[Dewey]

@zsionakides 163620 wrote:

With pedal assist the rider can go 28mph, which I’ve seen riders do on the MVT and 4MR. This is dangerous and not something a non ebike rider can easily do.

20mph is very fast for riding uphill. If you look at the Rosslyn hill on the Custis trail on Strava (https://www.strava.com/segments/12543956), only 9 out of over 7500 riders have ever averaged 20mph up that hill. Putting ebikes out there means that anyone can spend a couple grand and be faster than basically every rider on the trail, simply by twisting the wrist or flicking a switch.

You are talking about the performance of high power/over-volted electric motors likely drawing above the 1,000w Virginia definition of an electric power-assisted bicycle and I agree 20mph is too fast going uphill on the Custis Trail, it’s also 5mph over the trail speed limit, lower powered Class 1 and 2 ebikes typically don’t achieve those velocities uphill. I converted a bicycle with a pedal assist motor, no throttle, I’m not interested in speed only utility cycling and commuting, and I need help pedalling uphill, towing a child trailer, and carrying groceries. The motor while continuously rated at 250w can draw peak power of 648w – this is capable of assisting my pedalling up to 14mph unloaded going uphill from Rosslyn on the Wilson Blvd PBL, with child trailer and groceries I’m usually going 10mph uphill.

The riders zooming past you uphill may or may not know this but in Virginia motor power >1,000w means they are not riding an ebike. Bicycles are not equipped to NHTSA moped safety standards so they don’t have a VIN number and in Virginia it cannot be registered or titled without a VIN number so it likely also can’t be insured or operated on the street. It’s why I advocate for Virginia adopting a California style ebike classification system certified by the manufacturer or distributor with a decal to identify legal ebikes. Class 1 pedal assist and Class 2 throttle ebikes and kit motors are power limited with performance similar to pedal bicycles, Class 3 speed pedelecs provide pedal assistance up to 28mph which is suitable for long distance commuting on the street, in California only Class 1 and 2 ebikes are allowed on the trails.

[Dewey]

@lordofthemark 163590 wrote:

…and changes to contributory negligence laws.

I emailed WABA and wrote it in the WABA member survey asking for advocacy/action to build on the successful campaign in DC to repeal Contributory Negligence for cyclists to extend the benefit to include ebikes – we’re still subject to this unfair driver loophole – don’t give car drivers an excuse to abdicate their responsibility to vulnerable road users, that should include pedestrians, cyclists, ebikes, all of us. I’m just asking for equitable treatment.

In addition to Infrastructure, Education, etc. we need a safe Potomac river crossing that is legal for both cyclists and ebikes to use, I like @Scoots suggestion earlier of a PBL on Key Bridge. VC does not work in the rush hour commute on any of the Potomac bridge vehicle lanes for low powered Class 1/2 ebikes that are limited to <20mph.

[Dewey]

@huskerdont 163571 wrote:

PBLs on Key Bridge would solve a lot of my and others’ problems in life, especially if the Roosevelt Bridge walkway isn’t going to be widened. A PBL on Memorial would be good, but I feel they’d need to improve connections on the Virginia side so you weren’t just leaving the PBL and riding straight to your death.

I would gladly ride a PBL over Key Bridge. The volume of traffic at the intersection with the northern end would require good traffic engineering to enable bicycles and ebikes to turn left from Westbound M St onto the bridge.

[Dewey]

@scoot 163554 wrote:

A PBL would be especially useful for e-bike riders on the uphill out of Rosslyn.

Yes, I appreciate the PBL on Wilson coming out of Rosslyn and I ride my ebike on it rather than the Custis Trail on my commute home, I hope Arlington extends the PBL the rest of the way up hill to Courthouse. I would like bike lanes or preferably a PBL installed on one of the Potomac bridges. Memorial bridge is the obvious candidate but it seems NPS disagree. DC DDOT have an opportunity to widen the Rossevelt bridge sidewalk but I’ve read they too are not interested. This type of segregated infrastructure is necessary or lower powered ebikes are obliged to ride the bridge sidewalks/paths because there are no safe on-street routes for cyclists or lower powered ebikes to cross the Potomac. There also needs to be improved infrastructure at either end of a river crossing to connect to lower speed on-street routes, for Memorial Bridge the path around the East side of Arlington cemetery should be widened and preferably a segregated cycle path put in to enable safer cycling alongside the, at times, heavy pedestrian traffic – large tour bus groups, memorial visitors, joggers, dog walkers, etc.

