Electronic Scooters in San Francisco
In the recent past motor scooters regardless of the energy used to power them, that is either electric or gas engine scooters, have gained popularity in the transportation industry majorly as a form of public transit infrastructure. This is due to the fact that they are relatively cheaper and are also environmentally friendly since they don’t produce harmful emissions to the environment. In the light of the fact they are generally smaller in size, it is easy to see that they can be easily stored when they are not in use as well as having minimum maintenance. According to a recent research on global transportation, it showed that close to 200 million scooters and motorcycles cruise on the streets and roads globally nowadays (Hardt et al, 2). At this rate, electric scooters are likely to increase on the roads since according to Navigant the sales of E-scooters are believed to shoot from four million from 2013 to 4.5 million in 2024 meaning that they will hamper the growth of the electric car market. The consumers do not have a wide range of models to choose from since there are of only six types which include; electric kick scooters, motorcycles, bikes, tricycles, mobility scooters and go-karts (Bajpai et al, 4).
The adoption of the electronic scooter as a public transit infrastructure encourages environmental sustainability due to reduced carbon (IV) oxide emissions and energy saving in the public transport because they act as a substitute to the traditional combustion engines. On the contrary, this adoption has been accompanied by multiple issues based on the safety of the riders and pedestrians using the scooters more so in the high-tech city of San Francisco in California. This means of transport was commonly used more than a couple of months ago but came to a halt after their presence on the streets was banned due to safety issues and regulation from the concerned authorities.
According to Sperling et al (23), the safety issues emanated from the doctors in different hospitals in the city after multiple injuries from head trauma all the way to skinned knees. These types of complications were much reported after shared E-scooters arrived in the city early this year. Over-speeding and lack of use of helmets have been categorized as the core-cause of these injuries. Pursuing this further, these have led to the emergence of another issue concerning the safety of the rides as well as that of the pedestrians which are the introduction of an assembly bill in the legislature of California suggesting that the laws regulating the safety of the riders be relaxed. The bill suggests that it not mandatory for riders above the age of 18 to wear the protective gear, a helmet when riding the scooters. Also, the speed limit of the electric scooters is increased from 25 miles per hour to 35 miles per hour something which is terrifying (Hardt et al, 1). Don't use plagiarised sources.Get your custom essay just from $11/page
Apparently, another issue is that the companies which manufacture these scooters have been forced to face disciplinary action which has led to spending huge amounts of money in paying fines and secure proper and legitimate licenses. Some of them include the Bird company, lime company and lastly the Spin company. Majority of groups have been affected by the massive intrusion of the E-scooters in San Francisco ranging from individuals to governmental institutions. These groups include the riders as well as the pedestrians which have complained from minor to complex injuries, congestion of scooters on the roads. Additionally, the ministry of transport and also that of health have been affected negatively too. On the contrary, the environmentalists have experienced positive impact due to the adoption of environmental- friendly technology, that is the use of gas and electricity to drive the motors (Bajpai et al, 5).
Admittedly, to regulate the operation of electric scooters, San Francisco’s transportation agency has come up with a proposed policy with a detailed and synchronized planned intervention. The proposed plan will only permit only five companies which will in-turn give only five hundred scooters per permit justifying that not at one time will 2500 scooters will be allowed in the city. In addition, the policy mandates every permitted company to deliver insurance and motor education to its customers as well as sharing an inclusive trip information of every scooter with the city’s management so as to ensure the scooter operates in the approved area of service. The policy explains further that every company that requires a permit should avail detailed information on how it will ensure the safety of its riders as well as the scooters’ storage. This means that they will be held accountable for improper parking, blocking business lot doors and paths for the visual impaired. Also, it will be required to pay five thousand dollars as an application fee. The whole ideology of this policy is not to ban the use of electric scooters but to ensure that there are regulations which they should abide by in order to prevent public nuisance. The core-driver to the proposal of this policy was from concurrent complaints from the public due to irresponsible parking, arrogance, and elitism from the scooters.
Undoubtedly, the freedom of expression not only in California but in the entire United States has given every citizen the power to express their thoughts. Through this, different groups have shown different stands regarding the policy on the use of electric scooters as public transit infrastructure- some opposing whilst others supporting the policy. Almost 90 % of the residents have come to defend the policy since the scooter riders are always blocking the entrances of buildings- which some are hospitals, schools, business premises, and hotels (Bajpai et al, 2). Pursuing this further, they also block sidewalks leading to congestion of people on the sidewalks, hindered the movement of pedestrians and people with mobility complications.
Moreover, the community-based organizations in the area strongly support the policy and how it is going to be implemented because they will benefit abundantly and positively from the whole process because they play a key role in the process of monitoring scooter shares. In the same context, scooter share companies and the SFMTA are loyal supporters of the ideology due to the fact that they believe every citizen of San Francisco is provided with equal access to all types of transport which include the electronic scooters. Some of the riders have emerged to support the implementation of the policy since the speed limits have been increased hence faster movements around the city.
