Congested sidewalks: The effects of the built environment on e-scooter parking compliance
Keywords:micromobility, e-scooters, shared, parking, compliance, land use
With the proliferation of electric scooters (e-scooters) in cities across the world, concerns continue to arise about their parking spots on sidewalks and other public spaces. Research has looked at e-scooter parking compliance and compared compliance to other mobility devices, but research has not yet examined the impacts of the built environment on parking compliance. Using a field observation dataset in Portland, Oregon, and novel GIS data, we attempt to understand the spatial distribution of e-scooter parking and the impact of built features on parking compliance, offering recommendations for policymakers and future research. The results of our study show that 76% of e-scooters observed fail at least one of the Portland’s parking compliance requirements and 59% fail at least two criteria. However, compliance varies spatially and by violation type, indicating that parking compliance (or non-compliance) is dependent on features of the built environment. Parking compliance is significantly higher on blocks with designated e-scooter parking than blocks without designated e-scooter parking. A statistically significant relationship is observed between the amount of legally parkable area on a city block and parking compliance. Parking compliance increases with larger percentages of legally parkable area. This finding can help policymakers prioritize dedicated e-scooter parking for blocks with limited legally parkable area.
Bai, S., & Jiao, J. (2020). From shared micro-mobility to shared responsibility: Using crowdsourcing to understand dockless vehicle violations in Austin, Texas. Journal of Urban Affairs. https://doi.org/10.1080/07352166.2020.1798244
Bozzi, A., & Aguilera, A. (2021). Shared e-scooters: A review of uses, health and environmental impacts, and policy implications of a new micro-mobility service. Sustainability, 13(16), 8676. https://doi.org/10.3390/su13168676
Brown, A., Klein, N. J., Thigpen, C., & Williams, N. (2020). Impeding access: The frequency and characteristics of improper scooter, bike, and car parking. Transportation Research Interdisciplinary Perspectives, 4(March), 100099. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trip.2020.100099
Fang, K., Steele, J., Hunter, J. J., & Hooper, A. M. (2018). Where do riders park dockless, shared electric scooters? Findings from San Jose, California. Mineta San Jose, CA: Transportation Institute. Retrieved from https://scholarworks.sjsu.edu/mti_publications/251/
GPS.gov. (2021). GPS accuracy. GPS: The global positioning system. Washington DC: NOAA. Retrieved from https://www.gps.gov/systems/gps/performance/accuracy/
KATU staff. (2019). Disability rights: Oregon addresses concerns with e-scooter pilot program. Retrieved from https://katu.com/news/local/disability-rights-oregon-addresses-concerns-with-e-scooter-pilot-program
Kopplin, C., Brand, B., & Reichenberger, Y. (2021). Consumer acceptance of shared e-scooters for urban and short-distance mobility. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 91(February), 102680. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2020.102680
McQueen, M., Abou-Zeid, G., MacArthur, J., & Clifton, K. (2021). Transportation transformation: Is micromobility making a macro impact on sustainability? Journal of Planning Literature, 36(1), 46–61. https://doi.org/10.1177/0885412220972696
Merlin, L., Yan, X., Xu, Y., & Zhao, X. (2021). A segment-level model of shared, electric scooter origins and destinations. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 92(March), 102709. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102709
Moran, M. (2021). Drawing the map: The creation and regulation of geographic constraints on shared bikes and e-scooters in San Francisco, CA. Journal of Transport and Land Use, 14(1), 197–218. https://doi.org/10.5198/jtlu.2021.1816
Murase, R., Isaacson, K., Hinshaw, M., & Brown, M. (1998). Portland pedestrian design guidelines. Portland, OR: City of Portland, Office of Transportation Engineering and Development, Pedestrian Transportation Program.
North American Bikeshare Association (NABSA). (2020). 1st annual micromobility state-of-the-industry report. Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.7922/G2057D6B
National Association of City Transportation Officials (NACTO). (2019). Shared micromobility in the US: 2018. Retrieved from https://nacto.org/shared-micromobility-2018/
Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT). (2018a). 2018 e-scooter findings report. Retrieved from https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/78431
Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT). (2018b). New mobility – shared electric scooters (TRN-15.01). Retrieved from https://www.portlandoregon.gov.
Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT). (2019). Rules of the road for e-scooters in Portland. Retrieved from https://www.portland.gov/transportation/escooterpdx/rules-road-e-scooters-portland
Shoup, D. (2017). The high cost of free parking (updated edition). Oxfordshire, UK: Routledge.
Teale, C. (2018). Dockless digest: Bird, lime celebrate 10M rides. Retrieved from https://www.smartcitiesdive.com/news/dockless-digest-bird-lime-celebrate-10m-rides/532956/
Thomas, K., & KATU staff. (2019). E-scooter pilot program will return to Portland with new rules, enforcement fines. Retrieved from https://katu.com/news/local/e-scooter-pilot-program-will-return-to-portland-with-new-rules-and-enforcement.
Zhang, W., Buehler, R., Broaddus, A., & Sweeney, T. (2021). What type of infrastructures do e-scooter riders prefer? A route choice model. Transportation Research Part D: Transport and Environment, 94(May), 102761. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trd.2021.102761
How to Cite
Copyright (c) 2022 Rob Hemphill, John MacArthur, Philip Longenecker, Garima Desai, Lillie Nie, Abbey Ibarra, Jennifer Dill, Ph.D
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Authors who publish with JTLU agree to the following terms: 1) Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial License 4.0 that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal. 2) Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal. 3) Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work.