Tucson, AZ, ban on ebikes riding the Loop

[jabberwocky]

Just curious, what is singletrack?

Singletrack is off road natural surface trail that is wide enough for a single person or bike. Can vary from flat and smooth dirt trail to very difficult, rocky, steep trail that takes great skill to ride. Mountainbike and hiking trails, basically.

 

[Ken M]

The best, most fit riders in the world in the Tour de France average 25 to 28 mph on the flat, while drafting in a peloton.

Prior to Colorado passing their 3 class law, most municipalities banned the use of assist on any off road venue. Use the search here, we had many discussions in 2015/16. Read the old municipal laws. I have. The silly thing was you could ride your ebike OFF power. Read the threads from that time frame. I just did again today.

As for interstate commerce, I'll just paste what I wrote before that you ignored:


That's been addressed. I could pick any 2 states where products are either different or available for sale in one and not the other. Products regulated by the CPSC or one of the other alphabet agencies.

Pennsylvania vs California. Things I can buy that Californians cannot; either not at all or in a very different form. Let's call the latter different programming and stickers.

Cars and pickups
Space heaters
Kerosene heaters
Gasoline powered lawn equipment
Hair dryers
Paint
Stain
Household cleaning chemicals
Boats
Outboard motors
Snowmobiles
Motorcycles
Hunting knives
Firearms
Power tools
Fireworks
A variety of children's products
Vaping products
Mercury switches (thermostats, etc.)
A variety of cosmetics

Not to mention the variety of foods!

Just a sampling across a broad spectrum, the list just goes on and on and on. States requiring different specs or having different regulations or not allowing the sale of some products is as old as the country.

Some light reading:

https://dtsc.ca.gov/what-are-the-safer-consumer-products-regulations/

| Consumer products law blog​

www.consumerproductslawblog.com
"The Supreme Court has held that activity was commerce if it had a “substantial economic effect” on interstate commerce or if the “cumulative effect” of one act could have an effect on such commerce."

"From 1937 until 1995, the Supreme Court did not invalidate a single law on the basis of the Commerce Clause."

Not because cases were not filed, it's just really rare that it can be proven that a state law has a substantial economic impact.

Requiring different tuning and stickers is not onerous; it doesn't prevent the sale of the bike, it can be done and the seller passes the minor costs on to the consumer. Happens all the time. Things often cost more in states that have different regulations. If ebikes ever get big enough, I expect to see some states really crack down on bikes they deem illegal. There's a lot that I don't like about it, but there's that pesky 10th amendment.

Please. You are wrong about speed. The world record for 1 hr sustained speed on a level surface is close to 33mph and that's not even using the drafting effects of a peleton. I'm 60 years old and I could sustain 30mph for at least a 1/4 mile which is a significant distance in my opinion. There is data that shows that most bike riders do hit speeds of 28-32mph during rides (obviously that includes downhill sections but the achieve those speeds). In most context I'm not referring to "average" speed I'm referencing top riding speeds for most riders for at least some appreciable distance. I'm just trying to show that assist limits are not going to change these riding speeds I'm talking about. Sure average speeds are going to be increased because climbing on an ebikes is so much easier and faster.

Requiring class tuning is more stringent and it's required before entry into interstate commerce. The claim you make about sellers passing minor costs onto the consumer are the unique use laws like having to wear helmets because the rider has to buy a helmet but that is not required inside the box with the bike before entry into interstate commerce.

If an ebike is not 3-class compliant but is compliant to the federal / CPSC definition it can be legally sold in all 50 states and most riders are just going to assume that is legal bike to ride in that state.

Colorado passed ebike laws in 2009 that recognized the federal definition of a Low Speed Electric Bicycle as a bike and if compliant they were allowed to ride anywhere a bike was allowed. Not until 2017 did Colorado move away from that and adopted 3-class legislation because Haibike would not move their national sales offices to Colorado unless it was adopted (the merits of it were never discussed publicly because in reality it has far less technical merit than the 2002 HR727 definition).

 

[Ken M]

back on topic. ebike prohibitions or limitations on use on shared trails is largely about perceptions and concerns of either local authorities or the community of trail users or both.

the path to regaining or establishing more access or more ideal riding conditions will be a grassroots effort of education, listening and responding to concerns and being in a position to compromise as the “shared” nature of these trails implies if not requires compromising.

waving an abstract and out of context document from the CPSC will do nothing for ebikes except potentially make the situation more contentious and divisive.

we’ve seen great reports of opening access and improving access in other threads here and none of them began with the CPSC definition. correct me if i’m mistaken.

