Metro Jacksonville

'What We Have Here Is A Failure To Communicate'

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/3624143063_StSM74M-M.jpg)

Metro Jacksonville's Robert W. Mann believes our leaders could be selling the public a bill of goods when it comes to realizing the true economic impact of Bus Rapid Transit, Streetcars and Light Rail Transit on our landscape.  There are a growing number of cities expanding or proposing new local rail systems across the country. Could he be right? Could they be on to something that Jacksonville is overlooking?

Read More: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-nov-what-we-have-here-is-a-failure-to-communicate

B- Bubbley
R- Route
T- Trip

Pub Crawl!

Good stuff. Rail on Ock.

Love the cartoon.

Stay positive.

Visit Jacksonville!

It's a good and comprehensive take.  However, a 34:1 ROC is a little misleading.  Here's why:

$100M invested in a transit trunk
$3.4Bn in private development subsequently built along some arbitrary radius around that trunk over a certain period of time (5 years, 10 years, 20 years, etc)

That $3.4Bn isn't directly "paying back" taxpayers in full...

In direct measurable tax increases, a smaller portion comes back (taxes often being in the 1-2% range, IF all $3.4Bn of development opened with the opening of the transit, that's a 1-2% annual return on cost in direct taxes, similar to a savings account I suppose, but close to a 0% "IRR", or "return").

In reality, $3.4Bn is built over time, and it's hard to prove that all of it is directly due to the transit.

In terms of other measurements, construction jobs are provided, stores open and employ people, offices are built and attract companies (some that may already be in existence and are simply shuffled geographically, leading to deterioration elsewhere for improvement around the transit).

If a construction worker is hired and paid a $15/hr salary, and spends $2-3 of that on things like discretionary goods, restaurants/bars, cab rides, etc, and then those people providing those goods/services take the money they got paid by him and likewise go out and buy things, there is a multiplier effect.  Pretty tough to measure, but attempts are made.

I guess my point is that it's difficult to directly prove or disprove true economic benefits of these systems in some/many cases, though it doesn't stop people from trying.

I think the best evidence is simply the most macro and visual evidence you can find:

Visual appearance of cities with transit.  Growth of cities with transit.  GDPs per capita of cities with transit.  Educational levels attained and poverty levels avoided by cities with transit.  Etc. There are definitely correlations.

Many of the cities you listed are really only slight improvements in the grand scheme of things over Jacksonville.  Charlotte may seem light years ahead, but when compared to a Denver really isn't.  And Austin and Nashville are building more residential and office right now in their downtowns, without transit (Austin and Nashville's commuter rail lines are jokes, especially Nashville's).

I'm generally a huge pro, but transit in my mind either has to really be about moving people around, or it needs to be billed as a real estate play.  It's rarely both.  Charlotte's LYNX serves 16,500 daily riders for an almost 10 mile line.  In the grand scheme of things that's not even that much more than Jacksonville's crappy skyway.  But lots of those type 3 construction apartments have been built along the line (with massive garages in each one despite the location right on the line).  In the grand scheme of Charlotte, LYNX doesn't move that many people.  But it spurred lots of infill real estate!  It was probably a huge armrest to lean on for developers looking to do bigger things downtown.

What is Jacksonville's angle?  Transportation or real estate/economic development?

Here's what I know from personal experience.  Build a business with a large part of your clientele using any kind of bus transit and the odds are that eventually a route will change and that business will go bye-bye.  Fixed rail (street car) promotes development simply because it creates an atmosphere of permanence. SIMMS3, while your return on investment may be accurate to some degree, what is the return on investment on BRT? If it spurs a fraction of the development dollars, the ultimate cost to us taxpayers could be many times the ultimate cost of streetcar. 

In Jacksonville's case, perhaps the best question to ask is why does the good old boy network believe they will continue to make more off of the building and maintaining of the roads than the development streetcar would bring? 

Quote from: simms3 on November 28, 2014, 05:01:49 AM
What is Jacksonville's angle?  Transportation or real estate/economic development?

This one is easy. If Jax were willing to take an angle, it would be real estate/economic development of the urban core.

The JTA plan nor anything else that has been built or planned is not BRT. Just because someone is calling it duck don't make it a duck.

I do not think that anyone in the new JTA leadership has oversold the BRT or route optimization plans.  Board members are not staff and people should not consider them as anything remotely close to transit experts.

Quote from: strider on November 28, 2014, 09:37:24 AM
Here's what I know from personal experience.  Build a business with a large part of your clientele using any kind of bus transit and the odds are that eventually a route will change and that business will go bye-bye.  Fixed rail (street car) promotes development simply because it creates an atmosphere of permanence. SIMMS3, while your return on investment may be accurate to some degree, what is the return on investment on BRT? If it spurs a fraction of the development dollars, the ultimate cost to us taxpayers could be many times the ultimate cost of streetcar. 

In Jacksonville's case, perhaps the best question to ask is why does the good old boy network believe they will continue to make more off of the building and maintaining of the roads than the development streetcar would bring? 

I agree, and I only even responded because I saw improper use of a couple of terms (return on cost being one).  Pet peave related to what I do with my life, so I had to comment.  Overall, yes, in a town like Jax, you're going to want to follow suit of your peers and build something that will result in a large real estate play.  You'll never be a transit town and face it.  People in Jacksonville will NEVER ride the bus, and hardly anyone will be riding rail, either.  If you want to live in a transit town, then move to a big established city.

BUT, that being said, a light rail will be much better than a BRT, if not for the simple fact that developers aren't going to lean as hard on a bus line in Jax as they will "tout" the hell out of a new "fancy" rail line.  Remember, to a small town, a light rail line is "fancy".  In a transit town, a misplaced or overly expensive rail line is a "reason why transit can't be improved where we need it most".  In SF they are building BRT too, and most want heavy rail extensions, which we can't afford right now.  Neither is seen as a "real estate play", but simply a necessity of a dense/carless city with relatively limited transit.

Quote from: thelakelander on November 28, 2014, 09:45:48 AM

Quote from: simms3 on November 28, 2014, 05:01:49 AM
What is Jacksonville's angle?  Transportation or real estate/economic development?

This one is easy. If Jax were willing to take an angle, it would be real estate/economic development of the urban core.

So is that something JTA can push politically in Jax?  Or does their argument still need to be about actual transportation?  I remember in Atl, leaders there tried to push a bill to expand transit, and billed it as traffic unclogging good ol' fashioned transit.  However, many people saw through it and argued it "was nothing more than a real estate play", and I know people who were "for" the proposition who voted against it on the basis of faulty pitching by leaders.  I think that was stupid as the city then got nothing - no real estate play or "solved traffic", but maybe the voters in Jax are similar?  How do you pitch transit in this town?

Quote from: Bike Jax on November 28, 2014, 10:26:00 AM
The JTA plan nor anything else that has been built or planned is not BRT. Just because someone is calling it duck don't make it a duck.

Also true.  If Jax is going the bus route and having this whole PR campaign about it, then they need to at least get it right.  They are setting themself up for failure, still spending a lot of money (wastefully as it's obvious it will be a failure), and setting themselves up to be able to make excuses not to invest in transit in Jax ever again.

It's all a crock.  In fact, there's got to be a route of legal action to take since taxpayer money is involved and JTA clearly doesn't seem to have a fully vested interest in protecting such money (would that be a breach?  or typical of bureaucracy?)

Quote from: tufsu1 on November 28, 2014, 01:53:02 PM
I do not think that anyone in the new JTA leadership has oversold the BRT or route optimization plans.  Board members are not staff and people should not consider them as anything remotely close to transit experts.

That sounds ironic.

Quote from: simms3 on November 28, 2014, 02:02:40 PM
I agree, and I only even responded because I saw improper use of a couple of terms (return on cost being one).  Pet peave related to what I do with my life, so I had to comment.  Overall, yes, in a town like Jax, you're going to want to follow suit of your peers and build something that will result in a large real estate play...

...BUT, that being said, a light rail will be much better than a BRT, if not for the simple fact that developers aren't going to lean as hard on a bus line in Jax as they will "tout" the hell out of a new "fancy" rail line. 

Quote from: Bike Jax on November 28, 2014, 10:26:00 AM
The JTA plan nor anything else that has been built or planned is not BRT. Just because someone is calling it duck don't make it a duck.

Also true.  If Jax is going the bus route and having this whole PR campaign about it, then they need to at least get it right.  They are setting themself up for failure, still spending a lot of money (wastefully as it's obvious it will be a failure), and setting themselves up to be able to make excuses not to invest in transit in Jax ever again.

It's all a crock.  In fact, there's got to be a route of legal action to take since taxpayer money is involved and JTA clearly doesn't seem to have a fully vested interest in protecting such money (would that be a breach?  or typical of bureaucracy?)

People, JUST BE HONEST! Is this 'Flyer' a needed improvement? ABSOLUTELY! Will it produce Bogota, Cleveland or LA like results? Not a chance in hell, true TOD producing BRT is going to cost nearly as much as LRT and more then streetcar in order to get those results. What I want every reader to understand is even if you build that top notch type BRT, over the life of the project, it is going to cost you more then rail and produce less.

The math looks like this (all taken from recent projects):
$13,271,861+/-  19 CNG buses
$17,500.000 +/- 5 modern streetcars

Bus capacity 40 passengers
Streetcar capacity 170 passengers

Bus total capacity 19 vehicles = 760
With 19 drivers

Streetcar capacity 5 vehicles = 850
With 5 operators

Bus life expectancy = 12 years
Streetcar life expectancy = 30 years

Your end cost (30 years out) at current dollar levels would be:
New Buses - $33,179,652.5 the fleet will then have only 6 remaining years until it's 3rd replacement.
New Streetcars/LRT - $0 the fleet will be replaced at the end of 30 years.

BRT busway/street resurfacing (26 miles x $1M per mile / per 10 years) $52,000,000 - $78,000,000.
New railroad track 2 - 30 years, NONE with approximately 15 years remaining at the end of the 30 year time.

Number of drivers @ 20 years employment each:
BRT = 38
Rail = 10

As 'ExNewsMan,' so ably demonstrated this past week, many on here think I hate JTA and everyone and everything connected to it. Bologna! I actually rather like JTA, have had breakfast with Nat and spoken to Brad on many occasions. No anger, no hate, no ill-will. My fairly constant critiques deal with transit issues from the viewpoint of a former regional supervisor for Tamiami Trailways (Millennials? think Greyhound) and as a railroad planner. What I detest is the political games and public smoke and mirrors that make something as basic as the new (expensive) not quite BRT Lite, (by international standards) into a booming economic engine that will 'transform Jacksonville.' As Simms, Lakelander and myself have repeatedly pointed out, they are setting themselves up (nobody at MJ is doing this to them) for another huge failure. When the people recall the promises of what they are mislabeling BRT and then realize it is just another bus, a bit more frequent, different color, their creditability will tank worse then it has to date. They are practicing that Jacksonville art of shooting themselves in the foot.

And I agree Simms, I believe their should be legal recourse for this breech of faith with JTA's 'streetcar studies' and/or the $100,000,000 voted for and then stolen from JTA for the courthouse.

Incidentally, you can find pro-transit, anti-streetcar studies as well, notably at CityLab.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/09/overall-us-streetcars-just-arent-meeting-the-standards-of-good-transit/379516/

QuoteTo be clear: there's no inherent reason streetcars can't provide good mobility options for city residents. On the contrary, if they run in dedicated lanes and with high frequencies as part of a wider network, they can perform quite well. It's the way too many new streetcars are being deployed—as economic engines first and mobility tools second (if at all), even after being constructed with painfully limited transportation funding—that's inspiring much of the criticism.

Jacksonville's diet-not-really BRT also has these same issues, really, but it will cost less...

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2013/11/4-hard-truths-about-transit/7526/

...yep, less! And Canada's study is actually looking at exclusive lane BRT...and over the timeframe of 25 years. Ock is right in that buses have higher vehicle replacement costs over time, but that's it. You could and should have exclusive right of way BRT for less cash than shared traffic streetcars.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/02/why-more-us-cities-need-embrace-bus-rapid-transit/8480/

http://www.metro-magazine.com/news/story/2013/09/brt-a-cost-effective-catalyst-for-urban-development-study-says.aspx

BRT is pretty much proving to be quite effective, both cost and transit wise, provided the have ROW and meet international standards.

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/09/clevelands_healthline_gives_mo.html

...and will offer more bang for your development buck, although probably not in Jacksonville's watered down version of it.

Incidentally, since you're calling out places playing with streetcars, it's interesting...

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/08/striking_gold_with_silver_line.html

...that Grand Rapids launched a semi-exclusive ROW BRT line that delivered 3 times as much transit for less than half the cost of their 3-ish mile proposed downtown streetcar line.

http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/housingcomplex/2014/10/23/city-names-three-finalists-to-oversee-scaled-back-streetcar-network/

In DC, my town, we've curtailed expansion of the streetcar network, notably because it doesn't remotely solve anybody's congestion issues and demographic and economic realities are doing the gentrification and renewal lifts at this point.

http://blogs.rollcall.com/the-container/a-streetcar-setback-in-d-c-suburbs/?dcz=

And in big news up here, as super liberal Arlington County is the poster child for transit and density, they cancelled their streetcar because  "that it's not worth trying put in new transportation options that are focused on economic development and do not actually improve travel times or accessibility for people."

You know what DID launch in the metro region up here this year?

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/24029/alexandrias-metroway-brt-open-and-carrying-passengers/

Yep. BRT.

To be honest, BRT spurring a bunch of development in Cleveland is a bunch of bull.  I covered this after a trip to Cleveland last year:

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2013-jun-a-look-at-brt-clevelands-healthline

The Health Line is an excellent BRT example that other cities should try to copy.  However, the billions being touted as TOD would have came regardless of if transit were present or not. For example, dig into the data and you'll find out they are calling college dorms, classroom expansions, and medical center expansions.....TOD because the Health Line runs down a street adjacent to pre-existing colleges and medical centers.  Also, since it penetrates downtown, everything in downtown within a 1/4 mile radius of Euclid Avenue is also being called TOD.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2585925625_2rLVCVg-M.jpg)

Another thing that stands out about that system is it's complimentary to the pre-existing heavy rail line that parallels it a few blocks south of Euclid between DT and University Circle.  Once one realizes the surrounding context, it's totally understandable that most of this "TOD" is occurring where BRT meets heavy rail stations or on the campuses of the two universities and several medical centers that were already present.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/photos/2574966671_mQmDBJH-M.jpg)
I have a hard time calling hospital expansions "TOD" just because the transit agency put up a nice bus stop across the street.

The problem with calling development along Euclid Avenue "TOD" is that others believe just putting in a nice bus will deliver similar results in their communities. It's not the bus or its branding, it's the selected route and pre-existing development/land uses surrounding it.

Also, unless we're not counting the capital costs of roads where lanes are removed for exclusive bus ROW, true BRT will cost you just as much as rail.

Overall, I don't think we should play these systems against each other. They both have their positives and negatives and work best when part of a comprehensive, well connected and integrated multimodal transit network.

Also, running a streetcar in mixed traffic makes no sense, imo.  If you're going to invest in fixed transit, it needs to have its own dedicated lanes or ROW. If you're not going to do that, you might as well run a bus in mixed traffic.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on November 29, 2014, 12:52:16 PM
Incidentally, you can find pro-transit, anti-streetcar studies as well, notably at CityLab.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/09/overall-us-streetcars-just-arent-meeting-the-standards-of-good-transit/379516/

QuoteTo be clear: there's no inherent reason streetcars can't provide good mobility options for city residents. On the contrary, if they run in dedicated lanes and with high frequencies as part of a wider network, they can perform quite well. It's the way too many new streetcars are being deployed—as economic engines first and mobility tools second (if at all), even after being constructed with painfully limited transportation funding—that's inspiring much of the criticism.

Jacksonville's diet-not-really BRT also has these same issues, really, but it will cost less...

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2013/11/4-hard-truths-about-transit/7526/

...yep, less! And Canada's study is actually looking at exclusive lane BRT...and over the timeframe of 25 years. Ock is right in that buses have higher vehicle replacement costs over time, but that's it. You could and should have exclusive right of way BRT for less cash than shared traffic streetcars.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/02/why-more-us-cities-need-embrace-bus-rapid-transit/8480/

http://www.metro-magazine.com/news/story/2013/09/brt-a-cost-effective-catalyst-for-urban-development-study-says.aspx

BRT is pretty much proving to be quite effective, both cost and transit wise, provided the have ROW and meet international standards.

And you could and should have exclusive right of way streetcar for less cash than BRT. The first 5 miles of Metroway is costing $42.5 million dollars for 5 miles of busway. That's $8,500,000 per mile, without the buses. The 10, 42 passenger buses add another $6,985,190 which will be repeated every 8-12 years, though the industry is pushing for an 8 year cap. The busway itself, considering the 20,000 pound axle load of the BRT buses and temperate weather will not last 10 years without a rebuild or at least a recap or milling... Another $1-2 million per mile ever 10 years. To that add the cost of 10 drivers per 8 hours running those 92 daily trips. The expected initial passenger load is small, roughly 3,500 per day, or a little less at first but growing when the rail station is established at Potomac Yard. So the BRT will  work, fed by rail.

Quotehttp://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/09/clevelands_healthline_gives_mo.html

...and will offer more bang for your development buck, although probably not in Jacksonville's watered down version of it.

As Lakelander has pointed out, the claims on Cleveland's Silver Line are much more suspect then those of Tampa's lowly streetcar or Kenosha's streetcar. Here's another table from Reconnecting America.
(https://farm9.staticflickr.com/8571/15909452732_a10bc52d7c_z.jpg)

QuoteIncidentally, since you're calling out places playing with streetcars, it's interesting...

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/08/striking_gold_with_silver_line.html

...that Grand Rapids launched a semi-exclusive ROW BRT line that delivered 3 times as much transit for less than half the cost of their 3-ish mile proposed downtown streetcar line. The 9.6-mile line that connects the center city and the Medical Mile with its southern suburbs of Wyoming and Kentwood, supporters say, it should offer an efficient alternative by cutting a typical 45-minute drive to a 27-minute commute. Except that the same was said of the Los Angeles Orange Line BRT until they discovered that the buses tended to bunch up at stations, and the 18 minute savings per Grand Rapids claims using the LA experience will be more like 5 minutes. Grand Rapids is equipping the new line with 10 hybrid electric buses that run full electric to 25 mph, then combine diesel and electric power. They cost $700,000 each, and at 42 passengers, can carry 420 in total with 20 daily drivers covering the schedules. 3 modern streetcars, requiring 6 daily operators would carry 540 passengers in total, the 30 year cost being $10,500,000 dollars. Those buses will end up costing
$17,500,000 over the next 30 years.

