Main St. Bridge: Repurpose? Replace?

[jaxlongtimer]

After the accident that killed 2 people this past weekend on the Main Street Bridge, comments are appearing on the internet saying the lanes are too tight to maintain safe travel in 4 lanes.

So... should the bridge be modified, maybe for three lanes, with the middle lane being one way and reversed based on time of day?  Should there only be two lanes and the other two are incorporated into wider travel lanes with added bike/pedestrian lanes (which adds the question of whether the "Landing" ramp should remain for pedestrian/bike access)?  Should we start over and replace the entire bridge? Or, do we just leave it as is?

For comparison purposes, I note that we have another "new" area bridge in a downtown area that is also heavily traveled and it was kept at 2 lanes for historic purposes:  The Bridge of Lions in St. Augustine.  If you don't like the backups, you have to travel to the next bridge crossing.

I find it interesting that the Main St. bridge has somehow become an icon for Downtown.  Growing up here, I don't recall the bridge getting that kind of attention.  Most people cursed it for going up for boats at the most inconvenient times (some things never change  ).  I guess just outliving the original Acosta Bridge moved it to the forefront as it assumed the title of our oldest bridge.  It also gained new appreciation when it was incorporated into the logo for the Super Bowl here in 2005.

Don't get me wrong, I like the bridge's retro style and reminder of our past.  I am just wondering what others here think of it and its current configuration.

[tufsu1]

yes - the bridge needs fewer, wider lanes....which would allow for dedicated bike lanes (the grating can be covered), meaning the sidewalks would be just for peds.

The Acosta offers plenty of auto capacity

[marcuscnelson]

I think replacement is out of the question. That's expensive, and there are many other priorities. If any bridge is getting replaced anytime soon, it would (and probably should) be the Matthews. As tragic as this accident is, it's relatively rare, and I would be shocked if the city changed anything as a result of it.

I'd argue that if we're going to do anything at all, the two-lane+pedestrian lanes idea sounds decent. We've closed it completely to pedestrian access before, for the Super Bowl. The Mayor's "Riverfront Plaza" proposal includes a smaller ramp for pedestrian/bike access, although whether it will actually be implemented is possibly in question. Reversible lanes is an alternative option, although I don't know how well that works with it being a movable bridge. Either way, there'd be a matter of adjusting to sending much more access through the Acosta.

I'm young enough that I don't remember it being anything other than iconic, but I do think it's nice to look at and a decent gateway. The matter is making what's at the other end worthwhile.

[thelakelander]

The lanes are fine if people drive slow. I'm not sure of the speed limit there but people tend to gun it on the bridge. On the other hand, the AADT is only 13,700. Other than the off chance of capacity being preserved for in case of hurricane evacuation or I-95 being shut down, going down to two lanes with a cycle track could work too.

[acme54321]

The lanes are tighter than normal and seem more so because they are boxed inside the bridge. If anything they should put those flappy lane markers down the center divider to get people's attention of they drift over center.

[Ken_FSU]

The lanes are fine if people drive slow. I'm not sure of the speed limit there but people tend to gun it on the bridge.

This.

As someone who drives over the Main Street Bridge twice daily, I honestly don't think there's anything inherently dangerous about the bridge.

It's tight, but I'm more nervous driving on a highway with a narrow shoulder than I am on the Main Street Bridge.

To Lake's point, I'm not a traffic engineer, but there's something really screwy with the timing of the lights down Main Street as you approach the bridge from the Northbank that causes people to absolutely GUN through those last three or four lights. Puts you on the bridge at like 65 mph. I've seen it almost cause some pretty bad accidents.

Lower the speed limit, tweak the timing of the lights, and put up the flappy lane markers described above and I think you get the same result without adding the further confusion of having a lane that alternates direction depending on time of day.

It'd be the most Jacksonville thing ever to replace the Main Street Bridge.

[Charles Hunter]

Given the amount of development around both ends of the Main Street Bridge, I think replacement is off the table. This is especially the case if the Coast Guard would require the same 65-foot clearance above the river as the new Acosta.  The current clearance is 35 feet (or 40', 2 sources, 2 numbers) in the down position.

According to Wikipedia, the bridge deck is 58' wide, 42' of which is the roadway, implying two 8' sidewalks. At 42', each of the four lanes is just over 10' wide.  If you reconfigure to have three lanes, at 12' each, that would leave six feet, which could be added to the sidewalks. Not really wide enough to create 2 bike lanes, and would be tight if all six feet were on one side. 

Widening both sidewalks would likely not be cheap, given how 'tall' the sidewalk is above the roadway and the removal/relocation of the barrier wall.  The advantage to widening both sidewalks would be to provide more of a buffer, on both sides, between the roadway and the bridge piers.  But, it seems to this non-engineer, widening only one sidewalk by six feet might be less expensive.

