Category Archives: Cycling

Forest Drive/Eastport Sector Study

Leave a reply

The City of Annapolis Forest Drive/Eastport Sector Study, one of the “neighborhood” plans that rolls up in the city comprehensive plan is in full swing. There were a number of public meetings which I attended and a variety of presentations and work sessions with the Planning Commission, some of which I have also attended.

My main comments on the plan over time – the area is in general the newest part of the city and the most auto oriented as outlined in a prior piece on street grids – revolve around a bifurcated view of the goal of the plan. People who just pass through the area (both city and county residents) do not want any changes that affect auto mobility. They focus almost exclusively on the traffic engineering portion of the plan and only comment on the land use and other parts in so far as they don’t want changes that bring people and in their opinion, more cars. There is the other side of the street that would like to see the area more urban in nature with less emphasis on auto mobility and more on traditional urban development with a more human scaled setting for buildings, economic and residential activity, and mobility. It is this dichotomy that causes some cognitive dissonance in the plan. Strong Towns points out as a core principal that these two are fundamentally incompatible and result in a STROAD which we currently have. The worst of both worlds, people, auto oriented commerce and fast moving cars.

I have expressed this philosophically in public meetings and to staff, but I’m not sure there is really anything fundamental that will come out of that. Because of this dichotomy, I assume the plan will pretty split the difference (status quo) or attempt to do both which will read with the same cognitive dissonance I see now.

Be that as it may, I did want to comment on one very specific aspect of the study area – the need for bicycle mobility along Forest Drive. This has been a long standing goal, perhaps best documented in the 2011 Bicycle Master Plan being the only online “active” plan that contains explicit reference to this.  The May 31 draft of the report is much more explicit about this, and I am encouraged by the additional focus, but want to supplement the options presented with practical implementation suggestions that will result in the highest return on investment. This is the summary I sent to the Planning Commission and Planning and Zoning Staff to be entered into the June 20 public meeting record:

Leaving or entering the City of Annapolis by bicycle requires crossing the ring of automobile-oriented arterial roadways that surround the historic core of Annapolis, including: Roscoe Rowe Boulevard (MD Highway 70), US Highway 50/301, Solomons Island Road (MD Highway 2), and Aris T Allen Boulevard/ Forest Drive (MD Highway 665). Bicyclists of necessity can be seen in all parts of Annapolis, weaving routes through neighborhoods and often on sidewalks to access commercial and employment destinations. The existing network of off-street bicycle facilities is similarly discontinuous, but provides the initial links in what will be an exemplary regional trail network, connecting neighborhoods and forming the core of Annapolis’s future Bicycle Network.

Desired and Existing Bicycle Network

I appreciate the updates in the May 31 draft of the sector study that brings bicycle mobility to the forefront. Both the short term and long term issues are addressed in section 2.7.2.2, Bike and Pedestrian Networks, as well as the potential solutions in section 3.4 Mobility: Pedestrian and Bikes.

Building on the discussion of the issues and potential solutions, it is important to go into additional detail because the efficacy of bicycle infrastructure for both transportation and recreation is very dependent on the implementation. I refer to an article published on strongtowns.org (https://www.strongtowns.org/journal/2014/5/19/follow-the-rules-bikers.html) which discusses the auto-centric cultural bias of planners and engineers and how it affects bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure implementation. Perhaps equally important is how this bias affects public perception of this infrastructure. I encourage you to read the entire article.

“…the concept of a “complete street” as “separate but equal”, not to diminish the despotism of racial segregation but to show the parallel of mindsets with how most of the country treats bikers and walkers. When we build a trail – or a separate drinking fountain – we’re (engineers, planners, drivers, society) doing something within our comfort zone. It allows us to feel like we’ve fairly accommodated others while not really having to change our approach to be accommodating. We can continue to act in a despotic way only now with a tinge of self-righteousness. We paid for them to have theirs, after all.”

“We need to rethink our urban areas. They need to be redesigned around a new set of values, one that doesn’t seek to accommodate bikers and pedestrians within an auto-dominated environment but instead does the opposite: accommodates automobiles in an environment dominated by people. It is people that create value. It is people that build wealth. It is in prioritizing their needs – whether on foot, on a bike or in a wheelchair – that we will begin to change the financial health of our cities and truly make them strong towns.”

