The Okanagan Rail Trail (ORT) corridor is widely used by people of all abilities and interests - joggers, dog walkers, cyclists, families, tourists, commuters - it is truly an active transportation corridor connecting communities throughout the Okanagan Valley with four major entities charged with maintaining and servicing it. 

The Regional District of North Okanagan (RDNO) has posted new signage prohibiting Class 2 electric bikes along their section of the ORT. I oppose this restriction as discriminatory against less able-bodied cyclists.   

RDNO Bylaw 2834 Section 8 item 8: “No person shall operate a motorized vehicle, including Class 2 and Class 3 e-bikes, motorbikes, or snowmobiles on park, trail, or natural space property without prior authorization of the Regional District unless the property is designated for such purpose, such as roadways, or signed accordingly.”

It is important to note that a Class 2 electric bike has the identical operating and maximum speed features as the Class 1 ebike (which is permitted) with the one addition of the on-demand throttle. 

The on-demand throttle assists less able-bodied riders to start smoothly from a standing position and move up inclines with ease while picking up the correct gear and pedal assist level. It can also assist when a fatigued rider wants or needs to complete a longer ride.   

Prohibiting Class 2 electric bikes, restricts seniors, injured or less- abled people from using the RDNO portion of the ORT contradicting the core objective of connecting communities with an active transportation pathway for people of all ages and all abilities. 

Not knowing or understanding the boundaries of the RDNO jurisdiction, the public was frustrated, confused, and caught off-guard by this newly posted bylaw. The primary demographic of Class 2 electric bikes owners is 55+ who utilize the throttle as the assistance tool that it is. The majority who desire to be law abiding, will stop using the trail so as to not break the law. This does not serve the objective of the trail and is discriminatory against this demographic.  

I believe governance of the ORT should be seamless, clear, and united in its mandate to bring the communities that the ORT connects through public consultation - as it did during the ORTs inception. 

Background

Trail Development:  Input was gathered for the initial phase of trail development at public information sessions and through an online survey. Additional feedback collected from the engagement process will be retained for future reference, for use in any future planning and development of the trail corridor.

Trail Benefits: 

• Connects more than 200,000 residents living in communities of the Okanagan Valley 
• Provides access to some of the valley’s most scenic features, including 22 km of lakefront 
• Preserves the corridor for future regional transportation opportunities 
• Improves overall cycling and pedestrian linkages 
• Supports destination tourism opportunities in the region 
• Improves economic development opportunities 
• Increases opportunity for preventative healthcare with associated recreational uses.

Community Involvement: Community champions, donors and volunteers have been integral to the trail’s successful development. Over a two-year period, volunteers, businesses, groups, organizations and individuals worked to fundraise $7.8M. More than 5,000 donors contributed towards developing this legacy that is now a huge part of our communities’ lifestyle and visitor experience.

This work continues today through private donations and fundraising efforts. 

My business, Pedego Oyama, is also invested in the health of the trail and the well-being of its users. We are Okanagan Rail Trail supporter where a donation from every ebike rental is annually given back to the maintenance of the ORT. 

With so many stakeholders, should public consultation not have been a part of bylaw process?

RDNO stated restrictions came about because of complaints. To date (May 18), I have requested but not received the complaints logged by the RDNO on ORT usage. I can only speculate: If speed is the issue, then the bylaw language should encompass all bikes and set a speed limit as others (Calgary) have. 

If reckless riding is the issue, then a bylaw that speaks to trail etiquette and safety is more appropriate than the throttle ban. Enforce the provincial law of mandatory helmets and make bells mandatory as other cities (Vancouver) have. Educate on safe passing and pedestrian right of way - supporting the work of Friends of Okanagan Rail Trail ambassadors. 

We don't restrict the kind of car driven on a public road. Instead, we put laws in place as to how the driver should operate that vehicle in a safe and responsible manner. Rail trail rules ought to follow that same common-sense approach.

The ORT has been an active transportation route for generations with Indigenous people using this corridor through the Okanagan to access their summer fishing grounds. The Railway use began in 1908 to assist the communities along this corridor get their product to market. Today, I use the ORT for my ebike commute from Coldstream to Oyama for work. 

Consider the economic impact. With the restart of the tourism season after Covid, rising fuel costs and the public desire to reduce our carbon footprint, don’t restrict this important demographic from riding their class 2 ebikes in the RDNO. 

In the best interests of healthy bodies and healthy minds for all ages and abilities, I encourage you to sign and share this petition to allow Class2 ebikes on RDNO ‘s section of the Okanagan Rail Trail. 

Sheila Fraser

692 Mt Thor Dr 

Coldstream, B.C.