Shared e Bike and EScooter Final Pilot Report

Item #_____
Transportation Report to ISC: UNRESTRICTED

SPC on Transportation and Transit TT2020-1260
2020 December 16 Page 1 of 4
Shared e-Bike and e-Scooter Final Pilot Report
RECOMMENDATION(S):
That the Standing Policy Committee on Transportation and Transit recommend that
Council:
1. Allow private sector operation of shared micromobility services with the conditions that:
a) Operators must cover City administrative costs to regulate and manage the
program; and
b) Obtain City permission and follow all requirements in order to operate
2. Give three readings to the proposed bylaw to amend the Calgary Traffic Bylaw 26M96
(Attachment 3)
HIGHLIGHTS
• 1.9 million trips and over 200,000 unique users were recorded during the two-year shared
e-Bike and e-Scooter pilot that ran from October 2018 to October 2020. The company
Lime, which is currently in over 130 cities globally, found that during summertime
months in 2019 and 2020, their e-Scooters recorded more trips per vehicle in Calgary than
any other city in the world.
• The pilot was operated and funded by three shared micromobility companies. City
Administration created the pilot regulations, provided oversight and evaluated the pilot.
• Micromobility services (e.g. shared e-Scooters and e-Bikes) funded by the private sector
provide additional mobility options and recreation to Calgarians. Changes to the program
are required to address Calgarians' concerns.
• What does this mean to Calgarians? Calgarians will have private sector micromobility
options after the pilot.
• Why does this matter? Shared micromobility offers Calgarians and visitors a quick,
convenient and easy private-sector mobility option.
• Throughout the pilot, The City consulted with stakeholders and applied best practices from
other jurisdictions across North America. Information was collected such as health data
from Canada’s first injury study on shared e-Scooters and public engagement data from
two citizen surveys with over 17,000 responses.
• Three issue themes emerged: user behaviour, parking, and safety. Changes were made
during the pilot to address them. Further modifications are required including:
o A visible numerical identification number on each shared e-Scooter
o Allowing companies to be fined directly for improperly parked e-Scooters
o Allowing e-Scooters to operate on lower-classification roadways
o Limiting the amount of e-Scooters to 2019 levels
o Dedicated company funding and incentives for e-Scooter parking
o Requiring and evaluating companies’ safety plans and strategies
• Strategic Alignment to Council’s Citizen Priorities: A city that moves
• Background and Previous Council Direction is included as Attachment 1
Approval: D. Morgan concurs with this report. Author: A. Sedor and J. Oriold
Item #_____

DISCUSSION
Administration reviewed data to address concerns and develop recommendations on the future
of shared e-Bikes and e-Scooters in Calgary. Data and analysis can be found in Attachment 2.
The main themes emerging from the data are user behaviour, parking, and safety. Changes were
made during the pilot, and further changes are required to address these issues.
User behaviour - Key issue data: Public survey respondents in 2020 cited e-Scooter riders not
sharing the sidewalk or pathway fairly and not following the rules as their top two concerns. 125
of the 426 (29%) of 311 service requests in 2020 were about bad behaviour or conflicts with
pedestrians.
What we have done: Based on 2019 data in high pedestrian volume areas, slow speed zones
were implemented in 2020 in Kensington, Mission, Inglewood and on Stephen Avenue. 311s went
down in these areas from 27 in 2019 to 11 in 2020. The Business Improvement Areas (BIAs), with
slow speed zones, reported user behaviour improved in 2020, compared with 2019.
In 2020, Calgary Community Standards (CCS) conducted several education and enforcement
initiatives throughout the pilot. In total, 39 tickets were issued, along with numerous warnings.
Eau Claire was one of the busiest areas for e-Scooter use in Calgary, with usage increasing 80%
in the area from 2019 to 2020. Eau Claire accounted for 11% of the 311s in 2019 and 40% in
2020. Most of the concerns were around e-Scooter riders using the pedestrian pathway instead
of the bike path. To address this concern, a number of improvements were made: signage was
installed directing e-Scooters to the bike path; e-Scooter companies incorporated in-app
reminders when trips started in Eau Claire; CCS conducted enforcement and engagement; and
a slow speed zone and limits on the number of e-Scooters in the area was implemented in 2020
October on a trial basis.
What we will do: E-Scooter identification numbers, in conjunction with time and location, can be
used to report poor behaviours and have been successfully implemented in several jurisdictions
in North America. Companies can ban specific users if they receive serious or multiple complaints.
Calgary Police Services and CCS support an easily identifiable number on each shared e-Scooter
to assist enforcement. The City will require highly visible identification numbers on each shared
e-Scooter.
To reduce conflicts with pedestrians in neighborhoods, Administration recommends that e-
Scooters are allowed on lower-classification roadways without road markings. These are usually
residential roadways with lower design speeds. Both users and non-users of e-Scooters reported
they were comfortable with e-Scooters on these types of roads. Attachment 3 includes the
amendments required to the Transportation Bylaw to allow e-Scooters on roadways without road
markings.
Parking - Key issue data: 255 of the 426 (60%) of 311s in 2020 were due to parking concerns.
Calgarians listed parking as their third top concern in the 2020 e-Scooter citizen survey.
What we have done: E-Scooters parked inappropriately cause impediments and accessibility
concerns for people walking/wheeling on sidewalks and pathways. To address this, 30 designated
e-Scooter parking zones were installed in high-use areas in 2020. Approximately 2.5% of trips
ended in these zones, while 10% of e-Scooters were deployed by operators in these zones. While
the zones had relatively low user usage, they helped organize e-Scooters in high-use areas. If
there were more parking zones and incentives to use them, usage would likely increase.
Item #_____