During a public meeting to discuss ebike regulation on Colorado Springs trails the debate came up about ebikes not being motor vehicles and that argument lead to the allowance of ebikes even thought motorized vehicles were not. The definition of non-motorized came from the CPSC and is it bad that it was contentious (some are never going to want ebikes anywhere where people are hiking or walking).

 

[J.R.]

Please. You are wrong about speed.

How Does Your Average Bike Speed Compare With Tour de France Pros? - FloBikes

How does your average bike speed stack up with the fastest riders in the world?

www.flobikes.com

I'm 60 years old and I could sustain 30mph for at least a 1/4 mile which is a significant distance in my opinion.

 

[Ken M]

back on topic. ebike prohibitions or limitations on use on shared trails is largely about perceptions and concerns of either local authorities or the community of trail users or both.

the path to regaining or establishing more access or more ideal riding conditions will be a grassroots effort of education, listening and responding to concerns and being in a position to compromise as the “shared” nature of these trails implies if not requires compromising.

waving an abstract and out of context document from the CPSC will do nothing for ebikes except potentially make the situation more contentious and divisive.

we’ve seen great reports of opening access and improving access in other threads here and none of them began with the CPSC definition. correct me if i’m mistaken.

Here's an example where the federal definition was leverage to gain trail access for ebikes (to override the local use law that motor vehicles were not allowed):

E-bike talk in Colorado Springs turns to motors on non-motorized trails

Notice how I'm providing an example instead of just claiming I'm correct. I would be willing to bet that the HR727 law that makes a Low Speed Electric Bike NOT a motorized vehicle has been leveraged a lot to over-ride local regulations banning motorized vehicles that prevented ebike access. The fact that some on EBR don't want to acknowledge this doesn't make it let true.

 

[J.R.]

Colorado passed ebike laws in 2009 that recognized the federal definition of a Low Speed Electric Bicycle as a bike and if compliant they were allowed to ride anywhere a bike was allowed.

Denver Post, July 17, 2016

This is the fastest growing category of e-bike, giving an electrified bump to riders as they pedal, but typically never faster than 20 mph. In Colorado, those low-powered e-bikes are allowed on trails only if local governments approve. And few do.

“These companies want to have a home, and they want to be based in an iconic location, but as one CEO said to me, ‘Why would I choose to move my company to a place where there isn’t access?’”

Colorado e-bike advocates hope to spark a quiet commuter revolution

Electric bikes are coming to the U.S., offering to reduce car trips, grow new bike advocates and change urban travel, but changes to state laws regulating electric-assist bicycles are required for …

www.denverpost.com

There are archived regulations that you can easily find.

 

[J.R.]

Colorado passed ebike laws in 2009 that recognized the federal definition of a Low Speed Electric Bicycle as a bike and if compliant they were allowed to ride anywhere a bike was allowed.

"It’s still illegal to turn on the electric engine on Colorado’s shared-use paths, such as the Cherry Creek and South Platte trails"

A new law could open more Colorado bike paths to e-bikes

A bike speeds by Cherry Creek. Biking to work might be more feasible if you didn't have to pedal so much. One problem: E-bikes still aren't legal on

denverite.com

Most ebike riders in Co. are really grateful they have the 3 class law, as now they can legally turn the assist on.

 

[mschwett]

all this talk about the federal three class definition and it having some sort of authority over the way local jurisdictions regulate their infrastructure is bizzarre. states and counties and cities absolutely have the power to create laws which define what is legal on their public infrastructure, assuming they don’t violate the constitution or something. the federal government can define a car, and california can absolutely say “no cars on this walkway,” just as a county or city can. cities can set speed limits, enforce laws about turns, prohibit vehicles over a certain weight, and yes, prohibit electrified vehicles of various types (whether some obscure federal commission calls it a bike or a motorcycle or a car or a unicorn).

does anyone know if this rule on the Tucson Loop allows ebikes whose motors / assist are turned off?

