Poll: Should Windsor Crack Down On Ebikes?
- Thread starter Lock
- Start date
Lock
100 MW
Ykick said:
It did look last night as if somebuddy was "stuffing the ballot box" with Yes votes... kinda disappointed in the low response from the Ebike Nation...
Chalo
100 TW
I think it's reasonable to ban e-bikes from multi-use paths. It's not my preference, but it's reasonable. If you can and do carry 20mph, the street is the place for that. Personally, I think the line should probably be drawn at pedelecs, for both practical and public relations reasons.
E-cyclists have to use good judgment about recreational paths if they want to keep their privileges. Some paths are crowded while others are practically derelict. Some are mainly used by commuters, while others have lots of toddlers, old folks, skaters, and dogs. There are no rules of the road for kids or dogs, and they are allowed to use the trail too. Traffic procedures must adapt to fit the situation. There is a whole spectrum of traffic dynamics between air traffic control at one end and packed nightclub at the other, and recreational paths occupy a larger range of that spectrum than anything else I can think of. The very same path that adopts a freeway paradigm for the Monday morning commute may use rock concert dynamics during a Fourth of July fireworks show. On a normal Saturday afternoon, neither of those things works.
Where I live, cyclists are allowed on sidewalks almost everywhere, if they don't interfere with ped traffic. I think that general principle should apply to e-bikes on multi-use paths. Kids on kick scooters and moms with strollers should have precedence over us on paths, because they can't use a lane in the street but we can.
Riding an e-bike under power does not makes sense in all path situations. But many e-bike riders display poor judgment. That's why these conflicts arise in the first place. If e-cyclists would use appropriate speeds, and use their pedals when it made sense to do that, most path users would have no issues with us. We sometimes forget that the status of e-bikes amounts to a social and legal experiment, and if we let a few a-holes define our public image, the outcome of this trial period will not be favorable to us.
Scooter type e-bikes are just stupid; they're not bikes and they are lame scooters. They were designed to exploit a loophole, and they look like it. Pedals that can't be used normally should not count towards e-bike status. Those machines are a material example of the kind of poor judgment I was talking about: Just because you can, does not mean you should.
Chalo
E-cyclists have to use good judgment about recreational paths if they want to keep their privileges. Some paths are crowded while others are practically derelict. Some are mainly used by commuters, while others have lots of toddlers, old folks, skaters, and dogs. There are no rules of the road for kids or dogs, and they are allowed to use the trail too. Traffic procedures must adapt to fit the situation. There is a whole spectrum of traffic dynamics between air traffic control at one end and packed nightclub at the other, and recreational paths occupy a larger range of that spectrum than anything else I can think of. The very same path that adopts a freeway paradigm for the Monday morning commute may use rock concert dynamics during a Fourth of July fireworks show. On a normal Saturday afternoon, neither of those things works.
Where I live, cyclists are allowed on sidewalks almost everywhere, if they don't interfere with ped traffic. I think that general principle should apply to e-bikes on multi-use paths. Kids on kick scooters and moms with strollers should have precedence over us on paths, because they can't use a lane in the street but we can.
Riding an e-bike under power does not makes sense in all path situations. But many e-bike riders display poor judgment. That's why these conflicts arise in the first place. If e-cyclists would use appropriate speeds, and use their pedals when it made sense to do that, most path users would have no issues with us. We sometimes forget that the status of e-bikes amounts to a social and legal experiment, and if we let a few a-holes define our public image, the outcome of this trial period will not be favorable to us.
Scooter type e-bikes are just stupid; they're not bikes and they are lame scooters. They were designed to exploit a loophole, and they look like it. Pedals that can't be used normally should not count towards e-bike status. Those machines are a material example of the kind of poor judgment I was talking about: Just because you can, does not mean you should.
Chalo
liveforphysics
100 TW
Chalo said:
I agree with you about scooter bikes being lame designs, and I would never own one myself (though I do think the giant lockable storage compartments for grocerys or whatever and useful lighting and visibility do make a decent case for their use, which is massively common in China).
