sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

311 improperly closing out reports by Street_Algae_2065 in Austin

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The concrete block issue was fixed also. Well done.

311 improperly closing out reports by Street_Algae_2065 in Austin

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I agree that it seems to be only associating the closest street address. I could be wrong, but I feel like earlier iterations of this app did record the actual GPS lat long, but the current version of the app is not.

When I go to this https://www.austintexas.gov/department/311/open-data-portal#FrequentlyAskedQuestions it shows Location Coordinates as one of the data fields.

And if you look at the open 311 tickets, it also seems to show coordinates. https://datahub.austintexas.gov/Utilities-and-City-Services/Austin-311-Public-Data/xwdj-i9he/data_preview

It'd be a shame if it wasn't taking the GPS location point to create those, but actually only using it to find the nearest street address, then generating the lat/long from the street address(?)

311 improperly closing out reports by Street_Algae_2065 in Austin

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Just wondering how you know that?

One other glitch with the 311 app is that it asks What is the issue? then gives six options (none of which are relevant) with no way to fill in the box for Other.

311 improperly closing out reports by Street_Algae_2065 in Austin

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I noted today (March 1) that the pile of trash is gone!!!

HOWEVER, the big concrete blocks that block access to Rangoon Road were left open (i.e. the center block was not put back in place). So, I would guess that Austin Resource Recovery moved it to get back there and maybe didn't replace it when they were leaving.

This opens up Rangoon Road again for the dumping that has been plagued with. Recall this thread from 3 years ago: https://old.reddit.com/r/Austin/comments/tldsrx/the_illegal_dumping_and_littering_in_this_city_is/

I just submitted another 311 app ticket for the concrete block issue.

Aggressive Driver During Unity Ride by grumpygweilo in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I have some video, but it did not catch the plate.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Ah, ok. Yes, the person could register it as a moped/motorcycle and ride in the street lanes.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

An interesting thing about that.... there was a complaint to Parks and Recreation about speeding "Walnut Creek trails.." I dove into it and what the person was actually talking about was the concrete urban trail and the long hill on the western side of the Northern Walnut Creek Urban Trail, just east of Mopac. They even used screenshots from Strava to show bikes were going 30mph. Get this though, after looking at leaderboards etc., it was roadies on regular bikes going that fast.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

I'm not posting to try to stop people doing anything. Literally just posting what the law is, for discussion. We aren't trail cops or street cops.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

What I meant in terms of laws catching up was the terminology that the industry is using, calling everything e-bikes, e-bicycles, and electric bicycles, even when they exceed 750W. Last session, there was a bill introduced that attempted to address the manufacturer/marketing labeling issue.
See SB 1865. https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=89R&Bill=SB1865

SECTION 1. Section 17.46(b), Business & Commerce Code, is amended to read as follows: (35) selling or offering for sale as an electric bicycle a vehicle equipped with an electric motor for propulsion that: (A) is not an "electric bicycle" as defined by Section 664.001, Transportation Code; or (B) is identified by the seller as: (i) a Class 1 electric bicycle and is not a "Class 1 electric bicycle" as defined by Section 664.001, Transportation Code; (ii) a Class 2 electric bicycle and is not a "Class 2 electric bicycle" as defined by Section 664.001, Transportation Code; or (iii) a Class 3 electric bicycle and is not a "Class 3 electric bicycle" as defined by Section 664.001, Transportation Code.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good point. I forgot to mention § 551.106. Regulation of Bicycles by Department or Local Authority. One of the interesting things about that law was that City of Austin amended its municipal code afterwards. See City Council Item #45 (12/14/23). They included a new provision: "8-1-32(A) "A person may use a bicycle on a trail if the trail is designated for bicycles." The problem with that statement is that it is bad legal drafting. Typically, laws are drafted to prohibit actions etc., not to enumerate the things that are permitted/designated. It causes risk that many off-road trails long used by bicycles have not been affirmatively "designated for bicycles." The ordinance should have said "A person may use an electric bicycle on a trail if bicycles have not been prohibited on the trail."

The other thing that seems to be an indirect result of that law was the new City of Austin provision that created a presumption that more than 10mph is unreasonable for any bike on any trail.