[Dewey]

Sigh…

[Dewey]

Re: Section 2.2 Ensure Trails Function for a Range of Users

I don’t know how to word this correctly but if mode separation is to be a stated aim with action taken to separate bicycle and pedestrian on high traffic trail routes and where conflicts commonly occur, could we also consider modifying the prohibition on motorized vehicles to permit electric power-assisted bicycles to ride on Arlington trails?

In 2015 California revised their vehicle code and adopted a new 3-tier classification system for ebikes at the same time they permitted Class 1 and 2 pedal assist and throttle ebikes with motors regulated to <20mph to ride off-street trails and bike paths - this California style ebike regulation has since been adopted by several other states.

Virginia permits ebikes in on-street bike lanes and protected bike lanes and on sidewalks, and allows localities to regulate use in off-street trails/paths. The current Virginia definition of an electric power-assisted bicycle limits power but not speed which is regulated by Arlington with the 15mph trail speed limit.

I would like for there to be official recognition of the reality of ebikes on Arlington trails, with the aim of legitimizing those that can be shown to meet both power and speed limits. I accept Virginia vehicle code may need to be changed first to introduce a California style ebike classification, as in California the law also requires ebikes to display a motor classification decal put on by a bike shop or distributor who electronically limit speed to comply with the classification. Having something in writing in the plan would indicate there is a need to do something to legitimize ebikes on Arlington trails whilst recognizing the need to regulate motor assisted speed.

[Dewey]

@zsionakides 161743 wrote:

The issue I see is one ebike who passed me yesterday on the MVT was going at least 25mph – I was going ~15-16mph, and he passed me like I was standing still, with no audible warning BTW. At that speed, the ebike is basically a low powered electric motorcycle and needs to be evaluated as such.

It’s this type of behavior that gets my back up too, I’m sorry you encountered this jerk. I appreciate your acceptance of low speed Class 1 & 2 ebikes. There are many riders including commuters, parents, the elderly, the disabled, students, low-income workers, delivery or rickshaws, riding low speed Class 1 and 2 ebikes, who benefit from electric power assist up hills, and of course this requires ebike cyclists to gain acceptance from existing trail users by respecting everyone’s safety. I would like to see WABA, Bike Arlington, People for Bikes, League of American Cyclists, all the local and national cycling organizations on the same page with a consistent message advocating for equitable treatment for pedal bicycles and low speed Class 1 and 2 ebikes through reasonable compromise. Please let’s start with DC adopting a California style law to regulate the distinction between low and high speed ebikes. Next lets build on the recent successful change to DC Code repealing contributory negligence in bicycle-car collisions, to make low speed Class 1 and 2 “motorized bicycles” an exception to the motor vehicle exclusion so we no longer remain subject to this unjust driver legal loophole. Please let’s work together to change the Municipal Regulations and/or DC Code to permit low speed Class 1 and 2 ebike cyclists to enjoy personal safety while respecting others safety using bicycle infrastructure in the District of Columbia.

I try to follow the golden rule, I am equally as frustrated as you by those who ignore it and intrude on your ride. I ring my bell and call my passes, I bought a 3rd party liability insurance policy I try my best to never use, I joined WABA and took a City Cycling class because I needed to be educated on how to be safe and ride safely around others – I turned off my motor during the drills (the one where you throw yourself on your stomach on the bike seat is fun on a heavy unassisted ebike), I joined an Arlington Kidical Mass ride – I counted 3 other parents towing children who had converted their pedal bicycles with similar Class 1 pedal assist motors. In the past 9 months of commuting I have had two incidents, right hooked, and locked up my rear brake in front of a closely following Metro bus, but despite this I try to ride on-street routes where safe to do so, I take the new Protected Bike Lane on Wilson rather than the Custis trail up hill from Rosslyn – I hope they extend the PBL on Wilson all the way up hill to Clarendon.

