Pirate 4x4 banner

41 - 60 of 304 Posts

·
flamethrower
Joined
·
12,597 Posts
I think it boils down to this:

If it's legal on the trail - it SHOULD be legal on the combined use roadway to and from the Chalet Parking area.

Period - day or night.
 

·
Read Only
Joined
·
14,843 Posts
I think it boils down to this:

If it's legal on the trail - it SHOULD be legal on the combined use roadway to and from the Chalet Parking area.

Period - day or night.
I don't think anyone disagrees with you. Hell, even if Marcus agrees with us, he would still have to do his current job and enforce the current book on it.

I think Scott is talking about a situation on the fence that will hopefully pan out nicely soon, and I am 100% on his side and agree with it. But until things are set in stone, I don't think I'm wrong about telling the public that between the Chalet and spillway - be street legit to avoid tickets.

Furthermore, the concern you and Scott have about the trail after dark needs no worry. That is for the same section between Chalet/spillway because it's still considered and enforced like a "highway". If the after dark thing applied to the trail itself, it would mean all other laws of the highway would apply - like windshields, mudflaps, etc.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
16,230 Posts
While looking at vehicle code...

I found this:

21959. It is unlawful for any person to ski or toboggan on or
across any roadway in such a manner as to interfere with the movement
of vehicles thereon. A person on skis proceeding on or across a
highway at a pace no greater than a walk is not within the
prohibition of this section and shall be considered to be a
pedestrian with all the rights and duties thereof as prescribed in
this code

:p

21956. (a) No pedestrian may walk upon any roadway outside of a
business or residence district otherwise than close to his or her
left-hand edge of the roadway.


Will Ken be handing out tickets to Monte and the ski patrol this winter up on the Rubicon?
 

·
flamethrower
Joined
·
12,597 Posts
I don't think anyone disagrees with you. Hell, even if Marcus agrees with us, he would still have to do his current job and enforce the current book on it.

I think Scott is talking about a situation on the fence that will hopefully pan out nicely soon, and I am 100% on his side and agree with it. But until things are set in stone, I don't think I'm wrong about telling the public that between the Chalet and spillway - be street legit to avoid tickets.

Furthermore, the concern you and Scott have about the trail after dark needs no worry. That is for the same section between Chalet/spillway because it's still considered and enforced like a "highway". If the after dark thing applied to the trail itself, it would mean all other laws of the highway would apply - like windshields, mudflaps, etc.
My point is if it's legit for the trail - green sticker legal, or Street Legal you should be able to drive it at night to and from the Chalet.

What get my hackles up is when we bust our butts to get things situated for folks - ie overflow parking at the Chalet so there is plenty of legal parking to keep the road clear for emergency vehicles, and then something like this pops up especially when it's some obscure CVC code that has not been enforced before.

If this is in fact the case - and it will be enforced - then now we are going to have to put signs up at the Chalet Parking area that you cannot drive to and from this point at night with your non street legal vehicle.


I hate surprises and time-wasters, this is both. I know most of us have bigger things to focus on.

Thanks Ken....
 

·
flamethrower
Joined
·
12,597 Posts
there are signs up there that say shared road and i told the cop that and he didnt care he said the shared road starts at the spillway.
The Combined use roadway starts at the Chalet.

Soulfly - is there anything else that is missing from this story? I saw in another thread you said you had a cracked windshield....
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
52 Posts
Discussion Starter #47
yes whole passanger side windsheild is busted when
i rolled last and no mudflaps and my tires stick out...there full width on 39s but he didnt cite me for that
 

·
Super Moderator
Joined
·
17,783 Posts
I don't think anyone disagrees with you. Hell, even if Marcus agrees with us, he would still have to do his current job and enforce the current book on it.
Please... :rolleyes: If every cop has to enforce the letter of the law, you'd be getting speeding tickets for doing 55.1 in a 55. Cops have discretion, you know. Marcus has a hardon for us, plain and simple.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
937 Posts
From the CA Vehicle Code:

38026.
(d) A designation of a highway, or a portion thereof, under
subdivision (a) shall become effective upon the erection of
appropriate signs of a type approved by the Department of
Transportation on and along the highway, or portion thereof.


