Skyway Could Be Torn Down.....In 2036!

[iMarvin]

Well frankly, now that we're talking about JTA, that is really my main motivation in why I believe the streetcar should not in any way rely on the skyway. I just didn't want to come out loud and say it. It is looking like it may be set up as a separate light rail authority rather than under JTA. Get where I'm going here? If it is kept away from them, JTA can't possibly f*uck it up. Drag them into it, by some psuedo-merger with the skyway, asking for special scheduling, or by designing it in such a way that a streetcar passenger winds up having to rely on JTA to get to a significant number of streetcar destinations, and we're really no better off than we started, are we?

Keep JTA out of it, and it might actually be real public transit with real service, independent of the JTA buffoons.

Maybe JTA could hand it over to a different authority...

Marvin, it's not JTA'S to hand to anyone. Thus far the streetcar is a completely independent project.

OCKLAWAHA

I was talking about the skyway.

[thelakelander]

No problem, when you're right you're right! Thanks for sharing the link.

Both of you are wrong.  Metromover averages +30k riders a day.  Metrorail averages +65k riders a day.  Combine them and the Metro gets the +96k riders a day.  With that said, if you take Metrorail and transfer to Metromover, you are counted twice.  You're a rider on Metrorail and Metromover.  You can call it a fuzzy way of counting but a chunk of Metromover riders do transfer to the downtown loop from Metrorail and local buses.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_Metrorail

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metromover

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami-Dade_Transit

[iMarvin]

No problem, when you're right you're right! Thanks for sharing the link.

Both of you are wrong.  Metromover averages +30k riders a day.  Metrorail averages +65k riders a day.  Combine them and the Metro gets the +96k riders a day.  With that said, if you take Metrorail and transfer to Metromover, you are counted twice.  You're a rider on Metrorail and Metromover.  You can call it a fuzzy way of counting but a chunk of Metromover riders do transfer to the downtown loop from Metrorail and local buses.



http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami_Metrorail

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metromover

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Miami-Dade_Transit

Maybe I should've said that 30,000 with no help from other rail systems. That is right.

[thelakelander]

Metrorail is another rail system and the riders it feeds into Metromover are a part of the 30k number you're quoting.  They just happen to count an individual transferring between them as (1) rider for Metrorail and (1) rider for Metromover.  So when you combine Metrorail's (+65k riders) with Metromover's (+30k riders) you end up with 96k.  For example, if live in Kendall and work in downtown, my commute would be a combination of Metrorail and Metromover.  Each trip I make to my office, I'd be counted as two riders.  I'd be a rider on Metrorail and another rider on Metromover.  If you click on the links for Metrorail you'll see the same numbers shown for Metromover in reverse.  Also, I suspect there are some BRT and commuter rail riders being tagged multiple times as well.

Comparing this to Jax, if I lived in Riverside and worked in the Southbank, such a trip would require me to take the streetcar and transfer to the skyway.  Thus, I'd be counted twice.  Once as a streetcar rider and a second time as a skyway rider.

[Dashing Dan]

As far as fares go I'm over 60 so the only thing I have to pay for is the skyway.  My personal issue with transfers has
nothing to do with the fact that they aren't free or discounted, although I do believe that they should be.

[tufsu1]

I wish JTA would be eliminated altogether and replaced with something under the direct control of our city government, rather than being this hybrid state/city agency where everyone is obligated to foot bill but nobody has any control over what they do.

actually the trend seems to be for regional transit agencies...look for legislation on that during the 2012 Legislative session

btw, Chris...can you please explain your "6 transfer" thing?

My issue is you seem to be implying that the 6 transfers occur on a round trip....that's just now how the transit world works....trips are one-way, as most people make multiple trips with different origins and destinations.

In transit speak, trips are viewed as one-seat rides, two-seat rides, etc...and data shows that there is virtually no dimunition in ridership with two-seat rides (one transfer) when the waiting time is minimal.

[Dashing Dan]

...and data shows that there is virtually no dimunition in ridership with two-seat rides (one transfer) when the waiting time is minimal.

ChrisWUFGator has set a high bar today for references.   

Have you got one that backs this claim?

