PDA

View Full Version : New York City Council Transportation Committee




SEG American-Missouri
03-29-2004, 11:34 PM
http://www.transalt.org/press/testimony/040330scooters.html

Folks, notice the date on the document! It's tomorrow! This is what they are presenting. Somebody please, please go to the petition to stop this. The eyes of the world are watching what happens in NYC (as a whole) Take a couple of minutes to send out a few emails to folks who haven't posted on here in a while. It's the 11th hour and NYC needs our help.

http://www.thepetitionsite.com/takeaction/403918936

Here's the exact ordinance:
http://www.council.nyc.ny.us/textfiles/Int%200098-2004.htm


quote:
New York City Council Transportation Committee Hearing on Intro 98: Sale, Lease, Rental or Operation of Motorized Scooters

City Hall

Testimony of Noah Budnick, Projects Director, Transportation Alternatives

Hello, my name is Noah Budnick. I am Projects Director for Transportation Alternatives, the advocates for bicyclists, pedestrians and sensible transportation. We are an organization with 6,000 dues-paying members and have been advocating for safer streets and sidewalks and improved quality of life in New York City for thirty years.

Transportation Alternatives supports New York City Council Intro 98, which would ban the sale, lease, rental or operation of motorized scooters in New York City. We have long been concerned about motorized scooters because they are a threat to public health and safety and degrade quality of life in New York City. They are often ridden recklessly, against the flow of traffic and on sidewalks and greenway paths.

In New York City, motorized scooters exist in a legal grey-area: it is legal to sell them, but it is illegal to drive them. In order to improve the safety of the traveling public and public safety in general, motorized scooters should be banned from operating on city streets, sidewalks and bridge and greenway paths. Specifically, we urge the Council to do four things:

1. Ban the sale, lease, rental or operation of all gasoline-powered scooters in New York City.
2. Ban the sale, lease, rental or operation of all electric-powered scooters with motors over 300 watts.
3. Ban all motorized scooters from being driven on New York City sidewalks, bicycle and pedestrian bridge paths and multi-use bicycle and pedestrian paths.
4. Oppose New York State Senate bill S579-C, which would allow Segway scooters to be driven on New York City sidewalks.

Gasoline-powered scooters are incompatible with New York City’s dense streets and housing. They are noisy, polluting and a fire hazard. Gasoline-powered scooters cannot be registered with the New York State Department of Motor Vehicles and can only be operated on private property. Per gallon of gas, their two-stroke engines spew one hundred times more pollutants into our air that an automobile engine. Additionally, gasoline-powered scooters have caused serious fires, most notably, a June 2003 fire that killed a fourteen year old Harlem girl. Given these threats to public safety, gasoline-powered scooters should be banned in New York.

In a city constantly fighting gridlock, Transportation Alternatives recognizes the need to create alternatives to automobile travel. We support allowing low-powered electric scooters to travel on city streets—not sidewalks or greenway paths. A scooter with a 300-watt electric motor, the electric scooter standard set by the European Union, can travel around 12mph, which is the average speed a bicyclist rides in city traffic. Provided that electric scooter riders use lights and a bell, which are also required for cyclists, they should be allowed to operate their vehicles on New York City streets—again, not on sidewalks or multi-use paths.

Transportation Alternatives emphasizes our position that no one should be allowed to drive any scooter, whether it’s electric or gasoline-powered or a Segway scooter, on any New York City sidewalk, bicycle and pedestrian bridge path or multi-use bicycle and pedestrian path. Pedestrians are already a much beleaguered group and should not be put in harms way and forced to contend with anyone driving a vehicle on the sidewalk.

New York City traffic law already bans people from driving motor vehicles, limited use vehicles (motor vehicles with a maximum performance speed of less than forty miles per hour, e.g. motorized scooters) and bicycles on the sidewalk. (See New York City Traffic Rules Section 4-07, “Other Restrictions on Movement,” section (c) “Restrictions on crossing sidewalks,” paragraph (3) “Bicycles and limited use vehicles,” part (ii) and New York City Traffic Rules Section 4-01, “Words and phrases defined,” section (b) “Definitions,” “Limited use vehicle.”) In any new City legislation, this prohibition on sidewalk driving, of motorized scooters and Segway devices, should be continued.

In New York City it is rightly illegal for an adult to ride a bicycle on the sidewalk. The average bicycle weighs less than 30 pounds, yet adult bicyclists are too big, too fast and too threatening to safely share space with small children, seniors and other vulnerable pedestrians. Likewise, allowing any motorized scooter, gasoline or electric-powered, to drive on the sidewalk puts children, seniors, persons with disabilities and the blind in danger.

Transportation Alternatives urges Council to act quickly and put a stop to the confusion and public safety threat caused by motorized scooters.

Thank you.



Mike McWilliams




SegwayUtah
03-30-2004, 12:03 AM
Just so everyone sees the parts that talk about "Segway scooters":

quote:4. Oppose New York State Senate bill S579-C, which would allow Segway scooters to be driven on New York City sidewalks.
...
Transportation Alternatives emphasizes our position that no one should be allowed to drive any scooter, whether it’s electric or gasoline-powered or a Segway scooter, on any New York City sidewalk, bicycle and pedestrian bridge path or multi-use bicycle and pedestrian path. Pedestrians are already a much beleaguered group and should not be put in harms way and forced to contend with anyone driving a vehicle on the sidewalk.
...
In any new City legislation, this prohibition on sidewalk driving, of motorized scooters and Segway devices, should be continued.

Segway scooters? I didn't know that Segway was getting into the scooter business. The letter does addresses Segway HTs (EPAMDs) though, when it speaks of "Segway devices."

Maybe they haven't heard of the term EPAMD, the federal and state classification for safe, self-balancing robotic transportation.

Chris

SegwayUtah
03-30-2004, 12:08 AM
P.S.

I wonder if Mr. Budnick from Transportation Alternatives has had the opportunity to try out a Segway HT. The organization says it stands for "cycling, walking, and environmentally sensible transportation" (although, notably his tesimony excludes the word "environmentally").

It is also interesting that he proposes that all "electric power scooters with motors over 300 watts" are ones that should be banned. Since that is the "electric scooter standard set by the European Union." What happens then when something comes along that fits into this bill's definition of a "motorized scooter" that exceeds 300 watts, but is a safe, low-speed mobility device?

Chris

JohnM
03-30-2004, 12:25 AM
Don't get into a big panic. Segway LLC met with T.A. last year and butted heads over this issue. There's nothing new here that the folks from Segway LLC haven't already heard. And there's nothing that a petition can do to stop T.A. from having their say. They are the biggest pedestrian/bicyclist advocacy group in NYC and have worked with and against the city for years. T.A. going to be heard. Just hope that the pros on your side have done their homework and present the Segway case well.

And regarding the term 'EPAMD', it currently has no meaning within the state of New York. Until the state assembly acts, the Segway falls under the state DMV's definition of motorized scooter. And the city has to work with the DMV's definition.

SEG American-Missouri
03-30-2004, 02:16 AM
Jeff, (et al) good post(s)!

I want take a couple of minutes about to express public paradigm. Public opinions and viewpoints of the Segway are mostly how the device is "scooterish". Many may have experienced some type injury on free-wheeling, tandem (in-line) like devices. These range from scooters, xooters, automobiles, bicycles, in-line skates, you name it.

This might be a bold statement to make, but the general public is ignorant to the fact that the HT does not free-wheel unlike every other mobility counterparts in existence today. (Just like I am ignorant to foreign languages, chemistry, world economies, politics, government, and the clock settings on my VCR.) The belief systems instilled in their minds are that most things free-wheel; so there's a natural path of thought or perception... paradigm.

The "public HT paradigm" is why we get pummeled with questions when people see it. Have you ever seen someone look at you and your Segway with a confused look and get more bewildered because they know they don't know why their confused in the first place? (Sounds circular, I know, please forgive me.) Experiment sometime when you see it again. Just say, "The Segway HT does not free-wheel", and I promise you'll see a completely changed face.

The issue of safety (and we really know this) is only perceived from what they already know. Tandem, Free-wheel. Let's change that paradigm, get them on the HT to experience it.

No disrespect to Mr. Budnick, but if he'd try the HT (and from what I understand he was offered many times) the HT's safety wouldn't be an issue. I find it strikingly odd that he favors alternative transportation but is not willing to try a device that truly represents "alternative" ? Is there is some financial motivation for his actions? Why wouldn't somebody who claims they foster change in the transportation community want to try the Segway? "I'm thirsty! Fill me up that sieve!"

The 1200+ people I met love it. Here's the guest-book of just a few.
http://www.stlsegway.com/DesktopDefault.aspx?tabid=57


Mike McWilliams

Itsi Atkins
03-30-2004, 10:58 PM
I think the hearing today was positive for Segway. The disabled users were well represented and the Committee members listened to all the pro Segway statements. Thanks to all who gave us their time and energy.

Sal
03-30-2004, 11:02 PM
I am on pins and needles, and hope that common sense and logic will prevail.

I would like to express my own thanks to everyone's hard work and support!!!! Especially to Itsi for spearheading this campaign.

-Sal

Think Different
www.apple.com

Answers that Matter
www.lilly.com


http://home.earthlink.net/~sal1k/images/si2f.jpg

fathertime
03-31-2004, 01:13 AM
Jeff, well said! If you don't mind I will use some of your arguments along with my own to fight an upcoming problem here in the windy city. It is a delight to see such cogent arguments. Thanks for sharing![^]:D:)[:P];)

JR

Brooster
03-31-2004, 01:37 AM
But hey, it's comforting to know that if Segway LLC needs our help in Chicago, they might send a "letter" giving us a day or two's notice, and might send us all to the wrong address.

I think we should proceed under the assumption that we're on our own, as SEG NYNY have done. Good job, Itsi.

Brooster

SegwayUtah
03-31-2004, 04:00 AM
quote:But hey, it's comforting to know that if Segway LLC needs our help in Chicago, they might send a "letter" giving us a day or two's notice, and might send us all to the wrong address.

I think we should proceed under the assumption that we're on our own, as SEG NYNY have done. Good job, Itsi.

Brooster

Broo,

Please, please don't be so negative about Segway's support. None of us could do as much for the NYC hearing as those in NYC, and I'm pretty sure the letter from Segway was only meant to help.

I've had the unique opportunity to converse with Segway on the NYC issue (from the independent SEG America side) and have seen some of what Segway has been doing to educate the government in New York City.

Today, they sent their Chief Marketing Officer (Joe) and Regulatory/Legal Counsel (Matt) to the hearings, and Matt did speak. SEG America was also represented, and one of our own gave a very honest and clear testimony about Segway HTs. Itsi spoke, and one of our disabled friends spoke. Finally, the founder of CityStreets (NYC) spoke.

This hearing was just the first in a series of hearings. There was to be no vote today: this is the start of an official conversation. From what I understand, the transportation council will be working to improve the bill through a set of additional hearings (and I'm sure that Segway will send good people there too) before (and if) they send the bill to the city council for review.

I am also sure that other people will be there too (Itsi of course, and others), in support of safe, sensible alternative transportation like the Segway HT. In particular the Segway HT.

This is all quite the process, and while I could be wrong, it at least seems to me like Segway is quietly doing their part to help the lawmakers in New York write good transportation laws.

[Hey, I never realized that an HT is a good moving soapbox! ;)]

Anyway, none of this is hostile towards you, Broo. It just hurts to see someone I respect beat up one of our favorite companies (for so quietly and carefully working to help us--which helps too them of course, I'm all about full disclosure).

Chris

SegwayUtah
03-31-2004, 04:10 AM
P.S.

