directed to RTC Metropolitan Planning at 775-348-0480. Supporting documents may also be found on the RTC website: www.rtcwashoe.com. II. The Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) has a standing item for accepting public comment on topics relevant to the RTC TAC that are not included on the agenda. No action may be taken on a matter raised under this item of the agenda until the matter itself has been specifically included on an agenda as an item upon which action will be taken. For specific items on the TAC agenda, public comment will be taken at the time the item is discussed. Individuals providing public comment will be limited to three minutes. Individuals acting as a spokesperson for a group may request additional time. Attempts to present public input in a disruptive manner will not be allowed. Remarks will be addressed to the TAC as a whole and not to individual members. III. The TAC may combine two or more agenda items for consideration and/or may remove an item from the agenda or delay discussion relating to an item on the agenda at any time. ITEM 1 Approval of Agenda (For Possible Action) ITEM 2 Public Comment - please read paragraph II near the top of this page ITEM 3 Approval of the November 1, 2017 Meeting Minutes (For Possible Action) ITEM 4 Bike Share Update (Informational Only) ITEM 5 Discussion on the RTC Transportation Alternatives (TA) Set-Aside Program Call for Projects (Informational Only) ITEM 6 Development Updates (Informational Only) ITEM 7 Member Items a) City of Reno b) Reno-Tahoe Airport Authority c) City of Sparks d) FHWA e) Washoe County f) Air Quality Management Div. (AQMD) g) NDOT h) TMRPA i) WCSD j) Reno-Sparks Indian Colony (RSIC) ITEM 8 Agenda Items for Future TAC Meetings (For Possible Action) ITEM 9 RTC Staff Items (Informational Only) ITEM 10 Public Comment - please read paragraph II near the top of this page ITEM 11 Adjournment (For Possible Action) The Committee may take action on any item noted for possible action Posting locations: Washoe Co. Admin. Bldg., 1001 E. 9th St., Reno, NV; RTC, 1105 Terminal Way, Reno, NV; 4th STREET STATION, 200 E. 4th St., Reno, NV; CENTENNIAL PLAZA, Victorian Square, Sparks, NV; Sparks City Hall, 431 Prater Way, Sparks, NV; Reno City Hall, 1 E. First St., Reno, NV; Incline Village General Imp. Dist., 893 Southwood Blvd., Incline Village, NV; area press & media via fax; RTC website: www.rtcwashoe.com, State website: https://notice.nv.gov/ REGIONAL TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION TECHNICAL ADVISORY COMMITTEE Meeting Minutes Wednesday, November 1, 2017 Attendees Daniel Inouye Washoe County Health District-Air Quality Management Division Janelle Thomas City of Reno Community Development Chris Tolley Truckee Meadows Regional Planning Agency Steve Bunnell, Chair City of Reno Community Development Joe Spencer Nevada Department of Transportation Jon Ericson City of Sparks Public Works Adam Searcy Washoe County School District Clara Lawson Washoe County Public Works Kelly Mullin Washoe County Community Services RTC Staff Dan Doenges Garth Oksol Mark Maloney David Carr Amy Cummings Rob Reeder Stephanie Haddock Angela Reich Jacqueline Maldonado The Committee met in the First Floor Conference Room, 1105 Terminal Way, Reno, Nevada. The meeting was called to order at 9:01 a.m. by the Chair, Steve Bunnell. ITEM 1. APPROVAL OF AGENDA The agenda was approved as submitted. ITEM 2. PUBLIC COMMENT There were no public comments. ITEM 3. APPROVAL OF THE OCTOBER 4, 2017 MEETING MINUTES The minutes of the TAC meeting October 4, 2017, were approved as submitted. ITEM 5 - was requested to be moved before Item 4 on the agenda. ITEM 5. DISCUSSION AND RECOMMENDATION ON THE PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PLAN UPDATE (Item 5 was requested to be moved before Item 4 on the agenda) Dan Doenges, RTC Planning Manager, gave updates on the Public Participation Plan (PPP) which will be brought to the RTC Board for adoption at their November 17, 2017 meeting. A discussion followed on the funds and public outreach efforts of the RTC plans/projects. 