Festival ‘Sparks’ Ridership Boom on Skyway
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/3175606634_ZNnVXdJ-M.jpg)
What happens when thousands of people descend upon the streets of Downtown Jacksonville? The Skyway swells with riders proving its ultimate success is truly dependent on our community having a lively urban core. Here is a look at how the Skyway was impacted by last week's One Spark 2014 Festival.
Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-apr-festival-sparks-ridership-boom-on-skyway
I think this is what we all envisioned about the skyway and more. Nice to see the One Spark sign on the car.
One Spark shows what the Skyway could be with a healthy and vibrant Downtown. Though 20k/day may be unrealistic without some expansion - there is room for improvement even with the current configuration. One million rides a year is impressive, but two million could be within reach in 3-4 years with constant promotion, more Downtown events, etc.
Of course, the expansion into Brooklyn would go a long way toward connecting areas together. San Marco to Riverside. Brooklyn to Downtown. The financial district, 220 Riverside, Fresh Market - all connecting to Downtown and/or San Marco. That's a real positive thing.
But perhaps the best advantage of this kind of ridership for One Spark is the perception of the Skyway. Not so much bashing going on during the past couple of years - despite the lack of destinations to travel.
Expand the Skyway to Everbank Field and it could be like this every weekend. This is not to mention what it would be like all week with some expansion! It would also bring us one step closer to being a world class city! Come on JTA ... You can do it! (The Little Train that could - pun intended) :0)
Quote from: DjDonnyD on April 15, 2014, 09:27:13 PM
Expand the Skyway to Everbank Field and it could be like this every weekend. This is not to mention what it would be like all week with some expansion! It would also bring us one step closer to being a world class city! Come on JTA ... You can do it! (The Little Train that could - pun intended) :0)
Expansion takes money and political will. Right now the city seems to have neither. I do agree with your point however. :)
Expanding the skyway is a waste. It would cost tens of millions just to get a few hundred, maybe a couple thousand more daily riders at most.
For not much more you can basically build a light rail/tram system to somewhere that will serve far more people and in general be far more useful.
Quote from: DjDonnyD on April 15, 2014, 09:27:13 PM
Expand the Skyway to Everbank Field and it could be like this every weekend. This is not to mention what it would be like all week with some expansion! It would also bring us one step closer to being a world class city! Come on JTA ... You can do it! (The Little Train that could - pun intended) :0)
That little rinky dink skyway is definitely not meant to handle football stadium crowds. Holy smokes! That would be an F'ing nightmare. A full on heavy rail system has a hard enough time handling crowds of tens of thousands of fans, let alone this thing. It would be deemed an immediate failure after just one game. Can you imagine advertising "Park N Ride the Skyway" to the game, so that's what fans do? And right off the bat there is a 2 hour wait to get over there as there is simply not enough car capacity and long headways and slow speeds...it would totally ruin the game day experience for thousands of fans.
Quote from: simms3 on April 15, 2014, 09:49:17 PM
Quote from: DjDonnyD on April 15, 2014, 09:27:13 PM
Expand the Skyway to Everbank Field and it could be like this every weekend. This is not to mention what it would be like all week with some expansion! It would also bring us one step closer to being a world class city! Come on JTA ... You can do it! (The Little Train that could - pun intended) :0)
That little rinky dink skyway is definitely not meant to handle football stadium crowds. Holy smokes! That would be an F'ing nightmare. A full on heavy rail system has a hard enough time handling crowds of tens of thousands of fans, let alone this thing. It would be deemed an immediate failure after just one game. Can you imagine advertising "Park N Ride the Skyway" to the game, so that's what fans do? And right off the bat there is a 2 hour wait to get over there as there is simply not enough car capacity and long headways and slow speeds...it would totally ruin the game day experience for thousands of fans.
I don't think that is what DJ was saying Simms. The skyway could however be a nice addition to the current stadium transportation needs. However as already stated, the money and will to do such an expansion is not there. I know that it was really nice to be able to park and ride the rail during One Spark though. Folks were loving it. :)
Quote from: simms3 on April 15, 2014, 09:46:40 PM
For not much more you can basically build a light rail/tram system to somewhere that will serve far more people and in general be far more useful.
This is very true. You could probably get three miles of streetcar for the same cost it would take to get a mile of Skyway. For comparison's sake, three miles is essentially enough track to connect Riverside to Downtown.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 15, 2014, 09:56:15 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 15, 2014, 09:46:40 PM
For not much more you can basically build a light rail/tram system to somewhere that will serve far more people and in general be far more useful.
This is very true. You could probably get three miles of streetcar for the same cost it would take to get a mile of Skyway. For comparison's sake, three miles is essentially enough track to connect Riverside to Downtown.
Which is something you, Ock and others have talked about for a long time. This is something worth pursuing.
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 15, 2014, 09:51:21 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 15, 2014, 09:49:17 PM
Quote from: DjDonnyD on April 15, 2014, 09:27:13 PM
Expand the Skyway to Everbank Field and it could be like this every weekend. This is not to mention what it would be like all week with some expansion! It would also bring us one step closer to being a world class city! Come on JTA ... You can do it! (The Little Train that could - pun intended) :0)
That little rinky dink skyway is definitely not meant to handle football stadium crowds. Holy smokes! That would be an F'ing nightmare. A full on heavy rail system has a hard enough time handling crowds of tens of thousands of fans, let alone this thing. It would be deemed an immediate failure after just one game. Can you imagine advertising "Park N Ride the Skyway" to the game, so that's what fans do? And right off the bat there is a 2 hour wait to get over there as there is simply not enough car capacity and long headways and slow speeds...it would totally ruin the game day experience for thousands of fans.
I don't think that is what DJ was saying Simms. The skyway could however be a nice addition to the current stadium transportation needs. However as already stated, the money and will to do such an expansion is not there. I know that it was really nice to be able to park and ride the rail during One Spark though. Folks were loving it. :)
It would be a horrible idea. What's worse than implementing no idea/nothing? Implementing a horrible idea. Imagine you as a fan having gone through the Skyway debacle once...now after a season the thing in general is known as a debacle, but then media reports that ridership lines have drastically gone down, etc etc. Then do you make the decision to risk it and Park N Ride in, when perhaps thousands of other fans are thinking the same thing?
A football stadium needs to empty 70-80,000 fans in an hour. A heavy rail line (from experience using subway post-event in several cities with varying sizes of systems) will only put a dent in this crowd...and there will still be an insane crowd and push to get on a train.
Per the link below, a line on Jacksonville's Skyway has a maximum capacity of 3,600 per hour.
https://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/jack.htm
Now the standard heavy rail line has a capacity of 30,000 per hour (assuming 10 vehicles per train, 50 seats and a load factor of 2.0 where 50 sitters and 50 standers can fit in a train, so 1,000 passengers per train, with 30 vehicle sets per hour, which equates to 2 minute headways, which is only achieved on a few rail lines globally). I can speak from experience that at 5 minute headways and peak rush hour crowding, individual heavy rail lines are still able to move this number. This would imply a load factor of 4.0. It happens.
The Skyway has one of the lowest capacities for all transit systems. It should never be connected to an arena or a football stadium, and the math is definitely there to support the logic in avoiding crowding situations like those with barely survivable transit systems like the Skyway.
I will say, I've left Citi Field in NY quite a few times from Mets games, and getting on the 7 train is a zoo...and the NYC Transit people really do everything they can. They have full length trains staged just past the stop (the Citi Field stop is the second from the end of the 7 line), plus they run several "super express" trains that even skip the express stops in Queens and go straight to Manhattan.
So, while part of me would love an extension someday for things like a convention center, connecting the arena/ballpark to Bay St, emptying EverBank field isn't going to work.
Now, given that a streetcar is much cheaper, it seems like a moot point anyway. JTA really is in a spot with the system.
I think the only thing that could make the Skyway viable and help DT become a destination would be if full-scale casino construction would be permitted in Florida and a license was awarded to one in the old Shipyards locale. The casino would also have to contain some major retail/entertainment components and possible convention space possibilities (when they move Amtrak service back to the old Jax terminal which would also increase Skyway ridership). You can stipulate the casino help pay a portion of the construction bonds as part of being awarded the license, and expanding it to Metro Park would offer convenient additional satellite parking options not just for the complex but DT as well.
With the increased demand, you can start charging people to use it again, couple-up cars to increase capacity, and sell more advertising on cars and stations. To save costs, go ahead and make It land-based like a trolley, or better yet retrofit that dragstrip off of the Hart Expy. for trains and have all cars exit onto Bay St from the Hart Bridge to spur further development in the area.
I can dream, can't I...
Quote from: Steve on April 15, 2014, 10:42:35 PM
I will say, I've left Citi Field in NY quite a few times from Mets games, and getting on the 7 train is a zoo...and the NYC Transit people really do everything they can. They have full length trains staged just past the stop (the Citi Field stop is the second from the end of the 7 line), plus they run several "super express" trains that even skip the express stops in Queens and go straight to Manhattan.
So, while part of me would love an extension someday for things like a convention center, connecting the arena/ballpark to Bay St, emptying EverBank field isn't going to work.
Now, given that a streetcar is much cheaper, it seems like a moot point anyway. JTA really is in a spot with the system.
^^^There's a raging debate in SF on whether to bring the Warriors into the city from Oakland. Some people are saying "but there's transit nearby so it will work!" while other people are countering "have you ridden BART or MUNI recently?!?". LoL
Speaking of, I was just at a Warriors game (this is NBA, not football, for those who aren't immediately aware...so a crowd that is ~25% of what it would be for a Niners or Raiders game). BART has a stop by Oracle Arena (and Raiders stadium) that serves 2 lines, but only one that goes into SF (the other going up to Richmond). It took me I dunno, maybe 30 minutes of intense pushing to get on a train. And the Transbay Tube on a normal midday non-rush hour ride scares me. Crammed in with people pushed up against the windows is treacherously claustrophobic (5 minute ride under water at full speed with the idea that an earthquake can happen any minute, LoL...at least everyone is in it together, #humanity).
Quote from: JaxJersey-licious on April 15, 2014, 10:44:14 PM
I think the only thing that could make the Skyway viable and help DT become a destination would be if full-scale casino construction would be permitted in Florida and a license was awarded to one in the old Shipyards locale.
Downtown Detroit has three full blown casinos now. The peoplemover actually stops at Greektown Casino. Nevertheless, ridership on the peoplemover has not spiked. Ridership growth on the Skyway is more dependent on it being fully integrated with the rest of the regional transportation network. Out of the Skyway, Detroit Peoplemover and Miami Metromover, Metromover is the only one that gets decent ridership numbers. The difference is it has Metrorail and Tri-Rail to feed riders into it on a daily basis.
Quote from: Steve on April 15, 2014, 10:42:35 PM
I will say, I've left Citi Field in NY quite a few times from Mets games, and getting on the 7 train is a zoo...and the NYC Transit people really do everything they can. They have full length trains staged just past the stop (the Citi Field stop is the second from the end of the 7 line), plus they run several "super express" trains that even skip the express stops in Queens and go straight to Manhattan.
So, while part of me would love an extension someday for things like a convention center, connecting the arena/ballpark to Bay St, emptying EverBank field isn't going to work.
Now, given that a streetcar is much cheaper, it seems like a moot point anyway. JTA really is in a spot with the system.
Detroit's Peoplemover serves the arena where the Red Wings play and Metromover gets pretty close to the Miami Heat's arena. It fills up pretty quick with fans using it as a connection piece to Metrorail. That arena has a seating capacity near 20k.
Quote from: JaxJersey-licious on April 15, 2014, 10:44:14 PM
With the increased demand, you can start charging people to use it again, couple-up cars to increase capacity, and sell more advertising on cars and stations. To save costs, go ahead and make It land-based like a trolley, or better yet retrofit that dragstrip off of the Hart Expy. for trains and have all cars exit onto Bay St from the Hart Bridge to spur further development in the area.
I can dream, can't I...
I might as well be the one to tell you that the monorail cannot be land-based, unless you don't plan on having any at-grade crossings along the monorail's path. That is, where the monorail runs at street level you'd have to block off its path.
Perhaps a simple 1 station extension a hop, skip, and a jump over 95 and the rail yards to the Faemer's Market (and New Town/Mixon Town) be a good first step in achieving higher ridership..
^ that's like a 1+ mile long "simple extension" which would likely cost nearly $50 million
Yeah. I don't think many people really realize how expensive the Skyway is, in comparison with other modes of transit. At $50 million a mile, you're in the price range of Charlotte-style LRT. There's a reason none of these things were built in other cities after Jax, Miami and Detroit got theirs.
If you asked 100 people in Jacksonville about Skyway expansion - 95 of them would say to the Stadium. But as pointed out here - the Skyway was not really designed to haul that sort of high capacity "sporting event" crowd. With a 25-year old system and technology, JTA must decide how it will continue (patchwork the current system or transition into some other type of technology).
A dozen football games does not justify the cost of an expansion to the stadium. However, if the Shipyards sees a major development that drives regular daily traffic - commercial/retail/residential - then you may be able to start that conversation. But it still may not be feasible with the current system for capacity issues alone.
Having a convention center at the courthouse location plus a major development at the Shipyards - maybe a hotel and/condo combination like the W near American Airlines Arena in Dallas.
The one thing One Spark has done is re-open the conversation to all the possibilities for the Skyway/LRT /commuter rail and more.
If the shipyards are developed I could see us winning the next tiger grant. It would be extremely beneficial to have the sky extended towards the stadium with one or two stops along the way. They could probably convince the feds that we need it to go to 5-points and san marco at that point as well.... Just food for thought.
^ I think there's a pretty good chance of getting a TIGER grant for the Brooklyn skyway extension regardless of what might happen at the Shipyards
Nothing significant is going to happen with the Shipyards anytime soon. If we have to wait on the development of the Shipyards to justify expanding the Skyway in that direction, it won't be happening this decade.
I parked at the Convention Center and rode the Skyway to One Spark, more for the novelty factor than anything. It was kind of cool, but it just seems a little rinky-dink and inefficient. Hemming Plaza is only a mile from Convention Center and I think most people could easily walk that (and could use the exercise.)
It's a nice way for people to move around, when they're downtown, but I don't think it will ever become a way for people to get to downtown.
Yes, it was never meant to be used by people to get downtown. There was supposed to be complementing LRT and commuter rail lines to serve that purpose.
Quote from: RiversideHusker on April 18, 2014, 07:51:11 AM
I parked at the Convention Center and rode the Skyway to One Spark, more for the novelty factor than anything. It was kind of cool, but it just seems a little rinky-dink and inefficient. Hemming Plaza is only a mile from Convention Center and I think most people could easily walk that (and could use the exercise.)
It's a nice way for people to move around, when they're downtown, but I don't think it will ever become a way for people to get to downtown.
When it's 100 degrees outside and you're in a suit that mile of air conditioned goodness can't be beat.
Or it's a Florida Summer afternoon and the sky opens up.
Unfortunately, you can keep your suit dry by staying in your SUV and parking in a garage that's attached or immediately adjacent to your office building....
Unless you're lowly and poor and trying to save money where you can by not paying for parking :(
^Then you probably aren't wearing a suit to get to an office or using the Skyway on a regular basis because most of the existing bus lines aren't really integrated with it.
Living on the north bank taking the skyway to work on the south bank. $35k a year and trying to pay off student loans.... gimme a break man haha, I'm trying to be one of the young people who's helping revitalize the core. I'm doing the best I can, straight out of college, with what I've got. I like the skyway and use it on a daily basis to save money / avoid the elements. :o
^Haha, Lake, see what happens when you assume.
Jaxjaguar, I do that too from San Marco. I'm not going to walk to downtown, and I'm certainly not going to pay for parking either.
^No not really. You two, like me, are extreme exceptions. Jaxjaguar is one of a couple of hundred people living in the Northbank that's within walking distance of the Skyway.
I'm just as big of a Skyway fan as anyone. But being in the transportation industry, I'm also a realistic from a technical standpoint. Look at the overall daily ridership statistics versus the cost of operate and expand the Skyway and the numbers will tell you everything you need to know. It will take more than the development of the Shipyards to justify spending upwards of $40-$50 million/mile to extend it down Bay Street.
Massive investment, which is needed to truly attract larger numbers outside of the downtown core, is better reserved for some type of other mode that's cheaper to implement, operate and comes with higher ridership capacity potential. It's why no other cities outside of Miami and Detroit have built something similar in the last 20 years. This is an issue our community will eventually have to address one way or the other.
Extending the Skyway down Bay St seems like a really poor choice compared to something like a streetcar. The high cost of monorail stations means you would probably only get one additional station with the extension, near the arena/stadium. That would effectively bypass all of the establishments on Bay St, whatever ends up on The Shipyards, etc. A streetcar would have much better interactions due to the additional stops and street-level interaction it would have.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 18, 2014, 10:27:29 AM
^I'm just as big of a Skyway fan as anyone. But being in the transportation industry, I'm also a realistic from a technical standpoint. Look at the overall daily ridership statistics versus the cost of operate and expand the Skyway and the numbers will tell you everything you need to know. It will take more than the development of the Shipyards to justify spending upwards of $40-$50 million/mile to extend it down Bay Street.
