Festival ‘Sparks’ Ridership Boom on Skyway

[simms3]

Ock, many cities have totally different dynamics than Jax.  I don't need to get into specifics that you already know, but many cities where people "gladly brave worse weather and make 20 transfers before arriving at their destination" are cities with Manhattan densities, extreme expenses/hassles with owning cars and intense congestion (even with cars) that will never be seen in the likes of Jax, and developed cultures of transit, and systems that are actually convenient (which is a rarity in the entire USA...I'll take most European metro systems of average size over the MTA or DC Metro, the two best systems in our country).

Do you honestly think Jax will develop a culture of transit ridership immediately even if they build something?  It will take time, "training", and a different development style (i.e. denser and a little more car-inconvenient).  Charlotte and Houston have achieved *decent* ridership per mile on short feeder lines either connecting two CBDs exponentially larger than DT Jax (Houston's case), or in Charlotte's case a feeder line filled with development opportunity (opportunity that you know as well as I know won't happen in Avondale or even Riverside) connecting to a much larger downtown than DT Jax.  Minneapolis already apparently had a culture of riding transit, given its far more progressive population and densely built environment - its bus system has pretty darn high ridership for a city its size.

I'm familiar enough with Jax to know that it's far too convenient to own and use a car.  Not much traffic, wide open pothole free roads (relatively), timed lights, easy driving, etc etc.  I can picture a single line similar to Charlotte's, Austin's, or Norfolk's single line systems working well if given a chance to see TOD sprout up along it (i.e. the route you discussed).  But Jax is part of the Deep South/Sunbelt and this entire region of the country has a seemingly difficult time adopting transit and developing to densities that support transit.

I'm sure most other posters on here are far far more traveled than I, but it doesn't take a genius to realize any of this if you are traveled and transit-weathered.  I've also been permanently gone from Jax for 8 years, which is not a short amount of time to experience other systems and perspectives in our modern 21st century timeframe (not that I never traveled before leaving Jax either).

For an inkling of LRT ridership achieved over a more citywide footprint along a very fully developed system connecting dense corridors and multiple CBDs in one of the country's and certainly the south's largest cities - Dallas - ridership is 1,155 per route mile for avg weekday ridership, over 85 miles (98,300 avg weekday riders).  I think that's a fair number to expect in the SE for a fully developed system.  I know ridership is increasing, but to reach "big city" ridership density levels, Dallas has a very very long way to go.  I also know it's replacing an HRT system, but beside the point since a lot of HRT systems that extend out into the burbs of other metros also still have far higher ridership levels (which as you know probably partly goes with the increased capacity of the trains...though I doubt DART trains are anywhere near capacity now).

Conversely, the other SE/Sunbelt systems are single, starter line systems and achieve higher ridership/mile, but much lower ridership overall.  Charlotte achieves 1,605 riders per mile on a short, single 9.6 mile line along its most dense mixed-use corridor.  Houston achieves 5,105 per mile on a similar 12.8 mile route connecting two huge CBDs (downtown and TMC).  Calgary, Boston, San Francisco, and Toronto are just on a whole different level.  In fact, SF's Central Subway project, which is LRT, like Houston's line, is projected to have a ridership of over 20,000 per mile over its 1.7 mile length (and that for a route many say is utterly useless...I can only imagine the projection for a line down Geary which has the country's most congested bus line).

Therefore I think it's reasonable to surmise that in some cities people might be willing (or forced) to brave a bit more to ride transit than in Jax.

All one has to do is look at Miami's metro line to see how difficult it is to make transit catch on significantly in FL.  Miami, with a density of 12,139 ppsm, a huge captured transit ridership base, TOD done pretty well, multiple CBDs and destinations connected, and horrible transit, still has 64% the ridership per mile of MARTA, a system viewed by many as one with many flaws.  How do you explain that one, Ock?  I've ridden Metrorail - I've connected to it using TriRail and connected to the People Mover downtown, as well.  It's a pretty comprehensive system...why don't people down there ride it?

[thelakelander]

Metrorail misses several major destinations in Miami. South Beach, Coral Gables, Design District, the Marlins ballpark, cruise terminal, etc.  It connects well with Tri-Rail but Tri-Rail misses all the downtowns of South Florida's several cities.

