May ban Segway in San Fran.?

[Blinky]

http://www.bayarea.com/mld/mercurynews/business/4616223.htm
quote:Posted on Wed, Nov. 27, 2002

S.F. may ban sidewalk scooter
By Matt Marshall
Mercury News

Barring Mayor Willie Brown riding to the rescue, the high-tech, two-wheeled Segway Scooter will be banned on San Francisco sidewalks next week.

Brown on Tuesday threatened to veto a ban approved by the board of supervisors.

The Segway, which inventor Dean Kamen once mused could ``change civilization,'' went on sale last week for $4,950. But city supervisors voted to prohibit the Segway on city sidewalks beginning next week, saying it is a safety hazard.

If the ban sticks, San Francisco would become the first major city to block the scooters. That could be a blow to the city's image as friendly to high-tech innovation and gadgetry.

``I think its likely that the mayor will veto it,'' said P.J. Johnston, the mayor's spokesman. ``He doesn't agree with the outright ban on new technology . . . It sends a message around the world that San Francisco is no longer a center of the high-tech world.''

Johnston added that a ban would be ``jumping the gun,'' since the Segway hasn't yet hit the city's streets.

But city supervisors said they were forced to act. State law signed by Gov. Gray Davis in September, they said, rules that Segways can be used on sidewalks beginning in March unless local governments ban their use. ``After that, the default is that they become legal,'' said Supervisor Gerardo Sandoval.

If they are banned, Sandoval said, the city can always go back and permit Segway use for specific purposes, by postal or emergency medical workers, for example.

``I think they're a lot of fun, but they have no business being on sidewalks,'' said Sandoval. They run as fast as 15 mph, he said, posing a hazard to pedestrians, in particular seniors. ``In the city, you have doors swinging all the time, customers stepping suddenly out of stores, fire hydrants, poles, street signs, not to mention cars and motorcycles.''

Sandoval joined the majority of supervisors in an 8-2 decision Monday to support a ban ordinance, which is almost certain to be upheld after a second reading next week, unless there is significant uproar from residents.

Matt Dailida, director of state government affairs for Segway, said he felt the supervisors acted prematurely.

Besides safety issues, politics is also at work. The Segway, which looks like a futuristic, push-style lawn mower and operates with powerful gyroscopic technology, is backed by Silicon Valley's most high-profile venture capitalist, John Doerr, of Kleiner Perkins Caufield & Byers.

Segway, with Kleiner Perkins' support, has launched an all-out lobbying campaign across the nation to pass legislation that will allow Segways on sidewalks. So far, the company has been stymied in its efforts to sell the scooter to corporations.

[Blinky]

Is there still hope yet for the city by the bay?

[Casey]

Well Blinky, the San Francisco Examiner reports this.

quote: Brown has indicated he may veto the ban, a mayoral staffer told The Examiner.

A Brown veto could heat things up again.. the protesters may have to get their signs out of the closet..

should be interesting..

Brown is the San Francisco Mayor, so I would say the answer to your question is "it aint over 'til it's over".

[Blinky]

I wonder if the "board of supervisors" is compiled of mostly democrats over there in San Fran.. I am not sure, but I would not be surprised if that mayor is republican. It would just be consistent with the rest of the chess matches between these parties that goes on all year around.

Could this make or break someone's political career? I did not think the Segway could have such an affect on these little critters we elect in office.

[Blinky]

http://www.planetark.org/dailynewsstory.cfm/newsid/18829/story.htm
quote:The mayor and city council are at war over whether the chic, crowded streets of San Francisco are ready for the latest thing in people moving - Segway Human Transporters, electric-powered scooters that some technophiles claim could change the world.


The city council of what is usually the most tech-friendly town in the country is expected to vote to ban the scooters next week. But Mayor Willie Brown vows to veto any ban, setting the stage for a possible council vote to override the mayor.
This is nothing really new in terms of news, but it seems its going to get ugly over there in the West.

They should really give them a chance.

(*EDITED* *EDITED* *EDITED*, made a boo boo)

[BruceWright]

Buncha luddites.

Two-wheeled bullets my butt.

I can't imagine San Fransiscans voting against anything that would get people out of their suv's!

[Casey]

This excerpt from a new Reuters report clarifies the situation. quote:The ban has already passed a first reading in the council and is expected to pass its second reading next week. After that it would go to Mayor Brown who will have 30 days to veto it. Then the board has a month to override the veto. There are 11 city supervisors and Sandoval said the board would need an eight member majority to override.

[Blinky]

BruceWright writes,
quote:Buncha luddites.

Two-wheeled bullets my butt.

