Comments: I am fine with ebikes on commuter routes, but oppose their use on recreational mountain bike trials. I believe that in a congested trail environment like we have in Boulder, they will add to the hiker/biker conflicts. We already have difficulty managing human only powered activities, adding motorized vehicles is a step change. I know they are "power assisted" but adding 300 watts to a users output is a huge change. allow them on commuter routes, not mountain trails.

Comments: The staff has done a good assessment of the situation an their rationale for allow e-bikes on Open Space is sound.

Comments: Please allow E-bikes on county open space trails as recommended by staff. E-bikes allow me to get around town, to work, shopping and to take recreational rides on the LoBo trail. I am 70+ yrs old and if I can't use my e-bike I will drive.

Comments: In my opinion E bikes of any type should NOT be allowed on trails other than those specifically designated as commuting routes; Boulder to Longmont for example. These vehicles do not mix well with standard bikes. As an aside, I am a former, now retired, bike commuter. I routinely commuted from Four Mile Canyon to Gunbarrel until I retired at age 74.

Comments: Hello and thank you for taking my comments into consideration for the future of e-biking in Boulder County. Born in Chautauqua park in 1977 I am a true Boulder County native. Never will you hear me complaining about the amount of people moving to this area I have called home for Nearly 42 years. I love it here and never plan on leaving. Two wheels have been my passion before I understood the definition of the word. I ride traditional mountain bikes, e-bikes, and dirt bikes. Of the group my e-bike gets the most usage. Every person from my 83 year old uncle to my extremely talented mountain bike friends that have ridden my e-bike have the same reaction. A smile that can be described as giddy child syndrome. Through the years I have suffered many traumatic injuries(currently recovering from four broken vertebrae, two ribs, and wrist). Have had nearly 20 trauma related surgeries and a body that will never be the same. However, as long as I am capable of getting on a bike, I will be riding. Results of my injuries make me qualified to be a disabled citizen but never have I considered myself disabled. My ebike has been paramount in injury recovery from the physical assist to the mental health aspect of recovery. Bikes have also been a major aspect of my own personal substance abuse healing. September I traveled to Hood River Oregon where class 1 e-bikes are treated the same as conventional bikes. User conflict was all but gone due to Oregon adopting trails that are directional and bike only. It was almost unbelievable to be able to partake in my passion while feeling guilt free. My dream would be to have that same feeling my home town trails. User conflict is the biggest hurdle to overcome. While biking I am over the top courteous and will always go out of my way to help educate other users on trail etiquette. Sincerely, Andre Kaiser

Comments: Most folks who ride E bikes are elderly and can no longer get up hills or long distances on a regular bike. They are generally not going to speed down trails or bump into hikers. Seniors use bikes for exercise and to do errands to avoid the horrific traffic generated by the growth of available apartments.

Comments: Anything that gets people out of cars and onto bikes is a good thing. And e-bikes make biking accessible for people who might otherwise not ride, such as parents with children, older riders and less fit riders.

Comments: I think ebikes should only be allowed on paved commuting routes, e.g. Hwy 36, Longmont Diagonal and other commuter routes. I have been hit on the bike paths by other regular bikes. I can not imagine how bad it would be to be hit by a heavier e-bike.

Comments: I commute daily from Gunbarrel into Boulder and back on my e-bike, something I would not have time or energy for on a regular bike. I am also a runner, hiker, and dog walker, and value the careful consideration you've taken to honor all trail users in your recommendations. Anything that gets more folks driving less and biking more is good, so long as it can remain a win-win. Thank you! ~Sara Wright

Comments: I support e-bikes for commuting, recreation and around town purposes. However, e-MTBs on singletrack is another issue so the current staff recommendation is a balanced approach.

Comments: Opening up commuter trails to e-bikes will allow people to go farther distances, which will potentially reduce the number of cars on the road, which is win for everyone. These go no faster than lots of people training for races on non e-bikes.

Comments: As the national bike advocacy organization, PeopleForBikes, supports the Parks and Open Space (POS) staff’s recommendation to allow Class 1 and 2 e-bikes where traditional bicycles are allowed, with the exception of Boulder Canyon Trail, Coalton Trail and Mayhoffer-Singletree Trail. The results of the POS’s 1-year e-bike pilot study demonstrates that e-bikes do not decrease public safety and do not cause increased trail impacts as compared to traditional bicycles. Permitting e-bikes where traditional bikes are allowed is a fair and sensible decision. E-bikes allow for more people to enjoy the outdoors. We encourage the adoption of this policy due and welcome the opportunity to provide any further information.

Comments: We have a daughter that is disabled and she is 15 years old, and 135 pounds. The only way she can be on a bike is to be transported on our Urban Arrow e-bike. We fully support the policy to allow e-bikes as inclusive to all members of our community.

Comments: As a regular e-bike commuter (work, errands, taking kids to school, etc.) I support the use of e-bikes on the proposed trails as a means of opening biking (both for commuting and recreation) up to more people - especially those for whom the distance is very far to travel (e-biking cuts down on the time and the amount of fitness required to travel from one point to another) and for those with disabilities/different abilities for whom traditional biking may be difficult. Everyone deserves to ride.

Comments: E bikes are making short and long Bicycle trips more common and more attainable for more people. This is a logical step forward for Boulder county to alleviate traffic congestion and promote the use of a vehicle type that just might be able to finally convince more than 1% of the American population that riding can be fun and convenient. Thank you. Brian Hannon

Comments: My e-bike is an equalizer. It gives me the option to leave my car at home, to get exercise, and to have fun. I would not be out and about on a regular bike. At 65, I just can’t get up the hills. In my experience, e-bike users are safe and relatively slow! Please allow e-bikes on trails throughout Boulder County

Comments: Boulder County residents use bike trails to commute to work and for recreation. E-bikes make getting around more convenient and accessible for all. E-bikes are bicycles according to Colorado law and the county's pilot study showed that trail access would not decrease public safety or cause increased trail impacts compared to traditional bicycles. This proposed policy is easy for residents and visitors to understand and will therefore make its adoption a simpler process. Together we can make bike riding better!

Comments: I think ebikes are great for around town and commuting but I don’t think they should be allowed on all trails (emtb) as they will cause too much damage and get inexperienced riders into trouble. Mountain bikers especially in Boulder county have fought what seems like forever to be able to ride the paltry amount of trails we have. More riders on heavy fast bikes are going to get that hard earned trail access taken away in Boulder when we need more trails not less access. Their speed and weight make them a burden on already over taxed trails.

Comments: This is such a no-brainer for our bike-friendly city... I strongly urge that this provision for e-bikes pass, as more people on bikes means less people in cars. Also, on our mountain bike trails it is very hard to tell the difference between and e-bike and regular bike. Please pass it!

Comments: I do support the use of Class-1 e-bikes, because there are elderly people who need the electric dynamic to move the bike forward. Also, parents who are toting a child may need the electric dynamic to move the bike forward. Lastly, I like the idea of those who are unable to peddle a bike with enough force to move it forward being able to use the electric dynamic to bike on the trails. My guess is that they will not be travelling at or near the speed of 20 mph. I do NOT currently support the use of Class 2 e-bikes on trails. I might be open to them if I learned more about why they should be permitted. I don't like the idea of recreational Class 2 e-bikers (and maybe e-scooter users in the future when the precedent is set for Class 2 E-Bikes) roaming the trails and zooming by me at 20 miles an hour because it's fun for them. Imagine walking or standing still (maybe with headphones on your ears with music that "turns off" the sound of the world around you), and from behind you, you are passed by a car going 20 mph. That is fast and, whether it's a car or a bike, for many people, it results in a state of surprise, shock, startle, freeze, stress and disturbance from their current and often peaceful experience. Competitive mountain bikers are generally not going that speed or if they are going that speed, down hill for example, they slow down and use caution when passing a walker. I do like the idea of people who actually need a Class 2 e-bike to move a bicycle, because they are unable to peddle. I imagine that they would not be using the max speed. If there is a practical and efficient way to qualify certain Class 2 e-bike users that actually need to move a bike forward without peddling AND they are restricted to going a speed that the staff deems comfortable for walkers to be passed, I may support Class 2 e-bikes on the trails. Thanks for all of your open-space work.

Comments: As someone who used to race bikes seriously, I have several different perspectives on why e-bikes should be allowed on trails. My wife, for years wouldn't go riding with me, because she felt like she was holding me back and keeping me from getting useful training rides. When she got her first e-bike three years ago, all of a sudden she could ride with me on the hardest rides, get as much exercise as she wanted and we now get to do an activity that we both love, together. My other perspective is the "pro-athlete" syndrome. If you're someone who's put in hours, months and years of training to get to the pinnacle of your sport, it's easy to let your ego get the better of you and feel like someone else who hasn't put in the same work, shouldn't be able to go as fast as you. For example, if another rider were doping and was able to ride faster than you, that doesn't seem fair. Likewise, if another rider has the benefit of an electric motor to help them go as fast as you, when you know they're a weaker rider, it's easy to feel like that isn't fair - they shouldn't be allowed to cheat. Of course, the truth is, some of us are genetically blessed and will always be faster than the rest of us. Is that fair? Some people are younger and therefore faster. Is that fair? The fact that e-bikes help compensate for the weaker muscles, hearts or lungs of the old, infirm or genetically challenged, can really bruise the egos of those who feel like they should be able to pound lesser riders into the pavement (or dirt). Unfortunately, that's not a reason for outlawing e-bikes from our trails. The other argument against e-bikes, that they are too fast, too dangerous and that they damage trails - is also very flawed. Again, use the strapping young pro-athletes, who are of course free to use our trails, as the example. Class 1 or 2 e-bikes have limits to the speeds they can help a rider achieve and to the power their motors deliver to the bike. Now take our pro athlete - who can put out a burst of power significantly higher than an e-bike with an average rider onboard (~1,000 watts vs. ~750 watts). Which one is likely to do more damage to a trail? And, as to safety, e-bikes aren't typically the ones blasting the downhills. Granted it's possible, but let's be real here - it's far more likely that our young, super-strong rider is the one zipping by you at 30 miles an hour than the typical e-bike rider - and the e-bike certainly isn't helping the rider to go faster down a hill.

Comments: Anytime you can get outside, leave the car behind, get some exercise and feel the wind on your face you’ve made a good decision.

Comments: Please allow eBikes on the trails. Boulder wants more people on bikes; this is an accessibility issue for those who cannot pedal a regular bike - older people, parents wanting to take kids in a trailer to school, those who want to ride in from far away and would otherwise drive into Boulder. It is time for Council to essentially put their money where their collective mouth is, and create policy that supports riding bikes. Additional support: speed limit signs, a year or 6 months' worth of active policing to educate/warn eBikers that they need to slow down, some signage about speed limit located at key intersections and junctions, about staying right except to pass, etc. Thank you for your hard work in trying to do the best for our city. Best, Fran Katnik

Comments: I do not support e-bikes on open space trails...unfortunately, every motorized vehicle is eventually is used to accelerate speed and destroy the experience of trail tranquility.

Comments: I got a class 1 e-bike last year after knee surgery and love it. My other bike sat in my garage as I had trouble with hills. I can now tackle hills and longer rides with ease. Boulder wants to encourage more people to use alternative transportation.. E-bike users will tend to be older folks; folks in injury rehab and those who have other physical limitations and parents wanting a little help to haul their kids in bike trailers. And yes some folks will discover that these make a long daily commute easier and if so this gets additional people out of their cars. The issue is not e-bikes. It is riding safely.. Folks in the categories mentioned above will tend to be your most cautious and courteous riders. I have MUCH more concern about the speed and lack of awareness in general on the trails. A fit cyclist can outpace me on my e-bike any time and these are the folks who go whizzing by without using a bell or a voice warning to others on the trails. Thanks!

Comments: Support Class 1 on all trails; Opposed to Class 2 bikes except on paved/hard-surface paths.

Comments: Without any viable regulation or policing of what motorized vehicles are and are not allowed on the discussed trails, I don’t believe it’s wise to attempt to allow some motorized vehicles but not all motorized vehicles on trails that have traditionally been human-power-only. Ebikes are incredibly easy to modify to exceed their theoretical speed limits - so much so that I’ve seen more “unlocked” ebikes than I have ebikes in their original condition. That alone is cause for concern, but it’s Boulder’s making of policy in this static moment in the ebike’s current technical status that is akin to making regulations about flip phones without any prediction of them morphing into smartphones. While the bicycle industry aims to increase power and performance of ebikes on a regular basis to promote sales, the motorcycle industry is on a similar path that is already blurring the lines of what a bicycle and a motorcycle are. As a 25-year resident of Boulder, I’ve noticed a drastic change in safety on our multi-use paths with the new addition of e-skateboards, ebikes, etc. Speeds are not only surpassing what the paths were intended to safely accommodate, but many users in the e-market seem unaware of basic path/trail etiquette. I take that as a sign - if not an argument - that an obviously unpoliced policy for electric motorized vehicles will simply open these trails and paths to unregulated, modified, and flat-out illegal vehicles on a regular basis.

Comments: There is already great user conflict and overcrowding of trails. Allowing E-bikes will only exacerbate the the situation. I believe E-bikes should only be allowed to those who are ill or disabled. I think E-bikes will lead to the eventual banning of bikes on the trails

Comments: Allowing e-bikes on regional trails will increase ridership for both recreational and practical uses, without adversely affecting safety. It is another step towards creating an inclusive environment where all types of people can liver with less dependence on motor vehicles.

