Time and transportation

A recent comment thread on that social network site reminded me of a prior rant about travel times and average speeds. The trigger comment was this,

Topping the list must be the notion that one person’s time is worth more than another’s, and that this difference in value can be determined by looking at the vehicle that one drives.

For example, a 55-year old brain surgeon and an 18-year old frat boy are waiting at a light. Each of these travelers chose his vehicle for the day based on what he determined to be “the fastest way.” Which person’s time is more valuable?

The Evidence Provided: The surgeon is driving a 35-dollar, three-speed bike, and the frat boy is driving an 85,000-dollar SUV.

Aside from being wholly conscious that one's vehicle choice may also be made in part to say things about oneself, there is the following math problem:

A more accurate figure for average speed of your car includes the time spent in service to the car. To calculate that, start with the dollar figure spent on ownership and maintenance for the last year. Take the hours working to earn that number of dollars and add it to the number of hours you spent actually operating the vehicle. Divide that number of hours into the number of miles driven in the same time period.
The American Automobile Association reported a while back that the average American household pays $9000 per year to own and operate the average car. That seems excessive, but there are a lot of people driving expensive late-model cars to offset all those clunkers.

If I pay a measly $4000 to own and maintain a car for a year, and make $40,000 per year, it takes me one tenth of my working hours for that year to pay for the car. Assuming full-time employment at fifty weeks per year and forty hours per week, or 2000 hours working per year, that's 200 hours per year to pay for the car. That's five weeks of work. If I make twice the salary, and drive that average car, that's still eleven percent of my working time, or 225 hours, to pay for it.

If I drive that car 15,000 miles in that year, and go twenty-five miles an hour the entire time the car is in operation, that's 600 hours. Add the 200 hours it takes to earn the money to pay for the car, and the average speed is not 25 but rather 18.75. The higher-paid me driving the average car averages 18.2 miles an hour.

The odometer is the default device for determining the amount of wear and tear on a car. Few cars used in America have Hobbs meters that tell us how much time the car is actually used, making the above calculations a bit tougher for the average person. Claiming that one spends all one's time driving on roads with speed limits of, say, forty-five miles an hour is specious, as this ignores traffic lights, slowed traffic due to the range of causes common on such roads, and getting to and from such a road from one's residence, among other factors.

Considering, for a moment, a bicycle as the primary vehicle, and factoring in any bicycle-specific clothing and accessories purchased in the time period, and perhaps even clothing that is primarily worn while cycling but not at other times, the math gets interesting. I have a 1974 Raleigh 3-speed that I bought for $25 in 2008. Since that time, I've spent a fair bit on rehabilitation--the bike came to me third- or fourth-hand, and had suffered a fair bit of neglect if not outright abuse. I've also installed lights and some home-built reflectors on the bike to make it more useful for me. At retail prices (I was working for Bluegrass Bicycle when I did most of the work to this bike), I probably did six hundred dollars or so worth of work to the bike. If we call the purchase price as rehabbed $700, and figure twenty bucks worth of tubes, cables, and brake pads per year, I've spent about $800 on the bike in the five years I've had it, or $160 per year. 


I've logged my miles on that bike, and log entries for the last year or so have included more accurate trip times (I finally got a cyclometer for it a year or so ago). My usual rolling average speed on that bike is 13 miles an hour (rounded). If we keep with that above employment assumption of $20 per hour, it takes me eight hours to pay for the bike for a year. My logs shows that I spent about 43 hours riding that bike the 570 miles I put on it last year. According to the calculations, I spent 51 hours riding and paying for this bike, for an average speed of 11 miles an hour.

Compared to the less than 19 miles an hour average for the car, that's not a big difference. If I had chosen to ride that bike more out of the 4000 miles, say, half of the time, my average speed on the bike would be over 12 miles an hour. If I had ONLY ridden the Raleigh, excluding other bikes all year, my average speed would have been 12.7 (rounded to tenths).

The most cycling I've done in one year was 8000 miles, in 2011. My average speed for that year was 13.77 miles an hour. I don't know what I spent on bicycles that year, or the amortization on those bikes and parts and accessories. If I figure the amortization on five years of ownership for all purchases, just to make math easier, and assume the money spent to be $2000, it's $400 a year. That's half a week's work in the income assumption above, at 20 hours. 13.5 miles an hour.


I haven't included calculations for time that might be spent exercising separately from driving the car that is offset by the exercise of driving the bike. The salary figures were chosen for simplicity, and do not reflect my actual income.


"Your Mileage May Vary," as the expression goes.

Proposed updates for 601 KAR 14:020 and the problems in the proposals.

I've had a chance to review the suggested revisions to 601 KAR 14:020, that govern bicycle safety standards and bicycle usage. There are some problems in the proposed revisions.

To make things a bit easier to read, I've done some formatting. The suggested revision is in clear text, and words like this are slated to be removed from use. My comments on specific sections are in blue text, to place them were they are most relevant.




Transportation Cabinet     
Kentucky Bicycle and Bikeways Commission
Office of the Secretary
(Amendment)
601 KAR 14:020. Bicycle safety standards.
RELATES TO: KRS 189.030(1), 189.450 [KRS Chapter 189]
STATUTORY AUTHORITY: [KRS 174.125,] 189.287
NECESSITY, FUNCTION, AND CONFORMITY: KRS 189.287 requires the cabinet to promulgate administrative regulations to establish standards for bicycle safety and equipment. This administrative regulation establishes the equipment and safety requirements required in the operation of a bicycle [KRS Chapter 189 sets forth many bicycle safety standards that can be overridden by administrative regulations promulgated by the Transportation Cabinet. The Bicycle and Bikeways Commission authorized by KRS 174.125 has suggested that with the ever-growing use of bicycles in Kentucky additional or different standards are necessary for the safety of the traveling public. This administrative regulation sets forth the required bicycle safety standards].