 

[Ken M]

all this talk about the federal three class definition and it having some sort of authority over the way local jurisdictions regulate their infrastructure is bizzarre. states and counties and cities absolutely have the power to create laws which define what is legal on their public infrastructure, assuming they don’t violate the constitution or something. the federal government can define a car, and california can absolutely say “no cars on this walkway,” just as a county or city can. cities can set speed limits, enforce laws about turns, prohibit vehicles over a certain weight, and yes, prohibit electrified vehicles of various types (whether some obscure federal commission calls it a bike or a motorcycle or a car or a unicorn).

does anyone know if this rule on the Tucson Loop allows ebikes whose motors / assist are turned off?

Yes. The Feds define and safety regulate the products and the states regulate the "use" of that product. This is so fundamentally simple no one should get it confused. When there is no product definition or regulation of a product or the product is unique to a state or there are unique needs then the states can also define the product.

In this situation in 2002 the feds defined a Low Speed Electric Bicycle in HR727 in 2002. In that LAW a LSEB was defined to not be a motor vehicle (they were considered motor vehicles prior to 2002 and regulated by the NHTSA) and the equivalent of a bike. States are certainly allowed to decide where bikes are allowed, but in my opinion they are not permitted to redefine what a LSEB is. That is what 3-class does which I believe is a violation of the constitution and the enumerated right of feds to regulated interstate commerce.

If you actually real the local rules for the loop in Tuscon there are some areas where they are saying ebikes are motorized vehicle and as such they are banned from the path. They are not motorized vehicles by federal definition even though they have a motor (people just can let go of the fact they have a motor and yet are not considered motorized...it's one of the fundamental misunderstanding of ebikes and their "use" regulation by states/cities/municipalities).

 

[Ken M]

"It’s still illegal to turn on the electric engine on Colorado’s shared-use paths, such as the Cherry Creek and South Platte trails"

A new law could open more Colorado bike paths to e-bikes

A bike speeds by Cherry Creek. Biking to work might be more feasible if you didn't have to pedal so much. One problem: E-bikes still aren't legal on

denverite.com

Most ebike riders in Co. are really grateful they have the 3 class law, as now they can legally turn the assist on.

This is just another example where some local regulations still banned "motorized vehicles" from a path but a compliant LSEB has not been a motorized vehicle since. 3-class had nothing to do with use of LSEBs on those paths as they were legal to ride if bikes were already allowed. Stop making it sound like ebikes were not legal to ride in Colorado prior to the adoption of 3-class legislation in 2017 as that is simply not true.

 

[J.R.]

This is just another example where some local regulations still banned "motorized vehicles" from a path but a compliant LSEB has not been a motorized vehicle since. 3-class had nothing to do with use of LSEBs on those paths as they were legal to ride if bikes were already allowed. Stop making it sound like ebikes were not legal to ride in Colorado prior to the adoption of 3-class legislation in 2017 as that is simply not true.

Sorry, Ken, you are incorrect. The 2009 law excluded ebikes on all paths unless local municipalities specifically opted in.

You don't understand your own state law history as it relates to ebikes.

May 6, 2016

Electric motors give some cyclists a needed boost, especially on steep terrain. But the newer technology is banned on Durango trails.

Motorized vehicles have been banned on trails for years, and recently, Durango City Council added electric bikes to the list of prohibited vehicles for safety reasons.

Durango bans pedal-assist bikes on trails

Electric motors give some cyclists a needed boost, especially on steep terrain. But the newer technology is banned on Durango trails. Motorized vehicles have been banned on trails for years...

www.durangoherald.com

In 2009 the state enacted a law that allowed E-Bikes to use bicycle lanes and does not require riders to obtain a license. However the law requires individual municipalities to opt-in, this has lead to some patchwork enactment. For example, if an individual wanted to commute from Boulder to Denver along the US 36 bike path, they would be unable to use their motor all the way.

E-Bikes: A Commuter Revolution - Zilo International Group

By Jarid Kahn Colorado state officials deserve a hearty round of applause for wooing the German electric bike brand, Haibike, to locate some of their facilities in Denver. This is a critical first step for the company, moving all of their US operations, including manufacturing, to Colorado. This...

www.zilointernational.com

 

[Ken M]

Requiring different tuning and stickers is not onerous; it doesn't prevent the sale of the bike, it can be done and the seller passes the minor costs on to the consumer. Happens all the time. Things often cost more in states that have different regulations. If ebikes ever get big enough, I expect to see some states really crack down on bikes they deem illegal. There's a lot that I don't like about it, but there's that pesky 10th amendment.