The City worked with the e-Scooter providers in 2020 to implement a $10 fine to users who parked
their e-Scooters improperly. The e-Scooter companies reviewed photos taken at the end of trips
and issued fines to customers that did not park properly. Citizens also submitted 311s for
improperly parked e-Scooters, and these were shared with the companies for investigation. 188
company fines were issued to users. The companies reported that the number of improperly
parked e-Scooters went down by 25% from August to October 2020.
From 2019 to 2020 the number of permitted e-Scooters increased from 1,500 to 2,800. Some of
the increase in parking complaints is likely attributable to the increased number of e-Scooters.
From the e-Scooter citizen survey, there was not a substantial change in how often a user could
easily find an e-Scooter (74% of the time in 2019, 84% of the time in 2020). While ridership was
higher in 2020, the ridership per device went down from 11.1 rides per day in August 2019 to 4.3
in August 2020.
What we will do: We will limit the number of e-Scooters to the 2019 level of 1,500 devices. This
allows the companies to operate economically, ensures e-Scooters are accessible for those who
want to ride them and will likely reduce parking and sidewalk clutter issues. The City will reassess
the e-Scooter device limit periodically and can adjust numbers if parking issues are resolved.
Various North American jurisdictions have reduced e-Scooter parking infractions by allowing The
City to ticket companies directly for improperly parked e-Scooters. The company then passes
along the fine to the user. As part of future operating requirements, The City will look to duplicate
this approach.
Funds will be collected from e-Scooter companies to implement more e-Scooter parking zones.
Administration will work with the companies to incentivize parking and deploying in the zones.
Safety - Key issue data: 75 shared e-Scooter injuries that required an ambulance during the pilot
period were studied by a University of Calgary medical research team. 71 of these injuries
occurred to the e-Scooter rider, while four impacted pedestrians or cyclists. There were zero
fatalities and zero admissions to the ICU. 40% of the citizen survey respondents who had ridden
an e-Scooter, stated that they had experienced e-Scooter maintenance or quality issues.
What we have done: The City commissioned a study by the University of Calgary Cumming
School of Medicine, in conjunction with Alberta Health Services, to investigate e-Scooter injuries
that required an ambulance. A summary of the insights gathered can be found in Attachment 2.
Each e-Scooter company was required to conduct education and safety events and distribute free
helmets. In total, five events were held, and approximately 1,400 helmets were distributed.
What we will do: The future operating requirements for e-Scooter companies will emphasize
safety. Specifically, promoting best maintenance practices, and safe e-Scooter etiquette including
helmet use and educating riders on the risks of riding intoxicated and riding double.
STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT AND COMMUNICATION (EXTERNAL)

☒ Public Engagement was undertaken
☐ Public Communication or Engagement was not required
☒ Public/Stakeholders were informed
☒ Stakeholder dialogue/relations were undertaken
Item #_____