Section 1. Definitions.
(1) "Bicycle":
(a) Means a device with an attached seat propelled solely by human power (what of the emerging technology of electric-assist bicycles?) upon which a person may rides (sic) astride regardless of the number (Zero is a number, so a sled could be a bicycle?) and size of the wheels in contact with the ground; and
(b) Does not mean a:
1. Wheelchair designed for a person with a disability; or
2. Device designed solely for use as a play vehicle for a child.  How is this determined? It appears to open a door so that anyone who doesn't like that bicycles are vehicles can say that my primary means of transportation is a children's toy and get me off the road.

(2) "Hazard" means a condition present on the roadway that constitutes a danger to a bicycle rider such as:
(a) A fixed or moving object;
(b) A parked or moving vehicle;
(c) A pedestrian;
(d) A surface irregularity; or
(e) An animal.
    
(3) "Shared lane" means a single lane of traffic less than fourteen (14) feet in width not including the gutter pan."Shared" how, exactly? Common usage for "shared" is often misused as meaning "side by side," a notion which is ludicrous on its face. Indeed, there are many cases in which a lane of width greater than fourteen feet is not shareable side-by-side with other vehicles. Or do they mean "shared in series?" so that I get my turn, then the next road user gets a turn, and so on?

Section 2 [Section 1. Front] Lights and reflectors.
(1) A bicycle operated on a highway during the hours or atmospheric conditions described in KRS 189.030(1) shall display at least [be equipped with] one (1) front light on either the bicycle or the bicyclist that is visible for 500 feet and capable of revealing [which clearly reveals] substantial objects at least fifty (50) feet in front of the bicycle [ahead and which is visible for 500 feet].
 [Section 2. Rear Lights or Reflectors.]
(2) A bicycle[,] if [when] operated on a highway or highway shoulder[,] shall display on either the bicycle or the bicyclist[so that it is visible from the rear of the bicycle]:
(a) [(1)] One (1) red reflector or red light visible for at least 100 feet from the rear of the bicycle; and
(b) [(2)] One (1) red light or a flashing red light visible from the rear of the bicycle for at least 500 feet  during the hours or atmospheric conditions described in KRS 189.030(1)[, one (1) red light or flashing red light visible for at least 500 feet].

Section 3 [Section 3]. Horn or Bell. 
(1) A bicycle may be equipped with a bell, horn, or other device capable of making an abrupt sound, but shall not be equipped with a siren or whistle.   
(2) A[Every] person operating a bicycle shall shout or sound the bell, horn, or other sound device as necessary to warn pedestrians or other bicycles of the approach of the bicycle [whenever necessary as a warning of the approach of the bicycle to pedestrians or other bicycles, but shall not sound the horn or sound device unnecessarily.
    (3) A bicycle shall not be equipped with a siren or whistle].


Section 4. Brakes.
A bicycle shall not be operated on a highway or highway shoulder without a brake or brakes adequate to control the movement of, or [and] to stop the bicycle within fifteen (15) feet at a speed of ten (10) miles per hour on a dry, level, clean pavement.

Section 5. Seat.
(1)(a) A bicyclist[,] if [when] operating on a highway or highway shoulder[,] shall ride [on or] astride a seat attached to the bicycle [a permanently attached bicycle seat].
(b) A bicyclist operating on a highway or highway shoulder may transport a person in a seat or carrying device attached to the bicycle in a manner in which the seat or device is manufactured and designed to be used.
[Section 6. Passengers.] 
(2) A bicycle [, when being] operated on a highway or highway shoulder[,] shall not carry more than the number of persons for which the bicycle is [was] designed or [is] safely equipped.

Section 6. Transporting a package and attaching to a motor vehicle.
(1) [Section 7. Packages.] A bicyclist[, when] operating on a highway or highway shoulder[,] shall not carry a package, bundle, or article that prevents the operator from keeping [at least] one (1) hand on the handle bars. [Section 8. Prohibition Against Attaching to Vehicles.]
(2) A bicyclist[, when] operating on a highway or highway shoulder[,] shall not attach either the bicycle or himself or herself to a motor vehicle [any other vehicle].

Section 7[Section 9]. Operation of Bicycles.
(1) A bicycle shall be operated in the same manner as a motor vehicle, except that the [following] traffic conditions established in paragraphs (a) and (b) of this subsection shall apply.[:]
(a)[(1)] A bicycle may be operated on the shoulder of a highway unless prohibited by law or ordinance.  Where bicycle travel on shoulders is permitted, it shall not be required.
(b)[(2)] If a highway lane is marked for the exclusive use of bicycles, the operator of a bicycle shall use the lane unless: [whenever feasible;]
    1.Travelling (sic) at the legal speed;
    2. Preparing for or executing a left turn;
    3. Passing a slower moving vehicle;
    4. Avoiding a hazard;
    5. Avoiding the door zone of a parked vehicle; or
    6. Approaching a driveway or intersection where vehicles are permitted to turn right from a lane to the left of the bicycle lane.   

(2)[(3)] Not more than two (2) bicycles shall be operated abreast in a single highway lane unless part of the roadway is exclusively for bicycle use.  Persons riding two (2) abreast shall not impede the normal and reasonable movement of traffic.

(3) A bicycle operated in a highway lane with other vehicle types shall keep to the right unless:
This entire section is badly written at best. If a regulation has exceptions that cover almost the entire gamut of the situations a cyclist is likely to experience (for example, see (c)), there is no reason for the regulation in the first place. Many people who claim to despise cyclists already think there is some version of this law on the books with no exceptions whatsoever. How can this be "making it better for cyclists?"
(a) Preparing for and executing a left turn;
(b) Passing a slower moving vehicle;
(c) The lane is too narrow to be considered a shared lane. A bicycle may be ridden far enough to the left to prevent overtaking vehicles from attempting to pass in the same lane;
(d) Approaching an intersection or driveway where right-turn movements are permitted. A bicycle may be ridden far enough to the left to avoid potential conflicts with right turning vehicles;
 (e) It is necessary to avoid a hazard.  A bicycle may be ridden far enough to the left to provide a reasonable safety space to the right; 
(f) The bicycle is operating on a one (1) way street with two (2) or more marked traffic lanes. A bicyclist may ride as near as  practicable to the left side of the roadway subject to the conditions in paragraphs (b) through (e) of this subsection;
(g) It is necessary for a cyclist to use a lane other than the right lane to continue his or her route; or
(h) The bicycle is operating at or near the legal speed.

