1 Train - 2 trains - red trains - blue trains... Skyway unscrambled and expanded

[thelakelander]

4: The whole point of this thread is asking for opinions on what would make the skyway viable. I gave my opinion. Nothing I have said is at all impossible. It's all perfectly feasible, and already exists exactly as I'm describing it in other cities, as I've pointed out and given examples, like Seattle.

5: I got your point, I just disagreed with it. That doesn't mean I don't understand it.

Cool.  No hard feelings.

[civil42806]

stjr... To use your very own words...

I can only roll my eyes at the persistent misconceptions and distortions

...that you attribute to others.  You have consistantly and without justification misrepresented the positions of anybody who offer a differing opinion than your own.  We get it stjr... you hate the skyway in all forms and want it dismantled or better yet imploded with dynamite in a made for TV event... we get it.  Your position however is a wishful fantasy and not grounded in reality...

Bridge, please show me a position that I "consistently and without justification" misrepresented or distorted.  Are you sure you aren't guilty of this yourself by making this accusation of me?

You are correct, I would love to take you up on your suggestion for the TV event.  Is it a crime to want to see the $ky-high-way dismantled?  I think my reasons for this have been made clear.  Is this any more a fantasy than that of many to expand it to the far corners of town?  Just reread the many threads on the $ky-high-way to see the multitude of "pro-expansion" fantasies.  Is my "fantasy" somehow less valid because it's not yours?  Just wondering....

I would gladly pay the pay per view cost to see this ugly, hulking, shadow casting, monstrosity blown up live on tv.  But I am apparently a minority on this site, not to say that there is anything wrong with that  .  But I have said before if there is serious talk of extending this thing then deconsolidation needs to be considered.  If the downtown area wants it let it pay for it.

[Ocklawaha]

To summarize, I actually think we have an overlap, if I get your drift properly.  We seem to be agreeing that other mass transit priorities are needed to make a properly functioning mass transit system for Jax.  Where I believe we differ, is that I don't support ANY expansion of the $ky-high-way for any reason and I am looking for its gradual phase out as other, better alternatives are implemented to supplant it.  You seem to view these other alternatives, not as replacements for the $ky-high-way, but adjuncts to it and its expansion.  We also appear to disagree as to the impact of an expansion of the $ky-high-way as to the funding and timing of other mass transit projects.  I feel it will lead to more deferrals, you don't.  So be it.  We agree to disagree.  Each of us will, I am sure, continue the advocacy of our positions.  That's also OK by me.

Unlike certain others who regularly post here, I don't like violence of any type, including angry words, shouting etc... PEACE MAN!

Yes we have a lot more overlap then you can imagine. As I told you here is the JOURNAL article that ran 28 years ago!

JTA was warned in 1981 about the looming Skyway failure. Now, 27 years later, the same mistakes are being made on a grander scale. Jacksonville, welcome to 1981.

Times Union and Journal, Jacksonville, Sunday, April 12, 1981

TITLE: Mann favors trolleys over people movers

Written By: George Harmon (Journal Editorial Page Editor)


Robert W. Mann is a man after my own heart. He likes streetcars and I do, too. Only I call a streetcar a streetcar. Mann prefers to describe the modern version of the streetcar as "light-rail transit," or LRT.

Since I have written two columns in the past month on the proposed Downtown People Mover for Jacksonville, and am favorably disposed toward it, Mann has written to me warning the DPM could be a big fat turkey for Jacksonville.

(It may already be a turkey, The Reagan administration this week ordered cities such as Jacksonville to suspend activities aimed at developing people movers, but Democrats in the U.S. House are hoping to block Reagan's move.)

Mann said the so-called experts on mass transit in Jacksonville ought to be paying more attention to the revival of the streetcar-er, light-rail transit- that he says is taking place elsewhere in this country and Canada.

Mann describes himself as a freelance writer and says a book by him is due to be published later this year by Darwin Publications ("no connection with the theory of evolution") in Burbank, Calif. He says this book will be a pictorial history of the railroad systems in Florida and its title will be "Rails 'Neath the Palms."

With that introduction, I will let Mann write most of the rest of this column, which first questions the wisdom of the Downtown People Mover ever getting off the drawing boards, it is time that the Jacksonville Transportation Authority came down from the lofty Buck Rogers perch and examined a very real and cost-effective alternative to what may well be "pie-in-the-sky planning," says Mann.

Downtown People Movers are relatively new in the transit world. They combine several technologies into one system. DPMs include the building of an elevated guideway that is for all purposes, a two-lane highway.

This massive structure must also contain a 'railroad' of some form of guideway to keep the cars on track.
Add to this a power delivery system and a computer system and you come out with one very expensive machine.

"As originally planned, the Jacksonville system would virtually be a gift from Uncle Sam, a three- or
four- mile $150 million dollar gift. The trouble with gifts of this nature is that someone has to pay to maintain the thing and what happens if the entire system proves to be a turkey? What about 5 or 15 years from now? Will a sleek little box that rolls along, akin to an airport shuttle system, really be the answer for an urban sprawl that may someday reach St.Augustine?"

"I don't intend to spend any more time with DPMs. One only has to travel as far as Morgantown, W.Va, where the federal pilot system has been operating for years, to see this whole thing is a turkey!"

Mann says there is an alternative to a DPM in Jacksonville "but I fear that the JTA, City Hall and perhaps our news media will have to do their homework to see how real it really is. It is called LRT, for light-rail transit. LRT is a rebirth of the old, clunky trolley in a modern high-speed vehicle that can operate on many present track systems."

Mann then offers an imposing list of cities in which planned LRTs are being built or planned. "Light-rail systems are presently being built in Buffalo, N.Y., and San Diego, Calif., and planned for Portland, Ore; San Jose, Calif.; Denver, Col.;; Baltimore, Md.; Dayton, Ohio; Sacramento, Calif.; and Vancouver, British Columbia.

"The transit vehicles operate in any number of ways - elevated, just like the DPM, subway, new track in the street, in a median strip, lane separations, transit malls or down the same route that the regular freight railroads use, which in our case includes much lightly-used switching line.

"LRT is electric and clean. It is better on labor than the bus systems since the higher-capacity cars can be linked into trains of up to four or five cars with a single driver. As for speed, which includes time at stations and stops, the average bus in the United States does little better than 11.5 mph while the light-rail vehicle in Buffalo will do 23 mph. LRT has a much higher ridership than the bus systems on a worldwide basis and the vehicles can be bought 'off the shelf.'

"Look at what San Diego has done. The Southern Pacific railroad line from San Diego to Yuma, Ariz., was crippled by a flood several years ago and, even as a freight railroad, Southern Pacific had little interest in the industrial switching tracks that remained stretching from San Diego to the Mexican Border. The city and a short-line railroad operator made an offer on the tracks and soon were given the OK by the railroad.

"Transit planners decided that the existing track was valuable and decided to string the single electric wire and improve the line, where needed, for a ready made LRT system. For a dozen blocks or so downtown a street was ripped up and two tracks were laid in the center in what will remain a running transit mall with restricted auto traffic. And as the sleek new German-built cars leave downtown they can spring like an Amtrak streamliner with crossing lights flashing and bells ringing.

"Portland is building along a freight railroad line and a former freeway right-of-way [yes the freeway was scrapped in favor of LRT]. Calgary, Alberta, is putting its system along existing railroad lines and medians while others are working on deals to operate LRT by day and at peak hours, and allow the freight railroads to switch by night.

"In Jacksonville, there exist opportunities which exist in no other city: a spider web of tracks fanning out from Union Station to Southside, Ortega and Orange Park, Baldwin, northwest Jacksonville and Dinsmore, within a mile of the aiport, onto Blount Island, etc.

"Imagine a transit mall or LRT lane from the Union Station to the Union Street viaduct area and from there north into Springfield on the old Seaboard Coast Line tracks, then west to within a block of the Eighth Street hospital and then south to Union Station as a starter."

"Then tell yourself that it is already there save for the downtown mall and the trolley wire and it wouldn't have to compete with the automobile. Next tell yourself that San Diego built a 16 mile system for half the cost of our Four-mile DPM and used not one penny of federal money! Next ask: Who really runs things at the JTA?"

I have run out of space and cannot begin to answer Mann's questions, and am not sure how well I could. So I will end with this question: What do you readers think of his ideas? I'd like to know.

