Lime Scooters are now here. Looks like they have 150-200 scooters in the city so far, according to their map. Their map seems to tell you how much distance the scooter has left on it before it dies - some show 21.4 miles, which I think is more than Bird? I haven't actually used Bird, so I am not sure if their system tells you how far you can go once you rent it, or if you just know the battery percentage.

Bird scooters show the percentage of remaining battery capacity, not range in miles. People who have ridden both in other cities tell me that Lime Scooters are faster and more powerful than Bird.

Bird scooters show the percentage of remaining battery capacity, not range in miles. People who have ridden both in other cities tell me that Lime Scooters are faster and more powerful than Bird.

I was driving on 23rd the other night in the 30mph zone, and there was a Lime scooter *almost* keeping pace with me. Granted, it was going down a hill, but I was pretty impressed.

I feel like I've been seeing a whole lot more of the Limes lately.

Saw a 25ish girl and her significant other at the airport in a wheelchair with her leg in a cast. Someone said to her there must be a good story behind the cast to which she replied, "electric scooters are a lot of fun until they aren't." Seems she was going to run into a car, tried to get off the scooter and broke her ankle.

Are there rules for using? Helmet requirement? I've noticed these being used on the street and on sidewalks, parents with kids, etc. One of the news channels had a story of the scooters blocking sidewalks for handicap accessible areas.

The one time I've used a lime so far it wouldn't go faster than 10mph (they have speedometers unlike birds)

Are there rules for using? Helmet requirement? I've noticed these being used on the street and on sidewalks, parents with kids, etc. One of the news channels had a story of the scooters blocking sidewalks for handicap accessible areas.

Bicycle rules generally apply: You must ride on streets only, in the direction of traffic, obeying all traffic laws & controls. Helmets are recommended but not required. Scooters should be parked so as to not obstruct private property, entrances, streets, roads, sidewalks, paths or parking areas. In other words, use common sense & consideration.

Presently no helmet requirement, nor should there be as those have devastating consequences to the viability of bike shares and scooter shares, and lead to selective enforcement and other law enforcement issues. There are a wealth of statistics available on this. The level of participation drops precipitously with a helmet requirement. Nobody carries one around with them, and nobody wants to wear a shared helmet. Not to mention the logistics for providing them are a nightmare.

Regarding selective enforcement, don’t police have something better to do than write tickets or issue warnings to helmetless scooter (or bicycle) riders? The answer is yes.

Speaking of statistics, head injuries occur at roughly the same rate among bicyclists as they do among pedestrians. There are studies which have shown that automobiles take more chances and act more aggressively around bicyclists wearing helmets than those who are not.

Since e-scooters travel at speeds similar to bicycles, and should be treated exactly the same. Which is, no helmet requirement, follow traffic rules - with the exception that the Idaho Stop should be added to our traffic code - NO RIDING ON SIDEWALKS (for purposes of pedestrian safety), ride on the street, WITH TRAFFIC (not against), make use of bike lanes where available, etc., etc..

I do believe that this is the direction the City is headed with the permanent ordinance, other than the Idaho Stop, which I hope becomes law here at some point.

Apparently Municipal Code allows for riding bicycles on the sidewalk outside of the business district or unless there is signage prohibiting such.

§ 32-487. - Riding on sidewalks.
(a)

No person shall ride a bicycle upon a sidewalk within a business district.
(b)
The Director is authorized to order the erection of signs on any sidewalk or roadway prohibiting the riding of bicycles thereon by any person and when such signs are in place no person shall disobey them. Such an order shall be based upon the public health, safety and welfare.
(c)
Persons riding a bicycle upon a sidewalk shall yield the right-of-way to any pedestrian and shall give an audible signal before overtaking and passing any pedestrian.

(Code 1970, § 34-250; Ord. No. 15924, § 1, 8-12-80; Code 1980, § 32-487)

Yes, that is correct. I was mostly referring to the areas where e-scooters are presently being used (business districts). This law is routinely ignored and not enforced regarding bicycles, which eventually I think should change. First there needs to be better public awareness of the rules, which is common in a city so auto-centric. Basically many drivers assume that a bicycle has no rights on a street, when in reality it has the same rights as an automobile. So, many inexperienced bicyclists prefer the sidewalk because it feels safer. But this is a hazard to people correctly using the sidewalk on foot, using assistive devices, pushing strollers, etc.. Also, sidewalks are way to iffy/spotty in OKC to provide a reliable surface for bicycles.

Bicyclists need to feel safer in the street than they do, which will come from better bicycle infrastructure and more public awareness. And e-scooters should be subject to the same general rules as bicycles.

Yeah, I was thinking of neighborhoods such as Mesta, Gatewood, and the neighborhoods sandwiched between business districts. I agree 100% on your take on bicycles needing to feel safe while traveling arterial roads and streets. While sidewalks are iffy/spotty in OKC, the same can be said for the roads. That is one of the reasons I choose to ride the dirt trails versus riding a road bike.

One of the news channels had a story of the scooters blocking sidewalks for handicap accessible areas.

No one should block sidewalks and handicap accessible areas. Period. Having said that, this story is kind of comical considering all the other ways the city allows construction, construction signs, cars, sand bags, and their own curbs to do the same thing... yet there’s no stories on these impediments. Just stories on these easy-to-move scooters. Is this the first ever story on sidewalk and handicap access in OKC history? Lol.

^^Good points you mentioned. Honestly the scooters I've seen have all been neatly parked upright.

^^^^^^^
Yep. I have now seen what probably amounts to many, many hundreds - if not thousands - of instances of parked scooters, and I have yet to see one blocking a sidewalk. Other than a few that I have seen tucked next to a doorway, without exception they have been dutifully parked in sidewalk amenities areas, which ultimately will be their legal location.

At the same time I daily see instances of complete and utter disregard for pedestrians in the form of sidewalks blocked by construction, fences, signs, sandbags, and various other items intentionally and unintentionally placed debris. No attention is required by local ordinance of developers or construction crews to provide protected parallel pedestrian access such as is required all over the U.S. in other cities large and small.

I have yet to see television news (or really much of anybody else other than a few walkability advocates) give even passing interest to any of these issues. So pardon me if I laugh derisively at a TV news station reporting a plague of scooters blocking sidewalks. It simply isn’t true.

On not parking on sidewalks...I was in Norman this morning and find Bird scooters there. Three on the SW corner of University and Gray parked on concrete off the sidewalk and three on the SE corner parked on the sidewalk. They look like they have just been set out by bird et al. They might need to do some in house training.

https://s22.postimg.cc/vlav92lwx/bird.jpg

https://s22.postimg.cc/jjfhf4n0x/bird2.jpg

And yes, in the first photo there are street signs and cones piled up on the sidewalk too. University is shut down a block south and there is other road work in the area.

Those Bird parking jobs look fine, no? Maybe I misunderstood your post. But those scooters look they're parked either off the sidewalk (picture 1) or on the very edge of the sidewalk so there is still a clear pathway for pedestrians and wheelchairs (picture 2). They do a good job generally parking them in places so as not to block pedestrians.

Those Bird parking jobs look fine, no? Maybe I misunderstood your post. But those scooters look they're parked either off the sidewalk (picture 1) or on the very edge of the sidewalk so there is still a clear pathway for pedestrians and wheelchairs (picture 2). They do a good job generally parking them in places so as not to block pedestrians.

First photo location is fine. Perfect. Second photo they aren't fully blocking the sidewalk but they are parked on a standard width sidewalk and are not in an "ancillary space" mentioned above. Street view looking down that walk, east along Gray:

https://www.google.com/maps/@35.21997,-97.4487376,3a,42y,240.09h,91.07t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1shedGVXYDkChp7pddEF6O6A!2e0!7i1 3312!8i6656

If people are walking both directions someone is going to have to yield for the parked scooters. That's not acceptable to me. YMMV.

14911

Some praise for the people at Lime. When checking out a scooter a screen pops up instructing you not to ride on sidewalks. Before ending a ride, you’re required to snap a picture of the scooter showing that you properly parked it.

14911

Some praise for the people at Lime. When checking out a scooter a screen pops up instructing you not to ride on sidewalks. Before ending a ride, you’re required to snap a picture of the scooter showing that you properly parked it.

Bird does the same thing, at least when I rode it for the first time.

