Fuller Warren Bridge Replacement - Major Missed Opportunity for Jacksonville

[Timkin]

which is probably why the center span was concreted in , to replace the dangerous grating that once was there............

[Noone]

The Fuller Warren should have been just as notable being on I-95 and as part of the Downtown "skyline".

stjr You nail it. And that is why legislation needs to be introduced right now to compliment 2010-604 that would keep the Promised 680' Downtown Public Pier separate from the other 40 plus acres that was Shipyards/Landmar.

To quote North Miami when it happens we will have

"Jacksonville's front porch. Southern style"

[acme54321]

Interstates can not have bikes or peds...its just that simple!

Now maybe there could have been a separate pedestrian bridge connecting the two sides of the river....and this might make sense if/when there are riverwalks on both sides....but the state/fed won't pay fo this...it will have to be the City and/or privately funded. 

I know that this is way after the fact, but your statement is at least partially incorrect.  Interstates can (and do) have cyclists on them, I have seen it with my own eyes, also horses.  I would imagine that pedestrians are allowed on those stretches also.  They have extra wide shoulders to accomodate these other user types.

[subro]

Utah is currently trying to pass a law prohibiting pedestrians from their Interstates.

http://www.ksl.com/?nid=148&sid=14498207

Measure to outlaw pedestrians on interstates advances

February 24th, 2011 @ 9:58am
By ksl.com

SALT LAKE CITY -- A bill that will outlaw pedestrians on Utah's freeways cleared the House Wednesday and is on its way to the Senate.

Currently, it's illegal to hitchhike on Utah's interstates but not to walk on them.

Rep. Lee Perry, R-Perry, who is also a Utah Highway Patrol lieutenant, is sponsoring . It would make it a class C misdemeanor to walk on an interstate except during an emergency. The fine would be determined by a judge.

Perry told the Standard-Examiner that previously troopers have thought it was illegal to walk on the freeway, but in reality it wasn't.

Although pedestrians on the freeway are not common, Perry says often they are transients moving on to a new location.

[finehoe]

This from the FHA:

Each State establishes the operating rules that determine which vehicles are allowed on the Interstate highways under their jurisdiction.  Most States do not allow bicyclists on the Interstate shoulders, but bicycle use is permitted in some States, particularly in the west where there is less traffic and where good alternative routes may not exist for bicycles.  Determining if bicycle access should be permitted is done only after careful study and consideration of how bicyclists and motor vehicle traffic can safely negotiate on- and off-ramps.  The safety of all roadway users must be considered.  In addition, some Interstate highways, mainly in urban areas, have been built with bicycle paths.

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/interstate/faq.htm

[120North]

In Florida, limited access highways are off limitis to bikes and pedestrians.  These include interstate highways like I-95.  With the Acosta and Main Street Bridges having pedestrian facilities in place as well as connections to the surface streets on either side of the river, having a pedestrian facility was certianly not critical.  Also, not sure how many of you have actually walked next to interstate traffic but it is just freaking scary.  I have inspected my share of interstate bridges, including the FW and the Myrtle Ave. Arch, and tell you what, there is nothing like a mirror of a semi truck flying by you at 60+ mph a foot or two from your skull to make you realize that its not such a good idea for people to be walking next to I-95.

As for the FW itself, I believe it was originally built to be a "local road" type bridge.  When they were planning I-95, the FW was either just finished or nearly finished, it was also 4 lanes making it the logical choice to carry I-95 across the SJR. 

When it was to be replaced, the biggest hurdle to overcome in the replacement was the phase construction and  maintenance of traffic.  It was not feasible to completely shut down the existing bridge to build the new one on alignment.  A replacement bridge could not be completely built off the alignment due to constraints at each end of the bridge.  One portion was built first, the existing one demolished, and then the rest was built.  This method does not lend itself to the construciton of a "signature bridge" like a suspension or cable stayed structure.  Due to the construction methodologies employed by those types of structures.

[stjr]

If there are plans to replace the I-95 Overland Bridge, I hope the design includes aesthetically pleasing elements for a change.

Lake, saw this old post and was just wondering, how's your idea turning out?  I suspect we will get the same ol' tried and true unimaginative FDOT concrete pillar/dirt mound project and your dream will remain just that, a dream.