Page 81 of 96 FirstFirst ... 3171798081828391 ... LastLast
Results 801 to 810 of 952

Thread: e-Bikes - Let's talk

  1. #801
    dasgeh's Avatar
    dasgeh is offline Queen of Family Biking & All Things Kidical
    Join Date
    Aug 2011
    Posts
    5,178
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Meatmotor View Post
    A 25mph (contextual) speed limit on any MUP in this area would only affect Class-3 e-bikers. MAMILs would remain unharmed. Snotty racers ride on the roads anyhow.

    Go for it! Bring on the enforcement!
    Except for all the downhills. There are plenty of people on non-ebikes that can make it higher than 25mph on the downhills on the Custis. Since a speed limit would be the max speed, not the average speed for the trip, it would affect many people. Not saying it's a bad thing. Nor I'm I saying 25mph is ok for a trail -- it's probably too high.

    Quote Originally Posted by mstone View Post
    You have, you just haven't acknowledged it or really responded to it. Again: the number of people who can ride at 25MPH on the trails is significantly lower than the potential number of people who could ebike at 25MPH on the trails. The current trails can't handle that many people riding 25MPH. Also, those who do so for recreational reasons tend to specifically avoid the trails for high-speed riding. Yes, there are people who currently ride too fast on the trails, and they are conspicuous exactly because they are rare. Please, explain how the trails function for pedestrians or slow riders/children when (in some bright future for the ebike manufacturers) the majority of cyclists have vehicles that are limited by battery power rather than muscle power.
    I don't think it's a reasonable argument, because it basically says "we're going to control volume by restricting access by physical ability." I don't think that's fair when you're talking transportation.

    And as far as how trails function -- with infra and rules that are designed to control speeds and make things safe for everyone. Not by banning folks based on ability - or some folks based on ability (those on ebikes), but not others that have that same ability (those on regular bikes who can go just as fast).

    Quote Originally Posted by hozn View Post
    I guess I didn't understand. But this line of argument is lost on me. We want to make sure that all e-bikes are allowed on the trails, but then we want them to voluntarily get off the trail because it could otherwise become too crowded?
    [...]
    So, I suppose I'm all for crowding the trails with reasonably-paced traffic. I think when you have e-bikes weaving between people on the Custis at 25+mph you have a problem. So, if you anticipate that e-bike volume is going to grow enough to cause our MUPs to become unsafe for 7-year-olds, why on earth would we want to encourage - or even allow - the use of class-3 motors on these trails? I don't follow this.
    I think anyone weaving between people on the Custis at ANY unsafe speed (which is often much less than 25mph) is a problem. Which is why we need to address the behavior -- build parallel safe infra that encourages those who want to go fast to go somewhere else. But we have to realize that there are routes that necessarily involve trails (e.g. the bridges), so ebikes should be allowed on those. It seems way too complicated for everyone to try to distinguish between those trails that are necessary and those that are optional. Besides, as we've heard again and again, speeding on the Custis by those without ebikes is a problem already, so this policy would kill two birds with one stone: encourage more folks to bike by allowing ebikes into the mix, but make the trails safer by introducing the necessary changes to slow EVERYONE on trails down to safe speeds.
    Last edited by dasgeh; 11-02-2017 at 11:20 AM.

  2. #802
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Arlington
    Posts
    1,071
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Harry Meatmotor View Post
    FTFY.

    (if it was around 4:15-4:25pm, it's the same dude I see every day...) He wears actual moto leathers. And he really doesn't like getting held up behind ped traffic on the 14th St. ped bridge.
    Strava tells to me it was just before 3:30. Could be the same guy. He was coming out from under the trees just south of the I-395 bridge, and it happened so quickly I really only noticed the speed, direction, lack of any serious pedaling, and creepiness.

  3. #803
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    South Arlington
    Posts
    278
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    Which is why we need to address the behavior -- build parallel safe infra that encourages those who want to go fast to go somewhere else.
    I get the point, but I don't recognize a need to build parallel safe infrastructure for people who simply want to go fast. Those who want to go faster on an e-bike -- or any bike -- can use the parallel infrastructure we already have, the roads. The roads would be better for it.

    Sure, a road isn't as safe as the path. That's not news to motorcycles and scooters.
    What happens when those vehicles are mostly electric, and there's no aesthetic excuse (dirty noisy combustion engines) with which to exclude them from this proposed high speed bike path, the way mopeds are excluded from the current MUPs?
    Should they observe a speed limit or is say, 40 mph cool?

  4. Likes Tania liked this post
  5. #804
    lordofthemark's Avatar
    lordofthemark is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    I don't think it's a reasonable argument, because it basically says "we're going to control volume by restricting access by physical ability." I don't think that's fair when you're talking transportation.
    Just as a reminder, the possible policies under discussion are
    A. Ban all ebikes
    B. Ban all ebikes able to go over 15MPH (the classification system used in the EU, but I don't know their trail rules)
    C. Ban all ebikes able to go over 20MPH (the California law, banning Class 3, but allowing Class 1 and 2)
    D. Ban all ebikes able to go over 25MPH (allowing Class 3, but with a definition of Class 3 not in the California law, that you have been using, not sure your source)
    E. Ban all ebikes able to go over 28MPH (allowing Class 3 as defined in the California law)

    Of these, only A would actually prevent people from riding bikes on the trails based on their level of physical ability (Note even that would not prevent people using the MULTIUSE trails by means other than a bicycle) None of the others would. Note also, that while B has been proposed by people on this forum, it is not what the semi-consensus of people I am discussing policy with wants.

