Bailey Bike Bridge

I was thinking about transportation finance recently. Today, multi-modal projects can receive significantly more federal funding than uni-modal projects. The means that adding a bike/ped component to a major project can be free for states. As always I was wondering what this could mean for the Brent Spence.

Where is the bike/ped component in the image below?

 

There is none. Peds can use the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge today. 

Six (on BSB) plus three (on CWB) local lanes seems a little excessive to me. It all seems a little excessive to me.

If I were to ride my bike from Cincinnati to Covington I would probably use the Robling bridge as the man below (google street view) has done. 

What we could do today:
Road diet the Clay Wade Bailey Bridge to add protected bike lanes in both directions - eliminating the reversible lane. The intersections on both sides of the bridge should be looked at to make sure bikes are visible and respected.

Then - extend Redbike to Covington.

Maybe Second street will someday look less like a parking lot overpass/ highway ramp and more like an urban street. The current setup sends the message to drivers that they are still on a highway. Adding bike lanes would narrow the street - helping drivers to realize that they need to be alert of their surroundings. Best thing that can happen on a street like this is to make the driver uncomfortable so that they slow down.

What do you think? Do we need a reversible lane on the Bailey? Would you bike on it today? Is the Robling bridge enough? Do we need 5 car bridges and one person bridge? Should every local bridge have bike lanes?

Finally - what if you had a chance to add in a bike component to the $3 billion plan? It would be a rounding error on the budget. I am thinking that 6 local lanes on the BSB and 3 on the Bailey is too many. Covington could have one of the best bike bridges in the country by taking 3 of the 9 local lanes proposed.

Purple People Bridge - you have a challenger.