The test

Monday evening I decided to make a test-run on the ride I'll be doing when I decide to get of my lazy @$$ and get back to biking at least part of the way to work. It's a not overly special ride, a little more than 3 miles each way down a quick (speed limit 40 MPH) well-maintained artery of a road. This was my first ride in months on the Scwhinn and I felt it.

I've mentioned before how sore I get when I switch from one bike to another, mainly because I have a couple of different styles of bikes. My day-to-day commuter is an upright Schwinn that's older than me and almost as heavy. As happened the first time I rode it, I felt most of this trip in my quads. The other thing I noticed is that the new dress shoes I bought last week are very slick on the bottom. I did the ride in my work clothes because I will be doing it that way "for real". The slick shoes led to an odd foot position on the pedals  (all the way back so the heels caught on the back of the pedal) which will really screw me up when I ride clipless on the weekends.

All told it took me about a half an hour (including the pleasant visit with the other commuter I mentioned in my last post) to do the 6+ miles. It will feel great to be doing that on a daily basis again.

A pleasant encounter

On Monday evening I decided to take a stab at the ride from my temporary sleeping place (AKA Dad's house) to BART. I want to start riding to the station in the morning rather than driving and wanted to get an idea about the time it would take. I'll be posting about the ride itself in a bit. What I wanted to get down first is the pleasant and very unexpected encounter I had on the trip home.

I did a quick loop, along Clayton Rd. Clayton is a drag-racer's dream - long, straight, and almost flat. It's not my favorite road to ride on, but it is the street I take in the morning (at that time of day there aren't many cars) and since I don't especially care about how long it takes me to get home I decided to go the quick, direct route. Anyway, I was about 3/4 of the way home, and noticed a mini-van parked across a side street with the driver trying to get my attention.

I pulled over to see what he wanted. Turns out the guy was a bike commuter and wanted to advise against riding on Clayton because of the speed of cars and the buses. It's always nice to encounter not only another commuter, but one who cares enough to mention to a total stranger that there are other, safer routes. I've bad-mouthed preachy activist types before. To me, this is the kind of pro-bike activism we should all be doing.

A timely post?

Yesterday I was whining about the discomfort my neck feels from the head-whips I still do, years after my semi-beloved Trek was stolen. And what do I see this morning in my feed, but Yehuda Moon about to know the same pain.

Followed by THIS over at CycleDog.

Good wishes to anyone who has gone through this.

And if you haven't been reading Yehuda Moon & the Kickstand Cyclery, what's wrong with you?

Visit and support

I imagine that most people who read my sketchy writing have come across Elden "Fatty" Nelson as well. If not, head over to his fantastic blog and give it a read.

The main reason I want to encourage everyone to read Fatty's blog is so that there will me more Friends of Fatty lending their support to Fatty and his wife Susan in her ongoing battle with cancer. I don't soapbox or preach much here, because I'm not all that great at it, but this is one case where I will do it. Head over to his site, read his blog, and if you can buy some FC gear to help support them. Or, as Fatty has recommended more than once, head to your favorite anti-cancer charity (mine is here) and donate.

If you happen to find this yourself Fatty, here's an oldie but goodie for you.

WIN

Post Bike-Theft Trauma

So my actual bike theft happened a while back - better part of two years I think - but that hasn't lessened my annoyance. It hasn't lessened the whiplash-inducing head wrench that I engage in every time someone goes by on an even remotely similar bike. I've now moved across the country, and I still spin my head.

Let me back up a little so this all makes sense. A few months after I moved to Baltimore (call it March of 2006) my Trek 930 Singletrack (green/black/green, outfitted as a commuter bike and tweaked over a year of travel back and forth across the Oakland hills) was stolen out of my pick-up. It was my own fault since a camper shell isn't all that protective, but I was still irked at whoever did it. I made a brief tour of the closer pawn shops just in case, but mountain bikes are popular transport for the unlicensed pharmaceutical industry in Baltimore so I didn't have much hope. From that point on I took a look at every bike I saw going by to see if it was mine. For as long as I've been a serious commuter I've had swivel-head for bikes passing me by. After my bike was stolen I became obsessed. Any mountain bike got scoped out, if it was green I would stare.