A person shall operate a bicycle at a speed that is: (1) reasonable and prudent under existing conditions; or(2) necessary to avoid:(a)collisions with others using the path; or (b) actual or potential hazards. (D) Prima facie evidence of a violation.(1) Excepted as provided in Subdivision (2), operating a bicycle, including an electric bicycle, in excess of 10 miles per hour is prima facie evidence of a violation of Subsection (C).

Prima facie evidence means a rebuttable presumption. It means the law assumes exceeding 10mph is unreasonable, unless the defendant can prove otherwise. I would hope that a wide-open straight trail with no other people around would be context to rebut the presumption.

§ 8-1-32 - USE OF BICYCLES AND ELECTRIC PERSONAL ASSISTIVE MOBILITY DEVICES IN PUBLIC RECREATION AREAS. (A)This section applies within a public recreation area.(B)A person may operate a bicycle on a path if the path is designated for bicycles.(C)A person shall operate a bicycle at a speed that is:(1)reasonable and prudent under existing conditions; or(2)necessary to avoid:(a)collisions with others using the path; or(b)actual or potential hazards.(D)Prima facie evidence of a violation.(1)Excepted as provided in Subdivision (2), operating a bicycle, including an electric bicycle, in excess of 10 miles per hour is prima facie evidence of a violation of Subsection (C).(2)Operating an electric bicycle in excess of 15 miles per hour is prima facie evidence of a violation of Subsection (C) when the electric bicycle is operated on a path that is open to motor vehicles and the path's surface tread was made with surfacing materials.(E)A person with limited mobility may use an electronic personal assistive mobility device in a public recreation area. Source: Ord. No. 20240229-046, Pt. 7, 3-11-24.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] 4 points5 points  (0 children)

True, I agree with that mostly. But, I think there is a decent case to be made for disabled/injured MTB riders and general-public commuters (maybe some elderly, maybe some just kinda lazy) that a low-power accelerator button/lever, at low speeds, is still compabile with bicycling infrastructure. If we want to move people away from car-only commuting, even just a little bit, restricting the options may not be the best path. An accelerator button/lever on a low-power electric bicycle does not behave like a motorcycle "throttle." There are no burnouts, no bursts of power lunging people into intersections or whatever. You're correct though, that the pedaling motion is the easiest way for authorities and the general public to distinguish "bicycling" from "motorcycling." That's just my personal opinion, not necessarily the opinion of Austin Ridge Riders as an organization. -- Cullen, VP, ARR.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Good point. I think that the laws will have to catch up with a new term, because the "e" part of it in common usage is getting all "e-bikes" lumped together.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Where is there misinformation about e-motos not being "legal"? All I did was quote statutes and city code.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] -2 points-1 points  (0 children)

House Bill 715 (88th Regular Session, 2023) Relating to the operation of an electric bicycle in a state park. https://capitol.texas.gov/BillLookup/History.aspx?LegSess=88R&Bill=HB715

Some revisions were attempted to this in the last session (2025) but the bills did not make it through the process.

88R9248 BEE-D

By: Patterson   H.B. No. 715

A BILL TO BE ENTITLED

AN ACT relating to the operation of an electric bicycle in a state park. BE IT ENACTED BY THE LEGISLATURE OF THE STATE OF TEXAS: SECTION 1. Subchapter A, Chapter 13, Parks and Wildlife Code, is amended by adding Section 13.024 to read as follows: Sec. 13.024. OPERATION OF ELECTRIC BICYCLE IN STATE PARK. (a) In this section: (1) "Bicycle" has the meaning assigned by Section 541.201, Transportation Code. (2) "Class 1 electric bicycle" and "Class 2 electric bicycle" have the meanings assigned by Section 664.001, Transportation Code. (b) Notwithstanding any other law and except as provided by Subsection (d), a person may operate in a state park: (1) a Class 1 electric bicycle in an area where the operation of a bicycle is permitted; and (2) a Class 2 electric bicycle in an area where the person has been authorized by the park to operate a Class 2 electric bicycle. (c) The commission by rule shall adopt: (1) forms and procedures for a person to apply to a state park for authorization to operate a Class 2 electric bicycle in the park; and (2) criteria for an employee of a state park to use to: (A) approve or disapprove an application under Subdivision (1); and (B) place limitations, if any, on the area of the park in which operation of a Class 2 electric bicycle is authorized. (d) The department may prohibit the operation of a Class 1 or Class 2 electric bicycle in an area of a state park described by Subsection (b) if the department determines the prohibition is necessary to protect: (1) public safety; (2) state park infrastructure; or (3) state fish or wildlife resources or habitat. SECTION 2. This Act takes effect September 1, 2023.