I think that a new Convention Center, Shipyards development, maybe the Berkman 2 redevelopment, and some other infill can certainly start the conversation toward a Bay Street extension. I'm not really a "Skyway to the Sports Complex" guy. Too limited without all these other elements. But regardless, JTA will have to work out the technology issues first. Can't get parts for what they have now. I do think the Brooklyn extension has merit to connect Brooklyn/San Marco/Downtown.
In other words, a billion worth of private development between downtown and EverBank Field first? In that case, sure. But when the decade arrives for the time to extend down Bay, we'll have to ask ourselves is it worth extending an archaic and obsolete transit mode or going with another type.
I don't really understand why it's soooooo expensive. Yes, I know it's not going to be cheap, but I feel like it could be done for much cheaper.
This was my whole contention with the TIGER grant to extend a quarter mile and build a "simple" station in Brooklyn to serve "all the new apartments". It was well over $20M to do so, and means that this additional federal "equity" in the system ensures that this obsolete system is here to stay. Not only that, $20M for a couple hundred apartments, most of which won't be lived in by Skyway riding customers, and even if they were, that's still a high price to pay. A similar expansion line being built for me is costing $42,500/estimated initial new rider. That would equate to about 500 new daily riders for the Brooklyn extension. 220 Riverside is 294 units. The other development is 310 units. Call it 1.5 people on average per unit and you have 906 new people. Nevermind that the parking ratio is about 1 space per bedroom + room for visitor and commercial shoppers and that not everyone will be working downtown, at New York City transit usage rates you're only 504 people (55.6%) using Skyway to go to work. At SF rates you're down to 294. At Jax rates, I think it would be well under 100, maybe even under 50.
Bottom line is that in my opinion, doing anything with the Skyway is fruitless and setting the city up for a more difficult transition into a better alternative.
Quote from: jaxjaguar on April 18, 2014, 11:43:07 AM
I don't really understand why it's soooooo expensive. Yes, I know it's not going to be cheap, but I feel like it could be done for much cheaper.
And I feel like I should make a million bucks a year but I don't :/
Keep in mind if the Brooklyn expansion happened there are also several large office buildings near-by, soon (if it gets funding worked out) a new YMCA, and the Riverside Arts Market. It's reasonable to believe those who live downtown and on the south bank would use the skyway to get to work, the grocery store and restaurants, ymca, arts martket, etc...and those who lived / visited those areas would travel downtown more frequently. I know i would much rather take the skyway to the grocery store than wait in the nightmare that is the Publix parking lot of 5-points.
I like the Skyway, but for character you can't beat a good old streetcar, trolley, etc. Plus, as pointed out, the on/offs can be increased or decreased as needed; more flexible. The Skway is permanently fixed entrance/exit.
Quote from: simms3 on April 18, 2014, 12:05:16 PM
This was my whole contention with the TIGER grant to extend a quarter mile and build a "simple" station in Brooklyn to serve "all the new apartments". It was well over $20M to do so, and means that this additional federal "equity" in the system ensures that this obsolete system is here to stay.
I'd actually prefer them funding a station at the existing O&M site by dipping into their reserves. In the Brooklyn case, the infrastructure is literally already there. In reality, it doesn't cost $20 million to build a station there. A lot of stuff was thrown into that application to make it eligible for TIGER grant consideration. In addition, that's a situation where the connectivity benefits downtown as a whole, moreso than filling seats on the Skyway.
Quote from: jaxjaguar on April 18, 2014, 01:32:39 PM
It's reasonable to believe those who live downtown and on the south bank would use the skyway to get to work, the grocery store and restaurants, ymca, arts martket, etc...and those who lived / visited those areas would travel downtown more frequently. I know i would much rather take the skyway to the grocery store than wait in the nightmare that is the Publix parking lot of 5-points.
This. IMO, a "no-frills" Brooklyn station is a good trade off because it makes the description above actually feasible regardless of whether one lives in Brooklyn, the Northbank or Southbank. Between the Union Street Winn-Dixie, Brooklyn's Fresh Market and proposed East San Marco's Publix we can forget about seeing any other grocery stores in the walkable heart of DT anytime soon. A "no-frills" Skyway stop at a place the Skyway already goes seems like a no-brainer. My outlook and position starts to change when the discussion moves to actual extensions.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 19, 2014, 01:25:56 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 18, 2014, 12:05:16 PM
This was my whole contention with the TIGER grant to extend a quarter mile and build a "simple" station in Brooklyn to serve "all the new apartments". It was well over $20M to do so, and means that this additional federal "equity" in the system ensures that this obsolete system is here to stay.
I'd actually prefer them funding a station at the existing O&M site by dipping into their reserves. In the Brooklyn case, the infrastructure is literally already there. In reality, it doesn't cost $20 million to build a station there. A lot of stuff was thrown into that application to make it eligible for TIGER grant consideration. In addition, that's a situation where the connectivity benefits downtown as a whole, moreso than filling seats on the Skyway.
Quote from: jaxjaguar on April 18, 2014, 01:32:39 PM
It's reasonable to believe those who live downtown and on the south bank would use the skyway to get to work, the grocery store and restaurants, ymca, arts martket, etc...and those who lived / visited those areas would travel downtown more frequently. I know i would much rather take the skyway to the grocery store than wait in the nightmare that is the Publix parking lot of 5-points.
This. IMO, a "no-frills" Brooklyn station is a good trade off because it makes the description above actually feasible regardless of whether one lives in Brooklyn, the Northbank or Southbank. Between the Union Street Winn-Dixie, Brooklyn's Fresh Market and proposed East San Marco's Publix we can forget about seeing any other grocery stores in the walkable heart of DT anytime soon. A "no-frills" Skyway stop at a place the Skyway already goes seems like a no-brainer. My outlook and position starts to change when the discussion moves to actual extensions.
You're right, the grant application is for more than just a station and guideway extension. A big portion is upgrading the current trains, which desperately need an overhaul to continue service. This was done to meet part of the TIGER criteria.
You'll just have to wait until the grant application and website goes public to understand the project better.
^I was referring to last year's TIGER grant application. I know this next round will be improved and include some things like bike share. I'm interested to see what JTA pulls together.
Agreed. I think folks will be pretty impressed when this year's TIGER grant application is submitted. I believe they are due next week so we should see something soon.
It's going to be quite interesting to see what JTA comes up with.
Quote from: simms3 on April 15, 2014, 09:46:40 PM
Expanding the skyway is a waste. It would cost tens of millions just to get a few hundred, maybe a couple thousand more daily riders at most.
For not much more you can basically build a light rail/tram system to somewhere that will serve far more people and in general be far more useful.
Light-rail is going to cost about the same as a monorail expansion, the key being 'monorail' and not 'people mover.' The Skyway is WAY overbuilt and could serve the city better if all future expansion were to follow a more traditional monorail model beamway. Questions of speed and per hour capacity are also addressed by taking a logical step toward system completion.
Quote from: simms3 on April 15, 2014, 10:31:02 PM
Quote from: Cheshire Cat on April 15, 2014, 09:51:21 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 15, 2014, 09:49:17 PM
Quote from: DjDonnyD on April 15, 2014, 09:27:13 PM
Expand the Skyway to Everbank Field and it could be like this every weekend. This is not to mention what it would be like all week with some expansion! It would also bring us one step closer to being a world class city! Come on JTA ... You can do it! (The Little Train that could - pun intended) :0)
That little rinky dink skyway is definitely not meant to handle football stadium crowds. Holy smokes! That would be an F'ing nightmare. A full on heavy rail system has a hard enough time handling crowds of tens of thousands of fans, let alone this thing. It would be deemed an immediate failure after just one game. Can you imagine advertising "Park N Ride the Skyway" to the game, so that's what fans do? And right off the bat there is a 2 hour wait to get over there as there is simply not enough car capacity and long headways and slow speeds...it would totally ruin the game day experience for thousands of fans.
I don't think that is what DJ was saying Simms. The skyway could however be a nice addition to the current stadium transportation needs. However as already stated, the money and will to do such an expansion is not there. I know that it was really nice to be able to park and ride the rail during One Spark though. Folks were loving it. :)
It would be a horrible idea. What's worse than implementing no idea/nothing? Implementing a horrible idea. Imagine you as a fan having gone through the Skyway debacle once...now after a season the thing in general is known as a debacle, but then media reports that ridership lines have drastically gone down, etc etc. Then do you make the decision to risk it and Park N Ride in, when perhaps thousands of other fans are thinking the same thing?
A football stadium needs to empty 70-80,000 fans in an hour. A heavy rail line (from experience using subway post-event in several cities with varying sizes of systems) will only put a dent in this crowd...and there will still be an insane crowd and push to get on a train.
Per the link below, a line on Jacksonville's Skyway has a maximum capacity of 3,600 per hour.
https://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/jack.htm
Now the standard heavy rail line has a capacity of 30,000 per hour (assuming 10 vehicles per train, 50 seats and a load factor of 2.0 where 50 sitters and 50 standers can fit in a train, so 1,000 passengers per train, with 30 vehicle sets per hour, which equates to 2 minute headways, which is only achieved on a few rail lines globally). I can speak from experience that at 5 minute headways and peak rush hour crowding, individual heavy rail lines are still able to move this number. This would imply a load factor of 4.0. It happens.
The Skyway has one of the lowest capacities for all transit systems. It should never be connected to an arena or a football stadium, and the math is definitely there to support the logic in avoiding crowding situations like those with barely survivable transit systems like the Skyway.
If you hold that the future Skyway follow the current operational and physical model then yes, it would fail and be a disaster running to the football stadium. Updated to modern monorail standards and the Skyway would be quite satisfactory. There is nothing in the current beamway and very little in the station structure that creates a 3,600 ppdph system, it's the trains themselves that limit our system. Our beam is actually wider then the Tokyo monorail system or the new monorail system in São Paulo (highest capacity in the world).
To achieve a heavy rail like capacity figure we would need to modify the stations by narrowing the platform areas and/or setting the beam further out. This work would be restricted to the station areas and the only other track adjustment needed appears to be under the west approach to the Acosta Bridge where there is a very tight clearance. It might turn out that shifting the entire system to a modern narrow beamway would be feasible.
Nowhere, in NYC, São Paulo or the proposed system in Rio de Janeiro, does a football stadium empty at 70,000 persons per hour all going to mass transit. To be realistic, you might get 10% to 20% of that in a few isolated markets but as a whole your probably going to get just over the typical transit, shuttle usage as there are only so many area's on a system as short as ours to park and ride. At 5% of 67,164 your only putting 3,358 passengers on the Skyway and even at 20% riding transit you've just 13,432 boarding the cars. You would have to attract 70% of everyone in Everbank Field just to approach the capacity of the new São Paulo systems hourly capability.
Where do those 70% come from? Jefferson Street, Jacksonville Terminal, Kings Avenue, put together are somewhere in the 7,000 parking spaces range and if you could fill them all to capacity you might get to the 20% of the entire stadium crowd figure, but I doubt it.
The Skyway should have NEVER been built but there was simply no turning the city away from the allusion of free money giving us a transit system reflective of Gotham. The most expensive part is over, we have the bents and panels, we have the stations and we have the control and maintenance facility. We actually did the right thing by converting the horizontal elevator of a people mover into true monorail, but then we continued to build both a people mover and a monorail trackbed.
At this point some modest extension of the Skyway makes sense along with a plan for streetcar, BRT, light-rail and limited commuter rail reaching out beyond the core, integrated into the Skyway system. Brooklyn, San Marco @ Atlantic, UF, Farm Market/Woodstock and East Jacksonville are all viable targets provided we call it DONE. From these points the lower density makes sense to use surface transportation. In short, complete the system as a small high capacity capable monorail at the lowest possible cost.
Arguments such as these are somewhat anti-productive as we get into mindsets of specific targets such as Everbank Field, focus these efforts on an East Jacksonville extension and the 365/7 possibilities are myriad.
Hitachi Monorail Types
Hitachi produces three sizes of monorail train: Small: About 46 persons per carriage. Maximum speed is 60 km/h. Minimum curve radius is 60m. Length of a 4-car train is 38 meters.
Medium: About 95 persons per carriage. Maximum speed is 80 km/h. Minimum curve radius is 100m. Length of a 4-car train is 57 meters. These are the world's second largest monorails.
Large: 110 persons per carriage. Maximum speed is 80 km/h. Minimum curve radius is 100m. Length of a 4-car train is 61 meters. These are the world's largest monorails.
Hitachi Monorail Capacity per HourThe following is the capacity per hour per direction for eight carriage trains with three minute headway:
Small: 7,360 passengers / hour / direction.
Medium: 15,600 passengers / hour / direction. (Recommended for Australian Cities.)
Large: 18,160 passengers / hour / direction.
(*Capacity figures above assume a maximum loading of four passengers per meter2)
Hitachi "Medium" Characteristics Length of a 4-car train is 57 meters.
Width of the carriages is 2.98m compared to 2.650m for a D-Class Siemens tram or 2.92m for a V/Locity train.
Capacity of about 110 persons per carriage (4 passengers / m2)
Maximum operational speed is 80 km/h.
Minimum curve radius is 100m.
Rail is 1.4m high.
Monorail Trains may have between two to eight carriages with a claimed minimum headway of 75 seconds.
Flat floor, walk through layout
Hitachi monorail trains can be between two to eight carriages long with a suggested headway of three minutes.
Hitachi has been building monorails since 1962.
Visit the Hitachi Rail web site for the full technical specifications of their monorail products.
Bombardier "Innovia" Characteristics Length of a 4-car train is 50.1 meters.
Width of the carriages is 3.147m compared to 2.650m for a D-Class Siemens tram or 2.92m for a V/Locity train.
Capacity of about 90 persons per carriage (4 passengers / m2)
Maximum operational speed is 80 km/h.
Minimum curve radius is only 46m.
Rail is 1.22m high.
Monorail Trains may have between two to eight carriages with a claimed minimum headway of 75 seconds.
Flat floor, walk through layout
Driverless operation is possible.
Visit the Bombardier site for more information about bombardier's automated monorail 'Innovia 300' and also this
Scomi Monorail Characteristics Length of a 4-car train is 45.5 meters.
Width of the carriages is 3.0m compared to 2.650m for a D-Class Siemens tram or 2.92m for a V/Locity train.
Capacity of about 90 persons per carriage (4 passengers / m2)
Maximum operational speed is 80 km/h.
Minimum curve radius is 50m.
Rail is 1.2m high.
Monorail Trains may have between two to eight carriages with a claimed minimum headway of 75 seconds.
Walk through layout, but not completely flat-floor.
Visit the Scomi site for more information. See also the video of a four-carriage Scomi Monorail on their test track.
Here is a little video on the newer higher capacity monorails: http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=65368766&server=vimeo.com&show_title=0&show_byline=0&show_portrait=0&color=&fullscreen=1&autoplay=true&api=1&player_id=vimeoPlayer"%20/><embed%20src="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=65368766&server=vimeo.com&show_title=0&show_byline=0&show_portrait=0&color=&fullscreen=1&autoplay=true&api=1&player_id=vimeoPlayer"%20type="application/x-shockwave-flash"%20allowfullscreen="true"%20allowscriptaccess=
I think you and Simms are in agreement. If you're going to expand "the Skyway", whether it's monorail, LRT, streetcar or whatever, it would make sense into looking at some sort of retrofit/different rolling stock altogether over what's currently in operation. The question becomes is it worth working with the elevated structure already in place or abandoning it altogether and going with something that better fits into the surrounding urban context.
You know I'm onboard with with making sense out of the Skyway, originally it made ZERO sense except to starry eyed politico's with visions of 'Sears Towers', 'World Trade Centers' and 'Empire State Buildings,' dancing in their heads. Big mistake, BIG! HUGE!
I tend to lean toward leaving the current elevated line in place and end point terminals at ground level for simplicity. Short simple, slender beam monorail with new equipment reaching into the immediate surrounding urban neighborhoods. Full integrated with the balance of the system with some Surface Rail, Express Bus and BRT, complimenting a gridded network of regular city bus routes.
Once we properly address our transit and complete streets, the dreams of the Skyway's early promoters become more likely to someday happen.
Quote from: simms3 ----I don't think that is what DJ was saying Simms. The skyway could however be a nice addition to the current stadium transportation needs. However as already stated, the money and will to do such an expansion is not there. I know that it was really nice to be able to park and ride the rail during One Spark though. Folks were loving it.
Hey Simms3 --- Thanks! That is just what I ment. I'm not saying lets put everybody on the Skyway every Sunday. I know that would never happen. We all love our cars to much for that and Jax is way to spread out for that. I know when i was a kid in jax in the San Marco area they bragged that someday the skyway would make is easier to get around downtown. It is nice to finally see the thing getting some real use.
And to your point of it only being used on Sundays for games.... Well almost every weekend or every week there is something going on down in that area. The Jags, The Suns, The Fair, The Horse shows, Concerts and so on.... what sooo wrong finally making use of this system? I know we will most likely never see anything else happen with the Skyway. I was just saying..... Sorry if I upset anyone.... That was not my intent... Thanks for listening and Thanks again Simms!
^exactly... I don't know why everyone assumes people would only use the skyway for the Jags games. There are constantly events going on at the arena, fairgrounds, baseball grounds, metro park, etc. An extension to this area would only help with traffic, planning, and space. It would allow for events to essentially close down that entire area (think blues fest on steriods)
How many of you pro-Skyway people are current transit riders? This AM I took a bus to an underground light rail station then took that into a meeting. Then hopped on a streetcar to slide down Market to work. I take heavy rail to sports games. We are all sad to hear the Warriors go to Mission Bay, which is only served by light rail. Fans here no that nothing short of heavy rail is going to get people to and from games. There is theory, there is impractical vision born out of isolation (ie being in Jax), then there is wisdom through experience. The Skyway is a turd that should be abandoned.
Brilliant idea, abandon functional infrastructure funded by money we'd have to pay back.
Quote from: Tacachale on April 22, 2014, 12:26:03 PM
Brilliant idea, abandon functional infrastructure funded by money we'd have to pay back.
^amen... Something else no one seems to understand. If we tear it down or stop using it, we have to pay back the money the federal government spent to build it in the first place.
My wording was poor. But why try to save a sinking ship? Why double down on an obsolete concept? Why use a dated business model? Why invest more in the Skyway? Use what we have, sure, but don't expand it! Why tie ourselves down more to federal financing obligations by using federal dollars to expand or "vastly improve" the Skyway? The city/JTA should come up with a comprehensive, feasible plan for superior transit infrastructure that is cost effective. Vastly improving the bus system using fewer dollars than expanding the Skyway by 1 station and a quarter mile of track will be more useful to more people and potentially have further reaching effects.
Brooklyn isn't developing because there is transit there. TOD is a moot point as the chicken came before the egg. We can't have all this stuff built through private means using the concepts of supply and demand, then build some instigating effect and say that transit was a causation and that Brooklyn developments are TOD. Not how it works. Build an effective transit system as the egg, and then the chicken will hatch in the form of real TOD, born out of demand increased through market reactive agents (transit).
Quote from: simms3 on April 22, 2014, 11:13:50 AM
We are all sad to hear the Warriors go to Mission Bay, which is only served by light rail.
and don't forget the Niners leaving for a city more than 1 hour away!
^^^Well that's a totally separate issue. Where the Niners were (Candlestick Point) is going to be turned into mass planned high rise market rate and affordable residential, and a mix of commercial and institutional uses (Vancouver style planning), which is desperately needed in the city far more than a football stadium and surrounding surface lots. Many cities have been shipping their NFL teams out to suburban areas.
However, an arena and a ballpark are a different story and done appropriately can really become a catalyst for a specific type of mass redevelopment. So the Warriors' move into SF is seen as a plus for the city overall. And Oakland is trying to see how it can partner with the A's and community redevelopment agencies to do something similar over there.
However, those of us who take public transit to games (not as common for football, but predominant for arena or ballpark events) are wary of logistics. Even lay people (myself included) know the limitations of the various types of transit for specific purposes, and we know this through practical everyday application, not through studies, classes, internet boards, or hypothetical wishing. Nothing worse than a highly necessary, but impractical transit system. Tying transit into event usage is tricky, but must be done carefully and wisely. If we are deathly afraid of the end result of tying the country's 2nd most heavily used LRT system to a 20,000 seat arena here in SF, you can imagine where I come from at the thought of tying a rinky dink people mover system to a 75,000 seat football stadium. LoL
What is the capacity of water taxis and bike taxis delivering people to the stadium area? Should they not function if they can't handle a certain minimum load?
I usually either completely agree or completely disagree with you Simms, but as polarizing as your views might be, on this one I'm in between. I agree with part of your conclusion though the logic you use to get there is contradictory. You argue against extension because there won't be enough usage and at the same time say that the system won't be able to handle the number of potential riders. You built an argument that Jax transit riders can't compare to SF riders and then you use SF as a comparison to make your point. It doesn't make sense, at least to me.
As for expansion, at the present time it seems like the only ones that would ever make sense are into Brooklyn to connect to a future streetcar system in Riverside and over the FEC tracks to get to San Marco Square and connect to future commuter rail on the SE corridor. I could also imagine a logical extension farther down Bay Street that might connect to another streetcar system to the Stadium and Eastside.
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on April 22, 2014, 04:33:02 PM
What is the capacity of water taxis and bike taxis delivering people to the stadium area? Should they not function if they can't handle a certain minimum load?
I usually either completely agree or completely disagree with you Simms, but as polarizing as your views might be, on this one I'm in between. I agree with part of your conclusion though the logic you use to get there is contradictory. You argue against extension because there won't be enough usage and at the same time say that the system won't be able to handle the number of potential riders. You built an argument that Jax transit riders can't compare to SF riders and then you use SF as a comparison to make your point. It doesn't make sense, at least to me.
As for expansion, at the present time it seems like the only ones that would ever make sense are into Brooklyn to connect to a future streetcar system in Riverside and over the FEC tracks to get to San Marco Square and connect to future commuter rail on the SE corridor. I could also imagine a logical extension farther down Bay Street that might connect to another streetcar system to the Stadium and Eastside.
There are several ways the connectivity to the skyway can be improved. You have hit on a few here. There are certainly ways to improve usage and we need to focus on those because as has been stated several times already, this is a project that the city cannot simply walk away from. All the expended money would have to be repaid and that idea is a non starter.
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on April 22, 2014, 04:33:02 PM
What is the capacity of water taxis and bike taxis delivering people to the stadium area? Should they not function if they can't handle a certain minimum load?
I usually either completely agree or completely disagree with you Simms, but as polarizing as your views might be, on this one I'm in between. I agree with part of your conclusion though the logic you use to get there is contradictory. You argue against extension because there won't be enough usage and at the same time say that the system won't be able to handle the number of potential riders. You built an argument that Jax transit riders can't compare to SF riders and then you use SF as a comparison to make your point. It doesn't make sense, at least to me.
As for expansion, at the present time it seems like the only ones that would ever make sense are into Brooklyn to connect to a future streetcar system in Riverside and over the FEC tracks to get to San Marco Square and connect to future commuter rail on the SE corridor. I could also imagine a logical extension farther down Bay Street that might connect to another streetcar system to the Stadium and Eastside.
^^^But this is where practicality is an issue as well. I have always been super opposed to tying a streetcar system into the Skyway system, so that there is an "easy" transfer for riders looking to complete the leg into downtown. As anyone who rides transit outside of European cities and NYC/DC knows, transfers suck.
Given the nature of the Skyway, its route and technology, upgrades that improve headways at individual stations are pretty unlikely. So the wait alone while you transfer from one mode to another will be enough to dissuade the general public from consistent use. But that's not all...you're talking two above ground systems in FL. There's a constant threat of rain and extreme heat. Having to walk in that because the city decided to force a transfer unnecessarily will not make the potential rider base happy after a couple of unpleasant experiences.
It is of my opinion, born of experience now being carless and captive to transit, that the fewer transfers between systems the better, the more protected the system in inhospitable climates the better, and the faster and more reliable the system the better.
The other big problem with systems that cannot handle capacity is delays. I've used two light rail lines, one very extensively, that are basically at capacity. Delays must be factored into commute times as people crowd the cars, the doors can't shut, and general chaos ensues. This is a fear locally here that already crowded 2-car MUNI LRT trains will be an absolute clusterf**k for arena events, and this is a well founded fear.
Maybe the Skyway goes to the Stadium and puts an unnoticeable dent in fan disbursement, but to a much earlier point of mine, it will be chaos. What was supposed to be 8 minute headways (moving a few hundred fans out of 70,000 every 8 minutes or so) will easily turn into 10 minute headways as people try to jam on and cause delays. This will be inevitable. It's inevitable even with heavy rail, however, advanced heavy rail systems include massively long cars and short headways that are adaptable for special events much moreso than other forms of fixed transit.
My wishes are for the city to develop an appropriate fixed rail system along a corridor that can support higher density and new development, and for this system to go from a clear Point A directly into downtown as an initial Point B, and perhaps through downtown to another side as a Point C. Forget the Skyway as a black box to sink more money into.
I'm even a little wishy on doing streetcar into Avondale, but mainly because I don't foresee any development opportunities there or any political will to demolish a few "historic" homes to be replaced by higher density mixed-use apartments. But Springfield and San Marco (a north-south corridor) could potentially be fantastic. Shands is a superb endpoint destination as is San Marco Square. So long as higher density is encouraged.
Quote from: simms3 on April 22, 2014, 04:49:25 PM
^^^But this is where practicality is an issue as well. I have always been super opposed to tying a streetcar system into the Skyway system, so that there is an "easy" transfer for riders looking to complete the leg into downtown. As anyone who rides transit outside of European cities and NYC/DC knows, transfers suck.
Simms you are like a drama looking for a movie whenever you launch on the 'isolated (and thus ignorant) Jacksonville theme,' that permeates your posts. I would venture to say that just among those who are currently posting in this thread there are those with much more travel, world city, urban and transportation experiences. This is not to say your opinion isn't welcome, in fact the questions you pose are often raised by those outside of the industry as well as among the general public.
The major point that we all seem to agree on is that Jacksonville has lost it's will to lead to the point where you and many others seem to think it is incapable of ever revisiting it's once held regional greatness. We might never capture Atlanta's numbers but we can design the airports Atlanta flies out of. We might not have Orlando's entertainment industry, but we can sell them every napkin, shower curtain and drinking glass they use. Port Tampa carry's far more tonnage then we do but they can't off load the containers of pens they ink their contracts with. We don't smell like Bellingrath Gardens, but we manufacture the oil in the perfumes on the neck of every Belle in the place. Jacksonville isn't out of this game by a long shot and those that have answers need to step up and be counted, loud and clear. (End of tirade ;))
QuoteGiven the nature of the Skyway, its route and technology, upgrades that improve headways at individual stations are pretty unlikely.
Overcome the will to move forward and the above statement is groundless, there are many ways to fix a ill planned rail system. We could streamline the whole operation with the addition of a single track switch realignment just west of Central Station. Automatic Train Control (ATC), additional and MODERN cars would go far to reshape the Skyway.
So the wait alone while you transfer from one mode to another will be enough to dissuade the general public from consistent use.
The key in downtown and in San Marco and above UF Hospital is called 'SEAMLESS CONNECTIONS' with the ATC and additional cars there shouldn't be any wait at the station for the portion of the load that is transferring. No one is suggesting that we force everyone to get off a streetcar or BRT in Brooklyn, and drive them onto the Skyway. A streetcar coming in from Brooklyn can easily head straight up Water/Independence to the Hyatt, before turning north on Newnan. A transfer station at both Brooklyn and Newnan would allow for a seamless transfer to Skyway, a ground level station at UF and San Marco, would allow seamless movement between commuter rail/light rail and Skyway.
QuoteBut that's not all...you're talking two above ground systems in FL. There's a constant threat of rain and extreme heat. Having to walk in that because the city decided to force a transfer unnecessarily will not make the potential rider base happy after a couple of unpleasant experiences.
Not highly likely you'd build a subway in Florida - though Jacksonville once had a very short segment known as 'The Subway.' Light rail works just fine in Minneapolis, Seattle, Cleveland, Boston and many other cites with weather far more damaging then what you've just described. This point is a non issue.
QuoteIt is of my opinion, born of experience now being carless and captive to transit, that the fewer transfers between systems the better, the more protected the system in inhospitable climates the better, and the faster and more reliable the system the better.
No argument here, a single transfer is quite the world norm.
The other big problem with systems that cannot handle capacity is delays. I've used two light rail lines, one very extensively, that are basically at capacity. Delays must be factored into commute times as people crowd the cars, the doors can't shut, and general chaos ensues. This is a fear locally here that already crowded 2-car MUNI LRT trains will be an absolute clusterf**k for arena events, and this is a well founded fear.
Maybe the Skyway goes to the Stadium and puts an unnoticeable dent in fan disbursement, but to a much earlier point of mine, it will be chaos. What was supposed to be 8 minute headways (moving a few hundred fans out of 70,000 every 8 minutes or so) will easily turn into 10 minute headways as people try to jam on and cause delays. This will be inevitable. It's inevitable even with heavy rail, however, advanced heavy rail systems include massively long cars and short headways that are adaptable for special events much moreso than other forms of fixed transit.
Same technology, different day, Disney's monorail regular ally carries 157,000 passengers a day, and the Chongqing Rail Transit in Chongqing, China holds the record for the world's busiest monorail system with over 500,000 riders per day on average on Line 3 alone... So capacity if the system were properly rebuilt isn't our problem. Likewise light-rail can be entrained so 4 units @ 175-220 persons each? How about 8 units? Running on five minute headways for special events using all doors and remote parking facilities. 21,000+ in an hour. A four car Innovia Monorail running in 75 second headways would be able to move 24,000+ in an hour... Carriage width on any of the 4 major monorail products carriages is right at 3m+ with a couple even wider, compared to 2.650m for a D-Class Siemens tram or 2.92m for a V/Locity train ABOVE THE STREETS. It's all rather silly anyway as the locals have the highest praise for the JTA stadium shuttles and they handle no where near this load.
QuoteMy wishes are for the city to develop an appropriate fixed rail system along a corridor that can support higher density and new development, and for this system to go from a clear Point A directly into downtown as an initial Point B, and perhaps through downtown to another side as a Point C. Forget the Skyway as a black box to sink more money into.
Which is exactly what I've been proposing for 34 years. Streetcar runs to Fairfax/Roosevelt Plaza area via Riverside-Avondale, along both Water/Independence and Duval/Monroe through downtown east-west, then north to Gateway via the old F&J (my story on 'The Electric 7'). A second streetcar route would run from Riverside @ Forrest over to Myrtle, up Myrtle THROUGH THE SUBWAY and into JTA property skirting west Durkeeville, then hooking back east on the old 'S' line to the Gateway route @ Springfield Rail Yard, this line could then continue along the CSX right-of-way (which should be city owned) to Airport Road. Both northerly S and 7 Streetcars would operate as limited stop, exclusive right-of-way rapid streetcar.
Skyway reaches UF via Springfield Park (buffer areas), San Marco @ Atlantic, Arena/East Side @ Randolph, Brooklyn @ Forrest and possibly the Farmers Market/Woodstock Park.
Add Commuter Rail (DMU/RDC) south to Green Cove Springs along the A line and St. Augustine along the FEC RY.
Highway 21/Park, Post, Cassat, Normandy, Pearl-Lem Turner, Beach and San Jose would have basic to bronze level BRT. Arlington Expressway, Southside, JTB and a short piece of 95 South would have Silver level BRT. Result? Comprehensive, go anywhere transit, connected by a fleet of city buses... including urban electrics.
QuoteI'm even a little wishy on doing streetcar into Avondale, but mainly because I don't foresee any development opportunities there or any political will to demolish a few "historic" homes to be replaced by higher density mixed-use apartments. But Springfield and San Marco (a north-south corridor) could potentially be fantastic. Shands is a superb endpoint destination as is San Marco Square. So long as higher density is encouraged.
As you see above, I'd pass through Avondale, restoring the community to its roots. The corner of Ingle and St. Johns BTW tells it all... Ingle was the President of the Jacksonville Traction Company. The development of mid rise condos would take off around the Roosevelt Plaza neighborhoods. Shands is now UF and it would be (a block north at the old S LINE) a mini-hub for streetcar, skyway, BRT and city bus routes.
Ock, many cities have totally different dynamics than Jax. I don't need to get into specifics that you already know, but many cities where people "gladly brave worse weather and make 20 transfers before arriving at their destination" are cities with Manhattan densities, extreme expenses/hassles with owning cars and intense congestion (even with cars) that will never be seen in the likes of Jax, and developed cultures of transit, and systems that are actually convenient (which is a rarity in the entire USA...I'll take most European metro systems of average size over the MTA or DC Metro, the two best systems in our country).
Do you honestly think Jax will develop a culture of transit ridership immediately even if they build something? It will take time, "training", and a different development style (i.e. denser and a little more car-inconvenient). Charlotte and Houston have achieved *decent* ridership per mile on short feeder lines either connecting two CBDs exponentially larger than DT Jax (Houston's case), or in Charlotte's case a feeder line filled with development opportunity (opportunity that you know as well as I know won't happen in Avondale or even Riverside) connecting to a much larger downtown than DT Jax. Minneapolis already apparently had a culture of riding transit, given its far more progressive population and densely built environment - its bus system has pretty darn high ridership for a city its size.
I'm familiar enough with Jax to know that it's far too convenient to own and use a car. Not much traffic, wide open pothole free roads (relatively), timed lights, easy driving, etc etc. I can picture a single line similar to Charlotte's, Austin's, or Norfolk's single line systems working well if given a chance to see TOD sprout up along it (i.e. the route you discussed). But Jax is part of the Deep South/Sunbelt and this entire region of the country has a seemingly difficult time adopting transit and developing to densities that support transit.
I'm sure most other posters on here are far far more traveled than I, but it doesn't take a genius to realize any of this if you are traveled and transit-weathered. I've also been permanently gone from Jax for 8 years, which is not a short amount of time to experience other systems and perspectives in our modern 21st century timeframe (not that I never traveled before leaving Jax either).
For an inkling of LRT ridership achieved over a more citywide footprint along a very fully developed system connecting dense corridors and multiple CBDs in one of the country's and certainly the south's largest cities - Dallas - ridership is 1,155 per route mile for avg weekday ridership, over 85 miles (98,300 avg weekday riders). I think that's a fair number to expect in the SE for a fully developed system. I know ridership is increasing, but to reach "big city" ridership density levels, Dallas has a very very long way to go. I also know it's replacing an HRT system, but beside the point since a lot of HRT systems that extend out into the burbs of other metros also still have far higher ridership levels (which as you know probably partly goes with the increased capacity of the trains...though I doubt DART trains are anywhere near capacity now).
Conversely, the other SE/Sunbelt systems are single, starter line systems and achieve higher ridership/mile, but much lower ridership overall. Charlotte achieves 1,605 riders per mile on a short, single 9.6 mile line along its most dense mixed-use corridor. Houston achieves 5,105 per mile on a similar 12.8 mile route connecting two huge CBDs (downtown and TMC). Calgary, Boston, San Francisco, and Toronto are just on a whole different level. In fact, SF's Central Subway project, which is LRT, like Houston's line, is projected to have a ridership of over 20,000 per mile over its 1.7 mile length (and that for a route many say is utterly useless...I can only imagine the projection for a line down Geary which has the country's most congested bus line).
Therefore I think it's reasonable to surmise that in some cities people might be willing (or forced) to brave a bit more to ride transit than in Jax.
All one has to do is look at Miami's metro line to see how difficult it is to make transit catch on significantly in FL. Miami, with a density of 12,139 ppsm, a huge captured transit ridership base, TOD done pretty well, multiple CBDs and destinations connected, and horrible transit, still has 64% the ridership per mile of MARTA, a system viewed by many as one with many flaws. How do you explain that one, Ock? I've ridden Metrorail - I've connected to it using TriRail and connected to the People Mover downtown, as well. It's a pretty comprehensive system...why don't people down there ride it?
Metrorail misses several major destinations in Miami. South Beach, Coral Gables, Design District, the Marlins ballpark, cruise terminal, etc. It connects well with Tri-Rail but Tri-Rail misses all the downtowns of South Florida's several cities.
In Atlanta, MARTA has north-south and east-west lines that tie in pretty well with most of Atlanta's core destinations by comparison. I believe Metrorail saw a significant boost in daily ridership from the short extension to MIA a year or two back.
My guess is if there were investments in connecting it to a place like South Beach or the cruise terminal (which means the train would directly connect them to MIA), ridership would go through the roof.
That's a good point, but are you then saying that Miami needs to rely on tourists/visitors to the city for its ridership numbers to climb to mere average?
What Metrorail does hit are several dense, economically disparaged neighborhoods with low car ownership, several hospitals including the key major ones (incl Jackson/U Miami), downtown and Brickell Ave, Coconut Grove, University of Miami, Kendall, and severall malls (including Dadeland). I think it already hits quite a bit, though obviously, as with any metro in this country, can be improved.
The commuter rail doesn't hit downtown, though is tied into downtown Miami with metrorail. However, I can name other commuter rail systems that aren't designed with convenience in mind (Caltrains) and don't hit downtown or heavy rail (Caltrains) with much much much higher ridership. Trirail at least connects 3 large cities and allows for transfers. It also directly hits three major airports (MIA, FTL, and Palm Beach).
The fact is ridership of various rail systems in South FL is dismally low even though many ingredients are in place that would otherwise likely result in higher ridership in other cities. What is it about ridership down there? Sure, transit in S FL is not comparable to transit in Boston (which imo is superior even than in DC for the time being), but it's good enough such that countless cities in this country would kill to have what they have down there.
Atlanta's system (which I HATE for the record) also misses *a lot*. Doesn't hit Turner Field, which may be part of the reason why they are moving to Cobb County. Doesn't hit most of Buckhead within walking distance and the station there was so poorly connected above the highway that they had to spend $18M on special walkways to adjoining office towers. Doesn't hit Vinings/Galleria area. Doesn't hit Emory. Doesn't serve Atlanta's densest most walkable neighborhoods on the eastside. It can easily be argued that the MARTA system is disgustingly inadequate. Yet it achieves much higher ridership than Metrorail. Atlanta density is also 1/3 what it is in Miami. That really says something.
Quote from: simms3 on April 22, 2014, 11:07:05 PM
That's a good point, but are you then saying that Miami needs to rely on tourists/visitors to the city for its ridership numbers to climb to mere average?
No. I'm just saying any transit spine needs to hit as many major walkable destinations as possible. In Miami, they found a way to miss most of them for two decades. Regarding South Beach/Miami Beach, while most of us think of it as a tourism mecca, it is actually a city with a population density of nearly 13,000 residents/square mile. In any circumstance, you should want your local mass transit spine to serve such a pedestrian scale setting in some efficient manner. The fact that it also has millions of tourist flocking to it is icing on the cake.
QuoteWhat Metrorail does hit are several dense, economically disparaged neighborhoods with low car ownership, several hospitals including the key major ones (incl Jackson/U Miami), downtown and Brickell Ave, Coconut Grove, University of Miami, Kendall, and severall malls (including Dadeland). I think it already hits quite a bit, though obviously, as with any metro in this country, can be improved.
Metrorail does serve downtown and Brickell well, via the Metromover connection but Metrorail misses the core of Coconut Grove. Kendall has developed from a sprawling center into a major TOD district because of Metrorail, which is a testament to Miami-Dade's push to facilitate TOD around existing stations over the last decade or so. I wish JTA would attempt to at least aggressively seek infill development on land it owns adjacent to it's existing Skyway stations because that's as close to TOD as Jax will be getting anytime soon.
QuoteThe commuter rail doesn't hit downtown, though is tied into downtown Miami with metrorail. However, I can name other commuter rail systems that aren't designed with convenience in mind (Caltrains) and don't hit downtown or heavy rail (Caltrains) with much much much higher ridership. Trirail at least connects 3 large cities and allows for transfers. It also directly hits three major airports (MIA, FTL, and Palm Beach).
Tri-Rail only hits MIA (there's a monorail you can transfer to access MIA terminals. It get's close to FTL and Palm Beach but there's a 14-20ish lane interstate and a mile or so of streets to between them, so some type of stronger connectivity Is needed. Nevertheless, it still misses the heart of every community it serves, simply because the tracks are a couple of miles west. It will be interesting to see what type of numbers they get if they can find the cash to add a second line to the FEC by piggybacking AAF track capacity improvements.
QuoteThe fact is ridership of various rail systems in South FL is dismally low even though many ingredients are in place that would otherwise likely result in higher ridership in other cities. What is it about ridership down there? Sure, transit in S FL is not comparable to transit in Boston (which imo is superior even than in DC for the time being), but it's good enough such that countless cities in this country would kill to have what they have down there.
I believe missing most of South Florida's major destinations, especially those where parking is an issue, is a route cause. Sure, it hits transit dependent communities but when it misses places like Miami Beach, not only does it miss tourist, it also misses a chance in delivering the hundreds of thousands of everyday workers needed to operate those hotels and restaurants.
QuoteAtlanta's system (which I HATE for the record) also misses *a lot*. Doesn't hit Turner Field, which may be part of the reason why they are moving to Cobb County. Doesn't hit most of Buckhead within walking distance and the station there was so poorly connected above the highway that they had to spend $18M on special walkways to adjoining office towers. Doesn't hit Vinings/Galleria area. Doesn't hit Emory. Doesn't serve Atlanta's densest most walkable neighborhoods on the eastside. It can easily be argued that the MARTA system is disgustingly inadequate. Yet it achieves much higher ridership than Metrorail. Atlanta density is also 1/3 what it is in Miami. That really says something.
MARTA is a 48 mile, two corridor heavy rail system while Metrorail is half that size, being a one line 24 mile corridor. Add a five to ten mile east/west corridor that terminates at the beach and Miami's numbers would dramatically rise. If Metrorail had 48 miles of system to play with, like Atlanta, that would be more than enough to serve just about everything worth serving in the core area of Miami-Dade, considering how compact things are down there.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 06:58:04 AM
Quote from: simms3 on April 22, 2014, 11:07:05 PM
That's a good point, but are you then saying that Miami needs to rely on tourists/visitors to the city for its ridership numbers to climb to mere average?
No. I'm just saying any transit spine needs to hit as many major walkable destinations as possible. In Miami, they found a way to miss most of them for two decades. Regarding South Beach/Miami Beach, while most of us think of it as a tourism mecca, it is actually a city with a population density of nearly 13,000 residents/square mile. In any circumstance, you should want your local mass transit spine to serve such a pedestrian scale setting in some efficient manner. The fact that it also has millions of tourist flocking to it is icing on the cake.
Miami Beach adds only a 100,00 more residents (many of whom are wealthy "islander" types who wouldn't necessarily be transit commuters) and no office (though I see your point below about the many service industry/retail workers that could use it for commuting, and I agree). I agree Metrorail misses the boat by not connecting it, but I don't think it should account for the system having dismal ridership. A Miami Beach line would be more of a tourist service and my company would certainly benefit, since due to tourism, we have picked up a good bit of Miami Beach retail.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 06:58:04 AM
Quote from: simms3 on April 22, 2014, 11:07:05 PMThe commuter rail doesn't hit downtown, though is tied into downtown Miami with metrorail. However, I can name other commuter rail systems that aren't designed with convenience in mind (Caltrains) and don't hit downtown or heavy rail (Caltrains) with much much much higher ridership. Trirail at least connects 3 large cities and allows for transfers. It also directly hits three major airports (MIA, FTL, and Palm Beach).
Tri-Rail only hits MIA (there's a monorail you can transfer to access MIA terminals. It get's close to FTL and Palm Beach but there's a 14-20ish lane interstate and a mile or so of streets to between them, so some type of stronger connectivity Is needed. Nevertheless, it still misses the heart of every community it serves, simply because the tracks are a couple of miles west. It will be interesting to see what type of numbers they get if they can find the cash to add a second line to the FEC by piggybacking AAF track capacity improvements.
There is a shuttle from FTL. I've never flown into Palm Beach, so perhaps you're right. But I've taken Trirail in to downtown Miami (via shuttle and Metrorail) from FTL. It could be far worse. I don't personally think TriRail has much of an excuse since Caltrains is arguably in the same boat and on the "wrong side of the highway (101)", a factor discussed in the lack of recent renewals/expansions in San Mateo County. However, Caltrains is at capacity whereas TriRail is virtually empty in comparison.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 06:58:04 AM
Quote from: simms3 on April 22, 2014, 11:07:05 PMThe fact is ridership of various rail systems in South FL is dismally low even though many ingredients are in place that would otherwise likely result in higher ridership in other cities. What is it about ridership down there? Sure, transit in S FL is not comparable to transit in Boston (which imo is superior even than in DC for the time being), but it's good enough such that countless cities in this country would kill to have what they have down there.
I believe missing most of South Florida's major destinations, especially those where parking is an issue, is a route cause. Sure, it hits transit dependent communities but when it misses places like Miami Beach, not only does it miss tourist, it also misses a chance in delivering the hundreds of thousands of everyday workers needed to operate those hotels and restaurants.
Now here you make a good point, but I don't think hundreds of thousands work in Miami Beach. There are very few downtowns in America that even have "hundreds of thousands" of workers, however, yes, the service industry would benefit from a Miami Beach connection.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 06:58:04 AM
Quote from: simms3 on April 22, 2014, 11:07:05 PMAtlanta's system (which I HATE for the record) also misses *a lot*. Doesn't hit Turner Field, which may be part of the reason why they are moving to Cobb County. Doesn't hit most of Buckhead within walking distance and the station there was so poorly connected above the highway that they had to spend $18M on special walkways to adjoining office towers. Doesn't hit Vinings/Galleria area. Doesn't hit Emory. Doesn't serve Atlanta's densest most walkable neighborhoods on the eastside. It can easily be argued that the MARTA system is disgustingly inadequate. Yet it achieves much higher ridership than Metrorail. Atlanta density is also 1/3 what it is in Miami. That really says something.
MARTA is a 48 mile, two corridor heavy rail system while Metrorail is half that size, being a one line 24 mile corridor. Add a five to ten mile east/west corridor that terminates at the beach and Miami's numbers would dramatically rise. If Metrorail had 48 miles of system to play with, like Atlanta, that would be more than enough to serve just about everything worth serving in the core area of Miami-Dade, considering how compact things are down there.
I'm mainly focused on ridership per mile rather than absolute numbers. I don't think there is
anyone in Atlanta that will tell you MARTA effectively serves everything worth serving in its square mileage. Speaking of which, 24 miles of track goes A LOT further in much denser south FL than it would in sprawly Atlanta, so I'm not hung up on mileage either. LA and Toronto don't have much track mileage, either, and achieve intense ridership per mile. I wouldn't say MetroRail and MARTA are all that different in what they connect, in the grand scheme of things...Metrorail certainly connects to residential neighborhoods far better than MARTA does, and the density of Miami helps. What it doesn't have that MARTA has to a larger degree is Park N Ride (go figure).
Los Angeles (8,225 ppsm avg density...though higher where track is) - 17 miles track - 9,667 riders per mile
I just think there is less of a "transit" culture in SFL. Speaking of - I snapped the two pics below at nearly 1 AM my time last night:
(http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/gearybus1_zps69a17ea7.jpg)
(http://i916.photobucket.com/albums/ad1/jsimms3/gearybus2_zps986bef03.jpg)
Forgive the quality since I refuse to get a new phone until I need one (3 yr iPhone), but left the BFs to go home so I could wake up early for a call...we're separated by 2 bus routes, the second of which I didn't get a pic of since I got a side facing seat as opposed to the back. This is one of those "extended" length busses, and obviously decent ridership 24-7. This is due to a transit "culture" that is ingrained in people here. I think there are factors at play, but my biggest points about bringing Miami into this are to point out that city by city, metro by metro, numbers on paper aren't always explainable.
If you put the same people living in SF in Miami, immediately I guarantee you MetroRail ridership would skyrocket through the roof. Over time, people may figure out that having a car is pretty convenient there and more and more people might switch to the car, since parking is free and abundant. However, two different populations produce two different results.
I worry in Jacksonville's case that we aren't thinking rationally how to tackle transit as it should be tackled in Jax. Our population density is LOW. We are holding onto every structure in Avondale without budge. And we think that a people mover (even if we were to invest many millions to upgrade it, let alone expand it) can serve a 20,000 seat arena, a 10,000 seat baseball park, and a 75,000 seat football stadium. What if there are events in all 3? That's over 100,000 fans!
We need to think about resources, practicality, where we can actually do TOD here in Jax, and politics. Adding to a somewhat failed system is not practical, feasible, doesn't spur TOD really (unless you're much much bigger Miami), and is not politically savvy given the nature of the history of the system, projections, issues, and our population.
That's all I'm saying...
Late to the conversation here, but +1 to whoever said the skyway just wasn't built to handle any real crowds.
We took the skyway over to One spark from Kings avenue, but on the return trip, due to an extremely long line at Hemming Plaza we just walked back to Kings Avenue Station in less time than it would've taken waiting on the next shuttle to come by.
Quote from: simms3 on April 23, 2014, 09:17:27 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 06:58:04 AM
Quote from: simms3 on April 22, 2014, 11:07:05 PM
That's a good point, but are you then saying that Miami needs to rely on tourists/visitors to the city for its ridership numbers to climb to mere average?
No. I'm just saying any transit spine needs to hit as many major walkable destinations as possible. In Miami, they found a way to miss most of them for two decades. Regarding South Beach/Miami Beach, while most of us think of it as a tourism mecca, it is actually a city with a population density of nearly 13,000 residents/square mile. In any circumstance, you should want your local mass transit spine to serve such a pedestrian scale setting in some efficient manner. The fact that it also has millions of tourist flocking to it is icing on the cake.
Miami Beach adds only a 100,00 more residents (many of whom are wealthy "islander" types who wouldn't necessarily be transit commuters) and no office (though I see your point below about the many service industry/retail workers that could use it for commuting, and I agree). I agree Metrorail misses the boat by not connecting it, but I don't think it should account for the system having dismal ridership. A Miami Beach line would be more of a tourist service and my company would certainly benefit, since due to tourism, we have picked up a good bit of Miami Beach retail.
I was only using Miami Beach as an example of a missed opportunity. There are actually several that a single 10-14 mile east west line could hit before terminating at Miami Beach. Such spots include FIU, Dolphin Mall, Coral Gables, Port Miami, Little Havana and a host of dense working class communities. Ridership per mile dramatically increases when you have a transit network that's efficient, no matter the overall length and absolute number. For example, even today, despite all the bad press, the Skyway's ridership per mile is tops when it comes to JTA's overall system. As you mentioned, Houston's is another good example. Only 7.5 miles initially but tying two major employment centers (DT and TMC) and a university together. Tying the right destinations together from the start is just as important on ridership per mile as anything else, regardless of system length. Miami's (the Skyway too) misses the mark in my book. However, further clouding the Skyway is the fact that the mode isn't really a financially viable one compared to other common alternatives out there.
QuoteI worry in Jacksonville's case that we aren't thinking rationally how to tackle transit as it should be tackled in Jax. Our population density is LOW. We are holding onto every structure in Avondale without budge. And we think that a people mover (even if we were to invest many millions to upgrade it, let alone expand it) can serve a 20,000 seat arena, a 10,000 seat baseball park, and a 75,000 seat football stadium. What if there are events in all 3? That's over 100,000 fans!