In Atlanta, MARTA has north-south and east-west lines that tie in pretty well with most of Atlanta's core destinations by comparison.  I believe Metrorail saw a significant boost in daily ridership from the short extension to MIA a year or two back. 

My guess is if there were investments in connecting it to a place like South Beach or the cruise terminal (which means the train would directly connect them to MIA), ridership would go through the roof.

[simms3]

That's a good point, but are you then saying that Miami needs to rely on tourists/visitors to the city for its ridership numbers to climb to mere average?

What Metrorail does hit are several dense, economically disparaged neighborhoods with low car ownership, several hospitals including the key major ones (incl Jackson/U Miami), downtown and Brickell Ave, Coconut Grove, University of Miami, Kendall, and severall malls (including Dadeland).  I think it already hits quite a bit, though obviously, as with any metro in this country, can be improved.

The commuter rail doesn't hit downtown, though is tied into downtown Miami with metrorail.  However, I can name other commuter rail systems that aren't designed with convenience in mind (Caltrains) and don't hit downtown or heavy rail (Caltrains) with much much much higher ridership.  Trirail at least connects 3 large cities and allows for transfers.  It also directly hits three major airports (MIA, FTL, and Palm Beach).

The fact is ridership of various rail systems in South FL is dismally low even though many ingredients are in place that would otherwise likely result in higher ridership in other cities.  What is it about ridership down there?  Sure, transit in S FL is not comparable to transit in Boston (which imo is superior even than in DC for the time being), but it's good enough such that countless cities in this country would kill to have what they have down there.

Atlanta's system (which I HATE for the record) also misses *a lot*.  Doesn't hit Turner Field, which may be part of the reason why they are moving to Cobb County.  Doesn't hit most of Buckhead within walking distance and the station there was so poorly connected above the highway that they had to spend $18M on special walkways to adjoining office towers.  Doesn't hit Vinings/Galleria area.  Doesn't hit Emory.  Doesn't serve Atlanta's densest most walkable neighborhoods on the eastside.  It can easily be argued that the MARTA system is disgustingly inadequate.  Yet it achieves much higher ridership than Metrorail.  Atlanta density is also 1/3 what it is in Miami.  That really says something.

[thelakelander]

That's a good point, but are you then saying that Miami needs to rely on tourists/visitors to the city for its ridership numbers to climb to mere average?

No. I'm just saying any transit spine needs to hit as many major walkable destinations as possible.  In Miami, they found a way to miss most of them for two decades. Regarding South Beach/Miami Beach, while most of us think of it as a tourism mecca, it is actually a city with a population density of nearly 13,000 residents/square mile.  In any circumstance, you should want your local mass transit spine to serve such a pedestrian scale setting in some efficient manner.  The fact that it also has millions of tourist flocking to it is icing on the cake.

What Metrorail does hit are several dense, economically disparaged neighborhoods with low car ownership, several hospitals including the key major ones (incl Jackson/U Miami), downtown and Brickell Ave, Coconut Grove, University of Miami, Kendall, and severall malls (including Dadeland).  I think it already hits quite a bit, though obviously, as with any metro in this country, can be improved.

Metrorail does serve downtown and Brickell well, via the Metromover connection but Metrorail misses the core of Coconut Grove. Kendall has developed from a sprawling center into a major TOD district because of Metrorail, which is a testament to Miami-Dade's push to facilitate TOD around existing stations over the last decade or so. I wish JTA would attempt to at least aggressively seek infill development on land it owns adjacent to it's existing Skyway stations because that's as close to TOD as Jax will be getting anytime soon.

The commuter rail doesn't hit downtown, though is tied into downtown Miami with metrorail.  However, I can name other commuter rail systems that aren't designed with convenience in mind (Caltrains) and don't hit downtown or heavy rail (Caltrains) with much much much higher ridership.  Trirail at least connects 3 large cities and allows for transfers.  It also directly hits three major airports (MIA, FTL, and Palm Beach).

Tri-Rail only hits MIA (there's a monorail you can transfer to access MIA terminals. It get's close to FTL and Palm Beach but there's a 14-20ish lane interstate and a mile or so of streets to between them, so some type of stronger connectivity Is needed. Nevertheless, it still misses the heart of every community it serves, simply because the tracks are a couple of miles west. It will be interesting to see what type of numbers they get if they can find the cash to add a second line to the FEC by piggybacking AAF track capacity improvements.

