DOCSLIB.ORG

Next Generation Advisory Committee

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Next Generation Advisory Committee Next Generation Advisory Committee Thursday, 1 Oct 2020 6:30 PM Virtual Meeting Participation Options for Non-Broadcast Virtual Meetings: Due to COVID-19, the City of Littleton is providing virtual coverage of public meetings for our boards and commissions to protect the health of citizens and staff. Meetings will not be held in person until further notice. To participate during the public comment portion of this meeting, or to listen to the meeting live, please call (669)-900-6833. When prompted, enter the Webinar ID: 968 7950 3360. Contact Ryan Thompson at 303-795-3876 with any questions regarding this process. 1. Roll Call 2. Approval of Agenda 3. Approval of September 3, 2020 Meeting Minutes a) Attachment: Areas of economic significance planning map v2 6-22-20 b) Attachment: Littleton Blvd Improvement to Land Value Analysis 4. Public Comment 5. Member Introductions a) What is your favorite place you have traveled and why? b) What TV shows are you watching right now? 6. By-laws, Protocols, and Standards a) Attachment: NGAC Bylaws b) Attachment: Robert’s Rules Overview 7. Break (5 min) 8. Micro-mobility in Littleton a) Attachment: Transportation Master Plan Chapter 7: Mobility Trends, Adopted October 2019 (Full TMP Report attached in NGAC member email) https://www.littletongov.org/home/showdocument?id=21031 b) Attachment: “Shared Micromobility in the U.S. 2018.” National Association of City Transportation Officials Report c) Attachment: District of Columbia Dockless Low-Income Customer Plan City of Littleton Page 1 NextGeneration Meeting Agenda 1 Oct 2020 d) Attachment: District of Columbia Dockless 2020 Sharing Vehicles Permit Application e) Attachment: DDOT Bike and Scooter Corrals f) Link: Safe Dockless Parking. DDOT Communications, 10 Oct 2019. https://youtu.be/_KphZveCjNg g) Attachment: “Understanding and Tackling Micromobility: Transportation’s New Disruptor.” Governors Highway Safety Association, August 2020. (pay particular attention to the section on Safety beginning on page 9) h) Attachment: “Analyzing the Potential of Geofencing for Electric Bicycles and Scooters in the Public Right of Way.” 17 Jan 2020. i) Attachment: “Did Your Rented E-Scooter Suddenly Shut Down? Blame the Invisible Geofence.” The Los Angeles Times, 17 Sept 2019. j) Attachment: City of Fort Collins Traffic Code PART 21 - OPERATION OF BICYCLES, ELECTRIC ASSISTED BICYCLES AND OTHER HUMAN-POWERED VEHICLES k) Link: “Are You Being Tracked?! Huge E-Scooter Controversy Surrounding Location Data and Privacy Sharing.” Rogue Rocket, 6 Aug 2019. https://youtu.be/ha9v5EB128s 9. Committee Reports a) Sustainability Committee b) Zoning/ULUC Committee c) DIEB Committee 10. Announcements a) Staff Report, Ryan Thompson b) City Council Representative Report, Pam Grove c) General Announcements 11. Adjournment City of Littleton September 3, 2020 Next Generation Advisory Committee 6:30 – 8:30 PM September 3, 2020 Meeting Minutes Littleton Center 2255 West Berry Avenue Littleton, CO 80120 Type of Meeting: Regular monthly, Zoom Meeting Number: 4 Minutes 1. Agenda item: Roll Call City of Littleton Members Present: (2) Ryan Thompson, Pam Grove NGAC Members Present: (10/15) Iftin Abshir, Lauren Burgess, Alyssa Campbell, Josh Hall, Jenny Makis, Charlee Ottersberg, Catherine Riggs, Cassie Sander, Abbie Steiner, Larry Thompson, Carson Wedding, Lydia Phillips, Faith Krech, Emily Przekwas, Ashley Ferris 2-3. Agenda item: Approval of Agenda / 8.6.20 Minutes Overview: Approve agenda: Alyssa Second: Lydia Approved (10 in favor) Approve minutes: Josh Second: Alyssa Approved (10 in favor) 4. Agenda item: Public Comment Overview: Commenter #1: Pam Chadbourn - District 1 in downtown Littleton - Thank you for reports on sustainability and land use code o Positive comments presented in various committees and meetings o Shout out to Iftin and the subcommittees - Historic preservation board added a definition for sustainability to the phase 2 code amendments - These will go to the middle of September, and feels there is great work to be done - Happy we are talking about the mid-century modern district on Littleton blvd. o The map shows Geneva village as a historic area, but it will be changed under the new code amendments o If this happens we could lose borrowed greenspace o We need a midcentury modern overlay district to help save Geneva Village Close at 6:38 PM 5. Agenda item: Guest Speaker, Jennifer Henninger, Community Development Director - Here to discuss the mid-mod mile - Hoping we can have tonight be a discussion - Zoning will need to take a close look at this study, how does it get integrated into the future of Littleton - We have a lot of properties that are either under utilized, or could be redeveloped, or make sure they are preserved o One way to do this is to create a district o The code is a way to do this to make it an amenable process for all involved - Economic aspects: o Shared slides (to be included in minutes) o Map shows the different sales and use tax along with amount generated o 78% of the cities revenue comes from sales tax o The Littleton Corridor has contributed significantly to sales tax generation increases from 2015-2019 § Perceives Littleton Blvd to become a zone of economic significance o Home Depot + Lowes + King Soopers has helped the city during the COVID crisis - Josh: Loves that this map shows just how big the shopping centers have an impact - Littleton Blvd improvement to land value analysis o This calculation does not reflect that historic landmarks or assets o The darker the green, the better the use from an economic perspective. The redder, to more indicative that it is not being used to its greatest potential o This shows sales tax impact - Iftin: as a part of the process to evaluate the parcels, do you take into the needs of the community? For example, the ARC thriftstore could serve the surrounding community based on? o Yes, this is taken into consideration, it looks into parking lots and their use. Can we change habits by reducing parking o Or, could you take part of the parking lot that has parking underneath o The focus is how you are using the land - From Railroad to Broadway 232 individual parcels o This means you need to take the needs and voices into consideration o Also needing to take the citizens, the people who use it as a throuroughfare. o Are all the needs being met? - Questions for the committee: o What is missing? § Abbie: Donut Shop § Josh: Restaurants + Banks o Does it feel walkable § Josh: no § Charlee: no, it feels like people go faster o What would make it feel more walkable: § Alyssa: The parking is difficult, which makes it feel less walkable o Iftin: There was talk about a circulator bus, is this still a conversation? § It is a funding issue § There was talk about going from the museum, and downtown Littleton, and Littleton Blvd § The city is trying to cobble funds for a transportation/accessibility study • Feels that some of the parking challenges could be addressed with this study o Kit: Downtown Littleton feels more walkable, but Littleton Blvd has more pedestrian friendly areas § Example: pedestrian crossways o Josh: the enclosure o Ashley: the way the buildings are make it feel more walkable downtown o Alyssa: has more destination location, vs downtown that is more stop in, explore type of businesses o Charlee: Do the parking lots prevent people from feeling close to the buildings? o Jenny: a safety perspective, it feels more nerveracking. It is a faster speed. It just doesn’t feel as safe. o Lydia: downtown Littleton feels like it has wider sidewalks vs Littleton Blvd. o Iftin: Windemere West feels more safer, Windemere East feels more suburban and more destination oriented. § Suggestion: could there be more street scaping could make it feel more green and more covered with a buffer. - Schedule for Phase 2 o Sept 15 – Ordinance on first reading to Adopt Phase 2 amendments to Title 10 of the existing code o Sept 22 – City Council Study Session on Phase 2 Amendments 2 o Oct 6 – Ordinance on second reading to adopts Phase 2 Amendments o Nov 16 – Envision Studio: Focus on Corridors and Mixed Use - Thank you for taking the time to provide the comments, they were well received - If you want more information on the mid mod mile, can be put in touch with Andrea 6. Agenda item: Introduction of New Members Overview: Iftin Abshir: Somali to better connect with Herritage, Reading Catch 22, Tyrants Tomb, A dance of Dragons, listening to cult of Trump, Reading kiss the girls and make them Cry, The Revolution Lauren Burgess: Choose Spanish then Sign Language Reading: Breaking the Habit of Being Yourself Alyssa Campbell: Fluent in Italian, love the culture and the country. Currently reading Ninth House Josh Hall: French, gorgeous language, Reading: Biography of George Washington Charlee Ottersberg: Sign-Language, and reading Girl on the Train Catherine Riggs: Spanish because it would help in healthcare and I could visit my brother in law in Peru in the future. Abbie Steiner: Spanish because I work with a number of communities who prefer this language. Reading: reading a lot about child development and parenting Lydia Phillips: I would want to be fluent in French because it would help with her class. Reading daughter of the forest. Faith Krech: Italian because she studied there and would like to get it back. Reading the Couple Next Door. Ashley Ferris: Spanish because so many of my students speak Spanish, Her body and other Parties\ 7. Agenda item: Discussion: Littleton Blvd Mid Mod Mile Overview: What do you feel about the importance of the mid mod mile? Should we be looking at this for the future? What ideas do you have should this become a district? o Alyssa: I feel like Littleton Blvd could become similar to the Baker district.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Electric Scooters and Micro-Mobility in Michigan
    CLOSUP Student Working Paper Series Number 46 December 2018 Electric Scooters and Micro-Mobility in Michigan Perry Holmes, University of Michigan This paper is available online at http://closup.umich.edu Papers in the CLOSUP Student Working Paper Series are written by students at the University of Michigan. This paper was submitted as part of the Fall 2018 course PubPol 475-750 Michigan Politics and Policy, that is part of the CLOSUP in the Classroom Initiative. Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily reflect the view of the Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy or any sponsoring agency Center for Local, State, and Urban Policy Gerald R. Ford School of Public Policy University of Michigan Perry Holmes December 10, 2018 PUBPOL 750: Michigan Politics and Policy Final Research Paper Electric Scooters and Micro-Mobility in Michigan This paper examines the emerging international trend of dockless electric scooters and evaluates how Michigan’s state and local policymakers can best respond. While there are important public safety and other concerns that must be addressed with regulation, the scooters are a promising last-mile mobility option. Communities should aim to address these concerns while allowing the scooter companies to operate safely and optimize their services. BACKGROUND The scooters, the companies, and their business model 1 Electric scooters are battery-powered, internet-enabled personal vehicles. They typically have a brake on one handle, an accelerator on the other, and a small kickstand that allows them to be parked upright. The maximum speed is around 15 miles per hour, with a range of 20 miles, although most rides are much shorter.2 The two largest scooter companies in the country are Bird and Lime, but several other startups are operating in cities across the country.3 In Michigan, Bird, Lime, and Spin are 1 Bird, https://www.bird.co 2 Lime, https://www.li.me/electric-scooter 3 Irfan, Umair.