We need to think about resources, practicality, where we can actually do TOD here in Jax, and politics. Adding to a somewhat failed system is not practical, feasible, doesn't spur TOD really (unless you're much much bigger Miami), and is not politically savvy given the nature of the history of the system, projections, issues, and our population.
That's all I'm saying...
I agree here. Jax should be treated and planned for like it is. A small 30 square mile city surrounded by 770 square miles of Duval County suburbs. Take the Charlotte, Houston, Salt Lake City, San Diego, Norfolk path and start with something small but effective (coordinated with land use/zoning policies that encourage higher densities) and expand incrementally as time goes on. If a person chooses to live in a place like Mandarin or Argyle, it will just have to come with the knowledge that high frequency transit service may not be available that far out from the actual true city initially. This is a locational decision that residents living in other American cities (even NYC and Chicago) have to make. Some places will be better served via transit and others won't.
The SkyWay wouldn't be the soul mode of transportation, Lake. It's merely a means for people who WANT to stay after the event is over to easily get into the core without dealing with a traffic nightmare. And then for those who don't want to park close to the stadium to have the option of going somewhere else. 150,000 people could be attending simultaneous activities at the arena, basbeball grounds, fair grounds and stadium... If only 10-15% of those people decided to ride the SkyWay from the facility parking lots and back to, stay in the downtown area for extra drinks, food, etc for a couple hours every weekend it would justify the expansion.
The Skyway would run you probably $40-$50 million per mile to extend to that area. If it's not going to be the sole mode of transportation, that means an investment in another mode (one most likely cheaper to build with the ability to move more people efficiently) will have to be made. If that's the case, you'd probably get more bang for your buck investing in that other mode and having it serve that area instead, with it interchanging with an existing Skyway station in some manner. What I'm describing is how Metrorail and Metromover interact in downtown Miami (Government Center & Brickell stations), which was the initial plan for the Skyway that we abandoned two decades ago.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/1108052105_4TKuc-M.jpg)
At the end of the day, despite its relative ineffectiveness, I think Metrorail serves a very car oriented population. LA arguably, too, but there's something about the west coast mindset that seems to inextricably get more people on trains and LA is not only expanding its light rail, it's seeing pretty darn high ridership per mile for the lines it has in service. There is something very "extra" autocentric about FL in general (see my points about Caltrains vs TriRail, as well).
I don't know what it is, though I've heard people talk about how in Houston the heat/humidity is something to combat when forcing people out of air conditioned cars and into public transit (which can be a very hot experience, even in milder cities). They have found a way with that one line, however, as soon as you start getting into transfers (not a factor in Houston now since it's single line door to door rail service, essentially) where you're spending more time waiting outside in that weather (in a suit??) you're going to lose effectiveness. And I disagree with Ock that in transit-sparse cities/towns a transfer is very easy to make quick and seamless. As a rider, transit in many cities is unreliable. How many times have I just missed the train or bus I wanted due to being 1 minute off? Fortunately, here in SF headways are like 5 minutes for anything (much of the time, sometimes up to 20 for some bus routes off peak), however, in a Jax, Miami, Houston, Atlanta, etc, making your transfer is SO important because it can be a friggin hour before the next one. I've had that happen to me in Atlanta where I got stranded at a commuter bus/rail station in the freezing cold and ended up calling a cab (which in that spread out city still took like an hour to come pick me up).
I think when planning for transit in Jax, we should really think about how and in what opportunities we'll get people out of the car and into rail/bus. I think an Avondale line would be overhyped. I really do. However, I think Charlotte style multifamily TOD along a N-S line connecting directly to downtown would be relatively effective.
It's this reason that I think it's stupid to connect one more station to Brooklyn for the sake of a few hundred residents who would have moved to those apartments in Brooklyn long before they were even served by the Skyway. What's not to say they all actually work on the SS? 1-2 lone developments along 6-lane Riverside Ave with abundant parking is not going to do much if anything to boost ridership on the Skyway, yet, we're willing to spend $21+M for that very faint possibility of an incremental pop. Hmm, just strikes me as a waste in a town where transit is politically sensitive and never in popular demand.
I put it in the same bucket as expanding the thing over to the stadiums.
Quote from: jaxjaguar on April 23, 2014, 10:19:31 AM
The SkyWay wouldn't be the soul mode of transportation, Lake. It's merely a means for people who WANT to stay after the event is over to easily get into the core without dealing with a traffic nightmare. And then for those who don't want to park close to the stadium to have the option of going somewhere else. 150,000 people could be attending simultaneous activities at the arena, basbeball grounds, fair grounds and stadium... If only 10-15% of those people decided to ride the SkyWay from the facility parking lots and back to, stay in the downtown area for extra drinks, food, etc for a couple hours every weekend it would justify the expansion.
Spoken like someone who has never taken transit to a game...also, that's really not a bad walk, LoL. I walk a mile to AT&T park for Giants games all the time in business attire. But getting Jacksons to walk is about as difficult as getting Jaxsons to take transit. Easy to say "yes I will", but will you in practice? Also, using transit to go to one time events on rare occasions is one thing. Relying on transit to actually get around is another. Again, an area that despite "the traveled folks in Jacksonville's knowledge and experiences of such things" in real life (which I highly doubt no matter how many times on this urban-minded board with a very "above average" travel IQ compared to the average Jaxson people want to tell me I'm the idiot peon) is not going to happen when it comes down to it.
Quote from: simms3 on April 23, 2014, 10:38:56 AM
At the end of the day, despite its relative ineffectiveness, I think Metrorail serves a very car oriented population. LA arguably, too, but there's something about the west coast mindset that seems to inextricably get more people on trains and LA is not only expanding its light rail, it's seeing pretty darn high ridership per mile for the lines it has in service. There is something very "extra" autocentric about FL in general (see my points about Caltrains vs TriRail, as well).
Yes, South Florida like every Sunbelt community is heavily car dependent and will remain so for the foreseeable future. However, there's still opportunity to become more multimodal friendly via better transit planning, implementation and land use integration. They seem to be on the right path. Locally, we've talked the game but when it comes to putting our money where our mouths are, our talk is being proven to be nothing more than hot air.
QuoteI don't know what it is, though I've heard people talk about how in Houston the heat/humidity is something to combat when forcing people out of air conditioned cars and into public transit (which can be a very hot experience, even in milder cities). They have found a way with that one line, however, as soon as you start getting into transfers (not a factor in Houston now since it's single line door to door rail service, essentially) where you're spending more time waiting outside in that weather (in a suit??) you're going to lose effectiveness. And I disagree with Ock that in transit-sparse cities/towns a transfer is very easy to make quick and seamless. As a rider, transit in many cities is unreliable. How many times have I just missed the train or bus I wanted due to being 1 minute off?
You'll never have a transit system where some sort of transferring doesn't have to happen...depending on your length and direction of trip. What San Francisco has going for it that most sunbelt cities have not is it has grown up with transit being a part of the local environment for over a century. Most sunbelt cities eliminated mass transit over 50 years ago and then spent those next five decades becoming totally auto dependent. It will take decades to reverse the negative impacts from WWII era mobility and land use decisions. As those decades pass (ex. in DC, they've been at it for 40 years now, San Diego is 30 years in), new dense environments will grow around transit investments and then you'll reach a point where a higher population won't have to transfer because the growth pattern will become dependent around the transportation infrastructure network that feeds it.
QuoteI think when planning for transit in Jax, we should really think about how and in what opportunities we'll get people out of the car and into rail/bus. I think an Avondale line would be overhyped. I really do. However, I think Charlotte style multifamily TOD along a N-S line connecting directly to downtown would be relatively effective.
We should plan for the environment the community envisions. If that is walkable and sustainable, transit investment and land use policy should be made to stimulate that type of atmosphere in certain places. If we want more sprawl, keep investing in highway construction into the neighboring counties. Detroit has some of the nicest suburbs in this country that I've seen. Lots of highways and little mass transit investment too. However, since they aren't paying taxes to that city, but continuing to drain the urban core, municipal bankruptcy is the long term result.
If we know where we want to go, what we want to connect and why, figuring out the right modes and finding money for them will become a much easier process. Charlotte has figured that out and that's a significant reason why its seeing some success with its investments.
QuoteIt's this reason that I think it's stupid to connect one more station to Brooklyn for the sake of a few hundred residents who would have moved to those apartments in Brooklyn long before they were even served by the Skyway. What's not to say they all actually work on the SS? 1-2 lone developments along 6-lane Riverside Ave with abundant parking is not going to do much if anything to boost ridership on the Skyway, yet, we're willing to spend $21+M for that very faint possibility of an incremental pop. Hmm, just strikes me as a waste in a town where transit is politically sensitive and never in popular demand.
I put it in the same bucket as expanding the thing over to the stadiums.
Brooklyn and the stadium are two different expansion scenarios. It doesn't cost $21 million to build a no-frills station at the Brooklyn operations center. That's basically the minimum number for a project to be considered for a TIGER grant. If JTA wins a grant, most of that money will be going to a host of other things like Skyway related operational needs and some type of integrated bike share program. Futhermore, if the goal is for downtown to become this "walkable urban environment" where people can live and not be forced to drive a car to get to grocery stores, public spaces, retail, dining, entertainment, etc., then it makes since to attempt to tie in the Fresh Market and 70,000 square feet of retail going up on Riverside Avenue with the North and Southbanks. By the same token, it also makes sense for JTA and the DIA to get aggressive with finding infill development opportunities for the land JTA owns around existing Skyway stops (literally every stop outside of Hemming Plaza, Central, and San Marco stations).
With Everbank Field, the desire being mentioned revolves around serving people in the sports district. If that's the case, such transit investment should be able to handle that job. If it can't but some other alternative can more effectively for a cheaper price to the taxpayer, why make the investment?
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 11:04:54 AM
Yes, South Florida like every Sunbelt community is heavily car dependent and will remain so for the foreseeable future. However, there's still opportunity to become more multimodal friendly via better transit planning, implementation and land use integration. They seem to be on the right path. Locally, we've talked the game but when it comes to putting our money where our mouths are, our talk is being proven to be nothing more than hot air.
This is kind of my point though with both transfers and with planning for Jax transit. People used to relying on transit are willing to put up with a whole lot more. People in autocentric sunbelt cities will need baby steps. I don't think Jax is an environment where we can expect young professionals to ditch cars they can well afford and are highly convenient to drive to use complex multi-modal transit systems that require lots of transfers and walking. Boston and Miami share similar density. One is a transit city, the other is not. Simple as that. Jax is less of a transit city than Miami, so make it super simple and really "spell it out". See my comment about transfers below...
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 11:04:54 AMYou'll never have a transit system where some sort of transferring doesn't have to happen...depending on your length and direction of trip. What San Francisco has going for it that most sunbelt cities have not is it has grown up with transit being a part of the local environment for over a century. Most sunbelt cities eliminated mass transit over 50 years ago and then spent those next five decades becoming totally auto dependent. It will take decades to reverse the negative impacts from WWII era mobility and land use decisions. As those decades pass (ex. in DC, they've been at it for 40 years now, San Diego is 30 years in), new dense environments will grow around transit investments and then you'll reach a point where a higher population won't have to transfer because the growth pattern will become dependent around the transportation infrastructure network that feeds it.
Transfers are a reality for people who want to rely on transit. But in Jax it's going to be very difficult to get both captured riders and choice riders to fully rely on transit. Downtown isn't super centralized in terms of destinations or a major employment center for captured riders, and even the captured riders in the city are pretty spread out (look at bus ridership - very low in Jax). Choice riders likely won't be big weekend or nighttime riders on any starter system and it will be a century of concentrated growth in the city before we get to a density where you really have a mix of uses everywhere and you can really ditch the car altogether.
Charlotte's line is used for yuppies living along it in new TODs who do the AM/PM commute to Uptown for work and for special events.
It has no transfers and is door to door service, essentially...like Houston's line as well. Uptown Charlotte's also a predominant bar area, so they take it in and cab back down. Which begs another question - how late do you have a starter system running in Jax? Jax hasn't even developed a cab culture yet - people literally drink and drive every time they go out and there really aren't any cabs. That's how long we have to climb before we get to a level.
True enough Lake, The Skyway will never live up to it's potential if we never finish it. However saying that confuses people, most don't understand it was planned to go to the sports district, UF, Brooklyn and San Marco from the start, I wouldn't take it an inch farther. Had those lines been built with the monorail beams in 2002, we'd be running 6 car trains today.
To those that say the Skyway can never handle capacity, this is simply not true. New trains of the current type alone could easily increase capacity 3-4 times over. Going with a modern monorail train such as the Innovia could give it a light-rail capacity for about the same cost per mile as light-rail (not streetcar). The new system in Sao Paulo will have many times the capacity of light-rail and in fact will be a 'heavy-rail equal'.
But as we've all said, we have much bigger problems with the Skyway then just simple expansion or new equipment. The little system gets within a block of 9,000 employees on the Southbank that have virtually no way to get to the train thanks to a freeway and railroad. The fact that we never included a pedestrian bridge/skywalk is just inexcusable. If it's raining, one can't even get from Central Station into the Everbank Building, or the Omni. It's almost as if we built stations at random then built walls around them.
As to the transit ridership in Miami, I agree with you having lived in the area, one can't really get to anything using Tri-Rail except a bus stop... If you get to Metrorail you can go to the Airport or downtown but that's about it. The work-a-day element is completely lacking from the South Florida system.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/TRANSIT%20Interurbans/ScreenShot2013-01-30at93850PM_zpsd7c57120.png)
Pacific Electric Hollywood Subway then...
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/TRANSIT%20Interurbans/ScreenShot2013-01-30at93241PM_zps0d85d9eb.png)
Now...
Los Angeles on the other hand has far more miles at 87.7 with more on the way and this doesn't include 388 more miles of Metrolink trains as well as a couple of decent BRT lines. LA also has a certain transit spirit you won't find anywhere else. The City was built on the back of the 1,200 mile long Pacific Electric Railway. The nations largest interurban railway literally blanketed the whole LA basin, reaching as far east as San Bernardino and Riverside, South to Seal Beach and north into the mountains above the San Fernando Valley. The PE even serve the Mount Lowell, Alpine Tavern and Lake Arrowhead resorts. It was as much a part of the fabric of the city as the river is to Jacksonville, it was also long-lived. When it was finally completely abandoned in favor of the insane freeway plans in 1961, there was a near revolt among the Southland population. You would be hard pressed to find a single person in LA that wouldn't tell you that the city was as dumb as a bag of hammers for allowing it and that we were ALL going to regret it. 29 years later, and BILLIONS of dollars, the Los Angeles 'BLUE LINE LRT' opened... Guess where? Yeah, right down the mainline of the old Pacific Electric Railway.
For the record, my first train ride experience was on the PE.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/CRITICAL%20Maps/ScreenShot2012-12-13at110057AM-1.jpg)
^ Ock, would you say a simple solution to the southbank would be some sort of jitney that just ran between Wolfson/baptist/aetna to wyndham/king ave? I think any pedestrian bridge over 95/fec might be overly expensive.
QuoteAnd I disagree with Ock that in transit-sparse cities/towns a transfer is very easy to make quick and seamless.
This is not what I said. I said in a future system (or upgrade of the current one) transfers should be seamless. This is much easier in a city like Jax where it is less likely that your connection would be late. For example 3 inbound AM commuter RDC/DMU trains rolling in from St. Augustine, as they stop at San Marco @ Atlantic and the door opens, you'd have a 20' foot, sheltered platform to walk across and enter an awaiting Skyway train at the same level. By the time the Commuter run is heading north for Jacksonville Terminal, the Skyway train is rolling over it to Kings Avenue Station. Arrival at the current so-called San Marco Station leaves you with a simple Skywalk to get into Baptist Medical Center. With ATC, Automatic Train Control or PTC Positive Train Control, there is no reason why this wouldn't be as normal as sipping water. This doesn't mean that in transit sparse cities/towns a transfer is very easy to make quick and seamless. It means there is no reason, properly planned and built, that it can't be easy.
Jacksonville during the City Coach era had a system of bus transfers and they were quite normal and popular even though headways were not what they were with our streetcar system. JTA had a better idea. Get on a bus and pay, change buses and pay, ride 3 buses to you destination and pay 3 times for the same trip each way... ridership crashed. DUH!
Quote from: JayBird on April 23, 2014, 11:31:36 AM
^ Ock, would you say a simple solution to the southbank would be some sort of jitney that just ran between Wolfson/baptist/aetna to wyndham/king ave? I think any pedestrian bridge over 95/fec might be overly expensive.
95 is already bridged for pedestrians at the hospital and Nemours, a Skywalk-Bridge would be a relatively simple project running from the second level of the current San Marco station over the Acosta Freeway and the FEC RY. I would continue it on to the parking garage and split it half going into the hospital and the other into Aetna. Such a project would possibly come in around the low 2-3 millions $$.
Here is a link to my story on the same: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-mar-skybridge-jacksonville
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
True enough Lake, The Skyway will never live up to it's potential if we never finish it.
Can we hear from Lake if he believes we should invest more in the Skyway to "finish it" or if he believes we should just move on to a different system altogether (not saying tear down the Skyway and pay back the Feds here)? I think you speak as if Lake is 110% on board with finishing the Skyway, when I don't think he's made that clear.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
However saying that confuses people, most don't understand it was planned to go to the sports district, UF, Brooklyn and San Marco from the start, I wouldn't take it an inch farther.
Ok, so we spend hundreds of millions more (perhaps north of a Billy?) on the Skyway to do that and we have your "complete system". How do we treat line duplication when we want to string something more practical along a further route? Like light rail from well north of Shands (which you call UF) down to Shands along the same route, through downtown, over to San Marco and points beyond? Well, the river crossing is always going to be a major obstacle there (damnit, we have the fucking Skyway along the most practical river crossing route already!!!!!!!!)...
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
Had those lines been built with the monorail beams in 2002, we'd be running 6 car trains today.
I know the Skyway is way-over-engineered for the current trains, but are you positive that both the station and the concrete support structure can support 6-car standard-gauge equivalent size trains? Station design is very important - 6 cars will have to be safely supported, capacity wise, at each station along the route. Additionally, 6 car trains have obviously different weight and different lateral forces on turns. Are you 100% sure we won't have to rebuilt the fuckin thing to support cars 3-6x the length (do you consider current cars one car or two car?) and 3-6x the weight and lateral forces?
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
To those that say the Skyway can never handle capacity, this is simply not true. New trains of the current type alone could easily increase capacity 3-4 times over. Going with a modern monorail train such as the Innovia could give it a light-rail capacity for about the same cost per mile as light-rail (not streetcar).
And nevermind the questions surrounding the structural and capacity support of the concrete and stations in place, what pray-tell do these cars cost??
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
The new system in Sao Paulo will have many times the capacity of light-rail and in fact will be a 'heavy-rail equal'.
So now we're going to compare what we can do in Sao Paolo, one of the world's largest cities and most crowded, to what we should do in Jacksonville? WTF We're going to put heavy rail capacity on what's currently a 2.5 mile system in total, and what might be able to be expanded to ~4 miles? L oh fucking L....we wouldn't even come close to mentioning building a 4 mile HRT system and you know that, so why do you even bring this up?
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
But as we've all said, we have much bigger problems with the Skyway then just simple expansion or new equipment. The little system gets within a block of 9,000 employees on the Southbank that have virtually no way to get to the train thanks to a freeway and railroad. The fact that we never included a pedestrian bridge/skywalk is just inexcusable.
This is true, except people in Jacksonville probably wouldn't really ride it much more than they do now even if it were put in their lap. Let's be honest. People in other cities brave these same kind of obstacles every day of their lives. Yes, and you know it. Typically, a city will try to make things easier with a pedestrian walkway, but that is not always the case.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
The fact that we never included a pedestrian bridge/skywalk is just inexcusable.
If it's raining, one can't even get from Central Station into the Everbank Building, or the Omni. It's almost as if we built stations at random then built walls around them.
Oh, boo hoo. I know you're thinking of a couple of different buildings in Miami where the people mover there goes directly to the garage/lobby, and yes, we're short-sighted here. But you just echoed a point of mine. Do we expect a Jaxson to wait in inclement weather for transit? Hell fucking no!! I wait at bus stops with my umbrella in the rain all the time...I have no choice. I know when to bring a change of clothes...lol If I were in Jax, I'd choose my car every time over waiting in heat, rain, etc.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
As to the transit ridership in Miami, I agree with you having lived in the area, one can't really get to anything using Tri-Rail except a bus stop... If you get to Metrorail you can go to the Airport or downtown but that's about it. The work-a-day element is completely lacking from the South Florida system.
I thought the Tri-Rail System was every bit as connected, perhaps even moreso (since it ties directly to Metrorail) than Caltrains, which sees exponentially higher ridership (literally squished standing room only during rush hour). I find its ridership inexcusable, as well. But my perspective is apparently flawed and it's 100% the system to blame and not car culture in S FL.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
LA also has a certain transit spirit you won't find anywhere else.
This I can agree with. I find western cities in general tend to be more "rail and transit" friendly than their counterparts elsewhere. But this also goes to my earlier point that you drop the same people that live and run Miami in LA, and what's happening in LA now and the ridership they get falls through the roof. Conversely, as I said earlier, you drop the people that live in SF now into Miami with the system it has in place, and I guarantee you that ridership skyrockets through the roof. Granted, over time, the switcharoo could be such that SF people living in Miami will eventually be conditioned onto the car and Miami people living in SF will switch to transit (much more quickly than SF people will switch to car, bc getting around SF in a car is a biatch).
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:43:15 AM
Jacksonville during the City Coach era had a system of bus transfers and they were quite normal and popular even though headways were not what they were with our streetcar system. JTA had a better idea. Get on a bus and pay, change buses and pay, ride 3 buses to you destination and pay 3 times for the same trip each way... ridership crashed. DUH!
Hmmm, well as a bus rider, I pay every time I board (I choose to buy # tix rather than monthly pass because of a FSA account I need to drain). This is not that uncommon...
Quote from: simms3 on April 23, 2014, 11:21:05 AM
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 11:04:54 AM
Yes, South Florida like every Sunbelt community is heavily car dependent and will remain so for the foreseeable future. However, there's still opportunity to become more multimodal friendly via better transit planning, implementation and land use integration. They seem to be on the right path. Locally, we've talked the game but when it comes to putting our money where our mouths are, our talk is being proven to be nothing more than hot air.
This is kind of my point though with both transfers and with planning for Jax transit. People used to relying on transit are willing to put up with a whole lot more. People in autocentric sunbelt cities will need baby steps. I don't think Jax is an environment where we can expect young professionals to ditch cars they can well afford and are highly convenient to drive to use complex multi-modal transit systems that require lots of transfers and walking. Boston and Miami share similar density. One is a transit city, the other is not. Simple as that. Jax is less of a transit city than Miami, so make it super simple and really "spell it out". See my comment about transfers below...
It's not as simple as that. Boston was the first city to have a subway in America. It's been continuously operating since 1897. That's 117 years of continuous land development and building of density around a pedestrian oriented transportation investment. Metrorail in Miami opened 29 years ago. Not counting streetcars, Boston has an 88-year jump start on land development around transit lines than Miami does. Yes, Boston is going to be a "transit" city moreso than Miami. Give Miami another 88 years to grow and expand it's system and things will probably be much different than how they appear today.
Overall, if I'm Jax, I'd worry less about a Boston or Miami and instead spend time on developing the type of transportation network that best facilitates whatever local vision this community wants. I'm not sure if worrying about whether a certain segment of choice riders will want to transfer or not should be a major priority at this point. Even if we build nothing but subways, transfers are simply unavoidable for any decent sized mass transit network serving different neighborhoods and areas of town with different types of density and development concerns.
QuoteQuote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 11:04:54 AMYou'll never have a transit system where some sort of transferring doesn't have to happen...depending on your length and direction of trip. What San Francisco has going for it that most sunbelt cities have not is it has grown up with transit being a part of the local environment for over a century. Most sunbelt cities eliminated mass transit over 50 years ago and then spent those next five decades becoming totally auto dependent. It will take decades to reverse the negative impacts from WWII era mobility and land use decisions. As those decades pass (ex. in DC, they've been at it for 40 years now, San Diego is 30 years in), new dense environments will grow around transit investments and then you'll reach a point where a higher population won't have to transfer because the growth pattern will become dependent around the transportation infrastructure network that feeds it.
Transfers are a reality for people who want to rely on transit. But in Jax it's going to be very difficult to get both captured riders and choice riders to fully rely on transit. Downtown isn't super centralized in terms of destinations or a major employment center for captured riders, and even the captured riders in the city are pretty spread out (look at bus ridership - very low in Jax). Choice riders likely won't be big weekend or nighttime riders on any starter system and it will be a century of concentrated growth in the city before we get to a density where you really have a mix of uses everywhere and you can really ditch the car altogether.
I wouldn't plan on trying to get people out of cars and relying on transit. It would be great when that eventually happens at a larger scale but from an economic and sustainability standpoint, the important thing is having viable multimodal mobility choices. One thing I like about Boston is you can have a lifestyle that does not have you relying on transit for day-to-day mobility needs. The level of mixed use and human scale walkability is at a point where walking is just as effective mode of transportation as anything else for day to day needs of a larger segment of the core area's population.
QuoteCharlotte's line is used for yuppies living along it in new TODs who do the AM/PM commute to Uptown for work and for special events. It has no transfers and is door to door service, essentially...like Houston's line as well. Uptown Charlotte's also a predominant bar area, so they take it in and cab back down. Which begs another question - how late do you have a starter system running in Jax? Jax hasn't even developed a cab culture yet - people literally drink and drive every time they go out and there really aren't any cabs. That's how long we have to climb before we get to a level.
You're only looking at one small segment of ridership (ex. that line also connects the inner city residents with suburban big box retail/suburban park & ride to Uptown, etc.) yet it still shows what happens over time around transportation infrastructure investment.
What you're seeing in Charlotte is the beginning stages of what happened in Boston over a century ago and Miami over the last 15 years. An investment in a permanent transit corridor is helping alter the land development form around that particular corridor. Nevertheless, the majority of people in that city do not live along the route and never will. Thus, transferring is still required for everything not within a 1/4-mile walking distance of the 9 mile LRT line. Charlotte also has the Sprinter (BRT-lite) and a proposed streetcar line that will run perpendicular to LRT. If those yuppies in South End want to use mass transit to get from that district to the airport, it requires a transfer from LRT to the Sprinter.
I actually think we're saying the same thing in so many words. I also raised the point of walkability several times...it won't be until you can walk to most places you need to go for stuff that the city will become a good "carless" city. Having walkabilty/mix of uses is correlated both with transit and with density. Who wants to take 3 different bus lines to run one errand, another 2 for your next, 2 to get back, etc etc. It all needs to come together concurrently.
However, when you say transfers are inevitable - they need to be *seamless* and totally hassle free for choice riders in a sunbelt transit-naive city and they need to work efficiently for captured riders, as well. My whole point is when we can't even get people to take cabs after drinking in this town, we need to think about transit in baby steps (i.e. transfers out of the picture). Also to your point choice/options for growth, maybe Jax people want the Detroit model, where Ortega becomes that super old going nowhere "old money" lakefront neighborhood to the north of downtown, the rest of the city starts to turn to shit and goes bankrupt, and SJC becomes absolute paradise like W Bloomfield for those who like that. No transit will be necessary then at all ;)
But if business leaders, city leaders, and enough of the public does want to follow the transit, then we need to be *very careful* about our first step. The Skyway was a horrible failed first step. For real transit - is it a streetcar serving Avondale/Riverside? Is it S-Line commuter rail? Is it FEC commuter rail from Avenues or St. Augustine? Is it a N-S light rail line? Is it BRT to the beach down Atlantic? If we want a transit future, we can't fuck up our only shot and screw it up in the public's mind.
I'm pretty doubtful about all of those except for maybe 1-2 choices. Point A to Point B with stops along the way and sites for TOD development. That's the only thing I really see working "relatively" successfully, like Charlotte's LYNX.
Quote from: simms3 on April 23, 2014, 11:53:04 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
True enough Lake, The Skyway will never live up to it's potential if we never finish it.
Can we hear from Lake if he believes we should invest more in the Skyway to "finish it" or if he believes we should just move on to a different system altogether (not saying tear down the Skyway and pay back the Feds here)? I think you speak as if Lake is 110% on board with finishing the Skyway, when I don't think he's made that clear.
I can't answer for Lake, but I believe he is M/L on the fence. IF we could do the Skyway to the original destinations for a price and performance parallel to light-rail, he'd probably go for it, if not, no.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
However saying that confuses people, most don't understand it was planned to go to the sports district, UF, Brooklyn and San Marco from the start, I wouldn't take it an inch farther.
Ok, so we spend hundreds of millions more (perhaps north of a Billy?) on the Skyway to do that and we have your "complete system". How do we treat line duplication when we want to string something more practical along a further route? Like light rail from well north of Shands (which you call UF) down to Shands along the same route, through downtown, over to San Marco and points beyond? Well, the river crossing is always going to be a major obstacle there (damnit, we have the fucking Skyway along the most practical river crossing route already!!!!!!!!)...
The buildout of the original system would be somewhere in the $100 million - $150 million range. The most expensive parts of the actual system, river crossing, train control and operations/maintenance center are already built and would not have to be repeated. This means (if we could get JTA away from the stupid overbuilt track bed) a simple monorail beam system would be well within the price range and capacity of Charlotte like Light-Rail.
Beyond UF (I call it that as they officially changed their name a year or two ago) you have existing right-of-way and/or railroad track that could be rebuilt into light-rail purposes. On the Southbank you want to stay with monorail and BRT (except for the Florida East Coast as a potential limited service commuter line) as any form of light-rail would have to cross the FEC RY. Such crossings at grade would eat the budget due to insurance requirements and red tape.
I was the original protestor about the Skyway project, (see: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2011-aug-mass-transit-30-years-later-special-report ) I never supported the people mover, not then or now and led a fight to stop the city from going over that cliff. I realize however what we've already spent on ½ of a transit system and believe it nearly criminal to walk away from that investment, not even considering the refunds we'd have to issue Uncle Sam. We've got lemons and we need to find a way to make lemonade.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
Had those lines been built with the monorail beams in 2002, we'd be running 6 car trains today.
I know the Skyway is way-over-engineered for the current trains, but are you positive that both the station and the concrete support structure can support 6-car standard-gauge equivalent size trains? Station design is very important - 6 cars will have to be safely supported, capacity wise, at each station along the route. Additionally, 6 car trains have obviously different weight and different lateral forces on turns. Are you 100% sure we won't have to rebuilt the fuckin thing to support cars 3-6x the length (do you consider current cars one car or two car?) and 3-6x the weight and lateral forces?
A walk-through train takes care of the length issues provided you don't have to walk 4 cars back from the door you boarded at, but 4 to 6 cars should be doable. As to weight, yes, the current system is designed to WAY MORE then support the weight of larger trains, in fact it was engineered to light-rail standards. A study would have to be done to see if a conversion to light-rail would make any sense, my gut feeling is it would be too radical of a change from what we have making it cheaper and faster just to upgrade and extend as TRUE MONO-rail.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
To those that say the Skyway can never handle capacity, this is simply not true. New trains of the current type alone could easily increase capacity 3-4 times over. Going with a modern monorail train such as the Innovia could give it a light-rail capacity for about the same cost per mile as light-rail (not streetcar).
And nevermind the questions surrounding the structural and capacity support of the concrete and stations in place, what pray-tell do these cars cost??
The 4 car Las Vegas trains ran $3.5 million per train, this would have to be adjusted upward, but it appears to be similar to light-rail cars.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
The new system in Sao Paulo will have many times the capacity of light-rail and in fact will be a 'heavy-rail equal'.
So now we're going to compare what we can do in Sao Paolo, one of the world's largest cities and most crowded, to what we should do in Jacksonville? WTF We're going to put heavy rail capacity on what's currently a 2.5 mile system in total, and what might be able to be expanded to ~4 miles? L oh fucking L....we wouldn't even come close to mentioning building a 4 mile HRT system and you know that, so why do you even bring this up?
You brought up capacity questions, and I used this to demonstrate that capacity per train needn't be what we have today. You spoke of ½ the stadium wanting to board in an hour and by Sao Paulo numbers it could be done, however stupid it would be to try this in Jacksonville. Folks that are not savvy to Brazil, lets just say that by Sao Paulo standards, New York City is Palatka! LOL.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
But as we've all said, we have much bigger problems with the Skyway then just simple expansion or new equipment. The little system gets within a block of 9,000 employees on the Southbank that have virtually no way to get to the train thanks to a freeway and railroad. The fact that we never included a pedestrian bridge/skywalk is just inexcusable.
This is true, except people in Jacksonville probably wouldn't really ride it much more than they do now even if it were put in their lap. Let's be honest. People in other cities brave these same kind of obstacles every day of their lives. Yes, and you know it. Typically, a city will try to make things easier with a pedestrian walkway, but that is not always the case.
Connectivity is our single biggest failure, on the Skyway, the River Taxi's, the buses. JTA is selling both the federals and the locals a 'BRT Miracle' that isn't even BRT by accepted international standards, and are thus setting us up for a new saga: "SKYWAY II, THE NIGHTMARE CONTINUES!" Which will be followed by ugly press convincing and again paralyzing the politico from doing anything right with transit because 'everyone knows JAX hates transit...' And no F---ing wonder when we have the likes of JTA's track record as the only transit many of these folks have ever met.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
The fact that we never included a pedestrian bridge/skywalk is just inexcusable.
If it's raining, one can't even get from Central Station into the Everbank Building, or the Omni. It's almost as if we built stations at random then built walls around them.
Oh, boo hoo. I know you're thinking of a couple of different buildings in Miami where the people mover there goes directly to the garage/lobby, and yes, we're short-sighted here. But you just echoed a point of mine. Do we expect a Jaxson to wait in inclement weather for transit? Hell fucking no!! I wait at bus stops with my umbrella in the rain all the time...I have no choice. I know when to bring a change of clothes...lol If I were in Jax, I'd choose my car every time over waiting in heat, rain, etc.
It is a winnable situation, on my return from Medellin I no longer wanted to park downtown, and though I live in the Mac... out in World Golf Village, I drive to the nearest Skyway Station and ride.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
As to the transit ridership in Miami, I agree with you having lived in the area, one can't really get to anything using Tri-Rail except a bus stop... If you get to Metrorail you can go to the Airport or downtown but that's about it. The work-a-day element is completely lacking from the South Florida system.
I thought the Tri-Rail System was every bit as connected, perhaps even moreso (since it ties directly to Metrorail) than Caltrains, which sees exponentially higher ridership (literally squished standing room only during rush hour). I find its ridership inexcusable, as well. But my perspective is apparently flawed and it's 100% the system to blame and not car culture in S FL.
HEAVY RAIL. Where the system failed was that Tri-Rail (like Metrolink in LA) was just a temporary measure during freeway construction (or in LA's case, earthquake remediation). As such they really were not looking at long-term use and as Florida East Coast Railway was under the direction of Ed Ball and fiercely anti-passenger or public, they went to what is today the CSX route. That line didn't enter Miami until 1927, and West Palm Beach not much before that. So the entire system is WAY out of town to the west of everything. Metrorail was built as a sister to the Baltimore system, same cars, same plans, same orders, but Maryland kept improving and Miami did nothing until recently.
Here you go: The Baltimore Metro vehicles were built in the same contract as that of the Miami, Florida rapid rail transit system. Both Miami and Baltimore cars are identical except for the paint design. The Baltimore Subway car is the Budd Universal Rapid Transit Car (BURT). It is 75 feet long, 10 feet 2.5 inches wide, 12 feet high, 3 feet 6.5 inches floor height, weighs 76,000 lbs., has 76 seats, has 275 passenger crush load, uses 700 VDC electric power, has a maximum speed of 70 MPH, with minimum horizontal radius of 250 feet, with chopper control, and air conditioning.
Baltimore then added or connected it all with MARC, Amtrak Corridor trains, bus, and then overlaid the entire metro with a comprehensive Light-Rail system.
Quote from: simms3 on April 23, 2014, 10:46:30 AM
Quote from: jaxjaguar on April 23, 2014, 10:19:31 AM
The SkyWay wouldn't be the soul mode of transportation, Lake. It's merely a means for people who WANT to stay after the event is over to easily get into the core without dealing with a traffic nightmare. And then for those who don't want to park close to the stadium to have the option of going somewhere else. 150,000 people could be attending simultaneous activities at the arena, basbeball grounds, fair grounds and stadium... If only 10-15% of those people decided to ride the SkyWay from the facility parking lots and back to, stay in the downtown area for extra drinks, food, etc for a couple hours every weekend it would justify the expansion.
Spoken like someone who has never taken transit to a game...also, that's really not a bad walk, LoL. I walk a mile to AT&T park for Giants games all the time in business attire. But getting Jacksons to walk is about as difficult as getting Jaxsons to take transit. Easy to say "yes I will", but will you in practice? Also, using transit to go to one time events on rare occasions is one thing. Relying on transit to actually get around is another. Again, an area that despite "the traveled folks in Jacksonville's knowledge and experiences of such things" in real life (which I highly doubt no matter how many times on this urban-minded board with a very "above average" travel IQ compared to the average Jaxson people want to tell me I'm the idiot peon) is not going to happen when it comes down to it.
So will there be too many or too few riders? ::)
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 11:04:54 AM
With Everbank Field, the desire being mentioned revolves around serving people in the sports district. If that's the case, such transit investment should be able to handle that job. If it can't but some other alternative can more effectively for a cheaper price to the taxpayer, why make the investment?
This has been your stance for years, and I find it the most rational and elegant argument.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:48:15 AM
Quote from: JayBird on April 23, 2014, 11:31:36 AM
^ Ock, would you say a simple solution to the southbank would be some sort of jitney that just ran between Wolfson/baptist/aetna to wyndham/king ave? I think any pedestrian bridge over 95/fec might be overly expensive.
95 is already bridged for pedestrians at the hospital and Nemours, a Skywalk-Bridge would be a relatively simple project running from the second level of the current San Marco station over the Acosta Freeway and the FEC RY. I would continue it on to the parking garage and split it half going into the hospital and the other into Aetna. Such a project would possibly come in around the low 2-3 millions $$.
Here is a link to my story on the same: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-mar-skybridge-jacksonville
Thanks Ock, and that is actually a great idea. It just makes plain sense.
Quote from: ProjectMaximus on April 23, 2014, 01:58:27 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 23, 2014, 10:46:30 AM
Quote from: jaxjaguar on April 23, 2014, 10:19:31 AM
The SkyWay wouldn't be the soul mode of transportation, Lake. It's merely a means for people who WANT to stay after the event is over to easily get into the core without dealing with a traffic nightmare. And then for those who don't want to park close to the stadium to have the option of going somewhere else. 150,000 people could be attending simultaneous activities at the arena, basbeball grounds, fair grounds and stadium... If only 10-15% of those people decided to ride the SkyWay from the facility parking lots and back to, stay in the downtown area for extra drinks, food, etc for a couple hours every weekend it would justify the expansion.
Spoken like someone who has never taken transit to a game...also, that's really not a bad walk, LoL. I walk a mile to AT&T park for Giants games all the time in business attire. But getting Jacksons to walk is about as difficult as getting Jaxsons to take transit. Easy to say "yes I will", but will you in practice? Also, using transit to go to one time events on rare occasions is one thing. Relying on transit to actually get around is another. Again, an area that despite "the traveled folks in Jacksonville's knowledge and experiences of such things" in real life (which I highly doubt no matter how many times on this urban-minded board with a very "above average" travel IQ compared to the average Jaxson people want to tell me I'm the idiot peon) is not going to happen when it comes down to it.
So will there be too many or too few riders? ::)
Both. In my mind, day to day, too few riders to justify spending more on the system, though Ock brings up good points (I do question train length vs station length as a non-issue though as here due to safety concerns/regulations, there has to be a considerably longer station than train length - people are already griping the new Central Subway project stations are designed for 2-car trains only).
For events, the system might be "filled with riders", but unless we do what Ock brings up (which may or may not be feasible and also in my mind isn't nearly worth it) and expand the capacity to light rail or even heavy rail capacity, "filled with riders" for an hour here and there for events doesn't do much for overall ridership, and still doesn't put a dent in crowds.
I've been to big events in SF, Chicago, NYC, and Atlanta where heavy rail couldn't really even do the job. In Atlanta it's routine to have a convention, normal rush hour traffic, a Thursday night Falcons game, a Braves game (5 Points shuttle transfer), and other stuff going on (former Thrashers, Hawks, concert at Phillips, etc). In these cases, MARTA heavy rail fails to a large degree at effectively moving all of the crowds. I was at an event in SF last year where BART + MUNI could not do the job...I ended up walking 3-4 miles at 3 AM with a crowd the entire way and spending $321 on an Uber SUV for my friends and I the next day (that's extreme surge pricing for you and literally nothing else was available).
You get a Jags game, a Celine Dion concert at the arena, a Suns game, and an outdoor Paul McCartney concert at MetroPark (I saw him in Piedmont Park in Atlanta - crowd of 60,000, and Golden Gate Park in SF as part of a music festival with God knows how many people), and you try to throw in the Skyway as a viable alternative of clearing the area, and you're bound for problems you can't even fathom. Pure desperation will set in with some people...Skyway will throw a kink in crowd management, and I bet it will be a safety concern on top of it all.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 01:01:57 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 23, 2014, 11:53:04 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
True enough Lake, The Skyway will never live up to it's potential if we never finish it.
Can we hear from Lake if he believes we should invest more in the Skyway to "finish it" or if he believes we should just move on to a different system altogether (not saying tear down the Skyway and pay back the Feds here)? I think you speak as if Lake is 110% on board with finishing the Skyway, when I don't think he's made that clear.
I can't answer for Lake, but I believe he is M/L on the fence. IF we could do the Skyway to the original destinations for a price and performance parallel to light-rail, he'd probably go for it, if not, no.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
However saying that confuses people, most don't understand it was planned to go to the sports district, UF, Brooklyn and San Marco from the start, I wouldn't take it an inch farther.
Ok, so we spend hundreds of millions more (perhaps north of a Billy?) on the Skyway to do that and we have your "complete system". How do we treat line duplication when we want to string something more practical along a further route? Like light rail from well north of Shands (which you call UF) down to Shands along the same route, through downtown, over to San Marco and points beyond? Well, the river crossing is always going to be a major obstacle there (damnit, we have the fucking Skyway along the most practical river crossing route already!!!!!!!!)...
The buildout of the original system would be somewhere in the $100 million - $150 million range. The most expensive parts of the actual system, river crossing, train control and operations/maintenance center are already built and would not have to be repeated. This means (if we could get JTA away from the stupid overbuilt track bed) a simple monorail beam system would be well within the price range and capacity of Charlotte like Light-Rail.
Beyond UF (I call it that as they officially changed their name a year or two ago) you have existing right-of-way and/or railroad track that could be rebuilt into light-rail purposes. On the Southbank you want to stay with monorail and BRT (except for the Florida East Coast as a potential limited service commuter line) as any form of light-rail would have to cross the FEC RY. Such crossings at grade would eat the budget due to insurance requirements and red tape.
I was the original protestor about the Skyway project, (see: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2011-aug-mass-transit-30-years-later-special-report ) I never supported the people mover, not then or now and led a fight to stop the city from going over that cliff. I realize however what we've already spent on ½ of a transit system and believe it nearly criminal to walk away from that investment, not even considering the refunds we'd have to issue Uncle Sam. We've got lemons and we need to find a way to make lemonade.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
Had those lines been built with the monorail beams in 2002, we'd be running 6 car trains today.
I know the Skyway is way-over-engineered for the current trains, but are you positive that both the station and the concrete support structure can support 6-car standard-gauge equivalent size trains? Station design is very important - 6 cars will have to be safely supported, capacity wise, at each station along the route. Additionally, 6 car trains have obviously different weight and different lateral forces on turns. Are you 100% sure we won't have to rebuilt the fuckin thing to support cars 3-6x the length (do you consider current cars one car or two car?) and 3-6x the weight and lateral forces?
A walk-through train takes care of the length issues provided you don't have to walk 4 cars back from the door you boarded at, but 4 to 6 cars should be doable. As to weight, yes, the current system is designed to WAY MORE then support the weight of larger trains, in fact it was engineered to light-rail standards. A study would have to be done to see if a conversion to light-rail would make any sense, my gut feeling is it would be too radical of a change from what we have making it cheaper and faster just to upgrade and extend as TRUE MONO-rail.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
To those that say the Skyway can never handle capacity, this is simply not true. New trains of the current type alone could easily increase capacity 3-4 times over. Going with a modern monorail train such as the Innovia could give it a light-rail capacity for about the same cost per mile as light-rail (not streetcar).
And nevermind the questions surrounding the structural and capacity support of the concrete and stations in place, what pray-tell do these cars cost??
The 4 car Las Vegas trains ran $3.5 million per train, this would have to be adjusted upward, but it appears to be similar to light-rail cars.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
The new system in Sao Paulo will have many times the capacity of light-rail and in fact will be a 'heavy-rail equal'.
So now we're going to compare what we can do in Sao Paolo, one of the world's largest cities and most crowded, to what we should do in Jacksonville? WTF We're going to put heavy rail capacity on what's currently a 2.5 mile system in total, and what might be able to be expanded to ~4 miles? L oh fucking L....we wouldn't even come close to mentioning building a 4 mile HRT system and you know that, so why do you even bring this up?
You brought up capacity questions, and I used this to demonstrate that capacity per train needn't be what we have today. You spoke of ½ the stadium wanting to board in an hour and by Sao Paulo numbers it could be done, however stupid it would be to try this in Jacksonville. Folks that are not savvy to Brazil, lets just say that by Sao Paulo standards, New York City is Palatka! LOL.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
But as we've all said, we have much bigger problems with the Skyway then just simple expansion or new equipment. The little system gets within a block of 9,000 employees on the Southbank that have virtually no way to get to the train thanks to a freeway and railroad. The fact that we never included a pedestrian bridge/skywalk is just inexcusable.
This is true, except people in Jacksonville probably wouldn't really ride it much more than they do now even if it were put in their lap. Let's be honest. People in other cities brave these same kind of obstacles every day of their lives. Yes, and you know it. Typically, a city will try to make things easier with a pedestrian walkway, but that is not always the case.
Connectivity is our single biggest failure, on the Skyway, the River Taxi's, the buses. JTA is selling both the federals and the locals a 'BRT Miracle' that isn't even BRT by accepted international standards, and are thus setting us up for a new saga: "SKYWAY II, THE NIGHTMARE CONTINUES!" Which will be followed by ugly press convincing and again paralyzing the politico from doing anything right with transit because 'everyone knows JAX hates transit...' And no F---ing wonder when we have the likes of JTA's track record as the only transit many of these folks have ever met.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
The fact that we never included a pedestrian bridge/skywalk is just inexcusable.
If it's raining, one can't even get from Central Station into the Everbank Building, or the Omni. It's almost as if we built stations at random then built walls around them.
Oh, boo hoo. I know you're thinking of a couple of different buildings in Miami where the people mover there goes directly to the garage/lobby, and yes, we're short-sighted here. But you just echoed a point of mine. Do we expect a Jaxson to wait in inclement weather for transit? Hell fucking no!! I wait at bus stops with my umbrella in the rain all the time...I have no choice. I know when to bring a change of clothes...lol If I were in Jax, I'd choose my car every time over waiting in heat, rain, etc.
It is a winnable situation, on my return from Medellin I no longer wanted to park downtown, and though I live in the Mac... out in World Golf Village, I drive to the nearest Skyway Station and ride.
QuoteQuote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
As to the transit ridership in Miami, I agree with you having lived in the area, one can't really get to anything using Tri-Rail except a bus stop... If you get to Metrorail you can go to the Airport or downtown but that's about it. The work-a-day element is completely lacking from the South Florida system.
I thought the Tri-Rail System was every bit as connected, perhaps even moreso (since it ties directly to Metrorail) than Caltrains, which sees exponentially higher ridership (literally squished standing room only during rush hour). I find its ridership inexcusable, as well. But my perspective is apparently flawed and it's 100% the system to blame and not car culture in S FL.
HEAVY RAIL. Where the system failed was that Tri-Rail (like Metrolink in LA) was just a temporary measure during freeway construction (or in LA's case, earthquake remediation). As such they really were not looking at long-term use and as Florida East Coast Railway was under the direction of Ed Ball and fiercely anti-passenger or public, they went to what is today the CSX route. That line didn't enter Miami until 1927, and West Palm Beach not much before that. So the entire system is WAY out of town to the west of everything. Metrorail was built as a sister to the Baltimore system, same cars, same plans, same orders, but Maryland kept improving and Miami did nothing until recently.
Here you go: The Baltimore Metro vehicles were built in the same contract as that of the Miami, Florida rapid rail transit system. Both Miami and Baltimore cars are identical except for the paint design. The Baltimore Subway car is the Budd Universal Rapid Transit Car (BURT). It is 75 feet long, 10 feet 2.5 inches wide, 12 feet high, 3 feet 6.5 inches floor height, weighs 76,000 lbs., has 76 seats, has 275 passenger crush load, uses 700 VDC electric power, has a maximum speed of 70 MPH, with minimum horizontal radius of 250 feet, with chopper control, and air conditioning.
Baltimore then added or connected it all with MARC, Amtrak Corridor trains, bus, and then overlaid the entire metro with a comprehensive Light-Rail system.
Thanks Ock. Love the way you speak to the issue (I'm certainly a little more dry and a lot less optimistic, LoL). I do question station length to train length, though. I've certainly never seen a train longer than its station, and I believe there are federal regulations there? What if doors "accidentally" open onto the tracks during boarding? Technology fails and we live in a nanny state country, so there's a regulation for that I'm pretty sure.
A lot of people here in SF are disappointed that the new Central Subway stations will only be built to 2-car length LRT trains. In fact, we're all sick of 2-car length LRT trains! We have our own transit issues over here, but issues that arise from using the system daily and knowing what works and what doesn't. Some of our biggest issues are union-related (same song in Atlanta with MARTA, and the reason BART shut down twice last year for strikes). Once Jax gets significant transit, just wait for your little red county to be beholden to big blue unions. :D Even the staunchest of democrats here in the Bay Area cannot stand our transit unions - they are a large part of the reason for delays on busses and trains, and why we have 2-car trains in the first place.
^ After Hurricane Sandy destroyed the South Ferry station, MTA has tried to get it back up and running. Though it has now opened, they had to rebuild the old station which was for much shorter than the 10 car trains they use now. So, when the 1 Train pulls into the station, they announce you must be in the first five cars to exit, the doors in the last five will not open. And close to 200,000 people use that station just during the rush hours. So far, no one has been injured or accidentally got out on a closed portion. Though the commuters know to walk through, the tourists to Battery Park and Statue of Liberty get all confused and befuddled.. Yet somehow it all still works.
I don't know why people look at our weather (heat) as a negative here when it comes to transit & walkability. To me its quite the positive. Have you ever been in Boston or Chicago (or further south in DC for that matter) in the winter? That shit is NOT pleasant. It feels like you're walking through a frozen, post-apocalyptic wasteland. And trying to carry kids or groceries through that? Forget about it. I'd take sweating over that ANY day.
We're also forgetting what its like in the "winter" here. It's quite nice.
^^^Welp, I guess that confirms that because the 1 Train can do it, we should rebuild Jacksonville Skyway to be 5 cars too long as well! LoL
Also, South Station appears to be the southern nexus (obviously if it was impacted by Sandy). I've never used that station, but can you imagine if every station along the 1-2-3 route going up through Manhattan and into the Bronx were 5 cars too short? I would imagine that would be an issue...delays exiting and boarding at each station if capacity is such that people must occupy all cars then come forward to the front 5 each time. People having to get out of the cars to let others out, then enter back in before the people waiting on the platform take their spots, etc.
Good to know there isn't a regulation for that (also good to know that nobody has been hurt in the process...I've definitely been pressed against the doors in crowded cars before...would hate for that similar situation on an elevated monorail where one accidentally opened and someone fell out). Still doesn't stop the fact that you can't build stations along an entire route to be shorter than the train cars that are a length designed to fit a high demand/capacity.
Quote from: peestandingup on April 23, 2014, 03:11:05 PM
I don't know why people look at our weather (heat) as a negative here when it comes to transit & walkability. To me its quite the positive. Have you ever been in Boston or Chicago (or further south in DC for that matter) in the winter? That shit is NOT pleasant. It feels like you're walking through a frozen, post-apocalyptic wasteland. And trying to carry kids or groceries through that? Forget about it. I'd take sweating over that ANY day.
We're also forgetting what its like in the "winter" here. It's quite nice.
Many might agree, though I think both hot + sticky and freezing + snow are horrible conditions. The most I have to contend with is rain rain rain in the winter, but otherwise perfect 45-65 degree weather. Once you get used to that, brutal cold and sweltering heat both seem equally unpleasant.
But I think the question is moreso, what's to stop people from using their heated/cooled car all the time in Jax? People in cities like NYC, Boston, DC, SF, Chicago, etc are basically forced to use transit, and it's not so bad because the cities are designed that way (it's literally less of a hassle to use transit than to drive around SF or Manhattan, and forget about the $$$$$ of driving, holy shit).
I'm the first to admit, if I move back to Jax (or Atlanta, or Charlotte, or any of these cities), I will own a car and use it as much as possible. It's so much more convenient and it's cheap to do so. Standing around in a suit in 95 degree weather at a bus/train stop, or leased Audi with cooled seats, AC, and a stereosystem with garage parking at my house and at my office. Hmmm :-\
Quote from: simms3 on April 23, 2014, 11:53:04 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
True enough Lake, The Skyway will never live up to it's potential if we never finish it.
Can we hear from Lake if he believes we should invest more in the Skyway to "finish it" or if he believes we should just move on to a different system altogether (not saying tear down the Skyway and pay back the Feds here)? I think you speak as if Lake is 110% on board with finishing the Skyway, when I don't think he's made that clear.
I've been busy with work and tying up loose things before I head out in the wee morning but wow, this thread has grown since I last posted around lunch time.
I don't believe it makes sense today to finish the Skyway as originally proposed. The cost would be so expensive, we'd simply be better off investing in another type of mode that interacts with it, while also serving destinations that the existing Skyway's footprint does not. Whether we like BRT or not, the watered down version is going to run up Jefferson and Broad, connecting UF Health, so there's no valid reason to pursue a costly northern expansion. I've also already stated my position several times on the sports district. Anything done there is being sold on it's ability to move people in and out who attend major events. If that's the case, the solution should be one that can actually do that effectively, given the cost of investment to the taxpayer. The Skyway (the system we have today) can not do this.
However, there are two areas worth considering Skyway expansion, IMO. Brooklyn (which has already been discussed) and San Marco Square. With San Marco, there are opportunities for high density redevelopment and infill between Kings Avenue Station and Atlantic Blvd, between Hendricks and Kings Avenue/I-95. It's also the cheapest way to get a grade separated railroad crossing (motorized mobility) option between the Southbank and San Marco. As far as numbers go, we'd only be talking about a half mile to Atlantic Boulevard and half of that could possible run at-grade, thus reducing the overall expense. Converting this area into some sort of TIF district seems to be the way to go, in regards to getting it funded.
With that said, I'm fine with leaving the Skyway as is, taking our pennies and investing in something that's cheaper, brings higher capacity, provides TOD opportunities and also extends connectivity outside of DT. I believe, the mobility plan's streetcar route between Park & King and Everbank Field would do the trick initially for less than the cost of extending the Skyway to Everbank Field alone.
So if you had $50 million in downtown transit money spend, would you:
A. Extend Skyway one mile down Bay to EverBank Field, even though it can't handle stadium crowds?
B. Build a starter streetcar line that runs from EverBank Field to Park & King, that can be designed to handle crowds, while also tying in Brooklyn/Riverside Avenue, Memorial Park, Five Points, St. Vincent's and Park & King.
No matter how long the Skyway has been in downtown, I'd take option B every single time. More people served, more development opportunity, more return on investment for the taxpayer.
When the time comes to replace or retrofit the Skyway (+15 years out), I'd probably look at modern streetcar or LRT as major alternatives. If the support system can handle it, I'd explore converting the Skyway to modern streetcar and tying that in to the line connecting Riverside to EverBank Field. If it can't be retrofitted, I'd take it out and use the Skyway's north/south corridor as a downtown segment for a full blown LRT line that could also be incrementally extended to other areas of town.
Quote from: peestandingup on April 23, 2014, 03:11:05 PM
I don't know why people look at our weather (heat) as a negative here when it comes to transit & walkability. To me its quite the positive. Have you ever been in Boston or Chicago (or further south in DC for that matter) in the winter? That shit is NOT pleasant. It feels like you're walking through a frozen, post-apocalyptic wasteland. And trying to carry kids or groceries through that? Forget about it. I'd take sweating over that ANY day.
I highly disagree, but that's because this is highly subjective. I'm a Jacksonville native living in a city with harsher winters than any major city on the East Coast (Kansas City), and right up there with Chicago. Highs in the single digits and entire weeks below freezing are what you can expect here. High winds from the northern plains giving -20 or lower wind chills. I live here without a car. I ride transit regularly. My grocery shopping involves a half-mile walk (one-way) on foot, and I do it in all weather. My apartment has crappy heat, so it gets into the 50s indoors regularly. I have no problem with any of this, and again, I'm a native Floridian. I've even visited Chicago in the middle of winter, and folks up there were coping as fine as we do here in KC. It was not at all a dead or miserable city.
Our summers are equally harsh. Last summer saw over 30 days of highs between 100-110. THAT'S the one time of the year you can find me miserable. That and Florida's 90s with high humidity. I don't mind extreme cold, because I dress properly for it. I can be outside in any temperature that it can get here and I can still be warm. That's just how it works in cold places. There's no good counterpart for me and extreme heat/humidity, as I find it uncomfortable in any (or no) clothing. I always have. The only option is to get out of the heat, find shade, or a breeze. I love Florida, but mostly when it's below 80. I'm moving back there this year, and I do plan on continuing to use transit, walking, and biking as much as possible, as going back to car dependence is not on my to-do list. I will just have to deal with the weather, as we humans have had to do for thousands of years, and as I did when I lived there before.
IMO, we've become too attached to climate control. It should never have become something that keeps us locked up in chilled buildings and vehicles. In moderation, it's a great thing, but not when it becomes a debilitating crutch. With heat in particular, there are ways to build for it that we seem to have forgotten since the invention of air conditioning. Shade and wind can be utilized in remarkable ways. Consider the arcaded cities of Europe, the canopied streets of Northern Africa and Asia, the balconies of New Orleans' French Quarter, the wrap-around porches common in the South, breezeways, etc. Now we build in ways that require you to be within reach of an air conditioner, because all other cooling features are out of our vocabulary. But maybe I'm getting a bit off-topic at this point... at any rate, these concepts can be used to make transit more pleasant in hot climates, as well. Not to mention buses are air conditioned and you can crack windows to get a breeze. But we could benefit from making our streetscapes
feel pleasant rather than just look pleasant (*cough* fewer palm trees *cough*). And this is something that benefits everyone, as even car users have to be outside
sometimes.
^^^I would agree...and to add to that further, the most I hear people complaining about transit in the NE is when it is summertime and the stations are saunas. DC and NYC in the summer? Ugh
I hear people complain about winter itself, but not specifically having to take the train or the bus in while it's cold. I do hear people specifically complain about having to take transit while it's hot, but conversely I hear less complaining about "heat" in general. Also - busses and trains can quickly rack up a nice little stench if it's warm. Nothing like that and a cup of coffee to wake you up in the morning. :)
What winter in Jax feels like is what my weather is like all year (granted it's totally dry in the summer with fog). It's absolutely perfect. Business attire in general is just not made for 80+ degree heat.
BTW props Scrub for going carless in KC. I've never been there (STL is closest I've gotten), but I just cannot even imagine it. SF is about the "lowest" city I think I'd willingly go carless in since it's so congested and expensive, but it honestly has mediocre transit when compared to Boston or DC. That being said, I think the city overall is more walkable, which is good because you'll be walking when you can as opposed to bussing it since MUNI can be aggravatingly slow.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 07:04:37 PM
Quote from: simms3 on April 23, 2014, 11:53:04 AM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
True enough Lake, The Skyway will never live up to it's potential if we never finish it.
Can we hear from Lake if he believes we should invest more in the Skyway to "finish it" or if he believes we should just move on to a different system altogether (not saying tear down the Skyway and pay back the Feds here)? I think you speak as if Lake is 110% on board with finishing the Skyway, when I don't think he's made that clear.
I've been busy with work and tying up loose things before I head out in the wee morning but wow, this thread has grown since I last posted around lunch time.
I don't believe it makes sense today to finish the Skyway as originally proposed.
I was told by one of the engineers that the bents and panels on the Skyway structure sans running beams were engineered for full blown light-rail. Unless that's untrue, I suspect it can handle whatever we throw at it.
As to not finishing it to plan, I think at the very least you take it to Newnan, where it is most likely to intersect streetcar. I also think getting across State Street into the FSCJ property is the right move north if your going limited improvement. Brooklyn and San Marco are no brainers and if you wanted a totally new direction you terminate at the Farmers Market/Woodstock. Of course extending the Skyway to the Farmers Market/Woodstock has never been on the radar.
As to conversion to true light-rail, you could ramp down on East Bay, San Marco, Brooklyn, FSCJ and the Farmers Market, but considering where we are with the Skyway and the possibility that future expansion could be single beam 'Disney Style' pre fabricated track it's going to cost about the same as LRT.
I'm not a fan of streetcar on Bay Street as:
1. It is a main arterial
2. Newnan to Beaver will get you to the sports district/Eastside just as easily without the traffic.
3. A Beaver street east extension also lines you up seamlessly with the F&J which is a city owned right-of-way all the way to Gateway.
Simms, I recall many posts back that you stated going through the tunnels in the earthquake zone is scary. Earthquakes are very common in Colombia, the Andes are in the 'Pacific ring of fire' and are actively volcanic, but the tunnels are hardly effected. FACT: The Subway tunnels are among the safest places you can be in a big earthquake. Tunnel structure is constrained and will not feel the amplification of motion that bridges and buildings experience. Also that amplification diminishes with each foot of depth. If a tunnel moves, because of seismic construction it flexes as a whole unit... In short your good.
Also didn't know if you knew but San Francisco had a wonderful classic terminal at 3rd and Townsend. A streetcar mainline on 3rd and a trolley on Townsend date to that station. Check this out: http://wx4.org/to/foam/sp/san_fran/3rd/townsend.html
A final point on the Skyway, I'm for going after the whole tamale and break the grant application into segments so the FTA could approve parts or the whole package. Nothing beats a trial but a failure!
^^^Haha completely different thread my friend. :) I have a base civil background (went to school for civil before switching to finance) so I get all that to a degree, however, I will always be anxious every time I take the tube (largely simply because of the realization of being in a tube so far underwater in a train...I think it's a common anxiety not unlike some people's anxiety flying...having earthquakes does not help that fear!).
Ironically Curbed or Socketsite just had a "feature article" on that train depot since some land at 500 Townsend just sold last Friday...was interesting. Still a lot of history for me to learn here...
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 11:24:26 AM
True enough Lake, The Skyway will never live up to it's potential if we never finish it. However saying that confuses people, most don't understand it was planned to go to the sports district, UF, Brooklyn and San Marco from the start, I wouldn't take it an inch farther. Had those lines been built with the monorail beams in 2002, we'd be running 6 car trains today.
of course the stations are only designed for 4-car trains
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 01:01:57 PM
Baltimore then added or connected it all with MARC, Amtrak Corridor trains, bus, and then overlaid the entire metro with a comprehensive Light-Rail system.
The "entire" metro system you speak of is really one line going from downtown to the northwest suburbs. The MARC commuter rail system connects with light rail at Camden Yards and Penn Station. The Metro does not connect with either directly.
Quote from: stephendare on April 23, 2014, 09:53:35 PM
although during the one spark festival they were running two car trains every time i rode
correct...because Jax has never run the system with 4-car trains. That said, to their credit trains ran every 3-4 minutes between Central Station and FSCJ
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 07:38:01 PM
2. Newnan to Beaver will get you to the sports district/Eastside just as easily without the traffic.
except that Beaver doesn't go that far....It stops at Washington...perhaps you meant Duval.
Quote from: stephendare on April 23, 2014, 09:53:35 PM
although during the one spark festival they were running two car trains every time i rode
That's all we have. Anything else would call for the ordering and manufacturing of new rolling stock.
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 23, 2014, 09:58:10 PM
Quote from: stephendare on April 23, 2014, 09:53:35 PM
although during the one spark festival they were running two car trains every time i rode
correct...because Jax has never run the system with 4-car trains. That said, to their credit trains ran every 3-4 minutes between Central Station and FSCJ
Trains typically run every 3-4 minutes between Central and FSCJ. The longer waits are typically around 7 minutes at the other end points like the Convention Center and Kings Avenue.
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 23, 2014, 10:02:07 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 07:38:01 PM
2. Newnan to Beaver will get you to the sports district/Eastside just as easily without the traffic.
except that Beaver doesn't go that far....It stops at Washington...perhaps you meant Duval.
Ock has a long time dream of seeing streetcars going down Beaver, along with a new bridge over McCoys Creek.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 07:38:01 PM
I'm not a fan of streetcar on Bay Street as:
1. It is a main arterial
2. Newnan to Beaver will get you to the sports district/Eastside just as easily without the traffic.
3. A Beaver street east extension also lines you up seamlessly with the F&J which is a city owned right-of-way all the way to Gateway.
Not that I care whether it goes down Bay, Adams, Duval, etc., but Forsyth and Adams are just as much "arterials" on that end of downtown as Bay. Probably even moreso, outside of game days, as they form the connection between I-95 and the Hart Bridge. At the end of the day, if one mode (say streetcar) ties the heart of DT with the sports district, there's little need to turn around and invest in a second fixed transit corridor running parallel to it, a couple of blocks away. Take that $40-$50 million and spend it on another corridor that penetrates another section of town.
^Me neither. The service is actually probably the best that JTA has to offer. The problem is Jacksonville gave up on mass transit way too soon and has done everything in its power to make the system a failure.
Quote from: thelakelander on April 23, 2014, 10:15:12 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on April 23, 2014, 10:02:07 PM
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 07:38:01 PM
2. Newnan to Beaver will get you to the sports district/Eastside just as easily without the traffic.
except that Beaver doesn't go that far....It stops at Washington...perhaps you meant Duval.
Ock has a long time dream of seeing streetcars going down Beaver, along with a new bridge over McCoys Creek.
Quote from: Ocklawaha on April 23, 2014, 07:38:01 PM
I'm not a fan of streetcar on Bay Street as:
1. It is a main arterial
2. Newnan to Beaver will get you to the sports district/Eastside just as easily without the traffic.
3. A Beaver street east extension also lines you up seamlessly with the F&J which is a city owned right-of-way all the way to Gateway.
Not that I care whether it goes down Bay, Adams, Duval, etc., but Forsyth and Adams are just as much "arterials" on that end of downtown as Bay. Probably even moreso, outside of game days, as they form the connection between I-95 and the Hart Bridge...
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/TRANSIT%20STREETCARS%20TROLLEYS/ScreenShot2014-04-24at95744AM_zpsbd21b65b.png)
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/CRITICAL%20Maps/e0b4a125-f820-47a9-b551-9229a913dda1_zpsbb83cd97.png)
BEAVER! There is a common opinion that 'STREETcars' must run in a street, but the reality is you don't want them there if there is any way to avoid it. In Little Rock they use long sections of the sidewalk! In Dallas most sections are curb divided. Turning east on Beaver gives you an E-W street that is pretty free of traffic anytime but signal protected. Run off the east end of Beaver and the railroad track becomes exclusive transit territory not effected by auto traffic. On the map this little trail through the woods and across Hogan's Creek is still Beaver Street right-of-way. At the ½ way point to the Arena garage it passes alongside (just to the south) of the Arlington Expressway bridge over the old F&J/Southern Railroad yards behind Maxwell House. So any extension into the northside along right-of-way already city owned would be a snap and never encounter that heavy State/Union street traffic feeding into the Arlington Expressway. The old F&J joins the former 'S' line in Springfield Yard, then continues NW straight into Gateway. Beyond the Expressway bridge you'd have a choice to turn back south behind the garage, on Randolph or beyond. I just guess I have that dream because of the 10,000 times I've studied that 'get to the Sports District/Eastside/Fairfield problem.