Dynamic Curbside Management: Keeping Pace with New and Emerging Mobility and Technology in the Public Right-of-Way, Part 1: Dynamic Curbside Management Guide and Part 2: Conduct of Research Report (2022)

Below is the uncorrected machine-read text of this chapter, intended to provide our own search engines and external engines with highly rich, chapter-representative searchable text of each book. Because it is UNCORRECTED material, please consider the following text as a useful but insufficient proxy for the authoritative book pages.

NCHRP Web-Only Document 340: Dynamic Curbside Management: Keeping Pace with New and Emerging Mobility and Technology in the Public Right-of-Way Meghan Mitman Fehr & Peers Walnut Creek, CA Alex Rixey Tory Gibler Fehr & Peers Washington, DC Amanda Howell Tiffany Swift Urbanism Next Center at the University of Oregon Portland, OR Rachel Weinberger Weinberger and Associates Brooklyn, NY Jay Primus Primus Consulting Berkeley, CA Sarah Abel Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Washington, DC Guide and Conduct of Research Report for NCHRP Project 20-102(26) Submitted May 2022 © 2022 by the National Academy of Sciences. National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine and the graphical logo are trademarks of the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. NATIONAL COOPERATIVE HIGHWAY RESEARCH PROGRAM Systematic, well-designed, and implementable research is the most effective way to solve many problems facing state departments of transportation (DOTs) administrators and engineers. Often, highway problems are of local or regional interest and can best be studied by state DOTs individually or in cooperation with their state universities and others. However, the accelerating growth of highway transportation results in increasingly complex problems of wide interest to highway authorities. These problems are best studied through a coordinated program of cooperative research. Recognizing this need, the leadership of the American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials (AASHTO) in 1962 initiated an objective national highway research program using modern scientific techniques—the National Cooperative Highway Research Program (NCHRP). NCHRP is supported on a continuing basis by funds from participating member states of AASHTO and receives the full cooperation and support of the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), United States Department of Transportation, under Agreement No. 693JJ31950003. COPYRIGHT INFORMATION Authors herein are responsible for the authenticity of their materials and for obtaining written permissions from publishers or persons who own the copyright to any previously published or copyrighted material used herein. Cooperative Research Programs (CRP) grants permission to reproduce material in this publication for classroom and not-for-profit purposes. Permission is given with the understanding that none of the material will be used to imply TRB, AASHTO, FAA, FHWA, FTA, GHSA, NHTSA, or TDC endorsement of a particular product, method, or practice. It is expected that those reproducing the material in this document for educational and not-for-profit uses will give appropriate acknowledgment of the source of any reprinted or reproduced material. For other uses of the material, request permission from CRP. DISCLAIMER The opinions and conclusions expressed or implied in this report are those of the researchers who performed the research. They are not necessarily those of the Transportation Research Board; the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine; the FHWA; or the program sponsors. The Transportation Research Board does not develop, issue, or publish standards or specifications. The Transportation Research Board manages applied research projects which provide the scientific foundation that may be used by Transportation Research Board sponsors, industry associations, or other organizations as the basis for revised practices, procedures, or specifications. The Transportation Research Board, the National Academies, and the sponsors of the National Cooperative Highway Research Program do not endorse products or manufacturers. Trade or manufacturers’ names appear herein solely because they are considered essential to the object of the report. The information contained in this document was taken directly from the submission of the author(s). This material has not been edited by TRB.

The National Academy of Sciences was established in 1863 by an Act of Congress, signed by President Lincoln, as a private, non- governmental institution to advise the nation on issues related to science and technology. Members are elected by their peers for outstanding contributions to research. Dr. Marcia McNutt is president. The National Academy of Engineering was established in 1964 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to bring the practices of engineering to advising the nation. Members are elected by their peers for extraordinary contributions to engineering. Dr. John L. Anderson is president. The National Academy of Medicine (formerly the Institute of Medicine) was established in 1970 under the charter of the National Academy of Sciences to advise the nation on medical and health issues. Members are elected by their peers for distinguished contributions to medicine and health. Dr. Victor J. Dzau is president. The three Academies work together as the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine to provide independent, objective analysis and advice to the nation and conduct other activities to solve complex problems and inform public policy decisions. The National Academies also encourage education and research, recognize outstanding contributions to knowledge, and increase public understanding in matters of science, engineering, and medicine. Learn more about the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine at www.nationalacademies.org. The Transportation Research Board is one of seven major programs of the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine. The mission of the Transportation Research Board is to provide leadership in transportation improvements and innovation through trusted, timely, impartial, and evidence-based information exchange, research, and advice regarding all modes of transportation. The Board’s varied activities annually engage about 8,000 engineers, scientists, and other transportation researchers and practitioners from the public and private sectors and academia, all of whom contribute their expertise in the public interest. The program is supported by state transportation departments, federal agencies including the component administrations of the U.S. Department of Transportation, and other organizations and individuals interested in the development of transportation. Learn more about the Transportation Research Board at www.TRB.org.