The fact is ridership of various rail systems in South FL is dismally low even though many ingredients are in place that would otherwise likely result in higher ridership in other cities.  What is it about ridership down there?  Sure, transit in S FL is not comparable to transit in Boston (which imo is superior even than in DC for the time being), but it's good enough such that countless cities in this country would kill to have what they have down there.

I believe missing most of South Florida's major destinations, especially those where parking is an issue, is a route cause. Sure, it hits transit dependent communities but when it misses places like Miami Beach, not only does it miss tourist, it also misses a chance in delivering the hundreds of thousands of everyday workers needed to operate those hotels and restaurants.

Atlanta's system (which I HATE for the record) also misses *a lot*.  Doesn't hit Turner Field, which may be part of the reason why they are moving to Cobb County.  Doesn't hit most of Buckhead within walking distance and the station there was so poorly connected above the highway that they had to spend $18M on special walkways to adjoining office towers.  Doesn't hit Vinings/Galleria area.  Doesn't hit Emory.  Doesn't serve Atlanta's densest most walkable neighborhoods on the eastside.  It can easily be argued that the MARTA system is disgustingly inadequate.  Yet it achieves much higher ridership than Metrorail.  Atlanta density is also 1/3 what it is in Miami.  That really says something.

MARTA is a 48 mile, two corridor heavy rail system while Metrorail is half that size, being a one line 24 mile corridor. Add a five to ten mile east/west corridor that terminates at the beach and Miami's numbers would dramatically rise. If Metrorail had 48 miles of system to play with, like Atlanta, that would be more than enough to serve just about everything worth serving in the core area of Miami-Dade, considering how compact things are down there.

[simms3]

That's a good point, but are you then saying that Miami needs to rely on tourists/visitors to the city for its ridership numbers to climb to mere average?

No. I'm just saying any transit spine needs to hit as many major walkable destinations as possible.  In Miami, they found a way to miss most of them for two decades. Regarding South Beach/Miami Beach, while most of us think of it as a tourism mecca, it is actually a city with a population density of nearly 13,000 residents/square mile.  In any circumstance, you should want your local mass transit spine to serve such a pedestrian scale setting in some efficient manner.  The fact that it also has millions of tourist flocking to it is icing on the cake.

Miami Beach adds only a 100,00 more residents (many of whom are wealthy "islander" types who wouldn't necessarily be transit commuters) and no office (though I see your point below about the many service industry/retail workers that could use it for commuting, and I agree).  I agree Metrorail misses the boat by not connecting it, but I don't think it should account for the system having dismal ridership.  A Miami Beach line would be more of a tourist service and my company would certainly benefit, since due to tourism, we have picked up a good bit of Miami Beach retail.

The commuter rail doesn't hit downtown, though is tied into downtown Miami with metrorail.  However, I can name other commuter rail systems that aren't designed with convenience in mind (Caltrains) and don't hit downtown or heavy rail (Caltrains) with much much much higher ridership.  Trirail at least connects 3 large cities and allows for transfers.  It also directly hits three major airports (MIA, FTL, and Palm Beach).

Tri-Rail only hits MIA (there's a monorail you can transfer to access MIA terminals. It get's close to FTL and Palm Beach but there's a 14-20ish lane interstate and a mile or so of streets to between them, so some type of stronger connectivity Is needed. Nevertheless, it still misses the heart of every community it serves, simply because the tracks are a couple of miles west. It will be interesting to see what type of numbers they get if they can find the cash to add a second line to the FEC by piggybacking AAF track capacity improvements.

There is a shuttle from FTL.  I've never flown into Palm Beach, so perhaps you're right.  But I've taken Trirail in to downtown Miami (via shuttle and Metrorail) from FTL.  It could be far worse.  I don't personally think TriRail has much of an excuse since Caltrains is arguably in the same boat and on the "wrong side of the highway (101)", a factor discussed in the lack of recent renewals/expansions in San Mateo County.  However, Caltrains is at capacity whereas TriRail is virtually empty in comparison.

The fact is ridership of various rail systems in South FL is dismally low even though many ingredients are in place that would otherwise likely result in higher ridership in other cities.  What is it about ridership down there?  Sure, transit in S FL is not comparable to transit in Boston (which imo is superior even than in DC for the time being), but it's good enough such that countless cities in this country would kill to have what they have down there.

