SHARE THE ROAD! Bicycle thread

[The B]

Ben, I know you have a dog in the fight, so I also know you will not understand what I meant because you simply do not want to.

That's pretty unfair. I'm obviously taking a side in this thread - but I'm ALWAYS willing to acknowledge logic, and will concede valid points, whether they support my argument or not.

 

[ripcity]

Some people just like to argue.

 

[The B]

Not arguing your position because your opposition doesn't agree with your position makes absolutely no sense. If anyone can present a valid argument for registration, licensing, and taxation of bicyclists, beyond spite, I'll acknowledge it. But it's going to need to be well supported. As any gun owner should be able to recognize, you need to have a REALLY good reason to further regulate and restrict rights.

 

[BAMCIS]

 

[Jamie6.5]

Bike paths, lane striping and enforcement costs money. Currently DOT funds, a high percentage of which are derived from fuel taxes, are used for those things. Registrations, licensing of bikes and riders would help offset some of those costs.
Last time I checked, bicyclists don't buy fuel for their bikes.

When a transportation plan is developed by a municipality, it includes estimates for the number of cars that can move from place to place efficiently, and becomes part of the overall carrying capacity of the system. When a lane of a given street/road is sacrificed for bicycles, no compensation for the overall carrying capacity can be made without adding additional lanes elsewhere.

Despite your claims of minimal costs incurred from bicycle damage, replacing dented fenders, broken windshields, marker lights, headlights etc., and repairing scratched paint is expensive. The cost of deductible, as well as increases in premiums falls on the car owner, even when the bicyclist (who has no insurance) is at fault.

 

[The B]

Bike paths, lane striping and enforcement costs money. Currently DOT funds, a high percentage of which are derived from fuel taxes, are used for those things. Registrations, licensing of bikes and riders would help offset some of those costs.
Last time I checked, bicyclists don't buy fuel for their bikes.

When a transportation plan is developed by a municipality, it includes estimates for the number of cars that can move from place to place efficiently, and becomes part of the overall carrying capacity of the system. When a lane of a given street/road is sacrificed for bicycles, no compensation for the overall carrying capacity can be made without adding additional lanes elsewhere.

Despite your claims of minimal costs incurred from bicycle damage, replacing dented fenders, broken windshields, marker lights, headlights etc., and repairing scratched paint is expensive. The cost of deductible, as well as increases in premiums falls on the car owner, even when the bicyclist (who has no insurance) is at fault.

This is a lot of "this is how it seems to me," but no substance. Are you really calling for a serious change in individual liberty for sake of how it seems? Once again... how would you feel if someone legislated your gun rights away because it seems like guns cause a bunch of problems they don't cause?

Like anyone who just doesn't like another group, anti-gunners want to strip you of liberty for spite. They don't have any real numbers to back their claims that guns should be registered, licensed, taxed, and etc. They just don't like gun types, don't like guns, and new laws are always a great way to stick it to people you don't like.

Please be very careful you're not following this same pattern.

 

[Jamie6.5]

This is a lot of "this is how it seems to me," but no substance. Are you really calling for a serious change in individual liberty for sake of how it seems?

Wait, you think the cost of striping a street for bike lanes is just a matter of "how it seems" to me?
You're being delusional if you think the DOT or the contractors that do these jobs for municipalities work for free Ben They don't.
Enforcement isn't free.
City planning and transportation department planning isn't free.

This isn't "how it seems" Ben, what I put in that post is reality.

Now, as to what it costs to repair a car that a bicyclist has damaged, it just so happens that was my line-o-work for over a decade, and I can tell you that repair of a car that needs a fender replaced, a marker light or a mirror replaced, or a windshield replaced is far from cheap. Basecoat/clearcoat paint in today's market isn't cheap either. Ever bought Toyota or Lexus or BMW parts? The costs could easily climb into the thousands.

