The Mathews Bridge is shut down in both directions due to a ship hitting the bridge
Channel 4's crew at the scene reports visible damage to the structure. Exactly what struck the bridge and how is still unclear.
http://www.actionnewsjax.com/content/actionbreaking/story/Mathews-Bridge-closed-in-both-directions-vessel/zIls68y9gkO8KiON1zw2VQ.cspx
Well that is going to suck for people who have to travel to or through downtown until they get that fixed.
http://www.news4jax.com/news/accident-closes-mathews-bridge/-/475880/22136666/-/30xdsc/-/index.html
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -
The Mathews Bridge is closed in both directions after a large ship being towed underneath struck the span.
Channel 4's crew at the scene reports visible damage to the structure. Exactly what struck the bridge and how is still unclear, but a vertical ramp on a large commercial vessel moored nearby is also damaged.
The U.S. Coast Guard did not have the name of the vessel under tow that struck the bridge, but their crews are enforcing a 200-yard safety zone around the bridge while the accident is investigated
The Florida Department of Transportation structural engineers assess the damage and structural integrity to the span.
"One of the supports was damaged," FDOT spokesman Michael Goldman said, adding that vehicles are being kept off to ensure that the weight does not cause additional damage.
As how long the bridge will remain closed, he said, "It will be a while. I'd be shocked if it reopened before rush hour."
Police are directing traffic to use the Hart Bridge until further notice.
This article will be updated as more information becomes available.
Copyright 2013 by News4Jax.com. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
This could have been really bad.
A span or two over, and it could have potentially brought the whole bridge down.
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- The Mathews Bridge is closed in both directions until Monday due to an accident.
According to the Jacksonville Fire and Rescue Department, a cargo ship hit the bridge causing major damage, closing traffic in both directions of the bridge until further notice.
According to Mike Goldman with the Florida Department of Transportation, the bridge will be closed the rest of the day. A tweet from FDOT updated the closing through Monday.
The cargo ship was coming inbound to Jacksonville and hit the Northwest corner of the bridge.
JFRD is asking the community to use alternate routes, stating the bridge unsafe for traffic at this time.
Goldman said the boat struck a high level support.
First Coast News has a team headed to the Mathew Bridge. We will update this story as get more information.
First Coast News
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/news/breaking/article/329389/17/Ship-slams-into-Mathews-Bridge-bridge-closed
This affects Jaguar game...
I'm hoping to see some footage released since there has got to be several cameras aimed at that part of the bridge at all times.
:o Christ... I already have a mild phobia of certain bridges, including the Matthews. This news is eroding the "mild" qualifier.
Looks like a certain ship's captain will be looking for work... soon.
Looks like a good bit of damage in this picture
http://www.news4jax.com/news/accident-closes-mathews-bridge/-/475880/22136666/-/30xdsc/-/index.html
Quote from: Ralph W on September 26, 2013, 03:55:19 PM
Looks like a certain ship's captain will be looking for work... soon.
It may have been a ship Pilot?
Gameday is going to be pretty bad :(
(http://www.news4jax.com/image/view/-/22137438/highRes/1/-/maxh/360/maxw/640/-/145udomz/-/Damage-to-Mathews-Bridge.jpg)
Quote from: coredumped on September 26, 2013, 04:23:06 PM
Gameday is going to be pretty bad :(
(http://www.news4jax.com/image/view/-/22137438/highRes/1/-/maxh/360/maxw/640/-/145udomz/-/Damage-to-Mathews-Bridge.jpg)
Why because the Jaguars are 0-3? People will just have to leave earlier to get to the stadium. Besides all the other bridges will be open.
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 26, 2013, 04:19:59 PM
Quote from: Ralph W on September 26, 2013, 03:55:19 PM
Looks like a certain ship's captain will be looking for work... soon.
It may have been a ship Pilot?
It appears it is a Navy ship and the Captain ALWAYS goes down with his ship.
Quote from: Ralph W on September 26, 2013, 04:28:57 PM
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 26, 2013, 04:19:59 PM
Quote from: Ralph W on September 26, 2013, 03:55:19 PM
Looks like a certain ship's captain will be looking for work... soon.
It may have been a ship Pilot?
It appears it is a Navy ship and the Captain ALWAYS goes down with his ship.
I'm not a 100% sure of that I have always heard that a Ship Pilot is the one that brings any good size ship up/down the St Johns River?
(http://media.defenceindustrydaily.com/images/SHIP_TAK-3015_USNS_1st_Lt_Harry_L_Martin_USMSC_lg.jpg)
Here is the ship that hit the Mathews Bridge today 9/6/2013
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 26, 2013, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: Ralph W on September 26, 2013, 04:28:57 PM
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 26, 2013, 04:19:59 PM
Quote from: Ralph W on September 26, 2013, 03:55:19 PM
Looks like a certain ship's captain will be looking for work... soon.
It may have been a ship Pilot?
It appears it is a Navy ship and the Captain ALWAYS goes down with his ship.
I'm not a 100% sure of that I have always heard that a Ship Pilot is the one that brings any good size ship up/down the St Johns River?
True, a pilot, familiar with local waters and waterway quirks would most likely be employed to guide a ship, but the Captain is still charged with knowing everything about his ship, including required clearances up, down and sideways. A competent Captain would know the height of a bridge span and the height of his vessel including any thing that might have changed the everyday height above water in relation to the overhead obstruction. That would also include tidal variations. I still think he's toast.
Laid down in 1980 as the German-flagged containership M/V Tarago, the USNS 1st Lt. Harry L. Martin was acquired by the US Navy in 1995 and was converted for service as a prepositioning ro-ro/container ship in Jacksonville before entering service in April of 2000. Named in honor of Medal of Honor recipient Harry L. Martin, the ship is operated by the Military Sealift Command as part of Maritime Prepositioning Squadron One.
http://wikimapia.org/#lang=en&lat=30.400057&lon=-81.522782&z=17&m=b&show=/6061255/USNS-1st-Lt-Harry-L-Martin-%28T-AK-3015%29
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 26, 2013, 04:25:19 PM
Why because the Jaguars are 0-3? People will just have to leave earlier to get to the stadium. Besides all the other bridges will be open.
0-3? Season ticket holder here, I'll be there, will you?
You ever been to a game? The traffic is already very bad/backed up. Everyone leaves the game around the same time.
All other bridges are
always open (including the Mathews) and traffic is pretty bad.
Quote from: coredumped on September 26, 2013, 05:20:23 PM
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 26, 2013, 04:25:19 PM
Why because the Jaguars are 0-3? People will just have to leave earlier to get to the stadium. Besides all the other bridges will be open.
0-3? Season ticket holder here, I'll be there, will you?
You ever been to a game? The traffic is already very bad/backed up. Everyone leaves the game around the same time.
All other bridges are always open (including the Mathews) and traffic is pretty bad.
No I injured myself several years ago and getting around with crutches sucks! I find it funny how you can't take a joke you said "Gameday is going to be pretty bad" so I said "Why because the Jaguars are 0-3? People will just have to leave earlier to get to the stadium. Besides all the other bridges will be open." And yes I have been to several games over the years. A lot of times I would go by river taxi so I wouldn't have to pay $30.00 for parking.
Quote from: Ralph W on September 26, 2013, 04:45:09 PM
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 26, 2013, 04:31:00 PM
Quote from: Ralph W on September 26, 2013, 04:28:57 PM
Quote from: If_I_Loved_you on September 26, 2013, 04:19:59 PM
Quote from: Ralph W on September 26, 2013, 03:55:19 PM
Looks like a certain ship's captain will be looking for work... soon.
It may have been a ship Pilot?
It appears it is a Navy ship and the Captain ALWAYS goes down with his ship.
I'm not a 100% sure of that I have always heard that a Ship Pilot is the one that brings any good size ship up/down the St Johns River?
True, a pilot, familiar with local waters and waterway quirks would most likely be employed to guide a ship, but the Captain is still charged with knowing everything about his ship, including required clearances up, down and sideways. A competent Captain would know the height of a bridge span and the height of his vessel including any thing that might have changed the everyday height above water in relation to the overhead obstruction. That would also include tidal variations. I still think he's toast.
Capt. Tim McGill, president of the St. Johns Bar Pilot Association, said a number of tug boats were carrying the military supply ship from Blount Island to the shipyards so that Blount Island could be dredged. He said the ship was not under its own power. http://www.news4jax.com/news/accident-closes-mathews-bridge/-/475880/22136666/-/30xdsc/-/index.html
JACKSONVILLE, Fla. -- Naval vessel USNS Lt. Harry L. Martin, a Surge Sealift Ship, hit the Mathews Bridge, causing major damage to the bridge and shutting it down past Monday.
