6 ms·

SFMTA Offers Two Permits for One-Year Powered Scooter Pilot

40 points by coloneltcb 8y ago

hkmurakami 8y ago
After a thorough review of 12 applications and more than 800 pages of proposals received, the SFMTA will offer permits to Scoot and Skip. The SFMTA’s decision is based on the strength of the proposals submitted by the two companies, combined with their experience of owning, operating and maintaining a shared mobility service in the public right-of-way. The agency looked for applications that prioritized the city’s concerns around safety, disabled access, equity and accountability. ... In its application, Scoot demonstrated a strong commitment to safety. For example, the company proposed to educate and train its users in safe scooter operations with mandatory instructional videos, helmets included in rentals and free in-person trainings. Furthermore, Scoot’s model was unique in its proposal to use swappable batteries instead of manually taking the scooters off the street for regular recharging. This method could help the city reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled on San Francisco streets, which helps reduce traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. ... At the tail end of March, three companies -- Bird, Lime and Spin -- unloaded hundreds of motorized scooters across San Francisco. While they were operating, several concerns were raised by the city and our communities. From April 11 to May 23 alone, San Francisco’s 311 Customer Service Center received nearly 1,900 complaints regarding scooters. Complaints ranged from scooters blocking sidewalk access to unsafe riding in the public right-of-way. San Francisco Public Works had to impound more than 500 scooters that were blocking sidewalks or otherwise improperly parked. So looks like Bird, Lime, and others are out on the sidelines. And it also looks like the era of brazenly ignoring the regulatory environment profitably a la Uber is over.
cbhl 8y ago
I never thought I'd say this, but I think I'd like to see an increase in parking garages in San Francisco. Then we could convert on-street parking into parking for bikes and scooters, as well as bus lanes and bus stops (both for tech shuttles as well as for public transit). We should make it as easy, cheap, and convenient to use an alternative transportation method as it is to call an Uber.
- toomuchtodo 8y ago
  You can do both. First floor parking garages can be bikes, scooters, floors above that can be auto parking, and the remainder can be residential/commercial/office space. Its all about the upzoning. Ground level shared infra (roads, sidewalks, etc) is very expensive (arguably infinitely so compared to lots for structures), don't waste it on parking. Disclaimer: Not a SF resident
- xvedejas 8y ago
  There really is an awful lot of street parking in SF. In the neighborhoods I'd like to see some project to turn some of the on-street parking into lawns/gardens. I believe at one point, in the 60s or 70s, most homes (at least in my neighborhood) paved over their front laws for additional parking space. There's a lot that could be done to improve land use in SF. The street parking in particular seems unnecessary, especially when you're a 10-minute walk from BART.
- woolvalley 8y ago
  You don't need to sacrifice a lot of on street parking to accommodate scooters & other bike sized objects. 1 spot per 0.1 mile / large-ish block is about 7000 spots, out of the approx 200'000 parking spots available is about %3 of total parking spots. 1 car spot can accomidate about 10 bikes, and 70k scooters could probably fulfill most demand in SF.
- maccam94 8y ago
  Or.. just remove car parking from the city center. It's a waste of space, and of limited utility (because it's so hard to find a spot due to the limited supply). Adding more bikes/scooters/mass transit is much more efficient for moving people around than allowing more cars.
throway99998 8y ago
SFMTA boss Ed Reiskin hates uber/lyft/bird/lime/jump etc. as an afront to his authority so this is outcome (Skip, Scoot) is unsurprising. anyway I suppose its good they are allowing 1k to 2k scooters in a city of <checks google> 500,000 cars.
extrapolate 8y ago
tl;dr Scoot & Skip were selected. The PDF[0] outlining SFMTA's evaluation criteria for each company application is interesting. A lot of them were rated pretty poorly, even Lime & Bird (especially) which both had a large presence before the shutdown. [0] https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/reports-and-documents/2018/08/application_rating_summary_table_08.320.2018.pdf https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/reports-and-docume...
- steadicat 8y ago
  Can’t help but think that spite factored in significantly in the decision. There’s a row that conflates “applicant’s history in complying with city regulations” with “applicant’s experience in operating and maintaining shared mobility systems”. Bird, Lime, and Spin all got “poor” for this row, even though they obviously have experience operating and maintaining such a system.
  - eridius 8y ago
    Bird, Lime, and Spin were only operating for a short time (at least in SF, not sure how long they were operating in other cities). Versus Scoot which has been operating in SF since 2012 (I know nothing about Skip; I assume they've been operating elsewhere). This also isn't just "length of time operating", the same row covers "applicant's history" and "history of their users", and Bird/Lime/Spin all have a very poor history here: > From April 11 to May 23 alone, San Francisco’s 311 Customer Service Center received nearly 1,900 complaints regarding scooters. Complaints ranged from scooters blocking sidewalk access to unsafe riding in the public right-of-way. San Francisco Public Works had to impound more than 500 scooters that were blocking sidewalks or otherwise improperly parked.
    - steadicat 8y ago
      Bird/Lime/Spin have a very poor history only because they’re the only ones with any history at all. They just happened to be around when the controversy started. It seems unfair to penalize them for that, and give them zero credit for previous experience. Scoot’s been around, yes, but with a very different service.
gok 8y ago
> In its application, Scoot demonstrated a strong commitment to safety. For example, the company proposed to educate and train its users in safe scooter operations with mandatory instructional videos, helmets included in rentals and free in-person trainings. I've often wondered what would happen if bicycles were invented today. Surely cities would ban them immediately for being unsafe ("exposed chains and gears? what if a child put their finger in there?!") and they would completely fail to gain traction, right?
- suhail 8y ago
  Not really an accurate comparison. A better one would be if people left their bikes randomly all over the street & sidewalks at scale.
  - mmebane 8y ago
    Welcome to Dallas: https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/19/dallas-city-hall-says-not-one-tired-junky-bike-rentals https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/19/dal...
- aphextron 8y ago
  >I've often wondered what would happen if bicycles were invented today. Surely cities would ban them immediately for being unsafe ("exposed chains and gears? what if a child put their finger in there?!") and they would completely fail to gain traction, right? It just comes down to power. Bicycles are fundamentally different because they are human powered. A powerful adult cyclist can produce maybe 500 watts at a full sprint for a few minutes. Compare this to an electric scooter which gives even a small child nearly 1 kilowatt of power, making it quite easy to hurt themselves or others. It's just a different level of responsibility, like the difference between firearms and archery.
  - woolvalley 8y ago
    The city / journo complaints about them don't really seem to be about the electric part of the scooters & bikes, but the dockless nature of them.
ghobs91 8y ago
Between NIMBY antics with housing development and absurd levels of gov overreach in situations like this, SF is going to end up cannibalizing its tech industry. So many cities would kill to be the center of such a fast growing and high paying industry, and they're squandering it because their old guard is a bunch of gate-keeping snobs. Oh well. NYC, LA, Austin, and other cities will gladly grab the fruits of tech talent.
- woolvalley 8y ago
  I don't think NYC is much better in that regard. Look at how they created taxi 2.0 recently with driver limits, how e-bikes are illegal and a lot of downright hostile reactions in the press to citi bikes a few years ago.
  - ghobs91 8y ago
    At least the taxi thing was meant to curb road congestion. SFs scooter regulation seems like the intent is "how dare you run a business without our oversight?".
- rrix2 8y ago
  Regulation surrounding bikeshare/scootershare isn't specific to SF, many cities want a piece of the pie
deleted 8y ago
[deleted]
singularity2001 8y ago
In the mean time there are already 100 million (!) electro scooters in use in China: https://www.accessmagazine.org/fall-2010/electric-two-wheelers-china-promise-progress-potential/ https://www.accessmagazine.org/fall-2010/electric-two-wheele... . Quoth: "Having lived in China for the last year it’s pretty much 99.8% ebikes. Petrol motorbikes don’t make an appearance except in very poor areas."

40 points by coloneltcb 8y ago

After a thorough review of 12 applications and more than 800 pages of proposals received, the SFMTA will offer permits to Scoot and Skip. The SFMTA’s decision is based on the strength of the proposals submitted by the two companies, combined with their experience of owning, operating and maintaining a shared mobility service in the public right-of-way. The agency looked for applications that prioritized the city’s concerns around safety, disabled access, equity and accountability. ... In its application, Scoot demonstrated a strong commitment to safety. For example, the company proposed to educate and train its users in safe scooter operations with mandatory instructional videos, helmets included in rentals and free in-person trainings. Furthermore, Scoot’s model was unique in its proposal to use swappable batteries instead of manually taking the scooters off the street for regular recharging. This method could help the city reduce the number of vehicle miles traveled on San Francisco streets, which helps reduce traffic congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. ... At the tail end of March, three companies -- Bird, Lime and Spin -- unloaded hundreds of motorized scooters across San Francisco. While they were operating, several concerns were raised by the city and our communities. From April 11 to May 23 alone, San Francisco’s 311 Customer Service Center received nearly 1,900 complaints regarding scooters. Complaints ranged from scooters blocking sidewalk access to unsafe riding in the public right-of-way. San Francisco Public Works had to impound more than 500 scooters that were blocking sidewalks or otherwise improperly parked. So looks like Bird, Lime, and others are out on the sidelines. And it also looks like the era of brazenly ignoring the regulatory environment profitably a la Uber is over.

cbhl 8y ago

I never thought I'd say this, but I think I'd like to see an increase in parking garages in San Francisco. Then we could convert on-street parking into parking for bikes and scooters, as well as bus lanes and bus stops (both for tech shuttles as well as for public transit). We should make it as easy, cheap, and convenient to use an alternative transportation method as it is to call an Uber.

toomuchtodo 8y ago
You can do both. First floor parking garages can be bikes, scooters, floors above that can be auto parking, and the remainder can be residential/commercial/office space. Its all about the upzoning. Ground level shared infra (roads, sidewalks, etc) is very expensive (arguably infinitely so compared to lots for structures), don't waste it on parking. Disclaimer: Not a SF resident
xvedejas 8y ago
There really is an awful lot of street parking in SF. In the neighborhoods I'd like to see some project to turn some of the on-street parking into lawns/gardens. I believe at one point, in the 60s or 70s, most homes (at least in my neighborhood) paved over their front laws for additional parking space. There's a lot that could be done to improve land use in SF. The street parking in particular seems unnecessary, especially when you're a 10-minute walk from BART.
woolvalley 8y ago
You don't need to sacrifice a lot of on street parking to accommodate scooters & other bike sized objects. 1 spot per 0.1 mile / large-ish block is about 7000 spots, out of the approx 200'000 parking spots available is about %3 of total parking spots. 1 car spot can accomidate about 10 bikes, and 70k scooters could probably fulfill most demand in SF.
maccam94 8y ago
Or.. just remove car parking from the city center. It's a waste of space, and of limited utility (because it's so hard to find a spot due to the limited supply). Adding more bikes/scooters/mass transit is much more efficient for moving people around than allowing more cars.

throway99998 8y ago

SFMTA boss Ed Reiskin hates uber/lyft/bird/lime/jump etc. as an afront to his authority so this is outcome (Skip, Scoot) is unsurprising. anyway I suppose its good they are allowing 1k to 2k scooters in a city of <checks google> 500,000 cars.

extrapolate 8y ago

tl;dr Scoot & Skip were selected. The PDF[0] outlining SFMTA's evaluation criteria for each company application is interesting. A lot of them were rated pretty poorly, even Lime & Bird (especially) which both had a large presence before the shutdown. [0] https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/reports-and-documents/2018/08/application_rating_summary_table_08.320.2018.pdf https://www.sfmta.com/sites/default/files/reports-and-docume...

steadicat 8y ago
Can’t help but think that spite factored in significantly in the decision. There’s a row that conflates “applicant’s history in complying with city regulations” with “applicant’s experience in operating and maintaining shared mobility systems”. Bird, Lime, and Spin all got “poor” for this row, even though they obviously have experience operating and maintaining such a system.
- eridius 8y ago
  Bird, Lime, and Spin were only operating for a short time (at least in SF, not sure how long they were operating in other cities). Versus Scoot which has been operating in SF since 2012 (I know nothing about Skip; I assume they've been operating elsewhere). This also isn't just "length of time operating", the same row covers "applicant's history" and "history of their users", and Bird/Lime/Spin all have a very poor history here: > From April 11 to May 23 alone, San Francisco’s 311 Customer Service Center received nearly 1,900 complaints regarding scooters. Complaints ranged from scooters blocking sidewalk access to unsafe riding in the public right-of-way. San Francisco Public Works had to impound more than 500 scooters that were blocking sidewalks or otherwise improperly parked.
  - steadicat 8y ago
    Bird/Lime/Spin have a very poor history only because they’re the only ones with any history at all. They just happened to be around when the controversy started. It seems unfair to penalize them for that, and give them zero credit for previous experience. Scoot’s been around, yes, but with a very different service.

gok 8y ago

> In its application, Scoot demonstrated a strong commitment to safety. For example, the company proposed to educate and train its users in safe scooter operations with mandatory instructional videos, helmets included in rentals and free in-person trainings. I've often wondered what would happen if bicycles were invented today. Surely cities would ban them immediately for being unsafe ("exposed chains and gears? what if a child put their finger in there?!") and they would completely fail to gain traction, right?

suhail 8y ago
Not really an accurate comparison. A better one would be if people left their bikes randomly all over the street & sidewalks at scale.
- mmebane 8y ago
  Welcome to Dallas: https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/19/dallas-city-hall-says-not-one-tired-junky-bike-rentals https://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/commentary/2017/12/19/dal...
aphextron 8y ago
>I've often wondered what would happen if bicycles were invented today. Surely cities would ban them immediately for being unsafe ("exposed chains and gears? what if a child put their finger in there?!") and they would completely fail to gain traction, right? It just comes down to power. Bicycles are fundamentally different because they are human powered. A powerful adult cyclist can produce maybe 500 watts at a full sprint for a few minutes. Compare this to an electric scooter which gives even a small child nearly 1 kilowatt of power, making it quite easy to hurt themselves or others. It's just a different level of responsibility, like the difference between firearms and archery.
- woolvalley 8y ago
  The city / journo complaints about them don't really seem to be about the electric part of the scooters & bikes, but the dockless nature of them.

ghobs91 8y ago

Between NIMBY antics with housing development and absurd levels of gov overreach in situations like this, SF is going to end up cannibalizing its tech industry. So many cities would kill to be the center of such a fast growing and high paying industry, and they're squandering it because their old guard is a bunch of gate-keeping snobs. Oh well. NYC, LA, Austin, and other cities will gladly grab the fruits of tech talent.

woolvalley 8y ago
I don't think NYC is much better in that regard. Look at how they created taxi 2.0 recently with driver limits, how e-bikes are illegal and a lot of downright hostile reactions in the press to citi bikes a few years ago.
- ghobs91 8y ago
  At least the taxi thing was meant to curb road congestion. SFs scooter regulation seems like the intent is "how dare you run a business without our oversight?".
rrix2 8y ago
Regulation surrounding bikeshare/scootershare isn't specific to SF, many cities want a piece of the pie

deleted 8y ago

[deleted]

singularity2001 8y ago

In the mean time there are already 100 million (!) electro scooters in use in China: https://www.accessmagazine.org/fall-2010/electric-two-wheelers-china-promise-progress-potential/ https://www.accessmagazine.org/fall-2010/electric-two-wheele... . Quoth: "Having lived in China for the last year it’s pretty much 99.8% ebikes. Petrol motorbikes don’t make an appearance except in very poor areas."