Before & After: Rail Spurs Economic Development

[thelakelander]

What I do find interesting, however, is that while rail transit usually is legislated to spur transit-oriented, dense development, it doesn't necessarily translate into increased ridership on the rail transit next to said transit-oriented development.

I believe another factor is walkability.  Once you get up to a certain level of density and decent street interaction, the pedestrian mode of travel (the greenest of all) becomes dominant.

thelakelander , that's not always true. Remember, a great deal of these developments are islands of urbanity in a sea of suburbia. There's not a continuous grid of dense, urban streets to walk upon. Miami's "Downtown Dadeland/Downtown Kendall" TOD is the perfect example of this. You can walk around the TOD, but it's not advisable to walk beyond the TOD. At present, it's not connected to another TOD, another set of densely populated streets and services.

I never gave a timeline.  In another 10 years or so, many of these isolated islands of urbanity will grow to become more extensive walkable neighborhoods reducing the need to use transit or the automobile for many short routine trips.

Am I disputing the value of these TODs? Of course not. In many ways, they represent a phenomenal first step towards a New Urban future. You have to start somewhere, correct? I'd rather have people driving to a TOD and then experience the enjoyment of a pedestrian-friendly environment than not. But until the islands link into a continuous fabric (and in that case, transit use should skyrocket,) people are merely trading "driving from nowhere to nowhere" for "driving from nowhere to somewhere."

You're coming from a more suburban TOD view but within urban areas, TODs can stimulate additional connectivity and vibrancy in existing urban districts.  Using DC as an example, many of the new developments along the Green Line around Columbia Heights and U Street do just that. 

From an economic development angle, this is what attracts me to good mass transit the most.  This type of investment has been proven to redirect growth in distressed and underutilized urban communities that were originally developed for twice as much density as they have today.  In Jacksonville, neighborhoods that would fit this bill include Durkeeville, Springfield, New Springfield, Brooklyn, LaVilla and the Eastside.

[thelakelander]

Captain Zissou, I believe the argument is thus: why spend the $100 million when you can get the $600 million in dense, walkable TODs without spending the $100 million? Now, I'm not making that argument. A TOD without a transit component seems like a wasted opportunity, but if I were a bean counter, one could make that argument stick.

You can't have a TOD without transit.  You can modify development and land use regulations for a walkable project, but it will not be a TOD.  I also don't think it's a good idea to build transit for the sake of building transit.  I'd come from an angle of economic development stimulation.  In Jacksonville, we have an urban core that developed around mass transit and the mass transit component was removed.  Since that removal, public policy, social and development patterns have resulted in these former transit oriented districts to decline.  Now this city claims to want to revitalize its downtown and the surrounding neighborhoods.  It also claims to want to be a place that wants to improve its quality of life, not suffer from brain drain and to build an urban environment that is attractive for educated workforces and the companies that employ them.  Restoring what was torn out to help redirect new walkable development to the urban core is a critical economic development component, imo.  With that said, this is why you drop the $100 million in transit.  That $100 million will help stimulate the type of development we claim we want and save us from continuing to drop billions into the same old road projects that energize unsustainable sprawl.

I know that BRT isn't preferred as the Jacksonville option, and with good reason: the United States has piss-poor implementation of BRT. But the city-county-region could learn a lesson or three from the BRT systems in South America, where they connect their buses to actual, real stations, as opposed to concrete slabs on the side of the road. (Heck, DC could learn from them; it totally sucks to wait for a bus on the side of the road in the swamp heat/bitter cold/November rain.) So while Jax probably shouldn't use BRT for their mass transit system, they could take the lessons of simple station design from Curtiba's BRT and create a bus system that links to the light rail system...with station that folks would want to use.

If your goal is sustainable economic development, then BRT is a waste.  It's going to cost you just as much money as rail and you're not going to get the same level of economic development.  The fact that we have to go outside of this country (where public policies are completely different) to find decent examples is very telling indeed.

