In 2008, we calculated that the average Madison residential home paid
$307.63 per year in property taxes for roads or 17.07% of the home's total
tax bill for city services.  These calculations were done using a method to
support a Street Utility, whereby all road costs are recovered as user fees.

 

If that same home had two cars and used the state per capita average for
gasoline (10.663 barrels or 448 gallons per capita) and two people, they
would pay $150 for car registration and $384 for gasoline taxes.  

 

This would indicate that property taxes are less than one-half of road
expenditures.  

 

I am sure that there are other scenarios that road costs can be attributed,
but this method is closest to the expenditures of individual Madisonians.  

 

I am rather interested in this subject and would be happy to review other
data to calculate/attribute road costs.

 

I can provide the spreadsheets used but I don't think the bikies server will
let an attachment through its portal.  (They are public records.)

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of STRAWSER, Charles
Sent: Wednesday, May 12, 2010 9:14 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: Steve Hiniker
Subject: Re: [Bikies] County Highway KP

 

When a developer turns farmland into a subdivision of houses, the developer
is generally responsible for building the local roads (that, is, generally
the roads within the subdivision itself, and sometimes widening the
collector or arterial road that makes the farmland accessible, and valuable,
in the first place, though that is usually limited to "improvements" i.e.
widening, where the collector/arterial intersects with the subdivisions
roads).

Therefore, Larry's point is valid - development (when it takes place in a
"greenfield" rather than an area that is already urbanized and has
infrastructure) pays for the costs to construct the smallest roads, and,
sometimes, development pays for some part of the cost to expand the bigger
roads adjacent to the new development to accommodate the increased traffic
they induce. But the point bolsters the argument of myself and others on
this list that small facilities for cyclists are a better investment in the
long term than big roads.

 

Because after the local roads are built, it is the responsibility of the
local municipality to maintain these newly built roads. This is just one
more reason why conventional suburban development in greenfields cost more
for a municipality to service than the revenue it brings in. Studies going
all the way back to the 1970s have born this out again and again. One I
recall estimated that typical sprawl cost $1.25 in municipal services for
every $1 in tax revenue. Of course, the study considered all municipal
services (water, sewer, trash, etc.), not just road maintenance. But road
maintenance is typically the lion's share of the municipal budget.

 

But the fact is, we have a mechanism to expand the transportation
infrastructure (and in a manner I would say that mostly benefit's car
drivers to the detriment of all other road users), but we don't have a
mechanism to expand the revenue that can be used to maintain the expanding
infrastructure.

 

Therefore, it would probably be a good idea for us to build smaller
infrastructure that costs less to maintain (Tim's points about the
maintenance requirements of paths that mostly see 50lb vehicles vs roads
that mostly see 5000 lb vehicles are relevant here) than to continue
building larger infrastructure (even when someone else is paying for a small
portion of it) that we can't afford to maintain.

 

chuck

  _____  

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Mad City Biker
Sent: Tuesday, May 11, 2010 11:23 PM
To: Larry D. Nelson
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Bikies] County Highway KP

 

Sorry for dredging up an old thread, but I'm just getting caught up.

 

Quote Larry Nelson: "Steve Hiniker doesn't include the developer's
contribution for local roads, which is generally 100%."

 

Could you please expound on this statement? (in layman's terms please!).
Bikers (myself included) tend to use talking points similar to Hiniker's to
justify our right to use the roads. Are we incorrect in quoting this? Just
how do developers $$$ fit into the equation? Thanks! -MCB

 

  _____  

From: Larry D. Nelson <[email protected]>
To: burleigh chorus.net <[email protected]>; [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Sent: Wed, April 28, 2010 5:10:42 PM
Subject: Re: [Bikies] County Highway KP

The cost to widen a road for bike lanes is greater than just the proportion
of pavement as the road bed has to be widened whereas the existing road
doesn't require the replacement of the road bed.  Also, the road side
ditches have to be excavated beyond their current location and new turf
established.  Bridges and storm sewers need to be widened beneath the
roadbed  and the storm water culverts for driveways have to be relocated.  I
suspect that the County Transportation Engineers have estimated the costs
quite closely and I am not surprised by the cost increase.

 

Steve Hiniker doesn't include the developer's contribution for local roads,
which is generally 100%.

 

From: [email protected]
[mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of burleigh chorus.net
Sent: Wednesday, April 28, 2010 10:36 AM
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [Bikies] County Highway KP

 

Al, 
thats great to hear.

Unfortunately, the Town of Middleton is waffling on bike lanes on Old Sauk
Road:

http://host.madison.com/ct/news/local/govt_and_politics/article_b3533244-507
e-11df-bb09-001cc4c03286.html

Does it really cost 50% more money to add 25% more width to a road?

Anyway, Ivey hits on the real problem here:

"Hiniker says most drivers assume the taxes on gasoline cover the expense to
build and maintain roads. But he notes the state's transportation fund -
which is basically the gas tax combined with vehicle registration fees -
provides only 60 percent of local road funding. The rest falls to property
taxpayers."

On Tue, Apr 27, 2010 at 11:55 AM, <[email protected]> wrote:

Greetings fellow bikies:

Dane County Executive Kathleen Falk sent out a letter I thought you'd be
interested in. County Highway KP, a favorite route for bicycling in
west/northwestern Dane County, is scheduled for reconstruction. Two
elected officials from the Town of Black Earth expressed interest in
having a bike lane/shoulder included in the construction project. The
County Executive's office agreed to make this addition, and noted a price
tag of $600K.

-- 
..........
-darin

 

_______________________________________________
Bikies mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.danenet.org/listinfo.cgi/bikies-danenet.org

Reply via email to