C O O P E R A T I V E R E S E A R C H P R O G R A M S CRP STAFF FOR NCHRP WEB-ONLY DOCUMENT 340 Christopher J. Hedges, Director, Cooperative Research Programs Waseem Dekelbab, Deputy Director, Cooperative Research Programs, and Manager, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Sid Mohan, Associate Program Manager, Implementation and Technology Transfer, National Cooperative Highway Research Program Ann M. Hartell, Senior Program Officer Dajaih Bias-Johnson, Program Associate Natalie Barnes, Director of Publications Heather DiAngelis, Associate Director of Publications Jennifer J. Weeks, Publishing Projects Manager NCHRP PROJECT 20-102(26) PANEL Field of Special Projects Jonathan R. Peters, City University of New York (CUNY), Staten Island, NY (Chair) Maria L. Irshad, City of Houston, Houston, TX Malisa Mccreedy, City of Gainesville, Gainesville, FL Benito Omar Pérez, Transportation for America, Washington, DC Charles E. Prestrud, Washington State Department of Transportation, Seattle, WA Michael Schwartz, Ride Report, Durham, NC Balwinder Singh Tarlok, California Department of Transportation (CALTRANS), Sacramento, CA Maulik Vaishnav, Chicago Transit Authority, Chicago, IL Allen Greenberg, FHWA Liaison

Author Acknowledgments The research reported herein was performed under NCHRP Project 20-102(26) by Fehr & Peers, the Urbanism Next Center at the University of Oregon, Weinberger and Associates, Primus Consulting, and the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE). Fehr & Peers was the contractor for this study. Meghan Mitman was the Principal Investigator. The other authors of this report are Alex Rixey and Tory Gibler of Fehr & Peers; Amanda Howell and Tiffany Swift of the Urbanism Next Center at the University of Oregon; Rachel Weinberger of Weinberger and Associates; Jay Primus of Primus Consulting; and Sarah Abel formerly of the ITE. The researchers thank the more than 50 individuals who shared their valuable experiences and opinions as part of the unconference. Thank you to the 20 stakeholder interviewees who participated in the case study and who are advancing the development and implementation of dynamic curbside management.

Dynamic Curbside Management: Keeping Pace with New and Emerging Mobility and Technology in the Public Right-of-Way Part 1: Dynamic Curbside Management Guide

Table of Contents DYNAMIC CURBSIDE MANAGEMENT GUIDE ............................................................................... 1 Introduction ................................................................................................................................................. 1 Section 1: Why Dynamic Curbside Management? .................................................................................. 2 Introduction .............................................................................................................................................. 2 What is the Curbside? ............................................................................................................................... 2 What is Curbside Management? ............................................................................................................... 2 What is Dynamic Curbside Management? ............................................................................................... 6 Understanding and Addressing Stakeholder Concerns Through Dynamic Curbside Management ......... 7 Section 2: A Dynamic Curbside Management Program Framework .................................................. 10 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 10 Overview of Dynamic Curbside Management Program Frameworks .................................................... 10 Establishing Curb Goals and Priorities: Context, Use, Time, and Space ............................................... 10 Performance Measurements ................................................................................................................... 11 Dynamic Curbside Management Approaches: Pricing, Regulation, and Permitting .............................. 13 Dynamic Curbside Management: Enforcement Considerations ............................................................. 15 Dynamic Curbside Management Roles: Developing Effective Partnerships ......................................... 16 Capacity Building Support ..................................................................................................................... 18 Section 3: Dynamic Curbside Management Implementation ............................................................... 20 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 20 Overall Considerations for Dynamic Curbside Management Implementation....................................... 21 Dynamic Curbside Management Basic Elements ................................................................................... 23 Dynamic Curbside Management Tools .................................................................................................. 29 Section 4: Evolving Dynamic Curbside Management Opportunities .................................................. 32 Introduction ............................................................................................................................................ 32 Curbside Management Evolution and the COVID-19 Pandemic ........................................................... 32 Autonomous, Connected, Electric, and Shared (ACES) Vehicles ......................................................... 33 Urban Freight Delivery at the Curb ........................................................................................................ 35 Ongoing Evolution in Micromobility ..................................................................................................... 36 Facilitating and Maintaining Equitable Access ...................................................................................... 37 The Curb as an Extension of the Public Realm ...................................................................................... 38 State DOTs and MPOs Role in Evolving Curbside Opportunities ......................................................... 39 Section 5: Conclusion ................................................................................................................................ 42 REFERENCES ......................................................................................................................................... 43

List of Figures Figure 1. Typical Curbside Users and Uses .................................................................................................. 3 Figure 2. SFMTA’s Category of Curb Functions ......................................................................................... 4 Figure 3. SFMTA’s Curb Function Prioritization by Land Use ................................................................... 5 Figure 4. Interplay of Curb Goals, Use, and Context with Dynamic Curbside Management ....................... 9 Figure 5. NHTSA’s Levels of Automation from the Society of Automotive Engineers ............................ 34 List of Tables Table 1. Examples of Pilot Dynamic Curbside Management Goals ........................................................... 11 Table 2. Performance Measurement Categories and Examples .................................................................. 12