The current Johnson Street Bridge has two car lanes going east, out of downtown, and one lane going west. Most transit systems seem to be designed around more condensed rush hour in the morning, so I never really understood why they weren’t divided the other way (perhaps growing out of the awkward approaches?). The plan for a replacement bridge maintained three car lanes – I like to think that the middle lane would be reversible, although there’s no evidence of that.

Right now there are signs stating that cyclists have use of a full lane and cars should not pass them on the bridge. I’ve always found this works well (I come from Wharf Street to the south mostly), but Ryley tells me he’s been honked at a few times. Whether they’re actually safer, most cyclists prefer a seperated bike path or bike lanes. So both refurbishment and replacement plans have always assumed one or the other.

JohnsonStreetBridge.org has a good argument that the City should try converting one lane of traffic into two bike lanes for a few weeks to see what happens. Given the cost of such an experiment compared to the amount being spent on analysis of the bridge, I think it’s a no-brainer. The question is whether it’s a fair test if the approaches aren’t tweaked as well?

I’d like to see the City doing a lot more experiments, like converting car parking to bike racks. How about some affordable housing experiments?