Metro Jacksonville

With all of the recent talk about the State/Union and the Hart Expressway issues, I've been thinking about what could possibly be done to utilize the existing Hart expressway versus tearing it completely down.

It occured to me that we "could" possibly use portions of the expressway as a structural support for a skyway extension to the sports district.  It would likely only take one half of the overland bridge and gives us a budget concious vehicle to extend the system.

The current Hart Expressway could easily be brought down to grade and tied right into Bay Street, east of Met Park.

What do you guys think?  Is this possible?  Feasible?

(http://i3.photobucket.com/albums/y74/asonj23/Google%20Earth%20Snapshots/SkywayExtension-1.jpg)

A convention center public/private partnership could help to offset some of the costs for a convention center station as well as using the "pink" alternate route (eliminating the Duval Street station). 

Perhaps Mr. Kahn would entertain the idea of helping with funding for the stadium portion.

This would be pretty awesome. Then extend it to 5-Points down Park Street (an actual residential area? no way!) and we could have ourselves a real, working Skyway!

The Pink route looks like you might get the most bang for the buck. My favorite thing about this plan would be you could sell it to the public as utilizing existing infrastructure.

Great idea, I saw a plan someone had drawn up that was very similiar to this ... involved closing down Monroe Street from new Courthouse to Hart Expressway ramps, closing off all Expressway from MLK (Meaning the bridge would only connect you to the Stadium right there at Duval? I think and then MLK Expressway.  All the bridges along waterfront would be combined to make an aerial pedestrian/bikeway park (greenway/pedestrian mall/whatever the hipsters are calling it that month).  And Monroe Street would be the same, with a streetcar setup running all the way to almost in front of the stadium (stairway/elevators were included from bridge in plan).  It has been at least a year since I have seen it, but that was the jist of it.

As long as we are on the subject of the Hart Expressway and what to do with it, I figured i would pitch my idea. I'm sure most of you are familiar with the High Line in New York. Converting the Hart Expressway into something similar would create an instant destination for travelers downtown.
(http://www.weekendhippie.com/.a/6a011570587570970b0134810671a0970c-800wi)

(http://i.imgur.com/sXInu.jpg)

This would definately ease game day traffic. I dont even drive down Bay Street on game day. I take the back way down A.Phillip Randolph. No to mention, we would be the ONLY NFL city with a people mover that goes to the stadium.

Quote from: JeffreyS on October 25, 2012, 12:05:27 PM
The Pink route looks like you might get the most bang for the buck. My favorite thing about this plan would be you could sell it to the public as utilizing existing infrastructure.

I think the Pink route is the most appealing from a cost standpoint, although the full Red route would open up the Duval Street area to TOD devlopments.


Matthew, I really love the greenway that New York did.

Quote from: Jason on October 25, 2012, 10:05:07 AM
With all of the recent talk about the State/Union and the Hart Expressway issues, I've been thinking about what could possibly be done to utilize the existing Hart expressway versus tearing it completely down.

It occured to me that we "could" possibly use portions of the expressway as a structural support for a skyway extension to the sports district.  It would likely only take one half of the overland bridge and gives us a budget concious vehicle to extend the system.

The current Hart Expressway could easily be brought down to grade and tied right into Bay Street, east of Met Park.


I really like this idea Jason, But is it just an example of what can be done?

Do you have any kind of sway to get the authorities attention?

If not, can we find someone that does?

Or can MJ work its magic and put together a formal presentation?

And finally, can we get a few (if not 9 to 10) members of MJ to run for city council?

IMO that's the only way to get anything that's worthwile for the public. I can almost guarantee that the current leadership and those they would endorse wouldn't even consider it.

Jason and Matthew1056, you are on to something here.  The skyway wouldn't take up much of the expressway width, leaving the remainder for an elevated greenway.

Quote from: Jason on October 25, 2012, 12:43:06 PM

Quote from: JeffreyS on October 25, 2012, 12:05:27 PM
The Pink route looks like you might get the most bang for the buck. My favorite thing about this plan would be you could sell it to the public as utilizing existing infrastructure.

I think the Pink route is the most appealing from a cost standpoint, although the full Red route would open up the Duval Street area to TOD devlopments.


Matthew, I really love the greenway that New York did.

I like the red route because of the TOD opportunities in the Cathedral District.  I'd think the significant costs would be constructing a link between Hogan and Liberty Streets, so if you've already invested in that link, you might as well go ahead and tap into the Cathedral District.

It may be far fetched but I wonder if something like this could be implemented incrementally, even with the expressway in tact?  For example, would it really impact traffic flow if the expressway was reduced to two lanes, freeing up half of it for the concepts discussed in this thread?

Quote from: urbaknight on October 25, 2012, 12:59:11 PM
I really like this idea Jason, But is it just an example of what can be done?

Do you have any kind of sway to get the authorities attention?

If not, can we find someone that does?

Or can MJ work its magic and put together a formal presentation?

And finally, can we get a few (if not 9 to 10) members of MJ to run for city council?

IMO that's the only way to get anything that's worthwile for the public. I can almost guarantee that the current leadership and those they would endorse wouldn't even consider it.

