Unfortunately, those areas are so small that you can be stuck with a scooter that is impossible to return, because the GPS tracker doesn’t update fast or precise enough.
And unfortunately, people still dump them on the side of the road if either they go out of their allowed area, or run out of juice.
Considering you can rent a car at a lower rate per minute with less fuss, I think these scooter companies just have a hard time accepting sunk cost.
There is a YouTuber who collects and dumps them in piles, and it seems like the scooter companies have sufficient anti-theft measures in place to justify that the risk of theft is low.
I agree, it seems like such a trivial solution to implement that I am baffled that no western city has done it. Laws against blocking pedestrian spaces surely exist already so they only need to be enforced. If car rental companies can designate parking spaces for their cars, surely scooters can too.
As someone who frequently has to dart myself and my puppy out of the way of these jerks—almost always on a narrow sidewalk beside a busy arterial—this kind of sounds nice. But I can’t imagine how it would work. Even if I could scramble fast enough to snap a picture while keeping pup safe, would it be actionable?
As it is, on the rare occasion it’s just me out walking I’m content to play chicken with them and try to hold my ground. But I don’t take those chances with pup, and trying to get evidence (however useful) would involve the same risk.
Mixing operation of motorized vehicles in the same space with vulnerable humans and their pets is the real problem. Operating them on the sidewalk is an instance of and amplification of the same problem.
I’m wildly sympathetic to the anti-car position, but I’m not at all sympathetic to excusing motor scooters on sidewalks in the interest of advancing that position.
Can’t say the same about other US cities.
dart myself and my puppy out of the way of these jerks
Look at all the infrastructure, rules, regulations and surveillance we maintain to make the use of these large, heavy, loud, air polluting vehicles possible.
Why not put some effort into making the use of small, lightweight, silent, clean vehicles possible?
snap a picture while keeping pup safe, would it be actionable?
What for? So that they can extract more money and let the rest of us deal with the externalities?
This is the people telling those companies that they create too much hassle for what they contribute. People are still welcome to have their own lightweight, silent, clean vehicles. The various start-ups who came here were just too much of a pain for everyone.
It’s already possible. The effort you seem to be requesting is the effort I already described as dangerous to me and my pup. If I’m understanding correctly: that’s why. Because it’s dangerous to me and my pup.
If I’m not understanding correctly, please feel free to clarify what effort you think I should be making to better accommodate these vehicles by which I wish not to be hit.
There are so many logistical barriers to creating systems for accountability with rental scooters. First of all, remember that crime (and law enforcement) is an economy, and the fines have to be large and frequent enough to result in positive cashflow into the city. Otherwise, there is no incentive to enforce the rules. Now consider what a city would have to do to enforce the rules you suggested. The city will either need to
1) force the e-scooter companies to provide their data to law enforcement,
2) require the e-scooter companies to self-report misbehavior and pay the corresponding fines,
3) rely on citizens to report misbehavior.
Among the litany of reasons why (3) doesn't work is because it relies almost entirely on circumstantial evidence. (2) is laughable because the scooter companies have no incentive to self-report, and an audit would be hideously expensive for the city government. (1) doesn't work under US law because the police would need a warrant, or a legal hellstorm would ensue.
Bicycles also make no noise and emit no air pollution. They can also be electrically-powered, they are safer for the rider, and are limited by the laws of physics to safer, less erratic driving. They're faster and harder to steal. They're categorically better than e-scooters in every way except size, and as I said, even their size can be considered a strength.
Rental e-scooters were a fun experiment, and I will definitely tell my kids all kinds of stories about the stupid things I saw people do with them. If my city bans them, I will be pleased.
The city also made quite a few changes in the last few years, sometimes giving whole car lanes to bikes, and all that for a monthly 3 euros or so price. I would much prefer a centralized solution like this over the ad hoc, leave everywhere scooter one. Bikes can also be misused, but have a better, existing culture/understanding, and are much more safer for the drivers (scooters have very low central mass and a small hole can cause really bad accidents).
Scooter left on the sidewalk? Charge the operating company with a ticket. So they will charge their customer.
Scooter driving in an illegal manner? Charge the driver and the company.
This way, scooters would be operated in a manner that is good for everybody. They are a very effecive way to get around in a city. Are used much more than personally owned cars and bikes, so less parking time / occupied space. They take up way less space while driving and parking. Make no noise. And emmit no air pollution.
It is similar to banning light bulbs vs introducing a carbon tax. Concrete laws like banning things are more popular. But taxing the problems they create is more effective.