With this in mind, when the city begins to implement infrastructure outlined in the sector study, we have to make sure it is done in a way that does not just accommodate bikes in an auto-centric environment, but results in a network that is not only safe, but also contiguous, fast and comfortable. If we expect to shift mode share based on this infrastructure – that is to fully realize the return on investment – there must be a definite “value add” for bike riders. For example, faster transit time, bike parking at the front door of the destination, and/or a more pleasant trip. If we always give priority to the auto mode, why would someone chose to ride a bike? This is the most common criticism. Or worse, it incentivizes breaking the law which is always most unsafe for the bike rider because this infrastructure prioritizes the mistakes of drivers over the mistakes of bike riders. The following examples illustrate this bias towards the auto mode and implementation suggestions that attempt to remove this bias.

An Unrealistic Expectation For Path Users

This bike path requires cyclists to stop at every curb cut. Anyone trying to get down this bike path bike will likely never fully stop, resulting in a very unsafe situation.

Shared Use Path Along Forest Drive

In the study area, the existing path near the Safeway grocery store is typical of US-based infrastructure along arterial roads where it is clear the path users are secondary because the turn radii are large and the auto lanes uninterrupted which promotes fast vehicle movements in an area designed to (minimally) accommodate pedestrians and bike riders.

In a similar vein to the visual examples of community character in the draft document, examples of well-designed bicycle infrastructure – we can look to the Dutch for inspiration – will help guide future implementation. The Dutch are not only leaders in urban bicycle infrastructure, but also suburban bicycle infrastructure. The You Tube Channel “Bicycle Dutch” (https://www.youtube.com/channel/UC67YlPrRvsO117gFDM7UePg) is an excellent resource for examples of both.

Contrast the above images with this Dutch junction design where the bicycles are given priority and this priority is supported by the visual treatments on the pavement.

Typical Dutch Junction Design

Additionally, an east/west separated path along the corridor should be as isolated from the major arterial as far as possible. Not only will this make the user experience more pleasant, but will move conflict points away from arterials and allow for vehicle speeds to decrease before a conflict point. This is consistent with the complete streets philosophy and many of these ideas are also discussed in the National Association of City Transportation Officials Urban Street Design Guide (https://nacto.org/publication/urban-street-design-guide/).

There are a number of areas that are slated for development along the corridor that the city should require this type of design as a condition for the development such as The Village at Providence Point and Rocky Gorge (at least garnering an easement for when a path can practically be extended along Aris T Allen). Furthermore, around Annapolis Middle School, there is copious right of way owned by Anne Arundel County that could easily be used for this path and would significantly benefit the children who attend the school. This would also mitigate the current safety concerns resulting from the recent crashes involving school children. Funding for this area of the trail could be sought through the federal Safe Routes to Schools part of the Transportation Alternatives Program.

Given the corridor is a priority residential development area, the large number of existing commercial services and the lack of non-auto infrastructure, construction of this path along the entire corridor should be the highest priority in the capital improvement project recommendations.

Raising the Interest and Reducing the Concern

Leave a reply

Contemporary cycling in the United States is largely viewed by the public as a recreational endeavor. However, it was not always this way. For distances greater than that easily covered on foot, bicycles were the preferred mode of local transportation prior to the early 1900s when the automobile came into wider use. During the next half decade, bicycles were seen primarily as children’s toys. The 1970s and 1980s brought a new boom in bicycle sales for adult recreational purposes and this was augmented by the “Lance effect” in the early 2000s, introducing a large number of people to performance cycling.

As a result, most infrastructure built in the latter half of the 20th century was geared around this recreational aspect of cycling, primarily off road paths in parks, “rails to trails” efforts and even mountain bike facilities. It is only in the last 10 years that urban areas have started to look again at bicycles as part of their transportation strategy and to construct suitable infrastructure to implement it. By most measures these efforts have been fairly successful in increasing the numbers of transportation cyclists, but still not to a level of places like the Netherlands where there is upwards of 30% bicycle mode share. The United States will likely never achieve that kind of mode share if for no other reason than our systemic land use issues, but in areas where the land use patterns do support bicycle transportation, we can get to more modest shares like that of Portland (7+%). What actions can be taken take to increase this mode share?

