Send this story Print this story

Adjust text size

Upfront: Bike lanes racing ahead
Alternative transportation pedals into the political mainstream

by Peter Seidman

Alternative transportation is gaining political clout as the practical effects of nonmotorized travel chip away at a mind-set that previously acknowledged only a fossil-fuel reality.

The road hasn't been smooth; the ride hasn't been easy. But walking and bicycle riding as practical, even in a sense preferred, methods of transportation recently forced the state's transportation department, Caltrans, to rethink a proposal that calls for adding a third lane in each direction to the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge.

The idea of adding a bicycle and pedestrian lane to the bridge entered North Bay consciousness recently when Caltrans went to the Bay Conservation Development Commission to test the waters. Although Caltrans has no immediate plans to add lanes to the bridge, the concept of a bridge with added capacity for increased commute traffic is at least on the Caltrans list of possibilities. Because BCDC has jurisdiction over the bay up to the high tide line, that agency has the right to accept or reject a Caltrans plan to add lanes to the bridge.

At a recent BCDC meeting, commissioners voted 14 to 2 to support a plan that bicycle advocates have envisioned for years: adding a bike and pedestrian path on the bridge. Currently there already are three lanes in each direction on the bridge, but one of the lanes in each direction is used as a kind of wide shoulder, an auxiliary lane. During commute hours, by using the space in the auxiliary lanes, Caltrans could create additional capacity across the four-and-a-half-mile span. Then, during off-peak hours, bridge workers would move a barrier out onto the upper deck of the bridge to create an 8-foot-wide protected bike and pedestrian lane in both directions. The show of support at the BCDC meeting is significant because the agency could require Caltrans to include the bike and pedestrian lane as part of a plan to add the extra vehicle lanes. The cost to add that movable barrier lane has been estimated at about $50 million. That might be the cost of doing business in a new landscape of alternative transportation, which advocates say returns rewards, both societal and financial, well in excess of initial outlays.

The Richmond-San Rafael Bridge for years has been considered part of the San Francisco Bay Trail, a system intended to ring the bay with accessible alternative transportation routes. Adding the bike and pedestrian lane would provide a key link for bicyclists and pedestrians moving between Marin and the East Bay. Bicyclists and pedestrians "could get all the way to Berkeley and Oakland and south. It's a long-term [regional] network connectivity plan," says Marin Supervisor Charles McGlashan, who also is a BCDC commissioner. There still is "a gap on the east side of the bridge," adds McGlashan, "but that can be fixed."

Caltrans says it opposes the bike and pedestrian plan because allowing vehicles moving at high speed across the bridge with bikes and pedestrians on the upper deck without a wide shoulder, even during non-commute hours, would increase accidents by 200 percent. But alternative-transportation advocates find fault with these estimates. As a matter of fact, they say, a movable barrier actually could reduce the accident rate on the upper deck while it also accommodates bicyclists and pedestrians. To back that assertion, they point to statistics compiled during the recent earthquake retrofit of the span. Advocates say that when work crews moved cement barriers out onto the deck of the bridge to create protected areas during construction work, accidents actually declined by 30 percent from 2002 to 2005.

The movable barrier plan came from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission. It gained support in the commission's Bay Area Toll Authority Oversight Committee. Marin Supervisor Steve Kinsey is chairman of the committee. His participation at MTC and McGlashan's at BCDC creates a pair of potent Marin advocates for the bike and pedestrian plan. The power BCDC has over projects that affect the bay makes it a critical gatekeeper in any Caltrans proposal to create a third traffic lane. "The bottom line is that I intend to take a very hard line at BCDC about public access," says McGlashan. "If Caltrans is going to propose a freeway with no [auxiliary] shoulder over that bridge, then I propose a bridge that has no shoulder but has a bike lane. It is absurd to close it off [completely to alternative transportation]." McGlashan says BCDC commissioners generally agree with his hard-line approach toward public access for alternative transportation across the bridge. The 14-2 vote supporting the plan offers evidence for that contention.

The Marin County Bicycle Coalition has been pushing for access across the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge for years. That goal seems within reach. "We're going to be meeting with Caltrans in Sacramento," says Deb Hubsmith, advocacy director with MCBC. Hubsmith says it was the coalition that collected the crash data showing a decrease in accidents on the span during retrofit construction when there was no shoulder on the bridge. "Caltrans' chief complaint about safety we think is not backed by any facts. We are going to continue to push." The BCDC commissioners asked Caltrans to return within six months with more information to support its safety concerns. Commissioners also "asked for other parties to provide additional information," says Hubsmith, who reiterates that MCBC intends to remain involved.

"The bottom line," she says, "is that BCDC will have to issue a permit to Caltrans if Caltrans wants to use the shoulder for cars. BCDC can condition the permit on providing the bicycle and pedestrian access. That's within their purview." Hubsmith says MCBC, along with other alternative-transportation advocates, would like access to the bridge as soon as possible, but she adds, "When Caltrans tries to go for that third lane for cars, I think that's when we're going to get our access."

While alternative transportation is reverberating politically at the state level with Caltrans, people-powered locomotion recently made it onto the county supervisors' list of top five priorities for the next couple of years. After a bit of persuading, the supervisors agreed to include the county's goal of creating a showcase of programs promoting alternative transportation.

The county has come a long way toward promoting alternative transportation, as have individual Marin cities and towns. County supervisors recently approved an update to a 2001 Unincorporated Area Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan, which, according to county staff, is "the policy and program framework" for developing and implementing projects with the county's unincorporated jurisdiction. Some alternative transportation advocates said the county had failed to include their areas, such as Tam Valley and West Marin, in an overall document that would create a truly comprehensive master plan. MCBC helped broker a solution that calls for "including a section in the county plan that acknowledges community-based plans," says Hubsmith. And by weaving together the county plan with plans in cities and towns, Marin is moving closer toward a unified alternative-transportation strategy.

A major part of that strategy will come with the north-south bikeway planned for the railroad right-of-way, whether or not the proposed commuter rail system between Marin and Sonoma counties gets rolling. The plan for the bike and pedestrian lane along the railroad right-of-way can proceed independently. That idea, along with the opening of the Cal Park Hill Tunnel and improvements to bike routes through San Rafael, means a bicyclist will be able to ride from Novato, through San Rafael and down into central and southern Marin on a route created for alternative transportation. Each city and town in the county also is looking at improvements to its own alternative transportation system.

As Supervisor Susan Adams says about the county's plan: "It's a big wish list, and we have limited resources. But it's a good document." Even if funds are tight, the concepts fulfill a requirement to qualify for state and federal funds that can help pay for them.

Among all the programs under way in Marin, the Nonmotorized Transportation Pilot Program stands proud. In 2005, Marin was one of four communities chosen for the federal pilot program designed to promote and assess the impacts of alternatives to the daily use of gas-guzzlers. The four communities chosen to develop nonmotorized pilot programs were Minneapolis and its surrounding communities; Sheboygan County in Wisconsin; Columbia, Missouri; and Marin County. The federal program is providing $25 million a year from 2006 through 2009 to be distributed among these four communities to determine the effectiveness of investing in alternative transportation.

In December 2007, Marin County received an interim report from Alta Planning and Design of Berkeley, which conducted studies to determine the effectiveness of promoting alternative transportation. "Bicycling rates have increased on average 66 percent between 1999 and 2007 during weekdays," the report states, "and an average of 33 percent during weekend days."

This indicates that people are riding their bikes and walking to work. Students riding and walking to school, a result of the Safe Routes to Schools, are a key element in those numbers. Hubsmith is a founding director of Safe Routes. While she and other alternative-transportation advocates are happy to see outreach programs increasing the number of people walking and riding bikes on a daily basis—for transportation as well as sport—they are equally frustrated at state laws that seem aimed at stymieing an increase in bicycle transportation.

In almost every local survey conducted, bike riders and potential bike riders say the lack of public bike racks is a roadblock to their taking a two-wheel alternative to the office or to the store. Adding more public bike racks seems like an easy answer.

Marin has money available from the federal pilot program for bike-path signs and bike racks. But, says Hubsmith, "Caltrans has the most cumbersome regulations possible for doing things like installing bike racks. It might be that the county cannot even do the bike racks because they will end up being too expensive because of all the red tape and paperwork. The way the system is set up, it basically takes the same amount of paperwork for a large highway project as it does for a bike rack."

Despite some of the cumbersome regulations, Marin is making rather impressive headway in programs funded by the pilot program. In Sausalito this spring and summer, for instance, a program is starting in which residents will receive a postcard asking them if they would like information about walking maps, bike routes and public transit. Residents then can request specific information offered from a list. Results will be monitored to determine the effectiveness of the program, which is modeled after a similar program in Portland.

Each individual program makes a dent. Hubsmith says 13.6 percent of trips in Marin now are made walking or bicycling. Nationally the number is about 10 percent. One of the individual programs, Bike to Work Day, is May 15. Another is a county program that pays employees $4 every time they use alternative transportation to get to work. And this year, the county will once again field a team in the Team Bike Challenge, sponsored by the 511.org program at MTC. Starting May 1, team members around the Bay Area will earn points for every day they ride to work. Supervisor Adams, a bike commuter, will lead the county team this year. Last year, in the second annual Bike Challenge, a team from Fairfax tied with a team from Santa Clara County for the top spot.

Although the winners received a modest prize, an installed public bike rack, the symbolism is obvious. Maybe Caltrans will get the message.

Contact the writer at peter@pseidman.com