Yes, I started this topic just to open up discussions.  I would also back a formal MJ proposal/presentation if we were to decide to push this idea further.


The Hogan to Liberty stretch is probably the hardest to get funding for, however, it is the most important (even if the line stops at Liberty).  This stretch could/should be anchored by a new convention center at the courthouse site allowing the station to be directly tied into to new building.  It would also have to be a two way line that would likely eat up a lane of traffic along Bay Street.

The next hurdle is coordinating with DOT/JTA on a joint venture to repurpose the expressway and tie in the skyway monorail beam and stations.  Also, the stations along that portion would be "taller" because of the elevation of the highway above the street compared to the other stations, which would cost more money to build.

The Met Park station could serve as the line's terminus until funding was secured for the extension to the staduim concourses.  This would be a one way loop around the stadium.

I'd say the Bay Street Route is superior on account of future development potential, directness and most of all the FACT that most any streetcar plan that taps the Stadium district will use Newnan to Duval/Beaver. A streetcar on Duval would render the Pink and red alternatives redundant.

Also looping the stadium would certainly be cool and would only require a single track, but we'd get more 24/7 usage out of a line that turned north from Bay to AP Randolph with a station located on the west end of the fairgrounds. A future extension of this same line could reach AP Randolph at Union and Jessie making the Skyway THE connection for all of east Jacksonville.

Having just recently experiencing the High Line I think this would be an excellent idea for the elevated roadway. I like keeping it as it does provide a nice covered area for tailgating for Jags games. Make sure the vegetation provided plenty of shade for the summer months. Encourage perhaps each of our local breweries to open small beirgartens on it to provide a fun reason to take it in and enjoy the great views. Also include a permanent kiosks you might see at Disney or even our beloved SJTC to sell ice cream, cotton candy, popcorn, fries etc. Add a few access points along the way with escalator or elevator access that are connected to street car stations at ground level.  What a great addition this could be to downtown. Are you listening Jax2025??

While were at it lets add a zip line area down to the Northbank Riverwalk extension and an area where the kids could either bring their own kites or rent some neat funky kites to fly.

I want rocket shoes that take me to a land of rainbows and ponies.

^^ as long as those rocket shoes take you far away from Jax, works for me!

Quote from: bill on October 25, 2012, 07:13:50 PM
I want rocket shoes that take me to a land of rainbows and ponies.

Here you go Bill, hope you don't mind skates...


That roadway along Bay might make for an easy conversion to a Skyway track too, it would be worth the study.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 25, 2012, 05:04:46 PM
I'd say the Bay Street Route is superior on account of future development potential, directness and most of all the FACT that most any streetcar plan that taps the Stadium district will use Newnan to Duval/Beaver. A streetcar on Duval would render the Pink and red alternatives redundant.

Also looping the stadium would certainly be cool and would only require a single track, but we'd get more 24/7 usage out of a line that turned north from Bay to AP Randolph with a station located on the west end of the fairgrounds. A future extension of this same line could reach AP Randolph at Union and Jessie making the Skyway THE connection for all of east Jacksonville.

I would think that it would be easy to only run service on the stadium loop on game/event days.  That would make the MetroPark station the typical terminus.  Or the Stadium loop stations could simply be closed offering a drive-by touristy aspect that allows the trams to continue in one direction without having to run back and forth.

Would their be any negative to the Arena/Ballpark station location as I've indicated?  Part of me agrees that your proposed route would be ideal, but another part of me thinks that a station located behind the arena allows for less of a visual impact on the arena, ballpark, church, etc. and leaves more space for infill development in the sports district while maintaining the estreet widths.

Also, with the skyway adequately serving the smallish sports district, why would we need a streetcar?

Quote from: Jason on October 26, 2012, 02:58:37 PMAlso, with the skyway adequately serving the smallish sports district, why would we need a streetcar?

This is where some type of advanced coordination would be needed.  The 2030 Mobility Plan, JTA, and the TPO's LRTP include a streetcar line to the sports district.  The mobility plan includes funding for it, plus it's cheaper to construct.  Unless stymied, its quite possible it will come online before the Harts Bridge viaduct nears replacement.  Ock will argue that both are needed, but I fall in the camp that a skyway extension and a streetcar are overkill, when prioritizing incremental implementation.  Only having one well planned fixed transit corridor will allow extra money to be spent on providing connectivity to another neighborhood (ie. Springfield, Durkeeville, etc.).

During the 2035 LRTP, some "competing" alternatives were tested for the Needs Plan...so for example, there was talk of skyway extensions and streetcar for both Brooklyn and San Marco

That said, a skyway extension to the sports complex was not even considered due to the length needed and costs.

^ I would love to see some solid estimates on what the sports district line would cost if it were to use the existing highway infrastructure compared to a completely new build.

I would too Jason, in fact I even filed a request for the engineering that was done back when the Skyway was "going to the Gator Bowl," only to be told by JTA that they were "lost!"

I argue that both should extend to the stadium not so much that they are both needed, as the fact that the best extension location for the Skyway in downtown ends at the stadium, and the best North-South location for 'Rapid Streetcar' ends within a block or so of the same place.