I mentioned it in my last post, but it is important to note that SEG America, on its own launch day, was present in NYC (thank you Itsi, for the notice to come and everything), helping to educate the city government on the characteristics and potential of Segway technology, as stated in our mission statement.

It's awesome to be off and running from the start, even with the first election still a few weeks away! I hope that SEG America can find more ways to help everyone interested become involved in keeping safe, self-balancing transportation alive and well in the cities of this country--where it often serves the biggest benefit to the community. Plus, we'll all have a lot of fun :)

Also, I forgot in my last e-mail: thank you to all those who had the passion to come to the NYC meeting today. Your enthusiasm is greatly appreciated.

Chris

L.I. Glider
03-31-2004, 10:50 AM
The hearing was mentioned in the NY Times today, though nothing about Segways.

MANHATTAN: SCOOTER BAN BEING CONSIDERED The City Council's transportation committee held a hearing yesterday on a bill that would prohibit the sale, rental or operation of small motorized scooters anywhere in the city, including on private property. Currently, they are banned only in public places. Under the bill, anyone who sells, leases or rents out a motorized scooter would be fined $1,000 and imprisoned for 15 days. Anyone who operates a motorized scooter would be fined $500, and the scooter would be impounded. Citing safety concerns, Councilman Michael E. McMahon, above, said that "like a plague of locusts, children on motorized scooters are swarming through our neighborhoods." Winnie Hu (NYT)


At the hearing, the council made it clear that they were targeting the noisy, smelly, souped up, gas powered scooters ridden by teens and adolescents that are proliferating in the city. They even pointed out that out of all the complaints that the city and police received regarding scooters, that not one was about a Segway.

However, there were several people who testified in support of the ban that were definitely anti-Segway.

Also mentioned by someone (not from the Segway panel) was that the wording of the bill was so broad that technically, golf carts would no longer be allowed on golf courses in the city. (yes, NYC actually has several 18 hole courses).

This was the first hearing on the proposed bill. It remains to be seen if they’ll keep the current wording and lump Segways in with the scooters they are adamant about banning.



Regards,
Joanne

You must be the change you wish to see in the world - Mahatma Gandhi

Sal
03-31-2004, 11:37 AM
Joanne,

Thanks for the report. I am glad that the distinction was made that complaints were NOT about Segways.

It's important, now more than ever, to separate ourselves from the term "scooter."

I remember a few months ago there was a lengthy post here about the term and why it should/shouldn't apply to the Segway, or why it bothers or doesn't bother Segway owners.

I think what's happening in NYC would definitely warrant taking another look at Segways and the term "scooter."

Personally, I don't like being referred to as riding a scooter.

-Sal

Think Different
www.apple.com

Answers that Matter
www.lilly.com


http://home.earthlink.net/~sal1k/images/si2f.jpg

Sal
03-31-2004, 02:01 PM
Jeff, Well said. I hope you were one of those (with me) that wrote words to the transportation committee.

The key there is prejudice. And having that quality in persons of power is a lethal thing.

I hope that the committee members aren't afflicted with short sightedness and narrow views about alternative transportation.

If they are indeed solutions-oriented people, it's inconceivable for them to react negatively to the Segway.

I hope they will THINK on the issue at hand rather than formulate a gut-reaction.

Everyone can see cars are the precipitate, Segways are the solution. LOL

-Sal

Think Different
www.apple.com

Answers that Matter
www.lilly.com


http://home.earthlink.net/~sal1k/images/si2f.jpg

Itsi Atkins
03-31-2004, 02:14 PM
Has anyone noticed how much the NYC residents are behind us. Ever since the media coverage last week, I have had positive comments from many people on the streets. New Yorkers love their city and a good cause. I have faith that our efforts are making a difference and that the City will make the correct decisions. It will take time, continued support,good pr,safe gliding and keep the faith.
"please don't call it a scooter"

SWSWFL
03-31-2004, 05:45 PM
Doesn't anyone know Donald Trump... within 7 degrees of separation?

How cool would it be to see him on one on the late news?