Festival ‘Sparks’ Ridership Boom on Skyway

[jaxjaguar]

Living on the north bank taking the skyway to work on the south bank. $35k a year and trying to pay off student loans.... gimme a break man haha, I'm trying to be one of the young people who's helping revitalize the core. I'm doing the best I can, straight out of college, with what I've got. I like the skyway and use it on a daily basis to save money / avoid the elements.

[Tacachale]

^Haha, Lake, see what happens when you assume.

Jaxjaguar, I do that too from San Marco. I'm not going to walk to downtown, and I'm certainly not going to pay for parking either.

[thelakelander]

^No not really. You two, like me, are extreme exceptions. Jaxjaguar is one of a couple of hundred people living in the Northbank that's within walking distance of the Skyway.

I'm just as big of a Skyway fan as anyone. But being in the transportation industry, I'm also a realistic from a technical standpoint. Look at the overall daily ridership statistics versus the cost of operate and expand the Skyway and the numbers will tell you everything you need to know.  It will take more than the development of the Shipyards to justify spending upwards of $40-$50 million/mile to extend it down Bay Street.

Massive investment, which is needed to truly attract larger numbers outside of the downtown core, is better reserved for some type of other mode that's cheaper to implement, operate and comes with higher ridership capacity potential.  It's why no other cities outside of Miami and Detroit have built something similar in the last 20 years. This is an issue our community will eventually have to address one way or the other.

[Josh]

Extending the Skyway down Bay St seems like a really poor choice compared to something like a streetcar. The high cost of monorail stations means you would probably only get one additional station with the extension, near the arena/stadium. That would effectively bypass all of the establishments on Bay St, whatever ends up on The Shipyards, etc. A streetcar would have much better interactions due to the additional stops and street-level interaction it would have.

[exnewsman]

^I'm just as big of a Skyway fan as anyone. But being in the transportation industry, I'm also a realistic from a technical standpoint. Look at the overall daily ridership statistics versus the cost of operate and expand the Skyway and the numbers will tell you everything you need to know.  It will take more than the development of the Shipyards to justify spending upwards of $40-$50 million/mile to extend it down Bay Street.

I think that a new Convention Center, Shipyards development, maybe the Berkman 2 redevelopment, and some other infill can certainly start the conversation toward a Bay Street extension. I'm not really a "Skyway to the Sports Complex" guy. Too limited without all these other elements. But regardless, JTA will have to work out the technology issues first. Can't get parts for what they have now. I do think the Brooklyn extension has merit to connect Brooklyn/San Marco/Downtown.

[thelakelander]

In other words, a billion worth of private development between downtown and EverBank Field first? In that case, sure. But when the decade arrives for the time to extend down Bay, we'll have to ask ourselves is it worth extending an archaic and obsolete transit mode or going with another type.

[jaxjaguar]

I don't really understand why it's soooooo expensive. Yes, I know it's not going to be cheap, but I feel like it could be done for much cheaper.

[simms3]

This was my whole contention with the TIGER grant to extend a quarter mile and build a "simple" station in Brooklyn to serve "all the new apartments".  It was well over $20M to do so, and means that this additional federal "equity" in the system ensures that this obsolete system is here to stay.  Not only that, $20M for a couple hundred apartments, most of which won't be lived in by Skyway riding customers, and even if they were, that's still a high price to pay.  A similar expansion line being built for me is costing $42,500/estimated initial new rider.  That would equate to about 500 new daily riders for the Brooklyn extension.  220 Riverside is 294 units.  The other development is 310 units.  Call it 1.5 people on average per unit and you have 906 new people.  Nevermind that the parking ratio is about 1 space per bedroom + room for visitor and commercial shoppers and that not everyone will be working downtown, at New York City transit usage rates you're only 504 people (55.6%)  using Skyway to go to work.  At SF rates you're down to 294.  At Jax rates, I think it would be well under 100, maybe even under 50.

Bottom line is that in my opinion, doing anything with the Skyway is fruitless and setting the city up for a more difficult transition into a better alternative.

[simms3]

I don't really understand why it's soooooo expensive. Yes, I know it's not going to be cheap, but I feel like it could be done for much cheaper.

