DOCSLIB.ORG

Shared Mobility in Bexar County

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Shared Mobility in Bexar County Shared Mobility in Bexar County Draft Report November 26, 2018 Prepared by: November 2018 1 Alamo Area Bike Share Master Plan Shared Mobility in Bexar County Table of Contents Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................................................. 3 1. Introduction ...................................................................................................................................................... 4 1.1. Shared Mobility ......................................................................................................................................... 4 1.2. Background ............................................................................................................................................... 5 1.3. Shared Mobility in San Antonio ................................................................................................................ 5 2. San Antonio Bike Share (SABS) ...................................................................................................................... 6 3. The Changing Face of Bike Share and Shared Mobility ................................................................................ 9 3.1. Changes to BCycle Technology ............................................................................................................... 9 3.2. San Antonio’s Dockless Pilot Program .................................................................................................. 14 3.3. Peer City Examples ................................................................................................................................. 16 4. The Opportunity for Shared Mobility in San Antonio ................................................................................... 22 4.1. Policy Review .......................................................................................................................................... 22 4.2. Bike Share Market Analysis .................................................................................................................... 25 4.3. Community Engagement ........................................................................................................................ 26 4.4. Stakeholder Outreach ............................................................................................................................. 31 4.4. Potential Demand ................................................................................................................................... 33 4.5. Underserved Communities ..................................................................................................................... 35 5. The Role of San Antonio Bike Share ............................................................................................................. 38 5.1. Expansion Options .................................................................................................................................. 38 5.2. Technology Update and Transition ........................................................................................................ 40 5.3. Financial Analysis ................................................................................................................................... 44 5.4. Role of Partner Agencies to Support Shared Mobility .......................................................................... 45 6. Conclusions and Recommendations ........................................................................................................... 47 Appendix A - Station Assessment Matrix Appendix B - Transit Integration November 2018 2 Alamo Area Bike Share Master Plan Shared Mobility in Bexar County Acknowledgements Study Oversight Committee Jeanne Geiger, AAMPO, Project Manager Linda Alvarado-Vela, AAMPO Allie Blazodky, AAMPO Yida Capriccioso, City of New Braunfels Jillian Harris, City of San Antonio Riley Metcalfe, City of Boerne Crystal Miranda, City of Seguin Parks and Recreation Tim Mulry, VIA Transit Susanna Ramos, City of Boerne Jason Rodriguez, VIA Transit Darcy Schipull, Texas Department of Transportation Tiffany Simper, Bexar County Public Works JD Simpson, San Antonio Bike Share Angel Whitley, San Antonio Bike Share Deborah Wilson, City of Boerne Authors Toole Design Group RJ Eldridge, Principal Adrian Witte, P.E., Senior Engineer Rae-Leigh Stark, AICP, Project Planner Erin Machell, Planner II Belinda Judelman, Planner Halff Associates, Inc. Jim Carillo, Vice President Christian Lentz, AICP, Senior Planner Jill Baumgartner, Landscape Architect November 2018 3 Alamo Area Bike Share Master Plan Shared Mobility in Bexar County 1. Introduction The Alamo Area Metropolitan Planning Organization (AAMPO) is evaluating the role of bike share and other forms of shared mobility in the Greater San Antonio Region including expansion or changes to the existing bike share program in San Antonio (Bexar County), planning for new shared mobility options such as electric-assist (e-assist) bikes and electric-powered scooters (e-scooters), and considering shared mobility options suitable for smaller communities in Guadalupe, Comal, and Kendall Counties. This report focuses on Bexar County and presents a background and history of the existing bike share program, explores the City of San Antonio’s new dockless pilot program, and presents the results of an independent analysis that looked at demand, equity, public and stakeholder opinion, and experience from other cities to develop options and recommendations for how San Antonio should move forward and best leverage public and private investment in shared mobility. Figure 1: The Alamo Area Bike Share Master Plan Study Area. 1.1. Shared Mobility The term “shared mobility” is used to describe transportation systems that make use of a pool of resources that can be used by a broad group of people to increase their transportation and mobility options. For this report, “shared mobility” refers to traditional docked and dockless bike share, e-assist bicycles within a bike share platform, and e-scooter programs. November 2018 4 Alamo Area Bike Share Master Plan Shared Mobility in Bexar County 1.2. Background San Antonio is the largest city in Bexar County and one of the fastest growing cities in the United States.1,2 The City has focused a lot of its recent growth on innovation, technology, and redevelopment. Systems such as shared mobility transportation are important solutions that supplement existing transit services, provide health and economic benefits to the communities they serve, and advertise the city as a vibrant and modern city to help attract talent. The region’s economy is comprised of government, medical services, manufacturing, business, tourism, technology, and communications. South-central Texas is home to several Fortune 1,000 companies, new tech startups, and a number of universities and colleges, including the University of the Incarnate Word, Trinity University, Our Lady of the Lake University, St. Mary’s University, and the University of Texas – San Antonio. There are numerous examples of public-private partnerships that are funding these initiatives, including San Antonio Bike Share. San Antonio has traditionally been an auto-oriented city. However, more recently, it is recognized that a more sustainable transportation model is needed to support growth. This includes increased funding to enhance transit, active transportation, and other low-impact transportation modes. As an example, VIA, the regional transit agency, is investing in several rapid transit lines and recently upgraded their fare system to be easier to use and more accessible. The City of San Antonio is a bronze-level Bicycle Friendly Community and continues to build out a network of separated bikeways and AAMPO recently sponsored an update to the region’s bicycling and pedestrian plans to help prioritize investment in these modes. All of these efforts demonstrate a commitment to changing the transportation culture and shared mobility will both benefit from these changes and help to push them. 1.3. Shared Mobility in San Antonio San Antonio was one of the first cities in the United States to embrace the modern form of bike share. The bike share program has grown from 14 stations and 140 bikes in 2011 to 61 stations and 535 bikes currently. It operates in the center of San Antonio between Interstates 10 and 37 and extends from the Witte Museum along the Mission Reach to Mission Espada. The attractions along the San Antonio River are some of the most popular stations in the system. San Antonio Bike Share (SABS) is the non-profit organization that was formed specifically to manage the bike share program and was chosen through a competitive bidding process. A contract was signed in June 2010 between SABS and the City of San Antonio’s Office of Sustainability. Equipment, including the bikes and stations, is purchased through a variety of funding sources including federal, state, and local grants and then held “in trust” by the non-profit. Operating funds come from a combination of user revenues, sponsorships, and local public subsidies. In fact, the system was renamed Swell Cycle in early 2018 after the Steward Health Care System became the official title sponsor.3 In Summer 2018, new mobility options arrived in San Antonio. A number of companies placed e-scooters on the streets without permits and although they were allowed to keep operating,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Future of Transportation in the Black Community
    The Future of Transportation in the Black Community Author: Regan F. Patterson, Ph.D. Transportation Equity Research Fellow Contributors: Christen Richardson, Fatou Sahor, Sarah Wagner SEPTEMBER 2020 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, Inc. The Congressional Black Caucus Foundation, Inc. (CBCF) is a nonprofit, nonpartisan public policy, research, and educational institute that seeks to advance the global Black community. CBCF envisions a world in which all communities have an equal voice in public policy through leadership cultivation, economic empowerment, and civic engagement. The mission of CBCF is to advance the global Black community by developing leaders, informing policy, and educating the public. Center for Policy Analysis and Research The Center for Policy Analysis and Research (CPAR) identifies, analyzes, and disseminates policies and policy-related information critical to the economic independence, quality education, and health equity of African Americans. CPAR helps to fill the need for quality research and effective policies regarding underserved communities and the personal and social welfare of their individuals. Transportation Equity The CPAR Transportation Equity program conducts policy analysis and research as it relates to transportation, sustainability, and equity. This program is generously supported by State Farm. New Routes to Equity: The Future of Transportation in the Black Community 2 TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction 4 Transportation Challenges for the 7 Black Community Policy Recommendations 12 Conclusion 18 New Routes to Equity: The Future of Transportation in the Black Community 3 INTRODUCTION Our transportation system is being transformed by three rapidly evolving and emerging mobility options: shared mobility, electric vehicles, and autonomous vehicles (see Figure 1). Shared mobility services and electric vehicles are already changing the transportation landscape.
