Stimulus leftovers could jump-start 9B construction

buckethead · September 22, 2009, 08:21:03 AM

Which is why they should be required to to it for all new development. A desirable urban core can enhance property values throughout a city and its suburbs. More sprawl will beget more sprawl.

CS Foltz · September 22, 2009, 08:29:31 AM

They are supposed to pay for area enhancements through a special fee...........forgot the name of the darn thing but it is supposed to be used for traffic upgrades, sewer, water, power and the like. Somehow the Council, in it's infinite wisdom seldom used it at the area that was being developed. Here at Linkside, when DR Horton bought the old Golf Course, he was going to have to pay something like 900K! Of course since that did not come to be, never heard anything further about it! But there is some kind of a tax,special fee or whatever that is added to permitting and the like!

buckethead · September 22, 2009, 08:35:48 AM

IIRC, the developers of Nocatee were held responsible for redoing 210 as well as the racetrack road connector.

Most of that is in St Johns County, if that makes any difference. Methinks there are some unhappy folks dealing with those costs in this market.

CS Foltz · September 22, 2009, 08:40:31 AM

Yes I have been down there...........nice set up! Cell tower down there I had to visit just before bridge about a year ago and the roadway is done very nicely but all developers should be held to those standards. If they wish to build then they need to build the roads also! Not let tax dollars do it for them and they take it from there!

buckethead · September 22, 2009, 08:41:55 AM

Agreed.

tufsu1 · September 22, 2009, 09:38:42 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on September 22, 2009, 06:40:21 AM
9B and the Outer Beltway are two different projects. Are you guys aware of their price tags?

SR 9B (I-95 to SR 9A) - $164 million for 4.7 miles
SR 9B (I-95 to Racetrack Road) - $12 million for 0.7 miles
First Coast Outer Beltway (I-95 to US 17) - $1.8 billion for 13.2 miles
First Coast Outer Beltway (US 17 to Blanding) - N/A for 17.3 miles
First Coast Outer Beltway (Blanding to I-10) - N/A for 15.4 miles

I don't see either of these streets as really being relievers for traffic on I-95, I-295, I-10 or port traffic. I see them opening up fresh virgin soil for future development. Even 9B can do this around US 1, with the simple extension of service roads paralleling the highway to provide visual exposure to the undeveloped land it will cut through. Imo, there are other options for dealing with future anticipated traffic that are worth exploring and more affordable. This isn't the 1970s and 1980s, so additional highway expansion projects don't have to be your final answer.

pretty sure I know where these costs came from...and as such, you should be aware that the 9B segment from I-95 to Racetrack is low....the $12 million doesn't include the extra ramps that would need to be built at I-95....so the real cost is probably closer to $75 million

thelakelander · September 22, 2009, 09:41:03 AM

Wow. Any idea on the full cost of the Outer Beltway between US 17 and I-10?

Captain Zissou · September 22, 2009, 10:19:39 AM

Quote from: tufsu1 on September 22, 2009, 09:38:42 AM

pretty sure I know where these costs came from...and as such, you should be aware that the 9B segment from I-95 to Racetrack is low....the $12 million doesn't include the extra ramps that would need to be built at I-95....so the real cost is probably closer to $75 million

WOW! For less than 5 miles with no revenue coming from it? It doesn't take a genius to see that this falls way short of what $75 mil could do for a rail line.

reednavy · September 22, 2009, 11:16:07 AM

Make 9B a toll connector, end of discussion.

Jason · September 22, 2009, 11:19:52 AM

Not to pile on Ock, but I too disagree with the necessity of 9B for a truck traffic reliever. If the truck will aready be cruising on I95 and 9A all that will be necessary are some upgrades to the I95/I295 south interchange. I was designed to allow for future expansion. The current bottleneck is the western side of the interchange. If your correct in saying that the additional truck traffic will be related to the port, they will all use the eastern portion of the interchange and steer clear of the bottleneck. For the same money or less we can upgrade the interchange and save millions of acres of untouched land the destructive fate of development.

Besides, 9B will do nothing more than ease access from northern St. Johns to southern Duval allowing for more of the Duval tax base to live south of the border. IMO, making it easier to live in the burbs does nothing for Jacksonville or the region, for that matter.

Captain Zissou · September 22, 2009, 12:23:35 PM

^ The Captain supports this post.

tufsu1 · September 22, 2009, 01:12:54 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on September 22, 2009, 09:41:03 AM
Wow. Any idea on the full cost of the Outer Beltway between US 17 and I-10?

The Outer Beltway cost shown of $1.8 billion is correct....and is for the full 46 miles from I-10 to I-95.

Not sure how much the portion from I-10 to US 17 is....but the part from I-10 to Blanding is about 1/3 of the total cost.

Dog Walker · September 22, 2009, 03:39:05 PM

" A billion here, a billion there; after a while it adds up to real money", - Everett Dirkson, Speaker of the United States House of Representatives circa 1965.

CS Foltz · September 23, 2009, 06:54:09 AM

I do agree with the general concensus........9B extensions won't do much except allow developers to create more Homes etc........etc! Money could be better spent for HSR/LR but thats just my take!

Dog Walker · September 23, 2009, 08:49:15 AM

You might not know that in our last Legislative session, the requirement for "concurrency", that the developers had to pay part of the cost of road expansion, was lifted in the cause of "stimulating the construction industry."

Now the taxpayer has to bear the full costs of expanding the roads to accommodate new development.

Don't you feel better now?