It’s Obvious Why I-90 Shouldn’t Have a Pedestrian Path (Opinion)
The reasons are obvious. The Billings Gazette is reporting that despite a push to get a lane for bicycles and pedestrians approved on the Lockwood bridge, the state ruled it out. The answer is and should be a loud NO. Trucks and cars don't mix with bikes and people. Keep in mind this is an Interstate highway. They don't even allow access roads or turnouts on these roads for obvious reasons. Bicycles are allowed to use every other type of road in the city. State highways, city streets, trails--everything. The interstate is used for massive transportation requirements for cars and trucks. High speed and high volume does not mix with recreation.
There is a reason why drone traffic is not permitted near airports. There is a reason why canoes and kayaks are not allowed in major shipping channels. And there's a reason why construction zones are operated at a reduced speed. Why? People and large equipment. We just had another fatal motorcycle accident on Grand Avenue and that was with a machine that can keep up with traffic speed and flow and use the roadway.
I get your push to have the two sides of the river connected, but using the interstate is not the answer. Pick which side you want to ride on and unload there. The only part of the ride you will miss is the 2000 feet across the river. One final point, keep in mind that kids are allowed to use the trails or pathways too. That in itself is enough not to allow it. Don't you think that cars and trucks should have a road that's just for cars and trucks?
LOOK: Route 66’s quirkiest and most wonderful attractions state by state
Check Out the Best-Selling Album From the Year You Graduated High School