    [Show full text]
  • CONNECTING the RARITAN HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rutgers University Bloustein School of Policy and Planning | Fall 2016 Graduate Studio
    RUTGERS UNIVERSITY BIKE SHARE CONNECTING THE RARITAN HEALTH IMPACT ASSESSMENT Rutgers University Bloustein School of Policy and Planning | Fall 2016 Graduate Studio ABOUT THE STUDIO This studio project is an analysis of the health impacts of the We met with Bloustein professors, with planning professionals, potential new Bike Share program planned for the Rutgers-New and with the organizers and staff of bike shares across the coun- Brunswick community. It builds upon our client’s – the Rutgers try in order to ask questions and gain invaluable advice on how University Department of Institutional Planning and Opera- to proceed with our analysis. We used this collected knowledge tion (IPO) – Internal Bicycle Share Proposal. The IPO report to build impact projections and develop a list of actionable rec- highlighted existing bicycle infrastructure, robust public trans- ommendations targeted at maximizing positive health outcomes portation infrastructure, and the high concentration of bicycle while mitigating health concerns. commuters in the study area as support for their proposal. This studio expanded on that analysis by examining the physical, This studio course is intended to advance the goals of Healthier mental, social, and economic health of the users and residents New Brunswick, a network of partners in the City of New Bruns- of Rutgers campus and the surrounding areas. Our targeted wick that are working together to ensure that all residents have audience for this analysis was people who currently do not bike; equal access to the services and conditions that allow for good we paid close attention to equity issues and vulnerable popula- health and well-being.
    [Show full text]
  • By the Numbers
    By the Numbers Quantifying Some of Our Environmental & Social Work 6.2 MILLION 100 Dollars we donated this fiscal year Percentage of Patagonia products we take to fund environmental work back for recycling 70 MILLION 164,062 Cash and in-kind services we’ve donated since Pounds of Patagonia products recycled our tithing program began in 1985 or upcycled since 2004 741 84 Environmental groups that received Percentage of water saved through our new a Patagonia grant this year denim dyeing technology as compared to environmental + social initiatives conventional synthetic indigo denim dyeing 116,905 Dollars given to nonprofits this year through 100 our Employee Charity Match program Percentage of Traceable Down (traceable to birds that were never live-plucked, 20 MILLION & CHANGE never force-fed) we use in our down products 2 Dollars we’ve allocated to invest in environmentally and socially responsible companies through our 1996 venture capital fund Year we switched to the exclusive use of organically grown cotton 0 8 New investments we made this year through 10,424 $20 Million & Change Hours our employees volunteered this year 1 on the company dime 5 Mega-dams that will not be built on Chile’s Baker 30,000 and Pascua rivers thanks to a worldwide effort Approximate number of Patagonia products 5 in which we participated repaired this year at our Reno Service Center 380 15 MILLION Public screenings this year for DamNation Acres of degraded grassland we hope to restore in the Patagonia region of South America by buying and supporting the purchase of responsibly sourced 75,000 merino wool Signatures collected this year petitioning the Obama administration to remove four dams initiatives social + environmental on the lower Snake River 774,671 Single-driver car-trip miles avoided this year 192 through our Drive-Less program Fair Trade Certified™ styles in the Patagonia line as of fall 2015 100 MILLION Dollars 1% for the Planet® has donated to nonprofit environmental groups cover: Donnie Hedden © 2015 Patagonia, Inc.
    [Show full text]
  • Sacramento Council of Governments Bikeshare and Micro–Mobility White
    Sacramento Area Council of Governments Regional Bike Share Policy Steering Committee November 20, 2020 at 2 – 3:30 p.m. SACOG Zoom Meeting Timed items are estimates only and may be taken up by the committee at any time. The Policy Steering Committee may take up any agenda item at any time, regardless of the order listed. Public comment will be taken on the item at the time that it is taken up by the committee. We ask that members of the public complete a request to speak form, submit it to the clerk of the committee, and keep their remarks brief. If several persons wish to address the committee on a single item, the chair may impose a time limit on individual remarks at the beginning of the discussion. Action may be taken on any item on this agenda. (2:00) Roll Call: Ayala, Cabaldon, Frerichs, Hansen, Harris, Trost (2:05) Public Communications: Any person wishing to address the committee on any item not on the agenda may do so at this time. After ten minutes of testimony, any additional testimony will be heard following the action items. (2:10) Information and Discussion 1. White Paper on Bike Share and Shared Micromobility (Ms. Bradbury) (2:40) Action 2. Potential Extension of the Program Agreement with Lime (Ms. Bradbury) (3:00) Other Matters (3:15) Next Meeting and Adjournment This agenda and attachments are available on SACOG’s website at www.sacog.org. SACOG is accessible to the disabled. As required by Section 202 of the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 and the Federal Rules and Regulations adopted in implementation thereof, a person who requires a modification or accommodation, auxiliary aids or services in order to participate in a public meeting, including receiving this agenda and attachments in an alternative format, should contact SACOG by phone at 916-321-9000, e-mail ([email protected]) or in person as soon as possible and preferably at least 72 hours prior to the meeting.
    [Show full text]
  • Strategies for Engaging Community
    Strategies for Engaging Community Developing Better Relationships Through Bike Share photo Capital Bikeshare - Washington DC Capital Bikeshare - Washinton, DC The Better Bike Share Partnership is a collaboration funded by The JPB Foundation to build equitable and replicable bike share systems. The partners include The City of Philadelphia, Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia, the National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO) and the PeopleForBikes Foundation. In this guide: Introduction........................................................... 5 At a Glance............................................................. 6 Goal 1: Increase Access to Mobility...................................................... 9 Goal 2: Get More People Biking................................................ 27 Goal 3: Increase Awareness and Support for Bike Share..................................................... 43 3 Healthy Ride - Pittsburgh, PA The core promise of bike share is increased mobility and freedom, helping people to get more easily to the places they want to go. To meet this promise, and to make sure that bike share’s benefits are equitably offered to people of all incomes, races, and demographics, public engagement must be at the fore of bike share advocacy, planning, implementation, and operations. Cities, advocates, community groups, and operators must work together to engage with their communities—repeatedly, strategically, honestly, and openly—to ensure that bike share provides a reliable, accessible mobility option
    [Show full text]
  • Guideline for Bike Rental Transdanube.Pearls Final Draft
    Transdanube.Pearls - Network for Sustainable Mobility along the Danube http://www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Guideline for bike rental Transdanube.Pearls Final Draft WP/Action 3.1 Author: Inštitút priestorového plánovania Version/Date 3.0, 23.11.2017 Document Revision/Approval Version Date Status Date Status 3.0 23/11/2017 Final draft xx.xx.xxxx final Contacts Coordinator: Bratislava Self-governing Region Sabinovská 16, P.O. Box 106 820 05 Bratislava web: www.region-bsk.sk Author: Inštitút priestorového plánovania Ľubľanská 1 831 02 Bratislava web: http://ipp.szm.com More information about Transdanube.Pearls project are available at www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Page 2 of 41 www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Abbreviations BSS Bike Sharing Scheme ECF European Cyclists´ Federation POI Point of Interest PT Public Transport Page 3 of 41 www.interreg-danube.eu/approved-projects/transdanube-pearls Table of content Contacts ..................................................................................................................................................................... 2 Bike Rental ................................................................................................................................................................ 5 Execuive summary ................................................................................................................................................. 5 1. Best practice examples from across
    [Show full text]
  • New Mobility Playbook
    Seattle Department of Transportation NEW MOBILITY PLAYBOOK Version 1.0 September 2017 MORE MOBILITY MORE INFORMATION MORE SEATTLE ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS SDOT PROJECT TEAM INTERAGENCY PROJECT Evan Corey | Project Lead TEAM Andrew Glass Hastings | Division Director, Carol Cooper and Jean Paul Velez | Transit and Mobility King County Metro Tracy Krawczyk | Division Director, Policy Kara Main-Hester | Seattle Department of and Planning Finance and Administrative Services Benjamin de la Peña | Deputy Director for Policy, Sean Bouffiou | King County Records and Planning, Mobility and Right of Way Licensing Services Mayumi Thompson | Communications Mafara Hobson | Communications Director CONSULTANT SUPPORT Scott Kubly | Department of Transportation Joe Iacobucci and Ellen Gottschling | Director Sam Schwartz Engineering Leslie Carlson, Mike Westling, Heidi Nielsen, CITY OF SEATTLE and Erin Halasz | Brink Communications INTERDEPARTMENTAL TEAM Cristina Van Valkenburgh, Mike Estey, EXPERT REVIEWERS Mary Catherine Snyder, Candida Lorenzana, Mollie Pellon and Corinne Kisner | NACTO Ben Smith, Naomi Doerner, and Kyle Rowe | Russell Brooks and Rob Benner | SDOT Transit and Mobility Division Transportation for America Jonathan Lewis | SDOT Policy and Planning Greg Lindsay | New Cities Foundation Division Katja Schechtner | OECD/MIT Media Lab Mark Bandy and Adiam Emery | Stonly Baptiste | Urban.Us SDOT Transportation Operations Division Gabe Klein | CityFi Darby Watson | SDOT Project Development Division Kevin O’Neill | SDOT Street Use Division Michael Mattmiller
    [Show full text]
  • Change of Bike-Share Usage in Five Cities of United States During COVID-19 1. RESEARCH QUESTIONS and HYPOTHESES 2. METHODS and D
    Tokey, Ahmad Ilderim. 2020. “Change of Bike-Share Usage in Five Cities of United States during COVID-19.” Findings, November. https://doi.org/10.32866/001c.17851. TRANSPORT FINDINGS Change of Bike-share Usage in Five Cities of United States during COVID-19 Ahmad Ilderim Tokey 1 1 Geography and Planning, The University of Toledo Keywords: bicycle share, mobility, travel behavior, covid-19 https://doi.org/10.32866/001c.17851 Findings This study explores how bike-share usage varied over the six months of the coronavirus pandemic (March’20-August’20) in five US cities. First, it finds that in most of the months, the changes (both increase or decrease) of bike-share usage from the preceding months are significantly higher in central tracts than peripheral tracts. This finding has more statistical significance for cities that are popular for biking (e.g. DC, Boston, Portland). Second, biking is found to be positively associated with cities’ non-work trip rate and people’s COVID exposure and it was diminished with more people maintaining social distance and staying at home. 1. RESEARCH QUESTIONS AND HYPOTHESES As an effect of COVID-19, the ridership of bike-share services plummeted with the economic shutdown wave. Teixeira and Lopez (2020) found that bike-sharing in New York, comparative to transit, show higher resiliency and a lower drop in ridership. Analyzing ridership of bike-share in Washington DC, Boston, Pittsburgh, Columbus, and Portland, this exploratory study tries to answer two questions: 1. How has the usage of bike-share services in areas with different distances from CBD varied during the pandemic? 2.
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Share Hubs • Defined “No Parking” Areas • System Growth Based on Operator Compliance
    6B City of Transportation Commission Bellevue Study Session DATE: March 8, 2018 TO: Chair Bishop and Members of the Transportation Commission FROM: Andreas Piller, Associate Transportation Planner [email protected] 425-452-2931 Franz Loewenherz, Principal Transportation Planner [email protected] 425-452-4077 SUBJECT: Citywide Bike Share Pilot Program DIRECTION REQUESTED X Action X Discussion X Information At the March 8, 2018 Transportation Commission meeting, staff seeks Commission endorsement of the strategies for implementing a citywide bike share pilot program. In accordance with its Bylaws approved on December 14, 2017, the Commission must also authorize a person to represent this feedback to the City Council. Note: Multiple hyperlinks are included in this memo, requiring extensive Commission consideration. It will not be possible to review these materials in depth in the 60 minutes allotted to this topic at the March 8 meeting. Staff offers to meet with Commissioners to review materials and answer questions in advance of the March 8 meeting. Background Bellevue’s Comprehensive Plan, adopted in August 2015, aims to “maintain and enhance a comprehensive multimodal transportation system to serve all members of the community” (Transportation Element Goal). The plan notes that “mobility in Bellevue means providing people with an assortment of mobility options that help people get where they need to go,” and that this “contributes to a quality of life that Bellevue residents expect, and that attracts employers and businesses” (Transportation Element Introduction). Policies direct the City to “evaluate and facilitate car-sharing and bike sharing programs” (TR-16) and to “support the establishment and operation of a bicycle sharing program in Bellevue” (TR-115).