Largest Gains

There are four types of transportation cyclists: Strong and Fearless (<1%), Enthused and Confident (7%), Interested but Concerned (60%) and No Way No How (33%). To this I would add a fifth group: “Unseen Bicyclists”, who have no particular interest in cycling other than as a nearly free mode of transportation that is faster than walking. In order to get to work they often must ride in inhospitable areas for cyclists.

In years past, transportation cycling in urban areas has included the three of the five smallest groups, personified by the bike messenger (Strong and Fearless), the racer who decides to commute (Enthused and Confident) and the guy riding the squeaky mountain bike on the sidewalk late at night (Unseen Bicyclist). Together, these groups never reach the critical mass/tipping point where transportation cycling would be seen as something normal people do. The question is how to encourage the largest untapped group (Interested but Concerned) to embrace transportation cycling as a way of life?

Infrastructure Is The Key

I use the word “infrastructure” here as it captures the Zeitgeist, but to be more precise, I mean the built environment that cyclists experience trying to get from place A to place B. Interested but Concerned cyclists who would definitely drive to a safe place to ride recreationally, first and foremost, need to feel safe in order to participate in transportation cycling. It is a necessary but not sufficient condition that, if not met, significantly degrades the return on investment of any infrastructure as it will not be widely used. Critics will point out that there s no demand, and thus a waste of money. The largest factor in achieving this perception of safety is separating cyclists from fast moving vehicles. An on road bike lane on a 6 lane arterial with speeds of 40+ mph, often the result of Complete Streets efforts implemented by state DOTs, while fine for a fast road cyclist, is not going to make the average Interested but Concerned cyclist feel safe.

md2 bike lane

On road bike lane on MD 2 in Edgewater, Maryland. I ride here often, but I am in the Strong and Fearless Group. (Google)

The second condition that must be met to entice Interested but Concerned cyclists is that the routes need to be direct and efficient from a time standpoint. Dedicated cyclists inherently like cycling as an activity and as a result are willing to “pay extra” in terms of time and effort to do it, but in order for regular people to take up transportation cycling, there has to be real value over other modes. Most recreational bicycle facilities that feel safe are often circuitous or if they are direct, require cyclists to stop at every cross street or curb cut or even worse require pressing a beg button and waiting a full light cycle, making the trip an annoying and time consuming process. As Strong Towns pointed out in the “Follow the Rules Bikers” piece, typically our cycling infrastructure is geared to automobiles, which puts bicycles on the same footing as cars. If there is no time saving advantage, why not just drive? That’s what the Interested but Concerned cyclist would do.

Residential neighborhoods with low and slow traffic offer acceptable routes for the Interested but Concerned cyclists and can be direct if the development pattern is a grid of streets with good connectivity. But so often local subdivision regulations or requests by residents close off streets to through traffic and once they are closed, very hard to reopen even for pedestrian or bicycle access. Yet, they can have a significant positive impact on the efficiency of a route.

victor parkway

Victor Parkway in Annapolis, Maryland has a fence between adjacent neighborhoods. The only way around is using a notorious five lane arterial that adds a half mile distance. It took a significant effort with the City of Annapolis to get even the pedestrian gate opened. It helps but is still unpleasant for cyclists. (Google)

Start With An Insider

A decidedly un-Strong Towns approach to getting Interested but Concerned cyclists engaged in transportation cycling would be to advocate for a huge pot of Federal transportation dollars and plan a perfect Shangri La bicycle network. Municipal governments often won’t do anything because of the perfect solution fallacy. They know this approach is not workable so anything incremental is rejected because it isn’t a complete plan and problems would still exist.