Comments: I support continuing to allow ebikes access to designated Boulder County Open Space trails. 1) As a long time ebike user ( over 9 years) I've enjoyed having ebike access to both Boulder County Open Space scenic destinations as well as regional connective trails this past year during the pilot program. During this time, I have not experienced any negative feedback from other trail users. Instead, just occasional curious conversation like "is that an ebike...How do you like it?....my co-worker or neighbor has one & loves it....", etc. Residents of our region are becoming more knowledgable, familiar & accepting of ebikes, from my perspective. However, being a safe & courteous cyclist is paramount to good relations with other trail users. When riding & approaching other trail users. I use standard protocol that all cyclists should ues: If approaching a group or individual from behind, I first ring my bike bell & say "bike passing on your left", slow my speed, then carefully pass them saying Thank You! If a trail is super crowded & if there is a less congested & safe alternate route, then I take it instead in order to give the joggers, walkers with dogs or strollers their space. Whether traditional bikes or Class 1, 2 or 3 ebikes, it really shouldn't matter. If everyone is educated to follow similar trail use etiquette, then it can be a low stress & respectful experience & hopefully ebikes will be a "non issue". 2) E bikes are smart Micro-mobility whether used for transportation or recreation not to mention clean carbon free, quiet, healthy for riders & a fun way to get around while reducing car trip miles. Many cities, govts & businesses interested in promoting sustainability & or Climate Change mitigation recognize this & encourage their use. Ebikes are getting more people using bikes more often. I've personally ridden thousands of miles by ebike in Boulder County & also while traveling abroad. I believe ebikes should be encouraged & allowing them access to safe enjoyable open space whether for recreation or transportation has proven to increase their usage & is making a difference. Overly complicated regulations or a confusing patchwork of jurisdictions banning access for ebikes has in the past been a significant barrier to usage. Disclosure- I'm in the bicycle industry & know hundreds of cyclists & ebike users.

Comments: I believe allowing E-bikes on bike paths will have no negative effect on the cyclist now using those paths. I also feel that more individuals will use the paths versus individual motorized vehicles because it allows them to ride further than they would be able to without E-bike assistance. I am fully in favor of E-bike use on the paths.

Comments: Anything that will promote any kind of cycling over car use (e.g. commuting to work, running errands, etc.) is welcome policy. If an e-bike makes cycling a viable choice over a car for some, then so be it.

Comments: Being able to use my e-bike on trails to commute means that I use my car far less frequently. E-bikes make getting around more convenient and accessible for all.

Comments: I rode an ebike for the first time this summer. I am an avid mountain biker, and was curious as to what ebikes have to offer. I was amazed. The ebike experience is really great and a very natural extension of cycling. I find most people have no idea you are riding an ebike. Adoption of this technology is only going to continue to grow, and Boulder Co should implement the staff recommendation as the first step into integrating them into our transportation and recreation system.

Comments: As a regular bike commuter in Boulder, I would prefer that e-bike NOT be allowed on the multi-use paths. There are already too many conflicting activities with runners (often with ear buds!), walkers (ear buds, too), dog walkers (more ear buds) scooters, skateboards and bicycles all going different speeds. E-bikes go fast and make things more dangerous for everyone else. Also, once you allow one motorized thing, the lines get blurred and soon there will be electric scooters, small motorbikes, electric skateboards, etc. Then things will become REALLY dangerous!

Comments: I was not sure about eBikes until my elderly neighbor bought one because it gave him the freedom and the joy to ride bycicles again...at his old age. My elderly neighbor opened my eyes into the future, meaning that as I get older I will probably need an eBike to do what I do today which is to ride bycicles (now eBikes) and I never want to stop riding bycicles. I support this initiative.

Comments: My husband Davis Phinney has Parkinson’s Disease and the e-bike has really saved him and many like him. I ride an e-bike so I can ride with him and also be painfree from various back and knee issues. E-bikes are the wave of the future and make cycling accessible for more people. We shouldn’t limit e-bikes but should continue to advise people how to courteously exist together on the trails along with pedestrians, people walking their dogs, and all ages of people using the paths. They are for everyone. Every day. Thank you.

Comments: e-bikes are awesome to get more people on bikes. I support that, especially for older population and disabled. However, e-bikes have several major issues that need to be addressed before being allowed on trials designed for standard bikes. - e-bikes have motors and are motorcycles - Trails are designed and built for non-motorized bikes - motorized bikes are unpredictable with regard to speed; closing gaps, visability, etc. current corners are too short to spot a bike moving at 30+MPH I ride the bike path daily and I see issues developing with speed and control in populated areas.

Comments: Totally against allowing on so many trails initially Nd certainly not both classes. Once you do this there will be no going back. What will prevent motorcycles next?

Comments: I would support class one e bikes only. Bikes on trails are dangerous to pedestrians and wildlife when ridden at unsafe speeds.

Comments: Once age and failing body parts force me on to an E bike, I want to continue riding our wonderful trails!

Comments: I use bike trails to commute to work and for recreation. E-bikes make getting around more convenient and accessible for all. By commuting by ebike I am taking a car off the road and creating less congestion and pollution and doing something healthy for myself. E-bikes are bicycles according to Colorado law and the county's pilot study showed that trail access would not decrease public safety or cause increased trail impacts compared to traditional bicycles. This proposed policy is easy for residents and visitors to understand and will therefore make its adoption a simpler process.

Comments: I support greater amounts of bike use. Allowing e-bikes on OSMP trails will encourage more recreation and more bike use in general. I support the 1-year trial

Comments: Regarding e-bikes, I believe that the public perception is that they will make multi-modul trails more dangerous, but the data show that is simply not the case. E-bikes are bicycles according to Colorado law and the county's pilot study showed that trail access would not decrease public safety or cause increased trail impacts compared to traditional bicycles. I like the simple fact that e-bikes are a great form of transportation and recreation. Let's not forget that using a transportation method which involves using your body for propulsion, balance and control is good for your health and will lead to a healthier, better quality of life. There are a lot of people who don't ride bikes and want them to have as little access as possible. There are also a lot of people who are, rightfully, afraid for their lives that if they ride on the roadways they could be hit by a car and seriously injured or killed. (I have had many friends seriously injured and some killed in bicycle-automobile accidents.) Let's share the trails, and include e-bikes in that equation. Sure, there will be some people on e-bikes who will ride faster than they should in certain situations, but that's not a reason to ban them. There are plenty of people who operate a motor vehicle in ways others don't approve, but we don't ban motor vehicles. PLEASE VOTE TO LET E-BIKES USE TRAILS ON OPEN SPACE! Thanks!

Comments: I am concerned about the safety of pedestrians and pets. Consider the effects of a large person riding at 20 mph and colliding with a smaller person who is walking or colliding with a pet. It would be safer to only allow class 1 e-bikes that are restricted to 15 mph. Class 2 e-bikes seem quite dangerous to mix with pedestrians, so please do not allow them. Thank you.

Comments: I gave up driving over a decade ago for biking and, while I don't ride an e-bike and still have some concerns, I fully support staff recommendation.

Comments: I support the use of e-bikes on paved bike trails or paths, but do not support the use of e-bikes on dirt trails on Open Space lands. On the whole, this will separate most commuting trips from recreation ones, though it's likely that some commuters could be using dirt trails. However, the over-use and poor condition of Open Space / dirt trails in the county leads me to believe that we need enhanced focus on reducing the over-use of Open Space trails, particularly among those that allow bicycles. Simply go out to the old Dowdy Draw trail and see how allowing the use of bicycles on the trail has led to an ever-widening trail that's now as wide a a jeep trail instead of a single-track trail. Thank you for considering my comments. Nicholas Lenssen

Comments: I wish it was permitted on the Boulder Canyon Trail. I got into ebiking to make my commute better up 4 mile canyon.

Comments: I would encourage the elimination of class 2 e-bikes from being considered bicycles. They are really scooters. Class 1 (and class 3) are really the only real “bikes” when it comes to e-bikes. I have been selling e-bikes here in Boulder since 2008 and have extensive experience riding and observing other riders. Please consider this change to the recommendation.

Comments: I am 82 years old and ride 10 to 12 miles every day for exercise. Without an E-bike this would not be possible. I believe I am protected by the ADA and ride wherever I want.

Comments: It does not matter what type of bike you ride as long as you abide by the rules of the trail, bike path or road.

Comments: E bikes with limits on power output should be allowed on paved trails and double track. I don't believe any motorized vehicles of any kind should be allowed on single track trails, due to current overcrowding, speed differential between users and additional wear and tear from people riding extended distances (over pedal-only powered bikes).

Comments: e-bikes are an important addition to the bicycling community. To encourage use of e-bikes will further promote cycling in Boulder. I fully support the staff recommendations.

Comments: Boulder County residents use bike trails to commute to work and for recreation. E-bikes make getting around more convenient and accessible for all.

Comments: No ebikes on trails! They should only be able to ride a moto trail!

Comments: I am so happy to see that staff is recommending e-bikes on area trails. While I do not currently own an e-bike, I see it as a great future option. As I live in Niwot, the only somewhat safe way to bike to Boulder is on the LoBo trail (or ride a road bike adjacent to that trail.) I see many e-bikes on the trail and see that people are using them for their commute as well as using them to get out and ride. E-Bikes are one step on the path to reducing our greenhouse gas emissions. Not only that, they are fun to ride. I appreciate the work staff has put into this and agree that e-bikes are an appropriate way to traverse Boulder County open spaces.

Comments: While I believe that eBikes have improved people's lives though increased mobility and helping reduce carbon emissions, I have strong hesitations with allowing eBikes on any sort of bike trail (paved or dirt) in Boulder. My biggest concern is the speed at which eBikes allow people to move on the narrow trails. The two eBikes mentioned (e1 and e2) allow speeds up to 20 mph. I would argue that most of the trails in Boulder (paved or dirt) are not rated to have vehicles traveling on them at 20 mph. There are many hidden curves on our trail system and when a collision occurs with an eBike traveling at 20 mph, which is quite quick and with adding ~50 extra pounds, it will be impressive. Here are some examples of what it is like to have a collision at certain speeds: 10 m.p.h. at impact is equivalent to falling 3.3 feet off a desk, 15 m.p.h. at impact is equivalent to falling 7.5 feet off a ladder, 20 m.p.h. at impact is equivalent to falling 13.4 feet off a 1 story building (https://ellisclinic.com/legal-medicine/low-speed-accidents/index.html). The rapid increase in damage is because the force of a collision increases exponentially with speed. Here are some other random thoughts. The speed limit on trails in boulder is 15 mph (https://bouldercolorado.gov/goboulder/bike-safety). According to wikipedia the average riding speed in Copenhagen is 9.6 mpg (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bicycle_performance#Typical_speeds). Until eBikes are governed to more normal human speeds, in my opinion around 10 mph, I cannot agree to letting them on our trails (paved or dirt) or roads. Thank you for your time.

Comments: I rented one in Glenwood to get a feel for it. I found that it took me much farther than my street bike in the same time. Those trails were speed limited, which I think is a good idea. In Boulder, I can see e-bikes for commuters and short in-town errands which could cut emissions. If they were licensed, rules of the road could be disseminated. Downside: both e-bike users and pedestrians would be challenged on multiple-use paths. It would be so tempting to use them at a high rate of speed. In the street, auto drivers would be challenged to see them if they get off the bike paths. I suspect they are not a fad and must be dealt with as a long term reality, so thanks for doing this now.

Comments: I have concerns about the fact that e bikes are heavier. Even if they don’t go any faster than non electric bikes, the damage caused to a person that is hit is dependent not only on the speed of the bike but also on the mass they are hit by. I am completely in favor of allowing e bikes on commuter trails in an effort to reduce road congestion and greenhouse gas emissions. They, class 1 and 2, should be encouraged for transportation. However when it comes to “recreation” I would rather have NO e bikes on trails that are often narrower and aimed at allowing people to access “nature”. Bikes whizzing by are not in sync with that value for me.

Comments: I ride a class 1 trike so I can use the throttle to get started on a uphill. I do not use it as I pedal my trike. I am glad you are allowing my trike on the paths I enjoy very much. At 74 i would be sitting at home instead of enjoying the out of doors. Also, some of the gates are very hard for me to get through on my wider trike. Please keep this in mind when you are replacing gates. I have trouble with the gates off Marshal road and this is my favorite place to ride.

Comments:

Comments: Thank you for the opportunity to use my ebike to commute to work. I am old (58), I was fat (280lbs), and my mountain bike sat unused for 25 years. Now I can ride my bike 20 miles to work. This summer I only rode to work 50 times, but that is 2000 miles and saved 100 gallons of gas! This has changed my life!!! o. In my observations ebikers will dump more speed approaching others probably since it is easier to get back up to speed, or maybe it is just that we are older and less aggressive. o. I worry about overcrowding on the paths once people realize how great ebikes are, how beautiful the paths are, and how bad cars are. Please consider opening more opportunities for (the majority of) people to get out, exercise and enjoy this beautiful state!

