File #: REPORT 19-0167    Version: 1 Name:
Type: Action Item Status: Municipal Matter
File created: 3/12/2019 In control: City Council
On agenda: 4/9/2019 Final action:
Attachments: 1. 1. November 2017 Staff Report, 2. 2. August 2018 Staff Report, 3. 3. Hermosa Beach Education and Enforcement Efforts on Shared Mobility Devices and Electric/Motorized Equipment, 4. 4. South Bay Shared Mobility Guidelines Draft.pdf

Honorable Mayor and Members of the Hermosa Beach City Council                                                               

Regular Meeting of April 9, 2019








(Environmental Analyst Leeanne Singleton)



Recommended Action:


Staff recommends that the City Council:

1.                     Receive an update on the City’s implementation efforts related to the temporary ban of shared mobility devices;

2.                     Provide input on the South Bay Shared Mobility Guidelines;

3.                     Consider participation in a South Bay Shared Mobility Pilot Program; and

4.                     Direct Staff to prepare municipal code changes, establish appropriate fees, and other regulatory measures related to the operation of shared mobility devices based on the direction provided for Recommendations 2 and 3.



Executive Summary:


In August 2018, City Council enacted a temporary ban on shared mobility devices; amended regulations for motorized equipment on the Strand and Pier Plaza; adopted an administrative fee related to the release of impounded bicycles, scooters, and other personal mobility devices; and provided input on the preliminary South Bay Shared Mobility Goals with the intent to implement a shared mobility pilot program in coordination with other neighboring South Bay cities.


Since August 2018, staff has worked across departments toward education and enforcement of the temporary ban on shared mobility devices and other electric bicycle/scooter regulations while simultaneously working with neighboring cities on drafting shared mobility guidelines for a proposed South Bay Pilot Shared Mobility Program. Staff efforts toward enforcement, education, and the development of shared mobility guidelines are provided within this staff report.


The Draft Guidelines were developed based on guidelines from other operational shared mobility programs including the City of Santa Monica, City of Long Beach, City of Los Angeles, City of Portland, and Culver City. The Draft Guidelines identify 15 primary areas of regulation, including those areas of concern identified through previous Council discussions, input from the City’s Risk Manager/City Attorney, as well as community input and dialogue. City staff, neighboring cities, and the South Bay COG have additionally developed a process to implement a region-wide shared mobility pilot program and this proposed process is detailed within the staff report along with next steps required for implementation of a pilot program or continuation of a ban on shared mobility devices.



A recent surge of shared mobility systems and devices with "dockless" technology, including motorized scooters (e.g., Bird, Lime, Spin, Lyft) and dockless bicycles (e.g. Lime, JUMP, Mobike, Spin, Wheels), has emerged in cities throughout the United States. Currently, there are operational programs in a number of cities in Los Angeles County including: Culver City, Long Beach, Los Angeles, Monrovia, and Santa Monica.


Establishing a bikeshare program in Hermosa and the South Bay has been a topic of discussion in various Hermosa Beach commission and City Council meetings for several years as an opportunity to expand transportation choices for residents and visitors to Hermosa Beach. The 2016 Strategic Plan identified Bike Sharing as an item “on the horizon” for 2017-2021 and PLAN Hermosa, the City’s integrated General Plan, and Coastal Land Use Plan, include policies and implementation actions associated with expanding transportation options and facilitating rentals in the Coastal Zone.


These shared mobility devices (SMDs) offer additional transportation choices and are ideal for short distance trips by providing users the ability to pick up equipment at a variety of designated locations and return it to any other location within the system's service area. These services allow users to only pay for the equipment while they are actually riding the bike or scooter. The technology associated with bikeshare equipment has evolved rapidly in the last year, with several companies now offering dockless equipment in which the bike or scooter self-locks, can be left virtually anywhere in the public right of way, and has the potential to create a nuisance condition if not properly regulated.