I can't imagine San Fransiscans voting against anything that would get people out of their suv's!
I think its more that they think they are dangerous, they won't even give them a chance. The mayor is probably knows that, which is why he is going to possibly oppose the council's vote.

[Casey]

The Reuters article says SF has had an extremely high pedestrian death by automobile in the recent past. It looks to me that they are taking that out on anything with wheels, which in this case is Segway.

http://66.241.210.178/forum/topic.asp?TOPIC_ID=551

[impatient1]

Blinky, the S.F. mayor, Willie Brown, is about as hard-core liberal Democrat as they come. The board of stupidvisors is politically all over the place, but basically liberal to radical. City politics is incredibly byzantine and there are lots of self-appointed "representatives" of groups (like pedestrians). They're far more interested in getting into the media than trying to do the right thing, whatever that might be. I think Willie will veto the measure, at least partially just to piss off the supervisors.

[Blinky]

I just think it is horrible that the elect officials of San Francisco might wind up not even giving the Segway a chance. Of all the applications we have discussed on this forum for the past few months, the Segway may actually wind up saving that city money in one way or another and possible increase funding to these groups that oppose the Segway.

[FP]

SF is a fairly old city, by West standards. Its streets are not wide, and the sidewalks have been reduced, from the trolley age, to accommodate autos.

So there is not that much space to actually accommodate Segways on the sidewalks. And thats where the proposed ban is. Segways are NOT banned from the numerous bike lanes that are popping up all over town. And since S-HTs will travel at abt the speed of a bike, I don't see what the problem would be for running them in the street.

I saw a trial S-HT on Fillmore a few months ago, used by a postal carrier. Is was driven on the sidewalk, that was no more than 15' wide (I'll check and correct if necessary). On that sidewalk are street trees, merchant signs, several outdoor cafes, newsracks, parking meters, light poles -- AND pedestrians. Lots. Many of the senior-variety: frail, slow-moving, and easily startled. Its not even a place where one would want to WALK a bicycle, let alone DRIVE a 70# electric vehicle.

The postal carrier was admittedly only going at abt 3 mph (walking speed). But I (and many others) can imagine some hot-shot, gung-ho, data-dude trying to make time (or jsut an impression on the opposite sex) by hot-footing it along the ped path, weaving in and out until he comes across a situation unanticipated -- an unpredictable walker.

I can see where S-HTs would be useful on unoccupied sidewalks. But I thing the Supervisors (and I don't agree with them much) are right on this issue. Segway-HTs belong off the sidewalk -- in the bike lanes, and on the street.
FP

[BruceWright]

FP,
That is a very reasoned argument. It's a shame that the people who get quoted in the papers made such reasonable statements rather than resorting to vitriol like "two-wheeled bullet" and the like. I've seen Segways navigate in shoulder to shoulder crowds of elderly and children with no safety issues whatever (of course, nothing stops crazy people from doing crazy stuff anywhere).

If the sidewalks are as crowded as you say, anything that gets people out of their cars in SF is adding to a problem. Have there been any movements for widening the sidewalks (switching streets to one-way)? Having companies remove sidewalk display-racks, cafe's etc?

In a city with as many bike lanes as SF, bike lanes would be a useful mode of travel on a Segway. But nobody on a 12 mph Segway wants to dodge a bicycle (2-wheeled-bullet) travelling 35 MPH!

I guess I'd say, a Segway is closer to a pedestrian's speed and manuverability than it is a bicycle's speed and manuverability. A segway is closer to an adult mobility assistive device, like a Rascal, than a car or a bicycle. In fact, the same elderly folks could see their mobility greatly increased with a Segway. It would be a shame to put them on the road where more traffic fatalities would certainly occur, without testing this first.

[JohnM]

quote:Originally posted by FP

So there is not that much space to actually accommodate Segways on the sidewalks. And thats where the proposed ban is. Segways are NOT banned from the numerous bike lanes that are popping up all over town. And since S-HTs will travel at abt the speed of a bike, I don't see what the problem would be for running them in the street.



Since California state law defines a Segway rider as a pedestrian, do they have a right to use bike lanes? Do SF pedestrians currently walk in the bike lanes and streets? My experience is that pedestrians have few rights to the roadway outside of crosswalks.

Runnin' with the Big Dogs

[Blinky]

BruceWright writes,
quote:If the sidewalks are as crowded as you say, anything that gets people out of their cars in SF is adding to a problem. Have there been any movements for widening the sidewalks (switching streets to one-way)? Having companies remove sidewalk display-racks, cafe's etc?
One would think that if it were overcrowded that all those things you mentioned would have taken into effect already. Here in New York City, I wish they were to do that. I think they must be waiting for some group to complain before they do anything. You have to love the way these local government all work :(

[Blinky]

Does anyone know if it is final? Is it banned for now? Did the mayor veto the panals vote? I can't find anything new on this.