Comments: I support Class 1 e-bikes only for general use, but not on every open space trail at this time. The use of Class 2 bikes should only be allowed for persons with actual and documented health issues and disabilities on any trail and should not be permitted for anyone on mountain single track trails like Hall, Heil Ranches. The legacy trails in our open space do not safety support the use of e-bikes. My primary concern is a trail like Bitterbrush at Hall Ranch that is a two-way single track(ish) trail. There’s enough user conflict already without adding e-bikes to the mix. E-bike users are able to climb at speeds that most of us can only descend at, easily 10-15mph in the climb. Per your definition, class 1 e-bikes are assisted up to 20mph! This creates unsafe closure issues with descending bikes and hikers. I witnessed the issue first hand on the Betasso Connector trail climbing out of the canyon. An e-bike rider was climbing the steep first pitch and a rate I’ve never seen a mountain biker climb it. Most folks need to walk that portion. This person simply ripped up the hill and expected those of descending to yield the right of way, which we did. At first I thought this guys was the next Lance Armstrong (never mind the doping issues…)! I would highly recommend a different course of action with introducing e-bikes to our mountain trail systems at this time – one that would incorporate e-bike usage as trail systems were updated over time. If we are going to incorporate e-bikes into places like Hall Ranch, the county must modernize and expand the trails. The county must build loops that support directional use for mountain bikers and hikers. The county also needs to Increase trail mileage that mountain bikes can access, especially on all of the open spaces in the northern part of the county. Adding connectors between the three big open spaces and partnering with other land owners and stakeholders would also benefit all users. How is the county going to define right of way, especially with Class 2 bikes that do not require pedaling? I’ve ridden a lot of shared trails with motorcycles when I lived on the western slope. For the most part the moto users were very polite and almost always yielded the right of way, and almost always shut down their bikes. I would expect the same from e-bikes – minus the shutting down of the motor of course. I am glad the county is considering allowing the use of e-bikes, they are a great equalizer for different abilities and ages of riders. I also firmly believe that safety will be compromised on some trails, but with further investment in the trail infrastructure, leveraging sound design, class 1 e-bikes have a place on the vast majority of trails in Boulder County. Thank you for the opportunity to share my thoughts!

Comments: Thanks much to the County for carrying out extraordinarily detailed and sophisticated analyses as well as many public participation opportunities. It was very revealing how few e-bikes you were able to find on trails and how no actual problems were identified. I strongly support the balanced staff recommendations and very much hope they are adopted.

Comments: I support allowing bikes on the trails in the current trial, mostly because the trails on the prohibited list are the ones I want to see protected. Part of your effort to allow bikes on certain trails should include an aggressive plan to educate bike users in proper trail manners and safety, ie. calling or dinging your pass and controlling your speed.

Comments: The danger of allowing bikes with engines on Open Space trails is the power and speed they are capable of and the commensurate risk to other users on these trails. There is currently no speed enforcement on these trails by Open Space rangers or police, and just adding signage is wishful thinking. When one of these e-bikes whips around a corner at top speed into a pedestrian or a baby carriage, then I want the Boulder County Staff involved with this recommendation to know they are responsible for this poorly thought out decision. EV engines in bikes are a great alternative to ICE engines, but cleaner air and less noise pollution don't magically erase the increased safety risk of high speed bike travel on Open Space trails.

Comments: I do not believe class 2 e-bikes should be included in the new regulations as permitted vehicles on trails. Also, I believe it class 1 e-bikes are going to be included then speed limits on the trails should be set at 15 mph and enforced. 20 mph riders are moving too quickly for trails where walkers and pedal cyclists are present.

Comments: Hi. I own a Class 1 e-bike, which I use primarily for taking my two children too and from school. It weighs a hefty 50 pounds by itself. Loaded up, though, I can easily reach 18 miles per hour, but it requires me to pedal. And it is the pedaling that is important. The class 2 e-bikes with throttle control don't require the same amount of attention or bike handling skills. While the throttle functionality of class 2 e-bikes alllows more people to experience cycling, it doesn't require the physical ability that is needed to guide a 50 pound bike amongst other cyclists, walkers, runners, children, etc. It is just a matter of time before a 50 pound class 2 e-bike chartered by someone who otherwise would not be riding a bike, carreens into an unspecting user of said trails at 20 mph and causes serious bodily damage. These bikes can easily be rented in downtown Boulder. While it is not possible to police where these bikes are used, I would like to see bike shops be held responsible for educating where they can and cannot be used, especially rental bikes to out of town guests.

Comments: More and more, bikes are making our open spaces unusable for pedestrians. I do not support bikes because my experience is that I am expected to move over for every bike. It is hard enough now, I cannot imagine how much harder it would be if the bikes are moving even faster. Sorry, but when bicyclists show no courtesy to pedestrians, they do not belong on a pedestrian path.

Comments: E-bikes should not be allowed on open space. The bikes will ruin the natural enjoyment of open space and make it dangerous for others to use the trails. If you choose to allow them, I will vote against any other open space acquisitions or taxes to support open space.

Comments: There are DEED RESTRICTIONS on the Twin Lakes trails! If you move forward with this recommendation, you violate those restrictions (not only no-motorized vehicles but ONLY vehicles for maintenance or emergency purposes). Therefore, I'm assuming the Staff is also recommending to re-deed the Twin Lakes trails (actually open space) property back to the Twin Lakes HOA that dedicated them? dave

Comments: In my opinion, e-bikes are no more disruptive than non-motorized bikes. I own an e-bike, and I've noticed that pro bikers on non-motorized bikes usually go faster than I do, often passing me on the trails. So if anyone thinks e-bikes are too fast, that all depends on who is operating it. I always turn off my motor and slow way down around blind turns and when passing walkers, and I always give lots of notice with my bell. I have tried to be an example of a responsible e-bike owner, and hopefully my style of riding is common. I enjoy the use of my e-bike for exercise and to reduce my carbon footprint. Without it, I could not ride all the way to Boulder on the LoBo trail and would have to drive. This would cost me more, release more CO2, create more traffic, and rob me of my beloved exercise. Please continue to allow e-bikes. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Comments: Great work on the study and recommendations, Tina & team. I won't be able to come to the e-bike hearing on Wed. 11/13/2019 but want to make an important point. I hope staff and elected officials keep this change in approach in mind as use of the POS lands continues to evolve with new technologies, increasing population, and possible climate change impacts. --- Consider altering the OS Element of the Comp Plan to take out reference to non-motorized vehicles and instead use performance-based criteria. Saying 'non-motorized' was a shorthand way to try to prohibit negative issues of noise, speed & trail wear that the ban on motorized vehicles meant to accomplish. --- Current users can create plenty of open space degradation through noise, speed and wear and tear before we even talk about e-bikes. --- So, please consider changing the regulations to specifically set speed limits, set noise limits, and mitigate wear & tear from heavy use by all visitors to POS. This will necessitate regulation, 'policing', and hopefully arresting violators. I grew up spending a lot of time at the beach in small towns on the New Jersey shore. That 'open space' - the oceanfront beaches were their equivalent of POS. Use and care of the beaches had been fine from those towns' founding in the 19th century through the 1950s & 60s. But as population grew, demand for use of the finite beach space caused problems of crowding, noise, littering, and public nuisances. So the towns instituted 'beach tags' for summer use. Fees were nominal and local property owners were advantaged by paying lower charges. The funds help educate visitors about noise reduction, not littering, and paying for the enforcement of the tag programs. --- I think Boulder County POS may have to institute such a system eventually, where users pay directly for access to the trails etc, and the fees pay for enforcement of noise, speed, safety, and wear-and-tear regulations. Thank you, Anne Peters

Comments: eBikes are an excellent alternative to fossil fuel-based transportation and everything Boulder County and it's communities can do to encourage their use should be adopted by our local governments.

Comments: Cyclists 4 Community (501c3) supports the position of staff on this matter.

Comments: I'm a life long riser on Boulders bike lanes and open space trails. I'm a total bike supporter, but my experience is that ebike are no different than motorized vehicles. When mixed with walkers, runner and regular bikes they are dangerous. I'm really sorry to say this, but I strongly believe ebike should not be allowed.

Comments: As a 67 year old active woman with physical challenges, my e-bike has been a saving grace. I have CRPS, a foot pain condition that started 10 years ago. Unable to walk more than a block, I got an e-bike and it changed my life. I moved here 6 years ago and took my handicapped placard with me on rides on the Lobo trail. I was so afraid I would have to stop riding. My activity has increased and am getting better because staying active is part of the treatment. Thank you.

Comments: I am a long-time bicycle commuter and recreator in Boulder. I have predominately ridden conventional bicycles through my life, and use both the recreational and mountain bike trails in Boulder County. I am very supportive of allowing ebikes on any trails used by commuters. My office recently moved from Boulder to Louisville, moving many employees from a 3 mile bicycle commute to a 10+ mile bicycle commute. The use of ebikes and the associated time savings to riders has not only retained our bicycle commuter level, but actually increased it. Any policy that banned ebikes on commuter trails such as the 36 bikeway, parts of the Coal Creek, and the LOBO trail would have an immediate negative impact, and convert many people back to single occupant vehicle commuting. I am less supportive, but open minded, about ebikes on trails that are purely recreational, such as the Hall Ranch, Betasso Preserve, and similar areas. Those areas rely on their wilderness nature for their beauty, and too much ebike traffic (as with any motorized transport) would risk turning them into simply more OHV trails. That said, I acknowledge that for some, e-assist is a mobility assistive technology allowing those with moderate-to-severe mobility challenges to participate in open space recreation. I would want the needs of local disability advocates and assistive technology groups to be considered in any final rules.

Comments: I scanned the report and didn't see this observation, so I will make it: If there is a question of whether to allow Type 2 e-bikes on a trail, it should be known that Type 2 are safer and should be allowed on trails more readily than the all the 1 models I have experienced. The jerky application of acceleration on a Type 1 jerks the bike and can cause the rider to lose balance on startup. This is my experience from riding several e-bikes, either using pedal-assist or hand-throttle. Only Type 2 ebikes have a Hand-throttle. A hand-throttle is safer, if the bike is restricted to a low speed.There is no reason to even have "pedal-assist" except to give an illusion that the rider is exercising the pedals. Unless you can pedal much faster than I can, you won't be putting significant power into the pedals. The petals are still important for startup and for when the electric motor doesn't work.

Comments: I currently ride my electric mountain bike much more than I have ever ridden a normal mountain bike. Unfortunately this means that I am spending my money in Jefferson County much more than I’m spending my money in Boulder County during my off days. I know this is not about the money, so keep in mind that Jefferson county has had no problems sharing all mountain trails with us for over 3 years. And their trails just keep getting better and better. I have seen no evidence at all the more erosion is occurring due to our use, even with more power. In fact I can keep my line much better, and I am fine stopping to remove rocks from the center of the trail that regular pedal bike riders go around. This is because I can get right back up to speed and lose no cadence, staying in the zone is simply easier. My current vacations involve traveling to mountain bike friendly places where I can ride my E bike. I live in Gunbarrel and I work in Longmont. So far I have ridden LoBo about 700 miles of commuting. I I am exceptionally courteous as I would love to be a good envoy of the future. I choose not to go into Boulder because the short trail that connects is off-limits. I am finding that Longmont has some great restaurants but I would like the option to go into Boulder without riding on the side of busy roads. I drive to be safer.

Comments: Absolutely, anything to get people out of their damn cars! Boulder County is clogged with cars.

Comments: I support e bike access to all Boulder/ Boulder County trails.

Comments: E-bikes do not belong on any trails that are not heavily used for commuting. I am a HUGE supporter of e-bikes for commuting. Any paved trail, used for bike commuting, is suitable for e-bike use. Unless people get out of their cars (and make other radical life-style changes) climate change will destroy the planet for future generations. Its that simple. E-bikes are one way of making this transition possible for many people. This is great. However recreational trails are an entirely different issue. Don't confuse the two. On a recreational trail its not about getting from A to B in a reasonable amount of time, its about getting exercise and enjoying nature. A human powered bike is quite sufficient for this. There is no logical need to travel twice as fast on an e-bike. A number of the trails listed for e-bike use are ideal trails for small children to ride on. With e-bikes now the norm on the in town bike paths, these are no longer safe for smaller children, who cannot always be relied on to ride in a straight line. However I believe that this is is a price worth paying to get people out of their cars. Currently, flat, non-technical off road trails are the best places for small kids to ride - allow e-bikes on these trails and there are no options left, and we'll bring up another generation who doesn't understand the joy of biking and thinks the only way to travel is in a car. Summary - e-bikes on paved trails used heavily for commuting: YES. e-bikes on any unpaved recreational trails: NO.

Comments: On the face of it ebikes seem to be allowed in some regions and not in others. This does not seem fair since some residential areas will have ebikes on all the nearby trails (Gunbarrel Twin Lakes, LoBo) while other regions will have trails with and without ebikes. Since I am very sensitive to noise, I anticipate I would like to avoid them while on open space. I do support a pilot program to see if they will increase access for those with limited mobility, but this program should be distributed equally across all areas, not depending on terrain alone. This change on our open space could well degrade these properties as users stray off paths on wet terrain and use all kinds of bikes in various condition, so I would urge a more selective start to the program. Decisions seem to be based on staff recommendations to a great extent across the county and city. They are not elected, nor do they necessarily reflect the community. I have met many of them. Thank You.

Comments: I support e-bikes on trails.While the e-bikes help make it easier to bike, they do not provide for zero exertion from the riders like, say, dirt bikes. Instead, it helps people who may struggle for one reason or another to still enjoy the same trails as everyone else.

