by No Comments

Fwd: Genesee River Wilds Project

From: Allen Kerkeslager <akerkesl@sju.edu>
Date: Sun, Nov 15, 2009 at 11:43 AM
Subject: Genesee River Wilds Project (Please Forward as Appropriate)
To: BDSHARP@democratandchronicle.com, Jon.Schull@rit.edu

Dear Rochester Area Trail Advocates,

I just noticed some recent news on the Rochester Greenway and I am glad to see the progress that your groups are making on this.  You may find it helpful to peruse the newsletter of the Genesee River Wilds Project below and look over the attached documents, especially the project’s “Program Guide.”  You may find it especially helpful to read the opening description of the project’s main goals and the references to trail systems in the Program Guide’s “Infrastructure Inventory.”  This will make it clear that one of the goals of the Genesee River Wilds Project is to create the links needed to complete a massive recreational trail system reaching all the way from the Susquehanna River at Williamsport, PA, to Lake Ontario in Rochester.  As the newsletter below and the contact list in the back of the Program Guide. indicates, many state and regional officials (including some in your area, as mentioned below) are aware of the Genesee River Wilds Project.  The Program Guide. (from last April) and the newsletter (from end of last August) are, in fact already outdated because our contact list has grown considerably.  For example, the project recently received a $5,000 grant to help pay for planning work being done by an architectural engineer, who is working almost for free with my colleagues and DEC officials in designing nature parks along the Genesee River in Allegany County, NY.  Given that these and other features of the Genesee River Wilds Project involve two states and environmental issues that extend to federal interests such as Lake Ontario, you may find it especially helpful to articulate how your work on the Rochester Greenway can be integrated into these larger environmental concerns and the proposed interstate trail system when you submit applications for grants for federal and state funds.

If you are not familiar with the recreational trail system in Pennsylvania’s Pine Creek Gorge, then you may want to follow some of the links on the Genesee River Wilds Project’s website to see the exciting possibilities that will open up when the entire trail system from Rochester to Williamsport is completed.  You may also want to pay special attention to the section of the newsletter below that deals with some of the planning on the Pennsylvania side that is underway for completing the remaining sections in PA (see below, “(6) Developments on the Pennsylvania side”).  Completion of all 240 miles of the projected trail system is obviously a long-term goal, but so much has already been done on the Genesee Valley Greenway and the Pine Creek Trail that we actually are already far more than halfway there.  Pennsylvania is also, as the note below indicates, moving more quickly than New York.  So perhaps it will not be that many years before the Rochester Greenway can boast of being part of one of the longest and most scenic recreational trail systems in the country.

Please feel free to forward this note and the attached documents to people in your area.  Our project has advanced rapidly by its appeal to stakeholders interested in not only riverside recreation, but also in conservation and the economic benefits of tourism and related business.  Thus this may be of interest to business leaders, environmental scientists and biologists at the University of Rochester who may be involved in research projects related to the improvement of the water quality of the Genesee River or Lake Ontario, non-profit conservation groups in your area, and many others–including hikers, bikers, and kayakers.  The more people that can be recruited to join in, the faster this will proceed.

All the best,
 Allen Kerkeslager, Ph.D.
Saint Joseph’s University
Philadelphia
(former western New Yorker)

akerkesl@sju.edu
www.geneseeriverwilds.org
————————————————
Project Newsletter
————————————————