Although these devices provide additional mobility and transit options, the disruptive nature of this new technology does not fall under conventional regulations related to bicycles or vehicles and has resulted in many communities experiencing negative impacts from the use and misuse of such devices. These issues include: parking in the public right-of-way and obstructing vehicle and pedestrian access; reduced sidewalk area or parking spaces (docked systems); urban clutter (dockless systems); aggressive competition and oversupply; use of public property for commercial purposes; potential public liabilities; unsafe operation of equipment by riders; scooter-pedestrian conflicts; scooter-vehicle conflicts; and increased demand on enforcement resources.


In addition to concerns over shared mobility equipment, these same technology innovations have resulted in a dramatic increase in the number of privately-owned electric and motorized bicycles, skateboards, scooters, hoverboards, and other wheeled devices. While these privately-owned devices eliminate some of the parking and blocked access concerns of shared devices, they exhibit many of the same rider-pedestrian safety concerns such as riding without a helmet, speeding on the Strand, riding on sidewalks, that have raised the need to further clarify regulations, particularly on the Strand and Pier Plaza, and provide additional education and awareness around safe rider practices for all users regardless of shared or privately-owned equipment.


In November 2017, staff presented an update to Council on options for a South Bay bikeshare program,  and  some  discussion  of  the  newly  emerging  scooters. The  November  2017  staff  report (Attachment 1) provided a detailed summary of bikeshare technology, local businesses renting bicycles, bikeshare operations in other cities in Los Angeles County, and the goals and objectives of implementing a similar program in the South Bay/Beach Cities. At that time, staff recommendation was to introduce an ordinance that established a permit requirement for bikeshare and establish administrative penalties for parking or operating bikeshare equipment that was not part of a City-permitted program. Council direction at that meeting was to have staff return at a future meeting with an ordinance that would prohibit bikeshare, conduct additional community engagement, and to form and expand the multi-jurisdictional group to discuss bikeshare/scooter approach so that a program may be implemented.


In August 2018, Council received an update (Attachment 2) on shared mobility operations within the City and staff recommended that the City Council:

                     Adopt a temporary ban on shared mobility devices;

                     Amend regulations clarifying current regulations for motorized equipment on the Strand and Pier Plaza;

                     Adopt an administrative fee related to the release of impounded bicycles, scooters, and other personal mobility devices; and

                     Provide input on the preliminary South Bay Shared Mobility Goals with the intent to implement a shared mobility pilot program in coordination with other neighboring South Bay cities.

Council action in August 2018 reflected the staff recommendation and the ordinance temporarily prohibiting shared mobility devices in Hermosa Beach for one year went into effect on October 17, 2018, 30 days following second reading of the ordinance.



Since the August 2018 update to City Council, staff has continued to work across departments toward education and enforcement of the temporary ban on shared mobility devices and other electric bicycle and scooter regulations while simultaneously working with neighboring cities on drafting shared mobility guidelines for a proposed South Bay Pilot Shared Mobility Program. These efforts are described in greater detail below.


Update on Temporary Shared Mobility Ban & Strand/Pier Plaza Regulation Efforts

Following adoption of the temporary shared mobility ban and clarification of electric/motorized equipment regulations along the Strand and Pier Plaza in August 2018, staff from the Police Department, Community Development, and the City Manager’s Office have coordinated to expand education and enforcement efforts on this topic to both users of shared mobility devices and those on privately owned equipment (both electric and human-powered). These efforts are summarized below and provided in more detail in Attachment 3.


1.                     Targeted Education and Enforcement

                     Quick Reference Guide for Officers and Code Enforcement-staff prepared a quick reference guide to assist the City team in identifying common violations of the California Vehicle Code or Hermosa Beach Municipal Code in support of staff efforts to conduct targeted education and enforcement, particularly along the Strand and Pier Plaza.

                     Direct Contact with Riders and Shared Mobility Operators-Code Enforcement, Police Officers, and Community Service Officers continue to regularly patrol the Strand, Pier, and Pier Plaza to advise riders of the regulations regarding speed limits, the walk zone, and use of electric equipment.

                     Social Media Educational Campaigns-the City has engaged the community via social media channels with reminders of Strand Regulations regarding speed limits, the walk zone, and use of electric equipment.

                     Signage-in the coming month, staff will place new signage along the Strand and near the Pier and Pier Plaza reminding riders of the rules prohibiting use of electric or motorized equipment along the Strand.

                     Reporting of Parked Scooters through the GO Hermosa App-a module has been added to the City’s Go Hermosa App that allows the community and staff to report bikes, scooters, and other equipment that is parked in problematic locations. Users can provide a photo, location, brand of equipment and select one of the issues related to parked equipment, such as “blocking sidewalk”, “in roadway”, “appears dismantled or broken”. While the community has the ability to report these directly to different companies, and still do, this app may be more convenient for constituents that have not downloaded the apps for each shared mobility company , and would provide the City with an electronic record that can be tracked through the app’s reporting functions.


2.                     Contact/Coordination with Shared Mobility Companies

                     Following implementation of the temporary ban on shared mobility devices, staff has worked to establish and maintain contact with the shared mobility operators, particularly those that have active programs in nearby Los Angeles, Long Beach, and Santa Monica as their devices sometimes end up in Hermosa Beach.

                     Shared mobility operators have additionally been notified of Hermosa Beach procedures for shared mobility devices that have been reported or observed by staff in Hermosa Beach. These procedures include a requirement to retrieve equipment within two hours upon receiving notice through their app, phone number, or via email (between 6 am and 10 pm) or the equipment may be moved by City personnel, the company may be cited for violation of the municipal code, and the equipment impounded.

                     Equipment not collected in a timely manner by shared mobility operators has been impounded and subject to a $130 impound fee upon release to an authorized representative of the company.


3.                     Community Interest Survey on Bikeshare and Scooters

                     Staff continues to make the online survey available to the community as a means to provide their input, ideas, and concerns regarding the use and/or regulation of bikeshare, scooter share, and other motorized equipment. The survey results provided in August 2018 included input from approximately 332 individuals. Since August 2018, the survey has collected an additional 35 responses and the South Bay Cities Council of Governments additionally released a survey with similar questions, generating 49 responses from those that live or work in Hermosa Beach. The sentiment among the additional responses since August 2018 is similar to the results provided previously in that interest in a bikeshare or scooter share program is split, there are a number of both benefits and concerns related to bike share and scooter share, and preference that equipment is parked at a bike rack or bike corral or a designated space on the street.


Draft South Bay Shared Mobility Guidelines

Pursuant to the Council’s direction and the public survey input, City staff and South Bay COG staff have produced a draft set of Shared Mobility Guidelines for review and input by Council and the public. While the draft guidelines seek to maximize consistency across South Bay cities to use in a shared mobility program, each city has the ability to provide input that can either be considered across all cities or customized as city-specific regulations based on unique conditions or concerns.


Staff shared a draft of the guidelines in February with several shared mobility companies and local bicycle rental operators to ensure the guidelines accurately reflect the latest trends and best practices in the field. While minor updates were made based on this input and reflected in the guidelines provided to Council and the community, both local bicycle rental and shared mobility operators are likely to provide additional comments as part of Council’s review based on their preferences and priorities to support their business model and/or practices. Council should consider the collective input from these operators and the community when providing feedback or recommending changes to the Draft Guidelines.


The Draft Guidelines were developed based on guidelines from other operational shared mobility programs including the City of Santa Monica, City of Long Beach, City of Los Angeles, City of Portland, and Culver City. The Draft Guidelines identify 15 primary areas of regulation, including those areas of concern identified through previous Council discussions, input from the City’s Risk Manager and City Attorney, and community input and dialogue. The complete guidelines are provided as Attachment 4 and a brief summary of the topics covered in each section are provided below.


1.                     Purpose.

The purpose of the guidelines is to test shared bike and shared scooter (shared mobility) services that, as indicated in the responses to the public survey, would offer flexible alternative transportation options to residents, businesses, and visitors to the City.