The USNS 1st Lt. Harry L. Martin was being tugged by four civilian tugboats when the ship struck the bridge near the center span at 2:15 p.m. Thursday, according to a United States Coast Guard press release.
The port side stern ramp impacted the Matthews bridge when it was traveling to the North Florida Ship Yard Inc., in Jacksonville, Florida, according to LCDR Corey Barker, Fleet Public Affairs Officer.
The ship was empty of cargo at the time and there are no reported injuries on the ship or the civilians tugboats.
The ship belongs to the Military Sealift Command, however it is run and managed by civilians, Barker said.
"Damage is more than thought initially which is why we are saying 'indefinitely,'" Mike Goldman says. "The boat and/or insurance company will get the bill for this repair."
Jacksonville Transportation Authority tweeted that the bridge will be under repair for one month.
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/topstories/article/329389/483/Ship-slams-into-Mathews-Bridge
MATTHEWS BREAKING BRIDGE NEWS... UM...
Hey, not to worry, people can just use the BRT, or Light Rail... Well okay, maybe not. Anyone up for a 'Aerial Cable' system?
Whacking the weakest, lowest scoring bridge in town doesn't bode well for the next year or two.
News4Jax just shared a overview photo shot of traffic right now. Wow, looks pretty rough. Patience everyone.
JACKSONVILLE SHERIFF'S OFFICE DETOURS DURING MATHEWS BRIDGE CLOSURE AND REPAIR:
■ Detours from downtown - The eastbound primary detour route is to the Hart Bridge via the Union St. Expressway to the Sports Complex exit. The westbound primary detour route is to the Hart Bridge via Cesery Boulevard to Atlantic Boulevard – motorists should be aware of possible added delays due to heavy construction.
■ Detours from the Southside - Interstate 95 South to Emerson Street and University Boulevard.
ROAD CLOSURES REGARDING MATHEWS BRIDGE CLOSURE
■ East Beaver Street entrance ramp to Mathews Bridge and both the Martin Luther King Boulevard Southbound Exit heading West into downtown and the Southbound at East Bound Mathew Bridge Exit.
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2013-09-26/story/traffic-alert-jacksonvilles-mathews-bridge-shut-down-after-ship-hit-it#ixzz2g2YBegmQ
Wow. Well if Arlington weren't deteriorating rapidly enough before...
A couple of weeks ago (each year) they shut down the Bay Bridge for about 5 days for maintenance, and that bridge typically brings about 280,000+ vehicles a day into the city from the East Bay (I think Matthews is around 67,000). BART posted some of its highest ridership to date during this year's shut down with 450,000-500,000 riders each weekday and 250,000-300,000 riders each weekend day. Negated of course by BART strikes 2 months ago and 1 coming up, when ridership of course goes to 0 and bridge traffic is stopped 24 hours a day in both directions. Guess it helps to have alternatives (SF has literally 2 - one bridge and one Transbay Tube), but at least Jax has lots of alternative roads and relatively minor traffic compared to lots of places.
(http://jacksonville.com/sites/default/files/imagecache/lead_photo_wide/bridge2_0.jpg)
Quote
She said the ship was 754 feet long and 116 feet wide. It displaces 51,531 tons of water when traveling, she said. It was on its way to the North Florida Ship Yard in Jacksonville, Morris said
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2013-09-26/story/traffic-alert-jacksonvilles-mathews-bridge-shut-down-after-ship-hit-it#ixzz2g2apl1Dz
http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2013-09-26/story/traffic-alert-jacksonvilles-mathews-bridge-shut-down-after-ship-hit-it
Clearly a big ship for Jacksonville...but these kinds of ships used to park along that area and by the Hart Bridge all the time...I guess with the picture one can see that 150 ft clearance is not that high.
Bridge Clearances for Peer Shipping Channels
JacksonvilleHart Bridge - 141 ft
Matthews Bridge - 152 ft
Dames Point Bridge - 175 ft
Brunswick, GASidney Lanier Bridge - 185 ft
SavannahTalmadge Memorial Bridge - 185 ft
CharlestonArthur Ravenel Bridge - 185 ft
TampaSunshine Skyway Bridge - 175 ft
New YorkVerrazano Narrows Bridge (Hudson) - 228 ft
Lincoln Tunnel - depth of 97 ft
George Washington Bridge (Hudson) - 212 ft
Brooklyn Bridge (E River) - 135 ft
San FranciscoGolden Gate Bridge - 220 ft
Bay Bridge (Port of Oakland) - 220 ft
Transbay Tube - depth of 135 ft
Richmond-San Rafael Bridge (Port of Richmond) - 185 ft
Carqinez Bridge (Sacramento River Delta/port) - 148 ft
HoustonFred Hartman Bridge - 262 ft
Sam Houston Ship Channel Bridge - 175 ft
Sidney Sherman Bridge - 135 ft
New OrleansCrescent City Connection (twin spans near DT that look like Matthews) - 170 ft
Baton RougeHorace Wilkinson Bridge (like Matthews) - 175 ft
Huey P Long Bridge (also like Matthews) - 113 ft
MobileGeorge Wallace Tunnel - 40 ft depth
Guys, guys, it's fine! Everyone can just take the 20th St Bridge!
Oh.... wait.
Atlantic between 95 and Art Museum was a parking lot. Beach wasn't much better.
Quote from: Scrub Palmetto on September 26, 2013, 07:13:26 PM
Guys, guys, it's fine! Everyone can just take the 20th St Bridge!
Oh.... wait.
JU killed that years ago.
Raw video: Jacksonville's Mathews Bridge hit by ship
http://www.firstcoastnews.com/topstories/article/329432/566/Raw-video-Mathews-Bridge-hit-by-ship
Quote from: simms3 on September 26, 2013, 06:53:13 PM
Wow. Well if Arlington weren't deteriorating rapidly enough before...
Arlington is deteriorating?
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2012-dec-jacksonvilles-densest-neighborhoods
Do people forget that Arlington is more than just Regency? It also include million dollar homes on the water. Sure it has it's problems (like every neighborhood in jax) but no place is perfect.
Back on topic, JSO needs to update the lights to favor the heavy traffic. All they need to do is look at google maps.
At least now we have an answer to "How could the Jags season possibly get worse?"
Quote from: KenFSU on September 26, 2013, 11:47:12 PM
At least now we have an answer to "How could the Jags season possibly get worse?"
Hush. At this rate one of the cruise ships could run into the Dames Point.
All those height figures are variable when you consider that the river rises and falls. Tides although predicted often don't follow the predictions and can be higher or lower and at different times than publized. Rain water also affects the river level independent from tide. It is a dynamic system, bridge clearance.
The ship was also empty and in the shipyard. Empty of cargo............what about fuel and water?. ......or other structures? all would cause it to ride higher.
At least the bridge is still standing. Could have been really bad.
According to Action News, the bridge could be closed for months...
QuoteThe UNF associate professor says an inspection could take days. Repairs to the complex cantilever truss structure could take months.
"It is a sophisticated process of reviewing the design, going through the inspections very thoroughly and then coming up with a very good detailed repair plan. A repair itself is not going to be easy," he said.
Depending on what the inspection reveals, the entire section of the bridge may need to be cut out and replaced.
Engineers say they hope it's not the nail in the coffin for the bridge.
"To replace it, we will need hundreds of millions of dollars to replace such a bridge because it's very costly," El Safty said.
full article: http://www.actionnewsjax.com/content/topstories/story/Local-engineer-says-bridge-fix-could-take-months/bzRtiOlCkkm2XO8lS5_gKw.cspx
I'd be fine with cutting our losses on the bridge and building a new one. It's going to have to happen anyways.
The second I read that there was severe visible damage I laughed at the reports of the bridge "not likely to be reopened in time for rush house." When that first picture came out, you could tell this is going to take months to repair. Not to mention it's going to take time for the city to put this out to the lowest bidder.....
Quote from: Josh on September 27, 2013, 09:02:02 AM
The second I read that there was severe visible damage I laughed at the reports of the bridge "not likely to be reopened in time for rush house." When that first picture came out, you could tell this is going to take months to repair. Not to mention it's going to take time for the city to put this out to the lowest bidder.....