I believe missing most of South Florida's major destinations, especially those where parking is an issue, is a route cause. Sure, it hits transit dependent communities but when it misses places like Miami Beach, not only does it miss tourist, it also misses a chance in delivering the hundreds of thousands of everyday workers needed to operate those hotels and restaurants.

Now here you make a good point, but I don't think hundreds of thousands work in Miami Beach.  There are very few downtowns in America that even have "hundreds of thousands" of workers, however, yes, the service industry would benefit from a Miami Beach connection.

Atlanta's system (which I HATE for the record) also misses *a lot*.  Doesn't hit Turner Field, which may be part of the reason why they are moving to Cobb County.  Doesn't hit most of Buckhead within walking distance and the station there was so poorly connected above the highway that they had to spend $18M on special walkways to adjoining office towers.  Doesn't hit Vinings/Galleria area.  Doesn't hit Emory.  Doesn't serve Atlanta's densest most walkable neighborhoods on the eastside.  It can easily be argued that the MARTA system is disgustingly inadequate.  Yet it achieves much higher ridership than Metrorail.  Atlanta density is also 1/3 what it is in Miami.  That really says something.

MARTA is a 48 mile, two corridor heavy rail system while Metrorail is half that size, being a one line 24 mile corridor. Add a five to ten mile east/west corridor that terminates at the beach and Miami's numbers would dramatically rise. If Metrorail had 48 miles of system to play with, like Atlanta, that would be more than enough to serve just about everything worth serving in the core area of Miami-Dade, considering how compact things are down there.

I'm mainly focused on ridership per mile rather than absolute numbers.  I don't think there is anyone in Atlanta that will tell you MARTA effectively serves everything worth serving in its square mileage.  Speaking of which, 24 miles of track goes A LOT further in much denser south FL than it would in sprawly Atlanta, so I'm not hung up on mileage either.  LA and Toronto don't have much track mileage, either, and achieve intense ridership per mile.  I wouldn't say MetroRail and MARTA are all that different in what they connect, in the grand scheme of things...Metrorail certainly connects to residential neighborhoods far better than MARTA does, and the density of Miami helps.  What it doesn't have that MARTA has to a larger degree is Park N Ride (go figure).

Los Angeles (8,225 ppsm avg density...though higher where track is) - 17 miles track - 9,667 riders per mile

I just think there is less of a "transit" culture in SFL.  Speaking of - I snapped the two pics below at nearly 1 AM my time last night:





Forgive the quality since I refuse to get a new phone until I need one (3 yr iPhone), but left the BFs to go home so I could wake up early for a call...we're separated by 2 bus routes, the second of which I didn't get a pic of since I got a side facing seat as opposed to the back.  This is one of those "extended" length busses, and obviously decent ridership 24-7.  This is due to a transit "culture" that is ingrained in people here.  I think there are factors at play, but my biggest points about bringing Miami into this are to point out that city by city, metro by metro, numbers on paper aren't always explainable.

If you put the same people living in SF in Miami, immediately I guarantee you MetroRail ridership would skyrocket through the roof.  Over time, people may figure out that having a car is pretty convenient there and more and more people might switch to the car, since parking is free and abundant.  However, two different populations produce two different results.

I worry in Jacksonville's case that we aren't thinking rationally how to tackle transit as it should be tackled in Jax.  Our population density is LOW.  We are holding onto every structure in Avondale without budge.  And we think that a people mover (even if we were to invest many millions to upgrade it, let alone expand it) can serve a 20,000 seat arena, a 10,000 seat baseball park, and a 75,000 seat football stadium.  What if there are events in all 3?  That's over 100,000 fans!

We need to think about resources, practicality, where we can actually do TOD here in Jax, and politics.  Adding to a somewhat failed system is not practical, feasible, doesn't spur TOD really (unless you're much much bigger Miami), and is not politically savvy given the nature of the history of the system, projections, issues, and our population.

That's all I'm saying...

[David]

Late to the conversation here, but +1 to whoever said the skyway just wasn't built to handle any real crowds.

We took the skyway over to One spark from Kings avenue, but on the return trip, due to an extremely long line at Hemming Plaza we just walked back to Kings Avenue Station in less time than it would've taken waiting on the next shuttle to come by.

[thelakelander]

That's a good point, but are you then saying that Miami needs to rely on tourists/visitors to the city for its ridership numbers to climb to mere average?