Quotehttp://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/housingcomplex/2014/10/23/city-names-three-finalists-to-oversee-scaled-back-streetcar-network/

In DC, my town, we've curtailed expansion of the streetcar network, notably because it doesn't remotely solve anybody's congestion issues and demographic and economic realities are doing the gentrification and renewal lifts at this point.

http://blogs.rollcall.com/the-container/a-streetcar-setback-in-d-c-suburbs/?dcz=

Setbacks yes, canceled? NO! What happened on Oct 23rd is the District Department of Transportation (DDOT) announced three finalists for its contract to design, build, operate, and maintain streetcar lines. Earlier this year, DDOT had planned for that contract to encompass all of the 22-mile streetcar system: an east-west line from Benning Road to Georgetown, a north-south line from Southwest to Takoma or Silver Spring, and a line from Anacostia to Southwest.

To make that possible, the mayor's office had asked the DC Council to essentially set aside all of the money for the entire system right now.

While they insisted, vehemently, that they still support the streetcar system, the Council dedided they just weren't ready to give it all of the money today. Therefore, this current bidding process can only legally encompass the lines which are in the six-year capital plan—the east-west line and the part of the Anacostia line from Bolling to the foot of the 11th Street Bridge.

The news stories have, accurately, reported that the current funding only lets the system grow to about 8.2 miles. Unfortunately, some of them also gave them impression that DC has "cut" the program. It's going to happen slower, definitely, but that might not even be all bad.

QuoteAnd in big news up here, as super liberal Arlington County is the poster child for transit and density, they cancelled their streetcar because  "that it's not worth trying put in new transportation options that are focused on economic development and do not actually improve travel times or accessibility for people."

You know what DID launch in the metro region up here this year?

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/24029/alexandrias-metroway-brt-open-and-carrying-passengers/

Yep. BRT.

In the end BRT has it's place, but not at the cost of rail, IE: "Rail is not a good fit in Jacksonville," or "light-rail on tires." Imagine a true exclusive lane BRT line running on the center lanes of the Arlington Expressway. Road and pedestrian overpasses having elevators or ramps down to station platforms in the medians, with left hand boarding. TRUE gold level BRT between downtown and Regency... amazing. Add to that a BRT line down Blanding, which could perhaps use Post Street to Normandy and hence on Cassat to Blanding, setting up a future line on Normandy and Edgewood. The Lem Turner line is a good choice as well. The trouble with the BRT plans locally is they are promising 'Gold or Silver' results with something less then BRT-Lite. The other problem is duplication or near duplication of routes already covered by the Skyway or identified by the streetcar study as streetcar routes. JTA says they understand about streetcars... Yep. Streetcars. 34 years and counting.

I believe we must do BRT right. We also must purchase 6-10 intercity motor coaches to serve our longer interurban routes to the beaches and St. Johns. I am certainly not anti-bus, a good chunk of my transportation career was spent as a regional supervisor for Trailways. But it must be done right, and done right the first time, anything less is Skyway 2.0 .

Thelakelander, I posted primarily because the story was misleading. Under the thesis statement "is Jacksonville missing the streetcar boat," the article used two systems up here...one of which has been cancelled ENTIRELY in super transit friendly Arlington and the other cut back by 90% because it's a costly, ineffective, inefficient White Elephant...in a city that never met a costly, ineffective, inefficient White Elephant it wasn't willing to feed truffle covered peanuts dipped in gold to.

My point is that there are plenty of places that have found success with BRT, plenty of "leading cities" from Chicago to DC to Paris and beyond that have found success with BRT, and that while a streetcar in mixed traffic may spur economic development, it doesn't exactly function as a transit solution. (Tampa's slow moving, noisy "historical" and poorly used mess of a streetcar could be the poster child for this paradigm. "Look! I went a distance I could easily walk, and I'm uncomfortable! Just like the old days.")

If anything, Metrojacksonville should focus on getting Jax's Diet NotBRT to have exclusive ROW, either now or as a second phase. And to not miss that boat. Especially true in Florida, where they consistently vote down transit of any kind, and especially rail.

As for the Healthline not driving development, we're going to agree to disagree. The existing medical centers and colleges could have very well created car oriented development. Or none at all, considering that it's Cleveland and not exactly growing. And that its in a downtown with existing assets doesn't and shouldn't detract from clever, smart and working transit policies as it relates to BRT. I do agree that they over promise, but c'mon. Doesn't every transit agency over promise? Wasnt the SkyWay supposed to be a gateway to our Epcot dreams?

Where we've gone off the rails, as it were, is in using transit in non-exclusive lanes as a tool for real estate development, versus as a long term, effective way to move people quickly that also tends to spur real estate development. We're putting the cart before the horse and then buying a house cat to drag it.

And seriously...DC's streetcars have been a money suck, resource suck disaster.. Nobody with any degree of intelligence or self respect should hold up the DC Streetcar as anything but an example of how NOT to implement a transit program. Bowser saying she would "reevaluate the entire project" is code for "quietly shut this nonsense down." And this is in a city where gondola transportation is seriously being considered!

Quote from: AaroniusLives on November 29, 2014, 10:12:49 PM
My point is that there are plenty of places that have found success with BRT, plenty of "leading cities" from Chicago to DC to Paris and beyond that have found success with BRT,

I hate to get into BRT vs streetcar arguments because we really shouldn't be playing transit modes against each other.  All work in certain situations and should be a mode of choice, dependent on the context a corridor serves and the end goal of each individual community.  If your primary goal is to stimulate economic development, without a doubt, fixed transit is your better solution....streetcar, LRT, whatever.... If your primary goal is to provide reliable mass transit for an affordable price and stimulating economic development is a secondary goal, then BRT-lite is your solution.

Quoteand that while a streetcar in mixed traffic may spur economic development, it doesn't exactly function as a transit solution. (Tampa's slow moving, noisy "historical" and poorly used mess of a streetcar could be the poster child for this paradigm. "Look! I went a distance I could easily walk, and I'm uncomfortable! Just like the old days.")

Tampa's streetcar has spurred over $2 billion in TOD. However, it's a tourist train and is operated like one.  It doesn't serve the local population and barely penetrates DT Tampa. Furthermore, service doesn't start to 11am, so that should tell us just about all we need to know about it.  With that said, since it's not operated as a true local transit solution, we probably shouldn't damn it for not effectively serving as a local transit solution.

QuoteIf anything, Metrojacksonville should focus on getting Jax's Diet NotBRT to have exclusive ROW, either now or as a second phase. And to not miss that boat.

We actually successfully stopped this from being a true dedicated BRT project about 8 years ago.  That would have cost taxpayers $1 billion and still would not have provided access to areas of town that happen to be growing now.  I actually feel better about what's proposed now than what was attempted in the past. Neither will result in TOD but the current option does provide us with 4 major reliable bus routes with decent headways, for significantly less. We probably shouldn't call it BRT because its really BRT-lite, but it's an improvement over what we have today and rail isn't really a viable option for the selected routes anyway.

QuoteAs for the Healthline not driving development, we're going to agree to disagree. The existing medical centers and colleges could have very well created car oriented development. Or none at all, considering that it's Cleveland and not exactly growing. And that its in a downtown with existing assets doesn't and shouldn't detract from clever, smart and working transit policies as it relates to BRT.

The problem here is that the corridor has always been dense and somewhat transit friendly. The heavy rail system serving it has been operating since 1955 (1920 if you count the interurban line before it). The new BRT line only compliments density that was already in place. 

That's a completely different animal from JTA running a bus down Philips Highway and expecting similar results. Doesn't matter if they dedicate a lane to buses or not. The existing context is apples and oranges. Philips is suburban and littered with warehouses, mobile homes and strip clubs.  On the other hand, the Health Line was built on a former streetcar corridor already anchored by DT Cleveland, Cleveland State University, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland Clinic, University Hospital, Little Italy, etc. Everything I've named was built in a walkable manner decades before the Health Line was dreamed of.  Now what I really like about the Health Line is that it's moreso a context sensitive streets project than specifically BRT. They spent a pretty penny (+$25 million/mile) but Euclid was completely rebuild to include dedicated bus lanes, medians, pedestrian refuges, bike lanes, wider sidewalks, landscaping, new lighting, fiber optics, etc. In other words, an aging blighted thoroughfare was transformed into a new "grand bouelvard" that also happens to have great reliable bus service with a few extra stops between the three heavy rail stations along the corridor.

We can agree to disagree on whether University Hospital built their new cancer center on their medical campus only because of BRT, but we can't debate if the major activity centers were already present or not.  That's fact.

If we want BRT in Jax to deliver what is happening in Cleveland, expect to drop over $25 million/mile and select to upgrade a corridor that's already transit friendly with a number of urbanized walkable nodes already in place.

QuoteI do agree that they over promise, but c'mon. Doesn't every transit agency over promise? Wasnt the SkyWay supposed to be a gateway to our Epcot dreams?

Yes, but that doesn't make it right.  We're still trying to overcome the wild projections of the Skyway from a few decades back.  Lying about what a transit project can deliver only hurts future transit investment due to the previous investment being seen as a failure when it doesn't live up to unachievable expectations.

QuoteWhere we've gone off the rails, as it were, is in using transit in non-exclusive lanes as a tool for real estate development, versus as a long term, effective way to move people quickly that also tends to spur real estate development. We're putting the cart before the horse and then buying a house cat to drag it.

This depends on a community's long term goals.  If you want a walkable city, you modify your land use and invest in the type of transit system that breeds the desired type of environment. I think we've gone off the horse by focusing too much on the details of various transit modes instead of spending the necessary time to identify what type of environment we really want to be.  The desired environment should be the thing that drives the land use policy and specific transit solution best suited to help us make the dream a reality.

QuoteTampa's streetcar has spurred over $2 billion in TOD. However, it's a tourist train and is operated like one.  It doesn't serve the local population and barely penetrates DT Tampa. Furthermore, service doesn't start to 11am, so that should tell us just about all we need to know about it.  With that said, since it's not operated as a true local transit solution, we probably shouldn't damn it for not effectively serving as a local transit solution.

Then you shouldn't praise it, either. It's listed at the top of the article as an example of streetcar superiority. TOD is great, but is it really "transit oriented development" if, as in the case of the TECO streetcar, only 600 people get on the thing we shouldn't damn, as noted by this very site? Or, to put this another way, this streetcar which spurred economic development from Ybor to Harbor Island, actually carries next to none of them. So, really, that's a development plan selling a lifestyle versus a transit reality. All those condo dwellers are driving to Publix, and clearly a majority of tourists are bypassing the pretty, atmospheric choo-choo for actual transit, most likely of the car variety.

Heck, even Miami's Metrorail has spurred a ton of TOD along its US1 stretch, but those condo dwellers and tourists are driving to Publix, too. Seriously, 73,000 people per weekday is PATHETIC, and in the 22 years since I stopped taking it to high school, they've only added 8,000 ish riders? And that's with all that snazzy TOD?

Quote
This depends on a community's long term goals.  If you want a walkable city, you modify your land use and invest in the type of transit system that breeds the desired type of environment. I think we've gone off the horse by focusing too much on the details of various transit modes instead of spending the necessary time to identify what type of environment we really want to be.  The desired environment should be the thing that drives the land use policy and specific transit solution best suited to help us make the dream a reality.

Agreed...to a point. I think, in this day and age, where most of the country has either been rebuilt for the car or purpose built for the car, the goal for a mass transit system has to be comprehensive coverage. Unfortunately, you have to convince people that they can get from point A to point B in a time frame approximating a car ride (but obviously not beating it, unless you're in true mess of traffic,) and demonstrate the time/savings benefits. (DC's Metro is currently having the 'holy heck, it's wicked expensive and thus people would rather sit in traffic" issue. I don't but my job subsidies my fare.)

If you can get exclusive ROW and the mode happens to be BRT...and at the relative bargain of $25-$30 million per mile...and you get gorgeous boulevards out of the deal, that's not too shabby. And if you start with 40 miles, you're much further along than you would be otherwise.

Jacksonville's old BRT plan was a mess. The "central elevated lanes in the highway" thing was bonkers (and indeed, it was your takedown of that plan that attracted me to this site.) Where I think your site and the region made a mistake was in not working to make that plan better and more feasible, versus getting it trounced for rail that's not forthcoming. But, that's just an opinion, and I don't live there. If you're dead set on the superiority of rail, then go for it.

I just dislike distortion of any kind, and to present the cancelled Arlington streetcar and the curtailed DC Streetcar in your laundry list as "examples of streetcar success" is distortion. To present the TECO line as anything but a vanity train adding atmosphere but little actual transit is distortion. To present a Grand Rapids streetcar project that has yet to be built or funded, outside of the context of Grand Rapids recently launched BRT system being a leading reason why the Center for Transportation Excellence is holding their next conference in "the learning laboratory for leaders around the country" is distortion. I'm pretty sure you can find other examples of that, for example:
In Kansas City, which is still building its first streetcar segment, voters have overwhelmingly rejected a plan to extend it. 
In August, San Antonio's city and county leaders pulled financial support from their streetcar plan.
It's fine to list the systems, but list the obstacles, the challenges, the failures. Otherwise you're just as bad as the transit agencies over promising. Inform, debate, retort. Don't distort.

^^^Excellent post!!! Straight down the middle with no bias.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on November 30, 2014, 01:17:21 AM

QuoteTampa's streetcar has spurred over $2 billion in TOD. However, it's a tourist train and is operated like one.  It doesn't serve the local population and barely penetrates DT Tampa. Furthermore, service doesn't start to 11am, so that should tell us just about all we need to know about it.  With that said, since it's not operated as a true local transit solution, we probably shouldn't damn it for not effectively serving as a local transit solution.

Then you shouldn't praise it, either. It's listed at the top of the article as an example of streetcar superiority. TOD is great, but is it really "transit oriented development" if, as in the case of the TECO streetcar, only 600 people get on the thing we shouldn't damn, as noted by this very site? Or, to put this another way, this streetcar which spurred economic development from Ybor to Harbor Island, actually carries next to none of them. So, really, that's a development plan selling a lifestyle versus a transit reality. All those condo dwellers are driving to Publix, and clearly a majority of tourists are bypassing the pretty, atmospheric choo-choo for actual transit, most likely of the car variety.

Heck, even Miami's Metrorail has spurred a ton of TOD along its US1 stretch, but those condo dwellers and tourists are driving to Publix, too. Seriously, 73,000 people per weekday is PATHETIC, and in the 22 years since I stopped taking it to high school, they've only added 8,000 ish riders? And that's with all that snazzy TOD?

To be clear, I didn't write the article. Ocklawaha did.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on November 30, 2014, 01:17:21 AM
Agreed...to a point. I think, in this day and age, where most of the country has either been rebuilt for the car or purpose built for the car, the goal for a mass transit system has to be comprehensive coverage.

I agree, but we're talking about two different things. Comprehensive coverage means there is no one size fits all solution out there. Some corridors BRT may work best, others perhaps streetcar, LRT, or community shuttles.  Your existing context and desired land use goals should help drive this more than anything else.

QuoteUnfortunately, you have to convince people that they can get from point A to point B in a time frame approximating a car ride (but obviously not beating it, unless you're in true mess of traffic,) and demonstrate the time/savings benefits. (DC's Metro is currently having the 'holy heck, it's wicked expensive and thus people would rather sit in traffic" issue. I don't but my job subsidies my fare.)

Even in NYC, the majority of the MSA drives. You don't have to "convince" people unless you believe that's your desired end goal...and if you do, you're setting yourself up for a losing battle.  You develop your land use in a supportive way that creates an environment where mass transit is a reliable alternative. At the end of the day, you're giving your community viable choices.  When true vibrancy is reached, most will walk anyway.

QuoteIf you can get exclusive ROW and the mode happens to be BRT...and at the relative bargain of $25-$30 million per mile...and you get gorgeous boulevards out of the deal, that's not too shabby. And if you start with 40 miles, you're much further along than you would be otherwise.

It all depends. No need to have exclusive ROW if you don't need it.  In Jax's case, the selected BRT routes aren't congested. Taking lanes off streets like Philips and Blanding for a bus to run every 15 minutes in suburbia (where the land uses aren't compatible for mass transit) would be a waste of money.

QuoteJacksonville's old BRT plan was a mess. The "central elevated lanes in the highway" thing was bonkers (and indeed, it was your takedown of that plan that attracted me to this site.) Where I think your site and the region made a mistake was in not working to make that plan better and more feasible, versus getting it trounced for rail that's not forthcoming. But, that's just an opinion, and I don't live there. If you're dead set on the superiority of rail, then go for it.

It didn't get trounced for rail. It got modified into something more realistic that now stretches to the beach as opposed to something that only reached Gateway and Regency Malls originally. I count that as a success.

QuoteI just dislike distortion of any kind, and to present the cancelled Arlington streetcar and the curtailed DC Streetcar in your laundry list as "examples of streetcar success" is distortion. To present the TECO line as anything but a vanity train adding atmosphere but little actual transit is distortion. To present a Grand Rapids streetcar project that has yet to be built or funded, outside of the context of Grand Rapids recently launched BRT system being a leading reason why the Center for Transportation Excellence is holding their next conference in "the learning laboratory for leaders around the country" is distortion. I'm pretty sure you can find other examples of that, for example:
In Kansas City, which is still building its first streetcar segment, voters have overwhelmingly rejected a plan to extend it. 
In August, San Antonio's city and county leaders pulled financial support from their streetcar plan.
It's fine to list the systems, but list the obstacles, the challenges, the failures. Otherwise you're just as bad as the transit agencies over promising. Inform, debate, retort. Don't distort.

You'll have to talk with Ock about that one.  I didn't write this particular article and I don't necessarily agree with everything in it.

Quote
I agree, but we're talking about two different things. Comprehensive coverage means there is no one size fits all solution out there. Some corridors BRT may work best, others perhaps streetcar, LRT, or community shuttles.  Your existing context and desired land use goals should help drive this more than anything else.

And I don't agree with this in a cynical world, as in your environment you're swimming upstream against a dearth of effective transit, a physical environment defined by automobile travel, and a public aversion to mass transit. You need to get as much of the premium transit as you possibly can for the best cost to investment ratio to launch the largest, most comprehensive system at once, and thus demonstrate comprehensive coverage. If that's LRT or BRT or gondola, get as much as you can and build as much as you can.

I am not a big supporter of incremental transit improvements, as they don't demonstrate comprehensive coverage, can easily be just that: a one time improvement that never gets expanded again (ahem...SkyWay,) and don't offer a method to get as many people possible connected to the transit system at once. To use the $25 million a mile for Cleveland's BRT, that's 40 miles of a system for your $1 billion.