[Blinky]

I guess this piece of news does it for Segway HT in San Fran for now...

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2002/12/20/WB39616.DTL
quote:Rookie supes support plan to ban Segway from sidewalks

Rachel Gordon Friday, December 20, 2002

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



San Francisco -- It was out with the old, in with the new at the Board of Supervisors this week, when District 8 Supervisor Bevan Dufty and District 4 Supervisor Fiona Ma attended their first meeting. They were supposed to take office Jan. 8, but Mayor Willie Brown swore them in early last week to fill the seats left open by Mark Leno and Leland Yee when they left City Hall for the state Assembly.

Dufty and Ma quickly got into the swing of things, and sided with the board majority to ban the high-tech Segway scooter from city sidewalks. Their support of the restriction was crucial, given that word was out the mayor was going to veto the Segway ban. But nine supervisors are on record in favor of the legislation -- enough to override a veto.

The arrival of the new supes also meant the need for some administrative housecleaning at the board. By the luck of the draw, Dufty was ranked No. 10 in seniority on the 11-member board; Ma was ranked 11th. The ranking is important when supervisors are appointed to outside governmental bodies, such as the Golden Gate Bridge board and the regional air quality board.

[Blinky]

No updates on this thread as of yet, but I am happy to see the great efforts on my fellow members on this site to prevent a possible ban. :D

[Sunday]

Willie Brown has been photgraphed before riding around on a Curie Phat Flyer escoot. He loves stuff like that. Maybe he can craft a compromise to allow use of the HT in SF. Otherwise, more cities may start goose stepping with SF, and then we'll all be SOL!

[RobbW]

The unfortunate truth is that the largest of the anti-Segway San Francisco based groups (Walksf, Senior Action Network) see SF as a stepping stone to a statewide and then national campaign.

The Senior Action Network has already started moving on to try to change SB1918 (the California Bill that takes effect March 1, 2003) and in WalkSF's most recent newsletter (Dec.16, 2002), they declare, "Pedestrian advocacy groups from other cities will now likely follow our lead. San Jose, Berkeley, Santa Cruz, and San Diego are already looking at the issue."

As a resident of Los Angeles, I'm watching these events unfold with utter disbelief. I'm amazed that such fear and ignorance can be successfully peddled and sold by these fringe groups.

RobbW

[Blinky]

Hopefully these same groups in these other cities are not as grumpy as they are in San Francisco.

[Sailor]

quote:Originally posted by FP

But I (and many others) can imagine some hot-shot, gung-ho, data-dude trying to make time (or jsut an impression on the opposite sex) by hot-footing it along the ped path, weaving in and out until he comes across a situation unanticipated -- an unpredictable walker.

Wouldn't the solution to this be to ban what you call "hot-footing" and/or weaving in and out of foot traffic? Outright banning the device all together simply because it has the ability to go fast enough to be dangerous is not a resonable reaction, if it was all automobiles, bikes, skateboards, skates, and even running and walking should be banned as well.

If I had a dollar for every time I was walking in the financial district and bike messenger nearly creamed me, or a car came so close to hitting me that I could feel it brush my clothes I'd be a rich man. Yet nobody would argue that we should outlaw all bikes and cars from San Francisco, so why completely ban the Segway from all sidewalks?

Instead reasonable regulation would be more appropriate.

[Sailor]

quote:Originally posted by FP

But I (and many others) can imagine some hot-shot, gung-ho, data-dude trying to make time (or jsut an impression on the opposite sex) by hot-footing it along the ped path, weaving in and out until he comes across a situation unanticipated -- an unpredictable walker.

Shouldn't the appropriate reaction be to ban "hot-shot, gung-ho" activity such as unreasonable speeding and or weaving in and out of foot traffic be more appropriate than an outright ban of the device?

If we were to ban all devices that could be abused based on it's speed ability we wouldn't have automobiles, bicycles, skateboards, roller skates, or even be able to walk as running and jogging are a danger to normal foot traffic.

Regulation, not banning, is far more appropriate for the concerns sited by the anti-segway groups.

As for the argument that SF sidwalks are narrow, I'm not sure what you are basing this opinion on. In the financial district the average sidewalk appears to me to be at least 8 feet wide, often wider. Even in the residential areas such as Diamond Heights and pacific Heights the sidewalks are rarely more narrow than 6 feet wide. When they are more narrow they are often no longer sidewalks but instead switch to stairs (for the non-SF familiar, yes, the hills are really so bad that stairs are installed in the sidewalks) in which case the Segway is no longer an option for sidewalk travel.