A rendering of the proposed future Mayo Bridge and Mayo Island park. (Images courtesy City of Richmond)
The design of the planned replacement of the Mayo Bridge is starting to take shape.
Last month the City of Richmond, according to a federal infrastructure grant application, showed that the next incarnation of the bridge would include only two lanes of car traffic, down from the existing four lanes on the current bridge.
The rest of the planned revamp of the 66-foot bridge would include two protected bike lanes, a six-foot sidewalk on each side of the bridge, and a 14-foot shared-use path that could act as a connector for the Virginia Capital Trail and under-construction Fall Line Trail.
The city proposed the new design in an application for a federal Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) grant, in which it’s applying for $25 million to help finance the nearly $200 million project.
Plans to replace the Mayo Bridge date back to 2022. It was initially thought the 112-year-old bridge’s surface (called the superstructure) needed to be replaced, but last spring a Virginia Department of Transportation analysis found that its piers (the substructure) also needed to be replaced. That means the replacement bridge would have to be built entirely anew.
The discovery of substructure’s deficiencies more than doubled the project’s estimated cost from $90 million to $195 million. It also opened up more design possibilities for the new bridge, and last spring the city and the VDOT began gathering ideas from the community.
A comparison of the existing bridge versus the proposed new streetscape.
Last fall an initial set of proposed designs by VDOT and the city’s Department of Public Works favored retaining four lanes of car traffic, but after speaking with many local stakeholders, newly installed Mayor Danny Avula directed the city to submit the grant application that included the two-travel-lane design option. Those stakeholders included the associations which represent the two neighborhoods that are linked by the bridge, the Manchester Alliance and Shockoe Partnership,
“Community members overwhelmingly wanted to prioritize sidewalks, bike lanes, and a shared-use path within the parameters of the flood wall opening and current neighborhood traffic flow,” Avula said in an email.
“The two-lane design meets my goals for a safer, human-scale bridge that builds towards a future with more walking, biking, and access to the proposed park on Mayo Island.”
The new structure would be aligned differently from the existing Mayo Bridge.
Bike Walk RVA, the multimodal transit advocacy arm of local nonprofit Sportsbackers, worked with the city, Manchester Alliance and Shockoe Partnership on shaping the new bridge. Bike Walk RVA Director Brantley Tyndall said they’re thrilled that the new proposed bridge would improve bike and pedestrian access.
“The (Avula) administration’s decision to design a bike/ped-oriented bridge tracks closely with the clear and longstanding community preference expressed in plans and surveys over the past few years,” Tyndall said.
“The Mayo Bridge will be an important connector between the forthcoming Fall Line and the Virginia Capital Trail through the downtown feel of Manchester. A shared use path and wide bike lanes will drastically improve the safety and comfort of this essential crossing of the James River,” Tyndall added.
Approximately $88 million of the project’s $195 million cost is accounted for, and the remaining $82 million would come through “state, local, and regional funding sources provided by the City of Richmond, the Central Virginia Transportation Authority (CVTA), and/or VDOT,” per the city’s application. The federal grants recipients are expected to be announced this summer, with funds coming available in the fall.
The existing bridge would close while the new one is built. The final design is planned to be completed in late 2026 and construction would run from fall 2027 until spring 2031.
In the meantime, VDOT will continue conducting an environmental study on the existing bridge, and the future bridge’s design will continue to be finalized.
The existing bridge remains open, but will become unusable to the public by 2035 due to an alkali-silica reaction in its concrete that “significantly increases the risks of structural failure,” per the city’s grant application.
The current bridge was initially built in 1913 and replaced an original Mayo Bridge that had opened in 1788. It’s named for the Mayo family, which laid out the city’s street grid.
The Mayo Bridge also bisects a planned future city park on Mayo Island. The city bought the majority of the island last year for $15 million, though one small piece of it remains privately owned.
A rendering of the proposed future Mayo Bridge and Mayo Island park. (Images courtesy City of Richmond)
The design of the planned replacement of the Mayo Bridge is starting to take shape.
Last month the City of Richmond, according to a federal infrastructure grant application, showed that the next incarnation of the bridge would include only two lanes of car traffic, down from the existing four lanes on the current bridge.
