Time to Revisit Bike Lanes on Busy Roads

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bikes belong on sidewalks not the road.

If cars are required to be registered, taxed to death for road taxes, licenses, and other garbage etc. and bicycles are not, then bicycles do not belong on the roads.

Roads are paid for with general taxes - all of ours, not just drivers. And you need to be licensed and insured while driving because of the extreme damage you can do. You pay for parking because you take up a sizeable amount of space to do so. Perhaps you don't belong on the road.

I can just picture you running after little Timmy with his training wheels on, shouting at him about registration requirements.

None of what you said makes any sense whatsoever.

Start requiring licenses, insurance, registration fees, inspection fees, taxes for food to fuel the peddling, extra taxes for electricity if using an Ebike, etc. for bicycles if you want them on the road.

OR stop doing all those gov taxes, etc. on automobiles, gasoline, home owners, etc., then everyone can share the roads.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bikes belong on sidewalks not the road.

If cars are required to be registered, taxed to death for road taxes, licenses, and other garbage etc. and bicycles are not, then bicycles do not belong on the roads.

This right here, but unfortunately people on here will argue with you ad nauseam... these are the same people that support taking out 1/3 of lanes in a major traffic area to accommodate 20 to 30 bikes per day.

You're the people arguing for "just one more lane" to alleviate traffic. Like some kind of junkie.

DP but roads need to become "static" and NO MORE EXPANSIONS. There are plenty of roads.

If a city becomes congested, then people will quit moving to it if they are stuck in traffic for hours each day.

Everyone quit playing musical chairs and stick to an area.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bikes belong on sidewalks not the road.

If cars are required to be registered, taxed to death for road taxes, licenses, and other garbage etc. and bicycles are not, then bicycles do not belong on the roads.

This doesn't seem to be working it's not killing enough drivers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what the question is here - bike lanes serve a number of purposes that I won't take all the time to list below. From my perspective bike lanes done right should be the default on all roadways - once we have established that then all the automobile drivers can start making their case for why the bike lanes should not be there. How much extra time do you really think the bike lane is costing you on a particular road? This is the problem with society....we can find a million different ways to waste our damn time but delaying you a couple minutes so a bunch of people can have safe transportation is just to much. Same thing when I bike on the road - drivers lose their mind having to pause 30 seconds to safely pass but those same people will wait in lines all over the place or play on their phone for hours.

100% this. Couldn't have put it better. OP is a "Larry" who would rather kids be mowed down in roads than be a minute late in checking his sports bets.

Completely delusional posters. How are a bunch of motorists being delayed a couple of minutes good for the environment? How are bike lanes in the road actually safer?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am not sure what the question is here - bike lanes serve a number of purposes that I won't take all the time to list below. From my perspective bike lanes done right should be the default on all roadways - once we have established that then all the automobile drivers can start making their case for why the bike lanes should not be there. How much extra time do you really think the bike lane is costing you on a particular road? This is the problem with society....we can find a million different ways to waste our damn time but delaying you a couple minutes so a bunch of people can have safe transportation is just to much. Same thing when I bike on the road - drivers lose their mind having to pause 30 seconds to safely pass but those same people will wait in lines all over the place or play on their phone for hours.

100% this. Couldn't have put it better. OP is a "Larry" who would rather kids be mowed down in roads than be a minute late in checking his sports bets.

Completely delusional posters. How are a bunch of motorists being delayed a couple of minutes good for the environment? How are bike lanes in the road actually safer?

Why would we want to make it easier for more cars? We have too many and there’s too much traffic. Even with bike lanes, cars get 98 percent of the infrastructure (and that’s generous to bikes)… sharing a little and maybe encouraging you to think of other ways to get around is the point and it’s not unreasonable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve noticed the bike lane on Old Georgetown Road is rarely used, especially during rush hour, while it’s causing dreadful congestion for drivers. I understand the importance of safe cycling infrastructure, but I wonder if we can find a better balance to serve all commuters. It seems the dream of transitioning to a carbon free transportation infrastructure is not longer in the cards.

Could we discuss potential solutions, like redesigning a bike path off the road to maintain bike safety while easing traffic flow? I’d love to hear your thoughts and work together to propose actionable ideas to the County and State governments. Also, the bike lanes have not been properly maintained, nor the road median. It is just a big mess that needs to be cleaned up.