Up here, Montgomery County is putting together what will probably be the country's most comprehensive BRT system...but they are making the mistake of building it one corridor at a time, which doesn't get coverage and gives your opponents more time and more opportunity to NOT build out a comprehensive coverage transit system.

Quote
Even in NYC, the majority of the MSA drives. You don't have to "convince" people unless you believe that's your desired end goal...and if you do, you're setting yourself up for a losing battle.  You develop your land use in a supportive way that creates an environment where mass transit is a reliable alternative. At the end of the day, you're giving your community viable choices.  When true vibrancy is reached, most will walk anyway.

Yes, but we are talking about an enormous MSA here, and we are talking about a MSA with comprehensive coverage for those that move from an environment where they drive to one where they walk...easily. It's easy for the soccer mom to get on a commuter rail when she needs to. We're also talking about a MSA that is looking at BRT because rail is too expensive.

To your point, however, NYC's MSA features all forms of transit that work together comprehensively. To mine, Jacksonville doesn't even have the backbone, the canvas to base that multiple mode upon, whereas NYC has the subway, Washington has the Metro, etc. If you can get as large as backbone up at once, do it, do it, do it. And to be fair, this isn't exclusive to Jax. Pretty much everywhere in America has crap transit that doesn't remotely offer comprehensive coverage.

Quote
It all depends. No need to have exclusive ROW if you don't need it.  In Jax's case, the selected BRT routes aren't congested. Taking lanes off streets like Philips and Blanding for a bus to run every 15 minutes in suburbia (where the land uses aren't compatible for mass transit) would be a waste of money.

I don't agree with either side of this statement. In the first place, why run an upgraded bus route on a not congested route? In the next, offering suburbia a way to connect to transit and to begin the retrofit of the land use is the best move you could make.

And my point on distortion still stands...as a general, royal "we" referring to the site and the content it chooses to present. One loses credibility via distortion, and especially if one is not coming at the issue from a place of dominance. To put this another way, MetroJacksonville could have chosen to foster an interesting conversation on the place of streetcars in metro areas, how and where and why they work and don't, instead of offering a distorted perspective.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on November 30, 2014, 03:11:43 PM

Quote
I agree, but we're talking about two different things. Comprehensive coverage means there is no one size fits all solution out there. Some corridors BRT may work best, others perhaps streetcar, LRT, or community shuttles.  Your existing context and desired land use goals should help drive this more than anything else.

And I don't agree with this in a cynical world, as in your environment you're swimming upstream against a dearth of effective transit, a physical environment defined by automobile travel, and a public aversion to mass transit. You need to get as much of the premium transit as you possibly can for the best cost to investment ratio to launch the largest, most comprehensive system at once, and thus demonstrate comprehensive coverage. If that's LRT or BRT or gondola, get as much as you can and build as much as you can.

Regardless of length, it needs to be efficient and successful in achieving whatever goals the community has established. In the world we live in our context and finances will limit us. When I look at Jax, it's a 30 square mile city built by streetcar, surrounded by 770 square miles of low density suburbs. Houston's METRO is a great example. The initial segment was only 7.5 miles in length but effectively linked two major urban core destinations. High ridership has resulted in additional expansions. San Diego and Salt Lake City offer similar examples of successful mass transit implementation in the Sunbelt.

QuoteI am not a big supporter of incremental transit improvements, as they don't demonstrate comprehensive coverage, can easily be just that: a one time improvement that never gets expanded again (ahem...SkyWay,) and don't offer a method to get as many people possible connected to the transit system at once.

The Skyway would be a bad example of incremental implementation. LRT systems in Salt Lake City, San Diego, Houston and BRT in Cleveland and Kansas City would be good examples of incremental implementation. Working in transportation planning, I'll tell you our reality is incremental transportation improvements, due to the nature of our available funding mechanisms. I'm not aware of any place in the US that built their comprehensive system all at once. 

QuoteTo use the $25 million a mile for Cleveland's BRT, that's 40 miles of a system for your $1 billion.

If we had $25 million/mile to spend on transit, I wouldn't waste it on 40 miles of BRT in Jax.  We don't need that type of coverage, given the local population, density and land development patterns.  We'd be better off creating a well connected, comprehensive transit network in areas that can support it with existing context, destinations, and supportive land use policies. You'd have to evaluate various environments on their own merit but at the end of the day, you'd probably end up with a mix of Skyway, BRT, streetcar, transit systems, better local bus routes, etc.

QuoteUp here, Montgomery County is putting together what will probably be the country's most comprehensive BRT system...but they are making the mistake of building it one corridor at a time, which doesn't get coverage and gives your opponents more time and more opportunity to NOT build out a comprehensive coverage transit system.

You could very well be right. I'm not familiar with this project or its rollout. What's the overall cost of the project?

Quote

QuoteEven in NYC, the majority of the MSA drives. You don't have to "convince" people unless you believe that's your desired end goal...and if you do, you're setting yourself up for a losing battle.  You develop your land use in a supportive way that creates an environment where mass transit is a reliable alternative. At the end of the day, you're giving your community viable choices.  When true vibrancy is reached, most will walk anyway.

Yes, but we are talking about an enormous MSA here, and we are talking about a MSA with comprehensive coverage for those that move from an environment where they drive to one where they walk...easily. It's easy for the soccer mom to get on a commuter rail when she needs to. We're also talking about a MSA that is looking at BRT because rail is too expensive.

From what I can tell, most MSAs are looking at a variety of mode expansions, depending on the desired goal for particular types of urban environments.  Locally, we're looking at BRT, commuter rail, streetcar, and Skyway expansion. The entire bus system overhaul goes live tomorrow as well.  Then there's All Aboard Florida, which will probably expand into Jax within the next decade.

QuoteTo your point, however, NYC's MSA features all forms of transit that work together comprehensively. To mine, Jacksonville doesn't even have the backbone, the canvas to base that multiple mode upon, whereas NYC has the subway, Washington has the Metro, etc. If you can get as large as backbone up at once, do it, do it, do it. And to be fair, this isn't exclusive to Jax. Pretty much everywhere in America has crap transit that doesn't remotely offer comprehensive coverage.

Unfortunately, Jax, like most 2nd and 3rd tier cities its size, doesn't have the finances to build a comprehensive system from scratch.  So we're forced to grow and improve incrementally.  Coordination will be critical to our success. In the past, it's been our downfall.

Quote

QuoteIt all depends. No need to have exclusive ROW if you don't need it.  In Jax's case, the selected BRT routes aren't congested. Taking lanes off streets like Philips and Blanding for a bus to run every 15 minutes in suburbia (where the land uses aren't compatible for mass transit) would be a waste of money.

I don't agree with either side of this statement. In the first place, why run an upgraded bus route on a not congested route? In the next, offering suburbia a way to connect to transit and to begin the retrofit of the land use is the best move you could make.

The best thing one can do for suburbia is retrofit the zoning regulations and land use policies. The worse thing we can do is invest in an expensive transit retrofit without having the land use policies in place to support and grow around it. This is what happened with the Skyway.  But this is one of the reasons I've come to the conclusion that this BRT-lite plan isn't BRT against Rail. The corridors selected for BRT-lite aren't idea corridors for rail anyway. In fact, I'm kind of skeptical of commuter rail on the FEC between DT Jax and St. Augustine. Considering that corridor will have BRT-lite, AAF and perhaps Amtrak (California corridor style), commuter rail seems like overkill and waste of transit resources.  IMO, any extra cash saved up should probably be shifted to improving transit in another underserved area of town.

QuoteAnd my point on distortion still stands...as a general, royal "we" referring to the site and the content it chooses to present. One loses credibility via distortion, and especially if one is not coming at the issue from a place of dominance. To put this another way, MetroJacksonville could have chosen to foster an interesting conversation on the place of streetcars in metro areas, how and where and why they work and don't, instead of offering a distorted perspective.

You are a part of Metro Jacksonville. We routinely feature articles and opinion pieces from a variety of perspectives and individuals.  It's one of the reasons, I started making people sign their names to their articles. We don't always share the same view in many of these pieces as well, which is why debates tend to happen.  However, the debates is where we all truly learn and where the best ideas tend to grow out of.

Just on this topic, I can tell you, Ock and I have different opinions.  For the most part, I'm fine with the modified BRT-lite system and route optimization project.  I'm also glad the JRTC design has been modified.  I'm also not a big fan of spending money on major Skyway extensions.  As for this particular article, I agree with what you have to say about distorting perspectives.  Luckily, our debate brings some of these issues to light and hopefully Ock will respond with his own position and thoughts about what he put together.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on November 30, 2014, 01:17:21 AM

QuoteTampa's streetcar has spurred over $2 billion in TOD. However, it's a tourist train and is operated like one.  It doesn't serve the local population and barely penetrates DT Tampa. Furthermore, service doesn't start to 11am, so that should tell us just about all we need to know about it.  With that said, since it's not operated as a true local transit solution, we probably shouldn't damn it for not effectively serving as a local transit solution.

Then you shouldn't praise it, either. It's listed at the top of the article as an example of streetcar superiority. TOD is great, but is it really "transit oriented development" if, as in the case of the TECO streetcar, only 600 people get on the thing we shouldn't damn, as noted by this very site? Or, to put this another way, this streetcar which spurred economic development from Ybor to Harbor Island, actually carries next to none of them. So, really, that's a development plan selling a lifestyle versus a transit reality. All those condo dwellers are driving to Publix, and clearly a majority of tourists are bypassing the pretty, atmospheric choo-choo for actual transit, most likely of the car variety.

Heck, even Miami's Metrorail has spurred a ton of TOD along its US1 stretch, but those condo dwellers and tourists are driving to Publix, too. Seriously, 73,000 people per weekday is PATHETIC, and in the 22 years since I stopped taking it to high school, they've only added 8,000 ish riders? And that's with all that snazzy TOD?

Agreed on all points.  I'm not certain any of the projects in Channelside are billed as TOD or even marketed as such by the developers.  You can't take the streetcar into downtown, which technically you can just walk over to (I'm sure "Within walking distance of downtown" is used while "On the TECO streetcar line" is not).

As for Miami's system - I've criticized both its ridership and Tri-Rail's in my posting history, but have been rebutted by defenses of both systems.  I don't think there is much of an excuse that Miami's Metrorail has such low ridership or that Tri-rail does, either.  I don't think it will be too difficult for Tri-Rail to find higher ridership on their new route along AAF's tracks into Miami Central/DT Fort Lauderdale, with points in between.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on November 30, 2014, 01:17:21 AMI just dislike distortion of any kind, and to present the cancelled Arlington streetcar and the curtailed DC Streetcar in your laundry list as "examples of streetcar success" is distortion. To present the TECO line as anything but a vanity train adding atmosphere but little actual transit is distortion. To present a Grand Rapids streetcar project that has yet to be built or funded, outside of the context of Grand Rapids recently launched BRT system being a leading reason why the Center for Transportation Excellence is holding their next conference in "the learning laboratory for leaders around the country" is distortion. I'm pretty sure you can find other examples of that, for example:
In Kansas City, which is still building its first streetcar segment, voters have overwhelmingly rejected a plan to extend it. 
In August, San Antonio's city and county leaders pulled financial support from their streetcar plan.
It's fine to list the systems, but list the obstacles, the challenges, the failures. Otherwise you're just as bad as the transit agencies over promising. Inform, debate, retort. Don't distort.

Agreed.  I think Atlanta's streetcar is another one of these streetcars to nowhere projects.  For the past few years it's as if every city feels that the way it can compete is to just stick a streetcar somewhere.  In reality, a lot more goes into what NYC, DC, Boston, Philly, Chicago, SF, and LA have than an occasional new streetcar system.  The bulk of the systems now available to these top tier cities were constructed or made available (through ROW) generations ago when public works projects were common, when it was cheaper and easier to get things done (with less bureaucracy/regulation), and before the automobile took over and made general mobility more personalized (and often easier).  I think it will be next to impossible to replicate these more comprehensive systems.

Just because Little Rock created a little streetcar line and saw a little pop in downtown development doesn't mean that overall the ROI was as significant as amateurs like us (or biased proponents involved with its implementation) say it was, doesn't mean Jax should necessarily do the *exact* same thing.  Jax needs to do what's best for Jax.

Similarly, just because Nashville created a commuter rail line doesn't mean it needs to be held up as some example of success.  1,000 people a day ride it, and there was really no TOD spurred.  I predict a similar "success" if Jax brings commuter rail to FEC between Jax and St. Augustine.

As I pointed out before, even Charlotte's LYNX line doesn't have that impressive of ridership (in total or ridership per mile).  It has spurred a ton of real estate opportunities, but it's not an extremely useful mobility option, except for those yuppies who now live in new apartment complexes along it.

Real mobility?  Or economic driver?

Quote from: thelakelander on November 30, 2014, 05:17:34 PM
You are a part of Metro Jacksonville. We routinely feature articles and opinion pieces from a variety of perspectives and individuals.  It's one of the reasons, I started making people sign their names to their articles. We don't always share the same view in many of these pieces as well, which is why debates tend to happen.  However, the debates is where we all truly learn and where the best ideas tend to grow out of.

Just on this topic, I can tell you, Ock and I have different opinions.  For the most part, I'm fine with the modified BRT-lite system and route optimization project.  I'm also glad the JRTC design has been modified.  I'm also not a big fan of spending money on major Skyway extensions.  As for this particular article, I agree with what you have to say about distorting perspectives.  Luckily, our debate brings some of these issues to light and hopefully Ock will respond with his own position and thoughts about what he put together.

Good points.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on November 30, 2014, 01:17:21 AM
Then you shouldn't praise it, either. It's listed at the top of the article as an example of streetcar superiority. TOD is great, but is it really "transit oriented development" if, as in the case of the TECO streetcar, only 600 people get on the thing we shouldn't damn, as noted by this very site?

FROM THE ARTICLE LAKE SAID...

'What We Have Here Is A Failure To Communicate'
Metro Jacksonville's Robert W. Mann believes our leaders could be selling the public a bill of goods when it comes to realizing the true economic impact of Bus Rapid Transit, Streetcars and Light Rail Transit on our landscape. There are a growing number of cities expanding or proposing new local rail systems across the country. Could he be right? Could they be on to something that Jacksonville is overlooking?

FROM THE ARTICLE I SAID...

As we push our crippled tricycle along, Jacksonville's leaders appear to be lacking in their understanding of mass transit, with a belief that rail won't work locally. "Rail isn't a good fit for Jacksonville," has been the position either blatantly or quietly taken among the city's leadership since 1929. As we struggle to fill our downtown, several other cities investing in rail are literally rocketing right past us. Here's a few:

Certainly these cities are rocketing past us for many reasons, the streetcar (real-proposed-planned-or under construction) is a common denominator in all of them. Even with the paltry 600 riders daily on Tampa's system, had that $2 billion dollars worth of tourist and housing sites developed in downtown Jacksonville, we'd be proclaiming ourselves the next world capital. Another missed point is Tampa/HART long-range plan to build a LRT system, do any of you really believe that little streetcar line with its huge carbarn was done as an isolated thought? It wasn't, and could handle LRT trains tomorrow.

I actually didn't write anything more in the article, so the references to Ock said, or Ock ________ fill in the blank are perceptions you created as you saw the host of cities working on this. I have just 2 main points here, and that is all I want to get across:

1. While we were the FIRST city in America to 'plan' a return to heritage streetcars, yet we have continually dicked around with monorails to nowhere and billion dollar buses, having undergone a sea change with our 'free' Skyway, now claiming that 'rail is not a good fit for Jacksonville.' POINT ONE - URBAN RAIL IS JUST A GOOD OF A FIT IN JACKSONVILLE TODAY AS IN 1880.

2. In their latest version of 'mass transit suicide' they are promising huge, Bogota like results, while investing next to nothing and then labeling it 'Buses on steroids,' a transformational change in mass transit. TOD, huge ridership surges and projections, choice riders and park and ride luxury... Every bit of that is bogus. YES IT IS AN IMPROVEMENT.... that is all it is. End of story. I would be seriously surprised and happy if they actually gain 2,700 daily riders to add a cool million to their annual ridership. POINT TWO - STOP THE FALSE CLAIMS ABOUT OUR (supposed) BRT BEING THE ULTIMATE SOLUTION TO JACKSONVILLE'S MASS TRANSIT. When we invest in streetcar, we've built a railway, when one invests even heavily in BRT, all you've done is add lanes to a highway... Which usually comes with immediate demands to surrender them to automobiles (as happened in LA's Harbor Freeway BRT), this would be especially true when locals realized they built a bus expressway for a bus every 15 minutes.

I hold a firm belief that a streetcar, heritage or otherwise from and across our north bank waterfront, down through Brooklyn and into Riverside, Avondale and eventually to Fairfax/Roosevelt Plaza, would easily attain the same ridership surge along with the missing TOD they are touting with this 'something less then BRT-Lite,' excuse for BRT. For $25 Million a mile, we could easily duplicate a good deal of Cleveland's Euclid Avenue with streetcar or BRT, but over the long haul, considering the difference in TOD, labor costs, bus and road replacement, we'd be better off with streetcar. I'm also a huge proponent of using what we already have. From our Arena's back door, all the way north to Gateway Mall, we have a former railroad right of way that is city owned and could easily link on the east side of downtown with the cross-town waterfront link. On the west side of downtown, we have the old 'S' line railroad grade, city owned, all the way through Durkeeville to Springfield where it connects with the Arena-Gateway link. Running south on Myrtle Avenue we have a streetcar subway under the railroad, and streetcar width (former streetcar streets) that could send the tracks down to Roosevelt in their own lane. Light-Rail running in two car low-floor trains? The east side of the CSX line from downtown all the way to Orange Park would make for a ready right-of-way... again, part of it was, once, a streetcar line.

Enlarging on the various project sites I posted in the article gives one a pretty good handle on the why of streetcar. Nationally ridership is about 30% higher then the best of the bus options. Even those buses that do match rail, the Orange Line and Silver Line are fed by rail, or running on rail right-of-way. BRT is great where it makes sense, as I said a surface running BRT on the center lanes of the Arlington Expressway downtown to Regency could be silver or even gold standard BRT for not much more then resurfacing and station costs. Go for it!

BRT Lite is perhaps more palatable for smaller cities as it can be initiated quickly and on the cheap, but don't call it 'Light-Rail on Tires...' It simply is not.

So no buses are not our final solution, nor are they the ultimate solution for growing urban area's. However buses have a much larger presence in a city's mass transit mix then rail, as it should be. Buses hold 42 passengers with one driver, rail can literally hold hundreds with one operator.