That's not the point I'm interested in making though, it's if you're going to ban bicycles because of pedaling ergonomics and/or styling, would you also ban chopper style ebikes? They try to appear as a motorcycle, just as a scooter bike tries to appear as a scooter. I've ridden some that were amazingly dangerously unwieldy handling at any speed, virtually useless to get any meaningful pressure on the pedals, obnoxiously long to maneuver, and lack the utilitarian function of the scooter bikes cargo compartments and lighting.
Would you also ban extra-cycles? Amberwolf's bike with lots of useful storage compartments? Recumbents? Trikes? Road bikes with touring bags on them?
It's a slippery slope to start banning things (or any rule making).
Chalo
100 TW
liveforphysics said:
Do Chinese ride them on ped rights-of-way?
None of these things should be banned, but that's a different question from whether they should be allowed on recreational rights-of-way, on sidewalks, inside public buildings, etc. The simple and clean solution for multi-use paths is to allow no powered vehicles except for electric wheelchairs, full stop. Anything more than that is imposing on the intended trail users and trusting the judgment of those who use motors, and that gets messy. We should treat it like the extended privilege it is, rather than seeing it as limitation of our rights. There is no basic right of motorcyclists to use footpaths, which is fundamentally what we're discussing here.
Now that I reflect on it, maybe recumbents should be banned everywhere as a gross violation of decency and a waste of valuable resources.
But that's a topic for another day. Chalo
Russell
1 MW
While the "scooter style" e-bikes pass the law regarding speed and power we all know the pedals are there just to pass the pedal power test. Yeah they're e-bikes but the owners will take more flack over them from other trail users and law enforcement because of their similarity to mopeds and scooters.
Aside from the scooter-looking e-bikes I do feel the folks who go overboard with powerful e-bikes are doing a disservice to e-biking in general. Sure the builds are cool but IMO if ya wanna go so fast buy a scooter or a motorcycle! That may be an unpopular thing to say on a board where pretty much everyone's creation fails the e-bike definition but it’s going to be the guys zooming along at hyper-bike speeds who will ruin it for everyone. In the end we’ll probably see an escalation of this type of backlash against electrically-assisted bicycles in more and more places.
-R
Aside from the scooter-looking e-bikes I do feel the folks who go overboard with powerful e-bikes are doing a disservice to e-biking in general. Sure the builds are cool but IMO if ya wanna go so fast buy a scooter or a motorcycle! That may be an unpopular thing to say on a board where pretty much everyone's creation fails the e-bike definition but it’s going to be the guys zooming along at hyper-bike speeds who will ruin it for everyone. In the end we’ll probably see an escalation of this type of backlash against electrically-assisted bicycles in more and more places.
-R
liveforphysics
100 TW
Ask yourself, is the problem with the ebikes using the trails, or is the problem with people's confused perception that various styled ebikes using the trails violates some law (or should violate some law).
IMHO, the problem isn't the bikes, it's the people who feel some compulsion to complain about things they think violate some rule or should violate some rule.
I would ban pedestrians and dogs and children from a bike path personally. If anything is going to be a traffic hazard in mixing with pedal bicycles on a bike path, it's those things not ebikes.
IMHO, the problem isn't the bikes, it's the people who feel some compulsion to complain about things they think violate some rule or should violate some rule.
I would ban pedestrians and dogs and children from a bike path personally. If anything is going to be a traffic hazard in mixing with pedal bicycles on a bike path, it's those things not ebikes.
DCMotorworks
10 W
- Joined
- Jun 23, 2010
- Messages
- 73
from my experience E-bikers get flak from both sides. cyclists say I am cheating (I'm commuting, not competing, right?) and motorists flip me off for only doing 28mph in the far right side of the right hand lane in a 25mph zone.
I ride on the local bike trails and I do it responsibly. rainy weekdays in winter months they tend to be clear. on a sunny Sunday I will take the streets. basically the same thought process I will use when choosing a route to drive based on the likelihood of congestion.
but I have often made the point, validly I think, that I am a safer multi-use trail-rider on my E-bike than most regular cyclists. I have no problem slowing way down to pass pedestrians, toddlers, dogs on leashes, etc. knowing I can regain speed with the flick of a throttle as soon as it is safe to do so. conversely, I routinely see cyclists blow past pedestrians or through stop signs at full speed in an effort to maintain their momentum.