So you see stjr, I really was the Skyway's public enemy number one. The facts are they built the stupid thing anyway, invested $200 Million dollars got it about 1/3 done and walked off the job. Not all of this was JTA's fault, but something I was watching even 28 years ago. As soon as the Republicans took full power in Washington, all rail (and monorail) projects came to a screeching halt. The funding requirements were revised each year and little by little, if one was not building 12 lanes of new Expressway, (or JTB) your mass transit project could rot on the vine. So not only did we quit, but we would have had the federal carpet pulled right out from under us.

Things have changed since then. The downtown has transformed from a shopping mecca to more of a white collar, highrise
office tower and Landing/Riverwalk playground.

So I started this thread to find what major employers, or residential, church, restaurants, we can name in the downtown (BOTH BANKS) that the Skyway misses. I don't want to spend the local money on the Skyway, I figure the federal government got us into this (through UMTA) and they can damn well get us out of it. Again I'm not looking for double track to the Beaches, or even beyond North Riverside.

I have access to FDOT and AMTRAK plans, but the best ones are found in an older obscure USDOT study on multi-modal stations. In it, it lays out a 12 track terminal for Jacksonville and gives us the "PIN on the HINGE position" in Southeast Rail.
Amtrak is talking about 30 trains daily, 15 in each direction on various lines into and out of Jacksonville. Meanwhile Greyhound, Conejo, Trailways, American Coach and others will have 50 or so schedules running in and out of the Terminal. Add in JTA's 60+ bus routes and the express coaches, and the old terminal will have more human BUZZ then our airport. On top of all that activity, somewhere in the next 10 years, we start seeing several dozen commuter trains North, Southeast, Southwest, and West of the City DAILY.


Concept for FEC-BUS-SKYWAY + PARKING CENTER at Atlantic Ave and the Florida East Coast in San Marco, this view is looking South by Southeast.
When these things start to show symptoms of life, we must get our downtown distribution systems up to speed. Now rather then reinvent the Skyway, I'd say a simple group of short extensions would allow it to be more then a parking lot shuttle.
If passengers could Access San Marco - WEST - of the always blocked railroad, we could build another Rosa Parks like center at ATLANTIC and THE FEC RY...

This one station would be a model for the others, parking lot (over the railroad?), Commuter Rail Station, Amtrak Station, Skyway Terminal, JTA Southside hub, BRT, and perhaps streetcar or trolley bus.  I believe it could be done with a simple double track beamway, (LIKE DISNEY, VEGAS, and EVERYPLACE ELSE). It would add one mile to the Skyway, but it would access thousands of people at a transportation feeding station. Then shoot for duplication at the Stadium/Randolph (which could be phased - BOA Tower - Newnan/Hyatt - BERKMAN/Police etc... Do it again at FCCJ downtown (a whoping 300 yard extension onto the campus) and again phase by phase at Blue Cross/Fidelity.  At this extent the Skyway would be able to operate when a rare tropical storm floods downtown up to BAY STREET. We'd still be mobile. It would also provide an alternate choice as a part of a grid of assorted modes.

If I were King of JTA, the diesel Bus would be shortly banned from downtown, Streetcars / Skyway / Hybrid BRT / Motor Coaches / Trolley Buses would provide a mini version of any world city. Right now we could do this just for the asking. The President, Vice President, Congress, Senate, and Duval delegation are all poised to strike a blow for Jacksonville. Now is the best time we'll probably ever see to make a very grand system come together.

OCKLAWAHA

[thelakelander]

Mann then offers an imposing list of cities in which planned LRTs are being built or planned. "Light-rail systems are presently being built in Buffalo, N.Y., and San Diego, Calif., and planned for Portland, Ore; San Jose, Calif.; Denver, Col.;; Baltimore, Md.; Dayton, Ohio; Sacramento, Calif.; and Vancouver, British Columbia.

I wonder how successful these cities have been since 1981?  Daily ridership numbers, 27 years later.