No. I'm just saying any transit spine needs to hit as many major walkable destinations as possible.  In Miami, they found a way to miss most of them for two decades. Regarding South Beach/Miami Beach, while most of us think of it as a tourism mecca, it is actually a city with a population density of nearly 13,000 residents/square mile.  In any circumstance, you should want your local mass transit spine to serve such a pedestrian scale setting in some efficient manner.  The fact that it also has millions of tourist flocking to it is icing on the cake.

Miami Beach adds only a 100,00 more residents (many of whom are wealthy "islander" types who wouldn't necessarily be transit commuters) and no office (though I see your point below about the many service industry/retail workers that could use it for commuting, and I agree).  I agree Metrorail misses the boat by not connecting it, but I don't think it should account for the system having dismal ridership.  A Miami Beach line would be more of a tourist service and my company would certainly benefit, since due to tourism, we have picked up a good bit of Miami Beach retail.

I was only using Miami Beach as an example of a missed opportunity. There are actually several that a single 10-14 mile east west line could hit before terminating at Miami Beach. Such spots include FIU, Dolphin Mall, Coral Gables, Port Miami, Little Havana and a host of dense working class communities. Ridership per mile dramatically increases when you have a transit network that's efficient, no matter the overall length and absolute number. For example, even today, despite all the bad press, the Skyway's ridership per mile is tops when it comes to JTA's overall system. As you mentioned, Houston's is another good example. Only 7.5 miles initially but tying two major employment centers (DT and TMC) and a university together. Tying the right destinations together from the start is just as important on ridership per mile as anything else, regardless of system length. Miami's (the Skyway too) misses the mark in my book. However, further clouding the Skyway is the fact that the mode isn't really a financially viable one compared to other common alternatives out there.

I worry in Jacksonville's case that we aren't thinking rationally how to tackle transit as it should be tackled in Jax.  Our population density is LOW.  We are holding onto every structure in Avondale without budge.  And we think that a people mover (even if we were to invest many millions to upgrade it, let alone expand it) can serve a 20,000 seat arena, a 10,000 seat baseball park, and a 75,000 seat football stadium.  What if there are events in all 3?  That's over 100,000 fans!

We need to think about resources, practicality, where we can actually do TOD here in Jax, and politics.  Adding to a somewhat failed system is not practical, feasible, doesn't spur TOD really (unless you're much much bigger Miami), and is not politically savvy given the nature of the history of the system, projections, issues, and our population.

That's all I'm saying...

I agree here.  Jax should be treated and planned for like it is. A small 30 square mile city surrounded by 770 square miles of Duval County suburbs.  Take the Charlotte, Houston, Salt Lake City, San Diego, Norfolk path and start with something small but effective (coordinated with land use/zoning policies that encourage higher densities) and expand incrementally as time goes on.  If a person chooses to live in a place like Mandarin or Argyle, it will just have to come with the knowledge that high frequency transit service may not be available that far out from the actual true city initially. This is a locational decision that residents living in other American cities (even NYC and Chicago) have to make. Some places will be better served via transit and others won't.

[jaxjaguar]

The SkyWay wouldn't be the soul mode of transportation, Lake. It's merely a means for people who WANT to stay after the event is over to easily get into the core without dealing with a traffic nightmare. And then for those who don't want to park close to the stadium to have the option of going somewhere else. 150,000 people could be attending simultaneous activities at the arena, basbeball grounds, fair grounds and stadium... If only 10-15% of those people decided to ride the SkyWay from the facility parking lots and back to, stay in the downtown area for extra drinks, food, etc for a couple hours every weekend it would justify the expansion.

[thelakelander]

The Skyway would run you probably $40-$50 million per mile to extend to that area.  If it's not going to be the sole mode of transportation, that means an investment in another mode (one most likely cheaper to build with the ability to move more people efficiently) will have to be made.  If that's the case, you'd probably get more bang for your buck investing in that other mode and having it serve that area instead, with it interchanging with an existing Skyway station in some manner.  What I'm describing is how Metrorail and Metromover interact in downtown Miami (Government Center & Brickell stations), which was the initial plan for the Skyway that we abandoned two decades ago.

[simms3]

At the end of the day, despite its relative ineffectiveness, I think Metrorail serves a very car oriented population.  LA arguably, too, but there's something about the west coast mindset that seems to inextricably get more people on trains and LA is not only expanding its light rail, it's seeing pretty darn high ridership per mile for the lines it has in service.  There is something very "extra" autocentric about FL in general (see my points about Caltrains vs TriRail, as well).

