Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[jmacswimmer]

https://mdta.maryland.gov/blog-category/mdta-news-releases/200-million-federal-loan-approved-nicemiddleton-bridge-replacement

The U.S. Department of Transportation has approved a $200 million federal loan to finance part of the nearly $463 million replacement of the Governor Harry W. Nice Memorial/Senator Thomas “Mac”  Middleton Bridge, an 81-year-old span across the Potomac River between Charles County in Maryland and King George County in Virginia.

The Maryland Transportation Authority (MDTA), identified the federal Transportation Infrastructure Finance and Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan program as a resource to help finance a portion of the project. Approval was granted March 15.

This appears to be the same loan discussed upthread as previously being 'in jeopardy', so the approval did end up coming thru after all.

[jmacswimmer]

Aerial footage shot by MDTA on July 14th showing progress at the Nice Bridge:

https://twitter.com/TheMDTA/status/1551946808183717888?ref_src=twsrc%5Egoogle%7Ctwcamp%5Eserp%7Ctwgr%5Etweet

[NJRoadfan]

Drove past it on Saturday. Bridge deck itself is done. Work remaining looks to be mostly fishing guardrails and such, along with the approaches.

[1995hoo]

WTOP reports the new bridge has a ribbon-cutting tomorrow and will be fully open to traffic by Thursday. Meanwhile, the cyclist/pedestrian groups are suing to stop demolition of the old bridge. I can’t help but wonder how many cyclists and pedestrians there actually are wanting to cross the river there. I suspect the number is quite low just because of where it is, aside from the occasional long-distance cyclist.

https://wtop.com/local/2022/10/lawsuit-seeks-to-halt-demolition-of-old-nice-bridge-as-new-bridge-set-to-open-wednesday/

[froggie]

^ In part because of the pandemic, demand for paths has jumped up.  Also consider that, at present, there is no bike/ped crossing of the Potomac downriver of the Wilson Bridge.

Which MDTA and Larry Hogan could have solved simply by having a path on the new bridge.  Bikes also could have been accommodated by having full shoulders, which also would serve a safety purpose, but Maryland officials balked at that too.  They chose poorly, and at this point I hope they're forced to retain the old bridge to serve as a reminder of their poor choice.

[jmacswimmer]

Interesting that the opening date only came out thru these preliminary court proceedings; the MDTA has yet to make an official announcement about the opening.

Meanwhile, a host of traffic cameras have been added to the MDOT CHART website covering the new bridge, and the penny pinching really shows...the cross-section basically looks like the Pennsylvania Turnpike. "Bicycle accommodations" aside, the lack of 2' shoulder doesn't do anything for motorists either in the event of a breakdown.

The boost from 2 to 4 lanes will be a huge upgrade, at least.

Screenshot from one of the traffic cameras on the new bridge:

[Rothman]

I just drove through the site twice this weekend in both directions.  The approaches are still a mess.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah hopefully they keep the old bridge for cyclists and pedestrians. Absolutely insane they didn’t build a mixed use trail with this. Now the only other option is to rehab the old bridge and spruce it up for peds and bikes.

[Rothman]

Yeah hopefully they keep the old bridge for cyclists and pedestrians. Absolutely insane they didn’t build a mixed use trail with this. Now the only other option is to rehab the old bridge and spruce it up for peds and bikes.

Shared use trails are more expensive than you'd think, especially if there isn't one already in the area (e.g., ROW costs).

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah hopefully they keep the old bridge for cyclists and pedestrians. Absolutely insane they didn’t build a mixed use trail with this. Now the only other option is to rehab the old bridge and spruce it up for peds and bikes.

Shared use trails are more expensive than you'd think, especially if there isn't one already in the area (e.g., ROW costs).

Yes infrastructure isn’t cheap I know but we need to provide more modes of transportation than just cars and busses.

[Rothman]

Yeah hopefully they keep the old bridge for cyclists and pedestrians. Absolutely insane they didn’t build a mixed use trail with this. Now the only other option is to rehab the old bridge and spruce it up for peds and bikes.

Shared use trails are more expensive than you'd think, especially if there isn't one already in the area (e.g., ROW costs).

Yes infrastructure isn’t cheap I know but we need to provide more modes of transportation than just cars and busses.

Makes me wonder what other trails are out there.  Even the path across the Cuomo Bridge connects to a larger network.

[sprjus4]

^ At the bare minimum, the bridge should’ve had 10-12 foot right shoulders.

[jeffandnicole]

Yeah hopefully they keep the old bridge for cyclists and pedestrians. Absolutely insane they didn’t build a mixed use trail with this. Now the only other option is to rehab the old bridge and spruce it up for peds and bikes.

Shared use trails are more expensive than you'd think, especially if there isn't one already in the area (e.g., ROW costs).

Yes infrastructure isn’t cheap I know but we need to provide more modes of transportation than just cars and busses.

They do. Depending where one is at and where they need to go: Sidewalks. Planes. Trains. Choppers. Motorcycles. Mopeds. Golf carts.

Just say "we need to provide access for bicycles" next time.

[vdeane]

Wow, that bridge is so narrow, it looks like it was built in the 40s or something!  That might be fairly intimidating to cross.  I guess we can always dream of a parallel span with one direction + shoulders with this being the other direction + shoulders + trail.

[jmacswimmer]

Wow, that bridge is so narrow, it looks like it was built in the 40s or something!  That might be fairly intimidating to cross.  I guess we can always dream of a parallel span with one direction + shoulders with this being the other direction + shoulders + trail.

I compared to the Pennsylvania Turnpike earlier, but another interesting comparison I thought of is the Hatem Bridge...which, yes, was built in the 40s 

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah hopefully they keep the old bridge for cyclists and pedestrians. Absolutely insane they didn’t build a mixed use trail with this. Now the only other option is to rehab the old bridge and spruce it up for peds and bikes.