[AaroniusLives]

Am I disputing the value of these TODs? Of course not. In many ways, they represent a phenomenal first step towards a New Urban future. You have to start somewhere, correct? I'd rather have people driving to a TOD and then experience the enjoyment of a pedestrian-friendly environment than not. But until the islands link into a continuous fabric (and in that case, transit use should skyrocket,) people are merely trading "driving from nowhere to nowhere" for "driving from nowhere to somewhere."

You're coming from a more suburban TOD view but within urban areas, TODs can stimulate additional connectivity and vibrancy in existing urban districts.  Using DC as an example, many of the new developments along the Green Line around Columbia Heights and U Street do just that.

From an economic development angle, this is what attracts me to good mass transit the most.  This type of investment has been proven to redirect growth in distressed and underutilized urban communities that were originally developed for twice as much density as they have today.  In Jacksonville, neighborhoods that would fit this bill include Durkeeville, Springfield, New Springfield, Brooklyn, LaVilla and the Eastside.

thelakelander, the key difference, of course, between DC and Jacksonville, is that DC didn't tear itself apart to make the environment more habitable to cars. Columbia Heights and the U Street corridor may both have benefited from TOD, but even without the shiny new urban Target, the condos over housing and the rest, they'd still be "urban." To put this another way, a great many people moved to Columbia Heights long before they designated the area as a TOD. You got a lot of beautiful housing stock for the money, you got a grid of streets that led to transit, and you got to be an urban pioneer.

The new community popping in DC is Shaw/LeDroit Park, neither of which has done a thing regarding new TOD, but since the fabric of pedestrian urbanity was never torn asunder for the sake of automobile traffic, even when people were fleeing into the hinterland suburbia melee, it never ceased to be a traditional urban environment. Does having Metrorail access enhance it? Of course, as does several bus lines, as does a fabric of streets with houses, shops and the rest already in place. DC has it much, much easier than most other cities in the country (for many reasons,) specifically because a great deal of it's pre-automobile infrastructure is in place, is in use.

The challenge for Jacksonville is to not only reactivate those places that were once urban and thriving, but in many cases, to refit those places as well, since they've been carved up, rezoned and replanned for the age of the car. Transit, will..of course, help those prospects.

As for "coming from a more suburban TOD view," that's for a couple of reasons. In the first place, the very fabric of the downtown core has been torn up by a series of highways, no? That's an endemic problem for most American cities: they are an "urban" environment existing in a "suburban" reality. But I agree: transit will help link the city back together...and in many places, as demonstrated via the photo tours on this site, TOD isn't necessary, the infrastructure is awaiting reactivation into it's original urban purpose.

The second reason is that you need to involve the suburbs in this transformation as well. They need to see the "fake downtowns" as a viable place to live and work and play. For many of them, they won't be the urban pioneers taking a risk by moving into the core...but they will visit the core and begin to appreciate a slice or urban life through their "island TOD."

Heck, I live in the city, and I'm not an urban pioneer. I'm not moving to Shaw or LeDroit Park or even Columbia Heights while it's still in between crack-and-commerce town. I'm not saying that to appear elitist (although I suspect that it does make me, in fact, elitist. I own it.) But I am saying that as an example of a suburbanite drawn to TOD in the 'burbs, where it's marketed as the best of both worlds: the safety of the suburbs (despite all the statistics that show that suburbia ain't safe,) the newness of the suburbs, and the "excitement" and "opportunities" of the cities. Before the real estate crash, I sold tons of these communities in exactly this manner. And periodically, such as in my work for your failed "The Shipyards" for LandMar, we had to sell the safety AND privacy as much as the connectivity and pedestrian-friendliness (that didn't really exist.) You can't leave out the 'burbs.

If your goal is sustainable economic development, then BRT is a waste.  It's going to cost you just as much money as rail and you're not going to get the same level of economic development.  The fact that we have to go outside of this country (where public policies are completely different) to find decent examples is very telling indeed. 

Firstly, I wasn't suggesting that Jacksonville implement BRT. Lord knows light rail is better (and even the suggestion gets virtual eggs thrown at the doofus on the stage at this site.  )

I was suggesting a way to make the bus system be more premium, however, but using the lessons of BRT systems elsewhere to make the "stops" into "stations." That's all.