Daily riders - System name - Completion Date - City - System length

107,600 Max Light Rail/Portland Streetcar (1986) - Portland - 44 miles of light rail and streetcar lines

103,900 San Diego Trolley (1981) - San Diego - 53.5 mile light rail system

68,800 The Ride Light Rail (1994) - Denver - 35 mile light rail system

60,500 Sacramento RTD light rail (1987) - Sacramento - 36.9 mile light rail system

34,400 Santa Clara VTA light rail (1987) - San Jose - 42.2 mile light rail system

33,600 Baltimore light rail (1992) - Baltimore - 30 mile light rail system

26,300 Buffalo Metro Rail (1984) - Buffalo - 6.4 mile light rail system

  1,700 Jacksonville Skyway (2000) - Jacksonville - 2.5 mile APM system

* Dayton is not listed because they never went through with anything.

link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_United_States_Light_Rail_systems_by_ridership

[BridgeTroll]

You are correct, I would love to take you up on your suggestion for the TV event.  Is it a crime to want to see the $ky-high-way dismantled?  I think my reasons for this have been made clear.  Is this any more a fantasy than that of many to expand it to the far corners of town?

First... the thing exists... it functions.  Its problem is it does not connect properly to destinations or other forms of transit.  Nearly all proposals for mass transit on this site call for using the skyway as a small piece of an efficient and integrated system.  IF it was to be expanded, several logical short extensions have been proposed.  That is all.  I do not recall any proposals to expand it to "the far corners of town."

[ChriswUfGator]

1: The cost of buying air rights or the small strip of property necessary to build an elevated railway is nowhere NEAR the cost of razing the 100ft wide swath you'd need for a traditional multi-track railway. It would be NOWHERE CLOSE.

There is nothing to buy for Light Rail, Streetcar or Skyway expansion, the rights-of-ways are already owned by the city.

Did you look at my list of additions/extensions?

Then where in residential Riverside and San Marco, where in Gate Corporate Park, and where at the beaches, and where at Gateway Mall, Regency, Avenues, and Orange Park, does the city already have sufficient rights of way for a ground-based multi-track setup, stations, and parking?

They don't.

My point about extending an elevated system was to minimize the footprint. Despite any other drawbacks you mention, you must admit EL's have a smaller footprint than traditional setups, and so it follows the land cost would be exponentially cheaper in denser neighborhoods with high property values. Outside of those areas, it could certainly run on the ground. I'm suggesting a comprehensive system, not a trick-pony to impress tourists, that only goes 3 miles.

2: Like every other elevated railway, except for Disney and Jacksonville (LOL!) Chicago's is part of a larger rail system. In areas where land is easier to obtain, it runs on the ground. Where land is scarce, it's elevated to minimize it's footprint. That's the whole point. I see no reason why we couldn't design a dual-purpose train that can run on an elevated as well as ground tracks. Trains can go uphill you know...

There would be no need to reinvent the wheel here. Most any off the shelf train equipment could climb a grade onto an elevated structure, but the costs become astronomical. Rather than some hi-tech modern transit cure-all, the monorail concept â€" as William D. Middleton's Metropolitan Railways: Rapid Transit in America reveals â€" predates electric street railways, the predecessor of light rail, by at least ten years. The fact that streetcars, light rail, interurbans, and other conventional forms of dual-rail urban transit (subways, elevated, etc.) proliferated everywhere in the world beginning in the late nineteenth century to the present day, while monorail systems remain few and far between, says a great deal about the relative versatility, suitability, reliability, and cost-effectiveness of traditional dual steel-rail technology.

I'm not caught up on the monorail thing at all. I've already said, scrap it, and modify the elevated tracks to accommodate another type of train. My point was, expanding the skyway to be a true EL system that serves the entire city would make it useful and useable.

Adding two or three more stops so the current skyway system extends a whopping 4 miles instead of 3 miles or whatever it is now, is not going to make it useable. It needs to be a real system that connects the populous parts of the city. The current setup is utterly ridiculous, I could almost walk from one stop to another faster than waiting for the train. Not that I would, since I'm lazy, I'd drive. But still...you get the idea.

Scrap the monorail, and make it into a real EL that goes somewhere people need/want to go. That, I'd use.

3: I know what the current trains are, and that's why I've already said we need new ones. You could easily mount steel rails to the existing elevated cement rail lines, at a minimal cost. The main cost is pouring all that concrete. Redesign the trains, and add tracks if you want. That prolly wouldn't be that expensive.