Comments: As a Boulder Canyon business owner (Boulder A-Lodge) and e-bike owner I support the staff's recommendation to allow e-bikes on BoCo bike trails. I want to encourage our guests and visitors to seek alternate and more environmentally friendly forms of transportation to and from our lodge. I also wish to personally commute to and from work (often with my one year old daughter on the back) without having to drive my car and contribute further to the congestion in downtown Boulder and Boulder Canyon.

Comments: Prohibiting e-bikes on the Boulder Canyon Trail does not make sense. We should encourage alternative transportation in this area and enable access to fully connect the Boulder Creek Trail with this western-most outlet including guests at the A-Lodge and residents in the Fourmile/Sugarloaf area. I understand the sentiment behind prohibiting e-bike use on mixed-use trails that have heavy hiker/pedestrian use and support this to ensure safety in areas like Betasso and the ranches.

Comments: Ebikes on county open space as proposed makes so much sense!

Comments: I have been riding mountain bikes on Boulder County trails for 40 years. Now in my 60's, I have evolved to riding a class 1 e-mountain bike on trails, allowing me to access trails that had become out of reach. I fully support allowing (at least class 1) e mountain bikes on all trails throughout Boulder County were any bikes are allowed. I ride 12 months out of the year (weather permitting) and have never encountered an e-bike that was going to fast or being rude/inconsiderate. On the flip side, I have encountered several obnoxious and angry people who were not on e-bikes. Courtesy and consideration should rule the day, not entrenched "I got mine, and you can't have yours" attitudes.

Comments: I support e-bikes on multi use paths and bike lanes throughout the city and county.  Getting people out of cars and commuting by bicycle is imperative to alleviate the growing congestion and overcrowding in the Boulder Area.  (Unfortunately, there are already problems arising with this, see below)    However, I am 100% against allowing motorized vehicles on single track trails in the parks system. The human propelled natural experience that can be found in our Parks system is the exact reason why so many people choose to live and visit Boulder.  Allowing motorized vehicles onto the single track trail system will adversely affect the experience for the existing groups of trail users.  I understand these motors are "small, not very loud and barely noticeable" but they are still motors and with that comes complications.     The main rationale for proponents of e-bike use on mtn trails is simply; "I like this, it works for me, so it should be legal."  That seems to be an extremely self centered justification for changing the statute of Boulders Open Space and Parks system.  If this is the sole reason for allowing usage then I must ask, what about the rest of us?  There are thousands of people who choose to live here because of the human powered trails in the Parks system. What about the impacts this decision will have in the future?  How would this decision affect the trail experience for current self propelled users?    The answer to those questions can already easily be seen with a little time spent on the Boulder Cr Path during morning commute hours.  There are many e-bike users who ride respectfully and cautiously around the other users of this path.  However, there are a significant portion of e-bike users who are clearly riding too fast for their experience and ability level.  They can be seen traveling far above the posted speed limit and riding into oncoming traffic around blind corners.  These riders are unaware of the etiquette involved when passing a walker, jogger, children or another cyclist.  Additionally, many of these "bicycles" are not even pedal assist which means they have a throttle button that allows them to ride without pedaling.  This is the definition of a motor vehicle.  Others have easily hacked their electronics to allow pedal assist at speeds higher than regular Class 3 of 28 mph.  There is currently zero enforcement of ebike regulation on Boulder Cr Path and it is in the center of Boulder.  How do you expect to maintain enforcement of ebike use in the parks system singletrack when it can't be accomplished in the middle of town? An example of an e-mtn bike that reaches 40mph with a throttle; https://lunacycle.com/luna-cycle-apollo/  Here's one that goes 50mph; https://www.treehugger.com/bikes/neematics-powerful-50-mph-fr1-breaks-e-bike-mold.html  Here's how to make your own that goes 50mph with parts purchased from Amazon; https://www.instructables.com/id/50-Mph-E-Bike/ Another one that is already quite popular on our path system with a throttle;  https://www.radpowerbikes.com/products/radrover-electric-fat-bike?variant=18179920068704 Is this the type of experience you seek to create on our human powered singletrack trails in the park system? I hope not.    The Open Space Board is trusted to be stewards in preservation of our land.  I fail to see how the current and future preservation of the natural experience for users in our park system and allowing motorized vehicle use goes hand in hand.  Please do not allow motorized use on existing open space and mountain parks singletrack trails. 

Comments: The report is largely anecdotal and has little value. The policy violates the trust placed by the citizens in the integrity of staff. Open space was purchased for resource preservation and PASSIVE recreation, which was clearly understood by all to prohibit motorized vehicles. E-bikes are motorized vehicles.The reason some trails have been excluded is because of joint jurisdiction with the city of Boulder, which has chosen to keep faith with its voters and continue to exclude motorized vehicles. POS should do the same.The trial was a bad idea. Making this use permanent is a worse one.

Comments: What would it feel like to be plowed over by a 230lb linebacker going 20mph. That is the risk you are putting my child into by allowing motorized cycles (motorcycles!) on our bike trails. Let's be honest about the demographic of the ebike rider. They are not as fit as a typical cyclist and are heavier. The bike also weighs a lot more than a normal bike. Also consider that they are older than most and have slower reflexes. This is a recipe for disaster and tragedy. I'm all for the overweight and elderly enjoying a bike ride but don't put my life in danger. Keep motorcycles off the bike trails!

Comments: E Bikes are dangerous on Coal Creek. I have lived here for 25 years. I am right on the path. E Bike traffic is dangerous to peds and kids. Also, more machine traffic is not a good thing for the Open Space wildlife. It seems to me downright ignorant to put more machine traffic near any Open Space. Animals and Nature have rights. Why should machine traffic trump those pre-existing rights of Animals and Nature?? Take a breather from machines...It is a good thing to away from machines now and then. Really.

Comments: Actually, I think ebikes should be allowed on all trails any bike is allowed on. I am 66, work full time, have ridden bikes all my life. My wife and 1st started riding mountain bikes in the early 1990's. We quit mountain biking a few years ago due to age, endurance and the affect of high altitudes, I bought a class 1 e mountain bike in June and have put 685 miles on it. Those miles were split between Boulder and Summit counties. They were on paved trails, gravel trails, single track trails, both ebike allowed or not. No one cared, or even knew it was an ebike. It changed my recreational life this summer. Everyone who has tried it, wants one, even hard core cyclists. All your studies about speed and user conflicts are correct. They are not motorcycles. If you don't pedal, they just don't move. They are silent.They are no faster than a regular bike. At 20 mph you loose all assist and you are on your own just like a regular bike. You do get exercise, you just get to go on rides 3 times as long or as far. To put an ebike's power in perspective, with about 1 horsepower and a 200 lb rider, they have a power to weight ratio of about 1 hp per 250 pounds. A typical dirt bike has a power to weight ratio of 1 hp per 9 pounds. It is a minimal assist, but it makes a major difference. What they do is level the playing field and allow older people like me to have access miles of trails my tax dollars have paid for the last 40 years of my life. I have lived in Boulder since 1971 and paying property taxes since 1976. The only real reasons people do not want them are 1) ego & 2) selfishness. The ego reason is the young hard core biker can't deal with being passed by an ebike on an uphill stretch. 2) The selfishness argument is based on the same hard core biker not wanting anymore people using what they think are THEIR trails. Well, we all paid for those trails. The greatest endorsement on them is my wife. When I brought it home she was not happy to say the very least. We both had nice mountain bikes (even though we rarely used them anymore) and it was a waste of money.Well, she tried mine, tested a couple and owned one in a week. She has a bad knee and with her ebike she can no go anywhere she once used to. she loves it

Comments: High-speed bikers and e-bikes should not be allowed on the Twin Lakes Open Space trail. The Commuter Trail System being proposed is for commuter bikers and e-bikers who want to get where they are going as fast as they can. I live adjacent to the Twin Lakes Open Space trail and I witness riders whizzing by, often packs of riders who look like they are in training for bike racing. There is no need for these kind of bikers to use the Twin Lakes Open Space gravel trail when they can easily use the paved Twin Lakes Road that will allow them to travel at higher speeds and get to their destinations more quickly. They won't have to dodge joggers, or people walking their kids in strollers and their dogs. Many people walk the Twin Lakes Open Space trail to enjoy a peaceful and calm nature experience. They are often birders who stop to listen to bird calls and view and take pictures of the wildlife. Turtles and other creatures often cross the trail because it intersects a wildlife corridor. The Twin Lakes Open Space trail is on land deeded to the County by the Twin Lakes Homeowners Association. The rider to that deed specifically restricts the use of the property for a park and open space purposes only, or the land ownership reverts back to the HOA. The property was intended to be used as a park and open space for the enjoyment of the local community, not to be used as a high-speed commuter bike trail. For many years, local maps showed the bike trail as Twin Lakes Road. There is no reason to disturb the quiet and peaceful nature experience for visitors at the Twin Lakes Open Space when it can be very easily averted by commuter bikers using the Twin Lakes Road. https://assets.bouldercounty.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/03/twin-lakes-map.pdf

Comments: Dear Ms. Nielsen, My wife and I purchased two CLASS 1 e-bikes last fall. She wanted the e-bike to help her ride with me during my road bike rides around Boulder county. At age 50, her knees are not able to handle some of the steeper hills. The e-bike with pedal assist helps her get a good workout with out the knee pain, and fully enjoy the beautiful Boulder roads. I have used my e-bike as a substitute for the car. On my longer commute days (Longmont to Lafayette), I have really enjoyed being able to ride the e-bike, not only saving gas, but reducing car traffic and getting exercise. We have also ridden on the allowable trails and this has been wonderful. I like how this study/test year has gone, and am hopeful that the Study confirms that e-bike riders (class 1 or 2) can ride safely and courteously, just as non assist riders. The small assist that e-bikes can give, help more citizens get out and enjoy the trails. Also, it offers a real solution to getting cars off the roads. I have yet to see a traffic jam on any of the Boulder trials. Please continue to allow e-bikes on the trails. Sincerely and thankful, Richard and Debra Bindseil Longmont, CO

Comments: My "e-car"(a completely irrelevant modifier) must be used only on the same roads as gasoline powered cars. In the exact same way, electric motorcycles(or " e-bikes") must be restricted to the exact same roadways as gasoline a powered motorcycles. E-bike use on Open Space trails is always a bad idea causing an increase in total use, use of steeper trails, use by less acclimated riders, higher average speeds, more disturbance to wildlife, more trail braiding, more disruption of trailside plant communities, more hiker/biker conflicts, more parking lot and trail congestion, etc.

Comments: We have determined that there is insufficient legal distinction between motorcycles with engines powered by batteries, and motorcycles with engines powered by Hydrogen, methane, diesel fuel, fuel cells, or gasoline in addition to or instead of batteries, to allow one type of external power source but prohibit others.

Comments: If you allow conventional bicycles on trails, you must allow class 1/2 e-bicycles on trails. They have no significantly different impact on fellow path users or trail damage. They are proven not to be faster (except for some uphill). If speed is a concern, set speed limits on trail sections where speed matters. If people are not following courtesy rules (eg having/using a bell, safe passing distances, speed), help educate or require riders to educate themselves/take a training class before trail use. too many county residents depend on their e-bicycles for work/recreation and to minimize/avoid auto use. let's not restrict this.

Comments: (Partly support recommendation) I can't understand why e-bikes should be prohibited anywhere (if operated safely) but especially from the Boulder Canyon trail.

Comments: Your recommendation " Increase education & outreach efforts on trails {where e-bikes are allowed}, including trailhead displays about sharing the trails, hikers, runners, bikers, equestrians and trails users with dogs" implies e-bikes are problem. Eliminate circled language and say "runners, bikers, ebikers, equestrians..."

Comments: Open all trails to 1,2,3 e-bikes. I have a 3 and couldn't go 28 mph if I wanted to. But I no longer ride a non-motorized bike due to ADA issues.

Comments: I think the discrimination with class 3 is not justified. Just because an ebike can go faster, doesn't mean the rider will use it. I ride a class 1 and there are times when the additional 8 mph would be useful. Not often but sometimes. It comes down to the behavior of the ride. I average 15 mph and I am constantly being passed by riders, most not riding ebikes. Please reconsider the restriction on class 3 ebikes.

Comments: Find a better class of more respectful rider and our problems will be over. I love our trails and riding. Open as many places as imaginable to all forms of cycling. I ride both self propelled and electrically assisted, at my age, e-bikes give me a chance to continue my enjoyment of our community.

Comments:

Comments:

Comments: I hope county works with city to resolve the no e-bike signs on LoBo. Trail speed limits make sense. Courtesy for all trail users-Dogs and bikes don't always mix but I wouldn't say prohibit dogs. Studies show that riding e-bikes is healthful. Don't prohibit them for "passive recreation". Please keep sections between spine and 63rd open to bikes-you may wish to let people know of tight trails.

Comments: I ride an e-cargo bike with my 2 children (1 and 6) on the back. The pedal assist on e-bikes for many riders I know is used for assistance with getting the bike started on an uphill slope as well as allowing for longer rides. Most riders of e-bikes I have encountered appear to be using their bikes in a similar fashion. There appears to be no additional wear and tear to any trails due to this type of usage. I can say from personal experience, having my bike has allowed me to provide 425 miles of fresh air and sightseeing this summer while running errands that would have otherwise been spent in a hot car. Please continue to allow e-bikes on all public trails and open space. We would be lost without our e-bike!