DC
I ride on the local bike trails and I do it responsibly. rainy weekdays in winter months they tend to be clear. on a sunny Sunday I will take the streets. basically the same thought process I will use when choosing a route to drive based on the likelihood of congestion.
but I have often made the point, validly I think, that I am a safer multi-use trail-rider on my E-bike than most regular cyclists. I have no problem slowing way down to pass pedestrians, toddlers, dogs on leashes, etc. knowing I can regain speed with the flick of a throttle as soon as it is safe to do so. conversely, I routinely see cyclists blow past pedestrians or through stop signs at full speed in an effort to maintain their momentum.
DC
Lock
100 MW
On a positive note, there is a very good chance that City of Windsor Councilors will choke up their own lungs before they have a chance to ban ebikes...
Go Ozone!
Go Ozone!
Chalo
100 TW
liveforphysics said:
You understand, I hope, that the existence of such users is why we get to have "bike" paths at all. There are not enough cyclists, let alone e-cyclists, to motivate the provision of much infrastructure anywhere. Cyclists specifically don't represent a revenue stream for government (no more than we would if we didn't ride bikes, anyway) and those who don't ride, don't care (or else they hate us). We're also a feeble interest group. Cyclists would have a hard time influencing the outcome of even a very close local election, and as a demographic we don't command a lot of political dollars either.
The only way we'll ever get bike-only infrastructure is if the conventional wisdom gets its head around the facts that a bicycle on a path is one not riding in front of you on the street, and paths are very cheap compared to streets. If drivers come to see transportation-oriented bike paths as a way to dispose of us inexpensively, then they might vote for projects that promise to do that. Where I live, it's usually framed in terms of buying a bike path vs. buying an extra lane on the freeway, and it's hard to win that argument with morons even when we're right.
Chalo
Lock
100 MW
Chalo said:
Sadly, savings in health care costs and property damage do not represent "revenue streams" to Gov. Wasn't it Shakespeare who said "First we shoot all the accountants"?
Lock
Chalo,
I disagree with your thought that it is reasonable to ban ebikes from multi use paths. We both live in Austin, and you and I both know that 20mph makes you an obstacle for drivers on most roads, even many roads downtown. Yes, even roads like Nueces, 20mph cyclists play a yo-yo game with cars trying to pass.
PLEASE tell me how you think crossing the river on any of the non-pedestrian area options (car travel lanes on any of the bridges) is safe at 20mph. PLEASE PLEASE tell me. I personally think you are insane if you think it's safe to go 20mph in any of the car travel lanes across ANY of the bridges.
All this talk about banning things..... How do you enforce it? The reality is that under an ebike ban, the law is saying that no matter what, you as an ebiker are dangerous to others and should be fined for using the multi-use path. The officer sees you ebiking on a path safely, but the law says you must be fined so he stops you and tickets you. Now, true, it's possible some ebikers may be using the path unsafely, and of course they should be fined.
If dangerous ebikers are banned, what makes you think THEY will actually obey the law? They already are the ones who don't care much for others and likely break other traffic laws. The ONLY result of an ebike ban on multi-use paths is that the safe, law-abiding ebikers will suffer since they will obey the law, and be forced to play sitting-duck in car travel lanes with traffic going at double their speed running up behind them, likely texting, drunk or otherwise distracted or not concerned with the stress they are imposing on the ebiker, in addition to being forced into breathing horrible quality air.
I ride my ebike on sidewalks across the river nearly every day, I use the Lance Armstrong Bikeway all the time, Town Lake trail often, almost always use the sidewalks on S 1st street bridge or take the Pluger Ped bridge or the sidewalks along I-35, I use the Johnson Creek Trail occasionally, and ride the Lamar Sidewalk leading into the Shoal Creek trail all the time. I ride safely and slow down (sometimes stop) for pedestrians/kids/dogs/cyclists. I realize the extreme value using these off-street facilities are to me, since I know how stressful it is to try sharing a car lane with auto traffic. To take that away from me, or any other law abiding cyclist/ebiker would be a huge loss. It would be a game changer, that would completely shift the usefulness of ebiking, and therefore, IMO, the best way of getting around, and my way of life.
