Segway Not Welcome at Eco-Development… Even if You Have a Disability
A Segway may seem a little tame for a professional slalom skateboarder, but for 2003 Slalom-Cross world champion Richard de Losada, his Segway has become the transportation mode of choice for short errands and trips to the beach (as well as playing Segway polo).
A resident of eco-community and tourist destination the Sea Ranch in Northern California, de Losada certainly thought his Segway was the perfect choice for the green lifestyle promoted by the community.
He found out differently on Feb 24, 2007, when the Sea Ranch Association gave him a ticket for a covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&R) violation for riding his Segway.
Richard, who had moved his family of five kids to the community for the “good clean environment,” limited his Segway use, even though the community’s CC&R didn’t specifically mention such vehicles. He didn’t ride it around the community, but continued to use the Segway for other trips. “I could ride 4-5 miles on 10-20 cents of energy,” said Losada, “so it seemed like a no-brainer. But I observed the rules at the Sea Ranch.”
- » See also: Simran’s Eco-Friendly Home Makeover Comes to Oprah.com
- » Get Sustainablog by RSS or sign up by email.
Richard’s run-ins with the community association probably would have ended there. But, on April 18, 2008, he was involved in a work accident: a tire blew out on a riding lawn mower he was operating, the machine 
rolled over, and Richard was left with a broken nose, hairline fractures in his ribs and skull, and dislocation of both hips. “The weight of the machine almost broke my back, so I guess I came out of it lucky,” he said.
The accident left Richard not only unable to work, but also with very limited mobility. Suddenly, the Segway wasn’t just a greener choice for transportation: according to Richard, it became his “magic carpet.”
The Sea Ranch Association didn’t see it that way, though. Despite his disability, Richard was again ticketed for riding his Segway in the community on January 15, 2009. This time, the citation was more specific: two-wheeled electric vehicles are not allowed in this “green” community.
I did reach out to the Sea Ranch Association for comment, but received no response. The CC&Rs for the community are available online: while I found no reference specifically to “two-wheeled electric vehicles,” the document does clearly state that the Association can make rules concerning “the type or types of vehicles other than conventionally equipped passenger automobiles which may be permitted to use the roads” (Article V). I’d still be happy to talk to a representative of the Association…
Richard’s issue isn’t with the Association’s right to make rules, though: rather, he’s concerned with the rules themselves. “This is a community that promotes itself as green,” he told me. “Why would they ban the use of a vehicle that’s also green?”
That’s a good question… especially when that vehicle is also being used as transportation for someone with mobility issues. I’d be really interested to hear what others of you have to say about this issue. Are these kinds of limitations common in such communities (green or not)? If so, why… I still can’t wrap my head around the idea of banning Segway use period. They seem no more offensive than bicycles…
Images courtesy of Richard de Losada
Richard should contact DRAFT-Disability Rights Advocates for Technoogy for advice. The Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA) gives certain legal protections to mobility devices for idividuals with discbilities.
Jeff, this is not about being green at all. This is about control. I lived in Houston for 8 years and every time I have ever dealt with “homeowners associations” and “planned communities” it is about control - who can be in the community and how they must live. The reason given is “maintenance of property values”. However, it is really about homogenization. If you read the website for the Sea Ranch, they are very imformative about how they limit public access and if you are a visitor you must have a permit with you at all times. They don’t simply ticket autos without resident or visitor stickers, they IMMOBILIZE them. Further, much info is limited access such as home design, ongoing activities - things perspective residents might want to know.
Frankly, I find it interesting a “planned community” considers itself “green” at all since part of the underlying philosophy of green is one of openness and diversity. Planned communities are for people who do not want diversity and openness, hence the walls, guards, resident ID stickers, etc.
In this situation, the obvious control issues are even more unforntuate as this approach people will do more damage to their community and the image of eco-communities in general than a 100 segways.
Anytime you deal with HOAs, it’s walking a fine line because they can make your life difficult by nitpicking everything you do. Landscape light burnt out? You get a warning letter. Park your car in the driveway overnight? You get another warning letter. On and on it becomes very uncomfortable. Some HOAs have board members that have nothing better to do than be jackasses.
As a Segway owner, I would first send a certified letter to the board asking to provide specific evidence of what code was violated. Assuming they don’t back off of their position, I would inform them of the ADA rules and threaten a big-ass lawsuit which they would most definitely loose.
I do not know this community or the whole background story. But I agree with Lori.
Petty people, with a little “power” in community associations tend to be rigid to the point of being irrational. That is the main reason I gave up on such communities.
For example, would they still say no to Richard if he showed them that the Segway is greener than alternate options (e.g. a regular, 4 wheel mobility aid)? What about if he has a Dr.’s note? The answer is probably yes, they would. But to find out I encourage you to dig on this and as for Richard, I wish him luck.
Z
Contact D.R.A.F.T. at: http://www.draft.org/
First, let me agree, contacting DRAFT (draft.org) is a good step.
If I’m not mistaken, this falls under the Fair Housing Act, rather than the ADA, though possibly the public areas fall under the ADA. Anyway, that’s one thing to investigate.
Also, the California UNRUH statute may apply here.
Also, as he needs his mobility to be able to enjoy his property, perhaps he can sue under constructive disposession?
There was a similar case recently in Florida. The HOA lost that one.
HOA’s (or their management companies) often depend on sheer staying power — most people don’t have the energy to fight. But HOA boards are volunteers — often well-intentioned and NOT power hungry.
For example — the HOA’s management company might have been telling the board that allowing these “vehicles” would open them up to liability. In the absence of other information, the board may have followed this bad advice.
By the way, under California law, these are NOT vehicles, they’re EPAMDs (Electric Personal Assistive Mobility Devices), and classed as pedestrians, not vehicles.
I’d try a series of quiet conversations with the individual board members, indicating why the policy is wrong, that you’re not going to back down, and will pursue it legally if necessary, but would rather solve it through neighborly discussion and education.
I’d also look for a lawyer, but wouldn’t go beyond an initial consultation until you explored the basic communication approach. After all, these are your neighbors, and there are a lot of negatives around suing your neighbors!
Let the Man Ride.
1 Segway is 1 Less Car
Keep it Green
Are you kidding me? The Sea Ranch is the perfect place for a Segway. I would really like to hear from the homeowners association and how they arrived at their decision. On the face of it, I do not agree with them.
I used to have a couple of Zappy electric scooters and the rangers at Annadel Park in Santa Rosa asked us not to ride them on the bike/walking path…. they said they had a rule against motorized vehicles and these were motorized…
This is just too funny. Once again the HOA rears its ugly head and tries to force “standards” that it has no place enforcing.
1. The Segway is classified as an EPAMD (Electric Personal Assistive Mobility Device) which, under CA law is considered a pedestrian, NOT a vehicle.
2. If the roads in the community are maintained by the CA DoT then the community must abide by the CA DoT regulations as to the use of the roads and sidewalks (which are considered public property, btw).
3. If the roads aren’t maintained by DoT then the community may (emphasis on may) be able to set standards but must abide my Federal regulations (the ADA is but one example).
All that being said the HOA may not know the benefits of the Segway and may be responding to one or more “complaints” regarding its use. Richard should first try to talk to the managing members and explain the benefits and his reasoning / need to use it. A little discussion goes a long way, something it seems that the HOA has yet to learn.
SJ
I can’t defend a Segway since it takes the place of walking, skateboarding, and/or biking–all greener choices. However, this community sounds a bit oppressive.
(a segway to the Slingshot)
Segway inventor Dean Kamen does have an amazing invention in the works though–The Slingshot, which advertises the ability to purify ANY liquid. Unlike the Segway, this invention could change the world!