History has shown that Monorail can't really compete with steel wheel on steel rail at grade. If Monorail could compete in costs, speeds, capacity, we would have built a nation wide Monorail system rather then a steel wheel/rail system. Why?

This is the reason we need to complete the Skyway to logical end points using a rather simple formula. Locate the dense residential, office, factory's, employers, restaurants, entertainment places and lay out the Skyway extensions so that each leg has some of each of those elements. People travel for a different experience then the one they are experiencing at the present moment in the space time continuum. A teen might travel from Condo to Candy Shop to School each day. But that same teen is not highly likely to go from School to School, Office to Office, etc...

I believe you on that. So scrap the monorail then. Or, get trains like Seattle's, where it's actually useable. Seattle's monorail is great, it's quick, connects the city with other areas, etc. I don't know what it costs to operate vs. a traditional ground-based setup, but it works for them. In any event, I'm not caught up on the monorail concept, it can be a regular EL, it just needs to be useable. And it's not.

4: The whole point of this thread is asking for opinions on what would make the skyway viable. I gave my opinion. Nothing I have said is at all impossible. It's all perfectly feasible, and already exists exactly as I'm describing it in other cities, as I've pointed out and given examples, like Seattle.

Actually the whole point of this thread is to see where we can get, NAME, ADDRESS, TYPE OF BUSINESS, VENUE, RESIDENCE. Only then can we at MJ offer to help JTA plan short logical extensions of the Skyway that would convert it from running from a Garage to a Bus Stop, into a real destination grabber. Name a building, help build a list, let's pool our knowledge... I think we got hijacked!

First, I provided exactly that. A list of locations and names that it should connect. We only got off onto this tangent, when lakelander started saying how it could never work, and I had to point out examples of other places where they've already done the same thing and it works fine.

And your original post was pretty clear, in that you WERE asking for opinions on system changes:

A new prospective and maybe a new type of post. We're always talking about how the Skyway misses the mark and I'm thinking which marks?

and,

What major employment, school or residential centers does the Skyway miss? I would say name anything more the a block away, and in some cases such as FCCJ  its cut off by a virtual freeway.
You can add any new or unknown route idea if you can justify the traffic potential and name the buildings.

You will note, I provided exactly what you asked, a list of areas/locations the skyway should serve. No hijack, I simply responded to your original question.

and,

I counting on you good people to come up with a list, I'm thinking simple like the following example, or invent your own list:

And that's exactly what I did.

5: I got your point, I just disagreed with it. That doesn't mean I don't understand it.

No problem man. Elevated rail and subways are the most expensive types of railroad construction. Likewise JTA's original BRT-Quickway designs we're even more expensive then elevated or subway rail, and when all was said and done, all we would have to show for it was a few more miles of highways, and a handful of new buses. Not exactly the stuff dreams are made of.

I was talking to lakelander when I said that, not you.

And as to subways, I'm not sure we could even build one here, I think you'd have groundwater issues. But as to an EL, I think that's entirely possible, and further I think it's actually necessary in areas like RS and SM, where the population density is high and the land acquisition cost for building stations etc. is high. With an EL, you could have parking underneath, and the tracks could go over and around things rather than just demolishing them.

In any event, those are my thoughts. I'm sorry if you don't like them, but you did ask for them.

[Shwaz]

But as to an EL, I think that's entirely possible, and further I think it's actually necessary in areas like RS and SM, where the population density is high and the land acquisition cost for building stations etc. is high. With an EL, you could have parking underneath, and the tracks could go over and around things rather than just demolishing them.

To rebuild the skyway into the EL just to run into Riverside & San Marco would be grossly overkill. Both neighborhoods really only need a people mover system like a street car, trolley or skyway.

I think the majority here are saying a light rail system like the EL is needed for longer lines and they don't have to be up high but instead on the tracks that already run through NE FL.


OCK would it be possible to run the skyway from the current track down to street level and operate in the median strip?

If so, why not just lower it say Convention Center Station - extend it up Park St. turning east on Post St. to Riverisde Ave (near the Cummer / RAM ) maybe becoming elevated again at the parking garage at Fidelity before heading back to downtown and Central Station.?