2.                     Authority

The California Vehicle Code regulates all vehicles including bicycles and motorized bicycles or scooters. However, the City has clear authority to regulate its own right-of-way and businesses that offer these types of vehicles for rent in the City’s public right-of-way.


3.                     Definitions

The definitions section defines all bicycles, electric assist bicycles, and electric scooters as “Shared Mobility Devices” or “SMDs.” The section also includes related definitions of terms that would be used in a Shared Mobility Device pilot program. The section aims to ensure that staff and the public in all of the South Bay cities use common terminology.


4.                     Deployment

The deployment section establishes the process and rules regarding when, where and how shared mobility companies would deploy their SMDs in a City during a pilot program. The deployment section aims to ensure that SMDs are deployed in a manner that does not block sidewalks or traffic, that they are not over-concentrated in certain areas, do not create a sense of visual litter, and that they are deployed in areas that the City considers high priority areas. Participating companies would have to submit a deployment plan to the City for review and approval prior to receiving a permit. The deployment plan would contain maps of the permitted service area, any restricted or prohibited areas, and the specific locations where SMDs would be deployed on a daily basis.


Staff would propose to make the Strand, Pier and Pier Plaza, at a minimum, as restricted or prohibited areas for Hermosa Beach.


5.                     Parking

The parking section regulates where and how SMDs are physically parked in the City. It gives individual cities the option of designating specific sidewalk parking areas, rather than permitting parking anywhere along a block. Each City participating in a pilot program would determine the extent to which sidewalk parking is permitted and other parking options are encouraged or required. Participating companies would have to submit a parking plan to the City for review and approval prior to receiving a permit. The parking plan would contain maps identifying permitted parking areas that reflect the City’s priorities with regard to parking.


Staff would focus on directing shared mobility devices to the City’s extensive network of bicycle corrals and bike racks rather than on sidewalks in Hermosa Beach.


6.                     Fleet Size and Mix

A shared mobility pilot program could include a variety of SMD types. This section of the guidelines establishes a general process for setting the minimum and maximum number of SMDs and the type that could participate in a pilot program. Each City participating in a pilot program would decide the appropriate fleet size and mix based on its unique circumstances and priorities. Ultimately, companies that apply to operate in a City would have to propose and justify an appropriate fleet size and mix, which would be subject to City review and approval.


Based on the size, space available and potential demand for shared mobility devices in Hermosa Beach, staff expects a fleet would range between 50 to 100 devices per operator and an overall fleet (among all permitted operators) of no more than 300 devices.


7.                     Education

The education section indicates that each company is responsible for educating the general public and users of their SMDs on riding safety and roadway regulations. Companies that apply to operate in a City would have to submit an appropriate education plan for City review and approval prior to receiving a permit.


Hermosa Beach would additionally consider requesting permitted companies to provide staff or ambassadors to support user education and good rider behaviors at the start of the program to assist with an orderly launch of operations that does not require City staff enforcement resources.  


8.                     Enforcement

The enforcement section outlines the range of enforcement measures the City can take to ensure companies and the users of their SMDs comply with the applicable State Laws, local laws, and permit requirements. The enforcement measures to companies and users range from written warnings to citations to suspension or revocation of permits. Enforcement and permits would be reviewed on an ongoing basis-not just at the end of the pilot program period-and cities would have the option to suspend, revoke or change permit requirements and conditions at any time.


9.                     Safety

The safety section establishes safety requirements including a maximum speed for SMDs of 15 mph, a minimum rider age of 18. It requires companies to hold helmet give-away events as part of their education plan and requires minimum safety warning language on all SMDs.


10.                     Operations and Maintenance

This section contains minimum equipment specifications for the SMDs, maintenance and recharging requirements, and communication requirements. The equipment specifications define requirements for, electric motors, brakes, head lights, GPS devices, etc. The maintenance requirements include regularly scheduled maintenance, a checklist of items to review during routine maintenance, and maintenance logs. The communication requirements include maintaining a 24-hour customer service line, providing contact information to City staff of the company’s project manager, and providing mechanisms, such as a website and a mobile phone application, that allow users and the public to ask questions and/or report issues to the company.