A better Strong Towns approach would be to work incrementally starting initially with a “do no harm” mantra and building on that to address the issues mentioned above. The number one action a municipal government can take to prevent further harm is adding a dedicated pedestrian/bicycle planner to the staff who has a seat at the table for any infrastructure development and maintenance projects. The singular focus of a subject matter expert who really understands the perspective of the Interested but Concerned, can point out bad designs before they are implemented. Additionally, the insider cultivating relationships with local cycling advocacy groups can be a force multiplier in this regard, utilizing a broad network of people who understand issues at a hyper-local level. This is the foot in the door that will provide internal advocacy for early input to projects. Collectively that will improve the infrastructure over time to raise the interest and reduce the concern in transportation cycling.

An Illustrative Project

I will end with a local example that highlights how a cycling subject matter expert might have prevented a disaster from happening. In Anne Arundel County, there is an on road bike lane along a well-traveled recreational route to view the Chesapeake Bay from Annapolis Maryland where I live. It’s essentially a 4-5’ shoulder with bike lane markings. Not great, but good enough to make the average recreational cyclist comfortable, and sadly one of only two marked bike lanes in a county with 4000 lane miles of road under its jurisdiction.

bay_ridge

Bay Ridge Avenue immediately south of Annapolis, Maryland. The driveway on the right is being expanded to accommodate a church expansion.

The expansion of a local church required a turn lane according to the County code. However, this situation was complicated by the presence of a park next door. The park has some recreational paths that are contained within the park and do not serve a transportation purpose in any way. The engineering company that did the design work is a respected regional firm, but the design that was approved by the County makes very little sense from a transportation cyclist’s point of view.

bike squeeze

The bike lane prior to the driveway was replaced with a turn lane. Although common when turn lanes are added, not a good situation for cyclists. But the most egregious change was after the driveway, where the bike lane was blocked with a concrete curb and only resumes after the curb radius where the park path exists to the road. Since virtually all cyclists will be going through, this presents an extremely dangerous situation for cyclists who can get squeezed into the curb by a passing car.

The design makes an assumption that due to the proximity of the park all cyclists are going to be riding on the path around the park – the standard recreational assumption. Because the County does not have a subject matter expert on staff, they assumed that extending the park path in lieu of the bike lane was a benefit, not a detriment. Anyone with local/contextual knowledge would have flagged this design as unresponsive to the typical cyclist pattern and it could have been easily corrected prior to construction with no adverse effect to the church by maintaining the bike lane straight through. Sadly, it was not seen until after concrete had been poured, making a correction difficult and costly.

Why I Ride A Bike

Leave a reply

A shorter version also appeared as an Op Ed column in The Capital on May 11, 2016.

Aerial view of Annapolis, Maryland

Aerial view of Annapolis, Maryland (Library of Congress)

Let me get this out of the way: I am a bike guy. I love bikes, all kinds – transportation bikes, off road bikes, racing bikes and classic bikes.

But that’s not why I ride a bike for transportation.

I currently reside in Annapolis, the capital city of Maryland, a smallish city of about 40,000 people. The dominant view of cycling here is that it is an athletic or recreational endeavor. You know, “put the bike on the car and drive somewhere to ride”. However, Annapolis is ideal for getting around by bike. It’s compact, only eight square miles, and you can pretty much get to any part of the city and even the surrounding areas that are experiencing a lot of urbanized growth with a flat two or three mile bike ride.

Annapolis Map

Annapolis is very compact.

This is easily within the ability of most people. I ride my 1972 Schwinn around town because it’s a convenient and economical mode of transportation to accomplish my daily business of getting to the DC commuter bus stop for work, shopping, and socializing around town. But there are too few of us and we often feel like lone voices in the wilderness. Thankfully, many cities around the world and a growing number of cities in the U.S. are proving that bicycles can easily be a part of a modern transportation system. What’s missing here to make transportation cycling appealing for more than just the “Strong and Fearless” – or those who have no other choice – are the connecting off-road paths and bike lanes called for in the city’s excellent, but mostly ignored, bicycle master plan.

Bikes are cheap and save money. Despite this area having a very high median income, many residents in the city pay a disproportionally large portion of their income to own and operate a car, never mind multiple cars. Using a bike for around town trips can easily decrease the number of vehicles a family needs to have and saves wear and tear by using the car only for those trips that require it. Riding a bike for my daily needs saves thousands of dollars per year in my family budget. Relatively inexpensive bikes can easily haul a surprisingly large amount of stuff, require very little maintenance and avoid the city parking costs. And, bike riding if viewed as something regular people do, provides equity of access to our streets as Bike Law’s Peter Wilborn writes about in Charleston SC.

