laws

In article <[email hidden]>,

Daniel said:

does anyone know if tall bikes are considered legal in san mateo
county? I think that would be a blast to cruise down canada/portola
valley loop on one. Lots of heads turn when I pass them on my 6ft tall
uni....id like to see the reaction to a tall bike.

I am aware of no jurisdiction that has banned them.

In most places, at least on this continent, bicycle regulations are
mercifully minimal. The usual definition of a bicycle is something along
the lines of "human-powered vehicle." A lot of jurisdictions have a law
setting a minimum efficacy standard for brakes (being able to skid a
wheel on dry ground is popular), or requiring at least two brakes, or
both.

I don't think dimensional constraints are common, though.

Besides, a law against tallbikes would accidentally ban Ordinaries.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 09:04:03 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Daniel said:

does anyone know if tall bikes are considered legal in san mateo
county? I think that would be a blast to cruise down canada/portola
valley loop on one. Lots of heads turn when I pass them on my 6ft tall
uni....id like to see the reaction to a tall bike.

I am aware of no jurisdiction that has banned them.

In most places, at least on this continent, bicycle regulations are
mercifully minimal. The usual definition of a bicycle is something along
the lines of "human-powered vehicle." A lot of jurisdictions have a law
setting a minimum efficacy standard for brakes (being able to skid a
wheel on dry ground is popular), or requiring at least two brakes, or
both.

I don't think dimensional constraints are common, though.

Besides, a law against tallbikes would accidentally ban Ordinaries.

It is illegal to ride a unicycle or an ordinary on the roads in
British Columbia.

Daniel said:

does anyone know if tall bikes are considered legal in san mateo county?
I think that would be a blast to cruise down canada/portola valley loop
on one. Lots of heads turn when I pass them on my 6ft tall uni....id
like to see the reaction to a tall bike.

The Massachusetts Bicycle Coalition has a database of state bicycling
laws:

http://www.massbike.org/bikelaw/statelaws.htm

There do appear to be sections of California law limiting the physical
form of a bicycle, including this:

==================================================

21201. (a) No person shall operate a bicycle on a roadway unless it is
equipped with a brake which will enable the operator to make one braked
wheel skid on dry, level, clean pavement.
(b) No person shall operate on the highway any bicycle equipped
with handlebars so raised that the operator must elevate his hands above
the level of his shoulders in order to grasp the normal steering grip
area.
(c) No person shall operate upon any highway a bicycle which is of
such a size as to prevent the operator from safely stopping the bicycle,
supporting it in an upright position with at least one foot on the ground,
and restarting it in a safe manner.

==================================================

I'm not sure how up-to-date the Massbike database is, so you might want to
check whatever you find there against other compendiums of California law.
(Or check with a local bicycle advocacy group or a lawyer.) Findlaw.com is
usually a pretty good source of timely information about state law:

http://california.lp.findlaw.com/ca00_casecode/index.html

It's possible that San Mateo county has additional requirements, though
many states prohibit localities from enacting ordinances that conflict
with state traffic law, even when it comes to bicycles (I don't know if
that's true of California).

Daniel said:

does anyone know if tall bikes are considered legal in san mateo
county? I think that would be a blast to cruise down canada/portola
valley loop on one. Lots of heads turn when I pass them on my 6ft tall
uni....id like to see the reaction to a tall bike.

A penny farthing or some sort of 'circus' bike. What do you mean?

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 09:04:03 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Daniel said:

does anyone know if tall bikes are considered legal in san mateo
county? I think that would be a blast to cruise down canada/portola
valley loop on one. Lots of heads turn when I pass them on my 6ft tall
uni....id like to see the reaction to a tall bike.

I am aware of no jurisdiction that has banned them.

In most places, at least on this continent, bicycle regulations are
mercifully minimal. The usual definition of a bicycle is something along
the lines of "human-powered vehicle." A lot of jurisdictions have a law
setting a minimum efficacy standard for brakes (being able to skid a
wheel on dry ground is popular), or requiring at least two brakes, or
both.

I don't think dimensional constraints are common, though.

Besides, a law against tallbikes would accidentally ban Ordinaries.

It is illegal to ride a unicycle or an ordinary on the roads in
British Columbia.

http://www.gvcc.bc.ca/links/motorvehicleact.shtml

183 (8) A cycle operated on a highway must be equipped with a brake that
will enable the person operating the cycle to make the braked wheels
skid on dry, level and clean pavement.

Yes, that would de facto ban both unicycles and ordinaries, though I
suspect if you really wanted, an ordinary could be made legal with a
caliper brake on the rear wheel. Note that the act only calls for
mandatory braking on one wheel.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

In article <[email hidden]>,

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Daniel said:

does anyone know if tall bikes are considered legal in san mateo
county? I think that would be a blast to cruise down canada/portola
valley loop on one. Lots of heads turn when I pass them on my 6ft tall
uni....id like to see the reaction to a tall bike.

A penny farthing or some sort of 'circus' bike. What do you mean?

I bet he means a tall bike:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_bike

The modern way to build a tall bike (aka tallbike) is to put one bicycle
frame on top of another, do some creative welding (remove the rear
triangle of the top frame, add a tube to connect the two head tubes into
one extremely long head tube, make an extra long steer tube), and the
cranks go on the upper bottom bracket.

The Wikipedia entry also has a photo of a lamplighter bicycle, circa
1898. In the hi-res version, you can see the skip-tooth front cog,
pneumatic 28" tires, and that this bike must be a fixie.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Daniel said:

does anyone know if tall bikes are considered legal in san mateo
county?

State law is all that matters; the California Vehicle Code prohibits
local jurisdictions from making any laws/ordinances on such matters.
But of course you are talking of the Township of Woodside and Portola
Valley, areas which have been known to ignore this and pass laws that
are in violation of state law and the state constitution.

Quoted message said:

I think that would be a blast to cruise down canada/portola
valley loop on one. Lots of heads turn when I pass them on my 6ft tall
uni....id like to see the reaction to a tall bike.

Unless you can stop it, sit atop it with one foot on the ground the
tall bike would appear to violate provisions in the CVC.

- rick

Gary Young said:

(b) No person shall operate on the highway any bicycle equipped
with handlebars so raised that the operator must elevate his hands above
the level of his shoulders in order to grasp the normal steering grip
area.

That would appear to prohibit many recumbent designs.

--
Dave...

Ryan Cousineau said:

http://www.gvcc.bc.ca/links/motorvehicleact.shtml

183 (8) A cycle operated on a highway must be equipped with a brake that
will enable the person operating the cycle to make the braked wheels
skid on dry, level and clean pavement.

ISTM the legislators screwed up. (Again.) That term "wheels" should
not be plural.

You're not going to get the front wheel of a normal bike to skid on dry
level clean pavement, no matter what sort of brake you use. At least,
not while the bike is being ridden in any normal fashion.

- Frank Krygowski

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 14:32:03 GMT, Ryan Cousineau <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

In article <[email hidden]>,

Qui si parla Campagnolo said:

Daniel said:

does anyone know if tall bikes are considered legal in san mateo
county? I think that would be a blast to cruise down canada/portola
valley loop on one. Lots of heads turn when I pass them on my 6ft tall
uni....id like to see the reaction to a tall bike.

A penny farthing or some sort of 'circus' bike. What do you mean?

I bet he means a tall bike:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tall_bike

The modern way to build a tall bike (aka tallbike) is to put one bicycle
frame on top of another, do some creative welding (remove the rear
triangle of the top frame, add a tube to connect the two head tubes into
one extremely long head tube, make an extra long steer tube), and the
cranks go on the upper bottom bracket.

The Wikipedia entry also has a photo of a lamplighter bicycle, circa
1898. In the hi-res version, you can see the skip-tooth front cog,
pneumatic 28" tires, and that this bike must be a fixie.

Dear Ryan,

What a nice bit of history!

If I knew how to photoshop, a picture of Jobst cornering on that bike
would soon appear.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Quoted message said:

ISTM the legislators screwed up. (Again.) That term "wheels" should
not be plural.

You're not going to get the front wheel of a normal bike to skid on dry
level clean pavement, no matter what sort of brake you use. At least,
not while the bike is being ridden in any normal fashion.

It's a poorly expressed rule even if it says 'wheel' instead of
'wheels.'

The emerging question, that has already been tortured to opposite
conclusions by at least two traffic judges of the pacific northwest,
is whether or not such a rule would ban a brakeless track bike
if the operator can skid the thing to a stop.

I suspect that the word "mechanical" will make
its way into the sentence before too long.

Robert

"dkahn400" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Gary Young said:

(b) No person shall operate on the highway any bicycle equipped
with handlebars so raised that the operator must elevate his hands

above

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the level of his shoulders in order to grasp the normal steering grip
area.

That would appear to prohibit many recumbent designs.

--
Dave...

OH! You just opened a can of worms....

Prepare for the zealot's onslaught!

Chas.

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

(b) No person shall operate on the highway any bicycle equipped
with handlebars so raised that the operator must elevate his hands

above

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the level of his shoulders in order to grasp the normal steering grip
area.

That would appear to prohibit many recumbent designs.

--
Dave...

OH! You just opened a can of worms....

Only if someone changes the header to read-

RECUMBENTS OUTLAWED IN CALIFORNIA!

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

"* * Chas" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

"dkahn400" <[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Gary Young said:

(b) No person shall operate on the highway any bicycle equipped
with handlebars so raised that the operator must elevate his hands

above

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

the level of his shoulders in order to grasp the normal steering grip
area.

That would appear to prohibit many recumbent designs.

--
Dave...

OH! You just opened a can of worms....

Prepare for the zealot's onslaught!

Chas.

<[email hidden]> wrote in message
news:[email hidden]...

