BIKEPGH MESSAGE BOARD ARCHIVE

This is interesting b/c I always had to get a bike license for my bike in the neighborhood where I grew up (that is, if I wanted to ride it on the street). This is actually not such a bizarre concept to me, but I'm not sure how well it would work on a city-wide level, esp. a city the size of Philly. My neighborhood was a large suburb, and I'm honestly not sure how much the licensing was enforced.

This line: The Bicycle Coalition of Greater Philadelphia says the bottom line is, try to behave on a bike as if you're driving a car.

i know what they mean, and since it's not in quotes i'm guessing that this was taken out of context. i've had the media misquote me. but really?

I dont understand how this could possibly work.

The first thing that I think of is the "philly week"

of bike racing. This used to be the US pro champs.

Anyway, hundreds if not thousands of people come

into town to watch and... ride their bikes along

the course to watch. Could you imagine the backlog

if 200 people showed up on a friday to register?

Also what is the registration attached to? The

frame? the compplete bike?

this is so dumb.

yeah, not to mention the east coast greenway that is in the works. can you imagine riding down the coast, and then, just to get thru philly you need to register your bike?

these legislators need to take a tour of a place like free ride and realize that it's impossible

Also what is the registration attached to? The

frame? the compplete bike?

I can't speak for Philly, but I always stuck the bike license on the frame, usually on the piece that holds the seatpost (as you can tell, I don't know squat about bicycle parts. ). The license that I had was always a red sticker that said it was the neighborhood's bike license, had a number on it, and was bright red. It wasn't big. I'd say about 2 in. x 3 in.

Having a license plate over the fender is a pretty sweet look... Or perhaps as a spoke card?

Check out Philadelphia Bicycle Insurrection on Facebook if you get a chance. Two of my friends have been hit in the last month with the cops being actively hostile towards them when taking the report. It's BS, as Steevo says.

Do I have to register my bike any time I race in Philly? Redic.

Having a license plate over the fender is a pretty sweet look... Or perhaps as a spoke card?

http://www.fallingpixel.com/products/14142/mains/01.jpg ...

what about a bike that is only ridden on a track? i mean baseball bats are dangerous too

Anybody remember when Valerie Mcdonald (now valerie roberts) tried making all messengers have a license plate in like 1999 and 2001. Triangle volunteered to do it because they were like "every dude wearing a messenger bag is not a messenger"

When I worked there, I had to switch "TM 13" plate

to the bike I was riding everyday.

http://www.post-gazette.com/regionstate/19990908messenger1.asp

Valerie Roberts is now the recorder of deeds. She can still suck it.

here's greater philly bike coalition's statement: http://blog.bicyclecoalition.org/2009/11/councilmen-kenny-dicicco-proposed-bills.html

I like this: ith regards to laws requiring registration and licensing of bicycles, the Bicycle Coalition does not support a mandatory program. Among other issues, we are concerned about the potential for a registration program to discourage riders, impose financial disincentives, and expose the City to numerous legal issues. Peer cities and states have passed and then repealed registration and licensing programs. We recommend a thorough investigation of registration and licensing programs in other cities to determine whether such programs would help or hinder efforts to achieve peace on Philadelphia’s streets.

Anybody remember when Valerie Mcdonald (now valerie roberts) tried making all messengers have a license plate in like 1999 and 2001. Triangle volunteered to do it because they were like "every dude wearing a messenger bag is not a messenger"

When I worked there, I had to switch "TM 13" plate

to the bike I was riding everyday.

http://www.post-gazette.com/regionstate/19990908messenger1.asp

Valerie Roberts is now the recorder of deeds. She can still suck it.

all because that stupid women wasn't looking where she was going (talking on the phone of course) and almost ran over one of us.

those plates were a pain in the ass. glad they never made us have the flags though...

btw last time i talked to bill he said he was STILL getting calls to complain about his messengers. he probably should have sprung for a new number for games n'at.

Anyone have a link to the stories on the deaths?

edit: i misread. oops!

and then double-posted. teh internets are hard.

I am confused by the comment about it being a trend to remove brakes from bikes. State law doesnt say the bike needs brakes, it says a braking system. Having a fixie and being able to brake the bike with the drivetrain is by definition a braking system. and I dont know of anyone that rides a freewheel bike with no brakes. gg newb.

