Note: Other Truxel Bridge posts are available under category ‘Truxel Bridge‘.

Update: Photos of boards from the community meeting added below. Another post shortly will cover information from the meeting. The presentation from the meeting is available. Not very useful, but have at it.

The City of Sacramento is proposing a multi-modal bridge over the American River and American River Parkway in alignment with Truxel Road. The website is Truxel Bridge Concept and Feasibility Study. Multi-modal means, in this case, transit, walking, bicycling, AND motor vehicles. The first public meeting is today, January 10. Very little information is available ahead of time, a two-page flier, and reference to the American River Crossing Alternatives Study Summary Report 2013, which in turn refers to the Sacramento County American River Parkway Plan 2008, with the relevant part being in Chapter 8, Bridge Crossings of the American River, page 133.

From the Sacramento County American River Parkway Plan 2008: “While all crossings can degrade the Parkway in some way, crossings designed for automobiles cause greater impacts than those designed for pedestrians, bicyclists, and equestrians in terms of noise, light, possible litter, quantity of use, duration of use throughout the day and night, and size and scale of the crossing itself.” The plan accepted the possibility of a walking-bicycle-transit bridge over the river, but did not accept a motor vehicle bridge.

The crossing alternatives document presents three alternatives: 1) a ‘no project’, which is only no-project from the motor vehicle perspective, as the bridge for walking, bicycling and transit would still be built; 2) enhancing existing bridges to make them multi-modal; and 3) building a new multi-modal bridge. Eight alternative alignments and projects were considered, and Alternative 3, a multi-modal bridge crossing in alignment with Truxel Road, was selected.

Throughout the study and the current page and flier, claims are made that a multi-modal bridge would reduce VMT (vehicle miles traveled), both by providing the alternatives to motor vehicle travel, and by shortening the distance of motor vehicle trips. We know that expansion of motor vehicle capacity ALWAYS induces more vehicle trips. The outcome of more trips versus shorter trips is an unanswered question, but unless the city can provide solid data to support its claim of reduced VMT, this justification for the bridge should be rejected.

Though the study is vague on details, the graphic below represents a possible configuration. There are walking and bicycling paths on both sides, and a two-lane, two-way bridge where light rail is mixed with motor vehicle traffic. STAR notes that light rail in traffic is subject to safety issues and delay of transit, as well as deterioration of pavement and tracks, so is never the best option, but is not absolutely opposed to mixed flow.

STAR is not in favor of the original concept of Green Line light rail to the airport. There are concerns about cost, likely over $1.5B, and low ridership. The current bus service to the airport, Route 142, at 60 minute frequency but effectively 30 minute for part of the day by combination with YoloBus 42A/42B, is not well utilized. It is unlikely that SacRT would ever receive full funding for such an expensive project with low ridership potential. STAR believes that ridership demand should demonstrated by high frequency bus service before commitment to light rail construction. That has not happened. However, the area north of the American River, South Natomas, is very poorly served by any transit, so there is a case to be made for light rail to that area, including light rail across the American River at Truxel Road.

Truxel Bridge is of course not just a transit project, but a transportation project. We will keep our eye on it as it becomes better defined, and we hope you will too.

Added information.

Note about the cross-section alternatives: All three options are displayed as the same width on the display board, but clearly they would not be. No measurements are shown for widths of various allocations. Presumably these diagrams were produced in StreetMix, which by default shows widths of each feature, so this was turned off to create these. How wide are those bike lane. Can it accommodate cargo bikes and three-wheeled bikes? How wide is the sidewalk, and can two wheelchairs pass? The project engineer staff who spoke said that all these aspects of the bridge had been researched, but seemed unwilling to share such details with the public.

• SacRT light rail
• Truxel Bridge