A little test for you. If every state had a different power and assist tuning requirement such that no ebike compliant in one state would be compliant in another yet all were compliant to the federal definition would you consider that onerous?

My guess is you will avoid answering. Do we really want to allow states to re-define every product that the feds define and have safety requirements on?

I'm asking because you seem to think it's a matter of how significant the impact is to interstate commerce but I think the states are to avoid conflicts unless they have a very specific need.

 

[Ken M]

Sorry, Ken, you are incorrect. The 2009 law excluded ebikes on all paths unless local municipalities specifically opted in.

You don't understand your own state law history as it relates to ebikes.

May 6, 2016

Electric motors give some cyclists a needed boost, especially on steep terrain. But the newer technology is banned on Durango trails.

Motorized vehicles have been banned on trails for years, and recently, Durango City Council added electric bikes to the list of prohibited vehicles for safety reasons.

Durango bans pedal-assist bikes on trails

Electric motors give some cyclists a needed boost, especially on steep terrain. But the newer technology is banned on Durango trails. Motorized vehicles have been banned on trails for years...

www.durangoherald.com

In 2009 the state enacted a law that allowed E-Bikes to use bicycle lanes and does not require riders to obtain a license. However the law requires individual municipalities to opt-in, this has lead to some patchwork enactment. For example, if an individual wanted to commute from Boulder to Denver along the US 36 bike path, they would be unable to use their motor all the way.

E-Bikes: A Commuter Revolution - Zilo International Group

By Jarid Kahn Colorado state officials deserve a hearty round of applause for wooing the German electric bike brand, Haibike, to locate some of their facilities in Denver. This is a critical first step for the company, moving all of their US operations, including manufacturing, to Colorado. This...

www.zilointernational.com

Well that's a start ... at least you are admitting to my claim that Colorado enact ebike legislation in 2009 and it was consistent with the federal definition in HR727.

The municipalities didn't really need to opt-in. The default was that compliant ebikes could be any path traditonal bikes were allowed. Some paths did have motorized vehicle bans (some local-yocals just can't let go of their view that ebikes are motor vehicles but they are just flat out wrong and need to educate themselves.

 

[rajron]

I certainly hope you all above have taken the time to fill out the form the OP suggested.
Most of us don’t live in Pima County and most likely will not ride the loop but it would be great for those who are going to ride the loop to do so with their e-bikes.
I for one want to ride the loop if allowed with my e-bike.

Recently Kyle Chittock of Bolton Ebikes recorded a video describing the ebike ban Pima County have on the Chuck Huckleberry Loop, 136 miles of paved shared use paths and bicycle lanes that encircles Tucson, AZ. The local ban is despite Arizona having adopted the People for Bikes model ebike legislation that permits Class 1 and 2 ebikes to ride wherever pedal bicycles can ride. I have visited the Tucson area twice in recent years where my aunt lives on a senior retirement community, and I have observed how battery electric vehicles are very popular among seniors and the disabled in her community, and among students on the University of Arizona campus downtown, to get around for fitness, recreation, and transportation. If you feel so moved please consider offering feedback on the ebike ban using this form.

 

[Ken M]

"It’s still illegal to turn on the electric engine on Colorado’s shared-use paths, such as the Cherry Creek and South Platte trails"

A new law could open more Colorado bike paths to e-bikes

A bike speeds by Cherry Creek. Biking to work might be more feasible if you didn't have to pedal so much. One problem: E-bikes still aren't legal on

denverite.com

Most ebike riders in Co. are really grateful they have the 3 class law, as now they can legally turn the assist on.

Recently EBR did a review of one of the new Sonders ebikes that are multi-mode and off-road and part of that review was on the Cherry Creek trail. Not all the "opinions" you read online are accurate.

 

[J.R.]

Sorry, Dewey! I'm done posting to Ken on this thread.

 

[Ken M]

Sorry, Dewey! I'm done posting to Ken on this thread.

