The City Council today unanimously adopted a new set of regulations that will limit "electric personal assistive mobility devices" to routes approved by the city transportation department.
People with disabilities will not have to register their Segways with the city or obey the new ban on Segway use on sidewalks and plazas and in parks - but will have to carry proof of their disabilities and will not be allowed to ride more than two abreast.
The measure is aimed mainly at operators of Segway tours - whom some councilors have said pose a growing threat to pedestrians, particularly seniors and parents with strollers - but the restrictions will also apply to non-disabled people who like Segways enough to buy one on their own.
The regulations mean "we control this industry before it gets out of control in the city of Boston and my seniors in the North End will be safe walking the streets," Councilor Sal LaMattina (North End, East Boston, Charlestown) said. LaMattina, the driving force behind the new rules, once had a city official ram him with a Segway to see if it would hurt. It did. He began calling for a Segway crackdown after mothers in Charlestown complained they couldn't get across one intersection one tour operator was using as a starting point for his excursions.
City councilors, city agencies and pedestrian groups spent more than a year developing the new rules.
Under the regulations, tour operators will have to register with the Boston Police hackney unit, which regulates taxis and which will set fees for registration. In addition to proscribed routes, operators will also have to show customers a safety video and have them sign a document that they understand city safety rules before they wheel out onto the streets.
Councilor Maureen Feeney (Dorchester) agreed with LaMattina, but put a positive spin on the regulations. "Certainly it's new technology, it's exciting, it's fun," she said. "We want to create an opportunity for people to explore Boston on thesse vehicles."
| Attachment | Size |
|---|---|
 City council Segway order and regulations | 0 bytes |
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!
Ad:
Comments
Didn't work out that way, did it?
By Stewart
Wed, 06/15/2011 - 2:33pm
Problem is, nobody can ride a Segway without looking like a complete prat. It was doomed from the start.
However, I agree that it would be better to deal with the hipster shitstains who think they get to ride their bikes on the sidewalk and then worry about the three people who actually bought Segways.
(In a futile attempt to forestall the inevitable carping from people who insist on a convoluted intentional misreading of the laws on the books: No, you're not allowed to ride your bike on the sidewalk in the city of Boston. Deal with it and move on.)
because you haven't lived in
By anon
Wed, 06/15/2011 - 2:34pm
because you haven't lived in one of the less progressive cities in this nation...
Well...Baltimore
By Kaz
Wed, 06/15/2011 - 3:00pm
But fair enough.
Yaaaayyy!!!
By anon
Wed, 06/15/2011 - 2:54pm
For those people who have been swarmed about on sidewalks by these Segway-hooligans, they are much more annoying than you might expect.
Bravo to the city council for doing something about it!
Wow...just wow...
By anon
Wed, 06/15/2011 - 2:59pm
Is this even legal? Can the city really ban personal use of Segways on all public streets? I understand putting some restriction on the tour operators, however, this ordinance is absolutely draconian. I had a coworker at my last job who used his Segway every day to get to our Tremont St. office. To my knowledge he doesn't require it's use or have any "apparent" disabilities, so now he won't be able to use his Segway in Boston anymore.
Their justification is that Segways would hurt if they hit someone and some Charlestown moms couldn't get across the street when the tour groups were departing. That's it?
You know what else hurts when it hits you? Bicycles. Strollers. Scooters. Cars....
And quite often I can't get across a street because of all of the cars driving down it, or have to walk around 2 moms pushing strollers and scooters parked on the sidewalk, or have to jump out of the way of bikes which, in the financial district, seem to come out of nowhere.
So what's the next step...ban cars? Strollers? Bikes? If the Mayor was a Segway enthusiast you can bet this never would have been an issue. Ridiculous. Absolutely ridiculous.
Segways are motor scooters.
By anon
Wed, 06/15/2011 - 3:54pm
Segways are motor scooters. They should be allowed any place a bicycle or low-power moped is allowed, which would include any street except a limited access state highway.
This bill would ban them from streets, except as part of a licensed tour on a designated route. I think that's a bad idea.