1 Clara Lawson made a motion to recommend approval of the Public Participation Plan (PPP). Dan Inouye seconded. The motion carried unanimously. ITEM 4 - was moved after Item 5 on the agenda. ITEM 4. RTC ASSET PLANNING FOR EMERGENCIES (Item 4 was moved after Item 5 on the agenda) Rob Reeder, RTC Safety/Security Administrator briefed the committee on RTC’s participation on the Emergency Support Functions (ESF’s) assistance in transportation. A discussion followed on emergency transportation support and resources. ITEM 6. DEVELOPMENT UPDATES Janelle Thomas gave development updates for the City of Reno. Jon Ericson gave development updates for the City of Sparks. Kelly Mullin gave development updates for Washoe County. ITEM 7. MEMBER ITEMS Adam Searcy gave updates for the WCSD. Chris Tolley gave updates for TMRPA. ITEM 8. AGENDA ITEMS FOR FUTURE TAC MEETINGS There were no agenda items given. ITEM 9. RTC STAFF ITEMS Amy Cummings, RTC Director of Planning stated the City of Reno and NDOT coordinated in removal of construction cones for the bike lane section on West Fourth Street improvements from a public comment given at a previous TAC meeting. Mark Maloney, RTC Transit Manager stated the Token app is launched for RTC ACCESS now. Dan stated RTC submitted for the INFRA Grant, which is underway for the improvements on the Lemmon Drive southbound interchange project. ITEM 10. PUBLIC COMMENT There was no public comment. ITEM 11. ADJOURNMENT The meeting adjourned at 9:25 a.m. 2 December 6, 2017 AGENDA ITEM 4 TO: Technical Advisory Committee FROM: Amy Cummings, AICP, LEED AP Director of Planning SUBJECT: Bike Share Update RECOMMENDATION Acknowledge receipt of an update report on bike share. SUMMARY On November 2-3, 2017, RTC hosted a Bike Share Industry Forum at CENTENNIAL PLAZA. The purpose of the forum was to learn more about the alterative bike share operating models and equipment, and to inform regional decision making about the type of program that would be best suited to the Truckee Meadows. The forum supplements information in the Bike Share Feasibility Study, which was completed before the privatized dockless bike share business model became available in the United States. Three types of bike share operating models were reviewed at the forum: Station-based – requires bike check-in/check-out at kiosks and is publicly funded. Smart bike – requires bike check-in/check-out at designated bike racks and is publicly funded. Dockless – bikes may be checked-in/checked-out at any location. No racks or designated parking areas are required. This system type is privately funded. Publicly funded systems (station-based or smart bike) could be operated by RTC and capital costs funded through a Transportation Alternatives Set-Aside grant. Ongoing operations would be funded through private sponsorships. Dockless systems are privately funded and would require permitting through the local jurisdictions. RTC would have no management/oversight role with a dockless system. RTC Board: Ron Smith (Chair) Bob Lucey (Vice Chair) Paul McKenzie Marsha Berkbigler Neoma Jardon PO Box 30002, Reno, NV 89520 1105 Terminal Way, Reno, NV 89502 775-348-0400 rtcwashoe.com Bike Share Update TAC Staff Report December 6, 2017 Page 2 Six providers participated in the forum, including: Company System Type Proposed Business Model SPIN Dockless Privatized ofo Dockless Privatized PBSC Urban Solutions Station-based Purchased/owned by government entity (electric assist bikes available) LimeBike Dockless Privatized BCycle Smart Bike Lease or purchase by government entity (electric assist bikes available) noa Technologies Smart Bike Purchased/owned by government entity Forum evaluators included representatives from RTC, City of Reno, City of Sparks, Washoe County, Washoe County Health District, University of Nevada, Reno, Renown, and the Reno Bike Project. A summary of the two day forum was given to the RTC Board on November 27, 2017, where staff was directed to attend the City of Reno and City of Sparks City Council Meetings and Washoe County Commission meeting to provide a status report on bike share, provide information regarding a dockless bikeshare pilot program, and seek support for an RTC Transportation Alternatives grant application for a regional smart bike/station based bikeshare program. Staff will report back to the RTC Board with a status update in February or March, 2018. BACKGROUND INFORMATION The complete 2015 Bike Share Feasibility Study is available on the RTC website (https://www.rtcwashoe.com/mpo-reports/bike-share-feasibility-study/). On August 11, 2017, a community Bike Share Forum was held to identify potential interest in using public-private partnerships to implement bike share. The Bike Share Forum was well attended with over 60 participants, including public officials. Staff reviewed the study and provided an overview of bike share. The Bike Share Forum resulted in strong support for implementing a bike share system in the Truckee Meadows and there was a consensus to invite vendors to an Industry Review. At the direction of the RTC Board, RTC coordinated a meeting of the RTC, City, and County attorneys to initiate coordination regarding bike share-related issues. Transportation Alternatives (TA) Set-Aside funding may be a funding option for start-up capital costs associated with implementing a publicly-funded bike share system.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Mobility Payment Integration: State-Of-The-Practice Scan