Comments: I absolutely feel that E-bikes should be allowed and encouraged throughout Boulder county. E-bikes are an outstanding solution to our pollution and traffic issues in Boulder County. It is also a wonderful way to get back out there safely, if you are not already in the habit of riding your bicycle. I have NO feelings that e-bikes are any more intrusive, dangerous or even much faster than regular bikes. If anything the ability to safely and easily get through intersections makes e-bikes more safe as a part of our transportation system as a whole. Thanks for all you do!

Comments: I'm concerned about the potential bias of Open Space offering free e-bike demos leading up to this decision. Luring people to e-bike use should have been left to the industry which now includes Yamaha, Harley Davidson, Kawasaki. Bike plus motor = motorbike. You're saying that they behaved on the plains commuter trails during the pilot study period. That's great. Allowing them there permanently should come with monitoring and an easy system for quiet users to report violations of speed, safety or disturbance. Keep in mind that most people won't bother to report. Any kind of enforcement will be impossible. I've observed e-bikes on the Chapman Trail. Regular bikers told me they are frequently on the Boulder Canyon Trail to access Chapman. Excellent signage, education and enforcement will be necessary on ALL non e-bike trails. Please be aware e-bikes are now routinely seen on the West Mag and other Forest Service mountain trails. Motocross (dirt bike) trail systems are unmanaged in many areas of Western Boulder County. A big illegal system even crosses BC Open Space. I am concerned about the future of the fragile Toll Property. I oppose any changes to the definition of passive recreation in the County Plan.That would be a downgrade to what I think of as the New Boulder. It is perfect just the way it is. It reflects values and an outlook - the old Boulder - that we can't afford to lose. Thanks.

Comments: Today I was walking on the Cottonwood trail and was passed by an E-bike going at a much higher speed than a regular bike. This is too dangerous for those of us who walk or have dogs on these trails. I do notice that E-bikes are really not allowed on the Cottonwood trail, yet I see several every day. If people need to commute on E-bikes there are plenty of low traffic roads as alternatives and I am all for E-bikes on roads. We also really need to respect the right to continue to have non-motorized trails in our open-space wild areas. Pella Crossing, for example, is a recreational area, not a commuting trail. Why do we need E-bikes there?

Comments: I just purchased my first class 2 ebike in August and have enjoyed the efficient alternative to using a motor vehicle for trips to Berthoud and occasionally to Longmont to ride the bike paths. Now that I'm older and my knees get sore pushing up inclines, the ebike has opened up a world of enjoyment , allowing longer trips on the backroads and trails many of which I had constructed during my years with the Transportation Department. I always ride safe and wear reflective gear to be an example to other riders. Keep up the excellent work and foresight to enable everyone to enjoy the outdoors!

Comments: Ebikes allow for longer duration bike rides enabling all abilities of riders to enjoy the amazing trail systems the public has funded for recreation and commuting. I strongly support allowing ebikes on designated trails and encourage the locales to increase investment in more trails connecting our communities. Ebikes provide a remarkable Eco-friendly alternative to automobile travel for recreation and work. These paths provides safe routes for rides without the fear of distracted drivers and the like. Without access to these routes legally, many will have to ride on them illegally since death by car is worse than a fine by officer. I understand the concern about speed and safety for pedestrians on the trails and this is why proper signage in hard to see areas, including labeled speed limits adjusted based on trail dangers, education as well as enforcement based on behavior is all that should be required to provide safe travels and enjoyment on our trail systems for all users, electrified or not. Overall, study after study, shows the majority of ebike users don't ride all that much faster or unsafely than a seasoned rider, they just do it with a little bit more of a gut, but that will go away with time as trail mileage increases and our network improves!

Comments: I am a recent above-the-kee amputee and former 2-wheel bike user. I will be depending on an e-bike to access the County's trails. Please make our trails accessible to ebikes!

Comments: Class 1 and class 2 e-bike are a great way to get older adults back on a bike and active outdoors. The bikes do not pollute or make noise. Most observers do not realize that an e-bike is on the trail.

Comments: I do not agree with the restrictions placed on some trails with e-bikes. I think type 1 ebikes should be allowed on any trail that allows bikes. I am 79 years old and enjoy riding the same trails I rode several years ago on a conventional MTB. I find my circuit times on the ebike to be the same, or slightly slower, than on my previous MTB.

Comments: Thank you for this. I have had a few ebikes for 2 to 5 years here in Boulder-.

Comments:

Comments: I am an older adult who has ridden bikes for over 40 yrs. I recently purchased an e-bike and have found joy in riding again. I used to limit my ride distance because it was always riding up hill to get home. Now I don't worry about distance as much and I go further and ride more often. I have both power assist and a throttle but find I don't use the throttle as much as I thought I would. I know trail etiquette and warn people as I'm passing and go slow. Many times I turn off the motor to reduce noise when I'm passing someone. This is unlike many regular bike riders who have almost run me off the trail not letting me know they are passing and whizzing past me at high speeds. I think education of trail etiquette is essential for both regular bikes and e-bikes. Walkers also need to be aware that they are sharing the trail and not take up the whole trail. Most move when you warn them you are there, but many are unconscientious and using earphones. Maybe we need to license all bikes so bad behavior can be reported. All users shouldn't be punished for the bad behavior of a few. We all need to respect users of the trails so we can all use them.

Comments: My wife and I, 69 and 70 yr old, have been riding our e-bikes for the past year around the area trails and have had 0 incidents with other trail users. We are often passed by young folks on regular bikes. There are obviously polite and rude riders of both types of bikes so the key here is to respect the other trail users, NOT banning users of E-Bikes. E-Bikes allow folks like ourselves to get out and use the trails and enjoy far more of the trails systems than we ever could on a regular bike.

Comments: Please open all trails open to Ebikes.

Comments: awesome document! so much great info and a very solid Lit Review We cant wait to see the final draft we noticed a number of edits, including a sunrise to sunset error in text content. I would love to chat more and help share this helpful document with others Thanks! Tony

Comments: I am 65 with knee issues riding my e-bike allows me to keep up with my very active wife. At present we have to go to Jefferson county anytime we want to do trails on my e-bike. I wish we could ride more trails closer to home. In my experience e-bikes are a very small percentage of the bikes on the Jefferson county trails and don't have an adverse impact on the trails. I think e-bikes are great for aging riders who want to remain active. Staff in Boulder county should consider allowing them on all of the Boulder county trails. Most e-bikes I see are on the bike paths and do not seem to disturb anyone. Please reconsider the current staff position on e-bikes. With my knee conditions I cannot ride the trails without my e-bike.

Comments: Having an EBike has allowed me to get back to biking. I had major back surgery 4 years ago and was experiencing back issues climbing the big hills of Boulder County. Now with and EBike, its realistic for me to bike again. As more people age in this county, Ebikes will be an essential tool to reduce car travel.

Comments: ebikes are popular among the group who pay the majority of taxes

Comments: I would suggest that each bicycle in Boulder have a registration along with a tag/plate on the bike.

Comments: Riding an e-bike is the only way I can enjoy the open space trails which I pay taxes to maintain due to an injury that I had which caused my disability.

Comments: I disagree with the recommendations that ebikes be restricted from any trails since all ebikes have top speed limits where pedal assist stops, which are lower than the speeds achieved by ordinary bicyclists on level or downhill trails anyway. Additionally, in the case of going uphill, the only time ebikes are really faster than ordinary bikes, speeds are already much lower so there isn't a safety impact. I see young, fit people on traditional bikes going far faster, far less safely than some parent on a cargo ebike or towing a trailer with their ebike. Safety relates to going a reasonable speed for the conditions, and is not about the bike's inherent capabilities. - A car that can go 200MPH can perfectly reasonably, safely, and legally be on any of the same roads as one that has far less capability. The laws should be about people's actions - not the potential capability of the machine. Additionally, ebikes allow accessibility for a far greater portion of the population to access the amazing resources that Boulder has for recreation.

Comments: I have resided in Boulder for 57 years and am now 74. While a mountain bike rider for years, age and hip replacements have forced both my wife and myself to ride ebikes today. I believe that ebikes are a valuable part of many Boulder residents’ lives and should be allowed on Boulder trails. I do not understand some of the current restrictions such as part of the Cottonwood Trail, as the Lobo trial is an important connection for Boulder/Niwot/Longmont. I do not believe that the ebike users are the speed risks for walkers/hikers. I use the 36 bike path to get into Boulder and can attest that road bikers travel at much higher speeds on the downhill: I may pass them on the uphill, but am going less than 15 or 20 mph. I strongly support the use of ebikes on the trails in Boulder county.

Comments: I support allowing e bike usage anywhere bikes are allowed. Usage of e bikes is growing exponentially around the world. If anyone cares about reducing our carbon footprint and getting more people off of their sofas, then this fun mode of transportation is the ticket.

Comments: As a Colorado taxpayer and e-bike owner, I kindly request that the open space trails be available to all e-bikes. As a 52 year old woman, I can enjoy the trails with a little assistance from my bike and can keep up with my husband who rides a regular bike. We spent 3 years living in Norway and observed that many Norwegians and Europeans use bikes and e-bikes regularly to commute to work. We knew many families that owned only one vehicle as they relied on their bikes and public transportation. As Americans, we need to encourage more citizens to ride their bikes for positive health and environmental reasons. Thank you, Rebecca Mooney

Comments: As a Colorado taxpayer and e-bike owner, I kindly request that the open space trails be available to all e-bikes. As a 52 year old woman, I can enjoy the trails with a little assistance from my bike and can keep up with my husband who rides a regular bike. We spent 3 years living in Norway and observed that many Norwegians and Europeans use bikes and e-bikes regularly to commute to work. We knew many families that owned only one vehicle as they relied on their bikes and public transportation. As Americans, we need to encourage more citizens to ride their bikes for positive health and environmental reasons. Thank you, Rebecca Mooney

Comments: I’m unsure what the “staff recommendation” is, I am for Ebikes on bicycle trails. I’ve been riding an ebike for 5 months. I’ve ridden 1000 miles. I ride my bike back and forth to work. I guarantee I would not have ridden my road bike that far in 5 months. I love the freedom I have with the ebike. I can make it to the top of Davidson Mesa on my way to work now, I do not ride my road bike to work from Boulder to Superior, it is too long and too hard. Thus, the freedom I mentioned. I have a bell on my bike and I notify people with my bell and verbally when I pass them. I can not say the same for the people on non electric bikes who pass me. I’ve come close to being hit as I am riding by someone on a non electric bike that is passing me. The real problem is NOT the People on an Ebike, it is the lack of communication from people on any bike communicating their intentions. In Amsterdam, it’s required to have a bell on your bike to assist with communication. If you have ever visited Amsterdam, you would see how fast and efficiently people pedal around the city. I do not like to ride on the unsafe roads in Boulder. Please do not take away my means of great exercise. I’m afraid when I ride on the roads. Ebikes are just as safe as road or mountain bikes. It’s the drivers/riders. My recommendation is to follow the lead of a city that has a huge success rate with Ebikes. What are their laws regarding Ebikes? They have roads for cars, sidewalks for pedestrians, and special roads/infrastructure for bikes/Ebikes. The bikes and Ebikes share the roads successfully. Check out Amsterdams bike rules I am a 62 year old grandmother, please don’t take away the trails I pay taxes to support

Comments: I took up riding again at age 65 after not doing so for 40 years. The e-bike compensates for my infirmities.

Comments: I support access by Ebikes including to the three prohibited trails by Boulder City. Ebikes are important to seniors in maintaining ability to ride as aging occurs.

Comments: I support allowing ebikes to use all Open Space trails where bicycles are allowed. I have ridden my ebike (class 2) over 1,000 miles during the past 12 months. The ebike allows me to get to the park n ride without driving during my daily commute. I often ride on the Coal Creek trail on my commute, which provides a safe route, with minimum time riding on streets. I have noticed that ebikes or more likely to slow down to share the trail, since ebike riders can easily speed up after slowing down or stopping.

Comments: I believe ebikes should be allowed wherever pedal bikes are allowed, and eMTBs should be allowed wherever regular mt. bikes are allowed. The older population has the most to gain or lose by this decision as most ebikers are older, especially regarding eMTBs. Most current eMTB riders are between the ages of 45 - 70, and many older than that. We are a responsible group. We are trusted to drive a car responsibly. I think we can be trusted on the trails. Yes there will be a few bad actors, but please don't force us deeper in the woods, because that is where we go now. Allow us to ride the trails we have worked so hard to develop over the years. We did not just build them for the young fit racer types. Plus, I am tired of driving to Jeffco so often to ride my ebike. Even if we ebikers were allowed the ride the mt. bike trails let's say only on Tuesdays and Sundays or whatever, That would be a way to dip your/our toes in the water to test it out. Open you minds and allow the future in. We are not going away. -outlaw ebiker Tom

Comments: I don't know the staff's reccomendation. So I can not agree or disagree. My opinion is that people think that a bikes are like motorcycles. E bikes do not have that much power, just assistance to get places. Education is key to informing the masses.

Comments: I support allowing e bikes on all public trails. Specifically, I support allowing pedal assist e bikes on these trails. I do not support allowing throttle(non pedal assist) e bikes on said trails. Pedal assist e bikes allow riders to navigate up hills more easily but only allow modestly increased speeds on flat terrain and no advantage down hills. I do not think that this type of e bike riding causes any safety issues. Especially for those that are older or have less physical capabilities, e bikes allow these riders to enjoy the trails.