Dear Colleagues in Conservation of the Genesee River and Lake Ontario,
  
This note and the attached documents offer an update on the Genesee River Wilds Project.  Readers interested only in technical details can go directly to the “Program Guide” (in the attachments).  This is only one of a number of documents that originally were prepared for use by US House Representative Eric Massa in dialogues with Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and Governor David Patterson (below).  But they deserve wider dissemination.  Please feel free to forward this to others who may be encouraged to support the New York State side of the project.  Relevant contact information is listed in the attached Program Guide and on the project website at www.geneseeriverwilds.org.  
Some recipients of this note are familiar with the Genesee River Wilds Project and have begun promoting a more holistic approach to the Genesee River watershed.  Those not familiar with the project may consult the Briefing Paper, the longer Program Guide, and the project website (which does not include the budget and some of the technical data found in the Program Guide).  Briefly, the project promotes a comprehensive program of conservation, flood control, recreational development, and economic revitalization along the uppermost (southern) 70 miles of the Genesee River.  The focus of the project is conservation.  The project emphasizes development of recreational infrastructure because the resulting promise of tourism and business development has proven to be the most effective strategy for winning eager support from local officials and landowners in the impoverished rural communities nearby.  The project has implications that that are inter-state and even international in scope because the Genesee River begins in northern Pennsylvania, flows northward all across western New York State before reaching its mouth in Rochester, and is one of the largest rivers feeding into Lake Ontario.  The project merits support from organizations concerned with environmental protection, health, education, recreation, economic revitalization, flood control, and improvement of water quality in the Genesee River and Lake Ontario.
Some points of information and recent news:
(1) Series of articles and videos on the Genesee River: 
The Genesee River Wilds Project website now includes a link to the recent series of videos, articles, and photographs on the Genesee River done by the major Rochester newspaper (Steve Orr, Max Schulte, and Jeff Blackwell, “Rediscovering the Rambling River,” Rochester Democrat and Chronicle); see www.geneseeriverwilds.org.   This excellent series covers the entire river watershed from its sources in Potter County, PA, to the riverside park system in Rochester, NY.  Be sure to click around enough to read all the articles and watch all the videos to benefit from its full value.  For those unfamiliar with the Genesee River, this is a painless but informative introduction to many of the environmental and economic issues related to the river system as a whole.
(2) On the attached documents created for US House Representative Eric Massa (NY 29th District, which includes much of the Genesee River):
In early March, a member of the Genesee River Wilds Project committees met with Congressman Eric Massa and his environmental specialist Nathan Sermonis in Congressman Massa’s office in Washington, D.C.  This was followed a few weeks later by a fuller meeting between five members of the project committees and Congressman Massa in his office just outside of Rochester in Pittsford, NY.  Massa requested that we compile a series of documents that could be forwarded to Senator Kirsten Gillibrand and to Governor David Patterson.  The most important of these documents are in the attachments (a briefing paper; a budget summary; the Program Guide).  The new Program Guide effectively replaces the project’s older Comprehensive Program document that was created when the project first began a year ago.  The most important additions are the provisional budget, maps, and other technical information.
The new Program Guide and other attached materials should be useful for your own federal congressional representatives, state officials, agency directors, and leaders of non-profit organizations.  Although the Program Guide was written for use by officials from New York, it has been designed to address the needs of both the New York side an
d the Pennsylvania side of the Genesee River so that it can be used in both states and in the context of the inter-state discussions at the federal level in Congress.  The budget provided in the Program Guide is merely a provisional one and represents an inflation-adjusted estimate for a multi-year program.
(3) Other developments on the NY side since the project began last year: 
Although some of recipients of this note may have been involved with discussions about the Genesee River Wilds Project and patiently supplied information and feedback as early as April of 2008, in the last few weeks the Genesee River Wilds Project has celebrated what may arguably be identified as its first anniversary.  The formation of our current committees emerged from large meetings in Belmont, NY, on August 11-13, 2008, with key officials from various New York State agencies, county and municipal legislators from Allegany County, NY, and representatives of various non-profit groups.  I am especially grateful to individuals from state agencies who took time from busy schedules to come to that first meeting a year ago, including Russell Biss, New York State Dept. of Environmental Conservation (NYSDEC) Region 9; Scott Cornett, NYSDEC Region 9; Michael Miecznikowski, New York State Office of Parks, Recreation and Historic Preservation (NYSOPRHP) Allegany Region; and Ray Goll, NYSOPRHP Genesee Region.  Since that time Don Sweezy and others at the New York State Dept. of Transportation (NYSDOT) Region 6 office in Hornell have been quite supportive.  A couple officials from this office graciously made time for a meeting with us in January on short notice.  I am especially grateful for the continued work of my colleagues on the project committees in New York, including Bill Hart (president of the Allegany County  Chamber of Commerce when the project started, more recently squeezing in time to chair the chamber’s project committee while still trying to keep up his jewelry business); Gretchen Gary (Executive Director, Allegany County Soil and Water Conservation District); Eric Grace (Executive Director, Genesee Valley Conservancy).  John Foels (Director of Development, Allegany County), continues his support, with the more recent addition last fall of Sherry Grugel (Executive Director, Allegany County Chamber of Commerce, and Tourism Director for Allegany County).  The Allegany County legislators have encouraged the project because it provides an avenue for implementing the county’s comprehensive plan.  Officials far downstream in Rochester recognize that cleaning up the Genesee River in their city requires cleaning up the river in the rural areas upstream, so they have been very supportive of our efforts to develop a coalition that will address the river system as a whole.  Here special thanks goes to Charles Knauf, Environmental Health Project Analyst of the Monroe County (NY) Health Department in Rochester and Paul Sawyko of the Rochester area Water Education Collaborative.  Other collaborative relationships have been developed with the Friends of the Genesee Valley Greenway and other groups.  Steve Winslow and his colleagues in the Army Corps of Engineers at the Genesee River’s Mt. Morris Dam kindly hosted a meeting last spring and in other ways have helped to foster such collaboration.  Biologists from colleges and universities have been supportive from the very beginning and one of them helped his institution host one of our meetings with local landowners last January.  The Genesee River Wilds Project held a canoe-kayak trip on the Genesee River in May that went well, despite multiple dunkings and the devastation wreaked on one of the canoes. 
This only gives a snapshot of the new interest in the long-neglected upper Genesee River that is beginning to grow on the New York State side.  I cannot say enough good about my colleagues on the project committees in New York.  Despite the meager financial, technical, and human resources available to them, they continue to hold up under the growing burden of the work on the ground.
(4) Need for technical assistance and other forms of support from better-equipped outside organizations and agencies:
One of the reasons why the upper Genesee River has been neglected for so many decades is that it passes through sparsely pop
ulated rural communities that rank among the lowest in per capita income among all of the counties in NY and PA (Allegany County has long been at or near the very bottom in NY).  This imposes limits of personnel, finances from public and private donors, technical resources, and political clout when pursuing funds from federal and state agencies.  Thus I would appreciate any recipients of this note who are involved with non-profit organizations and with various federal, state, regional, or municipal agencies to consider how they can help to secure grants, donations, and volunteer support for conservation and recreational development along the upper Genesee River as articulated by the Genesee River Wilds Project.  Those with expertise, resources, or access to channels better equipped than what we have available in the small fledgling committees associated with the Genesee River Wilds Project are strongly encouraged to contact my colleagues on the New York side of the project.  The internet has made it easy for anyone outside the immediate area to help quite independently, such as by consulting county property tax rolls to compile a list of landowners along the river who, with significant financial incentives, could be recruited for conservation efforts along the river.  But my colleagues on the project committees in New York have the advantage of being personally acquainted with local landowners, farmers, county officials, and municipal leaders sympathetic to the project (and despite my present distance, I have some contacts with others with whom they are less familiar).  They also know many specific targeted locations to which funds from outside organizations could be allocated.  Unfortunately, this advantage does not compensate for their need for help from the specialists and richer resources available in larger agencies, major non-profit organizations, potential partners among the officials of distant urban municipalities downstream, and other groups outside the small rural communities around the upper Genesee River. 
The Genesee River Wilds Project is a great opportunity for anyone who has long wished to rectify the years of relative neglect of the distant upper sections of the Genesee River and thereby improve the lower Genesee River, the urban riverside landscape of Rochester, and the water quality of Lake Ontario.  Organizations such as Trout Unlimited have played key roles in various smaller projects along the upper Genesee River for a number of years.  But for the first time, the upper Genesee River has a small group of local people with enough courage and vision to take up the challenge of improving the river and the nearby areas on the much more massive scale that these resources truly deserve.  But this small group needs help from outside.
I urge recipients of this note to contact them to foster the kind of collaboration needed to grapple with a project with such a massive scope.  Their contact information and that of others less formally involved is listed on the project website and in the attached Program Guide.
(5) Federal Great Lakes Restoration Initiative (including attached “Interagency Funding Guide”):
For some specific examples of possible funding for the Genesee River Wilds Project, one may consult the project website, which includes a “links” page with a long list of organizations that supply grants that might be relevant to the project.  Once again, it would be helpful for an outside agency and other groups with more expertise and human resources than available in our own small group to collaborate with my colleagues in New York to help them secure some of these grants.  The most exciting new source for grants is the Federal Great Lakes Restoration Initiative, which is still so new that some readers of this note may not have had time to consider how important this is for the Genesee River.  Probably some of readers or representatives of their organization were at the Federal Great Lakes Restoration Initiative meeting in Rochester on July 29.  As a representative of the Genesee River Wilds Project, I was very grateful for the opportunity to meet some individuals at this meeting face-to-face after many months of conversations with them via e-mail. 
Recipients of this note who are not aware of this new federal program (proposed $475 million) should see http://www.epa.gov/glnpo .The EPA officials at the July
meeting correctly noted that this is a rare, once-in-a-lifetime opportunity to do something for the Great Lakes, so they and everyone at the meeting repeatedly stated how grateful they were for this new program and the work of the EPA officials in formulating new policies for administering it.  Perhaps one of the best features of this new federal initiative is that it rectifies one of the great flaws with the current Great Lakes Legacy Act, which is that it only allows funding to be directed to the targeted “Areas of Concern” along the lakes themselves.  This prevented the Great Lakes Legacy Act from addressing problems that are systemic in nature.  For example, about 29% of the impairment of the Genesee River is due to agricultural nutrients, many of which are deposited in Lake Ontario and contribute to the lake’s problems with eutrophication.  In contrast, the Great Lakes Restoration Initiative offers a litany of funding opportunities that directly address the needs of the upper Genesee River.  EPA officials at the meeting in Rochester affirmed that (a) grants are available for the upper reaches of river systems feeding into Lake Ontario as long as applications can be articulated in terms of the benefits to Lake Ontario; (b) many of these grants do not require matching funds; (c) these grants emphasize wildlife habitat, fishery restoration, land preservation, agricultural nutrient reduction, and other concerns not normally targeted in infrastructure projects; (d) some of these grants can be used for purchase of lands that accomplish suc h goals.  This offers an exciting and unprecedented opportunity for correcting the years of neglect of the upper Genesee River, which has been counterproductive conservation efforts directed at the lower Genesee River and Lake Ontario.
Grants from the EPA Great Lakes Restoration Initiative that might be relevant to the area of the upper Genesee River targeted by the Genesee River Wilds Project are listed in the “Interagency Funding Guide” (dated August 12, 2009), which is in the attachments and in the box labeled “Great Lakes Restoration Initiative Activities” at http://www.epa.gov/glnpo/glri . This guide reveals an abundance of research grants that might attract collaborative efforts from biologists and other specialists with expertise potentially related to the Genesee River and its systemic relationship to Lake Ontario.  There are also a number of new grants that could potentially be used to support projects directed at the sections of the Genesee River targeted by the Genesee River Wilds Project.  For example, from the “Interagency Funding Guide” one could cite (especially ones with an asterisk [*]):  Page 2, Coordinated Implementation on Remedial Action Program; Page 3, Pollution Prevention and Toxics Reduction in the Great Lakes; Page 3, Toxicant TMDL Development; Page 6, Development of Ecosystem Services; Page 6, Emergency Watershed Protection Program *(especially appropriate for upper Genesee River); Page 6, Environmental Quality Incentives Program, non-point source pollution; Page 6, Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program; Page 6, Great Lakes Basin Program for Soil Erosion and Sediment Control; Page 7, Watersheds Best Management Practices; Page 8, Great Lakes Habitat Restoration Program; Page 9, Great Lakes Basin Candidate Fish Habitat Partnership *(especially appropriate for upper Genesee River because it emphasizes restoring “tributary” fish habitat and removing related impediments, no match required); Page 9, Great Lakes Basin Endangered Species Recovery *(despite improvement in status of bald eagle, this still might be relevant to the identifiable bald eagles’ nest north of Belmont and related habitat at other points along upper Genesee River); Page 9, Great Lakes Watershed Habitat and Species Restoration Initiative *(especially appropriate for the upper Genesee River because it explicitly addresses “stream banks,” includes “brook trout,” and is relevant to other species in this area, such as the bald eagles that make their home along Genesee River); Page 10, North American Wetlands Conservation Act; Page 10, Ecosystem Approach to Infrastructure and Restoration Work *(ideally suited for Genesee River Wilds Project’s interest in developing nature parks with boating access points at bridges because it emphasizes eco-system approach to transportation infrastructure); Page 10, Environmental Quality Incentives Program, habitat and wildlife protection and restoration *(especially appropriate for upper Genesee River); Page 11, Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program *(especially appropriate for upper Genesee River).  Other potentially relevant items include Page 1, Toxic Substances in Brownfield Sites (e.g., Sinclair Oil Refinery in Wellsville, NY); Page 11, Sustain Our Great Lakes.
This new federal funding source offers a unique opportunity to clean up Lake Ontario by developing a strategy for the entire Genesee River as a whole.  This would include the need to address the long-neglected upper Genesee River, not just the areas around its mouth that have received so much more attention in the Great Lakes Legacy Act and in other conservation efforts.  But this will not be accomplished if securing funds depends on the limited staffing, technical expertise, and political clout available to my colleagues in the sparsely populated hillsides and small rural v
illages along the upper Genesee River.  The Genesee River Wilds Project needs the expertise, technical skills, and resources of better-equipped outside agencies and large non-profit organizations proactively brought to bear by leaders in these groups who can see how protecting the upper Genesee River fits into the bigger conservation picture.  Recent news suggests that New York is indeed thinking more collaboratively and comprehensively, but I urge that these discussions include a much bolder effort to improve the upper Genesee River than in previous generations.          
      
(6) Developments on the Pennsylvania side:
Given that only about ten miles of any given one of the source streams of the Genesee River are in Pennsylvania, it is somewhat ironic that in some ways PA has been more proactive in adopting many of the goals of the Genesee River Wilds Project.  Partly this is because PA takes a much more centralized approach to conservation that is less dependent on local initiative.  Thus already in the spring of 2008, discussions of the project had been shuttled from regional officers in the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (PA DCNR) to its Harrisburg headquarters.  This allowed plans for the inter-state multi-use trail that is part of the Genesee River Wilds Project to be incorporated into PA’s statewide-plan for developing recreational greenway trails in all 67 counties in the state.  Planning commission officials in Williamsport, PA, and its county (Lycoming County) also expressed support for the Genesee River Wilds Project at an early stage because the plans for a multi-use inter-state trail system would result in an economically productive trail reaching from Rochester, NY, to Williamsport, PA.  But support for the Genesee River Wilds Project in PA is not limited to the state or broader regional level.  State conservation agency officials in PA were able to recruit local support in rural communities because conservation projects in PA are consistently and seamlessly combined with development of recreational infrastructure and other features that aggressively promote tourism and economic development in such communities.  This is admittedly easier to do in PA than in NY because the Pennsylvania Department of Conservation and Natural Resources (PA DCNR) strategically combines in one agency the missions of conservation and recreation, which New York State relegates to two separate agencies (NYSDEC and NYSOPRHP).  Thus eager support for connecting the Pine Creek Trail system in PA to the Genesee River Wilds Project trail system and related trails in NY quickly emerged among some of the community leaders in rural Potter County, PA, which nurtures the sources of the Genesee River.  Individuals in this county needed little convincing about the economic potential of the Genesee River Wilds Project because over the last few decades they have witnessed the stunning success of the nearby Pine Creek Trail in dramatically transforming the economy of neighboring rural counties in PA (most notably PA’s Tioga County, where the advantages of combining conservation and recreation are visibly demonstrated by the burgeoning economy of the small town of Wellsboro).  As a result, one of my colleagues in NY (Sherry Grugel) was invited to a Pine Creek Watershed planning session in Potter County, PA, and benefitted from the suggestions of friends in PA who are interested in the Genesee River Wilds Project.  Developments in PA have reached a stage in which I am confident that the project’s goals for the PA side will be completed, even if the current problems with the state budget slow progress down a bit.
(7) One final note on why development of recreational infrastructure is just important to the Genesee River Wilds Project as conservation:
As already mentioned and as is clear from our budget, the Genesee River Wilds Project emphasizes the development of recreational infrastructure that can be used for promotion of tourism.  This strategy for recruiting local allies for river conservation in rural communities emerged from direct negotiations with local people in these communities.  Emphasis on recreational business development and tourism associated with the project’s proposed forested conservation buffer along the Genesee River helped us to alleviate local concerns that creating this buffer might result in loss of revenues from property taxes and agricul
ture.  Even many of the farmers who own land along the Genesee River have joined in supporting us because of their own families’ needs for more economic opportunities.  These developments in NY and the greater speed with which the project’s goals have been adopted in PA illustrate why we continue to insist on our rather pragmatic approach to conservation.  More idealistic approaches emphasizing “pure” conservation without accompanying recreational development of protected lands are ultimately counterproductive because they do not recruit as many local allies in the rural communities that guard most of our country’s natural resources.
 I trust that the information in this note and its attachments is helpful.  Some of recipients of this note have expressed support for the Genesee River Wilds Project, but any who would like to have their names and organizational contact information listed on the “Contacts” page of our website should let me know.  This will make collaboration easier.
 All the best in your own work in protecting the Genesee River and Lake Ontario.   
Allen Kerkeslager, Ph.D.
Saint Joseph’s University
Philadelphia
akerkesl@sju.edu
Preferred paper mailing address (home address):
833 Fairfax Road
Drexel Hill, PA 19026
Office: 610-660-1121
by No Comments

Railroad bridge could become trail walkway

November 14, 2009

Railroad bridge could become trail walkway

Brian Sharp
Staff writer

From 200 feet above the Genesee River gorge, the abandoned railroad bridge offers spectacular views and some uncertain footing.

The 700-foot span, just north of Smith Street, came to the city as part of a $1 million-plus land deal in 2005. he land, nearly 20 acres of abandoned rail line, stretches from Charlotte to High Falls, and a significant portion will be converted to a recreational trail next year. The 130-year-old bridge was something of an extra — and also an unknown.bilde.jpg

If it turns out to be the “workhorse” city officials hope, however, then it could be a stunning addition to the city trail system one day, on par with the Pont du Rennes pedestrian bridge at High Falls.

“You are pretty high up. It’s a scary situation,” said Tom Hack, senior structural engineer for the city. “(But) it does have a bit of coolness to it — it really does.”

Work began this week inspecting the bridge, a $135,000 project with the city paying engineers from Bergmann Associates, aided by Skala Inc. technicians, to go over the side of the bridge on ropes, to climb and check the support structure. The on-site work will continue into next week, with a feasibility study — outlining options from demolition to rehabilitation — due to the city by mid-2010.

“It’s really a process of discovery for us,” said Mike Cooper, project manager with Bergmann. “We really don’t have a lot of background information.”

Much of what is known about the bridge came from railroad history buffs on the Internet. The bridge last was used in the mid-1980s and decommissioned in the mid-1990s. Inspectors have found reinforcement steel, and some problems with the stone masonry of the east abutment. Up top, the steel rails have been removed, allowing some of the ties to warp and shift, “which is an uneasy feeling” when crossing on foot, Cooper said.

This is one of two unused railroad river bridges the city hopes to reuse. The other is south of Ford Street and links the Plymouth-Exchange neighborhood to the University of Rochester campus.

“There’s certainly a number out there that are probably still lying around, unused,” said Cooper, whose firm just completed work last month on the former Poughkeepsie-Highland Railroad Bridge over the Hudson River.

Early indications are that Rochester’s bridge is sound, Cooper said.

Once the city knows the stability of the bridge, how much weight it will support, and other fundamentals, officials would need to decide whether to move ahead and seek funding. Factoring in planning and design, the project likely remains at least three or four years off, and could cost as much as $2 million or $3 million, Hack said.

The bridge would be another link in the Genesee Riverway Trail, and connect into the planned El Camino-Butterhole-Seneca Park Trail. Construction on the El Camino trail should begin next summer, running along the old rail line between Seneca Park and St. Paul Street, and crossing Ridge Road West on another old railroad bridge.

That work is being paid for with a $2 million federal grant and $150,000 from Eastman Kodak Co. Also next year, the city should receive $70,000 in state money to design a Genesee Riverway Trail connection on the west side of the river from Smith Street to Brown and Mill streets in High Falls. The city will spend $20,000 on a temporary trail connection next year.

All this fits into a larger $1 million connection running all the way from Lower Falls to downtown on the west side of the river. Separately, the city plans to put up signs next year for on-street trail routes downtown.

“Now, we don’t think that is perfect, but at least it will connect up from Court Street to the Riverway Trail at St. Paul,” said JoAnn Beck, the city’s senior landscape architect.

There also are plans for the city to develop a bicycle master plan, mapping connections to neighborhoods.

BDSHARP@DemocratandChronicle.com

by No Comments

NYSDOT rumble strip proposal. Use extreme caution!


The New York State department of transportation is proposing a policy that could doom one or our region’s most promising growth opportunities: bicycling for recreation, transportation, and tourism.

NYSDOT Proposing Widespread Use of Rumble Strips on Secondary Highways, Posing New Hazards to Bicyclists

Contact NYSDOT and Your Legislators—Urge NYSDOT Not to Jeopardize the Safety of Its Roadway Users!

CURRENT NYSDOT POLICY: Do not install rumble strips on secondary roads except in rare instances

PROPOSED NYSDOT POLICY: Installation of rumble strips will be the preferred practice in the design of all secondary roads with a few exceptions
Rumble strips are a well-documented hazard to bicyclists. Accepted practice nationwide dictates that rumble strips be used only sparingly on roads permitting cycling

NYSDOT is proposing an Engineering Instruction (EI), titled “Secondary Highway Audible Roadway Delineators – Guidance and Policy,” which is at variance with the practices recommended by the Federal Highway Administration, The American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials, and other standards setting agencies. Such national agencies generally recommend if rumble strips to be used on two-lane roads if there is a documented run-off-the road accident problem—and then, used only as a last resort due to the hazards they may create for other roadway users, including bicyclists.
Contact NYSDOT and your legislators to urge NYSDOT to not issue the proposed policy. Ask them to work with groups, such as the New York Bicycling Coalition, organizers of bicycling tours and events, and local cycling clubs to construct a less hostile policy that better balances the needs of motorist and bicyclist safety.

BACKGROUND: Rumble strips, as illustrated, are audible roadway delineators or indentations in the shoulder pavement that make sound when a car runs over them at high speeds. While an important safety tool used to prevent run-offs on high-speed Interstates and other limited access highways, they are a well-documented hazard to individuals on bicycles and should be used only sparingly on roads permitting cycling. NYSDOT is proposing to replace current stated policy — not have rumble strips on secondary roads except in rare instances — with a new one declaring “installation of shoulder rumble strips to be the preferred practice in the design of all secondary highways” with a few exceptions.
In short, the proposal would have NYSDOT install rumble strips (with certain exceptions) on secondary roadways throughout New York State, compromising bicyclists’ safety and the quality of riding surfaces on thousands of miles otherwise scenic roadways. National practice is to have rumble strips nowhere with some exceptions on secondary roadways. By taking the opposite tack, NYSDOT’s policy promiscuously promotes rumble strips, going far beyond what is seen as efficient deployment. Aside from the policy’s cost implications, it is unwise. It means rumble strips in urban areas, creating or adding to the din. It means rumble strips on roads with speeds too low to generate sound. Rumble strips also mean higher maintenance costs for the taxpayer. And, of course, they pose a danger to cyclists by causing spills, erratic avoidance maneuvers, or causing them to avoid the shoulder and ride mingled in automobile traffic.

A check of other states with such secondary highway policies shows they require an accident analysis be done before such rumble strip use; the proposed NYSDOT policy does not. Other states specify where rumble strips are used, have at least 5 feet of paved shoulder between them and any guardrail; the proposed NYSDOT policy does not. Other states say not to even consider rumble strips unless there are high speeds and high traffic volumes: while the proposed NYSDOT policy does have speed and volume thresholds, they are considerably lower than those of any other state. There are dozens of other such examples in this EI where the proposed policy varies from generally accepted practice.

Action Alert from NYBC (Continued)

Contact NYSDOT and your legislators to urge NYSDOT to not issue the proposed policy TODAY. Call, write, or email (or utilize all 3 methods of communication) your Assembly Member, State Senator and the Commissioner of Transportation.
WHO REPRESENTS ME?
Prefer to mail?

Simply send a postcard (28¢ each at your nearest US Post Office) to your legislators and the Commissioner. For an investment of 84¢, you have the ability to improve bicycling throughout New York State, including in your village, town or city. Or, if easier, just stuff a copy of this notice in an envelope (adding personal comments if you wish) and mail (44¢ postage) it off to the Commissioner and elected representatives..

WHO REPRESENTS ME?

Who’s my Assemblyperson?
Click here to search by Zip Code http://assembly.state.ny.us/mem/

Who’s my NYS Senator?
Click here to search by Zip Code http://www.nysenate.gov/senators

At the above sites, clicking on the highlighted names will bring you directly to the legislator’s official website where you may make comments.

How to contact NYSDOT:
Website: Click here to email NYSDOT https://www.nysdot.gov/about-nysdot/contact

Or write: Commissioner Stanley Gee
NYS Department of Transportation
50 Wolf Rd.
Albany, NY 12232

About the New York Bicycling Coalition

The New York Bicycling Coalition is dedicated to preserving New York State’s wide and smoothly paved shoulder network as an important asset for use by the State’s residents (bicyclists and pedestrians) as well as visiting cyclists. Since 1992, the New York Bicycling Coalition (NYBC) has served as the only statewide, not-for-profit organization of its kind advocating various “Share the Road” education and safety initiatives on behalf of both cyclists and motorists, while working to assure highway, street, and transit facilities are amenable to bicyclists and pedestrians. Support Our Efforts to Increase Bicycling and Pedestrian Safety and Access Today by joining online: http://www.nybc.net/donate

by No Comments

Rochester Bicycle Ecology and Opportunity


Here’s the movie we prepared for the Oct 24 GreenRide and Bike Summit.

The sound is rough, there’s too much of my talking head, but it seems to tell a story worth telling.

Widescreen larger than life viewings available on demand (pretty much) at RIT’s Center for Student Innovation.


by No Comments

Andrew Dollard and the RCA address City council

Andrew Dollard writes,

Greeting fellow pedallers,

Here’s an update on recent goings-on with the Rochester Cycling Alliance:

Last night (Monday) the RCA made its public debut at a meeting of the Rochester City Council, where Chris, Jon, and I (Andy) all spoke in support of better facilities for cycling. We also spoke with Alinda Drury, the coordinator of Mayor Duffy’s Green Team, who will be an important ally. Also – there appears to be a fair amount of interest in my remarks at the meeting, so I’ve attached them to this email. [And I append them below–Jon]

In addition, we’ve learned that the City of Rochester is developing a Bicycle Master Plan to be completed by February 2011. The City has issued a request for proposals from planning and engineering firms, and will begin the process of evaluating the proposals at the end of this month. Along the way there will be many opportunities for public input. It will be a great way to have cyclists’ voices heard in the city planning process, and the RCA will be there. More information is available on the city’s website at http://ci.rochester.ny.us/article.aspx?id=8589940474

Good evening. My name is Andrew Dollard. Im a resident of the City of Rochester and Im here tonight as a member of the Rochester Cycling Alliance, which Chris spoke about earlier.

We started the RCA because were passionate about cycling and we believe that bicycles are the ideal form of urban transportation. We see in cycling an alternative to noisy, congested roadways and polluted air, to urban sprawl and dependence on oil. Riding a bike is beneficial to the body and the spirit, and it allows a person to experience the city in a way thats not possible in a car.

But when we ride through Rochester, we see a lot of unmet potential in our cycling infrastructure. Rochester is blessed with many things which could create a great cycling city: natural corridors along the Erie Canal and the Genesee River; an energetic, talented pool of young people at our colleges and universities; and an active community of cycling organizations and businesses.
But not all of the pieces are in place. Our river trails are disconnected and in parts not suitable for cycling. Theres currently no adequate cycling route from RIT and the U of R to the downtown area. Theres a lack of bicycle lanes and bicycle parking facilities in the city. And as far as we can tell, the cycling community is under-represented in the city planning process.
We see opportunity here. Bicycle infrastructure is far less expensive than automobile infrastructure, and far more rewarding in terms of public health and quality of living. Moreover, cycling is an opportunity to help create a real renaissance in our community.
Every year thousands of students come to Rochester to attend our educational institutions, but most will leave when their studies are done. Building a truly bike-friendly city will make Rochester an even more attractive place for people to start their families and their careers.

Weve spent millions of dollars over the years on projects to revitalize this city the High Falls district, the fast ferry, Renaissance Square and theyve gotten us nowhere. But with cycling we have a chance to reimagine city living and remind people of the innovation and energy that Rochester has. And we dont have to break the bank to do it.

Weve already begun to reach out to the citys engineering department to work with them on the development of a bicycle master plan and the improvement of our cycling infrastructure. Were here tonight to encourage the city council to continue to support these efforts and to consider the potential of a bicycle-friendly policy to help revitalize and reenergize the city of Rochester.
Many of the pieces are already in place; all thats needed is action in a few key areas. It wont cost much, and the potential dividends are enormous.

Thank you for your time.

by No Comments

RCA Update

Here’s an update on recent goings-on with the Rochester Cycling Alliance:

At our regularly scheduled biweekly meeting at Spot Coffee, the group met with Jon Schull, RIT professor and friend to cyclists everywhere, to coordinate our efforts with his. Jon’s been working on bicycle issues for a while now, in particular developing the bike corridor between RIT, UR, and downtown Rochester (check out his blog: http://jonschull.blogspot.com/). It was a productive and energizing meeting, with the group finally beginning to coalesce.

Last night (Monday) the RCA made its public debut at a meeting of the Rochester City Council, where Chris, Jon, and I (Andy) all spoke in support of better facilities for cycling. We also spoke with Alinda Drury, the coordinator of Mayor Duffy’s Green Team, who will be an important ally. Video is below, courtesy of Jon.

In addition, we’ve learned that the City of Rochester is developing a Bicycle Master Plan to be completed by February 2011. The City has issued a request for proposals from planning and engineering firms, and will begin the process of evaluating the proposals at the end of this month. Along the way there will be many opportunities for public input. It will be a great way to have cyclists’ voices heard in the city planning process, and the RCA will be there. More information is available on the city’s website at http://ci.rochester.ny.us/article.aspx?id=8589940474

Finally, we’re trying to organize a trip sometime in the next couple weeks to the City’s Bureau of Architecture and Engineering to meet with the engineers running the Bicycle Master Plan project and other bicycle-related planning activities. It will be a huge learning experience for the RCA and a chance to connect with the people who can actually put together a quality cycling infrastructure for Rochester. I encourage everyone to come along; if you’re interested please email me your scheduling preferences and I’ll try to work out something that can accomodate as many people as possible.

And don’t forget: RCA Potluck this Sunday at 21 Diem Street! Be there!

by No Comments

RCA Update

Here’s an update on recent goings-on with the Rochester Cycling Alliance:

At our regularly scheduled biweekly meeting at Spot Coffee, the group met with Jon Schull, RIT professor and friend to cyclists everywhere, to coordinate our efforts with his. Jon’s been working on bicycle issues for a while now, in particular developing the bike corridor between RIT, UR, and downtown Rochester (check out his blog: http://jonschull.blogspot.com/). It was a productive and energizing meeting, with the group finally beginning to coalesce.

Last night (Monday) the RCA made its public debut at a meeting of the Rochester City Council, where Chris, Jon, and I (Andy) all spoke in support of better facilities for cycling. We also spoke with Alinda Drury, the coordinator of Mayor Duffy’s Green Team, who will be an important ally. Video is below, courtesy of Jon.

In addition, we’ve learned that the City of Rochester is developing a Bicycle Master Plan to be completed by February 2011. The City has issued a request for proposals from planning and engineering firms, and will begin the process of evaluating the proposals at the end of this month. Along the way there will be many opportunities for public input. It will be a great way to have cyclists’ voices heard in the city planning process, and the RCA will be there. More information is available on the city’s website at http://ci.rochester.ny.us/article.aspx?id=8589940474

Finally, we’re trying to organize a trip sometime in the next couple weeks to the City’s Bureau of Architecture and Engineering to meet with the engineers running the Bicycle Master Plan project and other bicycle-related planning activities. It will be a huge learning experience for the RCA and a chance to connect with the people who can actually put together a quality cycling infrastructure for Rochester. I encourage everyone to come along; if you’re interested please email me your scheduling preferences and I’ll try to work out something that can accomodate as many people as possible.

And don’t forget: RCA Potluck this Sunday at 21 Diem Street! Be there!

by No Comments

A Wonderful Day to Save the World

Great report in the RIT Reporter by RIT student and
CSI Innovation Fellow Michael Conti!


 Published October 29, 2009
A Wonderful Day to Save the World
2
1
Students and community leaders participate in 350.org’s International Day of Climate Action.

Steve Pfost

Over 60 cyclists rode the distance from the downtown library to the Innovation Center at RIT on Saturday, October 24. Students and local community members rallied by the cry of “Climate Change Action Now!” Punctuating the day’s events was a Bicycling Summit, proposing a series of changes that could radically expand alternative transportation in the community. It was a day of worldwide protest brought to Rochester by concerned efforts at RIT. Thousands of people from over 175 countries participated in coinciding events, as part of Bill McKibben (writer of “Deep Economy”) and 350.org’s International Day of Climate Action.

But what did this flurry of activity accomplish? According to scientific researchers and world leaders, our atmospheric concentration of CO² is already at 390 parts per million and climbing; a critical amount that is causing the polar ice caps to melt at an alarming rate and changing global weather patterns. The earth is heating up, and it will take more than a few rag tag protestors to fix things, right?

Not so fast. The day’s activities had a distinctly different tone. Instead of lonely cries by environmentalists and empty promises by leaders, both administration and student activists stood side by side on this issue. Not only did RIT President William Destler and his wife Rebecca Johnson bike the 14-mile round trip, but a contingent of cycling enthusiasts from Rochester Community Bikes, Finger Lakes Community College in Canandaigua and the Rochester area also joined the RIT group. Environmentalists’ positions are now transforming from the fringe to center stage as more political leaders endorse the need to do something about the impending droughts, rising sea levels and mass extinctions promised by global warming.

Steve Pfost

The bicycle trip began slowly, with a group of 20 departing from the Sentinel amid gloomy skies. The 40 or so who met the group at the Public Library gave the event some fresh legs, and their return home was a good-natured afternoon excursion. As the afternoon light shone through the golden and orange autumn leaves, the large group began to diverge into smaller packs mixed with students and older participants. “Having the wind in your hair, the sun at your back, that motorcycle stereotype… well, it’s all true,” said Nathan Schiffer, a fifth year Computer Science major. The event was intended to get more people out of their cars, which he said, “isolates people.” Biking is an activity that directly involves the rider with the environment. This simple action also brought together a large community of interests at the Innovation Center.

A community of concerned students is what many people who have gravitated to the Innovation Center are looking to form. Kyle Shay, a fourth year Computer Science and Environmental Studies major, joined his classmates and teachers in the morning, planting trees in the wetlands near the RIT Observatory to offset carbon emissions. “If people see us planting trees and riding bikes today, maybe they’ll look at the news or online and see the over 4,000 events that are happening around the world. Maybe they’ll see that action needs to be taken immediately,” said Shay. The group intends to grow 350 trees and have planted 100 this fall.

According to Christy Tyler, a professor of Environmental Science, “We need to increase the amount of trees we plant, but that isn’t enough to offset all of the extra carbon dioxide. We need to produce less to begin with.” Tyler estimates that 350 fully-grown trees of this type will offset the same amount of carbon produced by three cars in one year. This kind of change, though symbolic, is certainly slow to set in.

“These kind of movements take time,” said Elisabetta D’Amanda, an Italian professor in RIT’s foreign language department. As a participant in the “slow foods” movement, which was born out of Italian counter-culture, D’Amanda has been pushing for more environmentally conscious changes to RIT’s Dining Services. Slow foods (a play on fast food) are those that are locally harvested, healthy and sustainably grown. Her contribution to the event was a $3.50 meal of rice and lentils, served to a tired and eager assembly of bikers. D’Amanda stated, “I would like to start a slow food movement on campus … but this kind of thing needs to be student organized. If the students don’t push for it, it won’t happen.”

