Skyway Merits Debated

[thelakelander]

Totally agree about the Sports Complex line - in time.  I think at this point we need to concentrate on more of a citywide system, instead of focusing on just downtown.  It's great that people have 19 ways to move AROUND downtown, now let's get them TO downtown.

I agree with Steve on this one.  While I can see the merits of a Skyway system that actually went where people want to go, as opposed to parking lots, I'm still of the opinion that reality shows we don't have a pot of gold at the end of the rainbow.  Its difficult to justify spending hundreds of millions on an elevated skyway system to cover a downtown that only has 2,000 residents, at the expense of other more populated and congested areas of town.  With that said, its cool to draw these lines on paper, but if money were available, I'd think that money would be better put to use on a more comprehensive system that connects the suburbs with each other, downtown and the airport.  Only after that more comprehensive system is funded and underway would it be time to seriously look into expanding the skyway.

[Coolyfett]

Places the Skyway needs to be/go:

Sports Complex extended from Central Station
5 Point/Riverside extended from Convention Center Station
Springfield extended from Rosa Parks Station
La Villa/The Ritz extended from Rosa Parks Station

reasonable station IMO.



...................I'm tired I need to go to sleep. I should have been to bed 4 hours ago. I love the site. Thanks to whoever is responsible. I'll do my best to take part in discussions. ttyl

Totally agree about the Sports Complex line - in time.  I think at this point we need to concentrate on more of a citywide system, instead of focusing on just downtown.  It's great that people have 19 ways to move AROUND downtown, now let's get them TO downtown.

The Riverside line would be from Central, not Convention Center.  If you look at the skyway track now, there is a little spur that extends off of the line back to the maintenance center.  It is mentioned briefly in this article: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/478/116/

With that said, I could see the skyway going down Riverside Avenue, but I don't see it going past I-95 by Fidelity.  The RAP folks don't really feel like the modern Skyway fits into the historic fabric of the neighborhood.

Springfield - See above (substitute SPAR instead of RAP)

LaVilla - don't see that happening.  What would people ride it to - don't say the Ritz.  Not that I have anything against the Ritz, but having events there once a week is not going to get ridership on something that is extremely expensive to build.

The La Villa was a reach Ill admit. But the same statements could be made for Jefferson and King Ave Station. What is there?? What are the points of interest at those 2 stations??

Springfield has nothing on Riverside, I mean really a Skyway station would be an upgrade. A lot of people that live in Springfield used to live in Riverside before the yuppies came and raised the price of living.

I will agree the Sports Complex Station is priority. Where do you feel the SCStation could be located?

[thelakelander]

The La Villa was a reach Ill admit. But the same statements could be made for Jefferson and King Ave Station. What is there?? What are the points of interest at those 2 stations??

They both failed so we definately don't need to repeat that model.

Springfield has nothing on Riverside, I mean really a Skyway station would be an upgrade. A lot of people that live in Springfield used to live in Riverside before the yuppies came and raised the price of living.

Both of these neighborhoods would go for a streetcar system before the skyway.  Because its elevated, it would become a visual blight to these historic districts.  On the other hand, they were both streetcar suburbs 100 years ago.

[Coolyfett]

Oh the second line, would continue north of Rosa Parks about 2 blocks, curve around FCCJ (ON THE CAMPUS) for a student station at the NW corner of the fence. Days that the school is closed, we simply lock the FCCJ access gates and open the gates to the City Street and Park area. Interface with buses bound for Shands or Streetcars on Pearl (advanced phase) of the streetcar system.


Ocklawaha

Why not just send line to Shands/Springfield area? Seems like the we would have two FCCJ Stations?

[Coolyfett]

The La Villa was a reach Ill admit. But the same statements could be made for Jefferson and King Ave Station. What is there?? What are the points of interest at those 2 stations??

They both failed so we definately don't need to repeat that model.

Springfield has nothing on Riverside, I mean really a Skyway station would be an upgrade. A lot of people that live in Springfield used to live in Riverside before the yuppies came and raised the price of living.

Both of these neighborhoods would go for a streetcar system before the skyway.  Because its elevated, it would become a visual blight to these historic districts.  On the other hand, they were both streetcar suburbs 100 years ago.

I was in Springfield today...I don't think that streetcar thing is good idea. You say the A Springfield Skyway Station would be a visual blight??? I saw many visual blights. Springfield still needs a lot of work.

[Charles Hunter]

Ock, where are you saying you would turn the north leg within the FCCJ Downtown Campus?  I think putting an elevated rail adjacent to - or imposing on the view from downtown of - Historic Bethel Church would be a bit of a hard sell.  Perhaps have one leg come out of Rosa Parks Station, turning west, then split it at Pearl or Jefferson - one going north to Shands the other west to EWC?

[Steve]

I was in Springfield today...I don't think that streetcar thing is good idea. You say the A Springfield Skyway Station would be a visual blight??? I saw many visual blights. Springfield still needs a lot of work.

It would be visual blight in that sense that it is a historic neighborhood with a modern monorail running through it - I'd tend to agree.

