Earlier this year the Arkansas Transportation and Highway Department (ATHD) drafted an update to the Statewide Long Range Transportation Plan which characterized bicycle and pedestrian activities as more recreational than as a mode of transportation, that the trend was likely to continue for the next 20 years, and that neither bicycling nor walking was a viable option for transportation in Arkansas.
Thanks in large part to the efforts of the Bicycle Advocacy of Central Arkansas the revised Plan will now contain the following language:
"Bikeways and Pedestrians
The importance of bicycling and walking as modes of transportation in Arkansas is growing. As more Arkansans become health conscious, bicycling and walking will become more important. Furthermore, many individuals living in communities with no access to public transportation systems and working at lower wage jobs rely on bicycling and walking as their sole means of transportation."
This will open up a lot more funding to bicycle-oriented projects.
ctyler
11-19-07, 12:29 PM
Good for the Bicycle Advocacy of Central Arkansas for getting the wording changed. Makes me wish I had stayed in Arkansas.
Artkansas
11-19-07, 01:45 PM
Good for the Bicycle Advocacy of Central Arkansas for getting the wording changed. Makes me wish I had stayed in Arkansas.
You're welcome back anytime you like. :D
maddyfish
11-19-07, 02:10 PM
I don't like the lower wage part of it. Biking to work is for everyone, not just poor people.
Artkansas
11-19-07, 02:38 PM
I don't like the lower wage part of it. Biking to work is for everyone, not just poor people.
That it defines the bike as transportation is the real miracle here.
Though I agree, I have ridden as a poor person and as a slightly richer person. The richer folks don't need as much help riding though. The poor may find it hard to afford that bike at all. I know that at one point I had to delay my start date at a job by a week so I could get a usable bike assembled.
Besides, it seems that we can use that to find funding for getting bike racks paid for and maybe even for Road 1 courses. Hopefully it also enables funding for things like bike lanes and bike paths as well.
richardmasoner
11-19-07, 04:42 PM
Biking to work is for everyone, not just poor people.
True, but affluence does tend to open up more choices. For the less affluent, the choice is often biking to work, or not getting to work.
RFM
maddyfish
11-19-07, 05:05 PM
. Hopefully it also enables funding for things like bike lanes and bike paths as well.
I hope not, I would hope funding would go to useful things, like education, and enforcement.
bmclaughlin807
11-19-07, 11:03 PM
I hope not, I would hope funding would go to useful things, like education, and enforcement.
I would just like to say, with all my heart: STFU.
PLEASE don't presume to speak for all cyclists when you say that lanes and paths are not useful.
They can be EXTREMELY useful, and open up not only the possibility of cycling at all to a lot of people, they can also allow a bicycle to be a form of transportation that is as convenient as (or in some cases MORE convenient than) using a car.
ctyler
11-20-07, 06:43 AM
You're welcome back anytime you like. :D
I've been thinking about it after three winters in Wisconsin.
John E
11-20-07, 07:19 AM
I hope not, I would hope funding would go to useful things, like education, and enforcement.
How about "useful things" such as bicycle-sensitive traffic signal detectors?
I concur that education and accountability for all road users should be the top priority, but I can cite a number of intersections which I consider pedestrian-hostile and/or bicyclist-hostile. Fixing these should be the second priority.
Artkansas
11-20-07, 10:24 AM
I hope not, I would hope funding would go to useful things, like education, and enforcement.
Well, we are talking DOT funding, so it's most likely to be pavement related.