Various stakeholders were consulted throughout the pilot, including: Government of Alberta,
shared micromobility companies, University of Calgary, Alberta Health Services, Advisory
Committee on Accessibility and the Canadian Institute for the Blind. Administration connected
with colleagues in Seattle, Portland, San Francisco, Chicago, Montreal, Ottawa and Edmonton
to learn from their experiences. Public engagement occurred through two online surveys (more
than 17,000 responses) and an ongoing dialogue with BIAs. The City communicated details
about the pilot through social media channels, calgary.ca and media interviews.
IMPLICATIONS
Social
Increased transportation options expand people’s ability to take part in a variety of economic and
social activities. Shared micromobility options allow Calgarians and tourists to sightsee, socialize
with family and friends, and visit local businesses and attractions.
Environmental
The citizen e-Scooter survey results show that a third of e-Scooter trips replace a car trip.
E-Scooters and e-Bikes are electrically powered and do not have tail pipe emissions.
Economic
Approximately 55% of shared e-Scooter and e-Bike trips ended in BIA areas, which feature small
local businesses. The shared micromobility companies hired 82 full time, 22 part time, and
numerous contract staff in Calgary.
Service and Financial Implications
No anticipated financial impact

Between 2018 and 2020 The City took in $177,000 from company permits and it cost an estimated
$163,000 for The City to run the pilot. The City will continue to recover all municipal costs by
implementing a per-trip fee model and additional permit fees to build and maintain e-Scooter
parking infrastructure.
RISK
The Calgary e-Scooter injury study reports several injuries associated with e-Scooter usage.
There will likely be further e-Scooter ER admissions if the program continues.
ATTACHMENT(S)
1. Previous Council Direction, Background
2. Shared e-Bike and e-Scooter Data and Analysis
3. Proposed Text of a Bylaw to amend Bylaw 26M96, the Calgary Traffic Bylaw
Department Circulation
General Manager Department Approve/Consult/Inform
Doug Morgan Transportation Approve
TT2020-1260
Attachment 1
Background
Previous Council Direction
In July 2018, Council unanimously approved a Notice of Motion directing administration to

conduct a two-year pilot for bike share by September 2018 that would include:
- An intake process for interested operators to participate

- Data sharing requirements with permitted operators
- A pilot consisting of up to 10,000 bicycles, scooters or other personal mobility devices
- A performance-based system for permitted operators to gradually increase their fleet size,
within set pilot limits
- A permit and fee structure that covers administrative costs to regulate and manage the
pilot program
- Any other permit conditions to be imposed on bike share operators to ensure that the safety
and convenience of roadway and sidewalk users is not unduly impacted
The Notice of Motion further directed administration report back to Council through the Standing
Policy Committee on Transportation and Transit to:
- Review the existing bylaw rules governing mobility devices such as scooters, skateboards,
roller skates and personal mobility devices with electric motors and to bring forward any
necessary bylaw amendments to facilitate the use of such devices no later than Q1 2019
- Provide an update on the pilot in Q4 2019
- Provide a final report with potential further recommendations no later than Q4 2020.
TT2020-1260 Attachment 1 Page 1 of 2

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 1
Timeline for Shared Bike Notice of Motion
DATE REPORT NUMBER DIRECTION/DESCRIPTION

7/23/2018 C2018-0934 Bike Share in Calgary
Council unanimously Approved the Notice of Motion directing
Administration to undertake a 2-year micromobility pilot
(bicycles, scooters or other personal mobility devices).
2/27/2019 TT2019-0205 Transportation Bylaw Changes

Council approved a number of updates to charter and non-
charter Bylaws including changes to where non-motorized
Skateboards, Inline Skates and Scooters can operate, allowing
cyclists to signal with either hand, the safe passing bylaw, and
updating the definition in the bylaw for skateboards, scooters
and bicycles. These changes helped allow for the legal operation
of micromobility devices in Calgary.
12/18/2019 TT2019-1374 Shared e-Bike and e-Scooter Mid-Pilot Report

Administration updated Council on the pilot and brought forth
new operational strategies to help manage and regulate the pilot
program. Council passed updates to the Traffic Bylaw to
regulate e-Scooters, and additional fines in the traffic bylaw
including fines for doubling and interfering with pedestrians.
12/16/2020 TT2020-1260 Shared e-Bike and e-Scooter Final Pilot Report

Administration in proposing to continue the shared micromobility
program post pilot, with the conditions that operators must
cover City administrative costs to regulate and manage the
program and obtain City permission and follow all requirements
in order to operate. Bylaws are also proposed to allow e-
Scooters on low volume roadways and to add additional vehicle
requirements.

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Shared e-Bike and e-Scooter Data and Analysis Report
Content
Page Topic Content Data source
Fleet size
2 Ridership Ridership numbers Mobility Data Specification (MDS)
Destinations
3 Destinations Where are people going Mobility Data Specification (MDS)
How people are getting to

5 Routes Mobility Data Specification (MDS)
their destinations
311 Calls and Common concerns
Citizen Survey Results
7 Correspondence with User behavior & conflicts
Citizens 311 & Citizen Correspondence
Parking issues 311 & Citizen Correspondence

10 Parking
Share and Go Zones Mobility Data Specification (MDS)
Public Engagement Complaints Citizen Survey Results
12
Survey Distribution 311 & Citizen Correspondence
How many, why and
Safety & e-Scooter
19 when are people being Alberta Health Services Data
Injuries
injured on e-scooters
City Revenues and Costs
21 Financial Summary Financial Data
for the pilot

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Ridership
Table 1 shows a comparison of fleet size and number of trips recorded by shared e-Bikes and e-
Scooters over the entire pilot period. Information was collected from the shared mobility
companies in the mobility data specification (MDS) format. The data provides information on
where and when a trip starts, ends, and the route it took to get there.
Table 1: e-Bike and e-Scooter Fleet Size & Ridership
Company 2019 2020
Lime chose to remove

500 e-bikes
their e-Bikes in 2020
1,000 e-Scooters
1,300 e-Scooters
500 e-Scooters 1,000 e-Scooters
N/A 500 e-Scooters
Number of trips per year 918,000 956,000
Operating Days 110 162
Number of unique riders 200,000+
Total # of trips during the pilot 1,874,000
Due to uncertainties with COVID19, a restricted number of 450 e-Scooters were permitted to
operate between May 22nd and June 22nd, 2020. The permitted number of e-Scooters increased
on June 22nd to 2,500, which was the original number of permitted e-Scooters for the second year
of the pilot. In accordance with the performance based Dynamic Cap, the number of permitted e-
Scooters increased again in August 2020 from 2,500 to 2,800. Although 2,800 e-Scooters were
permitted, the maximum number deployed during the pilot was 2,300.

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Destinations
People used e-Scooters and e-bikes to travel to a variety of destinations in the inner city, as shown
in Figure 1. The following destinations were the most popular throughout the pilot:
• Stephen Avenue
• Kensington
• East Village
• 17th Avenue SW
• 4th Street SW
• Eau Claire
Figure 1: Trip End Locations for the Combined Two-Year Pilot

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Throughout the duration of the pilot, approximately 55% of shared e-scooter and e-bike trips
ended in a BIA or BRZ, as shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2: Percent of Overall Trip Destinations That End in a BIA or BRZ
Table 2 Percentage of Total Trips that ended in a BIA - 2019 vs 2020
BIA / BRZ 2019 2020

Calgary Downtown Association (CDA) 24.1% 24.1%
Victoria Park 7.2% 6.2%
17th Avenue Retail & Entertainment District 5.7% 7.7%
Beltline 4.0% 4.3%
Chinatown 3.6% 5.2%
4th Street South West 3.0% 3.3%
Kensington 2.3% 2.1%
Inglewood 1.8% 1.6%
Bridgeland 1.4% 1.2%
First Street Improvement Area 0.5% 0.7%
Total 53.6% 56.4%

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Routes
Approximately 60% of e-Scooters and e-Bikes used the pathway network or cycling infrastructure
to get to their destinations. The rest of the volume of the trips (40%) took place on sidewalks
and/or roadways. The most popular routes in the city were along the river path, commercial areas,
and in the cycle track network (Figure 3).
Figure 3: Most Popular Routes – 2019 + 2020

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Figure 4 shows the difference in popular routes in 2019 vs 2020. Areas with a darker shade of
orange/red indicate increased use in that area in 2020 compared to 2019. In 2020, there were a
higher number of trips in: Eau Claire, the River Pathway, 17th Avenue SW, Memorial Drive
(Adaptive Roadway) and select streets in the downtown core.
Figure 4: Differences in Route Use - 2019 vs 2020

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
311 Calls and Correspondence with Citizens

