Title
Recommendation to Accept an Update on the April 2, 2018 and May 1, 2018 Referrals from Council Member Matarrese to Consider Banning Motorized Vehicles, Including Robotic Commercial Vehicles, from Sidewalks and Commercial Drone Aircraft Used for Deliveries; and Electric Scooters. (Public Works 310)
Body
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: David L. Rudat, Interim City Manager
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
On April 2, 2018 and May 1, 2018 the City Council directed staff to consider 1) banning commercial delivery vehicles, including robotic delivery, 2) banning commercial drone aircraft used for deliveries, and 3) banning electric (powered) scooters. Each one of these referral items is distinct in the benefits and challenges to the City’s public right-of-way and is addressed separately in the discussion that follows. Accordingly, staff’s recommendation as to each of these issues is likewise distinct. With each recommendation, staff has provided an alternative, which would allow the City Council to adopt a ban.
Given the evolving nature of these technologies, their potential contribution to reductions in green-house gases and Federal preemption issues, staff recommends that the City Council a) take no action at this time to ban robotic delivery vehicles, b) take no action at this time to ban drone deliveries, and c) take no action at this time to ban shared electric scooters and continue to work with shared electric scooter companies to discourage deployment and parking of scooters in Alameda until such time that staff is able to return to Council within one year with a recommended shared electric scooter permit program.
BACKGROUND
Private companies are developing and implementing new technologies to more efficiently move people and goods. In particular, companies are developing a variety of methods to tackle the “last mile” problem of transport and delivery. The last mile of delivery is a major logistical challenge for businesses and particularly for e-commerce, getting goods to the customer at their office or residence. Similarly, solving the last mile of transportation can often be the difference for a commuter using public transit versus a single occupancy trip by car. Solutions to the last mile problem bring the promise of more efficient (and thus cheaper) delivery, more transportation choices, reduced traffic congestion and air pollution, a reduction in carbon emissions, and less demand for parking.
These same technologies can also have negative impacts. For example, as reflected in the referral, “sidewalks provide a safe and convenient space for pedestrians and those with personal mobility devices to move about the City. Allowing motorized commercial vehicles, including robotic vehicles, on sidewalks could impede pedestrians and those with limited mobility in using sidewalks”. Furthermore, the referral states, “Alameda’s peaceful atmosphere will be unnecessarily disrupted” by drone delivery aircraft. Similarly, the deployment of large fleets of rentable electric scooters in many cites has created significant conflicts between pedestrians and scooter riders, and safety issues for riders, as well.
The rapid pace of innovation, deployment, and adoption by an app-wielding public can challenge the ability of city governments to regulate new technologies in a way that balances their promise and benefit with the overall health, safety, and welfare of the public. In general, cities have responded in three primary ways to the influx of new technology in the public right-of-way: 1) ban the new technology, 2) regulate the technology through a permit process, often with a pilot program, or 3) adopt a wait and see approach, often relying on the lessons learned by other cities.
DISCUSSION
The City Council referral includes three distinct items: 1) banning commercial delivery vehicles, including robotic deliveries, 2) banning commercial drone aircraft used for delivery, and 3) banning electric (powered) scooters. Each one of these referral items is distinct in the benefits and challenges to the City’s public right-of-way and is addressed separately in the discussion that follows. Accordingly, staff’s recommendation as to each of these issues is likewise distinct.
Commercial Delivery Vehicles, including Robotic Delivery
Several companies have developed or are developing autonomous robotic delivery vehicles that can operate on sidewalks and pathways. The promise for these vehicles is to load and deliver packages within a localized area and complete the “last-mile delivery”. Customers can order food or other items through an app and then have it delivered to their residence, work, or any other location. Similarly delivery companies could also use a fleet of robots to deliver packages in a neighborhood. A customer will typically receive a text or other notification when the robot has arrived and will retrieve the package from the robot. These robot vehicles contain multiple sensors which allow them to scan, maneuver over or around obstacles including people, and use Global Positioning System (GPS) to track location. Most vehicles operate at or about “walking speed” given concerns about pedestrian safety and to allow the robots to navigate the chaos of crowded city sidewalks, particularly at intersections. Human minders, however, are still needed at this phase of development to guide the robots through especially difficult areas or to address other problems.
Other issues to consider include potential impacts with pedestrians, cyber risk, sidewalk congestion and docking/parking requirements on private property. Where these vehicles have been permitted, the autonomous delivery device companies also are required to indemnify the jurisdiction from any legal claims and to have insurance coverage for general and automotive liability.
The benefits of these devices could include convenience for the customer, increased efficiencies of deliveries because customers text when they are ready for the delivery, reduced stolen packages, expedited return of unwanted goods and reduced greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled including commercial vehicle deliveries. Moreover, the devices map the sidewalks, and, if shared, the data could be used by Public Works staff for future sidewalk improvements.