The rest of the planned revamp of the 66-foot bridge would include two protected bike lanes, a six-foot sidewalk on each side of the bridge, and a 14-foot shared-use path that could act as a connector for the Virginia Capital Trail and under-construction Fall Line Trail.
The city proposed the new design in an application for a federal Better Utilizing Investments to Leverage Development (BUILD) grant, in which it’s applying for $25 million to help finance the nearly $200 million project.
Plans to replace the Mayo Bridge date back to 2022. It was initially thought the 112-year-old bridge’s surface (called the superstructure) needed to be replaced, but last spring a Virginia Department of Transportation analysis found that its piers (the substructure) also needed to be replaced. That means the replacement bridge would have to be built entirely anew.
The discovery of substructure’s deficiencies more than doubled the project’s estimated cost from $90 million to $195 million. It also opened up more design possibilities for the new bridge, and last spring the city and the VDOT began gathering ideas from the community.
A comparison of the existing bridge versus the proposed new streetscape.
Last fall an initial set of proposed designs by VDOT and the city’s Department of Public Works favored retaining four lanes of car traffic, but after speaking with many local stakeholders, newly installed Mayor Danny Avula directed the city to submit the grant application that included the two-travel-lane design option. Those stakeholders included the associations which represent the two neighborhoods that are linked by the bridge, the Manchester Alliance and Shockoe Partnership,
“Community members overwhelmingly wanted to prioritize sidewalks, bike lanes, and a shared-use path within the parameters of the flood wall opening and current neighborhood traffic flow,” Avula said in an email.
“The two-lane design meets my goals for a safer, human-scale bridge that builds towards a future with more walking, biking, and access to the proposed park on Mayo Island.”
The new structure would be aligned differently from the existing Mayo Bridge.
Bike Walk RVA, the multimodal transit advocacy arm of local nonprofit Sportsbackers, worked with the city, Manchester Alliance and Shockoe Partnership on shaping the new bridge. Bike Walk RVA Director Brantley Tyndall said they’re thrilled that the new proposed bridge would improve bike and pedestrian access.
“The (Avula) administration’s decision to design a bike/ped-oriented bridge tracks closely with the clear and longstanding community preference expressed in plans and surveys over the past few years,” Tyndall said.
“The Mayo Bridge will be an important connector between the forthcoming Fall Line and the Virginia Capital Trail through the downtown feel of Manchester. A shared use path and wide bike lanes will drastically improve the safety and comfort of this essential crossing of the James River,” Tyndall added.
Approximately $88 million of the project’s $195 million cost is accounted for, and the remaining $82 million would come through “state, local, and regional funding sources provided by the City of Richmond, the Central Virginia Transportation Authority (CVTA), and/or VDOT,” per the city’s application. The federal grants recipients are expected to be announced this summer, with funds coming available in the fall.
The existing bridge would close while the new one is built. The final design is planned to be completed in late 2026 and construction would run from fall 2027 until spring 2031.
In the meantime, VDOT will continue conducting an environmental study on the existing bridge, and the future bridge’s design will continue to be finalized.
The existing bridge remains open, but will become unusable to the public by 2035 due to an alkali-silica reaction in its concrete that “significantly increases the risks of structural failure,” per the city’s grant application.
The current bridge was initially built in 1913 and replaced an original Mayo Bridge that had opened in 1788. It’s named for the Mayo family, which laid out the city’s street grid.
The Mayo Bridge also bisects a planned future city park on Mayo Island. The city bought the majority of the island last year for $15 million, though one small piece of it remains privately owned.
The reduction in traffic lanes from four to two is a huge improvement. The traffic volumes don’t justify four lanes and the current configuration leads to excessive speeds. The bike lanes are described as protected but the graphic doesn’t show any physical barrier to actually protect the bike lanes. A physical barrier is the only way to truly protect the bike lanes.
Overall this is good news and thanks to Brantley and Dr. Avula for pushing for the reduction in traffic lanes.