I don't know what it is, though I've heard people talk about how in Houston the heat/humidity is something to combat when forcing people out of air conditioned cars and into public transit (which can be a very hot experience, even in milder cities).  They have found a way with that one line, however, as soon as you start getting into transfers (not a factor in Houston now since it's single line door to door rail service, essentially) where you're spending more time waiting outside in that weather (in a suit??) you're going to lose effectiveness.  And I disagree with Ock that in transit-sparse cities/towns a transfer is very easy to make quick and seamless.  As a rider, transit in many cities is unreliable.  How many times have I just missed the train or bus I wanted due to being 1 minute off?  Fortunately, here in SF headways are like 5 minutes for anything (much of the time, sometimes up to 20 for some bus routes off peak), however, in a Jax, Miami, Houston, Atlanta, etc, making your transfer is SO important because it can be a friggin hour before the next one.  I've had that happen to me in Atlanta where I got stranded at a commuter bus/rail station in the freezing cold and ended up calling a cab (which in that spread out city still took like an hour to come pick me up).

I think when planning for transit in Jax, we should really think about how and in what opportunities we'll get people out of the car and into rail/bus.  I think an Avondale line would be overhyped.  I really do.  However, I think Charlotte style multifamily TOD along a N-S line connecting directly to downtown would be relatively effective.

It's this reason that I think it's stupid to connect one more station to Brooklyn for the sake of a few hundred residents who would have moved to those apartments in Brooklyn long before they were even served by the Skyway.  What's not to say they all actually work on the SS?  1-2 lone developments along 6-lane Riverside Ave with abundant parking is not going to do much if anything to boost ridership on the Skyway, yet, we're willing to spend $21+M for that very faint possibility of an incremental pop.  Hmm, just strikes me as a waste in a town where transit is politically sensitive and never in popular  demand.

I put it in the same bucket as expanding the thing over to the stadiums.

[simms3]

The SkyWay wouldn't be the soul mode of transportation, Lake. It's merely a means for people who WANT to stay after the event is over to easily get into the core without dealing with a traffic nightmare. And then for those who don't want to park close to the stadium to have the option of going somewhere else. 150,000 people could be attending simultaneous activities at the arena, basbeball grounds, fair grounds and stadium... If only 10-15% of those people decided to ride the SkyWay from the facility parking lots and back to, stay in the downtown area for extra drinks, food, etc for a couple hours every weekend it would justify the expansion.

Spoken like someone who has never taken transit to a game...also, that's really not a bad walk, LoL.  I walk a mile to AT&T park for Giants games all the time in business attire.  But getting Jacksons to walk is about as difficult as getting Jaxsons to take transit.  Easy to say "yes I will", but will you in practice?  Also, using transit to go to one time events on rare occasions is one thing.  Relying on transit to actually get around is another.  Again, an area that despite "the traveled folks in Jacksonville's knowledge and experiences of such things" in real life (which I highly doubt no matter how many times on this urban-minded board with a very "above average" travel IQ compared to the average Jaxson people want to tell me I'm the idiot peon) is not going to happen when it comes down to it.

[thelakelander]

At the end of the day, despite its relative ineffectiveness, I think Metrorail serves a very car oriented population.  LA arguably, too, but there's something about the west coast mindset that seems to inextricably get more people on trains and LA is not only expanding its light rail, it's seeing pretty darn high ridership per mile for the lines it has in service.  There is something very "extra" autocentric about FL in general (see my points about Caltrains vs TriRail, as well).

Yes, South Florida like every Sunbelt community is heavily car dependent and will remain so for the foreseeable future.  However, there's still opportunity to become more multimodal friendly via better transit planning, implementation and land use integration. They seem to be on the right path.  Locally, we've talked the game but when it comes to putting our money where our mouths are, our talk is being proven to be nothing more than hot air.

I don't know what it is, though I've heard people talk about how in Houston the heat/humidity is something to combat when forcing people out of air conditioned cars and into public transit (which can be a very hot experience, even in milder cities).  They have found a way with that one line, however, as soon as you start getting into transfers (not a factor in Houston now since it's single line door to door rail service, essentially) where you're spending more time waiting outside in that weather (in a suit??) you're going to lose effectiveness.  And I disagree with Ock that in transit-sparse cities/towns a transfer is very easy to make quick and seamless.  As a rider, transit in many cities is unreliable.  How many times have I just missed the train or bus I wanted due to being 1 minute off?

