HELP: Proposal to BAN unicycles from the Golden Gate Bridge, in San Francisco, CA

corbin · 2011-05-13, 04:07 PM

Hi All,

There's a silly addition to this proposal that will ban unicycles on the Golden Gate Bridge:

http://goldengate.org/news/bridge/bikespeedlimit.php

Please email them ASAP and request them to not do this. They are taking feedback into consideration. Suggested wording that you can copy and paste is below.

Thanks,

Corbin

To: bridgecomments@goldengate.org

---------------
To whom it may concern,

The proposed speed limit for bicycles also includes a ban on unicycles for no apparent reason. Unicyclists can stop faster than bicyclists and are more maneuverable. They also don't sit up any much higher than a typical bicycle. We frequently ride across the Golden Gate Bridge, and would like you to reconsider the ban on unicycles.

Thank you,

XXX

harper · 2011-05-13, 04:17 PM

You may want to also note that in the proposal itself there is no mention of unicycle related injuries.

Dane M · 2011-05-13, 06:27 PM

I sent in my comments and suggestions. I think that they may have images of giraffes in their mind, and that is where the ban may have sparked from.

corbin · 2011-05-13, 07:52 PM

NeilFred made a great email to them. I'll share it with you all:

---------

Hello. I was alarmed to read in this article:

http://bikeportland.org/2011/04/20/s...den-gate-51749

that unicycles are likely to be banned from the cycling lane going over the Golden Gate Bridge. In particular, the article quotes Golden Gate Bridge spokeswoman Mary Currie as saying, "the control that a cyclist has is different than a unicyclist might have."

The truth is that however precarious unicyclists might seem if you're a non-unicyclist, they are safer and generally have more control than bicyclists, simply because they go slower.

A ban on both tall unicycles and tall bicycles makes perfect sense; a ban on normal unicycles makes exactly as much sense as a ban on normal bicycles -- i.e. no sense at all.

Please don't ban unicycles!

---------

scott ttocs · 2011-05-13, 08:15 PM

It is a bizarre situation. Their safety report suggest banning bicycles and unicycles that have seats more than 4 ft off the ground. In their recommendations this was changed to banning bicycles with seats more than 4 ft off the grand and unicycles.

They did not even read their own report when developing the recommendations.

Idiots!

Scott

deadbeatpope · 2011-05-13, 08:18 PM

We need lobbyists! Bring in the BUFFOONS!

scott ttocs · 2011-05-13, 08:20 PM

Corbin,

Why don't you track down Mary Currie and offer to teach her to unicycle?

A little knowledge goes a long way.

Scott

Tak · 2011-05-13, 09:04 PM

Done.

tadaniels · 2011-05-13, 09:24 PM

Corbin,

Somebody needs to point out to the Committee (or to whomever compiled the list of five recommendations on the Committee's Web site) that the consultant's report does not propose banning unicycles. The ban it proposes is for any 'tall' bike or unicycle with a seat higher than 4' off the ground. The consultant's recommendation is based on the consultant's fear that somebody riding a bicycle or unicycle with a seat more that 4' off the ground could possibly fall over the 4' 6" high safety railing. From the report:

Recommendation 4: Other User Groups
The Bridge currently prohibits roller / inline skaters, skateboards, and dogs (except service animals). These prohibitions should continue as these user groups are not compatible with the high levels of pedestrian and bicycle use experienced on the Bridge sidewalks. Our research into multi-use trail regulations of unicyclists yielded no results; this user group is simply so unique and infrequent that trail and pathway management agencies do not regulate them as a special group. In terms of safety, a “tall bike” (a custom built bike where the seat is situated at a height that may be 5 or more feet off the ground) poses a safety risk to the user from toppling over safety railings. Because the safety rail stands 4’6” tall, prohibition of bicycles or unicycles whose seats are more than 4 feet off the ground might make sense so that no riders topple over the safety railing.

UniTrac · 2011-05-14, 01:24 AM

done

Dane M · 2011-05-14, 02:14 AM

Here is the email I sent if you are curious, or want to touch on something that I forgot to mention. Sorry for the terrible grasp of the english language.

Quote:

Hello,

I am a unicyclist, and I am a bit flustered that unicycles are outright banned for seemingly no reason. Anyone can ride a bicycle, but unicyclists (and especially ones doing longer distances, i.e. commuting across the bridge) have a keen sense of balance, and are in fact safer than bicyclists.

