Advocacy & Safety - Bikes on big bridges?

Who rides across fairly large bridges on their bikes? How do they accomodate you - pedestrian walkways, special lanes, etc.?

The bridges between Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware are almost totally inaccessible to bicycles. I am trying to get ideas of what could be done about this. The approaches are also pretty inaccessible, being mostly limited access highways, so it is an uphill battle, but certainly a worthy one.

Thank you.

Some of the bridges in the bay area are very accomodating of biikes. Personally I have ridden my bike across the Dumbarton bridge and the Golden Gate bridge.

The Dumbarton bridge has one lane (protected by a short concrete wall) for both directions of bike traffic. This also houses pedestrians, so caution is advised. There is not much room to work here with a flat either.

The Golden Gate has two sides, on is usually open for bikes only, and the other is open for pedestrians. The bikes here are also protected from the cars, but not well from each other. Caution here is also advised.

I know with the addition of the new span of the Oakland Bay Bridge there was talk of adding a bike lane. I am not sure what the end results of this were. Anyone have any additional knowledge on the subject?

I think all bridges need to accomodate cyclists and pedestrians.

Originally posted by Ralph
The bridges between Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware are almost totally inaccesible to bicycles. I am trying to get ideas of what could be done about this. The approaches are also pretty inaccessible, being mostly limited access highways, so it is an uphill battle, but certainly a worthy one.

I guess we're pretty lucky here in the Seattle area in that all of the big bridges tend be relatively bike-friendly. The I-90 floating bridge across Lake. Washington has been in my experience the friendliest with a wide multi-use path running alongside. However we do have a few bridges which don't have special provisions. The 520 bridge that parallels the I-90 bridge to the north is one such example and I would never attempt to ride it (bikes are probably prohibitted on there anyways). If I myself in that area and need to cross, I'll swing a couple of miles north to the top of the lake or south to the I-90 bridge.

A bridge that I do end up riding from time to time (when I get out that way) that has no real seperate cycling path (it does have a sidewalk but it's quite narrow and pedestrians can be a problem) is the Hood Canal Bridge. The traffic across that particular bridge while heavy at times isn't awefully fast and it's two lanes but they're quite wide lanes all the way across. I ride as close to the right as possible (especially since there's a concrete strip there instead of just plain metal grate) and as long as you maintain a consistant line and speed, the drivers don't seem to have much a problem with you. I have never crossed it at night or during the winters though. There can be high crosswinds so that's another thing to be careful of.

One of the most enjoyable bridges to ride around here (okay so it's not exactly close to me but it's in the area) is actually quite short. It's the Deception Pass Bridge. The view is simply breathtaking. Some people ride the sidewalk but there's often way too many pedestrians for that. Admittedly many people take their time walking their bikes across to take in the view.

Curiously enough, I haven't had the chance (or given myself the chance) to ride the Tacoma Narrows Bridge. Anyone care to share their experience?

I've ridden across the Golden Gate Bridge but that was a no-brainer due to the large sidepaths. The one bridge I haven't ridden despite having spent quite a bit of time living in Michigan is the Mackinac. Normally bicycles are not allowed on the bridge except for a few major cycling events (DALMAC)... sadly, none of which I got around to attending. However, the bridge authority has a transport service for bikes (as well as snowmobiles in the winter) for a small fee and I'm not actually sure how it works... perhaps someone from the area could chime in.

Hi, Ralph. We talked about this in your introductory thread. I emailed http://www.bicyclecoalition.org/ about the bridge problem. I didn't get a response. I'll have to try again.

Take a look at this though. http://www.transalt.org/bridges/index.html

I mean if New Yorkers can bike over the Geoge Washington, I think we ought to be able to bike over the Walt Whitman. The problem as you say is that our bridges weren't designed to accomodate anything other than cars and it would be difficult to get that changed now. But even on the Ben Franklin the pedestrian path is frequently closed and is locked up at night.:mad:

If you're trying to bike commute across the Delaware, I'm wondering if you may be able to take NJtransit over the bridge. Many of the busses are equiped with bike racks and the ones that aren't should be able to carry your bike in the large luggage compartments. This may be your only way to "bike" over the river.

Good idea, thbirks. I don't remember ever seeing a NJ Transit bus on the Commo Barry, but I e-mailed and asked them.

It looks like they concentrate on downtown Philly and Wilmington, DE. It does sound promising in that they say all South Jersey buses can take bikes. So maybe there's hope.

I just ride on the road, the same as I do everywhere else. I'm yet to have any problems.

Originally posted by Chris L
I just ride on the road, the same as I do everywhere else. I'm yet to have any problems.

Here in the states, most big bridges (at least all the ones I have seen) are multi-lane freeways/tollways. Bikes are usually prohibited from using these roads unless there are special circumstances. Using the road would probably get you killed if not arrested.

"Using the road would probably get you killed if not arrested."


More than likely both

I ride on the Jacques Cartier bridge between Montreal and the South Shore. Bikes have to use the sidewalk, which is separated from the motor traffic. When they redecked the bridge over the past two summers, they widened the path on the west side to about 8 or 9 ft, this makes it easy to deal with bikes coming in the opposite direction. However the approach path on the south end of the bridge is only about 4 ft wide between a chainlink fence and a tall crash barrier.

I spent 10 weeks in NYC 19 yrs ago and rode over the Queens bridge and the Brooklyn bridge several times. I just took my place in the traffic (not rush hour). I felt a bit nervous but didnt receive any unpleasantness from the motorists.

Now if I had just $1 every time someone said riding on the road would get me killed, I'd be a very wealthy man.

FYI, I have in the past tried to use bikepaths along side these multi-lane bridges you describe, but inevitably I found the road to be superior in every aspect (including the safety one). In my opinion, I'm better off on the road with the cars and the extra room it provides, than trying to squeeze past pedestrians and negotiating exit/re-entry points in a space that really isn't nearly wide enough.

As Sailguy stated many of these bridges prohibit bicycles in traffic lanes. As for crossing over the Delaware river. There is only one bridge under the Delaware River Port Authority than accomodates bicycles or pedestrians. This is the Ben Franklin bridge. I once tried to use the traffic lane on my bike when the walkway was closed and I was immediately stopped by a police officer sitting next to the bridge. This was probably a good thing as the bridge has no place for a bike in the traffic lanes and the traffic is unforgiving.

Its dangerous enough driving a car over the bridges around here. I have dodged my share of accidents in my non-commute crossings.

Some of the things you have to contend with are that none of the bridges have any shoulders. When not stopped due to traffic, the pace is about 65-85 mph. The Bay Bridge has about 5 or six lanes on the bottom deck, and the same on the top deck, and no shoulders for about four miles. The Golden Gate bridge (2.5 miles) has various lanes in any direction depending on the time-of-day. (I even believe the outer edge of the road has a hole in it that drops down into the water. (a kid fell through it several years back)).

I have not been on the San Mateo bridge since the new lane was added, but there was no shoulder, and narrow lanes. This also is about five miles before the lanes widen.

I know the bay bridge has a shuttle that you can pile your bikes into to cross, but there is no way to currently ride across it.

Montreal is a good area, there are cyclable ways to get off the Island. I have never really seen it as a problem. Most of them are dedicated bike paths adjoining or completely independant from a roadway.

Originally posted by thbirks
As Sailguy stated many of these bridges prohibit bicycles in traffic lanes.

Point taken about the legislative side of things. Short of writing letters asking to repeal these fascist laws, there's not a lot you can do about it. However, the main thrust of my rant (something I still stand by) was that I get a little tired of hearing this "You're gonna die! You're gonna die!" crap every time cycling in traffic is brought up. Over 100,000km in all kinds of situations and I'm still waiting for it to happen.

It's this irrational fear that leads to cyclists being banned from many roadways in the first place.

(Quote)
I mean if New Yorkers can bike over the Geoge Washington, I think we ought to be able to bike over the Walt Whitman. The problem as you say is that our bridges weren't designed to accomodate anything other than cars and it would be difficult to get that changed now. But even on the Ben Franklin the pedestrian path is frequently closed and is locked up at night.:mad:

Strange....very strange!
America land of the free...... as long as you use an automoble.
reading some of these posts I FIND IT INCREDIBLE. that some of the rivers are un-crossable on foot or cycle.
I cannot think of any bridge crossings in the U.k. that are inacsessable to walkers or cyclists.
The Tyne in my area at the main city Newcastle is famous the world over for its bridges. Some of which over recent years with the increased volume of traffic, although not restricted have become very uncomfortable for anything other than motorized trans`t .
With that in mind, a dedicated pedestrian and seperate cycle way bridge was constructed, this turned out to be a modern work of art, winning prestigeous archi`al awards throughout Europe .
Known as the "blinking eye"bridge, costing £9 Million . So despite much critisism on the expenditure, especially by the, (can`t you guess) motoring fraternity. It now stands together with "the Angel of the North" as a symbol of the N.E. England.

Maybe a few of your U.S. cities should take a look at this example.

Originally posted by Chris L
Over 100,000km in all kinds of situations and I'm still waiting for it to happen.



Of course, dude, it only has to happen once.

I can't speak much for big city bridges, since I avoid big cities like that plague that they are. But country bridges can be annoying if they are the old fashioned metal-mesh type; I call them 'tickle bridges' because of the noise they make when you ride over them. Your tires get caught in the grooves and it makes it feel like you have a flat. Yuck.


roughstuff

This is the bridge I cross each day. It's pretty high in the middle(the aircraft carriers can get underneath!!), and can be a bit windy which is why it gets closed to bikes at times.

There are marked cycle paths (15 mph max) both ways with footpaths, but people tend to wander over the cycle paths.


It does give you a good view but my wife insists it is steeper one way than the other- I'm not sure.

Unfortunately is also a bit of a magnet for suicides.

Originally posted by Ralph
Who rides across fairly large bridges on their bikes? How do they accomodate you - pedestrian walkways, special lanes, etc.?
There's a 1999 study (http://home.swbell.net/mpion/river.htm), with recommendations, by John S. Allen of river crossings in St. Louis that you might find interesting. St. Louis is virtually surrounded by rivers. There are 10 existing bridges over the Mississippi and one proposed bridge. Of the existing bridges, 4 allow bicycle traffic. One of those is now strictly a bicycle/pedestrian bridge. One is an interstate. Missouri permits cyclists to use the approaches; Illinois does not, which is interesting.

Of the Mississipi River bridges that don't permit cyclists one, the Poplar St. Bridge (which Allen calls the I-70/Bernard Dickman Bridge) is dangerous enough in a car. A couple of the existing bridges are currently closed to automobiles and bicycles.

There's a proposal for a "New I-70 Bridge", which will be an addition, not a replacement. It's supposed to be a zillion lane interstate and bicycles will be prohibited.

There are 5 bridges over the Missouri River. Two of them allow bicycles. About half of the 9 or so bridges over the Meramec River allow bicycles.

Is there enough left of that old Rt.66 bridge north of town for cyclists to use?

Originally posted by D*Alex
Is there enough left of that old Rt.66 bridge north of town for cyclists to use? That's the one that's been converted to a bicycle/pedestrian bridge. The old "Chain of Rocks" Bridge. Scrap values were so low that they couldn't afford to tear it down. ;)
Get your kicks on Route 66 :D

The Chain of Rocks Bridge (http://www.dnr.state.mo.us/magazine/2000_Fall/One_last_word.htm)


The continuous-truss structure is among the world's longest pedestrian and bicycle bridges... Constructed in 1929 as a toll bridge, the Old Chain of Rocks Bridge became part of the now-historic Route 66 in 1936. The City of Madison, Ill., purchased it in 1939...

In 1989, a newly formed land trust dedicated to the development of linear parks, Trailnet Inc., envisioned a new use for the bridge – as a bicycle and pedestrian crossing. The $4 million restoration project began in 1997...

The view looking south is a confluence of past and present. In the distance, the modern St. Louis skyline rises as a backdrop to three water intake towers whose turn-of-the-century architectural style mimics that of gothic castles.

http://www.confluencegreenway.org/bridge.jpg

The other bridge that can be used to cross the Delaware River is the Tacony-Palmyra bridge. The approach on the Jersey side is pretty good. The Philly side is a little dicey, but is doable. I have not tried during a weekday rush hour, though. The walkway is pretty narrow and you are supposed to walk your bike, but I have ridden it. There is nothing south of the Ben Franklin, though, as none of the other bridges has a walkway.

Originally posted by willic
(Quote]

Strange....very strange!
America land of the free...... as long as you use an automoble.
reading some of these posts I FIND IT INCREDIBLE. that some of the rivers are un-crossable on foot or cycle.
I cannot think of any bridge crossings in the U.k. that are inacsessable to walkers or cyclists.

It's quite frustrating. Sometimes it seems like they're trying to keep me from leaving New Jersey.

"However, the main thrust of my rant (something I still stand by) was that I get a little tired of hearing this "You're gonna die! You're gonna die!" crap every time cycling in traffic is brought up."ChrisL

Well, then I agree with your main thrust, but I think that if you could see the situation with these bridges you'd be pleased as could be to share a path with annoying pedestrians. I'll try and get a photo of the traffic lanes on the B.F. the next time I venture into Philly.

"The other bridge that can be used to cross the Delaware River is the Tacony-Palmyra bridge. The approach on the Jersey side is pretty good. The Philly side is a little dicey, but is doable. I have not tried during a weekday rush hour, though. The walkway is pretty narrow and you are supposed to walk your bike, but I have ridden it. There is nothing south of the Ben Franklin, though, as none of the other bridges has a walkway" dougc

Thanks Doug. I wasn't aware you could cross this bridge. I'm trying to plan a tour along the canal path to Easton, Pa. The Burlington-Bristol bridge would be the best crossing point but of course there's no access. I'm thinking of trying to hitch a ride across from a pickup driver. Of course hitch-hiking is illegal in NJ. Did someone say fascist?

Originally posted by Roughstuff
Of course, dude, it only has to happen once.

True, but this applies to many other facets of life as well, including many more dangerous than riding in traffic which people undertake on a daily basis.


Originally posted by thbirks
Well, then I agree with your main thrust, but I think that if you could see the situation with these bridges you'd be pleased as could be to share a path with annoying pedestrians. I'll try and get a photo of the traffic lanes on the B.F. the next time I venture into Philly.

Please do, because this argument is sounding so much like the one I hear about the Story Bridge in Brisbane or the Sundale bridge on the Gold Coast, both of which I have ridden numerous times and have never felt in any danger at all, and on both of which, the footpath/shared path/whatever politically correct name, is more dangerous than simply using the road.

The bridges between Pennsylvania, New Jersey, and Delaware are almost totally inaccessible to bicycles

I suppose you know that one (and only one) bridge between NJ and Philly is accessable. It's teh Ben Franklin bridge. I cycled accrosed it last summer.

WHAT A BRIDGE!

thbirks,
I made my previous post before reading the entire thread. Maybe you don't know about the Ben Franklin. Last summer I road from Easton Pa to Phily and then to NJ.

There is always one "sidewalk" open for cycling and walking on the Benn Franklin. Sometimes its the right side and sometimes it's the left.

The "sidewalk" is easily 8 to 12 feet wide and very nice. It's about 30 feet higher than the roadway. The NJ side has a flight of stairs you have to climb to get to the walkway, but they have installed a ramp next to the stairs so you can push you bike up it.

The walkway itself is great - even some stone benches along the way. It's a massive bridge with great scenery. The bridge takes you to the center of Phila, and there are bike lanes in Phila.

One more thing. I've got a bunch of digital photos of the B.F.
When I get home I'll try to post some.

I just ride on the road, the same as I do everywhere else. I'm yet to have any problems.

Chris,

i'm a major cyclist too, but... there are unfrotunately many areas in the US where the only bridge is a restricted access freeway and bikes are prohibited.

and even if it is not prohibited, riding on some of these high-speed, heavy traffic roads is pretty unpleasant and is of questionable safety (not as unsafe as most people would say, but not my idea of a good situation to put myself in either) - i would do it one time for a tour, but not routinely for a commute... honestly Chris, not even Sydney has anthing close to the unfriendly traffic ridden masses of inept auto drivers that the majority of US cities have - Canada is in general a little better and the US West Coast better than the rest of the country (and small towns are quite OK)...

