State Rd 9B

[thelakelander]

Any idea about what type of profit 9B will bring?  How will this $170 million road pay for itself without tolls?

[CS Foltz]

lake.........I would be willing to bet developers are just waiting for the tax paying public to build it, then they will come! They can put toll's on it all they want...........I won't use it or need it...........so just who or what is this road supposed to benefit?

[Ocklawaha]

So how would you fix it CS? When signs are posted, articles run, mailers go out to all effected businesses and residents, and... 20 people show up?

One cannot hold a project forever in the hopes that someone will get off their good intentions and comment. I've been to these things where the DOT or planning and consultant staff outnumbered the public 20-1.

There was even a meeting a year ago in which FREE fried chicken dinners were served and they still got... 20 people.

This is much more the fault of the general public then the transportation planners.

OCKLAWAHA

[tufsu1]

lake.........I would be willing to bet developers are just waiting for the tax paying public to build it, then they will come! They can put toll's on it all they want...........I won't use it or need it...........so just who or what is this road supposed to benefit?

CS...please explain how the new developmnt you expect to come would not be lived in or patronized by the "taxpaying public"?

Or, another way to look at is to think of a road funded by St. Johns County taxpayers (they pay gas taxes too you know)....and many of them seem to think its a good idea.

[tufsu1]

Explain this we thing.

I believe this would be all of us....now I happen to think 9B is unnecessary, but look at it this way....how many people thought JTB or 295 were bad ideas before they were built...and how many of those same people use those roads now?

[reednavy]

Part of the problem in this town is the fact that it has nearly zerro connectivity, i.e., a street grid. All these ridiculous developments and their curvey "parkways" have screwed up any chances of this city having connectivity.

One city that has a street grid, is comparable in size, but commute times are much better is Oklahoma City as you have many, many options in addition to 35, 44, 40 and several turnpikes.

[stjr]

So how would you fix it CS? When signs are posted, articles run, mailers go out to all effected businesses and residents, and... 20 people show up?

...This is much more the fault of the general public then the transportation planners.

Ock, you should know better.

This is the fault of transportation planners that are "road building happy" and in bed with developers and their politicos addicted to their campaign contributions.

Why should the public have to fatigue itself to reign in "experts" that should also know better.  Cynical citizens believe the system is rigged when they see one unneeded road project after another.  Why don't our "professional planners" do their jobs and stop pushing these projects and start focusing on mass transit, the real future of transportation.

9B is nothing more than another surreptitious link of the Outer Beltway plan and will just push more urban sprawl on all of us.  Not to mention siphoning funds from the very rail development you advocate for.  We need to break this cycle and there is no time like the present.  I urge you to reconsider your thoughts on this project.

[tufsu1]

This is the fault of transportation planners that are "road building happy" and in bed with developers and their politicos addicted to their campaign contributions.

which transportation planners are you referring to?

btw...stjr...Ock was referring to the public meeting/hearing process...he was not endorsing 9B

[Ocklawaha]

I think stjr didn't catch the drift of my comment TU, I never said that it was the fault of the public that we have some planners that are indeed highway-happy. These are mostly developers who have paid their way into office, as well as a good portion of the JTA crew. To put it in the vernacular of the peasantry, they are "Bad to the Bone!"

What I was saying is HOW DO YOU FIX the lack of public participation when they have done everything up to and including give away free dinners... That was an idea that stiffed the tax payers for "free chicken" which they'll complain about, and God knows if they hadn't given it away, they'd complain even more. Personally I'd give Victoria, or whoever came up with the chicken idea, points for having at least tried to motivate the citizenry.


OCKLAWAHA

[jandar]

Explain this we thing.

I believe this would be all of us....now I happen to think 9B is unnecessary, but look at it this way....how many people thought JTB or 295 were bad ideas before they were built...and how many of those same people use those roads now?

I remember JTB being built and it was a nice quiet road that we took to get to the beaches (after paying a small toll). No traffic on it whatsoever.