This also goes towards cyclist education tho.. ask the average person and they have no clue that it is illegal to ride on the sidewalk in a business district, or against the flow of traffic. I am not opposed to correct enforcement of the laws, but a 300$ fine because you didnt know you couldnt ride on a sidewalk?

I am confused by the comment about it being a trend to remove brakes from bikes. State law doesnt say the bike needs brakes, it says a braking system. Having a fixie and being able to brake the bike with the drivetrain is by definition a braking system. and I dont know of anyone that rides a freewheel bike with no brakes. gg newb.

Point taken, but your average fixie n00b may not have the l33t skillz necessary to actually use the drivetrain to stop their bike. There is certainly a trend for riders to remove the redundant braking systems from their fixed wheel bicycles[1], but there is also a trend among BMXers to ride their brakeless park bikes on the streets (which, of course, is illegal.

[1] Is that better?

the media loves to scare people.

agreed. The state law is clear that the braking system be able to stop the bike form 15mph in 15ft on a dry flat surface. I will say that is a pretty quick stop for any vehicle.

Man, that's actually a ridiculous standard.

http://www.eecycleworks.com/VNJune%20BrakeTest.pdf

yeah.. looks like they were doing 25mph and their best stop was about 20ft. And that was on top of the line bikes with top of the line brakes in perfect condition.

FAIL

15ft @ 15mph is a lot easier than 20ft @ 24mph. This standard was developed by the bike lobby to replace the stupid "must be able to skid the rear wheel".

I think: acceleration = 0.5*v^2/d

Right? According to the article cited, the best brakes were able to stop from 40kph in 6.44m, for a deceleration of 9.58 m/s^2. (almost 1g!)

And indeed, the math checks out

0.5*(40kph*1000/3600)^2/6.44 = 9.585

And the worst brakes only managed 0.6g, which caused the reviewers to write:

It was the only brake in this test where we had a true, “I don’t think I’m going to be able to stop,” close call.

So the legal standard of 15ft (4.6m) from 15mph (24.2kph) works out to:

0.5*(24.2*1000/3600)^2/4.6 = 4.8 m/s^2

That's less than 0.5g. Is my math wrong?

That's even worse than the reviewers' "I don't think I'm going to be able to stop" brake -- the one that they said required them to "grossly adjust their braking technique".

@netviln (below, sorry): I don't think that's equivalent to "stand on the front brake and hope you don't endo". I do think that you are right that you can't manage 0.5g braking with a rear brake alone. At best, it would be close. But you can do it with a front brake alone, at least in theory.

Note that the law doesn't actually require that a cyclist has the skill to perform such a stop, only that the equipment must be capable of it.

But I would hope that the denizens of this board actually can do it, and if not, practice!

I dont agree that its possible, but would argue that bike that simply have back brakes or coaster brakes would not be able to make that distance. 15 at 15 is more of a stand on the front brakes and hope you dont go end over.

For comparison, the _new_ federal standards for tractor trailers require them to be able to stop in 250 ft from an initial speed of 60 mph.

That's 76m @ 97kph or, using the formula above, 4.8 m/s^2!

Huh. I wonder if that's a coincidence. So, do you think that a bike should be able to stop in less distance than a fully-loaded tractor trailer?

I think it takes a lot of training and practice for a truck driver to learn to plan far enough ahead that they can avoid running into things with their anemic brakes. I don't think the average cyclist has had that kind of training or experience. So I don't think it's unreasonable to require a higher equipment standard.

I dont think most bikes go 60mph. From a purely mechanical point of view, 15 at 15 I think is a good standard. Im just saying in practice, panic stops are tough, especially for less experienced cyclists. They usually end up over the bars or laying down their bike.

I guess I was mostly making the argument that given the 15 at 15 standard, bikes with only rear brakes, whether drum, rim, disc, or fixed, wouldnt be able to stop in time.

