I initially was bah humbugy about these scooters, but after reading an article that points out we have acres of space devoted to private automobiles, and that it really wouldn't be hard to accommodate these electric scooters, I changed my mind.
They look fun, they seem more flexible than the hard-wired go-bike stations, and they don't seem super expensive.
It's pretty obvious that our cities are broken, and SF needs help in particular. I've worked at companies that had to choose between being near bart or near caltrain to provide a shorter commute to different employees. The time it took to walk across soma was non-trivial and annoyed people. Ultimately the caltrain commuters used foot-powered scooters.
As for the self righteousness of "only peds belong on sidewalks", I get tired of that. Being in traffic is exceedingly dangerous, and apparently as long as someone else's life on the line you're good with it. If "sidewalks" were a lot larger, then there would be more ability to mix traffic. See: the embarcadero.
Let's work on our cities and have some fun doing it!
>As for the self righteousness of "only peds belong on sidewalks", I get tired of that.
I strongly disagree with this. I've owned an electric scooter for over a year now and I learned real fast that it's super dangerous to ride on the sidewalk.
The problem with pedestrians is that they are not looking out for scooters. People will wander into your path and depending on how fast you're going you may collide.
Also you can't see people walking out onto the sidewalk from doorways and recessed building entrances and around corners. I see people on those scooters going full speed on sidewalks and if someone happens to suddenly walk out doorway they're getting hit.
When people walk out onthe street they should look both ways for cars before stepping on the road. In my opinion it's ridiculous to expect people to peer out of doorway stoops and look for people on scooters barreling down the sidewalk.
> As for the self righteousness of "only peds belong on sidewalks", I get tired of that. Being in traffic is exceedingly dangerous, and apparently as long as someone else's life on the line you're good with it.
As someone who uses electric skateboards and scooters fairly regularly, I disagree. Bicycle lanes are the most appropriate place for them.
Supposedly Steve Jobs predicted the Segway would cause cities to be "redesigned". He was wrong, but I don't think he was far off. The rising popularity of light electric vehicles may actually prompt cities to build more bike lanes to accommodate them.
> As for the self righteousness of "only peds belong on sidewalks", I get tired of that
Nothing self-righteous about that.
Sidewalks are -- as the name itself suggests - meant for WALKING on the SIDE of the road, not for riding scooters and other vehicles which pose a danger to other people walking. Only exception being people on wheelchairs, but they aren't driving at break-neck speeds like an electric scooter rider, or a bicyclist.
I used one today for the first time, and loved them. Faster than an uber, 3$ instead of 10, environmentally responsible, and fun to ride. As long as we fine people for being assholes (riding on the sidewalks, parking in stupid places) I think they're a great step forward.
I have more sympathy for pedestrians. They go around 2-3mph. Auto traffic around 25-50. Bikes and scooters are way closer to cars than pedestrians. So, its a matter of risking the safety of cyclist, or pedestrians. No clear win there I can see.
It’s insane how we don’t even notice how much public space is devoted to cars:
For a typical residential street, it’s 2/3: two lanes of traffic, two lanes for parking, vs two sidewalks. All are about the same width.
That primacy of the car is what needs to change. Autonomous driving could go a long way, by allowing offside parking and increased utilization of shared cars. But even before, just inconveniencing drivers by eliminating one lane of parking would open up enough space to accommodate safe bike and scooter lanes.
Next up is the wasteland of endless parking lots the US is so fond of, and that unnecessarily decreases density to maybe a third of what’s easily possible. But it’ll take far more time to heal that particular hellscape.
It's worth remembering that peds (otherwise known as "people") used to be able to roam the street freely. Can't find the source now (at work) but in the 1920's a judge in New York bemoaned the then-ridiculous idea that cars would mean children could no longer play in the street, which of course they had every right to do.
> As for the self righteousness of "only peds belong on sidewalks",
It should be pretty clear that both car lanes and pedestrian paths are both unsafe for scooters.
Add a bike path, just like e.g. The Netherlands, Denmark, etc. The bike path is generally designed for up to 25-30km/h. Certain scooters and electric bikes may go above that. In Netherlands scooters and electric bikes are divided into 2, ones which can reach up to 25km/h and ones which can reach up to 45km/h (above is not allowed). This with different regulation for each.
There might be a case for adding yet another special path, e.g. scooter path for traffic up to 45km/h.
Way more people can travel around on a bike path than a car lane (occupies more space while often just having 1 person).
