[dasgeh]

BTW, in Iowa I saw a lady on a bike with a speaker. As in she was riding along, a speaker was mounter where I bike computer would normally be on the stem, and a nice workout-oriented was playing (at a responsible level). Seemed like a nice idea…

[dasgeh]

Full disclosure: I didn’t do the ride because I was out of town. Sorry to have missed it.

But having read the letter, it sounds like the organizers are shirking responsibility here. It reads like “there are three things that caused problems: 1) more people showed up (not our fault); 2) there was construction (not our fault) and 3) the DCMPD screwed up (not our fault).” I call BS. People were required to register, so they should have known about the increase in numbers. The construction has been there for at least 3 weeks, but even if it were new the week before, they should have better communicated to participants what to expect and what to do. When it became clear that a new officer would be in charge on the DC side day of, they should have briefed him or her and made sure there were open lines of communication with that person.

At the very least, the organizers should have acknowledged their role in the problems. Without that much, I’m not hopeful they’ll do better next year.

[dasgeh]

Welcome!

What kind of ride are you looking for? Are you a racer looking for training? Are you a triathlete looking for company? Are you looking for a social outing? Hills? Flat? Fast? Slow? Singles? Families with kids?

Basically, you have your pick of different rides in this area (though not all through RCP).

[dasgeh]

@Brendan von Buckingham 19484 wrote:

There’s more than one crossing there.

Not to be nit-picky, but there are three crossings from the South side of Memorial Bridge and all are technically on different roads. The crossing to continue towards the cemetery crosses the ramp between Washington Blvd and Memorial Circle. To get to the MVT, you cross two roads: closest to the bridge, it crosses “Washington Blvd”, and down the hill, closer to the river, it crosses “the George Washington Parkway”. This seems to be the common parlance on this forum, and it helps to be clear about what we’re talking about.

Personally, I cross the ramp every day, and think it sucks, but my understanding is that it’s nothing compared to the last crossing at the GWP.

[dasgeh]

The most low hanging fruit on this road is to ENFORCE THE SPEED LIMIT. It’s an absolute joke. I believe it’s 25mph here, but driving that slowly is a hazard, because no one does. We’re all used to speed cameras now — install them with great fanfare, and everyone will be safer.

@baiskeli 19469 wrote:

In the absence of stop signs, a motor vehicle has the right of way when it doesn’t have time to stop. A ped/cyclist cannot just jump out in front in that situation. This is obviously common sense anyway. A ped/cyclist has the right-of-way when he/she decides it is safe, and goes into the crosswalk. Cars then must give way. This is also just common sense. It boils down to doing what’s safe anyway.

Or at least that’s how I understand it. I’m sure there are people here who know it better than I do. I hadn’t thought that much about it even after years of cycling. I can imagine many people who drive think even less.

This actually misstates the law. The law in DC is that drivers must STOP for pedestrians crossing using a crosswalk. When exactly a ped is “crossing” isn’t clear, but once someone is in the crosswalk, “stop” is pretty clear”. The law in VA is that peds in the crosswalk have the right of way. Peds also have a duty to not jump out in front of cars (I forget the exact wording). However, if the ped ignores their duty, the law isn’t written to negate the right of way. Of course, the law is not enforced as written. (As written in VA, there’s a crosswalk implied at every intersection where speeds are 35 or under, regardless of paint on the street).

Sorry I can’t look up the cites now, but they’ve been cited to on the forum enough times, they should be easy to find.

[dasgeh]

@KLizotte 19123 wrote:

From what I’m reading I don’t think most people are advocating banning you or the situation you describe.

But we’re already banned.

@KLizotte 19123 wrote:

I just fear that manufacturers will start producing beasts (like SUVs) because they can make a buck.

The federal law has been around for more than a decade, and this hasn’t happened. Why would you think that Arlington allowing ebikes on its MUPs would lead to this? Moreover, the law limits the speed of the assist, so there’s necessarily a cap on that aspect.

@Nuke 19180 wrote:

With no warning, an e-bike passes me going rather fast. Scare the cr@p out of me since I would not expect to passed at that speed going up a hill. What pisses me off the most about was that there was no good reason to be on the trail. The roads around there would have gotten the guy to the same place.

I’m pretty sure my husband on a road bike could have beaten the ebike up the hill (there’s only one hill that meets your definition there, and I know it well — I’ve seen plenty of racers carry plenty of speed up steeper hills). There’s a rider who chose to be on a path when I road would have been better and probably faster (** though the construction crews in that area have forced me on an ebike onto the paths, so there’s the possibility that the guy didn’t have a choice**), and didn’t pass you in a safe manner. That’s on the rider, not the bike.