So it's more a case of "it seems to YOU" that we are talking about insignificant amounts here Ben. You need to get real about these things before you start spouting off about no substance.
Taking a few miles of a single 4 lane street down to three lanes to accommodate bike lanes, when that street is already laid-out and striped for cars only, is going to cost in the tens of thousands of dollars minimum per mile, and depending on the length of it, may run into the hundreds of thousands.
Now do that all over town, to dozens of streets,...
Who foots that bill Ben? People buying gasoline and diesel do when it's paid out of DOT funds.
Care to compare the cost increases for a bridge that has to be designed to accommodate bikes as well as cars, over the cost of the same span without bike lanes? The cost differences become staggering, and the fuel buyers are paying for it, when federal and state DOT funds are on tap.

It sounds like you are like most bike riders that I've talked to Ben, you just don't grasp the realities of the infrastructure demands placed on transportation systems to accommodate your hobby, or mode of transportation.
And you want to dismiss my, and other's concern as misguided objections.
When the reality is, you haven't grasped he problem, because you aren't the one paying for it.

 

[The B]

When the reality is, you haven't grasped he problem, because you aren't the one paying for it.

Well checking my records, Jamie, I spent $4,160 on fuel last year, Jamie. How much did you, Jamie, spend, Jamie?

 

[The B]

"staggering" costs need to be presented, Jamie.

I'd really like to see what percentage of the ODOT budget is spent on bikes and bike lanes- they DO get their own percentage of the budget, but I'm not finding it, Jamie. I know that ODOT is REQUIRED, Jamie, required to spend at least 1% of their budget, Jamie, on bike lanes, so I, Jamie, suspect it's probably around there.

How much do you think they spend on re-paving and re-striping due to car wear? My section of highway 30 gets repaved once a year... it ain't bikes burning up all that asphalt.

Numbers, Jamie. You need to post some numbers. You're just presenting a lot of seems like to me stuff here.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Well checking my records, I spent $4,160 on fuel last year. How much did you spend?

That's not the question.
The question is, how much did the bike riders pay for the privilege of using infrastructure they didn't pay for, because they don't pay licensing fees, or registration fees for their bikes, or buy fuel for them.

The state recognizes that electric car owners aren't paying to use the roads they drive on, because road tax is on motor fuel, not home electric meters.
What's wrong with recognizing that bikes get similar use, and don't pay a dime?

 

[The B]

You claim traffic lanes are being converted to bike lanes.... where? I'd love to ride a bike-only lane. In all my thousands of miles, I'm riding on a shoulder. Sometimes I get to ride over "sharrows," little icons painted into the road that are supposed to remind drivers that I'm likely to be there. Jamie.

Post up! Where's the lane diversions? How much do they cost? I will give you all the time you need, and I'm also sort of looking here and there. I'll post anything I find, whether it supports either of us.

What we need to establish is two part: IS there actually a PROBLEM, and if so, what's REALISTICALLY going to FIX it?

Till either of us post anything concrete, Jamie, we're just nuh uh! Yea huh! back and forth.

 

[The B]

That's not the question.
The question is, how much did the bike riders pay for the privilege of using infrastructure they didn't pay for, because they don't pay licensing fees, or registration fees for their bikes, or buy fuel for them.

The state recognizes that electric car owners aren't paying to use the roads they drive on, because road tax is on motor fuel, not home electric meters.
What's wrong with recognizing that bikes get similar use, and don't pay a dime?

I didn't pay a dime? My 9% income tax, my fuel taxes from that $4,160, my property taxes, my registration and licensing fees don't count? How are bicyclists dimes not counted as dimes? Hipsters and students living in downtown areas who happen to not buy fuel (and wouldn't anyway, since they live downtown) still pay property (property taxes are included in your rent, or do you think landlords just eat that?) and income taxes. The tens of thousands of other bicyclists that commute in from the suburbs and surrounding towns all own and register cars and buy plenty of fuel.

According to ODOT, fuel taxes only pay for about 1/8th or so of the annual budget. I'm sure CITY improvements aren't even paid for by fuel taxes.

 

[The B]

We pay all of this money into the system, AND have less impact on the services we're paying for.