I was riding my bike along river road and I saw like three cars - time we shut it down and turn it over to bikes? I can’t think of a reason not to.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bikes belong on sidewalks not the road.

If cars are required to be registered, taxed to death for road taxes, licenses, and other garbage etc. and bicycles are not, then bicycles do not belong on the roads.

Crybaby pedestrians disagree. Cars have lots of room, share it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Bikes belong on sidewalks not the road.

If cars are required to be registered, taxed to death for road taxes, licenses, and other garbage etc. and bicycles are not, then bicycles do not belong on the roads.

Roads are paid for with general taxes - all of ours, not just drivers. And you need to be licensed and insured while driving because of the extreme damage you can do. You pay for parking because you take up a sizeable amount of space to do so. Perhaps you don't belong on the road.

I can just picture you running after little Timmy with his training wheels on, shouting at him about registration requirements.

None of what you said makes any sense whatsoever.

Start requiring licenses, insurance, registration fees, inspection fees, taxes for food to fuel the peddling, extra taxes for electricity if using an Ebike, etc. for bicycles if you want them on the road.

OR stop doing all those gov taxes, etc. on automobiles, gasoline, home owners, etc., then everyone can share the roads.

Bikes don’t need to be inspected for emissions because they don’t emit anything. My electric car also is exempt from D.C. inspections for the same reason.

As for the other taxes and fees, I also pay gas taxes (when I put gas in our gas car) and property taxes for the home I own. Am I allowed to ride a bike now?

[Anonymous]

I think it’s absolutely reasonable and timely to start requiring registration and tag fees and licensing riders, given that so many more people are riding bikes now.

It’s basically a revenue stream that’s going untapped at the moment, and any fiscally responsible municipality owes it to its residents to ensure that all possible avenues of revenue are exploited.

And with licensing on bikes, tickets could then be issued to riders who ride through red lights or stop signs. That’s yet another unrealized revenue stream, and it will make cyclists safer because it will eliminate the rampant red light running they do now.


Loopholes like this need to be closed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s absolutely reasonable and timely to start requiring registration and tag fees and licensing riders, given that so many more people are riding bikes now.

It’s basically a revenue stream that’s going untapped at the moment, and any fiscally responsible municipality owes it to its residents to ensure that all possible avenues of revenue are exploited.

And with licensing on bikes, tickets could then be issued to riders who ride through red lights or stop signs. That’s yet another unrealized revenue stream, and it will make cyclists safer because it will eliminate the rampant red light running they do now.


Loopholes like this need to be closed.

You can be ticketed without having a bike registration. Want enforcement, ask for enforcement.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s absolutely reasonable and timely to start requiring registration and tag fees and licensing riders, given that so many more people are riding bikes now.

It’s basically a revenue stream that’s going untapped at the moment, and any fiscally responsible municipality owes it to its residents to ensure that all possible avenues of revenue are exploited.

And with licensing on bikes, tickets could then be issued to riders who ride through red lights or stop signs. That’s yet another unrealized revenue stream, and it will make cyclists safer because it will eliminate the rampant red light running they do now.


Loopholes like this need to be closed.

You can be ticketed without having a bike registration. Want enforcement, ask for enforcement.

Registration and license plates are two different things. Registration just means you’ve paid the city to register the bike. But plates should be required to ride that bike on public roads. And tags would allow for a means of issuing tickets to the registered owners of bikes that run red lights or stop signs.

This is about safety. It’s about encouraging cyclists to ride safely and not run red lights.


Why would anyone oppose this?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s absolutely reasonable and timely to start requiring registration and tag fees and licensing riders, given that so many more people are riding bikes now.

It’s basically a revenue stream that’s going untapped at the moment, and any fiscally responsible municipality owes it to its residents to ensure that all possible avenues of revenue are exploited.

And with licensing on bikes, tickets could then be issued to riders who ride through red lights or stop signs. That’s yet another unrealized revenue stream, and it will make cyclists safer because it will eliminate the rampant red light running they do now.


Loopholes like this need to be closed.

You can be ticketed without having a bike registration. Want enforcement, ask for enforcement.

Registration and license plates are two different things. Registration just means you’ve paid the city to register the bike. But plates should be required to ride that bike on public roads. And tags would allow for a means of issuing tickets to the registered owners of bikes that run red lights or stop signs.

This is about safety. It’s about encouraging cyclists to ride safely and not run red lights.