[dasgeh]

@jabberwocky 19119 wrote:

Just to be clear, I’m not arguing that e-bikes are somehow inherently dangerous. I’m just unconvinced that any laws prohibiting them from MUPs need to be changed. There is a ceiling to how fast a human-powered road bike can go. Average speeds for pro cyclists haven’t changed much in the last 60 years. The speed ceiling for an e-bike is limited purely by the tech, which is constantly improving. If e-bikes were locked into todays commercial tech, I’d have no issues changing the law. But that isn’t the case. At some point (and I think we’ll reach that point in the near future), e-bikes being speed limited to 20mph is going to be purely voluntary.

What I’m advocating for, and I believe what others are advocating for, is allowing SPEED LIMITED ebikes on the trails. I think using the federal definition is the easiest solution. Even if the tech gets better, and the law doesn’t change (as you argue will happen). BTW, ebikes aren’t that new, and the tech hasn’t really gotten better. Prices may have come down somewhat, but they’re still prohibitively expensive for most. The only people I know with ebikes are like me — committed cyclists who started on regular bikes, but because of temporary or permanent conditions, physically can’t do what they want on a regular bike at the moment. As I asked before, why ban those people from MUPs?

[dasgeh]

@mstone 19116 wrote:

Except, 20 is generally too fast for the close-in MUPs when other users are out and about–and the fact that anyone can jump on and do it in less than a week is exactly the problem…

There are lots of things that anyone can jump on a bike and do in less than a week that are very dangerous on trails. We don’t ban any other entire class of bikes/riders from the trails just because they could possibly be dangerous. We have rules that the riders are required to follow, and riders are expected to be able to control their equipment sufficiently to follow those rules. (I can just imagine the damage I’d do on the trail if I tried to ride one of the portable elliptical machines for the first time on the W&OD)

As far as enforcement, let’s be realistic – this isn’t about enforcement. The rule currently isn’t enforced at all. The debate is a little be academic, but it goes to the whole “if you make things that lots of cyclists do, and logically should be allowed to do, illegal, then cyclists will generally have less respect for the law”. If the police wanted to enforce this, they could issue tickets if they suspect a motored-bike isn’t an ebike, and let the cyclist submit documentation showing that it meets the definition (mine came with that, and it’s easy to get replacements online). Most importantly, most retail motored bikes are ebikes. So police should really focus suspension on self-built motored bikes.

The reason I’m pushing this is because part of my commute requires me to hop on an MUP in Arlington (the trail between 110 and the cemetery — all the “on road” options involve highways – 66W, 50, 110, 27 — unless I more than double the length of my commute). I prefer not to break the law. So should I be required to give up bike commuting because I’m medically unable to power the bike myself at the moment? There are others situations where a cyclist legally would be allowed to be on the road, but it would be much safer for the ebiker to be on the MUP. You may imagine all ebikes speeding away at 20MPH (which isn’t the case), but even 20MPH is too slow to safely be on road on, eg the Fairfax County Parkway.

The better question is: given that ebikes can be and generally are ridden in a safe manner, and that ebikes can expand the population of cyclists, why should we ban ebikes from trails?

[dasgeh]

First of all, but “ebike” I mean one that complies with the federal law that exempts certain assisted bikes from motor vehicle regulations. That law limits the bikes to ones where the motor can only help the bike go up to 20mph. The ebike can go faster, but only under the rider’s power. I believe that law also requires that the motor be designed to “assist” active riding — so a rider will still have to pedal to make the motor go, just not as hard. That also impacts the acceleration of the bike — it’s nothing like a car. It accelerates like the bike is on a downhill, or like a much stronger rider is pedaling.

Personally, I’d be fine with leaving the ban from MUPs for other bikes-with-motors that aren’t ebikes. Honestly, when I was shopping for one, pretty much all advertised that they complied with the federal law, so I suspect that the only non-ebike bikes-with-motors are self-built.

@KLizotte 19099 wrote:

Well, I see the problem of faster bikes as an issue since we already that problem happening today with the fast road bikes.

I’ve said this before, but just to reiterate, my top speed on my road bike is much faster than my top speed on my ebike, because the ebike is so much heavier (and if I have enough space and the right conditions, even I can make my lightweight aluminum road bike get over 20mph). I support having clearly advertised speed limits on trails, but I don’t think that’s a reason to ban ebikes.

@KLizotte 19099 wrote:

There is also the issue of being able to correctly gauge someone’s speed, especially in dicey situations. One develops a general sense of how quickly a pedal cyclist can travel; throwing a motor into the mix makes things even trickier because now I can’t guess accurately where the cyclist will be at a particular point in time. If the bikes can’t go faster than regular road bikes this isn’t a problem, but if they start getting a lot faster….