ADA lawsuit incoming
By J
Wed, 06/15/2011 - 9:06pm
Open your pockets folks, because tax monies will be flying out in quick and easy lawsuit. A lawyer wont ever make an easier buck.
Asking someone to prove their disability = illegal.
Just like asking someone to prove their service animal is for a disability = illegal.
So as soon as the first cop demands proof of disability, payday arrives.
Yes and no
By eeka
Wed, 06/15/2011 - 9:53pm
Asking people to disclose the details of their disability to the cop or business owner or whomever is illegal. Requiring people to disclose it once to an official who issues paperwork is not. Housing and employment can require people to provide a letter in order to get an accommodation. Accessible parking placards and MBTA TAP cards require documentation to get. The city needs to either issue Segway permits for PWD or else needs to agree to just do "do you have a disability? ok, you're fine then" as is done when people try to kick people using service animals out of places etc.
The way the article is
By J
Thu, 06/16/2011 - 12:28am
The way the article is worded:
"People with disabilities will not have to register their Segways with the city or obey the new ban on Segway use on sidewalks and plazas and in parks - but will have to carry proof of their disabilities"
Makes it sound like "papers please" which is illegal. Especially if a disabled person will be stopped every 5 minutes and asked to show proof of disability.
ADA is about anti-discrimination and equal access to public facilities. Forcing a disabled person to stop and prove disability constantly goes completely against that, and thus, is illegal.
The MBTA TAP situation is different. The disabled are being offered a benefit that normal citizens are not, a reduced fare. If the disabled had to prove disability to enter the system with a wheelchair or service animal, then that would be illegal. Theres nothing stopping a disabled person from paying full fare. The disabled do not need to prove anything to bring a service animal. They just need to say "yes this is a service animal" if asked.
Same with parking spot. A disabled person can "opt out" of the proving process by parking in any other spot.
In this case, there's no opt out. Someone who REQUIRES a segway to transport themselves in the same manner than an able bodied person could (ie, walk across the street) must stop and present papers every time.
Illegal.
As you said, if the extent of enforcement is "are you using this to assist your mobility or is this for leisure?" then that's fine.
Asking someone to prove disability is not illegal.
By Chris Owens
Thu, 06/16/2011 - 12:11am
It's precisely how handicapped parking placards are issued: one demonstrates a need.
I hope youre not a small
By J
Thu, 06/16/2011 - 12:29am
I hope youre not a small business owner. If you are, please read the ADA law before you get hit with a large fine (ADA lawsuits can be extremely easy to win).
Asking someone to prove disability is ILLEGAL.
Please see my above response.
Cite please?
By Chris Owens
Thu, 06/16/2011 - 8:08am
Are you saying that if I ask someone to prove their disability by displaying a handicapped placard before parking in the designated handicapped spot in the (hypothetical) parking lot of my small business, I am in violation of the law? I'd want to see a cite on that.
Again, this isnt about
By J
Thu, 06/16/2011 - 2:56pm
Again, this isnt about handicap spaces (which are a bonus).
Its about equal access and discrimination.
You cannot ask someone to prove their disability which warrants a service animal. If you have a non-compliant section of your store (like a non-compliant restroom) and the handicapped patron complained, you cant say "prove your disability requires handrails".
In this case, you cant stop someone on a segway, and ask them to prove their disability.
A handicap person can also park in a normal space.
Handicap placards exist because those spaces have extra-wide loading zones, allowing for wheelchairs to be loaded onto vans. Without a placard system, other people would park there. But again, a disabled person can park in any other spot, and opt out of the proof process.
A disabled person cnnot park in any other spot
By Chris Owens
Thu, 06/16/2011 - 4:06pm
Handicap placards don't exist "because those spaces have extra wide loading zones"; an on-street handicapped space is exactly like any other on-street space except for the rules governing who can park there.
In the case where there is a reserved handicap space in front of the disabled person's house or in front of the business that the disabled person wants to patronize, and the neighborhood is fully saturated (meaning that, certain hours of day, there is [b]no[/b] on street parking available, then it is disingenuous to say that the disabled person could park in any other spot. Saying that the disabled person has other options to using the handicapped spot is exactly like saying that the disabled person using a Segway has other options.
