by J. Brooks Terry
Staff Writer
Mayor John Peyton says he’d like to see the remnants of the old Fuller Warren Bridge gone before July. However, the Florida Department of Transportation says that might be a tall order.
“I have hopes it can be removed within 60 days,” Peyton said at the Chamber’s Downtown Council meeting Friday. “It’s a hazard to boaters and an eye sore.”
Since taking office in July, Peyton has made no secret of his plans to remove the crumbling structure.
FDOT spokesperson Mike Goldman said the bridge would eventually come down, but only after the necessary permits have been secured through the St. Johns River Water Management District and the United States Army Corps of Engineers.
“We don’t have a definite time table, but we’ll do whatever we have to do once we have permission,” said Goldman. “As much as we’d like to do it right away, it’s all contingent upon getting approval from the permitting agencies.
“Hopefully before the Super Bowl, though, it will be gone.”
Goldman said ongoing permitting discussions have remained largely amiable, but declined comment on when any work would begin.
“The engineering corps realizes that there is a sense of urgency in getting it down and they’ve been very cooperative and informative about that, but they still have their rules and regulations to abide by,” he said. “It’s obviously going to be a complicated project because we’re all looking at a lot of different issues.”
According to Goldman, the majority of the bridge located above water line can be removed by mechanical means. However, anything below that will require explosive blasts before it can be removed.
The FDOT would foot the bill for any work done, though Goldman declined to speculate on cost estimates.
“I don’t have that kind of information,” he said, “but it is coming down. I can confirm that much.”
Earlier this year, a handful of community advocates wrote to Peyton and the City Council imploring them to let the structure stay where it is as a fishing pier and public walkway.
But Peyton and the majority of the Council say the bridge could serve no further purpose.
“It’s something he’s talked about and strongly advocated since he arrived in office,” said mayor’s office spokesperson Heather Murphy. “When you have a valuable asset like we have in river you want to enhance it as best you can. The old bridge is not an enhancement in any way.”
“Besides the fact that the Department of Transportation is not in the pier business, it was never going to serve in that capacity for three main reasons,” said Goldman. “There’s absolutely no parking near it, and it would be incredibly expensive to convert it for public use.”
A third reason, said Goldman, is that having the new and old bridges located in such close proximity to each other might cause long term soil erosion along the river floor.
“It’s not a problem now,” he said, “but certainly over time it can be when you have two structures so close to each other.
“The sooner we have it out of there, the better. That’s what we’re trying to do.”