alton brown's energy bar recipes. 

http://www.foodnetwork.com/food/show_ea/episode/0,1976,FOOD_9956_38665,00.html

I've started producing them and will try to bring some to group rides.

- - - posted by scott

http://www.craigslist.org/about/best/aaa/213715274.html

if this link is dead, drop me a line and I'll include the message text.

-sg

just south of the plaza de la revolucion, above the command bunker and next to the congress of people's deputies is the supreme revolutonary council for message propogation.  this building houses the tireless servants of the revolution, the very heart and soul of the glorious cause.  they spin endless strands of silky smooth language designed to help people better understand the necessity of change and the centrality of the bicycle.  it's hard work but they excel at it.

and while their operation is usually a seamless, well-oiled and efficient one, they are currently in turmoil.  when it comes to propoganda the language of liberation, we take a back seat to no one.  but the enemy has recently developed some advanced rhetorical methods and constructions that appear stunningly powerful,and beyond our ability to match.  while union forces clearly have solid chops, they have been humbled by the sheer power of this technique:

HENRY: You know, going back to September 2001, the president said, dead or alive, we're going to get him. Still don't have him. I know you are saying there's successes on the war on terror, and there have been. That's a failure.

TOWNSEND: Well, I'm not sure -- it's a success that hasn't occurred yet. I don't know that I view that as a failure. 

simply amazing.  a success that has not occured yet.  this type of pravda is powerful magic.

but i will not be intimidated.  in fact, let me try it out.  as you all may remember, in my last correspondence with usa cycling, i modestly and reasonably argued that the racing union best represents the ideals of cycling and should obviously be recognized for this while other clubs are punished for their mindless devotion to the status quo.  as can be seen here, the clarity of our message was lost on them.  but we can use this new construct to declare victory.  the racing union's ascendancy over all other cycling organizations is merely a success that has not occured yet.  yes, i think i like that.  i think i like that a lot. far from failure, our complete domination of all things cycling is merely a success that has not occured yet.  yes, 2007 is looking like it will be a very, very good year.

- - - posted by scott

http://www.mediathatmattersfest.org/5/fast_and_reliable/

thanks to erik for this nice link. 

http://rodale.typepad.com/bi_audio_blog/2006/12/getting_fixed.html

and thanks to bryan, our mad hectic fixie rider for this link...

- - - posted by scott

updated

I can't help myself...

awesome :: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p1s3hxcp5bs

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0LmAhsEvl7c

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5LW_VkWyWN8

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PWc9w-ep1_A

and of course: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_EaJMr26F5w

p.s. who out there is still interested in a fixed gear pub crawl/poker ride for charity?

bryan b comes through a link that's pure money: what rock opera should have been.  pete townsend and his ilk would likely turn up their noses at it but this smells like revolution to me.

rock on!

Pittsburgh Skyline from the trail along the Allegheny River (from adrasteia9, Flickr.com)

As the WashCycle blog points out (http://washcycle.typepad.com/home/2006/12/allegheny_highl.html#trackback), the Allegheny Highlands Trail is now pretty much complete.  Once a small nine-mile portion from McKeesport, PA to downtown Pittsburgh is completed, you’ll be able to ride from downtown Pittsburgh to Washington, DC on a bike.  Truthfully, you could have done that about four or five years ago, because I did just that with a group of friends, though it meant going out on the open road for a good portion.  Although the road portions weren’t an option with which everybody in my group of cyclists at varying levels of experience was enthralled (there were some complaints about the climb up Big Savage Mountain outside Frostburg, MD -- though that sounds a lot more dramatic than it was), I certainly enjoyed it and found it ride-able.  In any case, it seems as though it’s a lot easier now, and I certainly recommend the trip.  From what I could tell from the portions still under construction at the time, sections of the ride included railway trellises with some pretty spectacular views.

