Dear Friends,
This is sort of a long message, but it’s a critical decision for Richmonders, and one in which you can play a part:
As people who live, work, and recreate in Richmond, we all know the Mayo Bridge is more than just a way to get from one side of the James River to the other. It’s a vital link between Manchester and downtown, offering pedestrians, cyclists, and motorists alike a chance to cross the river and take in some of the best views in the city. It is also the spot where I have come closest to being hit while riding my bike.
The current traffic there is unsafe and too heavy, and with two other bridges capable of carrying large volumes of traffic less than one mile away, a four lane Mayo Bridge creates unnecessary risk. This is important for us because the newest section of the James River Park System, Mayo Island Park, is being developed in the middle of this bridge and the JRPS is connected to both sides of it. This road is already in Richmond’s High Injury network. We want the new bridge to improve safety and reduce the need to cross a four lane speedway from one section of the new Park to the other.
A specific concern I have with the options presented is that none of the options maintain bicycle and pedestrian space that connects through the Floodwall at both ends of the bridge. Each option narrows to a tight five feet at those locations which will continue to create conflicts between users. This seems short-sighted and inconsistent with VDOT’S own survey data showing that the community desires safety and connectivity above all else.
For years, Richmond has been talking about making the city more walkable and bike-friendly. With the booming popularity of the James River Park System and the growth of Manchester as a residential and commercial hub, now is the perfect time to invest in pedestrian and recreational infrastructure. Yet, somehow, the Mayo Bridge replacement plan seems to have overlooked one critical aspect: people. It is frustrating, especially given the City’s recent multi-million dollar investment to purchase Mayo Island and develop it as public green space, paired with the ambitious plans to enhance the Historic Slave Trail which takes people across the Mayo Bridge as part of the interpretive journey.
The current plan appears to prioritize cars and traffic flow over pedestrians and cyclists, missing a golden opportunity to enhance the bridge as a vital part of Richmond’s recreational network. We’ve seen this pattern before—projects designed with little regard for the needs of non-motorists, leaving pedestrians and cyclists to make do with narrow sidewalks or poorly marked bike lanes. It’s frustrating, especially when we have such a strong outdoor culture in this city.
What’s more disappointing is that this bridge could be so much more than just a car-centric thoroughfare. Imagine a pedestrian and cyclist-friendly bridge that serves as a recreational destination, offering seating, overlooks, and dedicated lanes for those of us who aren’t stuck behind the wheel. Imagine wide paths where you don’t have to worry about being clipped by a car mirror or dodging potholes. This isn’t some futuristic fantasy—it’s exactly what other cities across the country are doing to promote sustainability and recreation.
Richmond has long prided itself on its unique outdoor amenities, from the James River Park System to the Capital Trail, and soon the Fall Line Trail. The Mayo Bridge replacement could be another feather in our cap, a project that demonstrates our commitment to being a truly walkable and bike-friendly city. Instead, it feels like we’re stuck in the past, repeating old mistakes that prioritize cars over people.
This is also a golden opportunity to change how cars move through the city. With the bridge completely closed for several years during construction people who use it are going to find other ways to get across the river. The 9th street bridge, 95, and the Belvedere Bridge all cross the river, and can handle the extra traffic. People will develop new habits during bridge construction out of necessity. It is completely plausible that the new Mayo Bridge will not need to accommodate as many cars by the time it is finished.
Replacing the Mayo Bridge should be an opportunity to make Richmond better, not just replace a crumbling structure with another that doesn’t fit the city’s needs. The people of Richmond deserve a bridge that reflects the city’s growing commitment to outdoor recreation and alternative transportation. It’s time for the city to rethink its priorities. Let’s stop treating pedestrians and cyclists like afterthoughts and start designing infrastructure that works for everyone. The Mayo Bridge replacement should be about more than just cars—it should be about community, safety, and the future of our city.
There are opportunities for you to weigh in on the current plans, and let the decision makers know where you stand on this issue.
.
.
