Segway riders face stiff fines in Ontario

Flawed and Poor Judgment Legislation



Innovative Mobility sees the Ontario Highway Traffic Act Regulation 488/06 –
Pilot Project for Segways as being flawed and poor judgment legislation that
puts everyone at risk whether the Segway operator and/or sidewalk and roadway
stakeholders. Now 14 people of handicap will be allowed to ride their Segways
traveling at 12.5 km on roadways with 50 km plus speed limits.

1. NO driver training required
2. NO written test
3. NO licence plate
4. NO vehicle registration
5. No requirement for insurance
6. No helmet required for those 18 plus
7. No requirements for physical fitness
8. No light specifications other than the rear
light may be attached to the person
9. AND NO WE ARE NOT KIDDING!!!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
ONTARIO REGULATION 488/06made under the
HIGHWAY TRAFFIC ACT
Made: August 24, 2006
Filed: October 19, 2006
Published on e-Laws: October 19, 2006
Printed in The Ontario Gazette: November 4, 2006
PILOT PROJECT — SEGWAYS
http://www.e-laws.gov.on.ca/DBLaws/Source/Regs/English/2006/R06488_e.htm

Pursuant to "Segway 'Pilot Project under the Ontario Highway Traffic Act" Segways permitted users are:
1. A police officer may, in the course of his or her duties ( Sc 5.1)
2. A letter carrier who is an employee of Canada Post Corporation may, while engaged in door-to-door delivery of mail (Sc 5.2)
3. A person who is 14 years old or older may operate a Segway if his or her mobility is limited by one or more disabilities (Sc 6)

In reference to forementioned letter from the Honourable Donna Cansfield dated Feb./13/07 and the Segway- Pilot Project Regulations of Aug./24/07 each municipality is still in control of the use and operation of Segways on public “sidewalks, trails, paths or walkways or in public park or exhibition ground” within their respective municipalities under municipal by-laws. Ref Sc 3.1 Segway Regulation “a Segway is a motor vehicle for the purpose of a municipal by-law that governs or prohibits the operation of motor vehicles on or along any sidewalk, trail, path or walkway or in any public park or exhibition ground, unless the by-law provides otherwise.”


Innovative Mobility would not recommend any Municipality pass a bylaw permitting
any motor vehicle including Segways on municipal sidewalks or paths due to the
huge liability issues that the municipality would face.


Flawed and Poor Judgement Bylaw Enactment
Liability Issues Are Huge For Any Municipality:
To my knowledge only the City of London Ontario has established such a by-law under the City of London 2006 Accessibility Plan“the City’s Streets Bylaw was amended to permit the Segway HT as a personal assistive mobility device. Only people with disabilities will be able to use the Segway on City sidewalks and paths.”
A. We believe that this was a huge mistake by the city of London Ontario because “now by default or precedent wherever wheel chairs and medical scooter are allowed under the Ontarians with Disabilities Act (2001), the Segway is allowed.The
Ontarians with Disabilities Act (2001) applies to the Government of Ontario and a range of public sector and publicly funded organizations, including:
o Municipalities.
o "Public transportation organizations", a defined term which includes a wide range of entities specified in the Act.
o Hospitals.
o School boards.
o Colleges and universities.” (Reference letter of 12/7/05 to London City Council by Innovative Mobility)
I We believe that London’s Segway by-law as it is written currently without conditions, qualifications or quantification of what in fact is a disability suitable for Segway approval:
• It presents the city with a huge potential liability from London’s pedestrians who now have the potential to be injured in a collision with a Segway in what was formerly considered a safe zone from motorized vehicles
• The precedent of recognizing the Segway as a “personal assistance mobility device” will present undue hardship for London’s private sector under the
Accessibility for Ontarians with Disabilities Act, 2005• There is simply too many unanswered and open ended question to permit the use of Segways on the City of London’s public pedestrian infrastructure.
• While an admirable egalitarian effort by Council to increase the quality of life for people of disability, the $5000 plus purchase price and the seasonal “on and off” usability results in Segways having limited appeal to the majority of people with disabilities.

The catch-22 of London’s bylaw is that it now puts people with disabilities both visible and invisible at risk due to Segway collisions on the sidewalk and other public pedestrian infrastructure. Our blog,
Segway Caveats for Municipal Council Consideration and

Segways are not Disability Devices , you will see that even disabled groups are against the Segway because:
• People of disability like other pedestrians are not regulated traffic and do not travel in a straight line.
• Fast moving vehicles on the sidewalk would be especially dangerous to those with visual impairments.
• There is no viable way to enforce safe operation of Segways on the sidewalks.
• Segway users are not required to have insurance, though the devices are demonstrably dangerous to operate on a sidewalk. Who would be responsible for disability and medical claims in the event of a Segway collision?
• Segways are virtually silent, and therefore a serious menace to the visually impaired.
• There is no way to expect police to enforce a speed limit on our sidewalks. It is difficult enough for them to enforce the speed limits on our roads.
• How do you licence only people with true and Segway suitable disabilities --- and weed out those who are trying to game the system?
The most important consideration from the safety perspective whether for the able bodied or the disabled is the risk to other sidewalk stakeholder due to braking distance and energy exerted on collision impact. For the able bodied:
• The National Safety Council has determined that the average reaction time for an emergency braking situation is three-quarters of a second. At even 12mph, a Segway would therefore travel an average of 13 feet before the user would even initiate braking. Segway claims that the device could then be stopped in an additional 5 feet (which would be a remarkable 1g of deceleration if true) for a total stopping distance of 18 feet. Again, this would be completely unsafe for sidewalk use.
• Energy increases with the square of velocity. This means the energy expended in a crash of a rider on a 80 lb Segway scooter going 12 mph would be approximately 25 times greater than for a person walking.
• It should be noted that braking distances may be substantially longer for “persons of disability” depending on exactly what their disability is. I don’t believe any municipality should get into qualifying and quantifying Segway suitable disabilities due to the potential for claims of insensitivity and claims of discrimination. ((Reference letter of 1/17/06 to London City Council by Innovative Mobility)