[ChriswUfGator]

Boston is another example, Schwaz. In the high density areas, it runs underground, but it comes up in areas where it can. We can't do a subway here, but an EL works nicely.

In Brookline, the T actually runs down the median of Mass Ave and Brookline St., just as you're describing.

But it's a UNIFIED rail system. You don't have to change trains 67 times to go 4 miles. You have maybe 1 or 2 changes, at MOST, to go where you need to go, over long distances

If we do this piecemeal thing, where you have a skyway, buses, ground trains, etc., etc., nobody is ever going to use it because it will take LONGER than just walking or driving, and because it's just a plain hassle.

Nobody in this thread is acknowledging that public transport is a direct competitor to the automobile. The only people who use public transport around here are the people who can't afford cars, because the system is so FUBAR that nobody in their right mind would use it if they didn't have to.

For a system to be successful, it actually must have some advantage over driving. This is exactly why railroads died out in the first place, because the interstate highway system was built. So for this to work, it needs to be faster, cheaper, and more convenient than driving, or at least 2 out of those 3. Otherwise, it'll just be another giant flop.

So you can't have 17 different modes of transport, with 10 bus/train/skyway changes to get anywhere, or nobody will use it. It needs to be integrated, and as seamless as possible. Yes, it will be expensive. But cheaping out and combining light rail with buses, with the skyway, with whatever, will be a complete waste, because you'll just wind up with one more thing that nobody uses.

[JeffreyS]

Multimodal transit is fine.  Many different systems can be fine if you work from a cohesive master plan that contributes to an easy commute.  Commuter rail and urban distribution systems accomplish different things.

[Ocklawaha]

You are correct, I would love to take you up on your suggestion for the TV event.  Is it a crime to want to see the $ky-high-way dismantled?  I think my reasons for this have been made clear.  Is this any more a fantasy than that of many to expand it to the far corners of town?

First... the thing exists... it functions.  Its problem is it does not connect properly to destinations or other forms of transit.  Nearly all proposals for mass transit on this site call for using the skyway as a small piece of an efficient and integrated system.  IF it was to be expanded, several logical short extensions have been proposed.  That is all.  I do not recall any proposals to expand it to "the far corners of town." or "Universe."

The liability deal does indemnify CSX to a large extent. It's the same deal that's in place in 23 other rail cities across the country, including Miami. Supporters say Tampa and Jacksonville would need and get similar deals if they ever wanted a rail system.

The money being used for CSX comes from a transportation trust fund. Jeb Bush put 1.5 billion into that find during the years the state was flush with cash. The object was to get local dollars into road and transit projects. Once a local government came up with the money, the state would then use this trust fund to pay most of the project cost. This trust fund could be raided for education dollars in Legislators desired.

Backers of Sunrail are pushing this as a jobs program at a time when the economy desperately needs it. They say the train will create 133 thousand jobs within 4 months of approval.

What is the real cost of commuter rail? The total so far is 1.2 billion in federal, state, and local money. That total includes all of the upgrades on CSX tracks in the state. Dockery claims the t9total is much higher, nearly 2.7 billion. That total includes all interest payments, and the operating costs for the system once local governments have to start running in after 2017. We have not used those numbers. When you buy a car or house, you basically use the price tag of either item, not the price tag, plus all the interest you will pay over the life of the loan.

My opinion toward this Skyway system of ours has changed now that JTA is finally merging it's operations into a multi-modal system. With the word "Multi" in it, justification is fed by inter-modal relations, one mode to the next.  It will work, but it MUST be tied to a general plan for mobility once Commuter Rail has discharged it's passenger loads.

OCKLAWAHA

[Shwaz]

Chris, I've been to both Chicago and Boston and understand what you're saying about multi-modal being less attractive but I'm not so sure LRT with the tracks already in place would be inconvenient at all. 

We can run LRT from all over into a main downtown location (convention center) and then use the skyway (current train & model) with extensions as a loop encompassing both DT and the local neighborhoods.

Once you're in the neighborhoods jumping a trolley, streetcar or bus is no problem.

OCK would it be possible to run the skyway from the current track down to street level and operate in the median strip?

