Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The bike/ped bridge has always been about recreation - like the bike/ped path on the Ravenel bridge. I'm not sure the goal of it was ever to significantly reduce traffic.
The state determined that the added weight from appending a bike/ped path to the outside of the existing drawbridge would cause problems with the drawbridge functionality. Plus, the City and DOT experimented with closing a lane on the bridge, and that caused traffic problems all the way back to Maybank.
New bridges would have been nice, but apparently replacements are not even on the DOT's radar, as in there are not even plans to study the feasibility of replacements.
I'm glad to see the funding go through for this, and I'm grateful this bridge has so much top level support. I know there are some upgrades to the Greenway planned to help accommodate some of the anticipated increase in bike/ped traffic.
I guess what confuses me is how the contractor selection was made and a cost number determined ($74M)
when the bridge design is not completed which will take another year.
I do believe the bridge will get alot of usage once completed.
The bike/ped bridge has always been about recreation - like the bike/ped path on the Ravenel bridge. I'm not sure the goal of it was ever to significantly reduce traffic.
The state determined that the added weight from appending a bike/ped path to the outside of the existing drawbridge would cause problems with the drawbridge functionality. Plus, the City and DOT experimented with closing a lane on the bridge, and that caused traffic problems all the way back to Maybank.
New bridges would have been nice, but apparently replacements are not even on the DOT's radar, as in there are not even plans to study the feasibility of replacements.
I'm glad to see the funding go through for this, and I'm grateful this bridge has so much top level support. I know there are some upgrades to the Greenway planned to help accommodate some of the anticipated increase in bike/ped traffic.
I can't imagine it will significantly reduce traffic but I can easily see hundreds of people per day using it to bike to work. Or walk from the VA commuter lot and the apartment building next to the Herbert Fielding connector.
Traffic and parking have gotten bad enough that it might be feasible for those who live close in. I take the bus every blue moon and it is really not much worse than driving because of how long it takes me to get to/wind through/walk from my assigned parking garage. For people who have truly remote garages or lots it might be an improvement. (Just to acknowledge- this is catching the bus before 8 not having to play the guessing game of arrival for later loops.)
I'm incredibly dissapointed that Glenn Mcconnell is getting widened instead of just giving it overpasses where needed in order to always keep traffic moving.
I'm incredibly dissapointed that Glenn Mcconnell is getting widened instead of just giving it overpasses where needed in order to always keep traffic moving.
I imagine it is cheaper to add lanes on the ground than it is to construct overpasses which are ridiculously expensive in this area. Even Mt Pleasant only added two overpasses when they basically reconfigured about 8 miles of Hwy 17.
I'm wondering what will happen if we go into a recession next year. The original Magnolia Project died in the 2008 recession. I doubt we're heading into anything like that next year but at least a mild recession seems likely to me.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.