in Portland (which has a lot of bridges as the Williamette runs through the middle) virtually all of the bridges have bike provisions mainly b/c of advocacy groups like BTA and Citizens for Sensible Transportation - a few years back they did a renewal of the Hawthorne bridge and it was planned with an extension outside the car lanes on both sides for bike and pedestrian acces. then the project ran over budget and guess what was cut... the advocacy groups and citizens lobbied and it was build WITH the bike and pedestrian facilities. I've ridden on the I-205 bridge (over the Columbia) and i think the I-5 OR/WA bridge is OK too.

the Northwest tends to be pretty good, but there are exceptions: on the south side of Vancouver B.C. ( i think on the Canadian extension of US I-5) is a long tunnel/bridge (uh, forgot the name) and there are no bikes allowed. on my tour we considered some other routes but all seemed WAY out of the way. there is a bike shuttle for a few dollars that runs like every hour or so during the day... and they had a trailer that held my BOB trailer too, so for touring it was adequate

in the US i've even encountered problems like trying to get in to new shopping centers where the only entrance is via an Interstate... also i wanted to ride to the airport one time and i was told by authorities that at many airports in the US it is not allowed to go to the airport by bicycle - i ended up taking the train instead so i never found out if it was true or not...

anyway, the point is that unfortunately in many places in the US the roads DO NOT allow cylists and if there is no other road... well it's tough

as far as the bridges of the East Coast goes... i've ridden a few during rides (like the George Washington) and a few during organized inline-skates in the Philadelphia area... but i don't have any useful info.

we don't have the kind of Bridges out here in T.O. I mean the like of Golden Gate Bridge

Originally posted by nathank

and even if it is not prohibited, riding on some of these high-speed, heavy traffic roads is pretty unpleasant and is of questionable safety (not as unsafe as most people would say, but not my idea of a good situation to put myself in either) - i would do it one time for a tour, but not routinely for a commute... honestly Chris, not even Sydney has anthing close to the unfriendly traffic ridden masses of inept auto drivers that the majority of US cities have -

1. Traffic mass has no correlation with danger to cyclists. When I was in Victoria I found Melbourne to be a safer experience than Geelong, which is one twentieth of it's size.

2. If you want inept auto drivers, come no further than right here. Put it this way, after a couple of weeks cycling here (including some Friday night commutes) you'll soon realise that off-road bikepaths provide no protection from being hit by cars. Drivers around here simply cannot be relied upon to stay within the confines of the road. It's actually safer in heavy traffic because they drivers simply don't have the space to do the sort of crap they normally do.

3. In spite of the above, I have never suffered even so much as a broken bone in over 100,000km of riding. I'm sorry, but this whole "riding in traffic is dangerous" thing is just crap. Personally I think it exists only to avoid having to make motorists accountable for their actions. Every time a cyclist gets injured or killed, all we hear is "cycling is dangerous" (motoring deaths are conveniently forgotten). People are just afraid of being accountable for their actions.

Originally posted by nathank

in Portland (which has a lot of bridges as the Williamette runs through the middle) virtually all of the bridges have bike provisions


I absolutely enjoyed the last part of the STP when riding across the St. John's Bridge towards Cathedral Park. And yes, there was plenty of space for cyclists and auto traffic.

http://www.neebu.net/~khuon/images/cycling/rr/STP_13Jul2002-14Jul2002/0026AT.JPG

I also enjoyed the Lewis and Clark Longview Bridge spanning the WA/OR border. We actually got a police escort going over that one. |8^)

No St. Johns Bridge this year, however; it's going to be under repair work by summer, so STP will be rolling into Northeast Portland and finish near Lloyd Center. I, too love the Longview bridge. We did the ride last year and the police escorts were most welcome. STP is really a Critical Mass ride in bourgeoise drag that gets away with it. What small-town cop is gonna risk busting some Bellvue stockbroker on her Litespeed?

Who rides across fairly large bridges on their bikes? How do they accomodate you - pedestrian walkways, special lanes, etc.?

>>> I do ! :-)
I live in Vancouver, B.C. We have several bridges here due to all the water. Anyway, the only bridge I normally use is Cambie Street Bridge and it's great. It is easily 10-12 feet across and is for both pedestrians and cyclists as well as in-line skaters and horses (police horses).

Tons of space, VERY safe and no problems.

There are a couple of other bridges which aren't so easy to use. There are no bike lanes on either of them and the traffic is usually very fast moving and unforgiving. I would never want to cycle amongst them but some do.

We have a great system of pathways and of course the Seawall here which is a great 39 Kilometer course passing a number of different beaches. Fantastic views and they divide the pedestrian and cycling traffic so you don't get people wondering in front of you or cutting you off.

Justen

Living in an area that is a group if islands, bridges are a certainity on almost every ride. Most newer bridges built from about 1976 on have wide shoulders built in. A new bridge, and a very important connector between Beaufort and Hilton Head Island, is being built and has bike lanes planned into it. The lanes don't connect to any other lanes or pathways!! It will make the crossing safer. The current brige is 1 1/2 miles long, but only 16' wide!

1. Traffic mass has no correlation with danger to cyclists. When I was in Victoria I found Melbourne to be a safer experience than Geelong, which is one twentieth of it's size.

2. If you want inept auto drivers, come no further than right here. Put it this way, after a couple of weeks cycling here (including some Friday night commutes) you'll soon realise that off-road bikepaths provide no protection from being hit by cars. Drivers around here simply cannot be relied upon to stay within the confines of the road. It's actually safer in heavy traffic because they drivers simply don't have the space to do the sort of crap they normally do.

3. In spite of the above, I have never suffered even so much as a broken bone in over 100,000km of riding. I'm sorry, but this whole "riding in traffic is dangerous" thing is just crap. Personally I think it exists only to avoid having to make motorists accountable for their actions. Every time a cyclist gets injured or killed, all we hear is "cycling is dangerous" (motoring deaths are conveniently forgotten). People are just afraid of being accountable for their actions.

The Bay Bridge in the SF Bay Area is indeed a Freeway as mentioned previously. The only access to it is a Freeway, and bikes are prohibited on Freeways in California. This is a tightly enforced traffic code. Furthermore, at the Westbound entrance to the bridge, all of the access is TOLLED, and the manned tollbooths will not accept money from a cyclist, they're more likely to call the highway patrol and have you removed.

There is hope, however, as plans to add a bike lane (sepearate from automobile traffic) has been integrated into the design of a replacement for the eastern half of the bridge that is currently under construction, which also a means a bike access separate from the freeway will be provided. However, this will get you only half way to San Francisco... Treasure Island, as there are no plans currently under way to add a bike lane to the western span of the bay bridge. One can dream for the future though.

I've never ridden in Australia, but here in the San Francisco Bay Area, despite bike lanes, despite a general bike-friendly driving populace, you get hit. Period. It is often said among the bike messengers in this area that it's not a matter of IF you'll ever get hit, just a matter of when. I've been hit, and wasn't at fault, nor was there a way for me to avoid it, on a major thoroughfare, with a bikelane, and a green light. I'm very happy for your good fortune, may it last a very long time. However, Although skill and care may reduce the risk of some automobile imapacts, some stupid drivers just make it unavoidable.

Lastly, one must also conisder that bridges are typically high-wind environments and even if you could get access to the bridge, sharing a VERY skinny lane with no shoulder with an automobile going 50-70 mph with potentially VERY high crosswind bursts is just plain suicidal.

All that being said, aside from major bridges, I would generally very much agree that riding on the road is far safer than trying to share a space with pedestrians.

After all that, the real reason I'm responding to such an old post... does anyone know how things are looking for a lane on the Western span of the Bay Bridge? It would be nice to ride to work.

I certainly wish the San Diego - Coronado Bridge had bicycle and pedestrian access. All bridges should, since the alternate route is kinda wet. :)

coming down the east coast from Maine to Florida, I found 99% of the bridges passable by bike. The exceptions were that big bridge just north of Savannah (sorry I can't recall the name) and th Chesepeake Bay Bridge Tunnel. I hear the CBBT has a shuttle service but you have to set it up well in advance of your arrival, something I couldn't do. For those two bridges I just stuck my thumb out and got a ride over pretty quick.

PS coming out of new york I took the PATH train under the river to Hoboken, so I didn't have to sweat those bridges.