If so, why not just lower it say Convention Center Station - extend it up Park St. turning east on Post St. to Riverisde Ave (near the Cummer / RAM ) maybe becoming elevated again at the parking garage at Fidelity before heading back to downtown and Central Station.?

[ChriswUfGator]

Multimodal transit is fine.

Only to a point. When it is so fragmented as to become unusable...it will be unused.

By your logic, the skyway would already be a success, since you can connect to buses, right? But it's not, because it's a hassle.

[ChriswUfGator]

Chris, I've been to both Chicago and Boston and understand what you're saying about multi-modal being less attractive but I'm not so sure LRT with the tracks already in place would be inconvenient at all. 

We can run LRT from all over into a main downtown location (convention center) and then use the skyway (current train & model) with extensions as a loop encompassing both DT and the local neighborhoods.

Once you're in the neighborhoods jumping a trolley, streetcar or bus is no problem.

OCK would it be possible to run the skyway from the current track down to street level and operate in the median strip?

If so, why not just lower it say Convention Center Station - extend it up Park St. turning east on Post St. to Riverisde Ave (near the Cummer / RAM ) maybe becoming elevated again at the parking garage at Fidelity before heading back to downtown and Central Station.?

I agree, but it's a balancing act.

It can be multimodal, sure, but only to a point. You will get to the point where, if it's designed to take 2 buses, 3 trains, and a skyway ride to go 5 miles, then nobody will use it. Everybody always forgets, this thing has competition. It's not the only game in town. If it's enough hassle, people will just hop in the car. It needs to be competitive...

In Boston, the T can be FASTER than driving if you live in the burbs, and you can get almost anywhere changing trains 1 time (or none). The areas that are only served by bus are some of the most unpopular places, real estate agents will actually warn you not to buy there because there's no T stop.

[stjr]

Multimodal transit is fine.

Only to a point. When it is so fragmented as to become unusable...it will be unused.

By your logic, the skyway would already be a success, since you can connect to buses, right? But it's not, because it's a hassle.

Chris, I agree completely with your comments on this.  This is a big wedge between I and Ock and Lake about the viability of sustaining/expanding the $ky-high-way.  Regardless of the final system configuration, I too have serious doubts about why and who would commute from the suburbs and transfer to the $ky-high-way for the last mile or so.  Or, why in-town people would prefer this over buses, street cars, taxis, biking, or just plain walking.

When in NY, subject to weather and time, I think nothing of walking 5, 10, 20, or 40 city blocks vs. locating, waiting, paying for,, and taking a subway or even a bus.  It's nice to know they are there if you see a need, but once you get to walking a couple of blocks, walking a few more gets easier and easier.  With the limitations to how close the $ky-high-way can get to most destinations, I think users will be getting use to walking real quick.

I see time, physical, and psychological obstacles to the average person jumping through all these hoops.  Will some people tolerate it - sure.  You can always find a few to put up with anything.  Put not nearly enough will consider it to justify expanding or maintaining the $ky-hihg-way.  Add, that I think other modes can do the job far better and be more street and neighborhood friendly to development and lifestyle, and I just don't see why this thing should continue to exist.  That's just my opinion but I think history here and elsewhere is more on my side than not.

[thelakelander]

Multimodal transit is fine.

Only to a point. When it is so fragmented as to become unusable...it will be unused.

By your logic, the skyway would already be a success, since you can connect to buses, right? But it's not, because it's a hassle.

Chris, I agree completely with your comments on this.  This is a big wedge between I and Ock and Lake about the viability of sustaining/expanding the $ky-high-way.  Regardless of the final system configuration, I too have serious doubts about why and who would commute from the suburbs and transfer to the $ky-high-way for the last mile or so.  Or, why in-town people would prefer this over buses, street cars, taxis, biking, or just plain walking.

Because you would have no other transit choice to get around to DT areas where the skyway serves from the JTC.  Taking a commuter rail train from Orange Park to the JTC and transferring to the skyway to access the Southbank or City Hall, for example, would be no different from catching a NJ transit commuter rail train in Paterson and transferring to another train in Secaucus to access Manhattan.  I could understand if we were talking about trips that take a ton of transfers, but we're literally complaining about one transfer stop.  No matter what modes are selected in Jacksonville, an extensive mass transit system will include tranfers.  That's pretty common in any major city you go to.