Seriously, Think about that question I asked. If every state wanted it's own definition for a compliant ebike and none were compatible with any other state wouldn't that be onerous? I'm only trying to make a point that interstate commerce laws are pro business by helping establish economies of scale across the country. Manufacturers and distributors would hate having to make and distribute 50 different product configurations even if just a programming and sticker difference.

Also remember that bikes are one of the oldest products defined and regulated by the CPSC. I think that the feds actually have insight to a safe product definition than state locals trying to redefine instead of just deciding where bikes are safe to "use". The safety agencies actually cooperate with industry on the product definitions and requirements which I'm sure the locals you mention simply do not do. They should just stick to "use" regulation as is intended.

 

[Mahakala23]

From the Pima County website:

Can I ride my motorcycle or electric bike on the Loop?
No. The Loop is a multi-use path and is heavily used by pedestrians; therefore, for safety purposes, no motorized vehicles or devices are allowed. (ADA accessibility and official vehicles are exempt.)
The Loop moves between the city of Tucson, Marana, Oro Valley and unincorporated sections at various locations along the path. In September 2018, the city passed an ordinance, #11582, relating to electric bicycles. The ordinance permits riding an electric bicycle on shared-use paths under the jurisdiction of the city of Tucson. However, the sections of the Loop within the City of Tucson incorporated limits and in unincorporated Pima County are under the management authority of Pima County and the Pima County Regional Flood Control District and the use of electric bikes on the path is prohibited as declared on our Loop Guideline signage.
In addition, Arizona Revised Statute 28-819 addresses electric bicycles and electric standup scooters. It notes that an operator of an electric bicycle is granted all the rights and privileges and is subject to all of the duties of a person riding a bicycle. However, it also states that "A local authority or agency of this state having jurisdiction over a bicycle or multiuse path may prohibit the operation of a class 1 electric bicycle or class 2 electric bicycle on the path." That is what Pima County has chosen to do for the safety of all users.
Applying this guideline for all stretches of the Loop retains a level of needed consistency and promotes the safety and well-being of all users. Equally, for safety purposes, this guideline applies to any and all motorized or artificially-propelled devices (ebikes, scooters, hover boards, skateboards, etc.). Pima County is working toward proposing a comprehensive County Ordinance that would prohibit motorized vehicle or device use on any stretch of The Loop. Meanwhile, those who choose to violate the rule are at risk of being cited in violation of the current adopted Pima County Park Rule 1.070 (a Class 2 misdemeanor) and also knowingly accept the liability associated with any accident between a motorized vehicle or device user (illegal) and a non-motorized (legal) user of the Loop.

Can a person with bad knees or a condition like arthritis use a pedal assist e-bike on the Loop?
The Americans with Disabilities Act defines a disabled person as one who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, one who has a history or record of such impairment, or one who is perceived by others as having such an impairment. Pima County’s Natural Resources, Parks and Recreation oversees maintenance of the Loop. Our Loop Guidelines are intended to set the “motorized vehicle or device” standard at that legally-determined “disabled person” level so as to create an unambiguous statement of Departmental intent that motorized device use on the Loop is only authorized if the user believes that they possess a condition that meets this legally-defined standard. For all intents and purposes, a person with a disability and their motility device using Pima County multi-use trails and pathways are considered by Pima County to be pedestrians by our guideline.
The goal of NRPR is to be as inclusive of all users as possible on The Loop while retaining the necessary element of safety for everyone using The Loop whether on foot, horseback or on wheeled devices. This would include allowing Loop users to utilize select electric motorized devices if they can prove a “demonstrable medical need.” An example would be a user who is temporarily rehabilitating from knee surgery or who is otherwise in chronic pain due to a documented medical condition. NRPR recommends that any Loop user carry sufficient documentation of their medical condition which necessitates use of a mobility device.
Therefore, if a user believes that his or her condition would either constitute a disability under federal ADA definition, or otherwise meet the definition of demonstrated medical condition as outlined herein, and he/she possesses documentation of that condition, then it should be acceptable to use a motorized mobility assistance device under our published Loop guidelines.

