JTA planning to seek bids to build, run U2C

[thelakelander]

^ So Ennis, regardless of how we get there, when can we agree it is time to cut bait on the Skyway?

I'd cut bait (or significantly modify) on the U2C, based on what I know so far. I wouldn't cut bait on the Skyway infrastructure though. I think there's a lot that can be done with it. However before doing anything, it's important to figure out what that downtown master plan is and then see what the best role mass transit can play in that picture.

What would it take for you to come around to giving up on it?

I would need to know that there is no other affordable options out there for some type of streetcar, tram or AV based system that can utilize the Skyway infrastructure, while also operating at ground level with equal or more capacity than the existing system. I'm not sold that other alternatives have been fully and thoroughly vetted.

[marcuscnelson]

I'd cut bait (or significantly modify) on the U2C, based on what I know so far. I wouldn't cut bait on the Skyway infrastructure though. I think there's a lot that can be done with it. However before doing anything, it's important to figure out what that downtown master plan is and then see what the best role mass transit can play in that picture.

Problem is, the downtown master plan won't be ready until the fall, and from the sound of things the funding for this could be approved as soon as summer along with or before the budget cycle.

I would need to know that there is no other affordable options out there for some type of streetcar, tram or AV based system that can utilize the Skyway infrastructure, while also operating at ground level with equal or more capacity than the existing system. I'm not sold that other alternatives have been fully and thoroughly vetted.

The big challenge here seems to be that it's unclear what the mentality or logic is among JTA executives that makes them so dedicated to AVs as a concept. We can go and look at the studies JTA itself conducted on replacing with streetcars or alternative technologies, but that won't mean much if the board and Nat Ford are really going to AVs or bust.

(You know this, Lake, but just to have them here) From 2014 to 2015 JTA procured multiple studies on the state of the Skyway.

Load factors on the guideways and Acosta, conditions of the infrastructure, the potential for overhauling the system, and assessing the potential for replacement.

So the $378 million dollar question is, how did we get here? And how can we get out, if that's still possible?

[thelakelander]

I'd cut bait (or significantly modify) on the U2C, based on what I know so far. I wouldn't cut bait on the Skyway infrastructure though. I think there's a lot that can be done with it. However before doing anything, it's important to figure out what that downtown master plan is and then see what the best role mass transit can play in that picture.

Problem is, the downtown master plan won't be ready until the fall, and from the sound of things the funding for this could be approved as soon as summer along with or before the budget cycle.

That's the tale of Jax and why things end up being so screwed up. Although if approved now, it doesn't mean work starts right a way for something that can't be built at this point. 20 years ago, taxpayers approved $100 million for ROW for a rapid transit system. Out of that, we got nothing.

I would need to know that there is no other affordable options out there for some type of streetcar, tram or AV based system that can utilize the Skyway infrastructure, while also operating at ground level with equal or more capacity than the existing system. I'm not sold that other alternatives have been fully and thoroughly vetted.

The big challenge here seems to be that it's unclear what the mentality or logic is among JTA executives that makes them so dedicated to AVs as a concept. We can go and look at the studies JTA itself conducted on replacing with streetcars or alternative technologies, but that won't mean much if the board and Nat Ford are really going to AVs or bust.

It's not the first time. They were going bonkers for their original BRT and JRTC plan 20 years ago as well. Both eventually got the plug pulled and revamped into more realistic products. I suspect the same will happen with the U2C as well. Just hoping it happens before we blow through $400 million on something that won't even reach the Eastside or Durkeeville.

I'd also say, that the Skyway's name and current concept has been poison for 30 years locally. The idea of innovation and the transportation engineering and planning industry's wet dreams about AV technology were things that presented a much better image than the hulking and expensive system we have today. The JTA board was very favorable towards further exploration back then, so it's not totally out of the blue to see Ford and the JTA staff take the direction they have in recent years.

The challenge isn't the technology, which most seem to make it to be. It's the common sense things that generally go overlooked with mass transit. Coordinating land use policy (we clearly don't have this yet and it's not JTA's fault) with the transit infrastructure investment. For example, if we have no idea of what and where we want to be 20 years from now, then how can we logically select and invest in a transit system that will properly serve this future population? It's figuring out how to secure dedicated transit ROW, regardless of the desired technology and realizing that not mixing things in with regular auto traffic is a good thing, in terms of capacity and system reliability.

(You know this, Lake, but just to have them here) From 2014 to 2015 JTA procured multiple studies on the state of the Skyway.

Load factors on the guideways and Acosta, conditions of the infrastructure, the potential for overhauling the system, and assessing the potential for replacement.

So the $378 million dollar question is, how did we get here? And how can we get out, if that's still possible?

We got there through a situation where a desired technology was selected before thorough vetting and inclusive public participation. I recall many here were for the option to retrofit and expand the Skyway at street level. However, people didn't beg or ask for a solution that carries less than the Skyway does today or one that costs twice as much as what was sold to the public in 2014.