WashCycle recommends an article in the Baltimore Sun (http://www.baltimoresun.com/sports/outdoors/bal-te.sp.trail13dec13,0,3730065.story?coll=bal-home-headlines), though I’m rather partial to the article I saw in the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette over the weekend (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06349/746358-140.stm).  An editorial, also published in the Post-Gazette (http://www.post-gazette.com/pg/06352/746932-192.stm), proclaims “Here is a project that is all about fitness, health and vitality -- and is nothing if not cool. It would seem a natural ally to the city's efforts to keep and attract young people.”

Which brings me to a subject that’s been on mind lately – how cycling can be used to promote the economic development of a city with a crumbling downtown.  While the Baltimore Sun article focuses on economic development in Cumberland, MD, the case study in the Post-Gazette piece is obviously Pittsburgh – a city whose glorious past is not always in evidence today, unless you study some of the beautiful architecture downtown.  I sympathize with the dilemma faced by Pittsburgh because I have relatives who now live there and I was born in another rust belt city with even bigger problems – Detroit, Michigan.

Truly, Pittsburgh - though still very much a working class city in attitude - isn't the pollution-ridden steel town many who haven't been there think it is.  Though the former steel mill jobs haven't necessarily been replaced completely by new jobs.  In short, the economy hasn't kept up.

(Luke Swank, Steel Worker in Foundry, c. 1934,

Carnegie Museum of Art, Pittsburgh)

A real concern in Pittsburgh is keeping and attracting young people.  Ultimately, their efforts won’t work without attractive jobs, but it has been the purpose for much of the development in Pittsburgh over the past decade or so.   Regardless of one’s feelings about public financing of such things, the new stadiums were about that (though the local funding has a broader “buy-in” than in other places because it is raised through a regional sales tax that goes not just to pay for the stadiums, but also cultural and recreational entities and events); as were the efforts to build bike trails along all of the city’s riverfronts (on land formally occupied by steel mills).  A earlier Mayor, Tom Murphy, promoted the Pittsburgh Marathon to a national level with some success in order to project an image of the city as young and healthy.

Have these efforts worked?  Well, circumstantially, yes and no.  The evidence I have seen from visiting the city is that its economy is still in a slump – indeed, this weekend I just noticed that the Barnes & Noble downtown Pittsburgh location is closing (don’t bother going there to get some good clearance deals on good books – the place was already pretty much picked over).  On the other hand, I also saw evidence that the trails are being used.  On Friday, I noticed a good deal of people in the morning who were obviously commuting to their offices downtown (no small matter for a city every bit as hilly as San Francisco – though the trails overcoming this dilemma for the meek by being located largely on flat riverfront property).  As I noted elsewhere, it’s also encouraging to see

Washington's Landing Condo development

exists side-by-side with the trail.

that the city is promoting cycling to the extent that they provide bicycle racks at various strategic locations downtown (conveniently mapped out on a map provided by the Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership) – though, according to the good folks at BikePgh (http://www.bike-pgh.org/blog/), a lot more apparently needs to be done.  In other areas of the city, the trail runs through and around new condo developments, an old Heinz ketchup plant, and is used to promote the historic and cultural heritage of the city.  I’m thinking the guy in the late days of the great era of six day bike races (www.sixdaybicyclerace.com) who rode 80 miles before going to work at the steel mill for the day – he might have it better biking in Pittsburgh today (even though, given the dearth of steel mills today, they would be more likely to work in the heart transplant ward at UPMC Medical Center).  And, speaking of the six-day racers, Pittsburgh has something we don’t have here in Washington – a velodrome!(http://www.city.pittsburgh.pa.us/parks/html/bicycling.html).

This isn’t by any means meant to be a comprehensive view of this huge topic, or even a comprehensive observation of the cycling scene in Pittsburgh – I’m not qualified to make such analyses.  Rather, they are my random thoughts designed to get others to think about it as well.  Ultimately, I guess my point with all this is to note that it’s encouraging to see others point to cycling as a solution to a larger problem – such as keeping and attracting young people, or encouraging economic development, or providing an amenity to new housing – rather than as a detriment to getting home in your SUV heading to the ‘burbs.  And I much rather see “fat cities” like Pittsburgh making use of this kind of healthy option to promote their community over the other options, such as the casino they’re destined to build in downtown Pittsburgh.