Virginia Beach made every effort and ultimately blocked Norfolk's 'The Tide' LRT from crossing into their territory, no way, no how. After The Tide got a few miles on it, the citizens started demanding The Tide, and now Virginia Beach is working on rail. The same thing will happen wherever embryonic rail systems start, KC, DC etc. Once they start riding, the change will come.

Quote from: simms3 on November 30, 2014, 07:10:49 PM
Agreed on all points.  I'm not certain any of the projects in Channelside are billed as TOD or even marketed as such by the developers.  You can't take the streetcar into downtown, which technically you can just walk over to (I'm sure "Within walking distance of downtown" is used while "On the TECO streetcar line" is not).

I can answer this one for you and provide a few links about developers and TOD including the streetcar in their marketing. I grew up just outside of Tampa and visit the city quite often since my family is from there.  In fact, I'm just getting back to Jax from visiting family in Hillsborough for the Holiday. Here's a few links about TOD around the streetcar line.

http://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-commentary/tampas-iconic-streetcar-after-the-streetcars-revival-the-real-question-is-where-do-we-go-from-here-f-538802

"The concern was the use of public money," says Steven Polzin, a former regional transit authority board member who is a director of public transit research at the University of South Florida's Center for Urban Transportation Research. "Tampa-area roads are wanting for resources."

But the controversy did little to deter development in the Channel District, a 212-acre stretch of land where the city has agreed to grant tax breaks for developers. Developers say they were also drawn by the streetcar line. Fida Sirdar, president of Key Developers Group LLC, for example, is spending several hundred thousand dollars to build a pedestrian walkway connecting the York Station streetcar stop to his Place at Channelside, a $100 million 244-unit condominium. "It's a big plus," he says.

http://www.atdetroit.net/forum/messages/91697/105315.html

Here's links to two TOD apartments along the streetcar's route that tout the streetcar as an amenity for their location:

http://www.theplacechannelside.com/
http://www.thesladetampa.com/location.html

(http://www.thesladetampa.com/images/tn_map.gif)

Anyone who's familiar with Ybor and the Channel District (before and after the opening of the TECO streetcar) knows it had a significant impact on infill development along its route.  It's a winner as a tourist train and stimulator of TOD. It's a loser when it comes to serving the pre-existing local population.  However, that's a factor of route planning and operation. Not transit mode.  Btw, DT Tampa's Marion Street Transitway is also a loser when it comes to BRT.

(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/images/brt/other_cities/tampa/DCP_9482.jpg)
Marion Street Busway

QuoteAs for Miami's system - I've criticized both its ridership and Tri-Rail's in my posting history, but have been rebutted by defenses of both systems.  I don't think there is much of an excuse that Miami's Metrorail has such low ridership or that Tri-rail does, either.  I don't think it will be too difficult for Tri-Rail to find higher ridership on their new route along AAF's tracks into Miami Central/DT Fort Lauderdale, with points in between.

Look no further than the traditional land use around Tri-Rail, Metrorail, and the South Miami-Dade Busway (a 13-mile dedicated BRT line that opened in 1997). With that said, when it comes to TOD, compare what's popped up around Metrorail's stations verses the South Miami-Dade Busway's stations. What's your thoughts on why the South Miami-Dade Busway has been as successful in stimulating TOD as Metrorail over the last 17 years?

QuoteThe bulk of the systems now available to these top tier cities were constructed or made available (through ROW) generations ago when public works projects were common, when it was cheaper and easier to get things done (with less bureaucracy/regulation), and before the automobile took over and made general mobility more personalized (and often easier).  I think it will be next to impossible to replicate these more comprehensive systems.

I agree. No one is building heavy rail they way they did before the great depression and during the 1970s/80s. However, I'm not sure any of these smaller cities need to.

QuoteJust because Little Rock created a little streetcar line and saw a little pop in downtown development doesn't mean that overall the ROI was as significant as amateurs like us (or biased proponents involved with its implementation) say it was, doesn't mean Jax should necessarily do the *exact* same thing.  Jax needs to do what's best for Jax.

Correct. Jax needs to do what is best to achieve whatever vision Jax has.  If that vision is a walkable core with higher densities, then Jax will need to invest in transit solutions that best stimulate that type of development pattern.  If Jax wants to move people for cheap, buy a bus and call it a day.  If Jax wants a mix, depending on the neighborhood, then Jax needs to invest in multiple modes of mobility.

As for Little Rock, what stands out to me is the cost of their streetcar system. That city proves that you can implement fixed rail on the cheap. If you're paying +$30 million for streetcar, you're paying way too much. Go no frills by laying the tracks and forget about the pretty streetscape and $5k palm trees. 

QuoteSimilarly, just because Nashville created a commuter rail line doesn't mean it needs to be held up as some example of success.  1,000 people a day ride it, and there was really no TOD spurred.  I predict a similar "success" if Jax brings commuter rail to FEC between Jax and St. Augustine.

Similar to Little Rock, I view Nashville's commuter rail as a success in terms of capital costs.  Your good lessons come from there.  The bad lessons come from the route selected.  It's not an idea corridor for a commuter rail line. Thus, the ridership will be low. So depending on how you look at it, Nashville's can be viewed as a success and a failure.

QuoteAs I pointed out before, even Charlotte's LYNX line doesn't have that impressive of ridership (in total or ridership per mile).  It has spurred a ton of real estate opportunities, but it's not an extremely useful mobility option, except for those yuppies who now live in new apartment complexes along it.

Real mobility?  Or economic driver?

I don't believe Charlotte's 9 mile starter LRT line was intended to be a comprehensive city wide mobility option. For example, if you want to get from the airport to Uptown, you take the Sprinter (Charlotte's BRT-lite version of JTA's Flyer). However, it's real mobility for those who live and work along the corridor....like Houston's Red Line LRT.  It's also an economic driver for a part of town that was once blighted.....like Tampa's TECO Line or Portland's Streetcar.

By the same token, the First Coast Expressway (Outer Beltway) will offer me no real mobility. Other than taking pictures for MJ, I'll never pay to ride on it. However, it will offer real mobility for those who live in the tract home subdivisions and strip malls that spring up around its interchanges.  So, in that sense, it's real mobility and an economic driver for property owners in Clay County.

It might have been a bad choice Lake, but like Jacksonville and the FEC, it might have been their only choice. I've ridden the passenger trains in and out of the old Terminal Station downtown before Amtrak, and it was fairly impressive, but the Nashville Star route was long gone, station's boarded up, weeds ruled and the little towns declined.

The 286 mile Tennessee Central Railroad was built to haul minerals from eastern Tennessee to the markets of central and western Tennessee and Kentucky. It was built piecemeal and was NEVER very prosperous or had much traffic. Likewise the cities along the old TC never benefited from a robust railroad connection for industrial or city development. It did run a passenger train until 1955, but by 1965 the railroad, deeply in debit, gave up the ghost. Some of the trackage was taken over and other sections abandoned outright. The trackage between Monterey and Crossville was dismantled by the L&N in the 1980s, which has proven problematic to recent advocates of the restoration of passenger train service between Nashville and Knoxville. The Nashville and Eastern Railroad was formed to revive operation of the line's freight service to Old Hickory and Lebanon, approximately 30 miles east of Nashville, with occasional runs to points somewhat further east over the former L&N owned TC trackage. The N&E once participated in the operation of the Broadway Dinner Train out of Nashville. Today it hosts the Music City Star commuter rail service between Nashville and Lebanon.

The bottom line is that shortlines are all hungry for money and revenue streams, big railroads can afford to pick and choose, sometimes just screwing the small guy along the line as 'more trouble then their worth.' A shortline will sit down with you, work out deals and do business. This is why they chose that route. And why not a shortline, chances are your kids go to the same school and you probably attend the same church.

Quote from: thelakelander on November 30, 2014, 09:38:33 PM

Quote from: simms3 on November 30, 2014, 07:10:49 PM
Agreed on all points.  I'm not certain any of the projects in Channelside are billed as TOD or even marketed as such by the developers.  You can't take the streetcar into downtown, which technically you can just walk over to (I'm sure "Within walking distance of downtown" is used while "On the TECO streetcar line" is not).

I can answer this one for you and provide a few links about developers and TOD including the streetcar in their marketing. I grew up just outside of Tampa and visit the city quite often since my family is from there.  In fact, I'm just getting back to Jax from visiting family in Hillsborough for the Holiday. Here's a few links about TOD around the streetcar line.

http://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-commentary/tampas-iconic-streetcar-after-the-streetcars-revival-the-real-question-is-where-do-we-go-from-here-f-538802

"The concern was the use of public money," says Steven Polzin, a former regional transit authority board member who is a director of public transit research at the University of South Florida's Center for Urban Transportation Research. "Tampa-area roads are wanting for resources."

But the controversy did little to deter development in the Channel District, a 212-acre stretch of land where the city has agreed to grant tax breaks for developers. Developers say they were also drawn by the streetcar line. Fida Sirdar, president of Key Developers Group LLC, for example, is spending several hundred thousand dollars to build a pedestrian walkway connecting the York Station streetcar stop to his Place at Channelside, a $100 million 244-unit condominium. "It's a big plus," he says.

http://www.atdetroit.net/forum/messages/91697/105315.html

Here's links to two TOD apartments along the streetcar's route that tout the streetcar as an amenity for their location:

http://www.theplacechannelside.com/
http://www.thesladetampa.com/location.html

(http://www.thesladetampa.com/images/tn_map.gif)

Anyone who's familiar with Ybor and the Channel District (before and after the opening of the TECO streetcar) knows it had a significant impact on infill development along its route.  It's a winner as a tourist train and stimulator of TOD. It's a loser when it comes to serving the pre-existing local population.  However, that's a factor of route planning and operation. Not transit mode.  Btw, DT Tampa's Marion Street Transitway is also a loser when it comes to BRT.

Not surprised it's mentioned on apartment websites (not a top highlighted, but mentioned in blurbs about location).  Chalk it up to window dressing.  If any developer has built anything in Channelside since the implementation of TECO, they may say that the streetcar had an impact on their decisions to build something and how to build something, but most large-community apartment builders (for instance Crescent Heights, as in the owner of Slade, and Novare) have guys way smarter than that.  If there are tax credits, that has a far more significant impact than some worthless streetcar that not even tourists ride (I'd compare ridership to other tourist heavy streetcar routes, or even the Jax Skyway - TECO is not a success imo on any metric).

In fact, I feel privileged to work around the people I have for the past 4 years, and I can honestly say that I think our apartment underwriters (both on the debt and equity side as we do both) would be smart enough to see through TECO even if they were a pioneer builder and the streetcar hadn't even been built yet.  I truly believe that they would have either not put much weight on the streetcar to make decisions, or would have found someone smart enough to see through it (a partner maybe) to help them conclude that while they should build something, it shouldn't be because of some imaginary boon due to the streetcar.

Tax credits, location location location, a solid master plan and city backing, and efficient and well run RFPs by the city to develop the land by reputable builders (in addition to growing sunbelt/FL market of nearly 3 million) would be enough to attract a slew of best in class apartment developers.  Of course a streetcar could show additional commitment by the city, but it wouldn't necessarily mean much if anything more than that.  These guys were all smart enough to realize they would still need garages and high parking ratios and that nobody would ride the damn thing.

Quote from: thelakelander on November 30, 2014, 09:38:33 PM

Quote from: simms3 on November 30, 2014, 07:10:49 PMAs for Miami's system - I've criticized both its ridership and Tri-Rail's in my posting history, but have been rebutted by defenses of both systems.  I don't think there is much of an excuse that Miami's Metrorail has such low ridership or that Tri-rail does, either.  I don't think it will be too difficult for Tri-Rail to find higher ridership on their new route along AAF's tracks into Miami Central/DT Fort Lauderdale, with points in between.

Look no further than the traditional land use around Tri-Rail, Metrorail, and the South Miami-Dade Busway (a 13-mile dedicated BRT line that opened in 1997). With that said, when it comes to TOD, compare what's popped up around Metrorail's stations verses the South Miami-Dade Busway's stations. What's your thoughts on why the South Miami-Dade Busway has been as successful in stimulating TOD as Metrorail over the last 17 years?

Have no idea.  Don't know anything about the busway.  I know that Miami has quite a bit of significant TOD along its metrorail - moreso than Atlanta, and a far denser population, yet far fewer riders and fewer riders per mile.  It's actually all a mystery to me.  I just think that South FL is *that* in love with the car.

QuoteTax credits, location location location, a solid master plan and city backing, and efficient and well run RFPs by the city to develop the land by reputable builders (in addition to growing sunbelt/FL market of nearly 3 million) would be enough to attract a slew of best in class apartment developers.  Of course a streetcar could show additional commitment by the city, but it wouldn't necessarily mean much if anything more than that.

Several condo developments were linked with the streetcar when originally proposed. I'll have to dig in the newspaper archives to makes some links and quotes from that era available. You can get tax credits in several urban neighborhoods in Tampa. The location was also industrial decay and blight for decades. All that changed in the 2000s and the infill has occurred along the entire line, not just the Channel District. I have an old disk around here somewhere of pictures I took a few years before the construction and opening of the streetcar (I believe the people mover was still up then).

The TECO streetcar (in it's current state) is a failure in terms of public transit ridership but it isn't operated for that market segment and we can't deny it hasn't had a major positive impact on infill development.  We can also look at the same city (in the heart of dowtown) and not see the same development pattern occurring around the Marion Street Transitway.

Here's a good read on the TECO Line's struggles as a public transportation system:

QuoteHe was the lone City Council member to vote "no" on the streetcar project when it was approved.

"If folks had come and said, 'We want to build an amenity,' that's fine," Buckhorn said. "But don't call it a means of transportation, because what they had designed — and that's not the same in every city — it was not going to be a means of transportation."

Case in point: A study by Florida State University Professor Jeffrey Brown found Tampa's public transit agency did not track transfer activity between the streetcar and buses, indicating "the agency does not view the streetcar as an integral part of their regular transit service."

People ride the streetcar because it's nostalgic, said Hale, who joined HART after the streetcar was built.

Unlike the modern streetcar used in Seattle, which the Express-News also visited, Tampa's is vintage and made mostly with vintage parts.

Full article: http://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Tampa-has-had-a-bumpy-ride-with-its-streetcars-4797007.php#/0

At the end of the day, it's a tourist train not MARTA or New Orleans' RTA Streetcars. The route is also littered with TOD in the form of hotels and entertainment. If it were intended to truly serve as a public transportation system, the route would have been different, it would have been better integrated into the local bus network, and the operations would not be catered to tourist. As Ock has stated, one day it may but I wouldn't hold my breath on that happening since Tampa is just as backward as Jax traditionally when it comes to mass transit.

If a city really wants to use streetcar as public transportation, I'd suggest giving it, its own dedicated lane to speed it up, going no frills (stop lumping in expensive streetscapes to the capital costs), space out stations a bit more and run the train as a transit spine.

Quote from: simms3 on December 01, 2014, 02:57:40 AM
If any developer has built anything in Channelside since the implementation of TECO, they may say that the streetcar had an impact on their decisions to build something and how to build something, but most large-community apartment builders (for instance Crescent Heights, as in the owner of Slade, and Novare) have guys way smarter than that.  If there are tax credits, that has a far more significant impact than some worthless streetcar that not even tourists ride (I'd compare ridership to other tourist heavy streetcar routes, or even the Jax Skyway - TECO is not a success imo on any metric).

the main decision on whether to build or not is demand.  And yes, from the beginning, the streetcar helped build the desirability and demand for the area.

QuoteAnyone who's familiar with Ybor and the Channel District (before and after the opening of the TECO streetcar) knows it had a significant impact on infill development along its route.  It's a winner as a tourist train and stimulator of TOD.

We should really rethink the term "Transit Oriented Development" if nobody is using the transit. At best, it's an atmospheric streetscape addition that helps sell the Channelside development as "urban," even though pretty much everybody drives to and from there.

In that aspect, the TECO streetcar was used to promote a "lifestyle," much like the store Anthropologie uses Janis Joplin music to promote "hippie chic" or SoHo used to promote "bohemian living." All of which are very different from actually living urbanely with transit, as a hippie or as a bohemian, respectively.

Moreover, as DC's recent experience with the H Street Streetcar has shown, cities could get the same gentrification results just by announcing a streetcar project and then killing it.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/05/the-streetcar-minus-streetcar-plan-worked-for-dc/371830/

QuoteIf the D.C. government's plan all along had been to announce a light-rail project and then scrap it, it would be judged a success by the growth in the Atlas District. Perhaps cities can do exactly that—by widening neighborhood sidewalks, improving streetscapes, and boosting the public transit that already exists along underused commercial corridors. The next city that weighs building a streetcar should consider whether there's a way to be up front about building a streetcar minus the streetcar.

...and, for the record, I'm not against streetcars. I think in the right context, and especially with exclusive right of way, streetcars can be terrific modes of transit. Despite DC's bungling of their streetcar network launch (and absurdly not building it with right of way,) the density of DC warrants streetcars as more than a tourist train or a developmental tool. And there are some terrific international examples of streetcar networks, like the Vienna trams, that demonstrate how a belief and an investment in that mode of transit can be effective as a way to move people.

But, if we're going to ignore or discount international BRT successes such as in Curitiba or Bogota as not-applicable to an American context (as is frequently done at MJ), then Vienna doesn't count, either, and thus far, the modern streetcar in an American context has functioned as a development tool and as streetmosphere versus actual transit.

If that's the case, and people just want to see a streetcar versus actually riding one, a savvy city would announce a streetcar project, get development in the corridor, and then cancel it, perhaps replacing the actual streetcar with sculptures or non-working historical recreations of streetcars for photo opportunities.

QuoteBtw, DT Tampa's Marion Street Transitway is also a loser when it comes to BRT.

The Marion Street Transitway being presented as an example of BRT is another example of distortion. Yes, we are talking about an exclusive bus-only transitway...

...that runs for less than a mile downtown.
...that has no special branding, transit vehicles, queue jumps or the rest.
...that pretty much functions as a traffic-free way in or out of the Marion Street Transit Center.

Wake me when HART's MetroRapid gets exclusive ROW and links to that transitway as a larger, non-diet variant of BRT.

QuoteLook no further than the traditional land use around Tri-Rail, Metrorail, and the South Miami-Dade Busway (a 13-mile dedicated BRT line that opened in 1997). With that said, when it comes to TOD, compare what's popped up around Metrorail's stations verses the South Miami-Dade Busway's stations. What's your thoughts on why the South Miami-Dade Busway has been as successful in stimulating TOD as Metrorail over the last 17 years?

The busway begins exactly where the last node of urbanity ends in Miami-Dade County, at 'Downtown Kendall,' (itself a "fake downtown" built out of parking lots in the 2000s.) It then stretches from suburb to exurb to the end of the metro area. To put this another way, the busway STARTS at 80th Street (or 80 streets south of downtown Miami,) and ENDS at 344th Street. I would be surprised if a Metrorail lie would have stimulated TOD in that context, let alone the busway.