[ChriswUfGator]

I wish JTA would be eliminated altogether and replaced with something under the direct control of our city government, rather than being this hybrid state/city agency where everyone is obligated to foot bill but nobody has any control over what they do.

actually the trend seems to be for regional transit agencies...look for legislation on that during the 2012 Legislative session

btw, Chris...can you please explain your "6 transfer" thing?

My issue is you seem to be implying that the 6 transfers occur on a round trip....that's just now how the transit world works....trips are one-way, as most people make multiple trips with different origins and destinations.

In transit speak, trips are viewed as one-seat rides, two-seat rides, etc...and data shows that there is virtually no dimunition in ridership with two-seat rides (one transfer) when the waiting time is minimal.

I don't care what your industry term is, I wouldn't take 6 planes to get to California and back, let alone to San Marco and back.

Call it what you want, people aren't going to go for it.

[ChriswUfGator]

...and data shows that there is virtually no dimunition in ridership with two-seat rides (one transfer) when the waiting time is minimal.

ChrisWUFGator has set a high bar today for references.   

Have you got one that backs this claim?

I'd be interested to see this too.

Ocklawaha pretty much wrote the book on light rail, and he seems to think shorthaul intracity passengers begin to drop off after 1 transfer. If Tufsu disagrees, perhaps we could look at his figures? As I pointed out 10 pages ago, very little about what people will put up with in large cities applies here, where the system needs a level of convenience that enables it compete with the automobile. We don't have $400/mo garage fees and traffic that takes 2 hours to go 10 miles. This thing can't be a JTA bus on tracks with any reasonable expectation of success. It has to compete on cost and convenience.

[thelakelander]

Even with the Skyway, I don't see why anyone in the core would have to make 4 to 6 transfers for any single trip (I'm under the assumption that the entire transit network would be redesigned as new modes role online, including how the skyway operates).  Even in the a far flung spot like Cecil, access to the Southbank would only require 3 transfers (bus, commuter rail, skyway (on southbank instead of JRTC).  However, the majority of typical transit trips aren't originating in a place like that.

Also, here are some peer cities with multimodal transportation systems where transferring is necessary to access "some" destinations.

Salt Lake City (LRT, commuter rail, local bus and soon streetcar)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utah_Transit_Authority


Charlotte (LRT, Heritage streetcar, local bus and soon modern streetcar, BRT and DMU commuter rail)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lynx_Rapid_Transit_Services


Tacoma (modern streetcar, commuter rail, Amtrak corridor service, local bus)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tacoma_Link


Portland (LRT, modern streetcar, vintage streetcar, DMU commuter rail, Amtrak corridor, and local bus)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/TriMet
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portland_Streetcar

However, I do agree with Chris that no mode should be designed to simply make the Skyway work.  A transit network in any community should be designed based on the environment of context within specific neighborhoods and areas of town.  Thus, right off the bat, a good system should include multiple forms of mobility.

[Dashing Dan]

Whatever the basis for their decision, Nashville MTA quit running PCT trolleys over the transfer issue.

On the other hand they have a very slick operation for connecting buses with commuter trains.

[thelakelander]

It's also possible that Nashville's commuter rail line ends up like Syracuse's, due to low ridership.  In regards to transferring, I can't think of one major or second tier metro with any type of transit system where transferring isn't required to get to anywhere in the core city or burbs.  The key is to make it as seamless as possible.

[Dashing Dan]

I haven't checked lately but the last time I did, ridership was up significantly on "The Music City Star."

The Nashville MTA has a policy of keeping transfers to a minimum.  Within that policy I think they do a good job of facilitating transfers.

[thelakelander]

Yes, the 32-mile Music City Star is up to 1,000 riders a day.  Roughly 2,000 less riders than the 2.5 mile Jax Skyway gets today. 

Anyway, no one is talking about making transfers for the sake of making additional transfers.  I don't think anyone here has argued that.  However, that doesn't mean you shouldn't design specific lines to best fit the context and community it is intended to serve.  If a certain corridor calls for streetcar instead of local bus, skyway or commuter rail, so be it.  ON the opposite end, if your main priority in designing your transit system is to avoid transfers the end result will be pretty screwed up.

[Dashing Dan]

Yeah but the Music City Star will be considered successful if it draws 1,500 daily riders.