USS Orleck may move down the river

[BridgeTroll]

Why we can't execute on the Orleck and figure this out just baffles me.  Will we ever have a worthy riverfront park system with activated piers to host something like the Orleck?  That's supposedly the vision.  Literally every other city can figure this stuff out but us.

The issue with the Orleck is that it was never supposed to be a COJ funded project. It's backers sold the community on something that would not need local tax money. Now, the thing hasn't even been in town a full year and has cost taxpayers millions already. More local tax money will be needed to keep it afloat because without it, it won't survive the years it will take COJ to complete anything at Shipyards Park. Two previous cities got rid of the money pit. So from this perspective, it's not really baffling why the Orleck has had issues with obtaining COJ money and support.

Improperly conceived... Improperly planned... Improperly funded... Improperly placed... two previous cities got rid of it but Jax scooped it up... it will sink at the pier and be towed out to sea to become a reef at the expense of millions of Duval County taxpayers. Sad because a properly conceived, planned, funded naval display should be part of the Jacksonville waterfront... sigh...

[jaxlongtimer]

Omaha isn't likely stockpiling its cash and bonding capabilities to give a billionaire hundreds of millions of dollars and more for his pet projects and the stadium upgrades his NFL team will soon be expecting.  Add to it the hundreds of millions and more dollars going to politico's developer-friends' projects, boondoggles like autonomous vehicles and port improvements benefitting private interests only and an outer beltway, 9B and other interstate projects benefitting connected land owners (mostly in other counties!) rather than to infrastructure such as transit, streetscapes, parks, historic preservation and other community assets. Take all those dollars and spread them around our community as you suggest and mystery solved!

Most of the highway projects are funded by FDOT. Omaha and all these other places also get billions in similar road projects in their communities as well. So Jax is no special case on that end.

FDOT dollars are available for City priorities if the City pushes for them, whether its grants for the Port, Cecil, city road bridge replacements, tearing down the Hart Bridge or Main Street Bridge ramps, building out mass transit, rail line extensions, etc.....  But, FDOT only has so many dollars to spend in our City.  Dollars for interstate expansions are dollars not available elsewhere at some point.  I am just highlighting our misplaced local priorities.

[thelakelander]

FDOT dollars aren't going to the Orleck or riverfront parks, even if COJ pushed for that. Yes, some (not all) infrastructure projects funded with FDOT dollars could help shape those projects in a particular fashion but ultimately the project has to fit within FDOT's mission.

[jaxlongtimer]

FDOT dollars aren't going to the Orleck or riverfront parks, even if COJ pushed for that. Yes, some (not all) infrastructure projects funded with FDOT dollars could help shape those projects in a particular fashion but ultimately the project has to fit within FDOT's mission.

Like tearing down the Hart Bridge ramps for a Four Season's hotel or the ramp to the Main Street bridge so Curry can get a skyscraper built?  I don't consider these projects supporting FDOT's mission. 

There there is raising JEA power lines: https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/article/fdot-pledges-dollar22-5-million-for-jaxport-effort-to-raise-power-lines-over-st-johns.  How about FDOT spending the same dollars to bury power lines along FDOT roadways "to improve traffic safety" by eliminating poles for drivers to hit?   Improving urban aesthetics would just be a coincidental byproduct I suppose .

[thelakelander]

FDOT's general mission is to move people and freight and to do it efficiently and safely. So yes, demolishing an obsolete, aging structure in the Hart Bridge ramps (instead of rebuilding it, which would have been more expensive), burying power lines on roads in a hurricane prone environment or raising JEA powerlines to accommodate more shipping, would all be forms of moving people and freight more efficiently and safely. Keeping the Orleck afloat or building a riverfront park for the City of Jacksonville would not. Now, when you can match a project that aligns with the purpose of FDOT, in a manner that also improves urban aesthetics and connectivity, you get big wins with FDOT funds. The Fuller Warren Bridge pedestrian and bicycle path is an example of a good win.

[fieldafm]

FDOT's general mission is to move people and freight and to do it efficiently and safely. So yes, demolishing an obsolete, aging structure in the Hart Bridge ramps (instead of rebuilding it, which would have been more expensive), burying power lines on roads in a hurricane prone environment or raising JEA powerlines to accommodate more shipping, would all be forms of moving people and freight more efficiently and safely. Keeping the Orleck afloat or building a riverfront park for the City of Jacksonville would not. Now, when you can match a project that aligns with the purpose of FDOT, in a manner that also improves urban aesthetics and connectivity, you get big wins with FDOT funds. The Fuller Warren Bridge pedestrian and bicycle path is an example of a good win.

The Fuller Warren project extends beyond just the bike/ped path.  The Northbank Riverwalk Artists' Square (home of the Riverside Arts Market), the Artist Walk (which will host an extension of RAM), and the Riverside Dog Park have all been built or are in the process of completion.  Next up will be a skate park in between the Artist Walk and the Riverside Dog Park.  Every one of these public spaces have been built with a combination of FDOT, COJ and private funding sources.

I was and am still totally in favor of removing the Hart Bridge ramps.  The design of said ramp removal was sorely boggled by FDOT, COJ and their contractors.  I don't think the Jaguars or the public at large like the end product.

[thelakelander]

Now I do think the design of the Hart Bridge ramp removal was largely screwed up by COJ. If COJ wanted a better designed product, they could have worked with FDOT to create one. As such, it meets minimal design standards but is lacking in what it could have really been.

[thelakelander]

FDOT's general mission is to move people and freight and to do it efficiently and safely. So yes, demolishing an obsolete, aging structure in the Hart Bridge ramps (instead of rebuilding it, which would have been more expensive), burying power lines on roads in a hurricane prone environment or raising JEA powerlines to accommodate more shipping, would all be forms of moving people and freight more efficiently and safely. Keeping the Orleck afloat or building a riverfront park for the City of Jacksonville would not. Now, when you can match a project that aligns with the purpose of FDOT, in a manner that also improves urban aesthetics and connectivity, you get big wins with FDOT funds. The Fuller Warren Bridge pedestrian and bicycle path is an example of a good win.

The Fuller Warren project extends beyond just the bike/ped path.  The Northbank Riverwalk Artists' Square (home of the Riverside Arts Market), the Artist Walk (which will host an extension of RAM), and the Riverside Dog Park have all been built or are in the process of completion.  Next up will be a skate park in between the Artist Walk and the Riverside Dog Park.  Every one of these public spaces have been built with a combination of FDOT, COJ and private funding sources.

Yes, all additional projects associated with a larger FDOT project and on FDOT ROW. The FWB project is an excellent example of how the community should work with FDOT to improve the quality of highway projects funded by them. While some will complain about the layout of Hendricks, the road diet done there years ago is another decent local FDOT example, as that outcome has helped spur redevelopment and economic activity along the core.

[jaxlongtimer]

FDOT's general mission is to move people and freight and to do it efficiently and safely. So yes, demolishing an obsolete, aging structure in the Hart Bridge ramps (instead of rebuilding it, which would have been more expensive), burying power lines on roads in a hurricane prone environment or raising JEA powerlines to accommodate more shipping, would all be forms of moving people and freight more efficiently and safely. Keeping the Orleck afloat or building a riverfront park for the City of Jacksonville would not. Now, when you can match a project that aligns with the purpose of FDOT, in a manner that also improves urban aesthetics and connectivity, you get big wins with FDOT funds. The Fuller Warren Bridge pedestrian and bicycle path is an example of a good win.

To be clear, I wasn't ever saying that FDOT should directly support Orleck.  I was responding to the comments about civic improvements being made in Omaha and how public dollars get prioritized locally by government entities, working in concert with each other, that could support the same here within the scope of their missions.  Just as Field notes that FDOT has helped facilitate such projects in Riverside/Brooklyn, it could likely do the same many more times throughout the City on a grander scale.

[thelakelander]

Field notes just what I mentioned. The Riverside/Brooklyn stuff is a part of the Fuller Warren Bridge expansion project...like the shared use path. There is no real investment otherwise. If COJ wants things on a grander scale, when it comes to investments on FDOT ROW related to FDOT projects, it needs to be more ambitious and visionary. COJ and its residents need to lead there, not FDOT. Nevertheless, Omaha is likely getting the same treatment with their DOT projects too. A lot of their additional investment is coming through other financial resources and funding pots.

[jaxlongtimer]

If COJ wants things on a grander scale, when it comes to investments on FDOT ROW related to FDOT projects, it needs to be more ambitious and visionary. COJ and its residents need to lead there, not FDOT.

This!  Exactly my point.  COJ needs to redirect FDOT projects in this manner, away from constantly prioritizing interstates to the burbs and more in FDOT infrastructure in the urban core where it also benefits public space projects like it did under the Fuller Warren Bridge.  As I see it, this rarely happens with COJ presently or in the past.  Time for change.

Would the Emerald Trail, as a mobility pathway, qualify for an FDOT grant, aside from allowing it to cross FDOT ROW's?

[Charles Hunter]

Yes, the Emerald Trail would be eligible for FDOT funding, but it doesn't appear it has any in either the current or proposed funding programs. These "off-system" non-highway projects don't receive a whole lot of money from FDOT overall and are thus highly competitive.

[jaxlongtimer]

Yes, the Emerald Trail would be eligible for FDOT funding, but it doesn't appear it has any in either the current or proposed funding programs. These "off-system" non-highway projects don't receive a whole lot of money from FDOT overall and are thus highly competitive.

Charles, thanks for the info.  Your response furthers my point that if COJ would forcefully advocate more for changing FDOT priorities in our district, more money would be available for projects like the Emerald Trail and less would go toward interstates.  The entire Emerald Trail project appears to be less than one major interstate interchange or lane expansion (e.g. the wasteful express lanes) based on my observations.

[Charles Hunter]

More funding for the Emerald Trail - or any "non-motorized" (bike/ped) project would have zero effect on Interstate funding. Different pots of money as it comes from USDOT/FHWA in Washington, DC. This reminds me that FDOT isn't totally at fault for the small funding for bicycle and pedestrian facilities, as those funding levels are (mostly) set at the Washington level by USDOT and Congress.

[fieldafm]

Yes, the Emerald Trail would be eligible for FDOT funding, but it doesn't appear it has any in either the current or proposed funding programs. These "off-system" non-highway projects don't receive a whole lot of money from FDOT overall and are thus highly competitive.

Charles, thanks for the info.  Your response furthers my point that if COJ would forcefully advocate more for changing FDOT priorities in our district, more money would be available for projects like the Emerald Trail and less would go toward interstates.  The entire Emerald Trail project appears to be less than one major interstate interchange or lane expansion (e.g. the wasteful express lanes) based on my observations.

JTA and COJ have applied for Emerald Trail federal USDOT funding through the Reconnecting Communities program. The use of the funds likely doesn't meet the funding's stated objectives.  The specific funding requests aren't necessarily shovel-ready (I believe the funding request was for design work), nor actually reconnect a neighborhood severed by a highway (the specific road/infrastructure in question was there long before the neighborhood was).   We'll see if anything comes to fruition from that particular request.

Money for interstates has nothing to do with money for the Emerald Trail.  The USDOT and FDOT can choose to increase the pool for bike/ped projects, but that has no real effect on the pool of money for interstate expansion and maintenance.  Frankly, all forms of infrastructure funding across the country is woefully inadequate.