A streetcar running on the 'Electric 7' route could rapidly cover the distance from Gateway Mall to the west side of the Arena parking lot faster then any automobile or bus in the city. Move that southern terminus and the streetcar loses many of its advantages (private right-of-way, faster speeds) over buses.

A Skyway link into the east side of downtown somewhere in the Newnan Street - Catherine Street at Bay could eliminate downtown bus shuttles and make the Skyway the downtown connector that it was intended to be. It would be even better if we could locate the line with a major construction announcement for the shipyards property. I would agree that going all the way to a stadium isn't needed. As an ideal, linking the two in the AP Randolph area would make both stronger. Otherwise a connection at Bay and Newnan would work well.

The streetcar running M/L north south and the Skyway running east west makes the two systems complimentary without the duplication or overkill.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 29, 2012, 11:07:02 AM
I would too Jason, in fact I even filed a request for the engineering that was done back when the Skyway was "going to the Gator Bowl," only to be told by JTA that they were "lost!"

Not surprised at all with that response.  :)

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 29, 2012, 11:07:02 AM
The streetcar running M/L north south and the Skyway running east west makes the two systems complimentary without the duplication or overkill.

I see what your saying. 

Quote from: Jason on October 29, 2012, 10:04:01 AM
^ I would love to see some solid estimates on what the sports district line would cost if it were to use the existing highway infrastructure compared to a completely new build.

We'd probably have to take the initiative to develop them on our own to help sell the alternative.  When the mobility plan was developed, the estimated cost for a 1/2 mile extension of the skyway to Atlantic Blvd. in San Marco was $21 million.  About a 1/4 mile or so of that link would be at ground level. 

It's roughly a 1/2 mile gap between the Hart Bridge expressway (Forsyth & Liberty) and Hogan Street, so you're looking at all of that being elevated and that cost being at least $20 million.  On the flip end, you can do a bells and whistles streetcar for $15 million/mile or so.  Go no frills heritage streetcar and the price drops. 

The question I've always struggled with is this.  Would it be more prudent of taxpayer dollars to spend +$30 million to extend the skyway a mile to the Stadium (or Riverside Avenue) or take the same $30 million and get two to three miles of streetcar connecting the Stadium....and a Springfield.  Every time, I see the higher ROI being getting more bang out of your buck by connecting as many neighborhoods and destinations as possible, spreading the wealth of economic development in the process.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 29, 2012, 11:07:02 AMThe streetcar running M/L north south and the Skyway running east west makes the two systems complimentary without the duplication or overkill.

Unfortunately, the world we live in and financial realities require us to incrementally expand as opposed to building a massive plus billion dollar system literally overnight.  So assuming we'd already have an extensive system in place, I'd be more inclined to agree.  However, I'd say its overkill if we built two fixed transit systems to the stadium district without first building a more extensive fixed system connecting neighborhoods outside of downtown. 

(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/CRITICAL%20Maps/GreenwayStreetcarLine.jpg)

This is an OLD map I dug up from some of our earliest days. No reason why the entire system couldn't come about with incremental expansion. As we are so fond of reminding our readership, they needn't be funded out of the same pot. The Skyway has great favor with our local Congressional delegation, while the streetcar downtown, and possibly the Gateway route could be 100% locally financed.

That Gateway line (purple) would have to be lobbied into the LRTP for federal funding or into the mobility plan at the expense of another mobility plan project (commuter rail) for local funding.  Outside of that, you're looking at doing something like either raising taxes or selling JEA to acquire the cash, assuming it beats a list of other unfunded desires across town.  Congressional earmarks are no longer around, so I wouldn't put much stock in the skyway getting federal expansion money either.  If you want to see any of those at the expense of projects currently in the pipeline, you'll have to lobby to get them incorporated into the comp plan and LRTP.

I'm just so torn with the fact that the Skyway is intended to be THE major mode of transit throughout the downtown core.  IMO, any substantial streetcar routes with the core area would likely directly compete with the skyway further exaserbating the image of it being a waste.

Streetcars should be limited to non-competing routes within the core that connect the major neighborhoods VIA the Skyway.  Other modes such as commuter/LRT/BRT/Bus/Amtrak etc. should do the same via the JRTC.

I'm not so attached with the skyway or our 1970s era planning.  I tend to look at the needs of the overall city/region and go from there.  Where the skyway becomes a superior option (ex. extension to San Marco) starts to stand out.  Where other options can give you more bang for your buck (ex. Riverside streetcar), I see no problem not following a 1970s transit plan, that called for the skyway to serve that corridor.  At the end of the day, they won't compete, they'll complement each other. 

My concerns are mainly regarding the Eastside and Sports District.  If a streetcar line were implemented that connected that side of town to the core, there would be no need to expand the skyway.  Yes, it would be cheaper but it would likely be the nail in the coffin for all of that money invested in the skyway system. 

If youreally want to get the most bang for your buck then remove the short streetcar brance to the sports district and use the money to run deeper into Springfield and leave the Eastside alone until a skyway extension can be funded.

