Skyway expansion in Jacksonville at stake in proposed gas tax increase

[marcuscnelson]

I would like to see cost breakdowns of the $132 million and $240 million line items. How much for AVs and how many of them? How much for "stations"? How much for recharging infrastructure? How much to (and how will they) get the AVs between the Skyway and ground level, and how many of those transitions will there be?  Unless they are just grabbing random numbers, they have to have some idea about these things - and more.

The crazy thing is, it's unclear if they actually really know. The consortium that gets picked to build (at least) Bay Street this summer (which, mind you, is largely after the beginning of the budget process) is going to spend the following 18 to 24 months actually designing the system.

[thelakelander]

^Yeah, I get the impression that there are a lot of unknowns. They don't exactly know how they'll ramp down to the street in certain areas or even how AVs will safely cross the at-grade Hart Bridge Expressway to get to TIAA Bank Field. I believe the consulting team hired will have to figure the some of these details out. So, I doubt the estimates are accurate.

[Charles Hunter]

At that point in the river it would HAVE to be another drawbridge, right?

A draw bridge would wreak havoc on the frequency of service of the AVs, and would have its own continuing operating cost.
I would think a fixed bridge would have to be at least 75 feet above the water - that's the clearance of the Fuller Warren Bridge, the 'shortest' of the three downtown bridges.  The Main Street is 35 feet closed, 135 feet open, and the Acosta is 81 feet.  Getting to 75' would require a long approach, again increasing costs, and affecting where the "stations" could be.

[thelakelander]

A fixed bridge would likely need to be similar in height as the Main Street Bridge. Something clearing 135 feet would eat up tons of property on either side of the river. A bridge that size would also cost just as much as the entire U2C budget. You could build a decent starter LRT or commuter rail line for cheaper. At best, that bridge idea was just planners taking an unrealistic dream way to far. A dream that should have been taken out back and shot prior to the public seeing it.

[jaxlongtimer]

I find this chart very enlightening.  Looking at battery life, passenger capacity, maximum speed and maximum percent grade, no matter what vendor they choose, this looks like a totally worthless "mass" transit solution.  EasyMile's 12* people at 25 mph at 14 hour battery life is likely the best combo here.  For several hundred million dollars, how many people could this AV system move in an hour?  I bet the e-scooters could run circles around these things (literally!) and for a pittance of the cost.

*Per Wikipdeia, the EZ10 model only seats 6 and accommodates 4 standing for a total of 10 [hence the model #?] so that differs from 12 per JTA.  Why the difference?

The EasyMile EZ10 is a battery-powered autonomous electric bus designed and marketed by EasyMile. It seats up to six people and four more passengers may ride standing, or it can accommodate a wheelchair, with the aim of helping to bridge the first mile/last mile of a trip.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/EasyMile_EZ10

Wonder how many know that the NHSTA suspended this technology already:

In July 2019, an EasyMile passenger in Utah required medical attention after falling from a seat due to a sudden stop, prompting the company to put up warning signs and reduce the vehicles' maximum speed. In February 2020, a Smart Columbus (a service in Columbus, Ohio) passenger fell from a seat when an EasyMile vehicle executed an emergency stop from 7 miles per hour (11 km/h).[7] The second incident prompted the National Highway Traffic Safety Administration to suspend EasyMile passenger services nationwide (being used in 10 states) while the incident was investigated.

More on the NHTSA suspension here:
https://www.theverge.com/2020/2/26/21154532/easymile-columbus-ohio-nhtsa-suspension-injury

And, EasyMile's own presentation to Colorado Transit says it is only a last/first mile solution for low density areas.  How does that jive with JTA's vision?