    I am not sure how implementing C, instead of D, actually is limiting access to the trails for the physically less able. It does prevent people who are less able from going over 20MPH. I guess you can call that unfair. As someone who cannot do 20MPH an hour on flats myself, I would say I do not feel my ability to use the trails is constrained by that - and in fact my own enjoyment of the trails would be lessened by others in the same physical condition as myself choosing to ride at 25MPH on trails.

    I can see some might complain of an inablity to get their Class 3 ebike into the District of Columbia. I would point out three things. 1. As a bike advocate in Virginia, whatever Richmond does, that access depends on the govt of the District of Columbia 2. one particular bridge could be selected to allow Class 3 ebikes without allowing them elsewhere, until such time as the Long Bridge (likely to have a much wider sidepath) is replaced. 3. People can get their class 3 ebikes from Va to DC either on metro (at proper hours) or on metrobuses (several go from Va to DC) or they can even walk them across. Not ideal, but we have all had to put up with non ideal things, and it is their choice to purchase Class 3 instead of Class 1 ebikes.
    Last edited by lordofthemark; 11-02-2017 at 12:15 PM.

  6. #805
    Join Date
    Feb 2014
    Location
    Alexandria to NOMA
    Posts
    827
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    ...it would affect many people... Nor I'm I saying 25mph is ok for a trail -- it's probably too high.
    OK, is 20mph good? Let's do it.

    Next step is enforcement. Who is paying for it? There are surely going to be a lot of tickets issued (based on your assessment), and the revenue is going to turn this into a cash cow, right? Where should ticket fines start? What about ticketing based on ability/willingness to exceed the speed limit? The faster you go, the more you should pay!

    Now, remind me where any State or local code requires my bike to have a functioning and calibrated speedometer. While we're here, I'm trying to remember the last time I got pulled over for not having a bell or reflectors while riding in DC, too.

    Also, does my bike need to be registered now that I need to show proof that my speedometer is indicating speed incorrectly when I fight my first speeding ticket?

    What about the posted 15mph speed limit on the entirety of MVT? Why doesn't USPP want to enforce the rules that are already in place?

    Quote Originally Posted by dasgeh View Post
    encourage more folks to bike by allowing ebikes into the mix.
    How many more folks do you think this will be? Honestly, in the region, who is producing share estimates for that class (i.e., folks who are not physically able to ride a bike as trasnportation, but would if it was a Class-3 e-bike)?
    Last edited by Harry Meatmotor; 11-02-2017 at 12:28 PM.

  7. #806
    lordofthemark's Avatar
    lordofthemark is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    "I don't think it's a reasonable argument, because it basically says "we're going to control volume by restricting access by physical ability."

    Leaving aside the ability to allow Class 1 and 2 ebikes only, I still think its more about controlling volume based both on likely conflict (and no I don't think we will ever have that many people riding Human powered bikes over 20MPH, and there are plenty of places where people are NOT riding steeply downhill) and on the ability to comfortably use on road infra. Again, someone riding a class 3 ebike should be able to comfortably ride on a very wide range of roads in the region (can you find a an O-D pair where they can't and a trail works - I suppose - but again, we all have to put up with some O-D pairs where there is no comfortable option - accepting that on a few O-D pairs is not the same as giving up on ebikes as a tool to increase riding) If someone is not comfortable doing that because of inexperience, then they could first buy a class 1 or 2, get experienced riding, including on more comfortable in street routes (using MUTs where that is necessary for comfort) and then later graduate to Class 3, when they are confident and skilled enough to not need MUTs (this is, AFAICT, a path taken by lots and lots of riders of human powered bikes)

  8. Likes Harry Meatmotor, hozn liked this post
  9. #807
    Join Date
    Mar 2015
    Location
    Falls Church, VA
    Posts
    649
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lordofthemark View Post

    I can see some might complain of an inability to get their Class 3 ebike into the District of Columbia. I would point out three things.
    Chain Bridge, Key Bridge, and Memorial Bridge have motor vehicle speed limits within the range of class 3 ebikes (or class 3 ebikes can attain speeds to make playing in traffic on these bridges feasible). Thus class 3 ebikes would lose crossing opportunities on TR Bridge, 14th Street, and Wilson Bridge if banned from sidepaths.

  10. Likes lordofthemark liked this post
  11. #808
    lordofthemark's Avatar
    lordofthemark is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by bentbike33 View Post
    Chain Bridge, Key Bridge, and Memorial Bridge have motor vehicle speed limits within the range of class 3 ebikes (or class 3 ebikes can attain speeds to make playing in traffic on these bridges feasible). Thus class 3 ebikes would lose crossing opportunities on TR Bridge, 14th Street, and Wilson Bridge if banned from sidepaths.
    are bikes allowed on the Water Taxis from Old Town to National Harbor?

  12. Likes EasyRider liked this post
  13. #809
    Join Date
    Jul 2013
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    114
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by lordofthemark View Post
    are bikes allowed on the Water Taxis from Old Town to National Harbor?
    No, according to the FAQ page on the website of the Potomac RiverBoat Company. For people wanting to ride to Mt Vernon they recommend a one-way bike rental from Bike and Roll leaving the bike outside the estate then taking the boat back to Alexandria as a pedestrian.
    Last edited by Dewey; 11-02-2017 at 01:56 PM.

  14. #810
    lordofthemark's Avatar
    lordofthemark is offline I really need to log off the internet and go for a ride.
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    The forgotten corner of Alexandria, VA
    Posts
    2,561
    Post Thanks / Like

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Dewey View Post
    No, according to the FAQ page on the website of the Potomac RiverBoat Company. For people wanting to ride to Mt Vernon they recommend a one-way bike rental from Bike and Roll leaving the bike outside the estate then taking the boat back to Alexandria as a pedestrian.
    Alright. I will support allowing Class 3 ebikes on the Wilson Bridge sidepath. The bridge joints should suffice to discourage excessive speeds.

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •