'Complete Streets' bill being considered in Legislature would p...

"For decades, planners have designed Minnesota's roads to move cars and trucks as efficiently and quickly as possible.
But bicyclists, pedestrians and other road users would start getting a bit more standing if a bill moving through the Minnesota Legislature becomes law."
"Rigid state standards that don't easily allow them to add a bike lane in one portion of town or to put in a sidewalk in another would be eased. "

Lord knows we wouldn't want to hinder bicycle travel.
This is nothing more that a move to use gas tax dollars to fund bike lanes and pedestrian crossing bridges. They may be able to throw in another "Round-about" or two in order to obstruct traffic a little too.

I'm so totally sick of bicyclists in heavily traveled areas.

another ruse to waste money. Health advocates should fund their own PR if they think people ought to walk or ride bicycles more. Maybe people should, but roads are for cars and trucks to transport people and freight. Most of these dumpy DFL legislators need exercise i'm sure, but we need our tax dollars to build roads. Just roads.

This state spends a lot of money on bike, running and walking trails. These people get a pass when it comes to funding these projects. Now they're going to mandate bike paths on roadways? Let me guess, funded by the transportation budget?

It is time for the users of these boondoggles to kick in their fair share. These paths require plowing, maintenance and police protection. They take incredible amounts of money to build and return nothing to state coffers.

It is time for TEAM GREEN to pay for the heavy hand of government they so love to support!

I can't think of anything less American than building more roads for more cars that suck more Middle East oil. If you want to be energy dependent on nations that hate us, then use your tax dollars to build your roads and your cars. And don't come crying for Medicare dollars when you get hit by a car walking your kids to the park.

Very Interesting! My question is, "will these new users be required to pay proportionately as I do for my vehicles?" I bet not. I bet that the vehicle owners will be required to pay the entire cost of these additional requirements, and that pedestrians and bicycle operators will get by completely without cost. You counter with the fact that I as a vehicle owner am also a pedestrian and or bicycle operator. OK, the why do I have to pay for every vehicle when i cn only drive one at a time? I think this is just a unique way to raise he vehicle taxes without our knowledge.

I can't wait for these Complete Streets to be built - this shows real forward thinking on the part of the Legislature if (when!) they pass this legislation. We're making our communities accessible to EVERYONE, making them safer, and encouraging bikers/walkers to be out and about doing their thing. I think that most folks in cars aren't used to seeing bikers and walkers in the road and this will help all parties navigate the roads together in a safe way. Bikers/Walkers are part of the definition of traffic, I'm glad we're starting to actually plan our roads with that in mind.

Tito wrote:

I can't think of anything less American than building more roads for more cars that suck more Middle East oil. If you want to be energy dependent on nations that hate us, then use your tax dollars to build your roads and your cars. And don't come crying for Medicare dollars when you get hit by a car walking your kids to the park.

It would be nice if you could understand why we use petroleum as an energy source. To understand the complete methodology of why and how we discover/procure/process/ and consume petroleum is necessary to understand why we are in the situation that we are. The answer has more to do with where and how, than why. For example, we have not built a refinery in more than 40 years. We cannot store more than a 35 day supply of fuels, and our brilliant government has more than 150 different formulations for gasoline used throughout the US. Add that to the possibility that crude oil is a renewable resource. Maybe you could do some intelligent research.

If bibycles are going to get increased "standing" to use our roads, isn't it time to consider a bicycle license fee?

This isn't a bill saying you must build roads this way, so why* is there a cost associated with it? The only cost should be where roads are being (re)worked, and that cost should already be 'built into' the repair/building cost.

The added cost, is just a way for the govt to waste more of our money.

More bike lanes built on our roads, payed for by our gas tax. I see bicyclist's riding on our roads without the designated bike lanes, not following the same laws as motorists now. Blowing through intersections, impeding traffic in the right lane of a four lane road. I can see it now! Car going 55 mph, bicyclist going 10 mph in his/her dedicated bike lane. Irate driver sick of paying gas taxes for something the bicyclist is not paying for. Schreeeech, thump, thump, ooops.

Tito wrote:

I can't think of anything less American than building more roads for more cars that suck more Middle East oil. If you want to be energy dependent on nations that hate us, then use your tax dollars to build your roads and your cars. And don't come crying for Medicare dollars when you get hit by a car walking your kids to the park.

Maybe if we would just drill for our own oil. Would we then be "more American"?
Lots of other resources we could tap but the likes of Tito go out of their way to obstruct any progress, they like us beholden to other countries.

wow, Fat Margaret, where do you get your facts?. Shell? BP? Exxon? Who do you work for? Oil is a renewable resource? We could drill everywhere and anywhere, but the fact is the US has 2% of the world's oil reserves and we use 25%. By all means, fund terrorism and keep building roads for more cars.

Under a scaled-back House version, the projected price tag for the transportation department is $50,000 over four years. The agency would prepare and submit reports to the Legislature on how the policy is working, absorbing that cost within its existing budgets.

nice, but only in suburbs, I know in Eagan there is huge parks and a bike system that connects almost the whole town( great for morning runs:)too)
I dont believe this should be implented in the high car traffic areas though, as it causes accidents, and should really be terminated at busy streets.

The libs will probably twist this into who knows what, but enough fat kids, try sitting between two on a flight or viking game.

All for it! While we're at it, it's time to consider licensing fees and wheelage taxes for bicycles. Hey, if they get the same benefits as motor vehicles, they get the same burdens as well.

Tito wrote:

wow, Fat Margaret, where do you get your facts?. Shell? BP? Exxon? Who do you work for? Oil is a renewable resource? We could drill everywhere and anywhere, but the fact is the US has 2% of the world's oil reserves and we use 25%. By all means, fund terrorism and keep building roads for more cars.

Titto, build your bike lanes, hiking trails and trains from no where to no where. Just pay your share. You're not kicking in your fair share. You should be happy to pay for the priviledge to be GREEN.

Diogenes wrote:

More Marxo-Fascistic jackboots, tromping on the rights of taxpayers to fund nonsense programs that keep the bootlickers voting DFL. These political gangsters will keep buying votes, with taxpayer money, ala ACORN, until they OWN more than 51% of the voters permanently. Then there will be only one point of view, the "Progressive" view, which will ensconce the self-appointed "ruling elite caste" in permanent power over their hive of drones.

LIES,HATE,FEAR,AND ACORN.will be your fall from Grace, into the PIT,you PSYCOPATHIC,you weird nutty GREEP! take a dose of cinanine,like your Hitler and do yourself a favor and us too!

Any chance that bikers would need the following?

1) A license to ride
2) A tab fee on their bikes
3) fee for items for their bike that only goes to roads

bikers need to get out of way or they will be run over. I don't care who's fault it is if a biker is dead!

Freedom Lover wrote:

If biycles are going to get increased "standing" to use our roads, isn't it time to consider a bicycle license fee?

There is a "Bicycle License fee" It is administered through the Minnesota Department of Public Safety.(isn't that scary?) However it is not mandatory. I think the last time I checked,the fee was $75.00. Now, these are the people who do not obey ANY traffic laws, Why in the world would you expect them to buy a License for their two wheel pedal power thing? And parents have not taught their children the correct way to walk on the street when it is necessary. That is why there are so many pedestrian deaths. It has nothing to do with the way the streets are designed.

GB Fan wrote:

<quoted text>
Titto, build your bike lanes, hiking trails and trains from no where to no where. Just pay your share. You're not kicking in your fair share. You should be happy to pay for the priviledge to be GREEN.

get out of my town fudgie