Remember, Main St had a street car on it back in the day, it is historic to the neigoborhood.

As far as blight goes, I wish you could have seen it 10 years ago.  Holy crap, now there was blight.  To be honest, Main St is really the worst street there now.  When you have some time, take a drive down Laura, Silver, or Market.  Keep in mind that Springfield is what it is - a neighborhood in the middle of being revitalized.  Springfield didn't go south overnight, and will not turn into a great, no blight neighborhood overnight either.

With that said, prices there are nowhere near Avondale, Riverside, or San Marco for comperable properties

[fsujax]

Steve you are so right, driving down Main St, Springfield does look pretty bad.  Once you get off that main road and explore the rest of the neighborhood it is amazing.  I remember growing up in Riverside, 10-15 years ago, there was lots of visual blight (current Publix, used to be a hospital, Park and King was nothing like it is now). It took time for that change and it will happen in Springfield as well.

[Steve]

Steve you are so right, driving down Main St, Springfield does look pretty bad.  Once you get off that main road and explore the rest of the neighborhood it is amazing.  I remember growing up in Riverside, 10-15 years ago, there was lots of visual blight (current Publix, used to be a hospital, Park and King was nothing like it is now). It took time for that change and it will happen in Springfield as well.

It makes sense - generally, the residential streets were aided by individuals.  Yes, SRG has built some great houses, but if it weren't for the individuals ready to by those houses, they wouldn't be built.

Main St on the other hand is largely commercial (or parking lots).  We've demolished some buildings and the rest generally are in bad shape, landlords are asking too much in rent, or both.  Main St will take some large-scale invenstment on the sites of vacant lots, or landlords working with tenants to actually offer reasonable lease rates.

To me, the problems with Main St in Springfield resembel very closely the problems with downtown as a whole.  It's too expensive for the average person to set up shop, and in many cases overpriced.

[Coolyfett]

There are historic places in San Marco. If you think about all the southbank stations are all in San Marco. Would anyone be against the idea of the PS4 = Riverside Station concept?







"Believe it or not it looks like this could be done with very little modification to the exterior structure". 

Looks cool!

[gatorback]

I'm sold.

[Coolyfett]

I was reading that Folio Weekly article. I never knew the Skyway cost 200 million. Man I don't know if JTA can even afford to add to it.

[Charles Hunter]

Bingo.  Give that poster a cigar!!

[Ocklawaha]

I was reading that Folio Weekly article. I never knew the Skyway cost 200 million. Man I don't know if JTA can even afford to add to it.

Bingo.  Give that poster a cigar!!

My comments moved to their own "CAN WE AFFORD THE SKYWAY?" thread.

Ocklawaha

[Coolyfett]

I was reading that Folio Weekly article. I never knew the Skyway cost 200 million. Man I don't know if JTA can even afford to add to it.

Bingo.  Give that poster a cigar!!

Oh they could, IF they had the guts to stand up and tell the truth. Y'all have seen and maybe ridden that Southside extension? Ask why when it was ALREADY converted to a single beam monorail system. (Something quite simple and as cheap as BRT or high end LRT) WHY? WHY did JTA go right ahead and build all the way to King Street Station with the ORIGINAL people mover platform (system one) which they had already scrapped. Then came along and laid the monorail beam on top just like the retrofitted Northside line? In other words, they built both systems all over again, when they already knew they were sold to Monorail... Want to see how hard it would be to build to San Marco? Stadium? PS-4? Just drive up to the Times-Union, turn into the front of the Skyway Facility, pass it and make a right on the little dead end alley/street alongside the building. Get out of your car and look at the track coming into the Facility... Does this look anything like what they built on the Southbank? NOPE... WHY? Because this is simple, single beam monorail construction, and had the whole thing been done this way, it would already be in Riverside, Stadium and San Marco!

In my opinion, this might even be a criminal act or waste of public funds that could go into court... Someone should pay for this stupidity or oversight. The whole City, it's image, and a possible help to our transit has been wrecked by the same agency that claimed it would save us. What they did is equal to the new Mainstreet project, including the double streetcar tracks (all brand new) then covering the whole thing with new curbs, flowers and roads... WHY? WHY the duplication...

Thanks to the Monorail Society for this little tidbit...

Ocklawaha

Damn Ock!! You proved me wrong. I was just arguing this point with a friend the other day. My buddy swore that certain parts of the rail were rebuilt. Why the hell would they waste what they already built Ock? Thats extra rail that could have went somewhere else as you stated. That was my disagreement with my friend. Whats the opposite of forwards??

Chuck...I don't smoke cigars  . You obviously have a dislike for the system. I personally wish the OUR train system was better but time will tell. All I can do is jump the turnstiles and ride (none of the coin machines work except @ the Rosa Parks Station) to where i am going. Other then the cost, why SHOULDN'T it be extended Chuck?

The PS4/Riverside Station sounds like a good idea. IMO its saves the building, extends the Skyway to Riverside and adds overall mileage to the system. 2.5 miles?? What a joke!