-- posted by Chris

note: i have backdated this post so as not to post over chris' extra-ordinarily good post this morning.  yesterday an email went out from the current waba director.  i could find no link to thison their website so I have attached the text of the email below...

Dear Friend,

In the recently released Environmental Assessment for the Visitor Transportation Study for the National Mall and Surrounding Park Areas, the National Park Service has again failed to take into account the thousands of visitors and commuters that bicycle in the National Mall area each year. WABA needs your help to make sure that the concerns of cyclists are heard. At the beginning of the study, WABA submitted detailed comments on what needed to be done to further encourage bicycling on the Mall. Interest among cyclists was strong, and during the initial meetings former NPS regional Director Terry Carlstrom was quoted in a study newsletter as saying the public process, “indicated a great deal of interest in bicycling as a mode of transportation.”

Among our recommendations were to: update the 1991 Paved Recreational Trails of the National Capital Region and include a prioritization of implementation of the plan. integrate bicycle information in all National Park Service communications regarding transportation to and through National Capital Area Parks, such as, websites, wayfinding and directional signage, maps and brochures improve bike parking at Mall destinations by added new parking racks and replacing broken ones widen and improve Mall trails and improve connections between area parks and the DC street network. However, instead of safer trails, better facilities, and increased signage, the NPS is recommending a mandatory helmet policy for adults. And while there are new designated signed routes, they are creating them for Segways! Cyclists have been all but ignored despite the stated goals of the project to provide sustainable transportation solutions and to coordinate with other long term plans in DC that aim to reduce vehicle congestion, improve air quality, and provide a continuous system of hiker and biker trails. Comments are due by January 5th, 2007. Click here for more information and to see what you can do to help. Sincerely, Eric Eric Gilliland Executive Director Washington Area Bicyclist Association

i honestly have no beef with waba, and i share many of their goals but i read and re-read this note and i can't quite get over the tone.  it sort of coveys a mixture of surprise, indignaiton and frustration.  so i'm going to one up him and react to this thoughts with a mixture of surprise, indignaiton and frustration.  i can't believe that any but the most optimistic and naive would be surprised by this.  we have a joke about things like this: we say that it's not a bug, it's a feature.  this post does a very amusing job of pointing this out in another arena, but once you understand the motif, you'll see it replicated fairly often.

the issue here is the same as access to roads.  omnibus federal bills such as the intermodal surface transportation efficiency act have at various points mandated that new construction projects incorporate alternative transport friendly design.  but it never happens.  that's because the system that uses the funds has no incentive to do so.  you can write blog posts and send emails and circulate petitions all day long, every day but it won't make a difference.  that's because the lack of accomodation is not a bug (i.e. an oversight or a mistake or a mis-implementaiton) but a feature or something that essentially was planned, designed for and executed to bring about a desired result.

what we need is a new process: one that starts from a different set of assumptions.  i will try to dig through some of the authorizing bills and see if there is anything that can be used as a lever here but i suspect that the process is pretty far along (see my earlier post on the proposed bike station) and can't be re-engineered at this point.  i may be wrong and i will submit some comments, specifically asking about the segways.  so far as a i know, only commercial outfits have segways so why we would have a design program that singles a business like that out for special treatment when many users and citizens own bikes is beyond me.

let's submit comments where we can but let's also get more involved in the front end of the process.  more on this shortly.

