Smart Mobility - A Framework for Local Governments in the Buffalo-Niagara Region by University at Buffalo School of Architecture and Planning, University at Buffalo

Acknowledgments This report would not have been possible without the help of the many community organizations, planners, county officials, and individuals who offered their time and resources to our studio as this report was developed. We specifically would like to acknowledge Lisa Kenney and the Greater Buffalo-Niagara Regional Transportation Council for their continued support as we developed our report and for their efforts to improve transportation in the region, which inspired this report. We would also like to thank the Niagara Frontier Transportation Authorityâ&#x20AC;&#x201D; especially Robert Jones, Nadine Chambers, and Eric Svensonâ&#x20AC;&#x201D;whose staff offered valued comments and suggestions during our mid-semester review and final project review. Finally, we would like to thank the municipal planners who attended our mid-semester review and final review. Thank you to Jim Jones, Town of Tonawanda Town Engineer, Paul Becker, Town of Hamburg planner, and Julie Fetzer, City of Buffalo Public Works Department.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The following report on the applicability of various smart mobilities for the BuffaloNiagara region is a synthesis of the full findings produced by the spring 2019 Masters of Urban Planning Studio Practicum led by Professor Bumjoon Kang, PhD in collaboration with the Greater Buffalo-Niagara Regional Transportation Council (GBNRTC). The emerging technologies that are quickly transforming the transportation systems of cities worldwide are considered in this report in an effort to present local transportation planning professionals with a framework for implementing these technologies in the Buffalo-Niagara region. Building off of the vision put forth in GBNRTCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Moving Forward 2050 Plan, this report began by investigating case studies of smart mobility plans across selected domestic and international examples in section 2. Each case study reported out implications of the particular case for the Buffalo/Niagara region. Next, transportation challenges most common in each of the following three types of areas were analyzed: rural, suburban & urban. After reporting on the challenges found in each level of density, smart mobility solutions are suggested for each of the three sections (sections 3-5). Opportunities for implementing shared mobility technologies to augment public transit, including ride-hailing and micro mobility options, are were further analyzed in section 6. In order to visualize opportunities for extending public transportation as enhanced by emerging smart mobility technologies, section 7 analyzes Erie & Niagara Counties through application of a Transit Demand Index (TDI). Section 8 illustrates physical design features of large scale mobility hubs for three urban sites identified through the preceding TDI. Additionally, this section illustrates a more generic small scale mobility hub design that could be implemented in areas of lower densities as an enhancement of bus stops. Section 9 is a Smart Mobility Menu that connects interest in various smart mobility solutions with examples - the idea here is to provide recommendations and smart mobility examples that are applicable to various parts of our region whether they are rural, suburban or urban. Lastly, section 10 assesses what the private sector has to offer in terms of funding and partnership opportunities, including analyses of data sharing practices in the ride hailing sector.

TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. Smart Mobility Studio Report Overview 1.1. Purpose of the Smart Mobility Studio 1.2. Studio Client: Greater Buffalo-Niagara Regional Transportation Council 1.3. Smart Mobility Studio Research Process 1.4. Smart Mobility Studio Report Limitations 2. 2.1. 2.2. 2.3. 2.4. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. 10. 11. 12.

Domestic and International Case Studies: Understanding Smart Cities Domestic Smart Mobility Case Study Selection Methodology International Smart Mobility Case Study Selection Methodology Smart Mobility Case Study Review and Report Implications Selected Domestic and International Smart Mobility Case Study Examples

Rural Suburban Urban Shared Mobility and MaaS Data Analysis & Visualization Smart Mobility Hub Locations and Designs for the Buffalo-Niagara Region Smart Mobility Design Menu Smart Mobility Funding, Data Management, and Implementation Interviews Conclusion

Smart Mobility Studio Report Overview

1. SMART MOBILITY STUDIO REPORT OVERVIEW 1.1 Purpose of the Smart Mobility Studio The Smart Mobility Studio’s purpose was to work with real community partners to gain real world planning experience. Analyze the transportation challenges faced by urban, suburban, and rural areas in order to inform local planners in the region of smart mobility opportunities. This report details the data analysis, physical design elements, and implementation strategies recommended for smart mobility adoption in the Buffalo-Niagara region. To address issues related to transportation in the Buffalo-Niagara region, this studio worked to identify smart mobility solutions and considerations for implementing smart mobility. In line with the Greater Buffalo Niagara Transportation Council’s Moving Forward 2050 Plan, this reference report seeks to provide an overview of the possibilities of smart mobility for a variety of municipalities in the Buffalo-Niagara region to help solve their most pressing transportation issues. 1.2 Smart Mobility Studio Client: Greater Buffalo-Niagara Regional Transportation Council The Smart Mobility Studio’s client was the Greater Buffalo-Niagara Regional Transportation Council. The GBNRTC is the metropolitan planning organization for Erie and Niagara counties and works to identify transportation needs, and push for comprehensive transportation planning in the Buffalo-Niagara region. The Smart Mobility Studio worked in collaboration with the GBNRTC to research smart mobility technologies and implementations that lead to identifying opportunities for their implementation in the Buffalo-Niagara region.

1. SMART MOBILITY STUDIO REPORT OVERVIEW

The following section is devoted to an in-depth summary of the Greater Buffalo-Niagara Region’s transportation plan. The purpose of this section is to provide a basis of comparison between this local plan and the case studies researched by the studio. This section also includes a short analysis of Moving Forward 2015: A Regional Transportation Plan for Buffalo-Niagara (Figure 1).

Greater Buffalo-Niagara Region, New York Regional Characteristics Total Population of Greater Buffalo-Niagara Region o 1,135,509

Population of the City of Niagara Falls o 48,460

Population of the City of Buffalo o 258,612

Land area and Population Density (City of Niagara) o 14.09 sq. miles/ 3,563.3 people per sq. mile

Land area and Population Density (City of Buffalo) o 40.38 sq. miles/ 6,470.6 people per sq. mile Data sourced from United States Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013-2017 ACS via Quick Facts

1. SMART MOBILITY STUDIO REPORT OVERVIEW

Components The following topics are discussed in the Moving Forward 2050 Plan for the Buffalo-Niagara Region: Bi-national transportation planning; Integrating rural, suburban, and urban areas through the uses of mobility hubs; Increased bike infrastructure; Increased pedestrian compatibility; Enhanced highway systems; Autonomous vehicles (both cars and buses; Transportation Network Companies (Uber, Lyft, etc.); smart corridors; and use of modern technology and innovation. Summary Moving Forward 2050, a plan for smart mobility in Erie and Niagara counties, is a region-focused plan to improve transportation in the Buffalo-Niagara area. They cite needing “new, innovative ways of planning, building, and financing [the] transportation system” (Greater Buffalo Niagara Regional Transportation Council, 2018, p 11). The plan outlines ways in which the region can move towards more efficient transportation and systems of smart mobility. It was created in response to a slew of issues facing the Greater Buffalo Niagara Region, including a stagnant economy, a lack of transportation connections, vehicle dependence, excessive energy, land consumption, and dilapidated infrastructure (Greater Buffalo Niagara Regional Transportation Council, 2018). One major challenge facing the region is urban sprawl. The built environment is very spread out, with many smaller suburbs and towns surrounding the city. Many of these suburbs and towns do not have direct connections to the urban core. This leaves many people without access to transportation and without ways to travel to other areas of the region. This includes, but is not limited to, elderly people, people living with disabilities, and people that cannot afford cars and rely on the inadequate public transit available. In order to combat these challenges, the Greater Buffalo Niagara Regional Transportation Council (GBNRTC) outlined regional goals. In addition to these goals, the plan outlines specific objectives and regional performance measures that will allow any progress made to be quantifiable.

1. SMART MOBILITY STUDIO REPORT OVERVIEW Plans and Policies In order to accomplish some of these goals, the plan outlines what will here be called plans and policies. There should be strategic investment in in key sectors of the economy that will help it to flourish. These sectors are included in a grouping called Western New York Regional Economic Development Council (REDC) Target Industries. Some examples of REDC Target industries are agriculture, energy, and health and life sciences. More examples can be found on page 24. There should also be bi-national transportation planning that involves finding “quick, effective and safe/secure movement of freight and travelers [which] is imperative to building a robust, dynamic economy in Buffalo-Niagara” (GBNRTC, 2018, p. 27). It should also involve ways to capitalize on cross-border opportunities, because the international aspect of that area is something that has quite a lot of potential. This goes along with another plan/policy that calls for increased pre-clearance for passenger and freight vehicles in order to minimize border delays, and for an expanded NEXUS plan (p. 72). There is already work being done to support bicycles and pedestrians. Some examples include the GBNRTC Online Bicycle map, multi-use trails, and Safe Routes to School Programs, and more can be found on page 45 of the report. See also page 82. The highway system should also be enhanced. This should happen by way of things like electronic signage that can be quickly adjusted to convey relevant messages, alternative fueling options to support a wide range of automobiles, variable speeds for different weather and traffic conditions, and electronic tolling. The region’s highways could move towards being Next-Generation Freeways (p. 68) with the continued introduction of modern technology, such as ramp metering. Ramp metering is a way to control the number of cars entering a highway at a single time from surrounding major arterials and commuter expressways in order to reduce traffic jams and streamline flow. Along with this comes upgrades to commuter expressways, such as the creation of a mobility hub to connect people with buses and other transportation network companies (Uber, Lyft, etc.) bike and car-shares, EV charging stations, and real-time travel information. Commuter expressways could benefit from electronic tolling as well, because it could help limit delays. More information on enhancing the highway and expressway systems can be found on pages 66 through 71.

1. SMART MOBILITY STUDIO REPORT OVERVIEW

Plans and Policies cont. In addition to highways, the aforementioned major arterial roads can be turned into “smartly enhanced multi-modal” (GBNRTC, 2018, p. 75) corridors via sharing and reactivating the street, and improving the flow of people and goods. This should occur through more vehicle sharing, the introduction of autonomous vehicles (AV), and smarter traffic lights that are responsive to real-time information. Secondary corridors, or streets that do not have enough traffic to be considered arterials, should have technology integrated into them to help improve walkability and mobility for everyone. Moving Forward 2050 mentions many more plans/policies for improving smaller cities (p. 78), upgrading rural roads (p. 79), diversifying the freight network (p. 84), adapting underutilized infrastructure (p. 86), rethinking Route 5 and Main Street (p. 88), innovative funding (p. 112), and new forms of governance (p. 114). It also gives mention of the Main Street Knowledge Corridor, which spans the distance between the Buffalo Niagara Medical Campus (BNMC) and the Erie Community College (ECC) North Campus. The Corridor goes through both the urban core of Buffalo and through some nearby suburbs. It also connects several “major educational institutions” (GBNRTC, 2018, p. 90). The BNMC is working on a Smart Corridor in the area of Main Street near its campus, which will “incorporate smart transportation infrastructure and technology, and energy efficiency into the campus” (GBNRTC, 2018, p. 90). BNMC hopes to eventually connect the different educational institutions, neighborhoods, and jurisdictions that are intersected by Main Street to create a “complete corridor” (GBNRTC, 2018, p. 90). The idea of the corridor is to combine technology, research, and transportation planning, so that communities, and businesses in the area can all benefit. More information on the future of the Knowledge Corridor can be found on pages 90 and 91.

1.Â Â SMART MOBILITY STUDIO REPORT OVERVIEW

Critical Analysis Moving Forward 2050 is a good example of a transportation plan. It is well-formatted, and easy to read. The information is presented in a way that makes sense and flows logically. It makes good use of photographs, illustrations, and other graphics. It is not excessively wordy, and there are informative call-out boxes that draw the attention to important details. These components contribute to making the plan accessible to the general population. It is also one of the few plans investigated for the previous case studies that had an extensive risk management section. It outlined multiple concerns, including the unclear liability of autonomous vehicles, possible unemployment and lost revenues, and low level AV market penetration. The plan gives ratings to each concern in terms of high, medium, or low likelihood of occurrence and high, medium, or low impact if it were to occur. Each of these risks also has a possible solution. By including that section, GBNRTC shows that it put significant thought into what things could make this plan impractical for the Greater Buffalo Niagara Region, but has chosen to propose lofty goals with the hopes of helping the region reach its greatest potential. In addition, this plan has detailed objectives for its broader goals, and distinct measures of performance with which to access success or failure. In this way, it will be clear if a part of the plan is not working, and adjustments can be made.

1.3 SMART MOBILITY STUDIO RESEARCH PROCESS 1. The studio met with the Greater Buffalo Niagara Transportation Council (GBNRTC) to better understand the clientâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s goals and objectives concerning smart mobility implementations in the Buffalo-Niagara region. 2. The studio focused on researching domestic and international case studies that exemplified innovative implementations of smart mobility solutions. This process enabled the studio to better understand the various applications, technologies, and designs associated with smart mobility solutions. 3. Research on how shared mobility and MaaS (Mobility as a Service) continue to grow and impact transportation networks in the U.S. and other cities throughout the world. 4. Conducted interviews with local municipalities, NGOs, and private transportation companies to identify issues and challenges that they face in the context of smart mobility implementations. 5. Conducted a mid-review with the client (GBNRTC) to show completed research and identify directions that would lead to a final product that would be beneficial to the client. 6. Met with NFTA staff to better understand how the local transportation agency perceives how smart mobility impacts the Buffalo-Niagara region and public transportation services. 7. Data Analysis, Design, and Implementation teams crafted design concepts, produced tools for implementing smart mobility solutions, and made recommendations for planners, transportation service providers, and the private sector 8. Final Review with the client (GBNRTC) at their office in Buffalo, NY

1.4 SMART MOBILITY STUDIO REPORT LIMITATIONS This reference report collects a variety of smart mobility solutions and considerations for implementing those solutions, our studio identified several limitations. The urban planning studio course is set over a 15 week period, so developing the scope of the report, gathering data, analyzing data, and producing the report took place in a very limited time frame. Further, students working on the studio project take a variety of other classes, have a number of other projects, and work outside of academics. Therefore, this report covers a wide breadth of smart mobility interventions and considerations, but does not touch upon every issue related to smart mobility interventions to solve transportation problems. Some issues that we do not fully describe are the costs of all smart mobility projects, community outreach concerning smart mobility, labor governance concerning smart mobility interventions (especially for ride-sharing applications), clear effect of smart mobility on public transit, among others.

Domestic and International Case Studies: Understanding Smart Cities

2.1 DOMESTIC SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY SELECTION METHODOLOGY

The domestic smart mobility plans vision statements selected were collected from submissions to the 2015 USDOT [US Department of Transportation] Smart City Challenge. Additional case studies included in this analysis were selected based on submission criteria provided by the 2015 Smart City Challenge. There were 78 total submissions for the 2015 Smart City Challenge. We gathered information from 20 Smart City Plans pertaining to specific geographic regions in the United States. The plans selected in this section had to follow specific criteria: (1) Implement a multipurpose mobility platform; (2) Expand and Prioritize Advanced Mobility Technologies; (3) Enhance Parking Experience; and (4) Enhance Transportation Corridors. The 2015 USDOT Smart City Challenge was the starting point for our examination of smart mobility programs throughout the U.S. because the challenge asked the same question to all participants: “asking... mid-sized cities across America to develop ideas for an integrated, first-ofits-kind smart transportation system that would use data, applications, and technology to help people and goods move more quickly, cheaply, and efficiently.” (2015 USDOT Smart City Challenge) The domestic case studies included in this report were selected because they represent the most comprehensive analysis of smart mobility programs from the 78 plans submitted for the Smart City Challenge. The plans were separated into U.S. regions (Northeast, West, South, and Midwest) because each region shares similar issues and characteristics (Figure 2). These similarities are most evident when reviewing how climate and culture impact each city’s implementation strategies for smart mobility programs.

2.1 DOMESTIC SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY SELECTION METHODOLOGY

2.2 INTERNATIONAL SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY SELECTION METHODOLOGY The international smart mobility plans selected were identified by performing a keyword search and literature review. This search was used as a starting point because the plans identified represent a wide range of smart mobility initiatives both in terms of scale and geographic distribution. One plan, policy, or project was selected for each continent, excluding Antarctica, to ensure that a global perspective on smart mobility was represented (Figure 3).