11.                     Data

The data section includes the minimum data sharing requirements and responsibilities for participating companies. These include a specific data format which is generally acceptable and used by over 60 public agencies in the country, a specific software program to allow cities to view and organize the data, monthly reporting, and sharing of data with the public on the company’s website. In addition, the section requires companies to share region-wide data to city partners, such as LA County and the South Bay COG. The data to be shared includes the number of trips, beginning and end points of each trip, length of each trip, heat maps showing areas of high and low use, complaints, crashes, and damaged or lost SMDs.


12.                     Experience and Qualifications

This section requires companies applying for a City permit to submit a description of their experience, qualifications, and references to the City for review and approval. The City would also request companies to provide a summary of data on how these reference jurisdictions have similar qualities to the South Bay.


13.                     Insurance and Indemnification

This section sets the minimum insurance and indemnification requirements for shared mobility companies. This section also requires companies to submit their “End-User” agreements to the City for review to ensure it contains liability waiver language covering the City.


Companies applying for a permit from Hermosa Beach would be required to submit minimum liability insurance of $2 million per occurrence with not less than $4 million in annual aggregate coverage and indemnify the City, its staff and officials from any claims or suits related to a pilot program.


14.                     Permit Application Requirements

This section lists all the material, information and fees that a shared mobility company would submit for review and approval before a City issues a permit to operate.


15.                     Fees

While each City is able to set its fees based on its unique needs or circumstances, this section establishes the types of fees that could be assessed from participating companies and recommended ranges for the fees. The intent is to provide consistency in fees for companies operating in multiple neighboring jurisdictions.


Staff has conceptually developed a structure of fees that would be required of operators, some of which are already in place in Hermosa Beach:


a)                     An application fee, due at the time of application submittal-proposed based on the cost to review application materials and to recover the cost of the $3,000 COG proposed fee;

b)                     A permit fee, due before the City issues a permit-proposed based on the cost to administer and enforce permit requirements;

c)                     A fee per SMD, payable monthly or less frequently for the duration of the pilot program-proposed as $1 per device per day;

d)                     A performance bond/deposit, due before the City issues a permit-proposed as a bond per device to account for collection or removal of equipment if the company were unable to remove due to damage or other condition;

e)                     Impound fee-adopted as $130 per device; and

f)                     Fines/penalties for violations of applicable rules and regulations-adopted as subject to Administrative Citation Fee of $100 for the first offense, $200 for the second offense and$500 for the third and any subsequent offenses.


The intent of these guidelines is to provide a consistent regulatory framework for shared mobility companies across the South Bay region. A common set of rules would benefit the riders, the companies, and the participating cities. They would ensure that users riding SMDs from one city to another observe the same rules of the road or parking requirements from city to city. Common rules would ensure companies operating in two adjacent jurisdictions can submit similar application materials, insurance, data and fees to operate in both jurisdictions. Ultimately, this consistent regulatory framework is necessary for a pilot program and shared mobility services to succeed across the South Bay region.


Staff from the cities of El Segundo, Manhattan Beach, Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach, and Torrance have been the primary participants in developing the shared mobility guidelines and the proposal for a regional pilot. Hermosa, Manhattan, Redondo, and Torrance have temporary bans on shared mobility devices while rules/regulations for a pilot program are being developed. El Segundo City Council considered the Draft Guidelines on March 19 and recommended participation with neighboring cities. Staff in Manhattan and Redondo are planning presentations to their respective Councils in April to receive direction on a common pilot program. Other cities in the South Bay area are occasional participants in this effort and have adopted a “wait and see” approach.