You'll never have a transit system where some sort of transferring doesn't have to happen...depending on your length and direction of trip. What San Francisco has going for it that most sunbelt cities have not is it has grown up with transit being a part of the local environment for over a century. Most sunbelt cities eliminated mass transit over 50 years ago and then spent those next five decades becoming totally auto dependent.  It will take decades to reverse the negative impacts from WWII era mobility and land use decisions.  As those decades pass (ex. in DC, they've been at it for 40 years now, San Diego is 30 years in), new dense environments will grow around transit investments and then you'll reach a point where a higher population won't have to transfer because the growth pattern will become dependent around the transportation infrastructure network that feeds it.

I think when planning for transit in Jax, we should really think about how and in what opportunities we'll get people out of the car and into rail/bus.  I think an Avondale line would be overhyped.  I really do.  However, I think Charlotte style multifamily TOD along a N-S line connecting directly to downtown would be relatively effective.

We should plan for the environment the community envisions.  If that is walkable and sustainable, transit investment and land use policy should be made to stimulate that type of atmosphere in certain places.  If we want more sprawl, keep investing in highway construction into the neighboring counties.  Detroit has some of the nicest suburbs in this country that I've seen. Lots of highways and little mass transit investment too.  However, since they aren't paying taxes to that city, but continuing to drain the urban core, municipal bankruptcy is the long term result.

If we know where we want to go, what we want to connect and why, figuring out the right modes and finding money for them will become a much easier process. Charlotte has figured that out and that's a significant reason why its seeing some success with its investments.

It's this reason that I think it's stupid to connect one more station to Brooklyn for the sake of a few hundred residents who would have moved to those apartments in Brooklyn long before they were even served by the Skyway.  What's not to say they all actually work on the SS?  1-2 lone developments along 6-lane Riverside Ave with abundant parking is not going to do much if anything to boost ridership on the Skyway, yet, we're willing to spend $21+M for that very faint possibility of an incremental pop.  Hmm, just strikes me as a waste in a town where transit is politically sensitive and never in popular  demand.

I put it in the same bucket as expanding the thing over to the stadiums.

Brooklyn and the stadium are two different expansion scenarios.  It doesn't cost $21 million to build a no-frills station at the Brooklyn operations center.  That's basically the minimum number for a project to be considered for a TIGER grant.  If JTA wins a grant, most of that money will be going to a host of other things like Skyway related operational needs and some type of integrated bike share program.  Futhermore, if the goal is for downtown to become this "walkable urban environment" where people can live and not be forced to drive a car to get to grocery stores, public spaces, retail, dining, entertainment, etc., then it makes since to attempt to tie in the Fresh Market and 70,000 square feet of retail going up on Riverside Avenue with the North and Southbanks.  By the same token, it also makes sense for JTA and the DIA to get aggressive with finding infill development opportunities for the land JTA owns around existing Skyway stops (literally every stop outside of Hemming Plaza, Central, and San Marco stations). 

With Everbank Field, the desire being mentioned revolves around serving people in the sports district.  If that's the case, such transit investment should be able to handle that job.  If it can't but some other alternative can more effectively for a cheaper price to the taxpayer, why make the investment?

[simms3]

Yes, South Florida like every Sunbelt community is heavily car dependent and will remain so for the foreseeable future.  However, there's still opportunity to become more multimodal friendly via better transit planning, implementation and land use integration. They seem to be on the right path.  Locally, we've talked the game but when it comes to putting our money where our mouths are, our talk is being proven to be nothing more than hot air.

This is kind of my point though with both transfers and with planning for Jax transit.  People used to relying on transit are willing to put up with a whole lot more.  People in autocentric sunbelt cities will need baby steps.  I don't think Jax is an environment where we can expect young professionals to ditch cars they can well afford and are highly convenient to drive to use complex multi-modal transit systems that require lots of transfers and walking.  Boston and Miami share similar density.  One is a transit city, the other is not.  Simple as that.  Jax is less of a transit city than Miami, so make it super simple and really "spell it out".  See my comment about transfers below...