I do like roads a bit, when it's where kids can play and also have some cars at times. But the green/bike version has a lot to offer. It's relaxing just by looking at it.
The problem with American cities is that we only have two spaces: the road and the sidewalk. Bike lanes are sometimes added to roads, but they're still just lanes on the road. The roads have all been built and designed for cars. Sidewalks have been built for pedestrians. Bikes, scooters, skateboards, etc. just don't fit well into either space.
There's a great YouTube channel, BicycleDutch [1], that goes into some detail about the Dutch approach to thoroughfares. They almost always build three spaces: a road for cars, a path for bicycles, and a sidewalk for pedestrians. This results in a huge number of people using bicycles to get around; in Amsterdam 30% of people always commute with a bicycle and over 40% usually do.
Of course, it generally wouldn't be practical for an American city to just convert all its roads to also include a separated bike path. Instead they could look for areas where a bike path could be built without costing too much, drawing political ire, or significantly interfering with current use. Railroad tracks are good opportunities. As an example, Minneapolis converted an unused railroad corridor to a separated bike path, called the Midtown Greenway [2]. As of 2016 34,000+ people used it daily [3]. Portland, OR, has converted two former railways into bike paths, the Springwater Corridor trail [4] and the new Trolley Trail [5]. We have plenty of other separated paths here as well.
Where there just isn't enough horizontal space, a more radical approach would be to build an elevated bike path over a few major thoroughfares (i.e. main downtown streets) or freeways that connect commuters to other separated or multi-use paths. Xiamen, China, built an elevated cycle path -- really more of a bicycle highway -- last year [6]. Dallas [7], Phoenix [8], and Detroit [9] have all built parks over freeways that contain some mixed-use paths, though not always with transportation in mind.
Ultimately bicycles/scooters/etc. don't really fit well into the current American infrastructure, but it seems like a solvable problem.
Compared to my previous city (Paris), transportation in SF is shockingly poor.
That was actually a big surprise to me. It is so much easier to plan a city built recently compared to old Europe where you have a mess of old tiny roads you can't get rid of.
So I would have expected my SF commute to be easier than my Parisian one was.
However, Paris has a great subway infrastructure (and public transportation in general) that SF sorely lack.
Everything is centered around a car-first infrastructure which has failed to scale in order to accommodate the current traffic.
I don't want to own a car and even less to commute with one.
I have done it for a couple of years, that's x minutes every day where I can't do much and have to stay focused on the road.
Subway/walking commute on the contrary are often pleasant and let me listen to podcasts and read articles (pocket is great for this).
In the end, I bought a boosted board, it is a great commute shortener.
The biggest downside is that it is pretty hard to maneuver a longboard on the very poor SF streets. Some are in great shape, but most of them around SOMA are pretty bad when you use a skate.
It would be easier if my skate had bigger wheels, like scooters have.
It looks like a great alternative, I would love to see more of these on US streets.
PS.: I think it would be hard to share the sidewalk though. Unless it is very large, like on the embarcadero, there it is not an issue.
The problem with sharing the sidewalk is that the usual eskate/scooter speed is way too fast to share the sidewalk. Sooner or later somebody will exit a building just as you pass by and you are both going to get hurt.
We either need extra large sidewalks with a space reserved to small vehicles; or streets with protected bike lanes.
Streets without a bike lane are also pretty dangerous on this kind of vehicle. I am always on my guard : if I fall, I fall in the middle of the traffic.
Also, bike lanes are poorly engineered for scooter and especially skates. They have tiny wheels compared to bikes.
So you have to avoid potholes, manholes, and all kind of obstacles. Even the paint of the bike lane is an obstacle; it is often very slippery.
So you're saying you don't like sharing the road with heavier, less maneuverable, and faster moving objects, so you bring your scooter/bike on the sidewalk?
> As for the self righteousness of "only peds belong on sidewalks", I get tired of that.
Ever see an elderly pedestrian get plowed into by some 200 lb kid on a skateboard?
I used to live near and work on Mill Ave. in Tempe near ASU, which is a very congested pedestrian strip. It's also full of maniacs on bikes, scooters, and skateboards weaving in and around pedestrians at full speed, coming within inches the whole time. One false move and you'd get plowed.
This article makes some throwaway concession to the 'far less dire consequences' but this is huge.
These vehicles have far fewer negative externalities than cars. People don't die when they get hit by scooters and bikes. We can charge them with renewable energy. They don't take space from pedestrians as cars do.