2.2 INTERNATIONAL SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY SELECTION METHODOLOGY These plans had to meet at least one of the following selection criteria: To ensure that the plans identified aligned with the domestic policy they should (1) implement a multipurpose mobility platform; (2) enhance smart mobility hubs or transportation corridors; or (3) enhance parking experience.Â To ensure that they would be applicable to the Buffalo-Niagara region they had to (4) address a challenge faced by the BuffaloNiagara region; or (5) have an analogous population or geographic area to the BuffaloNiagara region. Priority was given to plans that had been successfully funded and had begun implementation. The information pulled from each cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s plan include characteristics (population size, land area, and population density), and key smart city components. Additionally, there are implications for the Buffalo-Niagara region that detail how components from each plan can be applied to the region.

2.3 SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY REVIEW AND REPORT IMPLICATIONS The case study selection and review process helped inform this report’s next stage. The studio separated into teams that reviewed urban, suburban, and rural challenges and opportunities for implementing smart mobility strategies and technologies in the Buffalo-Niagara region. The studio’s review of many smart city case studies led the team to the conclusion that a comprehensive smart mobility menu composed for the Buffalo-Niagara region should include all sectors and environments - from villages to the urban core. In the following section, we selected three case studies that exemplify excellent smart city and smart mobility plans to contextualize the following sections of this report. We also have provided a review of Moving Forward 2050: A Regional Transportation Plan for Buffalo-Niagara, which we used as a guiding document throughout our studio’s research process. The remaining case studies and their summaries may be found in the appendix.

2.4 SELECTED DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY EXAMPLES

1. Pittsburgh, PA: Smart PGH City Characteristics: Population o 302,400 residents · Land area and Population Density: 58.35 sq. mi/ 5,182.51 people per sq. mile (Data sourced from United States Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013-2017 ACS via Quick Facts)

2.4 SELECTED DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY EXAMPLES

1.Â Pittsburgh, PA: Smart PGH

City Characteristics: Population 302,400 residents - Land area and Population Density: 58.35 sq. mi/ 5,182.51 people per sq. mile (Data sourced from United States Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013-2017 ACS via Quick Facts)

2.4 SELECTED DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY EXAMPLES Components SmartPGH is not about the deployment of new technology for technology’s sake. At the core of their approach is a people-first strategy. Smart PGH prioritizes technology interventions that will improve the lives of those most in need. Pittsburgh also has one of the highest air pollution levels in the country, and poor air quality is well known to cause serious health and social impacts. The Smart PGH project aims to improve connections between historically isolated neighborhoods and major centers of employment and educational and healthcare services (Figure 4). To reduce transportation emissions by 50% by 2030, Smart PGH will jump-start electric conversion in the city through demonstration projects in street lighting, electric vehicles, and power generation. Plans and Policies The economic, social, and environmental performance of these investments will be tracked through an iterative Sustainable Return on Investment model combining door-to-door sociological “Community Census” surveys with data analysis. Led by the SmartPGH Consortium, a governance body made up of leaders from all sectors who will be responsible for infrastructure planning and capital coordination. 1. Convert up to 40,000 streetlights to LEDs to reduce energy use 2. Establish smart street lights with sensors to monitor local air quality 3. Install electric vehicle charging stations 4. Convert the city’s public fleet to electric vehicles In order to fully capitalize on this momentum and ensure future success, the City is moving forward with a plan to create a new Department of Mobility and Infrastructure in budget year 2017 to strengthen relationships with partners, improve communication and coordination internally and externally, shorten project timelines, and streamline processes.

2.4 SELECTED DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY EXAMPLES Implications for Buffalo-Niagara Region The federated nature of the SmartPGH Consortium model allows for partners to select data storage options that best meet their needs. Rather than having a single repository of all data collected, datasets will be collected and stored in the manner that is most costeffective or efficient. The WPRDC will provide Consortium partners with training and assistance on extracting data from internal systems, data transformation, metadata transformation, and data licensing. It is important that the initiatives set out by SmartPGH do not become entangled with political turnover. The creation and protection of an independent department that is wellfunded and responsible for carrying out the goals of SmartPGH will be key to its success.

2. Richmond, Virginia City Characteristics Population o 227,032 Land area and Population Density o 59.81 sq. miles/ 3,414.7 people per sq. mile (Data sourced from United States Census Bureau, 2010 Census and 2013-2017 ACS via Quick Facts)

2.4 SELECTED DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY EXAMPLES

Components Richmond’s smart mobility project includes multi-modal transportation, affordable and reliable transportation, autonomous Vehicles; safety Plans and Policies Richmond’s plans are more modest than others, focusing on improving the existing transportation in the city rather than introducing concepts that may not be feasible short term (Figure 5). Like other cities, they hope to improve the connectivity and support different forms of transportation. They are also looking to improve city infrastructure so that sensors can be added, warning drivers of hazardous conditions and other safety concerns. To support disadvantaged groups, Richmond proposed pedal-electric assist bicycles, low-speed autonomous shuttles, and other advanced options to keep them safe while traveling as well as expanding their options.

2.4 SELECTED DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY EXAMPLES

Implications for Buffalo-Niagara Region Richmond has a similar size and faces similar transportation issues as Buffalo. The modest approach, focusing on more feasible concepts that will improve life in the short term is an approach that may be beneficial to Buffalo. Richmond is looking to improve current systems instead in the short-term, introducing smart concepts that are applicable to today’s problems. Those short-term solutions such as connectivity expansion and pedal-electric assist bicycles can be implemented within a 5-year span.

3. Nishikata, Japan City Characteristics Population o 6,975 Land area and Population Density o 19.9 sq. miles/ 350.5 sq. mi Plans and Policies In partnership with the private company DeNA Co, the Tochigi Prefecture ministry of transportation has begun testing of an autonomous bus initiative in the rural town of Nishikata. The majority of the population in the town is over 65, and many face challenges when trying to perform daily activities that require a car. Currently the bus transports residents within the tests service area to a municipal complex with healthcare services. If the initial tests yield positive results, Japan’s government has plans to expand the program and convert highway rest stops into hubs from which elderly residents can be picked up. The transportation ministry plans to conduct similar tests in 12 other municipalities across the country. By using autonomous vehicles to provide assistance to elderly people living in rural areas with dwindling populations, the prefecture hopes to increase their independence and ability to access healthcare.

2.4 SELECTED DOMESTIC AND INTERNATIONAL SMART MOBILITY CASE STUDY EXAMPLES

Implications for Buffalo-Niagara Region The testing of autonomous vehicles in hilly areas in road conditions ranging from puddles to fallen debris will be important in Western New York. Â There are often challenging road conditions across the region, particularly during the winter, and the tests in the Tochigi Prefecture provide a model for establishing a baseline for autonomous vehicles operational safety in less than ideal conditions. If autonomous vehicles are able to operate in rural areas safely, it could provide a valuable service, especially in rural areas of Western New York.

Rural Smart Mobility

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Erie and Niagara County’s rural towns and villages provide Western New Yorkers’ with an alternative to busy city life, whether for residence, work, or recreation. Their protection and strategic development are key to maintaining the character and livelihood of Western New York. One Region Forward’s “Region of Villages” concept offers five goals for rural communities: (1) “grow where we have already grown,” (2) “build and protect walkable communities,” (3) “connect region by expanding transportation options,” (4) “protect farmland and natural environments,” and (5) “maintain fiscally sound local governments” (Error! Reference source not found.) (One Region Forward, ND). Unfortunately, the lack of adequate and accessible public transportation, extended distances between destinations, and sense of isolation experienced in rural communities and small villages poses a number of mobility obstacles throughout the region that could hinder the pursuit of these goals. Specifically, rural communities are impacted by substandard driving safety and poor access to critical services. Through the implementation of innovative transportation technologies, there are a variety of opportunities to address these concerns specific to rural communities and drive further social and economic prosperity (Error! Reference source not found.). As emphasized throughout this document, smart mobility solutions to significant transportation problems in different geographies can be adopted and implemented by local municipalities and counties. Below, significant problems related to transportation limitations in villages and rural areas are described, followed solutions specific to those problems, and a description of smart mobility or innovation transportation technologies that can help remedy a variety of issues villages and their rural areas face. Specific case studies of smart mobility and innovative technology solutions are provided to offer examples of how solutions may be implemented in rural and village settings.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY

This section aims to provide innovative transportation examples that can help municipalities and county governments identify similar solutions to their own rural transportation obstacles. Later sections in this report provide strategies for implementing and funding innovative transportation solutions.

Figure 1. One Region Forward's Region of Villages scenario. Source: One Region Forward.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Road Safety One of the major obstacles to development and prosperity in rural communities is insufficient road safety. On a national scale, rural communities are more threatened by road-related accidents than urban communities. In fact, rural communities, despite accounting for only 19% of the nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s population and 30% of the total vehicle miles traveled, were responsible for 50% of traffic fatalities in 2016 (NCSA, 2018). Compared to urban highways, drivers on rural roads die at a rate 2.5 times greater per mile (Berkes, 2009). In 2014, in the Northeast US specifically, vehicle-related death rates were almost 3 times as high in rural areas versus urban areas - 10.8 deaths per 100,000 population in rural areas and 3.5 deaths per 100,000 population in urban areas (Beck et al, 2017). These statistics on road-related deaths are concerning, especially for places like Erie and Niagara County where a large portion of the region is considered rural. A number of issues contribute to road safety problem in rural areas, including driving under the influence, speeding, wildlife collisions, seatbelt ignorance, and poor rural road infrastructure and design (Berkes, 2009). Understanding the context and impact of these road safety concerns can inform planning in rural communities so that their transportation needs can be effectively addressed. Driving under the Influence Drunk driving and driving under the influence are a major source of roadway accidents in rural communities. Across all of the United States, death rates associated with alcohol-impaired driving were higher in nonmetropolitan counties (6.2 deaths per 100,000 population) than metropolitan counties (2.4 deaths per 100,000 counties) (Beck et al, 2017). This is not only an issue for adults in rural communities. Another study found that high school students in rural areas are more likely to be a passenger in a vehicle with a driver under the influence (Smalley et al, 2018).

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Seat Belt Refusal Insufficient seat belt use is another root cause of road-related deaths in rural communities. Drivers in rural areas of the United States are less likely to selfreport wearing seat belts; about 74.7% of rural residents report that they do wear a seat belt compared to 88.8% of urban residents. Without wearing a seat belt, individuals are more likely to experience serious physical harm or death as a result of vehicular accidents (Beck et al, 2014). Not only are rural residents less likely to wear seatbelts, but there is a lower rate of seat belt use associated with fatal vehicle crashes in rural areas. In 2016, 49% of fatal crashes in rural areas had unrestrained passengers, as opposed to 46% in urban areas (Figure 7) (NCSA, 2018). Furthermore, 62% of fatal pickup truck accidents in rural areas in 2016 included unrestrained passengers, which is the highest percentage of fatalities related to seat belt use in both urban and rural areas. (NCSA, 2018).

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Poor Road Infrastructure While driver and passenger behaviors, like driving under the influence and seat belt refusal, contribute to higher vehicular accident rates in rural communities, the design and state of rural road infrastructure also affects road safety. In a national survey, infrastructure problems in rural areas was cited as a significant barrier to transportation systems (Henning-Smith et al., 2017). Compared to urban roads, rural roads are narrower, trees are closer to the road, and the ditches are deeper, posing greater threats for vehicles that go off-road (Berkes, 2009). Driven by limited funding resources in villages and rural communities, rural roads are subject to poor construction quality, outdated infrastructure, lack of equipment, and understaffing. (HenningSmith et al., 2017). Limited Roadside Assistance Higher vehicular accident and death rates in rural communities is exacerbated by limited roadside assistance. Because of the spatial isolation of rural communities from city and suburban resources, critical services like roadside assistance are not readily available. In 2016, 67% of rural drivers involved in fatal vehicle crashes died at the scene, compared to 50% of urban drivers (NCSA, 2018). Longer response times for roadside assistance and medical care threatens the safety of rural drivers and passengers. Furthermore, rural roads have less traffic, so individuals who are in an automobile accident and are unable to call for emergency services may have to wait extended periods of time before another driver sees and reports the incident.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Access to Critical Services Introduction Access to critical services is challenging for many rural and village residents, resulting from large distances between destinations and the lack of sufficient public transit in rural areas and villages, as discussed in the introduction to this chapter. Although Western New York residents living in rural areas and villages are more likely to own a car than those living in more urban settings (Figure 8), distance between destinations remains an extreme barrier for those without the ability to drive or own a car (Erie County NY Community Health Assessment, 2017-19). Especially difficult for rural and village residents is inclement weather for much of the colder months that limits transportation as a result of unsafe driving conditions or poor road maintenance and snow clearance, which was also discussed in the safety section of this chapter. For the purposes of this chapter, access to critical services is defined as access to health services and food. Transportation issues in rural associated with critical services specifically impact residents’ access to health care and food.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY

Access to health care and emergency medical treatment is limited, given the distance between healthcare facilities in rural areas in Western New York are greater than in urban areas. Especially given the six months of the year that brings unpredictable and inclement weather, travelling across large geographic areas to reach critical health services can be extremely difficult and often dangerous (Erie County NY Community Health Assessment, 201719). 28

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY

A significant reason for the lack of health care services in villages is due to rural hospitals difficulty meeting occupancy and staffing levels to provide an adequate range of health care services. This staffing inadequacy is especially prevalent in mental and behavioral health (Western New York Community Needs Assessment Summary, 2014).

Further, many rural areas within Erie and Niagara County are classified as Health Professional Shortage Areas and many include high populations of Medicaid beneficiaries (Western New York Community Needs Assessment Summary, 2014).Often, medicaid benefits are only accepted by certain health care providers, referred to as “safety-net” providers. Unfortunately, the ratio of Medicaid population to safety net providers is over 2,250:1 in Erie County and 4,500:1 in Niagara County (Western New York Community Needs Assessment Summary, 2014). Therefore, throughout the whole of Niagara and Erie Counties, including rural areas, access for low-income residents to primary health care providers is very low and may include long wait times or added expenses of seeing a provider who does not take Medicaid (Figure 9; Figure 10).

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY

Even more difficult than accessing primary care providers in rural areas, is accessing emergency centers in hospital emergency rooms or urgent care centers. Urgent care and ambulatory surgery centers are concentrated in urban areas throughout Western New York, limiting access for rural residents in a medical emergency (Western New York Community Needs Assessment, 2017-19). As discussed in the safety section of this chapter, limited roadside assistance issues related to fatal vehicular crashes exemplifies the issue of transportation access for rural medical emergencies, as well as transportation safety for villages. In addition to the limited number of providers in rural communities, the concentration of elderly individuals is another challenge in health access for villages and rural communities. Elderly individuals require more frequent and intensive health care services than other populations and the elderly population is higher in rural areas than urban areas in Western New York (Western New York Community Needs Assessment Summary, 2014). The intersection and accumulation of health care access issues within villages creates especially dire circumstances for the elderly, low-income, or chronically ill residents in Western New York.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY

Although village and rural communities have a higher rate of vehicle ownership, lack of public transport creates problems for people in small communities who are not able to drive or are low-income. Without a vehicle, living even just one mile away from a full-service supermarket hinders access to quality food (Bell et. al, 2013; Western New York Health Needs Assessment, 2014). In many cases, it is common for the closest grocery store to be 10 miles away for village and rural residents (Bell et. al, 2013). In 2014, 23.6% of rural households with children were deemed food-insecure and in 2016, 15% of rural Americans were food insecure (Jensen et al., 2014; Corbett, 2018). As vertical integration and consolidation of small grocery stores increases throughout the nationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s food system, the trend of few large box grocery stores serving several communities becomes more prevalent. This trend increases the distance for village and rural residents despite their access to transportation, yet creates food security concerns for vulnerable rural and village populations (Figure 11) (Bell et. al, 2013).