To give you an idea of the context and distance we're talking about here, Miami-Dade's Transit touts that "Express buses that run on the exclusive lanes now swiftly shuttle passengers between Dadeland South Metrorail station and SW 344 St. in an hour or less."

Interesting to note that it took Miami's Metrorail 20 years to create TOD, and again, with mostly not used transit. That's a multi-billion bet for dense development without actual use of transit.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 11:01:03 AM

QuoteAnyone who's familiar with Ybor and the Channel District (before and after the opening of the TECO streetcar) knows it had a significant impact on infill development along its route.  It's a winner as a tourist train and stimulator of TOD.

We should really rethink the term "Transit Oriented Development" if nobody is using the transit. At best, it's an atmospheric streetscape addition that helps sell the Channelside development as "urban," even though pretty much everybody drives to and from there.

In that aspect, the TECO streetcar was used to promote a "lifestyle," much like the store Anthropologie uses Janis Joplin music to promote "hippie chic" or SoHo used to promote "bohemian living." All of which are very different from actually living urbanely with transit, as a hippie or as a bohemian, respectively.

I think the term is fine. The nature of the development and form of buildings adjacent to it's stations isn't changing. What tenants in these buildings use the line for will change depending on future operations and connectivity of the transit infrastructure.

Right now, we're judging the first phase of an incomplete part of Tampa's transit system.  Because it's not integrated with the rest of Tampa's neighborhoods and employment centers, the dominant use of transit is for travel to and from hotels, entertainment and dining available along the route that exists.  That's probably not going to change until HART treats the streetcar like a part of it's public transit system and better integrates it with everything else they're running.

QuoteMoreover, as DC's recent experience with the H Street Streetcar has shown, cities could get the same gentrification results just by announcing a streetcar project and then killing it.

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/05/the-streetcar-minus-streetcar-plan-worked-for-dc/371830/

QuoteIf the D.C. government's plan all along had been to announce a light-rail project and then scrap it, it would be judged a success by the growth in the Atlas District. Perhaps cities can do exactly that—by widening neighborhood sidewalks, improving streetscapes, and boosting the public transit that already exists along underused commercial corridors. The next city that weighs building a streetcar should consider whether there's a way to be up front about building a streetcar minus the streetcar.

Or just design and implement a streetcar (if that's the desired mode) that alleviates transit demand and spurs economic development.  There's no harm in doing things the right way.

Quote...and, for the record, I'm not against streetcars. I think in the right context, and especially with exclusive right of way, streetcars can be terrific modes of transit. Despite DC's bungling of their streetcar network launch (and absurdly not building it with right of way,) the density of DC warrants streetcars as more than a tourist train or a developmental tool. And there are some terrific international examples of streetcar networks, like the Vienna trams, that demonstrate how a belief and an investment in that mode of transit can be effective as a way to move people.

I agree.

QuoteBut, if we're going to ignore or discount international BRT successes such as in Curitiba or Bogota as not-applicable to an American context (as is frequently done at MJ), then Vienna doesn't count, either, and thus far, the modern streetcar in an American context has functioned as a development tool and as streetmosphere versus actual transit.

They are applicable. But they will cost us just as much as streetcar or LRT, require more maintenance costs and have less capacity.  It's cheaper to lay track than to construct a road. At that point, you really have to start evaluating the ROI. In Houston's case, they decided they were better off scraping their dedicated busway plan and funding LRT instead.  In their evaluation, that was the cheaper option. I find it best to evaluate corridors and surrounding context on an individual basis.  For some, BRT will make more sense.  For others, another mode will. 

In the case of Cleveland, BRT was a better fit for Euclid considering there was a heavy rail line already present a few blocks south, the street needing a makeover, and already paid for ROW being available to shift to bus only lanes.  Locally, I think the Arlington Expressway's service drives provide a perfect opportunity for Jax to experiment with dedicated busways and supportive land use policies between DT and Regency Square Mall.

(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Neighborhoods/Arlington-Expressway/i-LThPWnc/0/M/P1610151-M.jpg)
It would be pretty easy to dedicate on of the two travel lanes on the service drives to transit.

Quote

QuoteBtw, DT Tampa's Marion Street Transitway is also a loser when it comes to BRT.

The Marion Street Transitway being presented as an example of BRT is another example of distortion. Yes, we are talking about an exclusive bus-only transitway...

...that runs for less than a mile downtown.
...that has no special branding, transit vehicles, queue jumps or the rest.
...that pretty much functions as a traffic-free way in or out of the Marion Street Transit Center.

Wake me when HART's MetroRapid gets exclusive ROW and links to that transitway as a larger, non-diet variant of BRT.

I don't believe that's in their plans.  They have a few more BRT-lite corridors they plan to implement along with LRT.

Quote

QuoteLook no further than the traditional land use around Tri-Rail, Metrorail, and the South Miami-Dade Busway (a 13-mile dedicated BRT line that opened in 1997). With that said, when it comes to TOD, compare what's popped up around Metrorail's stations verses the South Miami-Dade Busway's stations. What's your thoughts on why the South Miami-Dade Busway has been as successful in stimulating TOD as Metrorail over the last 17 years?

The busway begins exactly where the last node of urbanity ends in Miami-Dade County, at 'Downtown Kendall,' (itself a "fake downtown" built out of parking lots in the 2000s.) It then stretches from suburb to exurb to the end of the metro area. To put this another way, the busway STARTS at 80th Street (or 80 streets south of downtown Miami,) and ENDS at 344th Street. I would be surprised if a Metrorail lie would have stimulated TOD in that context, let alone the busway.

To give you an idea of the context and distance we're talking about here, Miami-Dade's Transit touts that "Express buses that run on the exclusive lanes now swiftly shuttle passengers between Dadeland South Metrorail station and SW 344 St. in an hour or less."

Interesting to note that it took Miami's Metrorail 20 years to create TOD, and again, with mostly not used transit. That's a multi-billion bet for dense development without actual use of transit.

Downtown Kendall is suburban TOD. The density surrounding it and Metrorail stations south of Brickell is roughly the same all the way down to Goulds and Southland Mall (formerly Cutler Ridge). Yet, no TOD. That's pretty damning. Some great opportunities, like directly linking to the Falls was missed during implementation too. Nevertheless, if you want know what took South Florida 20 years to create TOD was them arriving late at the party of integrating supportive land use policy with transportation infrastructure investment. Much of the land use policy and transportation strategies have since been modified and TOD is sprouting as a result.  For smaller cities like Jax, these failures and successes of various systems should provide a better road map for us to avoid the major pitfalls.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 11:01:03 AM

QuoteAnyone who's familiar with Ybor and the Channel District (before and after the opening of the TECO streetcar) knows it had a significant impact on infill development along its route.  It's a winner as a tourist train and stimulator of TOD.

We should really rethink the term "Transit Oriented Development" if nobody is using the transit. At best, it's an atmospheric streetscape addition that helps sell the Channelside development as "urban," even though pretty much everybody drives to and from there.

In that aspect, the TECO streetcar was used to promote a "lifestyle," much like the store Anthropologie uses Janis Joplin music to promote "hippie chic" or SoHo used to promote "bohemian living." All of which are very different from actually living urbanely with transit, as a hippie or as a bohemian, respectively.

Moreover, as DC's recent experience with the H Street Streetcar has shown, cities could get the same gentrification results just by announcing a streetcar project and then killing it.

Totally agree with this, couldn't have said it better.  In cities like Tampa it's basically just a symbol, or a sign.

Quote from: tufsu1 on December 01, 2014, 09:43:50 AM

Quote from: simms3 on December 01, 2014, 02:57:40 AM
If any developer has built anything in Channelside since the implementation of TECO, they may say that the streetcar had an impact on their decisions to build something and how to build something, but most large-community apartment builders (for instance Crescent Heights, as in the owner of Slade, and Novare) have guys way smarter than that.  If there are tax credits, that has a far more significant impact than some worthless streetcar that not even tourists ride (I'd compare ridership to other tourist heavy streetcar routes, or even the Jax Skyway - TECO is not a success imo on any metric).

the main decision on whether to build or not is demand.  And yes, from the beginning, the streetcar helped build the desirability and demand for the area.

Quote from: thelakelander on December 01, 2014, 06:34:27 AM

Quote from: simms3 on December 01, 2014, 02:57:40 AMTax credits, location location location, a solid master plan and city backing, and efficient and well run RFPs by the city to develop the land by reputable builders (in addition to growing sunbelt/FL market of nearly 3 million) would be enough to attract a slew of best in class apartment developers.  Of course a streetcar could show additional commitment by the city, but it wouldn't necessarily mean much if anything more than that.

Several condo developments were linked with the streetcar when originally proposed. I'll have to dig in the newspaper archives to makes some links and quotes from that era available. You can get tax credits in several urban neighborhoods in Tampa. The location was also industrial decay and blight for decades. All that changed in the 2000s and the infill has occurred along the entire line, not just the Channel District. I have an old disk around here somewhere of pictures I took a few years before the construction and opening of the streetcar (I believe the people mover was still up then).

The TECO streetcar (in it's current state) is a failure in terms of public transit ridership but it isn't operated for that market segment and we can't deny it hasn't had a major positive impact on infill development.  We can also look at the same city (in the heart of dowtown) and not see the same development pattern occurring around the Marion Street Transitway.

The point still stands.  PR for development is heavily crafted.  I sit in discussions all day all the time about where are we going to buy something, why are we going to buy that, should we move forward with phase II of this condo development or just sell to another guy horny for that type of deal or a certain $$ allocation?  Are we bullish on x market?  Why?

I guarandamntee you guys that there wasn't some meeting held by most or any of the best in class condo/apartment developers down there in FL who built stuff in Channelside who thought - golly gee, Streetcar!  That's why we should build here!  People in Tampa are going to love this thing - they're going to take it to Ybor all the time.  They're going to take it to the trolley connector into work downtown.  It's going to be so cute and useful!  This is why we need to build here.

No.

It's like LEED certification for apartments.  It does NOTHING for the bottom line, but boosts PR a bit, helps tell some "story", and thus affects marketing, to a limited degree (which is why it's pretty much buried in each community's "About" or "Location" description...it's simply mid-paragraph filler at this point).

What it also may have done is be a concrete financial commitment to the area by the city.  Blighted area, re-zoned, talked up by city officials.  Means nothing unless city officials put their money where their mouth is, and that's one thing the streetcar did.  Other than that, I stand by my absolute experience that while there are some idiot developers out there who will buy baloney, many/most see right through this stuff.  And nobody gives transit in the South/Sunbelt that much sway...

Jacksonville's Learn From Tampa lesson could be that it takes absolute signs of commitment from the city to spur development.  In other words, $$$ and action.  Not just words.  That brings me to the convention center...lol

In response to distortion, let's look at the page one examples promoted in the piece:

Atlanta Streetcar:
http://wabe.org/post/construction-issues-push-atlanta-streetcar-budget-nearly-100-million

http://www.bizjournals.com/atlanta/morning_call/2014/07/atlanta-streetcar-launch-delayed-again.html

http://www.atlantamagazine.com/news-culture-articles/no-you-cant-ride-the-atlanta-streetcar-but-you-can-look-at-these-sneak-peek-photos/

Now, Phase One of the Atlanta Streetcar should function exactly as it is intended to, linking tourist attractions and hotels, from the World of Coke to the Martin Luther King Center. It's interesting to note that one would expect TOD to be limited, as the area is already developed, but as an added perk to tourists and convention attendees, it certainly should deliver.

As for the cost, we're looking at $98,654,716. At 2.7 miles, that breaks down to $36.5 million per mile.

Where I think this project will get interesting is in Phase Two, where the streetcar will run around the Atlanta Beltline, and hopefully will get its own ROW on the route linking central neighborhoods together. Phase Two is in the planning phase and is not funded.





Charlotte CityLYNX Gold Line Corridor:
http://www.wsoctv.com/news/news/local/9-investigates-charlotte-streetcar-financial-boom-/nh7P5/

http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/bike-share-budapest-charlotte-streetcar-automated-trains-dc

http://www.charlotteobserver.com/2014/09/14/5170841/despite-claims-streetcar-projected.html#.VHybn75UGS2

The initial segment of this line would, in theory, be a part of a larger, 10-mile line linking the east and west sides of the city. The 4-mile segment will cost $150 million, or $24 million more than the original estimates. That breaks down to $37.5 million per mile.

Having said that, what Charlotte has regarding its transit is vision, exemplified by Council member Al Austin. He compared the streetcar to a hockey player who doesn't play where the puck is but plays "where the puck is going to go."

Notably, it will cost more to transport a passenger on the streetcar than on a bus or the light rail system there. And I'm unsure as to why they don't just make this Gold Line a light rail with exclusive ROW.






Oklahoma City Streetcar
http://okgazette.com/2014/08/18/regional-rail-based-transit-system-plan-could-reach-voters-in-a-few-years/

http://okgazette.com/2014/07/08/streetcar-still-on-track/

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/light-rail/oklahoma-city-seeking-streetcar-bids.html

This streetcar project is on-track to open in 2017. The first 4.5 mile segment will connect the Central Business District with the entertainment district, Bricktown, and with the Midtown District. It's estimated to cost $130 million, or $29 million per mile.

It's interesting that the streetcar is part of an overall regional transit plan, much like Charlotte's and that voters approved a sales tax to fund this project and others as a part of the overall plan.






Savannah Streetcar Project
http://savannahnow.com/exchange/2013-08-20/cat-ceo-propose-tad-help-fund-streetcar-project

http://www.wsav.com/story/24173940/savannah-city-council-to-hear-plans-for-streetcar-project

http://www.catconnects.com/home.html

This streetcar project is on hold for the time being, but it certainly looks interesting as both a circulatory tool and as an enhancement to the historic charms of Savannah. Being that this is Georgia, I'm unsure how to take this quote:

QuoteCity Manager Stephanie Cutter said the city has so many projects on the horizon, like a new arena, that it's too soon to commit to another big undertaking so quickly. The city wants to make sure that when they do take action on having streetcars the project will stay on track and not just fall by the way side.

One could read that as code for political speak for "killing the project softly," or one could view that as smart, genuine city planning. I certainly hope it's the latter, but I've lived in Georgia!






Miami Streetcar
http://www.miamitodaynews.com/2014/10/29/planners-sidetrack-streetcar-plan/

http://therealdeal.com/miami/blog/2014/10/29/miamis-streetcar-plan-revival-hits-snag/

http://www.miamitodaynews.com/2014/11/05/transit-planners-right-track-halt-streetcar-express/

Here's a note on distortion:
Note the headline chosen: "Miami Speeding To Get Streetcars Rolling."
Note the date: Oct. 1st.
Note the pub: Miami Today.
Note my first link: same pub, later date, with the 'sidetracked' streetcar plan for those 'speeding streetcars in Miami.'

That's total distortion.

In Miami, it's not as if the powers that be aren't supportive of a streetcar, it's that they don't want the streetcar to derail other projects. Here's a quote:

Quote"I am still very excited about this project as long as it doesn't compete with all of the other projects that's in the hopper," said board member Audrey Edmonson.

For one, Miami-Dade is working toward countywide bus rapid transit. The county and Miami Beach are collaborating on a downtown-Miami Beach transit link, referred to as Bay Link. And recently, a proposal called for study of a gondola connecting major destinations such as Marlins Stadium and Florida International University.

So, let's see: BRT countywide, a (finally) link to Miami Beach and gondolas are already in the hopper, so streetcars, at least for now, will have to wait. (Honestly, countywide true BRT could be the best thing to ever happen to my former home and my forever hometown.)

Also, it's fascinating that Miami (finally) seems to 'get' what transit planning is all about.

QuoteIt was the right track [to put the streetcar on hold] precisely because, as the Metropolitan Planning Organization decided last month, we've already got too many pieces of a transit jigsaw puzzle that don't interlock into a unified whole.

Well, I've dilly-dallied waaaaaaay too much this morning at work. But note that I pretty much covered page one, didn't diss the mode, or offer a distorted view of the debate going on.





 

Quote from: simms3 on December 01, 2014, 12:30:23 PM
I guarandamntee you guys that there wasn't some meeting held by most or any of the best in class condo/apartment developers down there in FL who built stuff in Channelside who thought - golly gee, Streetcar!  That's why we should build here!  People in Tampa are going to love this thing - they're going to take it to Ybor all the time.  They're going to take it to the trolley connector into work downtown.  It's going to be so cute and useful!  This is why we need to build here.

Luckily, no one ever stated this.  I don't believe this type of meeting is a requirement for TOD. The streetcar and coordination of supportive public land uses helped create an environment that was worth investing in, as opposed to the crime ridden blighted industrial district that was in place for decades before the early 2000s. It's hard to deny this if you're really familiar with the area before and after 2000.

QuoteWhat it also may have done is be a concrete financial commitment to the area by the city.  Blighted area, re-zoned, talked up by city officials.  Means nothing unless city officials put their money where their mouth is, and that's one thing the streetcar did.

I agree.  $$$ talks. Something else walks.

QuoteOther than that, I stand by my absolute experience that while there are some idiot developers out there who will buy baloney, many/most see right through this stuff.

I don't think anyone here is arguing about what developers see through. Just that the TECO streetcar has stimulated TOD. Nothing more, nothing less.

QuoteJacksonville's Learn From Tampa lesson could be that it takes absolute signs of commitment from the city to spur development.  In other words, $$$ and action.  Not just words.  That brings me to the convention center...lol

Again, I agree. Hot air won't get Jax anywhere.

QuoteDowntown Kendall is suburban TOD. The density surrounding it and Metrorail stations south of Brickell is roughly the same all the way down to Goulds and Southland Mall (formerly Cutler Ridge). Yet, no TOD. That's pretty damning. Some great opportunities, like directly linking to the Falls was missed during implementation too. Nevertheless, if you want know what took South Florida 20 years to create TOD was them arriving late at the party of integrating supportive land use policy with transportation infrastructure investment. Much of the land use policy and transportation strategies have since been modified and TOD is sprouting as a result.  For smaller cities like Jax, these failures and successes of various systems should provide a better road map for us to avoid the major pitfalls.

As someone who lived there from birth to 18, and frequently goes back to visit my peeps and relatives, that's not true. There's a similar density pattern from Viscaya to Dadeland South, and then it switches to less dense but still 'suburban dense' until the former Cutler Ridge, and then it turns into pretty much not dense. There's also, notably community resistance to said dense development. If I recall correctly, one of the reasons Pinecrest incorporated was the unwanted Dadeland density.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 12:42:17 PM
In Miami, it's not as if the powers that be aren't supportive of a streetcar, it's that they don't want the streetcar to derail other projects. Here's a quote:

Quote"I am still very excited about this project as long as it doesn't compete with all of the other projects that's in the hopper," said board member Audrey Edmonson.