As for BRT being a waste, in North America, that's certainly true. We haven't adequately approached anything resembling a true BRT. LA's metroliner lines suuuuuuuuck, for example. However, if 85% of Curtiba residents use their BRT every day, there is an argument for a comprehensive implementation of BRT. That we don't have a viable example of said implementation yet stateside, doesn't mean that the ideas behind it are bunk. (The enclosed stations should be implemented for every bus system in the country, IMHO.)

[thelakelander]

Am I disputing the value of these TODs? Of course not. In many ways, they represent a phenomenal first step towards a New Urban future. You have to start somewhere, correct? I'd rather have people driving to a TOD and then experience the enjoyment of a pedestrian-friendly environment than not. But until the islands link into a continuous fabric (and in that case, transit use should skyrocket,) people are merely trading "driving from nowhere to nowhere" for "driving from nowhere to somewhere."

You're coming from a more suburban TOD view but within urban areas, TODs can stimulate additional connectivity and vibrancy in existing urban districts.  Using DC as an example, many of the new developments along the Green Line around Columbia Heights and U Street do just that.

From an economic development angle, this is what attracts me to good mass transit the most.  This type of investment has been proven to redirect growth in distressed and underutilized urban communities that were originally developed for twice as much density as they have today.  In Jacksonville, neighborhoods that would fit this bill include Durkeeville, Springfield, New Springfield, Brooklyn, LaVilla and the Eastside.

thelakelander, the key difference, of course, between DC and Jacksonville, is that DC didn't tear itself apart to make the environment more habitable to cars. Columbia Heights and the U Street corridor may both have benefited from TOD, but even without the shiny new urban Target, the condos over housing and the rest, they'd still be "urban." To put this another way, a great many people moved to Columbia Heights long before they designated the area as a TOD. You got a lot of beautiful housing stock for the money, you got a grid of streets that led to transit, and you got to be an urban pioneer.

I agree.  I normally use sunbelt sprawlers like Charlotte as an example but threw a few DC hoods into my earlier post since that's where you're currently located.  Like DC's Columbia Heights, locally inner city neighborhoods like Springfield, Durkeeville and Brentwood are already urban.  These former streetcar suburbs have a grid of streets, beautiful dense housing stock and a mix of uses to build upon.  In these places, transit and TOD will serve as vital conduits liking them back to downtown and other areas of the city while also spurring infill pedestrian friendly development in the process.

The challenge for Jacksonville is to not only reactivate those places that were once urban and thriving, but in many cases, to refit those places as well, since they've been carved up, rezoned and replanned for the age of the car. Transit, will..of course, help those prospects.

I agree again.  Most are still in decent physical shape.  One area that will be a significant challenge is the retrofitting of Jacksonville's early inner ring automobile dependent suburbs. These areas don't have many of the physical assets still associated with Jacksonville's older neighborhoods.  

As for "coming from a more suburban TOD view," that's for a couple of reasons. In the first place, the very fabric of the downtown core has been torn up by a series of highways, no? That's an endemic problem for most American cities: they are an "urban" environment existing in a "suburban" reality. But I agree: transit will help link the city back together...and in many places, as demonstrated via the photo tours on this site, TOD isn't necessary, the infrastructure is awaiting reactivation into it's original urban purpose.

We're probably talking semantics here but it sounds like we're saying the same thing.  I've just included the reactivation and adaptive reuse of existing urban stock as a form of TOD as well.

The second reason is that you need to involve the suburbs in this transformation as well. They need to see the "fake downtowns" as a viable place to live and work and play. For many of them, they won't be the urban pioneers taking a risk by moving into the core...but they will visit the core and begin to appreciate a slice or urban life through their "island TOD."

Definitely agree.  In no case am I advocating leaving out the suburbs.  However, I do recognize that a phased implementation approach may be best in getting things underway locally.