I’m in complete agreement, Keith. I frequently ride my bike in the “protected” bike lanes throughout the City and I’ve had near death experiences due to negligent drivers using the bike lanes as passing lanes. Permanent barriers need to be installed to prevent injuries and death and make cycling a more accessible form of transportation for all. Other cities in our region have already accomplished this – you can find safely protected bike lanes in Charlottesville and DC; it’s time we join the party.
Hopefully this will also calm traffic on Hull Street a bit. Though much more needs to be done there.
That’s the best part of this design. By reducing the lanes, there’ll be slower progress. Those in a hurry will find an alternative route. There are 18 other lanes of bridges crossing the River nearby. Hopefully truck traffic in particular will avoid Hull and 14th Streets.
Rising seas? In Richmond? I’m not sure how much kool-aid one needs to drink to get to this conclusion. Unless you’re speaking of a hypothetical cataclysmic pole-shift where the entire continent is likely to be under water. However, the scientist who documented this had his work confiscated by the CIA, so it must not be true.
A stretch to make an unnecessarily snarky and political comment on net positive local urban planning project. Tastes like kool-aid to me.
Couldn’t agree more, Keith. As someone who has ridden that bridge numerous times to get to the Capital Trail, I can attest to the vehicular speeds and need for a better protected bike lane.
My argument has been to close it to vehicular traffic altogether and just resurface the existing bridge. Building a new bridge within the flood plain for a future that will bring us rising seas just doesn’t seem logical. But like the ever rising cost of the ballpark at The Diamond, once the government determines it’s going to do something with the tax dollars, then there’s just no fighting it. This is probably the best we’ll make of it. So, how do we improve pedestrian safety on both sides of the bridge?
You don’t have to worry about rising seas because that doesn’t exist. Too many people have been taught wrong on how our world is really changing. If there is any change in the climate, it is because of our polar north shifting closer to Russia. There is nothing you can do to change that so you need to stop worrying about it. But I do agree with closing to car traffic. Maybe narrow the lanes to 10 ft width and keep them for busses only.
That ship has sailed. This is the plan.
Richmond is missing the chance to build an architecturally pleasing bridge that could really stand out for the city. But it appears to be just ordinary
I’ll be happy with functional and safe.
lol. of course it needs to be functional and safe, and making it esthetically pleasing is a win win
Definitely agreed, enough with the boring modernism architecture.
Agreed. $200M, and we will get something identical to the highway bridges. It could be a landmark.
Bike lanes in Richmond need to be physically separated. Lines of paint don’t keep anyone safe from the drivers who run red lights and run over pedestrians on the sidewalk
I do think cars and bikes shouldn’t mix at all and in some counties in Europe the bike lanes are bike paths and fully separated from the road. Also when ever I have gone for walks in mixed traffic on empty neighborhood roads people in their pick up trucks will try to harass you by driving into you to bully you.
Yeah I’ve even experienced that in upstate NY…
I do not get the realignment of the road. This is state designated roadway. Building outside of the existing right-of-way, especially if the rendering is exact, even if the property is city owned land, requires extra layers of bureaucracy to the project that I do not understand the need for it. I hope some design elements can go into the new bridge.
It’s so the existing bridge can be kept in service while the new bridge is built. The Huguenot Bridge replacement used a similar strategy.
Plus it will help to reduce the bad curve at the south end of the bridge on to Hull Street.
I don’t know if people realize how many people have moved to Manchester, but two lanes is going to be a huge problem.
Nah, it will be fine.
At the very least, they might need a light or stop sign at the new Mayo Island Park. Can you imagine trying to make a left out of there on a Saturday?
I think that will be needed to assist parkgoers to pass between the east and west portions of the park. I don’t expect there will be parking for automobiles on the island.
Hull Street through Manchester is two lanes now. This will help funnel traffic down before it crosses the bridge and gets jammed up on the south side.
Richmond government and urban planners are synthetically creating automotive gridlock throughout the city by eliminating necessary car lanes. Why spend $195 million to rebuild this bridge if vehicular traffic is being reduced? Manchester is growing, and throttling the flow of traffic is not the solution.
Moving Richmond away from a car-based design to it’s origins of people-based design is good for the city and the region. Constantly accommodating more and more bigger mostly single occupancy cars isn’t the solution and is not sustainable.
