So you would be opposed to the way the Dutch use their bike lanes and paths? Moms with kids, commuters, tradesmen with their cargo bikes, students, retired people, delivery people, etc. all use space dedicated to bikes to actually “bike”. If allowing working people to use work bikes on bike paths offends you or causes resentment, perhaps you should take a good look at your sense of entitlement or privilege.....
Or do you think bike paths and lanes are strictly for recreational or leisure purposes only? If so, isn’t that more than a little bit elitist?
Actually you bring up an interesting point. When Cities. Counties and others put in such infrastructure, was that infrastructure designed for things like Cargo Bikes(they can be a bit wider than a regular bike and take up more space on the paths)? Did the governing authorities have intentions for them to be used in such a fashion? Will the authorities change laws on how those lanes are used as this becomes more prevalent?
I think it is great that the Dutch do that, but they have a very different culture than the US does. Things may not work out the same here.
I would love to see much more infrastructure for bikes and less for cars, but that will never happen on a large scale here.
Why would a minimum wage delivery guy want to work with a non-ebike? It’s not like they are hardcore bike messengers on single speed bikes with no brakes. Bikes for them are a means to make money, not a toy for filling leisure hours, of course they were not interested in push bikes.
The only way we as a society are ever going to wean ourselves off of ICEs is by shifting as many of our trips to highly efficient lightweight vehicles. And ebikes are the epitome of that. Expect to see a lot more people on bike paths and lanes who are getting paid to be there, as well as those who see the bike as nothing more or less than simple transport. Not as toys, fun machines or exercise devices and that’s where the real growth in ebike numbers will come from.
And bicycle/pedestrian paths and trails were originally built and primarily intended for leisure use, not commercial commerce. I'm all for trimming fat and unclogging highways but let them build their own infrastructure.
*also bike paths were originally built and intended for non-motorized use
Roads and streets were also originally built for non-motorized use too, but society was able to modify them for use by everyone once motorized vehicles were introduced. Bike lanes were never intended for 100% recreational usage, but were meant for commuters, fun riders and anyone else on a bike. And despite the claims made here, most states consider an ebike to be a bicycle and to be welcome on any paved lane or path.
My feelings on this is the governing bodies wont care until someone starts complaining to them about it(if they complain about it). But if families with kids out for leisurely bike rides start getting pushed off the trail by UPS e-Cargo Bikes voices will be raised at city council meetings.
But most roads and streets are now not friendly nor safe for bicyclist. Or ebikers for that matter. So I would not say once motorized vehicles were added the roads were "for use by everyone". As Klurejr said, it depends on the amount of traffic and how they behave.
It's kind of like we're seeing now with people using Google Maps, etc. Now crowds of drivers are cutting through neighborhoods on roads never meant to be through roads. A lot tend to drive like they are on through roads rather than neighborhood roads.
They make sense for places with a dense urban core, they'd probably be as faster or faster than a big brown truck. Not really once the distance between stops increase. I'd imagine, and I may be wrong, that they'd be limited by UPS to streets and bike lanes. Most segregated bike paths are city parks property, and they usually don't allow commercial use on them. Or motorized if that's also the case.