Documenting near misses

[smbi...@earthlink.net]

I urge all of you to watch this video .  It demonstrates how to use an incredibly useful data collection tool for near misses.  As you all know, near misses never get into documents used by public policy makers to determine how safe or dangerous a street or intersection is.  Armed with near-miss data, advocates can get the attention of policy makers, even sometimes law enforcement.

 

Stay safe,

 

Steve

 

Stephen Bingham

Co-Director

Sylvia Bingham Fund

www.sylviabinghamfund.org

Coordinator, California Ride of Silence Organizers

Board of Directors, Ride of Silence

Member, Families for Safe Streets/San Francisco

Truck Underride Advocacy TEAM

 

[Pete van Nuys]

Is this being used by cyclists in the Solana Beach area where the stupid Class 4 has increased falls and injury exponentially?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "CABOforum" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to caboforum+...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/031f01dcbd8a%24ec1b2250%24c45166f0%24%40earthlink.net.

[Damian Kevitt]

Hi Pete. What is a Class 4? I've never heard of the term.  

Best, Damian 

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/1d111832-3d1f-4ab6-aeed-5c893791d151%40cox.net.

[William Sellin]

A Class 4 bikeway is separated from travel lanes by a vertical curb, bollard, planter, parked cars etc..  “Cycle Track”

Class 1 is a bike path, 2 is a bike lane, 3 is a bike route designated road 

Bill Sellin

714 943-3678

WASe...@gmail.com

"Most of the World 

        is either Downhill or Flat..."

On Mar 31, 2026, at 6:19 PM, Damian Kevitt <damian...@streetsareforeveryone.org> wrote:



To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/CANHOu4Qt2-bXR9Z%2BCrvYU2sMiYFC__fEzPFS%2BYy-T22B4JtRMA%40mail.gmail.com.

[Damian Kevitt]

Oh, Class 4 bikeway. Right. Well familiar with those. I thought Pete was talking about a new e-bike term that was starting to be used -- Class 1, 2, 3 and now 4 (??) e-bikes. (LOL) 

Thanks!

D

[Clinton Sandusky]

Thankfully, there is NO such federal or any state definition of a supposed Class 4 (it's just some people's attempt at humor or to be clever)! CVC 436.1 and this bill by Senate Blakespear, SB-1167 will finally end that nonsense once and for all!!!

Clint Sandusky

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/CANHOu4TAAbNdjbhEGdm9yk-0N2M70Y13J_pGgEtKOTtwZaDNKw%40mail.gmail.com.

[Pete van Nuys]

In CA a "separated bike lane" or Cycletrack is technically a Class 4 bikeway. Segregation.

[Jim Baross]

A correction that may help us in the future regarding bikeway classes and electric bicycle classes. Bikeway classes use Roman numerals. Electric bicycles use Arabic numerals. 

Here's what Gemini provided.

 The California Highway Design Manual (HDM), specifically within Chapter 1000 ("Bicycle Transportation Design"), defines and describes the four primary classes of bikeways using Roman numerals.

According to the HDM and the California Streets and Highways Code (Section 890.4), the classifications are:

Official California Bikeway Classifications

• Class I Bikeway (Bike Path): Provides a completely separated right-of-way for the exclusive use of bicycles and pedestrians, with cross-flow by motorists minimized.

• Class II Bikeway (Bike Lane): Provides a striped lane for one-way bike travel on a street or highway.

• Class III Bikeway (Bike Route): Provides for shared use with pedestrian or motor vehicle traffic and is identified by "Bike Route" guide signs.

• Class IV Bikeway (Separated Bikeway): Also known as a "cycle track" or "protected bike lane," this is for the exclusive use of bicycles and includes a required physical separation (such as grade separation, flexible posts, or barriers) from through vehicular traffic.

---

Important Context

• Hierarchy: The HDM explicitly states that these designations are not a hierarchy (i.e., Class I is not inherently "better" than Class II); rather, each class is chosen based on the specific needs and constraints of the roadway.

• Evolution of Class IV: While Classes I, II, and III have been in the manual for decades, Class IV was officially established more recently following the Protected Bikeways Act of 2014.

Jim Baross

CABO President

To view this discussion visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/caboforum/e46e3714-273c-49e8-b135-61801875d162%40cox.net.

[Scott Seligman]

Clint Sandusky wrote:
>
>436.1 and this bill by Senate Blakespear, SB-1167 will finally end that
>nonsense once and for all!!!

There's an unfortunate contradiction. SB-1167 says the legislature
declares that:

"Nearly 90 percent of electric devices observed at the bike bicycle
racks of local schools in Counties of San Mateo and Marin in 2025 were
'e-motos,' not legal electric bicycles."

and:

"'E-motos' are causing increased safety issues on the streets of many
California communities"

But CVC 436.1, which went into effect this year, added an official
definition of "eMoto" that *stupidly* restricts them to devices that are:

"not equipped with pedals from the manufacturer."

So those things they're talking about in the bike racks of local schools
are not electric bicycles, but they're not eMotos either.

I was hoping that SB-1167 would fix the eMoto definition in 436.1, but
it doesn't look like it does.


Scott

[clint.sandusky]

If we read all the way through this bill, it fills in the gap between legally compliant electric bicycles and street-legal electric motorcycles -- like the Zero brand -- and even off-highway electric motorcycles.

With adding specific language of "electric motor" with "watts" to CVC 406 (motor-driven cycle) and CVC 405 (moped), we and of course my friends in law enforcement have a better understanding of electric vehicles (as currently described in CVC 312.5 (c)) beyond legally compliant electric bicycles.

It removes the confusing definition a of "motorized bicycle" which we know is synonymous with "moped."

Of course, there is more in the bill.

Is any bill, and law I suppose, perfect? Probably not.

I support this bill.

Respectfully,

Clint Sandusky

Retired LEO/Bike Patrol Instructor

Cycling in Traffic Expert & Educator, CyclingSavvy

E-Bike Instructor, Presenter, Author, Advocate & Consultant

Sent from my Galaxy

[Damian Kevitt]

We tried to clarify and set a formal legal definition for e-moto in the vehicle code last year with SB 455 (Blakespear), but that bill was killed by DMV. SB 586 made modifications to CVC 436.1 that don't formally define e-motos but says: 436.1. An “off-highway electric motorcycle,” commonly referred to as an eMoto...

SB 1167 aims to do what SB 455 did, but in a different way, and we hope the DMV won't kill the bill again. Right now, DMV is still threatening to kill the bill. Because of DMV-related issues, we can't formally define what an e-moto is, but can only informally refer to them as e-motos in the bill. That said, as Clint said, a lot of work went into SB 1167 to preserve the rights of legally allowed e-bikes while imposing regulations -- safety regulations and training requirements for riders, among other things -- on anything with an electric motor above 750 watts. We hope the legislative process will only strengthen the bill and won't force us to water it down. And we are doing our best to prevent the DMV from killing the bill again. 

It's important in the media and in police reports that they stop calling incidents caused by illegal electric motorcycles e-bike incidents. E-motos seems to be a word that is catching on to distinguish the difference. A number of organizations, including People for Bikes, CalBike, SFA, and SAFE, are doing what we can to get the term "e-motos" to be more widely accepted and recognized. 

Also working on a side campaign related to DMV, as they regularly kill good bills for bad reasons.

Best, Damian