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.
52 Appendix A: List of Participating Agencies/Organizations Representatives from the following agencies and organizations participated in the virtual Dynamic Curbside Management Unconference: Automotus Caltrans City of Boston, MA City of Centennial, CO City of Des Moines, IA City of Houston, TX City of Santa Monica, CA City of Seattle, WA City of Washington, DC City Tech Collaborative Coord FHWA Office of Planning Florida DOT IBI Group Interline LA Metro Louisville Parking Authority (PARC) Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) New Urban Mobility Alliance (NUMO) Open Mobility Foundation Sidewalk Labs TransLoc Uber UPS US Access Board
53 Appendix B. List of Promising Practices and Case Studies The following is a list of all the promising practices and case studies that participants identified during the Unconference, organized according to the breakout room topics. The case study suggestions were explored in preparation for developing the proposed case study list. The promising practices suggestions will be explored as the project continues and are presented without any details for the time being. Data Standards OMFâs Curb Data Specification (CDS) â OMF is developing a CDS in coordination with cities and companies. That standard is intended to enable dynamic curb management and have a two-way flow of data â that is meant to address a gap they saw in the field/area. OMF has evaluated all other possible curb data specs that are out there (e.g., Curb LR) so there is interoperability and to not duplicate â the intent is for the OMF standard to play nicely with other standards. The interoperability is essential as it is not realistic to expect all cities to adopt the same standard. Interoperability internationally would also be helpful. APDS has a very detailed car parking/garage spec that also includes the curb but itâs proprietary and require payment. CurbLR is another existing data standard but no clear governance, versions, or releases. Coordâs work on data standards. NUMOâs Periodic Table of Mobility. Coloradoâs DOT has started a conversation on data standards/data sharing but no answers yet. Enforcement Strategies Automotusâ smart loading zones, which include automated payment and enforcement, are launching in San Francisco, Pittsburgh, and Los Angeles. DDOT freight valet curb. UPS 10-point plan to NYC (More information available from UPS attendee.) University of Washingtonâs Urban Freight Lab work on barriers. Seattle DOT curb management studies. Performance Measures Coord pilots in Omaha, Aspen: Certainty of reserving a space was an incentive â got 65% participation. Also saw a reduction in conflicts with bikes. UW Urban Freight Lab pilots in Seattle and Bellevue WA used sensors to improve the delivery process. Borough of Kensington in London does CCTV enforcement of loading zones that is SUPER effective. SDOT had a Catch Your Ride program in that they plan to bring back. Used geofencing and designated pick-up zones. Kiwibot pilot in Santa Monica to measure greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions but should look at more criteria. Values, Benefits, and Barriers
54 Southern California Association of Governments in both the curbside/smart city grant program, and a curbside strategy for their ~200 cities / 20M people. Manayunk, Philadelphia - Shared Parking Management. San Jose - Shared Parking System Management. Mayorâs Office of New Urban Mechanics (MONUM) in Boston allows for easy access to city government to test out new ideas - partners with other agencies, gets around some of the bureaucracy. Parallels to utility practices / franchise agreements for utilities - roles of the coordinated city interests. City Tech / Stantec/ HERE / Teralytics demand modeling pilot in Chicago. Las Vegas work with Panasonic and others on dynamic management. Lessons from the pandemic Georgetown, DC - Temporary Street closings for bike/ped/café seating access where done safely. Regional curbside roundtable in DC. Flash Parking / Arrive mobility work around demand shift to off-street parking. NYC DOT neighborhood loading zone program. Torontoâs CaféTO program (1,000 curbside patios) and ActiveTO (new bike lanes replacing parking, both temp. and permanent). Many cities' repurposing during COVID for pickup space, outdoor dining, etc. Seattle and SF parking pricing. Boston MPO regional procurement. Role of MPOs and State DOTs MTC and MWCOG. Virginia collaborating with Arlington to do performance pricing (2020). Caltrans District 3 â SR99 in Gridley, CA public outreach. State DOTs have a lot of system data â NCDOT (which is a pretty centralized DOT) undertook a major data organization and governance activity to fix centerline data/ROW data statewide to create a standard linear referencing system. Starting point for coordinating with locals? Public-Private Partnerships NYC Cargo bike program. Urban Freight Lab work on common carrier lockers. Boston Fenway Park TNC geofence pickup locations. LACI pilot program. DOE interest. Data Collection, Privacy, Security Toronto Google city issues â design competition, data collection â challenges with how the data would be used and ultimately didnât move forward â have to be clear on the benefits. SF â need to match outcome to data granularity â cost implications, etc. Seattle data privacy laws â public exposure law. CurbFlow as an economic development tool (DC). LA scooter tracking. Vancouver making Uber pay âcongestion chargeâ in order to operate in the city. SDOT uses a parking activity model built with transactions and modeled to show when parking spaces are open. Sets rates based on model â displays parking activity on the street. It takes current usage and learns from the data. Not an AI model though. In theory could change rates at any given time (political will constraints). SDOT project to try and use land use data to understand delivery patterns. Special land use permits (on-street dining, measurement of obstruction).
55 Use of cellphone data (SafeGraph) in Centennial, CO to see patterns â average time spent, similar stores visited. DTPR: digital transparency in the public realm (Boston). Seattle review of how data sets collectively reveal/PII could â look at similar data sets and experiences. CurbFlow. Shifted away from curbside management. Shifted toward being on merchant buildings. Help businesses track trends. Easier to get permission to put a video camera on a private building than a public or utility pole. Springboard (similar shift as CurbFlow). o Previously did counts, but now storefront. Communicating Changes to the Public Parkdc.com. City of Pittsburgh challenges with PDFD pilot projects. City of Portland e-scooter pilot reports (2018 and 2019) to show the concerns and how they addressed them. Transparency is key. LACI/Santa Monica - zero emission delivery pilot project. Boston Active Transportation Team - multiple touch points, multiple times and days, many languages - more one-on-one time and less big group settings, avoids the shouting match. Coord - Aspen delivery pilot. SF dynamic pricing for parking.
56 Appendix C. Break Out Groups â Mural Board Sticky Notes The following are screenshots from the eight Breakout Group Mural boards. The sticky notes were written by participants at the beginning of each session, and in some cases were categorized by facilitators/notetakers during the session. Data Standards
57
58
59
60 Enforcement Strategies
61
62
63 Performance Metrics
64
65
66 Values, Benefits, and Barriers
67
68
69 Role of MPOs and State DOTs
70
71
72 Public-Private Partnerships
73
74
75 Data Collection, Privacy, and Security
76
77
78 Communicating Changes to the Public/Stakeholders
79
80