Editorial: Richmond Bridge lane trial will provide needed data

The follow-up trial proposal is a practical compromise, one that restores the lane to traffic during the busiest weekdays, to see if it helps the flow of traffic. Or, creates problems on the Marin side.

The Bay Area transportation agency that thought it was a good idea to turn a traffic lane on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge – at a cost of $20 million – into a bike lane is admitting that it’s been a flop.

After a four-year trial and less-than-impressive results, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission is understandably backpedaling, proposing to open the lane to cars and trucks Mondays through Thursdays, while limiting the lane to bikes on Friday, Saturdays and Sundays.

It is another trial, officials say — one that will provide statistics that show whether restoring the lane to traffic eases congestion on the trans-San Pablo Bay span and how it affects traffic on the Marin side.

MTC officials say their traffic studies show that the toll gate, not the bike lane, is the cause of westbound traffic jams. Restoring the lane to traffic will test that finding. In addition, some Marin transportation officials are worried that opening the bike lane could make congestion worse at intersections on the west side of the bridge.

Routinely shifting the movable barrier that was installed to create and protect the bike lane is also going to be expensive, an estimated $300,000 for the proposed second test period, which would run through the end of 2025.

When compared to the cost of time lost due to motorists being stuck in the westbound traffic jam, that cost is justifiable.

The follow-up trial should also provide data showing the possible benefit of using that restored lane as an express lane for carpoolers.

It’s become hard for MTC to defend the everyday bike lane, installed on the westbound deck.

The lane was created on the upper deck in 2019 as a four-year pilot. Five years later, the average daylong use is 140 trips on weekdays and 360 trips on weekends. Compared to the 35,000 drivers who cross the bridge every day, it is clear the trial fails the “greatest good” test.

The $20 million trial’s failure was predictable. That money could have been better spent improving bike paths on both sides of the bridge, but MTC’s leadership pushed the costly and impractical plan through the approval process.

But it was pitched as a link that would close a loop in the Bay Trail, a long-sought path ringing the bay.

But few used it, even after biking advocacy groups promoted it.

Its bike traffic certainly didn’t match the popularity of pedaling across the Golden Gate Bridge. By comparison, the Richmond bridge ride is a lot longer and arduous.

For motorists, driving past a lane they couldn’t use (while it got little use from cyclists) didn’t engender public support for the trial.

It has been a costly experiment, one that promoted a vision that never materialized.

It might have eroded public support for the idea.

MTC’s follow-up trial proposal – which would be even better if shorter – is a practical compromise, one that restores the lane to traffic during the busiest weekdays, to see if it helps the flow of traffic. Or, creates problems on the Marin side.

The agency has had its costly trial and the bike lane got so little use that it is really hard to justify not restoring the lane.

But MTC’s follow-up trial could provide real-time answers – even as a result of a short test – that could pave the way for a permanent solution.