    Mobility Payment Integration: State-of-the-Practice Scan OCTOBER 2019 FTA Report No. 0143 Federal Transit Administration PREPARED BY Ingrid Bartinique and Joshua Hassol Volpe National Transportation Systems Center COVER PHOTO Courtesy of Edwin Adilson Rodriguez, Federal Transit Administration DISCLAIMER This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the U.S. Department of Transportation in the interest of information exchange. The United States Government assumes no liability for its contents or use thereof. The United States Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the objective of this report. Mobility Payment Integration: State-of-the- Practice Scan OCTOBER 2019 FTA Report No. 0143 PREPARED BY Ingrid Bartinique and Joshua Hassol Volpe National Transportation Systems Center 55 Broadway, Kendall Square Cambridge, MA 02142 SPONSORED BY Federal Transit Administration Office of Research, Demonstration and Innovation U.S. Department of Transportation 1200 New Jersey Avenue, SE Washington, DC 20590 AVAILABLE ONLINE https://www.transit.dot.gov/about/research-innovation FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i Metric Conversion Table SYMBOL WHEN YOU KNOW MULTIPLY BY TO FIND SYMBOL LENGTH in inches 25.4 millimeters mm ft feet 0.305 meters m yd yards 0.914 meters m mi miles 1.61 kilometers km VOLUME fl oz fluid ounces 29.57 milliliters mL gal gallons 3.785 liter L ft3 cubic feet 0.028 cubic meters m3 yd3 cubic yards 0.765 cubic meters m3 NOTE: volumes greater than 1000 L shall be shown in m3 MASS oz ounces 28.35 grams g lb pounds 0.454 kilograms kg megagrams T short tons (2000 lb) 0.907 Mg (or “t”) (or “metric ton”) TEMPERATURE (exact degrees) o 5 (F-32)/9 o F Fahrenheit Celsius C or (F-32)/1.8 FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION i FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION ii REPORT DOCUMENTATION PAGE Form Approved OMB No.
    [Show full text]
  • Paying for Bike-Sharing Systems EXAMPLES and TRENDS from LATIN AMERICA Introduction
    Paying for bike-sharing systems EXAMPLES AND TRENDS FROM LATIN AMERICA Introduction Bike-sharing systems (BSS) have played BOX 1 a key role in discussions around how to promote cycling in cities for more than Financing and funding (CFF, 2017) a decade. This role has further increased Financing: Related to how governments (or with the emergence of private dockless private companies) that own infrastructure find the money to meet the upfront costs of building said systems since 2015. There are now infrastructure. Examples: municipal revenues, bonds, thousands of BSS in operation in cities intergovernmental transfers, private sector. across the world, particularly in Europe, Funding: Related to how taxpayers, consumers or Asia, and North America. others ultimately pay for infrastructure, including paying back the finance from whichever source Creating a BSS, however, is not simply a matter of governments (or private owners) choose. replicating a model that has worked in another city. BSSs are one element of a city’s overall transport infrastructure, Examples: Taxes, municipal revenues, user fees like roads, buses, metros, bike lanes, sidewalks, etc. Their and sponsorship. implementation must be based around a city’s context, including: (a) the applicable laws and regulations with respect to planning and operation of a BSS; (b) its integration with public transport networks, particularly The financing and funding options for a BSS will be its ability to connect transport nodes with offices and dependent on the operational structure that the city residences; and (c) the potential of cycling as a mode of chooses. In all cases, the city will be involved in this transport in the city and any relevant sustainability or structure: the degree of involvement will depend on the development objectives (Moon-Miklaucic et al., 2018).
    [Show full text]
  • Final W Abstract.Docx
    Bike Share Feasibility Study La Crosse, Wisconsin Zabrowski, Jack | Christen, Matthew | Buck, Jason | Miller, Jill Acknowledgements Bike-ability Field survey: Pioneering Healthy Communities Atticus Jaramillo Move More Committee: Carolyn Dvorak Brenda Maxwell Chuck Lee Brenda Rooney Erica Black Carolyn Dvorak Jacob Sciammas Dennis Rodenberg Lewis Kuhlman Erica Black Linda Lee Joyce Mlsna Matthew Christen Linda Larson Tim Acklin Matthew Christen Rebecca Lakowske Literature Review: Susan Lundsten Carolyn Dvorak Virginia Loehr Dennis Rodenberg Erica Black Heat Map creation and GIS analysis: Jill Miller Jason Buck City of La Crosse Lewis Kuhlman Matthew Christen Bicycle and Pedestrian Crash Map: T.Y. Lin International Financial Contributors: City of La Crosse City of La Crosse Planning Department: Gundersen Health System Amy Peterson La Crosse Area Planning Commission Jacob Larow Logistics Health Incorporated Larry Kirch Three Sixty Real Estate Solutions Lewis Kuhlman Mayo Clinic Health System-La Crosse Nathan Patros YMCA of La Crosse Tim Acklin 1 Bike Share Feasibility Study Table of Contents Executive Summary .........................................................................................................................3 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................4 Methods ............................................................................................................................................5 Results ..............................................................................................................................................8
    [Show full text]
  • Construction Projects Special Provisions Department of Public Works Capital Bikeshare Cityequipment of Falls & C Shurchtartup
    IFB # 0626-18-BIKE ATTACHMENT H CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS SPECIAL PROVISIONS DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS CAPITAL BIKESHARE CITYEQUIPMENT OF FALLS & C SHURCHTARTUP Attachment H IFB #0626-18-BIKE City of Falls Church Capital Bikeshare Equipment & Startup SPECIAL PROVISIONS TABLE OF CONTENTS I. DEFINITIONS .................................................................................................................... 3 II. HISTORY OF THE CAPITAL BIKESHARE PROGRAM ................................................... 4 III. BIKESHARE IN THE CITY OF FALLS CHURCH (“CITY”) .............................................. 4 IV. SCOPE OF WORK ............................................................................................................ 5 V. VDOT FINDING OF PUBLIC INTEREST - PROPRIETARY ITEMS .................................. 6 VI. EQUIPMENT - GENERAL ................................................................................................. 6 VII. BIKESHARE STATIONS................................................................................................... 6 VIII. EQUIPMENT PART NUMBERS ........................................................................................ 7 IX. STATION SPARE PARTS ................................................................................................. 7 X. BICYCLES ........................................................................................................................ 8 XI. BICYCLE SPARE PART KITS .........................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Sharing in the United States: State of the Practice and Guide to Implementation Bike Sharing in the United States
    DOWNTOWN BOISE Parking Strategic Plan APPENDIX A2 Bike Sharing in the United States: State of the Practice and Guide to Implementation Bike Sharing in the United States: State of the Practice and Guide to Implementation September 2012 Prepared by Toole Design Group and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center for USDOT Federal Highway Administration Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center CREDIT: CAPITAL BIKESHARE (WASHINGTON, DC) CREDIT: BOULDER B-CYCLE (BOULDER, CO) CREDIT: DECO BIKE (MIAMI BEACH, FL) NOTICE This document is disseminated under the sponsorship of the Federal Highway Administration in the interest of information exchange. The U.S. Government assumes no liability for the use of the information contained in this document. This report does not constitute a standard, specification, or regulation. The U.S. Government does not endorse products or manufacturers. Trademarks or manufacturers’ names appear in this report only because they are considered essential to the objective of the document. The opinions, findings and conclusions expressed in this publication are those of the authors and not necessarily those of the Federal Highway Administration. This document can be downloaded from the following website: www.bicyclinginfo.org/bikeshare September 2012. ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS This Guide was prepared by Toole Design Group and the Pedestrian and Bicycle Information Center through a cooperative agreement (DTFH61-11H-00024) with the Federal Highway Administration. This report would not have been possible without the support and assistance of the Advisory Committee, who were willing to share data, background information, and advice for future bike share programs. Also, special thanks to the League of American Bicyclists which distributed a bike share questionnaire to Bicycle Friendly Communities (results are reported in this report).