Oh, by the way. The typical most dangerous biker in Austin is a pedal cyclist (no lights, usually 1 gear bike). All the ebikers I've met in Austin, they clearly ride more cautiously and safely than many pedal cyclists. I'm also a pedal cyclist (spandex type). It's almost impossible to make a fair generalization about cyclist types or cyclists.
The city has quite a few separated bike facilities planned for construction. To ban ebikes on these incredible useful facilities will drastically kill any chance of the ebike saving the city from it's woes.
Quit with the banning and instead enforce dangerous behavior.
I disagree with your thought that it is reasonable to ban ebikes from multi use paths. We both live in Austin, and you and I both know that 20mph makes you an obstacle for drivers on most roads, even many roads downtown. Yes, even roads like Nueces, 20mph cyclists play a yo-yo game with cars trying to pass.
PLEASE tell me how you think crossing the river on any of the non-pedestrian area options (car travel lanes on any of the bridges) is safe at 20mph. PLEASE PLEASE tell me. I personally think you are insane if you think it's safe to go 20mph in any of the car travel lanes across ANY of the bridges.
All this talk about banning things..... How do you enforce it? The reality is that under an ebike ban, the law is saying that no matter what, you as an ebiker are dangerous to others and should be fined for using the multi-use path. The officer sees you ebiking on a path safely, but the law says you must be fined so he stops you and tickets you. Now, true, it's possible some ebikers may be using the path unsafely, and of course they should be fined.
If dangerous ebikers are banned, what makes you think THEY will actually obey the law? They already are the ones who don't care much for others and likely break other traffic laws. The ONLY result of an ebike ban on multi-use paths is that the safe, law-abiding ebikers will suffer since they will obey the law, and be forced to play sitting-duck in car travel lanes with traffic going at double their speed running up behind them, likely texting, drunk or otherwise distracted or not concerned with the stress they are imposing on the ebiker, in addition to being forced into breathing horrible quality air.
I ride my ebike on sidewalks across the river nearly every day, I use the Lance Armstrong Bikeway all the time, Town Lake trail often, almost always use the sidewalks on S 1st street bridge or take the Pluger Ped bridge or the sidewalks along I-35, I use the Johnson Creek Trail occasionally, and ride the Lamar Sidewalk leading into the Shoal Creek trail all the time. I ride safely and slow down (sometimes stop) for pedestrians/kids/dogs/cyclists. I realize the extreme value using these off-street facilities are to me, since I know how stressful it is to try sharing a car lane with auto traffic. To take that away from me, or any other law abiding cyclist/ebiker would be a huge loss. It would be a game changer, that would completely shift the usefulness of ebiking, and therefore, IMO, the best way of getting around, and my way of life.
Oh, by the way. The typical most dangerous biker in Austin is a pedal cyclist (no lights, usually 1 gear bike). All the ebikers I've met in Austin, they clearly ride more cautiously and safely than many pedal cyclists. I'm also a pedal cyclist (spandex type). It's almost impossible to make a fair generalization about cyclist types or cyclists.
The city has quite a few separated bike facilities planned for construction. To ban ebikes on these incredible useful facilities will drastically kill any chance of the ebike saving the city from it's woes.
Quit with the banning and instead enforce dangerous behavior.
Sunder
10 MW
liveforphysics said:
Neither of those are a problem. The problem is that different people have a different tolerance of risk, and of course, pedestrians see no benefit to sharing paths with eBikers, but eBikers see no risk with sharing paths with pedestrians. Neither view is completely correct, but neither view is totally wrong either.
If we for example, allow a 5kw, 50kg eBike on these paths, can you explain to me why a 75kg, 3.5kw Honda Cub shouldn't also be permitted on the paths? How about a 75cc scooter? A 125cc sports bike? A 1.3L chopper? Where do you draw the line? But that's the question isn't it? You either have to draw a line, or you don't draw any line and let people decide for themselves what's safe.
From previous conversations, I know you would prefer we let people let their consciences decide, but I'd rather have the laws in place to book a gang colour wearing bikie riding his 1.3L Harley on the same shared path as a mum with a pram, even if he wasn't always caught.
liveforphysics said:
In Sydney, pedestrians, dogs and children are all banned from bike paths - but many people don't know this, and it is very rarely enforced. Should we lift the ban because some people do what they want anyway?
Lock
100 MW
I vote we accept the Victorian pedal bicycle... the devil we know? (And the 21st-century ebike, designed to emulate same...)
Far superior to the 20th-century horseless carriage?
The logic should not be so difficult... the 20th-century was mostly an aberration?
Lock
Far superior to the 20th-century horseless carriage?
The logic should not be so difficult... the 20th-century was mostly an aberration?
Lock
hydro-one
10 kW
people and thier bans
i like what kalil says about the law ...
http://4umi.com/gibran/prophet/13
eg if mike rides on the path and no cops see him , did he commit a crime???
i like what kalil says about the law ...
http://4umi.com/gibran/prophet/13
eg if mike rides on the path and no cops see him , did he commit a crime???
winkinatcha
10 kW
hydro-one said:
Awesome... thanks for that
Chalo
100 TW
veloman said:
We don't like it, but we can do it. Drivers don't like sharing the road with each other, either. And peds don't like sharing the path with us.
I have been riding for transportation in the streets of Austin since 1987. It has gotten better during that span of time. You can be phobic about sharing the streets if you like, but it won't do you any favors. Admit that you just don't like having cars pass you at higher speed, the same way that peds don't like having you pass them on the path, and don't try to present it as a safety issue. It's legit not to like it, but I don't think you can make a strong case that it's abnormally dangerous. Riding on a sidewalk or a bike path that's crossed by driveways or streets is more dangerous than taking the lane, and accident statistics show it.
I like to think in terms of using whatever is my best option. Sometimes I take a back street or bike path to avoid the unpleasantness of car traffic, and sometimes I'll hang with the cars to avoid excessive hills or to use a shorter route. My wife likes to use the Hike & Bike Trail in her crosstown routes, whereas I usually prefer paved surfaces even when I could ride the trail for some of the way.
I routinely ride in the lane across the dam at Pleasant Valley Road, and occasionally across the South First Street bridge. Redbud Trail is also a fine bike crossing. I even use the northbound I-35 frontage road across the lake sometimes. Rarely do drivers want to be in the rightmost lane there, and visibility is good. I avoid using the lane on the Lamar Street bridge and the Congress Avenue bridge. The latter feels safe enough, but has been the site of many car-bike collisions because the abrupt slope off the bridge on the south side eclipses cyclists from the view of drivers who approach too fast. Lamar is too fast and too narrow with too much traffic, and West Austin people drive like dicks. Besides, we have the ped bridge there now, and it isn't even out of the way.
I don't care how such a ban would be enforced, because I don't want an e-bike ban. I just think it's a reasonable idea, in the same way that it's reasonable to ban mopeds and motorcycles from the path.
Mopeds don't ride on the paths, even though they could. It's not because they're law abiders either. Most of the traditional mopeds I see in East Austin don't even have plates. The cops don't seem to care about the registration/insurance thing, though I think they could become very interested if they saw any mopeds on bike paths.
My wife agrees with you. She also thinks nothing of adding 50% to her trip distance and 100% to her elapsed time by using bike paths or neighborhood streets. But I've spent twenty-five years demonstrating to myself that I can take the lane and get around successfully. You just have to use your head and take the path of least resistance. Streets go everywhere, while bike paths only go to a few places. Streets get the most direct, least hilly routes.
Don't forget the no-brakes thing. Those guys (and increasingly, girls) are idiots. But I'd rather have them on bikes than in cars. I'd rather have them on pushbikes than on e-bikes, too.
E-bikes aren't going to save the city from anything. Regular bikes and public transit might, but only after lots of people start running out of other options they can afford. So far I'm convinced that e-bikes are chiefly the domain of eccentric hobbyists, crackpots who think they know better than anyone, and a few folks who are too weenie to ride normal bikes. Plus folks with physical disabilities-- lest anyone get bent out of shape about that. (In this regard, e-bikes are sort of like recumbents, but not as bad.) When the time comes that you can go to, say, a Honda dealership and buy a Honda e-bike, that might change. But in the world of today, where trying to buy a decent 1kWh battery feels like trying to buy a brick of hashish, we have a lot of things to sort out before e-bikes are ready for prime time.
Chalo
Chalo
100 TW
hydro-one said:
Try sharing your paths with open piped two-stroke dirt bikes and ATVs and see if you can't think of reasons to ban certain vehicles from some places.
heathyoung
100 kW
Chalo said:
Awesome
The scooter style ebikes are banned full-stop here in NSW, Australia - the RTA has banned them from use as they deemed they didn't meet the rules - its kind of a pity, since they had quite a bit of potential - indicators + headlight (seriously - who doesn't understand freaking hand signals) + could be seriously worked to do some sort of speed (the brakes and handling was shit though) - 50Kph was doable without too much work. I think someone had one up to 70... No thanks.
The main reason was still (as it always is) money. They were pissed that someone was getting around without paying rego - most other states allow the use of a 50cc/30mph moped on a standard drivers license, couldn't be that easy could it...
One of the (shared) paths I use I encounter trailbikes (both registered(!) and unregistered) - and nearly got collected by a guy on an old '80's postie (ct110) with no headlights in the dark.
You can make it illegal, but the morons and bogans will keep doing it.
Lessss
1 MW
BULLSHIT You are aware of the fact that the reason you have paved roads at all is because of cyclists?
Chalo
100 TW
Lessss said:
Yes. You are aware of the fact that it happened over a century ago, when bikes were expensive, fashionable high technology and status symbols?
I'm talking about having enough votes and/or money and/or command of public consciousness to get policy makers' attention today. We owe a lot to those early cyclists; most of the rights and physical access we take for granted were established due to their organized efforts. Heck, if it hadn't been for the cycling-oriented "Good Roads" movement, cars wouldn't have made nearly as much sense as they did when they came along. But for various reasons, cyclists as a group don't have the sort of pull they did in those early days.
Chalo
El_Steak
10 kW
Here's a solution, just post a speed limit appropriate for the type of bike path and enforce it!
Going too fast on your ebike ? - ticket
Going too fast on your 5000$ carbon road bike ? - ticket
Going too fast on your rollerblades ? - ticket
My superfly minivan can go up to 160kph, should it be banned from driving in 30kph school zones?
Going too fast on your ebike ? - ticket
Going too fast on your 5000$ carbon road bike ? - ticket
Going too fast on your rollerblades ? - ticket
My superfly minivan can go up to 160kph, should it be banned from driving in 30kph school zones?
Chalo
100 TW
The same rationale allows pickup trucks on the bike path as long as they go slow enough.
dogman dan
1 PW
Winner winner chicken dinner. Unless you perfer steak.
Refers to El Steaks comment, Chalo got one in ahead of me.
Re trucks, ticket em. We have trucks on my local paths all the time, for the grounds crew. But ticket anyboy else of course.
Post reasonable speed limits. 20 mph where multi use trails are uncrowded, 5 where crowded, something else where apropriate. Post rules against passing pedestrians from behind faster than 15 mph.
Ticket all jackasses, including walkers or riders who ignore a posted rule to walk/ride to the right and pass to the left.
I've SEEN where they do this WITHOUT speed limits , In Albuquerque where the multi use paths are an inadequate 4 feet wide. But if everybody stays right and passes on the left, walkers, joggers,and fast moving bikes get along amazingly well. Lots of people on a saturday, and lots of peer pressre not to be a jackass.
It's so simple it's stupid. Run off the jackasses, don't tolerate em.
Refers to El Steaks comment, Chalo got one in ahead of me.
Re trucks, ticket em. We have trucks on my local paths all the time, for the grounds crew. But ticket anyboy else of course.
Post reasonable speed limits. 20 mph where multi use trails are uncrowded, 5 where crowded, something else where apropriate. Post rules against passing pedestrians from behind faster than 15 mph.
Ticket all jackasses, including walkers or riders who ignore a posted rule to walk/ride to the right and pass to the left.
I've SEEN where they do this WITHOUT speed limits , In Albuquerque where the multi use paths are an inadequate 4 feet wide. But if everybody stays right and passes on the left, walkers, joggers,and fast moving bikes get along amazingly well. Lots of people on a saturday, and lots of peer pressre not to be a jackass.
It's so simple it's stupid. Run off the jackasses, don't tolerate em.
sk8norcal
1 MW
veloman said:
http://www.johnforester.com
