Mathews Bridge Breaking News

[thelakelander]

Yeah, looking at those interchange modifications, they'd be ripping out several residents, businesses and industries to accommodate flyovers.

[simms3]

Thanks for clarifying Clear Center Span (was thinking it meant separated spans as in SF's newest bridge).  But you also mentioned single tower cable-stayed.  Given the width of the SJR there relative to Savannah River (your clear span example), is it possible to have a single-tower clear center span?  That's a tallll tower.

Also, what are the benefits of a clear center span right there?  Especially if there aren't going to be many ships coming through?  Would it have helped in this case?  Or is just the design du jour?

ON THE DAMES POINT BRIDGE: Not a single tower cable stayed, just that our one tower is in the drink and shouldn't have been. Any future bridge needs to have one tower on the land, and the other over nearer Exchange Island, leaving a broad channel . The JAXPORT and Maritime interests absolutely created a firestorm to try and get JTA/DOT to raise and lengthen that span, as I recall they got next to nothing. Today the port and the public will pay for that error for decades to come. The only redeeming value being that a cable-stayed bridge CAN BE raised fairly easily, segment by segment, cable by cable. It is going to happen in New York Harbor. We could gain maybe 5-10 feet, I doubt much more without it getting REALLY expensive.

ON THE MATHEWS: The benefits of the clear span would be ships making that sweeping turn would not have to negotiate both a bridge and a right angle turn in a river with either northbound current or southbound tidal ebb and flow. The shipyard on Commodore Point has been growing rapidly and seems to be getting a lot of defense contracts. We really don't have a very useful piece of property on the seaward side of the bridges to offer them as an alternative.

As for a clear span helping in this case, YES. The tugs were working along with a dock master to reposition the ship, they entered the channel and tried to transit under the bridge and push up to the yard on the riverine side of the bridge. They had to watch for the tallest point, and apparently misjudged, were caught by current, wind, unexpected/detected tides etc.


Just speculating what might be done with a new cable-stayed bridge. We could get a LOT more wiggle room.

Thanks, very informative.

[coredumped]

All this talk about billion dollar bridges makes me wonder if we should be thinking TUNNEL.

That's an interesting idea! Doing some quick googling the Syndey Harbour Tunnel cost $554 AUS in 92. Converting that to USD and using an inflation calc, it would cost $863 USD in todays money. The length is 2.8km (1.7miles).

Edit: For comparison, the mathews bridge is just under 1.5miles, but the width of the st johns appears to be about 1 mile, so only about a mile would need to be under water.

[carpnter]

All this talk about billion dollar bridges makes me wonder if we should be thinking TUNNEL.

That's an interesting idea! Doing some quick googling the Syndey Harbour Tunnel cost $554 AUS in 92. Converting that to USD and using an inflation calc, it would cost $863 USD in todays money. The length is 2.8km (1.7miles).

Edit: For comparison, the mathews bridge is just under 1.5miles, but the width of the st johns appears to be about 1 mile, so only about a mile would need to be under water.

While a tunnel might make more sense to construct, I don't know that the soil conditions under the river would support a tunnel. 

[I-10east]

Is that based on your many years of experience in Logistics I-10?

And by "no big deal", what on earth do you mean?  To you?  To shippers?  To maritime planners?

Or are you just weighing in with an opinion from the diner?

That's right with a channel that wide, it's no 'freaking big deal' to intermodal shipping, the Carnival Fascination, among many other large ships. Suddenly the DPB is the only bridge with a pier in the water....

[Scrub Palmetto]

That's an interesting idea! Doing some quick googling the Syndey Harbour Tunnel cost $554 AUS in 92. Converting that to USD and using an inflation calc, it would cost $863 USD in todays money. The length is 2.8km (1.7miles).

Edit: For comparison, the mathews bridge is just under 1.5miles, but the width of the st johns appears to be about 1 mile, so only about a mile would need to be under water.

I've been wondering about the possibility of a tunnel as well. Here's an article mentioning a related situation in 1962:

50 years ago this week
04/02/2012
by Max Marbut

[. . .]

It was pointed out that tunnels instead of bridges had been considered several times since the 1920s, but since a tunnel cost two to three times more to construct than a bridge, only bridges had been built in Duval County.

The possibility of constructing a tunnel underneath the river to connect the Expressway between 20th Street and Arlington was declared not feasible by consultants and traffic engineers.

Besides high construction and maintenance costs, the depth of the river between the two points made the project impractical, according to George Hills of the Reynolds Smith and Hills architecture firm.

Safety regulations dictated that the incline of a tunnel floor could not be too steep. Because the water in the St. Johns River was so deep at the proposed site, a tunnel would have to be built with an incline that would put its entrance and exit terminals "a good distance" from the river, he said.

[. . .]

full article: http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=536080&searchtext=ribault

How true are these things today? Is the bridge-tunnel cost comparison above unique to the St. Johns, or tunnels in general? Has the cost gap narrowed in the last 50 years? Also, I know the river is pretty much the same depth at the Mathews location as at the 20th St location, but how far would the entrances really have to be? If we can already get a roadway to ascend 150 feet between the MLK Jr & University interchanges, couldn't it descend deep enough between them as well?