Quoted message said:

Mike Jacoubowsky said:

Quoted message said:

> > (b) No person shall operate on the highway any bicycle equipped
> > with handlebars so raised that the operator must elevate his hands
above
> > the level of his shoulders in order to grasp the normal steering

grip

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

> > area.
>
> That would appear to prohibit many recumbent designs.
>
> --
> Dave...
>

OH! You just opened a can of worms....

Only if someone changes the header to read-

RECUMBENTS OUTLAWED IN CALIFORNIA!

--Mike Jacoubowsky
Chain Reaction Bicycles
www.ChainReaction.com
Redwood City & Los Altos, CA USA

Dear Mike,

I see Hell's Angels roaring around on motorized lawn-chairs.

Cheers,

Carl Fogel

Handle bar height was originally a motorcycle issue - ape hanger bars.
Banana bikes, BMX and so on were styled after motorcycles and choppers.

Chas.

In article <[email hidden]>,

Quoted message said:

Quoted message said:

ISTM the legislators screwed up. (Again.) That term "wheels" should
not be plural.

You're not going to get the front wheel of a normal bike to skid on dry
level clean pavement, no matter what sort of brake you use. At least,
not while the bike is being ridden in any normal fashion.

It's a poorly expressed rule even if it says 'wheel' instead of
'wheels.'

The emerging question, that has already been tortured to opposite
conclusions by at least two traffic judges of the pacific northwest,
is whether or not such a rule would ban a brakeless track bike
if the operator can skid the thing to a stop.

I suspect that the word "mechanical" will make
its way into the sentence before too long.

Robert

The real issue is that legislators wanted to make a rule that says
"bicycles must have effective brakes," but they wanted to do so without
creating some tedious, picky function test like "must be able to stop in
10m from 30 km/h."

In practice, I have never seen anyone pulled for a brake efficacy test,
and I don't expect I ever will unless the War On Fixies is started.

Locally, the traditional bike usage busts are for missing helmets, or
violations of Vancouver's bell requirement.

--
Ryan Cousineau [email hidden] http://www.wiredcola.com/
"I don't want kids who are thinking about going into mathematics
to think that they have to take drugs to succeed." -Paul Erdos

Quoted message said:

Ryan Cousineau said:

http://www.gvcc.bc.ca/links/motorvehicleact.shtml

183 (8) A cycle operated on a highway must be equipped with a brake that
will enable the person operating the cycle to make the braked wheels
skid on dry, level and clean pavement.

ISTM the legislators screwed up. (Again.) That term "wheels" should
not be plural.

You're not going to get the front wheel of a normal bike to skid on dry
level clean pavement, no matter what sort of brake you use. At least,
not while the bike is being ridden in any normal fashion.

- Frank Krygowski

Which, of course, also makes fixed-gear cycles illegal on the public
roads of British Columbia.

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 06:35:09 -0600, Gary Young <[email hidden]>

Quoted message said:

Daniel said:

does anyone know if tall bikes are considered legal in san mateo county?
I think that would be a blast to cruise down canada/portola valley loop
on one. Lots of heads turn when I pass them on my 6ft tall uni....id
like to see the reaction to a tall bike.

The Massachusetts Bicycle Coalition has a database of state bicycling
laws:

http://www.massbike.org/bikelaw/statelaws.htm

There do appear to be sections of California law limiting the physical
form of a bicycle, including this:

==================================================

21201. (a) No person shall operate a bicycle on a roadway unless it is
equipped with a brake which will enable the operator to make one braked
wheel skid on dry, level, clean pavement.

Does this law define a bicycle?

If it uses the same definition as British Columbia, then unicycles,
fixed-gear cycles, and ordinaries are illegal there as well.

On Fri, 29 Dec 2006 06:35:09 -0600, I wrote:

<snip>

Quoted message said:

I'm not sure how up-to-date the Massbike database is, so you might want to
check whatever you find there against other compendiums of California law.
(Or check with a local bicycle advocacy group or a lawyer.) Findlaw.com is
usually a pretty good source of timely information about state law:

http://california.lp.findlaw.com/ca00_casecode/index.html

Correction: the Massbike site has a link to an up-to-date copy of the code
(follow the link for "vehicle code"😉, so you shouldn't need findlaw.

Ryan Cousineau said:

In article <[email hidden]>,
[email hidden] wrote:

Quoted message said:

183 (8) A cycle operated on a highway must be equipped with a brake that
will enable the person operating the cycle to make the braked wheels
skid on dry, level and clean pavement.

Yes, that would de facto ban both unicycles and ordinaries, though I
suspect if you really wanted, an ordinary could be made legal with a
caliper brake on the rear wheel. Note that the act only calls for
mandatory braking on one wheel.

Note that it actually uses the plural of "braked wheels", not "wheel(s)"
or "wheel or wheels", implying a minimum of two. Both unicycles and
ordinarys *have*, inherently, a braked wheel, like all fixed gear
bicycles.

However, making the front wheel of a pennyfarthing and/or only wheel of a
unicycle skid would be a fairly stupid and suicidal act, even though you
could probably do it.

Jasper