Sprawl happened on JTB. It was not controlled in the least. There was no planned growth on that part of the southside. Yet many that now live in this area bemoan roads that are at least taking feedback and listening to the public (the few that do show).

[stjr]

I think stjr didn't catch the drift of my comment TU,  

Sorry, Ock and Tufsu, if I wasn't clearer.

I took Ock's defense of the public hearings for 9B as an endorsement of 9B because I see him trying to justify the steps that led up to 9B as an adequate and fair process.  I did put it into context, as well, with my recollection that Ock has endorsed 9B as a rationalized outlet for port traffic.

My point is that the burden of proof should not be on the public to NOT build the road, but on the planners TO build the road.  Ock's comments appear to support putting the burden on the public to stop the road building bureaucracy/steamroller which I think is just not a reasonable or fair expectation. (Still waiting for an example where a planned road, years in the making, was canceled due to a public hearing.)

A public citizen walking into a hearing is no match for the road building bureaucrats that, with immense taxpayer monies, have spent years investing in the project and whose sole job is to get the road built.  Most citizens can not readily access, read, vision, and/or comprehend thousands of pages in technical maps, engineering drawings, traffic studies, environmental studies, cost estimates, etc. and certainly can't afford the professional expertise to match the planners resources.  And, if they could, they certainly couldn't do it all in their "spare time" leading up to a hearing.  If I brought 100 people opposed to 9B who simply stood up and said we oppose this road, do you think FDOT/JTA would even delay the project for one minute?  Or just shoot us down as "wild and crazy" citizens who don't speak the language?

We have a cycle where "highway happy" planners (and they are, Tufsu, because that is how they keep their jobs) look for excuses to build roads (under cover of such groups as the TPO), however lame those excuses are.  Then, we the public, who have full time lives and jobs doing other things, have to make a career of trying to reign in these planners.  It's not really sustainable.

I have a better way.  BEFORE planners proceed beyond a simple theoretical line on a map for a road project, let's have public hearings on the general concept and see if the public shows up to support it.  If the same less than 50 people show up (especially with free fried chicken!), let's shelve the project.  If the public is divided, then let's defer until the pro-roaders can make a case that substantially prevails over the opposition in the public eye.  Perhaps roads costing over a certain amount or running more than a certain distance should be put up for a public referendum in the communities it affects.  That would be interesting.

Bottom line, almost any process would be better than the one we have now where public hearings are, in the perception of the public, merely window dressing on a foregone conclusion to build a given road.

[British Shoe Company]

It sounds like purchasing an "I Pass", or "Easy Pass" to drive thru toll booths would be great, instead of a stop, and paying toll.  I think there will be tolls. 

Not Trolls!

I do think there will be tolls, and  the  "I pass", or "Easy Pass" option also. It will save frequent users time.

[reednavy]

See, BCS, this is what I would like to see happen, having it tolled.

It is serving only a minority of the metro area, and those want to use it's convenience should have to pay the price for shaving 5-10 minutes off their travel time.

[reednavy]

Wild eyed Southern Boys can spell.  Maybe you Should change your logo from the "City of Jacksonville" to the High School you attended.

Except it isn't a logo, it is called an avatar.

[tufsu1]

I have a better way.  BEFORE planners proceed beyond a simple theoretical line on a map for a road project, let's have public hearings on the general concept and see if the public shows up to support it.  If the same less than 50 people show up (especially with free fried chicken!), let's shelve the project.  If the public is divided, then let's defer until the pro-roaders can make a case that substantially prevails over the opposition in the public eye.  Perhaps roads costing over a certain amount or running more than a certain distance should be put up for a public referendum in the communities it affects.  That would be interesting.

stjr...this is exactly what happens during a long-range transportation plan (LRTP)....theoretical lines are drawn on a map...and the "free chicken" meeting Ock referred to was part of the recent LRTP's public outreach.

so, given that there were not huge numbers at any public meeting, should we scrap all the ideas from the plan...including all the commuter rail and streetcar lines?