Steve Pfost

Products of passionate student-professor collaborations are the proposals of RIT professor Jon Schull at RIT’s first-ever Bicycling Summit. The Rochester Greenway was subject of much discussion at the Innovation Center. Approximately 5 miles of pathway already exist in a straight line between the Lehigh Valley Trail and the center of downtown; Schull’s idea is to create an all-weather covered road that would link the paths. This would provide year-round access to a much used conduit in the community. Garnering attention from numerous public officials, the Greenway is now being examined by the New York State Energy Research and Development Authority as part of a feasibility study.

The need to bring people of all ages out of their cars and into the environment is actively expressed now more than ever.
As the grassroots movement builds, teachers are looking towards student leaders to transform their Rochester home into a local model of sustainability that can be adapted and applied to cities and neighborhoods across the country.

To learn more about the Rochester Greenway and other sustainable projects at RIT, visit the Innovation Center on Thursdays at 12 p.m. or go to

http://rochestergreenway.org.

by No Comments

The last few days

Sunday afternoon I joined John Curran’s walking tour of the area between Brooks Landing and the Ford Street Bridge. There’s more to it than I knew!
A beautiful day and new acquaintances, in addition to seeing and learning about
  • the 107 mile Genessee Valley Canal (which terminated right in Rochester),
  • Camp Fitz-John Porter
  • the Vacuum Oil factory (oil drums piled five stories high and a football field wide!)
  • the abolitionist / underground railroad connection
  • the parallel paths that makes this my preferred riverway route for the Greenway
  • Mr. Curran himself, who I look forward to working with in the future

Then, on Sunday evening I met some of our Rochester Cycling Allies for the first time (http://RochesterCyclingAlliance.blogspot.com). A passionate and convivial group! I learned

  • that there is a budget proposal cooking that would allocate $25K for bicycle improvements this year, and 10 times that much next year
  • that the group was going to visit this evening’s City Council meeting to express support (see below)
  • that we have common interests and much to learn from each other
  • that my colleague Jason Hammell saw how bike advocacy took hold in Albany
  • that there are still more bike stakeholder/advocates to make contact with
So this evening I joined the group at City Hall.
  • Chris Machanoff made some good short remarks and then ceded a few minutes to me.
  • I pointed out that Rochester was “this close” to becoming a world capital of bicycling.
  • And then Andrew hit it out of the park.
  • And then, afterwards, Alinda Drury ( Sr. Staff Assistant, Office of the Mayor, and coordinator of the Mayor’s Green Team) introduced herself and told us about several more initiatives including a triathlon to be organized by Yellow Jacket. She also offered to convey my letter to the Mayor.
  • And the crew and I went to Dinosaur barbecue.
Productive, interesting, fun, inspirational, and promising.



by No Comments

PLEX Walking Tour of Brooks Landing to Ford Street Runabout. Sunday!


“PLEX (Plymouth-Exchange Neighborhood Association) will be holding four successive walking tours on Sundays in November to build awareness of the historical attributes along the west riverbank from Brooks Landing to the Ford Street roundabout (flyer attached).

Gather at Boulder Coffee at noon and then depart at 12:15 pm sharp.”

The first tour lasted approximately 2 hours. I’m in!

by No Comments

Erie-Lackawanna Railroad Bridge

The Erie-Lackawanna Bridge is going to be refurbished for bicycle and pedestrian traffic!

This is very big news, especially since the Southwest Common Council has already embraced the notion that a year round RochesterGreenway should go up the west side of the River (and re-invigorate a part of town much in need of it).

via Rochester Cycling Alliance by Rochester Cycling Alliance on 10/19/09

David Skinner, a friend of mine who has urged the city and the University of Rochester to open the Erie-Lackawanna Railroad Bridge to foot and bicycle traffic, passed along some good news on Friday. Tom Hack, a Project Engineer with the city, wrote to him:

“I have good news about the ELRR Bridge “Rails to Trails” Project. We have secured $1.2M from a 50-50 matching State Program. The State kicks in $600,000 and the City matches this with $600,000. We just received the agreement from the State, have signed it and it’s back on the Governor’s desk. The good thing with this is that it’s considered “old” money and should be sheltered from recent budget cuts. Our schedule at this point, barring anything crazy out of Albany, is as follows:

Solicit a Design Consultant…………….. Jan – Feb 2010
Undertake site reconnaissance and survey…..Feb -April 2010
Begin preparation of alternatives ………. April – May 2010
Host Citizens Advisory Meetings ………… May -June 2010
Layout alternatives …………………… June-July 2010
Host public meetings ………………….. August 2010
Finalize concepts …………………….. Sept 2010
Finalize design ………………………. Sept – Jan 2010
Issue Construction Contracts …………… Jan 2011
Construction phase……………………...April 2011
Open Bridge…………………………… Sept 2011
We’ve received a lot of community support along with the U of R’s direct support. This has helped a lot in allowing the funds to flow and the project to move forward.”

The bridge hasn’t seen any railroad traffic since the 1970s. Once opened to pedestrian and cyclist traffic, it will provide another link between the East and West-side river trails. The Genesee Transportation Council has a detailed report on the project at:

http://www.gtcmpo.org/Docs/PlansStudies/ErieLackawannaRRBridgeTrailStudy.pdf

— Gary Young

Things you can do from here:

by No Comments

“Rochester’s 350.org Coverage”


Judging from the media response around the world, the 350.org event has been a hit: October 24 Press Release | 350.org “350.org To Stage Largest Day of Environmental Action in History | 5,242 Simultaneous Events on Climate in 181 Countries.”

“Citizens, scientists and world leaders in 181 countries will take to nearby streets, mountains, parks, and reefs today to demand strong action on climate change, in what will be the most widespread day of political action in the planet’s history. 5,242 rallies and creative demonstrations will take place, all of them centered on the number 350, to draw attention to 350 parts per million (ppm), which an overwhelming number of scientists now insist is the safe upper limit for carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.”

However, judging from our local media response to the several 350.org events, not much happened: a Rousing Dud. (Disclaimer: Because I did not rush out and buy up all the paper versions of our local media, or frantically tune into all the TV and radio stations either, ((because they are insufferably myopic and merely pander to their corporate sponsors)), I am basing this observation on what our local media has posted on the Internet today—October 25, 2009.)

Maybe I posted this article too soon and the media just hasn’t gotten up to snuff yet on how this world-wide event played out in Rochester. Maybe, they’re all scurrying around in their backrooms, honing 350.org coverage so it will be a real sizzler when it comes out. Maybe.

But, I’m not on any of the local media’s editorial staff. So, what do I know? Maybe, getting world-wide attention focused on the planet warming up just is too far out of the comfort and profit zones of our local media. That must be the case because there are lots of sports, criminal activity, political carping, and lots of sports coverage on our local media. Really, a lot of sports. Sports are in, imminent environmental collapse is out.

Only as an observer (another disclaimer: I was a participant) did I see over sixty bicyclists ride from downtown Rochester to the RIT campus. Then, I witnessed for myself a great rally with the RIT president and his college in full support of the sea change needed on the matter of Climate Change and a full day’s programming to show that our community gets it on 350ppm. I witnessed lots of people taking photos and videos and uploading them to 350.org. To be fair, our local media wasn’t completely hopeless. I see one media with one article on one 350.org event for our area: RIT Marks International Day of Climate Action “It may not always be the right weather for a bike ride around here, but as they say wait 5 minutes and it’ll change. The rain Saturday morning didn’t stop a group of environmentally conscious riders from hitting the trail. The purpose: to mark the International Day of Climate Action.” (October 25, 09) http://rochester.ynn.com/

Yet, all in all it’s very troubling. One of 350.org’s purposes (the other was to get our politicians’ attention focused on the upcoming United Nations Climate Change Conference Copenhagen 2009) was to make enough noise to make everyone take notice of the danger point we have passed for a sustainable environment. That is, to both circumvent the dysfunctional media and get in the face of a corporate-manipulated press that is disinclined to speak about the fact that the planet’s atmosphere is warming up due to humanity’s activities.

Our planet is warming up due to our way of life. This is as clear as those annoying pop-ups on every mainstream media’s web page, as clear as the ubiquitous sports scores that flash across those flat screen TV’s, and as eye-catching as the endless violence that inundates local media stories: Those charged with informing us with the information we need to live sustainable are not doing their job.

If you did attend one of the area’s 350.org events, and you still welcome a challenge, why not contact your local media and ask them why they didn’t cover Rochester’s participation in this world-wide event?

by No Comments

Erie-Lackawanna Railroad Bridge

David Skinner, a friend of mine who has urged the city and the University of Rochester to open the Erie-Lackawanna Railroad Bridge to foot and bicycle traffic, passed along some good news on Friday. Tom Hack, a Project Engineer with the city, wrote to him:

“I have good news about the ELRR Bridge “Rails to Trails” Project. We have secured $1.2M from a 50-50 matching State Program. The State kicks in $600,000 and the City matches this with $600,000. We just received the agreement from the State, have signed it and it’s back on the Governor’s desk. The good thing with this is that it’s considered “old” money and should be sheltered from recent budget cuts. Our schedule at this point, barring anything crazy out of Albany, is as follows:

Solicit a Design Consultant…………….. Jan – Feb 2010
Undertake site reconnaissance and survey…..Feb -April 2010
Begin preparation of alternatives ………. April – May 2010
Host Citizens Advisory Meetings ………… May -June 2010
Layout alternatives …………………… June-July 2010
Host public meetings ………………….. August 2010
Finalize concepts …………………….. Sept 2010
Finalize design ………………………. Sept – Jan 2010
Issue Construction Contracts …………… Jan 2011
Construction phase……………………...April 2011
Open Bridge…………………………… Sept 2011
We’ve received a lot of community support along with the U of R’s direct support. This has helped a lot in allowing the funds to flow and the project to move forward.”

The bridge hasn’t seen any railroad traffic since the 1970s. Once opened to pedestrian and cyclist traffic, it will provide another link between the East and West-side river trails. The Genesee Transportation Council has a detailed report on the project at:

http://www.gtcmpo.org/Docs/PlansStudies/ErieLackawannaRRBridgeTrailStudy.pdf

— Gary Young

by No Comments

Erie-Lackawanna Railroad Bridge

David Skinner, a friend of mine who has urged the city and the University of Rochester to open the Erie-Lackawanna Railroad Bridge to foot and bicycle traffic, passed along some good news on Friday. Tom Hack, a Project Engineer with the city, wrote to him:

“I have good news about the ELRR Bridge “Rails to Trails” Project. We have secured $1.2M from a 50-50 matching State Program. The State kicks in $600,000 and the City matches this with $600,000. We just received the agreement from the State, have signed it and it’s back on the Governor’s desk. The good thing with this is that it’s considered “old” money and should be sheltered from recent budget cuts. Our schedule at this point, barring anything crazy out of Albany, is as follows:

Solicit a Design Consultant…………….. Jan – Feb 2010
Undertake site reconnaissance and survey…..Feb -April 2010
Begin preparation of alternatives ………. April – May 2010
Host Citizens Advisory Meetings ………… May -June 2010
Layout alternatives …………………… June-July 2010
Host public meetings ………………….. August 2010
Finalize concepts …………………….. Sept 2010
Finalize design ………………………. Sept – Jan 2010
Issue Construction Contracts …………… Jan 2011
Construction phase……………………...April 2011
Open Bridge…………………………… Sept 2011
We’ve received a lot of community support along with the U of R’s direct support. This has helped a lot in allowing the funds to flow and the project to move forward.”

The bridge hasn’t seen any railroad traffic since the 1970s. Once opened to pedestrian and cyclist traffic, it will provide another link between the East and West-side river trails. The Genesee Transportation Council has a detailed report on the project at:

http://www.gtcmpo.org/Docs/PlansStudies/ErieLackawannaRRBridgeTrailStudy.pdf

— Gary Young

by No Comments

Oct 24 Greenway Greenride to the Rochester Bicycle Summit at RIT


Greetings,

I’m writing to alert you to an event that should be of interest to bicyclists and environmentalists throughout the Greater Rochester area.
Saturday, October 24th will mark 350.org‘s International Day of Climate Action and the end of a week of climate action teach-ins at RIT. The culminating event in Rochester will be a mass bike ride along the proposed Rochester Greenway. The Rochester Greenway goes south from Downtown along the river, past the University of Rochester, through the Genessee Valley Park, and on down the Lehigh Valley North Trail to RIT. The draft GreenRide poster sketches the route.

Once at RIT, the Rochester Bike Summit will be held in the new Center for Student Innovation. Its goal: to discuss a number of exciting bicycle and alternative transportation initiatives, and to make connections between the bicycle community, city planners, and environmentalists. We might also consider the need for a “common cause” organization that could help these initiatives become realities. For more information, see the draft Rochester Bicycle Ecology Poster (attached), and look for details coming soon toRochesterGreenway.org. Your input and projects would be most welcome additions!

Among the attractions planned for the Rochester Cycle Summit

  • volunteer-manned stations for free bicycle maintenance
  • exhibits on pedal power and bicycles as energy-conservation solutions
  • posters and exhibits describing numerous bike initiatives
  • an ultra-wide screen short describing the potential for making Rochester a world class center for recreational and functional transport
  • free rides on electric bikes and recumbents
  • · your bike shop, project, or proposal!

We’d like your help shaping the event and recruiting participants. The attached materials are still evolving, but time is short. Please pass this message on to others who would be interested, and let me know, how you or your organization would like to be involved.


Jon Schull schull@digitalgoods.com cell: 585-738-6696
Associate Professor Rochester Institute of Technology