Throughout the course of the pilot, there were a total of 769 logged 311 service requests. As
shown in Figure 5, the two most common complaints were around rider behaviour/conflict with
pedestrians and parking. The number of concerns around bad behaviour and conflicts with other
sidewalk and pathway users was higher in 2019 (206) than 2020 (125). More parking complaints
were logged in 2020 (255) than in 2019 (69).
70%
206
255
60%
50%
40%
125
30%
69
66
20%
46
10%
0%
BAD PARKING OTHER
BEHAVIOUR/CONFLICT
2019 (n=343) 2020 (n=426)
Figure 5: 311 Complaints by Category – 2019 vs 2020
While the total number of 311 complaints in 2020 exceeded those complaints in 2019, there were
52 more operational days in 2020 than in 2019, shown in Figure 6. Therefore, the overall average
number of complaints per day dropped from 3.1/day in 2019 to 2.6/day in 2020.
250
200 203
150
117
100 107
84 82
50 53 45
41
20 17
0
May June July Aug Sept Oct
2019 (n=343) 2020 (n=426)
Figure 6: Overall 311 Complaints by Month – 2019 vs 2020

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
The areas with the most complaints were located centrally in Downtown and the Beltline, as well
as along the riverfront in areas such as Eau Claire, Sunnyside and Bridgeland. For the 2020
operating season, The City implemented geofenced slow speed zones (highlighted blue in Figure
7) in Kensington, Mission, Stephen Avenue and Inglewood. While the overall number of 311s
increased in 2020, 311 complaints generally went down in areas where Slow Speed Zones were
implemented, as highlighted in Table 3. The Business Improvement Areas (BIAs), with slow speed
zone’s, reported user behaviour improved in 2020 compared to 2019.
Slow Speed
2019 2020
Zone
Kensington 12 2
Stephen AV 5 2
Inglewood 1 3
4 ST SW
9 4
(Mission)
Total 27 11
Table 3: Number of 311s in Slow

Speed Zone Areas
Figure 7: Locations of 311 Complaints – 2019 vs 2020

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Eau Claire was one of the busiest areas for e-Scooter use in Calgary, with usage increasing by
80% in the area from 2019 to 2020. Rides in the area increased from 50,000 in 2019 to 90,000 in
2020. Eau Claire accounted for 11% of the 311s in 2019, and 40% of 311s in 2020 (Figure 8).
40%
27%
25%
20%
20%
19%
15%
12%
11%
9.5%
7%
4.5%
6%
6%
5%
2.5%
2.5%
4%
2%
2%
BELTLINE DOWNTOWN EAU CLAIRE SUNNYSIDE BRIDGELAND
2019 % of Ridership 2019 % of 311's 2020 % of Ridership 2020 % of 311's
Figure 8: Ridership vs 311 Complaints in Top 5 Communities – 2019 vs 2020

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Parking
The 2020 e-Scooter citizen survey indicated parking was the 3rd top concern. Figure 9 shows the
parking specific complaints made to 311. There were 69 parking 311s in 2019 and 255 in 2020.
The City worked with the e-Scooter providers to implement a $10 company fine to users who
parked their e-Scooters improperly starting in August 2020. Companies issued 188 fines in August
through October 2020. There was a greater number permitted of e-Scooters in Calgary in 2020
(n=2,800) compared to 2019 (n=1,500), which could account for increases in e-Scooter 311
parking concerns.
66
61
Number of Parking 311s
52
43 41
29
16
6 8
0 0 2
May June July August September October
Month
2019 2020
Figure 9: Number of Parking Specific Complaints by Months – 2019 vs 2020

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Share and Go Parking Zones
In response to concerns around improperly parked e-Scooters, The City implemented 30 “Share
and Go Parking Zones” in 2020. These zones were created as a go-to place to find an e-Scooter
or to end a ride. Three styles of parking zones were installed: painted off street zone, painted
parking mat, and repurposed Car2Go parking stalls. Costs associated with the installation of
parking zones were paid for by the fees collected from the e-Scooter companies.
Figure 10: Three Types of e-Scooter “Share & Go” Parking Zones
Since installation, approximately 2.5% of riders ended their trips in a Share and Go Parking Zone.
The three most popular parking zones were:
• South of the Peace Bridge (painted off street zone)

• North of Eau Claire AV & 6 ST SW (painted off street zone)
• South of the Jaipur Bridge (painted parking mat)
Approximately 10% of e-Scooters deployed by the operating companies were in Share and Go
Parking Zones. The three most popular deployment zones were:
• 12 AV & 10 ST SW (repurposed Car2Go stall)

