Trimess

Trimess
FOLLOW THE TWITTER FEED FOR UPDATES

Monday, June 16, 2014

Bike Portland covers the Erik Holm incident

After bike-bus collision, TriMet driver tells man 'You're fine' and drives off - BikePortland.org
Those folks have pull over there...

11 comments:

Anonymous said...

How about Randy Stedman sucks buttons

Anonymous said...

I wrote to BikePortland.org
I ll be glad the day comes when you huberistic huffy road hogs start obeying the rules of the road. What ORS exempts you. Maybe its time you start earning respect instead of insisting on be a danger to everyone. What special training or license do you have.Especially those of us who pay for the road and the privilage to be on it.

Max said...

1) Everybody pays for the roads.

2) Hate to break it to you, but it's the auto drivers that are causing the fatalities, not the bikers.

Anonymous said...

Hat to break it to you but it is the stupid bike riders who are blowing the red lights and stop signs. Weaving in and out of traffic and on to the side walks. They don't look when they make lane changes and do not have lights on the front and back of most bikes. Bikers have been known to knock down pedistrians and keep on going in a hit and run. Damage was done to a young boy and the Rose Quarters a few year back. They are aggressive and use that middle finger a lot. They should be licensed and insures and pay a tax to ride the streets. They come down hills in mobs and ride naked without a cause. At least if they were raising money for a charity their nakedness could be overlooked. Obviously you haven't been on Hawthorne or Williams during rush our.

Anonymous said...

rush hour

Anonymous said...

When you are succesfull in getting all vehicles off the street and its only let for the bikes who is going to pay then?

Max said...

1) Hate has an "e" on it.

2) The only reason why stop signs and red lights exist is to keep people in cars from killing everyone else and each other. If we didn't have cars, we wouldn't have stop lights or stop signs. That's why we don't see stop lights or stop signs on off-street trails, hiking paths, sidewalks, etc.

3) I challenge you to find out how many deaths were caused last year by people riding bicycles. Then find out how many deaths were caused by people driving cars. Do you really believe the bicycle riders have killed more people than auto drivers?


But let's look at your original comment where you made the argument that people riding bikes aren't paying for the roads.

0) What "it" is, is just a bit of paint. That's what a bicycle lane is -- it's paint. Paint is cheap.

1) Road damage is proportionate to vehicle weight. That's why you commonly see sidewalks in SE Portland than have not been replaced in 100 years, yet the road next to them has to be resurfaced every few years. If there were no cars, then there would be no need to continually resurface roads (and that's what the bulk of our transportation budget goes to).

2) Most bicycle riders also have cars.

3) Most of the transportation budget isn't paid for by gas tax anyway; it's paid for by city/state/federal income/property taxes -- which we all pay. ODOT's budget is funded only 22% by the gas tax. For PBOT it's about 30%.

4) Every time you buy something you in effect pay gas tax (you think that truck driver pays the gas tax out of his own pocket? -- No those costs are passed on to you, the consumer).

5) There are many roads that tax paying bicycle-only riders pay for, but do not get access to. (Ex: the interstate highways).


If you want to argue that some people who ride bikes need better manners, then fine - I see that too. I also see plenty of people who drive like idiots as well. Almost all auto drivers drive above the speed limit, and certainly that's illegal as well. The difference, however, is that when someone on a bike rides like an idiot they're unlikely to kill someone else.

Here's another thing to try: go to a street corner and ask the pedestrians "Crossing this street, do you think you have a greater risk of being killed by someone on a bike or driving a car?"

It's not hard for me to think of times when I was walking around my neighborhood and I was almost hit by someone in a car. I have *never* almost been killed by someone riding a bike.

kswiss said...

2) The only reason why stop signs and red lights exist is to keep people in cars from killing everyone else and each other.

I'm sorry, what? So if a bicycle runs a stop sign or red light then there's no chance of a serious accident? Sorry but that's BS.

In fact I was in Eugene with my BEST FRIEND Erik Halstead and some geeky chick on a bike ran a stop sign and almost ran over myself and his son. THAT WOULD HAVE CAUSED SERIOUS INJURIES TO REAL HUMAN BEINGS.

Also, ORS 814.400 says that bikes are to follow the rules of the road in the same sense as motorists. Sorry Max, but you fail. As usual.

Erik H. said...

That's why we don't see stop lights or stop signs on off-street trails, hiking paths, sidewalks, etc.

Explain the stop sign that governs the intersection of the I-205 Bike Path and the Springwater Trail Corridor.

Or the stop sign that governs the Springwater Trail at Spokane Street. Or Ivon Street.

Or the stop signs at the southern end of the Fanno Creek Trail, in Tualatin Community Park.

Or on the Oregon Electric Right-of-Way Trail, at the road leading to the Portland Water Bureau's Fanno Creek Pump Station.

Or on the Fanno Creek Trail, at North Dakota and Tigard Streets.

Just to name a few.