These are a huge clear good for cities. (And yes, people should gtfo the sidewalk, companies should educate as such, and there should be tickets for people who make others less safe.)
These Electric Scooters in San Francisco have become a total nuisance.
I've seen quite a few riders ride them on the sidewalks and 1 person even ran into a dude on a wheelchair who was trying to get onto the sidewalk after crossing the road on his wheelchair.
The last safe place for Pedestrians and disabled persons -- the Sidewalk -- is under attack.
The startups that have created this nuisance also park these scooters on the sidewalk, and it routinely blocks disabled people on wheelchairs from travelling safely on the sidewalk.
Police just need to start issuing tickets. Seems like a solid and easy revenue stream. Both riding on the sidewalk and riding without a helmet is illegal. Haven't seen any rider wearing one.
CA Law: "An operator of a motorized scooter must be at least 16 years old, possess a valid drivers license or instruction permit, and wear a helmet.
A motorized scooter may be operated on a bicycle path, trail or bikeway, but not on a sidewalk. On the roadway, it must be operated in the bicycle lane, if there is one. On roads without bicycle lanes, motorized scooters may operate where the speed limit is 25 mph or less, and shall be ridden as close to the right hand curb as possible, except to pass or turn left."
The sidewalk in San Francisco is already not a safe place.
Everyone is looking down at their phones. If they aren't, it seems like a large amount of SF residents don't know how to walk on sidewalks appropriately (stick to one side of the road when someone is coming the other way, don't walk 6 abreast, etc.).
I have seen so many people bump into each other and get into accidents simply walking. I wouldn't mind scooters on the sidewalk because then people will actually be forced to be aware, instead of walking around like mindless zombies staring at their phone and bumping into poles
I'm all for having more scooters parked on sidewalks and less Uber/Lyft vehicles blocking bike Lanes and adding to downtown traffic.
The scooters are much needed, obviously. But, as usual, the media and city are crying about it and all you read in the news is
"scooter mayhem" like this is the scooter apocalypse. Find something else to write and worry about, Jesus.
Scooters going painfully slow in bike lanes will not be terribly different from cars stopping in them. Either way, you have to merge into traffic to pass.
Replace these scooters with bicycles and all of the same issues apply.
Imagine if real self locking bicycles were somehow theft proof and private citizens started putting their bicycles willy nilly everywhere. That is the only new issue that is generated by these companies, and creating more parking for bikes and other low speed vehicles is the eventual solution.
The fact that these dockless bike companies have effectively created the 'theft proof' bike is pretty amazing on it's own.
Not sure how much of it is that they're theft-proof vs anyone who wants to steal one either already has or doesn't care enough to do so. You could e.g. line the inside of a U-Haul with RF-blocking material and load up a ton of these, strip the radios in there, and sell them, but if you were to try this at a large enough scale it would likely be worth them going after you. If they lose a few here and there it's probably just cheaper and easier to move on. It looks like they're using either http://www.segway.com/products/consumer-lifestyle/es2-kicksc... or https://www.amazon.com/Electric-long-range-Fold-n-Carry-Ultr... for most of these companies. The resale value probably isn't great for beat-up rental ones, especially if they still have any of the company branding on them or have e.g. obviously ripped apart electronics (or both).
Bicycles can be parted out if they're expensive, or re-sold on Craigslist very easily. Many less people are in the market for these things, so it's probably just not worth the risk + small expected profits to steal them.
Someone with a car can kill 10 people and himself-herself.
Someone with scooter will most likely die in an impact with most vehicles. It is most likely someone can break a leg, than have thousand deaths per year. But hey, humanity has proven common sense wrong befoe.
There's a bit of research that suggests helmets can encourage risk compensation and have people traveling faster. For a glimpse into a possible dire future, Australia and New Zealand are one of the very few countries in the world with mandatory bicycle helmet laws - the results have been dire. (See also the helmet law debate - there's probably not enough room in this thread to go into all of that.)
But yes, arseholes are arseholes wherever they might be. It's not limited to people on smaller lower-powered wheels.
The maximum deceleration of a vehicle is g times the tangent of the angle from the center of mass to the front wheel contact point.
On a sidewalk, a safe stopping distance is about 1 meter. Because of the small angle, safe speed for scooters and skateboards is about the same as walking.
Also, the small non-pneumatic wheels are easily stopped by cracks and small objects.
