[atodaso]

Funny how people are only saying this now, and not when David Miller and Adam Giambrone created Transit City.

There is nothing contradictory because there is a big difference between political posturing (Ford) and city building, (Miller & Giambrone).

Neither Miller nor Giambrone ran around yelling "subways subways subways", not knowing what a subway was. Both are extremely knowledgeable about transit issues and were working closely with experts. They were promoting transit because that's what cities must do - plan for transit. Ford on the other hand was pushing an ideology with no founding in rational thinking let alone expert advice. In fact the experts themselves vocally expressed their opposition to Ford's nonsensical bullshit.

 

[W. K. Lis]

There is nothing contradictory because there is a big difference between political posturing (Ford) and city building, (Miller & Giambrone).

Neither Miller nor Giambrone ran around yelling "subways subways subways", not knowing what a subway was. Both are extremely knowledgeable about transit issues and were working closely with experts. They were promoting transit because that's what cities must do - plan for transit. Ford on the other hand was pushing an ideology with no founding in rational thinking let alone expert advice. In fact the experts themselves vocally expressed their opposition to Ford's nonsensical bullshit.

Rob Ford infamous quote is "Streets are for cars".

He would not promote "Streets are for people", like in this video:
[video=vimeo;78886448]http://vimeo.com/78886448[/video]
He'll say no, no, no. Get into his car, and drive off.

 

[the lemur]

True. It's the stupidity of the conventional cyclists that most everyone hates (yes, even/especially the reasonable cyclists) plus the velocity of a moped plus the DUI/inexperienced component that seems to be overrepresented in the ebike user group.

You mean that reasonable cyclists also hate 'conventional' (oblivious/reckless) cyclists?

 

[Electrify]

I wonder if Toronto's position on e-bikes would stand up to a court challenge. If they aren't allowed in bike lanes, could forcing them on to the road be a safety issue? Also what about someone who has poor leg mobility, could the city's position on e-bikes be discriminatory? Let's not forget that a high end road bike can easily exceed 32km/h, though they aren't banned from bike lanes, trails, etc.

For what it is worth, my dad has an e-scooter and follows all the rules of the road (his knees would not hold up to full pedalling at his age). I used to have an e-bike, but found that the motor just carried itself and that I could get just as much speed, if not more, on a good road bike with the same amount of pedalling. That and the thing was made like crap and kept breaking on me (screw Daymak).

 

[ShonTron]

You mean that reasonable cyclists also hate 'conventional' (oblivious/reckless) cyclists?

Ugh. Booooo!

I bike on Harbord, St. George, College all the time (except last week, with the ice, and lack of clearance of snow on bike routes made commuting this week a write-off - cold in of itself doesn't dissuade me) and most fellow commuters are reasonable. If your observations are based on bike couriers and the asshats you remember, than yeah, you'd feel most cyclists are oblivious/reckless. The ones I commute with are 90% alright and yes, they hate red light runners. They make the majority of us look bad.

 

[MegaMax]

I wonder if Toronto's position on e-bikes would stand up to a court challenge. If they aren't allowed in bike lanes, could forcing them on to the road be a safety issue? Also what about someone who has poor leg mobility, could the city's position on e-bikes be discriminatory? Let's not forget that a high end road bike can easily exceed 32km/h, though they aren't banned from bike lanes, trails, etc.

For what it is worth, my dad has an e-scooter and follows all the rules of the road (his knees would not hold up to full pedalling at his age). I used to have an e-bike, but found that the motor just carried itself and that I could get just as much speed, if not more, on a good road bike with the same amount of pedalling. That and the thing was made like crap and kept breaking on me (screw Daymak).

Court challenge? You think those drunk slobs on ebikes would think of something like that?

 

[the lemur]

Quote Originally Posted by the lemur View Post

You mean that reasonable cyclists also hate 'conventional' (oblivious/reckless) cyclists?

Ugh. Booooo!

What?

I bike on Harbord, St. George, College all the time (except last week, with the ice, and lack of clearance of snow on bike routes made commuting this week a write-off - cold in of itself doesn't dissuade me) and most fellow commuters are reasonable. If your observations are based on bike couriers and the asshats you remember, than yeah, you'd feel most cyclists are oblivious/reckless. The ones I commute with are 90% alright and yes, they hate red light runners. They make the majority of us look bad.

I'm a bike commuter myself (although currently taking transit until the days get a bit longer - I don't mind the cold so much, but the dark brings out the stupid/cranky in drivers). I'm just trying to understand what you meant by 'the stupidity of the conventional cyclists that most everyone hates (yes, even/especially the reasonable cyclists)'.

I agree that 90% or maybe even more of cyclists I encounter while commuting and riding recreationally are generally okay in their riding habits and skills and don't run reds or approve of those who do. And yes, it's the red light runners who ruin it for the rest of us, because drivers and pedestrians never seem to remember or notice the ones riding reasonably and predictably. If there's a fault to be found among the majority of cyclists, it's a tendency not to be assertive enough.