(5)(a) A bicycle may be operated on a sidewalk or a crosswalk unless prohibited by law or ordinance.
(b) A bicyclist operating on a sidewalk or crosswalk shall have the rights and duties of a pedestrian in the same circumstances.
(c) A bicyclist using a sidewalk or crosswalk shall:
    1. Slow to the speed of an ordinary walk where pedestrians are present or if approaching a crosswalk, driveway, or other crossing where a motor vehicle is present; and
    2. Not suddenly leave the sidewalk or crosswalk and move into the path of another vehicle that is close enough to constitute an immediate hazard.
(d) A bicyclist operating on a highway or highway shoulder shall obey an official traffic control device applicable to a pedestrian unless otherwise directed by a police officer or other officially designated person. So, if I'm on the road in a general travel lane (as I am supposed to do as the operator of a vehicle per KRS 189.010), but the crosswalk sign indicates that I have to wait rather than go through that green light, I'm to do what, exactly? I realize that this paragraph is in a section governing bicycle use on sidewalks, but who wrote this tripe?
(e ) A bicyclist operating on a highway (??? If I am operating on a highway, I'm NOT operating on a sidewalk. Or am I??) or highway shoulder shall yield the right of way to a vehicle if crossing the road at a point other than within a marked crosswalk or within an unmarked crosswalk at an intersection.
(6) A bicyclist operating on a highway or highway shoulder may proceed against a red light if a traffic signal fails to detect the bicycle. Finally, some sensible verbiage. What's the standard for this, though? A cycle of the light phases? Two cycles? Why don't we have as a KAR that signal sensors have to recognize the presence of bicycles?

Section 8. Bicycle Parking.
(1) Unless prohibited, a bicycle may be parked on a sidewalk if it does not impede the movement of pedestrians or traffic.
(2) A bicycle may be parked in the roadway at an angle to the curb or edge of the roadway at a location where bicycle parking is allowed.
(3) A bicycle shall not be parked or stopped as established for a vehicle in KRS 189.450(b) through (j).
(4) A bicycle may be parked on the roadway abreast of another bicycle or bicycles near the side of a roadway where parking of vehicles is allowed.



As it happens, the Uniform Vehicle Code is outdated. There is an update in the works, and its wording is far easier to parse than the jumbled mess I see in some of the above proposal. This proposed "update" is stilted, hard to follow, and in places out and out inane. These are not stupid people at the Kentucky Bikeways Commission. They are not jerks. They care about what they do, or seem to.

I need for them to recognize the potential for harm I see in how this mess is worded, though.

Cycling Savvy progress

Cycling Savvy is going to happen in Louisville.

It's exciting enough to think that that I probably will type it several times here in the coming months!

Cycling Savvy (CS) is, of course, a very good adult bicycle education program. To present it well requires practice of a different presentation style than what I used to teach the TS101 classes. I've mentioned before that I found the TS101 a bit pedantic compared to the Cycling Savvy--too much reliance on "you need to know this" with less "here's a scenario, and, given the facts we've presented, how would you as a student navigate this series of interchanges?" TS101 is about putting information in front of people and then testing on whether they bothered to retain it. CS is about empowering people to move about their environment mindfully and safely.

With all that in mind, Jenn and I are having to rehearse better phrasing. A LOT of better phrasing. I'm comfortable with the information I'm presenting, but I'm having to work on my phrasing and pace. I want to avoid being pedantic, and be engaging.

Of course, there is more to it than just the script for the classroom session (Truth and Techniques). There is the scripting for the Train Your Bike sessions, in which we teach handling skills to enhance riders' confidence in themselves. This has to be right, so that students get a positive experience and that expanded personal confidence.

And, then, the big deal, the Tour of Louisville. The Tour is what really makes the class worth taking, because it gives students opportunity to put their new knowledge to work. The strategies the students are being taught to employ are successful for me already, or I wouldn't be excited to teach them to others. The students have to have success with the strategies, or it all falls apart. The Tour is designed to build on successes, and give students a chance to talk about those successes with each other.

So, yes, a lot of thought goes in to creating a Tour that brings students into increasing levels of complexity and successes with those bigger challenges. There are lots of intersection combinations I would like to put in the Tour, but distance and time limitations prevent my doing so.

I have a couple opportunities to include local images and video in the T&T session, and want to make that happen. I need to make some trips with Jenn to practice using two cameras to make this work right.

I won't be making any big profits on this program for quite a while.

Cycling Savvy courses scheduled!

Life got in the way of our scheduled Cycling Savvy class last fall. It was frustrating, but we (Jenn and I) learned a couple things, and have done and are doing a better job of preparing for upcoming classes. Finally, we can say we have classes (plural) on the schedule for 2014!

Why am I excited? Well, after learning of Cycling Savvy a few years ago, and hearing that it had a much better approach to helping riders learn information, skills, and techniques (as opposed to telling them that they needed to know information, skills, etc., as has been one critique of the Traffic Skills 101 class put on by the League of American Wheelmen).

I took the Cycling Savvy class in 2012, and was impressed with the teaching style. It really does reach people differently.

I have been wanting to bring Cycling Savvy to Louisville for almost as long as I've known about it. The more I read and learned about the program, the more I believed that this is a good program to have in Louisville. That Jenn also is excited about Cycling Savvy (perhaps even more so than I) meant that now we have two Cycling Savvy instructors in Louisville!

All of which leads to this link. And this link.

Course dates and locations are now confirmed! Registration is open.

Death of a friend

Not long after my father was transferred to Louisville in the early 1970s, my mother "returned to the workforce" (as the saying went). I was but a lad--I was in sixth grade at the time--and knew little of the whys then, nor of where the story arc would lead.

Whether conscious of it or not, Mom's return to the working world became a step toward the eventual formal breakup of my parents' marriage. This was a good thing (tm).

Anyway, one of Mom's first supervisors was Kay Armstrong. As Mom's surname at the time was also Armstrong, an alliance was, not surprisingly, formed. It became a solid strong friendship, and one that helped both over the ensuing years. Their customers would sometimes ask whether they were related, as they shared the surname. Their friendship was a source of emotional support for my mother before, during, and after the divorce from my father.

I have been a beneficiary of the good that emanated from Kay, both directly and indirectly. She and her husband were both very good to me over the years. I cannot possibly repay them. I can only hope that the good I try to do "pays it forward" in some small way.

Kay and my mother shared many bonds of friendship, one of which was that both had survived forms of cancer. Yeah, the "big C."

Kay passed away Monday. It was pretty sudden for all involved. The best part is that she did not seem to suffer. Sometimes "best possible outcomes" are still unhappy ones.

Another long spell of not writing

It seems the spells between posts get longer.

Since my last post here, I've had opportunity to visit my grandmother (how many men can say that at 52?). She is doing pretty well, considering that she's ninety-seven. She lives in the home she and my grandfather bought in the late 1940s. My father lives there most of the time to be sure she gets her needs met. As a result, I have to interact with him to visit her. This is awkward, as I have no real interest in having him in my life, for reasons I don't need to discuss here.

Anyway, my sister, my wife, and I drove over for a short visit, which seems to be better than long visits for my grandmother. We were driving through West Virginia during the big chemical spill hooplah, and had to be very careful where we got water.

I think it criminal that a company can allow a leak like that, declare bankruptcy, and let its assets be taken over by another company run by the same people created for the specific purpose of shielding the mismanagers from their responsibility.

On other fronts, I recently learned that the Cycling Savvy "Truth and Techniques" class material is undergoing a major update. I'm looking forward to the results, and holding off further preparations for my own presentation until I see the new materials. We hope to hold our first Louisville classes in either late March or early April--most likely early April.

Tonight there is a celebration of the Roe v Wade decision, that holds that any abortion discussions between a woman and her doctor are private matters, and that the government cannot prevent those discussions nor any procedures decided upon in those discussions.

There are too many who insist on butting into those decision-making processes, usually in the name of some deity or other. They refuse to accept that it's none of their business, so they "counsel" (read: harass, harangue, and bully) clients, their companions, and even those who are there to simply allow the clients space to exercise their own choices. In some states, there are buffer zones around clinics, which help enormously. In Louisville, however, the clinic door is very close to a public sidewalk, so a client must navigate a gauntlet of self-sanctified bullies who spew all manner of misinformation and vitriol their way (and have the nerve to call it "counseling").

I've stood at the door of the clinic a few times, and it's amazing to me how people can think that yelling at women for taking care of themselves the best way they can is somehow a positive thing. Some of the "antis" stand in front of the waiting room window and preach--loudly--as if they might change the minds of at least one client. I really think they are yelling to themselves more than anything else--they get to watch their own reflections in the window as they pontificate. Some of their claims are so absurd as to be laughable, and I cannot help but laugh as it is my only way to keep from challenging them on their nonsense (and challenging them leads to escalation, which is a bad thing--it doesn't help the clients one bit, and the clients are why escorts are there).

It should be noted that there have been almost exactly zero times when an American pro-choice person has pushed hard for an anti-choice person to have an abortion. We basically feel that if a person doesn't want to have an abortion, it's that person's choice.

2014 Bike Kick-Off this Wednesday

I'm looking forward to being there. Jenn and I get to have a table where we can sell folks on the idea of taking Cycling Savvy, the better to move between the quiet neighborhoods and networks that Bicycling for Louisville and Bike Louisville are trying to create.

Won't you join us?

What? No NYE Resolutions?

Again with the changing of the calendar year!

I hope your celebrations didn't leave you too wiped out. We have a lot to do this coming year.

Pretty early in the list is the 2014 Bike Kick-Off, being held at the Clifton Center. I'll be there, wearing my Cycling Savvy metaphorical hat (and my CS Instructor shirt), with plans to talk up education of cyclists as a way to bring lower stress to cycling around town.

Won't you join me there?

Numbers post

Two years ago, I was posting about numbers. A lot. The numbers in question had to do with a "personal record" season of cycling--I nudged out a bit more than eight thousand miles of bicycling in a calendar year. Things changed the following calendar year.



On January 1st of 2012, I rode what was to be my last ride with the Louisville Bicycle Club. At the time, I didn't feel any animosity toward the Club, but there was some sadness that the Club had not been as supportive of Bluegrass Bicycle as we had hoped. I was stepping down as VP Education, after three years in office, as I wanted to spend more time on my house and more time with Jenn (it may or may not surprise one or two who read this that some of the projects I envisioned for that year have yet to come to fruition). Since I no longer had the responsibility to participate in the Club education program, I no longer felt compelled to ride to Iroquois Park for the New Rider Clinics, or to the Clinics Jenn and I hosted in St. Matthews or at Waterfront Park. After a disappointing experience or several in long-distance cycling, I realized that I didn't have the interest in that sort of riding I once had.

About five months later, my job at Bluegrass Bicycle came to an end. With it, roughly 5600 miles of commuting went away.

Oh, I bought a bike to pull a trailer so that I could do handyman work, and even did some actual work.

I spent the year after the closure of the bike shop fighting off some level of depression, though. My bike mileage suffered, which correlated highly with my mood suffering. The direction of the causal arrow is not certain.

Since then, I've taken a part-time job at a megacorporate retail chain. At some levels, it is as the pay suggests: a soul-sucking servitude to some corporate big wig who makes more money off me than I make. There are things about the work that I enjoy, to be certain--helping folks figure out just what it is they seek in a store that has forty thousand or so SKUs, and how to make that bit of hardware or lumber do what they want to do is gratifying.