There's a few ways to get out. 1) It can turn out that what's dreamed, can't be done and the plan is modified (ex. like what happened with the JTA Flyer and JRTC). 2) Spending $400 million on the Skyway causes significant public push back on the funding proposal, causing the allocation to change (ex. this happened with getting the first Mobility Plan and Fee passed a decade ago). 3) We blow a bunch of money on Bay Street and figure out it isn't what we thought it would be, so we abandoned the rest of the plans (ex. the original Skyway plan going up in smoke). 4) By the time we implement, answers to the biggest obstacles are found, making the plan more realistic and feasible.

At this point, all four options are still open.

[FlaBoy]

^ So Ennis, regardless of how we get there, when can we agree it is time to cut bait on the Skyway?

I'd cut bait (or significantly modify) on the U2C, based on what I know so far. I wouldn't cut bait on the Skyway infrastructure though. I think there's a lot that can be done with it. However before doing anything, it's important to figure out what that downtown master plan is and then see what the best role mass transit can play in that picture.

What would it take for you to come around to giving up on it?

I would need to know that there is no other affordable options out there for some type of streetcar, tram or AV based system that can utilize the Skyway infrastructure, while also operating at ground level with equal or more capacity than the existing system. I'm not sold that other alternatives have been fully and thoroughly vetted.

I know you did a lot of work on some of this years ago in some threads and stories. Might be time to dig a lot of it up on what would be able to work on the current infrastructure.

[thelakelander]

I'm planning to sit down with Nat Ford and hear him out on the U2C. I'll also give him my concerns about the proposal, which have little to do with switching to AV technology and more to do with the non sexy things that can make or break any type of transit system.

[WAJAS]

Can you also ask about making sure the reconstruction of the current system allows for larger vehicles to be used as AV technology develops? We don't want to be stuck with the 1st generation of this technology without a way to upgrade easily.

[thelakelander]

Of course! That's probably my biggest gripe. In no way do you want to spend that much money on something that could be obsolete by the time it's built.

[jaxlongtimer]

I'm planning to sit down with Nat Ford and hear him out on the U2C. I'll also give him my concerns about the proposal, which have little to do with switching to AV technology and more to do with the non sexy things that can make or break any type of transit system.

Please ask Mr. Ford  (1) on what projection/analysis is JTA is relying on to justify this project (upfront costs, operating costs, usage projections, lifespan/obsolescence projections, competitive market, risk factors, etc.) and will the public be able to see that to see if it has any holes in it (just like the Jags and JEA were asked for their financial projections) and (2) what alternatives to this project were looked at and why they were not more viable.

Would also like to know how he thinks he is going to sell this to a skeptical public?  Are we going to get a PR campaign like JEA mounted?

[marcuscnelson]

JTA put out a video about the history of the Skyway:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZttIaaNdBM8

A few things I'm unclear about based on it.

• How much would expanding it to at least most of the places discussed (Sports Complex, Springfield in some way, Riverside) actually cost using an improved monorail system? They've repeatedly said it would be too expensive, but surely that assumes they actually ran cost estimates on it? I don't see how new cars and extra track alone (without the cost of having to completely redesign the existing stations that U2C will require) could cost more than $378 million.
• If we'd no longer be operating a people-mover system, and instead hosting an elevated road for autonomous vehicles, why would we not have to pay back the federal government anyway? Is that payback only for the concrete pillars and guideway? How much would that actually be, anyway? There seems to be a weird trend here of "trust us the other way is really expensive and we shouldn't do it" with little proof of how exactly that's the case.
• Declaring "the future has finally arrived" seems a little premature, or is it just me? Somehow it's supposed to take 5-7 years for an actual full system to be operational, after already spending 4 years working on it.
• Maybe I'm just a pessimist, but I still can't help but seriously wonder if this is the time, and downtown Jacksonville is the place, for residents and visitors to serve as guinea pigs for an autonomous vehicle network. We're still struggling to get so many fundamentals right, but we're going to be the world's first city to use these in mixed traffic revenue service? Are we sure?

[jaxlongtimer]

JTA put out a video about the history of the Skyway:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZttIaaNdBM8

A few things I'm unclear about based on it.

• How much would expanding it to at least most of the places discussed (Sports Complex, Springfield in some way, Riverside) actually cost using an improved monorail system? They've repeatedly said it would be too expensive, but surely that assumes they actually ran cost estimates on it? I don't see how new cars and extra track alone (without the cost of having to completely redesign the existing stations that U2C will require) could cost more than $378 million.
• If we'd no longer be operating a people-mover system, and instead hosting an elevated road for autonomous vehicles, why would we not have to pay back the federal government anyway? Is that payback only for the concrete pillars and guideway? How much would that actually be, anyway? There seems to be a weird trend here of "trust us the other way is really expensive and we shouldn't do it" with little proof of how exactly that's the case.
• Declaring "the future has finally arrived" seems a little premature, or is it just me? Somehow it's supposed to take 5-7 years for an actual full system to be operational, after already spending 4 years working on it.
• Maybe I'm just a pessimist, but I still can't help but seriously wonder if this is the time, and downtown Jacksonville is the place, for residents and visitors to serve as guinea pigs for an autonomous vehicle network. We're still struggling to get so many fundamentals right, but we're going to be the world's first city to use these in mixed traffic revenue service? Are we sure?

