1. Trending: Shared Mobility in the Regional Transportation Plan Susan A. Shaheen, Ph.D. University of California, Berkeley March 14, 2014

2.  Some national trends / recent studies  Access vs. ownership & sharing economy  Shared-use mobility services defined  Current understanding of impacts  Mobility management – emphasis on complete trip  Acknowledgements Overview

3. ~28% without Driver’s Licenses (16-34 yrs old) Increase in Public/Private Partnerships & Alternative Funding Models Declining revenues, licensed driversNational Trends

4. Access trumps ownershipParadigm Shift? The trend is clear: Access trumps possession. Access is better than - Kevin Kelly ownership

5. Decline In Traditional Ownership Model Of Material Goods Rise In Renting, Subscription & Pay-Per-Use Decline In Traditional Ownership Model Of Material Goods Rise In Renting, Subscription & Pay-Per-Use Subscription & Membership vs. Ownership New Models

6. Users are looking to transportation to meet multiple needs beyond getting to their destination Convenience & Cost First, Green Is A Perk User Behaviors & Preferences

7. Changes in Driving & Role of Apps, Sharing Recent Studies

8. Understanding Millennials Living in Urban Areas TCRP J-11 Study

9. Why Definitions?  Shared-use mobility services evolving & developing rapidly; distinctions can be blurry, particularly for users  Some services are not easily defined and have prompted new categories (e.g., TNC)  Knowing what these innovative services are and are not can be confusing, particularly as many services are evolving  Social & envt’l impacts are likely to vary across categories; understanding similarities & differences important

10. Evolving system of services and operators Ridesharing Carpooling: Grouping of travelers into a privately owned vehicle, typically for commuting Vanpooling: Commuters traveling to/from a job center sharing a ride in a van Real-time ridesharing services: Match drivers and passengers, based on destination, through app before the trip starts

11. Ridesharing in North America: A Snapshot (July 2011)  612 carpooling services  153 vanpooling services  127 services offer both carpooling & vanpooling  Includes both online and off-line programs Chan and Shaheen, 2011

12. Roundtrip Carsharing: Round trip, pay by the hour/mile, non- profit and for profit fleet models Peer-to-Peer Carsharing: Shared use of private vehicle typically managed by third party One-Way Carsharing: Pay by the minute, point to point, fleet operated, street parking agreements Fractional Ownership Carsharing: Individuals sublease or subscribe to a vehicle owned by a third party There are many flavors of carsharing Carsharing

13. Scooter Sharing: Round trip or one way, pay by the hour Smartphone access, operator fleet Fills the niche between cars and bicycles Scooter Sharing

14. Carsharing Statistics: Americas 46 operators, excluding PVS/p2p operators as of July 2013 Shaheen, 2013

15. Carsharing Membership Growth: Americas Shaheen, 2013

16. Carsharing Statistics for the Americas Almost 1.15 million members (excludes PVS/p2p members) as of July 2013

17. Carsharing Vehicle Growth: Americas Shaheen, 2013

18. Carsharing Statistics for the Americas Over 20,800 vehicles (excludes PVS/p2p vehicles) as of July 2013 Shaheen, 2013

19. Public Bikesharing: Point to point, pay by the ½ hr, fleet operated, docking stations Closed Community Bikesharing: Campuses and closed membership, mainly roundtrip, linking to carsharing Peer-to-Peer Bikesharing: Rent or borrow hourly or daily from individuals or bike rental shops Growing exponentially in urban centers Bikesharing

20. Worldwide & US Bikesharing: March 2014  714 cities with IT-based operating systems  740,000 bikes  35,000 stations  10 new city programs since January 2014  US: 41 cities with IT-based systems & 4 universities  19,600 bikes  2,000 stations Source: Russell Meddin, 2014

21. Understanding Transit Impacts  How do shared-use modes complement and compete with public transit?  Need to understand better when, why, and where this occurs; potential to fill gaps and extend transit’s reach  How will integration of multiple modes impact auto ownership and transit use overall and over time?