To it’s origins? Like horses?
Our city, like many, developed prior to the advent of the automobile.
“Moving Richmond away from a car-based design to it’s origins of people-based design is good for the city and the region.” No one on this comment page will be around to see the city and the region moving away from cars and trucks as basic transportation. As far as the region goes, I-95 has been widened with more lanes to accommodate more cars; I-64 east of the Bottoms Bridge exit is being widened to accommodate more cars; traffic volume is increasing; eliminating off-street parking requirements for new development in Richmond is increasing competition for on-street spaces. Bicycles are rarely in… Read more »
Show us an example of gridlock caused by bike lanes? The worst gridlock in the city is Belvidere Street at rush hour and it’s a 6 lane road. When the Pulse was proposed, the reduction in traffic lanes from 6 to 4 was supposed to lead to gridlock, which never happened.
Brook Road. Franklin Street. Roads where 50% of the travel lanes were switched to bike lanes
And yet no gridlock resulted…
Brook or Franklin have never seen any significant traffic or gridlock.
I was literally just in bike lane gridlock this morning. The new bike lanes choked the intersection of Byrd and 3rd, coming off of the Downtown Expressway. I am a cyclist and would love safe bike lanes, but paint, plastic and half-baked reassignment of traffic lanes is not that.
But allegedly it has hurt Broad Street’s economy downtown.
The magic of cars is that they can go elsewhere.
Not sure why the design would use unbalanced dimensions for sidewalks (per the graphic). Why not build 3 traffic lanes, the middle one being used for peak traffic flow and closed at non-peak? Then balance the sidewalks and have the bike lanes. As for the comments on pedestrian and bike safety, why only on the bridge? It wouldn’t make sense to employ added safety measures only on that surface, but not on the streets connecting. If you’re gonna improve bike and/or pedestrian safety, that needs to be for an entire area, not a single point.
The wider sidewalk on the downriver side accommodates the long tradition of fishing off of the bridge.
You win the comment of the day award!
True. But you gotta start somewhere — I am for adequate separate bike AND car infrastructure.
My guess is bike riders make up less than 1% of the road traffic yet are asking for much more than 1% of the spending on roads for their own lanes and added protection. How much in fees/taxes are they paying for the privilege of this infrastructure? Registration fees? Licenses? Property taxes? Inspection fees? Insurance? Air tax? Are they somehow viewed as a benefit to society? Are they a protected class? Are skateboards allowed in their space? Are they an endangered species that must be protected over common sense on how our tax money is spent? I’m all for freedom… Read more »
Cyclists pay taxes too and to answer your question, yes it is a benefit to society to have fewer cars on the road. I have been bike commuting for almost 10 years and I own a car, pay personal property tax and do not add to traffic on my morning commute. The gas tax does not fully fund road construction so my taxes do help pay for improvements like this.
That is great. My view is that a majority of bike riders are kids or college students. Adults are doing it mostly for their own interest not to save the planet. I would put you in the exception category.
I agree with this. For whatever reason, we bike fans are one or another of a “certain type” — I certainly was when I was younger but I wasn’t such a strange ideologue about it (only a slightly strange one — I had a few friends that were more extreme, and their biking could be epic) that it went into my thirties. One of those people I knew still rides his bike to work but he lives in a bike friendly college town where he is a professor so, he is where he should be…. where I live, it is… Read more »
Yeah. The way mopeds, Vespi’s, Segway’s and e-scooters have taken over. One big problem is that these are mostly for city navigation. Where do you park it and feel secure enough to leave it out of eyesight. Some people will steal anything not being guarded.
Yes but you are just an example of what is called the small minority. Frankly, I think Richmond SHOULD be more of a bike culture (Broad St Bullies don’t help in that regard — we want bikers to be respectable, not people who should be incarcerated.) but there is a chicken-egg aspect to this — when I was in my 20s I biked more in the city than the vast majority of young adults out of some kind of youthful sense of principle (or when my car was in the shop) and it was DEFINATELY challenging.. maybe if it was… Read more »
They should assess big $$$ fines for bicyclists who ride through red lights and stop signs and ride the wrong way on one-way streets. If you want to be treated like a car, follow the same rules.