Bird also instructs you to snap a pic, but that pop-up about sidewalks is really great and hopefully will help change some behavior. I have now ridden both several times (Bird a lot) and I sortof prefer Bird, but that may have to do with having ridden it more. Lime's brakes were surprising to me. I hopped on thinking it would ride just like the Birds I've become used to, but didn't understand the rear brake existed at all (you stomp on it) and the front brake sets as a parking brake really easy by accident. It's a recipe for disaster if you don't know about it going in and are used to the other system. After I got the hang of it I was fine, but I did have a close call initially.

Lime scooters now in Stillwater: http://www.stwnewspress.com/news/scoot-over-bird-lime-puts-a-new-twist-on-scooters/article_9a6601ea-99c7-55e7-bc2a-ebed2f3cadf6.html

Just wrote an article about whether you can get a DUI in Oklahoma on one of these scooters.

http://www.okdui.com/duionscooter.html

Just wrote an article about whether you can get a DUI in Oklahoma on one of these scooters.

http://www.okdui.com/duionscooter.html

I have seen Vids of Intoxicated, Men usually, getting busted driving all manner of powered machines. Riding Lawn Mowers to a Scissor Jack. I look forward to a Scooter take down vid.

Just wrote an article about whether you can get a DUI in Oklahoma on one of these scooters.

http://www.okdui.com/duionscooter.html

Good article!

Let's take this a step further. Riders must be 18 years old, but there isn't anything (that I'm aware of, but I could be wrong) requiring a rider to possess a valid driver's license as a condition of use. Would the mandatory driver's license revocation provisions of Section 6-205 apply to a conviction of DUI for scooter use? It would appear the answer is yes, as the statute makes no distinction between types of "motor vehicle". I'd be curious as to your thoughts on this.

Good article!

Let's take this a step further. Riders must be 18 years old, but there isn't anything (that I'm aware of, but I could be wrong) requiring a rider to possess a valid driver's license as a condition of use. Would the mandatory driver's license revocation provisions of Section 6-205 apply to a conviction of DUI for scooter use? It would appear the answer is yes, as the statute makes no distinction between types of "motor vehicle". I'd be curious as to your thoughts on this.

The license revocations under 47 OS 6-205 as well as the provisions under 753 and 754 would still apply. For the non lawyers (or normal people as my wife would say), 6-205 requires mandatory license loss upon conviction for DUI or APC. 753-754 requires the officer to take your license if you blow over the legal limit (.08 or .02 if under 21) or if you refuse to take the test. This can be challenged by requesting a hearing within 15 days though. The license loss is for 6 months if first offense. You can drive with an ignition interlock in the car in most cases. After 6 months, you can reinstate but if you refused the test or blew over a .15....you have to install an interlock on your car for 18 additional months.

There probably aren't many people aware of this right now. I hadn't thought of it until your article.

There probably aren't many people aware of this right now. I hadn't thought of it until your article.

I saw an article about an arrest in California which got me thinking about it here in OK. I didn't consider the license ramifications until you brought it up. Thanks

You're welcome. Muddling through stuff like this, and how medical MJ will affect the workplace and schools, is interesting.

If an FAA-licensed pilot receives a DUI/DWI citation (not conviction - merely a citation), they must notify FAA within 60 days, and they should expect an extensive, lengthy follow-up including suspension during the investigation. For this reason I would oppose treating “impaired scootering” the same as impaired driving . Unintended consequences.

If an FAA-licensed pilot receives a DUI/DWI citation (not conviction - merely a citation), they must notify FAA within 60 days, and they should expect an extensive, lengthy follow-up including suspension during the investigation. For this reason I would oppose treating “impaired scootering” the same as impaired driving . Unintended consequences.

Under 14 CFR 61.15, just receiving a citation doesn't trigger notification requirement, notification is required within 60 calendar days of the effective date of an alcohol and/or drug related conviction or administrative action. However, on the Medical...you have to list all dui arrests when you renew.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ash/ash_programs/investigations/airmen_duidwi/duidwi_reporting/

Saw a 25ish girl and her significant other at the airport in a wheelchair with her leg in a cast. Someone said to her there must be a good story behind the cast to which she replied, "electric scooters are a lot of fun until they aren't." Seems she was going to run into a car, tried to get off the scooter and broke her ankle.