 

[Ken M]

From the Pima County website:

Can I ride my motorcycle or electric bike on the Loop?
No. The Loop is a multi-use path and is heavily used by pedestrians; therefore, for safety purposes, no motorized vehicles or devices are allowed. (ADA accessibility and official vehicles are exempt.)
The Loop moves between the city of Tucson, Marana, Oro Valley and unincorporated sections at various locations along the path. In September 2018, the city passed an ordinance, #11582, relating to electric bicycles. The ordinance permits riding an electric bicycle on shared-use paths under the jurisdiction of the city of Tucson. However, the sections of the Loop within the City of Tucson incorporated limits and in unincorporated Pima County are under the management authority of Pima County and the Pima County Regional Flood Control District and the use of electric bikes on the path is prohibited as declared on our Loop Guideline signage.
In addition, Arizona Revised Statute 28-819 addresses electric bicycles and electric standup scooters. It notes that an operator of an electric bicycle is granted all the rights and privileges and is subject to all of the duties of a person riding a bicycle. However, it also states that "A local authority or agency of this state having jurisdiction over a bicycle or multiuse path may prohibit the operation of a class 1 electric bicycle or class 2 electric bicycle on the path." That is what Pima County has chosen to do for the safety of all users.
Applying this guideline for all stretches of the Loop retains a level of needed consistency and promotes the safety and well-being of all users. Equally, for safety purposes, this guideline applies to any and all motorized or artificially-propelled devices (ebikes, scooters, hover boards, skateboards, etc.). Pima County is working toward proposing a comprehensive County Ordinance that would prohibit motorized vehicle or device use on any stretch of The Loop. Meanwhile, those who choose to violate the rule are at risk of being cited in violation of the current adopted Pima County Park Rule 1.070 (a Class 2 misdemeanor) and also knowingly accept the liability associated with any accident between a motorized vehicle or device user (illegal) and a non-motorized (legal) user of the Loop.

Can a person with bad knees or a condition like arthritis use a pedal assist e-bike on the Loop?
The Americans with Disabilities Act defines a disabled person as one who has a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities, one who has a history or record of such impairment, or one who is perceived by others as having such an impairment. Pima County’s Natural Resources, Parks and Recreation oversees maintenance of the Loop. Our Loop Guidelines are intended to set the “motorized vehicle or device” standard at that legally-determined “disabled person” level so as to create an unambiguous statement of Departmental intent that motorized device use on the Loop is only authorized if the user believes that they possess a condition that meets this legally-defined standard. For all intents and purposes, a person with a disability and their motility device using Pima County multi-use trails and pathways are considered by Pima County to be pedestrians by our guideline.
The goal of NRPR is to be as inclusive of all users as possible on The Loop while retaining the necessary element of safety for everyone using The Loop whether on foot, horseback or on wheeled devices. This would include allowing Loop users to utilize select electric motorized devices if they can prove a “demonstrable medical need.” An example would be a user who is temporarily rehabilitating from knee surgery or who is otherwise in chronic pain due to a documented medical condition. NRPR recommends that any Loop user carry sufficient documentation of their medical condition which necessitates use of a mobility device.
Therefore, if a user believes that his or her condition would either constitute a disability under federal ADA definition, or otherwise meet the definition of demonstrated medical condition as outlined herein, and he/she possesses documentation of that condition, then it should be acceptable to use a motorized mobility assistance device under our published Loop guidelines.

Sure seems to me they refer to ebikes are "motorized vehicles" when a compliant "low speed electric bicycle" is specifically defined at the federal level as not being a motorized vehicle. I'm not an expert but clearly there is a conflict with how ebikes are viewed. I simply advocate that all CPSC compliant LSEBs be treated as any other bike. The parsing just creates the issues existing on this loop.

 

[Rickman1]

It's been awhile since anyone has mentioned the Loop in Tucson. Several websites state that you can ride ebikes on the Loop. That is partially true. A radio station posted online that Arizona passed House Bill 2266 that states that electric bikes will be treated the same as a normal bicycle and therefore they can be used on the Loop. Not so fast.

Here is the AZ HB 2266 posted below:

Read the blue highlighted portions regarding the classification of ebikes. Read the yellow highlighted portion that states that a local authority or agency of the state having jurisdiction can prohibit the use of ebikes on a shared use path. Another member posted that portions of the Loop do allow ebikes. Basically the Canyon del Oro section and the Marana section North of Ina (Road or Street?) allow ebikes. Hopefully the county will change it's view for the rest of the Loop in the near future.

https://electricbikereview.com/foru...op-an-ebike-tour-destination-heres-why.46594/