    [Show full text]
  • Marin County Bicycle Share Feasibility Study
    Marin County Bicycle Share Feasibility Study PREPARED BY: Alta Planning + Design PREPARED FOR: The Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) Transportation Authority of Marin (TAM) Bike Sharing Advisory Working Group Alisha Oloughlin, Marin County Bicycle Coalition Benjamin Berto, TAM Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee Representative Eric Lucan, TAM Board Commissioner Harvey Katz, TAM Bicycle/Pedestrian Advisory Committee Representative Stephanie Moulton-Peters, TAM Board Commissioner R. Scot Hunter, Former TAM Board Commissioner Staff Linda M. Jackson AICP, TAM Planning Manager Scott McDonald, TAM Associate Transportation Planner Consultants Michael G. Jones, MCP, Alta Planning + Design Principal-in-Charge Casey Hildreth, Alta Planning + Design Project Manager Funding for this study provided by Measure B (Vehicle Registration Fee), a program supported by Marin voters and managed by the Transportation Authority of Marin. i Marin County Bicycle Share Feasibility Study Table of Contents Table of Contents ................................................................................................................................................................ ii 1 Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................. 1 2 Report Contents ................................................................................................................................................... 5 3 What is Bike Sharing? ........................................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • Shared Mobility Pilot Program
    RESPONSE TO RFA: SHARED MOBILITY PILOT PROGRAM Prepared by Lyft Bikes and Scooters, LLC for the City of Santa Monica Primary Contact Information Name: David Fairbank Address: 1705 Stewart St., Santa Monica, CA 90404 Telephone #: < > Email: [email protected] CONFIDENTIALITY STATEMENT Please note that the information designated as confidential herein contains proprietary and confi- dential trade secrets, and/or commercial and financial data, the disclosure of which would cause substantial competitive harm to Lyft. Accordingly, Lyft requests that the City of Santa Monica main- tain the confidentiality of this information. Lyft further requests that, should any third party request access to this information for any reason, the City of Santa Monica promptly notify Lyft and allow Lyft thirty (30) days to object to the disclosure of the information and, if appropriate, redact any in- formation that Lyft deems non-responsive to the request before any disclosure is made. We have clearly marked each page of our proposal that contains trade secrets or personally identi- fying information that we believe are exempt from disclosure. The header of each page with confidential information is marked as illustrated to the TRADE SECRET - PROPRIETARY right: The specific written content on each page subject to these restrictions are bracketed < This specific content marked with the following symbols < >, as in this confidential and proprietary.> illustrative example to the right: Visual content and tables (e.g. images, screenshots) on each page subject to these restrictions will be highlighted with a pink border, as in this illustrative example below: The bracketed sections and highlighted visual content and tables are exempt from disclosure.
    [Show full text]
  • What Killed Ofo? Efficient Financing Pushed It Step by Step Into the Abyss
    2018 International Workshop on Advances in Social Sciences (IWASS 2018) What Killed ofo? Efficient Financing Pushed it Step by Step into the Abyss Nansong Zhou University of International Relations, China Keywords: ofo, Efficient Financing, dilemma Abstract: ofo is a bicycle-sharing travel platform based on a “dockless sharing” model that is dedicated to solving urban travel problems. Users simply scan a QR code on the bicycle using WeChat or the ofo app and are then provided with a password to unlock the bike. Since its launch in June 2015, ofo has deployed 10 million bicycles, providing more than 4 billion trips in over 250 cities to more than 200 million users in 21 countries. However, negative news coverage of ofo has increased recently. In September 2018, due to missed payments, ofo was sued by Phoenix Bicycles In the same month, some netizens claimed that ofo cheats and misleads consumers. On October 27, another media outlet disclosed that the time limit for refunding the deposit was extended again, from 1-10 working days to 1-15 working days. Various indications suggest that ofo is in crisis. What happened to ofo? How did the company come to be in this situation? This paper will answer these questions. 1. Introduction Bicycle sharing is a service in which bicycles are made available for shared use to individuals on a short-term basis for a price or for free. Such services take full advantage of the stagnation of bicycle use caused by rapid urban economic development and maximize the utilization of public roads. The first instance of bicycle-sharing in history occurred in 1965 when fifty bicycles were painted white, left permanently unlocked, and placed throughout the inner city in Amsterdam for the public to use freely.