If your goal is sustainable economic development, then BRT is a waste.  It's going to cost you just as much money as rail and you're not going to get the same level of economic development.  The fact that we have to go outside of this country (where public policies are completely different) to find decent examples is very telling indeed.  

Firstly, I wasn't suggesting that Jacksonville implement BRT. Lord knows light rail is better (and even the suggestion gets virtual eggs thrown at the doofus on the stage at this site.  )

I was suggesting a way to make the bus system be more premium, however, but using the lessons of BRT systems elsewhere to make the "stops" into "stations." That's all.

I'm an advocate of this as well and have mentioned it many times.  However, i'd like to see JTA start running such a service immediately by retrofitting their existing system instead of waiting years for all the "BRT" associated bells and whistles.

As for BRT being a waste, in North America, that's certainly true. We haven't adequately approached anything resembling a true BRT. LA's metroliner lines suuuuuuuuck, for example. However, if 85% of Curtiba residents use their BRT every day, there is an argument for a comprehensive implementation of BRT.

Without fully understanding how that country's government is set up and how their policies compare to America's I'd be hesitant to use them as an example.  Nevertheless, looking at their dedicated busway system, that would cost us just as much as rail to set up here.  In that event, why bother?

That we don't have a viable example of said implementation yet stateside, doesn't mean that the ideas behind it are bunk. (The enclosed stations should be implemented for every bus system in the country, IMHO.)

I'd rather do what we know works instead of experimenting on unproven theory (at least in America).  I say this because in the past, we've shot ourselves in the foot several times experimenting instead of just investing in proven theory.

[AaroniusLives]

OK, so I've done a little homework on BRT. It seems that successful implementation of the systems involves a complete execution, as in:

• dedicated lanes
  dedicated, exclusive roadways
  upgraded stations
  massive implementation

So, the reason that Curtiba's system works as well as it does is because Curtiba essentially built a highway/roadway combination specifically for their BRT system. This is also true for TransMillenio as well.

This contrasts highly with "BRT" as it's implemented in the United States, which I believe you generally stated, thelakelander. It appears that US municipalities use the idea of BRT to upgrade bus systems without actually creating a true bus rapid transit system. In other words, they do exactly what you shouldn't do in any transit system implementation, which is to half-ass it. So, with the exception of LA's Metroliner lines or the South Miami-Dade Busway, we don't have true BRT in the States. Moreover, LA's Orange Line is at-or-near capacity, so while it's a successful BRT line (and still kind of half-baked, as it runs at street grade, although on a dedicated busway,) it needs to be upgraded to some form of rail transit (and hysterically, because of politics, it has to be a subway and not a light rail.)

What hysterical about both the Orange Line AND the South Miami-Dade Busway is that they ripped up existing rail lines to lay down pavement for a busway! Moreover, in South Miami-Dade Busway's case nobody was using the rail line, and the rail line/busway begins where the freakin' MetroFail ends. That's nucking futs.

It appears that Tampa/Hillsborough county is actually taking the BRT concept a step backward, as their implementation will only use existing streets, will have outdoor, slightly upgraded bus stations, and will have signal priority.

So, after a day of looking, I'm in total agreement. We can't or won't do BRT effectively in the States. Light Rail or above all the way.   

[thelakelander]

^Yes, BRT works best when the system has dedicated infrastructure.  However, that dedicated infrastructure cost just as much or more as flat out building rail.

[CS Foltz]

Well......seeing how we don't even have 100% shelter coverage and won't for the next 20 yrs, as has been pointed out................BRT, the JTA way, will be half done and like most of JTA projects will  have as much success!

[stjr]

BRT, Skyway... I say these side shows just take away focus and resources from the solutions that provide the most bang for buck: commuter rail, streetcars, a first class bus system, sidewalks, and bikeways. 

Why do we have to keep falling in love with the unproven or dis-proven snazzy idea of the day and avoid the solutions that have stood the test of time for over a century or longer?

[JeffreyS]

It is horrible that we even considered BRT with the rail infrastructure already in place in Jacksonville. our rail lines also all converge on a beautiful historic station in our downtown.  I am not in favor of tearing down our skyway but it is not the answer. Commuter rail and Streetcar Now!!!

[Ocklawaha]

OK, so I've done a little homework on BRT. It seems that successful implementation of the systems involves a complete execution, as in:

• dedicated lanes
  dedicated, exclusive roadways
  upgraded stations
  massive implementation

So, the reason that Curtiba's system works as well as it does is because Curtiba essentially built a highway/roadway combination specifically for their BRT system. This is also true for TransMillenio as well.

As a dual national aka: COLOMBIAN and AMERICAN, I would do an injustice to our city if I didn't jump in on this Aaronius.

Actually, the TransMillenio system is a national joke in Colombia. Though Bogota is the largest city and the capitol, Medellin, Bogota and Cali are always in a close competition for a superior quality of life. Medellin built Heavy Rail and Rope Cableway's, Bogota built a MUCH bigger and complex system of BRT, and Cali is just getting some BRT and standard rail up and running (Cali is always a bit slow, I think it's the heat in the Cauca Valley HA!)  Today Medellin is expanding it's metro in several directions one of which will eventually be a mountain climbing railroad to connect the international airport up on a high plateau with the city. Cali is carefully watching but slowly rebuilding it's traditional rail system (American 3' foot gauge). Bogota's highly praised system is in virtual gridlock! Works? Hardly! Military police swarm the place just to keep riots from breaking out. The system is beautiful and a team of workers wash and scrub 24/7 because the big diesel buses spew filth over every inch of the stations and roadways. Today, the big secret (you can't sell BRT TECH if the world knows your secret) is the lousy TransMilenio is being undermined... BY A NEW SUBWAY - METRO! Not only that but the National Railroad system is back in business (wonder how THAT happened...hee hee) and Commuter Rail is right around the corner. BRT will make an excellent feeder network but it should NEVER have been built as the main or trunk line of the city.

THIS PRESENTATION HAS A GRAPHIC THAT DEMONSTRATES HOW BRT (or a Skyway) BECOMES A VITAL LINK IN A MUCH BIGGER SYSTEM
http://www.youtube.com/v/tIdHDGDoIzI&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&border=1


CURTIBA, is experiencing the EXACT SAME THING... BRT is a great compliment to any mass transit system but it fails when it is thrust into the role as the mainline. Once again, new RAIL METRO right around the corner in Curtiba. Why? Just as you never bring a knife to a gun fight, you don't run a bus where a railroad should be. Understand if you will that the average traffic velocity in Curtiba is LESS THEN 15 MPH! BRT runs at the astounding speed of 12-13 MPH average...  and JTA thinks that will improve Jacksonville? Hardly. Remember BRT as an answer FAILS, as a compliment it SUCCEEDS.

http://www.youtube.com/v/ZSgyYbQbDvE&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&border=1

This contrasts highly with "BRT" as it's implemented in the United States, which I believe you generally stated, thelakelander. It appears that US municipalities use the idea of BRT to upgrade bus systems without actually creating a true bus rapid transit system. In other words, they do exactly what you shouldn't do in any transit system implementation, which is to half-ass it. So, with the exception of LA's Metroliner lines or the South Miami-Dade Busway, we don't have true BRT in the States. Moreover, LA's Orange Line is at-or-near capacity, so while it's a successful BRT line (and still kind of half-baked, as it runs at street grade, although on a dedicated busway,) it needs to be upgraded to some form of rail transit (and hysterically, because of politics, it has to be a subway and not a light rail.)

BRT is not a "thing" it is a cover term for a "cafe" of bus improvements. In other words, Miami has REAL BRT, so does Eugene, Oregon, and Cleveland, and Boston, and depending on how we tweek it, one could call parts of the current JTA plans in downtown ---properly---BRT.  My own concepts for a Jacksonville TRANSIT system, would actually include many more miles of BRT then what JTA has or had on the drawing boards. The investment in various "toys" would be limited as the role of this larger system would be connectivity. TRUE BRT yes, Bogota, Santiago or Adelaide? NOT!