- - - posted by scott

kevin and i went to the public comment meeting on the proposed union station bike station.  my impression was that it was a decidedly weird event.  i'll get to my thoughts on that meeting in a minute, but some recent posts and comments set the stage perfectly for how i perceive this situation. 

chris' post from yesterday is a very good one.  it points out the everyday problems that people who wish to get around by bicycles face.  tom posted a very good comment as well.  in response to tom, my general experience is that the actual property owners are not always easy to work with.  my personal opinion is that they perceive they have enough to worry about and don't see cyclists as a large enough constituency to warrant the outlay of money necessary for something like this.  especially now, around the xmas shopping season, when mall rage breaks out because parking is such a premium.  can't you hear it now: "i'm too busy dealing with mall parking rage to help you with this...what did you say it was again....bike parking lot?  yeah, i'll get to it as soon as i survive the parking situation around the holiday season..."

i may be alone here but i see this issue as being very similar to ADA provisions.  the ada mandates that site managers and buildings must make access possible for people with a range of disabilities.  if you talk to the business managers, they will complain about the costs (very real and thousands if not tens of thousands of dollars in planning, permits, construction and equipment) to make the necessary modifications.  but i tend to be less sympathetic to their argument because it often boils down to this: "i don't have many handicapped customers now so why should i be required to spend lots on making my business easier for them to use?"  but this is so clearly a chicken and egg situation that you want to slap your forehead. 

the proximal reason that few commercial real estate owners think they need bicycle accomodations is that so few bicyclists show up or ask for accomodations.  but the ultimate reason that so few cyclists show up is that the roads and parking lots around these commercial areas are so dangerous to ride on and that there are no safe and effective places to put your bike while you're there.  if they built accomodations, would more people come there?  i'm not entirely sure.  but i'm certain that if they don't make it possible that it will never happen.

in very general terms, what's probably missing from this overall discussion is a set of standard tools for someone who wishes to pursue something like this.  maybe we need to develop a tool box so that you could go to any specified area and present them with a very professional package of information.  what might be in the toolbox?  it should probably contain some very brief introductory information about cyclists and what they need (not much!) to effectively use this person's resources/business/services.  you could have descriptions of what other businesses have done (with drawings or pictures and contact information for the site managers) as an example of best practices.  you could have a list of federal, state and local agencies that might offer grants or tax breaks or easements for things like this.  and finally, it would be brilliant to have an architectural firm draw up some generic plans for a simple prototype, cookie-cutter, one-size-fits-all solution so you can show the people there, in real terms, what you are talking about.  this would need to include a projected cost-estimate in current dollars.

such a toolbox would need to be customized for each individual application, in the same way that your resume would need to be tailored to each individual job you sought.  it would not be a lot of work but would stress the needs of that particular situation.  what do you guys think?  good idea?  bad idea? 

to address chris's quesiton, I'd be more inclined to suggest that somewhere in the parking garage, spots be allocated.  the garage already has the property of being covered, there's limited pedestrian traffic and there are "guards" down there.  there is also probably a concrete island somewhere that would be suitable.  i generally prefer bike racks that are public and out there and on display.  it helps to communicate the reality that biking is a very good alternative.  but in the case of the mci center, i'm not so sure.

now, on to the union station bike station meeting.  the meeting was initially described here.  kevin and i got there late owing to a really good deal on pints of guinness nearby.  when we got there, it had a very weird vibe.  there were several people presenting but they appeared to be mostly answering questions.  and the questions being asked appeared to mostly come from people who were interested in managing this facility.  many of the questions dealt with costs, overhead, ownership, subsidies, real estate, and regulations.

i'm not entirely sure what was going on so i am going to offer my best guess at what is going on.  i think that some money to build something has come through.  this money is (federal?) pollution abatement money and someone has decided that a bike parking facility is the best way to spend it.  the money will be spent.  and it's very, very probable that it will be spent on this product. 

again, i may be misreading the situation, but that's what i'm getting from it.  the stated purpose of the meeting was to get input.  but they already have plans, technicals, scale art models, traffic flow ideas and what not.  it looks like most of the decisions are made.  what i find troubling is that i think this particular idea is a solution in search of a problem.  when general interest questions were asked, there were really no answers.  what happens if this thing fills up?  there will be more street parking nearby.  what will happen to the existing bike parking?  unclear, it will probably be lost.  is this supposed to be a service for existing commuters or is it meant to be something to convince non-cycling commuters to give it a try?  no answer.  with the prohibition of bikes on marc and metro during rush hour, is union station the best place for this?  no answer.  will there be showers and changing places in the facility?  no, there will be no running water.  so there will be no toilets?  correct.  what happens when the "attendant" needs to go the bathroom?  does she/he just lock the place up and go into union station.  awkward silence.  no answer.  giggles from bikers.