South Bay Shared Mobility Pilot Program Proposed Process

City staff, neighboring cities, and the South Bay COG have developed a proposal for a region-wide shared mobility pilot program. The process would include the following components:


1.                     Request for Qualifications (RFQ)

The first step in the process would be the release of a RFQ for companies interested in participating in a region-wide shared mobility pilot program. Interested companies would submit their qualifications based on the South Bay shared mobility guidelines and additional information contained in the RFQ. South Bay COG staff has proposed preparing and releasing the RFQ on behalf of, and using input from, each participating city.


2.                     Evaluation and Ranking of Top Companies

A committee of South Bay COG staff and representatives from each participating city would review the qualifications of responding companies and rank the top companies that would then be invited to apply for permits from each participating city.


3.                     Invitation for Applications to Individual Cities

Participating cities would invite the top two or three responsive companies to submit applications for pilot program permits in each city. Company applications would have to comply with the shared mobility guidelines and any other city-specific requirements.


4.                     Permit Issuance/Launch of Pilot Program

Permits under the program would be for a 12-month period, but reviewed on an ongoing basis and revocable at any time at the City’s discretion. In addition to the broader shared mobility guidelines, the permits would contain city-specific conditions, such as the permitted service area, restricted and prohibited areas, identification of specific parking areas, the minimum and maximum fleet sizes, etc. The participating cities would coordinate the timing of the pilot program launch, so service could begin at the same time in all participating cities.


5.                     Post Launch

After a pilot program is launched, South Bay COG staff and staff from participating cities would evaluate the pilot program on a monthly basis. Staff would provide quarterly reports to the City Council or upon request. The South Bay COG would collect and share region-wide data on the pilot program. The general public and users of shared mobility services would be surveyed to gauge public attitudes and get input on ways to improve the program. The guidelines and permit rules would change along the way to address issues that come up. Operators who do not abide by the rules may have permits suspended or revoked.


For the past six months, the South Bay COG has been coordinating with the South Bay cities and assisting in the development of the shared mobility guidelines. The South Bay COG has additionally offered to retain a role going forward by (a) preparing and releasing the RFQ for the pilot program; (b) participating in the review and ranking of RFQ responses/proposals; (c) coordinating the launch of the pilot program; (d) participating in post launch pilot program reviews; and (e) collecting, reviewing, and sharing region-wide data submitted by participating companies. The South Bay COG anticipates that its role in preparing and releasing an RFQ and its post-launch role would cost staff time and resources for which they are seeking support from participating cities. The cost is anticipated to be approximately $3,000 for each participating city. Staff requests the City Council’s direction on whether to contribute $3,000 to the South Bay COG for this purpose. It is anticipated that permit application or other fees would be assessed on companies to reimburse the City for this cost.


Next Steps

Staff has identified two key questions for Council consideration:

1.                     Is there interest in participating in a South Bay Shared Mobility Pilot Program?

2.                     What, if any, additional regulations, detail, or information should be incorporated into the South Bay Shared Mobility Guidelines?


Based on Council direction on these two items, staff would look toward preparing municipal code changes and other regulatory measures related to the operation of shared mobility devices. Changes to regulations would be necessary whether a pilot program is initiated or not as the ordinance enacted in October 2018 included a one-year sunset provision providing the City time to work on shared mobility guidelines with neighboring cities.


General Plan Consistency:

PLAN Hermosa, the City’s General Plan, was adopted by the City Council in August 2017. The Vision Statement and Guiding Principles adopted as part of PLAN Hermosa describe a future where “Hermosa Beach is the small town others aspire to be; a place where our beach culture, strong sense of community, and commitment to sustainability intersect” and a desire to be a catalyst for innovation with “forward-thinking approaches to anticipating future lifestyles, transportation trends and environmental realities are necessary for creating a durable sustainability plan.”


As part of PLAN Hermosa, the City set goals and adopted policies aimed at offering greater transportation choices to the community and reducing traffic congestion/demand for parking. PLAN Hermosa also speaks to the need for collaboration with neighboring jurisdictions when it comes to transportation and projects of mutual interest and concern.