The PATCO trains are another way to get across the Delaware if the Ben's walkway is closed. They run 24x7, and cost $1.15 each way. AFAIK, bikes are allowed on all trains. I wouldn't recommend getting off at the first two Jersey stops (Camden) late at night, but the trains continue on to other towns in Jersey. They way I look at it, that's still cheaper than the $3 toll that motorists must pay.

To the people saying that we should just bike in the car lanes on the bridge: I don't disagree in principle, but that will generally not work in Philadelphia, at least on the Ben Franklin. If you saw this bridge, I think you would understand. The average speed of the crossing cars has got to be at least 45 mph (~72kph), except during rush hour. It is usually saturated with vehicles, and they zig-zag between lanes like crazy. In addition, it's illegal and the police posted at either end of the bridge will surely stop you if you try to cross the bridge that way.

Some bridges and underpasses have narrow 12" to 18" curb/sidewalks and can be ridden on walked on while you pull the bike along with you. Going under the runways at LAX was exciting. Check each and every bridge. Some I would try at 2AM as soon as I see a patrol car has gone by :D . I would like to try riding thru some of the bigger vehicle tunnels using the huge airducts. 100MPH tailwind. :lol:

The only place I ever lived with a real bridge was San Diego. I cannot imagine anybody riding a bike on the Coronado Bridge. Where's HH? I'd like to hear if he rides that bridge. I was terrified to even drive on it. The way that it sweeps way up in the sky so high, so thin, with the icy cold sea way down below just begging to suck my drowning body gently to the ocean floor. It took my breath away. I'm a land-lubber through-and-through.

All seven of the Bay Area’s state-owned toll bridges touch-down in the East Bay counties of Alameda or Contra Costa. Thanks to the organized efforts of bike advocates, three are currently open to bikes, two are under construction and will provide access when completed (although the East Span is being built with a generous bike/ped pathway, the West Span pathway remains unfunded), plus we are currently negotiating for access to the shoulder of the Richmond-San Rafael Bridge. Here is the score:

* Dumbarton Bridge (SR-84) between Newark and East Palo Alto offers unlimited access on a path separated from the roadway by a barrier.

* Antioch Bridge (SR-160) between Antioch and the Sacramento Delta offers unlimited access on a bike lane adjacent to the vehicle travel lane.

* Carquinez (Zampa) Bridge (I-80) from Crockett to Vallejo was dedicated in April 2004 and offers 6am to 9pm access on a path separated from the roadway by a barrier.

* Benicia-Martinez Bridge (I-680) is under construction and a separated path will be installed on the west side of the existing span in 2009 following completion of the new span.

* Bay Bridge (I-80). We celebrate that construction is underway of a separated path on the south side of the East Span replacement for the structure damaged in the 1989 earthquake. We expect to ride between Oakland and Yerba Buena and Treasure Islands by 2013. Efforts are also underway to build the access to the toll plaza area. In 2001 a thorough $2 million West Span study determined that it is feasible to install bicycle/pedestrian/maintenance paths on both sides of the existing suspension span between Yerba Buena Island and San Francisco. Our SFBC/EBBC campaign to “bridge the gap” seeks $200 million to implement the plan.

* Richmond-San Rafael Bridge (I-580) prohibits bicyclists from using the existing 12-foot shoulders despite existing access to the bridge ends and two elaborate studies that show bridge access to be safe and feasible. We are currently participating in another design study to overcome new Caltrans stipulations that bicycle access must be separated from traffic and must preserve a third lane of travel in the peak direction. With the bridge redecking project expected to be completed in 2007, we are building political support to insure that the new roadway accommodates bicyclists.

* Hayward-San Mateo Bridge (SR-92) No direct bicycle access. Advocates were blocked from requiring access on the newly opened “causeway” portion of the bridge.

Indirect bicycle access aboard transit is available for all of the crossings (see: http://bicycling.511.org/bridges.htm) Images and substantial access discussions on each span can be found using the internal google of www.ebbc.org. Bottom line, access does not happen without advocacy. Support your local bicycle coalition!

Here's a picture of the GOOD half of the Hood Canal Bridge, taken today.

I ran into another cyclotourist this morning and we rode across the Hood Canal Bridge on the way back to the Seattle ferry terminal.