Comments: As a daily commuter my ebike has changed the way I navigate the city. Instead of sitting idle in traffic just burning through gas. I am able to enjoy the amazing weather Colorado has to offer and be environmentally friendly. One less car on the road! My daily commute is 40 miles round trip and I work a nine hour shift. If it wasn't for my ebike this wouldn't be possible.

Comments: I support bikes, including and especially ebikes. I support the use of ebikes on all trails. I've been riding ebikes since 2016 and it's really wonderful to not have to rely on the use of a car to get around. I also have a pedal assist mountain bike and it has become my favorite sport. I support following the rules of Jefferson County, and allowing ebikes on all areas where bikes are allowed. I feel banning ebikes is a civil rights issue. Not all people are physically capable to ride far or up steep hills. Banning ebikes would essentially ban a number of citizens from enjoying the bike trails. We all pay taxes, we all deserve to enjoy the trails regardless of if we have massive leg muscles and lungs of steel.

Comments: I live in Boulder county and I feel e-bikes should be allowed on all trails. I'm not sure why Coalton Trail is on the banned list, its mostly crushed gravel and 4x4 trail. I'd vote to also have that open to e-bikes. I’m an avid mountain biker and commuter. However, I currently drive down to JeffCo when trail riding on my e-bike, where their county will get my business for restaurants, bike supplies and otherwise until our county comes around. They allow e-bikes on all their trails and I haven’t seen any issues there whatsoever! An e-bike will NOT allow superhuman speeds like some might suggest, but they will allow more accessibility and enhance range on our trail systems. We are all human… let’s embrace new faces and grow our outdoor community! I’m hoping Boulder County can see how e-bikes can get people out of their cars, get healthy, reduce pollution, and become more ‘green’. In response to negative responses: People always fear change. People freaked out when skateboards came into popularity and rode on the sidewalks. There are a multitude of issues with trail users... people with headphones walking up the middle of the trail not hearing a bikers bell or runner, people walking trail wide leaving no room to get by, dog walkers with no leashes leaving their waste on the trail, regular non e-bikes speeding, and many more issues that don’t relate to e-bikes at all. As with any transit system, there will be those that abuse it. We all need to be responsible for our own actions, and those who don’t abide by the rules may be penalized. I ride a Class 1 e-bike, it clocks a MAX speed of 18mph. It’s as quiet as any bike. I can ride faster on my regular bike if I wish as the e-bike cutoff makes it difficult to ride any faster. I suppose the e-bike train of 3 or more people might need some regulation, possibly a combined weight restriction of rider and bike for certain trails? Single rider only for some trails? I could see some rules being defined for this criteria.

Comments: I have owned an ebike for just over a year. I only ride it for fun, fresh air, and a little exercise. I have bad knees and if I didn't have the ebike, then I wouldn't be out at all. I have enjoyed riding on the Coal Creek Trail and Rock Creek Trail, and occasionally take the bike up to Longmont and ride on the St Vrain Trail. I never ride over 10 miles an hour, as speed isn't the goal. Many people riding regular bikes pass me all the time, so I think that a speed limit should be for anyone on any type of bike, not just for ebikes. Safety and being courteous is the key for anyone riding any kinds of bikes on any trail.

Comments: I own and ride 8 (eight) self powered bikes and also one E-bike. The Ebike allows me to commute more regularly which is saving gas, reducing carbon footprint, improving my health and just plain makes me HAPPY. The Ebike has allowed me to commute more easily, not arrive all worn out and sweaty. Also allows me to run some errands on way home. Some weeks I don't use my car Monday to Friday and this is great! Please keep expanding trail access to Ebikes. They are a goods fit with self powered bikes. Education helps all bike riders to be courteous of bikes and all other trail and pathways users.

Comments:

Comments: I agree with the recommendation of the Boulder Parks and Recreation.

Comments: E-bikes give me the ability to enjoy the beautiful trails and open space that makes our state so wonderful. I found that age has taken my ability to handle the hills and valleys that abound in this area. I had to give up riding my bike which was my main source of exercise because I couldn't handle the hills. With a joint replacement I can't do much walking so biking is of major importance to my health. I've had several surgeries and I'm not in the best of shape so an E-bike has solved the exercise problem for me. I now can get out and enjoy life and our wonderful state just like in my youth. It has made me a more fit, mentally sharp and happy individual. It would be a horrible disservice if this was taken away for others in my situation. Our county trails should be available for ALL not just the youth. If a trail is available for regular bikes then it should be available for E-bikes as well. Trish Blechman

Comments: E-bikes are NOT about speed. They are about providing accessibility and exercise that we otherwise would not have. My wife and I are both senior e-bike owners whose regular bikes have remained unused since my wife's knee surgery. It is now too difficult for us to easily pedal in and out of our somewhat hilly neighborhood using our regular bikes. The e-bikes help level the hills for us. This year's pilot has provided us the ability to get outdoors and enjoy the trails, get exercise, and enjoy the beauty of Boulder county - one of the main reasons we moved here in the first place. We typically only use the lowest of power assist levels. However, being able to have different levels of assist allows us to stay together on the trails without worry of at sometime not being able to have the ability to get back home. Ebikes for us has been one of the most liberating experiences we have had in many years.

Comments: I do support the recommendations, that being said would like to see all e-bikes (class I, II, III) on all trails. I strongly believe that an e-bike is a bicycle and should be allowed anywhere a bicycle is allowed. Some objection comes from trails being crowded. Rather than limiting trail usage lets increase the trail system. We have a great trail infrastructure now but lets work on enhancing/adding to them which will allow more people on bikes and less cars. The solution shouldn't limit bicycles but welcome more bicycles including e-bikes, which will allow more people to enjoy the beautiful outdoors as well as helping the environment. e-bikes are great for commuting as well as recreation.

Comments: I support the staff's recommendation and encourage them to expand access as much as possible for class one and two ebikes. I believe certain restricted paths (specifically the Bobolink Trail and Boulder Creek Path west of town) are perfect places to allow access. I can understand the hesitancy to allow ebikes on singletrack mountain bike trails but these other trails will ease commuter traffic and allow cyclists to be on safer trails that avoid roads. I would also like to see a clear and concise process to allow the use of class one ebikes on mountain bike trails as an exception basis. I think there could be a registration tag/sticker for cyclists whom use class one eMTBs as an alternative due to health issues. Most arguments I've seen against this are an element of current trail users not wanting to share the access they've already had. Overall I truly believe ebikes, when properly regulated by the three class system are a benefit to society for health benefits and alternatives to fossil fuel burning cars in commuting. Thank you Boulder County for your pilot period.

Comments: I'm 69 and have 8,000+ miles on four ebikes over 10 years. I currently own two. (class 1 & 3) I have arthritic knees among other ailments. It's my preferred recreation. It keeps me out of my car & motorcycles. I go faster and way much further (avg 11mph vs 7mph & typ 25miles vs 5 miles). I accept personal responsibility and announce & slow for walkers/bikes. I have never collided and rarely startled. (Not everyone hears). Many traditional bikers pass me, some startle me. Ebikes allow me to overcome hills, wind, and weight from groceries etc. I see negligible impact on open space trails other than adding to their use. I find it very hard to maintain a class 3 speed and see no reason for their restriction. (Just create a speed limit and expect personal responsibility). E-mtn biking is common in Europe, they should be permitted anywhere non electrics are allowed. The open space trails are a wonderful public benefit. The negative impact should be substantial before ebike restrictions are placed.

Comments: I am a Boulder County resident and own both a traditional mountain bike and a class 1 mountain e-bike. For myself and many other e-bikers I have spoken with, it is not about increasing the speed, it’s about increasing the DISTANCE. I do not have the endurance to ride my traditional bike very far, especially if any decent elevation gain is involved. Having an e-bike has significantly changed my ride for the better; I can climb those hills and go further with more enjoyment than ever before. In addition, my e-bike has a speedometer and I have yet to go over 20 miles/hr even on the street. On the non-paved trails, I don’t go over 15 miles/hr on either of my bikes. I acknowledge and understand the concerns of others on this forum, as I often walk and hike myself. However, it all comes down to common courtesy and knowing proper trail etiquette. Without proper trail etiquette any trail user can be problematic; whether its a traditional bike, e-bike, pedestrian, dog, or wheelchair. Increased education on trail etiquette and enforcement of rules are key to safely sharing the trail systems. I strongly support the use of e-bikes on all trails where other bikes are currently allowed.

Comments: Class 1 and Class 2 E-Bikes are no more impactful on trails than "Fat" bikes as far as weight, wear, and noise are concerned. The staff recommendation will allow more commuters to ride bikes to and from work, as well as to and from trails (as opposed to driving to a trailhead). Most concerns here and in previous comment sections can be attributed to rider behavior and not to the technology itself. I believe allowing more access to open space and other trails via the allowance of E-bikes will also increase support of maintaining and preserving the open space areas.

Comments: I've owned 2 ebikes (road and mountain) for the past 2 years, which has allowed me to continue to enjoy riding, which I would otherwise have had to give up. I fully support the recommendation, but don't understand why Boulder wants to exclude three trails? I've ridden two of those trails, and don't understand the distinction from any other trail?

Comments: I am a bike commuter and bike daily. 99% of the E-bikes I see on the Boulder paths are exceeding the speed limit (full out, 20mph) and they are HEAVY so when an accident occurs it is going to be bad. There was even a moped on the Broadway bike path yesterday. Zero enforcement for the city regarding speeds, so if you think putting some kind of "regulations" on this decision, just understand there will likely be no enforcement. Not a good mix with open space.

Comments: I support letting ebikes on all trails

Comments: E-bikes should be allowed on all trails. Boulder prides itself on being bike friendly. since living expenses in boulder are RIDICulous, most of your workers live outside town. This means an e-bike is the perfect commuting bike, by cutting us off, you'll increase car traffic

Comments: I am close to support. However, I’d like to see permissions withheld for Class 2 eBikes. I’m a senior constantly out walking the affected trails and have gotten used to young guns on feather weight expensive mountain bikes blowing by me “on your left”, going uphill at 25 mph. It’ll take a longer while (maybe never) getting used to a novice senior on a 50 lb Class 2 ebike wobbling by me going uphill at 28 mph without hardly peddling. OMG!!! My numerous experience riding eBikes of various types on various terrains reinforces my belief that human nature compels “ebike/ motorized vehicles” jockeys to operate at only two different speeds, zero and maximum.

Comments: I support allowing e-bikes on the trails already accessible to bikes, particularly those that provide connections between destinations - not just regional, but some of the short stretches that link city bike paths to other facilities e.g. the bobolink that links to the east boulder rec. E-bike use will continue to grow, and they can provide a great way to get people out of their cars for a lot of local trips. I'm an avid hike and bike user on open space trials. I would like to see the education point broadened to all trails that allow bikes and include all bike riders, not just e-bike riders - on some trails like Heil Ranch, it's often not great trying to hike while having conventional mountain bikers charging down the trail. I suspect the vast majority of e-bike riders have already been conventional bike riders, and if a rider is choosing to go too fast on an e-bike, I'm willing to bet that rider would have gone too fast on a regular bike. The section of the report on the speed observation survey is enlightening in terms of just regular bikes, not just e-bikes, when you consider how the speed differential to someone hiking at 3 or 4mph can feel to that hiker (with 70% of the bikes surveyed going between 11 and 19mph). It's also enlightening that regular bike speeds on the trail are up with, or ahead of class 1 or 2 e-bikes (even with the small e-bike sample). This is something I've experienced riding the class 1 e-bike and being passed by regular bikes - all just reinforcing to me the need for broader education. On the point of revising the definitions of passive recreation, the e-bike question has made me think more in terms of what it means to be assisted when using trails - that is, should assisted be allowed whether that's mechanical (bike or ebike) or a horse or other pack animal (and as a horse can gallop over 25mph we're still reliant on the good sense of that rider). So if assisted, what are their impacts on both non-assisted users and other assisted users, and what are their responsibilities?

Comments: I agree with the allowance of e-bikes on plains trails, but I think it should be clarified where they are NOT allowed.

Comments: This is an organizational comment, not a comment as an individual. C4C's board of directors supports the staff recommendation pasted in below on this matter. Regards, Matt Muir, C4C --- Staff recommendation is to allow class 1 and class 2 e-bikes on Boulder County trails on the plains where regular bikes are allowed. In the Open Space Element of the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan, passive recreation is defined, in part, as non-motorized. Boulder County Parks & Open Space staff will also present options for amending the definition of passive recreation in the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan Open Space Element to include e-bikes.

Comments: I am an avid mountain biker and have been riding in all areas of Boulder county for over 30 years. I currently do not use a e-bike. However as I turn 60 in 2019, I believe an e-bike is in my future, if I want to continue riding the more difficult trails I am accustomed to. I support the use of class 1 and 2 e-bikes on Boulder County and National Forest trails. In addition my boss suggested: “I support e-bikes because Brian wants to beat Steve uphill (since he has no chance to beat him downhill, e-bike or not). :) Sincerely, Steve Brooks

Comments: I have over 2200 miles on my e-bike in about a year. I use my e-bike in place of a car. I agree that it should not be ridden on trails like Betasso. But there are some flat gravel trails that I use to ride my e-bike on to run errands, etc. I am often passed by non-electric cyclists who are riding much faster than me. I use it for grocery shopping, to go to the doctor, to go visit friends, and for work. Thank you!