(How stupid do I feel that after 3 decades of life on this Earth, I've only just now realized our bridge is spelled with only one 'T', not two. Ugh.)

[Jason]

It seems to me that if a tunnel can be built beneath the Port of Miami's shipping channel, we should be able to do it as well.  Miami's tunnel (now under construction) is pretty deep and a similar length.  They had to build a custom boring machine to build it that may be able to be used here (just speculating).

Does anyone have any more background on the differenes between soil/bedrock conditions in Miami and Jax?

[Jason]

Wiki says the tunnel will lie a minimum of 60' below the seabed and is only 3/4 mile long.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Port_of_Miami_Tunnel

http://www.portofmiamitunnel.com/home/

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uq2Zj0sH1jE

[Cheshire Cat]

Seems there is a public informational meeting scheduled tomorrow to discuss the bridge and upcoming repairs.

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-09-30/story/town-hall-meeting-mathews-bridge-repairs-scheduled-tuesday-night

State Rep. Lake Ray, R-Jacksonville, will host a town hall meeting to discuss concerns regarding repairs to the Mathews Bridge from 6 to 8 p.m. Tuesday at the Nathan H. Wilson Center on the FSCJ South Campus at 11901 Beach Blvd.

The meeting will address the estimated cost and time frame for repairing the bridge, and the public will also be invited to ask questions.

Officials with the Florida Department of Transportation and City Council Vice President Clay Yarborough will also attend Tuesday's meeting.

Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-09-30/story/town-hall-meeting-mathews-bridge-repairs-scheduled-tuesday-night#ixzz2gPYDmZyf

[Riverrat]

Seems there is a public informational meeting scheduled tomorrow to discuss the bridge and upcoming repairs.

http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-09-30/story/town-hall-meeting-mathews-bridge-repairs-scheduled-tuesday-night

Officials with the Florida Department of Transportation and City Council Vice President Clay Yarborough will also attend Tuesday's meeting.

Oh. Thank heavens Clay Yarborough will be there. I'm sure it will be a groundbreaking meeting of the minds. 

[coredumped]

According to that wiki link Jason sent:

The project was temporarily cancelled in late 2008 due to the financial crisis but was resumed in 2009, with construction commencing in May 2010, and the tunnel is expected to open in May 2014.

So we're looking at about 5 years for a tunnel (if we started today). To do that they'd obviously still have to fix the bridge.

5 years is a long time for the Mathews bridge since she was being considered for replacement years ago. She's tired and needs to be REtired soon They ought to start looking at options now so we can have something completed in the next 10 years.

[YellowBluffRoad]

Would FDOT propose a replacement project be a toll bridge? They're now supporting tolls in other places in Duval County (tolls for "optional lanes" on 295, tolls on the "outer beltway" including the Duval section) so I'm  pessimistic about whether our local option sales tax would protect Jax from tolls on a bridge that's not an Interstate bridge. Would the local option sales tax provide enough funding to even consider replacing the bridge (whether with another bridge or with a tunnel) without adding tolls to it? I'm worried they'd have the same counterargument in this case that they do with the outer beltway and the additional 295 lanes ("people can always use a different route if they don't want to pay the toll").

[spuwho]

Did some more digging through the archives of the old web site.

There was a mention that "Public Hearings for the Mathews Bridge Replacement will commence once JTA finalizes their BRT strategic plan so it can be included in the design"

There were no updates after that.  I wonder why?

[Charles Hunter]

The local option sales did not even have enough money to complete the original Better Jax Plan project list.  Some have been dropped entirely, some delayed indefinitely (which may really be the first category), and the FDOT has taken over some.  A couple years ago, the FDOT Secretary said in 2011

Declaring gas tax financing of roads "not sustainable" the Florida secretary of transportation Ananth Prasad said recently that tolls will be the first choice for financing all new capacity and doing major bridge replacements in Florida. According to the prepared text for remarks at a talk in Marco Island August 5 the state's transport chief said: "Florida will be implementing a policy that all new capacity on interstates and expressways and widening and replacement of all major river crossings should be tolled where feasible or at the very least tolls should complement traditional funding in delivering the improvements and new capacity."

So, if that were followed, the new Mathews would be a toll bridge.  But that is probably not politically sustainable, so I would expect 4 free lanes - to match the existing bridge - and additional tolled 'express' lanes tying into express lanes perhaps running from Regency to downtown.  But the first step to a new Mathews Bridge is to get the project into the North Florida TPO's Long Range Transportation Plan - a process that is just getting underway and will conclude by November 2014.  http://pathforward2040.com/

[Ocklawaha]

Did some more digging through the archives of the old web site.

There was a mention that "Public Hearings for the Mathews Bridge Replacement will commence once JTA finalizes their BRT strategic plan so it can be included in the design"

There were no updates after that.  I wonder why?

Those buses got hit pretty hard by a room full of streetcar!