Richmond-San Rafael Bridge managers make arguments for modified path
Regional commissioners say a proposed pilot project to remove a multiuse path on the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge four days a week raises questions about equity, timing and the long-term vision for the span.
At a workshop lasting nearly four hours last week, the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission heard arguments from the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Caltrans, who have jointly applied for a permit to make the change.
The path was introduced in 2019 as a four-year trial project. The prior year, a part-time third traffic lane was opened on the eastbound lower deck.
The applicants say they need more time to study traffic, vehicle crashes and breakdowns, as well as associated backups and emergency response times, to help inform a more permanent plan for the path. It is part of the Bay Trail network.
“We don’t want to be doing serial pilots for decades,” Lisa Klein, deputy executive director of the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, told the state commission at the session on Thursday.
“I think what we’re really trying to figure out is how can we provide this trail connection and what does it look like given the real estate we have, which is this bridge,” Klein said.
Ideally, the bridge would have 24/7 bicycle and pedestrian access, Klein said. However, motorists and North Bay business leaders say that since the path has been installed, traffic is worse than ever, and it’s affecting their work and quality of life.
Under the proposal, the 10-foot wide, barrier-protected path would be removed from 9 p.m. Sunday through 2 p.m. Thursday to free the shoulder on the westbound upper deck for emergencies. A shuttle would operate from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. to transport cyclists when the path is closed.
The proposal includes making the eastbound third lane a permanent feature. A study found it reduced congestion, shaving 17 minutes off afternoon commute times.
“Is there any reason to think that if the upper deck were opened up in a similar way that you wouldn’t have a comparable result?” said Sean Randolph, a gubernatorial appointee to the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
A report by Partners for Advanced Transportation Technology at the University of California at Berkeley analyzed the original four-year pilot.
Francois Dion, lead author of the report, said there are only two lanes where Interstate 580 touches down in San Rafael. About 40% of peak traffic from the bridge exits at Sir Francis Drake Boulevard. Regardless, if there was expanded capacity, the bridge would still back up, he said.
The report shows that about 35 to 80 bicyclists use the bridge during peak hours on weekdays and about 120 to 260 on the weekends. Winter traffic is around 25% to 40% lower than summer activity, the report says.
According to a survey, about 85% of respondents said they used the path for recreation and exercise, whereas 14% said it was their commute route.
Klein said planners have completed connections to the Bay Trail on the approaches in both Richmond and San Rafael to improve access.
“That’s just half the story,” said John Gioia, a Contra Costa County supervisor who is a member of the bay commission. “People can’t get to the bridge if other connections aren’t fixed.”
Gioia said the Metropolitan Transportation Commission has identified an additional $60 million in Bay Trail gap projects, split nearly evenly between the two cities. Regarding equity and public access, Gioia said, those incomplete connections need to be part of the conversation.
He asked if Caltrans or the Metropolitan Transportation Commission would be willing to fund those projects as part of its application.
Klein said that while she can’t speak for her board, the agency is in a position to provide some support for the projects, including assisting city staff with grant applications, and potentially some funding through Regional Measure 3 toll revenues.
As for traffic, the report found westbound morning traffic was at about 92% to 99% of pre-pandemic levels.
Regarding crashes, the report relied on data provided by California Highway Patrol and towing companies, but some information didn’t match, was incomplete or was delayed. Dion said researchers have requested new data points from the towing companies to help close those information gaps.
Marin County Supervisor Stephanie-Moulton Peters, a member of the commission, said she’s interested in learning about “traffic delays behind the accident.”
“I think it’s important that we hear from the constituents of the unpredictability and the variability in their commute times,” Moulton-Peters said. “It’s really a friction point.”
John Grubb, chief operating officer of the Bay Area Council, a business group, said East Bay communities of color are the most affected by the traffic, especially during a breakdown.
“What we hear from these people is they have to plan for the incident, because if you’re a teacher, or a nurse, you can’t be late for your shift over and over again,” Grubb said. He said that some drivers reported arriving an hour early just in case.
Warren Wells, policy and planning director of the Marin County Bicycle Coalition, said that while there are more cyclists on the weekends, 40% of riders cross the path Monday through Thursday. He said a 24/7 arrangement provides the best access.
“I urge you to ask yourselves, if traffic gets better, and those employers hire another 1,000 East Bay commuters, what’s going to happen to traffic?” Wells said at the meeting.
Barry Nelson, an alternate governor-appointed commissioner, asked why the proposal is to significantly change the pilot “when it’s clear that we’re still trying to figure out how well this pilot project is really working and what are the impacts of changing it?”
The new permit would enable researchers to analyze an additional 18 months of data of the existing pilot, Dion said. That’s because in addition to the incomplete data for 2023 and 2024, if the change is approved it will take several months to launch. Researchers could use that time to collect and analyze more data of the existing path conditions, he said.
“The main issue is a lack of information,” Dion said. “With the extension we’ll get it.”
The new pilot would also enable the team to review the bike and pedestrian shuttle usage, equity impacts and impacts of the moveable barrier, including time and cost, and wear on the bridge.
A public hearing has not been scheduled but is planned for early this year, said Rylan Gervase, spokesperson for the San Francisco Bay Conservation and Development Commission.
Separately, the Metropolitan Transportation Commission and Caltrans are also moving toward open road tolling to streamline the bridge approach and reduce the amount of lane merging, which could also help lower the number of collisions. Part of that plan involves extending the commuter lane on the approach as well.
Planners say it’s expected to shave 12 minutes off travel times for buses and commuters and five minutes for others. Those improvements are planned to be completed by spring 2026.
Planners are also making transit and road improvements in Richmond to ease the crunch onto the bridge, and studying the viability of a third lane on the upper deck as a commuter and bus lane.