Why would anyone oppose this?

It's helpful if you label sarcasm. I can't tell if you're making fun of the anti-bike curmudgeons or if you are one.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s absolutely reasonable and timely to start requiring registration and tag fees and licensing riders, given that so many more people are riding bikes now.

It’s basically a revenue stream that’s going untapped at the moment, and any fiscally responsible municipality owes it to its residents to ensure that all possible avenues of revenue are exploited.

And with licensing on bikes, tickets could then be issued to riders who ride through red lights or stop signs. That’s yet another unrealized revenue stream, and it will make cyclists safer because it will eliminate the rampant red light running they do now.


Loopholes like this need to be closed.

You can be ticketed without having a bike registration. Want enforcement, ask for enforcement.

Registration and license plates are two different things. Registration just means you’ve paid the city to register the bike. But plates should be required to ride that bike on public roads. And tags would allow for a means of issuing tickets to the registered owners of bikes that run red lights or stop signs.

This is about safety. It’s about encouraging cyclists to ride safely and not run red lights.


Why would anyone oppose this?

It's helpful if you label sarcasm. I can't tell if you're making fun of the anti-bike curmudgeons or if you are one.

I want people on bikes using our roads to help pay for our roads the same way people with cars help pay for them - with registration fees and license plate fees.

I also want bikes to have license plates so that automated ticket enforcement cameras can ticket the registered owners of bikes that are pedaled through red lights or stop signs, just like cars. Because this will make cycling safer, by reducing the number of cyclists that run red lights and get hit by cars.


This is about maximizing city revenue for roads and safety for cyclists.


It has nothing to do with sarcasm.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s absolutely reasonable and timely to start requiring registration and tag fees and licensing riders, given that so many more people are riding bikes now.

It’s basically a revenue stream that’s going untapped at the moment, and any fiscally responsible municipality owes it to its residents to ensure that all possible avenues of revenue are exploited.

And with licensing on bikes, tickets could then be issued to riders who ride through red lights or stop signs. That’s yet another unrealized revenue stream, and it will make cyclists safer because it will eliminate the rampant red light running they do now.


Loopholes like this need to be closed.

You can be ticketed without having a bike registration. Want enforcement, ask for enforcement.

Registration and license plates are two different things. Registration just means you’ve paid the city to register the bike. But plates should be required to ride that bike on public roads. And tags would allow for a means of issuing tickets to the registered owners of bikes that run red lights or stop signs.

This is about safety. It’s about encouraging cyclists to ride safely and not run red lights.


Why would anyone oppose this?

It's helpful if you label sarcasm. I can't tell if you're making fun of the anti-bike curmudgeons or if you are one.

I want people on bikes using our roads to help pay for our roads the same way people with cars help pay for them - with registration fees and license plate fees.

I also want bikes to have license plates so that automated ticket enforcement cameras can ticket the registered owners of bikes that are pedaled through red lights or stop signs, just like cars. Because this will make cycling safer, by reducing the number of cyclists that run red lights and get hit by cars.


This is about maximizing city revenue for roads and safety for cyclists.


It has nothing to do with sarcasm.

Oh yeah, and we should have licensing and registration fees for sneakers to capture the revenue stream from pedestrians! And when they jaywalk we can it them with automated tickets! Genius!

Make them get walking insurance too.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think it’s absolutely reasonable and timely to start requiring registration and tag fees and licensing riders, given that so many more people are riding bikes now.

It’s basically a revenue stream that’s going untapped at the moment, and any fiscally responsible municipality owes it to its residents to ensure that all possible avenues of revenue are exploited.

And with licensing on bikes, tickets could then be issued to riders who ride through red lights or stop signs. That’s yet another unrealized revenue stream, and it will make cyclists safer because it will eliminate the rampant red light running they do now.


Loopholes like this need to be closed.

You can be ticketed without having a bike registration. Want enforcement, ask for enforcement.

Registration and license plates are two different things. Registration just means you’ve paid the city to register the bike. But plates should be required to ride that bike on public roads. And tags would allow for a means of issuing tickets to the registered owners of bikes that run red lights or stop signs.

This is about safety. It’s about encouraging cyclists to ride safely and not run red lights.


Why would anyone oppose this?

But cops can already ticket bicyclists… why do we need license plates on bikes to do it? Sounds like a waste of money.