For one, Miami-Dade is working toward countywide bus rapid transit. The county and Miami Beach are collaborating on a downtown-Miami Beach transit link, referred to as Bay Link. And recently, a proposal called for study of a gondola connecting major destinations such as Marlins Stadium and Florida International University.

So, let's see: BRT countywide, a (finally) link to Miami Beach and gondolas are already in the hopper, so streetcars, at least for now, will have to wait. (Honestly, countywide true BRT could be the best thing to ever happen to my former home and my forever hometown.)

Also, it's fascinating that Miami (finally) seems to 'get' what transit planning is all about.

I'd be surprised if they are going to invest in countywide dedicated busways.  I'd bet the house, they are talking about BRT-lite, not that there's anything wrong with it. South Florida's mass transit network can use all the help it can get and there's not enough money to implement all of its needs at once.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 12:46:06 PM

QuoteDowntown Kendall is suburban TOD. The density surrounding it and Metrorail stations south of Brickell is roughly the same all the way down to Goulds and Southland Mall (formerly Cutler Ridge). Yet, no TOD. That's pretty damning. Some great opportunities, like directly linking to the Falls was missed during implementation too. Nevertheless, if you want know what took South Florida 20 years to create TOD was them arriving late at the party of integrating supportive land use policy with transportation infrastructure investment. Much of the land use policy and transportation strategies have since been modified and TOD is sprouting as a result.  For smaller cities like Jax, these failures and successes of various systems should provide a better road map for us to avoid the major pitfalls.

As someone who lived there from birth to 18, and frequently goes back to visit my peeps and relatives, that's not true.

Unless something has changed since 2010, check out the population density maps from the US Census Bureau:

http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map

Everything appears to be pretty consistent (under 5k/mile with a few 5-9k pockets sprinkled in).

Quote from: thelakelander on December 01, 2014, 12:42:56 PM

Quote from: simms3 on December 01, 2014, 12:30:23 PM
I guarandamntee you guys that there wasn't some meeting held by most or any of the best in class condo/apartment developers down there in FL who built stuff in Channelside who thought - golly gee, Streetcar!  That's why we should build here!  People in Tampa are going to love this thing - they're going to take it to Ybor all the time.  They're going to take it to the trolley connector into work downtown.  It's going to be so cute and useful!  This is why we need to build here.

Luckily, no one ever stated this.  I don't believe this type of meeting is a requirement for TOD. The streetcar and coordination of supportive public land uses helped create an environment that was worth investing in, as opposed to the crime ridden blighted industrial district that was in place for decades before the early 2000s. It's hard to deny this if you're really familiar with the area before and after 2000.

QuoteWhat it also may have done is be a concrete financial commitment to the area by the city.  Blighted area, re-zoned, talked up by city officials.  Means nothing unless city officials put their money where their mouth is, and that's one thing the streetcar did.

I agree.  $$$ talks. Something else walks.

QuoteOther than that, I stand by my absolute experience that while there are some idiot developers out there who will buy baloney, many/most see right through this stuff.

I don't think anyone here is arguing about what developers see through. Just that the TECO streetcar has stimulated TOD. Nothing more, nothing less.

QuoteJacksonville's Learn From Tampa lesson could be that it takes absolute signs of commitment from the city to spur development.  In other words, $$$ and action.  Not just words.  That brings me to the convention center...lol

Again, I agree. Hot air won't get Jax anywhere.

Just so long as we're on the same page concerning Jacksonville - that the city should realize that most developers aren't going to build something based on the fact they think the #1 selling point will be the actual mobility aspect of whatever transit the city attempts to cook up.  But the city should realize that a meaningful transit project tied to appropriate/flexible up-zoning and land use, well-run RFPs seeking *credible* developers, etc etc will allow for profitable density, a sign of commitment from the city (and tax abatements never hurt!), and a boost to the marketability of a project (as Aaronius says - a "lifestyle" can be promoted.  You can call whatever you have "Slice of New York in Jacksonville" even though it couldn't be further from the truth - the consumer will buy that pitch).

And let's get another thing out on the table - developers (and Wall St) are sheep to each other.  A big name moving on something will attract more attention than ANYTHING.  Portland, OR is the latest market showing this in all of its glory (in terms of straight up office acquisitions - Metlife just bought something there, after we did, and literally every head on Wall St/RE world turned).

QuoteUnless something has changed since 2010, check out the population density maps from the US Census Bureau:

http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map

Everything appears to be pretty consistent (under 5k/mile with a few 5-9k pockets sprinkled in).

Huh. color me wrong!

Quote from: simms3 on December 01, 2014, 12:57:21 PM
Just so long as we're on the same page concerning Jacksonville - that the city should realize that most developers aren't going to build something based on the fact they think the #1 selling point will be the actual mobility aspect of whatever transit the city attempts to cook up.  But the city should realize that a meaningful transit project tied to appropriate/flexible up-zoning and land use, well-run RFPs seeking *credible* developers, etc etc will allow for profitable density, a sign of commitment from the city (and tax abatements never hurt!), and a boost to the marketability of a project (as Aaronius says - a "lifestyle" can be promoted.  You can call whatever you have "Slice of New York in Jacksonville" even though it couldn't be further from the truth - the consumer will buy that pitch).

Here's where I'm at. If Jax wants to stimulate a vibrant walkable environment, it's going to have to invest in the things that breed it (transportation, land use policies, maintained parks, better schools, etc.).

When it comes to transportation infrastructure, this means permanent human scaled modes.  If the city wants to stimulate autocentric economic development, then invest in beltways and roadway widenings. In both cases, they require a public entity to put their money where their mouth is.

^^^True.

Another chunk:
Winston-Salem Streetcar
http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/light-rail/winston-salem-set-to-ok-streetcar-plan.html

http://www.bizjournals.com/triad/blog/morning-edition/2014/03/winston-salem-council-picks-streetcar-route.html

http://myfox8.com/2014/03/25/winston-salem-hops-on-board-streetcar-route/

Moving forward, a 4-mile, $179 million dollar route. Or $45 million per mile. It's interesting, if baffling that the motion to endorse the route also was a motion for the city to not spend any more money on the streetcar. Incidentally, they chose the streetcar because:

QuoteBesse made the argument that developers will build next to fixed rails because they know the streetcar isn't going away, but won't develop near a bus route that can disappear at any time.

Grand Rapids Streetcar
http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/02/streetcar_plan_for_grand_rapid.html

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/02/3_streetcar_routes_in_grand_ra.html

http://www.grbj.com/articles/79323-streetcar-study-should-be-completed-this-year

http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/grand-rapids-good-transit-lessons

http://www.mlive.com/news/grand-rapids/index.ssf/2014/08/striking_gold_with_silver_line.html

In the study phase. A resurrected plan from 2008, which was killed because of the economic recession. The two miles would be estimated to cost between $50 and $60 million per mile. Also a part of a larger, more comprehensive master plan for transit in Grand Rapids, which also just launched a BRT line this year, which cost $40 million for the 9.6 mile line, or $4.2 million per mile. Notably, this is a 'sometimes and some places' exclusive right of way BRT, and is a part of a larger network (detailed in their plan,) including another BRT line, as well as the aforementioned streetcar.

Interestingly, much like Lake mentions a lot, Grand Rapids is looking at transit purpose for each of their lines, with the streetcar making many more stops than what they plan for their BRT lines (although, one supposes, that you could merely stop the bus vehicle more numerously, so one suspects that the development potential in their downtown is also driving this node.)

Perhaps most astonishingly, and as perhaps a sign of the future, check out this quote:

Quote"If we want to chase federal funds, we could be chasing it for the better part of 10 years," said John Logie, a former Grand Rapids mayor who is chairing the committee. "It may not be as hard as we think to raise all of it here."

That's pretty awesome that Grand Rapids may well fund their streetcar without federal funds. Aside from it getting done more quickly, they'll have much more community support and engagement.




Saint Paul Streetcar
http://www.minnpost.com/two-cities/2013/08/seven-proposed-st-paul-streetcar-lines-which-one-goes-first

http://www.railwayage.com/index.php/passenger/light-rail/st-paul-city-council-advances-streetcar-plan.html

http://www.twincities.com/localnews/ci_26119835/st-paul-council-approves-streetcar-study

Study approved unanimously by the city council. The overall plan calls for seven lines, and they are studying a four-mile "starter" line. That would cost $250 million, or $62.5 million per mile. Aside from the usual "no transit" nonsense there, it's interesting that, much like Charlotte, Saint Paul is pursuing this transit option because of future citizens and paradigm shifts:

QuoteHe said teenagers and 20-somethings are increasingly leading mostly car-free lifestyles, and other modes of transportation are also heavily subsidized by government, including cars.

Tucson Streetcar (Sun Link)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sun_Link

http://www.kvoa.com/news/tremendous-opening-day-for-sun-link-streetcar/

http://cleantechnica.com/2014/10/13/tucson-streetcar-ridership-surpasses-expectations/

Up and running, and exceeding initial expectations of ridership by a whole lot (from 3500 per day to 5000.) Notably, part of a master plan for the region. Open for about 5 months, and weirdly, did not include streetscape or road rebuilding as a part of the plan (which means that some of the route runs over potholed roads but with snazzy new transit, which seems like a Thunderdome mistake.)




Austin Rail
http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/06/austin-wants-to-build-a-light-railstreetcar-hybrid/371986/

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/moveit/2014/11/austins-rail-proposal-fails-badly/#22524101=0

http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/light-rail-road-freeway-funding-austin

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/07/austins-rail-or-fail-vote-is-uniting-transit-supporters-and-foes/374770/

Failed at the ballot box. Some suspect that the bundling of the light rail system with a roads and highway improvement program peeved both sides of the debate. Some didn't like the route the hybrid light-rail and streetcar was to take.




Sarasota Streetcar
http://sarasotastreetcar.com/category/news

https://www.google.com/maps/d/viewer?mid=z3eV8wVfzVzw.klV8mnELSQLQ&msa=0

http://letsgetmovingsarasota.com/docs/default-document-library/2012/11/19/2012-11-draft-circulator-report---for-web_ll.pdf

Errr...this seems more like a pipe dream than an actual, progressing project. The "studies" proposed are for a system in Nova Scotia, for Chrissakes, and the news page has two items: one from 2013 and one from 2009, with the latter concerning Cincinnati's streetcar system.

This is another example of distortion, where one suspects highly that there's no real initiative or push for a Sarasota streetcar. To put this another way, if one used this criterion, one could easily claim that Jacksonville is "actively developing a streetcar" based on the desire expressed at MetroJacksonville.com.

Notably, Sarasota is pursuing a downtown circulator bus, via the reorganization of existing bus routes...and it doesn't seem as if that's seen any action since 2012.
















 





 

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 03:31:08 PM
Austin Rail
http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/06/austin-wants-to-build-a-light-railstreetcar-hybrid/371986/

http://blog.mysanantonio.com/moveit/2014/11/austins-rail-proposal-fails-badly/#22524101=0

http://nextcity.org/daily/entry/light-rail-road-freeway-funding-austin

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2014/07/austins-rail-or-fail-vote-is-uniting-transit-supporters-and-foes/374770/

Failed at the ballot box. Some suspect that the bundling of the light rail system with a roads and highway improvement program peeved both sides of the debate. Some didn't like the route the hybrid light-rail and streetcar was to take.

This bundling helped kill a similar bill in Atlanta a few years ago.  So many people poured their hearts over it, but at the end of the day, neither the car folks nor the transit folks were happy, and people on all sides were displeased at the messaging, which was that "traffic would be relieved", when it was clear that it was more of a jobs/stimulus bill than a true traffic reliever.

^That's what a good chunk of transportation projects are these days. Jobs/stimulus projects. SR 9B and the First Coast Expressway aren't needed to "relieve" local streets. Both are examples of projects needed to trigger land development on on the properties surrounding them.

QuoteThis bundling helped kill a similar bill in Atlanta a few years ago.  So many people poured their hearts over it, but at the end of the day, neither the car folks nor the transit folks were happy, and people on all sides were displeased at the messaging, which was that "traffic would be relieved", when it was clear that it was more of a jobs/stimulus bill than a true traffic reliever.

Simms3, my whole point on this is that THIS is the discussion we should be having regarding transit investments in the country. I just don't like the distortion of the issue. In this article's case, I find it disingenuous to present streetcar successes, like Tucson's, alongside streetcar failures, like DC's (which has become something of a poster child for streetcar poor planning in transit circles,) alongside streetcars that have been voted down, like Austin's and Arlington's, bunched in with streetcars that arguably don't exist, like the 'made on my 1999 iMac Bondi Blue' Sarasota Streetcar page.

There's no doubt that a streetcar or streetcars in the right location and context would be fantastic in Jacksonville, just like any other transit node. And there's no doubt that by presenting a deep dive into this issue would generate new ideas and ways of approaching the streetcar dream, and turning that into an initiative, and hopefully, a reality. No doubt in my mind. None.

For example, without my combing over the list presented, I'd have never seen that Grand Rapids is actually reviving a streetcar plan, is using it to complement a BRT system, and is considering finding ways to finance the line without federal funding. That's flat-out fascinating, and it opens the debate in Metro Jacksonville into places where you can see a streetcar initiative going it alone without the feds, perhaps without JTA, and with the support of the communities and businesses that would be grouping together to finance the line. That's fascinating stuff, inspiring stuff. Worth a debate or even a visit to Grand Rapids to see what they're doing right.

But to put together a jpeg/power point mood poem, where every city that's ever considered a modern streetcar and some that haven't (ahem...Sarasota...ahem,) where "success," "failure," "pipe-dream" and "voted down" are all considered and presented as having the same pro-streetcar weight, with the implication being that everyone is doing it, when that's plainly not the case, is not fostering productive transit debate. It's distortion. Propaganda. It's exactly what bought Jax the SkyWay, Miami the MetroFail, and so on.

Quote from: thelakelander on December 01, 2014, 04:11:22 PM
^That's what a good chunk of transportation projects are these days. Jobs/stimulus projects. SR 9B and the First Coast Expressway aren't needed to "relieve" local streets. Both are examples of projects needed to trigger land development on on the properties surrounding them.

^^^Right, but not pitching it as such was a political misstep for the bill in Atlanta (among many missteps).  Congestion is a real and growing problem in Atlanta, so people were upset and felt lied to that a stimulus bill was wrongly labeled as a traffic reliever, or they felt it wasn't what was needed to solve the traffic issue (and transit advocates had their own set of grievances).

Pretty comprehensive, high level take:

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/state-regional-govt-politics/voters-reject-transportation-tax/nQXfq/

http://www.ajc.com/news/news/local/after-t-splost-defeat-business-groups-retool-messa/nQXg8/

Quote^^^Right, but not pitching it as such was a political misstep for the bill in Atlanta (among many missteps).  Congestion is a real and growing problem in Atlanta, so people were upset and felt lied to that a stimulus bill was wrongly labeled as a traffic reliever, or they felt it wasn't what was needed to solve the traffic issue (and transit advocates had their own set of grievances).

To be fair, T-SPLOST's failure to pass is almost emblematic of Metro Atlanta's issues, where a refusal to work together paired with a deep distrust of government (and unspoken, yet obvious imbedded racism,) all work or don't work together to not promote transit.

Quote"They're not proposing anything that will benefit me," Pollard said. "We're not getting anything out of this. People in the north — they're going to benefit big-time."

It's opinions like that, true or not, that leave out the obvious: that T-SPLOST would have benefited Metro Atlanta as a whole, that helped killed the bill.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 04:39:39 PM

Quote^^^Right, but not pitching it as such was a political misstep for the bill in Atlanta (among many missteps).  Congestion is a real and growing problem in Atlanta, so people were upset and felt lied to that a stimulus bill was wrongly labeled as a traffic reliever, or they felt it wasn't what was needed to solve the traffic issue (and transit advocates had their own set of grievances).

To be fair, T-SPLOST's failure to pass is almost emblematic of Metro Atlanta's issues, where a refusal to work together paired with a deep distrust of government (and unspoken, yet obvious imbedded racism,) all work or don't work together to not promote transit.

Quote"They're not proposing anything that will benefit me," Pollard said. "We're not getting anything out of this. People in the north — they're going to benefit big-time."

It's opinions like that, true or not, that leave out the obvious: that T-SPLOST would have benefited Metro Atlanta as a whole, that helped killed the bill.

All even bigger issues in Jax.  Jax will have to learn from a city like Atlanta on how to tackle transit/tax PR.

QuoteAll even bigger issues in Jax.  Jax will have to learn from a city like Atlanta on how to tackle transit/tax PR.

I think the primary issue with places like Atlanta and Houston, or Dallas, for that matter, is that they want to be all things to all people, at least as it pertains to the urban fabric. I don't think Atlanta, for example, either as an individual city or as an insanely not dense metropolitan statistical area, has any clue as to how to get to a definition of what they are to become; everything there is "lifestyle" versus actuality. One lives an "urban lifestyle," defined by driving pretty much everyplace. And one lives a "country manor" lifestyle, defined by look-a-like, massive houses in absurdly low densities.

It will be interesting to see how Atlanta (or others) will actualize urbanity on a large scale, if they, in fact, can.

One of the things I've actually come to appreciate about DC is the idea that they know what kind of city/metro region they want to be, which is to say a brain magnet with a strong transit backbone. The growing pains of getting from dense core with suburban/exurban donuts is proving to be quite painful to overcome, but...at least...there's a plan, a vision...an idea of where we are trying to go, in general. I certainly don't think that's in place in ATL, Houston, Dallas or the rest.   

http://www.communitiesfortransit.org/master_plan

Lake, MoCo's BRT Master Plan.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 05:27:53 PM

QuoteAll even bigger issues in Jax.  Jax will have to learn from a city like Atlanta on how to tackle transit/tax PR.

I think the primary issue with places like Atlanta and Houston, or Dallas, for that matter, is that they want to be all things to all people, at least as it pertains to the urban fabric. I don't think Atlanta, for example, either as an individual city or as an insanely not dense metropolitan statistical area, has any clue as to how to get to a definition of what they are to become; everything there is "lifestyle" versus actuality. One lives an "urban lifestyle," defined by driving pretty much everyplace. And one lives a "country manor" lifestyle, defined by look-a-like, massive houses in absurdly low densities.

It will be interesting to see how Atlanta (or others) will actualize urbanity on a large scale, if they, in fact, can.

One of the things I've actually come to appreciate about DC is the idea that they know what kind of city/metro region they want to be, which is to say a brain magnet with a strong transit backbone. The growing pains of getting from dense core with suburban/exurban donuts is proving to be quite painful to overcome, but...at least...there's a plan, a vision...an idea of where we are trying to go, in general. I certainly don't think that's in place in ATL, Houston, Dallas or the rest.   

The irony is that though DC is a successful model of suburban [true] TOD implementation and has a pretty urban core and excellent heavy rail system serving both city and metro, its metro area is no more dense than Atlanta's true core metro area.  Take Atlanta's 5 dominant counties, and they are not only the vast bulk of the population, they are often slightly denser than metro DC's counties (Montgomery Cty MD, for instance, or NoVA counties).

The two metros as a whole are quite alike, both demographically and in general development.  Atlanta doesn't have nearly as strong a core and it's a decade or two behind in terms of regional planning progress, but the two metros are far more similar to each other than different.  There is more of a tea party element in Atlanta's burbs than DC's, but that would be one of the only key differences producing different obstacles.  I would guess Atlanta has a bit more poverty (and sadly still crime), as well (which only helps fuel any racial/economic disparities it may have).

I've lived in both places. I actually find DC to be closer to Miami's frame of mind than Atlanta's, although, you're right about the core counties to a degree.

I don't dislike Atlanta, but it drops off from urban to suburban, even in the core, insanely quick. And when you go OTP, man, there's a whole lotta middle class people living their plantation dreams! It's no wonder it's one of the least densely populated MSAs in the country.

I think the issue is that the model for development and success there has been those super low density burbs, and that there's political and personal resistance to a rework of said burbs. DC has them as well, but they're not nearly as "acreaged" and not nearly as tea partied, so the reinvention continues apace.

I will say this: I miss Atlanta. Beautiful place with great food and superb cheap living. It certainly has the best weather by far, and of the sprawling sunbelt cities, I think it probably has the most potential to last, especially if they keep on keeping with the trees as they urbanize. For the right job, I'd miss DC but I'd move back.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 05:31:17 PM
http://www.communitiesfortransit.org/master_plan

Lake, MoCo's BRT Master Plan.

Thanks. It looks pretty comprehensive and complements the existing transit network pretty well.  A few questions:

1. How is it being funded, what's the total capital costs/mile and timeline for implementation?

2. To accommodate dedicated lanes, is the plan to take advantage of lane reductions on existing corridors or widen them?

3. If the dedicated lanes are coming at the expense of existing travel lanes, are these facilities maintained by DOT?

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 08:20:16 PM
I've lived in both places. I actually find DC to be closer to Miami's frame of mind than Atlanta's, although, you're right about the core counties to a degree.

I don't dislike Atlanta, but it drops off from urban to suburban, even in the core, insanely quick. And when you go OTP, man, there's a whole lotta middle class people living their plantation dreams! It's no wonder it's one of the least densely populated MSAs in the country.

I think the issue is that the model for development and success there has been those super low density burbs, and that there's political and personal resistance to a rework of said burbs. DC has them as well, but they're not nearly as "acreaged" and not nearly as tea partied, so the reinvention continues apace.

I will say this: I miss Atlanta. Beautiful place with great food and superb cheap living. It certainly has the best weather by far, and of the sprawling sunbelt cities, I think it probably has the most potential to last, especially if they keep on keeping with the trees as they urbanize. For the right job, I'd miss DC but I'd move back.

I can't think of any city that reminds me in almost any way of Miami.  Superficially, perhaps LA.  But even then, LA and Miami are vastly vastly different.  And quite frankly, Atlanta has more of that superficial "celebrity vibe" and "keeping up with the Joneses" vibe that SoFla has in abundance than I've experienced in most places.  But not similar - I can't imagine DC is all that similar to Miami, and I think that in many ways is a compliment.

I agree that Atlanta drops off in urbanity really quickly - in fact I'd go so far as to argue that Atlanta doesn't really have all that much urbanity to begin with, even in its densest pockets.  I think that is the biggest difference between DC and Atlanta, due to DC's core and a few of its more well thought out non-core cities (Rosslyn/Ballston/Bethesda/Silver Spring, etc).

But to be fair, DC's core is a little tweener in that it's "newer" and substantially less dense than Boston's, Philly's, Chicago's, or San Francisco's, even parts of LA's.  And the famed Rosslyn, VA doesn't look all that different from Buckhead in Atlanta (shorter buildings, less linear, slightly better - relatively - planning):

Rosslyn:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4114/4745531657_279091642a_z.jpg)
source (https://www.flickr.com/photos/briangratwicke/4745531657/)

Buckhead:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-O8WZb4JUMRs/UuAQhbyktKI/AAAAAAAARf4/511Hb2f80eI/s1600/Buckhead+Atlanta+-+construction+photo+1.jpg)
source (http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.php/topic/44053-buckhead-atlanta-formerly-the-streets-of-buckhead/page-5)

Relative densities:

Quote from: simms3 on November 03, 2014, 11:27:03 PM
3) Metro Atlanta truly does sprawl 8400 sq mi and people (oddly) make those commutes.  BUT, to put things in perspective:

Atlanta

County / Population / Area / Density

Fulton   984,293   527   1,868
Cobb   717,190   340   2,109
Dekalb   713,340   268   2,662
Gwinnett   859,304   430   1,998
Clayton   259,424   142   1,827

Total     3,533,551   1,707   2,070
Metro  5,522,942 8,376   659
64% of metro Atlantans live in 20% of the land area.

Houston

County / Population / Area / Density

Harris   4,336,853   1,704   2,545

Total   4,336,853   1,704   2,545
Metro   6,313,158   10,062   627
69% of metro Houstonians live in the central county (17% of metro land area)

DC

County / Population / Area / Density

DC   646,449   61   10,598
Montgomery   1,016,677   491   2,071
Prince George's   890,081   483   1,843
Arlington   227,146   26   8,736
Fairfax   1,116,897   391   2,857
Prince William   431,258   336   1,284
         
Total    4,328,508   1,788   2,421
Metro   5,949,859   5,564   1,069
73% of metro DC'ers live in 32% of the metro area land


My point about DC blending new urbanist/Sunbelt style development with that of an older, traditional city still stands.  It's literally the point between the North and the South and metro DC suburbs are essentially the same style/density as metro Atlanta suburbs.

DC and Atlanta are much more alike than you're giving credit.  Their heavy rail systems are also similar (similar age/vintage, similar program, similar mix of inner city rapid rail and heavy rail commuter style to the burbs).

^ when comparing densities, it is important to note that Montgomery County, MD has a large greenbelt.  The northern half of the county has purposefully been kept largely rural.  It should be subtracted from the urban density calculations.

There should be objective reporting on the advantages/disadvantages of rail in Jacksonville rather than showing subjective websites of other rail lines' websites claims. Naturally, one should take all such claims and numbers with a huge grain of salt as government always inflates things to look wonderful. Any development along a rail line is automatically assumed to be caused by the rail line, no doubt. Costs are also always projected about 30 - 50% lower than what the actual costs end up being. When was the last time you ever saw any government project that even came within 15% of the projected cost? Government has every reason to sell the cost as lower in order to get a project going. Only then does the taxpayer realize that government plays this game each and every time.

Quote from: simms3 on December 01, 2014, 09:53:06 PM
And the famed Rosslyn, VA doesn't look all that different from Buckhead in Atlanta (shorter buildings, less linear, slightly better - relatively - planning):

Rosslyn:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4114/4745531657_279091642a_z.jpg)
source (https://www.flickr.com/photos/briangratwicke/4745531657/)

Buckhead:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-O8WZb4JUMRs/UuAQhbyktKI/AAAAAAAARf4/511Hb2f80eI/s1600/Buckhead+Atlanta+-+construction+photo+1.jpg)
source (http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.php/topic/44053-buckhead-atlanta-formerly-the-streets-of-buckhead/page-5)

Rosslyn is definitely denser than Buckhead. That area of Northern Virginia started to densify a bit earlier than Buckhead, so it's further along.  It's also a lot more pedestrian friendly and urban at street level.  The population density of its census tracts are 20k residents per square mile and above. Buckhead's densest tract is less than 8k residents per square mile, according the the US Census Bureau.

http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010/map

I'm also not sure what we're looking at here...subjective selections of counties? Just go with the MSA or the continuous urbanized area. Metro Atlanta is known for, and is frequently the poster child for non-dense urban sprawl. Which isn't to say that DC doesn't have its own absurdities of scale as they compare to "dense, urban development," where people in Martinsburg, WV MARC Train into work everyday. But, c'mon. Atlanta is less dense than Tampa, not exactly a packed in metro...and by a looooooooottttttttt. I also have two sisters living in Houston; one in Montrose and one in the burbs, and Houston is by no means remotely dense, nor would anyone view it as such from any experience of being there.

We're also absurdly keeping DC and Baltimore's MSA's apart, as if there's not a massive cross-commuting pattern there. That CSA, I believe, still has less land area that Metro Atlanta and certainly less than the insanity that is Houston... and is in the 9.5 million people range or so.

I meant that Miami and DC feel more global and cosmopolitan than Atlanta did to me. And that both DC and Miami represent flip sides to pretense in people. There was/is just more of a feeling of cultural alignment in ways that the ATL seemed to mimic but didn't necessarily practice. But, that's just an opinion and a personal feeling, and thus, isn't quantifiable.

Nothing against Atlanta at all, really. Just different strokes for different folks. Everything against Houston because Texas is a wretched hole of backwards science and politics.

Quote from: tufsu1 on December 01, 2014, 10:10:45 PM
^ when comparing densities, it is important to note that Montgomery County, MD has a large greenbelt.  The northern half of the county has purposefully been kept largely rural.  It should be subtracted from the urban density calculations.

^^^That's a good point - weighted average density is going to impact DC more.  I just ran calcs on counties in metro Atl and metro DC.  Inner metro DC counties are in the 4,000-6,000 ppsm (eg Fairfield County is 5,356 ppsm and houses 1,116,897 people) while inner Atlanta counties are in the 3,000-4,000 ppsm range (eg Decatur County at 3,508 and houses 713,340 ppsm).

For reference, Duval County is at 2,792 ppsm.

But it doesn't change the fact that Metro DC is quite close to Metro Atlanta in many ways, not the least of which is demographics, age, layout of metro system, and overall built form.  Both cities have dense tree canopies, wild swings in building variation/density (which you can see in aerials of each, with large swaths of single family homes on large lots concealed by trees with clusters or strings of mid/high-rise buildings dotting the landscape).

The only few substantive differences DC has are its status (propped up by being nation's capital), its core density, its superior planning, and perhaps a couple decades of proper TOD development.

Quote from: thelakelander on December 01, 2014, 11:19:48 PM

Quote from: simms3 on December 01, 2014, 09:53:06 PM
And the famed Rosslyn, VA doesn't look all that different from Buckhead in Atlanta (shorter buildings, less linear, slightly better - relatively - planning):

Rosslyn:
(https://c1.staticflickr.com/5/4114/4745531657_279091642a_z.jpg)
source (https://www.flickr.com/photos/briangratwicke/4745531657/)

Buckhead:
(http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-O8WZb4JUMRs/UuAQhbyktKI/AAAAAAAARf4/511Hb2f80eI/s1600/Buckhead+Atlanta+-+construction+photo+1.jpg)
source (http://www.urbanplanet.org/forums/index.php/topic/44053-buckhead-atlanta-formerly-the-streets-of-buckhead/page-5)

Rosslyn is definitely denser than Buckhead. That area of Northern Virginia started to densify a bit earlier than Buckhead, so it's further along.  It's also a lot more pedestrian friendly and urban at street level.  The population density of its census tracts are 20k residents per square mile and above. Buckhead's densest tract is less than 8k residents per square mile, according the the US Census Bureau.

http://projects.nytimes.com/census/2010

No argument from me there.  However, I'd argue that neither Buckhead nor Rosslyn/Ballston are "urban", but rather new urbanist visions that fit a certain mold of a late 20th/21st century idea of what urban is.  They look rather similar to me.

Here is a comprehensive recent photo tour of the Rosslyn/Ballston corridor (http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=210259&highlight=ballston).  You can't tell me that's substantively different from the Peachtree corridor between Midtown and Buckhead.

In fact, looking at the density maps by tract, both areas are defined by "strings" of exceeding density (and Buckhead exceeds 10,000 ppsm whereas the Rosslyn/Ballston corridor achieves 40,000 ppsm in parts) with drastic dropoffs to obvious single family residential density.  One tract could be max density and an adjacent tract could drop off immediately to Jax density.  That just doesn't happen in a lot of cities, not to mention the physical landscape is quite similar.

I'd offer up the site below as more useful/entertaining (you can export data to Excel):

http://www.socialexplorer.com/89AACD3A4F1E4E1/explore

Recently discovered.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 02, 2014, 12:26:26 AM
I'm also not sure what we're looking at here...subjective selections of counties? Just go with the MSA or the continuous urbanized area. Metro Atlanta is known for, and is frequently the poster child for non-dense urban sprawl. Which isn't to say that DC doesn't have its own absurdities of scale as they compare to "dense, urban development," where people in Martinsburg, WV MARC Train into work everyday. But, c'mon. Atlanta is less dense than Tampa, not exactly a packed in metro...and by a looooooooottttttttt. I also have two sisters living in Houston; one in Montrose and one in the burbs, and Houston is by no means remotely dense, nor would anyone view it as such from any experience of being there.

We're also absurdly keeping DC and Baltimore's MSA's apart, as if there's not a massive cross-commuting pattern there. That CSA, I believe, still has less land area that Metro Atlanta and certainly less than the insanity that is Houston... and is in the 9.5 million people range or so.

I meant that Miami and DC feel more global and cosmopolitan than Atlanta did to me. And that both DC and Miami represent flip sides to pretense in people. There was/is just more of a feeling of cultural alignment in ways that the ATL seemed to mimic but didn't necessarily practice. But, that's just an opinion and a personal feeling, and thus, isn't quantifiable.

Nothing against Atlanta at all, really. Just different strokes for different folks. Everything against Houston because Texas is a wretched hole of backwards science and politics.

I see your points and I'm not disagreeing that Atlanta and Houston are worthy poster childs for sprawl, but so are SoFla and LA, both of which are structurally considerably more dense than the DC area.  Parts of LA are as dense as SF, though not built in a way where you "feel it" as much.  Houston has a Census Tract of 55,000 ppsm, and surrounded by an area of Census Tracts of 20-40,000 ppsm.  That's the same density as the Rosslyn-Ballston corridor, a density not difficult to achieve with non-descript decidedly unurban mid/high-rise apartment buildings not even built to the curb, necessarily.  Midtown Atlanta will achieve this density in the next Census, as will the built up parts of Buckhead, potentially.  All it takes is about 2,000-3,000 more units per tract, which means about 10 average 200-300 unit buildings.  Over a decade, not hard to do in a larger growing city.

And Atlanta's "metro area" is such a misnomer.  Atlanta's more like a 4-4.5 million person metro that oddly "annexed" about 15 additional counties simply because those people 3-4 counties out commute 1 county in for work, creating some sort of commuting pattern that allows them to be part of the Atlanta metro.  Its core 5 counties are 3.5 million people at an average ~2,000 ppsm (obviously still not dense, but WAYYY larger than Tampa's, of which that whole metro is far less people at half the density).

Atlanta and DC share a similar metro system, similar demographics, similar history in many ways, similar weather for crying out loud, similar flora/fauna, similar "size", similar overall built form, and the list could go on.  DC is just a better, more advanced version with a more traditional core and better land planning around its transit spines.

Going back to:

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 01, 2014, 05:27:53 PM
It will be interesting to see how Atlanta (or others) will actualize urbanity on a large scale, if they, in fact, can.

One of the things I've actually come to appreciate about DC is the idea that they know what kind of city/metro region they want to be, which is to say a brain magnet with a strong transit backbone. The growing pains of getting from dense core with suburban/exurban donuts is proving to be quite painful to overcome, but...at least...there's a plan, a vision...an idea of where we are trying to go, in general. I certainly don't think that's in place in ATL, Houston, Dallas or the rest.

I do agree.  Though I see lots of progress in all 3 cities, and I do see lots of interest in Atlanta's in particular to follow the DC model, because it's already part of the way there, and because it can.  That's the bottom line.  MARTA is finally taking an interest in developing its stations.  Comprehensive plans are being drawn up and implemented.  Both cities have mucked up streetcars (I don't think Atlanta's will be a success at all and it was always a Plan B version anyway, Plan A having failed at receiving federal stimulus funding).



For anyone's off topic interest because I played around with the link I listed above, I looked at a few counties around American cities...lol


NYC (select random sampling):

Bergen County, NJ - pop. 925,328 - 7,808 ppsm
Essex County, NJ - 789,565 - 14,163
Hudson County, NJ - 660,282 - 33,595
Westchester County, NY - 968,802 - 9,767
Nassau County, NY - 1,352,146 - 7,743
Fairfield County, CT - 939,904 - 5,125

SF/SJ (select random samplings):

San Mateo County - 747,373 - 8,927
Santa Clara County - 1,862,041 - 8,577
Alameda County - 1,578,891 - 10,109
Contra Costa - 1,094,205 - 4,821

LA:

Orange County - 3,114,363 - 8,681

Boston:

Middlesex County - 1,552,802 - 7,685
Norfolk County - 687,802 - 4,408

South FL:

Palm Beach County - 1,372,171 - 3,922
Broward County - 1,838,844 - 5,903
Miami-Dade - 2,617,176 - 10,239


In terms of cities:

NYC - 64,025

SF - 30,005
Boston - 24,535
Philly - 20,283
Chicago - 19,826
DC - 17,442
LA - 16,964

Atlanta - 4,743

Jacksonville - 2,793

Quote from: simms3 on December 02, 2014, 05:06:00 AM
I'd offer up the site below as more useful/entertaining (you can export data to Excel):

http://www.socialexplorer.com/89AACD3A4F1E4E1/explore

Recently discovered.

Nice site. It's something I'm going to have to play around with more. Thanks for sharing.

This is off topic but i didn't realize how the construction of I-95 negatively impacted Jax's urban core density. All of Jax's densest neighborhoods have virtually disappeared.