    [Show full text]
  • Bike-Sharing Industry Pioneer Pbsc Urban Solutions To
    Press Release For immediate release BIKE-SHARING INDUSTRY PIONEER PBSC URBAN SOLUTIONS TO REVOLUTIONIZE ELECTRIC URBAN MOBILITY IN BARCELONA • 1,000 state-of-the-art electric pedal-assist bikes in a smart hybrid system to be deployed in Barcelona as part of 7,000 total bike rollout • New contract crowns a year of exceptional growth for PBSC with the launch of bike-sharing systems in Rio de Janeiro, São Paulo, Salvador, Porto Alegre, Vila Velha, Nicosia, Valence, Santiago, Buenos Aires and expansions in the cities of Montréal, Toronto, Honolulu, Columbus, Chattanooga and Guadalajara. Montréal and Barcelona, September 25, 2018 – PBSC Urban Solutions, the leading global provider of sustainable urban mobility solutions, is bringing state-of-the-art electric pedal-assist bikes to the city of Barcelona after being awarded one of the largest and most prized contracts of the industry. Barcelona’s Bicing bike-sharing network is about to enter a new era! PBSC, through a joint venture with renowned infrastructure and services operator Ferrovial, was entrusted under a ten-year contract to roll out a total of 7,000 bikes, including 1,000 industry-leading pedal-assist BOOST e-bikes, all slated to be in operation in 2019 across the city’s ten districts. In both the planning and deployment phases, PSBC will be working in close collaboration with Barcelona de Serveis Municipals, B:SM, the organization responsible for the city’s bike-sharing system as mandated by the City of Barcelona. This massive rollout will leverage the fruit of years of research and development conducted by PBSC’s tech labs by a talented team of mechanical, electrical and electronic engineers to deliver the most convenient and flexible experience.
    [Show full text]
  • Bixi Montréal and Pbsc Urban Solutions Team up to Offer Montrealers State-Of-The Art E-Bike Technology
    Press Release For immediate release BIXI MONTRÉAL AND PBSC URBAN SOLUTIONS TEAM UP TO OFFER MONTREALERS STATE-OF-THE ART E-BIKE TECHNOLOGY MONTREAL, August 26, 2019 —PBSC Urban Solutions and BIXI Montréal are amping up the pedal power of Montreal’s public bike-share network. Starting today, 120 of PBSC’s next-generation E-FIT bikes join the BIXI fleet in a pilot project that will run until November 15, 2019. After the successful launch of PBSC’s electric pedal-assist products in several European and North American cities like Barcelona, Monaco and Detroit, the company is excited to bring its best-in-class e-bike technology to its hometown. “Montrealers are bike-share pioneers; in the past decade they have repeatedly shown their dedication to this alternative form of transportation. With the E-FIT, BIXI is once-again proving itself to be ahead of the curve, opting to introduce an e-bike that gives users the option to go further, faster and smarter,” says Luc Sabbatini, CEO of PBSC Urban Solutions. PBSC designed the E-FIT as well as its original BOOST e-bike, to fit seamlessly into existing public bike-share systems, removing barriers for cities and operators that want to offer mixed fleets. They use the same locking mechanism as the ICONIC bikes Montrealers know and love and can be docked at any station in the network. Plus, there’s no learning curve with the E-FIT — BIXI members and casual riders can still rent their bike at a station or through the dedicated mobile app.
    [Show full text]
  • Peer Programs
    CHAPTER 4 PEER PROGRAMS Photo Credit: Indego City of Wilmington - Bike Share Feasibility Analysis THIS PAGE LEFT INTENTIONALLY BLANK City of Wilmington - Bike Share Feasibility Analysis There are over 60 operating bike share programs in the Capital and operating costs generally come from a United States (Figure 3) and at least 10 more in various variety of sources. However the most prevalent sources stages of planning. This section draws from experience for capital funding include federal or state grants with a around the country to provide a complete account local match. Operating revenues generally come from of different technologies, business models, partner a combination of system revenues (membership and roles, operating costs, pricing structures, ridership and usage fees) and sponsorship and/or advertising. In mid- membership rates, success factors, and risks. Detailed sized communities, system revenues generally cover only summaries are provided for four bike share programs a portion of the operating cost (around 20 to 40 percent operating in peer cities that were selected based on in small-to-mid sized cities including Charlotte and similarities in geographic and population size, transit Columbus). Throughout mid-sized U.S. cities with existing infrastructure and other factors, as noted below: bike share programs there has been a push for attracting system-wide sponsors to help fund the operations and • Charlotte (Charlotte, B-Cycle): compact expansion of the programs. Mostly, however, bike share downtown, major transit hub integration, non- programs have been able to have a diversified portfolio profit ownership model. of funding sources which have helped them cover their • Columbus (CoGo Bikeshare): Midwest region, implementation costs.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Bikesharing in North America: Early Operator and User and Understanding Operator Early Public America: Bikesharing in North
    MTI Public Bikesharing in North in Bikesharing America:Public Early Operator andUnderstanding User Funded by U.S. Department of Transportation and California Public Bikesharing in North Department of Transportation America: Early Operator and User Understanding MTI ReportMTI 11-26 MTI Report 11-26 June 2012 MINETA TRANSPORTATION INSTITUTE MTI FOUNDER Hon. Norman Y. Mineta The Norman Y. Mineta International Institute for Surface Transportation Policy Studies was established by Congress in the MTI BOARD OF TRUSTEES Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act of 1991 (ISTEA). The Institute’s Board of Trustees revised the name to Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI) in 1996. Reauthorized in 1998, MTI was selected by the U.S. Department of Transportation Honorary Chairman Joseph Boardman (Ex-Officio) John Horsley Michael S. Townes (TE 2011) through a competitive process in 2002 as a national “Center of Excellence.” The Institute is funded by Congress through the John L. Mica (Ex-Officio) Chief Executive Officer (Ex-Officio)* President/CEO (ret.) Amtrak Transportation District Commision of United States Department of Transportation’s Research and Innovative Technology Administration, the California Legislature Chair Executive Director House Transportation and American Association of State Hampton Roads through the Department of Transportation (Caltrans), and by private grants and donations. Infrastructure Committee Donald H. Camph (TE 2012) Highway and Transportation Officials House of Representatives President (AASHTO) David L. Turney* (TE 2012) California Institute for Technology Chairman, President & CEO The Institute receives oversight from an internationally respected Board of Trustees whose members represent all major surface Honorary Co-Chair, Honorable Exchange Will Kempton (TE 2012) Digital Recorders, Inc. transportation modes.
