AN ORDINANCE relating to street and sidewalk use fees; adopting a Free-Floating Bike Share Program Fee Schedule; and amending Ordinance 125493, which amended the 2018 Budget (Ordinance 125475), by increasing appropriations to the Seattle Department of Transportation; all by a 3/4 vote of the City Council.
Bill passes and sign it. Let's move to committee reports. Please read the report of the Sustainability and Transportation Committee. Report of the Sustainability. And Transportation Committee agenda. Item one Constable 119305 relating to Street and Syracuse fees, adopting a free floating bikeshare program fee schedule and amending ordinance 125 493, which amended the 2018 budget by increasing preparations to Seattle Department Transportation all by 3/1 vote of the City Council. The committee recommends the bill passed. Thank you very much. I'm aware that we have some amendments, but let's start with the basic legislation. Councilmember O'Brien wants to lead us through it. Thank you very much. So a little over a year ago, the city of Seattle created a pilot program for licensing bike share programs, free floating bike share programs. It was one of the first in the country. And what we've seen is, as you heard today in public comment and of you heard through committee reports in the past number of months, a significant usage of these new types of bike share over a million riders of use these use these bikes in the last year and as time would like to continue licensing them under a new program. And so this legislation authorizes them to do that moving forward. Seattle Department of Transportation has extended, as has stated, their intent to essentially double the number of permits that they would allow permitted bikes from a maximum of 10,000 today to about 20,000 going forward with up to four companies. And each company could have up to 5000. It's not clear that there will be a full 20,000 yet. There are currently three bike share companies that have permits. One of them has publicly announced they're kind of pulling out of the United States market. But there are also a number of other bike share companies that have expressed interest. So we'll see how that goes. What we are doing today is essentially authorizing the collection of fees and giving the flexibility to our start on how they move forward. If there are other questions on the underlying legislation, and I'm happy to take those and if not, I would turn it over to Councilmember Herbold, who has an amendment that she would like, which I support. Very good. Any questions before we turn over? Councilman Herbold. Do you have a question? Councilmember O'Brien, can you speak to the. Scope. Of this ordinance as it relates to liability issues? I believe those issues, some of the issues related to contracts and liability that were brought up during public comment are out of the scope of this ordinance because this is just about the street use fees. Is that basically correct? Yeah, I'm a little nervous talking about liability without the attorneys being here. I can speak specifically that the scope of this is simply authorizing the collection of fees and spending those fees. I will note that what we heard during public comment specifically about an arbitration clause in there, this legislation does not address that. But I am I do appreciate those concerns being raised and specifically to the comment, the request that we follow the Governor Inslee's lead in stated city preference for partnering with folks who do not have mandatory arbitration clauses is something I am certainly interested in, in not just this program, but any partnerships we do have going forward. So it's something that I'd be willing to work with colleagues on separately in this work. Catherine Beck, she has a question. I do. And I'm not sure. Councilmembers whether you want to address these after Councilmember Herbold brings her amendment forward. But I'm particularly interested in the rules that we may be changing in response to the increasing number of bicycles. You all know that I am a huge supporter of riding bikes, particularly around downtown, but I am concerned about where people are parking. And I know there's been conversation about the last 30 feet, like in front of a stop sign, that parking spot that's usually disallowed any way for cars. Are we dealing with that? Are we dealing with rules around riding on sidewalks, especially when we've got a bike lane like on Second Avenue? And then as Mr. McDonald brought up something about the permits and being able to get that information, I don't understand why that continues to be a difficult problem for people. So could you address that? Rules about riding on sidewalks, increased parking, and what's the status of being able to get information around permits for massdot? Sure. So I have after Councilmember Herbold has her amendment, I have a separate amendment that speaks to how we plan to move forward with enforcement of parking regulations around free floating bike share. Specifically how the city requesting more information from Massdot about how they plan to enforce against the companies who can then hold their riders accountable for where they leave these bicycles when they're done. I will speak briefly to the parking what's loud right now? We've done a few pilots. They've been very narrow as far as creating specific spaces for bike share bikes and sometimes other bikes where they can park. And one of the areas that I think is ripe for kind of redeployment is, as you mentioned, the area adjacent to stop signs where parking is not allowed, but bike parking could be put in that place and it would be done right with not restricting the visibility around the stop signs. And so it's essentially an underused piece of the right away that could be reallocated to bike parking, including bike share corrals to create an opportunity for people to put bikes there. I don't this this ordinance, as it increases the permitting fee for operators, will generate additional revenue to make some of the investments necessary to make that parking available. I don't want to pretend that that parking alone will solve it. A lot of this is behavioral and we need to establish the type of behavioral norms. And we're going to look forward to hearing from the department within the next month or so on how they plan to enforce that against the bike share companies who can then establishes norms with a client. It's whether they want to find them or educate them or however they plan to do that. Can someone make sure he had one more time? The question was around our starts response to requests for data sharing. Yes, I have. The current