Technically it would be FDOT putting it out to the lowest bidder. Hopefully they won't use the same contractor that is replacing the bridge on Riverside Ave at Willow Branch.
Quote from: Josh on September 27, 2013, 09:02:02 AM
The second I read that there was severe visible damage I laughed at the reports of the bridge "not likely to be reopened in time for rush house." When that first picture came out, you could tell this is going to take months to repair. Not to mention it's going to take time for the city to put this out to the lowest bidder.....
( :o Not to mention it's going to take time for the city to put this out to the lowest bidder.....) So is this a joke?
This and the hart bridge were built during an era when our regional government was deliberately trying to kill off the waterfront downtown as part of a so-called redevelopment. I believe Stephen found articles from back in the day where folks were saying the bridge clearances were too low for ships even back at the time the bridges were built, let alone now that ships have grown larger. The dames point poses a similar problem, they designed it with clearances sufficient for cargo ships but not for cruise ships, which has hampered efforts to attract that industry. I think moving forward you're either going to have to build new ones with higher clearances, or let the remaining waterfront industries die off or relocate. Most already did move to the Blount island area after the Matthews was built.
Of course none of that excuses whoever was responsible in this instance for not judging the clearance properly. It doesn't really matter whether the ship was unladen, they all have the distance to the keel painted on the hull for this reason, you just add the number of feet showing above the waterline to the clearance height, it's not rocket science.
Didn't North Florida Shipyards just get a federal grant to expand? I believe they may be one of downtown's largest employers.
Didn't the Bridge receive a failing grade recently?
Just looked, I guess not failing but in need of repairs
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-jan-dangerous-bridges-in-jacksonville
Quote2010 Inspection
Status: Open, no restriction [A]
Average daily traffic: 67,500 [as of 2008]
Truck traffic: 2% of total traffic
Deck condition: Fair [5 out of 9]
Superstructure condition: Fair [5 out of 9]
Substructure condition: Satisfactory [6 out of 9]
Channel protection: Bank is beginning to slump. River control devices and embankment protection have widespread minor damage. There is minor stream bed movement evident. Debris is restricting the channel slightly. [6]
Pier/abutment protection: In place and functioning [2]
Scour condition: Bridge is scour critical; bridge foundations determined to be unstable. [3]
Operating rating: 36.0 tons [32.7 metric tons]
Inventory rating: 27.6 tons [25.1 metric tons]
Evaluation: Functionally obsolete [2]
Sufficiency rating: 43.6
Recommended work: Other structural work, including hydraulic replacements. [38]
Estimated cost of work: $4,093,000
Not a good day for bridges yesterday:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/26/us/wisconsin-bridge-sagging/?hpt=hp_t2
DANGER AHEAD: America's bridges and roads crumbling, and the Highway Trust Fund is set to go broke in 2014
One in nine U.S. bridges are structurally deficient, but few Washington politicians seem willing to confront the problem.
Read more: http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/u-s-bridges-crumbling-highway-trust-fund-broke-article-1.1416409#ixzz2g6GjIi1v
That's the ironic thing, this bridge was in good shape, they'd actually just wrapped up refurbishing it during most of 2012 at significant expense, which is why it was closed half the time until relatively recently. Just in time to get hit by a ship.
Here are some inspection photos of the damage: http://jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=540637
Months to fix... >:(
Yep, they said the damage was far more extreme than they first thought. That was one heck of a mistake on the part of that ships captain from the look of things. :( What do you bet that as work progresses more problems will be found? I am thinking that will be the case.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 27, 2013, 01:03:49 PM
That's the ironic thing, this bridge was in good shape, they'd actually just wrapped up refurbishing it during most of 2012 at significant expense, which is why it was closed half the time until relatively recently. Just in time to get hit by a ship.
wrong....the concrete work to replace the metal grating was done in 2007. They are CURRENTLY working on a $20+ million rehab project to repaint the bridge and replace all the bolts....which is in response to the bridge rating study noted in the post by Bridges one page back
Story on JBJ stating they could possibly reroute and use traffic on other side while repairs are being made to north side of bridge damaged. Of course all very prelim at this point. This was comment from Ray Lake. Not sure you would find me using. :D
Oops. Make that Lake Ray.
Inbound in the morning & outbound in the afternoon, or one lane each direction?
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 27, 2013, 03:08:56 PM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 27, 2013, 01:03:49 PM
That's the ironic thing, this bridge was in good shape, they'd actually just wrapped up refurbishing it during most of 2012 at significant expense, which is why it was closed half the time until relatively recently. Just in time to get hit by a ship.
wrong....the concrete work to replace the metal grating was done in 2007. They are CURRENTLY working on a $20+ million rehab project to repaint the bridge and replace all the bolts....which is in response to the bridge rating study noted in the post by Bridges one page back
Ok, either way, just in time to get hit by a ship. Not sure that changes my point...
BLONDE JOKE OF THE DAY? This mornings News gal on channel 4's morning show, was asking questions of a Coast Guard Spokeswoman on the scene.
NEWS BABE "As we drive around we see all of these bridges have the clearances clearly painted under them, we don't see that here, could that be an issue here?"
COASTIE OFFICERS SAVE: "Well we are considering all areas right now, nothings been ruled out."
After which she probably turned, grabbed her side and fell into the ditch laughing!! UM! For those that don't get it? There is NO set clearance under waterway bridges as tidal ebb and flow and or storm and floodwaters can greatly change the distance. LOL
^^even more frightening perhaps she was referring to the vehicle clearances on the bridge span!! Hey. Never know with our top notch reporters. :-\
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 27, 2013, 01:03:49 PM
That's the ironic thing, this bridge was in good shape, they'd actually just wrapped up refurbishing it during most of 2012 at significant expense, which is why it was closed half the time until relatively recently. Just in time to get hit by a ship.
I don't think it had been wrapped up at all - I live near Empire Point and the Mathews Bridge is still closed every weekend due to ongoing work. Traffic gets pretty bad - especially if I need to head east on Atlantic - and my guess is now it will be a lot worse for a lot longer.
Quote from: Traveller on September 27, 2013, 04:39:55 PM
Inbound in the morning & outbound in the afternoon, or one lane each direction?
Speaking of that, it's a shame reversible lanes aren't more prevalent. Imagine if you could regulate how many lanes are going in and out of downtown on the Hart Bridge right now.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 27, 2013, 05:22:37 PM
There is NO set clearance under waterway bridges as tidal ebb and flow and or storm and floodwaters can greatly change the distance. LOL
This is an overrated quote though. For smaller bridges they post clearance by foot...so if you're crossing under the Ortega Bridge, the Acosta, Main Street, Buckman, Roosevelt, Doctor's Inlet, etc etc you can see the clearance in real time in your personal watercraft. Obvi for ships this isn't the case, but they have radios, they know the tides, and generally in a big storm (Nor'Easter, Hurricane, TS, etc) they are not parking 700 ft ships anyway or navigating under bridges, LoL. As someone who grew up on the river and who has spent very much time on the water, the SJR is very predictable - really no material difference after your average afternoon storm, and tides are not extreme - 3 ft really.
If the clearance is give as 152 ft, I don't know all the rules - if that means average clearance, so +1.5 ft at low tide and -1.5 ft at high tide, or if that is maximum clearance (aka low tide), with -3 ft at high tide. However, I think SJR is pretty damn predictable and while for Jacksonville's lower bridges just inches can make a diff for the largest SJR-navigable ships, 3 ft diff is only a 1.9% diff on a 152 ft clearance. That's a generally negligible difference.
The issue here is less the clearance since they obviously knew the ship wouldn't clear, it's the tugboats inability to maneuver the ship safely to berth within dangerous distance to a no-clearance major bridge. My questions are why such a large ship? And why so close to Matthews Bridge? A 150 ft high, 750 ft long ship with over tonnage over 50,000 is a large ship for Jacksonville's navigable-limited waters. Shouldn't this thing be berthing at Blount Island? Who's making the decisions around here and how is this massive ship not under its own power at all while being towed upriver? I don't think you can just blame the tug captains here, and I do think Jax needs to acknowledge its waterway and bridge clearance limitations more now that it has become a serious issue with consequences.
According to the paper the ship normally docks at Blount Island, and was being moved so the channel could be worked on. That required going under the bridge, but another ship from the same place went under just fine a few days ago. There's still no word exactly what happened, hopefully we'll hear soon.
