Item 3A - Minutes Approval - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

factor, i.e., they were undertaken without a motor or engine. He noted that the ordinance was clearly written and enforceable, and it codified the historical use of the bicycle paths. Any suggestion that the City could or should change the ordinance to allow some MTDs but not others and to cite MTDs based on behavior was unrealistic. He stated that by passing the ordinance, the visions and efforts of many citizens who had been involved in the design and construction of the paths was confirmed, that the paths were a place to walk, ride bicycle, skate, amble and to do so under one's own power, thereby improving the health of the users of the paths and the cormnunity. Mr. Jensen proposed modifying paragraph E so that users of MTDs had the same access to City streets, the same rights and responsibilities, as all cyclists had on the roads. He urged the council to approve the proposed ordinance and asked the council to keep the bicycle paths safe and quiet, and MTD free. Eldon Andrews, 187 Deadmond Ferry Road, Springfield, proposed placing a speed limit on the bicycle trails and slowing down the bicycles as well as other users. He supported the idea of educating the public. He said pocket bikes were made with lots of power to excite the owner, capable of exceeding 24 miles per hour (MPH). He added they were not licensable as mopeds. He stated that all of the bike bridges would not be accessible to cross the river, resulting in scooter users having to take lengthy detour routes to get to town, creating a hardship. David Sonnichsen, 2435 Skyline Boulevard, spoke in support of the proposed ordinance as a well crafted motion. In addition to the comments from Sue Wolling and Kurt Jensen, Mr. Sonnichsen added that in the notifications that sellers provided to buyers, there should be a range of the potential fines identified for illegally operating a scooter on a City path where the devices were prohibited. He said in the past, drivers parked illegally in handicapped parking spaces until the fines were increased to make the illegal parking financially prohibitive. He added there needed to be a significant fine for people operating motorized scooters on City paths that deterred illegal use. He noted the police already had enough on their plates and there was a need for strong enforcement. Mr. Sonnichsen opposed allowing the scooters on the bridges over the Willamette River, especially near Autzen Stadium. He added that the scooters were toys rather than an alternative to riding a bike, driving a car or walking. Alternative modes were not applicable here because the manufacturers' instructions stated scooters should only be ridden on dry pavement, and there were a lot of days in Eugene when the pavement was not dry. Mayor Piercy closed the public hearing and asked for questions from councilors. Councilor Poling asked where the SegWay fit into the ordinance, as an electric, personal, assisted, motorized device. Sgt. Schulz replied that there were specific State statutes that governed those devices as a different classification from a motor-assisted scooter. In response to Councilor Poling, Sgt. Schulz said he understood that according to State statute, the SegWay would be allowed on bicycle paths. Councilor Poling had received an email from a constituent expressing concern that he could not cross the Willamette River over Coburg Road, noting that he was subject to citation if he used the sidewalk. If the proposed ordinance passed, the constituent would not be able to cross the river at all. Sgt. Schulz replied that the City Traffic Engineer, Tom Larsen and other City staff were in agreement that given the unique nature of the devices, having them share the roadway with cars was not a safe alternative. Sgt. Schulz added that having the devices share the space with pedestrians and human powered devices was equally unsafe. He concluded the only alternative was for the riders to dismount, turn the power off and walk the devices across the bridges. He said when the devices were viewed as a commuter vehicle, there were difficulties in that there were only specific roadways and areas where the devices could to be operated, resulting in difficulty for operators to map out a course where the devices could be legally operated on MINUTES--Eugene City Council February 14, 2005 Page 7 Regular Session