requirement is that data is shared with a third party who then kind of crunches those numbers for us. It's the University of Washington's transportation mobility folks that are doing that. And so I don't know the specifics about the public records. The data I've seen has been very thorough. I have not chatted with Mr. McDonald about specifically what he is trying to get and he has not been able to get. But there is some there may be some pieces that are proprietary, which I understand folks want to do. But my my intent is that the city is collecting all the information we need to make good policy decisions. And that information should also be made available to the public. So the public can weigh in on that, too. And so I'm happy to work with Mr. McDonald to continue to ensure that he has access to the data that he wants, assuming it's consistent with what I just said. And I think the other question that got lost in my intro was the question about just rules for riding. And I've heard from many folks that the concern is if there is not a bicycle lane, a dedicated lane, then bikes will ride on the sidewalks if it's less or the people feel safer on there than pedestrians feel concerned. You got bikes on the sidewalk. So the vicious cycle there is we need to have more designated places for bikes to ride. And is there a plan for changing the rules when we've got more spaces that are designated for safe? Because as we know, you know, what have we called the priorities? Soft over hard? You know, pedestrians have priority over bikes that have priority over cars and freight coming at them. And there's no I don't believe there's any specifics in our policy about a plan to do that. But I agree with what we heard from the public today and what you said. And, Councilman, make sure you and I, among others, have seen other jurisdictions where there is public right away and it's dedicated to pedestrians, public ride, whether it's dedicated to motor vehicles and public ride away. A whole network is dedicated for folks using bicycles or other modes to get around. You know, in the city of Seattle, we just have a small fraction of our right away actually has that type of facility where folks feel safe at all ages and abilities. And so I think there's an urgency around building that out. Which agenda item three touches on for downtown. How we manage what's allowed on the sidewalk or not, I think is a question that will continue to be in front of us in the coming years as we see more and more types of devices coming forward that do great to address mobility challenges, too great to address some of the climate challenges we have. But do do those certain conflicts that were heard a little bit about today and I'll talk about in my amendment and we need to address that going forward. I will say that the right to use the sidewalk is one that, you know, sometimes there's a bike lane and some of us feel safe on a bike lane. Some people don't feel safe enough on a bike lane. We know still, you know, protected bike lane is is or a regional trail is kind of a higher standard. There's a range of facilities and different individuals feel feel differently about their safety. And in the city of Seattle, we do allow folks to ride on the sidewalks. Of course, the requirement is that to do so in a safe manner. And sometimes that means the only safe manner would be to get off and walk the bicycle depending on who's there and have it is. And we need to make sure that regardless of everything else we're doing, that those standards are upheld. Right. Thank you. And thank you, President Herold, for giving us have that. May I add one point to Councilmember Bradshaw's last question? Thank you. It's my recollection that the state legislature has recently passed legislation as it relates to e-bikes and sidewalks and limiting their ability to use sidewalks. It's not clear whether or not we have to do something here in Seattle in order to implement that new law. It's something that my staff is checking on. Okay, good. And there's different levels of e-bikes to you. Exactly. Councilmember Johnson just reminded me of that as well. Okay. So Councilmember Herbold has an amendment to substitution. She'd like to talk about Councilwoman Herbold. Thank you. I moved to amend Council Bill 11 9305 by substituting version three for version two. So second, second guess. I would just like to describe what we're doing. Sure. And just to let folks know the you don't have a hard copy of it. That's because it did make the agenda. So it's it's linked online if you want to follow along. When I as I speak and if you don't want to, that's fine too. So the. Comments in the substituted version do a number of things. They limit council approval for fees to bicycles and adaptive cycles to accommodate disabled riders. They are the substitute requests that provide a written plan for sidewalk management and addressing the increased use of fast moving motor electric motor devices on sidewalks by December 31st, 2018. Also request quarterly reports from stat about installation of designated bike parking associated with the free floating bike share program. And the thinking behind this is we want to hear back from Massdot before considering approval for fees for additional devices such as electric scooters and other innovative devices. And then there's a specific recital that references Scott's current plans to allow for access for disabled riders. It notes an allowance of up to 1000 bicycles permit per permit to incentivize the deployment of adaptive cycles. And the again, the intention is to allow Eastport to work with the permitting companies to incentivize their deployment of one additional regular cycle for each adaptive cycle that they provide. Very good. Any questions on Councilman Herbold amendment that I'll describe as Amendment one? Basically. So choose version three for version two. Any comments or questions? How's it coming? Councilmember People, I appreciate your work on this and the clarifying language around this. The the original intent to provide a variety of types of cycles that can accommodate users is great and I really appreciate your focus on getting the language right to really specify what we're talking about here. Thank you. Very good. Okay. If there's no further comments, we will vote. Thank you again, Councilman Herbold. Oh, all those in favor of Amendment One, which substituted version three for version two, say I. I opposed the ayes have it. Amendment one does pass. Councilman Brown, I believe you had a Second Amendment. I do. So the Second Amendment I proposed add a new section for that would read as follows. Section four, no