See slide #17 at:
https://coloradotransit.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/10/EasyMile-CASTA-Oct-2018.pdf

Introduce a new transportation solution for cities/transit agencies:
✓Introduce first/last mile option to/from transit hubs
✓Provide service coverage in lower density/lower demand areas

Here is a sample of their North American deployments (slide #23):
-Bishop Ranch Business Park, San Ramon, CA
-Cowboys/Rangers Stadium, Arlington, TX
-MnROADWinter Testing, Minneapolis, MN
-Pena/61st St, Denver, CO
-Solar City, Babcock Ranch, FL
-City Project, Gainesville, FL
-Cube Project, Auburn Hills, MI
-Skyway Replacement, Jacksonville, FL
-Olympic Park, Montreal, Canada
-Calgary Zoo, Calgary Canada

Doesn't appear any are as ambitious as JTA's plans. Zoos, parks, stadiums, a closed community, a business park... that's not everyday public transit over several square miles.  Apples and oranges.

From EasyMile's own website:

We designed the EZ10 with appropriate levels of safety and system redundancies to enable safe operation with entirely remote supervision in specified operational design domains (ODDs), especially private sites like master planned communities, residential areas, business parks and the list goes on.

https://easymile.com/vehicle-solutions/ez10-passenger-shuttle

I think we taxpayers are getting sold a bill of goods when even the companies providing the technology don't indicate that it fits JTA's plans.  I hope the City Council investigates this technology at least as diligently as they did JEA's "incentive plan."

[marcuscnelson]

Something strange happened tonight, folks.

This Documentation page on the U2C website was not there yesterday, but it is now.

There's a lot of documentation in here.

[marcuscnelson]

Oh my God.

Technical Memorandum III: Skyway Technology Options & Evaluation  (April 2017) is apparently how this all happened.

I think the weighing of at-grade operation, "operational flexibility," and frequency put AVs over the second option, a beam-style APM.

The decision to dismiss repurposing or decommissioning as options took LRT/streetcar out of the running. It's unclear if the Advisory Group knew in 2015 that the choice would have led to autonomous vehicles.

[thelakelander]

This is on Melissa Ross now.

[WAJAS]

The Bay Street Innovation Corridor is treated as a separate project from U2C in this report from March 2020. This report is generally a great resource. It even has proposed routing between the new stations, which is something that's been absent from the other studies I have seen on this project.
https://u2c.jtafla.com/media/2912/1_jta_skyway_system_expansion_tcar2_report_final-march-_25_2020.pdf

[thelakelander]

So does the Bay Street Innovation Corridor fund the Bay Street U2C line or not? If it does fund AVs down Bay Street, then does that mean the $379 million is for everything that excludes Bay? If so, the overall price to construct the 10-mile U2C system is more than $379 million.

[Charles Hunter]

More questions for Council to ask JTA.

[marcuscnelson]

They keep calling it a separate project in what WAJAS linked, but it remains unclear if the cost estimates include Bay Street or don't. Which either means JTA is double-dipping with the gas tax, or is masking how much the full project actually costs.

Unfortunate I guess you didn't get a chance to ask them about this the other day.

[thelakelander]

They submitted their official response to all our questions last night. After review, I had some follow up questions and comments for them to elaborate and to provide documentation of background data for peer review. We're hoping to have a Q&A article live this Monday.

[WAJAS]

I think I can give some clarity now.

The Bay Street Innovation Corridor, including the AV portion, received a BUILD Grant from the federal government (https://www.masstransitmag.com/alt-mobility/autonomous-vehicles/article/21068641/jta-city-of-jacksonville-host-usdot-for-build-grant-event). This grant as well as some local contribution funds the AV route along Bay Street but doesn't include additional infrastructure costs to connect to the current Skyway, such as a ramp system. The exact funding breakdown is included in the BUILD Grant application here: https://u2c.jtafla.com/media/2901/bay-street-innovation-corridor-build-grant-application-july-19-2018.pdf
The exact routing of the Bay Street Innovation Corridor segment is at the end of this document: https://u2c.jtafla.com/media/2932/appendix-g_corridors-typical-sections-and-plans.pdf

TL;DR: The Bay Street Innovation Corridor segment of U2C is already partially funded by state and federal sources. It is still unclear whether the local portion of the funds for this corridor is supposed to come from the Gax Tax increase.

[thelakelander]

Ok thanks! Pretty sure that any local funds will likely come from the gas tax.