# Santa Clara County Parks in California.



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Too bad the "Where you can ride" section of this forum got closed; here's some news:

Although dated end of May this has just made it to the light of day:

View attachment 1160221


Classes 1 and 2 yes Class 3 not.


----------



## EricTheDood (Sep 22, 2017)

Thanks for the info. 

Which Santa Clara County parks are popular with MTBers? 

I'm only familiar with the open space preserves managed by the Mid Peninsula Open Space District, which has flat out banned all classes of e-bikes from their trails.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

EricTheDood said:


> Thanks for the info.
> 
> Which Santa Clara County parks are popular with MTBers?
> 
> I'm only familiar with the open space preserves managed by the Mid Peninsula Open Space District, which has flat out banned all classes of e-bikes from their trails.


Primarily Harvey Bear and Santa Teresa, Grant Ranch and Almaden Quicksilver also get some attention. A bunch of trails at Calero will be coming on line in the next couple of years.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

I wonder who drafted these regulation$$$? :skep:



> *SCC ORD B14 defines a Motorized Device as: Any motor-driven cycle or motorized bicycle as defined in CVC 405 and 406; any motorized skateboard or scooter.* E-bikes do not fall under this section.





> (1) A "class 1 electric bicycle," or "low-speed pedal-assisted electric bicycle," *is a bicycle equipped with a motor *that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour.





> (2) A "class 2 electric bicycle," or "low-speed throttle-assisted electric bicycle,"* is a bicycle equipped with a motor* that may be used exclusively to propel the bicycle, and that is not capable of providing assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 20 miles per hour.





> (3) A "class 3 electric bicycle," or "speed pedal-assisted [electric bicycle," is a *bicycle equipped with a motor* that provides assistance only when the rider is pedaling, and that ceases to provide assistance when the bicycle reaches the speed of 28 miles per hour, and equipped with a speedometer.





> 405. A motor-driven cycle is any motorcycle with a motor that displaces less than 150
> cubic centimeters. *A motor-driven cycle does not include a motorized bicycle, as defined in Section 406*.


Someone is seriously confused. This is completely contrary to what the Bureau of Land management, National Park Service, IMBA, and Sierra Club has written about them.

In Virigina:
http://www.fairfaxcounty.gov/parks/parkpolicy/app7regs.pdf



> B. Prohibited Vehicles.
> (3) Motor-assisted bicycles (commonly referred to as "mopeds") are permitted only in areas where motor vehicles are permitted.


----------



## Moe Ped (Aug 24, 2009)

Lemonaid said:


> I wonder who drafted these regulation$$$? :skep:
> 
> Someone is seriously confused. This is completely contrary to what the Bureau of Land management, National Park Service, IMBA, and Sierra Club has written about them.


Probably written by County counsel or at least approved by them. Took several months apparently.

It doesn't matter what the Bureau of Land management, National Park Service, IMBA, Sierra Club and/or Virginia thinks about them, this is a particular county in California and they can do as they damned well see fit.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

Moe Ped said:


> Probably written by County counsel or at least approved by them. Took several months apparently.
> 
> It doesn't matter what the Bureau of Land management, National Park Service, IMBA, Sierra Club and/or Virginia thinks about them, this is a particular county in California and *they can do as they damned well see fit.*


Whoa... ok mister sir.


----------



## Lemonaid (May 13, 2013)

BTW, typically when it comes to land access issues its usually majority rules from what I've seen. The courts don't usually have a say in who and who should not have access to certain trails. So if you really want e-bikes to be accepted where you live, it's probably best to be nice to everyone who has concerns about them being a problem and come to a mutual understanding.


----------



## sfgiantsfan (Dec 20, 2010)

Lemonaid said:


> BTW, typically when it comes to land access issues its usually majority rules from what I've seen. The courts don't usually have a say in who and who should not have access to certain trails. So if you really want e-bikes to be accepted where you live, it's probably best to be nice to everyone who has concerns about them being a problem and come to a mutual understanding.


Where are you from?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## Harryman (Jun 14, 2011)

Lemonaid said:


> BTW, typically when it comes to land access issues its usually majority rules from what I've seen. The courts don't usually have a say in who and who should not have access to certain trails. So if you really want e-bikes to be accepted where you live, it's probably best to be nice to everyone who has concerns about them being a problem and come to a mutual understanding.


Um, no. There's no "majority rule" that I've ever seen across multiple agencies. Land managers decide for themselves how to manage their land, if they can back up their decisions, as Moe Ped says, they can do whatever they'd Iike. They decide, their lawyers write up the code, done.

They might reach out for input, but the decision is theirs.


----------

