In one oblique reference to rules-of-the-road, it mentions/claims “Renters can ride … scooters on sidewalks”; I don’t have time to unpack yet another set of local ordinances but I don’t see how that’s possible ; see e.g. here for Phoenix and Tempe operating ordinances. Continue reading Scottsdale regulates scooter/bike sharing companies
The state of Delaware passed a package of updates to rules-of-the-road in 2017; as outlined by bikelaw.com
In October 2017, Delaware’s governor signed the Bicycle Friendly Delaware Act, placing into state law some cutting-edge, pro-bike reforms that put Delaware emphatically into a category of one among U.S. states when it comes to favorable statutory law treatment of cycling. The highlights:
1. requirement that drivers have to change lanes to pass;
2. the “Delaware Yield” at stop signs;
3. deletion of the “as far to the right as practicable” provision;
4. no aggressive honking at cyclists.
Arizona recently added to the panoply of transportation gadgets. (yet we still don’t regulate e-scooters; although the legislature did thankfully finally pass e-bike regs this session)
This reminded me of the pizza delivery robot in an episode of Black Mirror. Continue reading Personal delivery device
Just what is an e-scooter? … what rules of the road apply?
For our purposes here, an e-scooter is an electric powered “kick” scooter that is sized to accommodate up to most adults; with weight limits being typically 220lbs. They travel on level ground up to about 15mph. A very popular model, the Xiaomi which is no longer sold at retail is said to be typical, and the basis for most of the scooter sharing companies, a la Bird, Lime, etc.
Ebikes are currently classified legally as motorized bicycles in Arizona. Beginning in August of 2018, ebikes will have their own explicitly defined legal status and definition; in particular legally they are not motor vehicles.
It is expected that ebikes will see large growth in use in the coming years; it is also feared that this will have a deleterious impact on (e)cyclist safety since it’s possible that ebikes will generally be used at higher speeds potentially by less-experienced users, and also possible growth in older riders who tend to be more vulnerable to injury when a crash occurs. Feared but largely unknown at this time. [for some parallels, see recently reported large increases in older ebike rider fatalities in NL] Continue reading Motorized bicycles, Ebikes and crash reporting
Late in this legislative season (53 2nd regular), an ebike bill has once again surfaced from Rep Worsley; this time as a “striker” in the former dark sky lighting special plates bill HB2266.
The bill is suddenly, as is always the case I guess with strikers, being heard, scheduled for 3/20/2018 in the senate where it passed unanimously… Continue reading Ebike bill rides again
A Cross-type Bike-MV collision occurs when a bicyclist and motorist who are traveling in opposing directions collide while the motorist is making a turn. If both are traveling in proper direction, it would be a left cross; as illustrated between the blue vehicle and the bicyclist in the illustration. For a counter-flow bicyclist, a right-cross can occur.
(This in in contrast to to a hook collision, which involves a turning motorist and a same direction cyclist. ) Continue reading Left Cross Collision
An ebike bill PASSED in 2018: HB2652. Below info is for historical purposes…
[5/10/2017; bill stalled. Never got a House floor vote]
[Current Status as of 3/1/2017: passed the Senate by wide margins, also passed House T&I Committee but they implied it would need to be amended to pass the floor; as of 3/19 it’s not passed the house; see below ]
As of spring 2017 there is an e-bike bill working its way through the legislature. SB1273 (2017, 53rd/1st Regular session). This bill, if passed, would address some or all of the confusion documented at length in these pages, at least for e-bikes. The bill’s prime sponsor is Bob Worsley (R-Mesa)
, is senate president so I’d have to assume it’s going to pass ; [correction, Yarborough is, so I have no idea how i got that wrong] and is moving fast, as of the time of this writing (early February 2017) it has already passed the Senate Transportation and Technology Committee unanimously with little debate. Besides being senate president, Worsley is the chairperson of the senate Transp committee. I have no idea about the house but there’s little apparently standing in the bill’s way. Continue reading Arizona Electric Bicycle Legislation (bill died)
I’ve been following this since as far back as 1999 (a deaf-mute bicyclist was arrested and held in jail overnight because he lacked ID); with some interesting updates in 2014 (police demanding ID from an ostensibly “jaywalking” pedestrian).
The rules revolving around operators of a motor vehicle are pretty clear; drivers must have a valid drivers license for other reasons (e.g. to comply with §28-3151 ), and the DL satisfies the elements set forth in 28-1595: name, address, height, etc — but for everyone else it’s remain vague, and in fact court rulings have (repeatedly) looked at the non-motorist provision and struck it down, most recently in 2003 Atkins; and the law hasn’t changed since. Continue reading “Evidence of Identity” Rides Again
In mid December 2016 Sfbike.org (SanFrancisco Bike Coaltion) issued a warning regarding how Uber autonomously driving cars make right turns. At nearly the same time Uber has de-camped from CA (see e.g. this 12/22/2016 article from recode), literally loading their fleet onto car carriers and driving them to…. Arizona! The decision was based on CA’s regulatory environment for autonomously-driven cars; Uber decided they didn’t want to pursue special permitting which the CA DMV said was required, whereas Arizona has no special permitting required — so long as there’s a live driver sitting in the driver’s seat. More about Uber, below. Continue reading How to make a right turn