 

[the lemur]

I wonder if Toronto's position on e-bikes would stand up to a court challenge. If they aren't allowed in bike lanes, could forcing them on to the road be a safety issue? Also what about someone who has poor leg mobility, could the city's position on e-bikes be discriminatory? Let's not forget that a high end road bike can easily exceed 32km/h, though they aren't banned from bike lanes, trails, etc.

For what it is worth, my dad has an e-scooter and follows all the rules of the road (his knees would not hold up to full pedalling at his age). I used to have an e-bike, but found that the motor just carried itself and that I could get just as much speed, if not more, on a good road bike with the same amount of pedalling. That and the thing was made like crap and kept breaking on me (screw Daymak).

I don't get the speed argument. The whole point of e-bikes is that they are designed to fit a certain set of restrictions to be the fastest powered two-wheel vehicle you can get without requiring a licence, insurance or registration (I wouldn't be surprised if there were an e-bike salesperson somewhere saying 'And you don't even need a helmet either!'). Part of that is the 32 km/h top speed.

Yes, you can hit 32 km/h on a pretty good road bike, not even necessarily a high-end one, but it's hard to sustain it unless you are a) super fit and b) you have a long stretch of unobstructed road, which tends not to happen with most bike lanes in the city, never mind trails. I would think 32 km/h or even a speed somewhere in the mid to upper 20s sustained on an e-bike would be sufficient for keeping up with dense urban traffic. I certainly find that I can pedal comfortably in it, in the absence of bike lanes, at about 24-25 km/h.

Which is why I don't get it when e-bikers talk about using the bike lane and being continually passed by cyclists and how wanting to keep e-bikes out of the lanes means we're all a bunch of super-fit elitist body fascists, when e-bikers often switch between the travel lane and the bike lane when it suits them.

I also haven't really seen anyone e-biking this winter, which may be another strike against their battery power.

 

[BurlOak]

Court challenge? You think those drunk slobs on e-bikes would think of something like that?

Bikes (including e-bikes) are considered vehicles in the Highway Traffic Act (HTA). It is equally a crime to drive a car, boat, bike, while drunk.

 

[atodaso]

Bikes (including e-bikes) are considered vehicles in the Highway Traffic Act (HTA). It is equally a crime to drive a car, boat, bike, while drunk.

Are you deliberately not getting this?
The point is, you don't need a license to ride an e-bike. So bums who have had their licences revoked due to repeated DUI's, do the next easiest thing which is ride a e-bike. (This should really be the mayors only mode of getting himself around - he could take his act to the circus once his ass is kicked to the curb from city hall)

 

[nfitz]

Yes you can. But maybe you shouldn't - that sort of thing is usually frowned upon.

Indeed it is. Be careful, as trolling may be dealt with using the Spanish solution. No one expects the Spanish solution!

 

[Electrify]

Are you deliberately not getting this?
The point is, you don't need a license to ride an e-bike. So bums who have had their licences revoked due to repeated DUI's, do the next easiest thing which is ride a e-bike.

So because e-bikes don't require a license, all e-bike riders have DUIs? That is some sound logic you've got there...

 

[ShonTron]

What?

I misread. I'm glad we agree.

PS - pruned a few posts - no need calling fellow UT'ers trolls or morons.

 

[waterloowarrior]

Bikes (including e-bikes) are considered vehicles in the Highway Traffic Act (HTA). It is equally a crime to drive a car, boat, bike, while drunk.

It is not a crime to ride a bike drunk - it is not a motor vehicle, vessel or aircraft. However you could get a ticket for public intoxication. For an e-bike you can get charged under the criminal code but not under the HTA for impaired.

 

[Electrify]

I don't get the speed argument. The whole point of e-bikes is that they are designed to fit a certain set of restrictions to be the fastest powered two-wheel vehicle you can get without requiring a licence, insurance or registration (I wouldn't be surprised if there were an e-bike salesperson somewhere saying 'And you don't even need a helmet either!'). Part of that is the 32 km/h top speed.

Yes, you can hit 32 km/h on a pretty good road bike, not even necessarily a high-end one, but it's hard to sustain it unless you are a) super fit and b) you have a long stretch of unobstructed road, which tends not to happen with most bike lanes in the city, never mind trails. I would think 32 km/h or even a speed somewhere in the mid to upper 20s sustained on an e-bike would be sufficient for keeping up with dense urban traffic. I certainly find that I can pedal comfortably in it, in the absence of bike lanes, at about 24-25 km/h.

Which is why I don't get it when e-bikers talk about using the bike lane and being continually passed by cyclists and how wanting to keep e-bikes out of the lanes means we're all a bunch of super-fit elitist body fascists, when e-bikers often switch between the travel lane and the bike lane when it suits them.

I also haven't really seen anyone e-biking this winter, which may be another strike against their battery power.

Can't speak for all electrics, but when using battery only mine would peak at 20km/h. Even when peddling on a flat surface I would peak at 25km/h. I would have to be going down a steep hill while peddling heavily to hit the speed cap.

I think too many of you are looking at the glass half empty. E-bikes help to open up cycling to people who traditionally are unable to. Whether it be due to physical limitations, disabilities, or lack of confidence, the more people getting around without resorting to cars the better.