With a rapidly expanding port setting off a new land boom in Jacksonville, I am confident that we will see the revival of many a downtown project. We could well see the best times any of us have ever dreamed of, just around the corner. I, being an incurable romantic, might have been the lone Confederate at Gettysburg, yelling, "Just one more rock to throw and we'll win this damned fight!" Just so you understand my point of view, so here is my "A" list. Things we have NEVER CONSIDERED HERE! In my never so humble opinion, we could really use the leadership to go after 3 major projects that we have not approached in these boards:
(http://www.herronrail.com/Images/Gallery/jaxterm.jpg)
Photo of our one time huge Terminal Railroad, this COULD BE for freight as well
1. A City Owned, Joint Terminal Railroad, along the lines of THE JACKSONVILLE TERMINAL COMPANY, that would reconstruct the former ACL bridge over the Trout River. Also connect the City Terminal at Talleyrand, with the trackage to Hecksher Drive and Blount Island. Much of this trackage is in place, a good deal of the missing route, the Trout River Bridge and such WERE in place 30 years ago. We just need to put them back. Yes, I understand there is a light density railroad bridge over the Trout now, and perhaps CSX would sell it to the City and negate the need to build a new one. But the older bridge has a draw-span which is expensive to operate and maintain, building a true modern bridge with several tracks and using a joint access plan would allow our shipping access to 3 major railroads, and one shortline.
(http://www.southeastroads.com/florida001/us-001_nb_kinney_tunnel_02.jpg)
The Kinney Tunnel in downtown Fort Lauderdale, Florida
2. It's time to re-build or re-think the Dames Point/Captain Broward Bridge. This beautiful bridge does not score high in the national safety rankings and it is now a REAL danger and road block to our becoming a World Port leader. The JTA folks just built the darn thing WAY TOO LOW. Perhaps we need to study a tunnel? Perhaps a bridge AND tunnel under the channel? Mobile, Alabama, which is as Coastal and low lying as our riverfront, has several under harbor tunnels, So does Virginia, Michigan, Maryland, New Jersey, and New York. Why not Jacksonville, if that single bridge is blocking thousands upon thousands of future jobs and a building boom?
(http://www.hebners.net/amtrak/amtStationAB/BakersfieldCAa.jpg)
Bakersfield, California, a fraction of our size built THIS new terminal for Passenger Rail.
3. IF and that is a BIG IF, the City decides to go the safe route (imagine that!) and keep the Prime Osbourne as our Convention Center. If the promised development of LaVilla comes about along with the expansion of the Prime Osbourne, then it's time to do sometime unique. We should take a serious look at building a new "UNION STATION" perhaps on the Brooklyn side of McCoys Creek. Perhaps 1/3 as large as the original, we should create a rail center every bit as Fantastic, or Greek, or Art Deco, or Futuristic as JTA plans for the SUPER-BUS CENTER. The Lee-Park Street Viaduct should be re-re-built to allow the passage of trains under the North End, which JTA closed up. A steeper grade might buy us 2 or 3 more tracks for commuter rail, light rail and Amtrak.
With the Northeast Corridor loudly saying it is coming to Florida. With the CSX application for CORRIDOR expansion from Washington DC to Miami via Jax. We're beyond remiss if we don't act fast, I'd say we're a Daisy if we don't...
That's my view, what's yours?
Ocklawaha
All fantastic ideas Ock. Industry, tourism, and travel are the cornerstones of the Jacksonville boom at the turn of the century. There is no reason to believe that these very things won't do the same for the region if moved back to the top of the priority list.
The only thing I would change is actually moving the convention center to the riverfront and then shifting the proposed transportation center to the Prime Osborne site and refurbishing Union Terminal to bring it back to its glory days.
I think we're stuck with the Dames Point. Is it even 20 years old?
Its really close. I think it was finished in 89 maybe?
The Dames Point is pretty new but then it's numbers really stink on the "bridge score". Perhaps that would give us the chance to fund a major re-build or re-think. Right now the funds to fix bridges are on the front burner.
Jason, I agree that Union Station is the BEST of the BEST for Passenger Rail. My project would only fly IF they don't move the convention center. Keeping it there makes the station jump through too many hoops to be of any real use as a Center of rail commerce, IMO.
Ocklawaha
It took years and years to finally get the Dames point bridge. If the port expansion rivals the boon in Dubai we would possibly get a new higher bridge or perhaps a tunnel. Otherwise I agree with Lake, I think we're stuck with the Damespoint. I have always wondered why we never got a tunnel here. Even Mobile, Al has one.
It's possible we ARE stuck with it, at least the towers and supports. But with us on the cusp of becoming the 4 largest port in the USA, there are a dozen more sources of that money for bridge or crossing expansion that will open to us. The important thing is, we need to not do "The Jacksonville Two Step," and roll over saying the bridge is the best we can do. Example, if our football stadium would have been built in 89, would that have stopped us from knocking it down and building another for the Jags? Bet not! This port is on the brink of true World greatness, if we clamor for the fix, there will be many ways to fund it... Ways we've never seen before.
Ocklawaha
New York is dealing with the same problem that we have with the Dames Point.
QuoteThe Bayonne Bridge, completed in 1931, connects Bayonne, NJ and Staten Island, NY. The world’s fourth longest steel arch bridge, it stands 151 feet above the Kill van Kull tidal strait. It is this 151 foot height above mean water level that presents the problem for container ships travelling to reach the container terminals at Staten Island and Port Newark. Some container ships today are too high to pass under the bridge, but this problem will become worse when the Panama Canal expansion is completed, and the next generation of larger container ships, called “Post-Panamax†vessels, will be afloat. In this seventh segment of The Infrastructure Show podcast series, Host Professor Joseph Schofer, Director of Northwestern University's Infrastructure Technology Institute, and Co-Host Tom Herman of Vocalo.org, talk with Frank McDonough, President of the New York Shipping Association, about the challenge the Bayonne Bridge presents to New York and New Jersey shipping, and the options that have been discussed to address the bridge’s height problem. (13 min.) For more information, see the web-site: www.theinfrastructureshow.com.
Audio:
http://www.vocalo.org/files/media_mover/ffmpeg/converted/8/Bayonne_Bridge.mp3.mp3
In Tampa, are they going to replace the Sunshine Skyway Bridge when it too is too small for the newest Cruise Ships?
The cost to replace the Dames Point would be more than the benefit to come from ships. All land East of the Dames Point is in danger of Imminent Domain by the JPA to help grow the port.
Doesn't Genosee & Wyoming control the Tallyrand Rail system now? Why would we want to add a city funded rail system to a bloated utility like the JEA? Are you a closet big government guy?
Quote from: mtraininjax on December 23, 2009, 10:23:16 PM
In Tampa, are they going to replace the Sunshine Skyway Bridge when it too is too small for the newest Cruise Ships?
The cost to replace the Dames Point would be more than the benefit to come from ships. All land East of the Dames Point is in danger of Imminent Domain by the JPA to help grow the port.
Doesn't Genosee & Wyoming control the Tallyrand Rail system now? Why would we want to add a city funded rail system to a bloated utility like the JEA? Are you a closet big government guy?
NO! NO! NO! mtrain, my idea is for municipal ownership of the rest of the trackage from Yulee, or Kingsland/Riceboro all the way to Jacksonville Terminal via the "S" as well and all trackage east of the old F&J North-South line (Maxwell House north through Springfield - Panama - Trout River - Bush - Airport Road - Yulee). This same trackage would then be LEASED back to a terminal road such as G&W's Talleyrand Terminal, Rail America, First Coast RR, or Watco (all have a presence in Jacksonville already).
Talleyrand Terminal operates the former Municipal Docks and Terminal Railroad of Jacksonville. We once had several other terminal roads in town, REX, USN (3), Mayport Terminal Company, Atlantic and East Coast Terminal, MD&T, JAXPORT (the original Blount Island Operation), Jacksonville Terminal Company, St. Johns River Terminal Company, and the Watco Terminals, as well as several other Port and Industrial Railways.
The purpose of this City ownership would be to have the say in when and where we introduce Port Improvements (big money payback) and Commuter Rail (an eternal investment that needs tight control). Hell I don't want the City or JTA or JPA or JAA or, or, or, anywhere near these tracks for operations. Let the railroaders run the railroads, we'll call in occasional plays (improvements) from the sidelines.
Are you with me?
OCKLAWAHA
Ock - The City can't even balance their own budgets. How do you expect to have City Ownership of any venture that is self-sustaining? The track record here is pitiful.
The only way I ever see rail working in this town, is with something at SJTC. That has become to the center of the city, like it or not, so the first rail project, whatever it is, will involve the St Johns Town Center core. You can run rail down the middle of JTB to FEC, you can build a system to connect the buildings to each other, but something rail-oriented will be part of SJTC. It is the most popular place in Jacksonville, and now with "Whiskey River" (who dreams up these names), it will continue to grow and expand.
I agree that STJTC would make a great spot to focus a beach bound rail link, swing into the FEC right of way and head into downtown Jacksonville Terminal. This would be killer good for the city and the mall, but I don't expect anything will be done as Mr. Clem has already told us "Light rail is not a good fit for Jacksonville..." So watch for your town center to be linked by some form of "super bus," costing more then light rail, and doing much less.
The office complexes between Philips Highway and Town Center would be a great test bed for the new PRT ultra light monorails to feed the Light Rail, which until we see real change, will never happen.
OCKLAWAHA
LRT in Jax is a pipe dream at this point and BRT is proposed to run down Beach instead of JTB. The only thing SJTC will be served by is regular local bus service.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 17, 2007, 10:50:23 PM
2. It's time to re-build or re-think the Dames Point/Captain Broward Bridge. This beautiful bridge does not score high in the national safety rankings and it is now a REAL danger and road block to our becoming a World Port leader. The JTA folks just built the darn thing WAY TOO LOW.
Ock, the crime is that JPA, the City, and JTA were told the bridge was both too low and that the towers' locations so close to the channel were a danger to maritime navigation by the bridge's critics at the time including the Jacksonville Shipyards.
But the GOB's land owning friends smelled a killing and needed the bridge built on the cheap which meant lowering the clearance and reducing the span distance. Building on the cheap was necessary at the time because it was to be a toll bridge and if the bridge were to cost more, the tolls would have had to be so high that the traffic counts would be too low, not generating the funds to service the financing bonds. In short, another GOB, cheap-*ss, get-it-done-future-be-damned project. Just like the courthouse, convention center, Adams Mark/Hyatt, etc. Everyone a failure and/or regret.
stjr.........like you stated, GOB Network hard at it! They are busy lining their pockets at our expense!
Ock .....I have to ask - Does Columbia subsidize their Mass Transit systems also? That have never come up the the discussions!
CS...even Europe subsidizes their transit systems....either directly or indirecly
For example, gas costs 2-3 times what it does here and that's all taxes...which does two things
1. discourages people from driving
2. provides funding for transit
Thanks big guy........already know about that! Funding for trasit has to come from somewhere for sure! Europe is one thing and not sure nor have heard about South America!
Yup, and it's getting bigger as the young economies surge forward. Subsidy's are seen as providing safety in transporte as sin subsidy's the private companies or drivers race each other from stop to stop. There is no shortage of passengers or freight, but the economics are something like living in Tombstone circa 1882. The transporte unions are fighting for subsidy's to level the playing fields and tame the frontier.
Oh yeah CS, it's Col O mbia - Colombia, not Columbia (which is somewhere north of us) HEE HEE.
OCKLAWAHA
Thanks Ock............trying to stay focused and keep on eye on one five and one twelve is stretching my multitasking ability! I can see where there is some subsidy to most all mass transit systems but question why? If the initial cost is paid for by a private concern or consortium, initial system is lean, cost effective and efficient maybe you can explain why it must be subsidized? Everything I have been involved with made money and kept doors open, paid bills........I do not see why Mass Transit could not do the same thing! Biggest expense to start would be ROW, tracks, equipment and stations.......then cost connected with personnel, operators, maintenance and support personnel. Part of their salary could be stock to ensure success across the operating spectrum or points for the same benefit redeemed yearly after 5 years(vested)......couple of different scenarios that could do the same thing but bottom line rules all!
(http://inlinethumb56.webshots.com/18679/2847318730104969885S600x600Q85.jpg)
Well fed Motormen WILL pass inspection every time!
The Skyway is a great example CS, just because it's exaggerated. We have just under $200 million dollars, invested. 24 cars, a 600 volt dc electric system, an elevated track, stations, car barn, computer controls out the wazoo, parts facility, garage, techies, mechanics, porters, and we get 1,200 people a day, 313,000 annual passengers on the damn thing at .50 cents each or about $156,000 dollars. Even at low wages, that wouldn't even pay 5 employees their annual salary and benefits at maybe $20,000 a year each (add in benefits).
New buses for BRT? COUNT ON $600,000 to $1 Million (hybrid or PNG/LNG). Coaches for over-the-road commutes (such as JTA's 3 worn out MCI'S) a solid $1.3 Million each. Streetcars Modern Style - $1.5 Million min. and Heritage Streetcars $500,000 - $1 Million each, and full blown Interurban/LRT cars $2.5-3.5 Million each. Monorail cars? Holy Shit Batman! They are just now (thanks to Vegas, Indonesia, Japan, China, Dubai and Moscow) becoming available at something like LRT/Streetcar prices.
Salary's UNIONIZED. Count on Rail workers being on the + side of $50,000 a year (lowest rank) and many in the +$100,000 a year technical trades.
Now to cover a single run on 10 minute headways, we could be talking about a dozen vehicles and crews each. So when you see a URBAN transit system that is running a LRT with LONG BEACH on the front destination curtain
expect you are REALLY seeing 30+ cars scattered all up and down the line.
What's that fare? $1.00 REALLY? Yeah REALLY!
OCKLAWAHA
Well..........I can see where the price is artificially suppressed to make it useable! As to a Union, I think I would be informing them ain't no way! Have written code of conduct and adhere everyone to it with no exceptions......Union is not needed! Automation would take place of crew's, plus with correct software, trains would be self maintaining to a degree and come time for real maintenance, car should be able to tell the human end where the problem is. Hub and spoke setup with electric power and each spoke has x number of cars....each one does not need to run the whole of the system length........just its spoke to its hub.....at least that's one scenario or instead of one set of tracks that stretch the entire length of system........break it down into several smaller chunks..........each chunk independent of each other but with transfer points to allow lateral or directional movement from chunk to chunk! Or you could go to a box pattern.............depending on the size of the box dictating how many trains move within the box..............I see a couple of ways to get something up and running right now!
(http://image96.webshots.com/196/5/75/9/2803575090104969885RwAiTd_ph.jpg)
Quote from: CS Foltz on December 25, 2009, 07:04:50 AM
Well..........I can see where the price is artificially suppressed to make it useable! As to a Union, I think I would be informing them ain't no way! Have written code of conduct and adhere everyone to it with no exceptions......Union is not needed!
If we're still talking costs and possibilities for Jax, then with no insult intended, I'll critique your ideas.
As for the Union, transportation workers are unionized almost universally. The union demands good conditions for the employees and this one industry, especially rail has managed to secure a professional salary and benefit package (even avoiding Social Security). Busting that union would be costly and Ed Ball is long dead. The plus side that has to be considered is the union asks for a contract to work, usually 5 years and once the details are worked out and the paper work inked, the employer and employee KNOW what is going out in labor. Quote
Automation would take place of crew's, plus with correct software, trains would be self maintaining to a degree and come time for real maintenance, car should be able to tell the human end where the problem is.
The Skyway is automated and can be entrained so your cost benefit is already in practice. The automation costs are a huge chunk of the $185,000,000 Million we spent on the thing. The fact that 75% of transportation operating expense is eaten by labor seems to have completely missed those that now want us to tear down the Skyway. In short, while capital costs are about equal to Light Rail, the operating costs are much lower. Passengers per mile - per hour PPMPH ability is much more limited on the Skyway then on Streetcars entrained. That said, the least of our worries is overcrowding of transportation, something that will haunt us until we get it right, in fact, we should be so lucky. QuoteHub and spoke setup with electric power and each spoke has x number of cars....each one does not need to run the whole of the system length........just its spoke to its hub.....at least that's one scenario or instead of one set of tracks that stretch the entire length of system.......
Rail doesn't work well with a hub and spokes system. Even the great terminals of yesteryear were generally served by trains that came in from one direction and went out by another. In this respect Blaylock at JTA has it right, transit that transcends downtown is better transit. At the risk of over simplification, a series of giant rings for streetcars, a grid for buses, and a 5 pointed star for commuter rail, all tied to a X shaped Skyway, would indeed be very connected. Of course our city would have to discover the wonders of the "Free Transfer." Quote...break it down into several smaller chunks..........each chunk independent of each other but with transfer points to allow lateral or directional movement from chunk to chunk! Or you could go to a box pattern.............depending on the size of the box dictating how many trains move within the box..............I see a couple of ways to get something up and running right now!
The only thing preventing us from being up and running right away is the bone headed City that refuses to push the projects forward. Even that is unlikely with the completely flat lined brain function of our boy prince.
Want to really piss them off? Join with me on the FREE PUBLIC TRANSIT BANDWAGON, you owe it to yourselves to at least read their material. In light of Federal and Local funding for highways, I think they have a much more valid point of investment then Obama's recent deal where you, Lunican, Lake, Steve, and I, will pay for old weird Uncle Albert's Gall Stones.
http://www.webring.com/hub?ring=001bus General Transit Information Access / Jax Transit is featured!
http://freepublictransit.org/ Free Public Transit Organization / Jax Transit is nearly top listed! (gee wonder why?)
http://www.busatx.org/farefreeproposal Sample Free Public Transit Proposal
OCKLAWAHA
Ok........thats a new one for me.............leme do some reading and I'll get back to ya! Your right, by the way, if the Boy Blunder's brain was explosive, he would not have enought to blow his nose!
Count me in Ock!
Quote from: CS Foltz on December 26, 2009, 08:22:57 AM
Ok........thats a new one for me.............leme do some reading and I'll get back to ya! Your right, by the way, if the Boy Blunder's brain was explosive, he would not have enought to blow his nose!
Man, what a beautiful thing to say! God I love this stuff. ROFLMFHO :)
BTW, if your onboard the Free Public Transit bandwagon, be ready to get grilled... I don't know how realistic the idea would be in Jacksonville, simply because of the parochial mindset of this city. Perhaps we could get a few free fare days to give this a real try, or perhaps a .25 cent flat fare. OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: mtraininjax on December 23, 2009, 10:23:16 PM
In Tampa, are they going to replace the Sunshine Skyway Bridge when it too is too small for the newest Cruise Ships?
The cost to replace the Dames Point would be more than the benefit to come from ships. All land East of the Dames Point is in danger of Imminent Domain by the JPA to help grow the port.
Doesn't Genosee & Wyoming control the Tallyrand Rail system now? Why would we want to add a city funded rail system to a bloated utility like the JEA? Are you a closet big government guy?
St. Petersburg/Bradenton, not Tampa; Sunshine Skyway is primarily maintained by Pinellas and Manatee Counties; I believe the Hillsborough line runs through the skyway, but only about 1% or so which is an almost "no factor" in the maintenance and funds issue.
"HU"
Ock.............I think your on to something! Maybe the powers that be would be of a mind to maybe consider that concept for a week............I don't think there would be much over the regular riders just for a day but for a longer period? Who knows.....they could market that concept and inform everyone to take advantage of what is available! They want to increase ridership..........they need to market in the proper perspective and using the broadest range of marketing tools!
So, CS are you willing for a tax increase to cover the cost of eliminating fares at JTA - not just for a day or week, but always? And if more people ride, there will be demand for more service - at more cost.
Oh, and I think it's a good idea, at least for the Skyway and within "downtown" (however you define DT).
Well I don't think that a "Tax Increase" is warrented at this time Mr Charles. If you look at what the fares actually bring compared to what Advertising, on the bus's, brings in...........I would bet more money comes in from that than the fares actually produce! We subsidize JTA right now and appear to not have much say in how or what is offered as far as Mass Transit is concerned! I am just pointing out that a moratorium for a period of time, say a week, to establish just how this would work is something to consider. Trial period and see just what takes place and play it by ear from there. By the way, downtown I think ,should be the City proper not Duval County and if you stop and think about it............we already pay for JTA! I remember when its, JEA also, budget passed without discussion or review.......Council just rubber stamped what they asked for and I think that's wrong! You can not tell me there is not waste in both organizations and both are pass due for an outside Audit from an Independent Auditor!
CS, ALL forms of transportation are subsidized. Unless you are in the woods you are even walking on a taxpayer funded sidewalk. Hell, in the woods you are probably walking on a taxpayer funded hiking trail.
I used to laugh at the signs on the back of big trucks that said, "This truck paid $4,532.00 in road taxes last year." I wanted to reply, "And did $11,000 worth of damage to the roads in the same year."
Even the development of railroads in this country was financed by giving the railroad companies big chunks of public land for the right-of-way and towns along the way.
True enough Dog Walker, someone once did an accounting of all of the highway taxes paid by the trucking and bus industry and discovered it wouldn't add up to enough to patch the pot holes in the NY and PA Turnpikes.
The railroads were built on land grants, up to 20 section's (1-sq mile) on alternating sides of the track were given so the railroads could pay for construction, develop business, create towns and settlement, and from that, benefit from freight and passengers.
What is NOT known is that:
Nobody wanted the land that was given to 20 companies (out of hundreds)
This forced the railroads to mortgage the land, but the government did not grant mineral rights...yet.
The Government bought the mortgage bonds at 6% interest (6% in 1870 dollars).
As Part of the "DEAL" railroads had to carry US Government freight at a discount that continued into the 1950's when it was estimated that they had paid for the land in freight charges alone, 5 times. Quote
The total of public land grants given to the railroads by states and the federal government was about 180 million acres. At the time, the value of this land was about one dollar per acre, which was the average price realized by the government for sales in the land grant states during that period. Hence the total value of the land granted to these companies was approximately $180 million. Later, much of the land was sold by the railroad companies at an average price of $2.81 per acre. (Proximity to the rails increased the value of the land.) These sales offset a portion of the construction costs, which have been estimated at approximately $168 million.
Although these figures are immense and would appear to suggest that the American railroad system was built largely on the basis of government aid, this is actually not the case. In fact, only 18,738 miles of railroad line were built as a direct result of these land grants and loans. This figure represents only eight percent of the total railroad mileage built in the United States between 1860 and 1920. The government program was important because the building of these lines opened up the trans-Mississippi West (and FLORIDA) and stimulated settlement, but most of the railroads were built by private enterpriseâ€"in some cases with state and local support.
Reckon we could get the highway boys to pay for raising the Dame Point/Broward Bridge? Sorry I asked.
OCKLAWAHA
Your right Ock..........don't hold your breath, cause it won't happen! Nice to contemplate though! DW ...I believe you, taxes don't begin to cover the road repairs and the like!
Quote from: CS Foltz on December 27, 2009, 02:33:57 PM
Well I don't think that a "Tax Increase" is warrented at this time Mr Charles. If you look at what the fares actually bring compared to what Advertising, on the bus's, brings in...........I would bet more money comes in from that than the fares actually produce!
so what revenue source do you suggest replace the farebox revenue that is collected....and where would you find the additional revenues needed for the expanded service that would be needed?
Oh, and btw, weren't you one of the guys opposed to JTA's bus shelter advertising concept?
Well first off...........your making an assumption that "Bus" use would skyrocket! I did not suggest a tax increase .....what I suggested was a MORATORIUM for a preset frame of time! The time frame could be one day, which I don't think is enough, to one week..........JTA can make the call, but to suggest a TAX Increase .....those are your words not mine! JTA/JEA Budgets both, were passed without comment or review and I still say that is wrong! Past time for an Independent Auditor to review both Agencies........do not use a City Department or the so-called Inspector Generals Office but an outside Auditor/Accounting Firm! Would you like to bet there will be heads rolling in the aftermath? Bus useage may or maynot increase but it would be nice to find out if the fare was zero, would useage increase.........drivers could use simple hand counter. Concept has merit so lets find out! Then we can see what to do or how to go about doing it when we have some information to work with! By the way I am opposed to "Bus Shelter Advertising".............while we are on that subject do you know just how much money is generated by bus advertising? Operating cost's are obvious with what has been filed...........but advertising revenue appears no where.....neither does shelter revenue!
CS....you're once again dodging the question.
Let's assume that fares were eliminated for only one day...and ridership didn't go up that day....you still have to replace that lost revenue....so, again, where do you suggest it come from?
oh, and btw, JTA wouldn't be able to show any shelter revenue in their budget/books...because there isn't any yet!
Cut upper management one days pay! With what they make .........they probably would not even notice it. Seriously though why replace it.............take the standard deduction for depreciation and charge it against the money that would be made for the day. Why replace lost revenue at all? If people don't ride.....there is no money that is made! As to the "Advertising" are you telling me all of the ad's currently on bus's, at this very point in time, are all for free?
why replace it....because you've been harping about government breaking even!
TUFSU1, any idea of the average load factor on JTA buses? My suggestion is to use the Fare Free days (maybe 4 times a year) as promotions, then (if it's popular) market test .25 or .50 flat fares to see where the equalization point is: current fare - to - riders. A 71 passenger Gillig BRT, bus that currently averages 10 persons, would make an equal revenue with 40 persons at .25 or 20 persons at .50. Keeping the fares in .25 cent coin +/- for convenience.
In a city like ours with generally lower income military, warehouse, call center, retail, domestic jobs accounting for a large share of transit riders, we should allow the system to conform to their needs. I'm not beyond suggesting a fare free route or two added to the current system as time allows.
If it ever does come to a tax district fund there is still a huge development benefit. Everyone benefits - Everyone pays
If public transit were free, more people would use it. Fewer auto-miles would be driven. Carbon dioxide emissions would drop. Everyone would benefit. It would be fair, then, that the cost would be paid by everyone. A drop of carbon emissions equals a chance for carbon credit sales to polluting cities and industry. Bogota's bus system cashes in for $100 - 300 Million annually, not a bad "subsidy," wouldn't you say?
Let's address the argument that autosprawl is good for the economy. The profits generated by millions of single family homes and millions of single occupancy vehicles are not real profits. The waste of resources and other societal costs are "externalized" from the calculation of these profits, passed on to the taxpayer, future generations, and other countries.
OCKLAWAHA
Ock...I have no problems with free transit....its just important to identify a revenue source to offset the lost fares....if its taxes, fine (that's what some universities do).
I am somewhat confused tufsu1...........you point out
Quote from: tufsu1 on December 28, 2009, 11:20:36 AM
Ock...I have no problems with free transit....its just important to identify a revenue source to offset the lost fares....if its taxes, fine (that's what some universities do).
lost revenue...............if it's not used to its fullest, your trying to produce something from nothing! Now if the public is already paying JTA for its services, their Budget did run through the Council right?,then we are paying to ride what we already have paid for........that is just about the same as double taxation! You keep pointing out "Lost revenue" well I have not seen anything that even comes close to a break even proposition from JTA! Advertising revenue may have a bearing but you have not provided any figures from what JTA receives now, for the bus advertising! Ignore the shelters for now.........I ask point blank what revenue is generated by what is on bus's now and how does that compare to what revenue is generated by riders?
come on CS...its really not that hard.
The average transit system in the U.S. gets about 1/3 of its revenue from farebox collections....if riding the bus was free, there would be no collections...so where would the needed revenue come from?
btw, even if the other 2/3 of revenue came from taxes, no one would be charged more than 100% if the farebox revenue was replaced with higher taxes...so there still wouldn't be "double taxation"
the city maybe ehffing up with Hanjin and their desire to make Jacksonville the biggest automated port on the east coast.
So let me get this straight.........your saying that JTA collects one third of its revenue right now from its farebox collections correct? Then I would think your saying that the remaining two thirds of their revenue comes from the Advertising plastered on their bus's? They have a blanket check given to them right now.....they requested x amount of dollars, which we the taxpayers pay, and they are supposed to operate within their budget right? So what are you trying to point out? We already subsidize them.........they request, Council rubber stamps and they get their money! I see no reason to replace any moratorium money since we have already paid them to do the job! My point was a MORATORIUM to give a real life test of what is available and the goal was to show just how many people would be willing to ride the bus? Since it is paid for, already subsidized that is, one day or one week it matters not! With proper advertising, one day may do the job, but it would have to have plenty of lead time and marketing! To me, this is not consulting or projected numbers or another survey slanted one way or the other but a marketing test in real time, real life
I never said anything about ad revenues equalling 2/3...nor did I say JTA gets 1/3 of revenue from farebox (just on average around the country)...just like every other transit system, much of JTA's operatiing expenses are covered by allocations (yes taxes) from Federal, state, and local governments.
So what you have now made very clear is that you do not understand transit systems and are opposed to using taxes for just about anything!
Where did you get the 1/3 number TU? APTA and ATA have both published 25% recovery from farebox and 75% of expense from labor. I'd love to correct this if indeed the numbers have improved that much.
OCKLAWAHA
I was rounding Ock and may have been somewhat off...I know rail systems typically get about 40% recovery while buses are lower.
btw...FDOT recently released their 2009 Transportation Trends publication...it showed that average transit operating expense per passenger trip was close to $4 in 2008 (about $2.75 in 2000)...keep in mind that JTA charges $1 per trip...I wonder how much people in jax. would be willing to pay?
^I think the true answer depends on how good the service provided is. Nevertheless, $4 for one way fare is pretty high.
Once again tufsu1 you make unfounded assumptions and I am getting of tired of it! You seem to be the typical "Consultant" that tailors an answer for the paying customer!So once again I ask, do you know just how much money JTA takes in for Advertising on the bus's?A simple yes or no will suffice. I thought you would know since you seem to have all of the answers! I am trying to get a grasp on just what revenue's JTA has coming in to offset what they get from the City! You pointed out once that the lower income segment of Jacksonville is more inclined to use public transportation so based on that statement I would guess you would be inclined to raise rates to something more in line with actual cost per passenger mile than what is current? I am for honest, transparent and cost effective government whether it is at the local or the Federal level. I do not believe in Fee's being imposed to balance books or to circumvent voter approval! I believe in getting the most for my tax dollars and I don't believe in wasting much of anything! If that offends you .........sorry but thats a difference of opinion! Your welcome to yours!
government whether it is local to the Federal level
Quote from: tufsu1 on December 28, 2009, 09:13:10 PM
I was rounding Ock and may have been somewhat off...I know rail systems typically get about 40% recovery while buses are lower.
btw...FDOT recently released their 2009 Transportation Trends publication...it showed that average transit operating expense per passenger trip was close to $4 in 2008 (about $2.75 in 2000)...keep in mind that JTA charges $1 per trip...I wonder how much people in jax. would be willing to pay?
Don't know but if you'll check the Skyway on the DOT site, you will find between $10 and $17 dollar per pax per mile number. OUCH! Yet it is totally fixable. National Light Rail/Streetcar numbers are close to .31 cents per passenger.
None of the Monorail systems are cheap, in fact $3.00 to $7.00 per passenger per mile is about the norm.OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: tufsu1 on December 28, 2009, 09:13:10 PM
btw...FDOT recently released their 2009 Transportation Trends publication...it showed that average transit operating expense per passenger trip was close to $4 in 2008 (about $2.75 in 2000)...keep in mind that JTA charges $1 per trip...I wonder how much people in jax. would be willing to pay?
let me clarify...the $4 per trip was an average for all the transit systems in Florida
Quote from: CS Foltz on December 28, 2009, 10:04:32 PM
Once again tufsu1 you make unfounded assumptions and I am getting of tired of it! You seem to be the typical "Consultant" that tailors an answer for the paying customer!So once again I ask, do you know just how much money JTA takes in for Advertising on the bus's?A simple yes or no will suffice.
well CS...according to JTA's own annual report, advertising accounts for about 3% of all revenues (approximatley $0.5 million out of $17.5 million).
As you can see, its a pretty paltry amount...but without it, fares or taxes would need to be higher!
Much thanks for the information! But that leads me to an additional thought.......
Quote from: tufsu1 on December 29, 2009, 08:01:35 AM
Quote from: tufsu1 on December 28, 2009, 09:13:10 PM
btw...FDOT recently released their 2009 Transportation Trends publication...it showed that average transit operating expense per passenger trip was close to $4 in 2008 (about $2.75 in 2000)...keep in mind that JTA charges $1 per trip...I wonder how much people in jax. would be willing to pay?
let me clarify...the $4 per trip was an average for all the transit systems in Florida
if there is a choice between BRT or LR/Street Cars based on that............$.31 per passenger mile should be a no brainer! Cost differential between the two systems is night and day! So why would JTA push for something that is not cost effective .............I mean $4.00 compared to $.31 per pax mile! Looks like they are just opting for what is in their best interest's not the publics! I would not approve a tax increase for more bus's!
Keep in mind the monorail figures are HIGHLY skewed, when you consider we have the closest thing to a SYSTEM that there is in the USA out side of Disney. All of that technology and brain power operating a 2 or 4 mile system is a waste. Stretch the system out and you cut your cost to mile, making the damn thing MUCH more useful. But that involved expansion and City Hall is led by a herd of Neanderthals.
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: CS Foltz on December 29, 2009, 10:13:48 AM
if there is a choice between BRT or LR/Street Cars based on that............$.31 per passenger mile should be a no brainer! Cost differential between the two systems is night and day! So why would JTA push for something that is not cost effective .............I mean $4.00 compared to $.31 per pax mile! Looks like they are just opting for what is in their best interest's not the publics! I would not approve a tax increase for more bus's!
maybe because regular bus service on streets has minimal capital costs compared to rail...and because for the most of the decade (or more) we have had a Fedarl Transit Administation that was anti-rail.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on December 29, 2009, 10:25:30 AM
Keep in mind the monorail figures are HIGHLY skewed, when you consider we have the closest thing to a SYSTEM that there is in the USA out side of Disney. All of that technology and brain power operating a 2 or 4 mile system is a waste. Stretch the system out and you cut your cost to mile, making the damn thing MUCH more useful. But that involved expansion and City Hall is led by a herd of Neanderthals.
OCKLAWAHA
true...and the $4 I quoted earlier was per passenger trip...not per passenger mile...obviously, Skyway trips are quite short, which skews the per mile cost.
Neanderthals will be coming for you Ock............lumping them in with City Hall! Neaderthals are upset but City Hall could care less! Even if the $kyway were extended to Stadium and other points, cost would be prohibitive unless we are will to raise taxes to support that and I don't see it happening anytime soon guys! I would not go for it at all! Now if you can convinve the Fed's (yes ...I know still our tax money) maybe but and thats a very large but, I can't see it integrating with the proposed BRT for downtown! I keep looking at the cost per passenger mile......bus compared to rail is a no brainer to me. Yes I understand capital outlay at the onset is more but..........6 High Dollar Bus's (3.6 Million, based on 600K per bus) which I have never seen with more than a dozen people at any one time,actual cost around $4 per passenger mile versus Street Car @ .31 per passenger mile after initial cost outlay......both systems use depreciation to offset outlay cost's and granted Rail would be more expensive upfront! But rail & car service life compared to road and bus life two different worlds! So if I had any say in the matter I think I would telling Federal Transit hockey pucks to get out of town! Dollar costs and value just say to me that "Bus Vacumns"!
Quote from: CS Foltz on December 29, 2009, 02:47:19 PM
actual cost around $4 per passenger mile versus Street Car @ .31 per passenger mile after initial cost outlay......
once again, its $4 per PASSENGER TRIP, not per passenger mile....so if the average trip is 10 miles (which matches up w/ person trip data for our area but may not for state or local transit), that would be $0.40 per passenger mile.
Get it?
Yeah ....I got it tufsu1..........bus equals .40 per passenger trip and rail equals .31 per passenger mile. Not sure about the "person trip data for our area matches up but may not for state or LOCAL TRANSIT"? Based on that not sure if your figures apply since last time I checked we are looking at local mass transit possibilities! Bus still ain't worth squat, except to substantiate JTA and their existence. That would also make me think that any and all figures are skewed and biased....especially if those numbers came from the Federal Transit Administration or Florida Dept of Transportation!
way to change direction CS...do you automatically distrust stats that don't support your theories?
the reason I'm not sure about the 10 miles is because that is the average trip length including car trips for our area...I suspect that most transit trips in Jax. are in fact shorter than that....but keep in mind the $0.31 stat provided by ock isn't for Jax. either....most train trips (even urban rail systems) are longer than bus trips!
Can you blame me for being skeptical?
Quote from: tufsu1 on December 29, 2009, 07:58:41 PM
way to change direction CS...do you automatically distrust stats that don't support your theories?
the reason I'm not sure about the 10 miles is because that is the average trip length including car trips for our area...I suspect that most transit trips in Jax. are in fact shorter than that....but keep in mind the $0.31 stat provided by ock isn't for Jax. either....most train trips (even urban rail systems) are longer than bus trips!
Your average trip length for cars does not apply to me, Publix and Winn Dixie are less than 1 mile from where I live , along with the gym, Lowes is 2 miles (these are one way lengths) so I would have to question the "length duration" and yes I did catch the word "Average". I would agree most transit trips in Jax are shorter,bus wise, rail would be longer since that is more commuter oriented. With all of the survey's and consulting work that has been done around here, somewhat suprised those numbers are not available or no one thought it might be applicable to our world? How can anyone make an informed decision without having information to work with or form an opinion?