I'm still doing some home repair stuff, too. I'm not being aggressive enough about going out for the work, but some work is coming my way, and I'm enjoying much of it. Again, it's helping customers solve challenges.

In the process of all this, I've remained true to my email signature, a quote from Sir David Attenborough that reads, "If I can bicycle, I bicycle."

And I've put almost four thousand miles on bicycles over the last twelve months. I've spent more than three hundred hours on bicycles over the last year--132 of them on my newest bike (the Surly Big Dummy). Just over a third of those hours have been spent commuting. I used my Raleigh for a bit more than forty-three hours, WAY up from 2012, but down from 2010, when I used it quite often for errands and some commuting (which was also before I bought the Globe bike).

The year isn't quite over. I still have time to ride that last hundred or so miles to make it to four thousand miles for the calendar year. Maybe. If I'm really worried about that number.

I'm not as concerned about it as I was a couple years ago.

Sleeze as a weather form

Just less than three years ago, I started thinking about getting a bike that would accept commercially-available studded snow tires. My commute at the time involved Houston Lane in Pewee Valley, a lane-and-a-half (sometimes less) wide rural road that was part of how I avoided using LaGrange Road from the end of Westport Road to the northeastern end of Mount Mercy Drive in Pewee Valley.

Houston, being so small, rarely got plowed after any snow or ice, making it a difficult road for bicycle travel. LaGrange Road would be even more problematic under snow, as it is narrow for the prevailing traffic speeds and volume.

By February of 2011, I had made the decision to get a Globe Vienna 3 Disc, as: 1) Specialized had them on closeout pricing, which was very good, since I was working for a Specialized dealer at the time and had employee-purchase privileges, 2) It has "hard points" for mounting front pannier racks, fenders, and even a disc-type frame-mounted lock, 3) it uses 700X32C tires (or wider), meaning that Schwalbe Marathon Winter tires could be had to fit it, 4) it has disc brakes, for all-weather stopping power.

At some point after ordering the bike and ordering an assortment of stuff to go on it (did I mention that fancy Euro-style frame-mounted disc lock?), I ordered a couple sets of snow tires from Schwalbe. Their documentation recommends a run-in period of forty to fifty miles at dry-road pressure (85psi) to "bed" the studs (although some knowledgeable sources, such as Peter White Cycles, say this is not needed on tires from their inventory, as they do an additional quality-control step before shipping), so I rode to work on them a couple times late in 2011 or early in 2012. Aside from those two trips, totaling something like fifty miles, I haven't needed them since I bought them.

Until now.

Louisville's weather had a bit of a rough patch over the last few days--at least by local standards. It wasn't hurricane-level, or even tornado activity, but plenty of rain and cold temperatures (although we got it a lot easier than many parts of the country). I walked out to Westport Road to ride the bus to work Thursday and Fried-day rather than ride in the cold rain of Thursday or the rain/freezing rain/sleet (aka sleeze) on Friday.

Since I usually bicycle to work, one topic of discussion was whether I had ridden. I decided that I would install my snow tires so that I could ride to work today.

I installed them last night, and took a short spin around the neighborhood to see how they did. I realized quickly that riding them at full pressure was a bad idea--they were not connecting well at all, and the bike was not stable. I lowered the pressure (minimum rated pressure is 35psi, but since I would be on pavement a fair bit of time I opted to try 55-60 psi)--MUCH better!

Since this was to be my first real foray onto icy roads (at least as an adult) on tires that would actually have some traction, I figured a backup plan was a good idea. I checked the TARC schedule, and found that I could catch a bus at 7:00 or so, or another one at 8:20 or so, and get to work on time if all went well. Given the ice on the roads, I was concerned that the arrival time of the latter (or later, if you prefer) bus would make for a close thing when it came to my start time, I rode out in time to catch the 7:00 bus, in case Westport Road was bad or I was having some other trouble.

When I got to Westport Road, however, it was MUCH better than Warwick or Washburn Avenues had been, so I rode all the way out to the store. I of course had a plan for that eventuality, as well--I enjoy reading.

Having read the relevant page within Peter White's web site (linked above), I was not looking for race tires. During a couple of winters working as a tow truck driver, I got to see a lot of the results of people who overestimated their competence on bad roads (and have made my own share of errors on that score).

I didn't set any speed records, but I didn't fall, either. I got to work much faster than I could have walked. I got to the bus stop much faster than I could have walked, for that matter. And, yes, I am continuing my reputation as something of a nut at the store.

Does Hi-Viz clothing really make a difference?

---

These folks challenge the assumption.

On a first quick read-through, one of the ways that the authors were trying to minimize variables was to keep between 0.5 and 0.8 metres (or meters, if you prefer) from the kerb (or curb, for those of us on this side of the pond--it would perhaps be an acceptable assumption that if there was no curb as I know it, the fog line would have been a comparable marker).

Some folks I know criticize this study (admittedly not to the level of scientific, according to the authors) for not having a variable for driver behavior compared to edge-riding behavior (0.8 meters being less than three feet from the road edge, and far closer to the edge than I ride as a general rule). One reason could be that in the earlier paragraphs, the authors cite the Walker (2007) work suggesting that cyclists who ride centered in a lane get less passing clearance (which contradicts tests by Gutierrez, et al, and the results of many of us who ride well left in the lane in drive in the right lane countries).

At any rate, I'm not sure what this study means to me, if anything. It doesn't give me any reason to doubt that being visible and relevant at greater distance is important to my own safety, and I continue to hold that the relevance is more important than simply being visible (there are many signs along my commute route that are quite visible, but are irrelevant to my commute, so I ignore them with regard to whether I use my brakes or change lane positions--being viewed as relevant at greater distance gives overtaking road users more time to adjust their speed and lane choices, as you've seen me post before).
 

I'm reminded of a post I saw a couple years ago, from "The Lazy Rando Blog."