The 152 FT clearance number is the clearance at MEAN HIGH TIDE. basically meaning that the clearance is 152 feet at the average or median of all recorded high tides. So if we have a higher than normal high tide, the clearance would be less but that is an unusual situation. For Thursday at about 2:00 PM, it is pretty average and not yet high tide so at least the 152 feet and maybe even a foot or two extra.
The other consideration is the ship itself. What is the clearance of it loaded to what is it empty? Seems likely that someone either didn't bother to check at all or they used a loaded number. A friend was close by and said he heard one of the tugs giving horn signals so I suspect at least one person saw it coming and tried to do something about it but a ship that big moving at all is a lot to stop. The bridge itself couldn't do it.
Frankly, from the damage and some of the descriptions I have heard, it would not surprise me if the state came back and said it had to be replaced. I would not be looking for one side to be used in anyway as the damage is very severe and typically that type of structure works because of the small pieces making up the whole and if you remove one piece, all of it is weaker and easily can fail.
So much for Lake Ray's theory of using the eastbound lanes.....
QuoteStanding at the top of a Mathews Bridge devoid of motor vehicles, Florida Department of Transportation bridge maintenance officer Will Watts summed up the damage he was looking at.
"This is as severe as it can get without a bridge collapse," Watts said. "Right now it's in such a state that we can't even put service vehicles up here."
Read more at Jacksonville.com: http://jacksonville.com/news/crime/2013-09-27/story/mathews-bridge-repairs-will-cost-plenty-and-take-least-month#ixzz2gBvoGIYz
It's commendable that they will be over cautious, keeping all traffic off the bridge. No one should fault that decision keeping in mind that although the vehicular traffic continued until someone reacted and closed the span and nothing happened during that time, that strike took out what appears to be a major chord and undoubtably weakened adjacent connections which could further deteriorate with added pounding by use even on the opposite side.
I'd like to believe that the original engineering took into account the possibility of an accident like this and the structure is braced accordingly and methods of repairs have already been precalculated.
Quote from: Ralph W on September 28, 2013, 10:32:51 AM
It's commendable that they will be over cautious, keeping all traffic off the bridge. No one should fault that decision keeping in mind that although the vehicular traffic continued until someone reacted and closed the span and nothing happened during that time, that strike took out what appears to be a major chord and undoubtably weakened adjacent connections which could further deteriorate with added pounding by use even on the opposite side.
I'd like to believe that the original engineering took into account the possibility of an accident like this and the structure is braced accordingly and methods of repairs have already been precalculated.
Luck played a part in all this. The bridge could have come down from a hit like this. I think the issue with assuming anything about the design loads and possible repairs are the facts that in many cases, today's traffic loads are way over anything imagined in 1950's and the issue of fatigue. The bridge moves all the time. Eventually, things get worn out from age and with this damage, the repair could be higher than the cost of replacing it. Don't look at one damaged member, think the multitude of members damaged and twisted to some degree, including the damage you can't see but is there on the "good" side of the bridge. Even a little twist in a truss type structure can change the loads enough to reduce the load capacity of the structure significantly. I am thankful they closed it in time.
EXACTLY, this is WAY bigger then the local media or the DOT boys are letting on. My immediate concern is the fact that the structure is 60 years old, and has had a long history of varied and increasing loads. Heres a little primer:
Whenever a steel object such as a bridge (or railroad car) is subjected to a tensile, cyclic load, a situation that occurs with vibration, rocking, or other slight movements, you will find 'METAL FATIGUE'. Metal Fatigue is a slow growth of cracks, many barely detectible by the human eye, throughout the structure.
The cracks grow very slowly at first but can dramatically increase with age. They are generally sped up by an increase of stress at the top of the cracks. Keep in mind with two opposing pieces of steel, both subject to metal fatigue, the mutual support is affected by an ever diminishing cross section of material.
Metal Fatigue is often found at a point of extreme movement, load bearing, or where ever sharp corners, points, pins and such encounter the surface. Thus under a rail car for example, the 'center plate' where the car sits on the truck bolster is going to be a problem site, the car rocks and hunts and so does the truck, the center plate takes the brunt of the forces. This is why ships have round port holes rather then square ones. All of this is kind of hard to pull off on a bridge made of 90 degree steel beams. Even simple bolts and bolt holes can hasten the occurrence of Metal Fatigue.
It is often possible to find the source of the Metal Fatigue cracks, and some metals like mild steel are much less likely to develop cracks if engineered properly. Put those same forces or loads on aluminum and your toast!
Another factor that could well play into a disaster such as the recent one in the Twin Cities, is METAL FLAWS. There are two main types of flaws, systematic and statistical. Systematic flaws are usually fixed long before a product reaches market. These are flaws due to poor mold practices and the flaws themselves become predictable. Think of it as pressing a piece of clay against the same shard of broken glass, over and over again. You will always get an image of that same broken glass.
Statistical Flaws are the most dangerous and left undetected they can and have resulted in horrible death and destruction.
The statistical type of flaw includes gas cavities and non-metalic inclusions. These are encapsulated within the structural member itself and are IMPOSSIBLE to see. There are detection devices that use ultrasonic waves and a few other methods of scanning the structural members but on a bridge, the job would be daunting.
Add to these, a very hard hammer blow, and consider that hammer blow traveled the length and breadth of that bridge, and we've got a recipe for a major catastrophe. GO SLOW BOYS. WEAR YOUR PARACHUTES!
Here is what a railroad rail flaw looks like onboard a 'Herzog Railroad Flaw Detector Car.'
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/CRITICAL%20Doccuments%20Reports/ScreenShot2013-09-28at12113PM_zps4a0492d7.png)
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on September 27, 2013, 01:03:49 PM
That's the ironic thing, this bridge was in good shape, they'd actually just wrapped up refurbishing it during most of 2012 at significant expense, which is why it was closed half the time until relatively recently. Just in time to get hit by a ship.
And if it's closed for a month or more, that'll probably be just in time for them to move the ship back to its original berth east of the bridge, eh? They have to get a second shot at the bridge at some point. ???
Quote from: blizz01 on September 27, 2013, 09:30:48 AM
Not a good day for bridges yesterday:
http://www.cnn.com/2013/09/26/us/wisconsin-bridge-sagging/?hpt=hp_t2
Not a good week for bridges in general:
http://www.actionnewsjax.com/content/topstories/story/Sailboat-strikes-Bridge-of-Lions/Rd9kyjEDeEODKdZhRBp1RQ.cspx (http://www.actionnewsjax.com/content/topstories/story/Sailboat-strikes-Bridge-of-Lions/Rd9kyjEDeEODKdZhRBp1RQ.cspx)
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 01:24:22 PM
EXACTLY, this is WAY bigger then the local media or the DOT boys are letting on.
do you know something they don't?
A couple of months ago I tried to pull back up the FDOT/COJ website for the Mathews Bridge Replacement Project.
The site has been down for several years. I found parts of it on Rewind, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it mysteriously reappears in the next week or so.
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 28, 2013, 08:37:22 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 01:24:22 PM
EXACTLY, this is WAY bigger then the local media or the DOT boys are letting on.
do you know something they don't?
Spoke with my bridge engineer friends at a social function tonight here in WGV. They've basically said it's going to be bid like next week and they are pushing for replacement and reopening within a couple of weeks. But when they saw what I wrote above, they all FULLY AGREED and added: 'They will HAVE TO REPLACE IT NOW for safety.' And... 'Expect a Cable-Stayed bridge with a clear center span.'
So maybe I do... We'll see!
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
And... 'Expect a Cable-Stayed bridge with a clear center span.'
I hope I'm not sounding facetious, because this is a sincere question: what is a clear center span, as opposed to an unclear one?
Quote from: Scrub Palmetto on September 29, 2013, 01:10:49 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
And... 'Expect a Cable-Stayed bridge with a clear center span.'
I hope I'm not sounding facetious, because this is a sincere question: what is a clear center span, as opposed to an unclear one?
I believe exactly what is sounds like. See SF's new eastern span of the Bay Bridge (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eastern_span_replacement_of_the_San_Francisco%E2%80%93Oakland_Bay_Bridge) for a recent example:
(http://ww4.hdnux.com/photos/23/40/06/5112243/5/628x471.jpg)
(http://ww2.hdnux.com/photos/23/40/06/5112237/5/628x471.jpg)
http://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/Bay-Bridge-made-to-withstand-major-earthquake-4778622.php#photo-5112243
Hmm. If that happens, I hope they can at least make room for transit, bike and ped. Also, that would mean the closure would last a few years and funding would have to be shifted from several other projects.