    [Show full text]
  • Sustaining Dockless Bike-Sharing Based on Business Principles
    Copyright Warning & Restrictions The copyright law of the United States (Title 17, United States Code) governs the making of photocopies or other reproductions of copyrighted material. Under certain conditions specified in the law, libraries and archives are authorized to furnish a photocopy or other reproduction. One of these specified conditions is that the photocopy or reproduction is not to be “used for any purpose other than private study, scholarship, or research.” If a, user makes a request for, or later uses, a photocopy or reproduction for purposes in excess of “fair use” that user may be liable for copyright infringement, This institution reserves the right to refuse to accept a copying order if, in its judgment, fulfillment of the order would involve violation of copyright law. Please Note: The author retains the copyright while the New Jersey Institute of Technology reserves the right to distribute this thesis or dissertation Printing note: If you do not wish to print this page, then select “Pages from: first page # to: last page #” on the print dialog screen The Van Houten library has removed some of the personal information and all signatures from the approval page and biographical sketches of theses and dissertations in order to protect the identity of NJIT graduates and faculty. ABSTRACT SUSTAINING DOCKLESS BIKE-SHARING BASED ON BUSINESS PRINCIPLES by Neil Horowitz Currently in urban areas, the value of money and fuel is increasing because of urban traffic congestion. As an environmentally sustainable and short-distance travel mode, dockless bike-sharing not only assists in resolving the issue of urban traffic congestion, but additionally assists in minimizing pollution, satisfying the demand of the last mile problem, and improving societal health.
    [Show full text]
  • Bike Sharing 5.0 Market Insights and Outlook
    Bike Sharing 5.0 Market insights and outlook Berlin, August 2018 This study provides a comprehensive overview of developments on the bike sharing market Management summary 1 Key trends in > Major innovations and new regulations are on the way to reshaping the mobility market innovative mobility > New business models follow an asset-light approach allowing consumers to share mobility offerings > Bike sharing has emerged as one of the most-trending forms of mobility in the current era > Digitalization has enabled bike sharing to become a fully integrated part of urban mobility 2 Bike sharing market > Bike sharing has grown at an extremely fast rate and is now available in over 70 countries development > Several mostly Asian operators have been expanding fast, but first business failures can be seen > On the downside, authorities are alarmed by the excessive growth and severe acts of vandalism > Overall, the bike sharing market is expected to grow continuously by 20% in the years ahead 3 Role of bike sharing > Bike sharing has established itself as a low-priced and convenient alternative in many cities in urban mobility > The three basic operating models are dock-based, hybrid and free-floating > Key success factors for bike sharing are a high-density network and high-quality bikes > Integrated mobility platforms enable bike sharing to become an essential part of intermodal mobility 4 Future of bike > Bike sharing operators will have to proactively shape the mobility market to stay competitive sharing > Intense intra-city competition will
    [Show full text]
  • Cardiff City Bike Share a Study in Success
    Narrative, network and nextbike Cardiff City Bike Share A study in success Beate Kubitz December 2018 About the author Beate Kubitz is an independent researcher and writer on innovative mobility. She is the author of the Annual Survey of Mobility as a Service (2017 and 2018) published by Landor LINKS, as well as numerous articles about changing transport provision, technology and innovation including bike share, car sharing, demand responsive transport, mobile ticketing and payments and open data. Her background is in shared transport – working on the Public Bike Share Users Survey and the Annual Survey of Car Clubs (CoMoUK). She has contributed to TravelSpirit Foundation publications on autonomy and open models of Mobility as a Service and open data and transport published by the Open Data Institute. About the report This report is based on interviews with Cardiff cyclists carried out online and a field trip to Cardiff in August 2018 including interviews with: • Cardiff City Council Transport and Planning Officer • Cardiff University Facilities Manager • Pedal Power Development Manager • Group discussion with Cardiff Cycle City group Membership and usage data for Cardiff, Glasgow and Milton Keynes bike share schemes was provided by nextbike. In addition, it draws on the Propensity to Cycle Tool, the 2017 Public Bike Share User Survey (Bikeplus, now Como UK), Sustrans reporting, local government data and media and social media scanning. Photographs of Cardiff nextbike docking stations and bikes were taken by the author in August 2018. The report was commissioned and funded by nextbike UK in order to understand how different elements affect the use and success of a bike share scheme.
    [Show full text]
  • The Market Does Not Believe in Tears—Brutal Growth of Bike-Sharing Vs Well-Behaved Public Bicycles
    The Market does not Believe in Tears—Brutal Growth of Bike-sharing Vs Well-Behaved Public Bicycles Deng Han, Liu Shaokun, Li Wei, Huang Runjie@ ITDP Institute for Transportation and Development Policy With the rise of sharing economic concepts, and great development of payment technology on smart phone via the Internet as a medium in recent years, bike-sharing quickly entered the major cities in China in 2016. Virtually overnight, red, yellow, blue and other colors shared bikes spring up in every corner of the street. Same as the solution for “the last kilometer”, bike-sharing quickly go beyond traditional docking public bicycles in terms of quantity, radiating face, influence, user experience and other aspects. In the face of brutal growth of bike-sharing, many cities such as Guangzhou have pressed the “pause button” on public bicycles. Development status of public bicycles in Guangzhou: Guangzhou public bicycle system was officially launched in June 2010, and the stations were located along the BRT corridor of Zhongshan Avenue. Public bicycle stations are mainly distributed in the BRT stations, surrounding residential and commercial areas to meet the "the last kilometer trip" and the short trip along BRT corridor. Guangzhou public bicycle system received a warm welcome from the general public since it was put into use. According to the data provided by Guangzhou public bicycle company, as of December 2016, the system expanded to 8850 vehicles, more than 110 service points from the initial 1000 vehicles, 18 service points, and provided bike rental service for 35,382,400 passengers in total. Distribution Map of Guangzhou Public Bicycle Phase I (Source: ITDP) In order to further promote green travel, energy conservation and improve the atmospheric environment, Guangzhou government proposed the Work Program for the Development and Promotion of Guangzhou Public Bicycle Project in 2015.
    [Show full text]
  • The Economic Benefits of Sustainable Urban Mobility Measures Independent Review of Evidence: Reviews
    The Economic Benefits of Sustainable Urban Mobility Measures Independent Review of Evidence: Reviews Funded by the Intelligent Energy Europe Programme of the European Union This report has been developed within the European project, Evidence of the Proven Economic Benefits of Sus- tainable Transport Initiatives to Facilitate Effective Integration in Urban Mobility Plans (EVIDENCE), co-funded by the European Union and the following partners who have delivered the project: Arcadis (UK), Contemporary Trans- port (UK), INTERACTIONS Limited (IE), LUXMobility (LU), Urban Planning Institute of the Republic of Slovenia (Sl), RHV Erasmus University Rotterdam (NL), TAEM Urbanistai (LT), University of the West of England (UK), Wuppertal Institut für Klima, Umwelt und Energie GmbH (DE) Deliverable 3.1 For more information European Platform on Sustainable Urban Mobility Plans www.eltis.org/mobility-plans E-mail: [email protected] European Commission Directorate-General for Mobility and Transport Unit C.1 - Clean transport & sustainable urban mobility Rue Jean-André de Mot 28 B-1049 Brussels The sole responsibility for the content of this publication lies with the authors. It does not necessarily reflect the opinion of the European Union. Neither the EASME nor the European Commission are responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. Contract: Funded through the Intelligent Energy Europe programme - Grant agreement IEE/13/549/ SI2.675162. Title: The Economic Benefits of Sustainable Urban Mobility Measures: Independant Review of Evidence: Reviews Version: March 2016 Editor: Shergold, I. University of the West of England: Bristol Email: [email protected] Web: http://evidence-project.eu/ Authors: Bartle, C.