I've now moved from Baltimore to California, there is no way my bike made the same trip, but I still find myself hunting for it. That being the case I've decided that I'm suffering from the bike-theft equivalent of PTSD, I just need a better name for it. Any ideas?

A different take on Critical Mass

I've been a long-time critic of what Critical Mass has become. I remember when I worked in San Francisco (1998-2000) and it was a small but active presence on the streets of the Financial District. I've seen it move from being a bunch of cyclists getting "in the way" to the violent "everyone sucks but us" mob-rule ride it often becomes these days. I agree with what it is supposed to be about (raising the visibility of cyclists, protesting the lack of accommodations) but not the way the message is delivered. On my BART ride into work this morning I was listening to a podcast and got a different take on it.

 

I was listening to the show Law in Action from BBC Radio 4. The first 10 minutes or so of the 10/14/08 show are on a case involving Critical Mass that has worked its way through the British legal system until now, when it goes before the Law Lords. The short version is: the 1986 Public Order Act organisers of mass-gatherings are supposed to inform the police about the event (like in the US) ; an individual who was part of a CM ride challenged the law and won under the "there is no organizers for CM" argument; the appealed and won on appeal. The general argument from the rider is that CM 1) is not organized and 2) there is an exception in the law for "customary"(regularly occuring) events which CM is. The general argument from the police is that knowing the route in advance would allow them to better serve the general population by rereouting traffic as with normal parades.

 

It is a very balanced presentation, with the presenter going so far as to take part in the ride and record at least a few moments at the begining, despite having not ridden a bicycle for years. This is one of the few instances of coverage of CM that I can think of in recent times that hasn't been trying to argue one side or the other. Additionally, the presenter is careful to mention possible negative ramifications of the case going for the MP, namely a potential chilling effect on other marches if the organizers are afraid the participants might stray from the approved route.

 

Whatever your take on CM I recommend checking out the podcast. The story is the first ~ 10 minutes, and includes interviews with riders, police, laywers, and law professors.

New camera set-up

I am not a photographer, I'm a shutterbug. By that I mean that I carry a wee little digital camera (Canon PS A540, if anyone cares) around just about everywhere I go, and I pop off pictures of pretty much anything that catches my eye. I shoot for myself, and so I can share some of the things I have done with friends and family. If you are looking for beautiful photography with a cyclist flare check out Russ Roca's stuff.

This is mine, not Russ' - go to his site and prepare to be amazed

All that being said, I do like to take pictures while I ride, and I've been trying to figure out a convenient way to do it. I used to just slip the camera into my OYB bag on the bars and pull it out when I wanted to shoot. The good is that the camera was in my hand and I could really see what I was shooting, the bad was that I had to wait for it to turn on, fire up, and be ready to go each time.

On my ride on Sunday I decided to try strapping my mini-tripod to the stem and see how that worked. The good was that I left the camera on for the whole ride, the bad was that I had to adjust the angle before I set out and hope I was catching what I wanted - no zoom, no framing.

All in all I'm happy with the results. The next step will be figuring out a way to hook the camera up to a wired remote so I can shoot from the drops/hoods rather than having to let go and hit the button. Another step, especially if I pull together a tour, will be to get a new camera with a re-positionable screen so I can have a better idea what the shot is going to look like.

Finally

I have no one to blame but myself for this, but still. Yesterday was the first day in many moons (since September 8 according to my log at Active Body) that I got out for a ride. It wasn't anything special, but then again, it was. This was my first ride of any length on the Trucker, it was my first ride with the racks on the Trucker (unloaded), and it was my first ride testing out my mini-pod tripod as a camera holder on the handle bars.

I had done some short rides on the Trucker, but nothing more than commuting really. Today I did about an hour in the saddle, and went a whopping 12 miles. It was long enough to put me firmly in the "Brooks B17 works right out of the box" camp. It also was long enough for me to discover a couple of odd sore spots (right elbow, left knee) that show me just how long I've been away from biking and pretty much any working out.

You probably can't see it in this picture, but there's a deer running from R to L across the path

All things considered I'm ecstatic to be back in the saddle, and can't wait to do it again. I hope to start doing a few rides like this in the evenings after work, building up to doing some more serious rides on the weekends.

Bike commuting in the Bay Area 3

I mentioned that some BART stations have lockers that you apply for, and some now have first-come lockers. The last option for bike storage at BART stations is only available at a few stations, and is supervised bike parking.

Three stations (Fruitvale, Downtown Berkeley, Embarcadero) have bike parking. Fruitvale is operated by Alameda Bicycle and is located in the back of a small shop (great for getting new tubes). The others are in the BART stations themselves, and are operated in partnership with Bikestation. Unfortunately, all of these stations are on the wrong side of the hills for me.

I need to do a little legwork (har har) and check out the area around the stations at my end of the commute to see if there are options. If I had the money to ride a Rivendell (sigh, someday) I would stop by the shop and see if there was a way to park there, since they are walking distance from the Walnut Creek station.

Note - this whole set of posts was actually inspired by this article from the NY Times blog. The blurb that showed up in the reader irked me because it sounded as if the article was arguing that there should be government-sponsored bike valet parking set up, and I couldn't figure out why there needed to be government involvement. Then I read the piece and saw this:

The city (or perhaps a third party like Transportation Alternatives) should license the valets so people would be be confident that their valet isn’t a fly-by-night bike thief. The city has already used its licensing power to increase the availability of fruit and vegetable vendors in poorer neighborhoods, why not use it to increase parking valets?

Government licensing could be necessary, especially if the parking area is not right where the bikes are dropped off. The only one of these I've ever used is the one at Fruitvale, and you can see them wheel the bike into the back and place it on the rack. Plus, the fact that there is an obvious brick-and-mortar facility makes it a little easier to know who you would "go after" if your bike went missing.

Bike commuting in the Bay Area 2

My last post on commuting in the Bay Area was full of hill-love, this will be a little more of a downer. I mentioned last time that I liked to ride home over the hills rather than take the train. Even on those days I usually took the train partway, I just went over the hills first. The full trip is about 30 miles, one way, which is why I usually multi-moded it.

Where I worked before (Alameda) was a short hop from a BART station, about a 10 minute ride. That meant I needed my bike at both ends of the trip, which meant getting up really early. BART is semi-liberal with bikes, but excludes full sized (non-folding) bikes during commute hours which are ~ 7:00-9:00 AM and 4:30-6:45 PM. The issue I ran into before was that I would have to leave work really early to catch a train I could fit in (no bike-specific cars) which meant having to start really early so I could get my full 8 hours in.

The new office is across the street from a station, which means that bringing my bike with me is pointless unless I plan to ride after work. That means I'll be locking up at the station, which gives me the heebie-jeebies. Some stations have lockers that can be applied for. I have no idea how long the wait list is for the station near my dad's place, but the last time I was there I counted maybe 10 lockers. Apparently, some stations now have electronic, first-come/first-served lockers that can be registered for. The station near my dad's house is on the "coming soon" list. If I can't get a locker it means locking up outside which is something I've never had to do and I'm not at all comfortable with.

My plan is to check out the electronic lockers at one of the other stations (about twice as far away, but a locker would make it worth it), and time my ride to it. Hopefully I'll be able to do all that before I start working. If not, I'll check out the lockers by driving to that station for a couple of days during the week (to judge the usage) and time the ride on the weekend. The other option is to buy a folder, and as much as I'd love to do that I don't know how practical it would be. Given that my office is almost on top of the station at the other end of the trip, leaving the bike at the "home end" just makes more sense to me.

While I was away

While I was away there was some big news for cyclists. It was covered by just about every cycling-related blog I read, including:

• Bicycle Commuters
• Bikes Belong
• Bike Commute Tips Blog - two times
• Bike Hacks
• CycleDog
• Cycelicious
• Freewheeling Spirit
• Urban Velo
• The Velo ORANGE Blog
• The Wash Cycle

So what was it that got all of these fellow-travelers off their bikes and onto their keyboards? The inclusion of the Bicycle Commuter Act as part of the gigantic outpouring of taxpayer money for the financial industry.

From the San Jose Mercury News (by way of Paul Dorn's blog):

Effective Jan. 1, people who use bicycles as their primary means of getting to work will be eligible to get up to $20 a month in tax-free payments from their employers for the costs of owning and operating a bike. Employers can deduct the payments as an expense from their federal taxes.

As a cyclist, I think this is a good thing. Not because $20.00 per month is really going to make a big difference, but because it puts bike commuters on equal footing as other commuters, if only in the eyes of the IRS (but really, is there a stronger indicator of reality than the IRS?). However, I have a couple of problems with the way it went down.

First - This is just one more piece of pork tossed into a bad piece of legislation to bribe (yeah, I'll say it) reticent members to vote for it. The leadership knew that they weren't going to get the votes they needed, so they added superfluous amendments like this one to get more people on board. That rubs me the wrong way. If the bail out was so important, why weren't more members willing to support it on its own merits? If bike commuters deserve equal treatment at the hands of the tax code, why couldn't the Act pass on its own merits. The obvious answer to both questions is that there wasn't enough support for either on its own, and only by pooling the supporters of two flawed pieces of legislation those supporters able to get them passed.

Second - I know I'm committing bike blogger sacrilege by questioning the need for laws relating to cyclists, specifically benefits for cyclists. The line of argument that a lot of advocates have made is that other commuters can get pre-tax money to buy mass-transit tickets, and cycling serves the same "greater good" by removing people from cars, so cyclists should be able to get the same pre-tax benefit to offset some of the affiliated costs. My concern is that this is demonstrating one of the worst characteristics of federal laws - unnecessary complication. There is a reason that the index for the 2008 Code of Federal Regulations is over 1,000 pages long. Rather than adding a new law for bike commuters, wouldn't it be better to remove things from the old law, specifically the parts that indicate the means of commuting? The whole idea is to allow commuters to use pre-tax money to pay their expenses, is there some reason that this should only apply to certain types of commuters, and if so, why?

All things being equal, it is a victory for cyclists that this has passed. Personally, I have reservations about the way it happened, but that's just me.

Bike commuting in the Bay Area 1

As I prepare to once again bike commute in the SF Bay Area I am faced with the same challenge as the last time around: I will be living on the east side of the hills and working on the west. People from the Bay Area will understand without explanation the semi-obstacle that the Oakland-Berkley hills present, for those who don't, I offer this:

Don't get me wrong - I LOVE riding in those hills and am eagerly awaiting rebuilding my climbing motor using them, but that riding is for the weekends and afternoons.

When I was there before I lived in Concord (the A point on the map) and worked in Alameda (the island to the west of the B point). This time I'll be living in the same place and working in Oakland (the B point) for at least a few months, then I'll be moving into my own place. My commute to Alameda was crack of dawn early (4 AM) so I could leave work early enough to get on BART before the 4:30 PM "no bikes in commute time" rule kicked in. Sometimes I would ride over the hills instead of taking BART home, which gave me trips like this:Personally, there's no better way to end a long day spent over a lab bench (at that time) or in front of a computer (this time) than a 10-15 mile climb through semi-wild rolling hills. That, and the bragging rights that I earned when I was strong enough to ride the whole route home while my preparing-for-a-tour-I-couldn't-go-on buddies couldn't do it.

I will get back to that, but initially I won't be taking my bike all the way. The new office is right next to the BART station, so I would be lugging my bike on the train just to carry it into the office.

But those hills are calling loud enough that I can hear them all the way in Baltimore...

Rediscovering the town I grew up in

As I mentioned before the blog went dark, I moved from Baltimore back to the SF Bay Area. Specifically, at least for now, to Concord, where I grew up. I biked around town as a kid, and to/from my dad's place to BART as an adult, but never really thought about how bike-friendly my on-again/off-again hometown is.

I haven't gotten out on a bike yet, too busy half-unpacking  (I will be staying with my dad until I find my own place) and the like. I have been driving around town, and saw a few things that I didn't expect. First - there are a whole lot of bike lanes. Even to the point of having a bike lane that has a right side paint line, to set the lane off from the on-street parking. Second - at the end of one of those fancy two-sides-painted lanes was a turn-lane sign indicating that cars must yield to bikes. Third - a number of intersections around town have the nifty little devices for bikes to trigger the traffic signals.

Like I said, I never really thought about my hometown as bike-friendly. I guess it's time to rethink things.