The streets are filled with companies using public spaces: Fedex deliveries blocking the road, sidewalk signs for bars, Getaround rentals, food carts, mailboxes, ATMs, parking meters, Scoot scooters, taxi lines, Lyft/Ubers, Redbox DVD rentals, annoying Greenpeace petition people, construction, billboards, etc.
I don't think it's a cost-saving measure for scooter/bike companies, but rather convenience for users. I wouldn't use scooters if I had to walk 4 blocks to a "designated pickup zone".
Yes, these scooters/bikes are making money. But they also really improve cities, by cutting down on traffic congestion and car emissions. As long as they're regulated via permits (meaning the government makes a bit of money to pay for maintenance), they should be allowed... and if people dislike them, they'll go out of business, and it'll solve itself.
Fedex deliveries blocking the road for a short time are generally considered preferable to removing a whack of on-street parking from every block in order to have an excess of loading zones, or not being able to have deliveries at all.
sidewalk signs for bars are regulated, at least in my city. They have to leave (IIRC) 6' of clearance on the sidewalk so they don't obstruct pedestrian traffic. Whether those rules are being followed is perhaps another issue, but I haven't generally found them to be a nuisance.
Getaround rentals are private cars that you rent from the owner. If the city requires a fee to be paid for overnight on-street parking, that fee will be paid by the owner. If the street is meter parking, that fee will be paid by whoever is using the car.
food carts typically pay the city a fee in exchange for use of public space.
mailboxes are either owned by the government or installed on private property.
ATMs are installed on private property.
parking meters are government property.
Scoot scooters (don't know what those are)
taxi lines are a government designated thing. Note that most cities that have them also make money from taxi licensing.
Lyft/Ubers are a minor menace, I agree with you on that one.
Redbox DVD rentals are installed on private property.
annoying Greenpeace petition people are required to get permits, at least in my city.
construction also requires permits.
billboards are installed on private property.
Long story short, I think you're being hyperbolic here.
> Fedex deliveries blocking the road for a short time are generally considered preferable to removing a whack of on-street parking from every block in order to have an excess of loading zones, or not being able to have deliveries at all.
You mean the way that the minor inconvenience of having
a few scooters laying around is considered acceptable in return for having a cheap, efficient, green solution for last mile transportation?
If it's just a few, that's not a big deal. But what a lot of people are envisioning isn't just a few scooters and bikes left around, it's the nuisance and eyesore of public areas being absolutely littered with these things that people are seeing in photos from cities that have had these services for a while.
I don't think they're wrong. I also don't think it's a non-solvable problem. It seems that the worst of it is largely due to there being simply too many of the things -- far more than are needed to actually meet the demand for short- to medium-distance transportation -- in many cities. Requiring companies to get a permit for each of their bikes so that the city has a way to limit the total volume, and so that it can ensure that the rollout happens incrementally so any apparent problems can be addressed before they create a major nuisance, would probably be more than sufficient.
I think it's a question of how those things are "laying around".
In Paris this is a relatively new development, but what I take issue with is where they are left by the users, which is usually in the middle of the sidewalk. People really don't care where they leave them since there's no consequence for them.
I ride a motorbike around town. In Paris it's legal to park motorbikes and scooters on the sidewalks if the sidewalk is wide enough as to not bother pedestrians. If the police walks by and thinks your vehicle is bothering, you get a ticket or could even have your bike towed. This has a direct impact on the owner.
If you park like a d... you risk your bike being tipped over, scratched, etc. Again, direct impact on the owner.
However, with a rental scooter / bike, you won't get any fines for parking in the middle of the sidewalk, most people won't care if something happens to the bike, etc, so they just don't care. Of course, if the company is getting the tickets and has to repair the bikes more often than otherwise necessary, the cost will be transferred to the users, but not in a direct manner. So in a society where people are on average less and less civil, I think this kind of development is to be expected.
There are many (particularly those with mobility or vision related disabilites) that would disagree with your use of the word "minor" to describe randomly placed obstacles on the sidewalk...
Preferable to cars, maybe, since it frees up parking, however, around here they simply park in the bike lane. I go by a UPS store daily and there are often 1-2 trucks both parked in the bike lane.
In the greater Boston area, I think I've only seen Zipcar spots on private property (though I'm not sure what the ownership is of the MBTA parking spaces) and I would expect the rate to be somewhat negotiable, based on supply & demand for the neighborhood.
There are car sharing services in Seattle that operate much like the scooters and bikes (park them in any city space, pay just for when you use, etc). The city charges a flat rate per car per month. Like dockless bike share it ends up being way more useful.
Certainly, where I live in London, Zipcar has arranged with the council to have special bays marked, reserved for them. The council like car-sharing, so are happy - but it is done in a manageable way.
There is also Zipcar Flex in London. You can park the cars in on-street parking, even paid or residents bays. But they have only agreed it with some councils so far. Map: https://www.zipcar.co.uk/takethebluepin#zipzone-map
uk gov might not work like a greed corporation as its usa counterparts. usually when a deal is stabilished with one company, others can jump in for the same price/share. the worst that would happen for zip car is to have to share the spaces.
Are they? Are any of the companies public? It seems like a burn through cash to get a user base sort of thing but maybe these companies are older and more established than it seems to me.
Yep! And even rental car companies do take advantage of public parking: when cars are actually in use, customers are free to park them in any public parking spot.
Yet another clueless astroturfer who alters the facts to fit your own narrative. Go back to your PR boss and tell them we're not buying your "messaging".
The streets are filled with companies using public spaces: Fedex deliveries blocking the road, sidewalk signs for bars, Getaround rentals, food carts, mailboxes, ATMs, parking meters, Scoot scooters, taxi lines, Lyft/Ubers, Redbox DVD rentals, annoying Greenpeace petition people, construction, billboards, etc.
I don't think it's a cost-saving measure for scooter/bike companies, but rather convenience for users. I wouldn't use scooters if I had to walk 4 blocks to a "designated pickup zone".
Yes, these scooters/bikes are making money. But they also really improve cities, by cutting down on traffic congestion and car emissions. As long as they're regulated via permits (meaning the government makes a bit of money to pay for maintenance), they should be allowed... and if people dislike them, they'll go out of business, and it'll solve itself.