However, some of the cyclists have proved their standby opposing the policy on e-scooters’ riders basing their argument on safety. Apparently, they have been backed up by members from the health ministry as well as some members from the transportation agency arguing that the proposal of the abolishment of the compulsory law of wearing helmets for persons above 18 years of age. This is because when a rider is cruising with an average speed of 35 miles per hour accidentally gets involved in an accident without the helmet they can easily get severely hurt. Finally, the anti-scooter society in the region which is inclusive of some tech guys oppose the policy which was passed as a bill a few weeks ago so as to allow electronic scooters back to San Francisco city (Hardt et al, 1).
The policy is absolutely a great one since it will assist in solving some of the issues which arose from the multiple invasion of e-scooters in the city. Issues like congestion in the streets of San Francisco has been solved by the introduction of a limit of 2500 e-scooters in the city, blockage of pathways and entrances of building also has been catered for by ensuring proper packing of the e-scooters by the respective companies, and creation of public nuisance has been reduced by the policy too (Sperling et al, 17). Nevertheless, the policy has been compelled with some limitations or shortcomings too. In the light of the fact that the policy is recommending that only persons under the age of 18 are the ones who should wear helmets, we can see that the policy has failed in meeting the required safety measures for the riders. I think the committee behind the formulation of this policy and how it is supposed to be implemented failed by the introduction of higher speed limits than the current ones and then abolishing helmets basing their discussion that riders preferred riding for shorter distances without helmets. They passed the policy oblivious to the fact that many accidents such as head trauma which health officials were complaining about.
The electronic scooter policy aimed at regulating the scooters in the city kicked off some few weeks ago and it is clearly evident to suggest who are the winners and losers from it. Unquestionably, it can be seen that the companies which own the scooters are losers due to the introduction of tough limits which never existed before. The policy requires them to create awareness and educate the public on not only their personal safety when riding the scooters but also the safety of other parties. Also, they must acquire permits from the city’s transportation agency and only allow 500 permitted scooters in the city (Sperling et al, 25). This is a huge blow since the profits will decrease from the previous sales. Additionally, the companies should deliver track data to the scooters to ensure they don’t operate past the permissible locations. These companies will be responsible for improper parking of the e-scooters too. This was experienced some few months ago were the Bird company was forced to spend over there hundred thousand dollars on safety fines in the city of Santa Monica.
According to my own opinion, I can categorize some parties as both winners and losers at the same time because some of the policy measures are of positive impact while others are on the negative impacts. A group like the e-scooter riders have been benefited from the introduction of higher speed limits-35 m.p.h. but the abolishment of the helmets will lead to serious accidents than ever before. The scooter companies also lie in this category since they have also earned from the abolishment of helmets because now they are only producing fewer helmets hence prioritizing their profits over the safety of the public- something the lawyers from injury and transportation are not comfortable with. On the other hand, the residents of San Francisco can be categorized as winners since their pleas (as discussed above) were heard and included in the policy.
Remedies to complaints made by the public and several parties in the city have been included in the policy. Congestion and reduction of hit and run cases are expected to drop due to the limited number of e-scooters in the city, obstruction of pathways which create challenges for people with mobility issues and pedestrians is also expected to reduce due to strict parking rules and laws. In the same context, there will be a reduction of public nuisance in the city emanating from the e-scooters. The transportation agency in San Francisco will have an added advantage in tracing the mobility of the e-scooters in the area because the companies are expected to deliver the track records for each scooter. Besides, the safety of the riders will be increased due to the fact that the companies are expected to provide an insurance to every scooter as well as education to every owner on safety.
In conclusion, I support the move of injury and transportation lawyers and recommend that the policy of e-scooters in San Francisco be revisited and the policy on helmets be dropped so as to ensure that it will be mandatory for everyone riding a scooter to wear a helmet. Since the rate of invasion of e-scooters on the roads and streets is tremendously escalating majority of the cities globally should look up to this policy and adopt it since it is inclusive in handling almost all the issues which come along with adoption of e-scooters as a means of public transit. Generally, the transportation agency in San Francisco has done a good job in coming up with such a policy which is a challenge to many other cities in ensuring the safety of its citizens.
References
Bajpai, Jitendra N. “Emerging vehicle technologies & the search for urban mobility solutions.” Urban, Planning and Transport Research 4.1 (2016): 83-100.
Hardt, Cornelius, and Klaus Bogenberger. “Usability of escooters in urban environments—a pilot study.” Intelligent Vehicles Symposium (IV), 2017 IEEE. IEEE, 2017.
Sperling, Daniel. Three Revolutions: Steering Automated, Shared, and Electric Vehicles to a Better Future. Island Press, 2018.