They are far less safe than bicycles, which are excluded from sidewalks, and riding them on roads with vehicle traffic is suicidal. I guarantee that this will be born out by accident data soon.
I’ve spent years of my life on the road by my own power, and I am certain that I would be dead many times over if I were on a scooter instead of a bicycle.
When the streets of SF are wide open because the cars got kicked out, ride whatever you want. Until then, ride a bike. Ride a big long frame with steel-spoked wheels. E-bike if you must, and don’t mind me trying to keep up with you with an aging meat motor.
I've ridden a few of these. They're pretty fun and cheap. I actually like the model for trips in the 1mi range. In an ideal world full of well behaved people and good intentions I'd keep them around.
But am I the only one that has a problem with the complete hubris shown by these companies. Raise $100M, buy thousands of $500 Chinese scooters, drop them on the city sidewalks and hope everyone just deals with it.
Why can you disrupt life in a city just because you have a lot of VC money? What about when all the competitors come and we're drowning in low quality scooters?
And let's not kid ourselves that these scooters will even remain loved. Right now they're unsustainability cheap and vulnerable. Bird and Spin are undoubtedly bleeding money. When they come back and triple the prices and change the model we'll see we've sold our sidewalks for nothing.
I think bird fucked up in SF by not giving clear-enough guidelines to their users (or not taking it seriously enough). People just need to treat these like a bike, basically.
1) ride in the street, not on the sidewalk. The only thing that should be on sidewalks are people walking and wheelchairs (disabled people walking).
2) park it next to an area where people expect bikes to be parked, like a bike rack or parking meter or street post. but not next to a fire hydrant, someone's home/garage, in the middle of the walkway, etc. I've seen all three of those.
They make it incredibly clear through the app before you can unlock a scooter what the rules are. They have a very well designed and simple to follow few pages of rules you have to swipe through. The problem is enforcement. Who cares if the app tells you to not ride on the sidewalks if you've seen a hundred people doing it as they ride past police officers and don't get any tickets?
Sort of an empty comparison to the automobile. Similar in the fact that it's being thrown out into the world without a plan, and there's no space for them, and there's an outcry. Different because they're a lot less deadly.
The proliferation of private automobiles is a net negative for the world, so if these scooters displace (i.e. take away space from) cars, they're good. If they displace, hassle or inconvenience pedestrians or cyclists in any way, they're bad.
I don't hold out a lot of hope for them to change the world per se. I mean sheeeit, people trying to ride bikes at 15mph (which were the original reason for paving roads, no less) have been fighting for a space that's not filled with 40mph cars or 3mph walkers for years and getting mostly nowhere. To properly integrate scooters you would need basically a two-lane bike lane - one lane for bikes (10-25mph) and one for scooters (less than that, I assume). In a lot of places the automotive demographic has such a stranglehold on the polity, we can't even get a one-lane bike lane.
The only way it would work is if they end up being ragingly popular... like maybe if something like 1/3 to 1/2 of all trips started being done by scooter, that would get the attention of the scooter-lane-planners. Though there is still the problem of "where does the capital come from?" when every municipality is seemingly always broke ever since 2008...
Electric scooters go the same speed range of 10-25mph. All of these relatively new electric mini-vehicles go as fast or faster than a bicycle.
For stability reasons the sweet spot is about 10-15mph, which is the speed of a typical bicycle rider. Bike riders should see them as allies in getting better bike infrastructure, because they are pretty much equivalent.
On auto safety, the perception is that safety improvements came late, and improved dramatically at some particular point in time, though that is variously given: 1950s and safety belts (as they were called), 1960s and crash tests, 1970s and speed laaws, 1980s and airbags / ABS, etc.
The truth is that on a miles-travelled basis, early gains were greatest, followed by a remarkably steady rate of halved risk roughly every 20 years, starting around 1925 and continuing to present.
The chart below begins in 1921. I recall one I'd found previously dating to ~1910 showing an even more pronounced early decline, halving in ten years, before the 20-year trend was established.
A lesson on seeveral grouds: perception/impressions vs. reality, the power of gradual improvement, diminishing returns, underappreciated early gains, and the power of standardisation, regulation, and liability.
Surely a large part of the problem is thinking it's OK to leave the the hire scooters on public property wherever is convenient for the customer. Can't wait for the flying-vehicle startup.
It's another tragedy of the common.
BTW "sidewalks" are also known as "footpaths" and "roads" as "carriageways" in countries that speak British English.
The only thing I don't understand is the renting - these things are meant for owning them. You can store scooter under desk in office or under bed in condo.
> Today’s startups are promoting their products by following the same playbook as cars: get them on the street, and figure out how to regulate them afterward.
> But cities are moving quicker this time. Austin and San Francisco have seized dozens of them. San Francisco has sent a cease and desist letter (paywall) to one company decrying the scooters as a “public nuisance” and “endangering public health and safety.”
Good. It's a shame that we weren't able to do the same with cars before they ruined North American cities.
[+] [-] ryanobjc|8 years ago|reply
They look fun, they seem more flexible than the hard-wired go-bike stations, and they don't seem super expensive.
It's pretty obvious that our cities are broken, and SF needs help in particular. I've worked at companies that had to choose between being near bart or near caltrain to provide a shorter commute to different employees. The time it took to walk across soma was non-trivial and annoyed people. Ultimately the caltrain commuters used foot-powered scooters.
As for the self righteousness of "only peds belong on sidewalks", I get tired of that. Being in traffic is exceedingly dangerous, and apparently as long as someone else's life on the line you're good with it. If "sidewalks" were a lot larger, then there would be more ability to mix traffic. See: the embarcadero.
Let's work on our cities and have some fun doing it!
[+] [-] fstuff|8 years ago|reply
I strongly disagree with this. I've owned an electric scooter for over a year now and I learned real fast that it's super dangerous to ride on the sidewalk.
The problem with pedestrians is that they are not looking out for scooters. People will wander into your path and depending on how fast you're going you may collide.
Also you can't see people walking out onto the sidewalk from doorways and recessed building entrances and around corners. I see people on those scooters going full speed on sidewalks and if someone happens to suddenly walk out doorway they're getting hit.
When people walk out onthe street they should look both ways for cars before stepping on the road. In my opinion it's ridiculous to expect people to peer out of doorway stoops and look for people on scooters barreling down the sidewalk.
[+] [-] tlrobinson|8 years ago|reply
As someone who uses electric skateboards and scooters fairly regularly, I disagree. Bicycle lanes are the most appropriate place for them.
Supposedly Steve Jobs predicted the Segway would cause cities to be "redesigned". He was wrong, but I don't think he was far off. The rising popularity of light electric vehicles may actually prompt cities to build more bike lanes to accommodate them.
[+] [-] justboxing|8 years ago|reply
Nothing self-righteous about that.
Sidewalks are -- as the name itself suggests - meant for WALKING on the SIDE of the road, not for riding scooters and other vehicles which pose a danger to other people walking. Only exception being people on wheelchairs, but they aren't driving at break-neck speeds like an electric scooter rider, or a bicyclist.
[+] [-] Tuxer|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] JoeAltmaier|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] shaki-dora|8 years ago|reply
For a typical residential street, it’s 2/3: two lanes of traffic, two lanes for parking, vs two sidewalks. All are about the same width.
That primacy of the car is what needs to change. Autonomous driving could go a long way, by allowing offside parking and increased utilization of shared cars. But even before, just inconveniencing drivers by eliminating one lane of parking would open up enough space to accommodate safe bike and scooter lanes.
Next up is the wasteland of endless parking lots the US is so fond of, and that unnecessarily decreases density to maybe a third of what’s easily possible. But it’ll take far more time to heal that particular hellscape.
[+] [-] CalRobert|8 years ago|reply
It's worth remembering that peds (otherwise known as "people") used to be able to roam the street freely. Can't find the source now (at work) but in the 1920's a judge in New York bemoaned the then-ridiculous idea that cars would mean children could no longer play in the street, which of course they had every right to do.
[+] [-] mirimir|8 years ago|reply
If people have bicycles or scooters on sidewalks, they should be walking them, not riding.
[+] [-] bkor|8 years ago|reply
It should be pretty clear that both car lanes and pedestrian paths are both unsafe for scooters.
Add a bike path, just like e.g. The Netherlands, Denmark, etc. The bike path is generally designed for up to 25-30km/h. Certain scooters and electric bikes may go above that. In Netherlands scooters and electric bikes are divided into 2, ones which can reach up to 25km/h and ones which can reach up to 45km/h (above is not allowed). This with different regulation for each.
There might be a case for adding yet another special path, e.g. scooter path for traffic up to 45km/h.
Way more people can travel around on a bike path than a car lane (occupies more space while often just having 1 person).
[+] [-] agumonkey|8 years ago|reply
some before and after in the netherlands https://twitter.com/schlijper/status/987269913311137797
I do like roads a bit, when it's where kids can play and also have some cars at times. But the green/bike version has a lot to offer. It's relaxing just by looking at it.
[+] [-] edaemon|8 years ago|reply
There's a great YouTube channel, BicycleDutch [1], that goes into some detail about the Dutch approach to thoroughfares. They almost always build three spaces: a road for cars, a path for bicycles, and a sidewalk for pedestrians. This results in a huge number of people using bicycles to get around; in Amsterdam 30% of people always commute with a bicycle and over 40% usually do.
Of course, it generally wouldn't be practical for an American city to just convert all its roads to also include a separated bike path. Instead they could look for areas where a bike path could be built without costing too much, drawing political ire, or significantly interfering with current use. Railroad tracks are good opportunities. As an example, Minneapolis converted an unused railroad corridor to a separated bike path, called the Midtown Greenway [2]. As of 2016 34,000+ people used it daily [3]. Portland, OR, has converted two former railways into bike paths, the Springwater Corridor trail [4] and the new Trolley Trail [5]. We have plenty of other separated paths here as well.
Where there just isn't enough horizontal space, a more radical approach would be to build an elevated bike path over a few major thoroughfares (i.e. main downtown streets) or freeways that connect commuters to other separated or multi-use paths. Xiamen, China, built an elevated cycle path -- really more of a bicycle highway -- last year [6]. Dallas [7], Phoenix [8], and Detroit [9] have all built parks over freeways that contain some mixed-use paths, though not always with transportation in mind.
Ultimately bicycles/scooters/etc. don't really fit well into the current American infrastructure, but it seems like a solvable problem.
1: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC67YlPrRvsO117gFDM7UePg
2: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Midtown_Greenway
3: http://www.minneapolismn.gov/www/groups/public/@publicworks/...
4: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Springwater_Corridor
5: https://ncprd.com/parks/trolley-trail
6: https://www.mnn.com/green-tech/transportation/blogs/china-cy...
7: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Klyde_Warren_Park
8: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margaret_T._Hance_Park
9: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Interstate_696
[+] [-] on_and_off|8 years ago|reply
Compared to my previous city (Paris), transportation in SF is shockingly poor.
That was actually a big surprise to me. It is so much easier to plan a city built recently compared to old Europe where you have a mess of old tiny roads you can't get rid of.
So I would have expected my SF commute to be easier than my Parisian one was.
However, Paris has a great subway infrastructure (and public transportation in general) that SF sorely lack.
Everything is centered around a car-first infrastructure which has failed to scale in order to accommodate the current traffic.
I don't want to own a car and even less to commute with one.
I have done it for a couple of years, that's x minutes every day where I can't do much and have to stay focused on the road.
Subway/walking commute on the contrary are often pleasant and let me listen to podcasts and read articles (pocket is great for this).
In the end, I bought a boosted board, it is a great commute shortener.
The biggest downside is that it is pretty hard to maneuver a longboard on the very poor SF streets. Some are in great shape, but most of them around SOMA are pretty bad when you use a skate.
It would be easier if my skate had bigger wheels, like scooters have.
It looks like a great alternative, I would love to see more of these on US streets.
PS.: I think it would be hard to share the sidewalk though. Unless it is very large, like on the embarcadero, there it is not an issue.
The problem with sharing the sidewalk is that the usual eskate/scooter speed is way too fast to share the sidewalk. Sooner or later somebody will exit a building just as you pass by and you are both going to get hurt.
We either need extra large sidewalks with a space reserved to small vehicles; or streets with protected bike lanes.
Streets without a bike lane are also pretty dangerous on this kind of vehicle. I am always on my guard : if I fall, I fall in the middle of the traffic.
Also, bike lanes are poorly engineered for scooter and especially skates. They have tiny wheels compared to bikes. So you have to avoid potholes, manholes, and all kind of obstacles. Even the paint of the bike lane is an obstacle; it is often very slippery.
Some better civil engineering is needed here.
[+] [-] s17n|8 years ago|reply
Makes sense.
[+] [-] brandonmenc|8 years ago|reply
Ever see an elderly pedestrian get plowed into by some 200 lb kid on a skateboard?
I used to live near and work on Mill Ave. in Tempe near ASU, which is a very congested pedestrian strip. It's also full of maniacs on bikes, scooters, and skateboards weaving in and around pedestrians at full speed, coming within inches the whole time. One false move and you'd get plowed.
Like speed with like speed, I say.
[+] [-] zethraeus|8 years ago|reply
These vehicles have far fewer negative externalities than cars. People don't die when they get hit by scooters and bikes. We can charge them with renewable energy. They don't take space from pedestrians as cars do.
These are a huge clear good for cities. (And yes, people should gtfo the sidewalk, companies should educate as such, and there should be tickets for people who make others less safe.)
[+] [-] bigtunacan|8 years ago|reply
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.citylab.com/amp/article/381...
[+] [-] justboxing|8 years ago|reply
I've seen quite a few riders ride them on the sidewalks and 1 person even ran into a dude on a wheelchair who was trying to get onto the sidewalk after crossing the road on his wheelchair.
The last safe place for Pedestrians and disabled persons -- the Sidewalk -- is under attack.
The startups that have created this nuisance also park these scooters on the sidewalk, and it routinely blocks disabled people on wheelchairs from travelling safely on the sidewalk.
[+] [-] mattthebaker|8 years ago|reply
CA Law: "An operator of a motorized scooter must be at least 16 years old, possess a valid drivers license or instruction permit, and wear a helmet.
A motorized scooter may be operated on a bicycle path, trail or bikeway, but not on a sidewalk. On the roadway, it must be operated in the bicycle lane, if there is one. On roads without bicycle lanes, motorized scooters may operate where the speed limit is 25 mph or less, and shall be ridden as close to the right hand curb as possible, except to pass or turn left."
[+] [-] klochner|8 years ago|reply
They could easily take half the cars off the road and transform downtown.
They're more convenient and a fraction of the cost of an uber, and they're fun to ride.
People should not be riding them on the sidewalks, i'm expecting that to change quickly.
[+] [-] str33t_punk|8 years ago|reply
Everyone is looking down at their phones. If they aren't, it seems like a large amount of SF residents don't know how to walk on sidewalks appropriately (stick to one side of the road when someone is coming the other way, don't walk 6 abreast, etc.).
I have seen so many people bump into each other and get into accidents simply walking. I wouldn't mind scooters on the sidewalk because then people will actually be forced to be aware, instead of walking around like mindless zombies staring at their phone and bumping into poles
[+] [-] chrischen|8 years ago|reply
[deleted]
[+] [-] notaki|8 years ago|reply
The scooters are much needed, obviously. But, as usual, the media and city are crying about it and all you read in the news is "scooter mayhem" like this is the scooter apocalypse. Find something else to write and worry about, Jesus.
[+] [-] closeparen|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] woolvalley|8 years ago|reply
Imagine if real self locking bicycles were somehow theft proof and private citizens started putting their bicycles willy nilly everywhere. That is the only new issue that is generated by these companies, and creating more parking for bikes and other low speed vehicles is the eventual solution.
The fact that these dockless bike companies have effectively created the 'theft proof' bike is pretty amazing on it's own.
[+] [-] seanp2k2|8 years ago|reply
Bicycles can be parted out if they're expensive, or re-sold on Craigslist very easily. Many less people are in the market for these things, so it's probably just not worth the risk + small expected profits to steal them.
[+] [-] HenryBemis|8 years ago|reply
Someone with a car can kill 10 people and himself-herself.
Someone with scooter will most likely die in an impact with most vehicles. It is most likely someone can break a leg, than have thousand deaths per year. But hey, humanity has proven common sense wrong befoe.
[+] [-] analogmemory|8 years ago|reply
I could care less if they want to ride in the street without a helmet. Good luck with that.
[+] [-] coatmatter|8 years ago|reply
But yes, arseholes are arseholes wherever they might be. It's not limited to people on smaller lower-powered wheels.
[+] [-] jl2718|8 years ago|reply
On a sidewalk, a safe stopping distance is about 1 meter. Because of the small angle, safe speed for scooters and skateboards is about the same as walking.
Also, the small non-pneumatic wheels are easily stopped by cracks and small objects.
They are far less safe than bicycles, which are excluded from sidewalks, and riding them on roads with vehicle traffic is suicidal. I guarantee that this will be born out by accident data soon.
I’ve spent years of my life on the road by my own power, and I am certain that I would be dead many times over if I were on a scooter instead of a bicycle.
