Ad hoc committee members:  can you endorse this?  Can you elaborate
on it or suggest changes that would make it represent your view
for our group?   İBob


To: Cache Valley municipal and institutional planners
From:Ad hoc committee of transportation cyclists
Subj:planning for transportation alternatives
Date: Nov 3, 1995

A small group of local transportation cyclists has been formed to
offer input on transportation planning issues.  We offer our
experience, our learning and our research concerning cycling. 
Cycling is recognized as a transportation mode that is beneficial
to the community as well as to the participant.  Our group has not
been formed to promote the development of facilities for
recreational or sport cycling.  We are not "antiİcar."  We do not
seek a committment of resources for bike paths or bike trails or
even bike lanes.

As regular users of bicycles for many of our local transportation
needs, we recognize that our community is already a very "bike-
able" place to live.  We also recognize that this attractive
feature is largely coincidental.  As new planning efforts begin, we
would like to guard against wellİintentioned mistakes by non-
cyclist planners.  We see ignorance, myths and unfounded fears as
the major deterrents to greater participation in cycling as a
transportation option.  While some infrastructure improvements
might be desirable, education and awareness efforts could make
cycling an acceptable choice for more of the local transportation
needs of our fellow citizens.

We would like to help point out the planning and design features
that would help to retain and enhance our conmmunity's "bike-
ability" while encouraging the establishment of education and
awareness programs.  We would like to be welcomed to meet with
planners.  We would like to explore the viewpoints and standards
that are expected to guide the planning process.  We would like to
review and comment on relevant documents at the draft stage.  We
would like to be considered as the informed, interested
representatives of a group for whom an aspect of the planning
process will have major impact.  Please let us know how we may
participate.

???????????????????????  too controversial:
We believe there are many "pro-bike" planning options that would
actually make our community a less suitable place to get where
you're going on a bike.  Bicycle features and facilities designed
by non-cyclists can decrease efficiency, safety, and attractiveness
of cycling.  The "no action" alternative is not the worst planning
choice that could be made for the benefit of cycling.

Logan's Bike/Ped plan is seriously flawed because it is a
plagarized version of SLC's plan, altered only by the fears and
misunderstandings of local non-cyclist bureaucrats.