Here's ODOT's budget, BTW... http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/COMM/docs/budgetbooklet_11-13.pdf

 

[Jamie6.5]

"staggering" costs need to be presented, Jamie.

I'd really like to see what percentage of the ODOT budget is spent on bikes and bike lanes- they DO get their own percentage of the budget, but I'm not finding it, Jamie. I know that ODOT is REQUIRED, Jamie, required to spend at least 1% of their budget, Jamie, on bike lanes, so I, Jamie, suspect it's probably around there.

How much do you think they spend on re-paving and re-striping due to car wear? My section of highway 30 gets repaved once a year... it ain't bikes burning up all that asphalt.

Numbers, Jamie. You need to post some numbers. You're just presenting a lot of seems like to me stuff here.

Look Ben, you started this discussion, wanting an honest opinion about what people think.
Fair enough.
Now you say that streets can be striped and bridges can be built and that there is no cost associated with the bicycle use.
But then you admit that ODOT must devote 1% of their budget to bike usage.
<broken link removed>
considering that ODOT's budget is $4,069,000,000.00 for 2013-2015, that makes your "measly" 1% = $40,690,000.
Those are dollars/costs that bike riders pay NOTHING for.

Now, surely if the state, or each county, or each municipality in the state required every bike rider to pay a nominal fee of $25 for adult bicycles, and a $5 fee for each youth bicycle, with an 80/20 split to ODOT/enforcement agencies, that wouldn't break your wallet would it Ben? After all, anyone that can afford to pay $4100+ in fuel costs can certainly pay $25.00 annually to ride their bike.
PDXers pay more than that for their arts tax!

 

[Certaindeaf]

Well checking my records, Jamie, I spent $4,160 on fuel last year, Jamie. How much did you, Jamie, spend, Jamie?

And then you got a DUI, hence the bike preachery?
It seems a lot of people don't have driver's licenses.. boohoo. lol

 

[The B]

And then you got a DUI, hence the bike preachery?
It seems a lot of people don't have driver's licenses.. boohoo. lol

Uh, nope... license is perfectly valid. I hope to spend less on fuel this year, but it's still going to be a couple grand at the very least.

 

[The B]

Those are dollars/costs that bike riders pay NOTHING for.

"I didn't pay a dime? My 9% income tax, my fuel taxes from that $4,160, my property taxes, my registration and licensing fees don't count? How are bicyclists dimes not counted as dimes? Hipsters and students living in downtown areas who happen to not buy fuel (and wouldn't anyway, since they live downtown) still pay property (property taxes are included in your rent, or do you think landlords just eat that?) and income taxes. The tens of thousands of other bicyclists that commute in from the suburbs and surrounding towns all own and register cars and buy plenty of fuel."

And, again... we pay all of this, just like everyone else. and then we use the road less than everyone else.

 

[The B]

And I'm definitely not going to entertain any arguments that things that are beyond the control of bicyclists can be used to condemn bicyclists. If you don't like how the money is spent, you need to tell your representative to change how it's spent, not try to jack me for licensing, registration, taxes, and fees, when I already pay plenty.

 

[Jamie6.5]

So, since I pay those same taxes, should my NW Forest pass be free?
My Snow-park pass?
My OHV permit?
Should they be free too? Heck, by definition, my OHV isn't even USED on the roads, yet I have to pay the fee, and I have to put the permit on my truck!

I've been around boats all my life, yet I have to have an operators certification to drive one.
And I have to pay for that.
And the canoe, and the jonboat, and the big boat have to be permitted too. That costs money.
Shouldn't those be free? They aren't used on the roads,..... Well except the big boat, it gets towed and the trailer is licensed, so I'm paying again to use the roads.

Everybody pays,.... Except the bicyclists.
That wouldn't be "fair."

Gee,... where have I heard that before.

 

[The B]

LOL... well if you're OK with all that, then I guess I can't help you, dude. Forward me your Political Action Committee for the Registration, Licensing, and Taxing of Bicyclists info? I'll donate a dollar.

I also sometimes walk on public sidewalks... where do I register my sneakers?