I just don't see where the city would be running afoul of any ADA rules if it treated the right to ride Segways on the sidewalk exactly like the right to use reserved handicap spaces. Get the documentation together to demonstrate the need, get a sticker for your Segway, and you're done.
Theory vs. Reality
By Anonymous, sadly
Thu, 06/16/2011 - 8:14am
Most of the above posts (excluding the ones which deal strictly with bicycles) approach the subject from a purely theoretical context.
One theory is that these machines may have some use for people with disabilities. No one in this thread, however, has claimed to know (or know of) an actual person with any form of disability who actually uses one of these machines. The reality is that many forms of disabilities would preclude safe use of such a machine. There is, for example, a risk of falling off the machine, and people with frail bones or any sort of balance problems would be wise to avoid them. Also, in case the machine fails, the operator has to be able to control a heavy, bulky object with an inherently unstable shape (unlike the scooters that disabled people commonly use).
It is one thing to talk about these machines traveling singly, controlled by an experienced operator who is exercising reasonable caution and concern for the safety of other members of the general public who are around him or her. The reality in Boston to date, however, is that we're talking about packs of 8 to 12 machines, operated by people who are seeking an "adventure", who've had about 15 minutes experience using one of them, and who have complete unfamiliarity with the streets and neighborhoods where they are traveling. These novice users have no choice but to blindly follow the directions of the one group leader who accompanies them. In my personal experience, these group leaders have absolutely no concern for anyone who is not one of their paying clients.
My personal interactions with these group tours, and with their leaders, have included verbal and physical intimidation and threats. I have feared for my own safety and for the safety of children who have been entrusted to my care.
It is my personal opinion, based on multiple personal experiences, that the leaders of these group tours would be better suited for careers as enforcers-in-training for organized crime. The ones that I have had to deal with have an attitude that is wholly unsuited for the safe use of these machines in an urban context. I am glad that someone has stepped up to try to regulate them.
As for people with disabilities, the reality is not the person with precisely the right sort of disability who might find one of these machines useful. The reality is the person walking with a cane (or using a wheelchair or a scooter) on a public sidewalk, who feels threatened and intimidated by packs of these heavy machines traveling around her, at a rate of speed much faster than is usual for sidewalk travel, oblivious to the other people in their path.
(It is my normal practice to use my full name when posting to blogs such as this. But based on my previous interactions with the operators of these group tours, I am fearful of retaliation for my comments, and must therefore make this post anonymously.)
I've been down at the
By anon
Thu, 06/16/2011 - 8:56am
I've been down at the waterfront at the Christopher Columbus park when the segway tour group raced through. The area was packed with people and the segway riders fanned out and were going to fast, completely oblivious. Just because you pay to ride on a segway, doesn't entitle you to treat the sidewalks, parks and streets of Boston as your own personal yuppy racetrack.
City Council votes to restrict Segways in Boston
By Dustybear
Fri, 06/17/2011 - 12:58pm
Councilor LaMattina, What is the matter, are you NOT getting enough pocket money? Sounds more like a shakedown that violates federal anti-racketeering laws.
What harm is being done? Boston gets a bad reputation now, and Luddites like yourself want to harass people that are having an enjoyable time, in a wonderful city. Are you sure you're not really a Puritan. They believed having fun was a sin.
You should tell the truth, it will set you free, and then you will be able to enjoy life. Like so many others, you only see the negative, because you are afraid of something you do not understand.
As a result, you constantly lived in fear.
These new regulations make me think I am residing in 1920's and 1930's Germany. Should I be goose stepping?
The invitation to go on a glide still stands, but we can all see how this would violate YOUR new dictates. SEIG HEIL!
Hmm, taking a little time off
By anon
Fri, 06/17/2011 - 9:15pm
Hmm, taking a little time off from writing fake reviews on Trip Advisor?
Oh Danley, we will all be so happy when you're gone! Use your free time to get some therapy.
Pages