We Need Your Input

18

May

We Need Your Input

Now Closed — Thanks to everyone who took the time to fill out our survey.  We will be working on analyzing the results and let you know where they lead us.

The PBC has put together a quick survey asking about how you use your bike and what, if anything, can be done to get you on your bike more frequently. Our goal of the survey is two fold:

  1. We want to better understand the community of cyclists interested in the PBC and our activities
  2. We want to get some input on where we should focus our energy

Please take a moment and fill out our survey. Thanks to the generosity of The Hub and Providence Cycle, we are able to reward those of you who fill out the entire survey!

4 thoughts on - We Need Your Input

  • May 25, 2008 at 9:25 am

    I might also point out that I followed through on Action Plan items 1 through 9. Offered to share my findings with city, town, and state officials.

    1. I've compiled a complete statewide "pinch point" map, places in the roadnet that are inimical to safe bicycling.

    2. All plans for intersection accommodations are in limbo indefinitely. A high percentage of road funding comes from gasoline sales. With a huge increase in pump prices, you'd think more money was around for improvements. It's just the opposite. By 2010, all state and federal matching funding will go to debt maintenance, so new construction or road repairs will become impossible.

    3. Quiet parallel side streets exist, but they are discontinuous. You'd need some small segments of bikeway to tie together. A state law with penalties is required. Urging legislators or RIDOT employees to do their jobs has been futile. The don't patrol bikeways, and reports of bikeway attacks and deaths are on the rise.

    4. Providence Plan has been stalled for a decade. Only a change in leadership (chamber, city, state) will unfreeze it.

    5. Without a statewide bicycling plan, no routes will be arranged to take in parks, playgrounds, scenic vistas and schools, thus creating public safety for children and increasing tourism. For the most part, these are public lands you can't currently access.

    6. Personally introduced 250 changes to "Guide to Cycling in the Ocean State" before its 2005 edition. Introduced about a dozen changes to the forthcoming 2008 edition.

    7. Cities claim there's no money for enhanced sweeping and road repair, but don't get the fact that they could decrease some on non-biking corridors to increase some on biking corridors. Such compromises are delicate, but doing nothing is intolerable.

    8. Traffic controls are designed to control the momentum of motorized vehicles. Rollover controls don't even trip for bicycles. What are bicyclists supposed to do, wait forever? Bicyclists ought to be able to stop traffic whenever it gets in their way. After all, bicyclists free up space on the road. Motorists should ask themselves, "Which would I rather see ahead, a bus or bicycle?" Again, where to put controls would become obvious with a statewide plan.

    9. Appeared on radio and television, attended bike events, spoke several times in front of the Transportation Advisory Committee and town meetings, volunteered scores of times for biking events and club rides. Offered to rewrite motor vehicle training manuals. Held 4th local Ride of Silence this year. What are you doing?

  • Aug 11, 2008 at 6:54 am

    If you contrast the aggressive bicycling plans of Massachusetts with the lackluster plans of Rhode Island, there are many points of contention.

    Go to http://www.massbikeplan.org/index.htm and click on their maps. There are hundreds of miles of paths and on-road solutions being funded and constructed, with REAL intention of connecting them. They even have a permanent advisory council with a dozen or more experts, citizens and pedestrian advocates.

    Now go to http://www.dot.ri.gov/bikeri/bikepathfuture.htm. There are a few score miles of installed infrastructure supplemented with "neighborhood networks" with no intention of connecting them. Map just reeks of "discontinuous". Blatantly, the Warwick Network cuts off at Hoxie 4 Corners, there's no way at all to get from Bristol to Aquidneck Island, spotty accommodations throughout Aquidneck and no plans for Newport, and, worst of all, a giant hole called Providence, with good infrastructure surrounding. It's just maddening to think that a few mayors (No. Providence, Providence) and town councils (No. Kingstown Smithfield,) stand in the way of statewide progress and total bikeability. We're only taking 30 miles of dedicated pavement, either bikeways, per se, or paint on existing streets, a few $million collectively, for which feds would be glad to contribute. Add a few sensible signs, that sort route by color and contain small maps to key route names (like a subway map), and you could go anywhere in RI by bike in a day. Or at least from Cranston to East Provdence without diverting through Pawtucket.

    The biggest difference is MA's commitment vs. RI's. RIDOT should be eager to make this state the premier venue for bicycling in the NE. a) It's an easily attained goal, b) it would promote tourism in a state with little going for it otherwise because of poor stewardship under current administration, c) it was the birthplace of the League of American Bicyclists, and d) it's ideal for bicycling in 4 seasons, fairly flat with short distances. No, RI has a TAC full of motoring interests at odds with cycling, putting RI in direct violation of federal and state laws to the contrary. Where's the public outrage?

    As always, RI won't step up and be the leader in forward thinking policy, at a time of high fuel prices, would rather let brains of Boston steal the glory. Let's face it. If they can't merely PAVE the already graded segment between WSBP and Coventry Greenway, 2 miles, after 5 years, there just isn't any commitment or dedication and change in leadership is in order. Get your act together, or step down. No, that's not going to happen. They'll be running for even higher office according to the Peters Principle, of this you can be assured.

  • Aug 13, 2008 at 1:40 pm

    Another point to make about enlightened Massachusetts General Law, they don't define a bicycle as a "vehicle", which, of course, would be totally preposterous, just another way to restrict you for no particular reason other than that they can.