38026.5
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), it is unlawful for any person
using an off-highway vehicle on a combined-use highway to do any of
the following:
(1) Operate an off-highway motor vehicle on the highway during the
hours of darkness.
(2) Operate any vehicle on the highway which does not have an
operational stoplight.
(3) Operate any vehicle on the highway which does not have rubber
tires.
(4) Operate any vehicle without a valid driver's license of the
appropriate class for the vehicle operation in possession.

Ride on
Brewster
 

·
flamethrower
Joined
·
12,597 Posts
"Notwithstanding subdivision (a)"...guess that means in spite of it being a combined use roadway, you cannot operate your Green stickered rig from the Chalet to the Kiosk after hours of darkness.


:rolleyes:

Well folks - we had 4 years of a solution to the parking problems.

I guess I'll make some calls and see what we can do.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
637 Posts
From the CA Vehicle Code:

38026.
(d) A designation of a highway, or a portion thereof, under
subdivision (a) shall become effective upon the erection of
appropriate signs of a type approved by the Department of
Transportation on and along the highway, or portion thereof.


38026.5
(b) Notwithstanding subdivision (a), it is unlawful for any person
using an off-highway vehicle on a combined-use highway to do any of
the following:
(1) Operate an off-highway motor vehicle on the highway during the
hours of darkness.
(2) Operate any vehicle on the highway which does not have an
operational stoplight.
(3) Operate any vehicle on the highway which does not have rubber
tires.
(4) Operate any vehicle without a valid driver's license of the
appropriate class for the vehicle operation in possession.

Ride on
Brewster
that's a low down dirty law, combined use implies that OHV and street legal are sharing that road, i think the following clarifications should be posted up under the signs if they are indeed true:

1. dirt bike riders would need a class M license to ride on the combined use road
2. dirt bikes, quads, trucks, etc without stop lights are prohibited from using the combined use road
3. this road is closed to everything except street legal cars after sunset and until sunrise

i'm gonna make sure i get to MCR9 early enough to park below the dam and not even risk getting a $450 by driving down from Chalet!

why does it even say COMBINED USE if it's extremely limited and deceiving. :shaking:
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
668 Posts
Please... :rolleyes: If every cop has to enforce the letter of the law, you'd be getting speeding tickets for doing 55.1 in a 55. Cops have discretion, you know. Marcus has a hardon for us, plain and simple.
Amen Lance plain and simple Marcus has a hardon for all of us
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts
that's a low down dirty law, combined use implies that OHV and street legal are sharing that road, i think the following clarifications should be posted up under the signs if they are indeed true:

1. dirt bike riders would need a class M license to ride on the combined use road
2. dirt bikes, quads, trucks, etc without stop lights are prohibited from using the combined use road
3. this road is closed to everything except street legal cars after sunset and until sunrise

i'm gonna make sure i get to MCR9 early enough to park below the dam and not even risk getting a $450 by driving down from Chalet!

why does it even say COMBINED USE if it's extremely limited and deceiving. :shaking:
Exactly, however you missed one:

4. All OHVs using the roadway must have liability insurance also. How many dirt bikes and quads have that?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
462 Posts
I am sure this would be near impossible, but is there any chance of getting a trail that runs along the roadway from the Chalet to the end of the pavement?

This is crazy, it totally goes against the "spirit" of the law.
 

·
Premium Member
Joined
·
9,568 Posts
I and other folks worked hard to implement the existing 'combined use' solution for the chunk of the roads near Airport Flat and the Chalet, attending countless Rubicon Oversight Committee (ROC) meetings and working this solution through the process... the solution was literally years in the making. Let's not give up so quickly on a solution that has mitigated parking and enhanced OHV use.

Individual research through the associated agencies is a great idea, but please take this up at the ROC, where multiple agencies, organizations, and individuals attend and work together -- that's how we can get this issue agendized and addressed best, IMHO.

In the meantime, I'd love to see a picture of the rig that was ticketed... some of the stuff i see on the trail makes me want to renew my TB shot, and some makes me want to buy stock in Meguires... where does this rig sit? It shouldn't matter that much, but in reality, it alwasy does, because Lance nailed it -- officer discretion gives them enough latitude so that I'm definitely curious about the rest of the story...

Randii
 
41 - 60 of 304 Posts
Top