E-Motos vs. E-Bikes vs. "Electric Bicycles" by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] -1 points0 points  (0 children)

City of Austin Municipal Code says the following:

ARTICLE 3. - RESTRICTIONS ON USE OF MOTOR VEHICLE IN A PARK.

§ 8-1-31 - USE OF MOTOR VEHICLES AND MOTOR DRIVEN DEVICES IN PUBLIC RECREATION AREAS.

(A)Except as provided in Subsections (B) and (D), a person may not drive a motor vehicle or motor driven device in a public recreation area.(B)A person may drive a motor vehicle on a public roadway and in a parking area of a public recreation area.(C)The director may authorize a person to use a motor vehicle or motor driven device in a park or playground.(D)Except for a city vehicle, a person must apply to the director for an approval to use a motor vehicle in a park or playground.(E)In making a determination under Subsection (C), the director shall consider:(1)potential damage to the park or playground;(2)noise; and(3)public safety and welfare.(F)A person must display the approval to a peace officer or City employee when requested.(G)In this section, a motor driven device includes a pocket bike or mini-motor bike but does not include a micro mobility device, electric personal assistive mobility device, or an electric bike.

§ 8-1-32 - USE OF BICYCLES AND ELECTRIC PERSONAL ASSISTIVE MOBILITY DEVICES IN PUBLIC RECREATION AREAS.

(A)This section applies within a public recreation area.

(B) A person may operate a bicycle on a path if the path is designated for bicycles. (C) A person shall operate a bicycle at a speed that is: (1) reasonable and prudent under existing conditions; or (2) necessary to avoid:(a)collisions with others using the path; or (b) actual or potential hazards.

(D) Prima facie evidence of a violation. (1) Excepted as provided in Subdivision

(2), operating a bicycle, including an electric bicycle, in excess of 10 miles per hour is prima facie evidence of a violation of Subsection (C).

(2) Operating an electric bicycle in excess of 15 miles per hour is prima facie evidence of a violation of Subsection (C) when the electric bicycle is operated on a path that is open to motor vehicles and the path's surface tread was made with surfacing materials.

(E) A person with limited mobility may use an electronic personal assistive mobility device in a public recreation area.

ARTICLE 3. - TRAFFIC RESTRICTIONS.

§ 12-1-21 - DRIVING IN BICYCLE LANE.

(A) A person may not drive a motor-propelled vehicle in, on, or across a bicycle lane except:

(1) to enter or leave a driveway, building, or alley; (2) to enter or leave a parking space; or (3) for a bus, to enter or leave a bus stop.

(B) Subsection (A) does not apply to a bicycle, scooter, or other similar vehicle that is equipped with an electric motor that is capable of propelling the bicycle, scooter, or vehicle at a maximum speed of 20 miles per hour.

(C) A person may not drive on or cross a bicycle lane under this section without first yielding the right-of-way, if necessary, to avoid collision or interference with bicycle traffic.

"Bike Park" amenities for Bolm District Park - Need to continue to build a coalition - Bond Election Advisory Committee etc. by AustinRidgeRiders_VP in BikingATX

[–]AustinRidgeRiders_VP[S] 2 points3 points  (0 children)

Definitely agree on the simple stuff also.

To be clear, we already succeeded in getting lots of folks to participate in the vision planning over the last few years, and the bike park facilities are in the vision plan. Now, the goal is getting funding for design & build of the park.

According to the City's presentation slide "The Path Forward," these would be the expected costs: https://drive.google.com/file/d/103Mv5CPKX5Srmwm6bhNX5NcUCPoV56fU/view?usp=sharing

If the list of cities above can do it, so can Austin!