Accessibility and The Crowded Sidewalk: Micromobility's Impact on Public Space
Cynthia L. Bennett, Emily Ackerman, Bonnie Fan, Jeffrey P. Bigham, Patrick Carrington, Sarah Fox · 2021 · ACM Designing Interactive Systems Conference · doi:10.1145/3461778.3462065
Summary
This paper examines how micromobility devices — e-scooters, dockless bikes, and autonomous personal delivery devices (PDDs) — impact the accessibility of public sidewalks and pathways for people with disabilities. Drawing on 24 semi-structured interviews with government officials, disabled activists, micromobility operators, and commercial representatives across Seattle and Pittsburgh, the researchers chart how these devices and their governing policies co-evolve. The study is grounded in disability activism history, noting that disabled people have long fought for the right to occupy public space, from resisting Ugly Laws to hammering curb cuts. The authors, two of whom are disabled pedestrians who have personally encountered micromobility blocking their paths, interweave their own experiences with participants' accounts. The research traces three types of events: the planning and launch of micromobility programs driven by municipal sustainability and economic goals, on-the-ground encounters where disabled people navigated blocked pathways and dangerous situations, and activist responses that pushed for regulatory change and accountability from both companies and governments.
Key findings
Micromobility deployments consistently treated accessibility as an afterthought, even as cities promoted these programs as innovative and sustainable. Disabled interviewees described dockless bikes and scooters left blocking curb ramps, crosswalks, building entrances, and bus stops, creating serious safety hazards — two interviewees experienced injuries requiring emergency medical attention. Autonomous delivery robots posed additional dangers; one wheelchair user was trapped at a curb cut by a robot that would not move, forcing her into a dangerous maneuver in traffic. Reporting channels for mis-parked or broken vehicles were largely ineffective, and gig operators were disincentivized from flagging broken vehicles because it cost them wages. Disability activists had to repeatedly demand inclusion in planning processes, eventually winning concessions such as disability-led educational videos, quarterly parking audits, and permit fee-funded parking infrastructure. However, adaptive bike programs offered as accessibility solutions were critiqued as recreational substitutes rather than genuine transportation alternatives, often located far from transit and available only seasonally.
Relevance
This paper is vital reading for anyone involved in smart city planning, urban technology deployment, or transportation accessibility. It powerfully demonstrates how technologies marketed as sustainable and inclusive can recreate inaccessible infrastructure when disability perspectives are excluded from planning. The concept of micromobility as a "reincarnation of inaccessible infrastructure" — where curb ramps won by decades of activism are blocked by bikes and robots — offers a compelling framework for evaluating any public technology deployment. For accessibility practitioners and policy makers, the paper underscores that accessibility cannot be bolted on after launch; it must be integral to procurement, regulation, and design from the outset. The study also highlights how disabled people's refusal and resistance to inaccessible technology constitutes a valuable form of design feedback that companies and governments should actively seek rather than dismiss.
Tags: micromobility · public space · disability activism · urban accessibility · e-scooters · delivery robots · pedestrian accessibility · smart cities · governance · wheelchair accessibility
Standards referenced: ADA