While shared mobility programs are inherently consistent with the goals and policies to expand mobility choices, there are also policies in PLAN Hermosa that speak to the need to create safe, comfortable, accessible and attractive public spaces for non-motorized travelers, and the need to facilitate safe and confident use of alternative modes of transportation by promoting safety and education programs for active transportation users. Given the operation of shared mobility equipment such as dockless bikes and scooters in other cities adequate mechanisms and regulations are necessary to prevent nuisance conditions in the public right-of-way that maintain accessible walkways and ensure safe operation of equipment by users.


Based on the PLAN Hermosa policies listed below, staff believes that it is important in the long-term to implement additional shared mobility options in coordination with neighboring jurisdictions, once safety and accessibility concerns are adequately addressed through a combination of technology, regulation, and proactive education efforts.


Governance Element:

                     4.2 Leadership in sustainability. Establish the City as a regional leader in sustainable development and encourage compact, walkable development patterns that conserve land resources, supports active transportation, reduces vehicle trips, improves air quality, and conserves energy and water.

                     4.3 Collaboration with adjacent jurisdictions. Maintain strong collaborative relationships with adjacent jurisdictions and work together on projects of mutual interest and concern.

                     4.4 Regional transportation and infrastructure decisions. Actively support regional transportation and infrastructure projects and investment decisions that benefit the City and the region.


Mobility Element:

                     2.1 Prioritize public rights-of-ways. Prioritize improvements of public rights-of-way that provide heightened levels of safe, comfortable and attractive public spaces for all non-motorized travelers while balancing the needs of efficient vehicular circulation.

                     3.1 Enhance public rights-of-way. Where right-of-way clearance allows, enhance public right-of-ways to improve connectivity for pedestrians, bicyclists, disabled persons, and public transit stops.

                     3.4 Access opportunities. Provide enhanced mobility and access opportunities for local transportation and transit services in areas of the City with sufficient density and intensity of uses, mix of appropriate uses, and supportive bicycle and pedestrian network connections that can reduce vehicle trips within the City’s busiest corridors.

                     3.6 Complete bicycle network. Provide a complete bicycle network along all designated roadways while creating connections to other modes of travel including walking and transit.

                     3.7 Transportation project considerations. Ensure transportation planning projects provide consideration to access, health and safety, and individual responsibility that enhances the quality of life of residents in the community.

                     4.9 Encourage TDM strategies. Encourage use of transportation demand management strategies and programs such as carpooling, ride hailing, and alternative transportation modes as a way to reduce demand for additional parking supply.

                     6.3 Transportation sharing programs. Facilitate greater local and regional mobility through programs for shared equipment or transportation options such as car sharing and bike sharing.

                     7.8 Active transportation education and safety. Promote the participation in pedestrian, bicycle, and skateboard safety and education programs to facilitate safe and confident use of alternative modes of transportation.


Fiscal Impact:

Council direction to participate in the Request for Application process with the South Bay Cities Council of Governments as the lead would involve a participation fee of $3,000 by the City. This cost to the City could be recovered and incorporated into the application/permit fees charged to the operators of shared mobility programs.


If Council provides direction to pursue a shared mobility pilot program with neighboring cities, staff would return with proposed amendments to the Master Fee Schedule to add fees related to the application, permit, and operation of shared mobility devices within Hermosa Beach, based on staff time required to manage the program which is not currently recovered with a temporary ban in place.



1.                     November 2017 Staff Report

2.                     August 2018 Staff Report

3.                     Hermosa Beach Education and Enforcement Efforts on Shared Mobility Devices and Electric/Motorized Equipment

4.                     South Bay Shared Mobility Guidelines Draft



Respectfully Submitted by: Leeanne Singleton, AICP, Environmental Analyst

Concur: Ken Robertson, Community Development Director

Concur: Milton McKinnon, Acting Chief of Police

Concur: Vanessa Godinez, Human Resources Manager

Noted for Fiscal Impact: Viki Copeland, Finance Director

Legal Review: Mike Jenkins, City Attorney

Approved: Suja Lowenthal, City Manager