When the streets of SF are wide open because the cars got kicked out, ride whatever you want. Until then, ride a bike. Ride a big long frame with steel-spoked wheels. E-bike if you must, and don’t mind me trying to keep up with you with an aging meat motor.
[+] [-] habosa|8 years ago|reply
But am I the only one that has a problem with the complete hubris shown by these companies. Raise $100M, buy thousands of $500 Chinese scooters, drop them on the city sidewalks and hope everyone just deals with it.
Why can you disrupt life in a city just because you have a lot of VC money? What about when all the competitors come and we're drowning in low quality scooters?
And let's not kid ourselves that these scooters will even remain loved. Right now they're unsustainability cheap and vulnerable. Bird and Spin are undoubtedly bleeding money. When they come back and triple the prices and change the model we'll see we've sold our sidewalks for nothing.
[+] [-] randyrand|8 years ago|reply
I bought an electric scooter for $300 (Segway ES1). It costs near nothing to charge.
These scooters make back their money in a mere 40 hours of use. A 1 week car rental would have to cost $35,000 to have the same profit margin.
[+] [-] kalleboo|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] xivzgrev|8 years ago|reply
1) ride in the street, not on the sidewalk. The only thing that should be on sidewalks are people walking and wheelchairs (disabled people walking). 2) park it next to an area where people expect bikes to be parked, like a bike rack or parking meter or street post. but not next to a fire hydrant, someone's home/garage, in the middle of the walkway, etc. I've seen all three of those.
[+] [-] scrumbledober|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] odammit|8 years ago|reply
If you don’t know about the terror of cars being introduced this 99pi episode is pretty good.
https://99percentinvisible.org/episode/episode-76-the-modern...
[+] [-] rdiddly|8 years ago|reply
The proliferation of private automobiles is a net negative for the world, so if these scooters displace (i.e. take away space from) cars, they're good. If they displace, hassle or inconvenience pedestrians or cyclists in any way, they're bad.
I don't hold out a lot of hope for them to change the world per se. I mean sheeeit, people trying to ride bikes at 15mph (which were the original reason for paving roads, no less) have been fighting for a space that's not filled with 40mph cars or 3mph walkers for years and getting mostly nowhere. To properly integrate scooters you would need basically a two-lane bike lane - one lane for bikes (10-25mph) and one for scooters (less than that, I assume). In a lot of places the automotive demographic has such a stranglehold on the polity, we can't even get a one-lane bike lane.
The only way it would work is if they end up being ragingly popular... like maybe if something like 1/3 to 1/2 of all trips started being done by scooter, that would get the attention of the scooter-lane-planners. Though there is still the problem of "where does the capital come from?" when every municipality is seemingly always broke ever since 2008...
[+] [-] woolvalley|8 years ago|reply
For stability reasons the sweet spot is about 10-15mph, which is the speed of a typical bicycle rider. Bike riders should see them as allies in getting better bike infrastructure, because they are pretty much equivalent.
[+] [-] dredmorbius|8 years ago|reply
The truth is that on a miles-travelled basis, early gains were greatest, followed by a remarkably steady rate of halved risk roughly every 20 years, starting around 1925 and continuing to present.
The chart below begins in 1921. I recall one I'd found previously dating to ~1910 showing an even more pronounced early decline, halving in ten years, before the 20-year trend was established.
http://3.bp.blogspot.com/_otfwl2zc6Qc/TIp8lXB5h2I/AAAAAAAAOW...
A lesson on seeveral grouds: perception/impressions vs. reality, the power of gradual improvement, diminishing returns, underappreciated early gains, and the power of standardisation, regulation, and liability.
Which may also relate to the scooter debate.
[+] [-] kentbrew|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] linkregister|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] seanp2k2|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] vaughanb|8 years ago|reply
It's another tragedy of the common.
BTW "sidewalks" are also known as "footpaths" and "roads" as "carriageways" in countries that speak British English.
[+] [-] frgewut|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] lonk|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] physcab|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] gkoberger|8 years ago|reply
[+] [-] Tiktaalik|8 years ago|reply
> But cities are moving quicker this time. Austin and San Francisco have seized dozens of them. San Francisco has sent a cease and desist letter (paywall) to one company decrying the scooters as a “public nuisance” and “endangering public health and safety.”
Good. It's a shame that we weren't able to do the same with cars before they ruined North American cities.
[+] [-] pkulak|8 years ago|reply