Micromobility Policies, Permits, and Practices (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.

6 Background Micromobility vehicles and shared micromobility have been growing rapidly, both in the United States and on a global scale. Micromobility may refer to a wide range of low-speed vehicles that travel more slowly than 20–30 mph, are designed almost exclusively for a single adult, and may include bicycles, electric bikes, push scooters, motorized scooters, power skateboards, and other personal transportation technologies. These vehicles are often electric powered and may be either personally owned or shared by users to provide various mobility needs, including shorter circulation trips, first-mile/last-mile trips in high-density urban environments, regular commuter trips (including, in some cases, long-distance trips) or recreational trips. SAE Inter- national defines powered micromobility vehicles as motorized personal mobility devices that have a curb weight of less than or equal to 500 pounds and a top speed of 30 mph or less (SAE International 2019). Types of Micromobility Vehicles On the basis of the type of propulsion, micromobility devices can be placed into two broad groups: human-powered vehicles and motorized vehicles. Human-powered micromobility vehicles are propelled solely by human muscle power (such as pedaling or kicking) and pri- marily include bicycles, skateboards, and (standing) push scooters. Motorized micromobility vehicles are personal transportation devices that can be fully motorized (that is, capable of movement without human muscle power) or motor assisted (the rider provides some human- powered propulsion). The most common motorized micromobility vehicles include electric bikes, electric (standing or sitting) scooters, and other low-speed personal mobility devices such as e-skateboards, e-skates, and other self-balancing devices (PBIC 2019). United States Code defines a low-speed electric bicycle as “a two- or three-wheeled vehicle with fully operable pedals and an electric motor of less than 750 watts (1 horsepower), whose maximum speed on a paved level surface, when powered solely by such a motor while ridden by an operator who weighs 170 pounds, is less than 20 mph” (15 U.S.C., Title 15, Ch. 47, Sec. 2085). Electric bikes can be further categorized into three classes that are based on the type of electric motor assistance and maximum speed of the vehicle (PBIC 2019; Leger et al. 2018). While the three-tier classification for electric bikes is not used in all states, more are beginning to adopt that model. There are currently 26 states that use the three-tiered e-bike classification system. Class 1 e-bikes, sometimes called “pedal-assisted e-bikes” or “pedelecs,” require riders to pedal in order to move forward, while an electric motor assists by relieving excess physical strain and expanding the bicycle range. The motor, however, only runs when the rider is pedaling. Some pedal-assisted e-bike models offer start-up aid, allowing the motor to run briefly to help the rider C H A P T E R 1 Introduction

Introduction 7   start after a stop. The allowed maximum speed for Class 1 e-bikes in the United States is 20 mph, meaning that the motor ceases to assist at that speed. This is the most common type of electric bike used today. Class 2 e-bikes, sometimes called “throttle-assisted” or “throttle-operated e-bikes,” have a motor that operates independently from pedaling by means of a throttle, such as a grip-twist, trigger, or button. The rider does not have to pedal to engage the motor. When the motor is engaged through the throttle, it propels the bike without the need for additional pedaling. Class 2 e-bikes are limited to a maximum speed of 20 mph, meaning that the motor ceases to assist when the bike reaches that speed. Class 3 e-bikes, sometimes called “speed pedelecs” or “pedal-assisted high-speed e-bikes,” operate in the same way as Class 1 e-bikes, for which pedaling is necessary to move forward, but they have a higher top speed of 28 mph. The motor is not capable of assisting when the bike reaches that speed. In some European countries, Class 3 e-bikes are treated as motor vehicles with the corresponding requirements for a driver’s license and vehicle registration, while in the United States, Class 3 e-bikes are viewed and treated like bicycles. Unlike regular bicycles, e-bikes and e-scooters allow riders to travel with less physical effort. Fully motorized micromobility vehicles require less input from the rider than pedal bikes do or no input at all. As such, they may be more convenient for older adults or people with limited mobility. Motorized wheelchairs and personal mobility devices used by people with disabilities, despite having some similar characteristics, are not considered micromobility vehicles. Most states have clear, established legal definitions and requirements for motorized wheelchairs, and in most cases their use is classified fully under pedestrian regulations. Therefore, such devices are beyond the scope of this study. Reasons for Managing Micromobility Despite the growth in customer acceptance and market adoption, these new technologies and modes can present challenges, including but not limited to curb space management, safety, and increased pedestrian conflict due to volume. Micromobility vehicles often operate on pedestrian- or bicycle-oriented infrastructure, leading to conflicts and raising safety concerns. Lacking clear and uniform guidelines, micromobility vehicles may end up parked in pedestrian areas, thereby block- ing walkways and wheelchair paths and causing tripping hazards. In order to address some of these challenges, state and local jurisdictions are beginning to regulate and govern the technologies. The spread of micromobility often outpaces the rule- making that governs the vehicles’ usage, which often leads to confusion and regulatory uncer- tainty. Planners and policy makers must have a good understanding of the usage patterns of personal micromobility vehicles and shared micromobility services, as well as the common approaches to addressing barriers, in order to develop effective policies for improving mobility, ensuring safety, and facilitating integration with other transportation modes. As state DOTs become more engaged with managing micromobility, it is necessary to document the approaches they develop around the country to regulate micromobility. This synthesis report summarizes the existing rules, policies, and regulatory practices employed by state DOTs to regulate and manage micromobility, including both personal and shared micro- mobility vehicles. The findings presented are based on primary data collection through online surveys and interviews with representatives of state DOTs. The synthesis focuses primarily on regulations and micromobility policies at the state level. While local governments often play an active role (even more active than states) in regulating these new transportation modes within

8 Micromobility Policies, Permits, and Practices their jurisdictions, municipal regulation of micromobility is beyond the scope of this analysis. To address the significance of local governments, this report documents the interface between state and local policies. Goals of the Analysis The objective of this study was to document policies, permits, and practices that state DOTs are implementing regarding micromobility. In particular, the synthesis attempted to address the following topics and areas: • State definitions of micromobility • The role DOTs play relative to micromobility, including coordination with municipalities and other local or regional entities • Approaches to policies and regulations, including permitting, enforcement, monitoring, and emergency management • Challenges and opportunities that micromobility presents to state DOTs • A review of major planning, operation, and maintenance issues related to micromobility systems • Infrastructure design standards and maintenance for micromobility • Policies and procedures concerning integration and competition between other modes of transportation, such as walking, private cars, transit, taxis, and transportation network companies (TNCs) • Data collection and privacy issues • Policies and approaches addressing equitable access and diversity Report Organization This synthesis is organized into five chapters. • Chapter 1 provides general background information on current micromobility issues, high- lighting the reasons for the research and describing the scope of the synthesis. • Chapter 2 reviews relevant literature and briefly summarizes previous research on micro- mobility, focusing on studies that are particularly relevant to the current study. • Chapter 3 describes the methodology and research approach used to collect primary data for the current analysis. This includes details of the survey design, survey delivery method, selec- tion of agencies for in-depth interviews, and other aspects of data collection. • Chapter  4 summarizes the information obtained from surveying the state DOTs, which includes an overview of the policies, practices, and approaches, as well as the challenges related to managing and regulating micromobility at the state level. • Chapter 5 discusses the main conclusions of the research and outstanding issues that may need to be addressed through further research.