Lyle- thanks for doing the math.

i need to preface this post with: in no way do i support this, but...

i was wondering what people thought that if people had to register, do you think that cops and drivers will treat cyclists as legitimate users of the road, and treat us better. i mean if you are paying to register, and you get in a crash, then the cop doesn't fill out a police report then you have something to go on. likewise, if you registered then someone (including cops) couldn't say "get on the sidewalk."

also, i think if registration happened, cyclists that actually register would start demanding better conditions and treatment as well.

i want to reiterate, i do not support this.

just thought it would be a fun mental exercise and to see what folks thought

Erok, after having lengthy discussions at Sonny's about this very issue, my conclusion is that the old dudes there want this to happen in Pittsburgh ONLY so that they could call in complaints about cyclists to the police. They also tell stories about how they like to beep at us "so we know their coming" and how it's our fault that they right hooked us. Ugh. I am slowly enlightening them to the finer nuances of the PA driving laws and the reality of riding a bike in the city.

I think that this alot like blaming the victim of a crime. Wouldn't that money be better spent by Philly to educate drivers on bicycle/car issues? Or bike lanes? Or street repairs? Or anything really?

If this happens here I will never get one

oops, "so we know they're coming"

in short, no. we would still be different. different = scary = bad = get out of my way so i can speed to the next stop light.

man spak, you're on the front lines there.

but would some people turn their frustrations at us toward the government that "lets them cyclists on the road?"

again, just mentally exercising.

registration is stoopid

I think it would be the first step in mandating insurance.

I just don't see what good it will do. So I register my bike then what? How would that have prevented those two tragedies in Philly?

it's silly.

i found this bit of law from Pittsburgh in 1897. even then it seems more than the current bureaucracy can handle. Knowing this town, i wouldn't be surprised if this was still on the books.

there is more here: CLICKY CLICKY

pretty funny stuff, but i guess it handles the question of out of towners

@steevo If you do have auto insurance, you are covered, but I agree that there should be some sort of standalone cycle insurance for people that dont have cars. I know they sell it in some eu countries, but I am not sure can get anything like that in the US.. I may be completely wrong but I havent seen it.

The measured response of the Philadelphia Bike Coalition is exactly on target. Looking at the legislation, it appears that out-of-towners are exempted from registration. If I can come up with some intelligent questions, I may call the councilman's office anyway to ask them, and if so, I'll report what I hear.

i wonder if this stuff, especially the parts about headphones and brakes could fly. i seem to remember that either here, or in philly, the city tried to ban cell phone use while driving a car, but the state said that the cities can't amend the vehicle code. i could be totally wrong

that confiscation shit is whack

Freedom of travel is a fundamental civil right. Registration of motor vehicles got started back when there weren't very many of them, so driving was deemed a "privilege". But cycling has historically been considered a civil right, as crucial to freedom as the RKBA or Roe v Wade's right to privacy. I know, people who talk about civil rights are not considered "serious" any more. All the more reason this kind of thing has to be fought with every resource available.

Between all the posters on this board, the city could raise enough money @.50/bike to not need to tax the poor college kids.

When I went to school in Davis, registering your bike was mandatory if you operated it on the college campus. There was no city-wide ordinance though. I think it cost something like $10 for 2 years. You brought it in, they verify the serial number on the frame, and you can list whatever fancy parts you have on it. The registration was a little sticker on the seat tube. They would upload your details to some state-wide (I think?) database, so nobody can steal it and register it as their own.

If you didn't lock your bike up outside on campus, and never get pulled over for doing something illegal, nobody would have any reason to give you grief for not being registered. Good luck reporting a stolen, unregistered bike though.

This type of registration is more to protect the bike owner against theft and assist in recovering an "abandoned" bike cut away from a bike rack. I had no problem registering mine.

Registration designed for the sole purpose of having some bike-hating driver harass us using the police (ie a big number plate on our bikes) doesn't seem like a step in the right direction.

Some sort of bike insurance would be cool though. No-fault car insurance is makes no sense whatsoever when one of the parties was not in a car. Try explaining to Pittsburgh EMS billing that you have no car insurance for your bike, and don't own a car.

> Between all the posters on this board, the city

> could raise enough money @.50/bike to not need to

> tax the poor college kids.

Really? How many cyclists are there in the city? How much would it cost to manage a registration system? How much would the registration fee need to be to pay for that system? When that was all said and done, how many cyclists would there be then?

Registration of bikes is a system with the fail built in. It didn't work in 1897, why should it work now?

For those who dont know the way that insurance currently works for bikes:

1) if you have auto insurance, you are covered like a normal automotive accident only since you are on a cycle, you are automatically granted full tort even if you have limited tort on your insurance.