Exactly Jason, as we have 'imaginered' the two systems, the closest they come to competing with ourselves would be the stretch from Jacksonville Terminal (JRTC to the unwashed masses) and Newnan Street. However this being the core of Jacksonville, it wouldn't hurt either system to travel this key area a block apart. In short the same thing Denver has done with it's 16Th Street transit mall. I would suggest that the streetcar ultimately have a return loop running from roughly Duval and Palmetto Street, following Duval straight behind the new Courthouse to Lee, and south on Lee to the Jacksonville Terminal.

Streetcar primary links and Terminals:

Gateway Mall - Jacksonville Arena
Jacksonville Arena - Lee (via Duval)
Arena on Duval - Newnan Street Skyway interchange
Water Street FROM Newnan too Lee
Lee to Blue Cross - 5 Points - King Street

Skyway:

Shands/VA to Central Station
Stadium District to Central Station
Central Station to Jacksonville Terminal
Central Station to San Marco
Central Station to  Riverside

Each doing what it does best.

When looking at the Eastside, it starts to boil down to are we trying to create the best system we can with the resources we have or are we simply wanting to extend the skyway just because we have a skyway.  The skyway's success isn't dependent on a connection to the stadium.  It's success will be more dependent on having it tied into a regional mass transit system. 

I'd argue that it would make more sense to evaluate extending the skyway to areas where we need grade separated crossings over railroad tracks and yards.  With that in mind, the Southbank, San Marco, Farmer's Market, etc. are areas where better inner city utilization could be had with the skyway.  Another area would be the original proposal to Shands, which would provide redevelopment incentive in Sugar Hill and Hansontown.

As for the stadium, since I'm not sold that Everbank Field is the key to the skyway's success, I still believe we'd get more bang for our buck by designing something that better fits into the area (especially Bay Street east of Liberty) and is proven to stimulate more economic development.

QuoteIf youreally want to get the most bang for your buck then remove the short streetcar brance to the sports district and use the money to run deeper into Springfield and leave the Eastside alone until a skyway extension can be funded.

Another option could be to run street level transit deeper into Springfield, the Eastside, Phoenix Avenue, and potentially Fairfax by stretching the skyway stadium money.  Or take the skyway money and get it extended to the farmer's market or San Marco.

Another thing to consider is the skyway's life.  It's no spring chicken.  At what point will it require millions in upgrades to keep it running as is?  When that time comes, does it make sense to consider changing what it is?  Could it become some form of elevated LRT or streetcar itself?

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 29, 2012, 02:40:28 PM
Exactly Jason, as we have 'imaginered' the two systems, the closest they come to competing with ourselves would be the stretch from Jacksonville Terminal (JRTC to the unwashed masses) and Newnan Street. However this being the core of Jacksonville, it wouldn't hurt either system to travel this key area a block apart.

They wouldn't compete in this stretch because the'd be connecting different destinations.  If I were coming or going to San Marco, I'd use the skyway because the streetcar wouldn't cross the river.  If I were coming from Riverside or going to the Landing, the streetcar would be the route.  In the vicinity of the Prime Osborn, instead of competing, that would provide the opportunity to transfer between modes.  The real duplication is the proposed BRT line on the Southbank.  Now that's something that's simply not needed with the skyway being there.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 29, 2012, 02:40:28 PM
Exactly Jason, as we have 'imaginered' the two systems, the closest they come to competing with ourselves would be the stretch from Jacksonville Terminal (JRTC to the unwashed masses) and Newnan Street. However this being the core of Jacksonville, it wouldn't hurt either system to travel this key area a block apart. In short the same thing Denver has done with it's 16Th Street transit mall. I would suggest that the streetcar ultimately have a return loop running from roughly Duval and Palmetto Street, following Duval straight behind the new Courthouse to Lee, and south on Lee to the Jacksonville Terminal.

Streetcar primary links and Terminals:

Gateway Mall - Jacksonville Arena
Jacksonville Arena - Lee (via Duval)
Arena on Duval - Newnan Street Skyway interchange
Water Street FROM Newnan too Lee
Lee to Blue Cross - 5 Points - King Street

Skyway:

Shands/VA to Central Station
Stadium District to Central Station
Central Station to Jacksonville Terminal
Central Station to San Marco
Central Station to  Riverside

Each doing what it does best.

(http://www.slate.com/content/dam/slate/archive/2011/01/1_123125_2216585_2279964_110104_transport_lightrailillo_tn.jpg)

I'm definitely with you on the return loop idea.  IMO, it is a major limiting factor that the system is a "to and for" style system which limits headways and complicates routes.  Miami is an effecient example of a loop system that gives them greater flexiblity and expandibility.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 02:45:48 PM
When looking at the Eastside, it starts to boil down to are we trying to create the best system we can with the resources we have or are we simply wanting to extend the skyway just because we have a skyway.  The skyway's success isn't dependent on a connection to the stadium.  It's success will be more dependent on having it tied into a regional mass transit system.

