Community Editorial Board: Expanding e

Aug. 19—Members of our Community Editorial Board, a group of community residents who are engaged with and passionate about local issues, respond to the following question: Community members will soon be able to ride Lime e-scooters across most of Boulder as the city begins an expansion of its Shared Micromobility Program this month by adding up to 900 additional scooters. Your take?

I love the idea of fewer cars and more bikes on Boulder's streets. Personally, I ride my e-bike on the majority of my errands and I raised my kids to be cyclists with the help of Boulder's protected bike paths. I'm less enthusiastic about e-scooters. These scooters are often abandoned in inconvenient spots — on blind corners on the bike path or blocking a bus stop. At best, this simply inconveniences fellow bike path users or those in wheelchairs or with mobility issues. At worst, it endangers them as they must navigate the obstacles created by abandoned Lime scooters. E-scooters also seem to be begging users to become organ donors. At the risk of sounding like a grouchy Gen X-er, I have yet to see someone riding one of these machines at a reasonable speed. More often than not, I see teens or young adults riding two to a scooter at high speeds and without helmets. How can this be safe?

Scooters require very little skill to ride, while a person needs a modicum of balance and awareness to ride a bike. Instead of introducing more scooters to be thrown in creek beds, bushes, blind corners or ADA-accessible spots, why not increase the number of electric bikes available through the B-Cycle program? Why not think more holistically about how to get people out of their cars? The city should continue to work with RTD to subsidize bus rides — the past two months of free ridership seem to translate into fuller buses. It should disincentivize driving by making parking in popular places expensive and inconvenient. And it should do everything it can to make bicycling safer and more secure. The city could invest in bike racks throughout Boulder so that people could easily lock their bikes up. I agree that reducing vehicle congestion is a priority but I'm not convinced that Lime scooters are the solution our city needs.

Rachel Walker, [email protected]

------

My gut reaction to this program was that it was another expensive, ineffective, feel-good program to combat climate change, but I was wrong. It's not expensive. This program doesn't cost the city anything. In fact, Lime pays Boulder for access to the city.

It's flat-out ridiculous to associate this program with reducing CO2, as it is an extremely inefficient way to accomplish such a feat. The other major selling point for these scooters is to solve the "last mile" problem of public transportation, but they aren't used that way very often. Lime reports that these are only 20% of the trips. Also, 37% of trips on Lime scooters are for fun and recreation. That isn't saving any CO2 or reducing any traffic.

What about the increased danger to pedestrians and even to helmetless scooter riders? We know that hardly anyone wears a helmet riding an e-scooter, yet we are promoting the riding of these scooters. Is that wise? Maybe not, but caveat emptor.

The utilization of these scooters is ridiculously low for a shared device at just 1.5 trips per scooter. Trips averaged one mile so that is only 1.5 miles per day per scooter. Let's guess the average speed is 7.5 mph. Then the scooter is used just 12 minutes every 24 hours, or 0.8% of the time. But that's good for us consumers since each scooter is available 99% of the time.

This program will have zero effect on climate. I doubt it will have much effect on traffic. But it does give citizens another choice in how they move around the city. Lime takes all the risk. The only potential problems are the danger to pedestrians and possibly unsightly clutter of scooters. But I'll trust the pilot-program results and, at least for now, assume these won't be issues in the expanded program. And if they are, we can just end or restrict the program like many other cities have done.

Bill Wright, [email protected]

------

When I first ventured out on a bike in Helsinki, other cyclists yelled and motioned at me. Unknowingly, I had violated written regulations, unwritten rules and local etiquette. Helsinki is a city that values micromobility and public safety, issues that roil Boulder.

Boulder residents have waded into this controversy. Advocates of micromobility machines contend that they reduce traffic congestion, air pollution and carbon emissions. They help connect to public transportation networks and are fun.

Yet people complain about travel obstacles and hazardous conditions due to misparking, blocked sidewalks and clutter. Localities that have imposed bans or stringent restrictions on e-bikes and e-scooters include San Francisco, West Hollywood, Beverly Hills, New York City and Honolulu.

Boulder's phased program of expanding the availability of e-bikes and e-scooters offers options in its transportation system. Myriad considerations have come into play: monitoring, signage, speed limits, helmet use, costs and enforcement mechanisms.

This could be a springboard for tackling two huge quandaries. One is the risk of double standards. Geofencing (governing devices) limits the speed and range of e-bikes and e-scooters but not cars. Automobile manufacturers and highly zealous advocates of freedom use e-bikes and e-scooters as a cat's paw in trying to achieve their objectives. This reflects the individualism and quest for autonomy baked into American culture when meeting the common good is required.

Second, e-bikes and e-scooters are an entry point for rethinking the planning-transportation nexus. It is a splendid opportunity to explore how to advance participatory, democratic planning for meeting social needs: It provokes debate about working toward more comprehensive planning. This avenue can lead to giving voice and bringing together our diverse community.

The City of Helsinki has established clear, safe and observed protocols for bike- and scooter-sharing services. Boulder, too, can address its unique needs and challenges associated with mobility.

Jim Mittelman, [email protected]

------

This is a great idea whose time has not yet come. As much as we may want to be ready for the Shared Micromobility Program, we must recognize that our bodies and our infrastructure are not. The skills needed to drive a car are not identical to those needed to drive an e-scooter. The "muscle memory" involved in driving a car with relative ease takes time to develop and cannot be directly transferred from one type of vehicle to another without additional training. There is a reason that a license to drive a car requires more than a written test and is not transferrable to other types of vehicles.

The e-scooter question must be reframed. The question is not whether e-scooters are desirable; the question is what needs to be in place to implement this program safely. E-scooters are potentially dangerous and potentially better for the environment. This requires development of the kinds of standards applied to other useful but potentially dangerous devices. For example, how do you test for e-scooter driving competence? Should the roads and/or the rules governing them be modified to accommodate an e-scooter influx? What kinds of public education may be required for pedestrians and users of other types of vehicles? What safety equipment might reduce injuries among ordinary e-scooter users — as opposed to the presumably non-representative sample studied by the pilot program?

This will take time, which is difficult to tolerate in the current context of constant climate-related disasters. Daily exposure to these traumatic scenes may make the Shared Micromobility Program especially appealing. Although there is clearly a need for immediate environmental action, there are multiple ways to fight climate change while the e-scooter regulations get worked out. Perhaps one meatless meal every time we would have taken an e-scooter but drove a car instead?

Elyse Morgan, [email protected]