[Dewey]

@zsionakides 161731 wrote:

…risks of someone getting hit by a high speed e-bike.

As someone who commutes sometimes on the equivalent of a Class 1 pedal assist ebike I appreciate more jurisdictions are following California’s example and making the distinction between low speed ebikes (Class 1 & 2) and high speed pedelecs and electric motorcycles, mopeds, and scooters (Class 3 & 4) and continuing to ban the latter from sidewalks, paths, and trails, while granting the former the right to ride on the sidewalk. This is in line with existing Virginia and Maryland laws that permit low speed ebikes to ride on the sidewalk. As previously noted there is no safe way for cyclists to cross the Potomac bridges except on sidewalks/paths.

[Dewey]

Copied and pasted to VDOT and my Virginia house and senate delegates.

[Dewey]

@dasgeh 160784 wrote:

take Lynn to the Key Bridge to M, and head south on whichever numbered street makes sense for you.

The same thing happened again today, this time the train stopped at Courthouse due to a power outage at Eastern Market. Once again CaBi to the rescue, and it was a nice morning so I followed your advice Gillian and took Key and M through Georgetown. I managed to resist the temptation to stop at Ladurée. I’d like to be able to carry a folding cardboard helmet in my bag for these CaBi ‘get out of Dodge’ rides.

[Dewey]

Expensive one
Cheaper one
Cheapest

Other leather cycling accessories apart from saddles, grips & bags – U-lock holster, wine carrier, trouser clips…coffee holder…six-pack caddy, growler caddy, yoga mat strap…streamers…mud flaps…washers…shoes…helmet…curious object holder…Lederhosen…err…

[Dewey]

Standing in the Orange Line Crush this morning after we pulled into Courthouse station I heard the ominous ker-chunk of doors failing to close followed by the inevitable off-loading. The platform was packed. I decided to bail and take Bikeshare, I’m only an occasional user now but keep my membership alive for this eventuality. I was pleasantly surprised to find plenty of bikes available at the Courthouse CaBi station at 8:15am – took Veitch to the Custis trail, through the improved Roosevelt Island GW trail section, and over the Roosevelt Bridge to my workplace in Foggy Bottom, downhill most of the way except for the bridge (why is there a headwind whichever direction I cross!). Thank you Capital Bikeshare.

[Dewey]

Thank you to the two cyclists who complimented me this morning on my goggles and crank motor. Reading to my toddler last night I reassured her like Willow I go slow but I use a bicycle bell instead of loud horns.

[Dewey]

[Cross posted from Commuters forum]

I do sometimes feel e-bikes are the Rodney Dangerfield of the cycling community when it comes to safety legislation, take for instance the recent welcome change to DC Code repealing contributory negligence concerning fault in bicycle-car collisions and fairness to crash victims – there was no mention of “motorized bicycles” as an exception to the motor vehicle definition so that must mean e-bike cyclists remain subject to the unfair contributory negligence provision that is exploited by drivers lawyers. Then there is the DC DoT interpreting in the strictest sense the DC municipal regulation prohibiting motorized bicycles from “bike routes” to mean e-bikes should not use protected bike lanes – why shouldn’t e-bikes be allowed in DC protected bike lanes when we are allowed to ride on PBL’s (and on sidewalks) in Virginia and Maryland? The Park Service is not listening to WABA advocating for on-street bike lanes on Memorial Bridge when at present there is no safe way for cyclists to cross the Potomac bridges except on sidewalks/paths – but even if the cash were found to build bike lanes on Memorial bridge DCMR 18-1201.18 would still not allow e-bike cyclists to use them! These things need to change to provide safety for e-bike cyclists on the roads if the local jurisdictions want to encourage us off the sidewalks/paths/PBL’s.

[Dewey]

Thanks for helping organize this event, it was good to have a helmet safety check done with my 21 month old, and have her try out a balance bike.

[Author]

Posts