I'd measure the skyway's success by how well it moves people within the core, as it was intended to do.  It will naturally gain ridership as the outlying nodes are connected to it via the JRTC.  Ensuring that the Skyway is as comprehensive as possible makes it a an exponetially better system that limits transfers and gives those that are already downtown a faster alternative to navigate the core.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 02:45:48 PM
I'd argue that it would make more sense to evaluate extending the skyway to areas where we need grade separated crossings over railroad tracks and yards.  With that in mind, the Southbank, San Marco, Farmer's Market, etc. are areas where better inner city utilization could be had with the skyway.  Another area would be the original proposal to Shands, which would provide redevelopment incentive in Sugar Hill and Hansontown.

Grade separated crossings make a lot of sence in a sports district that deals with ebbs and flows of gridlock traffic allowing seamless and quick routes into and out of the immediate area.  And I don't think we should be expanding this thing for the sole purpose of the Jag gameday mess, moreso as a reliable convenient means to navigate the area.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 02:45:48 PM
Another thing to consider is the skyway's life.  It's no spring chicken.  At what point will it require millions in upgrades to keep it running as is?  When that time comes, does it make sense to consider changing what it is?  Could it become some form of elevated LRT or streetcar itself?

You got me here.  There is certainly no arguing that the Skyway would cost less to maintain.  And if the slate were clean, at grade transit would prevail.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 02:50:47 PM

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 29, 2012, 02:40:28 PM
Exactly Jason, as we have 'imaginered' the two systems, the closest they come to competing with ourselves would be the stretch from Jacksonville Terminal (JRTC to the unwashed masses) and Newnan Street. However this being the core of Jacksonville, it wouldn't hurt either system to travel this key area a block apart.

They wouldn't compete in this stretch because the'd be connecting different destinations.  If I were coming or going to San Marco, I'd use the skyway because the streetcar wouldn't cross the river.  If I were coming from Riverside or going to the Landing, the streetcar would be the route.  In the vicinity of the Prime Osborn, instead of competing, that would provide the opportunity to transfer between modes.  The real duplication is the proposed BRT line on the Southbank.  Now that's something that's simply not needed with the skyway being there.

Neighborhood to neighborhood would most definitely make the most sence via streetcar.  Though, neighborhood to DT would require a transfer at JRTC from streetcar to the Skyway (as it should be).  There would only be a neighborhood to downtown via streetcar in the areas not served by the skyway.

Quote from: Jason on October 29, 2012, 03:05:51 PM
I'd measure the skyway's success by how well it moves people within the core, as it was intended to do.  It will naturally gain ridership as the outlying nodes are connected to it via the JRTC.  Ensuring that the Skyway is as comprehensive as possible makes it a an exponetially better system that limits transfers and gives those that are already downtown a faster alternative to navigate the core.

You can achieve this without a "skyway" extension to the sports district.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 02:45:48 PM
I'd argue that it would make more sense to evaluate extending the skyway to areas where we need grade separated crossings over railroad tracks and yards.  With that in mind, the Southbank, San Marco, Farmer's Market, etc. are areas where better inner city utilization could be had with the skyway.  Another area would be the original proposal to Shands, which would provide redevelopment incentive in Sugar Hill and Hansontown.

Grade separated crossings make a lot of sence in a sports district that deals with ebbs and flows of gridlock traffic allowing seamless and quick routes into and out of the immediate area.  And I don't think we should be expanding this thing for the sole purpose of the Jag gameday mess, moreso as a reliable convenient means to navigate the area.[/quote]

Assuming the Hart Bridge Expressway ramp were used, you could accomplish this with a variety of modes.  However, being able to bring the system down to grade would enable the preservation of Bay Street's historical character.  As those older buildings continue to be utilized, it's probably not the best idea to have a skyway car running past the front of people's loft living rooms.

Quote

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 02:45:48 PM
Another thing to consider is the skyway's life.  It's no spring chicken.  At what point will it require millions in upgrades to keep it running as is?  When that time comes, does it make sense to consider changing what it is?  Could it become some form of elevated LRT or streetcar itself?

You got me here.  There is certainly no arguing that the Skyway would cost less to maintain.  And if the slate were clean, at grade transit would prevail.

I bring this up to simply encourage an open minded planning process.  I'd hate to see us force something that may be a worse and more expensive fix, simply because we assume we have to make the skyway work "as is" or as originally conceived.  There are a lot of alternatives, variations, combinations, etc. out there worth exploring.

Quote from: Jason on October 29, 2012, 03:08:39 PM
Neighborhood to neighborhood would most definitely make the most sence via streetcar.  Though, neighborhood to DT would require a transfer at JRTC from streetcar to the Skyway (as it should be).  There would only be a neighborhood to downtown via streetcar in the areas not served by the skyway.

I wouldn't worry too much about transferring.  The best mass transit systems contain a variety of modes designed specifically for the corridors they serve. As far as the streetcar goes, the great benefit in it would be connecting downtown with the surrounding urban core neighborhoods.  However, the skyway can't go everywhere.  Thus, when designing additional modes that complement, they provide an opportunity to better serve certain areas at a lesser expense.  This is the case in both Miami and Detroit, where both are proposing streetcar systems to complement their skyway siblings.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 03:45:52 PM
Assuming the Hart Bridge Expressway ramp were used, you could accomplish this with a variety of modes.  However, being able to bring the system down to grade would enable the preservation of Bay Street's historical character.  As those older buildings continue to be utilized, it's probably not the best idea to have a skyway car running past the front of people's loft living rooms.

There is only a three block stretch that would be affected by this and the line would be on the opposite side of the street (through the historic area).  IMO, a necessary evil in urban living.  :)  Also, if it were tied directly into a new convention center there would be even less of the line exposed to the tenants across the street.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 03:45:52 PM
I bring this up to simply encourage an open minded planning process.  I'd hate to see us force something that may be a worse and more expensive fix, simply because we assume we have to make the skyway work "as is" or as originally conceived.  There are a lot of alternatives, variations, combinations, etc. out there worth exploring.

I could not agree more.  That's why we're having this discussion.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 03:45:52 PM
I wouldn't worry too much about transferring.  The best mass transit systems contain a variety of modes designed specifically for the corridors they serve. As far as the streetcar goes, the great benefit in it would be connecting downtown with the surrounding urban core neighborhoods.  However, the skyway can't go everywhere.  Thus, when designing additional modes that complement, they provide an opportunity to better serve certain areas at a lesser expense.  This is the case in both Miami and Detroit, where both are proposing streetcar systems to complement their skyway siblings.

Miami and Detroit are enjoying the benefits of a more-or-less completed skyway system and are now expanding their reach to untapped areas via streetcar.

I think we'd all agree that our skyway is unfinished.  Short of a small extension to Brooklyn, the sports district is the major hole.  Why not fill that hole with an extension that will also pick up Bay Street and possibly the Cathedral district in the process?

Quote from: Jason on October 29, 2012, 04:35:06 PM

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 03:45:52 PM
Assuming the Hart Bridge Expressway ramp were used, you could accomplish this with a variety of modes.  However, being able to bring the system down to grade would enable the preservation of Bay Street's historical character.  As those older buildings continue to be utilized, it's probably not the best idea to have a skyway car running past the front of people's loft living rooms.

There is only a three block stretch that would be affected by this and the line would be on the opposite side of the street (through the historic area).  IMO, a necessary evil in urban living.  :)  Also, if it were tied directly into a new convention center there would be even less of the line exposed to the tenants across the street.

It doesn't have to be a necessary evil, unless we force something elevated down that corridor.

Quote

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 03:45:52 PM
I wouldn't worry too much about transferring.  The best mass transit systems contain a variety of modes designed specifically for the corridors they serve. As far as the streetcar goes, the great benefit in it would be connecting downtown with the surrounding urban core neighborhoods.  However, the skyway can't go everywhere.  Thus, when designing additional modes that complement, they provide an opportunity to better serve certain areas at a lesser expense.  This is the case in both Miami and Detroit, where both are proposing streetcar systems to complement their skyway siblings.

Miami and Detroit are enjoying the benefits of a more-or-less completed skyway system and are now expanding their reach to untapped areas via streetcar.

I think we'd all agree that our skyway is unfinished.  Short of a small extension to Brooklyn, the sports district is the major hole.  Why not fill that hole with an extension that will also pick up Bay Street and possibly the Cathedral district in the process?

Being a regular in Detroit, I'd say their peoplemover is worse off than ours.  Ours may not be complete but in most cases, you're better off walking that taking their one-way looped route around downtown.  You'll save yourself some change, not waste time moving vertically, and reach your destination faster. 

They have the same discussions we have about what to do with their peoplemover.  Now they've decided to feed riders into it with a modern streetcar line that will bisect it in downtown and extend north into New Center.  Two different modes, yet complementing each other within the core. 

Also, the streetcar line (currently shown in LRTP, mobility and JTA plans) to Springfield pretty much accomplishes what the skyway won't be able to do.  Serve an entire section of downtown (Cathedral District, Bay Street Town Center, etc.) as it connects DT with an adjacent neighborhood in Springfield. The benefit here is its literally an extension of the Riverside line and complements the skyway by feeding riders into it.

I would like to see plans drawn up for the Skyway to expand to the area of the fair grounds, north to VA/Shand's, West to Farmers Market/Woodstock Park, Southwest to Annie Lytle, Southeast to Atlantic in San Marco.

Make a plan for it to work, then work the plan. Done incrementally with a 10-15 year build out almost entirely on the federal grant system. I would inflate the hell out of the cost of the two interchange stations with Streetcar, allowing the Fed's to shoulder a larger chunk of dollars. I would turn the plans over to the Chamber Of Commerce business development section and have staff write powerful Op-Ed's suggesting any high rise in the east side along Bay or Randolph would get the Skyway Extension and Station. We'll never know what the resolve is in Congress, as long as JTA remains scared to move forward without testing the opportunity.

I would also set the plan up as the ABSOLUTE MAXIMUM expansion of the little monorail until at least 2030 when the plans could again be reviewed.

Include station and train modifications to accommodate bicycles, power chairs, and commercial vendors. Reopen the rest rooms.

I would include the Southbank  Sky-Walks tapping Riverplace, Prudential, Aetna, Baptist, Wolfson  and Nemours. Beyond this frame work, ALL other mass transit expansion would be steel wheel on steel rail technology. A self funded heritage streetcar (more historical then you might think as I have learned the original Riverside line had a northern terminus in New Springfield) and a Streetcar plan to match. Using Fairfax, Stadium, Gateway, Shand's as well as a downtown loop and stadium loop. Again setting an incremental goal, staying the course, promoting the route to developers,

Lastly the old fire station 5 would be lifted and moved across Riverside Avenue to the corner FDOT/JTA lot then adapted as both a 'antique' Skyway and Streetcar Terminal, as well as ample lease space for commercial businesses. This would preserve the old station and continue it's use as a public building. This could be a 'practice preservation effort' prior to reaching Annie Lytle.

Lastly the trains would be lengthened to include 4 cars with two large center cars, and the end units we see today.

QuoteHelp Save the Historic Fire Station #5


Brooklyn’s historic Fire Station #5, built in 1910 to replace a modest wooden structure dating to 1897 on the same site, now faces imminent demolition unless funds can be raised to move the structure. There are numerous reasons to save this attractive brick building, but there appears to be a lack of will at City Hall to take up the cause. Please consider adding your voice to the calls to save one of Jacksonville’s most endangered historic treasures. Your neighbors have created an informational page on Facebook as well as a petition urging city officials to protect this unique structure for future generations. The move itself might be achieved as a practice session of the Seabees and National Guard.
SOURCE: R.A.P. Historic Preservation Page

yeah...but the Seattle monorial is nearly dead now...thanks in part to the success of the streetcar

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 05:18:13 PM
It doesn't have to be a necessary evil, unless we force something elevated down that corridor.

That has been the plan since the skyway's inception.  We would once again be tossing aside working planning documents after completing half of it.  We've all touted time and time again that Jax has a bad habit of half baked and unfinished plans.  Why continue that pattern?

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 05:18:13 PM
Being a regular in Detroit, I'd say their peoplemover is worse off than ours.  Ours may not be complete but in most cases, you're better off walking that taking their one-way looped route around downtown.  You'll save yourself some change, not waste time moving vertically, and reach your destination faster. 

They have the same discussions we have about what to do with their peoplemover.  Now they've decided to feed riders into it with a modern streetcar line that will bisect it in downtown and extend north into New Center.  Two different modes, yet complementing each other within the core. 

Also, the streetcar line (currently shown in LRTP, mobility and JTA plans) to Springfield pretty much accomplishes what the skyway won't be able to do.  Serve an entire section of downtown (Cathedral District, Bay Street Town Center, etc.) as it connects DT with an adjacent neighborhood in Springfield. The benefit here is its literally an extension of the Riverside line and complements the skyway by feeding riders into it.

I'm not arguing that streetcars are not needed.  I think we agree completely.  I'm just of the opinion that we shouldn't use streetcars to access the sports district.

I have heard grumblings about Detroit's system, although you tend to hear the negatives first.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 29, 2012, 11:25:32 PM
It's not like the Federal Government hasn't encouraged this sort of multi-modalism in the recent past. [/center]

I would like to see plans drawn up for the Skyway to expand to the area of the fair grounds, north to VA/Shand's, West to Farmers Market/Woodstock Park, Southwest to Annie Lytle, Southeast to Atlantic in San Marco.

I've been working on sketches for quite some time that hits all of those areas as you've described except the sports district, which shows the line I mapped out in the beginning of the thread.

When you've got them done, send me a PM and we'll set up an article.

Quote from: Jason on October 30, 2012, 09:24:11 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on October 29, 2012, 05:18:13 PM
It doesn't have to be a necessary evil, unless we force something elevated down that corridor.

That has been the plan since the skyway's inception.  We would once again be tossing aside working planning documents after completing half of it.

There are no working documents for any expansion of the skyway.  Even if there were, they'd be 20-30 years old and out of date. Anything at this point, would have to be designed and developed from scratch.

QuoteWe've all touted time and time again that Jax has a bad habit of half baked and unfinished plans.  Why continue that pattern?

Because we know better now, the urban landscape has changed, and different technologies have evolved that we can take advantage of.  I wouldn't recommend extending the Hart Bridge Expressway to the beach or the Acosta Bridge through LaVilla to I-95 either. 1970s Jax and 2010s Jax are completely different animals and should be treated as such.

QuoteI have heard grumblings about Detroit's system, although you tend to hear the negatives first.

I've ridden it several times over the last decade.  The grumblings are legit.  It should benefit from the addition of the modern streetcar penetrating downtown, which will feed riders into it.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 30, 2012, 10:25:26 AM
There are no working documents for any expansion of the skyway.  Even if there were, they'd be 20-30 years old and out of date. Anything at this point, would have to be designed and developed from scratch.

According to JTA, there was some drawings (perhaps renderings)  and preliminary engineering. I agree that we would need to revise or remake those plans, but I've got a lot of industry contacts that would likely be more then happy to give us some ball park estimates, suggestions, and conceptual'

Armed with such documentation should make it easier to reopen conversation at the city level.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 30, 2012, 10:25:26 AM
There are no working documents for any expansion of the skyway.  Even if there were, they'd be 20-30 years old and out of date. Anything at this point, would have to be designed and developed from scratch.