    [Show full text]
  • Exhibit B Kelowna Bikeshare Systems Pilot Opportunity Background
    Kelowna Bikeshare Systems December 11th, 2017 kelowna.ca CITY OF KELOWNA Kelowna Bikeshare Systems: Background Report TABLE OF CONTENTS TABLE OF CONTENTS ...................................................................................................................................... 2 Executive Summary .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Options/Discussion: .......................................................................................................................................... 3 Operating Models for Bikeshare: ................................................................................................................... 4 Benefits of Bikeshare: ................................................................................................................................... 6 Governance Models for Bikeshare: ................................................................................................................ 7 Objectives for Bikeshare in Kelowna: ............................................................................................................ 8 Opportunities for Bikeshare in Kelowna: ........................................................................................................... 9 Opportunity for Pilot Testing: ........................................................................................................................... 9 Key Issues for a Bikeshare Pilot ..................................................................................................................
    [Show full text]
  • 2018 Update to Nice Ride Nonprofit Business Plan
    2018 Update to Nonprofit Business Plan This Business Plan Update has been approved by the Nice Ride Board of Directors. It is subject to approval by the City of Minneapolis and is incorporated by reference in the proposed Third Amendment to Grant Funded Agreement by and between the City of Minneapolis and Nice Ride Minnesota. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Since its launch in 2010, Nice Ride has followed the core elements of the December 3, 2008, Nonprofit Business Plan for Twin Cities Bike Share System (“2008 Business Plan”). Core elements included: station-based bike share; capitalized through combination of public funds and title sponsorship by Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Minnesota (“Blue Cross MN”); operated by nonprofit staff with costs covered by sales revenue plus station sponsorship. In 2010, NRM and The City of Minneapolis entered into a Grant Funded Agreement (“GFA”), which expires in August of 20211. In that Agreement, Nice Ride agreed to operate “the Program” using the grant-funded equipment. “The Program” was the 2008 Business Plan. Core goals included: establishing bike sharing as a convenient and reliable form of transportation, increasing bicycle mode share, and increasing cultural acceptance of active transportation. The 2008 Business Plan was successful. NRM has achieved public goals, expanded using funds from multiple public sources, and become a model for over 50 similar nonprofits in other cities. In 2017, the market and technology assumptions underlying the 2008 Business Plan fundamentally changed. Over $3 billion in private capital flowed into the bike sharing industry worldwide. Over 20 million bikes were deployed in cities worldwide.
    [Show full text]
  • San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency
    Project Lead: Maddy Ruvolo June 2020 Faculty Advisor: Evelyn Blumenberg Client: San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency A comprehensive project submitted in partial satisfaction of the requirements for the degree Master of Urban & Regional Planning Technical Report Documentation Page 1. Report No. 2. Government Accession No. 3. Recipient’s Catalog No. N/A N/A N/A 4. Title and Subtitle 5. Report Date Access Denied? Perceptions of New Mobility Services Among Disabled People in 2020 San Francisco 6. Performing Organization Code UCLA-ITS 7. Author(s) 8. Performing Organization Report No. Maddy Ruvolo LAS2008 9. Performing Organization Name and Address 10. Work Unit No. Institute of Transportation Studies, UCLA N/A 3320 Public Affairs Building 11. Contract or Grant No. Los Angeles, CA 90095-1656 N/A 12. Sponsoring Agency Name and Address 13. Type of Report and Period Covered UCLA Institute of Transportation Studies Final www.its.ucla.edu 14. Sponsoring Agency Code UC ITS 15. Supplementary Notes DOI: doi:10.17610/T6DK5J 16. Abstract Thirty years after the passage of the Americans with Disabilities Act, people with disabilities still face significant barriers to transportation access. In recent years, new transportation services known as “new mobility” or “emerging mobility” launched entirely without accessible options. These services include transportation network companies (TNCs) such as Lyft and Uber, bike share, scooter share, and car share. Whether cities rush to welcome or grudgingly accept new mobility services, disability access is still too often an afterthought. This report, prepared for the San Francisco Municipal Transportation Agency, examines perceptions of new mobility services among disabled people in San Francisco via a survey of 218 people with disabilities.
    [Show full text]