You understand, do you not, that you can avail yourself of all the advantages of bike infrastructure rather than rail against something that you perceive is for others and not for you.
Just because I think some cyclists are selfish jerks in funny clothing, doesn’t mean I’m not for bike infrastructure.
While I am not shaking my fist at bicyclists, you should also understand that bicyclists in many countries don’t have the kind of 12 yo outlaw culture that they often have here — a lot of countries like in northern Europe have very law abiding bicyclists (much like my parents’ generation)
They should assess big $$$ fines for 4k pound cars that run red lights and stop signs and ride the wrong way on one way streets. If you want to be treated like a adult, follow the rules.
I know I speak for many people who ride bikes when I say I don’t want to be treated like a car, I want to be treated like a human being.
Cutting out lanes is only going to cause traffic congestion on both sides,and not just rush hours.Theres a bunch of vehicles that use that bridge on a daily basis .You might as well build a bridge and just have it for y’all to ride your little bicycles across the river.
Your terms are acceptable.
So you want more congestion? You folks gotta read up on cart-horse issues.
This city needs more congestion for its own good.
I accept his offer of a bridge for the sole use of our little bicycles.
I really would like to see the new bridge built to handle future streetcars or light rail in that the original bridge was built for streetcar tracks.
It won’t happen. Buses are many times cheaper to implement and run than light rail or streetcars. Most of what I’ve read puts Light rail at around $200m per mile to construct and bus rapid transit between $0.9m and $9m per mile. We haven’t got the geography or the density.
How much for a monorail from the State Capitol down 10th st. to the river then west up along the river to the Blvd.-Byrd Park. Then up the Blvd. to the Diamond District down Hermitage to Broad then down Broad to 9th st. and the Capitol?
Literally billions of dollars. We can’t even get a proper stormwater and sewage system in this city and that would be ~$1 billion alone. Why build a monorail when a bus in dedicated lanes can do what it does for much less money?
Well for one it would be a tourist attraction. Just think. A monorail along the bank of The James River with a stop at the new amphitheater then a stop at Maymont Park. Next stop would be Carytown then the VMFA and on up to Scotts Addition and the Diamond District. On the way back to the Capitol down Broad St. you’d have stop at VCU and the Art District and City Hall. No brainer.
If one was to attend a 3-day weekend convention at the center- they could hop on the monorail and visit several of Richmond’s attractions without the need of a car. The river, shopping, parks, concerts, baseball game, museums and breweries.
How do you provide ADA access at each station between street level and monorail level? I think clean and safe public restrooms would be a better alternative investment.
OMG. We are SO far away from that. We’re getting wealthier, but we’re not getting big enough. Even Raleigh is not going to get any light rail in the foreseeable future…
Why not a tunnel for cars and the bridge for bikes, skateboards, scooters and walkers? It’s only tax money.
Why not cars use one of the three large bridges within one mile of this one that all go to the same general area? Because people in climate controlled vehicles that can easily and quickly travel by moving their big toe can save two minutes of drive time.
Huh?
There are three bridges that go into downtown from Manchester within a mile, and those bridges have plenty of lanes. Why should high speed cars dominate them all?
Why can’t the bridge be narrower; with top level vehicle traffic and bottom level pedestrian and bike traffic? That could be a beautiful bridge, attractive to view from the river, enjoyable on both levels and infinitely safer.
Two level bridges are more expensive and there is plenty of room for this as designed.
What’s the deal where a group of about 30 or40 bicyclists ride together.You meet up at the local Food Lion ,unload,and all take off together?
Strength in numbers. And it gives them vast pleasure to look back on a two lane road and see a line of cars behind them who have no chance to pass them all in one shot.
Yes, exactly,Why don’t they ride on roads that have bike lanes?
Seems to me if one wipes out , it’ll take out the entire pack.Like the big one at Talladega.
How many times a year does this nightmare happen to you? Maybe take a few minutes to appreciate a community of people openly enjoying the city at less than 45 miles per hour. It lasts less time than a red light. Perhaps we should remove all of those as well, as to not interrupt the valuable time you need to spend trolling the internet.