U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Coastal North Carolina
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:16 PM
 
2,401 posts, read 3,360,902 times
Reputation: 1406

Advertisements

Greenville will be the headquarters of the little bank and Union Bank merger...

Eastern N.C. banks' merger will create a new Union Bank with 15 branches | News & Observer
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:49 PM
 
Location: Danville, VA
4,634 posts, read 3,044,259 times
Reputation: 2918
Quote:
Originally Posted by LM117 View Post
Today is the last day of AASHTO's fall meeting, but judging from this article, it appears that AASHTO's Standing Committee on Highways did not overturn the US Route Numbering Committee's rejection of Future I-587.
Looks like I was wrong! But I'm not complainin'!
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-15-2016, 02:52 PM
 
Location: Danville, VA
4,634 posts, read 3,044,259 times
Reputation: 2918
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpirate View Post
Huge news From Mayor Thomas' facebook page:
Yep! I just saw the Governor's press release. It still needs final approval from FHWA. They usually rubber stamp AASHTO approvals, so no worries here.

https://governor.nc.gov/press-releas...gnation-us-264
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 06:52 AM
 
1,021 posts, read 1,004,031 times
Reputation: 367
Greenville seeking input for Town Commons bridge:

'Opportunity to do something special': Pedestrian bridge options explored - Daily Reflector

Quote:
A Greenville architect said a potential project connecting the city north and south of the Tar River would “be the start of something big.”

“We have the chance to do something here that would be a regional draw,” Robert Griffin said Tuesday during a meeting to discuss the possible construction of a pedestrian bridge across the river that would connect Greenville’s Town Common and River Park North. “We have an opportunity to do something special.”

City staff and members of a design team with Alta Planning and Design — a firm that specializes in the planning, design, engineering and implementation of bicycle, pedestrian, park and trail facilities — held a series of meetings this week as part of a design and feasibility study on the bridge project.

Greenville’s Tar River Legacy Plan, Town Common Master Plan and Horizons 2026 Plan all recommend a pedestrian bridge connecting the 25-acre Town Common to the 324-acre River Park North. The study is being conducted to look at the feasibility of constructing the bridge and to determine what the estimated cost of the project would be.

The Greenville City Council last month approved the $25,000 study, which is part of the city’s Active Transportation Master Plan to connect Greenville and surrounding areas through bicycle paths, pedestrian walkways and greenway systems. The N.C. Department of Transportation is reimbursing the city for 80 percent — or $20,000 — of the study’s cost.
“This is an offshoot of the master plan that deals specifically with connectivity across the river,” Daryl Vreeland, a transportation planner with the city, said. “This is exploring every way to get across the river.”

Vreeland said members of Alta’s design team on Monday walked both sides of the Tar River at the Town Common and River Park North to look at potential construction sites.

“They looked at what type of zoning exists in those areas and what kinds of constraints there would be,” he said. “These guys really know what they are doing.”

The design team held a conceptual design workshop with local stakeholders on Tuesday and developed several different design options based on input from the meetings. Those concepts were displayed Tuesday night during an open house.
“We think of this bridge as a destination ... a bridge to somewhere,” Wade Walker, an engineer with Alta’s design team, said. “This city has a rich history along this river, and this bridge will be a reflection of that.”

The design team displayed six different concepts for the pedestrian bridge on Tuesday. The concepts were listed in order of estimated cost and complexity of the project’s design.

“Some of these are not iconic structures,” engineer Jake Sherman said. “They are serving the purpose of getting from A to B. The more iconic this bridge gets, the higher the cost will be.”

The concept options presented included:

* Adding a dedicated bicycle lane to the Greene Street and Pitt Street bridges. This option, which would cost between $407,000 to $1.7 million, would be the least-expensive project but would not serve as a direct bicycle or pedestrian path to River Park North.

* A bridge constructed adjacent to the Greene Street bridge. The bridge, which would cost between $3.7 million and $15.3 million, would provide a dedicated bicycle and pedestrian path across the Tar River but would not serve as a direct path to River Park North.

* A high-visibility bridge constructed at the center of the Town Common near the location of the amphitheater. This option, which would cost between $7.2 million and $20.3 million, would provide a direct path to River Park North, but is more expensive and likely would require substantial flood mitigation to construct.

* An elevated gondola system crossing the Tar River between the Town Common and River Park North. The bridge alternative, which would cost between $12 million and $20.9 million, would provide a unique feature for the city but would have high maintenance costs and would require a staff of four people to operate.
“We included the gondola alternative to illustrate what types of things are possible with this project,” Sherman said. “But during our meetings with stakeholders, it seemed to be the consensus that people want a direct connection to River Park North.”

Several people at Tuesday’s open house expressed concerns about a bridge that would lead directly to River Park North.
“The Tar River is a major block to our bikeway system, and this is our chance,” one man said. “If we only have a bridge that connects to River Park North, we blow what might be our only opportunity to make that connection. It would be a shame to build a bridge that doesn’t serve all the people of Greenville.”

Another man expressed concerns about constructing a pathway in a flood-prone area.
“I really love the thought of something iconic across the river,” another man said Tuesday. “But I don’t see how it is possible to build anything leading to River Park North and then out to Mumford Road that wouldn’t be flooded certain times of the year.”