The reason that unicycles are safer is because:
1. We can only go as fast as we can pedal, unlike a bicycle which can hit very high speeds. The average commuter unicyclist may be traveling between 5-9mph, but in full-conscious control.
2. If we do happen to crash, we can actually control where the unicycle goes during the crash, since it is so much smaller than a bike. And almost every crash, the unicyclist is able to just walk-out of it, with the unicycle safely in one hand.
3. More maneuverable. We can stop quicker, and we can navigate unforeseen situations easier (i.e. a pedestrian quickly moves in front of the unicyclist) Since we are not going fast and the unicycle is smaller, it is much easier to just change direction, or instantly stop via dismount.

I am a bicyclist, and a unicyclist. I prefer to ride my unicycle because I feel more in control, and it blends better with pedestrians, which you cannot do with a bicycle. I am in fact more comfortable riding a unicycle than walking, as strange as that may sound.

None of my unicycles have a seat above 4 feet high, but there are unicycles like that. If this was the original intent when the ban on unicycles were included, then the proper term for a tall unicycle is a "giraffe" unicycle. People do not commute on giraffe unicycles because they are designed for performers, and for riding very very short distance, or for riding in place.

Here are some giraffe unicycles: http://www.unicycle.com/unicycles/giraffes-tall/

These are typical commuter unicycles, 36" is the largest produced commuter, so people commute on wheel sizes from about 24"-36" but no larger:http://www.unicycle.com/unicycles/commuter-touring/

I am very willing to take any questions you may have. The amount of unicyclists in the world is very small, and you would be hard-pressed to find news of any unicycle-related accidents, I have never even heard of one, whether it be with cars or pedestrians. We are a very friendly and tight-knit group, and many of us used to be bicyclists, so we have good perspective. Banning unicycles from the bridge completely would be a big mistake in my opinion.

Thank you for your time and have a good one,
-Dane

johnfoss · 2011-05-14, 06:55 AM

Here's my letter:

Dear Goldengate.org,

People fear what they don’t understand. In this case, unicycles. A ban on unicycles is being considered, but with no reason given. That is because there is no reason. There is no evidence, no studies, no statistic, and no record of any unicycle-related accident on the bridge or its access areas. Where are your facts?

Unicycle facts:

Unicycles don’t go fast. According to the published background information provided on your website, speed was a factor in the majority of accidents cited.
Unicycles are more maneuverable than bikes. A unicyclist can make a u-turn in even the narrowest sections of the bridge sidewalks.
Unicycles can stop more quickly than bikes. Brakes are not needed, as the gear ratio is 1:1 in a fixed-gear drive system. But the main reason they can stop faster is that they’re not going very fast in the first place.
Unicycles don’t coast. You have to pedal all the time, and can’t just roll the downhill side of the bridge.
Unicyclists pay more attention than bicyclists. They have to. It takes a higher attention level to keep the thing balanced.
Unicycle riders on the GG Bridge are not rarely beginners, they are experienced riders looking to ride in exceptional places (like most of the non-commuting bicyclists on the bridge).
Number of unicycle accidents reported in the reports available on your site: 0

I found only one area in your related documents that speaks of unicycles, in bikesafetystudy_april2011:

“Our research into multi-use trail regulations of unicyclists yielded no results; this user group is simply so unique and infrequent that trail and pathway management agencies do not regulate them as a special group. In terms of safety, a “tall bike” (a custom built bike where the seat is situated at a height that may be 5 or more feet off the ground) poses a safety risk to the user from toppling over safety railings. Because the safety rail stands 4’6” tall, prohibition of bicycles or unicycles whose seats are more than 4 feet off the ground might make sense so that no riders topple over the safety railing.”

The above does not recommend a ban on unicycles. Instead it is honest and objective, noting the lack evidence or statistics for unicycles; none. It does recommend a seat height of no more than 4’ for bikes or unicycles, which sounds reasonable.

Source of my facts:
I’m not making this stuff up. I learned to ride a unicycle in 1976 and still ride regularly. I have ridden in unicycle competitions since 1980 and won many, at the national and world level. Did you know the North American Unicycle Convention and Championships was held in Berkeley last summer? It is hosted annually by the Unicycling Society of America since 1973. A highlight of many attendees’ trip to the Bay area was a unicycle ride across the famous GG Bridge. I am a past president of the Unicycling Society of America. I am also a co-founder and past president of the International Unicycling Federation. I am an advocate for cyclists’ rights, through the International Mountain Bicycling Association (IMBA), the Sacramento Area Bicycle Advocates (SABA), and the Folsom Auburn Trail Riders Action Coalition (FATRAC). We do real things to promote clean transportation, safety and access for cyclists.

There exists very little legislation regarding unicycles specifically. Unicycles make up a tiny fraction of 1 percent of the cycling population. Regulating them is silly, unless there is evidence suggesting a need for it. There isn’t. As a cycling advocate, I promote the idea of unicyclists adhering to rules for bicycles. We are, after all, cyclists. That’s where we belong.