Comments: As an old and decrepit bicycle commuter, mountain biker and hiker, I cannot not recommend e-bikes anywhere except on-street use and the Hwy 36 bike path. Humans are obsessed by speed and convenience, and e-bikers are no different. Everyone always likes to go as fast as possible. And why not? It is fun. And e-bikers zip past everyone. Sadly, zipping e-bikes are no fun for walkers, hikers, parents with strollers, runners, dog walkers, and every single other mixed-use trail user. Please do not jeapordize the safety of other trail users by allowing e-bikes of any kind on mixed use paths and mountain biking/hiking trails. They are motorized vehicles and should only be allowed where other motorized vehicles are allowed. Thank you.

Comments: I do support the.use if ebikes on any band allntrails where bikes are currently allowed. My suggestions are: Allow any ebike to use any trails where currently non ebikes are allowed with no class regulations noted. Why? You are creating an huge enforcement issue as no one really buys bikes with that type of understanding of use, and all cities and counties have different rules so this class system will create huge unintended consequences. Ebikes are going to be very normal and even become hard to identify. Soon they will look like any other bike... so let's make all the rules as simple as possible, and not try to "catch" Recreational, disabled, or older cyclists who may be using the "Wrong class" of ebike on trails. Finally this will one day be a civil rights issue if Boulder trys too hard to control who can use ebikes vs who cannot. Simple solution always work the best..so if Boulder allows biking on any trail l, expand the right to ebikes.. Thanks

Comments: I mostly support the recommendation. As a mom with two children, I think that ebikes are incredibly useful in reducing the traffic and congestion on our roads and i refute the arguments from folks that say that "ebikes do not solve any of the barriers to cycle commuting that bikes have (weather and car danger) but instead remove the health benefits of cycling." There is more to bike commuting than weather and car danger when you have two children. The weight of two children, their lunches, and backpacks would take way more time and energy than I have available. I do hate riding on the streets with my kids when I commute longer distances (Boulder to Niwot) and prefer to take trails so I feel safer with the kids on the back. By allowing ebike use on the LoBo trail, you are encouraging less traffic and safer commuting, especially for 2 kiddos. Thank you! All that said, I recommend considering the following tweaks: 1. I think that the "designation" of class 1 and class 2 ebikes is not going to be particularly effective or useful. It is not something that is advertised when someone is looking to buy an ebike. In addition, using those definitions, it is not clear what brand of ebike fits into each category. I also think it is much more about the operator of the bike and how thoughtful and responsible they are. For example, regardless of the "category" of bike, any of the classes (1,2, or 3) can still go too fast in certain situations. In addition, as a responsible rider (who often has children on the back), I may have class 3 (or future-defined class 4, 5 or uncategorized) but am responsible, go 10mph and slow way down when other people and trail users are around. Why ban these responsible people, just based on the potential of the bike? 2. I would also consider posting speed limits for ebikes in heavily used areas of trail. I believe Boulder's dense population of professional bikers and triatheletes should be held to the same speed standards as the rest of the "normal" population is held to. 3. As a mountain biker, I do think it could be particularly hellish to ride popular mountain bike trails with ebikes. I love ebikes, but it seems like it would be visionary to begin to consider how other places (like Crested Butte) have been able to have dirt bikes and mountain bikes live synergistically together.

Comments:

Comments: I certainly support keeping the current closed areas closed to e-bikes. In general, I don't feel that e-bikes should be anywhere other than on paved trails. They are too big and fast for other trails - they significantly degrade the experience for hikers and walkers.

Comments: Very much support this recommendation! Would like to see similar from City of Boulder; e.g., South Boulder Creek, Boulder Canyon.

Comments: Instead of saying that only a select few are worthy of being on Boulder’s trails, why can’t we follow the lead of countries like the Netherlands who have dedicated tremendous resources to expanding their bike infrastructure? In an effort to reduce congestion & improve health, they have developed city to city cycleways, separate bike paths adjacent to most main roads, cycling freeways & expanded bicycle parking. This has increased the use of bikes nationwide, with e-bike sales actually surpassing the sale of regular bikes. Seattle & San Francisco are making similar efforts to get more people on bikes & out of cars. I think allowing e-bikes on the trails is one small step towards a better future for Boulder & should be strongly encouraged by all.

Comments: I fully support allowing Class I e-bikes on EVERY TRAIL where a traditional bicycle is allowed. We regularly encounter e-bike riders over age 70 who say they wouldn't be out riding the dirt trails if it weren't for e-bikes.

Comments: As a Boulder resident for over 10 years I would like to support the use of Ebikes on ALL paths including the mountain biking trails. Ebikes are a great way to enjoy the outdoors and exercise for more mature adults. Mountain biking is a challenging sport so having pedal assist allows bikers like myself - I used to be a beginner - with pedal assist I can ride most of the trails with the confidence of an intermediate rider. Ebikes also foster community as different generations can ride together. I hope my input is helpful. Please confirm receipt. Best wishes Zsofia Alfonso Boulder resident Open Space and Nature Enthusiast

Comments: I would like there to be even more bike paths open to e-bikes. I believe doing so would lessen the car traffic on our overcrowded streets as more people would be likely to commute by e-bike if more paths were open to their use. Boulder Creek Path seems especially important to include as it is a main east-west route if you are commuting within Boulder.

Comments: BUT...Please do not let E bike usage expand. The real reason for allowing them on some trails is to aid commuting. The trails that are 1. strictly for recreation, 2. are in the foothills and are already overcrowded should be limited to human powered bicycles. Already I am seeing E-bikes at Heil ranch. I understand some trails are not accessible to all because of physical limitations...Not everything should be accessible to everyone. We don't allow snowmobiles in Indian Peaks, we don't expect those with my physical ability to be able to climb most of the 14ers...and that is OK. Many Open Space trails are already overcrowded...e-bikes on them would just add to this congestion.

Comments: I fully support the recommendation. Ebikes should be allowed on the same trails as mountain bikes. They have no greater environmental impact. The trails were built to be enjoyed by all the residents of Boulder County and not just a select few who do not understand the problems with seniors and other persons with disabilities. I’m in my 60’s and I have some physical limitations on riding my bicycle. Please do not take our ability to enjoy the trails away from us. I use an Ebike because I want the exercise while enjoying the outdoors.

Comments: I am in favor of allowing e bikes on all bike trails in boulder co. Whatever we can do to get people outdoors is good. Older people especially should be able to enjoy our open spaces as their physical capabilities decline. It seems elitist to deny them acess to our open space that they helped pay for.

Comments: I am going to be 67 in December and I have some physical limitations on riding my bicycle. I fully support the recommendation because with out it I would not be able to ride my bicycle on the trails I enjoy. I pedal everywhere but occasionally on hills I need assistance. The trails were built to be enjoyed by all the residents of Boulder County and not just a select few who do not understand the problems with seniors and other persons disabilities. Please do not take our ability to enjoy the trails away from us. It is not like we are riding motorcycles. We are on bikes because we want the exercise while enjoying the outdoors. For those that only own an E-bike you would be basically removing them from riding.

Comments: E-bike usage on legitimate mountain bike trails should be restricted to those who actually require electric assistance to enjoy the sport of off-road bicycling. I.e. age based > 60 years old and disabilities which restrict the ability to use non-electric assisted bicycles.

Comments: Ebikes should be allowed on the same trails as mountain bikes. They have no greater environmental impact and it will increase the support of building and maintaining more trail. If you have not ridden a type 1 ebike, please go ride one. They are fun and cause no harm. I have personally not ridden the boco trails in the past 2 years because ebikes are not allowed on the mountain trails. I have also quit frequenting the restaurants and supporting the the trail building and bike groups such as BMA because they are not supporting the ebikes and the entire industry.

Comments: I'm an everyday user of open space trails. Please keep the ban pertaining to all motorized vehicles in effect on all trails. There are plenty of roads around to ride e-bikes. Safety and adherence to a natural environment first.

Comments:

Comments: "Share the trail"? The non-electric mountain bike crowd is, overall, clueless and rude concerning the rules about the right of way. Trails open to bikes have become their turf, and I have to step aside when they pass, or get run down, or find somewhere else to hike free of bikes. In years of hiking on Open Space trails ONLY ONCE have approaching cyclists yielded to let me pass: they were two Open Space Rangers. Turning e-bikes loose even on select trails will only compound this problem. No e-bikes on Open Space trails!

Comments: No e-bikes on Open Space, period. An e-bike is not even a bike; it is an electric scooter.

Comments: There are older people and chronically ill people who can’t bike without an e bike. My husband has bad arthritis in his knees but is able to get around on an E bike and uses his car about 95% less now. I hope you will allow them on trails and paths.

Comments: EBikes are motorized vehicles. They can stick to roads and trails where motorized vehicles are already allowed. We are already seeing flagrant and consistent misuse of e-bikes on ALL trails outside of the pilot study area trails, including Heil Ranch, Hall Ranch, Betasso, Spring Brook Loop, Doudy Draw, etc. Should those who break the rules be rewarded by re-writing the rules in their favor?

Comments: I am a mountain bike rider and hiker who uses trails frequently. Most of the trails I ofter use, such as Coal Creek, Rock Creek, Lastoka and Meadowlark are recommended to be open to E-bikes. I strongly disagree with the recommendation to open these trails to ebikes and heartily disagree with the proposal to redefine 'passive recreation' to include motorized vehicles such as e-bikes. I suppose motorized scooters and motor cycles are next? E bikes travel at speeds well above what is safe for these trails and many (yes many) riders of bikes are careless and reckless, operating at speeds unsafe for the specific conditions and many times not even paying attention (looking at phones is very common). It's bad enough to have to navigate around dog walkers who are glued to their phone screens; at least they are not traveling at 20+mph. I think by opening trails to bike users you will discourage the use of these trails by those actually getting exercise via (real) biking, hiking and walking. It will also undoubtedly lead to accidents and injuries. I also use Coalton and Mayhoffer trails a lot and am happy to see e-bikes are to continue to be restricted from these trails. I expect I am not alone in my opinion regarding ebikes. Please give this perspective consideration in coming to the final decision. Thanks, Mark Berry Superior

Comments: I do not support the use of motorized vehicles on County Open Space. Open Space should provide opportunities for the quiet enjoyment of nature, not recreational challenges.

Comments: This is a good start! Now allow eBikes on Cottonwood Trail and Boulder Canyon Trail. This will complete the plains network.

Comments: way too many trails for a pilot study Noise pollution is a huge problem in E. Boulder "mixed zoning" in other words trucks, buses, UPS, garbage, and worst of all diving planes. At the rate you are going ebikes will be the norm, very hard to chage that once it is allowed. Bike trails can be an escape from our crowded noisy, polluted roads- ebikes can be noisy and speedy. Please allow from escape from rapidly growing, polluting, noisy Boulder and Boulder county. If you live and recreate on the foothills it may be hard to appreciate this. The ways development happens always harms those with the least options- and do they have the time and opp'y to respond to these surveys? Probably not. One more reason Boulder becomes richer and whiter, eventually irrelevant.

Comments: E-bikes can be very dangerous to others. A friend of mine was hit by one while riding his regular bike. The e-bike strayed to the wrong side of the path around a corner. My friend broke multiple ribs and a thumb. He said it felt like a motorcycle hit him. The bike person had no insurance for this short of thing either. E-bikes are not just faster. They are heavier. And they don't necessitate paying as much attention to them while riding so users can 'drift off' like this person did (note- the person did stay to help). As a person who mostly walks, I think they would be a big danger to me and I'd have to be watching for them instead of enjoying my walk. While I do understand most e-bike riders would be okay, another path user would have to assume all are potentially dangerous. Perhaps those who can't bike or walk could be issued handicapped passes so there are fewer. Or perhaps they would have to have 'permits' which would require insurance and that they agree to obey signs/speed limits/ and rights of way.

Comments: I do not support an amendment to the definition of passive recreation to include e-bikes. I believe there could be some use cases for e-bikes on public trails where other bikes are already allowed, if a person can present paperwork to prove a need for it. Because there are already criteria in place for proving this type of need with the Colorado Parking Privileges Application, that same paperwork could be used to give someone a small license plate tag for their bike to show they are allowed on trail. While it might seem like more overhead, I think this is ultimately safer and less costly over time because it will hopefully deter the reckless and help prevent costly injury/rescue situations. It will ensure that people using e-bikes on trails need them, and because of that need they will be less likely to endanger others. Using a motor vehicle of any sort is a great responsibility because it is inherently dangerous, and introducing motors onto relatively narrow trails with no discretion as to who can do so is a mistake. A strategy like this would create a mindset that e-biking is a privilege, and abusing that revokes the privilege to continue use of the machine on Open Space trails. There could be a simple online Boulder Open Space E-Bike Privileges Application that would maybe require a single in-person class to go over the guidelines as well (if there is enough demand). This strategy mirrors the off-leash program that Open Space already has. The combination of the paperwork and the in-person training would help people know the rules consistently, understand that e-biking is a privilege that can be taken away, and also find some community in the process. I believe a program that simply makes an exception for one type of motor vehicle is a dangerous compromise that will cause harm if it is not a licensed activity. Therefore, if the licensing and in-person program seems like to much to handle, then e-bikes should not be allowed. It is not enough for an organization that manages such populated trails to count on the random citizen the be responsible or aware enough to keep everyone else's safety in mind. We do not live in a society where individuals put others' safety before their own safety. To rely on anonymous e-bikers to keep others safe on the trails is negligence.

