AB 1193, what we said.
There has been/should be some concern and a lot of hype about AB 1193, the bill that some are miss-stating would free up cities from State standards for bikeways. Here’s what we at CABO have communicated to the bill’s author.
We appreciate interest and efforts of the Office of Assemblymember Philip Y. Ting to provide for more and safer bicycling. Thank you!
Although supportive of such efforts – CABO folks are very concerned that;
1) adequate study and review occurs so that resulting designs do not introduce hazards. Including the Caltran’s Calif. Bicycling Advisory Committee in design proposal review would be a good step in that process.
2) introduction of Class IV should not result in prohibition of bicycling on general traffic lanes… Not only do we oppose/fear introduction of mandatory side-path/Class IV use laws, but we fear increased harassment from motorists (and some law enforcement personnel) for bicyclists lawfully using general travel lanes where a separated facility exists.
Minimally we request consideration to -
1) Replace “protected bike lanes” in “Class IV bikeways, also known as “cycletracks” or “protected bike lanes,” with something else such as “Side-paths” or “separated Bikeways” or “segregated Bikeways”. The law would then read “… Class IV bikeways, also known as “Cycletracks” or “Side-paths” or “Separated Bikeways”…
2) Add legislative intent language such as “Class IV Bikeways are intended to provide additional places for people to choose to use a bicycle. Class IV Bikeways are not intended to reduce the utility of or prohibit bicycling on public roadways.”
3) We might try to add something to clear up the “trail immunity”/Prokop case issue… such as we are trying with the bike benefiting tax SB 1183 below.
Include an amendment to Government Code 831.4, below, as shown in red italic or (b) include an amendment the Streets and Highways Code §890.4(a): “A Class I and Class IV bikeways are not trails for purposes of Government Code Section 831.4.”
To change Gov’t Code as follows:
Section 831.4 – A public entity, public employee, or a grantor of a public easement to a public entity for any of the following purposes, is not liable for an injury caused by a condition of:
(a) Any unpaved road which provides access to fishing, hunting, camping, hiking, riding, including animal and all types of vehicular riding, water sports, recreational or scenic areas and which is not a (1) city street or highway or (2) county, state or federal highway or (3) public street or highway of a joint highway district, boulevard district, bridge and highway district or similar district formed for the improvement or building of public streets or highways.
(b) Any trail used for the above purposes that is not a bikeway as defined in Section 890.4 of the Streets and Highways Code.
(c) Any paved trail, walkway, path, or sidewalk on an easement of way which has been granted to a public entity, which easement provides access to any unimproved property, so long as such public entity shall reasonably attempt to provide adequate warnings of the existence of any condition of the paved trail, walkway, path, or sidewalk which constitutes a hazard to health or safety. Warnings required by this subdivision shall only be required where pathways are paved, and such requirement shall not be construed to be a standard of care for any unpaved pathways or roads.