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY

Solutions Using smart mobility to solve the above problems that people in rural areas and villages experience regarding access to critical services and increasing safety is possible for many municipalities. Many private companies that use smart mobility specifically focus on rural regions and offer potential opportunities for municipalities to solve the most pressing issues impacted by rural specific transportation problems. In some cases, counties and municipalities themselves spearheaded smart mobility solutions. As technology improves, it has great potential to solve problems associated with the lack of public transportation and distance transportation that limits the ability for many to access what they need or remain safe in order to live healthy, productive lives. Municipalities that begin to adopt smart mobility interventions can improve mobility for their residents by making life safer, healthier, and more connected to the larger Buffalo-Niagara region. With the help of funding strategies described in later sections, rural municipalities with restricted budgets can find opportunities to consider implementing smart mobility through innovative technologies with both private and public opportunities. The following case studies offer examples of smart mobility solutions that are villages and rural areas in Niagara and Erie County could adopt.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Case Studies Driving under the Influence As passenger vehicles become increasingly advanced technologically, new solutions to impaired driving have surfaced. Vehicles that can detect alcohol impairment are especially recognized as a promising method of minimizing driving under the influence. Qinetiqâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Driver Alcohol Detection System for Safety (DADSS) is an on-board system that tests a driverâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s blood alcohol content before turning on the car and makes it impossible to start the car when the alcohol level is too high. This emerging technology may be included in manually driven cars in the near future, either by law or insurance incentives, and could reduce incidents caused by intoxicated driving in rural areas (Atiyeh & Moskowitz, 2011). Seat Belt Refusal Since New York State already has primary seat belt enforcement laws, innovative automobile technologies can be implemented to further increase seat belt use. Two effective solutions are seat belt notification systems that sound an alarm when seat belts are not in use, even in the back seat, and transmission interlock systems, which prevent drivers from operating the vehicle without seat belt deployment. Alarm systems are better received by the public, but transmission interlock systems are more successful at increasing seat belt usage. For rural communities with high frequency of seat belt refusal, these emerging seat belt technologies offer an opportunity to reduce likelihood of injury in automobile accidents (Transportation Research Board, 2004). Upgraded and safer seat belt systems would require innovative implementation strategies in rural communities. They could be encouraged through an incentive system, like offering an award to drivers who purchase a car with an advanced seat belt system. A rural community could also use strategic funding structure, such as allocating money collected from seat belt refusal fines towards assisting residents in upgrading their vehiclesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; seat belt systems.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Case Studies Poor Road Infrastructure A number of road design strategies can make rural roads safer, such as rumble strips, shoulder widening, pavement markings, guardrails, and curve reduction. Unfortunately, funding for rural road improvements is limited and typically resourced at the state level and is not site-specific (TRIP, 2017). This makes improving driver assistance technologies especially attractive in rural communities. Automobiles that are able to detect and warn the driver of dangerous driving conditions or obstacles could prevent accidents on rural roads, especially those caused by wildlife collisions (NHTSA, ND). Limited Roadside Assistance Fortunately, the emergence of crash-reporting smartphone apps is opening up opportunities to reduce emergency roadside assistance wait times in rural communities. One particular app, called Noonlight uses algorithms to detect sudden changes in a userâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s location, motion, and force of movement that indicate the user has been in a crash. Then, the app automatically calls 911 to report the incident. If assistance is not needed, the user can enter a code and cancel the emergency assistance request. This app is effective for multiple modes of transportation, including driving, biking, and walking. Through automatic crashreporting apps like Noonlight, the threatening wait times for emergency roadside services associated with rural communities can be minimized (Holley, 2018). In order to encourage the use of crash reporting apps, rural municipalities would need to attract the adoption of these app services through outreach events and public announcements.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Case Studies Access to Health Care One innovative solution to limited access to health care services involves bringing medications and services from urban areas to rural facilities. Zipline, a company that currently is active in Rwanda and Ghana, delivers medical supplies, equipment, medicines, and lab samples via drone. Currently, the service is used for extremely isolated communities or for populations affected by natural disasters (Shankland, 2018). However, this company or this concept could have a number of applications for villages and urban areas. First, medical facilities in rural areas could use the service to inexpensively and quickly receive supplies from other medical facilities or manufacturers. For example, a rural hospital may not have the equipment for certain procedures because they are not very common, despite their ability to perform said procedure. Instead of sending a patient to an urban location or schedule the procedure far into the future, a medical facility could utilize Zipline to properly provide for all of their patientsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; needs. United States air rights laws currently would not permit this service from operation, yet testing of the product is currently taking place in the central valley of California. Therefore, it is important to consider Zipline or similar services as potential solutions to better connect resources from nearby urban areas to villages, increasing access to critical health.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Case Studies Access to Food A variety of innovative transportation solutions have been developed to address issues of food access caused by lack of transportation. First, some municipalities and regional governments are subsidizing transportation for their residents to farmers markets where residents can purchase fresh foods. Allegan County in Michigan offers free transportation to a partnering farmers market that specifically accept SNAP benefits, WIC benefits, and participate in other programs that offer benefits to low-income farmers market shoppers like Double Up Food Bucks that double the purchasing power of food stamp benefits (Mead, 2016). The Allegan County program includes seniors, as well with Senior Project Fresh that offers similar low-income benefits (Mead, 2016). In addition, the program allows any senior to send a proxy who needs transportation for those seniors that may struggle moving around a market (Mead, 2016). Another innovative solution does not bring consumers to fresh food, but fresh food to consumers. A company called My Hometown Delivery, operating in Montana, is a shopping delivery service prioritizing rural access. Community members register to become drivers, set their own rates, and connect with people in their community who need a delivery like groceries (My Hometown Delivery, 2019). Finally, mobile markets and â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;veggie vansâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; are becoming popular across the country, often targeting food insecurity in urban areas, but is a viable option for increasing access to healthy foods in villages, as well. Mobile markets are similar to farmers markets, except that a refrigerated truck travels from a farm or supermarket where food is picked up, to a food desert location (Hill, 2019). Mobile markets do have the capacity to bring a significant amount of fresh food to villages and rural locations, as long as an intermediary organization or a partnership between a municipality and a food producer or retailer is established (Hill, 2019).

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Case Studies Multi-Faceted Solutions A few smart mobility solutions apply to several problems facing transportation in villages and rural areas. Below multi-faceted solutions are described: Ride-Hailing Services Ride-hailing services, which offer demand-based transportation, can address a number of the concerns specific to rural regions. Because rural communities typically have scarce public transportation resources, ride-hailing provides a mobility service for people who are unable to drive or do not have access to a vehicle. This service could prevent intoxicated driving by providing an alternative to dependence on designated drivers. Furthermore, ride-hailing opens up more flexible and immediate opportunities for travel, which is especially critical for individuals seeking basic necessities and emergency health care services. In 2017, Lyft announced that it is extending its service range to all areas accessible by road within their 32-state jurisdiction - this means expansion into rural communities (Pierson, 2017). Ride-hailing services would establish better access to rural communities to health care and food services.

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Case Studies Bike-Share Services Bike-share services also address a number of transportation concerns facing villages and rural areas. For shorter distances, bike-share programs increase mobility for residents by expanding transportation options, with healthy, cost effective benefits. Members of a bike-share have the ability to ‘rent’ the bike for a period of time before returning it to a docking location (with or without docking infrastructure) near the person’s desired destination. Especially for communities that do have health and food service, but walking creates an accessibility problem, bike-shares may be a viable solution. Bike-share services are most popular in urban areas, however, one company - Zagster - has expanded to smaller cities like Carmel, Indiana and Westfield, Indiana (The successful community bike share, 2016). Allen County in Kansas, which has a population of just 13,000, has expanded mobility through a ‘bike library’ program where residents rent bikes at several locations throughout the county and bikes can be rented from hours to months at a time (King, 2017). MaaS to Connect a Variety of Smart Mobility Solutions Mobility as a service (MaaS) is the concept of transitioning away from privatelyowned transportation modes and towards transportation models that use mobility as a service consumed by users. MaaS achieves this goal by combining multiple innovative transportation technologies, including ride-hailing, ridesharing, bike-sharing, transportation apps, and others. If MaaS is implemented through stakeholder collaboration and communities are able to adopt and understand integrated technologies, MaaS could service the many of the challenges specific to rural communities by eliminating private vehicle dependence. It is critical, however, to recognize that immense changes to operational and regulatory models would be required to implement MaaS in rural areas, where there is very little existing physical and governance infrastructure from which to build MaaS. (Eckhardt, 2018). 39

3. RURAL SMART MOBILITY Concerns Related to Smart Mobility in Villages and Rural Areas A variety of concerns about innovative technologies or smart mobilities are necessary to discuss so that municipalities considering smart mobility interventions consider the situation in entirety. First, increased isolation as a result of technology use could pose as a potential problem to the social vitality of rural and village communities. For example, smart mobility interventions that prioritize bringing critical services to residents raises potential concerns of increased isolation, particularly for vulnerable groups like children and seniors. Attracting private companies like Zipline, Zagster or My Hometown Delivery may be difficult for village municipalities with limited resources. Further, financial constraints make improving road infrastructure and implementing new road infrastructure designs, as in the above section. Smart mobility and innovative technologies are investments that typically require a significant amount of capital upfront. However, in the following chapter outlining implementation through planning, policy, and design, solutions to financial constraints are discussed in full. Finally, consumption of agricultural land is a problem for villages and rural areas across the nation and implementing some smart mobility interventions may increase the possibility of encroaching upon agricultural land, specifically with infrastructure improvements, construction, and possible new companies entering the community. With concerns of preserving open and agricultural lands, understanding village resident perceptions of smart mobility and innovative transportation through technology, which can then help to guide municipalitiesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; implementation of those interventions while keeping the publicâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s interests in mind.

Suburban Smart Mobility

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Introduction Western New York historically has seen fragmented development of villages and small cities since its first settlements emerged, and suburbanization in the region has only served to further fragment the region and strain transportation systems. The exponential growth of suburban development left many municipalities with no other choice than to enable â&#x20AC;&#x153;developers [to] make network layout and connectivity decisions for streets built as part of their subdivisions and commercial sites . . . [resulting in] poor connectivity, inconvenient circulation, and over- crowded arterialsâ&#x20AC;? (Nelson, 2009). Today, many suburbs of Western New York are challenged by the externalities of rapid growth that have reduced effective transportation mobility, including isolation from urban centers, poor connectivity within suburbs, auto-centric streetscapes, limited transportation options, and unsafe road conditions for pedestrians and cyclists.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY The fragmented and sprawling development of suburbs contributed to the overwhelming reliance of suburban communities on personal vehicles to access commercial hubs, office parks, schools, and critical medical services. Oversized road infrastructure combined with the assumptions that suburban households own a personal vehicle, has created suburban “ . . . transit deserts, or areas where people don't own or can't afford cars and lack convenient access to other major forms of transportation” (Williams, n.d.). This holds true in Western New York where Erie County has the highest percentage of households without a vehicle in the region at fourteen percent; the largest share of those households being in Buffalo and Lackawanna (New York State Department of Health, 2014). In Niagara County eleven percent of households do not own a personal vehicle, the majority of which is concentrated in Lockport (New York State Department of Health, 2014).As a result of personal vehicle reliance, suburban street designs favor wide arterial corridors, winding residential roads, and cul-de-sac layouts, all of which “. . . are car-oriented and pedestrian-hostile, compared to grid layouts, which enhance walkability by virtue of their permeable configuration” (Cozens, 2008.). The design off suburban streets in Erie and Niagara County has contributed to higher rates of severe injury and traumatic brain injuries in pedestrians and bicyclists (Figure 12), despite these groups comprising a smaller share of total traffic accidents in the region (Cozens, 2008; (New York State Department of Health, 2016b, 2016a).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Problem 1: Limited Mobility in Isolated Suburbs Introduction to Challenges Challenges Public transportation connections to suburbs in Erie and Niagara Counties are weak. Buffalo’s inner-ring suburbs have some access to transportation, while the majority of suburban cities and towns in the county have no access to public transportation. Suburbs of Niagara Falls have even less access to transportation, as seen in Figure 13. Reliance on personal vehicles in suburbs has made it extremely difficult for municipalities to fund public transportation investments, despite the need for transit options in these areas. Even in suburbs where there is some access to public transportation first- and last-mile transit options are virtually nonexistent and much of these areas are have limited or no walkability. This means that even those who are able to access public transportation in suburbs have difficulty reaching designated pick-up points without access to a vehicle. In addition to the lack of connection to urban centers, the popular trend of business districts in suburban communities is creating challenges for the employees working in those districts. Contrary to someone who works in the heart of a city’s downtown, “those who work in many campus style office parks are virtually stranded in the midday if they do not drive their own car to work” and have limited chances to leave their place of work (Cervero, 1989). This trend is seen in Western New York as well where suburban office parks are common

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Potential Solutions As previously mentioned, suburban municipalities struggle to fund public transportation options largely as a result of personal vehicle reliance. However, smart mobility can present an opportunity to resolve many challenges associated with lack of transportation options in suburban communities and, potentially, reduce the cost burden of these interventions as well. For instance, public-private partnerships between suburban municipalities and ride- hailing services can alleviate first- and last-mile transit options for residents in suburban communities. Riders can request ride-hailing services on demand to reach critical mobility hubs to connect to suburban and urban public transportation networks. A case study of San Joaquin County, California is examined in the following case studies as an example of public-private partnerships to connect suburban users to public transit. Another potential smart mobility solution to suburban transportation deserts is the increased development of mobility hubs. The case below from Houston Texas provides an example of focusing development around mobility hubs. In the case of Houston, planners see the mobility hubs and the corridors connecting them as an opportunity to ease peopleâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s commutes and enhance mobility between suburban developments and economic centers. Planners also see these transportation nodes as an opportunity to implement new mobility technologies since the infrastructure is continuously going through improvements. Another mobility challenge in suburban communities is the isolation of employees of office parks. A potential solution to this challenge is the use of bike shares, escooters, or other smart mobilities to connect employees of suburban office parks to local amenities. These connections will enable suburban employees to support local businesses on their breaks. An example of this intervention can be found locally at BlueCross BlueShield here in Buffalo where the company hosts an employee bike-share program. A case study of this example follows.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY The case studies provided in the next section are examples of how other municipalities are solving the same mobility issues seen in isolated suburbs. While not all of these case studies are located in suburban communities, these solutions can be adapted to suit the needs of suburban communities in Western New York. It is important to note that some of these examples are in places that have their own unique regional challenges and any implementation of similar strategies in Western New York will need to bear this in mind and adapt the technologies accordingly. Case Studies 1. Multimodal Connections to Economic Activity Centers 2. Ride Hailing as First and Last Mile Transit Service: San Joaquin RTD Go! Multimodal Connections to Economic Activity Centers Ride Hailing as First & Last Mile Transit Service: San Joaquin RTD Go! San Joaquin County, California Lead Agency: San Joaquin Regional Transit District Partners: Uber The San Joaquin Regional Transit District has entered a partnership with Uber in 2017 to provided first and last mile connections for public transit riders living in suburban towns of the county (Kreutz, 2017). Commuters in areas not serviced by traditional bus lines, including the suburban towns of Escalon, Linden, and Lockeford, can utilize Uber ride hailing services to access existing public transportation (San Joaquin RTD, 2017). Riders receive a 50% discount of up to five dollars per ride when using the service to access eleven eligible transit stations in the county (Figure 14) (San Joaquin RTD, 2017). Riders can enter the discount code “SJRTD18” to receive their eligible subsidy on the Uber application. Additionally, riders can call RTD Go! and a dispatcher will set up the service for them (Kreutz, 2017). Trips using this service are limited to peak commuting hours between 4:00am and 10:00am in the morning and between 4:00pm to 10:00pm in the evening (San Joaquin RTD, 2017). Riders with limited mobility of who require wheelchair accessible transportation can call RTD Go! to set up a ride in these eligible areas provided by JVG Transportation, a paratransit contractor with the county (Caravan News, 2018).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY According to RTDâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s marketing manager, Terry Williams, RTD set aside $50,000 for the initial launch of the program (Kreutz, 2017). The funding came from the RTDâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s general budget with additional funding coming from grants. The exact grants that RTD applied for are not released, but RTD did work with representatives from Uber to negotiate pricing options. According to RTD CEO Donna DeMartino, since the programs initial launch in the spring of 2017, the program has been a success and RTD is extending the services for this program (Caravan News, 2018).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Takeaways Through a public-private partnership, the San Joaquin Transportation Authority is able to expand the service are of their public transit to outlying suburbs and towns without the added cost of increasing bus line or extending bus routes. The discount code makes the subsidy easy for riders to use and improves efficiency in determining eligibility for the discount.

· Through a public-private partnership, the San Joaquin Transportation Authority is able to expand the service are of their public transit to outlying suburbs and towns without the added cost of increasing bus line or extending bus routes. · The discount code makes the subsidy easy for riders to use and improves efficiency in determining eligibility for the discount. · This service is likely to discourage personal vehicle use for some commuters and increase ridership of the San Joaquin Transportation Authority traditional public transit. · The ability of riders to also call RTD Go! to setup a ride enables individuals without access to a smartphone or who might be visually impaired to also utilize the service. Considerations · The availability of Uber vehicles may vary in outlying towns, which could increase wait times for program users or leave them stranded for extended periods of time. There is no indication that the San Joaquin Transportation Authority has negotiated with Uber to increase the availability of vehicles in these areas. · The inability of Uber to serve ride with mobility issues or wheelchair accessibility needs requires the municipality to work with other subcontractors. There is opportunity for municipalities partnering with rideshare companies, such as Uber, to mandate that they have a certain number of wheelchair accessible vehicle to better serve this population.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Texas Medical Center Mobility Hub Harris County, Texas Lead Agency: Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority Partners: Texas Medical Center of Houston Houston METRO is connecting surrounding suburban communities to the Texas Medical Center in Houston. The Houston METRO routes busses that enter suburban communities to a central location in the suburban communities. At this central location, one bus runs directly from that location to the Texas Medical Campus. For employees who do not work in the medical complex, Houston METRO along with the privately owned businesses developed a system where a shuttle would pick up and drop off employees from this central transit hub to their place of employment (Houston METRO, 2018). This concept of mobility hubs and â&#x20AC;&#x2DC;park and rideâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; is not a new idea. However, the Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority sees the mobility hubs as an opportunity to implement new technological advancements. The Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority recognizes that the mobility hubs, and the corridors that connect them, is a promising testing ground for new innovative technologies. Since the bus route running from the suburban mobility hub to the medical center mobility hub is an express route, the Transit Authority is considering future infrastructure improvements that will give priority to the express bus along the route. The Transit Authority gives the example of smart traffic light sensors that sense when the bus is approaching an intersection to give priority to the express bus (Begley, 2019). The Transit Authority is also thinking of ways to implement new technology into the mobility hub itself. The example provided by the Transit Authority is installing charging stations for electric vehicles, and interactive maps that allow commuters to plan their commutes using real time information (Houston METRO, 2018).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY

Takeaways · The Houston Metropolitan Transit Authority is prioritizing busses that begin at suburban mobility hubs and end at urban mobility hubs. They hope that is can potentially encourage the use of public transportation and lessen the dependence on personal automobiles. · Mobility hubs serve as a central location for commuters to travel to and from their jobs. These mobility hubs can serve as the testing ground for these new transportation technologies. Considerations · The busses that offer the express trips to the hubs only offer trips from hub to hub. There are currently limited options to get to the hub from the commuter’s home. Due to Houston’s sprawled development, commuters often take their cars to this mobility hub. From there, then the commuter takes the express bus, but the “first mile” of the trip is still a challenge. · There are also concerns on if this type of system continuing sprawled development patterns. The mindset behind this is concern is people will feel more comfortable living further from economic centers since their commute time is either shorter or unaffected using these express services.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Employee Bike Share Program: BlueCross BlueShield Blue Bike Buffalo, New York Lead Agency: BlueCross BlueShield of Western New York Partners: BlueCross BlueShield, GoBike Buffalo Employees who work in suburban business districts are often isolation from the surrounding community and cannot access local businesses and restaurants during their breaks without use of a personal vehicle. A local example of employers trying to alleviate some of the concerns of isolated employees takes place in Downtown Buffalo. Starting in 2014, BlueCross BlueShield of Western New York provides its employees with a bike share program so that employees can travel around the City of Buffalo during their breaks (BlueCross BlueShield, 2015). The initial pilot of the program included 20 bikes that employees can check out for free to travel around downtown during their breaks (Drury, 2015). In the initial launch the bikes were checked out 600 times between May and September of 2014 (Drury, 2015). Since the success of the trial launch, BlueCross BlueShield has provided the Blue Bike program for employees for six seasons. The company’s 1500 employees use their employee ID badges to obtain bikes from building security and “are given a helmet, bike lock, a map of the surrounding downtown area and basic safety tips [including] . . . wearing a helmet, using hand signals when turning and ensuring visibility at all times” (BlueCross BlueShield of Western New York, 2017). As new mobility trends begin to emerge, these types of employee mobility programs can shift from bikes to electric scooters or electric bikes. These new technologies could allow the employee to travel greater distances during their breaks. Takeaways · There is an opportunity for private companies in suburban office parks to leverage smart mobility technology to improve multimodal transportation and connectivity for their own employees. Suburban municipalities can present this case study as a successful example of a company improving mobility as well as the health of its employees by introducing a private bike-share program. · Private employee bike share programs also shift the cost of these services from municipalities to employers. · Encouraging private shared mobility in suburbs enables employees to access the surrounding neighborhood and support local businesses on their breaks while reducing traffic on the road. · Continued innovation in smart mobility by electronic bikes and scooters can increase opportunities for employees with differing athletic abilities to partake in active transportation in suburbs.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Considerations · Many suburban communities lack adequate bike and pedestrian infrastructure that is essential for bike-share programs such as this to reach their full potential. Municipalities will need to consider complete street models going forward to support cyclists and pedestrians. · Another concern is that bike share programs in Western New York are seasonal as a result of limited all-weather bicycle infrastructure. Programs such as this will only improve office park mobility during spring and summer without additional considerations. Problem 2: Lack of Pedestrian and Cyclist Safety Introduction to Challenges Challenges As mentioned previously, the auto-centric design of streetscapes in Western New York suburbs lends itself to Erie and Niagara Counties see higher rates of severe injuries to pedestrians and cyclists Lacking pedestrian infrastructure and dangerous road conditions pose a particular threat to those in suburban school zones. In Western New York many suburban schools are located along wide arterial corridors that are unsafe for students to cross. The design of these roads not only makes it difficult to cross, but it also lends itself to high vehicular speeds within these areas as well. The design of these roads not only makes it difficult to cross, but it also lends itself to high vehicular speeds within these areas as well. Within the Buffalo and Niagara Region, schools are finding it difficult to enforce school zone speed limits since the signage is not in compliance with the New York State DOT (Baggerman, 2019). Schools like Kenmore East High School and Sweet Home Middle School are examples of these hazardous conditions. Kenmore East High School is located primarily in a residential area, but the roads surrounding the school are connected at confusing and dangerous intersections. Sweet Home Middle School is located on Maple Road, which is a four lane roadway with a 45 mph speed limit reducing to a 35 mph speed limit in front of the school. The New York State DOT requirements give specific guidelines for school zones, but these specifications are primarily “one size fits all” solutions that disregard unique the streetscape challenges of suburbs (NUTCD, 2009).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Potential Solutions Improving the overall safety and walkability of suburban roadways also involves general infrastructure improvements that create “complete streets,” or include considerations for multi modes of transportation including pedestrians and cyclists. Both Erie and Niagara Counties have passed complete streets policies (M. Roundtree, Phone Interview, March 22, 2019). Going forward, municipalities should consider including smart mobility technologies into their complete streets’ infrastructure improvements. These technologies could include pedestrian warning systems as well as camera enforcement of speed limits. The New York City Department of Transportation reports that “a systematic analysis and review of studies of speed camera effectiveness reported 14 to 65 percent reductions in the percentage of vehicles traveling above the speed limits” (New York City DOT, 2018). The same analysis revealed that anywhere between a 11 to 44 percent reduction in crash-related fatalities as well as serious injuries in areas where speed cameras are located (New York City DOT, 2018). This is a key finding because speed, and subsequent driver reaction time, has been found to be a critical contributor to serious injury in crashes. For instance, “[a] pedestrian who is struck by a vehicle traveling at 30 MPH is twice as likely to be killed as a pedestrian struck by a vehicle travelling at 25 MPH” (New York City DOT, 2018). In April of 2018, about $4.8 million from The New York State Pedestrian Safety Action Plan was awarded to several first ring suburbs around the City of Buffalo, including Cheektowaga, Amherst, and Tonawanda, received funding for pedestrian safety from The New York State Pedestrian Safety Action Plan (Radlich, 2018). The funding was allocated with the intention it be used to increase pedestrian safety at particular intersections, some of which are in school zones (Radlich, 2018). However, if the municipality develops a comprehensive plan to develop and encourage new smart mobility technologies, future funding sources could contribute to that overall goal. As mentioned previously, there is an opportunity for municipalities to include smart mobility technologies in their streetscape improvements to help prevent more pedestrian fatalities and injuries in these suburban neighborhoods.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY The following case studies explore pedestrian warning system technologies implemented in suburban and rural Ohio communities as well as speed camera enforcement in New York City. Both of these smart mobility interventions can be adapted to solve the challenges of pedestrian cyclist safety in suburban streets and school zones. While the New York City case is in a large metro area, the reasoning and methodologies beyond the strategy can be applied to safety in suburban school zones as well. Case Studies 1. Public-Private Testing of Smart Technology on Ohio Route 33 & in the City of Marysville 2. New York City Smart Enforcement in School Zone Smart Pedestrian Infrastructure in Suburban Communities Public-Private Testing of Smart Technology on Ohio Route 33 & in the City of Marysville Union County and Franklin County, Ohio Lead Agency: Drive Ohio, NW 33 Innovation Corridor Council of Governments Partners: Union County, City of Marysville, City of Dublin, and Smart Columbus, the Ohio Department of Public Safety, Wright-Patterson Air Force Base, The Ohio State University, Case Western Reserve University, University of Cincinnati, University of Dayton, Wright State University, the Transportation Research Center, and the Ohio Turnpike and Infrastructure Commission. Union County, the City of Marysville, and the City of Dublin, are collaborating with other local organizations and business to solve the issue of pedestrian infrastructure in rural, exurban, and suburban communities, respectively, through the use of smart technologies (Soller, Gibson, Caracciolo, 2017). The project vision is stated as follows: “‘to demonstrate how smaller cities can leverage intelligent transportation technology to improve congestion, safety, and employment access’” (Soller, Gibson, Caracciolo, 2017). The NW 33 Smart Mobility Corridor project, spanning a 35-mile portion of highway along U.S. Route 33 north of Columbus, Ohio, will provide a testing bed for smart infrastructure and autonomous vehicles in a non-urban setting (Union County CIC, 2019c). The corridor is geographically strategic for smart technology testing because it “is home to one of the largest concentration[s] of manufacturers, R&D firms, and logistics companies” in the state of Ohio, boosting over 250 corridor companies and 66 automotive companies (Union County CIC, 2019c). The increased investment in smart mobility technology is a draw for a variety of businesses to the region.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY The project includes testing of dedicated short range communication devices, connected and autonomous vehicles, connected traffic management and safety systems--pedestrian warning system, smart traffic signaling, and other warning systems--as well as data communication and management systems (Soller, Gibson, Caracciolo, 2017). A major component of this project is the installation of 432 strands of redundant fiber optic cables that will enable high speed communication between smart devices (Union County CIC, 2019a). These cables will be installed along 39 miles of the US 33 corridor as well as 42 miles â&#x20AC;&#x153;along [the] Industrial Parkway from Dublin to East Liberty and throughout the City of Marysvilleâ&#x20AC;? (Union County CIC, 2019a). Connected Marysville is an initiative within the NW 33 Smart Mobility Corridor project that includes the installation of 27 traffic signals and 67 dedicated short range communication roadside units throughout the city as well as 1,200 on board units for the delivery of safety messaging to vehicles (Union County CIC, 2019b). Connected Marysville will enable the testing of autonomous vehicle platooning, where a group of vehicles travel safely while close together and at high speeds, as well as the testing of connected traffic signals that offer real time signal timing to smart phone application or in-car delivery systems (Union County CIC, 2019b). Connect traffic signals include a Pedestrian Warning System designed to improve the safety of pedestrians by using real time signaling to warn both pedestrians and vehicles of potential crossing hazards (Soller, Gibson, Caracciolo, 2017). The crossing signals offer real time updates to changing traffic conditions and adjust the crossing signs accordingly. For example, sensors pointed at crosswalks are able to sense how long it is taking for someone to cross the road and adjust the light timing accordingly. The technology is implemented over a long period of time and lays the foundation for new emerging technologies. Research for the NW 33 Smart Mobility Corridor project began in 2014 and continues to phase in the implementation of new technologies (Soller, Gibson, Caracciolo, 2017). In 2016 Union County, the City of Marysville, and the City of Dublin formed the NW 33 Innovation Corridor Council of Governments to collectively seek additional funding and provide oversight for the project (Soller, Gibson, Caracciolo, 2017). In total the NW 33 Smart Mobility Corridor project has received $217 million in funding for smart mobility research and development from a variety sources (Figure 13), including public grants, public-private matching funds, and private investment, and expects 224 million to be invested in the corridor by the beginning of 2019 (Soller, Gibson, Caracciolo, 2017).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY

Takeaways · Increased investment in smart mobility infrastructure by suburban and rural municipalities can incentivize the location of innovative companies to those areas. · There is opportunity for suburban and rural municipalities to partner for the pursuit of funding to invest in fiber optic and other connected infrastructure that will enable the use of smart mobility technology. · There is also opportunity for suburban and rural municipalities to partner with private sector companies to fund the investment in smart mobility infrastructure. · Small suburban communities have a competitive advantage over large urban areas in the testing innovative smart mobility technology. Low to moderate traffic flow and other streetscape factors present the ideal conditions for smart mobility testing. · Smart and connected mobility technology will increase vehicular and pedestrian safety as well as improve traffic efficiency. The Pedestrian Warning System piloted in the NW 33 Smart Mobility Corridor and Connected Marysville projects can be utilized by suburban communities across the country to reduce traffic-related injuries and death of pedestrians and, potentially, cyclists. These technologies could be especially productive in suburban school zones. · The sensor informed real-time adjustment of traffic signals will make streetscapes more accessible to elderly and disabled individuals. These real-time signals will allow for the additional time it will take someone who is elderly or disabled to safely cross the street. 56

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Considerations · The large startup costs required for the installation of smart mobility infrastructure can present a barrier to suburban communities. Innovative funding approaches will need to be considered to make projects such as this a reality. · Maintenance of new smart mobility infrastructure will come at a financial cost and will also require an especially skilled labor force that suburban communities might not have access to--particularly because these technologies are emerging. · The two country region identified in this case study was a strategic geography to implement many of these technologies because of an existing innovative technology industry. Similar concepts in suburban communities will need to assess their existing industry assets to adapt a similar connected corridor and community project. New York City Smart Enforcement in School Zones New York, New York Lead Agency: New York City Partners: New York City Schools Section 1180-b of the New York State Vehicle and Traffic law, enacted in 2013, “granted New York City the authority to pilot an automated speed enforcement program to deter speeding in 20 school speed zones” (New York City DOT, 2018). The pilot officially launched in January of 2014 and in June of that year the pilot was expanded to 140 additional school zones (New York City DOT, 2018). The New York City speed camera program uses radar and laser technology to determine a vehicle's speed and captures (New York City DOT, 2018). The camera records images of the rear of the vehicle and license plate if it is found to be traveling 10 or more miles above the posted speed limit (New York City DOT, 2018). In school zones, speed cameras are only enforced during posted school hours (New York City DOT, 2018). Every recorded violation is then reviewed by a DOT staff member to ensure accuracy (New York City DOT, 2018). Drivers found to be in violation of posted speeds during school hours are fined a flat rate of fifty dollars—as limited by the State of New York—regardless of the speed the individual was traveling, previous driving record, or any other factor (New York City DOT, 2018).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY

New York City has reported that speeding at fixed speed enforcement camera locations within school zones reduced the number of speeding violations by an average of 63 percent and that injuries at these locations have dropped by 17 percent (New York City DOT, 2018) Figure 18 shows decreases in total crashes, injuries, and severe injuries (New York City DOT, 2018). Additionally, the New York City Automated Speed Enforcement Program Report found that â&#x20AC;&#x153;vehicle owners who receive a speed camera violation are far less likely to receive a second violationâ&#x20AC;? (New York City DOT, 2018).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY From 2015 to 2017 the New York Speed Camera Program cost a just under $100 million between operating and capital costs (New York City DOT, 2018). However, the program brought in over $180 million dollars, netting over $80 million dollars (New York City DOT, 2018). Takeaways · Despite only being operated during the school season and only during certain hours and speed camera enforcement programs reduced pedestrian and cyclist injuries, severe and fatal traffic related injuries, and total vehicle crashes. · Speed camera enforcement camera operating at all hours and cameras located at high crash intersections could significantly improve pedestrian safety in suburban communities. · Suburban schools in Western New York, as previously mentioned, are often located on large arterial corridors. Speed enforcement cameras in school zones along these large roads could significantly improve pedestrian and cyclist safety. · Although fines issued by speed cameras in the State of New York are a flat $50 total, speed enforcement programs present an opportunity for suburban communities to generate increased revenue. · Although it is based in an urban setting, suburban communities in the Buffalo Niagara Region can learn from New York City’s example of implementing smart technologies in school zones. · Although speeding cameras are not a new smart technology, infrastructure improvements like speeding cameras could establish school zones as a prime example of how smart technologies can improve the health and safety of residents. The radar systems create a profit for suburban municipalities, but funding from Federal or State level grants could cover the initial cost of this technology. The opportunity for a private or nonprofit entity to cover the initial cost for the smart systems is also a possibility for these municipalities.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Considerations · There is a history of opposition from residents to traffic camera enforcement systems, however the limited $50 fine for camera issued speeding violations will actually reduce the cost to the driver compared to the fines and penalties associated with an officer-issued fine. · Additionally, the overall operating cost of each individual camera will be less than the cost of posting an enforcement officer within a school zone, thus reducing the cost of enforcement on the taxpayer. · There are significant startup costs associated with beginning a speed camera enforcement program, which might prevent suburban communities from using this technology. However, the increased revenue from violations has the potential to not only pay for the program itself, but also generate a surplus revenue for the municipality. Problem 3: Aging & Limited Mobility in Suburbs Challenges Western New York has seen consistent demographic shifts toward high percentages of individuals over 65 years old living in suburbs (Figure 19), particularly in Amherst, Cheektowaga, West Seneca, Clarence, and Elma outside of Buffalo as well as Lewiston outside of Niagara Falls (New York State Department of Health, 2014). The Town of Amherst is even currently seeking an “age-friendly” designation from New York State as a result of these demographic shifts and their continued focus on becoming more accessible for older and/or disabled adults. As individuals age they are more likely to be affected by disease or disability that can impact their ability to operate a personal vehicle, therefore limiting “their access to doctor appointments, food shopping, and other basic needs” (Choi et al, 2017). Without a personal vehicle, many older individual must “depend on friends or family, inadequate public transit or specialty van services” to access basic necessities (New York State Department of Health, 2014).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Existing paratransit systems are typically underfunded, inefficient, and fail to deliver a good customer experience. It is also apparent that the cost of paratransit implementation is rising with the increase in demand by riders, “high vehicle costs, urban congestion and long trip lengths” (Kaufman, Smith, Connell, & Marulli, 2016). A report from the US Government Accountability Office “found that the average cost of providing an ADA paratransit trip increased an alarming 10 percent from 2007 to 2010” (Kaufman et al., 2016). While there are a variety of paratransit services throughout Erie and Niagara County, the cost can be very high, particularly for those with a disability, the registration and reservation processes are inefficient, and the service areas of these providers is limited. In Erie and Niagara County a one-way trip using paratransit can cost users anywhere from $1 to $35, depending on a variety of factors (Erie County Department of Senior Services, n.d.).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Potential Solutions The majority of current paratransit services still utilize phone-based dispatch centers that rely on paper-based systems for membership registration and ride reservations. Ride matching and route determinations are typically done manually by dispatchers. The New York University Wager Rudin Center for Transportation Policy and Management have developed a framework (Figure 20) for paratransit services to leverage technology upgrades to automate and optimize “onboarding, reservations, dispatch and routing and user experience” (Kaufman et al., 2016). An industry shift toward digital registration and member databases will streamline the process and create data points that can be used to improve efficiency in other areas. Multi- channel reservation systems, including phone, website, SMS messaging, and mobile apps, will improve the customer experience, automate ride matching, and increase efficiency in optimizing vehicle routes. The use of Application Programming Interfaces (APIs), as used by Uber, Lyft, and Google, can improve customer experience by showing “a real-time, comprehensive list of services, including taxi and for-hire vehicle dispatches, social service agencies and community transport” (Kaufman et al., 2016). Connecting paratransit services to existing public transportation options, even those in urban centers like Buffalo, can allow paratransit to “serve as first- or last-mile solutions, rather than door-to-door services” and eliminate cost for both customers and paratransit administrators (Kaufman et al., 2016).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY The following case studies were examined because they can provide insight for Western New York in implementing smart mobility technologies to resolve mobility challenges related to aging and disabled populations. Case studies in Boston, Massachusetts; Southeast Michigan; Los Angeles, California; and Arlington, Texas provide examples of how other municipalities have leveraged innovative paratransit technologies, including subsidized ridesharing, integrated web based systems, and autonomous vehicles. While several of the following case studies do not take place in suburban communities, the specific transportation technology utilized in the case could be a viable option for suburban communities in Erie and Niagara County. It is important to note that each case study is embedded in its own regional context. However, the smart motilities outlined below present compelling solutions that could be adapted to suit the unique challenges facing Western New York. Subsidized Ridesharing Case Studies On-Demand Paratransit Pilot Program: The RIDE Boston, Massachusetts Lead Agency: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Partners: Uber, Lyft, and Curb The Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) paratransit service, The RIDE, was the first city to implement (through July 1, 2019) an On-Demand Paratransit Pilot Program in partnership with private ridesharing and taxi companies Uber, Lyft, and Curb (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, 2019). The pilot program was designed to improve response times, â&#x20AC;&#x153;. . . provide a less expensive service option for customers, improve mobility management, create an on-demand individualized service using nondedicated vehicles and reduce strain on the existing ADA programâ&#x20AC;? (Kaufman et al., 2016).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Taxi Services In this model, introduced in fall 2015, eligible users could use accessible taxis at a subsidized rate. At the outset of this pilot, riders were issued a prepaid debit card that could only be used with eligible taxi services and every $2 loaded onto the card by the rider was matched by $13 from the MBTA (Kaufman et al., 2016). Additionally, the MBTA required all taxis trips to be capped at $13, representing an $18 cost reduction to users compares to the $31 average cost of a trip using The RIDE (Kaufman et al., 2016). CURB was added to the pilot program recently with a subsidy of up to $40 per trip. Users create an account with CURB to manage trips and payment (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, 2019). However, CURB service areas are limited to Boston, Brookline, Cambridge, and Somerville (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, 2019). Ride Sharing In this model, introduced in fall 2016, passengers pay $2 per trip to Uber and Lyft and the MBTA subsidizes the cost of the trip up to $40 (Figure 21) (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. 2019). Each user has a limited number of subsidized trips each month (Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority, 2019). Additionally, to bridge the technology divide with paratransit user, has started offering phone-based reservations. The MBTA has required companies, â&#x20AC;&#x153;to spread vehicles across the service area to ensure rapid response times,â&#x20AC;? manage data collection, serve as the primary user contact and service provider (Kaufman et al., 2016).

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Takeaways: · Public-private partnerships with ridesharing companies transfer logistics, technological support needs, data collection, and payment management of paratransit to private companies. This reduces the associated costs for municipalities. There is opportunity for municipalities in Western New York to shift paratransit coordination costs to private companies to not only reduce strain on their existing services, but to also reduce overhead costs. · Additionally, the subsidies provided to riders reduce the cost to user by up $40 per ride, incentivizing individual to utilize ridesharing over traditional paratransit. · The integrated API used by the Lyft, Uber, and CURB apps improve the user experience, allows for instant trip booking, and enables real-time trip management. Traditional paratransit, as mentioned, involves lengthy reservation requirements and wait times for drivers. · The integrated GPS route optimization of these services increases route efficiency and shortens the length of trips, especially compared to traditional manually selected routes and ride-matching of traditional paratransit. · The multichannel booking capabilities of Lyft and Uber enable individuals with difficulties using technology or visual impairments to also utilize the service as well. · The integration of ride hailing services with paratransit expands the service area immensely. In a region like Western New York, that is characterized by sprawled development, the integration of public-private partnerships with ride hailing services will enable paratransit to reach residents, particularly seniors, in outlying suburbs that do not have access to paratransit.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Subsidized Ride Sharing Concerns · The RIDE program does include wheelchair-accessible vehicles, however the pilot program is not substitute ADA compliant paratransit. Therefore, inefficiencies in ADA compliant paratransit will need to be addressed through other smart mobility technologies. · Paratransit advocates are concerned that Uber and Lyft vehicles are not accessible for physically disabled individuals. Additionally, their drivers are not trained in regards to the challenges that mentally and physically disabled riders experience and how to assist these riders with those challenges. The RIDE does inform paratransit users that if they need a driver to assist them to or from their door that they should utilize traditional paratransit services. · Data management of public information by private companies is always a concern. How will the privacy of users of a public program be protected? Will this information be shared with third parties? Will data be available to public transportation entities? Communities in Western New York will need to take data privacy concerns into consideration when negotiating partnerships with ride sharing companies. Integrated Web Based Systems Online Centralized Fare Account System Boston, Massachusetts Lead Agency: Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority Partners: Greater Lynn Senior Services, Veterans Transportation Services, National Express In 2012 the Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority (MBTA) instituted an online trip management portal and a centralized fare account system that enabled users to manage their paratransit payments through an online account in addition to by phone, by mail, of in person. The creation of an online centralized payment accounts system improved the ease of use for individuals across three different providers and increased efficiency for paratransit providers. Through the centralized online system users can “request trips, view past trips, cancel trips, and check the status of current trips” (Kaufman et al., 2016). Digital booking options give the opportunity for subcontractors to utilize GPS systems to optimize routes and automate ride matching for paratransit users.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Takeaways · The introduction of a centralized trip management system improves the user experience by enabling real-time trip management and streamlining the payment process across various paratransit subcontractors. · Erie and Niagara County have a variety of paratransit subcontractors as well as nonprofit and community volunteer paratransit options. A centralized booking and payment system for paratransit options in each county would greatly improve the user experience. Additionally, one channel competition between paratransit providers would drive efficiencies in price points, wait times, and other user experiences. · Multichannel booking makes paratransit services accessible to a variety of riders no matter their familiarity with technology or potential disability. · Subcontractors were previously tasked with managing payment systems. Now, with one centralized fare management system, this strain is reduced for existing paratransit services. · GPS enabled route design as well as automated ride matching reduces the length of trips for users tremendously. Additionally, the use of digital ride booking makes the coordination of paratransit rides more efficient for subcontractors because they are able to use GPS and automated ride matching to optimize routes and eliminate waste, such as excess gas use or inefficient use of staff time. Integrated Paratransit Platform Southeast Michigan Lead Agency: Regional Transit Authority of Southeast Michigan Partners: Ann Arbor Area Transportation Authority, Detroit Department of Transportation, Suburban Mobility Authority for Regional Transportation, Southeast Michigan Council of Government, the Area Agency on Aging 1B, and Menlo Innovations January 15, 2019 the State of Michigan announced $1,050,000 in Michigan Mobility grant funds for the creation of “an integrated online booking and trip management platform that can create a ‘one click’ experience” for users of all regional paratransit services (Schultz, 2019). The Michigan Mobility Challenge is an $8 million legislative appropriation that began in 2018 to “use technology and innovation to address core mobility gaps for seniors, persons with disabilities, and veterans across the state” (Michigan State Transportation Department, 2019). 68

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Takeaways · While the State of Michigan has yet to rollout their integrated paratransit platform, the announcement of funding its development shows a commitment of state government for innovative mobility solutions. Funding for upgraded paratransit technology is a common issue throughout Western New York. The example of Michigan’s investment in this technology could set the stage for the State of New York to also make smart paratransit a funding priority. · Again, integrated paratransit platforms improve the user experience through the centralization of trip management system. This enables users to compare wait times and process of various paratransit providers. This also enables users to request and cancel trips in real-time. · The use of digital ride booking makes the coordination of paratransit rides more efficient for subcontractors because they are able to use GPS and automated ride matching to optimize routes. This reduces wait times for riders and reduces costs for subcontractors (i.e. wasted gas and/or employee time). Integrated Web Based Systems Concerns · The initial cost of system upgrades and web based development are high. This poses an issue for suburban communities that lack funding for public transit or paratransit services. Communities in Western New York will need to look at innovative funding options to implement an integrated paratransit application for the region. · Municipalities should keep in mind that any centralized account system that is implemented for paratransit services will need to be accessible to differently abled individuals, for example the blind, and will need to be available in multiple languages as well.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Autonomous Vehicles: Autonomous Vehicle Paratransit Partnership Los Angeles, California Lead Agency: Access Services Partners: Lilee Systems, Baidu USA Baidu, a Chinese technology company, has announced a pilot program in 2018 of its Apollo autonomous vehicle platform in partnership with Access Services, a paratransit provider in Los Angeles County (Etherington, 2018). The pilot identified the VA Greater Los Angeles Healthcare Center was the most feasible route for the pilot autonomous paratransit project after analyzing three other existing fixed-route bus lines: VA Long Beach Healthcare System, Lancaster Station, and Rancho Los Amigos. Further research is scheduled from July 2018 to October 2019 (Tsuei, n.d.). Access Services and Baidu have identified three different electric vehicle models that will be tested in the pilot. The EZ10 has the capacity to fit six seated and six standing individuals, a maximum speed of 25 miles per hour, and 150 miles per charge (Tsuei, n.d.). The Navya ARMA has the capacity to carry eleven seated and four standing individuals, a maximum speed of 28 miles per hour, and 150 miles per charge (Tsuei, n.d.). The Waymo hybrid minivan has the capacity to seat seven individuals, has typical speed capabilities, and gets 33 miles per charge on electric alone (Tsuei, n.d.). On Demand pilot services are scheduled to begin in November of 2019 (Tsuei, n.d.). Takeaways 路 The Baidu and Access public-private partnership shows the potential for automation to transform paratransit market. There is an opportunity for municipalities in Western New York to form similar partnership in the future to bring automation into the optimization of paratransit services in the region. 路 Automated, fixed-route paratransit services could serve as connection for senior living facilities to commercial centers, socializing opportunities, and critical medical services for seniors living in suburban communities. 路 The use of electric vehicles and driverless shuttles can help to reduce operating costs associated with gasoline prices and staff time. 路 The Baidu Access pilot program does provide wheelchair-accessible vehicles and can substitute for ADA compliant paratransit, unlike other smart mobility options for paratransit innovation. 70

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY Autonomous Shuttle: Milo Pilot Project Arlington, Texas Lead Agency: City of Arlington Partners: EasyMile, the Arlington Convention and Visitors’ Bureau, First Transit, Texas A&M University's Transportation Institute, and the Texas AV Proving Ground Partnership The Milo Pilot Project is a yearlong test of an electric autonomous shuttle bus (Error! Reference source not found.) in downtown Arlington Texas. The shuttle offers rides “from parking lots in the entertainment district to Texas Rangers and Dallas Cowboys games and other special events” (Jayson, 2018). This pilot program launched in August of 2017 is “the first autonomous shuttle offered by a municipal government to the public on a continuous basis” (City of Arlington, n.d.). The shuttle has a designated operator for safety, offers a dozen seats, and is ADA compliant (Jayson, 2018; Poe, 2018). The Milo shuttle moves at speeds between 10 and 12 miles per hour (City of Arlington, n.d.). Signs have been posted along the shuttle’s 13 minute, off-street trail to warn pedestrians, cyclists, and other users of the trail to be aware of the autonomous vehicle (City of Arlington, n.d.). The French company, EasyMile, boosts “that after operating over 10,000 miles all over the world, in many different environments, these vehicles have never been in an accident (City of Arlington, n.d.). The City of Arlington “pursued a sole-source procurement with EasyMile based on their provision of a wheelchair ramp” for the shuttle, ensuring it is ADA compliant for public use (City of Arlington, n.d.). The Texas A&M Transportation Institute is currently “developing protocols and algorithms for people with and without disabilities and autonomous vehicles to communicate with each other in words, sound and on electronic displays” to address challenges of contemporary paratransit through shuttle automation (Saripalli, 2017). Researchers are also investigating other accessibility solutions including “including automated wheelchair ramps and improved seating arrangements for multiple wheelchair-using passengers” (Saripalli, 2017). The City of Arlington admits that one of the largest challenges to getting the pilot program off the ground was in obtaining the correct forms of insurance both for the vehicle and for the operations, including general liability insurance and workers’ compensation policies. Other challenges included: additional costs associated the data plan, sim cards, trail preparations, charging capabilities, and marketing materials, staff time, route planning, storage, cleaning, maintenance, and other preparation elements (City of Arlington, n.d.). 71

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY

Takeaways Âˇ The continued research on improved automated paratransit services provides a template for this technology to transform paratransit and improve mobility for elderly and disabled individuals. Additionally, improved software could enable autonomous paratransit vehicles to interact with differently abled individuals, as stated earlier. Âˇ Continued improvement and testing of automated shuttle services, such as this pilot, will increase route optimization, decrease wait times, and improve the user experience when applied to paratransit. Âˇ The Milo pilot program is wheelchair-accessible and has the potential to substitute ADA compliant paratransit with continued testing.