And I feel like I should make a million bucks a year but I don't :/

[jaxjaguar]

Keep in mind if the Brooklyn expansion happened there are also several large office buildings near-by, soon (if it gets funding worked out) a new YMCA, and the Riverside Arts Market. It's reasonable to believe those who live downtown and on the south bank would use the skyway to get to work, the grocery store and restaurants, ymca, arts martket, etc...and those who lived / visited those areas would travel downtown more frequently. I know i would much rather take the skyway to the grocery store than wait in the nightmare that is the Publix parking lot of 5-points.

[IrvAdams]

I like the Skyway, but for character you can't beat a good old streetcar, trolley, etc. Plus, as pointed out, the on/offs can be increased or decreased as needed; more flexible. The Skway is permanently fixed entrance/exit.

[thelakelander]

This was my whole contention with the TIGER grant to extend a quarter mile and build a "simple" station in Brooklyn to serve "all the new apartments".  It was well over $20M to do so, and means that this additional federal "equity" in the system ensures that this obsolete system is here to stay.

I'd actually prefer them funding a station at the existing O&M site by dipping into their reserves.  In the Brooklyn case, the infrastructure is literally already there. In reality, it doesn't cost $20 million to build a station there.  A lot of stuff was thrown into that application to make it eligible for TIGER grant consideration. In addition, that's a situation where the connectivity benefits downtown as a whole, moreso than filling seats on the Skyway.

It's reasonable to believe those who live downtown and on the south bank would use the skyway to get to work, the grocery store and restaurants, ymca, arts martket, etc...and those who lived / visited those areas would travel downtown more frequently. I know i would much rather take the skyway to the grocery store than wait in the nightmare that is the Publix parking lot of 5-points.

This. IMO, a "no-frills" Brooklyn station is a good trade off because it makes the description above actually feasible regardless of whether one lives in Brooklyn, the Northbank or Southbank. Between the Union Street Winn-Dixie, Brooklyn's Fresh Market and proposed East San Marco's Publix we can forget about seeing any other grocery stores in the walkable heart of DT anytime soon. A "no-frills" Skyway stop at a place the Skyway already goes seems like a no-brainer.  My outlook and position starts to change when the discussion moves to actual extensions.

[southsider1015]

This was my whole contention with the TIGER grant to extend a quarter mile and build a "simple" station in Brooklyn to serve "all the new apartments".  It was well over $20M to do so, and means that this additional federal "equity" in the system ensures that this obsolete system is here to stay.

I'd actually prefer them funding a station at the existing O&M site by dipping into their reserves.  In the Brooklyn case, the infrastructure is literally already there. In reality, it doesn't cost $20 million to build a station there.  A lot of stuff was thrown into that application to make it eligible for TIGER grant consideration. In addition, that's a situation where the connectivity benefits downtown as a whole, moreso than filling seats on the Skyway.

It's reasonable to believe those who live downtown and on the south bank would use the skyway to get to work, the grocery store and restaurants, ymca, arts martket, etc...and those who lived / visited those areas would travel downtown more frequently. I know i would much rather take the skyway to the grocery store than wait in the nightmare that is the Publix parking lot of 5-points.

This. IMO, a "no-frills" Brooklyn station is a good trade off because it makes the description above actually feasible regardless of whether one lives in Brooklyn, the Northbank or Southbank. Between the Union Street Winn-Dixie, Brooklyn's Fresh Market and proposed East San Marco's Publix we can forget about seeing any other grocery stores in the walkable heart of DT anytime soon. A "no-frills" Skyway stop at a place the Skyway already goes seems like a no-brainer.  My outlook and position starts to change when the discussion moves to actual extensions.

You're right, the grant application is for more than just a station and guideway extension.  A big portion is upgrading the current trains, which desperately need an overhaul to continue service.  This was done to meet part of the TIGER criteria. 

You'll just have to wait until the grant application and website goes public to understand the project better.

[thelakelander]

^I was referring to last year's TIGER grant application.  I know this next round will be improved and include some things like bike share. I'm interested to see what JTA pulls together.

[tufsu1]

Agreed.  I think folks will be pretty impressed when this year's TIGER grant application is submitted.  I believe they are due next week so we should see something soon.