• North of Eau Claire AV & 6 ST SW (painted off street zone)
• 15 AV & 5 ST SW (repurposed Car2Go stall)

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Public Engagement Survey

The City conducted two public engagement surveys that took place from September 23 to October
6, 2019 and September 16 to October 7, 2020 to understand what citizens thought about the
shared e-Bike and e-Scooter pilot. The full What We Heard report is available publicly online. In
2019, approximately 9,900 people responded to the survey, while 2020 saw approximately 7,200
survey responses. As illustrated in Figure 11, about half of the survey participants had tried riding
an e-Scooter.
2019 (n=9,935) 2020 (n=7,217)
No
46%
No
36%
Yes
64%
Yes
I don't I don't
49%
know know
0% 5%
Figure 11: Survey Response to Using a Shared e-Scooter - 2019 vs 2020
In 2019, most riders took between five and 15 trips. As shown in Figure 12, the number of people
who had used an e-Scooter 16 or more times increased in 2020.
16. How many times have you made a trip by a shared e-scooter in Calgary?
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30% 35% 40%
1 trip
2 to 5 trips
5 to 15 trips
16 or more trips
Don’t know
2019 (n=6,281) 2020 (n=3,460)
Figure 12: Survey Response to Number of Times Riders Use e-Scooters - 2019 vs 2020

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
As illustrated in Figure 13, in 2020, e-Scooter rider survey participants felt most comfortable riding
the shared e-Scooters on pathways, empty sidewalks and bike lanes/cycle tracks. Residential
roads were not as comfortable, but were preferred to busy sidewalks, commercial main streets,
and major roadways, which were ranked the least comfortable.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Bike pathway (e.g. Bow River pathway) (n=3,436) 5% 16% 74%
Bike lane or cycle track (n=3,441) 5% 22% 68%
Empty sidewalk (n=3,435) 7% 27% 59%
Residential road (n=3,435) 8% 10% 15% 36% 31%
Commercial main street road (e.g. 17 Avenue S.W., 1

38% 25% 17% 15% 5%
Avenue N.E., Kensington Road N.W.) (n=3,426)
Busy sidewalk (3,431) 36% 31% 18% 13% 3%
Major roadway (e.g. MacLeod Trail, Memorial Drive)

81% 9% 6%
(n=3,433)
Least comfortable Somewhat uncomfortable Neutral Somewhat comfortable Most comfortable
Figure 13: 2020 Survey Response to Level of Rider Comfort Based on Style of Infrastructure

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
When asked where people should be able to ride shared e-scooters, survey respondents (both
riders and non-riders) were in favour of shared e-Scooters being permitted to use bikes lanes,
bike pathways and cycle tracks. Residential roads and empty sidewalks were also acceptable,
but sidewalks with many pedestrians were not. There was less support for allowing shared e-
Scooters on main streets in commercial areas like 17th Avenue SW, Bridgeland and Kensington
Road and almost no support for on major roadways like Memorial Drive and MacLeod Trail. Figure
14 illustrates the survey response summary for citizens’ preference on where people should be
allowed to ride e-Scooters.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
83%
Bike pathway (e.g. Bow River pathway) (n=7,355) 14%
2%
89%
Bike lane or cycle track (n=7,413) 10%
2%
66%
Empty sidewalk (n= 7,398) 32%
2%
69%
Residential road (n=7,362) 27%
4%
30%
Commercial main street road (e.g. 17 Avenue S.W., 1
64%
Avenue N.E., Kensington Road N.W.) (n=7,388) 7%
16%
Busy sidewalk (n=7,369) 77%
6%
5%
Major roadway (e.g. MacLeod Trail, Memorial Drive)
92%
(n=7,366) 2%
Yes No Don't know
Figure 14: 2020 Survey Response to Where People Should be Allowed to Ride E-Scooters

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
As shown in Figure 15, in 2019 and 2020, approximately 1/3 of survey respondents indicated that
they would have used a vehicle (either personal, taxi or rideshare) had an e-Scooter not been
available. In 2019, In the absence of an e-Scooter, 56% of respondents indicated the same trip
would have been made by walking, in 2020 that dropped to 47%. In the 2020 survey, a new
answer option of “I would have not made the trip” was added. Close to 8% of survey respondents
said they would not have made the trip had an e-Scooter not been available.
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Walking 56%
47%
Driving my own car 18%