Whether having a center reversible lane would be appropriate would depend on whether the peak-hour traffic is "directional enough" - back of the envelope numbers for 2 lanes in one direction, and one in the other would be a 67%/33% traffic split.  If peak traffic is more evenly split than that, perhaps one lane in each direction might work - if there is a way to safely pass stalled vehicles. 

Two lanes could be done with 24' of auto lanes, leaving 18 feet for a buffered cycle track - which, in an emergency would provide room to get around a stalled car.  This seems to be the best solution.

As noted by others, the Acosta Bridge has plenty of available capacity for cars.

[BridgeTroll]

Distracted drivers cross medians and cause head on collisions.  Put down your damn phone and drive your car.  I think the center divider is a good idea...

[acme54321]

The speed limit on the bridge is 30.  I'm sure they were going a LOT faster than that. 

[JPalmer]

The FDOT has already stated the bridge is functionally obsolete. 

https://www.news4jax.com/traffic/2016/01/26/fdot-2-downtown-bridges-obsolete/

[Charles Hunter]

From the FHWA website, they stopped using the term "functionally obsolete" in Fiscal Year 2015.

Functionally Obsolete (FO): This term was previously defined in https://www.fhwa.dot.gov/bridge/0650dsup.cfm as having an appraisal rating of 3 or less for Item 68 (Deck Geometry), Item 69 (Underclearances), or Item 72 (Approach Roadway Alignment), OR having an appraisal rating of 3 for Item 67 (Structural Condition) or Item 71 (Waterway Adequacy). Functionally obsolete is a legacy classification that was used to implement the Highway Bridge Program, which was discontinued with the enactment of MAP-21. As a result, fiscal year 2015 was the last year outstanding Highway Bridge Program funds could be obligated on eligible projects, including ones with bridges that were once classified as functionally obsolete. Therefore, FHWA is no longer tracking this measure, and will not be publishing it on our website for the 2016 data forward. Our focus has shifted to a performance-based program as established in MAP-21 and continued in the Fast Act. As such, we encourage the use of the Good-Fair-Poor bridge condition measures outlined in the Pavement and Bridge Condition Performance Measures final rule, published in January of 2017.

From the Florida DOT website

The bridge inventory in Florida ranks among the best in the nation, as a percentage of bridges that are considered "poor" (FHWA's Tables of Frequently Requested NBI Information). The tables below retain two older terms, Structurally Deficient (SD) and Functionally Obsolete (FO). FO means that the bridge design is outdated. For example, narrow shoulders, narrow lanes, or older traffic barriers can induce the functionally obsolete classification. Functionally obsolete bridges are scheduled for replacement or rehabilitation as budgets permit.

Note the "as budgets permit" - it will be a long time before the FDOT budget allows replacing this bridge.  They will continue to spend funds to "rehabilitate" the bridge, especially the machinery that raises/lowers the bridge to allow boat traffic.  It might be possible to convince FDOT to include a "lane diet" as [part of] a bridge rehab project.

[Adam White]

Do you guys remember the old Acosta bridge? I may be wrong, but I seem to remember that being far tighter and scarier than the Main St bridge.

I never had issues with the Main St bridge - of course, maybe if I drove a big car or truck, it might seem too tight.

[Steve]

In a dream world with piles of money lying around (maybe from when we sold JEA in a very transparent manner), I'd do this:

- One lane in either direction
- Cycle Track on either side (Sidewalk for peds only)
- Get rid of the Southbank flyover. Bring the intersections with Prudential, Mary, and Riverplace at grade.
- Offer to convey now surplus land (where the at grade "service road" is on either side of the flyover) to the adjacent landowners for $1....PROVIDED they agree to add retail to their buildings. That would be the ownership of the Suddath, Former Stein Mart HQ, Prudential/Prudential Parking Garage Buildings. The last adjacent property is Treaty Oak Park (obviously don't put that into private hands except perhaps a Restroom/concession kiosk). It could make a nice pedestrian friendly area.
- On the northbank, if you can bring the bridge ramps to grade at Independent Drive, then do so. That may not be possible though. If not leave as is and demolish the ramp to Newnan Street if development is there to make use out of it.

Back to reality (Curry is still the Mayor):

- Reduce to 2 lanes
- Add Cycle Track.
- Call it a day.

That should be somewhat cheap, but I'd also say this is not in my top 10 for Downtown.

[vicupstate]

I'm surprised no one mentioned the need/desire to close off a lane for a hot dog cart.  Obviously said cart should be placed at the apex of the bridge. 

Let's see if Tampa/Miami can top that!   

[Steve]

I'm surprised no one mentioned the need/desire to close off a lane for a hot dog cart.  Obviously said cart should be placed at the apex of the bridge. 

Let's see if Tampa/Miami can top that!   

Blast from the past....did we ever decide if the Hot Dog cart goes up with the bridge?