MoveLouisville

As disappointed as I am with the local engineers and others within Public Wrecks (sic), including the "bike/pedestrian coordinator" who trumpets that his survey mirrored the Geller whackonomy,* I wonder how much of their fealty to bike lanes is driven by their bosses, who look at stuff like mode share for the sake of mode share or as a metric of how friendly a place is to those using that particular mode of travel (without realizing that individual safety is a prime component of how to build mode share)?

Louisville's "next big thing" (without even finishing the last "next big things"--those being the $300,000 in paint spillage that *might* include some decent bike boulevards, locally defined as quieter streets where cyclists are encouraged and motor traffic is all but discouraged and the boondoggle called the Ohio River Bridges Project--is being called "MoveLouisville."

I attended an informational presentation recently, and aside from being another opportunity to get involved at the planning level, I am warned that there will be a push for "Bike Infrastructure" as part of this 20- to 25-year plan.

Louisville is one of those cities that has little in the way of a grid system--many of our primary arterials are radials from near downtown, and there are not many good arcs between those radials. It doesn't help that well over half of the county was farmland or fallow until after that world-wide dustup in the 1940s, and was developed in the 1950s and beyond with the assumption that if one is anybody at all, one would not deign to use a bus or bicycle (or even walk) to get to anything more distant than one's next-door neighbor's patio. It will be exceedingly difficult to rework our street network to correct that, considering that there are several physical barriers (cemeteries, creeks, wetlands, single-family housing developments, etc.) to get around to get from one radial to the next.

"MoveLouisville" is a multi-modal approach to changing the way we as citizens get around town. It's a recognition that things are in some disarray now, and wanting to help our community build intelligently (we could spend time grousing that it's already too late for that, or work to undo the damage to the extent that we can).

One comment I heard that was encouraging to me was along the lines of, "we need to think of our streets as public space, not as hard-set asphalt or concrete streets or roads. We can change how they look--add trees, add curbs, subtract or reallocate parking spaces. The current configuration is not forever."

I must admit that my own imagination is not up to but so much of that task, but I hope to help shape things for the better--better for the community, not just for cyclists or folks who walk instead of drive, but for all of us.


* The Geller "taxonomy" is famous--or infamous--depending on one's outlook. It seeks to categorize people on a scale of whether they would ride bicycles, and is often used by people who think that mode share is of paramount importance as a way to guide spending on projects that would lure folks onto bicycles.

Never mind that rider safety is a product of individual riders' behavior, supported by well-designed infrastructure that doesn't violate the rules of motion that underlie well-written traffic law. I can teach a neophyte rider successful behaviors that obviate any perceived need for special bike facilities.

Never mind, either, that those who fall into the "interested but concerned" category will quite often find other excuses for not riding. Or that those who currently ride on sidewalks will continue to do so right beside a painted bike lane (as I see at least a couple times a month along Westport Road), suggesting that even they realize that the bike lane is a bad place to be.

'Tis the season

Well, not quite, but it's getting disgustingly close--close enough that some of the extreme whack-job pseudo-politicians and talk-show goofballs are, again, trumpeting on about this country's "war on christmas."



Warning: This is a long post, even from me. It's not exactly a positive post, either. My inner curmudgeon is bursting through. If you read this whole post, you'll learn a lot about why I am who I am. I've inserted a break so that you can be warned.

Cyclist Syndromes

One of my stepdaughters recently took a new job. Her first day at work is later this week.

When she announced that she had gotten the position, one of her comments to me was along the lines of, "I want you to help me find a good bike route there."

At first, I wanted to celebrate--at least to myself--that she was making such a plan. Then I remembered that we have one car for our three-adult household, and she was simply being realistic about the availability of the car. "Smugness level = off."

We got to chat about the options today. Her first route choice was to ride from our house in Westport Road to the Kroger store at Hubbards and Westport, then get into Beechwood Village to cross Shelbyville Road at Bramton Road (using the traffic light). Her job is at one of the stores in the Shelbyville Road Plaza. The Google Maps "get directions" function shows this as something like three and a quarter miles, for a six- to seven-mile round trip.

When I drive my bike to stores there (I frequent the Feeders Supply location there, for example), I use New LaGrange Road to get to Shelbyville Road, then enjoy having Shelbyville Road almost to myself for a good while as I near the bridge supporting the Watterson Expressway and its access ramps, then usually occupy the left lane so that I can make a timely turn off Shelbyville. I will sometimes, depending on traffic volume, stay in the right lane until I reach Stonehenge Drive, then turn right into Beechwood Village and cross at the light on Bramton. This gives me a round-trip distance of less than four miles.

When I mentioned this route to my stepdaughter, she refused to ride that way. I tried to be gentle in asking why she objected to my choice, she responded that she gets irked at cyclists if she is on Shelbyville Road, so doesn't want to irk motorists.

I find her reaction interesting, and thought-provoking. Sad, too, as it's a theme I've heard elsewhere in society, sometimes cited as a reason why a person won't ride instead of driving a car.

Howl-o-ween!

It seems that if I have something to say, it's brief enough or pithy enough that it just goes on Facebook. If I have something complex to say, I might put it here, but I haven't had a lot of complex thoughts bouncing around of late.

I'm still bummed that we had to cancel the Cycling Savvy class for this weekend, but I'll get over it.

To improve my mood a bit, I indulged in a little "cash therapy." I try to avoid doing this most of the time, as its benefits are usually pretty short-lived. However, when I do indulge, I try to get stuff that I'll be able to use rather than stuff that will simply sit on a shelf.

Today's purchase was the Surly "Nice Rack," to add some flexibility to how I haul stuff on the Big Dummy. I have mounted a pair of smaller panniers that I bought for the Globe (they are in the same style series as the rear panniers on that bike). I can, alternatively, use my JANDD grocery panniers (sized for paper grocery sacks). Or, following Ian's lead, use a pair of cat litter buckets converted to panniers with a few bucks' investment in hardware.

A couple weeks ago, while riding home from a job site, I realized that some of the cargo in my right cargo bag was pressing against the rear derailleur, preventing use of the outer two cogs on the cassette. Since my load was also a bit heavy, I wasn't too worried--I would have been more concerned over not being able to use lower gears--but I still missed the functionality.