22. 2008 N. American Carsharing Survey  Survey implemented from Sept. to Nov. 2008  ~9,500 completed surveys; analysis based on 6,281 hhds  Completion rate ~80%  Online survey challenging  Took between 10 to 15 minutes for most respondents to complete Martin, Shaheen, Lidicker, 2010

23. Participating Organizations American -City CarShare -CityWheels -Community Car -Community Carshare of Bellingham -Igo -PhillyCarShare -Zipcar Canadian - AutoShare - Communauto - Co-operative Auto Network - VrtuCar - Zipcar

24. N.A. Vehicle Holdings: Key Findings  Between 9 to 13 vehicles removed, including postponed purchase  4 to 6 vehicles/carsharing vehicle sold due to carsharing  Most shift due to 1 car households becoming carless  Second largest shift, 2 car households become 1 car households  25% sell a vehicle; 25% postpone purchase  Net CO2 reduction of 27% observed and 43% full impact (average) Martin, Shaheen, Lidicker, 2010

25. N.A. Carsharing Survey: Transit Impacts Martin and Shaheen, 2011 Total Sample = 6,281

26. 2012 Public Bikesharing Study Methodology  Online survey with members of early public bikesharing systems in: Montreal; Toronto; Washington, DC; and Twin Cities (Minneapolis and Saint Paul)  Total sample = 10,661 respondents  6,486 US and 4,175 Canada  Montreal = 3,322; Toronto = 853 ; DC = 5,248; Twin Cities = 1,238  Analyzed operational data from two American operators for 2011 Shaheen et al., 2012

27. Change in Public Transit Use Shaheen et al., 2012

28. Urban Rail Systems of Cities Surveyed Minneapolis Montreal Washington, D.C. Toronto

29. Perceptions of Bikesharing as Enhancing Transit Shaheen et al., 2012

30. Change in Driving a Car Shaheen et al., 2012

31. A new category of transportation services; need for study Transportation Network Companies Transportation Network Company: Prearranged trips, App to pay and connect passengers with drivers who use their personal vehicles

32. Recent Developments 1 20132012 CPUC cease- and-desist orders for Lyft, Sidecar, and Tickengo CPUC imposes $20,000 fine for Lyft, Sidecar, and Uber CPUC begins Order Instituting Rulemaking (OIR) to better regulate new companies Sidecar and uberX give free rides, and Lyft does publicity at SXSW in Austin SFO cease-and-desist for Lyft, Sidecar, Tickengo, InstantCab, Uber Study suggests SF add 600-800 more taxis; SFMTA to add 120 in 2013, 200 in 2014 Lyft and Uber enter interim agreements with CPUC to continue operations during OIR process Austin cease-and-desist for Sidecar; Philly impounds 3 Sidecar vehicles Sidecar expands to Austin (acquires Heyride), Philly, LA Lyft expands to LA Sidecar expands to Seattle Lyft acquires Cherry Sidecar expands to Boston, Brooklyn, Chicago, and DC Lyft expands to Seattle uberX launches in SF AUG NOV DEC JAN FEB MAR APR

33. Recent Developments 1 2013 Sidecar suspends service in Austin, awaiting city ruling Lyft expands to Chicago and Boston Zimride becomes Lyft, focus on real-time ridematching Enterprise acquires Zimride segment of Lyft During BART strike, Avego signup rate increases 8825%, deploys fleet of buses and vans to accommodate commuters; Sidecar rides up 40% LADOT cease-and-desist for Lyft, Sidecar, Uber, uberX Sidecar suspends service in Brooklyn; enters interim agreement with CPUC to operate in CA; expands to DC Lyft expands to San Diego MAY JUN JULSEP AUG OCT CPUC decision approves TNC operation in CA Lyft expands to DC, Indianapolis, St. Paul, Atlanta Google invests $250M into Uber Lyft expands to Phoenix, Denver, and Dallas Lyft expands to Baltimore, Silicon Valley, OC Lyft hits 1M rides

34. Corporate Regional Shuttles: Employer-funded regional transit, closed systems, limited stops Growing system of local and regional shuttles Shuttle Services Local Shuttles: Employer or development agreement service, door-to-door, closed systems, workplace to transit hub

35. Multiple modes, little or no integration Transportation Today Taxi, Limousine & Transportation Network Companies Public Transit, Rail, Bus, Ferry Shared Mobility Services Employer Shuttles, Jitneys, Commercial Deliveries Regional & Intercity Services: Rail, High- Speed Rail, Air Privately-Owned Vehicles

36. 36 Multiple providers, agreements, insurance, payments, routes, booking = headaches! Transportation Today =

37. User Experience Routing Booking Payments Credits/Offsets Games/Value add Integration to enhance customer experience Mobility Mgmt.

38. 38 Rapid Network Boarding Island Integrated for customer access Shared Mobility Vision

39. Acknowledgements  Shared-use mobility providers from across the Americas  Mineta Transportation Institute (MTI), Caltrans, and US DOT  Nelson Chan, Adam Cohen, Rachel Finson, and Elliot Martin, TSRC  Timothy Papandreou, SFMTA  Sharon Feigon, Alternative Transportation for Chicagoland  Russell Meddin, Philadelphia Bike Share

40. www.tsrc.berkeley.edu

41. Demographics 41

42. Demographics 42

43. Bikesharing Survey Demographics Shaheen et al., 2012