maybe i'm being way to cynical.  i don't think so as i chatted with several others right after the meeting and they had even more and better questions.  but i don't get the feeling that there's much discussion at this point.  which is a shame.

now to tie the whole post together.  some will be saying that i'm not playing consistently.  in the top of the post, i argue that we need to have bike facilities to make it easier for cyclists to get around and seen and fostering the perception that cyclists share the road and bicycles are a real transportation option.  and then in the bottom of the post, after being offered what i want, i'm turning up my nose at it.  fair enough, in a sense.  i think we need accomodations and they need to be visible.  i think the bike station is waaayyyy too much of a good thing in a single place.  it's probably not useful to think about what that money (>$2M) could have funded but i can't help it.  but i think we can come away from this with something valuable.  in place of this, is there something else that would have been better?  and should it be placed all over the city?  and the suburbs?  and the shopping centers? 

i'll start doing some research towards the toolkit and see where it takes me.  any and all help is appreciated.

- - - posted by scott

Despite my reservations about the real utility of bike lanes here and in other cities, I think it is fair to assume that they are constructed with an interest in encouraging people to ride bikes to their jobs and other destinations.  But what happens once the cyclist arrives at that destination?  Where do we lock up our trusty steeds?  A light post or a parking meter would work, I suppose, though a bike rack would be nicer.  And what if all the parking meters are taken?     

Monday night, I was waiting for Rob prior to the hockey game at VerizonCenter.  So there I was, waiting in the new pedestrian walkway between Gallery Place and Verizon Center where, in the space of about 15 minutes no less than 3 pairs of individuals attempted to lock their bikes up to whatever they could find – that’s 6 bikes in all! – and each one of them were informed by the security guard that locking up their bikes is expressly forbidden.  I was amused when I observed a bike messenger locking up his fixed gear to a pole behind the back of the security guard even while he was giving one couple his standard speech. 

I don’t blame the security guard – he’s just doing his job, and The Man’s told him to impose this stupid rule.  But with all this encouraging of bike riding, isn’t it time for facilities such as this to provide something so obvious as a bike rack?  There’s really no excuse for this outrage – the new pedestrian walkway has plenty of space, and a few parked bikes simply will not get in the way.  Direct action is clearly needed here!

-- posted by Chris (photo from Flickr, Octavio_DC)

http://www.cicle.org/cicle_content/pivot/entry.php?id=1189

dolph may look tough but clubber lang and apollo creed were so much better.

the revolution rolls along.  clothing order has been finalized and initiated.  a goodly number of new members have stepped up to the plate.  that pleases me.  some are solid racers and i think we'll field much more respectable teams in the races we choose to do as a result.  we also have a number of cycling advocates who i am hopeful will help us initiate and accomplish some off-the-bike goals as well.  please take some time to welcome our new brothers to the vanguard.

tonight is the sort of unveiling of a new idea for bike commuters.  details are below.  i'll be there a bit after six and will take some pictures, find out what i can, and post the results up some time later in the week.  If anyone is interested in coming, drop me a note and we'll arrange to hook up. 

You are invited to attend a public meeting on the design of the Union Station Bicycle Transit Center (aka the Bike Station) on Tuesday, December 12, 2006 from 6:00pm to 8:00pm in Room 1107 at One Judiciary Square (441 4th Street, NW), 11th floor, south elevator

The Bicycle Transit Center will provide bicycle parking, rentals, repairs and accessories in a new state-of-the-art building at the west end of Union Station.

The design is 65% complete and we are looking for additional input on the design and operation of the facility. There will be a short presentation followed by questions and answers. Background information is available at www.ddot.dc.gov/bikeprogram

Hope to see you there. Contact me directly if you have any questions. Feel free to forward this to anyone who might be interested.