more than $500,000 of the funds appropriated in this ordinance for the mobility operations budget control level in the 2018 budget may be spent on implementing the free floating bikeshare program until the Chair of the Sustainability and Transportation Committee files a certification with the City Clerk that the Department of Transportation has provided a plan for direct enforcement of bikeshare parking requirements and management of the right of way to accommodate disabled pedestrians by creating a parking enforcement program or identifying use of a parking enforcement strategy currently implemented by the city of Seattle. And this amendment would also remember the subsequent sections appropriately. Before we discuss it, I. Will move that. This move is their second. Second, second. Sort of self-explanatory that comes from a brand, as you want to say any more about it. And we'll just briefly what we what we heard today in public comment. And I really want to thank Michael, Marcy and Lynne for coming out and speaking about their personal interactions with these bicycles. And a number of folks were also a committee raising concerns, concerns both that folks with disabilities have not been included in the conversation with our staff. But I believe since committee there have been conversations have begun and the expectation is that those conversations will continue and that members of this community will be at the table helping design an enforcement strategy that will address the concerns they raise more broadly. I want to just say that bike shares have proven, as I mentioned earlier, over the nearly a million and a half rides in the first year as an opportunity to provide great mobility to a lot of people in our community. But we cannot be adding mobility options for some people in our community. Well, we're hindering the mobility opportunities of others, and we don't have to do that. There are ways, I am certain, that if we're smart about this, we can expand the mobility options for some while also maintaining and increasing the mobility options for folks in this case that may have vision disabilities and these bike shares are impeding that. And so I look forward to working with the Department of Transportation and advocates in the community in the coming weeks and months to identify ways that we can really create a standard our community with teeth to back it up so that folks who are using this new mobility option are doing so in a way that doesn't hurt others. Mobility options. Very good. We are just going to vote on the amendment right now. Any other comments on amendment number two? All those in favor of amendment number two as described by Councilman Bryan. Please vote i. I opposed. The ayes have it. Okay, so one and two are passed. So we have an amended piece of legislation in Constable 119305 comes from Brian actually. Any any closing remarks or any other comments. Just mentioned that that Seattle has been a pioneer in this new mode of bicycle transportation. And what we're seeing around the country is a very rapidly evolving system, and we will almost certainly be back multiple times in the coming years as new technologies and devices emerge. And I just want to acknowledge that we will continue to struggle with what exactly type of lane and facility folks use and how we manage that in a way that improves mobility for every single person in our community, not one group at the expense of others. And I'm proud of the the work we've done to date. I think the city could have done a better job to this point working with certain communities. And I hope that collectively moving forward as this body of work continues to evolve, we can really set a high bar for how we do this. Well, I think this is a good piece of legislation is is very good. And it comes from a Johnson. Briefly, I want to say, you know, to echo that point, Councilmember O'Brien, you know, we heard in committee that of the 40,000 some odd bike share bikes that exist in the United States, 10,000 of them are here in the city of Seattle. So, you know, when we look at mobility, particularly for those transit users, for a first mile or last mile connections, bike share in the city of Seattle is undoubtedly improving the lives of thousands of Seattleites on a daily basis to get them where they want to go. And I think as we continue to expand geographically and we and we put an increased focus on equitable geographic balance of these bikes, I think it's only going to do more to improve the lives of more satellites. Thank you. Katherine Johnson. Councilwoman Mesquita. Thank you, Mr. President. I'm really excited about this piece of legislation and the amended version that's in front of us. I think we are seeing more and more residents of Seattle decide that they can take up biking. I know for myself and for my husband, this was our reintroduction into biking and seeing it as a possibility for not just occasional use, but for a potential commuting option. And I know that we have community members throughout Seattle who never thought that they'd be able to make it up these hills and with the electric bikes now have a possibility of being able to use a bike to get up there. So I think it's a win. I think it's a win for environmental justice. I think it's a win for the mobility justice movement. I think it's a good first step. I also am concerned thank you to the Washington State Association for Justice for bringing up the concerns around injured bikers. And I know that we will be continuing to work with you on some additional protections, which I understand are the questions that were raised in our earlier conversations. That's a broader conversation that we must engage in. Initially, I was a little concerned about capping the number of bicycles out there, given that we're not even capping how many TNC operators we have in our city. But I absolutely agree that we have to have a way to make sure that we're being conscious about the impact of these free floating bicycles on our right way, on a ride away is on our sidewalks and making sure that we're not impairing those who have mobility or vision limitations. So I really appreciate the amended version that we have in front of us, and I look forward to working with you on how we create more opportunities for safe alternatives to using a car. Thank you, Councilmember Skater. Any other further comments from any of our colleagues? Okay, please call the rule on the passage of the amended. Bill Herbold i Johnson Morales. I mosquera i o'brien. I want to make sure President Harrell high eight in favor and unopposed. Bill passed and show sign it. Please read the second agenda item.