Various states and local jurisdictions are allowing autonomous delivery devices by adopting pilot programs and or passing specific ordinances authorizing use on sidewalks and crosswalks and setting limits on the size, weight and operating speeds. Some of the weight restrictions preclude some autonomous delivery devices and may seem overly restrictive at 50 to 90 pound restrictions when compared to personal assistive mobility devices such as motorized wheelchairs that can weigh up to 300 pounds. The operating speed tends to be no more than three miles per hour, which is the speed of a typical pedestrian.
Staff is not aware of nor has been approached by any company wishing to deploy autonomous delivery devices within Alameda. At the present state of development, a significant time and manpower investment is required by companies that wish to start up an autonomous delivery service; and therefore, it is unlikely that companies would initiate a service without cooperating with the City.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council take no action on this part of the referral at this time and, instead, adopt a wait and see approach to the regulation of robotic delivery vehicles. If the City is approached by a vendor, it would apply lessons learned from other pilot programs to develop a recommendation that would be brought to Council for its consideration.
Alternate Recommendation: If the City Council desires to enact a ban on robotic delivery vehicles, the City Council may introduce a first reading of the following ordinance amending Chapter VIII of the Alameda Municipal Code (AMC), which would establish a prohibition that could take effect in approximately 45 days. The ordinance would read as follows:
8.30 COMMERCIAL AUTONOMOUS DELIVERY DEVICES PROHIBITED ON PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAYS.
8.30-1 "Commercial Autonomous Delivery Device" means a motorized device used to transport items, products, or any other materials, and guided or controlled without a human operator sitting or standing upon and actively and physically controlling the movements of the device.
8.30-2 It shall be unlawful for any person to operate a Commercial Autonomous Delivery Device on any public sidewalk. Operation of a Commercial Autonomous Delivery Device in violation of this subsection shall be, and is hereby declared, a public nuisance.
The referral also requests that motorized commercial vehicles be banned from sidewalks. The California Vehicle Code, Section 21663 already prohibits vehicles from being driven on sidewalks; accordingly, no further action is needed.
Commercial Drone Aircraft
The rules and regulations to operate Unmanned Aircraft Systems (UAS), commonly referred to as drones, are complex. The Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) preemptively regulates the navigable airspace and limits the ability of local jurisdictions to regulate drones. FAA regulations currently permit package delivery (transportation of property for compensation or hire) by drones when the aircraft and package weigh less than 55 pounds. Local regulation, however, may include protections for individual privacy, trespassing, and limited other land use restrictions related to land use, i.e. hours of operation (noise), designated take-off and landing areas, rules for operation in parks, waterfronts, or other public events, and the right to condition the ability to take off and land on receipt of a permit.
The City cannot strictly ban commercial drone aircraft for deliveries since it is allowed by FAA rules nor could the City regulate the take-off of drones originating outside of the City limits or restrict drone flightpath or payload (package) within the City. While the City may have some ability to restrict the landing of drones, defining what constitutes a landing, separating commercial package delivery from other “acceptable” drone uses, and ultimately enforcement may become a challenge. However, current federal requirements include a line-of-site requirement where a drone operator must maintain visual contact with the drone at all times. This requirement currently limits the ability of a company to effectively deploy commercial drones for package delivery as an operator would need to be in close proximity to each delivery location.
The FAA has recently established a UAS Integration Pilot Program in ten cities across the country to evaluate a host of operational concepts including flying beyond the pilot’s line of sight, package delivery, and safety and reliability measures. The goal of the program is to foster a dialogue on the balance between local and national interests related to UAS integration into the national airspace system.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City Council take no action at this time on this part of the referral. The City will continue to monitor companies’ proposed use of drones for commercial deliveries, the FAA’s pilot program, and other cities’ responses to the implementation of this potential new delivery method.
Alternate Recommendation: Because FAA regulations currently regulate Unmanned Aircraft Systems, the City Council cannot enact a ban on commercial drone aircraft used for deliveries.
Electric Scooters
Dockless electric scooter sharing began in late 2017 and has rapidly spread to cities around the Bay Area, the country and the world. Electric scooters have proven popular for the general public, with people of all ages riding them, using them for commuting, first/last mile connections and fun. From a public policy perspective, electric scooters have a number of benefits: they (a) provide an additional transportation choice for residents, which adds another element of robust mobility options, they (b) can help reduce congestion and parking demand, and (c) can help cities reduce Greenhouse Gas emissions and meet local climate action plan goals. The City of Portland, which has an electric scooter pilot program, recently conducted a user survey, which found that one third of scooter trips are replacing an auto trip and almost half of riders had never ridden a bicycle.
The City cannot restrict the operation of an electric scooter (private or shared) in the public right-of-way when following applicable traffic laws, per the California Vehicle Code (Division 11 (Rules of the Road) Chapter 1, Article 5 (Operation of Motorized Scooters), Section 21221). This section of the CVC states that motorized scooters have all the rights and are subject to all the provisions applicable to the driver of vehicles, which includes being allowed to ride in the road. It may, however, restrict or regulate the parking of shared scooters. San Francisco, as part of its cease and desist action against shared electric scooter companies earlier this year, did not restrict the lawful operation of a scooter, but rather it restricted the ability to park a scooter on the street, sidewalk or public right of way and allowed for the impoundment of any scooter ‘abandoned’ in the right-of-way. The City of San Francisco has since instituted a permit program for a 12-month period, and two companies were issued permits in October.