Bike towing a moth sailboat.

Yes, bikes can do real work. Extracycle makes great hauling bikes (I do not own one or have any financial interest in the company) and some awesomeness from a local Moth sailor.

Bikes are cheap for the city, too. A lot of the auto-based traffic here is short trips around town, which can easily be done on bikes. The city is geographically constrained by two rivers and the Chesapeake Bay and as a result land is extremely valuable. While the city is in reasonable fiscal shape overall, it has neither the means nor the land to widen roads for more cars. Development is a hot topic here, and the general opinion is we need to lock the door in the Party Analogy. It inevitably conjures the traffic “boogeyman” as the assumption is that an additional person equates to an addition car. But, it doesn’t have to be that way. There are many small bike projects the city could do that would have a high return on investment in mobility. We often hear that Annapolis is not affordable. With a good cycling infrastructure, we can support additional development and can attract younger people who will likely choose bikes for a significant portion of their transportation needs. It doesn’t take much of a shift to bikes to have a large effect on traffic congestion and amount of needed parking.

And finally, there has been a lot of discussion recently in various forums here about rampant speeding in the city. I believe much of this occurs because people spend so much time in their cars in traffic that they have become chronically frustrated, often expressing that frustration as impatience or even road rage towards other drivers, walkers and bike riders. Spending time on the other side of the windshield brings the perspective of non-drivers into clear focus. Everyday riding makes me appreciate the luxury when I do use the car, especially if the weather is bad or I am tired. As a result, I am much more relaxed and courteous behind the wheel when I drive.

May is National Bike Month and we should celebrate transportation cycling. If you are a recreational rider, throw a basket on your bike and make a few trips to the store; if you haven’t ridden in a bike in a while, dust off that bike in your garage or grab an old beater from Craigslist and give it a try. The more people ride, the safer it is for everyone and the more apparent it will become to city governments that bikes can perform real work.

alex_pline_bike (1)That’s why I ride a bike.

Alex Pline is Chairman of the Annapolis Transportation Board, Vice President of Bicycle Advocates for Annapolis and Anne Arundel County and when he jumps out of a telephone booth in spandex, rides with the Annapolis Bicycle Racing Team.

Fixie Russian Roulette

Leave a reply

Note: I wrote this back in 2009 and have not ridden my fixed gear bike much on group rides recently, but nonetheless it also applies to riding a geared bike in a group with many stronger riders. Often, it’s not a question of if I will pop, but when…

Question: When is riding a Fixie like playing Russian Roulette?
Answer: When you ride it for the Saturday D’ville group ride.

Yesterday after ACE asked about who was riding today, there were a few exchanges about the possible pace for the D’ville ride. I think I proposed “sane and steady”, whatever that means, but Ian responded correctly with “Give it up, old habits die hard”. Having been riding my fixie a bit, I think sure, I’m ready to give it a try, especially if others are doing the same (Ian, Doug, Greg et al). I’ll just take my chances with the pace – Russian Roulette.

So I show up at the park and ride with my Steamroller. Given that I have a Corolla and no rack, I can only bring one bike, so I am comitted. At this point, I’m feeling like I have a revolver against my head with 1 bullet somewhere in the rotation. I’m looking around and not seeing any other fixies. I try to talk Tom Aga into riding his fixie (he’s smart, he brings 2 bikes). No dice. Uh oh. Luckily Ian and Doug roll in on theirs. Click. Nothing. Whew.

We roll out down the hill and onto Patuxent River Road. Then the pace starts to ramp up with some of the ususal “we have to go at some ungodly power level (for me anyway) beacause that’s what my coach says” types on the front. Uh oh. Then as the gap opens up they go off the front and the rest of the groups sits back, “steady and sane”. Click. Nothing. Whew.

