I received this note today and thought I'd pass it along. Haven't seen hide nor hair of these devices in Pittsburgh, but perhaps it's a.... I received this note today and thought I'd pass it along. Haven't seen hide nor hair of these devices in Pittsburgh, but perhaps it's a problem elsewhere.

By way of introduction my name is Cynthia Booker and I am a member of Innovative Mobility a student research group in Ontario, Canada. Our members all students come from a variety of disciplines and perspectives, very generally we are ¡°working for safe sidewalks, better cycling, walking, public transit and fewer cars. While many of our projects continue to be a work in progress, the one that I am writing to you about today is the threat of the ever increasing number of Electric Personal Assistance Mobility Devices (EPAMD) being developed for use on the sidewalks. The Segway was the first EPAMD developed exclusively for sidewalk use and we believe it is amazing and phenomenal technology but it does not belong on any public pedestrian infrastructure due to the hazards that motorized vehicles present to other sidewalk stakeholders.

Four years after the introduction of the Segway there are lots of really cool ¡°fun vehicle¡± available that have been designed for sidewalk use from pocket crotch rockets to electric tricycles to the newest the ¡°levitating hover scooter¡± in this rapidly emerging market. Innovative Mobility does not believe that any vehicle that is capable at speeds of 12.5 mph and beyond should be approved for sidewalk use whether driven by an able bodied or a person of disability.

Here in Ontario, we want to avoid the situation that has developed in the United States; whereby, the Segway lobbyists shoved through state, county and municipal committees a hodgepodge of statutes and ordinances that ¡°anomalously define the Segway operator as a pedestrian¡±. For example ¡°the Segway laws of New Hampshire, the Segway home state, demonstrates what can occur when corporate lobbyists set about to rewrite the traffic laws for their own purposes.¡± (Reference is John S. Allen¡¯s excellent article of December, 2003 ¡°The Segway ¨C Corporate Lobbyists Write the Law¡±.)

The ¡°bloom is off the rose¡± for Segway in Ontario because there are many pedestrian rights groups like Innovative Mobility that have actively lobbied the politicians not to buy into the Segway spin and hoopla. As a result, no municipality across Ontario has approved the use of Segways on public sidewalks or roadways; they are only permitted on private property.

All of Innovative Mobility¡¯s presentations both at the municipal and provincial level have been published in the form of blogs:
1. Segways Caveats for Municipal Council Consideration at this link
2. Segway Is Not A Disability Device at This link
3. Segway For Ontario (An Antithesis) at This link
While our blogs have a distinct Ontario Canada flavour, they are sufficiently generic that they will have relevance to any global community considering the approval of Segways or any other EPAMD for use on the sidewalk.

These forementioned blogs are not intended as ¡°original work¡± by Innovative Mobility but rather an assemblage of information sourced from internet resources by our team members. Within these documents every attempt has been made to give credit for intellectual property that is someone else¡¯s. Some of the most important resource material originated from authors:
¡¤ John Allen
¡¤ Steven B. Goodridge
¡¤ Charlotte Sorenson
¡¤ Todd Litman
¡¤ Robert Blair, and
¡¤ Barry Schiller
Innovative Mobility thanks these individuals for their work that made our assemblage documents possible.

We recommend that you check out our blogs and feel free to link to them from your internet pages. Thanks for your kind consideration in preserving the sanctity of the sidewalk; ¡°Lowly, unpurposeful and random as they appear, sidewalk contacts are the small change from which a city¡¯s wealth of public life may grow.¡± - Jane Jacobs, The Death and Life of Great American Cities.