State law requires that operators of motorized scooters have a valid driver’s license (or instruction permit). State law also prohibits operation of a motorized scooter on a sidewalk. As of January 1, 2019, State law will require persons under the age of 18 using motorized scooters to wear a helmet.
Many cities, including Oakland, Berkeley, San Francisco and Emeryville, have implemented electric scooter pilot programs, or have developed or are developing permit processes for the operation of shared scooter programs. Given the wide extent of the deployment of motorized scooters, feedback from municipalities and users, electric scooter companies are responding to common safety concerns by re-designing scooters to be safer and more comfortable to use, improving the technology to instruct users on where to ride and park, and improving user education. As a result, both the shared electric scooter industry and local regulations are rapidly evolving.
In response to the City Council’s referral, staff contacted two operators (Lime and Bird) that have had scooters in Alameda in recent months. Staff informed the companies that the companies may not park or leave standing scooters in Alameda until such time that Alameda has adopted its own pilot program. Nevertheless, since the scooters are available for rent in Oakland, in the last few months, the number of scooters being used and parked on City sidewalks has risen. Because City staff has received some complaints about sidewalk riding, the parking of scooters, and underage riders, staff has worked with both vendors to strengthen their education to users on not parking their scooters in Alameda, and to institute penalties for users who regularly park in Alameda. The Police Department has enforced the state laws regarding scooters as officers notice violations, much as they do for motorists who violate other sections of the Vehicle Code. As well, staff has received several requests from the community to establish a shared scooter program here.
Recommendation: Staff recommends that the City develop a pilot permit program for electric scooters within the next year based on lessons learned from other cities and the evolution of the industry. In the meantime, staff will continue to work with shared electric scooter companies to discourage deployment and parking of scooters in Alameda. The Police Department will continue to enforce state laws regarding riding of scooters on sidewalks and, after the first of the year, requiring riders under 18 to wear a helmet. City staff will also promote education on safe and legal scooter riding through social media and the City’s website, since riding electric scooters on City streets is legal.
Alternate Recommendation: The Council could introduce a first reading of an ordinance to ban the parking of shared electric scooters on City property. If introduced, the ordinance would go into effect in 45 days. Council may also wish to consider a pilot program, which could be returned to Council for its consideration within a year. If the Council wishes to impose a ban for the interim period, staff recommends introducing (and then adopting) the following ordinance adding Section 8-8.9 and Section 8-26.2 to the AMC:
8-8.9 POWERED SCOOTER SHARE PARKING RESTRICTIONS
It is unlawful to park, leave standing, or leave unattended a Powered Scooter that is part of a Powered Scooter Share Program, on any sidewalk, street, or public right-of way. Any such Powered Scooter so parked, left standing, or left unattended constitutes a public nuisance subject to abatement and removal. For purposes of this section "powered scooter" shall mean a "motorized scooter" as defined in Section 407.5 of the California Vehicle Code as amended from time to time.
8-26.2 It is unlawful for any person to ride a motorized scooter as defined in Vehicle Code section 407.5, as amended from time to time, on a sidewalk, street or public right of way, or on any property, building or structure owned or leased by the City.
FINANCIAL IMPACT
The potential financial impacts are unknown at this time. Complete enforcement of existing laws relating to electric scooter operation would likely require additional Police resources. Similarly, enforcement of electric scooter parking restrictions would require additional Police and/or Public Works resources to collect, store, and ultimately release the scooters.
MUNICIPAL CODE/POLICY DOCUMENT CROSS REFERENCE
Alameda’s Municipal Code does not currently contain ordinances pertaining to robotic delivery vehicles, commercial drone aircraft, or electric scooters. The Transportation Element of the General Plan contains several goals and objectives that, while not direct references to robotic delivery vehicles, commercial drone aircraft, or electric scooters, encourage the use of alternate modes of transportation to meet the City’s transportation needs.
Staff recommendations for each of referral items would not change the Municipal Code at this time. However, alternate recommendations are provided for Council consideration that would add or amend the Municipal Code to ban robotic delivery vehicles and/or electric scooters.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Adoption of any or all of these ordinances is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act as such ordinance(s) constitute general policy and procedure making and, as such, are not “projects”. CEQA Guidelines, section 15378 (b) (2)
RECOMMENDATION
Accept an update on the April 2, 2018 and May 1, 2018 referrals from Council Member Matarrese to consider banning (a) motorized vehicles, including robotic commercial vehicles, from sidewalks (b) commercial drone aircraft used for deliveries; and (c) electric scooters.
Respectfully submitted,
Liam Garland, Public Works Director
Andrew Thomas, Interim Planning Building and Transportation Director
By,
Scott Wikstrom, City Engineer
Rochelle Wheeler, Senior Transportation Planner
Financial Impact section reviewed,
Elena Adair, Finance Director