1960 - population density by census tract

26,000/sq mi - Hansontown
18,000/sq mi - Sugar Hill
15,000/sq mi - Springfield (south of 8th)
12,000/sq mi - LaVilla
12,000/sq mi - Springfield (north of 8th)
11,000/sq mi - Durkeeville
9,000/sq mi - Brentwood
7,000/sq mi - Murray Hill
6,000/sq mi - Riverside
3,000/sq mi - San Marco
3,000/sq mi - DT Northbank

2012 - population density by census tract

3,000/sq mi - Sugar Hill
4,000/sq mi - Springfield (south of 8th)
4,000/sq mi - Springfield (north of 8th)
6,000/sq mi - Durkeeville
5,000/sq mi - Brentwood
5,000/sq mi - Murray Hill
4,000/sq mi - Riverside
3,000/sq mi - San Marco
3,000/sq mi - DT Northbank/Hansontown/LaVilla

No wonder DT Jax has fallen apart. So much focus has been placed on the Northbank, but the dense population pockets (north and west of DT) that provided significant support to it have virtually disappeared.

QuoteThanks. It looks pretty comprehensive and complements the existing transit network pretty well.  A few questions:

1. How is it being funded, what's the total capital costs/mile and timeline for implementation?

2. To accommodate dedicated lanes, is the plan to take advantage of lane reductions on existing corridors or widen them?

3. If the dedicated lanes are coming at the expense of existing travel lanes, are these facilities maintained by DOT?

Well, you can look at the adopted plan here. It's pretty comprehensive.
http://www6.montgomerycountymd.gov/content/council/pdf/res/2013/20131126_17-952.pdf

1. How is it being funded, what's the total capital costs/mile and timeline for implementation?
As it is in the study phase, that's not been determined yet (and it may very well go by the way of the Arlington Streetcar and not get built at all...although if you sit in suburban traffic up here, you'd see why they'd actually vote for it.)

From http://www.montgomerycountymd.gov/RTS/:

QuoteMontgomery County is working with the State of Maryland to study four corridors for possibly BRT implementation. This is a community process and the planning studies are anticipated to be completed in 2016.

In the resolution, it looks as though they are benchmarking the Cleveland Healthline and Eugene EmX line, so I'd expect similar costs...but remember that this is not only an insanely wealthy and educated county, but also a very liberal county as well, so they may spend more to get more premium to the transit.

Also, a great op-ed regarding the plan:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/why-montgomery-county-is-getting-on-board-the-bus-rapid-transit-bandwagon/2013/12/13/1ba24398-61ed-11e3-94ad-004fefa61ee6_story.html

2. To accommodate dedicated lanes, is the plan to take advantage of lane reductions on existing corridors or widen them?


If you look through the documentation, it seems to be a little of both.

QuoteThere are many areas where the county has sufficient right of way to add dedicated transit lanes. However, there are some places, particularly the closer you get to the Beltway, where adding an additional lane will not be possible. In those situations, the county's plan envisions "repurposing" general-purpose lanes used by cars into transit-only lanes.

However, what sets it apart is that they are most certainly implementing exclusive transit lanes: the focus is on exclusive ROW and that language is all over the document.

3. If the dedicated lanes are coming at the expense of existing travel lanes, are these facilities maintained by DOT?
Hmmmm...that's a good question. I'd expect a little of both there.

QuoteThe state will be an integral partner in this effort, given that the approved network is almost exclusively on state roads.

Maryland is also a little bizarre when it comes to their quite comprehensive transit options, in that a lot of the transit is operated by the MTA, and that includes municipal options like the Baltimore Light Rail and Cracktacular Subway (and the forthcoming Purple Line, which will probably be branded as Metro but will be owned and operated by the MTA,) but then you have Ride On in Montgomery County which is not operated by the MTA. If I were to guess, I'd say the system will be owned and operated by Montgomery County, who will work out an arrangement with the state to 'lease' the corridors for the system, which will seamlessly integrate with MTA's MARC trains, MTA's Purple Line trains, and WMATA's Metrobus and Metrorail.

Remember, at the end of the day, Maryland isn't really a large state, and in many ways it functions as a city-state, so I'd expect a reasonable degree of cooperation between the entities. Also, remember that this is brain country, so MoCo may very well position their system as "a model" for the state to get both buy-in and additional resources. Maryland is, after all, the place where they built Suburban Utopian Epcot (Columbia,) under that same ideal.

And if they look at MoCo's BRT as the model in order to adequately transit-up the Howard County/Laurel/Columbia suburban chunk currently split commuting between Baltimore and DC, the state may very well view the project as essential in the long term, and offer a lot of help, resources and the rest. [Columbia is the missing "Fort Lauderdale" in the Baltimore-DC-95 corridor. It's kind of like if South Florida were Miami-Fort Myers-West Palm Beach.] Plus, it fits into the statewide plan for ecological preservation and massive increases in density.

Two places where I think they're really doing this right.
The first is in the stated purpose and the "why" of BRT:

QuoteWhy has bus rapid transit — or BRT for short — become the option of first resort for communities from Cleveland to Bogota? Because it is the least costly, most flexible and fastest solution to implement.

QuoteFor years, Montgomery County held firm to the notion that the Corridor Cities Transitway, a critical transit project for the county's economic future, would be a light-rail project. But as the advantages of BRT began to sink in, including that we could bring about high-quality transit options 10 years faster at a fraction of the cost, we shifted gears and embraced BRT.

The next is in the public involvement, so that nobody feels swindled or blindsided:

Quote"...councilmembers added language to the plan that would create more opportunities for public input. Each BRT corridor will have its own Citizens Advisory Committee of local stakeholders. And the council approved an amendment from Councilmember Valerie Ervin to not allow funding for BRT projects unless there's a public hearing first.

"We've taken almost unprecedented steps in this plan to make sure our communities are engaged," said Councilmember Roger Berliner, chair of the council's transportation committee.

QuoteNo argument from me there.  However, I'd argue that neither Buckhead nor Rosslyn/Ballston are "urban", but rather new urbanist visions that fit a certain mold of a late 20th/21st century idea of what urban is.  They look rather similar to me.

Here is a comprehensive recent photo tour of the Rosslyn/Ballston corridor.  You can't tell me that's substantively different from the Peachtree corridor between Midtown and Buckhead.

In fact, looking at the density maps by tract, both areas are defined by "strings" of exceeding density (and Buckhead exceeds 10,000 ppsm whereas the Rosslyn/Ballston corridor achieves 40,000 ppsm in parts) with drastic dropoffs to obvious single family residential density.  One tract could be max density and an adjacent tract could drop off immediately to Jax density.  That just doesn't happen in a lot of cities, not to mention the physical landscape is quite similar.

Agreed, to a point. I think the primary difference is in starting "string" density and degree of drop off. Just playing with your social explorer tool (and, of course, recalling my time spent in the ATL and, ironically enough, living in Buckhead and also Perimeter Center,) the density never quite gets as high and the drop offs to McMansions are pretty huge.

Don't get me wrong: Arlington also has the drop-offs, it's just to a more densely populated version of suburbia. Remember, a lot of the "garden apartments" and "adorable A Christmas Story" houses there were built during the New Deal era as government worker housing, on an existing street grid, versus Atlanta's pop in the post-war period (especially in the northern part of the core,) using existing farm to train paths as connector roads to unconnected, cul-de-sac-ed suburbia. It's not just a visual difference; there's actual form that Atlanta will have to address as it moves forward, or it will be "suburbs in the sky." 

If you click out once on the map, you can see exactly how different the two areas are, where even in the core of Atlanta, the street form is suburban and the density is concentrated into pockets. Which is to say that dendentric insanity isn't really prevalent in the core of DC (unlike what one would see in Atlanta.) And the strings are fatter: there's a lot more areas of high density joined together in a consistent, ongoing manner than one would find in Atlanta. To put this another way, it's a lot darker for a larger, more consistent area than Atlanta's core is...although you're certainly correct in the idea that with the Beltline and renewed interest in the core, Atlanta very well look like DC in 20 years.

It also benefits the DC region that there were existing and preserved towns like Frederick in the MSA landscape, to encourage those bullseyes of density. (And, of course, there's the MoCo agricultural preserve, which really has no antecedent in ATL.)

QuoteI see your points and I'm not disagreeing that Atlanta and Houston are worthy poster childs for sprawl, but so are SoFla and LA, both of which are structurally considerably more dense than the DC area.

Agreed. Following the LA model of development is why we have MSAs to define the "cities" to begin with. LA, to give it some props, is attempting to reinvent itself about 20 years after it probably should have begun that effort. Hopefully places like Atlanta will succeed in their efforts at reinvention. 

QuoteAnd Atlanta's "metro area" is such a misnomer.  Atlanta's more like a 4-4.5 million person metro that oddly "annexed" about 15 additional counties simply because those people 3-4 counties out commute 1 county in for work, creating some sort of commuting pattern that allows them to be part of the Atlanta metro.

Well, one could argue that for every "metro area" in that case. Does the dude who lives in Frederick and commutes to Fairfax not live in "DC?" Does the woman who lives in Gwinnett and commutes to Cobb not live in "Atlanta?" Does the person who gets on the MARC in West Virginia for their job by the National Airport somehow not "live" in the DC MSA? Here's another one: my cousins live in Aventura and commute into Fort Lauderdale...but they really live in "Miami."

Using your misnomer argument, one could easily make the claim for splitting up the South Florida MSA into three different ones, because nobody in Coral Springs is setting foot in Miami and nobody in Miami is shopping at Boca Town Center. I totally agree with you on density: how South Florida figured out how to build a zero-lot lined version of suburbia that dense I'll never know.

I'd actually argue that we're not accurately describing the DC area by splitting up the Baltimore MSA from the DC MSA, which, in the context of this discussion, is absurd. The level of cross-commuting from one MSA to the next is quite significant, with many people, for example, living in Howard and working in MoCo. Or Anne Arundel to Fairfax and so on. Which gets the physical area up to Atlantean and Houstonian proportions...with 9.5 million people. 


Wow, we've gone far off topic.

I'll just have to agree to disagree on a few things with you.  The core of DC is a good bit smaller and/or less dense than the core of its peers (SF, Boston, Philly, Chicago, even LA).  Conversely, the metro area itself, while statistically denser than Atlanta's, is molded out of the same pattern (denser transit spines surrounded by 70s/80s era cul de sacs, low-rise apartments, housing communities), and is nowhere near as dense as a comparable area of metro Chicago, South FL, the Bay Area, LA/SoCal all the way down to San Diego, or New York/Tri-State area.

I personally don't see too much of a difference between a Peachtree corridor and a Rosslyn/Ballston corridor, except that Rosslyn/Ballston is 1-2 decades ahead in "growing up".  Density wise, since each corridor is comprised of office/apartment high-rises of similar overall size, all it would take is the addition of a few more now for Buckhead (and Midtown) to equal, more or less, Rosslyn/Ballston today, and Atlanta's planning/development patterns of the past few years has really caught up.

None of these areas will resemble in any way, shape, or form Hoboken, Jersey City, Oakland, etc, but they will resemble each other.  Buckhead will always drop off to Atlanta's wealthiest single family neighborhood housing areas where estates sit on more than an acre, while Rosslyn/Ballston will only drop off to slightly smaller single family lots/more low-rise apartments (and thus drop off to "higher" density).  But the drop off for both will always be stark and sudden, not gradual.  Both metros have a "beltway" and traffic choke points due to poor overall connectivity.  It's just the nature of both metros.

Atlanta will never equal DC's core, and DC's core will never equal San Francisco's, and San Francisco's will never equal New York's.  It's just the nature of these cities and where they are now in relation to each other.

I think Jax has a lot it can take away both transit wise and planning wise from Atlanta and metro DC.  Less so from cities it will never even come close to resembling anywhere, anyhow (NYC, SF, core of Chicago, Philly, etc).

QuoteI think Jax has a lot it can take away both transit wise and planning wise from Atlanta and metro DC.  Less so from cities it will never even come close to resembling anywhere, anyhow (NYC, SF, core of Chicago, Philly, etc).

Respectfully to Jacksonville, I think it's highly unlikely that it will come close to resembling Atlanta and DC anytime soon. As different or similar as DC and Atlanta are, they've both moved past a people/education/globalization critical mass index that Jacksonville has yet to begin to curate in a meaningful manner.

As sprawling as it is (and I think it's the #2 sprawl 'large' metro after the ATL,) Jacksonville should really look at Charlotte and the steps they took to get from "where?" to where they are now. I just think that Atlanta is too far ahead in metropolitan development, and that if anything, Jacksonville should look at the Atlanta region of that past for lessons in what to do and not to do. (And again, DC, until quite recently, was/is a government town with a significant tourist and capitol boost, making it something of a special case.)

...and I don't mean "Atlanta built a huge airport, so we should build a huge airport," but rather "when Atlanta was figuring out where to grow and what to do in order to enter the modern age, what steps did they take to tie their horse to a different carriage? What might Jacksonville do?"

It's because they're two different animals, and arguably, two different places with dramatically different visions of what they want to be. If nothing else, Atlanta wanted for a loooooong time to be "great," "big," "decoupled from the South," "global," "connected," whatever. To say that they've succeeded is an understatement. The challenge for Atlanta's MSA now is how to transform both their physical geography while building every tighter, ever more international connections and collusions. Because as much as I pick on Atlanta, it's no longer the poster child for a "New South" city. It's in the American Top Ten Metros, and they have much more in common with one another than they do to their geographic constraints. They're also in competition with one another, all growing towards this global interconnection ideal. The trick is to not become Detroit, right? :p

Seriously, though...I think Atlanta itself is having trouble surrendering to the idea of this, as well...that they launched themselves right out of the New South into a whole new place of competition, uncertainty and potential. This might actually be the most striking difference between DC and Atlanta, where DC has thought that they were competing on another level for a long time now and Atlanta is waking up to that realization.

I don't think Jacksonville is really 'there,' either by design or choice (although nobody from Jacksonville will ever let you forget that they're the #1 city in Florida by virtue of consolidation.) And I'm not sure if Jacksonville really wants to go to the place where Atlanta went, as for all that Atlanta gained, quite a bit was lost in the transformation, yes? A lot of people like the smaller cities like Jacksonville, and so perhaps you could forge your own path towards a more intimate greatness.

QuoteI'll just have to agree to disagree on a few things with you.

No, I agree that you're wrong!

Kidding.

Quote from: Redbaron616 on December 01, 2014, 10:57:50 PM
There should be objective reporting on the advantages/disadvantages of rail in Jacksonville rather than showing subjective websites of other rail lines' websites claims. Naturally, one should take all such claims and numbers with a huge grain of salt as government always inflates things to look wonderful. Any development along a rail line is automatically assumed to be caused by the rail line, no doubt. Costs are also always projected about 30 - 50% lower than what the actual costs end up being. When was the last time you ever saw any government project that even came within 15% of the projected cost? Government has every reason to sell the cost as lower in order to get a project going. Only then does the taxpayer realize that government plays this game each and every time.

Actually Redbaron, the article did a good job of kicking that conversation onto the front page. My objective was not to report the advantages or disadvantages of each of these projects or coalitions, but simply to put them out there and state, why are we not in on this discussion while JTA 'educates' the city with 34 years of bull shit.

By the way, the Tucson Sun Link Streetcar was on or slightly below budget.
Kenosha Streetcar was nearly 50% under budget.
Tacoma Link Streetcar, under budget and ahead of schedule.
Salt Lake City TRAX has expanded twice and twice under budget and ahead of schedule
Sacramento LRT SOUTH line expansion was, under budget and ahead of schedule

There are actually many others. Part of the reason why rail is more exacting is it is priced complete and turn-key ready to operate. BRT is often priced in chunks and seldom includes the actual buses themselves in the ticket.

QuoteActually Redbaron, the article did a good job of kicking that conversation onto the front page. My objective was not to report the advantages or disadvantages of each of these projects or coalitions, but simply to put them out there and state, why are we not in on this discussion while JTA 'educates' the city with 34 years of bull shit.

That may have well been your intention, but it certainly read as if "all these places are going forward with the streetcar while Jacksonville doesn't." And some of the examples were successful and should have been enough to carry your thesis. Some are not, are curtailed or cancelled, and if presented should have been honestly explored (such as the DC/Arlington combo of suck,) and some are "places where some citizens would really like a streetcar but there's no traction for said streetcar," like the Sarasota example.

You could have easily listed this:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2012-aug-the-electric-7-a-streetcar-proposal-on-a-shoestring#.VH9MX75UGS0

...which would, at least under these loose definitions, presented Jacksonville as a place where streetcar initiatives are taking place, when really, it's a good idea from you with no public traction.

Again, you could have made your point with either more transparency or a more edited selection of streetcar projects. To present Sarasota (at best, private citizens wanting one,) Miami (on hold for BRT, light rail and GONDOLAS,) DC (still to open, expansion cut back, citizens pissed,) and Arlington (outright cancelled, period,) on the same level as successful projects (Tucson, anything Oregon,) controversial fighting tooth and nail projects (Cincinnati,) and in progress projects (Charlotte,) is disingenuous, at best, distortion, at worst.

Quote from: AaroniusLives on December 03, 2014, 12:52:51 PM

QuoteActually Redbaron, the article did a good job of kicking that conversation onto the front page. My objective was not to report the advantages or disadvantages of each of these projects or coalitions, but simply to put them out there and state, why are we not in on this discussion while JTA 'educates' the city with 34 years of bull shit.

You could have easily listed this:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2012-aug-the-electric-7-a-streetcar-proposal-on-a-shoestring#.VH9MX75UGS0

I did, that was my story too! LOL!

Quote...which would, at least under these loose definitions, presented Jacksonville as a place where streetcar initiatives are taking place, when really, it's a good idea from you with no public traction.

Public traction is coming soon to a city near you.

QuoteAgain, you could have made your point with either more transparency or a more edited selection of streetcar projects. To present Sarasota (at best, private citizens wanting one,) Miami (on hold for BRT, light rail and GONDOLAS,) DC (still to open, expansion cut back, citizens pissed,) and Arlington (outright cancelled, period,) on the same level as successful projects (Tucson, anything Oregon,) controversial fighting tooth and nail projects (Cincinnati,) and in progress projects (Charlotte,) is disingenuous, at best, distortion, at worst.

Again, you miss the point, it is merely a post of streetcar projects, public, private, funded, unfunded, coalitions, studied and everything in between. Meanwhile in Jacksonville, the very first city with this concept... chirp!  A chirp that is going to change.

Quote

Quote
You could have easily listed this:
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2012-aug-the-electric-7-a-streetcar-proposal-on-a-shoestring#.VH9MX75UGS0

I did, that was my story too! LOL!

I listed it as being illustrative of a point: is your proposal anywhere close to being a reality? No? Then should it be listed as a "project?" Nope.

QuoteAgain, you miss the point, it is merely a post of streetcar projects, public, private, funded, unfunded, coalitions, studied and everything in between. Meanwhile in Jacksonville, the very first city with this concept... chirp!  A chirp that is going to change.

No, I got the point. I simply don't agree with the "merely a post" aspect of it, as I wasn't born yesterday and have an IQ above 3.