Most of the transportation budget isn't paid for by gas tax anyway; it's paid for by city/state/federal income/property taxes -- which we all pay. ODOT's budget is funded only 22% by the gas tax. For PBOT it's about 30%

According to ODOT's 2011-2013 Budget Booklet (link: http://www.oregon.gov/ODOT/COMM/docs/budgetbooklet_11-13.pdf), here's ODOT's funding sources:

Total budget: $4,986M

State Fuel Tax: $1,106M (22.2%)
Federal Fuel Tax: $998M (20%)
Weight/Mile Tax (paid by trucks): $611M (12.3%)
Driver/Vehicle License Fees: $676M (13.6%)
Licenses and Fees: $97M (1.9%)

So according to ODOT, a full 70% of their revenue is derived directly from taxes assessed to road users through taxes and fees.

Only $17M is derived from the general fund (0.3%) and that is actually allocated specifically for roadside litter pickup; that in turn was a legislative move exchanging a funding source for Amtrak Cascade service in Oregon (which was formerly funded through the general fund, and is now funded through the sales of personalized license plates - which used to fund the litter program.)

Lottery proceeds made up 1.4% or $70M of revenues; bond sales $640M or 12.8%, and "sales of services" $25M or 0.5%.

Now let's look at PBOT. Source: https://www.portlandoregon.gov/transportation/article/441782

$41.5M starting balance
$31.9M gas tax revenues
#30.1M "City Agencies"
$25.9M in grant funding
$25.2M in gas tax revenues handed to the city by the county
$20.8M in fee revenue
$20.5M in parking meter revenue
$13.1M in parking garage revenue
$9.3M in bond sales
$8.7M in general fund transfers
$7.5M in citation revenues
$4.0M in parking permits.

So, out of $238.5M, only $8.7M of that pot of money came from the general fund - 3.6%. We're a long ways from your made up figures.

Most bicycle riders also have cars

Your point is? When you own and operate a motor vehicle you specifically pay fees and taxes tied to the use of that vehicle. If a "bicyclist" is allowed to somehow allocate their gas tax revenues away from their motor vehicle use, is that right granted to other people? Say, I want my TriMet fare revenue to pay for a community pool, instead of actually paying for the bus. Or, my property tax dollars to pay for National Parks instead of city services? Of course that's ludicrous - but yet you argue cyclists should be allowed to claim their motor vehicle taxes be used for other than motor vehicle expenses?

Every time you buy something you in effect pay gas tax

And how did that freight get shipped? Using roads. How many stores do you shop at, that have their own private cargo airport, or railroad spur, or steamship dock?

There are many roads that tax paying bicycle-only riders pay for, but do not get access to. (Ex: the interstate highways

Wrong on so many levels: In Oregon it is legal to ride a bike on an "Interstate Highway" except in urban areas; even then there is a bike path along the entire length of I-205 from Vancouver to Gladstone; I-84 east of I-205 into Gresham; the Interstate Bridge has a bike path from Delta Park into Vancouver.

Further, name the taxes that "bicycle-only riders" pay. (See above, with included sources to ODOT's own documentation.)

Anonymous said...

Property taxes

Jason McHuff said...

Or the stop sign that governs the Springwater Trail at Spokane Street. Or Ivon Street.

Or the stop signs at the southern end of the Fanno Creek Trail, in Tualatin Community Park.

Or on the Oregon Electric Right-of-Way Trail, at the road leading to the Portland Water Bureau's Fanno Creek Pump Station.

Or on the Fanno Creek Trail, at North Dakota and Tigard Streets.


Sounds like all of those are places where bicyclists (and skaters, etc) interact with cars, and and are there to protect bicyclists from getting hit by cars which are given the right of way.

Also, your budget numbers do not include things like pollution cleanup (it's been said that at least 40% of Portland stormwater runoff comes from streets, yet street users paid for none of the billion-dollar Big Pipe that was built to contain runoff), most parking, defense of oil supplies, crash investigation, etc.

Nor does it include various fees like Tigard and Washington County charge and Portland is proposing that are not charged to drivers yet are used for roads.

I believe if gas taxes went first toward costs associated with fuel use, there would be nothing left for roads and, therefore, roads are essentially fully subsidized.

But if there were to be a bicycle tax, bicycle riders should get a 100% credit for attempting to be healthy and reduce our health care burden.

And are there rare occasions where bicyclists mow down pedestrians? Maybe, but a bicyclist cannot cause the injury and death that cars can and frequently do cause. And given the narrow profile of a bike, it's easy for either side to move out of the way. Moreover, a careless cyclist raises their chances of getting hit and being the injured party.

As for running stop signs and traffic signals, I'm not advocating doing so but remember that, unlike drivers, bicyclists are much more aware of the surroundings as they aren't in a sealed box, don't have engine noise, don't have distractions like a car radio or passengers, and are seated much further forward.

the Interstate Bridge has a bike path

More like a scary sidewalk, and it's not like bicyclists and pedestrians can just go use a different street.