You mean this incident could lead to replacing the Mathews?
by the way the bridge above cost $6.7B, and is suspension, not cable-stayed. A new Matthews wouldn't be nearly that expensive, but would surely be very very expensive as it is ($1B?) and considering. The bridge above replaced a cantilever section not unlike the Matthews, except the cantilever was doubledecker and had already partially collapsed in an earthquake (the whole section had been deemed unsafe for the two+ decades it remained open after 1989).
From what I remember about the Mathews replacement studies, just replacing the bridge isn't enough - at the very least, have to rebuild the interchanges on each end (MLK and University), and should rebuild the Arlington Expressway from the east, and The Expressway With No Name from the west. So, yeah, a Billion is probably a pretty good guess.
Quote from: Scrub Palmetto on September 29, 2013, 01:10:49 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
And... 'Expect a Cable-Stayed bridge with a clear center span.'
I hope I'm not sounding facetious, because this is a sincere question: what is a clear center span, as opposed to an unclear one?
Didn't mean to ignore your question there Scrub Palmetto. Here are a couple of examples of what they were talking about.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/Transporte%20Bus%20Truck%20HIGHWAY/BRIDGES-savannah-river-bridge-sunset-L_zps99e9d20d.jpg)
This is the Savannah River Bridge in Savannah. Georgia. Note that the towers are both on the shore which leaves the entire river channel open for unobstructed shipping. This bridge has a clear center span.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/Transporte%20Bus%20Truck%20HIGHWAY/BRIDGES-DAMES-POINT-US-ARMY-PIX_zps6c22a9b1.jpg)
Here is a similar angle of the Dames Point Bridge, note that the northern tower is actually in the edge of the shipping channel. This is why the two dolphins (the round bumpers) were placed there, this, along with the vertical clearance were both huge bones of contention when the project moved forward. This bridge has an obstruction in the center span.
Remember I'm just passing on some VERY INTERESTING conversation from our little bash last night. These guys are not pulling the triggers but they must be plugging in their expertise. It really bothered me that they both agreed with my theories of the bridges weakness and that they will 'rather recklessly' reopen this to keep from having a black eye. It might reopen in a week and stand another 100 years... but I think I'll take the Hart.
Quote from: spuwho on September 28, 2013, 11:05:31 PM
A couple of months ago I tried to pull back up the FDOT/COJ website for the Mathews Bridge Replacement Project.
The site has been down for several years. I found parts of it on Rewind, but I wouldn't be the least bit surprised if it mysteriously reappears in the next week or so.
http://web.archive.org/web/20100516044441/http://mathewsbridge.com/master.asp
The last link on the internet archive for the mathewsbridge.com site is back in May of 2010. Not very useful as a lot of the links don't work
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 28, 2013, 08:37:22 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 01:24:22 PM
EXACTLY, this is WAY bigger then the local media or the DOT boys are letting on.
do you know something they don't?
Spoke with my bridge engineer friends at a social function tonight here in WGV. They've basically said it's going to be bid like next week and they are pushing for replacement and reopening within a couple of weeks. But when they saw what I wrote above, they all FULLY AGREED and added: 'They will HAVE TO REPLACE IT NOW for safety.' And... 'Expect a Cable-Stayed bridge with a clear center span.'
So maybe I do... We'll see!
sorry Ock, but I'm calling BS here...unless those guys were up on the bridge the other day and/or involved with the analysis done this weekend, then it is just pure speculation.
and yes...if they were going to replace the bridge, they would likely build 6 or 8 lanes....which as noted above, would necessitate rebuilding interchanges at either end.....which even in an "emergency" situation, would likely take 2-3 years.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 29, 2013, 05:51:54 PM
Quote from: Scrub Palmetto on September 29, 2013, 01:10:49 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
And... 'Expect a Cable-Stayed bridge with a clear center span.'
I hope I'm not sounding facetious, because this is a sincere question: what is a clear center span, as opposed to an unclear one?
Didn't mean to ignore your question there Scrub Palmetto. Here are a couple of examples of what they were talking about.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/Transporte%20Bus%20Truck%20HIGHWAY/BRIDGES-savannah-river-bridge-sunset-L_zps99e9d20d.jpg)
This is the Savannah River Bridge in Savannah. Georgia. Note that the towers are both on the shore which leaves the entire river channel open for unobstructed shipping. This bridge has a clear center span.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/Transporte%20Bus%20Truck%20HIGHWAY/BRIDGES-DAMES-POINT-US-ARMY-PIX_zps6c22a9b1.jpg)
Here is a similar angle of the Dames Point Bridge, note that the northern tower is actually in the edge of the shipping channel. This is why the two dolphins (the round bumpers) were placed there, this, along with the vertical clearance were both huge bones of contention when the project moved forward. This bridge has an obstruction in the center span.
Remember I'm just passing on some VERY INTERESTING conversation from our little bash last night. These guys are not pulling the triggers but they must be plugging in their expertise. It really bothered me that they both agreed with my theories of the bridges weakness and that they will 'rather recklessly' reopen this to keep from having a black eye. It might reopen in a week and stand another 100 years... but I think I'll take the Hart.
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?
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 29, 2013, 08:10:47 PM
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.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/Transporte%20Bus%20Truck%20HIGHWAY/8d792a71-3236-403c-992d-135c4ebdd3cd_zps06008fbe.jpg)
Just speculating what might be done with a new cable-stayed bridge. We could get a LOT more wiggle room.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 29, 2013, 07:21:50 AM
Hmm. If that happens, I hope they can at least make room for transit, bike and ped. Also, that would mean the closure would last a few years and funding would have to be shifted from several other projects.
Lake,
I have seen the designs for the Mathews Replacement Project from 2007-2009 and there was room placed for pedestrian and transit in the cross section view.
Oddly, I had been looking for it off and on for the past few months before the bridge was struck.
RS&H did the study so I am sure it is floating around in one of their archives. A few phone calls and emails will probably pry it back out for view.
The last entry that I could recall from memory was that FDOT and JTA were working on the process to reserve funds to start the effort, but I never heard why they canned it. At this point I can only assume it was the bust in the economy.
Here is a PDF of the study on the Mathews Replacement on the possible changes required on the MLK.
The new span was to be built on each side of the old. Either keeping the old as a transit/pedway or demolishing it with the transit/pedway built into the new one.
http://web.archive.org/web/20070721001649/http://www.mathewsbridge.com/assets/RecAlternatives/Bridge%20Alternatives.pdf
From the bridge study.
Jacksonville Downtown/Mathews Bridge Expressway
Existing
4 Lanes
Possible Alternatives
8 Lanes + Transit
Mathews Bridge Alternatives
Potential Option 1: Single Bridge Option
Alignment Parallel to Existing Bridge
8 Vehicle Lanes, Transit
Replaces Existing Bridge
Potential Option 2: Separate Vehicle and Transit Bridges
Alignment Parallel to Existing Bridge
8 Vehicle Lanes
Provide Transit Crossing on Rehabilitated Existing Bridge
Potential Option 3: Phased Bridge Construction
Construct 4-Lane Bridge
4 Lanes of Traffic on New Bridge
Transit Envelope on Initial Bridge
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 29, 2013, 05:51:54 PM
Quote from: Scrub Palmetto on September 29, 2013, 01:10:49 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
And... 'Expect a Cable-Stayed bridge with a clear center span.'
I hope I'm not sounding facetious, because this is a sincere question: what is a clear center span, as opposed to an unclear one?
Didn't mean to ignore your question there Scrub Palmetto. Here are a couple of examples of what they were talking about.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/Transporte%20Bus%20Truck%20HIGHWAY/BRIDGES-savannah-river-bridge-sunset-L_zps99e9d20d.jpg)
This is the Savannah River Bridge in Savannah. Georgia. Note that the towers are both on the shore which leaves the entire river channel open for unobstructed shipping. This bridge has a clear center span.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/Transporte%20Bus%20Truck%20HIGHWAY/BRIDGES-DAMES-POINT-US-ARMY-PIX_zps6c22a9b1.jpg)
Here is a similar angle of the Dames Point Bridge, note that the northern tower is actually in the edge of the shipping channel. This is why the two dolphins (the round bumpers) were placed there, this, along with the vertical clearance were both huge bones of contention when the project moved forward. This bridge has an obstruction in the center span.