Comments: I disagree with allowing e-bikes on any trails. Class 1 and class 2 e-bikes can go up to 20 miles per hour which is significantly faster than most people can passively pedal a bike. This is a slippery slope that will lead to more impact on the environment and a decrease in the natural element of the trails. Additionally, allowing the use of e-bikes on the trails goes directly against the Boulder County Comprehensive Plan - "Passive Recreation, referred to in the Open Space Element policies, is defined as non-motorized outdoor recreation with minimal impact on the land, water, or other resources that creates opportunities to be close to nature, enjoy the open space features, and have a high degree of interaction with the natural environment." Please reconsider the recommendation and keep these trails non-motorized and natural for people eager to use these trails for their original recreational purposes.

Comments: In recent years, I have dealt with intermittent joint and foot pain that limits my mobility including walking any real distance. While experiencing these periods of pain I am sometimes able to gently ride a bicycle to get some form of exercise. I typically ride the coal creek trail, but am limited to the flatter areas due to increased pressure on my feet and joints when exerting enough force to go up hills. Thankfully, my wife and I were able to purchase a pair of Class 1 pedal-assist mountain e-bikes last summer and have been able to enjoy many rides from Lafayette over to Superior and Erie. During periods of good health, we have enjoyed being able to get out into the mountains and experience more technical trails even without being “Iron-man” type athletes. Having a little assistance on the up-hill makes a real difference. We have always practiced good trail etiquette and most people we have encountered probably never even noticed that we were riding e-bikes. We do not use the electric motors to increase speed on the trails, we typically ride between 8 and 15 MPH which is about the same speed we ride on our non e-bikes. Our experience with e-bikes has been extremely positive; it has allowed us to go farther and see more of the trail systems than would have been possible for us without e-bikes. Our hopes are that Class 1 pedal assist e-bikes will eventually be allowed on all trails that allow mountain bikes, since these really are just traditional bikes that provide a little help when needed.

Comments: Since there is no enforcement presence on county trails, and there is not a practical way to distinguish e-bike "classes" even if there was enforcement, and since e-bikes keep getting faster and faster (see the HPC Scout Pro, top speed 45 mph, among others), I believe this whole thing will resolve itself through litigation, at great expense to Boulder County, after the first child or vulnerable trail user is seriously injured or killed by a e-biker. Eventually we will go back to non-motorized passive recreation on our county trails, as e-bikes, and now possibly 'regular' bicycles, since apparently the county considers them one and the same, will be banned. Hiker and equestrian user groups will pressure the county to not allow any bicycles on trails, and certainly new trails.

Comments: I think class 2 e-bikes should remain on roads, not trails. They are quite different, and I would encourage anyone making a recommendation to get on both types of bikes. That said, I think class 1 e-bikes should be allowed on any trail a regular bike can travel. I also think Boulder County Commissioners should quit buying open space, and do the maintenance and trail building for the properties they already own. Lets get some of those bikes trails to connect, and please build a bike path from Hwy287 into Boulder along Arapahoe road. This would make for an easy e-bike ride into Boulder, and would be faster than cars during the morning and afternoon commutes, not to mention decrease need for parking in town, and huge decrease in green house emissions.

Comments: (Sorry to post again) QUESTION: I see lots of comments about Class 1 and 2. How will this be policed? Bikes are not marked externally, and some battery packs are hidden in frames? Please make sure this is addressed.

Comments: Overall, I like the current suggested plan. E-bikes should be allowed on "commute" type paths, and not paths that are more recreational. By recreational, I mean a path/trail that is just a loop and/or is more challenging such as rocky, narrow or steep. I like E-bikes assisting people with getting from place to place. I do not want to see E-bikes on recreational trails for several reasons, including safety. I am concerned about people riding above their ability and getting hurt. Although I generally support what is being done now, some specific trails seem on the bubble for me. For example, Pella Crossing: It is not steep, rocky or narrow. But it is really for recreation. It is not used for commuting from one place to another.

Comments: I strongly support allowing class 1 and class 2 e-bikes anywhere a regular bike is allowed. After an injury, an e-bike was the only bike that I could use for nearly a year. Many of my friends and neighbors have the same restrictions for various reasons, some temporarily and some permanently, and I believe that they should be given equal access to these bike paths. Thank you.

Comments: Please do not allow e-bikes on any multi use path. The designation that these paths are for non-motorized use should stay that way. I almost never drive a car and I pedal my regular bicycle everywhere using multi use paths when ever I can. E- bikes have the speed that should keep them on roads only. I have almost been run over many times by e-bikes that are traveling way to fast with way to heavy of a load (two kids on the back and saddle bags). These bikes are ridden primarily by people who have not learned how to control a lighter bicycle at a lower speed. They come into the on coming lane while coming around turns and cannot correct their trajectory because they're going too fast and don't have the skills to control their machine. We might as well allow motorcycles on the paths if e-bikes are to be allowed as they are essentially the same thing except that motorcycle riders must prove competence in riding ability to get a license. Let's keep our paths and trails safe and free of motors of any kind, let e-bikes use the vast network of roads with the other motorized vehicles.

Comments: The recommendations seem OK at first glance. And I'm very happy that ebikes won't be allowed on any narrow bike trails. Two issues. 1) Ebikes should NOT be allowed on the Boulder creek path. It's too crowded and dangerous as it it is already ! 20 mph is way too fast for the creek path. 2) The main issue that I see is that allowing "select" ebikes is essentially allowing them all. Sure, currently, saying class 1 and 2 is OK seems reasonable, because that's what most people own. In just a couple of years, however, those will be obsolete, as batteries keep getting better. How will you police class 3 (or beyond bikes)? They don't look any different. There's bikes out there already that go 50 mph without any pedaling. How would you even catch them? It's one of these policies that seems reasonable now, but we'll have to deal with the unintended consequences soon. In any case, please hold firm on the no-Ebikes on singletrack policy !

Comments: I agree with allowing Class 1 and Class 2 electric bicycles on trails. I recommend that all trails be opened to Class 1 and Class 2 electric bicycles. I have experienced several electric bicycles on trails in Jefferson and Boulder County and all riders have been respectful and courteous. Allowing electric bicycles in more areas will encourage people that would not normally ride bicycle to get out riding and benefit from the exercise.

Comments: I frequent the LOBO and other trails on my regular bike. The proposal seems to exclude e-bikes from places where interference with others (tight curves, limited sight lines, etc) might be a problem. This seems sound. My wife and I just returned from a week-long bike ride in Switzerland,, mostly on designated bike/hike trails. We rode regular bikes but e-bikes were everywhere. Probably more than regular bikes. The riders were in many/most cases folks who likely would not have been able to get so far afield without the elec assist. I think e-bikes are a valuable addition to the transport mix. My wife and I are in our 70s and are lucky to be able to do a week-long (if slow) cycle trip. Others in our age class may not be as lucky or fit so e-bikes represent a great opportunity to venture in our beloved openspace. We likely will sometime get e-bikes, but don’t need them yet. We welcome the added traffic if it means more folks are getting out and improving their health and minimizing the climate impact.

Comments: Allowing motorized vehicles on trails designed for pedestrians and cyclists is dangerous. I predict pedestrians being hit by rapidly moving, heavy ebikes. I also predict that unseasoned cyclists will buy ebikes and wreck on unstable surfaces at higher speeds than they would normally ride. Both scenarios will leave the county liable. Leave motorized vehicles on streets that are designed for them.

Comments: Yikes - "Yes" or "No" are the only Answers possible? I strongly support e-bikes, including Class 3, so had to click "No", because that isn't the Staff recommendation. My wife recently got an e-bike for her 68th birthday, and we're having a great time, because now we can ride together (I ride regular somewhat briskly). I knew they were legal in east county because I see them there frequently, but had no idea Class 3 was not, which is what she purchased. So it turns out we spent $$$ and are illegal. But soon not in National Parks - don't see why Boulder County would want to be out of step with the NPS. She definitely can't ride 20mph on gravel anyway (few can or do), let alone the theoretical 28mph of a Class 3, so the restriction is unnecessary. OTOH, when commuting on the open road, the extra power of a Class 3 is very helpful - we have grandchildren in Louisville, and a Class 3 is definitely the way to get there. I've become an e-bike enthusiast, because every trip on an e-bike is a trip someone didn't take in their car, which is terrific for everyone. But I would not recommend someone purchase a Class 2 - it's like buying a car that only goes 50mph - it would senseless to spend that kind of money and not be able to use it on a highway. So you're banning the most sensible type of e-bike.

Comments: In general, I do support the staff recommendation. I would encourage the county to have a waiver program for the Boulder Canyon Trail so that people might use e-bikes to commute to Four Mile Canyon and other areas up there.

Comments: For those of us out there on e-bikes, the vast majority of us have been riding bikes for years. This isn't 'Learn to Ride a Bike 101'. And I have been recklessly passed by lycra cyclists many times. There simply need to be speed limits & common courtesy bike path rules for all to follow. I really don't understand the drive to keep people off the paths. We have an amazing trail system, whose use should be encouraged & celebrated! I want to keep up with my husband when we ride together, he on his regular bike & me on my e-bike, otherwise he leaves me in the dust. He is still going to be faster than me but at least I don't lose sight of him. My kids want to ride their bikes to school, while carrying heavy backpacks, covering several hills & traveling a much further distance than if they had gone by car. This would never even be a consideration if they didn't have an e-bike. As a woman, I would love to bike 10 miles to work without arriving looking like a hot mess & having to take a shower. It's a no brainer with my ebike. And the ride home is something I look forward to all day. After some longer runs, my knees get achy & can't handle the hills on a regular bike. I can add a little pedal assist on the hills & have no discomfort. Some days I want to get outside in the beautiful sunshine & swing by the store for groceries that I can put in my paniers. Without the option of my ebike, I am taking my car. Ebikes have been such a game changer - we actually USE them. And my regular bike is ready & waiting for me when I want to get in a good workout. There is a time & a place for each bike.

Comments: Must be allowed anywhere a reg bike can go. Do not limit them. They are the future. They help the handicapped get out too. Must be allowed in all open space where reg bikes go. Spandex bikers ride much faster than us! I get passed all the time. It's a myth that ebikes ride too fast or hurt trails!!!! Myth!!!! Honestly, I will ride anywhere no matter what you say. Truth. Ebikes are just bikes. Too much mis info out there!!!!

Comments: Please, please don't allow ebikes (electric motorcycles) on the mountain trails. I strongly believe it was a mistake to even allow them on city/county bike lanes and paths. They most always go faster than even the most accomplished cyclists, 20 - 30 mph; and you cannot hear them coming up on you. Mixing motorized traffic with pedestrians and regular cyclists in any situation is dangerous but lately, with ebike increasing proliferation, more and more hazardous situations are appearing to occur.

Comments: Thank you for your recommendations and supporting ebikes. Now this should go further and support ebike riding on natural/single track trails just like jeffco and the Colorado state park system. Keeping limitation to what has been proven to be an excellent way to keep people exercising and out of their car, is baffling. Your study and numerous others have confirmed that Ebikes are not used any differently than regular bikes, that they do not increase user conflict and do not damage the trails more than any other type of user, except maybe equestrian riders. lets go Boulder, we can do this!

Comments: I support your recommendation Thank you I definitely support e bikes for commuting and getting people out of cars. But they have to be kept in the proper places

Comments: Hello- I am a long time bicycle commuter in boulder (since 2010 when I first moved here). I've never once driven to work--I bike in the worst of the snow and cold and so I consider myself pretty serious about my bike commuting (about 3 miles each way, mostly on the bear creek path). I am also a road cyclist so Ive spent a lot of time on bikes. I would just say that many of the new e-bikes scare me more than anything else Ive seen on paths. Ive had a few instances recently where Ive almost been taken out by a middle aged woman (I think its the same one) with two kids on the back (in one of those stretch limo bikes) who isnt pedaling but is taking both lanes through a banked turn at like 20mph. This woman is like a speed demon. I had to go off the path once so she didnt hit me. The thing that bothers me about e-bikes is that it allows people without an understanding of how to handle a bike to go faster than they would physically be able to go with the comparable level of bike handling expertise. This example woman, for example, rides her stretch limo e-bike like a motorcycle--a 60lb bike with 3 people and disc brakes. I cant help but think that it is only a matter of time before she hurts someone. On this point, I think that the time it takes cyclists to become fast (under their own power) is also time that they spend learning how to handle a bike. There isnt a perfect correlation, but it is a good metric for screening out poor drivers. I.e. people who just got on a bike for the first time (and dont know how to follow etiquette) also dont have the power to go very fast. E-bikes change this. From my experience there are lifelong cyclists who can follow etiquette with earbuds and their eyes closed better than novices who are trying but who, for example, stop suddenly in the middle of the path rather than pulling over. There are certain expectations/ways of riding that are cultivated over time. My suggestion for this would be that people with e-bikes should be required to have some kind of license and training--how to take turns without going into oncoming traffic--how to approach and pass someone who is moving more slowly than them (not to pass on blind turns etc). Again, I think e-bikes just exacerbate the novice tendencies of people who just havent spent enough time on a bike to learn how to bike properly on a path. Another idea would be to put a governor on those things so they cant go faster than 20mph. I just dont want the paths to turn into drag strips for people who literally arent even pedaling. I will say, at least most e-bikers are fair weather bikers, so as soon as it gets a little cold, the paths become much more pleasant again. Then again, in an effort to reduce emissions and foster sustainable transportation, it would be great if these people did actually bike more.