You'll never have a transit system where some sort of transferring doesn't have to happen...depending on your length and direction of trip. What San Francisco has going for it that most sunbelt cities have not is it has grown up with transit being a part of the local environment for over a century. Most sunbelt cities eliminated mass transit over 50 years ago and then spent those next five decades becoming totally auto dependent.  It will take decades to reverse the negative impacts from WWII era mobility and land use decisions.  As those decades pass (ex. in DC, they've been at it for 40 years now, San Diego is 30 years in), new dense environments will grow around transit investments and then you'll reach a point where a higher population won't have to transfer because the growth pattern will become dependent around the transportation infrastructure network that feeds it.

Transfers are a reality for people who want to rely on transit.  But in Jax it's going to be very difficult to get both captured riders and choice riders to fully rely on transit.  Downtown isn't super centralized in terms of destinations or a major employment center for captured riders, and even the captured riders in the city are pretty spread out (look at bus ridership - very low in Jax).  Choice riders likely won't be big weekend or nighttime riders on any starter system and it will be a century of concentrated growth in the city before we get to a density where you really have a mix of uses everywhere and you can really ditch the car altogether.

Charlotte's line is used for yuppies living along it in new TODs who do the AM/PM commute to Uptown for work and for special events.  It has no transfers and is door to door service, essentially...like Houston's line as well.  Uptown Charlotte's also a predominant bar area, so they take it in and cab back down.  Which begs another question - how late do you have a starter system running in Jax?  Jax hasn't even developed a cab culture yet - people literally drink and drive every time they go out and there really aren't any cabs.  That's how long we have to climb before we get to a level.

[Ocklawaha]

True enough Lake, The Skyway will never live up to it's potential if we never finish it. However saying that confuses people, most don't understand it was planned to go to the sports district, UF, Brooklyn and San Marco from the start, I wouldn't take it an inch farther. Had those lines been built with the monorail beams in 2002, we'd be running 6 car trains today.

To those that say the Skyway can never handle capacity, this is simply not true. New trains of the current type alone could easily increase capacity 3-4 times over.  Going with a modern monorail train such as the Innovia could give it a light-rail capacity for about the same cost per mile as light-rail (not streetcar). The new system in Sao Paulo will have many times the capacity of light-rail and in fact will be a 'heavy-rail equal'.

But as we've all said, we have much bigger problems with the Skyway then just simple expansion or new equipment. The little system gets within a block of 9,000 employees on the Southbank that have virtually no way to get to the train thanks to a freeway and railroad. The fact that we never included a pedestrian bridge/skywalk  is just inexcusable. If it's raining, one can't even get from Central Station into the Everbank Building, or the Omni. It's almost as if we built stations at random then built walls around them.

As to the transit ridership in Miami, I agree with you having lived in the area, one can't really get to anything using Tri-Rail except a bus stop... If you get to Metrorail you can go to the Airport or downtown but that's about it. The work-a-day element is completely lacking from the South Florida system.



Pacific Electric Hollywood Subway then...


Now...

Los Angeles on the other hand has far more miles at 87.7 with more on the way and this doesn't include 388 more miles of Metrolink trains as well as a couple of decent BRT lines. LA also has a certain transit spirit you won't find anywhere else. The City was built on the back of the 1,200 mile long Pacific Electric Railway. The nations largest interurban railway literally blanketed the whole LA basin, reaching as far east as San Bernardino and  Riverside, South to Seal Beach and north into the mountains above the San Fernando Valley. The PE even serve the Mount Lowell, Alpine Tavern and Lake Arrowhead resorts. It was as much a part of the fabric of the city as the river is to Jacksonville, it was also long-lived. When it was finally completely abandoned in favor of the insane freeway plans in 1961, there was a near revolt among the Southland population. You would be hard pressed to find a single person in LA that wouldn't tell you that the city was as dumb as a bag of hammers for allowing it and that we were ALL going to regret it. 29 years later, and BILLIONS of dollars, the Los Angeles 'BLUE LINE LRT' opened... Guess where? Yeah, right down the mainline of the old Pacific Electric Railway.

For the record, my first train ride experience was on the PE. 

[JayBird]

^ Ock, would you say a simple solution to the southbank would be some sort of jitney that just ran between Wolfson/baptist/aetna to wyndham/king ave? I think any pedestrian bridge over 95/fec might be overly expensive.