Politicians in the Bay Area want to remove bike lanes from the Richmond-San Rafael bridge because they are worried about traffic congestion.
Cyclists say removing these bike lanes will put them in danger.
https://richmondside.org/2025/08/05/richmond-san-rafael-bridge-bike-path-final-vote/
https://bikeeastbay.org/rsr2024-2/
During the public hearing, commissioner Karl Hasz was spotted driving his car
That bike lane is such an offensive waste of hundreds of millions of dollars of infrastructure.
A handful of bike activists got a recreational lane that sees almost zero use, while every day thousands of people trying to get to work are stuck in traffic next to an empty lane.
is that you mr commissar
Source?
I live there.
Opinions don’t count.
You reject first hand experience because it conflicts with your political biases.
Please tell me o wise traveler, how us Bay Area residents should convert full freeway lanes into unused bike lanes.
No I reject it because sounds like every other time I’ve heard push back on bike lanes. My city is currently going through a similar fight and I have heard your argument several times with no backing information.
Your comment doesn’t pass the smell test.
What do I know, I only live there.
Approximately 68 cyclist use the bridge per day (3 orders of magnitude fewer than cars. Perhaps if it were within 1 order, it would make a difference).
https://tombutt.com/richmond-san-rafael-bridge-bike-path-enters-final-year-of-trial-run-east-bay-times-12-2-2022/
https://abc7news.com/post/access-bike-path-richmond-san-rafael-bridge-limited-converted-breakdown-lane/17466859/
https://www.kqed.org/news/12017869/will-the-richmond-san-rafael-bridge-bike-lane-stay-its-still-uncertain
Pedestrian use is even lower https://www.kqed.org/news/12017869/will-the-richmond-san-rafael-bridge-bike-lane-stay-its-still-uncertain
So perhaps 5 cars are taken off the road, at most, vs 67,000 cars.
Thats really making a difference. Great use of resources.
How many years, at even a dozen cars per day, to amortize the carbon footprint of the concrete used, let alone the equipment (diesel fuel), steel, asphalt/macadam, etc?
This project was an environmental net negative, and will never become positive.
I’m all for such projects, but far too often the bigger picture isn’t considered, it’s just a feel-good. Let’s do what actually makes a difference, otherwise we’re making things worse.
How is it that 68 cyclists are 5 cars?
If you want to talk bigger picture… they built a pedestrian/bike lane with zero access/amenities at either end (unlike the Bay Bridge). No staging area to load/unload your bike, no parking, no bathrooms, no water fountains. Good luck finding all-day parking on city streets in Pt. Richmond or… San Quentin.
Here are the directions: https://marinbike.org/news/getting-to-from-the-r-sr-bridge-pathway/
Once approaching/getting off the bridge, if commuting by bike, there is no direct connection to the Bay Trail. So anyone living in Marin and wanting to commute to, say, Berkeley or El Cerrito so they can get on BART (or even the Richmond Ferry) has to risk going through heavily industrial areas or dicey parts of Richmond. On the Marin side to/from Larkspur Landing, you had to ride unprotected on the shoulder of the freeway!
Only way to use it for commuters on either end would be to park and ride, but again, no parking and ride facilities. And there’s any wonder more people don’t use it? There’s wide open space at either end of the bridge to build staging areas, especially on the Richmond side right near the Toll Plaza, but nobody wants to make it easy. It’s such a gauntlet I’m amazed that many people use it.
The solution to traffic congestion is to make public transit and alternate forms of transportation more cost-effective, functional, and convenient. That includes offering easy transition/transfer points. It isn’t to open more driving lanes. They’ve known this since the days of Robert Moses in NYC, but keep doing it.
MTC data has different numbers: https://reports.mysidewalk.com/3374a0ca74
Regardless, adding a lane won’t work. The bottleneck is the 101, so you just get extra lanes to stand still in. And the toll gate as well.
The lane was already there btw, but it was an emergency pullover lane. It didn’t cost a lot of carbon to turn it into a bike lane.
I am thankful for the article links, but how many edits are you at?
If their time is so valuable, maybe they should ride a bike instead of trapping themselves in traffic?
The average American commute is 41 miles round trip. I guarantee you that a large number of people stuck on that bridge every day have a much shorter commute, could ride a bike instead, and would actually spend less of their time commuting by doing so.
Those are the people you should be angry with because they’re the ones that are directly wasting your time with their frivolous driving trips. The more we get people riding bikes, the less problems those that are required to drive will experience.
Also, maybe if the average American car wasn’t a wasteful hulking behemoth there would be more room for more people on the roads. 🤷
That bridge is too long for bike commutes.
You mean the 3ft wide lane you couldn’t fit a compact car in? Who’s going to drive in that lane? Brodizers? Mall crawlers?
No. The bike lane is full width and the proposal replaces with a full car lane.
Get educated before you try schooling others.