    [Show full text]
  • Public Bikesharing in North America: Early Operator Understanding and Emerging Trends
    PUBLIC BIKESHARING IN NORTH AMERICA: EARLY OPERATOR UNDERSTANDING AND EMERGING TRENDS Susan A. Shaheen, Ph.D. Lecturer and Co-Director, Transportation Sustainability Research Center (TSRC) University of California, Berkeley 1301 S. 46th Street. Bldg 190; Richmond, CA 94804-4648 510-665-3483 (O); 510-665-2183 (F); [email protected] Adam P. Cohen Research Associate, Transportation Sustainability Research Center (TSRC) University of California, Berkeley 1301 S. 46th Street. Bldg 190; Richmond, CA 94804-4648 510-665-3646 (O); 510-665-2183 (F); [email protected] Elliot W. Martin, Ph.D. Assistant Research Engineer, Transportation Sustainability Research Center (TSRC) University of California, Berkeley 1301 S. 46th Street. Bldg 190; Richmond, CA 94804-4648 510-665-3575 (O); 510-665-2183 (F); [email protected] 2013 Transportation Research Board Annual Meeting November 15, 2012 Shaheen, Cohen, and Martin. 2013 TRB Annual Meeting. November 15, 2012 1 PUBLIC BIKESHARING IN NORTH AMERICA: EARLY OPERATOR UNDERSTANDING AND EMERGING TRENDS ABSTRACT Public bikesharing—the shared use of a bicycle fleet—is an innovative mobility strategy that has recently emerged in major North American cities. Bikesharing systems typically position bicycles throughout an urban environment, among a network of docking stations, for immediate access. Approximately five years ago, information technology (or IT)-based bikesharing services began to emerge in North America. Since 2007, 27 IT-based programs have been deployed–26 are operational and one is now defunct. Bikesharing growth potential in North America is examined on the basis of a survey of all 15 IT-based public bikesharing systems operating in the United States and all four programs operating in Canada, as of January 2012.
    [Show full text]
  • An Inquiry Into the Potential and Sustainability Benefits Derived from the Expansion of Bike Sharing System in Porto, Portugal
    An Inquiry Into the Potential and Sustainability Benefits Derived From the Expansion of Bike Sharing System in Porto, Portugal The Harvard community has made this article openly available. Please share how this access benefits you. Your story matters Citation christensen, cindy. 2019. An Inquiry Into the Potential and Sustainability Benefits Derived From the Expansion of Bike Sharing System in Porto, Portugal. Master's thesis, Harvard Extension School. Citable link http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:42004143 Terms of Use This article was downloaded from Harvard University’s DASH repository, and is made available under the terms and conditions applicable to Other Posted Material, as set forth at http:// nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:dash.current.terms-of- use#LAA An Inquiry into the Potential Benefits Derived from the Expansion of a Bike Sharing System in Porto, Portugal Cindy Christensen A Thesis in the Field of Sustainability for the Degree of Master of Liberal Arts in Extension Studies Harvard University May 2019 Copyright 2019 Cindy Christensen Abstract The primary goal of this research was to model the potential of a bike sharing program (BSP) in Portugal and more specifically within the city of Porto. For many years, the topic of BSP has been heavily debated as the preferred mode of transportation for many urban cities across the globe due to several reasons, such as that they are environmentally friendly, cost-effective, convenient, safe, and more. While the derived benefits of BSP are not yet clearly justified in academic research, many politicians believe that BSP is good for locals as well as tourists.
    [Show full text]
  • Opposition to SB 1374: Dockless Bicycle Sharing Dear Senator, The
    P.O. Box 5014 Portland, ME 04101 March 9, 2018 Re: Opposition to SB 1374: Dockless Bicycle Sharing Dear Senator, The North American Bike Share Association (NABSA) connects the biggest minds in bikeshare to support, promote and enhance bikeshare across North America. NABSA is the bikeshare industry’s membership organization with representation from system owners, operators, host cities, equipment manufacturers and technology providers. In January 2018, Oklahoma State Senator Jason Smalley introduced SB 1374, a Dockless Bicycle Sharing Bill, into the Oklahoma Senate. It passed on February 27th through the Business, Commerce and Tourism Committee. As the industry experts representing a wide range of the bikeshare industry, NABSA would like to express its strong opposition to this bill. This bill is bad for bikeshare, it’s bad for cities, and it’s bad for citizens. Bikeshare is an affordable, efficient, healthy, and sustainable form of public transportation used mostly for short, point-to-point, trips. Anyone can rent a bike, ride it, and then return it back into the system service area. Cities across the country, both big and small, adopt bikeshare to: provide low-cost transportation; complete transit networks; resolve the ‘first and last mile’ problem; provide an accessible means for physical activity; reduce traffic congestion; improve air quality; and stimulate economic development. Bikeshare has been successful in hundreds of cities and towns across the country because of strong local involvement. This bill handicaps Oklahoma municipalities
    [Show full text]