    [Show full text]
  • 2019 Free Floating Bike Share Evaluation Report
    Seattle Department of Transportation 2019 FREE-FLOATING BIKE SHARE EVALUATION REPORT April 2020 CONTENTS ACKNOWLEDGMENTS ..............................................................................................4 1. INTRODUCTION ....................................................................................................5 Seattle’s Vision and Values for Transportation ........................................................5 Background ...............................................................................................................6 Our Approach ............................................................................................................9 2. HOW WELL DID WE ADVANCE OUR GOALS AND HOW CAN WE IMPROVE IN 2020? .................................................................................................15 Key Questions .........................................................................................................16 Goal 1: Support an active, healthy, people-first use of seattle’s streets ...............17 Goal 2: Ensure affordable and equitable service—particularly for cost-burdened communities of color—while expanding access to opportunities .....................23 Goal 3: Be safe and advance our vision zero objectives .........................................30 Goal 4: Fill mobility gaps and improve connections to transit ...............................34 Goal 5: Provide a low-carbon mobility option as part of Seattle’s efforts to reduce carbon emissions ...............................................................................38
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Sharing: a Review of Evidence on Impacts and Processes of Implementation and Operation
    Research in Transportation Business & Management 15 (2015) 28–38 Contents lists available at ScienceDirect Research in Transportation Business & Management Bike sharing: A review of evidence on impacts and processes of implementation and operation Miriam Ricci ⁎ Centre for Transport & Society, Department of Geography and Environmental Management, University of the West of England, Bristol BS16 1QY, United Kingdom article info abstract Article history: Despite the popularity of bike sharing, there is a lack of evidence on existing schemes and whether they achieved Received 13 February 2015 their objectives. This paper is concerned with identifying and critically interpreting the available evidence on bike Received in revised form 29 March 2015 sharing to date, on both impacts and processes of implementation and operation. The existing evidence suggests Accepted 30 March 2015 that bike sharing can increase cycling levels but needs complementary pro-cycling measures and wider support Available online 17 April 2015 to sustainable urban mobility to thrive. Whilst predominantly enabling commuting, bike sharing allows users to fi Keywords: undertake other key economic, social and leisure activities. Bene ts include improved health, increased transport fi Bike sharing choice and convenience, reduced travel times and costs, and improved travel experience. These bene ts are un- Cycling policy equally distributed, since users are typically male, younger and in more advantaged socio-economic positions Evidence than average. There is no evidence that bike sharing significantly reduces traffic congestion, carbon emissions Evaluation and pollution. From a process perspective, bike sharing can be delivered through multiple governance models. A key challenge to operation is network rebalancing, while facilitating factors include partnership working and inclusive scheme promotion.
    [Show full text]
  • Maximizing Micromobility
    Maximizing Micromobility UNLOCKING OPPORTUNITIES TO INTEGRATE MICROMOBILITY AND PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION 1 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS AUTHORS Dana Yanocha, ITDP Global Mackenzie Allan, ITDP Global REVIEWERS Background information, data, and draft review was provided by ITDP regional office staff: Christopher Kost, ITDP Africa Beatriz Rodrigues, ITDP Brazil Li Wei, ITDP China Pranjal Kulkarni, ITDP India Rian Wicaksana, National Development Planning Agency, Indonesia (formerly ITDP Indonesia) Clara Vadillo Quesada, Académie des Mobilités Actives, France (formerly ITDP Mexico) The authors would like to thank Carlos Felipe Pardo (NUMO) for guidance and assistance contributed to this report and the companion experts workshop held in December 2020. Support for this work was provided by ClimateWorks Foundation. Published in June 2021. 2 CONTENTS 1 INTRODUCTION 5 1.1 WHAT IS MULTIMODAL INTEGRATION? 8 1.2 THE BENEFITS OF MULTIMODAL INTEGRATION 9 2 EXISTING REGULATION AND WHY INTEGRATION MATTERS 11 3 WHAT CAN CITIES DO TO SUPPORT MICROMOBILITY INTEGRATION? 3.1 PHYSICAL INTEGRATION 13 3.2 PAYMENT AND FARE INTEGRATION 18 3.3 INFORMATIONAL INTEGRATION 22 3.4 INSTITUTIONAL INTEGRATION 24 4 KEY TAKEAWAYS 27 APPENDIX A 30 ADDITIONAL RESOURCES APPENDIX B 31 OUTSTANDING QUESTIONS COVER PHOTO SOURCE: Gabriel L. Guerrero, Shutterstock 3 To maximize the benefits of micromobility, cities must integrate these modes with public transportation. 4 INTRODUCTION Micromobility is an affordable, efficient, low-carbon transportation option that has become an attractive alternative to private vehicles for short trips. Micromobility refers to small, lightweight devices that: · Typically operate at speeds below 25 km/h (15 mph), · Can be human-powered or electric, · Can be shared or personally owned, and · Are ideal for trips up to 10 km.
    [Show full text]