Tall unicycles (aka giraffes) are not a good idea on the GG Bridge, or anywhere else with a narrow riding area and low rail. Therefore I support the 4’ seat height idea. Also the recommended speed limits on the bridge. This is the most obvious danger area I’ve noticed in my annual visits there for our San Francisco Unicycle Tour. Slowing down around the towers and other areas of low visibility would probably eliminate the majority of accidents, at least on the West side.

Don’t ban us for no reason. If you would like more information about unicycles, feel free to contact me, or one of these organizations, which are run by volunteers:
Unicyclingusa.org – Unicycling Society of America
Iufinc.org – International Unicycling Federation

Stay on top,
John Foss
the Uni-Cyclone
jfoss at unicycling dot com
www.unicycling.com

nickjb · 2011-05-14, 07:09 AM

I don't know if I will ever be anywhere near the bridge but I might like the option one day

Borrowed some text from above and sent this:

Hello. I was alarmed to read that unicycles are likely to be banned from the cycling lane going over the Golden Gate Bridge. In particular, the article quotes Golden Gate Bridge spokeswoman Mary Currie as saying, "the control that a cyclist has is different than a unicyclist might have." The truth is that however precarious unicyclists might seem if you're a non-unicyclist, they are safer and generally have more control than bicyclists, simply because they go slower and require skill, practice and concentration to ride.

The consultant's report does not propose banning unicycles. The ban it proposes is for any 'tall' bike or unicycle with a seat higher than 4' off the ground. The consultant's recommendation is based on the consultant's fear that somebody riding a bicycle or unicycle with a seat more that 4' off the ground could possibly fall over the 4' 6" high safety railing. A ban on both tall unicycles and tall bicycles makes sense, but not a ban on all unicycles.

Please don't ban unicycles!

Regards

Rowan · 2011-05-14, 01:27 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Bikesafety study April 2011

Recommendation 4: Other User Groups
The Bridge currently prohibits roller / inline skaters, skateboards, and dogs (except service animals). These prohibitions should continue as these user groups are not compatible with the high levels of pedestrian and bicycle use experienced on the Bridge sidewalks. Our research into multi-use trail regulations of unicyclists yielded no results; this user group is simply so unique and infrequent that trail and pathway management
agencies do not regulate them as a special group. In terms of safety, a “tall bike” (a custom built bike where the seat is situated at a height that may be 5 or more feet off the ground) poses a safety risk to the user from
toppling over safety railings. Because the safety rail stands 4’6” tall, prohibition of bicycles or unicycles whose seats are more than 4 feet off the ground might make sense so that no riders topple over the safety railing.

There is a lot of discussion going on at Bikeportland about this with some unicyclists offering their opinions too.

Quote:

Originally Posted by http://bikeportland.org/2011/04/20/s-f-mulls-speed-limits-tall-bike-ban-on-golden-gate-51749

UPDATE:
I spoke to Golden Gate Bridge spokeswoman Mary Currie on the phone today. She said her Board asked for an in-depth bike safety study in 2008 after seeing a "steady increase in bicycling" in the past 5-10 years. So far, Curries says she's gotten 30-40 emails from the public about the proposals and says after the hearing tomorrow, there will be a three week public comment period.
When asked about why they agreed to a ban on unicycles (not just tall unicycles, but all unicycles), Currie said they already ban roller skates, roller blades, and skateboards, and that, "the control that a cyclist has is different than a unicyclist might have."
I asked Currie, since they've seen such an increase in bike traffic if there might be a time soon when they'd consider giving some of the roadway space to bikes, she said,

"That would definitely not be an option. The mission is to carry vehicles on the roadway and we run at capacity and therefore the roadway lanes are needed to handle the motorists."

I think it is not surprising at all that they have mistakenly lumped unicycles in with rollerblades and skateboards as runaway-death traps on wheels, but only from ignorance and inexperience. I think we need to focus on the differences between skateboards/rollerblades and unicycles, and also decide whether we want to be classed as cyclists or pedestrians or a mix of both. Nobody can vouch for the control of all cyclists, unicyclists or pedestrians or drivers- they will all have a diverse range of skills and attentions. You can however vouch for the compatibility of unicycles with high levels of pedestrian and bike use areas. To exclude unicyclists based on the assumption they might be out of control is discrimination.

I think the 4' is a strange cut off point- my Coker seat is about 4'1" high- and that makes it too unsafe for bridge riding, but a slightly shorter rider with a 3'11" seat is safe? How is 4' the magic safe number for a 4'6" railing?

Can the shared path rules be avoided by riding on the railing?

Quote: