>Small EVs and their riders are a city menace. They hardly ever use roads--though they are allowed to, just like bicyclists are--and instead roam the sidewalks,

>Small EVs and their riders are a city menace. They hardly ever use roads--though they are allowed to, just like bicyclists are--and instead roam the sidewalks, expecting pedestrians to get out of the way and getting angry if they don't. You should probably try to dig a layer deeper and try to understand the root cause of this behaviour. We can read from your paragraph that the users of these vehicles are not actually particularly happy about being on the sidewalk - understandably so, there are plenty of pedestrian in their way there. So why would they not choose the road, then? The answer is simple - the roads are filled with cars, riding at unsafe speeds, threatening their lives if they dare use this infrastructure. There is a pretty simple solution to this issue: build infrastructure that is appropriate for this category of vehicles, that all travel faster than pedestrian speeds (~5 km/h) but slower than car speeds. Bicycle infrastructure happens to be an excellent fit for all these vehicles. Observe also that cities with adequate bicycle infrastructure do not suffer from this issue - micromobility users choose the bicycle infrastructure in that case, because it's the best option available. >The cities that get it right, in my opinion, divide all vehicles into either unpowered or powered. Powered vehicles use roads and are subject to regulations; those that do not fit any regulated class (eg. being too new) are illegal by default. Given what we learned from the analysis above, this is quite obviously a really bad take.