4. SUBURBAN SMART MOBILITY

Autonomous Vehicle Concerns 路 A major concern regarding the implementation of autonomous vehicles in Western New York is the lack of State approvals for the operations of these vehicles. Only limited research is permitted in the State of New York. In order to even pilot autonomous shuttle services in Western New York major state-level policy and regulations will need to be established. 路 Additionally, as mentioned in the case study, there is a major cost associated with the start of autonomous shuttle services, not only considering the purchase of technology, but also considering insurance requirements, maintenance, storage needs, and general route coordination. Suburban communities, particularly those in Western New York, lack funding to implement autonomous shuttles at this point. Innovative partnerships and funding approaches would need to be explore to pursue this avenue. Fortunately, the University at Buffalo has expertise in autonomous shuttle testing and could prove to be a strategic partner in the region. 路 Societal perception of autonomous vehicles, particularly those of senior residents, might be negative. Considerable public education and trust building campaigns would need to be undertaken to implement autonomous paratransit in the region. 路 Beyond wheelchair accessibility, autonomous paratransit vehicles will need to be specially adapted to interact with individuals with mental and physical disabilities. This will need to be a priority for any implementation of autonomous paratransit in the region.

Urban Smart Mobility

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY Introduction The aim of this section is to highlight the current challenges that City of Buffalo faces regarding transportation, highlights smart mobility opportunities to overcome these challenges, and concerns about implementing smart mobility in urban spaces. In addition, this section develops several planning and design parameters for mobility hubs and corridors. The City of Buffalo has undergone several challenges related to transportation, environment, and infrastructure at large. Each challenge has a potential smart mobility solution. The City of Buffalo’s urban core — Downtown Buffalo—offers a number of economic, cultural, and governmental activities that take place. The majority of employees working in the downtown area are coming from outside of the City of Buffalo and mainly they are car dependent. Due to the concentration of certain uses in the urban core, the influx of employees during peak hours will create congestion. In addition, there will be a huge parking demand in the core. Although, downtown Buffalo offers 37,500 parking spaces, there is still demand for the parking in the core area because people are unwilling to park further from their destination. Congestion and parking are also interrelated since street parking consumes transport capacity by removing one or two lanes for circulation. Further, looking for a parking space creates additional delays and impairs circulation. Smart mobility can help tackle the issues of congestion by strengthening public transportation. Autonomous vehicles (AV) have capacity to provide efficient transportation by reducing congestion caused by accidents, allowing vehicles to travel closer together, and decrease parking demand. In addition, using different transportation modes such as bike share, rideshare, or car share to get to the destination will decrease car congestion (Figure 23). Riders using carpooling services provided by ride-share companies like Uber and Lyft could reduce the number of cars on the road by 75 percent, according to a new study from MIT’s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory (Figure 24).

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY

Lack of Public Transportation and Access to Employment A closer look at the levels of service throughout the county finds that the NFTAâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s most frequent lines are largely confined to the city of Buffalo, with routes of moderate frequency connecting to the first-ring suburbs. In the rest of the county, routes are often infrequent, do not offer service on the weekends, and provide insufficient flexibility for people trying to access employers with varying shifts and schedules. The issues related to public transportation can be listed as follows: 1. Low frequency of public transit to the areas outside of Buffalo, where major employment centers are located. 2. Most high-to-moderate frequency routes are confined to particular areas within boundary of the city of Buffalo. 3. Bus stops are not well equipped with facilities (proper waiting area, shelter) that encourage people, especially vulnerable riders (handicaps, pregnant women, etc.) to use public transportation. 4. Lack of trips that link destinations in direct route 5. The train route and its stops along Main Street are not supported by the population living within Â˝ mile. Therefore, most of the riders depend on other mode of transportation to get the train.

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY Lack of Public Transportation and Access to Employment A closer look at the levels of service throughout the county finds that the NFTA’s most frequent lines are largely confined to the city of Buffalo, with routes of moderate frequency connecting to the first-ring suburbs. In the rest of the county, routes are often infrequent, do not offer service on the weekends, and provide insufficient flexibility for people trying to access employers with varying shifts and schedules. The issues related to public transportation can be listed as follows: 1. Low frequency of public transit to the areas outside of Buffalo, where major employment centers are located. 2. Most high-to-moderate frequency routes are confined to particular areas within boundary of the city of Buffalo. 3. Bus stops are not well equipped with facilities (proper waiting area, shelter) that encourage people, especially vulnerable riders (handicaps, pregnant women, etc.) to use public transportation. 4. Lack of trips that link destinations in direct route 5. The train route and its stops along Main Street are not supported by the population living within ½ mile. Therefore, most of the riders depend on other mode of transportation to get the train. Employment Centers There are five major employment centers in Erie County: Downtown Buffalo; River Road in Tonawanda; the area around Sweet Home Road in Amherst; a substantial area in the northeastern suburbs that includes the Airport, Wehrle Drive, Main Street, and Transit Road; and Walden Avenue in Cheektowaga. Four out of five of these major employment centers are located outside the city of Buffalo. A West Side resident with a car, for instance, can zip to Geico in Amherst in just over 20 minutes, someone making the same trip without a car can expect to spend nearly an hour and 20 minutes using public transit to get to the same place. From the East Side, the same trip still takes more than twice as long by bus, according to a report to be released today by the Partnership for the Public Good, a community think tank in Buffalo. This mass transit burden disproportionately hurts low income people of color. It also limits the pool of prospective employees that major companies want to reach to meet their hiring needs, according to the group's new "Working Toward Equality" report. The report focuses on local issues of race, employment and public transportation[Figure 25] .’

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY

The use of dynamic pricing can assist economically disadvantaged ridersâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; trips or underserved areas. Ride-sharing can provide immediate relief to those with high transportation cost burdens. Environmental Impact of Transportation Traffic congestion, reliance on private vehicles, and lack of alternative transportation modes generate negative impact on the environment. The environmental impact of transportation could be reduced by implementing green smart mobility solutions. 1. A study from MITâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Computer Science and Artificial Intelligence Laboratory concluded that professional carpooling might help the environment, by reducing the amount of carbon emissions created by cars on the road. 2.

Fully automated vehicles would reduce the greenhouse gas emissions.

3. Investment in public transportation system and other alternative transportation modes such as biking, scootering can lower negative environmental impacts Loss of Spaces and Lack of People Interaction with Built Environment The excess amount of parking spaces (surface and structure parking), single floor buildings in downtown area, and the existing elevated highways (flyovers), prevent people from interacting with one another as well as with city amenities (nature and built environment). The parking structures present an opportunity for higher utility land uses, including residential, commercial, and mixed uses. Higher utility uses and denser development has the potential to increase public transportation ridership and increase the social connections between people and the connections between people and the built environment. Additionally, the New York State Governor, Andrew Cuomo, recently announced a national design competition to seek alternative designs for adaptive reuse of the Skyway, a large elevated highway (Figure 26). 78

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY development will be available across the city. The demands for parking space and garages will decrease dramatically, while increasing opportunities to reuses these spaces for smart mobility interventions. This would increase residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; accessibility to various businesses throughout the region. A great opportunity of new and smart mobility and infrastructure that follows is to increase the interaction between people and built environment. Lack of Non-motorized Transportation Modes and Its Infrastructure The mobility of pedestrians, bicycles and other non- motorized vehicles is impaired because of intense traffic along streets and avenues where that bike lanes share with other vehicles. Deteriorated street and sidewalk pavements make biking and walking difficult, particularly for vulnerable population such as wheelchair users and mothers with strollers. The image of potholes in the City of Buffalo from 2017 to 2019 demonstrates the how poor the road infrastructure is in the city (Figure 17).

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY There are several opportunities to address the issues related to the poor infrastructure and lack of non-motorized transportation modes. These opportunities can be summarized below: 路 Provide safe and comfortable walking, bicycling, and other form of active transportation after fixing the issues related to payment and sidewalks. 路

Promote healthy lifestyles by using active transport

路

Promote access to health food and facilities

路

Reduce per capita health expenditure

Lack of Enforcing Traffic Law to reduce accidents and increase safety Exceeding speed limits, drunk or distracted driving and failure to wear a seat belt are still the leading causes of death and serious injury on roads. Despite legislation designed to prevent all four, many drivers involved in fatal traffic collisions clearly failed to comply with one or more road traffic laws at the time of their collision (Figure 28). Improvements in traffic law enforcement should be part of an integrated road safety policy and have been shown to lead to rapid reductions in deaths and injuries when applying best practice.

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY

Safer transportation system in line with smart technologies can help reduce accident rates, traffic congestion, time and costs that result from the traditional transportation system. Âˇ Autonomous vehicles can eliminate risky driving behavior, anticipate collision factors, and control speed, making the streets even safer for people on foot, people on bikes, and people in vehicles. Urban Mobility Hub as Solutions to Urban Transportation Problem Mobility hubs are defined as major transit stations, which plays the role of a place with connectivity for different modes of transportation where walking to rapid transit come together in an intensive concentration of land uses like institutional, educational, commercial and residential activities takes place. They are planned level of transit service accessible within a 5 to 10 minute walk from any land use. Itâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s essential that mobility hubs support the connection between public transit and various other travel options. Determining Potential Smart Mobility Hub Locations in Buffalo, NY The Mobility Hub could be provided at defined locations around existing and new transit stations, allowing transit riders to seamlessly access other modes of transportation once they arrive at the station. The strategy that used to indicate some potential locations in city of Buffalo was some data analysis like, Population density, bicycles and vehicles crashed location, existing and proposed bicycle lanes, number of ridership and household income. Population Density The population density map shows the targeted locations for the mobility hub have high population if we compare it with other intersections.

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY

Crash Analysis Map The intersection of W Ferry Street and Grant Street has higher frequency of bicycle/motor crash incidents in the west side of Buffalo. While the intersection of Bailey Avenue and Kensington Street has higher frequency of bicycle/motor crash incidents in the east side of Buffalo.

Bike Lanes Analysis Map The proposed locations for the mobility hub match with the vision of the future bike lanes. The missing links and disconnectedness in the city of Buffalo bike lanes are creating significant problems in accessibility especially in the east and west side of Buffalo. The proposed map shows the densifying of bike lanes through neighborhoods and connect the uncompleted lanes in the main corridors and streets to increase the accessibility.

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY

Bus Ridership by Location The intersection of West Ferry Street and Grant Street has higher bus ridership in the west side of Buffalo. The intersection of Bailey Avenue and Kensington Street has one of the highest bus ridership in the east side of Buffalo.

Household Income Map The median household income map (Figure 32) demonstrates that the two selected locations for mobility hubs in the City of Buffalo have a mix of low- and middle-income households. It may be a challenge to target different income classes and anticipate their interaction with a smart mobility hub. However, focusing on low-income populations for a smart mobility hub would help facilitate job accessibility and encourage development in the adjacent corridors. Extending the future vision of making the Smart Mobility Hub connect with the adjacent neighborhoods by encouraging the improvements along the neighborhoods streets and make it more walkable.

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY

Potential Locations for Urban Smart Mobility Hub Buffalo, NY · Eastside Location: The intersection between Bailey Avenue and Kensington Avenue · Westside Location: The intersection between West Ferry Street and Grant Street

5. URBAN SMART MOBILITY

Shared Mobility & MaaS

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS Emerging Trends in Shared Mobility Emerging mobility technologies and trends are quickly transforming urban transportation networks. Ridesharing/Transportation Network Companies (TNC) available through smartphone apps are becoming an increasingly bigger provider of mobility. And more recently e-scooters have popped up on the streets of many American cities and cities worldwide. How will public transportation be affected if people turn to these technologies in increasing numbers? Traditional mobility providers such as public transportation agencies must contend with these new emerging technologies. Public transportation agencies must position themselves to coexist with TNCs and e-scooters, perhaps by incentivizing them to be used as first miles/last mile solutions. Without some level of coordination, public transportation may lose out to these emerging forms of shared mobility. According to one recent study, Uber may actually have the effect of increasing ridership in larger cities and in places with smaller transit agencies. Furthermore, Uber may enhance rail ridership while detracting from bus ridership (Hall, Palsson, & Price, 2018). Both of these findings would suggest that without innovative and forward thinking planning strategies, WNYâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s public transportation (which is not situated within a large city and is heavily reliant on bus routes) would stand to lose out from competition with TNCs. How can these services be better integrated? Partnerships to promote first/mile last mile solutions through shared mobility is one answer. Another is integrated route planning technology that helps a user plan a personalized trip via multiple modes without needing a private automobile. Car-sharing Car-sharing is a type of car rental designed for short periods of time (20 minutes, an hour, 2 hours). It allows users to avail the service when they need to do their weekâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s grocery shopping and do not feel like using public transportation to lug their groceries home. One-way car sharing allows users to pick up and drop off their shared car in different locations.

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS App based ridesharing companies have been operating in WNY since June 29, 2017. Their services in WNY have been limited to basic services (UberX or UberXL & Lyft or Lyft XL). In larger, more established markets Uber and Lyft provide many more different services including the handicapped accessible UberWAV (wheelchair accessible vehicle) option. UberWAV is currently in a trial phase and is only in Chicago, New York, Philadelphia, and Washington, DC. According to Uber’s website, the price of UberWAV is “comparable” to UberX. UberWAV has yet to be introduced into any smaller markets comparable to Buffalo. Ride-splitting An additional service provided by TNCs is ride-splitting. Ride-splitting is cheaper than traditional TNC services like UberX & Lyft because it allows customers to share rides with other customers who are traveling to a similar destination. When using ridesplitting, the app will group customers together that are traveling from similar starting and ending points and assign them one driver who will pick them all up and drop them at their respective destinations through a route deemed most efficient through the TNC app. Compared to all of these customers using separate TNC trips and cars, theoretically the ride-splitting model would reduce the number of individual trips/cars needed to transport the people who are sharing the ride. This table shows the various Uber and Lyft services offered in selected American cities and Toronto. For the most part Uber and Lyft only operate their ride-splitting options in larger and/or denser markets. Ride-splitting is not available in cities of comparable population size and density to Buffalo (Cleveland, Pittsburgh, & Rochester) however it is available in smaller cities in New Jersey, perhaps because of linkages with New Jersey Transit commuter rail stations. Meanwhile some larger cities/metropolitan areas that are less densely populated like Detroit and Phoenix currently do not have ride-splitting. (“Yes” indicates the service is offered, “No” indicates that the service is not offered).

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS Currently Uber and Lyft only offer ride-splitting in denser markets. According to a conversation with Eric Plummer, Marketing Manager at Lyft’s New Jersey operations, Lyft may expand Lyft Shared to markets like Western New York if the density is there. This would be likely in the coming years if current trends continue. Bruce Schaller’s report on how TNCs are affecting traffic finds that ride-splitting options may actually lead to more traffic because it reduces public transit usage. People who cannot afford regular TNC service and are reliant on public transit are likely to opt out of public transit use when offered a cheaper TNC in the form of ride-splitting. These ride-splitting services are not always operating with multiple passengers and in fact spend a considerable amount of time driving around either between jobs or with just one passenger (Schaller, 2018). Bike-sharing Bike sharing systems which initially sprung up in a few select European cities made a big entrance into the American market with the introduction of New York City’s CitiBike in 2013. This initial generation of bike sharing systems requires users to pick up and return bicycles at specific locations. The bicycles lock in place at the docks scattered throughout the city. Buffalo saw the deployment of Reddy Bike-share in July, 2016 which incentivizes users to lock bikes at specific dock locations but also allows users to lock to their bike (thus ending their ride) to any bike rack. This provides for more flexibility of use, as users can end their ride at the location of their choosing and they are not limited by the location of docks. The newest model of bike sharing systems is the dockless bike share. These bikes can theoretically be parked anywhere as the bikes lock to themselves when the user decides that their journey is over and they have deployed the kickstand. This provides for greater ease of use for users as can end their trip anywhere within the bike share’s operational extent. However, this type of bike sharing system, if left unregulated, can lead to bike being parked in a disorderly manner (such as parking in loading zones, handicapped parking spots, the middle of sidewalks, etc.). Also, since bikes lock to themselves rather than using lock-to technology to lock to a bike rack or dock, parked dockless bikes can be knocked over and look like litter.