18%
Ride Share/Taxi 12%

14%
I would not have made the trip

8%
Riding my own bicycle 3%

7%
Public Transit 6%
3%
I don’t know 1%
1%
Carpool 1%
1%
Riding my own e-scooter

0%
Car Share 3%
0%
Bike share 1%
0%
Other 1%
0%
2019 (n=6,285) 2020 (n=3,457)
Figure 15: 2020 Survey Response to Alternative Mode Choice if an e-Scooter was Unavailable

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
The most common purpose for an e-Scooter trip in 2020 was getting to and/or from errands or
social gatherings, such as going shopping or to an appointment, or visiting a restaurant or friend’s
house. The second most common purpose for an e-Scooter trip was for fun/recreation. A
summary of responses (n = 3,460) is illustrated in Figure 16.
Getting to and/or from

errands or social
gatherings (e.g. going
shopping, to a
restaurant, a friend’s
house or an
appointment)
47%
Recreation – for fun

32%
Other
3%
Getting to and/or from

school
0%
Connecting to Calgary Getting to and/or from

Transit work
2% 16%
Figure 16: 2020 Survey Response on Purpose of e-Scooter Trip

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
As shown in Figure 17, in 2019, the amount of people who could find an e-scooter “almost always”
or “most of the time” was 75%. In 2020, this increased to 85%. In 2019, 20% of people could find
an e-Scooter “about half the time” while in 2020 this number changed to 13%. In both 2019 and
2020, less than 5% stated rarely or never being able to find an e-Scooter.
2019 2020
46%
43%
42%
28%
20%
13%
4%
2%
1%
0%
ALMOST ALWAYS MOST OF THE TIME ABOUT HALF OF RARELY NEVER
THE TIME
Figure 17: Survey Response on How Often a Rider Could Find an e-Scooter - 2019 vs 2020

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
As shown in Figure 18, public survey respondents (both riders and non-riders) in 2020 cited e-
Scooter riders not following the rules and not sharing the sidewalk or pathway with others as their
top two concerns. The danger to others, abandonment of shared e-scooters after use,
interference with traffic, and the need for more enforcement also rated high in the survey.
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%
Breaking the law – riders don’t follow the rules
People on shared e-scooters don’t share the

sidewalk or pathway fairly with other people
Parking – shared e-scooters are littered all over
Shared e-scooters are dangerous for other people
People riding on the road interfere with vehicles
Need more enforcement
Shared e-scooters are dangerous for the people

riding them
I don't have any concerns
Figure 18: 2020 Survey Response on the Top Concerns with Shared e-Scooters

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Safety & e-Scooter Injuries

The City used the funds collected from the shared mobility companies to commission a study with
Alberta Health Services and the University of Calgary Cumming School of Medicine. This study
aimed to better understand who, how, when, and why people were being injured on shared e-
Scooters. The study took place from July 8, 2019 to October 31, 2019 and from May 22, 2020 to
September 30, 2020.
This study retrospectively reviews paper medical records of all patients presenting to Adult
Emergency Departments in Calgary who arrive via emergency medical services (EMS) with the
term “scooter” included in the triage note. One research assistant reviewed each paper chart in
the secure Health Records Office and transcribed de-identified data onto the Case Report Form.
The University of Calgary Research Team reviewed 75 detailed patient records using this
methodology. This was a purposeful selection of people who had the most severe types of injuries.
The key findings from the study include:
• 71 out of 75 people injured during the pilot were riding on an e-Scooter; three
incidents involved pedestrians and one incident involved a person cycling
• The average age of a person injured was 35 years.
• Females accounted for 55% of injuries, while males accounted for 45%.
• Common causes of injuries occurred due to losing control, removing a hand or
foot while in motion, and environmental hazards in the built environment such
as riding over gravel, potholes or transitioning over a curb.
• In 2019, the majority of injuries were evenly distributed between 12:00pm and
12:00am
• In 2020, the amount of injuries occurring between 8:00pm and 12:00am
increased compared with 2019.
• In three out of 75 instances, the injured was known to be wearing a helmet
• Six out of 75 were double riding. Five in 2019 and one in 2020.
• Of the patients where alcohol intoxication was suspected, 28 patients had
blood alcohol detected.
• 20 out of 75 injured were admitted to the hospital, with 32 injuries requiring
surgery within 30 days.
• There were 0 fatalities and 0 admissions to the ICU