“That’s why we want your thoughts on this project,” Katie Lloyd, a designer with Alta, said. “We want to hear what you want and what your concerns are. Your input is what will guide the design.”

Vreeland said anyone wanting to share suggestions or concerns about the bridge project can contact him at dvreeland@greenvillenc.gov.

“We will take input until the end of the year,” he said. “We will present multiple recommendations to the City Council. ... There is so much potential along the Tar River, and I think this has the potential to spark investment in this area.”

Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 09:12 AM
 
Location: Greenville, NC
839 posts, read 1,039,749 times
Reputation: 176
The first two options that are basically just bike lanes on the highway and a separate bridge beside the highway road are big fat no's. I would not have any interest in utilizing either of them. The only real option I see of value would be a bridge across the river from the Town Commons to River Park North...expensive - yes, but would really be worth it to me.

I love the Greenway, an extension of the Greenway into River Park North would be fabulous & would certainly increase the usage & importance of River Park North...which is highly under utilized due to the travel to get there.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 11:33 AM
 
1,021 posts, read 1,004,031 times
Reputation: 367
I agree with most of what you're saying. I enjoy greenways as well. But I don't see a huge problem with a bridge running near Green Street into River Park North. It would still serve the purpose of getting people walking/biking/running through River Park North. I've seen nice pedestrian bridges on greenway trails, and I've seen solid, functional bridges (not as pretty) during my trips on greenways here in Raleigh. I do think they need a nice bridge across to RPN, but I'm not sure they should do it to the tune of 10-20 million. (might as well build a baseball stadium for that kind of money).

I'm sure they could find a simple design that would feed directly into RPN for under 10 million. Here are a couple of examples from a greenway trail in Raleigh.





I think something like the first picture would work and be less expensive than something like the bottom picture.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 11:42 AM
 
Location: Greenville, NC
1,069 posts, read 985,225 times
Reputation: 591
Pecheles is going to build a new Audi showroom where the old Morgan Printers was at Evans and Red Banks and rename it Audi Greenville. Not sure what's going to become of the original dealership building over on the boulevard.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 01:39 PM
 
293 posts, read 271,060 times
Reputation: 64
This pedestrian bridge gives Greenville an opportunity to do something that is iconic for the city. A symbol that is unique to Greenville that, IMO, it lacks. The price tag could be high but it is ultimately worth it, for the greenway and utility of RPN but even more so as an identifiable emblem and attraction.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 01:40 PM
 
Location: Winterville
181 posts, read 215,050 times
Reputation: 61
Quote:
Originally Posted by jpirate View Post
The first two options that are basically just bike lanes on the highway and a separate bridge beside the highway road are big fat no's. I would not have any interest in utilizing either of them. The only real option I see of value would be a bridge across the river from the Town Commons to River Park North...expensive - yes, but would really be worth it to me.

I love the Greenway, an extension of the Greenway into River Park North would be fabulous & would certainly increase the usage & importance of River Park North...which is highly under utilized due to the travel to get there.
I thought the same thing at first but I really don't see a lot of avid cyclists going through park. I may be wrong but I think you're only going to see a few casual cyclists use it from time to time. If you're going to spend $20 million why not get the most out of it. If we choose one of the cheaper options and then used the remaining $18.6 million (or more) how many more bike lanes or bike friendly roads could we add to the infrastructure for cyclist that actually ride regularly and potentially commute and take cars off the road. The congestion is terrible in Greenville, getting worse and drivers are horribly aggressive and dangerous riding with cyclists on the road. This way you potentially improve more than one problem.

I don't really see a bridge directly to River Park North, while convenient for casual cyclists, would not benefit cyclists who ride regularly. To me a cost of 20 times more does really seem worth it. I honestly don't know many avid cyclists that use the greenway because they have to go to slow.

I'm actually planning on packing my bike panniers and riding to and through River Park North and camping on the new raised platforms when they are done. I probably wouldn't even use a bridge through the Town Commons. Of course that may be simply because I don't live downtown but I don't like to bike in the downtown area anyways because of the narrow and poorly kept roads. The bike lanes down town, like on 5th street are TERRIBLE. It's more dangerous to ride in those "lanes" than in the middle of the road due to the debris and potholes which you have to swerve into traffic to avoid.

It would serve the community far better to find ways to create and environment friendly to cyclist with that kind of money instead of just one small bridge to a park that may not get that much use. It really just depends on whether or not people would use this but it's seems like a bowflex/nordic track purchase. We all have good intentions of using that home exercise equipment that is more accessible but it's only the really committed that use it. So spend the money to allow for more committed cyclists.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-16-2016, 02:52 PM
 
Location: Greenville, NC
839 posts, read 1,039,749 times
Reputation: 176
interesting point Bret. I was thinking about it more from a walk-ability standpoint & being able to hold events at the Town Commons & spill that over into the RPN area. I'm not a cyclist, so I didn't even think about that aspect of it.

Certainly an decision that needs lots of community feedback.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply

Quick Reply
Message:



Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > North Carolina > Coastal North Carolina
Similar Threads
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6.

2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top