Shared use trails are more expensive than you'd think, especially if there isn't one already in the area (e.g., ROW costs).

Yes infrastructure isn’t cheap I know but we need to provide more modes of transportation than just cars and busses.

They do. Depending where one is at and where they need to go: Sidewalks. Planes. Trains. Choppers. Motorcycles. Mopeds. Golf carts.

Just say "we need to provide access for bicycles" next time.

Access for bicycles and pedestrians, no? I wish in America we could raise our standards to having more than just a shoulder being adequate for such. Suppose a car breaks down on it. Then where are they supposed to go? On a lane built for cars going 40+MPH?

[jeffandnicole]

Yeah hopefully they keep the old bridge for cyclists and pedestrians. Absolutely insane they didn’t build a mixed use trail with this. Now the only other option is to rehab the old bridge and spruce it up for peds and bikes.

Shared use trails are more expensive than you'd think, especially if there isn't one already in the area (e.g., ROW costs).

Yes infrastructure isn’t cheap I know but we need to provide more modes of transportation than just cars and busses.

They do. Depending where one is at and where they need to go: Sidewalks. Planes. Trains. Choppers. Motorcycles. Mopeds. Golf carts.

Just say "we need to provide access for bicycles" next time.

Access for bicycles and pedestrians, no? I wish in America we could raise our standards to having more than just a shoulder being adequate for such. Suppose a car breaks down on it. Then where are they supposed to go? On a lane built for cars going 40+MPH?

Yes. In fact, bicyclists and their groups/coalitions routinely make requests that they should be entitled to the entire lane.

[1995hoo]

Yeah hopefully they keep the old bridge for cyclists and pedestrians. Absolutely insane they didn’t build a mixed use trail with this. Now the only other option is to rehab the old bridge and spruce it up for peds and bikes.

Shared use trails are more expensive than you'd think, especially if there isn't one already in the area (e.g., ROW costs).

The boldfaced is essentially what I was getting at with my earlier comment. Obviously I am well aware that this is the only crossing south of the Wilson Bridge, but I still wonder how much demand there really is for pedestrian and bicycle access there. Pedestrians in particular, of course; it's around two miles across the existing bridge and there's not a whole lot near either end of the bridge to walk to or from. Cyclists at least have the more reasonable ability to continue farther on to go somewhere, such that if there were access someone could live in Maryland and bike to work at the naval base in Dahlgren. My point in my earlier comment was simply intended to reflect the point that these are very rural areas on either side of the bridge and the idea of there being much volume of pedestrian or cyclist traffic seems questionable, aside from long-distance cyclists using it as part of a much longer trip (I'm thinking of people like two guys we encountered in Antigonish, Nova Scotia, who were riding recumbent trikes all the way across Canada) and perhaps people who might want to go out onto the bridge to go fishing if it were allowed.

[Plutonic Panda]

Yeah hopefully they keep the old bridge for cyclists and pedestrians. Absolutely insane they didn’t build a mixed use trail with this. Now the only other option is to rehab the old bridge and spruce it up for peds and bikes.

Shared use trails are more expensive than you'd think, especially if there isn't one already in the area (e.g., ROW costs).

Yes infrastructure isn’t cheap I know but we need to provide more modes of transportation than just cars and busses.

They do. Depending where one is at and where they need to go: Sidewalks. Planes. Trains. Choppers. Motorcycles. Mopeds. Golf carts.

Just say "we need to provide access for bicycles" next time.

Access for bicycles and pedestrians, no? I wish in America we could raise our standards to having more than just a shoulder being adequate for such. Suppose a car breaks down on it. Then where are they supposed to go? On a lane built for cars going 40+MPH?

Yes. In fact, bicyclists and their groups/coalitions routinely make requests that they should be entitled to the entire lane.

And then they get killed and bitch at car drivers for it.

[Alps]

Put it this way - decision made is NOT what engineers would design.

[seicer]

It's not that cyclists would "bitch" at car drivers - but mixing 10-20 mph cyclists with 55+ MPH motorists is not a safe design or outcome. What originally was proposed before the project was value engineered was better. It offered breakdown shoulders and space for cyclists.

This really should be the norm for all major river crossings where no viable alternative exists: providing shoulders or a separated sidewalk/bike path. If nothing else, a readily available van should be made accessible to all that want to cross - and that can be dialed up via a mounted (and visible) phone at each approach, with the costs borne by the MDTA. Isn't this what is essentially offered at the Chesapeake Bay Bridge further north?

Either way, this new bridge is a compromise on aesthetics, safety for motorists and cyclists, and design standards.

[Rothman]

Put it this way - decision made is NOT what engineers would design.

But they did.

[Rothman]

This really should be the norm for all major river crossings where no viable alternative exists: providing shoulders or a separated sidewalk/bike path. If nothing else, a readily available van should be made accessible to all that want to cross - and that can be dialed up via a mounted (and visible) phone at each approach, with the costs borne by the MDTA. Isn't this what is essentially offered at the Chesapeake Bay Bridge further north?

I see the possibility for bicycle/ped traffic being much higher for the Bay Bridge than the Nice Bridge.

[1995hoo]

A federal judge in Baltimore denied cycling groups' application for a TRO to block demolition of the old bridge, which is now slated to begin later this week:

https://wtop.com/charles-county/2022/10/judge-gives-go-ahead-for-maryland-to-demolish-old-nice-middleton-bridge/

[jmacswimmer]

And the MDTA finally confirmed the ribbon cutting today & opening tomorrow with a tweet:

https://twitter.com/TheMDTA/status/1580151308278853632?cxt=HHwWgMCj1cXP6e0rAAAA