What hysterical about both the Orange Line AND the South Miami-Dade Busway is that they ripped up existing rail lines to lay down pavement for a busway! Moreover, in South Miami-Dade Busway's case nobody was using the rail line, and the rail line/busway begins where the freakin' MetroFail ends. That's nucking futs.

Miami was a complete rail line, while the Orange Line had but a small segment of an old rail line intact. I was in Miami when construction was completed on this fiasco and had to shake my head at the stupidity of Florida. A single rail diesel car shuttling back and forth all day would have been a quick solution and I probably could have had such a system up and running for under $20 Million, while the boys on the bus spent $88.8 Million. Of course little Jebbie (I love Oil) Bush, and GW, and Daddy all cheered.  Amazingly our own BRT transportation think-tank CUTR in Tampa has told us BRT could have higher capacity then rail provided it runs on 2 second headways! Oh the humanity! Our FDOT representative stood facing the crowd last week as he told us FDOT has "always" sought to include "all modes" as we are truely an intermodal state, in fact we have "ALWAYS" supported Amtrak.
He sadly didn't explain how Carolina, California and even Oklahoma and Maine have added all manner of train services while our own network dwindled from 12 daily trains to 2.

It appears that Tampa/Hillsborough county is actually taking the BRT concept a step backward, as their implementation will only use existing streets, will have outdoor, slightly upgraded bus stations, and will have signal priority.

Exactly as it should be done, with very limited use of exclusive lanes or busways, many of the normal operating delays can be defeated with Que-Jumper lanes and signal priority. If I were designing the connector system in Jacksonville, I'd be looking at: que-jumper lanes, signal priority, real time information, enclosed AC stations at major stops or junctions, some park and ride capabilities, no onboard fare collection, radio and video monitored buses and stations, and a transit police force. The only major busway would connect North Main Street to Moncrief Road parallel to the rebuilt "S" LINE, aka: Jacksonville Belt Railroad.

So, after a day of looking, I'm in total agreement. We can't or won't do BRT effectively in the States. Light Rail or above all the way. 

We can, and we do, frankly our city needs ALL OF THE ABOVE!
http://www.youtube.com/v/mkR0LO1kG6g&hl=en_US&fs=1&rel=0&color1=0x402061&color2=0x9461ca&border=1


OCKLAWAHA 

[Timkin]

cool video... If only in Jacksonville................................................

[stjr]

We can, and we do, frankly our city needs ALL OF THE ABOVE!

Ock, you want Jax to go from the stone age to the space age in mass transit at warp speed.  With the laughable JTA at the helm who can't even get a few bus shelters built to support a third class bus system, an FDOT/JTA/political bias toward road building ad infinitum, and a failed Skyway representing mass transit in the eyes of many of our citizens, I think you need to pace your mass transit expectations.

I support much of your mass transit vision, but I see the need to pursue it incrementally whereas you seem to indiscriminately want it all at once.  What is your "doable" plan for the real world we live in?  You need to prioritize and prove out step 1 before selling step 2.  To ask for all of it as one is to risk getting none.

I would be happy, as a start, if they fixed the bus system, implemented street cars, and started commuter rail with redirected resources from a bagged Outer Beltway and like road projects due to a moratorium on urban sprawl creators.  Maximum bang for the buck as I have noted frequently.  In this town, those projects are at 20 years from fruition. 

Figure out the rest when that's done.  With some experience under our belt, new technologies, updates on growth and demographics, and changes in lifestyles, we may have all new ideas as to what to do for an encore.

[Ocklawaha]

Absolutely it would have to be done in increments, though those increments could include slow improvements and additions across the board as far as mode is concerned. For example "REAL TIME INFORMATION", the Skyway already has it, and the bus system needs it (major stops) and BOTH need Google Bus or NEXTBUS tracking technology.

Keep in mind I was merely responding to a reader that seemed to be buying into a This mode or That mode line of thinking. If I'm about anything at all on here it is that ALL TRANSIT has it's place in the system and we should never have to choose with an "either or" new start.

OCKLAWAHA