Remember I'm just passing on some VERY INTERESTING conversation from our little bash last night. These guys are not pulling the triggers but they must be plugging in their expertise. It really bothered me that they both agreed with my theories of the bridges weakness and that they will 'rather recklessly' reopen this to keep from having a black eye. It might reopen in a week and stand another 100 years... but I think I'll take the Hart.
The Savannah River looks alot more narrow than the St John's at those respective bridge points. IMO it's no big deal with Dames Point Bridges Towers being out in the water. With most considerable bodies of water, towers are gonna be in the water esp non-suspension bridges. I wouldn't call Dames Points channel 'obstructed' by no means as it's nothing unique from many bridges. That's really some pathetic navigation skills if you miss that channel.
IMO the older-style cable stayed bridges (with two towers, and two sets of cables on each side like the Dames Point, Talmadge Memorial in Savannah) look more aesthetically pleasing and classic than these newer versions. The newer versions may be more efficient or whatever, but to me they look like an ugly oversized pedestrian bridge. I guess that a 'more efficient' bastardized version of the suspension bridge is bound to happen in the future...
Thanks for the explanation, Ock!
I know it will need replacing sooner or later, and my phobia is much less on cable-stayed bridges, but I have to say it's kind of a shame. I've always liked the way Jacksonville's older bridges looked and their variety of colors. I liked the look of the old Acosta better than the new one, the old Fuller Warren better than the new one, and with 90%+ of cable-stayed bridges being the same bland color, I'll probably like the look of the current Matthews better than the future one.
I at least like that the Dames Point has the rarer parallel harp configuration. But I imagine, especially if the replacement has to come earlier because of this accident, the replacement Matthews will be as generic and average a cable-stayed bridge as they come. :-\
All this talk about billion dollar bridges makes me wonder if we should be thinking TUNNEL.
Quote from: spuwho on September 29, 2013, 10:59:35 PM
The last entry that I could recall from memory was that FDOT and JTA were working on the process to reserve funds to start the effort, but I never heard why they canned it. At this point I can only assume it was the bust in the economy.
the study findings showed massive impacts to surrounding neighborhoods and environment....keep in mind the expressways on either end of the bridge also "needed" widening....that's why the study has gone nowhere.
A ballpark estimate for replacing the bridge itself (based on other recent projects in FL) is $300-$350 million.
Yeah, looking at those interchange modifications, they'd be ripping out several residents, businesses and industries to accommodate flyovers.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 29, 2013, 10:02:34 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 29, 2013, 08:10:47 PM
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.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/Transporte%20Bus%20Truck%20HIGHWAY/8d792a71-3236-403c-992d-135c4ebdd3cd_zps06008fbe.jpg)
Just speculating what might be done with a new cable-stayed bridge. We could get a LOT more wiggle room.
Thanks, very informative.
Quote from: Jason on September 30, 2013, 08:30:14 AM
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 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_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.
Quote from: coredumped on September 30, 2013, 12:31:16 PM
Quote from: Jason on September 30, 2013, 08:30:14 AM
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 (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_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.
Quote from: stephendare on September 30, 2013, 11:35:52 AM
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....
Quote from: coredumped on September 30, 2013, 12:31:16 PM
That's an interesting idea! Doing some quick googling the Syndey Harbour Tunnel (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sydney_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:
Quote
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.)
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?
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
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
QuoteState 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
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on September 30, 2013, 04:46:39 PM
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
Quote
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. ::)
According to that wiki link Jason sent:
QuoteThe 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.
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").
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?
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
QuoteDeclaring 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/
Quote from: spuwho on September 30, 2013, 07:16:42 PM
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?
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/TRANSIT%20STREETCARS%20TROLLEYS/STREETCAR-WRECK_zpsaf815b09.jpg)
Those buses got hit pretty hard by a room full of streetcar!
Quote from: YellowBluffRoad on September 30, 2013, 06:41:08 PM
Would FDOT propose a replacement project be a toll bridge?
in theory yes....the FDOT Secreatary (who btw will be in Jax. tomorrow) has said that all new bridges and expressways will be tolled....but his first 2 attempts to implement that have failed....the new Pensacola Bay Bridge and US 331 bridge over Choctawhatchee Bay are rebuilds/widenings and both will remain free.
Quote from: stephendare on September 30, 2013, 11:35:52 AM
Quote from: I-10east on September 30, 2013, 12:38:46 AM
The Savannah River looks alot more narrow than the St John's at those respective bridge points. IMO it's no big deal with Dames Point Bridges Towers being out in the water. With most considerable bodies of water, towers are gonna be in the water esp non-suspension bridges. I wouldn't call Dames Points channel 'obstructed' by no means as it's nothing unique from many bridges. That's really some pathetic navigation skills if you miss that channel.
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?
This is really pretty funny isn't it. All I did was to post the facts about the Dames Point Bridge history, and the maritime firestorm it created, and suddenly (As usual) I'm somehow anti Jacksonville and posting opinion propaganda... Stephen you of all people had to know I'd respond to this with a few numbers LOL!
Let's look at the Savannah River? The channel is a uniform 500' feet wide virtually it's entire length.
East of the Dames Point, the Dames Point-Fulton Cutoff is 475' feet wide. The Blount Island Channel's are 300' wide.
The Dames Point Turn ranges from 875'-1,175' feet wide WEST of the bridge. The Dames Point-Fulton Cutoff ranges to 875' in width where the Blount Island Channels meet the main river channel. This entire turn pivots on the north tower with is IN THE WATER.
Funny thing about this is you are pretty much going to negotiate a 120 degree turn while swinging under that bridge. The bridge is only 169' above mean high water, but is actually 174' for a distance of 200' measured from the bridges centerline.
If your on that little Carnival 'boat', your dealing with a 855' foot long SHIP, with a 104' Beam (width) one with an air draft that barely clears the bridge in the exact center.
A Panamax Container Ship is 965' long, longer then the 875' turn and just shy of the 1,175' turn.
A Post Panamax Ship is 1,200' feet long, and 165' feet on the beam. "No big deal?" Why don't you ask the pilots association?
The even larger Triple E class will have similar lengths and widths BUT they will have 'U' shaped hull's rather then the current 'V' shape. The newer Malaccamax Ships WILL NOT EVER BE ABLE TO CALL IN JACKSONVILLE. This means the Post Panamax and Triple E Classes will be the 'local' collector-distributor ships of the near future. I want to stress again, this isn't a race with a completion date, the change will take place over the next 25 years. We still have time to act.
The Matthews?
I've always liked the idea of a tunnel, Florida has a nice one in Fort Lauderdale and of course Mobile has two great tunnels under the ship channel. Miami is getting a new one which is being completed, so perhaps Florida's unfamiliarity with these exotic devices will melt away and we could get some thought on the issue. Like the Chunnel it could be a simple cut, stabilize and fill type operation, with a modular tunnel lowered in pre finished sections. This is what would keep the cost down, but would it beat a bridge? We'd have to study it. And for GODS SAKE, if we do it, get it deep enough so that some future port work needing a 60 foot channel doesn't get tripped up on a damn tunnel 40 feet below.
If we ever got the density build out like South Florida, from our coast to our west side, I could see an eventual 2 lane tunnel at Mayport too. Makes one wonder what 20Th Street or 103rd would have looked like with this idea.
^^^Has there ever been any maritime accident dealing with a large ship, and the DPB? All of sudden all of the bridges in Jax are on the verge of falling in the water, or doesn't meet DOT standards.
Quote from: coredumped on September 30, 2013, 05:31:02 PM
According to that wiki link Jason sent:
QuoteThe 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.
According to the information here http://www.portofmiamitunnel.com/faqs/tunnel-boring-machine/ the actual tunnel construction took about 2 years. The other half of the effort has been the widening of the MacArthur Causeway and other upgrades at the port.
But I think you're right, start to finish we're probably looking at about 5 years...
http://www.portofmiamitunnel.com/system/js/back/ckfinder/userfiles/files/POMT%20Schedule-Web-Updated-9-2013.pdf
A bridge is like anything else really, if budget is of no concern it can be maintained indefinitely. There is no shelf life on infrastructure like a bridge as long as it has proper maintenance, much of europe uses bridges built in the 18th and 19th centuries. Our problem of course is we spend as little as possible on maintenance until it can't be avoided any longer, and sometimes well beyond that point, e.g. the recent bridge collapses in Milwaukee and Washington state. Especially Milwaukee, that was a bridge so in need of maintenance it had been failing inspections for years but still wasn't fixed because nobody wanted to spend the money. Much of this country's infrastructure is in a sad state, but it's not due to some inherent expiration date, it's that we maintain it as cheaply as possible and prefer to suffer the consequences instead of spending the money. I guess that's probably a separate discussion, but the point is there's really no expiration date on a bridge, if metal is corroded or weakened from fatigue, you just replace that component and move on. Except I guess we don't do that, but are apparently willing to spend a billion dollars on a replacement.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on October 01, 2013, 09:12:34 AM
A bridge is like anything else really, if budget is of no concern it can be maintained indefinitely. There is no shelf life on infrastructure like a bridge as long as it has proper maintenance, much of europe uses bridges built in the 18th and 19th centuries. Our problem of course is we spend as little as possible on maintenance until it can't be avoided any longer, and sometimes well beyond that point, e.g. the recent bridge collapses in Milwaukee and Washington state. Especially Milwaukee, that was a bridge so in need of maintenance it had been failing inspections for years but still wasn't fixed because nobody wanted to spend the money. Much of this country's infrastructure is in a sad state, but it's not due to some inherent expiration date, it's that we maintain it as cheaply as possible and prefer to suffer the consequences instead of spending the money. I guess that's probably a separate discussion, but the point is there's really no expiration date on a bridge, if metal is corroded or weakened from fatigue, you just replace that component and move on. Except I guess we don't do that, but are apparently willing to spend a billion dollars on a replacement.
??
Why repair a bridge when you can spend $50MM on an unneeded flyover? You know, in the name of development... ::)
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on October 01, 2013, 09:12:34 AM
Much of this country's infrastructure is in a sad state, but it's not due to some inherent expiration date, it's that we maintain it as cheaply as possible and prefer to suffer the consequences instead of spending the money. I guess that's probably a separate discussion, but the point is there's really no expiration date on a bridge, if metal is corroded or weakened from fatigue, you just replace that component and move on.
+1000
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on October 01, 2013, 09:12:34 AM
A bridge is like anything else really, if budget is of no concern it can be maintained indefinitely. There is no shelf life on infrastructure like a bridge as long as it has proper maintenance, much of europe uses bridges built in the 18th and 19th centuries. Our problem of course is we spend as little as possible on maintenance until it can't be avoided any longer, and sometimes well beyond that point, e.g. the recent bridge collapses in Milwaukee and Washington state. Especially Milwaukee, that was a bridge so in need of maintenance it had been failing inspections for years but still wasn't fixed because nobody wanted to spend the money. Much of this country's infrastructure is in a sad state, but it's not due to some inherent expiration date, it's that we maintain it as cheaply as possible and prefer to suffer the consequences instead of spending the money. I guess that's probably a separate discussion, but the point is there's really no expiration date on a bridge, if metal is corroded or weakened from fatigue, you just replace that component and move on. Except I guess we don't do that, but are apparently willing to spend a billion dollars on a replacement.
Chris, don't know if you know but much of the infrastructure in the EU was built to MUCH higher standards. For example the entire British Rail system has the slightest gradient, most ballast, longest curves etc. This was done from the get go by British law. The only exceptions were the few specialty narrow gauge lines that served highland villages and quarries. Here's a couple of items on the Minnesota bridge collapse.
Another factor that is playing a big roll in the Dames Point, and maybe the Matthews and Hart, (due to elevation) is salt air from the ocean.
[/quote]Minneapolis' I-35 Bridge Collapse: Is Structural Failure or Metal Fatigue to Blame?
Design News Staff
8/2/2007
Check in with our I-35W bridge collapse coverage page for the latest news, videos and photos covering the failure.
When the dust settles, will the bridge structure itself be to blame or was metal fatigue the true cause of the collapse?
Kenneth Russell, professor emeritus of metallurgy and nuclear engineering at MIT and Design News contributing editor, suspects metal fatigue could be a contributing factor based on a recent report from the University of Minnesota's Center for Transportation Studies. That report analyzed the metal fatigue behavior of the bridge.
"The report concluded that fatigue shouldn't have been a problem, but pointed out that the bridge was very near to the fatigue limit and had gone through many cycles," he says. Fatigue was analyzed visually, which Russell says could mean the analysis didn't go as far as it should have. "Fatigue is very hard to see visually, and you would need to use x-rays to be absolutely certain there wasn't any," he says. The conclusions section of the report didn't say anything about using an x-ray — just that nothing was found visually.
http://www.designnews.com/document.asp?doc_id=213834[/quote]
I'm more worried over the shock wave that traveled the length of that bridge, which will greatly effect the small fatigue cracks, bolt holes etc.
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on October 01, 2013, 09:12:34 AM
A bridge is like anything else really, if budget is of no concern it can be maintained indefinitely. There is no shelf life on infrastructure like a bridge as long as it has proper maintenance, much of europe uses bridges built in the 18th and 19th centuries. Our problem of course is we spend as little as possible on maintenance until it can't be avoided any longer, and sometimes well beyond that point, e.g. the recent bridge collapses in Milwaukee and Washington state. Especially Milwaukee, that was a bridge so in need of maintenance it had been failing inspections for years but still wasn't fixed because nobody wanted to spend the money. Much of this country's infrastructure is in a sad state, but it's not due to some inherent expiration date, it's that we maintain it as cheaply as possible and prefer to suffer the consequences instead of spending the money. I guess that's probably a separate discussion, but the point is there's really no expiration date on a bridge, if metal is corroded or weakened from fatigue, you just replace that component and move on. Except I guess we don't do that, but are apparently willing to spend a billion dollars on a replacement.
Not to nitpick....bridge failure was in Minneapolis.
The Washington bridge fail was caused by a truck striking a structural beam. Yes, bridge was old, but it did not fail of its own means.
Some modern bridges are cheaper to maintain than ones built in the 50's or 60's. Advances in material sciences, use of pre-stressed concrete, better designs. So it is possible that a bridge replacement could be cheaper than maintaining an old one.
Suspension bridges in New York, San Francisco, are in some of the harshest environments, temp swings, sea air, high traffic etc, but they hold up. Golden Gate participates in a perpetual paint job year round.
As long as it's fully inspected with any fatigued or damaged components being replaced, there will be no problem with it. The issue of course is we generally don't care much about it until its too late. That report you cited from Milwaukee was an early one, later in the investigation they released the inspection reports and that bridge had been failing and having stress cracks noted for years, but they never fixed them. The problem wasn't that the bridge was old, it's that virtually no significant maintenance was done on it until it finally failed from corrosion and fatigue. Frankly what else did anybody expect? I think as time goes on, if our infrastructure keeps heading the way it's going, we're going to see a lot more of those incidents.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 28, 2013, 08:37:22 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 01:24:22 PM
EXACTLY, this is WAY bigger then the local media or the DOT boys are letting on.
do you know something they don't?
Spoke with my bridge engineer friends at a social function tonight here in WGV. They've basically said it's going to be bid like next week and they are pushing for replacement and reopening within a couple of weeks. But when they saw what I wrote above, they all FULLY AGREED and added: 'They will HAVE TO REPLACE IT NOW for safety.' And... 'Expect a Cable-Stayed bridge with a clear center span.'
So maybe I do... We'll see!
Seems the engineers actually on site have determined that the damages aren't all that bad. Max 40 day closure while repairs are made. Repair cost less than $3 million. Actual bid is for $1.1 million with a $500k bonus for finishing in time for FL/GA weekend.
Shame they didn't listen to the cocktail party experts, and spend a few hundred million.
http://www.news4jax.com/news/mathews-bridge-to-reopen-within-2-weeks/-/475880/22215488/-/a6fa05/-/index.html
Quote from: spuwho on October 01, 2013, 09:38:29 PM
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on October 01, 2013, 09:12:34 AM
A bridge is like anything else really, if budget is of no concern it can be maintained indefinitely. There is no shelf life on infrastructure like a bridge as long as it has proper maintenance, much of europe uses bridges built in the 18th and 19th centuries. Our problem of course is we spend as little as possible on maintenance until it can't be avoided any longer, and sometimes well beyond that point, e.g. the recent bridge collapses in Milwaukee and Washington state. Especially Milwaukee, that was a bridge so in need of maintenance it had been failing inspections for years but still wasn't fixed because nobody wanted to spend the money. Much of this country's infrastructure is in a sad state, but it's not due to some inherent expiration date, it's that we maintain it as cheaply as possible and prefer to suffer the consequences instead of spending the money. I guess that's probably a separate discussion, but the point is there's really no expiration date on a bridge, if metal is corroded or weakened from fatigue, you just replace that component and move on. Except I guess we don't do that, but are apparently willing to spend a billion dollars on a replacement.