Watching the video, consider the source.  Increased ridership cited?  They failed to say they had to make it free to get that bump.  Citizens advisory committee?  Likely stacked to favor JTA's desires.  Why is it that a majority of the "citizens" in this town want it killed but JTA committees and surveys show otherwise?  Come on.

Interestingly, JTA admits in the video they looked at killing the Skyway and giving Uncle Sam "millions" back or converting it to a pedestrian walkway (see the Highline in NYC).  Both would be a fraction of the cost of the $372 million (plus the typcial cost overruns of millions more these projects often encounter) "solution" they have now come up with.  Then, you look at the AV's and see they are even smaller than the already too-small Skyway cars and run just as slow and you have to wonder where is the real improvement here?  You can run the system to California but if it doesn't satisfy users if it isn't going to get used.

And, the nod to Downtown losing lots of workers as a reason the passenger numbers fell short ignores the inherent shortcomings of the technology.  Further, I don't see where Downtown is on the way to getting those numbers of workers back anytime soon.  So, why will things be different now?  The residential numbers pale in comparison to over "100,000 workers" cited in the video at one time.

The Skyway proponents continue to whitewash this white elephant as evidenced by this type of PR.  The fact that they have to go to these extremes is evidence of the continued uphill battle they have to fight to justify this project.  Grabbing at straws.

[marcuscnelson]

^ At least personally, I'm generally in favor of keeping the Skyway, but that assumes we're using cost-effective, proven technologies to provide car-free public transit, not to experiment with technology that billion-dollar companies haven't figured out yet. If we're really going to play amateur hour, then we might as well toss the mess. I'm still thinking about the idea I had in another thread:

^ Removed is maybe a strong word, I imagine they're not going to cut two cents from the gas tax. And I'm not 100% opposed to using a little bit of the money to play with the technology. But for $378 million they could do a lot of other stuff that would likely be more impactful than the world's first urban self-driving taxi network.

If it were up to me, with my amateur opinion, I'd say use it like so (some of these numbers are probably larger or smaller than they actually would be):

• ~$40 million to build an Amtrak terminal per this, perhaps with support from this program if possible. Make sure it's ready for the obvious possibility of Brightline coming to town. Ideally somewhere along the way we'd have figured out a convention center solution.
• ~$20 million to overhaul the existing Skyway (which JTA already seems to be doing). Just to get another 10-15 years out of the existing system. This might actually be budgeted somewhere else already.
• ~200 million to build streetcar extensions into the areas already planned for U2C. Long-term, I'd seek to either use vehicles capable of using the Skyway guideways or eventually just demolishing them in favor of the streetcar, assuming that's another ~$25 million (the cost of actually building the streetcar connectors would have to come from somewhere else). Since we don't actually know how much the federal government would want, I'm not including it in these numbers.
• ~$15 million on establishing a RiverLink between Orange Park Mall and Avenues Walk. (I'd like to think this is too much, I'm just not sure.)
• ~$30 million to establish BRT (or just better bus service) to places we haven't historically connected, like the beaches via JTB or on Southside Blvd.
• ~$51 million (the remainder) on further AV development, in hopes of it eventually serving as a circulator for places we wouldn't traditionally build heavier transit services in, like master planned communities or college campuses. I've always thought they would be a great replacement for safe rides if they can figure out traffic and pedestrians.

[blizz01]

So I'm confused about exactly what the end result/goal is - especially as it applies to the autonomous vehicles.  When they talk about expanding from 2.5 miles to 10, how much of that includes the actual skyway?  And, taking the stadium leg for example, would they ultimately leverage the train at street level?  Are they looking to extend elevated tracks anywhere?  Would love to see what this thing looks like with the middle cars added in too......

[Papa33]

JTA coming out and stating new gas tax money is going to skyway is NOT how you get Duval County citizenry behind the tax.

[marcuscnelson]

So I'm confused about exactly what the end result/goal is - especially as it applies to the autonomous vehicles.  When they talk about expanding from 2.5 miles to 10, how much of that includes the actual skyway?  And, taking the stadium leg for example, would they ultimately leverage the train at street level?  Are they looking to extend elevated tracks anywhere?  Would love to see what this thing looks like with the middle cars added in too......

For something they're now asking for the neighborhood of half a billion dollars for, they've been surprisingly mum on details of how exactly this is all supposed to work. Part of that seems to be that they haven't actually designed the system yet, which seems to be what their chosen contractor for the Bay Street corridor is supposed to do.

The idea is that eventually the 2.5 mile Skyway is going to be converted to support autonomous vehicles, plus an additional 7.5 miles of roadway... adapted, I guess? to serve as mixed traffic guideways at street level. Somewhere along the way there are going to be ramps from the old elevated guideway to street level. In the end, the old monorail will be gone, replaced entirely with the pods. There would be no additional elevated tracks.

[thelakelander]

I just watched the video and went one step further to measure the length of the proposed segments. At best, everything adds up to 8 miles, without the bridge over the St. Johns, which isn't remotely feasible and can't be done within the $378 million figure. So we're really talking about 8 miles at $378 million or close to $50 million per mile. That's an insane price to pay for an affordable option.