I stopped at a local bike shop and found a derailleur guard that came off a 24-inch-wheeled kids' mountain bike, and finessed mounting it.

I haven't had that sort of load on the bike since installing this cage, but it should alleviate the problem.

Many people express amazement when they learn about this bike and what I can do with it. They can't seem to grasp that human-powered vehicles can be used to carry so much. I, on the other hand, keep finding myself hauling stuff I don't WANT to haul with a car--too dirty (bags of mulch), or too long (ladders), or too awkwardly-shaped (my kayak).

Life got in the way, again!

Sometimes things just don't go as planned. Sometimes life interferes.

To the point that I've had to put this message out in several places:

Friends,

Unforeseen circumstances have arisen that have forced us to reschedule the Cycling Savvy class. If you have registered, we will be in touch to discuss your options. If you have not registered, please watch the Commute Louisville web site (http://commutelouisville.com/) or the Commute Louisville page on Facebook for our spring schedule. We look forward to your participation as we move forward with launching this program in Louisville.

And, of course, I'll be saying something about the class here when I'm ready to have folks register.

Cycling Savvy tour pre-ride

I have spent some time trying to create a tour route for the upcoming Cycling Savvy class here in Louisville. An important part of the creation process is what we call "ground truth" examination. This gives us a chance to look at the features we want to teach in real life (instead of using the satellite view and Google car camera view), in part to be sure that a road that appears to go through actually does, to get up to date information on road conditions, and better decide where to situate the gatekeeper and receiving instructors for each feature.

I finally got to ride my route today. Jenn will get to ride it with me over the next few days--indeed, I may give her the cue sheet and have her ride it herself and compare notes afterward, then hit it one more time over the weekend and fine-tune things a bit.

For some reason, I was thinking about my bike miles today, and wondered how many miles I've ridden in what I think of as my bike-driving era, compared to how many lifetime miles I've ridden. I have no way to even guess at the latter number, as I didn't really keep track of such things until I got my first recumbent bike in 1992, and then only sporadically until the beginning of 2010, when David convinced me to start using MyCyclingLog.com to track my riding.

In 2003 or '04, I had a minor crash while riding my Bacchetta Strada in Iroquois Park. At the time, I figured I had ridden something like thirty thousand miles since getting my Linear recumbent bike in '92. I probably rode an average of twenty-five hundred miles a year between that time and my first posts on MyCyclingLog.com, for ten or fifteen thousand more miles--I'll call it forty thousand from 1992 to January 2010. My stats on MyCyclingLog.com show that I've ridden over twenty thousand miles since January 2010, and over a third of those miles in 2011 (my banner year).

This number pales compared to many racers' results, and even compared to several club members I know. However, it's significant that I've had few crashes, NO car-vs-bike crashes (I count my fall on the Frankfort Avenue rail crossing as a solo crash, even though it was partially influenced by a motorist who cut me off), and no crashes that required hospital visits.

Well, not really significant, when one considers that cycling is safer than many more mundane activities, like being in a car (by half, based on injuries per million hours of exposure), or taking a bath, or walking in a room where there are loose rugs.

Savvy Cycling

I don't know why I haven't posted on my blog of late.

Especially troubling is that I haven't mentioned Cycling Savvy here lately, knowing that there are a couple of folks who read this who don't necessarily keep close tabs on the Commute Louisville site and its blog, and/or dutifully ignore Facebook and other social media sites.

Anyway, Cycling Savvy is coming to Louisville!!

The class cost is $75, for which one gets a nine-plus hour class. The first three hours or so are indoors, and it's not necessary to bring your bike (although bicycles will be welcome...). That segment will be on Friday evening, November 1. We call this class session "Truth and Techniques."

The rest of the class will be on Sunday, November 3, and will consist of the sessions we call "Train Your Bike" and "Tour of Louisville." The Train Your Bike session is a series of drills held in a parking lot, to help folks master handling their bicycles and learn some tips for easier riding. The Tour segment is not an exhaustive tour of the city's sights, but rather a ride to a series of features--intersections or sets of intersections--that give participants a chance to try for themselves the strategies we help them learn.

Oh, and if you are an experienced cyclist, there is very likely a bit of learning you can find here as well. A long-time commuter took the class in Saint Louis a while back, hoping to learn one or two new things. He reported that he learned six new things, and that was just in the Truth and Techniques portion of the class.

The registration form is here, if you already know enough to sign up without following the other links I've offered.

September catch-up, and it's October!!

I keep having gaps in my interest in writing, then a flurry of posts, then another gap...

To update on a couple things: I had a tree company haul off the limb that was leaning on the house a couple weeks ago. I haven't gotten the bill, but the estimate was pretty reasonable, given the scope of work involved. I fixed the roof that Saturday. I spent more time on it than I expected, mostly because the pitch for that section of my roof is steep enough that I wasn't comfortable working on it. It wasn't bad, but I felt it appropriate to take my time, rather than fall off.

Yeah, I've heard the expression, "It's not the fall that hurts, it's the sudden stop at the bottom." Add the abrasions of sliding down a shingle roof, and, well, it seemed better to avoid the experience altogether. I took my time.

The shingles turned out to not be a really good match, but I'm not worried. The angle is such that most folks driving by won't notice the difference. I know my roof isn't leaking, so I'm okay with how it is.

This first picture is of the roof deck, once I removed the damaged shingles. It's easier to see the size and location of the hole this way:

 It took less than a third of a sheet of Oriented Strand Board (OSB) to fix the roof deck. I bought a bundle of shingles, and used less than a dozen of them. I used a piece of Roofer's Felt about five feet long. First the deck repairs:

I didn't bother taking a picture of the roof between this step and having installed the shingles. It's just a roof, after all.