2) if you dont have auto insurance or liability only, if you have home owners or renters insurance, it will cover your loss of property and some liability

3) If you have health insurance, it will cover your medical bills. and if you dont, take the easy way out and pay 1$ a month to the hospital and ems.. they cant do anything about it because you are making payemtns.

kordite sorry

I guess i should have put the sarcasm tags in.

I didnt really think that .50 a bike would cover the 16 million dollars that the city is trying to get out of the college kids, cause that would be 32 million bikes....

Oh, I realized the sarcasm there but I have had arguments with people who used the argument that cyclists should "pay their way" and be registered and licensed. Ultimately, the only way to counter those arguments is with numbers. I can say that the other municipalities that instituted registration did not recover their costs and eventually abandoned the idea.

So, how many bicycles are there in Pittsburgh? I've heard some numbers saying ridership is up some significant percentage but I haven't been able to find a number.

Another thing to look at when countering people who want bikes to be treated just like cars is the amount of damage done by cars and trucks on the road and the cost to repair that damage. Big rigs are heavily taxed because they put a disproportionate amount of stress on the roads. Trucks and cars cause less damage but surely bicycles, even if there were thousands of them, have a minuscule impact. I can't find the article that put numbers to this but it found that, if you are talking about "pulling your weight", all motorized vehicles should have taxes raised on them significantly to "pull their weight".

That kind of stuff should be compiled into an easy little table. Probably already has. we'll just have to find it.

Erok, in direct answer to your question, "I was wondering what people thought that if people had to register, do you think that cops and drivers will treat cyclists as legitimate users of the road, and treat us better?": FFC (fat flipping chance)

Changing hats here. 50 cents in 1897 dollars translates to about $12.80 in today's dollars. Don't tell Ravenstahl, though. Inflation calculator

So, how many bicycles are there in Pittsburgh? I've heard some numbers saying ridership is up some significant percentage but I haven't been able to find a number.

I'd say there are definitely more bikes than bike riders. (For instance, the people on this board under "What bikes do you own?") So that needs to go into whatever calculations.

Another thing to look at when countering people who want bikes to be treated just like cars is the amount of damage done by cars and trucks on the road and the cost to repair that damage. Big rigs are heavily taxed because they put a disproportionate amount of stress on the roads. Trucks and cars cause less damage but surely bicycles, even if there were thousands of them, have a minuscule impact. I can't find the article that put numbers to this but it found that, if you are talking about "pulling your weight", all motorized vehicles should have taxes raised on them significantly to "pull their weight".

We talked about this in http://bike-pgh.org/bbpress/topic/who-pays-for-the-roads . I found some materials that come up with the proportionality of damage = weight * 10^~4, such that a car causes 65,000 times as much damage as a bike, and, under this theory would pay 65,000 times as much. If car registration is $36 today, bike registration should be... well, maybe between all the Bike Pittsburgh members, we'd be on the hook for a penny. Or if we're going to have $36 bike registrations, cars will be paying... let's just say that solves the city's budget issues.

http://freakonomics.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/03/13/enjoy-the-free-ride-while-it-lasts/#comment-383329 linking to http://dinamico2.unibg.it/highways/paper/dodoo.pdf

The thing that always cracks me about this argument is that if there were only bikes on our roads they probably wouldn't need resurfaced every other year. How often have our trails been resurfaced?

Here's an update from philly on the process

http://blog.bicyclecoalition.org/2009/11/where-are-bicycle-bills-now.html

Erok, I don't understand the purpose of the legislation. Is it to fight bicycle theft? If all bikes were registered it theortically could make recovery more likely and may cause a potential theft to think twice, or maybe not. Also, it's interesting that based on the seat height exemption a recumbent wouldn't need to be registered.

in theory, registration can help with recovering bikes. you can register a bike here in pgh or at pitt. the problem is when registration is mandatory, and if you don't do it you get a big fine. they're targeting a population based on two freak occurrences.

just another update from philly comparing the proposed ordinances to comparable ones for cars

http://blog.bicyclecoalition.org/2009/11/fines-fines-everywhere-fine.html

Looks like Steevo is right. They want to apply motorcycle rules to bikes.

http://www.legis.state.pa.us/CFDOCS/Legis/PN/Public/btCheck.cfm?txtType=HTM&sessYr=2009&sessInd=0&billBody=H&billTyp=B&billNbr=2096&pn=2921

this text is kind of vague. Does this mean that a motorcycle license and registration would be needed to ride a bike?

