STREETCAR NOW JACKSONVILLE!

[thelakelander]

How would you get it under I-95 without dropping the elevation., which in turn restricts access to adjacent properties?  Also, running an elevated system into a historic district filled with mature oaks would require taking them down, which completely changes the character of the district.  I think its important to keep in mind that the skyway is a downtown circulator.  Just because its in downtown doesn't mean that it makes the most sense to extend it deep into every neighborhood.  Well planned mass transit networks tend to contain several different types of modes all designed to properly fit and integrate into the context they are intended to serve.

[iMarvin]

How would you get it under I-95 without dropping the elevation., which in turn restricts access to adjacent properties?  Also, running an elevated system into a historic district filled with mature oaks would require taking them down, which completely changes the character of the district.  I think its important to keep in mind that the skyway is a downtown circulator.  Just because its in downtown doesn't mean that it makes the most sense to extend it deep into every neighborhood.  Well planned mass transit networks tend to contain several different types of modes all designed to properly fit and integrate into the context they are intended to serve.

The skywas was for downtown, but also the surrouning neighborhoods. That's why it was planned to go to 5 points, San Marco, the stadium, and Shands. I envision the skyway going down Riverside to Lomax to Five Points. There won't be many trees cut down and the character will hardly change. A streetcar can do the rest, but the skyway needs to go to 5 points.

[Jimmy]

The Skyway goes over the river, iMarvin.  That ain't nothing.  If the streetcar lines are used to feed the existing Skyway strengths, that would be great. 

I think it's politically unfeasible to expand the Skyway at this time.  Best to work on projects that have a chance of happening.

[iMarvin]

The Skyway goes over the river, iMarvin.  That ain't nothing.  If the streetcar lines are used to feed the existing Skyway strengths, that would be great. 

I think it's politically unfeasible to expand the Skyway at this time.  Best to work on projects that have a chance of happening.

Ok then, say we had a streetcar (using the route that is planned). If you didn't have to go to San Marco, the chances of you riding the skyway are slim. Am I wrong?

[Jimmy]

Pretty slim.  Unless I needed to get up to Rosa Parks station to changeover to a bus.  Or FSCJ was at or near my final destination.  Hard to say.

[iMarvin]

Pretty slim.  Unless I needed to get up to Rosa Parks station to changeover to a bus.  Or FSCJ was at or near my final destination.  Hard to say.

Exactly, which is why I think the skyway needs to be expanded into Riverside. MJ even had a map showing what I would like to happen. Go down Riverside then to 5 Points. A streetcar going down another road would benefit from the skyway and the skyway would benefit from the streetcar. That's all I'm saying

[peestandingup]

Here is my study. Actual streetcar in Jax has been (not forecast or predicted) so successful that giant corporations (GM and Ford) bought them and scrapped them so they could actually sell some buses.  This is not hypothetical we have the true real life proof of viability. 

Yeah, pretty much. I mean, everyone at this point knows what happened. Do we really need another wasteful study that will just inject more bureaucratic mumbo jumbo into this to hold it up??

They worked before. They'll work again. The landscape has remained relatively unchanged. They should of course take into account new transit hubs & stuff like that. But if the main line once rolled down Oak, then put it right down Oak again.

Like Ock said, this should be looked at as rebuilding & making up for the mistakes of the past. Not something totally new.

[Jimmy]

Yeah, I like Oak for this.  And like PSU said, we're just getting back to where we used to be. 

Let's keep this as simple as possible.

[thelakelander]

Pretty slim.  Unless I needed to get up to Rosa Parks station to changeover to a bus.  Or FSCJ was at or near my final destination.  Hard to say.

Exactly, which is why I think the skyway needs to be expanded into Riverside. MJ even had a map showing what I would like to happen. Go down Riverside then to 5 Points. A streetcar going down another road would benefit from the skyway and the skyway would benefit from the streetcar. That's all I'm saying

You're not designing a mass transit system to force people to use the skyway.  You design the system to give people a viable alternative to using their cars to access a multitude of destinations throughout town.  Thus, I may hop on a streetcar in Riverside and transfer to BRT to get to Arlington, commuter rail to get to the airport, another streetcar line to get to Springfield, the skyway to get to the Southbank or a regular bus to get to Lackawanna.  Or I could hop on the streetcar at St. Vincents and get off at Five Points.  There is nothing wrong with any of these scenarios.  This is simply the result of a well planned mass transit network designed to get residents across town efficiently.

[iMarvin]

Pretty slim.  Unless I needed to get up to Rosa Parks station to changeover to a bus.  Or FSCJ was at or near my final destination.  Hard to say.

Exactly, which is why I think the skyway needs to be expanded into Riverside. MJ even had a map showing what I would like to happen. Go down Riverside then to 5 Points. A streetcar going down another road would benefit from the skyway and the skyway would benefit from the streetcar. That's all I'm saying

You're not designing a mass transit system to force people to use the skyway.  You design the system to give people a viable alternative to using their cars to access a multitude of destinations throughout town.  Thus, I may hop on a streetcar in Riverside and transfer to BRT to get to Arlington, commuter rail to get to the airport, another streetcar line to get to Springfield, the skyway to get to the Southbank or a regular bus to get to Lackawanna.  Or I could hop on the streetcar at St. Vincents and get off at Five Points.  There is nothing wrong with any of these scenarios.  This is simply the result of a well planned mass transit network designed to get residents across town efficiently.

Lake, I'm not saying I don't want streetcars in Riverside, I do. I'm saying I don't want them on Riverside because of a possible skyway extension. I would love to see streetcars in Riverside, but Riverside Ave is not the smartest choice. That wouldn't force people to use the skyway, it would just be what's on that street.

[Jimmy]

But the Skyway won't be extended down Riverside Avenue so I don't see the conflict.  There is not the money.  There is not the political will.  And without one or preferably both of those things, there won't be any extension of the Skyway.

Politics is the art of the possible.  A starter streetcar line is possible.  Go with that, wherever it can be done.

[Charles Hunter]

If I remember correctly (Ock? Lake?) the original "Riverside" line of the Skyway ended at Blue Cross/Blue Shield - that is, Forest, or maybe Edison Street.  It was never intended to cross I-95 into the Riverside neighborhood.  An elevated structure - even if they go to the Disney mono-beams, instead of the massive structure they have no - is a non-starter south of I-95.

So, Streetcar from the JTC via the Lee Street Viaduct, then Oak (could cut at an angle across some of that vacant property in exchange for a station to serve the development), to Forest or Edison to link with the Skyway (eventually - and if the Skyway is never extended, as Jimmy said, it is still close enough to serve both Riverside and Park), under I-95 on Riverside, then back over to Oak at a convenient spot (Post? Lomax?).

[thelakelander]

The possible skyway extension would terminate at Forest Street.  In the event that this ever happens that terminal spot would just tie in to where the streetcar would use Forest to gain access to a corridor like Park to get to the JTC.  In this case, there is no duplication.  With that said, I question if its worth spending the money on two fixed transit systems running parallel so close to each other.  To me, I'd abandon the idea of running the skyway to Forest, design the streetcar to serve Riverside/Brooklyn and use whatever money you want to spend on that skyway extension, extending the skyway to Atlantic Blvd in San Marco (they are about the same distance).

[Charles Hunter]

Yes!

[iMarvin]

If you check my previous posts, you'll see I said a skyway extension wouldn't happen until they re-evaluate the mobility plan. If a streetcar is successful, why wouldn't the skyway be? That's why I think it should run down Park and why we shouldn't forget about the skyway in Riverside.