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS Dockless bike sharing systems have been deployed in nearby communities. In New York, dockless bike sharing systems have been deployed in the outer boroughs of New York City, Westchester County, and in the Finger Lakes Region. In June 2018, White Plains saw the introduction of Ofo and LimeBike dockless bike shares. The one year pilot program has not needed tax dollars and both services were required to pay a “small permit fee” for their 150 bikes. This rollout was done through cooperation with the city government. Ofo pulled out while LimeBike’s 150 bikes remain (Liebson, 2018). According to Jeff Goodmark, Operations Manager for Lime in the Finger Lakes Region, Ithaca has been the main focal point of operations for Lime’s dockless bike shares in the Finger Lakes region. They have also tried small bike sharing systems in Dryden and in Watkins Glenn. Central Ohio has also seen the introduction of dockless bike sharing systems. Joining CoGo an existing dock based bike share with about 300 bikes, LimeBike moved into Dublin (northern Suburb of Columbus) in May and into Columbus with fleets of 250 and 450 bikes respectively. LimeBike worked with city officials to deploy their bikes. According to the company two out of every five rides start or end at a transit stop and the company is interested in working with Central Ohio Transit Authority to promote first miles/last mile solutions (Ghose, 2018). There are however significant safety concerns for bike-sharing systems: mainly the lack of helmet usage associated with bike sharing systems. King County, Washington has had a helmet law dating back to August 2003 requiring cyclists of all ages to wear helmets. Pronto Cycle, Seattle’s initial bike-share outfit, had stationed boxes of helmets for users to borrow through the honor system (Cohen & Shaheen, 2018). Now with the introduction of dockless bikes shares that throw even more randomness to where and when people may use bikes, how will helmet use change? A recent study of four locations in Seattle compared the number of cyclists using helmets between privately owned bicycle riders and recently introduced bike share users in July 2018. Only 20% of observed bike share users were using helmets while 91% of people using private bikes were using helmets (Mooney, Lee & O’Connor, 2018).

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS Emerging trends in bike sharing systems includes the introduction of e-bikes or pedal assist bikes. These bikes have a battery pack that and motor that allows for the user to activate the motor when they are feeling tired in order to give them a boost. On April 3, 2018 New York City’s DOT announced that pedal assist bicycles would be permitted in the city. However, throttle bikes (which can travel over 20 mph) are still not permitted under state law. This policy shift indicates a statewide trend towards allowing e-bikes and e-scooters which will be expanded upon further below. Electric scooters E-scooters operating as a shared form of micro mobility operate very similarly to dockless bike sharing systems in that they can be parked anywhere and lock to themselves (Figure 34). This means they can be parked inappropriately and easily be tipped over becoming litter. The Electric scooter market is largely unregulated and as with other emerging shared mobility companies, companies offering dockless electric scooters have moved or attempted to move into new markets without cities really knowing what they are getting into. Typically, these companies charge $1 per ride plus 15 cents per minute of usage. The two giants of the e-scooter shared mobility industry are Bird and Lime (which also operates LimeBike). While these two providers operate in many markets, other companies include Scoot (only operates in the US in SF), Jump (also does bicycle share & owned by Uber, operating in 9 US cities), Lyft (operating in 13 US cities) & Spin (also does bicycle share & was bought by Ford in 2018). Like TNCs, dockless electric scooter sharing companies rely on the gig economy in order to operate. “Juicers” are independent contractors that work for e-scooter companies to pick up scooters at night and recharge them, before redistributing them to designated parking locations. The industry also has regular employees (Portland Bureau of Transportation, 2018). Parking enforcement and safety remain as unresolved issues as different cities have differing regulations (some cities forbid sidewalk riding while other cities forbid street riding or riding on bike trails). 91

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS Since the deployment of e-scooters on American streets is a relatively recent phenomenon, there have been few studies of its effects. In Portland, the Portland Bureau of Transportation (PBOT) conducted a study of these effects during a trial period of e-scooters in that city. The main objectives of the pilot project were reducing private vehicle usage, safety, equity, and reducing pollution/other environmental benefits (Portland Bureau of Transportation, 2018). The study found that after the pilot program was completed 62% of Portlanders viewed escooters favorably (this was even higher for the following groups: 71% - Portlanders under 35, 74% - people of color, & 66% - people with income below $30,000). Most people used escooters for transportation (71%) and 34% of Portlanders and 48% of visitors used escooters instead of ride hailing services. E-scooters also seem to have attracted new people to attractive transportation with 74% of local users saying they never used the cityâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s bikeshare and 42% never bicycling. There were of course safety concerns which the study attributes to unsafe riding on sidewalks and infrastructure shortcomings. Companies fell short of equity goals and requirements in that only one company adhered to stipulations requiring 100 scooters to be placed in East Portland and offering of a low income fare (Portland Bureau of Transportation, 2018). The high favorability rates of e-scooters reported in the Portland study raise questions about the accuracy of the study. Is PBOT too eager to promote e-scooters? Or are these results unique to Portland, a city that already has a progressive record when it comes to bicycle infrastructure and transit innovations. Further study of attitudes towards e-scooters is needed in order to get a more accurate representation of their public perception. Cities have attempted to regulate e-scooters with varying success and stipulations. In Indianapolis, city legislation forbids e-scooters from being ridden on sidewalks or recreational trails. Despite these limitations on paper, enforcement of this law has been spotty as many people are riding on sidewalks including one person that was hit by a truck coming out of a downtown parking garage. Additionally, users are forbidden from parking their scooters in driveways, curb ramps, handicapped parking places, and loading zones. A $25 fine is incurred for parking in the areas, a fine that is assessed to the e-scooter company. The companies are still looking into how to pass this fee onto negligent users. Meanwhile in Denver, city regulations regarded e-scooters as toy vehicles and they were initially forbidden from being ridden on roadways or bike lanes. As for parking regulations in Denver, users are asked to park scooters at transit and bus stops. Companies in both cities are charged a $15,000 permitting fee plus $1 per day per scooter to operate in Indianapolis and $30 per scooter for one year in Denver (May & Hill, 2018). 92

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS As for E-Scooter regulation in New York State, they are currently illegal. However, Cuomo’s Executive Budget for 2020 would allow municipalities to decide for themselves whether or not to allow e-scooters within their jurisdictions (Office of the Governor, 2019). This would open the door to e-scooter deployment in New York State. Potentially within weeks-months we will see e-scooters on our streets. Besides the parking issues similar to dockless bike sharing systems, e-scooters also share the helmet issue similar to bike sharing systems. Users are supposed to wear helmets and companies have tried to encourage helmet use, even by offering to pay for free helmets (minus the cost of shipping) for active users, in the case of Bird. Lime’s Respect the Ride campaign is a multifaceted safety campaign which will supposedly include the giving away of 250,000 helmets. There is also the concern of sustainability as there have been reports of scooters not being durable. According to Quartz’s analysis of Louisville, Kentucky’s open data collection of data on scooter trips, the average Bird scooter in that city only lasted 28.8 days. If lifespans of e-scooters are this short, how can these companies turn a profit when average scooter trips are 18 minutes (costing $3.70) and scooters make on average 3.49 rides per day while the scooters themselves most likely cost $350-500 (Griswold, 2019). The profit margin of e-scooter companies is questionable.

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS Conclusion E-scooters and Micro Mobility E-scooters and e-bikes are coming soon. If current trends continue, we will see large scale expansions of e-scooter services with bike shares slowing in their growth. Already Ofo pulled out of the US market and Lime is focusing their business expansions on escooters. E-scooters took the micro-mobility market by storm in 2018 and with New York State’s Executive Budget for 2020, e-scooters and e-bikes are destined to be introduced in Western New York. Under the framework outlined in the Executive Budget, it will be up to municipalities to create a framework for regulating e-scooters and e-bikes. Another major takeaway from emerging trends in micro mobility is that micro mobility is not only an option for urban cores. Lime & Bird have set up their operations in smaller towns and on university campuses. It is thus conceivable based on this research and conversations with people and Lyft and Lime that these companies may want to provide their services in some of our smaller towns and villages. All these forms of mobility will in the end provide more transportation options. Rather than traveling in a personal vehicle, people will have more options when it comes to getting from point A to B. Private companies with large venture capital funding structures are interested in locating to our area (or already have located here in the case of Uber and Lyft). However, in order to make micro-mobility more viable in our region, infrastructure will need to be approved. Industry insiders Anders Gunnersen (Director of Operations at Reddy Bikeshare), Eric Plummer and Jeff Goodmark all agree that WNY’s bicycle infrastructure will need to be improved in order to 1) attract more people to use bicycles and possibly e-scooters and 2) make these forms of transportation safer for users of these services and unwitting pedestrians who are caught sharing sidewalks with e-scooter users.

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS MaaS - Mobility as a Service With increased availability of various transportation options in recent times and gradual, steady increase in privatization of vehicles, congestion in transportation has arisen as a result. While there has been lot of efforts, programs and attempts made to address the upcoming issues in context of transportation, private vehiclesâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; numbers have been growing irrespective of these efforts. Mobility as a Service is a concept that was formulated to address congestion issue. It was basically integrating the services provided by private network providers and public services to make people use more public transportation with the help of private transport network providers. This type of public private partnership has proved to have been effective and has yielded results showing improvement in increased usage of public transportation. Â MaaS exhibits features that comprehend the major service providing applications and then uses their application interface to obtain data to display it to the users. There are many private transportation networks that have been providing ridesharing, ride splitting, car rental services and many more, which means there are more and more options for people (Figure 35). It is therefore better if people are provided with a comprehended statistical data which will enable them to choose between the network providers based on their convenience, affordability, time for travelling and many such influencing factors, which is precisely what mobility as a service delivers. Mobility in cities evolves into a service we use as needed, which eliminates the idea of owning a private vehicle contributing to solving congestion and air pollution issues (Warwick G, Tiffany D F, Justine B, and Brett B, 2017, Deloitte Review).

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS One best comparable example would be Netflix. Instead of owning the movie we want to see, we pay an operator that owns the rights to distribute the films. With a monthly fee, we can watch as many movies as you wish. What if, for a fixed price, you would have access to all means of transport provided through one serviceprovider? MaaS Global sees the future of transportation in this way.

In the United States, data from the Federal Transit Administrationâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s National Transit Database show a 2.5 percent decline in total transit ridership from 2016 to 2017, with bus ridership displaying a 5 percent drop. There is a nationwide decline in transit ridership observed that has been in progress since 2014, in spite of increase in population and employment in the United States (Figure 36) (Randal T, November 2018, Charting Public Transitâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Decline).

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS

The Finnish City of Helsinki is where the concept of Mobility as a Service came into existence. It aimed for a well-functioning public transport network covering the wider metropolitan area. With the city center on a peninsula surrounded by the Baltic Sea on its three sides, Helsinki has only limited space for parking or traffic jams with the increase in private automobiles. Its new mobility system, was fabricated from the ideas by one of its architect Sampo Hietanen (ITS Finland CEO). He aimed to build a sustainable customer centric transportation by integrating public transit system and private companies (demand responsive transit system). The Whim App offers unlimited rides on public transit, access to city bikes, cheap shortdistance taxis and rental cars—all for one monthly fee. Whim negotiates with private mobility providers before including them in the application and takes a small amount of commission when trips are booked by users/riders (some private services active in Helsinki such as Drive Now and Uber are not currently available on Whim). Whim is already leveraging its growth in Helsinki to expand into other European cities Birmingham and Antwerp, and Singapore. The company mentioned North America is in its growth plans as well. With the Whim app, riders can plan and pay for trips in public transportation, bikes hare, taxis, and car-share. They need not shuttle between apps and everything is available in Whim. Whim offers three levels of service: 1. A free, pay-as-you-go option 2. A 49€ (approximately $55) monthly “Whim Urban” subscription offering unlimited public transportation and reduced rates for taxi (10€, approximately $11) and car-share (49€) and 3. A 499€ (approximately $565) “Whim Unlimited” package that adds unlimited taxi and car share access. Most of Whim’s 7,000 Helsinki subscribers use Whim Urban. 97

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS Limitations of MaaS In case a Whim subscriber receives unlimited or discounted taxi service from a private service provider, the incentive to use public transportation gradually decreases (Figure 37, Figure 38). If taxi trips increase, that would directly lead to an overall decrease in public transportation ridership. This may cause an increase in vehicle miles traveled and, congestion. There’s no proper information yet about how Whim changes the transportation behavior and pattern of its subscribers, but MaaS Global is studying it. If shared mobility is not well integrated with public transportation, what will happen? Though the idea of integrating shared mobility and public transportation has been considered and contemplated as suitable solution attributing congestion and other transportation issues, quite a few limitations have emerged as the concept was implemented and outcomes were scrutinized based on various locations. The collaboration between the private transport network companies turns out to be quite challenging and complicated as those companies will be aware of the company’s profit and its prominence in the market. The impacts if the shared mobility is not well integrated are specific and clear, which will affect the usage of public transportation and association with mobility as a service conception. · Major and significant impact would be increased traffic situation, which leads to Congestion. · Escalates the Vehicles Miles Travelled (VMT) as more usage of private vehicles on road leading back to existing situation or could go worse. · The Travel Network Companies (TNC’s) could compete with public transit leading to more traffic.

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS These impacts automatically affect the whole sequence of Mobility as a Service and results in not serving the concept’s purpose. The risks of TNCs replicating/competing directly with public transit … and actually leading to more traffic. One of the impacts mentioned is the Travel Network Companies (TNC’s) could compete with public transit, the risks associated with it are increased operation of private automobiles on the road. Recent research even shows data in which vehicle-miles traveled and congestion is increasing in many cities and transit ridership is declining since the gradual evolution of private service entities throughout the years (Figure 37, Figure 39).

Maas considers the transportation network as an ecosystem instead of viewing them as a network of Individual and independent service providers. MaaS facilitates features where it fades the division between the various transportation means or the division may even totally disappear.

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS The influence of digitalization in transportation contributes to the process of developing a smart city. Maas obliquely resolves the ownership of private automobiles, one of the targeted problems, which is applicable to any city. Convenience is not the only advantage, but it helps people to prefer cycling or walking, assisting in choosing healthier options. While taking all sorts of efforts, the concept of MaaS addresses parking problems. Parking issue is a major complication among the transportation planning, when solved it could lead to better and alternative usage of huge parcels of land across the country.

100

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS With the emergence of technology and innovation, there are various ways in which it encourages the ease of use across different modes. · People are provided with real time information about all the transportation modes available based on the user’s needs. · The information comprises fare prices and time travelled to reach the desired destination, allowing users to choose between the options based on their affordability and convenience. · It emphasizes the availability of public transit · Offers first miles/last mile transportation options from private TNC’s to riders, in a way encouraging riders to take up public transportation · Comprehends data on ride sharing, ride-splitting, rental options and bike sharing delivering environment friendly transportation options, and assisting users in choosing these types of services rather than owning or using private vehicles (Figure 40).

101

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS How can these different forms of shared mobility be integrated? · Providing first miles/last mile transit options collaborating with public transit service providers, promoting public transportation’s utilization and also increasing ridership of Private TNC’s (majorly Lyft and Uber in the United States) · Establishing bike docks, for bike sharing near main transportation nodes bus stops, metros and other transport hubs, connecting from hubs to destination points. · Availing bike docks, car sharing hubs and car rentals in major commercial points and frequently travelled region of the city. · Incentivized fare rates can be initiated for both public transit and private service providers, where the modes complementing each other and encouraging riders to opt for both modes. · Dockless bikes are now becoming prominent consideration for smart cities. They are cheap, zero-emissions, easy-to-access bikes and mainly reducing unnecessary car trips for shorter trips or shorter time.

102

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS Uber and Lyft - MaaS Statistical data indicates that since 2016, at least 27 or more communities across the United States have collaborated with Uber, Lyft and other Transportation Network Companies (TNCâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s) to boost and augment conventional transport services (Figure 43).

Unlike an Uber or Lyft, public transportation authorities exist to provide services to the public and not necessarily to turn a profit. But like a private company, they still have budgets, ridership numbers and business goals to meet (Laura B, August 2018, Where Ride-Hailing and Transit Go Hand in Hand). Many (PSTA, Altamonte and Centennial) of these partnerships are happening in the smaller cities. And there seems to be a strong positive correlation between the smaller the city and the more involved the partnership is, which makes sense.