We will also be holding a daytime meeting for organizations that might be interested in bidding on the contract to operate of the Bicycle Transit Center. Please contact me if you are interested in attending such a meeting.

James R. Sebastian
Manager, Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transportation Demand Management Programs
Transportation Policy and Planning Administration
District Department of Transportation

i'm working up a post on the holiday light displays i see when i commute home at night.  the pictures are not great but the displays sure are.  more to follow....

- - - sg

updated below.....

compare and contrast the dire news:

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/12/10/AR2006121001113.html

with the valuable services that are being provided:

http://www.wmata.com/bus2bus/smartbenefits/pages/Metro_start.html via this link.

we talk a lot about how the current travel infrastructure is "broken": entirely car based travel -> congestion -> sprawl -> need for more roads -> less green space -> more development -> more congestion -> more sprawl -> more need for more roads -> etc -> etc -> etc...  what we do not talk about as much is the need to have alternative transportation be all the more appealing.  this is somewhat counter-intuitive.  one would naturally assume that as commutes get longer and longer, less and less pleasant, and take up increasing shares of your life, that alternatives would seem more appealing. 

but this is not, in practice, how things work.  people who have hellish commutes will read this metro news about financial shortfalls and smile to themselves.  for them, it only serves to confirm the idea that mass transit and alternative transportation won't work very well for them, since it clearly isn't self sustaining.  i currently reside slighty west of the vienna metro stop.  if i were an average commuter, i would park at the metro, and then ride it into dc.  parking is $3.75 and let's just assume the metro fare is $3.70 each way for the trip which would put you near center city.  that's $11.15 a day or roughly $223 a month (20 workdays a month) or roughly $2,453 (48 work weeks a year).  could you operate a car for that?  in some cases, yes.  looking at insurance and wear and tear and gas, it would be tough for most of us.  you could take the bus to the metro and save a lot.  but hey, that's asking a lot of our commuters.

you're probably thinking that i'm going to tie up this post with a call for alternative transportation to conduct itself in a more becoming manner, to earn the respect of drivers and to work to be an appealing option and for jurisdictions to fund metro to a greater degree.  well, that'd be great but i don't see it happening.  no, i'm going the other way here.  we're going to the mat on this.  the problem is not necessarily metro: in all likelihood, it is no more inept or corrupt or inefficient than any other company or transit group anywhere else in the country.  no the problem here is that people (read: drivers) will read this article and smugly conclude that those great unwashed masses who don't sit for hours on our public thoroughfares are saps, and that they (the drivers) are beating the system and doing the right thing.  but they are drawing the wrong conclusion.  under my normal philosophy of put up or shut up, i proudly unveil my solution.  i will give away $10 in metro fare each month to some random winner. 

my preference is that you give it to a friend or neighbor or relative and ask they to try commuting by metro one day for free.  if you are a cyclist, you may certainly use this to get your bike to a group ride, or for some other purpose (take the kids to the national zoo for instance) but do it on public transit, not in a car.

here's the deal.  all racing union members are automatically entered in each month's drawing, because, well, because they are good peoples.  anyone else in the dc metro area who would like to be considered may send an email to metro_hook_up@racingunion.org with your email address and i will add you to the database.  all drawings will be at random and since i do the drawing, i will not be eligible to win the prize.  all i ask is that you send me a photo (same address) with you and the metro cash or a note by email on what you did with it.  but that's optional.  get those email addresses in.  drawing will take place shortly for december.  if the program goes well, i may expand it.  more on that later.

- - - posted by scott

update: before i dogged taking the bus up above, i didn't realize the true revolutionary powers of bus drivers.  you can witness it here, courtesy of one of the greatest geopolitical thinkers of our time.  this must have casued some sort of cognitive dissonance.  you can cause revolution and upheaval, but only by supporting the rights of striking workers.  can you picture it?  must support toppling of hardline, clerical, anti-american regime....but...cannot support striking unionized workers.....but must support toppling of hardline, clerical, anti-american regime....but...cannot support striking unionized workers.....  and on it goes!