However, the shingle color difference is striking when viewed from above. Part of this is that the original roof on the house is now fourteen years old. It's probably a twenty-year roof, but might have been done with twenty-five year shingles. We are planning for replacing the roof within the next five years, based on the wear I noted while playing around on the roof this time.

I was able to straighten the drip edge (white aluminum seen in the second image) enough that it looks fine from below. The shingle color difference isn't as striking when viewed from the street.

One thing that came out of my several trips up on and off of the roof was that my ladder was beginning to worry me. If you know much about ladders, you know that they are rated for their weight capacity--Type IA, Type I, Type II, and Type III are common ratings, with Type III the lightest, at two hundred pounds capacity. I jokingly called my ladder a Type IV. I found it beside a dumpster behind a paint store seven years ago, and kept it around because it was good enough to do most of what I needed it to do. However, the locking mechanism on one side had a recently-broken spring, and I was only willing to carry a couple shingles up at a time (rather than an entire bundle), lest the thing fail on me.

I decided that it was time to buy a good ladder.

I rode to work (my part-time job at that orange box store that sells lumber, shingles, and all manner of other home repair and maintenance stuff) the next day, pulling my trailer so that I could bring home a good ladder.

The old ladder was nominally a sixteen-foot extension ladder, meaning that its full extension was roughly fourteen feet. There are a couple of places on my house that I cannot safely reach, so I opted for a longer ladder. I now own a 20' Type II extension ladder.

And, yes, I used my bike trailer to get it home, for a couple of reasons: I could, and it was actually a better choice than using the car. To use the car, I would have had to use padding of some sort to protect the roof, PLUS ropes to tie it to the car. I would still have worried about tearing up something on the car. The trailer almost looks like a ladder to many who ask about it, so it was a simple matter to haul the ladder home. Jenn needed the car that afternoon, and I typically ride to work anyway, so...

The hole in the roof deck shown above came with a corresponding hole in my soffit. The soffit pieces are aluminum, and I was concerned that I wouldn't be able to straighten the damaged pieces enough that they would look okay.

The soffit after the storm:

 

After I spent about five minutes actually working on the pieces and reinstalling them:

I was surprised at how good the repaired soffit looks.

And, since the tree outfit removed the big pile of debris from my driveway when they removed the limb, I can get in and out of my garage much more easily!

Driver comments

Over the years, I've begun to train myself to ignore the unintelligible (and often unintelligent) ululations that emanate from the windows of passing motor vehicles. I get such comments from far less than one percent of the motorists who pass me, after all, as they are easily classified as "territorial noise."

To explain that concept, I'll put forth a word picture: When walking along the neighborhood street, a dog barks at me from behind his or her fence. I'm not hurting the dog, I'm not a threat to the dog in any real way--I'm on shared public space. The dog, not having the same understanding of property lines as a human, is still at some level sounding a warning, both to me to not come closer to his space and to his pack (if his pack is only his human caretaker) that someone is close.

It doesn't matter that I am on shared public space--the dog barks. It doesn't matter that I have no intention of invading the dog's space as I understand it to be, the dog barks.

Same thing with most of the very few motorists who yell silly stuff out their windows as they pass me. I already got what I wanted from them--a more-or-less safe pass (although I admit I could do without the extra drama and noise). They have already proven that I was seen in time that they could avoid hitting me.

So, the message I choose to receive often differs from the message these motorists think they are conveying. I hear it as the motorist saying, "I'm happy for you to consider me an even bigger jerk than I think you are for daring to bicycle instead of hewing to the status quo and driving a car!" Part of this is that I rarely hear more than one syllable out of whatever the motorist is yelling, due to the dynamics of sound and background noise and such.

Even so, every now and again I get to hear enough syllables to make some sense of what the motorist said, and I wonder whether the motorist thought through his or her comment at all (lending credence to the idea that it's just territorial noise).

Two sort-of recent examples:

I was cycling through Seneca Park one day, en route to a job site in the Highlands area. I was a hundred yards or so from the four-way stop sign-controlled intersection near Big Rock. There is a marked shoulder of some width on each side of the road, and there are often folks running or walking in that shoulder area. A guy in a white pickup truck blew his horn as he approached me from behind, and opened his power window on the passenger side to tell me that "there is a lane over there for you!" while pointing at this shoulder.

Of course, he was wrong on several points: A) it is a marked shoulder, not a lane. As such, I *may* use it, at my discretion, under KRS or KAR (I'd find the exact citation, but it's not the point), but I am not required to use it. B) That it was paved space to the right of a solid line, just as many bike lanes are marked elsewhere in town, does not make it a bike lane. C) Even if it WAS a bike lane, and thus subject to 601 KAR 14:020 (9)(2), there are many reasons why it would not be feasible for me to use it as such--at least thirty reasons ran by during the next five minutes, those reasons being human beings who were using the shoulder as a firm place to run rather than be in the traffic lane.

His language confirmed that my reception of the message as indicated above was spot on.

The other happened one morning, as I was riding to another job site in the Highlands area. I was on Lexington Road, having just turned off Shelbyville Road (or is it Frankfort Avenue there?), heading toward town. A guy in a sedan lowered his power window to helpfully let me know that it was rush hour.

How about that? What about it being rush hour changes any of the rules for polite behavior? What about it being rush hour (ignoring for the moment the oxymoronic nature of the expression, given that traffic so often moves more slowly during peak travel hours) changes whether I have reason to ride my bicycle to get where I am going?

And what of this issue of courtesy? Those who value themselves over all other road users tell me that a cyclist would be more courteous to get out of the way of faster, presumably more legitimate traffic. They ignore something that is pretty basic to the human experience: the principle of first-come, first-served.

I was there first, it's my turn to use the shared public space in a legal and legitimate manner. Just as you wait in line at the bank or at the grocery checkout lane, your turn at that piece of roadway will come, and you may then use the road in a law-abiding manner, just as I have. It shows amazing hubris to think that because my turn takes a few seconds more than yours, you should go first despite that you arrived after I did. THAT is rudeness.

Oh, and because I sometimes enjoy numbers, this is post 579 for this blog.