The pace continues sane and steady, even Bill Neumann appears to be enjoying it! Then we get to Brooks Woods; towards the latter part of it, I’m starting to spin pretty hard, some gaps start. Uh oh. After the turn, it slows and regroups, and I make it comfortably to the store. Click. Nothing. Whew.

We leave the store with ACE leading the charge. All of a sudden I realize that I’m working really hard to keep the wheel in front of me. ACE is doing an interval. Uh oh. He finishes before we get to Boyds turn and I catch my breath. Click. Nothing. Whew.

At Boyds Turn, there is some quick talk about who, if anyone, is doing the shorter route. Looks like no one is, so I keep following. The tandem goes by and I’m on the wheel. We start going down the first big roller, I’m spinning at a gazillion rpms and about 37 mph. Uh oh. Big gap. Click. BANG!

I’m gone. Oh well, I made it 4 rounds. I figure its all for the better anyway as it will spare me the indignation of being left for dead over the wall. After the first roller, there’s a cut in the road so I quickly do a 180 and high tail it for Boyds Turn as the north wind alone all the way from North Beach would not be pleasant. I’m enjoying my “sane and steady” pace through Fairhaven, up the horse farm, over the wall and as I come the stop, I see some ABRT jerseys up the road. Sweet, I guess some people DID take the short cut. I work hard to catch them. It’s Ian, Doug, Heff and John. This will really help with the wind. Nice to have some company all the way back.

The “beach crowd” gets back a few minutes after us, so they must have been hauling the mail to make up 6 miles in a little over an hour as we were not lollygagging. All in all, a nice December ride, and I’m better for the bloody experience.

DC to Cleveland – Route Planning

Leave a reply

I am finally getting serious about the “riding to Cleveland” thing. I have been jonesin’ about this ride starting in early in 2012 and even more after riding the C&O canal with friends in 2012 and 2013 thinking this kind of off road bike touring would be a lot of fun. Plus there are some trail additions that make this a breeze such as the filling the GAPs all the way into Pittsburgh and the fact that Amtrak finally has the roll on/roll off bike service on the Capital Limited which runs right through Downtown Cleveland to DC which will make the return logistics much easier.

Using the great routing site Ride With GPS I’ve refined the route west of Pittsburgh. I can’t embed an interactive version here, but click through to see the entire route:

dc-cle-overview

The full route is 530 miles and I have been considering how to break it up into stages. I had originally considered trying to do it in less than a week which would mean sequential 100 mile days, but when I am honest with myself, that just doesn’t seem realistic. Something on the order of 60-75 miles a day seems much more sane given that I will be riding often on unpaved trails on a 29er with 10-20 lbs of stuff. I had also considered camping, but that just sounds much more fun than I’m sure it would actually be. Upon further reflection about this, I think 8 days is easily doable. The stops are chosen to facilitate reasonable lodging and food as well as “interesting” places to see while not riding. I am anticipating average speed to be between 10-12 mph which will make for about 6 hrs a day pedaling time.

dc-cle-elevation

Route/Itinerary

Annapolis to DC

While I wanted to ride out the door of my house to start this journey, I have done this ride enough on a bike to say screw it, I’m taking the early morning commuter bus with the bike in the cargo hold. Easy to do. Ride the 2 miles to the bus stop.

Leg 1 (3 days): C & O Canal Towpath

The C&O in this direction is all “uphill” at a steady 1% grade if you look at the profile, however in reality it’s basically flat with a series of steps at the locks.

Day 1: DC to Harpers Ferry WV – 65 miles. Hotel: Econo Lodge, 25 Union St

Day 2: Harpers Ferry WV to Hancock MD – 60 miles. Hotel: America’s Best Value Inn, 2 Blue Hill Rd

Day 3: Hancock MD to CUmberland MD – 60 miles. Hotel: Fairfield Inn right on the trail.

Leg 2 (2 days): Great Allegheny Passage (GAP) Trail

The GAP is all uphill to the continental divide on the first day, but its a stead 2-3%, not hard but will be a bit slower. The packed cinder surface of the GAP is awesome and I have actually ridden up this section on my road bike, which makes for an awesome 20 mile FTP test because its a rock steady big ring hill.