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
According to Alberta Health Services medical data and shown in Figure 19, the most common
time of day for e-Scooter injuries requiring EMS in 2020 was between 8:00pm – 12:00am. This is
a change from 2019, when injuries were more distributed between 12:00pm and 12:00am.
25
20
20
15
# of Injury
10
10 9
8 8
6 6
5 3
2
1 1
0
0
0:00 - 4:00 4:00-8:00 8:00 - 12:00 12:00-16:00 16:00-20:00 20:00-24:00
Time of day
2019 2020
Figure 19: Time of Day Comparison for e-Scooter Injuries – 2019 vs 2020
A comparative analysis looked at injuries requiring an ambulance that involved bicycles,

motorcycles, and/or motor vehicles, shown in Table 4. It is important to note that these numbers
do not factor in the rate of travel by mode. There are more bicycle trips and driving trips than there
are e-Scooter trips. However, it is difficult to compare rates of injury directly as the number of e-
Scooter trips can be estimated more precisely using the MDS data, while trip rates from other
modes must be estimated using different methods.
Table 4: AHS Data on Number of Transportation Injuries Requiring an Ambulance
2019 (July 8 to October 31) 2020 (May 22 to September 30)

Type
E- E-
Bicycle Vehicle Motorcycle Bicycle Vehicle Motorcycle
Scooter Scooter
Emergency 33 197 502 103 42 1 484 617 166
ICU 0 4 17 3 0 3 11 5
Fatality 2 0 1 3 0 0 3 4 1
Surgery 8 33 51 35 24 109 79 57
1 There were an additional 25 e-Scooter injuries requiring EMS that did not contain detailed patient
records in 2020.
2 Fatality numbers do not include those who died on site. There were no e-Scooter fatalities.

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT2020-1260
Attachment 2
Approximately 1,300 e-Scooter related emergency department visits were identified using the
keyword search “e-Scooter” in Alberta Health Services records during the pilot period. This may
be an over inclusive amount due to the search strategy and could include: personal e-Scooters,
mobility scooters, vespas, motorcycles and other devices referred to as scooters.
Based on this information, approximately one in every 1,400 e-Scooter trips resulted in a visit to
the emergency room.
Financial Summary
Table 5: City of Calgary Revenues and Costs 2019 and 2020
Line Item Revenue Costs

Company Fees (security deposits not included*) $177,000
Staff Time $120,000
Infrastructure (Parking Zones) $15,000
AHS/U of C Medical Study $6,000
Enforcement and Education $11,000
Data Analysis (Internal and External) $11,000
Total $177,000 $163,000
*Fees to remove e-Scooter from the river were paid for by the company’s security deposits

ISC:UNRESTRICTED
TT202-1260
Attachment 3
Proposed Text of a Bylaw to amend Bylaw 26M96, the Calgary Traffic Bylaw
WHEREAS the Highway Traffic Act authorizes a municipality to regulate and control vehicle,
animal and pedestrian traffic and parking on the streets and on other property within the municipality;
AND WHEREAS the Municipal Government Act allows a municipality to pass bylaws and delegate
authority with respect to streets under its direction, control and management and transport thereon;
NOW, THEREFORE, THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CALGARY ENACTS AS FOLLOWS:
1. Bylaw 26M96, the Calgary Traffic Bylaw, as amended, is hereby further amended.
2. The following is added after subsection 44(3) as subsections 44(3.1), (3.2) and (3.3):
“(3.1) A person shall not ride an e-scooter on any roadway unless the e-scooter has the
following:
(a) at least one headlamp but not more than 2 headlamps;

(b) at least one red tail lamp;
(c) at least one red reflector mounted on the rear; and
(d) a handbrake.
(3.2) A person shall not operate an e-scooter along any section of road where the roadway has
lane markings unless within an exclusive bicycle lane.
(3.3) A person who is operating an e-scooter along any section of road shall operate the e-
scooter as near as practicable to the right curb or right edge of the roadway unless that person
is in the process of making a left turn with the e-scooter.”
3. This Bylaw comes into force on the day it is passed.

ISC:UNRESTRICTED

Shared e Bike and EScooter Final Pilot Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Shared e Bike and EScooter Final Pilot Report

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Shared e Bike and EScooter Final Pilot Report

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Item #_____

Transportation Report to ISC: UNRESTRICTED