103

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS Uber’s partnership in the United States, and its services that are closer to MaaS · Uber is recently partnering with peer-to-peer car sharing company called Getaround in San Francisco. Uber is testing this partnership, by including the renting option, which enables Bay Area users to be able to book and drive “Uber Rent”. The renting option allows users to take vehicles by the hour or day, at prices set by the individuals who owned the vehicles on the Getaround program. · Around last year (2018) in Washington, D.C, Uber established its ownership of Jump - New York City based dockless bike sharing company. This enables the users to be able to book a Jump bike from Uber App. This feature was already available to users in San Francisco from Uber’s pilot program with Jump (February). · Uber revealed recently that it has partnered with Masabi. Masabi is a London-based company which facilitates Mobile Transit Ticketing in almost 30 cities around the world. It allows users to purchase tickets through application, and showing the same to the conductors while commuting. Masabi is working to deliver services among the Uber’s option menu wherever Masabi is available. This feature enables users in location such as New York, Boston, Los Angeles and few others places to book regular commuter rail tickets with the same app (Uber) they use to book a regular Uber pick-up when they have reached the desired destination.

104

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS · All these partnerships and deals that are established and trying to establish by Uber is all about determining alternatives to reduce the usage of private/personal vehicles in cities, says the head of transportation policy and research for Uber, Andrew Salzberg. Uber, with all these efforts trying to cover maximum modes of transportation, is focusing to become an “Everything Company” in transit system. It is looking forward to meet demands of all sort. · Lyft has recently invested in Motivate- a New York based company that operates bike sharing system in some of largest US cities, where one of the largest cities includes New York (Citi Bike). Lyft and Uber have constantly been involved in integration and acquisition of various small scale transit companies to convert themselves as a Mobility as a service provider, comprehending most of all the transit network modes one by one. (Laura B., April 2018, Uber Pivots to On-Demand Everything) Existing Cases for integration of shared mobilities with public transit (Pittsburgh and Milwaukee) - for each of these we need to think about the results (was there an increase in public transit use because of these policy changes? Increase in bike share usage? What are the numbers?) The Linking Bike Share and Transit seminar online was a collaboration between the Better Bike Share Partnership and the National Association of City Transportation Officials. Staff from Pittsburgh and Milwaukee weighed in on how exactly they linked their bike share and transit systems, and what the user experience is like in the real world. ·

105

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS

· Shared Mobility in Pittsburgh, PA - Public Transit and Bike Share Pittsburgh uses shared technology to provide free bike share access across the city. Pittsburgh is the first U.S. city to offer free Healthy Ride bike share access to transit riders in September 2017. The Pittsburgh Bike Share (managing entity of Healthy Ride) explained that the most essential element is to take care of the delicate details in order to make it difficult for the transit agency to say “no” when connecting the systems. Pittsburgh Bike Share, aims for system integration through Healthy Ride’s launch in 2015. The system at present has 50 stations with 500 bikes, and will be expanding in 2018. Initial results show a 4.3% increase in Healthy Ride ridership, as opposed to previously flat growth. While overall revenues have dropped slightly, the managing entity is hopeful that they could find a corporate sponsor to help cover additional costs, given how the new feature has expanded access overall. (Stefani C, NA, Pittsburgh and Milwaukee explain how they linked bike share to transit) Shared Mobility in Milwaukee, WI - Public Transit and Bike Share Milwaukee has experienced an extreme drop in transit ridership between 2016 and 2017 (Figure 42). In Milwaukee, the process of linking bike share through the local transit card was quite different than in Pittsburgh, and advertising has also been a major part of connecting the two network systems. ·

106

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS

As the technology between the Milwaukee County Transit System and Bublr Bikes is distinct (unlike the similar RFID readers on both bikes and buses in Pittsburgh), the combined card in Milwaukee is actually two different cards brought in together. Riders acquire a special Bublr Bikes sticker that attaches to the MCTS fare card and allows for connection to both systems, “Eighty percent of Bublr stations share overlap with bus routes,” says Brendan Conway, Chief Marketing and Communications Officer of MCTS. “The bus will now say the approaching intersection and that there is Bublr Bike station. The transit app will also say whether there is a Bublr Bike station within a quarter mile.” Milwaukee has also been involved in co-branding the bikes with the MCTS logo, and are considering the concept of joint station maintenance and other collaboration processes. Bike share professionals and advocates would be well-advised to check up on both Pittsburgh and Milwaukee’s experiments with transit connectivity as the systems grow and evolve.

107

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS

Shared Mobility and MaaS Implementation All this information acquired based on the world cities example, show us why mobility as a service should be integrated in exclusive manner to effectively utilize the transportation planning strategies. In the United States, Universal Basic Mobility has been in the talk for long, which is basically a system of partnerships and/or policies that provide a minimum level of mobility to all people of society. In many cities, areas with poor mobility shows high rate of unemployment and low incomes. The integration of the transit networks and public transportation system can be achieved by means of associating municipal partnerships along with mobility companies, municipal policy and federal policies. The scope is much better in case of Buffalo, NY as the transportation network systems needs to improvised, for the overall development of the city. The ride sharing and ride splitting in Buffalo has not yet found a strong foundation. In fact, there is all the freedom to present innovative ideas for shared mobility, mobility as a service, and smart mobility for enhancing the transit systems. This could not only exhibit an enhancement in the department of transportation, but also could prove to be beneficial for the riders during bad weather conditions in Buffalo, as the place experiences extremities in weather.

108

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS The shared mobility programs that could be implemented in Buffalo include: 1. Public transportation authority and private service providers (like Lyft and Uber) to collaborate and associate to support and assist in implementing mobility as a service. 2. Lyft and Uber partnerships with the NFTA for First miles/Last mile to offer services from the major transport hubs to the desired destinations. Provide incentivized shared mobility options for the area where low incomes are located as they need the services like these the most. 3. The private TNC’s could provide lesser ride fares to the tourist attraction places, frequently visited locations and major commercial areas within the county to attract people in choosing shared transportation rather than usage of private vehicles. 4. Provide bike sharing facilities in locations where there are less availability or frequency of public transit as these bike sharing could be enormously effective in those regions. 5. Make partnerships with microtransit service providers to offer services in areas of poor mobility 6. Identify potential locations for placing small scale mobility hubs that compliment mobility as a service and shared mobility systems.

109

6. SHARED MOBILITY & MAAS 7. Identify potential locations for placing small scale mobility hubs that compliment mobility as a service and shared mobility systems. 8. As part of the planning process for the Citi Bike bike-sharing program, the New York City Department of Transportation conducted 159 public meetings, presentations, and demonstrations between the fall of 2011 and the spring of 2013. The City of Buffalo could also conduct open houses and public meetings to acquire feedbacks and opinions about the feasibility of these proposals and programs. These suggestions were identified to provide smart mobility solutions that express the limitations and satisfy the needs of residents throughout the Buffalo-Niagara region to increase transportation equity through shared mobility implementations.

110

Data Analysis & Visualization

111

7. DATA ANALYSIS & VISUALIZATION Introduction Â More often than not, transportation planning is informed by density calculations. Whether a city engineer is determining where to place pedestrian signaling technologies or a public transportation planner is determining where to place a new bus shelter, the decision ultimately comes down to where the intervention will impact the most individuals: riders, drivers, pedestrians, etc. Measures of volume are particularly important when it comes to public transportation planning because of the reliance on fares to fund a portion of the system cost. As a result of this reliance on volume, some vulnerable populations may be overlooked during the decision making process. Mobility as a service (MaaS), as described in previous chapters, takes a more holistic approach to public transportation planning, including considerations for vulnerable populations not being served by existing public transit systems, barriers to public transit usage including language, ability, or other characteristic, as well as strategic connections between populations, public transit, and public service providers. The following chapter identifies populations in the Erie-Niagara region that rely on public transportation or need public transportation solutions. A Transit Demand Index (TDI) was created using these identified variables to inform urban planners and transportation professionals in the region as to where vulnerable populations need public transportation solutions such as those outlined in previous chapters. We hope that this TDI will guide transportation professionals to consider smart mobility solutions to better serve all residents in the Erie-Niagara region. Additionally, a dot density map was created to visualize areas in the region that have the highest ridership on existing NFTA public transit routes. Areas with the highest existing ridership are prime locations for large scale mobility hubs, as discussed throughout this report. We hope that transportation professionals and urban planners considering smart mobility in the region will consider the implications of ridership density when considering ideal locations for large scale mobility hubs. 112

7. DATA ANALYSIS & VISUALIZATION Creating the Transit Demand Index Data Collection To develop the Transportation Demand Index (TDI) for Erie and Niagara County at the census tract level demographic information was retrieved from the 2017 5-year estimates (2013 - 2017) of the American Community Survey (ACS). American Fact Finder, an open source tool for U.S. Census data, was used to retrieve demographic variable data for all census tracts in Erie and Niagara County. The following raw variable data was retrieved: Total Population (B01003), Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months (S1701), Work Status in the Past 12 Months - Unemployed (S2303), Age by Sex (S0101), and Household Size by Vehicle Available - No Vehicle Available (B08201). Niagara Frontier Transportation Authority urban and rural routes were retrieved from the NFTA Data Analyst, Eric Svenson.

Variable Selection Variables used to create the TDI were selected based on documented literature, as well as public transportation needs and current usage trends specific to Erie and Niagara County. A number of socioeconomic factors have been shown to be correlated to public transit usage, and, therefore, can be used as good predictors of transit behavioral trends. The literature shows that that “household income, age, race/ethnicity, car ownership” and immigration status have a significant correlation to public transit usage (Gutierrez, 2011; Guiliano, 2003; Rosenbloom et al., 1998). The number of individuals below the poverty line was identified as an indicator of public transit demand because, in addition to documented literature, the overwhelming majority of current NFTA riders are very low income. According to Robert Jones, Manager of Service Planning at NFTA, 82 percent of riders are very low income and 67 percent make below $25,000, annually (Jones, R., 2019). Unemployment was included in this analysis of transit demand because many people who are unemployed often use public transportation during the job search, as well as the ability to get to and from a place of employment.

113

7. DATA ANALYSIS & VISUALIZATION Individuals who are age 65 or older were included in this analysis for several reasons. As mentioned in previous chapters of this report, senior populations are growing at exponential rates, particularly in suburbs and rural areas. As individuals age mobility becomes more and more of an issue, whether because of their own ability to drive a personal vehicle, potential disabilities, or constraints of a fixed income. Households without personal vehicles, as mentioned in previous chapters, are in particular need of public transportation in a region like Erie-Niagara because of carcentric infrastructure development and urban sprawl. Total population was considered in this analysis because population density is a still a major consideration when making · public transportation investments and has been shown to be a predictor of transit usage at the station level (Gutierrez, 2011).

· 114

7. DATA ANALYSIS & VISUALIZATION Transit Demand Index Methodology To construct the TDI each variable estimate was standardized to enable variables with different units of measurement to be easily compared. See the standardization equation below: Â Z = ((đ?&#x2018;Ľ - Âľ)/ Ď&#x192; ) Where x is the raw value, or population estimate for a given variable; where Âľ is the mean value of x; where Ď&#x192; is the standard deviation of x. Â Standard scores were used to calculate the TDI for each census tract. The Transportation Demand Index (TDI) for each census tract was calculated using the following formula: đ?&#x2018;&#x2021;đ??ˇđ??źđ?&#x2018;&#x2013;Â = đ?&#x203A;˝1 đ?&#x2018;Ľđ?&#x2018;&#x2013;,1 + đ?&#x203A;˝2 đ?&#x2018;Ľđ?&#x2018;&#x2013;,2 + đ?&#x203A;˝3 đ?&#x2018;Ľđ?&#x2018;&#x2013;,3 +

â&#x20AC;Ś+ đ?&#x203A;˝đ?&#x2018;?Â đ?&#x2018;Ľđ?&#x2018;&#x2013;,đ?&#x2018;?Â ,

Where TDIiÂ Â is the transit demand index for census tract i, đ?&#x203A;˝đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;Â is the weight for the k-th predictor variable k={1,2,...,p} , and đ?&#x2018;Ľđ?&#x2018;&#x2013;,đ?&#x2018;&#x2DC;Â Â is the normalized k-th predictor variable.Â The TDI for each census tract in Erie and Niagara County was then mapped to demonstrate the spatial relationship between transit demand indicators. The TDI map was visualized with a standard deviation classification, which enables the map to orient groups of variables (identified in the legend) by how much they vary from the standard mean, or average (roughly 0.0). This means that census tracts below 0, or with negative scores, scored least in terms of potential transit demand, and census tracts above 0 have the highest potential for transit demand. ÂˇÂ Â Â Â Â Â Referring back to the visualization of individual variable concentrations illustrates how the TDI combines each variable to create a cumulative predictor of transit demand. Current NFTA routes, urban and rural, were overlaid onto the TDI map to indicate areas in the region that are not currently served by traditional public transportation.

ÂˇÂ Â Â Â Â Â 115

7. DATA ANALYSIS & VISUALIZATION Interpreting the Transit Demand Index The transit demand index (TDI) combines each individual variable to show where the highest demand for transportation exists. Each variable is also mapped on its own to provide context for how the TDI is built. Included are maps that show the variables themselves and also the variable with NFTA bus routes and rural routes overlaid to show how different census tracts are being served by existing transportation. Each variable map and the TDI map act as tools to be used by GBNRTC, public transportation organizations, local municipalities, urban planning professionals, and other transportation professionals to inform future planning for smart mobility options in the Buffalo-Niagara region. The data shown in the maps should be used by organizations alongside their internal data to provide an extra source of information to determine the best locations for mobility hubs or expansion of mobility as a service. The first variable, population density, was used to show where the highest concentration of people are living in both counties. The population density map with the NFTA routes shows how NFTA is already providing service to densely populated areas except a few rural locations. A transportation professional working in one of these densely populated locations might consider how smart mobility could be leveraged to better connect into existing transit. A professional working in a less densely populated area, particularly in rural areas, might consider how smart mobility, such as a small scale mobility hub or a public-private partnership with a ride hailing company could be used to connect to end route locations. The second variable used for the TDI was the number of individuals living below the poverty line. The map shows census tracts with high numbers of people living in · poverty and they access to existing bus routes. Many of the most impoverished census tracts exist within the urban areas of Buffalo and Niagara Falls but there are some rural census tracts showing higher levels of poverty as well. Transportation and planning professionals operating in higher poverty rural census tracts might consider investments to create more mobility options for low income residents. This is particularly important since we know that roughly 82% of NFTA riders are very low-income, making income a large inconsideration in regional transit use. ·

116

7. DATA ANALYSIS & VISUALIZATION The third variable used for the TDI was the number of individuals unemployed. The map shows high amounts of unemployment individuals in rural census tracts, and many of these rural census tracts with high rates of unemployment are not serviced by existing NFTA routes. It follows that the individuals facing unemployment in these areas struggle to access employment centers in urban and suburban geographies. Increased mobility options, like those discussed in previous chapters, could make regional job centers more accessible for unemployed populations in rural communities and should be considered by transportation professionals in these areas. The fourth variable used for the TDI was the number of individuals age 65 and up. The map shows a higher concentration of elderly populations in suburban and rural census tracts. NFTA routes do service many of those census tracts, however planners in these areas could consider mobility as a service and advanced paratransit options could to increase senior mobility, better connect the aging population to public transportation, and improve the rider experience for elderly populations. The fifth variable used for the TDI was households without vehicles. A great number of public transportation users do not have access to vehicles and the map shows that more people without vehicles are living in urban and suburban areas instead of rural ones. Existing NFTA routes service a majority of the census tracts with high populations of households without vehicle access. There remain some rural areas that do see relatively high proportions of the population without access to a vehicle. Small scale mobility hubs, bikes shares, and other forms of smart mobility in these areas should be considered to increase mobility of populations without access to a vehicle who are cut off from existing public transportation. · ·

117

7. DATA ANALYSIS & VISUALIZATION Finally, by combining all five variables, we get a Transit Demand Index for Erie and Niagara County. The TDI map shows the census tracts where the highest demand for transportation is based on summation of all variables. Transportation professionals can use this TDI map along with other available data to make informed decisions regarding smart mobility investments in the Erie-Niagara region. There are high demand areas within each geographic category: urban, suburban, and rural. There are rural census tracts in both Erie and Niagara County that have high demand for transportation that are not serviced by existing NFTA routes. An argument can be made by transportation professionals that these census tracts would be ideal locations for mobility hubs and other innovative mobility solutions. A strategic approach to the placement of mobility hubs in both counties could improve public transportation connectivity throughout the region.

118