Here the bridge has been improved to offer an eight foot bike/breakdown lane. They are going to widen the other half of the bridge over the next few years.

On the unimproved half, it's riding the stripe and 6-12 inches of debris filled pavement. I didn't have the cojones to take out the camera for that stretch today, it was really windy.

There are some other, less well accomodated bridges in Washington State. Most of the highway bridges on Highway 2 coming down from Stevens Pass towards Puget Sound are no shoulder, unusable sidewalk, highway speed spans. Luckily, most of them are relatively short, a couple hundred yards or less.

I ran into a 400 foot, one-lane wooden bridge/trestle thing out on the Olympics this tour, it was pretty unerving because the approaches were both steep and curvy; I was envisioning a logging truck screaming downgrade, hitting the span doing 60.

(see: http://bicycling.511.org/bridges.htm)

http://bicycling.511.org/images/btwd06/newsom.jpg
Bike To Work Day
- Nike running suit...check
- baseball cap..check
- running shoes...check
- tourist rental bike..check
- try not to fall over in front of the camera...check

Gotta love our wacky mayor. ;)

Until recently that was a problem. The Interstate 430 bridge was the only way across the river for miles. Otherwise you had to pedal into downtown and cross one of the old bridges. Fortunately, now we have the Big Dam Bridge, exclusively for bicycles and pedestrians. Now that's the way a big bridge should be... NO CARS!

http://www.pointhappy.com/gcf/bicycle/BDBDSCF0068b.jpg
http://www.pointhappy.com/gcf/bicycle/BDBDSCF0059b.jpg

Answer to the post of several years ago: Cycling across the Tacoma Narrows Bridge should be a piece of cake. I (an engineer) made Pilgrimage there several years ago and walked out past one of the towers. A tandem could have gotten through there easily.

The only place I ever lived with a real bridge was San Diego. I cannot imagine anybody riding a bike on the Coronado Bridge. Where's HH? I'd like to hear if he rides that bridge. I was terrified to even drive on it. The way that it sweeps way up in the sky so high, so thin, with the icy cold sea way down below just begging to suck my drowning body gently to the ocean floor. It took my breath away. I'm a land-lubber through-and-through.


Yeah, the Coronado Bridge is a dangerous bridge. No walkways, no shoulders, no bicycles allowed. To get to Coronado on your bicycle, you have to take the ferry.

Once I read in the Union Tribune about a bride and groom on the way from their wedding and their car had a flat tire on the bridge. Of course they got out to fix it. Both were killed by a car that slammed into their car.

Coronado Bridge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/San_Diego-Coronado_Bridge)

http://www.automatters.net/photos%20-%20gallery/Vacations/20050824%20Coronado%20bridge_0115LO.jpg

With that in mind, a dedicated pedestrian and seperate cycle way bridge was constructed, this turned out to be a modern work of art, winning prestigeous archi`al awards throughout Europe .
Known as the "blinking eye"bridge, costing £9 Million .

Cool looking bridge

http://static.flickr.com/55/132778994_ec3d70136a_m.jpg

Bikes and peds ONLY. Closed to car traffic a few years ago, and now it's quite heavily traveled.

http://enquirer.com/editions/2003/04/20/bridge_300x115.jpg

Please do, because this argument is sounding so much like the one I hear about the Story Bridge in Brisbane or the Sundale bridge on the Gold Coast, both of which I have ridden numerous times and have never felt in any danger at all, and on both of which, the footpath/shared path/whatever politically correct name, is more dangerous than simply using the road.
The Story Bridge is limited to 60 kph, which people tend to keep fairly close to (now that they've installed speed cameras). Coming out of the city, it is mostly a downhill run, so bikes can almost keep up with traffic. Into town is a bit tougher, I've removed a wing mirror on the Story Bridge.

In Britain, virtually all big bridges have pedestrian/cycle options - First Severn Bridge, Humber Bridge and so on. The Dartford Crossing east of London doesn't but operates a bike shuttle bus on demand.

In Brisbane, the second Gateway Bridge will include pedestrian and cycle access, restoring options taken away when the ferry was replaced by the first bridge nearly 20 years ago.

Personally I'd prefer not to mix it with traffic on the Bay Bridge and Golden Gate.