Not to nitpick....bridge failure was in Minneapolis.
The Washington bridge fail was caused by a truck striking a structural beam. Yes, bridge was old, but it did not fail of its own means.
Some modern bridges are cheaper to maintain than ones built in the 50's or 60's. Advances in material sciences, use of pre-stressed concrete, better designs. So it is possible that a bridge replacement could be cheaper than maintaining an old one.
Suspension bridges in New York, San Francisco, are in some of the harshest environments, temp swings, sea air, high traffic etc, but they hold up. Golden Gate participates in a perpetual paint job year round.
My apologies, I think I said the correct city earlier and had an autocorrect issue on the last post, that or it's simply been a long day, I was aware the bridge collapse was in Minneapolis. But the Washington bridge is in fact a function of preventative maintenance, they should have incorporated changes in the superstructure to grant a higher clearance for modern vehicles, and the failure wouldn't have occurred. Back in the 50s/60s they wouldn't have given it a second thought.
Quote from: spuwho on October 01, 2013, 09:38:29 PM
Suspension bridges in New York, San Francisco, are in some of the harshest environments, temp swings, sea air, high traffic etc, but they hold up. Golden Gate participates in a perpetual paint job year round.
So the bridges here in Jax doesn't 'hold up'? I know that the Brooklyn Bridge is an icon, but it isn't all flawless like many think.
Quote from: tufsu1 on October 01, 2013, 09:49:34 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 11:37:12 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on September 28, 2013, 08:37:22 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on September 28, 2013, 01:24:22 PM
EXACTLY, this is WAY bigger then the local media or the DOT boys are letting on.
do you know something they don't?
Spoke with my bridge engineer friends at a social function tonight here in WGV. They've basically said it's going to be bid like next week and they are pushing for replacement and reopening within a couple of weeks. But when they saw what I wrote above, they all FULLY AGREED and added: 'They will HAVE TO REPLACE IT NOW for safety.' And... 'Expect a Cable-Stayed bridge with a clear center span.'
So maybe I do... We'll see!
Seems the engineers actually on site have determined that the damages aren't all that bad. Max 40 day closure while repairs are made. Repair cost less than $3 million. Actual bid is for $1.1 million with a $500k bonus for finishing in time for FL/GA weekend.
Shame they didn't listen to the cocktail party experts, and spend a few hundred million.
http://www.news4jax.com/news/mathews-bridge-to-reopen-within-2-weeks/-/475880/22215488/-/a6fa05/-/index.html
Seems like you left this little line out:
QuoteTemporary repairs for the Mathews Bridge will begin Wednesday and be completed in about a month, the Florida Department of Transportation announced Tuesday
.
Temporary repairs meaning something much more involved must be needed but hey, the need for moving traffic is so great that they will temporarily fix it and hope for the best?
Final repairs apparently have yet to be, well, finalized.
The problem is the bridge created Arlington and so it's loss causes huge problems with moving people from a to b. They can't allow that no matter what. Bad for business, bad politically and so temporary it is. Let's just hope fate doesn't have some other incident in store for that bridge and us.
I am already tired of the bridge news 24-7 coverage
Quote from: John P on October 02, 2013, 09:29:17 AM
I am already tired of the bridge news 24-7 coverage
I saw nothing on it last night...apparently the only news here yesterday was JIA and the Jaguars releasing Eugene Monroe...smh
Quote from: spuwho on October 01, 2013, 09:38:29 PM
...................Some modern bridges are cheaper to maintain than ones built in the 50's or 60's. Advances in material sciences, use of pre-stressed concrete, better designs. So it is possible that a bridge replacement could be cheaper than maintaining an old one.
.......
Hence the upland bridge project on I-95 between the fuller warren and Atlantic Blvd.
Quote from: Overstreet on October 02, 2013, 11:29:28 AM
Hence the upland bridge project on I-95 between the fuller warren and Atlantic Blvd.
Oh but so ugly and no character :(
Imagine what our skyline would look like if we just had a "standard" bridge instead of the hart and main st bridge?
Quote from: coredumped on October 02, 2013, 12:41:22 PM
Quote from: Overstreet on October 02, 2013, 11:29:28 AM
Hence the upland bridge project on I-95 between the fuller warren and Atlantic Blvd.
Oh but so ugly and no character :(
Imagine what our skyline would look like if we just had a "standard" bridge instead of the hart and main st bridge?
Yeah but I think we've all learned the hard way; the prettier it is the more expensive it is to maintain. That doesn't just go for bridges, lol...
QuoteYeah but I think we've all learned the hard way; the prettier it is the more expensive it is to maintain. That doesn't just go for bridges, lol...
Chris, You are talking about your cars, right?
Has this been posted yet?
www.isthemathewsbridgeclosedtoday.com/ (http://www.isthemathewsbridgeclosedtoday.com/)
Quote from: ChriswUfGator on October 03, 2013, 09:44:19 AM
Yeah but I think we've all learned the hard way; the prettier it is the more expensive it is to maintain. That doesn't just go for bridges, lol...
I think this is sound relationship advice, too! ;D
Quote from: TheCat on October 03, 2013, 11:56:01 AM
Has this been posted yet?
www.isthemathewsbridgeclosedtoday.com/ (http://www.isthemathewsbridgeclosedtoday.com/)
Site appears to be down :(
Quote from: coredumped on October 03, 2013, 03:18:25 PM
Quote from: TheCat on October 03, 2013, 11:56:01 AM
Has this been posted yet?
www.isthemathewsbridgeclosedtoday.com/ (http://www.isthemathewsbridgeclosedtoday.com/)
Site appears to be down :(
It's back up. I was adding new submissions and missed a comma after one of the names. My b.
Quote from: Dog Walker on October 03, 2013, 11:05:50 AM
QuoteYeah but I think we've all learned the hard way; the prettier it is the more expensive it is to maintain. That doesn't just go for bridges, lol...
Chris, You are talking about your cars, right?
Lol more in the vein of relationship advice ;)
On Friday, it was reported that FDOT would open the bridge to traffic on Tuesday (tomorrow). Seems almost too good to be true. Anyone else heard anything more about this?
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/10/25/mathews-bridge-to-open-october-29.html (http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/10/25/mathews-bridge-to-open-october-29.html)
^^^That's the same that I heard, it's gonna open tomorrow.
Quote from: Traveller on October 28, 2013, 04:47:43 PM
On Friday, it was reported that FDOT would open the bridge to traffic on Tuesday (tomorrow). Seems almost too good to be true. Anyone else heard anything more about this?
http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/10/25/mathews-bridge-to-open-october-29.html (http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/10/25/mathews-bridge-to-open-october-29.html)
All the news reports I've been hearing today say that it is still on schedule to open after the afternoon/evening rush tomorrow.
Does anyone know what happened to Captain Morgan? Was he charged with anything?
Only making really bad spiced rum.
^^^I take it that you're more of a Sailor Jerry guy.
Quote from: I-10east on October 28, 2013, 05:49:34 PM
^^^I take it that you're more of a Sailor Jerry guy.
;) Jerry is a legendary old salt!
As for the captain? Wasn't it under the control of the dock or harbor master? If so the Cap is off the hook.
Channel 4 is reporting that the bridge is back open.
The TU is reporting the same thing. The afternoon commute should be interesting
I live at the foot of the atlantic/I95 ramps and I am really glad the bridge is back open.
Traffic was still a little light on the State St, i suspect that will change tomorrow morning.
Here's an animation below from UNF on how 'the Old Matt' (as our long time locals affectionately call it, JK) got hit by that Naval ship. A couple of feet over on where the ship made contact with the bridge could have made this a tragic situation; Luckily, that wasn't the case. They said on the report that this footage will be used to possibly make bridges more safe in the future.
www.actionnewsjax.com/mediacenter/local.aspx?videoId=4623646&navCatId=20896
In the Blink of an Eye: The Story of the Mathews Bridge Repair
http://vimeo.com/97370834
^^^Thanks for the upload! Awesome job RS&H!!!
Man, that was a lot worse than I thought.
Nice documentary! That was really well done
Great story!
The damage was much worse than I'd thought. The news photos were taken from such a distance that the damage looked minimal, but when you see it up close it's a different story.