FDOT finds $120 million: Fuller Warren to be widened

[thelakelander]

Yeah, I switch over to the Hart, using Emerson pretty often, if headed DT or north. If it's Riverside, coming from the Southside, I take the Acosta to Riverside Ave. or Forest.

[icarus]

All great ideas ..... But, as I mentioned in a previous post ... there is no relief for coming from 17 to San Marco .. south.

Although, on some occasions and times, I've found its faster to backtrack to cross the Buckman and come north on San Jose. Face it the Fuller Warren and the 17/I-10/I-95 interchange is a major traffic choke point ... at least two times a day monday through friday.

[thelakelander]

I don't travel much in that direction, but I'd assume you'd take the same alternative routes in reverse.

[tufsu1]

All great ideas ..... But, as I mentioned in a previous post ... there is no relief for coming from 17 to San Marco .. south.

how about taking 17 to 95 north and getting off at either Forest or Forsyth...and then heading over the Acosta Bridge and down San Marco Blvd

[icarus]

That is a very plausible idea but for the fact that traffic from Stockton/I-95 backs up to US-17/I-10 ... and you can't even get off US-17 onto I-10 .... and when you finally do ... traffic is so backed up that you can't get over to get to the I-95 North lanes .....

My only purpose in pointing the situation out is to highlight the less than perfect planning of the existing roadways and to provide a basis for proposing alternatives to the proposed plans ... I still believe changes could be made in the existing right of way and without altering Fuller Warren that would provide significant relief.

[JayBird]

^ I've say in same trying to get downtown. For some reason the ramp from 17N onto 10E backs ups horribly. I've been stopped past mcduff and sometimes as far back as Edgewood. I had thought it was due to general construction on 10/95 interchange but apparently it wasn't.

I think some of it may be people coming on to 10E and almost stopping trying to get over ... But typically once you're actually on 10, it is clear sailing until right at the bridge.

[Know Growth]

Bring in another Planner & Consultant layer.

FDOT tripped over itself, per the process,regardless of the stated project details.This latest episode is in fact atypical.

The folks that orchestrated Clay County Brannon Chaffee & Lake Asbury (attempt 1 ,2) "Sector Plans" could play a dandy role.They adhered to Process masterfully,boldly. Some may have scattered and are current FW related players.There are whispers:transportaion study is "Black Science". 

The predicted demise of the Automobile is heart warming- we'll probably see the First Coast Outer Beltway and a host of other long established sprawl schemes promoted as "network alleviation" in the mean time.

Watch for it-dashed hopes for Fuller Waren;enter "By Pass", "Network Alleviation". SR 23,Outer Limits Beltway.
I've overheard Blue Hairs in Avondale speak positively of the benefits of The Beltway. Some may have invested in the Brannon Chaffee Corridor-but the key narrative is-diverting all that nasty traffic out of core Jacksonville.

(...waited until the Outer Limits of 18 page thread to merge on! LOL)

[mtraininjax]

how about taking 17 to 95 north and getting off at either Forest or Forsyth...and then heading over the Acosta Bridge and down San Marco Blvd

If people did that, they would not complain about the traffic backup that the FDOT idiots designed as part of the new Fuller Warren Bridge. 1 lane of traffic merging I-10 East with traffic from Stockton. The engineer in charge of that design should be strung up, tarred, feathered and run out of town. Its a nightmare on a good day, add some rain, Ugh!

People will not take the route to Forest, because their GPS takes them off their course. They will not change. Trying to get them to change is like trying to convince suburbanites that it is SAFE to park downtown. lol

[Josh]

I actually don't have any problem coming off the current I-95 North to I-10 West flyover, and merging left to get off at Roosevelt Blvd (US-17), but I can see someone who is less gifted at the wheel than me not making that merge. 

If anyone has difficulty with this merge, they shouldn't be driving. You have almost a full mile to get one lane over to the left.

[tufsu1]

^ to be more accurate, it is 0.6 mile

[ChriswUfGator]

Let it stay the way it is. People already use alternate routes, and more importantly there is no reason to destroy a natural creek, close local roads, and demolish private property in a historic district, for a 'fix' that, looking at it, won't fix what everyone's complaining about anyway.

[Josh]

^ to be more accurate, it is 0.6 mile

0.7 at its most conservative according to Google Maps

Additionally, I had forgotten if you're in the left lane coming off 95 South you don't even need to make that single lane change to the left to get off at Roosevelt.

[tufsu1]

If you are coming north on I-95, you need to shift over a minimum of two lanes in order to exit at US 17....if coming from I-95 north (heading south), then you don't....check yourself on Google Maps

And make sure when using Google Maps, measure from the end of the solid white line

[Josh]

If you are coming north on I-95, you need to shift over a minimum of two lanes in order to exit at US 17....if coming from I-95 north (heading south), then you don't....check yourself on Google Maps

And make sure when using Google Maps, measure from the end of the solid white line

Yeah, I was confusing myself with the directions there.

[Dog Walker]

From today's RAP Newsletter; quotes from some messages to the head of District 2 FDOT:

*At Large Councilman Robin Lumb:
"For the record, and as the elected representative of 875,000 citizens of Duval County, I object to the FDOT's proposed widening of the Fuller Warren Bridge and the I-10 flyover based on the concerns I've raised in my previous communication with the northeast Florida Transportation Planning Organization. Please advise Mr. Bennett and others representing the FDOT on this project that I intend to take a leading role in representing the interests and concerns of my constituents in this matter."

*Preston Haskell, Founder and Chairman of The Haskell Company:
"First of all, this bridge is only 12 years old and is performing well. .... Through traffic moves smoothly at most times, and overall traffic volume is below design capacity. ... To my knowledge, no safety hazards exist at any of these three locations and the accident rate at any of them is not high. Second, it is simply counterintuitive that we should suddenly spend a sum 35 percent greater than the bridge’s original 2002 construction cost on “improvements.” ... Third and perhaps most important, there are many other transportation priorities on which $136 million could be more productively expended."

*Lisa Rinaman, St. Johns Riverkeeper
"FDOT shocked the community on December 9, 2013, when the District 2 Tentative Work Program for FY 2014/15 â€" FY 2018/19 was released and included the highly controversial project to widen the Fuller Warren Bridge. This project had not been previously included in FDOT District 2’s 5-year Work Program or Long-Range Plan. ... In addition, this proposed project could threaten the St. Johns River and McCoy’s Creek. Unfortunately, FDOT has not conducted the required Project Development and Environmental Study.
Finally, the widening of the Fuller Warren Bridge is a threat to the Riverside Arts Market which has been an economic success that draws thousands of people to downtown Jacksonville and the St. Johns River each week."

*Mark Hudson, North Florida Land Trust
"Road construction must be predicated on a proven public need, for which FDOT has provided none. No study has indicated a public transportation need for the Project, nor has any elected official, transportation planning organization, or public advocacy group. In fact, the only stated necessity for the Project has been a “use it or lose it” argument about losing the funding to another transportation district. “Use it or lose it” is not, in fact, an argument of public necessity at all, merely a bureaucratic necessity.”