2nd Annual Frank’s Ride



2nd Annual Frank’s Ride

On Sept. 4th, 2007, Frank Cabral was killed while cycling on RI-1. This nearby 25.5 mile safe loop celebrates his life and raises “share the road” awareness.

Fun family event goes on rain or shine. Over 200 participants last year. Pre-registration strongly encouraged. Police stationed at crossings.

When: Sunday, September 13th, 2009, rain or shine.
Start: Matunuck School, Matunuck Beach Road. Ride: 25.5 mile loop ride, not a race, around RI-1.
Inducements: Commemorative tee shirt; drawings among pre-registered riders for cash, gift cards to local businesses, and other prizes. Win up to $200!
Post Ride: Grill catered by Dean Scanlon, Chef/Owner of Pawtuxet’s L’Attitude Restaurant of hamburgers, hot dogs and vegan fare, with bags of chips, bottled water, fruit, power bars and drinks. Party with entertainment.

Pre-registration: $25 before August 25th, strongly encouraged. All proceeds rolled into staging event; remainder, if any, used to promote cycling safety. Send Check & Form: Lori DiBiasio, 90 Sheffield Street, Warwick, RI 02889

More information vist http://www.franksride.com

17 thoughts on - 2nd Annual Frank’s Ride

  • Alan Barta
    Reply Jun 21, 2009 at 1:25 pm


    3 cyclists killed in Boise within a month.

    Sharing the road is not JUST about saving lives. It's also about obeying laws in a civilized society, showing respect for others (seldom evident), and watching out for vulnerable users.

  • Alan Barta
    Reply Jul 3, 2009 at 12:45 pm

    2 Cyclists (the second a state patrolman) killed a year apart in same place in upstate New York, yet they do nothing to improve the infrastructure.


    Note, the causes: overtaken (most recent) and t-boned at a bad intersection. Incident reports seem to suggest overtaken is equally, if not more likely, what leads to collisions, and getting more frequent due to cell calling and texting.

  • Alan Barta
    Reply Jul 10, 2009 at 8:17 am

    "Began posting bicycling obituaries nationwide on a local website. They are rare compared to tens of thousands of auto fatalities annually, but enough to collect a dozen over the last month. Early summer is the worst season for accidents. Spring spin classes turn out trim sprinters who lack road savvy. Avid fortysomethings often say they won’t go out unless ambient temperature exceeds their age, then it’s usually on deserted country roads. Danger mounts in suburbia wherever they must share routes with motorists. Unless you’re attentive and skillful, better avoid urban sprawl altogether, but, then again, can you with so much of it? Acquire the skill. "

    "A key factor in collisions is motorists’ false expectation of cyclists. Some equate them to cars having heard “Share the Road” and “Vehicular Cycling”. For others, they may as well be pedestrians suited only to crosswalks and sidewalks. Had begun to write about this several times, but could never seem to find a handle. Too clearly see both sides of this issue."

    "Speed of cycling rivals motoring on flat secondaries with a de facto limit of 25 mph. Obviously, on highways, where bicycles are banned anyway, motoring speeds triple or quadruple; the same is true of climbing hills, where cyclists struggle and weave. Motorists might not anticipate this or expect to ever be passed by cyclists on either side, which does tend to occur downhill and in gridlock. Bicyclists are not motorists, come in all levels of ability, and don’t necessarily stick to conventions amidst controls designed for motoring and walking, not pedaling. "

    "Heated controversies over shared use warrant 3 Foot and Vulnerable User bills already law or wending their ways through state legislatures. Whether or not they’re enforceable, a better solution would be to plan safety into infrastructure itself and weed out bad actors. More pavement must ban motoring altogether, some driver licenses should be irrevocably revoked, signs and stripes for bikes should accompany traffic lanes, and transportation should be provided to public for cheap or free from parking lots around periphery of cities so motoring to congested destinations becomes an unnecessary inconvenience. These measures won’t end carnage caused by impatient car drivers on edge. But they would be a start toward ending wanton waste of life. " – Labann

  • Alan Barta
    Reply Jul 12, 2009 at 1:40 pm

    16 year old runs down, kills 62 year old bicyclist on tour in Wisconsin.
    As you can see, there is a wide demographic for killers and victims.

    Bicycling deaths are something they are quick to report, whereas a 500 times as many motoring deaths each year go barely noticed, because they aren't so eager that you know about them.

  • Alan Barta
    Reply Jul 16, 2009 at 6:46 am

    Tracking down two local stories:

    Heard on television that a bicyclist was struck in Providence yesterday, but it is not reported in ProJo.

    In State of RI v. Sean Commins…
    defendent had been drinking before running down a victim in a hoodie on Main Avenue where it intersects the airport runaway and leaving the scene. However, don't know if victim survived according to the abstract linked above. What is instructional is how lawyer immediately filed a motion to dismiss. Who runs someone down intentionally? The standard of law is rather lax in such cases. Watch your back.

  • Reply Jul 25, 2009 at 4:09 am

    Sharing the road is about looking out for other vehicles and pedestrians AND cyclists while driving. But…much of this "safety" business has to be implemented by the government because no matter how careful a driver is, there'll be some areas that are fatal to cyclists.

  • Alan Barta
    Reply Jul 26, 2009 at 6:10 am

    2 key cures:

    1) Fix infrastructure to support cycling, as required by federal and state law.

    2) Revoke licenses of bad motorists, 3 strikes and you're on a bike or bus.

    1 is more easily accomplished than most imagine. Wherever there are 2 lanes in one direction, make it 1 plus a wide shoulder for biking and pulling over in emergencies. The 2 narrow lanes just cause more accidents, which betrays bad urban planning, and repainting stripes is fairly cheap and easy. Volunteers are standing by to do it for free.

    For 2, nobody wants to give up their privileges, neither drunken motorists or other criminals. But the others are rightly sent to prison. You are still free if you can go wherever you want, which is why God invented bicycles.

  • Alan Barta
    Reply Aug 5, 2009 at 7:24 pm

    Well written account of another cyclist killed, this time in Baltimore, where about eight die every year.


    Most interesting are the tired arguments of government officials as to why they can't supply bike lanes. "We can't knock down buildings!" Yet they do exactly that every day to throw in more motoring infrastructure than they'll ever use just to placate automotive impatience.

  • Reply Aug 7, 2009 at 4:46 am

    Most interesting are the tired arguments of government officials as to why they can’t supply bike lanes. “We can’t knock down buildings!” Yet they do exactly that every day to throw in more motoring infrastructure than they’ll ever use just to placate automotive impatience.

    I hear what you are saying, but I don't think the comparison is quite fair. Yes, buildings are often sacrificed for some street expansion, but typically it's a limited number in a relatively small area (i.e. the land seized for the I-way project). Modifying buildings to make all streets wider, so that we can have bike lanes everywhere is a different matter. It would affect FAR more buildings and I don't think it makes sense. What I do think makes sense is elimination of on street parking spaces. People want to drive to the city, fine, have them park in a monstrous parking garage somewhere (heck the Providence Place Mall one is probably severely under capacity these days) and then ride public transit around. This would provide plenty of additional capacity for bike lanes, without taking away more space.

  • Alan Barta
    Reply Aug 8, 2009 at 7:48 am

    There are scores of cities around the World which ban motoring altogether. You must bike, walk or take public transportation.

    Bicycling is so innocuous to landscape. You never need to displace families for its infrastructure, unlike motoring, which runs down whomever gets in its way.

    One way streets with bike lanes on right, parking on left and travel lane in the middle would work if done judiciously, which leave most planners out, because all they know how to do is spend billions of dollars badly instead of providing bike lanes on all roads (except highways) wider than 23 feet, as mandated by federal and state law.

    Cyclists don't care, though. As long as there is SOME infrastructure to use, they will gravitate to it. You see, bicycling isn't needy and unsustainable. Yet it gets less attention than its share when it comes to planning.

Leave a Reply