This is a problem with bikes in general — some riders/bikes are deceptively fast. I’ve seen people accelerate a lot faster than I expected them to, just because I was unfairly stereotyping them (big bike, rider out of shape, whatever). I imagine that I’ve encountered some people out-and-about who were surprised by how fast I was going on my ebike — it’s bulky and upright — but I get past by people going faster who look like they’re on heavier bikes and look more out of shape than me. So it’s not the ebike causing the surprise.

Have you ever actually encounter an ebike that riding in a way that was unpredictably fast? I imagine you pass a few every month and don’t even notice because generally, they ride just like normal bikes. (I know what to look for, and I don’t see that many around). Have you ever ridden one? Did you really find it that different? I always describe it as above – just like a normal bike, but you always get to pedal like it’s a downhill (not a Courthouse-Rosslyn downhill, more like a Clarendon-50 downhill).

[dasgeh]

Riding around on my ebike yesterday, I realized that riding an ebike actually makes me a safer rider.

On a regular bike, you have to earn almost all of your speed. Your little legs powered you up to this cruising speed and it sucks to hit the breaks and scrub that hard earned momentum. So when you approach a place where you’re _supposed_ to stop or slow, you have every incentive to hit the breaks as little as possible. And we all know the inertia curve — the hardest part is starting from a complete stop. So you have incentive to not come to a full-and-complete stop at stop signs; incentive to roll up to and through red lights; incentive to not really slow down when passing others on trails.

On an ebike, you have help earning that speed. So as you see those two peds coming towards each other on the trail, and realize that you would have to squeeze between them if you maintained your current speed, you just tap your brakes and slow down a bit so you can pass the one in your direction after the squeeze. When you pull up to a red light, you keep speed to the stop line and then stop. Ditto with stop signs. You act a lot more like a car, which cars like. Getting back up to speed is easy.

Don’t get me wrong, I normally love earning all my speed. But at the moment, I can’t. On good days, I could probably ride a normal bike to work, but I’d probably yield to those incentives to not hit the brakes. On bad days, I wouldn’t ride. So the ebike both encourages more cycling and safer cycling from at least me. I don’t know why the broader cycling community wouldn’t support that.

[dasgeh]

@acc 19018 wrote:

Last night I discovered that Spartacus, the only man I get along with, is three sizes too big for me.

Oh, ann! How horrid! I can’t even manage riding on a bike THREE sizes too big for so long. I was on a bike one size to big for about a year, and it was MISERABLE (in hindsight). Once I got my new bike, it was like night and day. All the sudden, long training rides were something to look forward to!

BTW, my new (well fitting) bike is a Felt ZW 35. I LOVE it. Of course, fit matters the most, but if Felt is on your list, I highly recommend it. I’m a bit taller than you, but I need a bike that’s smaller than my height suggests (I think my legs are long and torso is short, or something like that).

And sorry about Spartacus.

[dasgeh]

@KLizotte 18952 wrote:

If CaBi is going to be installed at the Lincoln and Jefferson Memorials then NPS is going to have get serious and cracking about fixing the biking infrastructure and signage at those two locations. I dread to think of what will occur if we start seeing 500+ CaBis at a time descending on those areas this summer.

WRT the Lincoln, just imagine how many tourists are going to try to get from the MVT from the North Memorial Bridge crossing if there’s no signage about how bikes should get down there!

[dasgeh]

@2fitt 18956 wrote:

I was stop by a PP in Hanes Point for not stopping at a stop sign. I disputed the incident but he gave me a ticket anyway. I just don’t understand, I was nearly hit by two cars and PP felt it was more important to give me a ticket for not stop at a stop sign. The PP is really tough on cyclist.

You probably have lots of grounds to challenge the ticket. First of all, if you did stop, you should contest it. I don’t think there’s anything in DC Code that requires a foot down.

If you didn’t stop, it’s still likely that the NPP officer wrote the ticket incorrectly.

Unfortunately, “they aren’t ticketing cars” is not a valid defense. However, it’s a great point to make in a letter to policy makers (head of NPP, NPS, your representatives in Congress).

[dasgeh]

@pfunkallstar 18627 wrote:

We aren’t the only targets, just the easiest – besides pedestrians that is.

Don’t you think that a tour bus idling along the side of the road is an easier target than a moving cyclist? (Idling is illegal in DC, not that NPP enforces it)

[dasgeh]

I just added this to the googlemap, but it seemed pretty dangerous to me as I headed through here today:

Headed Eastbound along the trail, there is a tree blocking the view of the stoplight at Scott St. until you’re very close to it. Given that this is the first grade crossing on the trail (if you’re headed Eastbound – and there are no other warning signs that there will be a grade crossing), and that cyclists are headed downhill here and likely going pretty fast, this could be particularly dangerous.

[Author]

Posts