Day 4: Cumberland MD to Confluence PA – 65 miles. Hotel: Confluence B&B, right off the trail

Day 5: Confluence PA to Homestead PA – 80 miles. Hotel: Courtyard Pittsburgh, right off the trail.

Leg 3 (2 day): Transit to the Lake Erie Watershed

Day 6: Homestead PA to Stuebenville OH – 60 miles. This is now “uncharted territory” for me. I want to detour through downtown Pittsburgh so I can see the GAP all the way to the terminus and will do this first thing in the morning (+10 miles). After the detour, make my way out of the city and make my way on surface roads through the southwest suburbs and connect to the Panhandle Trail in Collier Township. That will be the fist 15 miles that is not on trail. Just after the PA/OH border, the Panhandle Tail bends north, so the route exits there onto surface roads into Steubenville, about another 10 miles of non-trail. Hotel: Microtell Steubenville.

Day 7: Stuebenville OH to Massilon OH – 80 miles. This is the longest non-trail section. However, a lot of the roads between Steubenville and Jewett are chip and seal or packed gravel and there is a 15 mile section called the Conotton Creek Trail though Jewett OH. I might also stop by Atwood lake where there is a big Lightning fleet just to see it. In Zoarville OH, it’s back off the road using the Zoar Valley Trail and finally onto the Ohio&Erie Canal Towpath that goes into Massilon OH. This section ends up being about 50 miles on-road. Hotel: Hampton Massilon

Leg 4 (1 day): Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath

Day 8: 80 miles. This section uses the all rest of the Ohio & Erie Canal Towpath all the way into downtown Cleveland and is primarily downhill in a similar fashion to the C&O and will be fun to ride through the scenic Cuyahoga Valley and into Cleveland through the Flats. There are a bunch of new trails that Bike Cleveland has written about recently that will be fun to see.

Of the total 530 miles, 450 miles are on trails. Pretty neat. More trail could be added by exiting the GAP south of Pittsburgh and using the Montour/Arrowhead Trails as I originally had routed, but I really wanted to go into Pittsburgh so am willing to accept a little more distance on the road.

Once in Cleveland I am sure I will spend a few days with friends and then get on Amtrak at 1:30 am for the ride back to DC.

Trish Cunningham Memorial Rally and Ride

2 Replies

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

For more information contact: Alex Pline, alex@teampline.org, 443-­‐510-­‐7297 https://www.facebook.com/events/557691114304692/
Media Kit

Trish Cunningham Memorial Rally and Ride for Bicycle Safety Awareness Saturday September 28, 2012
7:00am Rally Start at Annapolis High School – 8:30 Bike Ride Start

Annapolis, MD, September 28, 2013 -­‐ On Wednesday August 21 at 5:30pm, 50 year-­‐old mother of three Trish Cunningham was riding her bike lawfully southbound on Riva Road in Davidsonville. As she was cresting a blind hill, a minivan attempted to pass, crossing the double yellow line. As the minivan was passing, an oncoming vehicle forced the driver to swerve into, strike and kill Ms. Cunningham. The driver was declared at fault by the Anne Arundel County Police Department.

Ride And Rally Details

This rally and following ride is to raise awareness of the Maryland 3-­‐Foot Law and to encourage all users of our city/county/state roads to respect the presence of bicycles on the roads as well as to pay tribute a life cut tragically short.

The rally will begin at Annapolis High School in the school parking lot at 7am with an area for interviews with the Rally spokesperson, area cyclists, the Anne Arundel County Police Bike Unit and Trish Cunningham’s family.

Following, the rally, a large group of cyclists will leave AHS as a group and travel down Riva Road escorted by the Anne Arundel County Police Bike Unit. A brief pause will be made for a moment of silence at the site where a Ghost Bike will be located. From there, the ride will continue to Riva Park, a distance of 4 miles from AHS. Riders wishing to return to AHS will be escorted back immediately after arriving at Riva Park. Riders wishing to participate must be able to cover the 8 miles under their own power.

Over 200 cyclists are expected to attend the ride in addition to members of the Annapolis running community, the Annapolis High School Track Team of which Trish was assistant coach, and supportive friends and family.

