Are JTA's Downtown Amtrak Plans Already Outdated?

dougskiles · January 16, 2011, 10:34:54 AM

Following the conversation on the 'current courthouse' thread about the train station at Prime Osborne lead me to read this thread about the JTA intermodal monster. Does anyone know where JTA is on the design, permitting, construction schedule? Is it too late for a new mayor to have an influence over the direction this thing is taking?

thelakelander · January 16, 2011, 10:46:13 AM

JTA should be pretty far along in design (I wouldn't be suprised if design is already at the 90% level), considering they submitted the project as being "shovel ready." Considering Rick Scott's position with HSR, unless financing is already in place and ground is broken, a new leader could have a strong amount of influence on the direction that it takes.

dougskiles · January 16, 2011, 10:50:14 AM

Good. Well, let's continue to be loud and clear about it with whomever will listen.

As noone likes to say, keep score, be concerned.

tufsu1 · January 16, 2011, 11:51:33 AM

as I understand it, some folks at JTA have been fighting tooth-and-nail against doing any redesign of the intermodal center....but take heart, they've been fighting pro-redesign folks at JTA....and I believe some changes (albeit minimal) are now in process.

dougskiles · January 16, 2011, 11:55:44 AM

Quote from: tufsu1 on January 16, 2011, 11:51:33 AM
as I understand it, some folks at JTA have been fighting tooth-and-nail against doing any redesign of the intermodal center....but take heart, they've been fighting pro-redesign folks at JTA....and I believe some changes (albeit minimal) are now in process.

Good news - and from what I understand, they may have a design, but no funding lined up for construction. It is a shame that we keep wasting money on design, but better to do that than waste $100 million - particularly when half is for a new JTA office building.

tufsu1 · January 16, 2011, 09:52:26 PM

the FDOT 5-year work program once again includes $ for the office building component....which will also contain the Traffic Information Center....JTA will partially fund (as will the TPO) and some tranit upgrades are included

dougskiles · January 17, 2011, 06:36:35 AM

Would the construction of the office building (as currently designed) prevent the remainder of the site from being altered to a more sensible plan?

thelakelander · January 17, 2011, 06:52:09 AM

No. However, we should probably focus on actually improving transit connectivity instead of building an office building first. If new office space is desired, the Northbank is full of empty available buildings. However, what will suck is if we can't get that convention center out of there before anything north of Forsyth Street is constructed.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2009-dec-a-closer-look-at-the-transportation-center

Get the convention center out and you'll have the ability to place all modes adjacent to each other. Connectivity and clustering complementing uses in a compact setting makes transit easier to use and creates synergy which spurs additional opportunities for complementing retail and services.

Jaxson · January 17, 2011, 09:59:47 AM

I have questions about this intermodal transit center, its planning and its construction.
1. Why does JTA need to reinvent the wheel with a lot of new construction that is sprawled out over several blocks? I have been to the Amtrak/bus terminal in St. Louis, Missouri. It is compact and easy to get around.
2. Why can't we phase in this complex - with us moving Amtrak into the terminal building now (And maybe the Greyhound station, too)? I do not see any progress with this project and only hear about the latest news on metrojacksonville. I sometimes feel like we are the only ones who care about this...

dougskiles · January 17, 2011, 10:15:21 AM

Now the need for a new convention center location is becoming clearer to me. I know it is far from ideal in location to hotels, but what is planned for the fairgrounds area once they move it to Cecil? Could it be used temporarily for convention space until a more permanent facility is constructed? Just from looking at the aerial, it appears to have 100,000 sq. ft. of roof. Granted, not all of that is conditioned space. It certainly isn't any less connected than the Prime Osborne.

thelakelander · January 17, 2011, 10:22:41 AM

Quote from: Jaxson on January 17, 2011, 09:59:47 AM
I have questions about this intermodal transit center, its planning and its construction.
1. Why does JTA need to reinvent the wheel with a lot of new construction that is sprawled out over several blocks? I have been to the Amtrak/bus terminal in St. Louis, Missouri. It is compact and easy to get around.

Because no one in power has the balls to address the convention center issue head on.

Quote2. Why can't we phase in this complex - with us moving Amtrak into the terminal building now (And maybe the Greyhound station, too)? I do not see any progress with this project and only hear about the latest news on metrojacksonville. I sometimes feel like we are the only ones who care about this...

We can. It's just not JTA's main priority with this particular project. They want that expensive office building put up first.

Does anyone know why it would not be ideal to purchase or lease one of the Northbank's several empty office buildings instead of constructing a new facility?

dougskiles · January 17, 2011, 10:38:22 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on January 17, 2011, 10:22:41 AM
Does anyone know why it would not be ideal to purchase or lease one of the Northbank's several empty office buildings instead of constructing a new facility?

I think you already answered the question at the top of your post responding to why convention center issue hasn't been addressed head on.

tufsu1 · January 17, 2011, 11:25:03 AM

to be fair, its not just JTA....FDOT and the TPO are also partners in the Traffic Management Center/office building....in fact, JTA had been stalling for so long that the TPO and FDOT were about to take their $ and walk.....that got JTA moving

stjr · January 17, 2011, 12:02:25 PM

TPO = JTA and FDOT. No difference. TPO is just a rubber stamp/pawn for appearances (witness Tufsu's invocation of their name as if this made the project somehow more creditable.) I know Tufsu will come to their defense but won't convince me otherwise based on reality that TPO never rejects JTA and/or FDOT endorsed projects.

Ocklawaha · January 17, 2011, 12:15:23 PM

The DOT-FDOT-JTA-TPO relationship? Sir Winston had it right, â€œriddle wrapped in a mystery inside an enigma."

In defense of the JTA-TPO office building on the site as opposed to elsewhere consider that if you built a discount store in Durkeeville, you wouldn't want the regisiters in LaVilla. There is merit in having it all in one building, and if indeed we someday manage to coax a sepperate "transit agency" or "rail authority," from the mix, just use the third office down the hall on the right. This does not mean that they couldn't all be located in the downtown core, can you just imagine the Skyway traffic between the two sites?

TU? Those rail side changes might be a whole lot bigger then you suspect...

OCKLAWAHA