Jump to content
LanghamP

Perhaps you shouldn't use the bike lane.

Recommended Posts

Over the years I've come to the gradual and strong suspicion that painted bike lanes are death traps, because over time I've noticed I've had quite a few more close calls on them versus not using them. It's not just close passes but also when a driver passes you then slams on the brakes to get into a driveway. 

However, scientific evidence now semi-confirms you really shouldn't use painted bike lanes.

https://road.cc/content/news/263722-council-says-it-wont-reinstate-cycle-lanes-after-road-resurfacing-because-they?amp

Their bikes were fitted with a device called a ‘MetreBox'  to calculate the distance drivers gave when overtaking.

Among the findings was that passing events that happened on a road with a painted bike lane or a parked car had an average passing distance 40cm less than on a road without a bike lane or parked car.

[Forcing drivers to properly execute a pass is safer.]

As an aside, do OneWheels really belong on bike lanes? They are all so godamn slow, and all the riders are kitted out with helmets and elbow pads. OW riders on a bike lane get passed by Segway tourists on the sidewalk. Not, not really true, but maybe true.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Decades of roadway constructed for the exclusive use of motor vehicles (and exclusively funded by motor vehicle license holders, I should note) cannot suddenly accommodate an additional traffic lane without making the entire roadway wider. I agree with you that narrow cycle ways on narrow roads are a recipe for piling up bodies - that council should be commended for their common sense approach to road safety and damn to the snowflakes. The only safe cycle way is one that is physically separate from larger vehicles in the same space - same reason dual carriage ways have concrete barriers separating opposing traffic flows, painted lines don't do jack for inattentive drivers. The Dutch have got it right but retro-fitting wider roads in inner cities is an impossible task for most of the world. I've noticed in several videos from riders in Chinese cities that they have constructed separate cycle ways on new roads.

In this country cyclists get the dubious privilege to share their space with buses! No joke, the cycle lane and bus lane is the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
48 minutes ago, Sidewalk Enforcer said:

and exclusively funded by motor vehicle license holders, I should note

Is that really the case? 

That is, would you say the following statement is true?

"In New Zealand, road construction and maintenance is entirely funded by automobile license fees and taxes upon automobiles."

If it's not true, could you put what you mean by "exclusively funded"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
34 minutes ago, LanghamP said:

Is that really the case? 

That is, would you say the following statement is true?

"In New Zealand, road construction and maintenance is entirely funded by automobile license fees and taxes upon automobiles."

If it's not true, could you put what you mean by "exclusively funded"?

I cannot give you a break down of all funding for road construction and maintenance and all parties that rely on such funding complain about the money received always being insufficient, but yes it is what I meant. No other road users contribute to the collection of funds - be it via fuel taxation, road user charges, road tolls, vehicle compliance and licensing charges and the contribution toward ACC (the Accident Compensation Corporation scheme, a sort of communal insurance cover for the treatment of injury resulting from accidents in New Zealand).

Pedestrians - nothing.
Cyclist - nothing.
PEV owner - nothing, $0.00.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Before even bothering to dig up the relevant information for NZ, I would have guessed about half the road and street funding came from road users while the other half came from sales tax, property tax (none automotive), Federal income and corporate tax, and finally from government debt. That is, drivers pay about half the cost of roads and streets while other people such as bicyclists, pedestrians, and PEV users pay the remaining via taxes. However, I was wrong; automobile users pay about 2/3 while the rest is "from other."

Here is the breakdown from the NZ government for funding sources. Notice that bicyclist and other non-vehicle users are specifically cited as paying for road funding.

And here too.

NLTP includes NZ$12.9bn ($8.52) from the National Land Transport Fund generated through fuel excise, road user charges, and other revenue sources, as well as NZ$3.4bn ($2.24bn) from local government collected through rates and Auckland’s Regional Fuel Tax, and NZ$557m ($368m) in other Crown investments.

In short, NZ, like all auto-centric nations, has everyone pay for automobile usage of roads and streets, although apparently NZ is less inclined to subsidize car users.

Therefore this statement

"In New  Zealand, road construction and maintenance is entirely funded by automobile license fees and taxes upon automobiles. "

is proven false via New Zealand own government site, with quoted multiple sources.

35 minutes ago, Sidewalk Enforcer said:

Pedestrians - nothing.
Cyclist - nothing.
PEV owner - nothing, $0.00.

The above statement is shown to be absolutely false.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)

Internet point awarded to @LanghamP

I concede that not all funding for road ways is gathered from motorists. -_-

NZ_road_cost.PNG

Edited by Sidewalk Enforcer
Found nice chart

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Sidewalk Enforcer said:

Internet point awarded to @LanghamP

I concede that not all funding for road ways is gathered from motorists. -_-

NZ_road_cost.PNG

I do have a car but I also know that by having a car I take away from people who do not also have a car. Society bends over backwards to accommodate my car usage via subsidized roads, streets, and "free" parking. Importantly, I realize our quality of life is severely degraded because too many people own and use cars.

When you think streets and roads are entirely paid for by automobile users, then you treat non car users as unwelcome and undeserving invaders, when the reality it's those same users that subsidize your car usage.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it really depends on the type of bike lane you have in your city.. we have protected bike lane here that are newly installed. basically there is the bike lane and then a planter that divide the park cars away from the bike lane to keep cars from door-ing anyone. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


×
×
  • Create New...