Maryland 3-­‐Foot Law

Maryland law states that the driver of a vehicle passing another vehicle, including a bicycle, must pass at a safe distance and leave plenty of space. Additionally, the driver of a vehicle must not pass within (3) feet to a bicycle if the bicycle is operated in a lawful manner. This is known as the “3-­‐ Foot Law”.

The Ghost Bike Tradition

A ghost bike is a bicycle set up as a roadside memorial in a place where a cyclist has been killed or severely injured. Apart from being a memorial, it is intended as a gentle reminder to passing motorists to share the road. Ghost bikes are usually junk bicycles painted white, sometimes with a placard.

Trish Cunningham

Trish Cunningham was a loving mother of Morgan, Ben and Avery, and husband Jerry as well as a respected cross country coach at Annapolis High School.

Thoughts on the AA County Public Meeting for the Draft Pedestrain/Bike Master Plan Update

Leave a reply

It had a flavor typical of these public meetings. George Cardwell from the County Planning and Zoning did a good job at setting the context for the plan.  I really do think he “gets it” about the need for a more balanced set of transportation options in the county.

For the most part, people who were there came either to listen and gather information or to air a particular issue in their local area. Since this meeting was at Broadneck, a number of people talked about issues with the (under construction) Broadneck Trail, College Parkway, access to AACC and crossing Ritchie Highway (MD 2) to get to the B&A Trail. Councilman Dick Ladd was also there advocating the County prioritize a ped/bike bridge over Ritchie Highway at College Parkway – something that has been discussed for many years.

These are all valid concerns for that area and to a certain extent are being addressed as projects in the plan, although not to the degree (in scope and timeframe) that locals would want. The projects in the plan really don’t contain much detail and are in there nominally to indicate that a particular area needs improvement (indicated with a few keywords like “sidewalk” or “multiuse trail” etc). It is always the case that people who know the local area intimately have *very* detailed ideas of *how* the projects should be implemented. I know that is true in my case with the Parole area that I know very well.

One thing to consider is that projects identified in this plan (or the Annapolis Bicycle Master Plan) still have to undergo the standard implementation process if/when there is a decision to move forward and a funding source is available. This process always includes some kind of public input during the design and permitting phase. In my opinion, *this* is the time that members of the local area should work very hard to input their solution ideas to the county during the public review process since this is where the rubber meets the road and the understanding of the local context will have the most impact.

One of the things I have learned about advocacy with local government through my wife’s involvement with Bates Middle School, Annapolis High School, Annapolis Education Commission and the county Board of Education, is that it is a long term proposition. As frustrated as it is as a *user* – we want things to be better NOW – the reality is the wheels of government turn slowly and deliberately in this country; I don’t think bike issues are going to trigger a coup d’etat…  For those of us who are, uh, more mature in our years, we are really effecting change for the next generation.

With that, one long term part of the plan that I think any land use, developer, planner or architecture professionals (or psuedo professionals) in the crowd can comment on is the proposed changes to the county documents that guide development (section IV):  Anne Arundel County Design Manual,  Anne Arundel County Code (Subdivision and Development Regulations,  Zoning) and the Anne Arundel County Landscape Manual. These documents will determine the long term viability of the transportation (and recreation) biking in the County. If we keep doing what we have been doing for the last 50 years, we are going to end up with the same result. Remember, the first thing to do when you are in a hole is to stop digging. So if you have this expertise, please review this section and provide comments.

It also occurred to me that one advocacy piece that is missing is input from the upcoming generation(s) that research is showing are driving less according to a recent report (http://uspirg.org/reports/usp/new-direction). We need to engage these folks to demand that non-auto transportation modes are viable and this should be a focus. The county needs to hear that upcoming generations are willing to trade auto-based for bike/ped (or transit) infrastructure. Until the county officials understand this is the direction the (at least urbanized) population wants to go, change will be slow.

George Cardwell said he is keeping the public comment period open for another week so everyone still has time to get the plan, review it and provide comments via e-mail to George at PZCARD44@aacounty.org

Again for reference, here is the link to the plan: http://www.aacounty.org/PlanZone/Resources/DRAFT_2013PedBic_MasterPlan.pdf