The California Association of Bicycling Organizations (CABO) stands firmly against Senate Bill 1216 (SB-1216), recently introduced in the California Legislature. This bill threatens to undermine critical aspects of our state’s bicycle infrastructure. If passed, SB-1216 would defund Class III bikeways and significantly restrict Shared Lane Markings (Sharrows) use. While seemingly well-intentioned, this bill could have severe negative consequences for California’s cycling community and overall road safety.

The Importance of Class III Bikeways

Class III bikeways, also known as bike routes, are the unsung heroes of our cycling infrastructure. These routes, which don’t require dedicated bike lanes or separate paths, serve as the backbone of many communities’ bicycle networks. The California Highway Design Manual provides clear guidance on the purpose and implementation of Class III bikeways:

“Class III bikeways (bike routes) are intended to provide continuity to the bikeway system. Bike routes are established along through routes not served by Class I or II bikeways, or to connect discontinuous segments of bikeway (normally bike lanes).”

Here’s why Class III bikeways are crucial:

1. Cost-Effective Solution: They provide miles of cyclist-friendly routes at a fraction of the cost of other infrastructure types.
2. Flexibility: They can be implemented on streets where space constraints make it impossible to add bike lanes or separated paths.
3. Connectivity: Class III routes often serve as vital links between other types of bicycle infrastructure, creating a comprehensive network.
4. Enhanced Service: According to the Highway Design Manual, bike routes should offer a higher degree of service than alternative streets, including features like traffic-actuated signals for bicycles, greater priority at intersections, and improved maintenance.

SB-1216 seeks to divert funding from these essential routes to more expensive Class I, II, and IV infrastructure. While we support the development of all classes of bikeways, we firmly believe that this should not come at the expense of Class III routes, which play a unique and vital role in our cycling infrastructure.

The Critical Role of Sharrows

Shared Lane Markings, commonly known as Sharrows, are another target of this legislation. While the bill has been recently amended at the request of Caltrans, it still imposes significant restrictions. The current language states that new Sharrows shall not be installed on highways with posted speed limits greater than 30 miles per hour, except at or near intersections for the purpose of connecting Class I, II, or IV bikeways.

This restriction contradicts the California Highway Design Manual, which states: “Additional enhancement of Class III facilities can be provided by adding shared roadway markings along the route.” The manual does not specify speed limits for the use of Sharrows, recognizing their value across various road conditions.

The current amendment, while an improvement over the initial proposal, still poses challenges:

1. Limited Application: Many urban and suburban streets have speed limits above 30 mph, potentially eliminating Sharrows from areas where they’re most needed for bicyclists desiring to ride there.
2. Safety Concerns: Sharrows alert drivers to the presence of cyclists in the lane, increasing safety and reducing potential conflicts. Limiting their use may compromise cyclist safety on higher-speed roads.
3. Incomplete Network Connections: While the amendment allows for Sharrows near intersections to connect other bikeway classes, it doesn’t address the need for continuous visual cues along entire routes.

CABO has long advocated for the use of Sharrows on higher-speed roads, recognizing their value in creating safer, more connected cycling networks. Even with the recent amendment, we believe the restrictions on Sharrows remain too stringent and inconsistent with official guidance.

A Call for a Balanced Approach

We at CABO believe in a comprehensive, multi-faceted approach to bicycle infrastructure, aligned with the California Highway Design Manual. All classes of bikeways serve a purpose, and our goal should be to create an integrated network that serves cyclists of all abilities and preferences. SB-1216, despite its good intentions, threatens to dismantle key components of this network and contradicts established best practices.

We urge our legislators to reconsider SB-1216 and instead work with cycling advocacy groups like CABO to develop policies that truly enhance California’s bicycle infrastructure, in line with official guidance. Let’s focus on expanding our cycling network, not limiting our options.

Your voice matters in this debate. We encourage all California cyclists and supporters of sustainable transportation to contact their state representatives and express their opposition to SB-1216. Together, we can ensure that California remains a leader in creating safe, accessible, and comprehensive bicycle infrastructure for all, as outlined in our Highway Design Manual.