Good point.  Which is why it would be a good idea to lock down these potential transit corridors as soon as possible, regardless of the type of system. 

Quote from: thelakelander on October 30, 2012, 10:25:26 AM
Because we know better now, the urban landscape has changed, and different technologies have evolved that we can take advantage of.  I wouldn't recommend extending the Hart Bridge Expressway to the beach or the Acosta Bridge through LaVilla to I-95 either. 1970s Jax and 2010s Jax are completely different animals and should be treated as such.

True.  But setting aside the historic three block stretch of Bay Street, what other negatives do you see with a skyway extension running through there?  There shouldn't be any visual detractors given that most of the corridor is practically a clean slate or already fairly modern.

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 30, 2012, 10:39:16 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on October 30, 2012, 10:25:26 AM
There are no working documents for any expansion of the skyway.  Even if there were, they'd be 20-30 years old and out of date. Anything at this point, would have to be designed and developed from scratch.

According to JTA, there was some drawings (perhaps renderings)  and preliminary engineering. I agree that we would need to revise or remake those plans, but I've got a lot of industry contacts that would likely be more then happy to give us some ball park estimates, suggestions, and conceptual'

Armed with such documentation should make it easier to reopen conversation at the city level.

Those rumored plans would be solid gold right now. 

And just continuing the chatter and discussions here should help to reinvigorate a large population to support our transit initiatives.  I've really enjoyed this conversation and feel that we are easily working out all of the possibilities to come up with something that will fit perfectly with the vision of what Jax is destined to be.  And we're doing it for FREE!  :)

Quote from: Ocklawaha on October 30, 2012, 10:39:16 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on October 30, 2012, 10:25:26 AM
There are no working documents for any expansion of the skyway.  Even if there were, they'd be 20-30 years old and out of date. Anything at this point, would have to be designed and developed from scratch.

According to JTA, there was some drawings (perhaps renderings)  and preliminary engineering. I agree that we would need to revise or remake those plans, but I've got a lot of industry contacts that would likely be more then happy to give us some ball park estimates, suggestions, and conceptual'

Armed with such documentation should make it easier to reopen conversation at the city level.

I'd suggest you go ahead and proceed with your contacts to come up with a ballpark estimate.  That would be needed first to lobby JTA and anyone else to seriously consider discussing potential skyway extensions anytime soon.

Quote from: Jason on October 30, 2012, 11:44:45 AM

Quote from: thelakelander on October 30, 2012, 10:25:26 AM
Because we know better now, the urban landscape has changed, and different technologies have evolved that we can take advantage of.  I wouldn't recommend extending the Hart Bridge Expressway to the beach or the Acosta Bridge through LaVilla to I-95 either. 1970s Jax and 2010s Jax are completely different animals and should be treated as such.

True.  But setting aside the historic three block stretch of Bay Street, what other negatives do you see with a skyway extension running through there?  There shouldn't be any visual detractors given that most of the corridor is practically a clean slate or already fairly modern.

My major concern would be capital and long term operational costs, potential for economic development and public ROI.  Also, it's very well known that downtown (and the skyway) needs better fixed transit connectivity with surrounding urban neighborhoods. We also know, that the skyway isn't the best or most efficient mode to penetrate these neighborhoods, meaning there will be alternative modes in the picture. Whether those connections are streetcar, LRT, commuter rail, etc., they aren't going to simply terminate at the skyway's end points.  Thus, there will be penetration into the downtown area, which provides us with the opportunity to use these modes to serve areas where the skyway doesn't exist.  So how various neighborhoods tie together on a larger level will also impact the idea of expanding the skyway in any direction. 

With these issues as concerns, I'm not so willing to completely eliminate all alternatives in favor of extending the skyway (as conceived) to the stadium, simply because we have it a mile down the street.  I strongly believe that there are a lot of questions that need to be answered to come to that final decision.

Quote from: thelakelander on October 30, 2012, 12:57:29 PM
My major concern would be capital and long term operational costs, potential for economic development and public ROI.  Also, it's very well known that downtown (and the skyway) needs better fixed transit connectivity with surrounding urban neighborhoods. We also know, that the skyway isn't the best or most efficient mode to penetrate these neighborhoods, meaning there will be alternative modes in the picture. Whether those connections are streetcar, LRT, commuter rail, etc., they aren't going to simply terminate at the skyway's end points.  Thus, there will be penetration into the downtown area, which provides us with the opportunity to use these modes to serve areas where the skyway doesn't exist.  So how various neighborhoods tie together on a larger level will also impact the idea of expanding the skyway in any direction.

The capital and long term costs may be the only negative because the right-of-way and potential for economic development would likely be the same.  There is plenty of TOD space available that could offset station costs by tying them right into the development.  Our convention center concept is a good example of that (regardless of the type of transit).

Because we know what a streetcar line would look like on Bay street I might throw together a rendering of what the skyway would look like tied into the CC with a station built right in.  Can't say how soon that will happen though.

Sounds good.  Can't wait to see it.