Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Micro Mobility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Johns Creek staff recommend allowing class 1–2 e‑bikes on sidewalks and trails, excluding most city parks
Summary
City staff recommended amending code 54‑6 to allow class 1 and 2 e‑bikes on sidewalks and trails outside parks while restricting class 3 to roadways; council members debated enforcement, speed limits and accessibility and agreed to place the issue on new business for further drafting and public feedback.
Get email alerts on the Micro Mobility topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Director Brian O'Connor told the Johns Creek City Council at its Jan. 12 work session that staff recommends amending city code 54‑6 to allow class 1 and class 2 electric bicycles to operate on sidewalks and trails outside of city parks while reserving class 3 e‑bikes for roadways. "As defined, class 1 e‑bikes are considered equivalent to traditional bicycles within the city," O'Connor said, and staff attached a marked‑up ordinance to the memo for review.
Council members divided over the best regulatory approach, with several arguing speed — not classification — should be the primary safety control. "I would make it a speed limit issue, not a type of bike," one councilmember said, counseling a simpler enforcement model focused on dangerous behavior rather than bike classification. Others raised concerns about enforcement practicality: police would need a way to identify classifications in the field, and some e‑bikes carry classification plaques only visible on close inspection.
Staff said they consulted the police traffic enforcement team, which recommended the option that would allow class 1 and 2 on sidewalks and trails but maintain park restrictions. "We met with the police department. They ... agreed with option 1," O'Connor said, noting that the department views the change as a practical enforcement tool that gives officers a local ordinance to cite.
Council members also flagged equity and accessibility questions. Several noted class 3 e‑bikes are commonly used by older adults, people with disabilities and parents towing child trailers; they discussed whether a hardship or accessibility carve‑out would be appropriate if class 3 users would be forced onto roadways. One member summarized the tradeoff: allowing broader sidewalk access can preserve multimodal transportation access but may require iterative policy adjustments.
Members expressed interest in community outreach before finalizing language. Council signaled a preference for starting with the more limited option 1 and revisiting the policy after public feedback and additional study of enforcement mechanisms. The item will be carried forward to new business for further drafting and a future vote.
The proposal reflects practices in neighboring jurisdictions that, staff said, generally follow state law allowing e‑bikes on trails 10 feet wide or wider and on bike lanes; most cities do not permit all classes on narrower sidewalks. Under the draft approach, parks would remain more restrictive: park policy would continue to allow only class 1 (pedal‑assist) e‑bikes on park trails because of pedestrian use and safety concerns.
Next steps: staff will draft ordinance language for new business, include community outreach in planned transportation and multimodal planning updates, and return with details on enforcement and any recommended signage or education campaigns.