I think people just drive like morons, and cyclists just happen to be in the way, so registered or not, we'll still be in their path.

so the state, then, one wants bikes to have turn signals like motorcycles?

There are three bills in committee listed here. 090828, 090829 and 090845

The first two are competing??? bills - increasing fines and outlawing riding on sidewalks, with headphones and without "brakes." The third bill is requiring registration of all bikes purchased in the city and/or rode by a resident of philly.

The third one demands a lot of time and effort for the philly police department to setup and administer registration and enforce the law.

the one i'm referencing is a proposed state law- an amendment to the pa vehicle code

Anyone who thinks I am going to get a freakin license or pay big brother to ride my bike can kiss my behind. That's about all I have to say about that one, and I can assure you that 90% of people who ride bikes agree.

I refuse to pay big brother a fee for putting my canoe in the water like they want me to do as well. Ridiculous if you ask me.

Just another glaring example of the control our so called leaders want to exert upon all of us. What's next a "hiking" license to go for a walk in the woods? PLEASE...

I'd love to see the pigs round up a large critical mass ride or an alleycat for biking without a license... LMFAO...

Tell ya what... I'll get some of the little license plates from some Honeycomb cereal boxes and put them on my bikes just for kicks haha.

From this summary of Pennsylvania motorcycle laws it looks like turn signals are not actually required, but there are lots of other rules for motorcycles that would be onerous if applied to bikes:

- Helmets mandatory unless you've been licensed to drive a motorcycle for two years or took an approved safety course.

- Mandatory eye protection

- Headlights on both night and day

- Passenger footrest if carrying passenger: probably doesn't apply to a tandem, but trailers become ambiguously legal, it seems.

- Mandatory mirrors

- Periodic safety inspection

- Mandatory muffler

- Mandatory insurance

By implication, a license to ride a bike on the streets would also be required... perhaps even obtaining a motorcycle license, because that is a requirement for a motorcyclist as well.

Also says madatory insurance, which isnt available for bikes as a standalone option.

But the state does have an Insurance Department, which of course has to have something to do.

The third one demands a lot of time and effort for the philly police department to setup and administer registration and enforce the law.

And cost. If they wanted to do bike registration here, how much would it cost to pay the person who would do it? And to pay the enforcers? You would never recoup that cost with the registration fees or any fines.... I think that alone would keep people from wishing for this when the city has enough financial troubles.

let alone all the other issues with it.

i wonder if these legislators and council members are so protective of pedestrians when it comes to assaults from cars? i doubt it, it looks like they are jumping on the anti-bike crusade.

I wonder how much of the anti-bike crusade would evaporate with the implementation of Idaho rules (stop sign=yield sign, red light=stop sign).

I sent a letter to State Rep. Frankel today, with the generally feeling of "just in case this crap comes your way..." I feel it's good to get an early word in. If I'm the first he's heard of it, he'll be comparing everyone else's comments to the first ones he heard.

Or maybe not. I don't really know how a legislator's mind works.

caitlin, that would require sense. Something the majority of our law makers have none of.

Also says madatory insurance, which isnt available for bikes as a standalone option.

LOL I was thinking about this today for some reason and thought to myself "Yeah, and then they are going to try and make everyone get "bike insurance" hahaha...

Yeah, go ahead and pass the laws and see how many of us actually obey them.

Its so sad when people keep calling this the land of the free when the people in your average dictatorships seem to have more freedom in some ways.

On Thursday, I sent a (long) letter to Reps. Cruz, Youngblood and Donatucci, copying Dan Frankel (my rep) and the chair of the House Transportation Committee, which would have to report this to the full house. I also copied Scott here at Bike Pittsburgh and the executive director of the Philadelphia Bicycle Coalition.

looks like things have calmed down a bit

http://blog.bicyclecoalition.org/2010/01/meeting-with-councilmen-dicicco-and.html

sounds like they need a Bike & Ped Coordinator! Not just a safety committee.

they have one