So wearing a helmet would do no good. Overall body armor, maybe, but who wants to do that? People better ride them more cautiously or not at all. In turn, if they're in your town and driving look out for them.

Under 14 CFR 61.15, just receiving a citation doesn't trigger notification requirement, notification is required within 60 calendar days of the effective date of an alcohol and/or drug related conviction or administrative action. However, on the Medical...you have to list all dui arrests when you renew.

https://www.faa.gov/about/office_org/headquarters_offices/ash/ash_programs/investigations/airmen_duidwi/duidwi_reporting/

Yep. Here's a little expansion on what you said for benefit of pilots on the board. This indicates that notice is required within 60 days of a failing or refusing a blood or breath test (that’s the “administrative action”), not a conviction:

Reporting Requirements
Under 14 CFR 61.15, all pilots must send a Notification Letter (MS Word) to FAA’s Security and Hazardous Materials Safety Office (AXE-700) (formerly Civil Aviation Security Division (AMC-700)) within 60 calendar days of the effective date of an alcohol and/or drug related conviction or administrative action. In 14 CFR 61.15(c), alcohol and/or drug related convictions or administrative actions refer to motor vehicle actions (MVA).
Notification Letters
Note: Each event, conviction, or administrative action, requires a separate Notification Letter. For example, an airman’s driver license may be suspended at the time of arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol for either:
Failing a blood/breath test
Refusing to test
The airman must send a Notification Letter for the suspension, then send a second Notification Letter if the alcohol and/or drug related offense results in a conviction. Even though the airman sent two notification letters, FAA views the suspension and conviction as one alcohol and/or drug related incident.

O0f14945

I couldn't believe how many Lime scooters were at Pump Bar last night when I stopped in for a beer while on a bike ride. It felt like Denmark, except with scooters instead of bicycles. ;) Issues aside it is pretty refreshing to see so much pedestrian activity around the city from the use of these scooters.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoYWyhpUcAATKgv.jpg

Last time I was there they were all across the street at Good Egg.

I couldn't believe how many Lime scooters were at Pump Bar last night when I stopped in for a beer while on a bike ride. It felt like Denmark, except with scooters instead of bicycles. ;) Issues aside it is pretty refreshing to see so much pedestrian activity around the city from the use of these scooters.

https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DoYWyhpUcAATKgv.jpg

There was a locally organized Lime scooter event going on last night where a group of folks scooted from place to place. I think they scooted to Capitals/Bocce court after. :) It's great seeing so many people out on the streets though! I have seen people on scooters going from place to place that probably would have driven to their desired location before.

Yep. Here's a little expansion on what you said for benefit of pilots on the board. This indicates that notice is required within 60 days of a failing or refusing a blood or breath test (that’s the “administrative action”), not a conviction:

Reporting Requirements
Under 14 CFR 61.15, all pilots must send a Notification Letter (MS Word) to FAA’s Security and Hazardous Materials Safety Office (AXE-700) (formerly Civil Aviation Security Division (AMC-700)) within 60 calendar days of the effective date of an alcohol and/or drug related conviction or administrative action. In 14 CFR 61.15(c), alcohol and/or drug related convictions or administrative actions refer to motor vehicle actions (MVA).
Notification Letters
Note: Each event, conviction, or administrative action, requires a separate Notification Letter. For example, an airman’s driver license may be suspended at the time of arrest for driving under the influence of alcohol for either:
Failing a blood/breath test
Refusing to test
The airman must send a Notification Letter for the suspension, then send a second Notification Letter if the alcohol and/or drug related offense results in a conviction. Even though the airman sent two notification letters, FAA views the suspension and conviction as one alcohol and/or drug related incident.

I agree the admin action must be reported. However, In Oklahoma, a refusal or test failure does not automatically trigger an admin action.....you have the right to challenge it. The administrative action is the suspension of the driver's license. When you blow over the limit or take the test...you have the right to an administrative hearing (the Department of Public Safety hearing must be requested within 15 days) at which time if you lose....you will have an administrative action and at that point that starts the 60 days for reporting. If we are successful in avoiding the administrative action (the suspension of the license), then no reporting is required unless conviction (still have to list on medical though). There is no administrative action unless the department takes your license.

Last time I was there they were all across the street at Good Egg.

There were 5-6 outside STAG tonight