2030 Mobility Plan: Pedestrian Network

[Mattius92]

It would make since to have a pedestrian walkway along the Fuller Warren, but tufsu is right. Busy Interstate + pedestrians + bikers = mega disaster waiting to happen.

Apparently the Main Street bridge is the only bridge that pedestrians can cross the river. Which in a way is better then none, but for sure there could be better. I like how Nashville closed one of their old bridges and converted it to a pedestrian only bridge. However I dont think we have any bridges that we can to that to.

Lake, that Beaver Street idea is real nice, hope something like that will go through.

[thelakelander]

Pedestrians can also cross on the Acosta Bridge.  As for the Fuller Warren, you could cantilever a ped bridge to the existing structure and design it to where it would be impossible for auto and ped/bike traffic to interact.  However, I doubt anyone would be willing to pay for it.  Nevertheless, if we can put a man on the moon, a pedestrian bridge fulfilling these requirements can be done as well.


Where there's a will, there's a way. An example of a design that accommodates multiple modes, yet keeps them physically separated, in Richmond, VA.

[Mattius92]

Pedestrians can also cross on the Acosta Bridge.  As for the Fuller Warren, you could cantilever a ped bridge to the existing structure and design it to where it would be impossible for auto and ped/bike traffic to interact.  However, I doubt anyone would be willing to pay for it.  Nevertheless, if we can put a man on the moon, a pedestrian bridge fulfilling these requirements can be done as well.

That is very true. I know it can be done, but our leaders like to do every thing cheap cheap cheap... All of our downtown bridges have something unique or beautiful about them, not the fuller warren.

[thelakelander]

^That's what scares me about replacing the Matthews.  I seriously doubt whatever replaces it will be as structurally unique as the current bridge.

[Jaxson]

Speaking of pedestrians on bridges, I have seen more people crossing the Mathews Bridge by foot.  I, for one, would NEVER try to do that.  It looks too dangerous for me, but there are quite a few brave (or foolhardy) folks who make that trek across the St. Johns.

[Mattius92]

^That's what scares me about replacing the Matthews.  I seriously doubt whatever replaces it will be as structurally unique as the current bridge.

Would be nice for them to add another deck to it. A double decker bridges I find pretty interesting. Keep the overall look and design but just add another deck. A transit line would be nice to have on it too.

[TheProfessor]

It is interesting how it shows the Mathews Bridge becoming a pedestrian pathway.  People walk over it now, but the "path" is like 2'-0" wide with no guardrail.  It would be nice if there was a continuous path from downtown to the beaches.

[Charles Hunter]

^That's what scares me about replacing the Matthews.  I seriously doubt whatever replaces it will be as structurally unique as the current bridge.

Would be nice for them to add another deck to it. A double decker bridges I find pretty interesting. Keep the overall look and design but just add another deck. A transit line would be nice to have on it too.

If I remember correctly, the DOT had to strengthen the bridge just to add the new solid center part.  Adding a whole new deck to the existing bridge seems impossible.  Well, if you spend enough money - but then you could probably build a brand new bridge.

[Mattius92]

It can be done, but not with our cheap uncreative poeple we have running our place. However in the long run something has to be done with that bridge.

[stjr]

C'mon guys, when tufsu1 wrote that - that was the USDOT policy, no pedestrians on Interstates, including bridges; the new USDOT Secretary has changed the policy to encourage looking at it.  You can't (well, you can, because you have) fault tufsu1 for an old statement because the policy has changed in the interim.

Just to be clear, Charles, my original context was "where there is a will, there is a way".  In this spirit, I had suggested the possibility of a pedestrian walk appropriately separated by effective barriers or at another level.  Tufsu and Reednavy in particular inferred there was absolutely no way any pedestrian walk could be attached to an interstate bridge.  As Lake posted, this turned out not to be true.  I did feel the stance taken in response to my suggestion was representative of the lack of creativity and flexibility associated with FDOT projects, a proposition that was central to my starting the thread on what the Fuller Warren bridge could have been. 

[gridsketch]

We should focus the conversation on people crossing dangerously. Even in places where there are sidewalks  people are crossing in the middle of the block. Yes, it's a bad idea but many people don't have cars. If you work at a fast food joint making minimum wage; at a strip mall on the 6 lane boulevard. You may HAVE TO JAYWALK. Often times the nearest intersection is a 10 minute walk. Add that to 60 minute bus frequency; a job that requires you to be on time and you have a recipe for disaster. I like the traffic islands in thelakelander's image post. pedestrians still have to run across the street but at least they can take refuge protected somewhat from trees and a curb. In some states like California they have removed painted crossing lines at intersections to discourage walking for the sake of liability. This forces more people the into cars for "safety" require parents to drive their children only a few blocks from school causing more traffic and a demand for even faster wider roads. We need more inner ring suburb infill and plan for "workforce" housing where people who need to walk, work. Someone should write a bog/white paper about jaywalking across long boulevards.

[buckethead]

OLE!!!



<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/OdOOIxcUjAs" target="_blank" class="new_win">http://www.youtube.com/v/OdOOIxcUjAs</a>