An article I'm quoted in about the Skyway's future.
QuoteDoing something to prepare the Skyway people mover for its next phase of life will cost at least $64 million, according to preliminary estimates by the Jacksonville Transportation Authority, and could be as much as $85 million.
A recently completed $349,000 study by engineering firm Lea+Elliott came up with four options for the oft-maligned monorail, ranging from tearing it down to buying new cars. To figure out what comes next, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority in the process of launching a committee to pick the best option.
my comments:
QuoteSome of those who have long been supporters of mass transit in Jacksonville are pushing for the system to be kept and modified, such as Ennis Davis, an urban planner with Ghyabi & Associates.
"You would salvage what's already in place," Davis said. "People see the Skyway as a negative, but it's actually a positive."
That proposal would have the monorail removed and the system turned into light rail, meaning maintenance would be more cost effective and parts easier to access.
The city could then connect a fixed trolley system with the Skyway that would travel to surrounding neighborhoods.
"Downtown would then be in the middle of several vibrant districts," Davis said. "You could live in Riverside and be a tram stop from the Fresh Market in Brooklyn. You could live in 11E Downtown and be two or three stops from San Marco Square. That's urban living."
Making a choice
On paper, it seems that the option to maintain the Skyway and invest in new vehicles is the clearly preferred option. On the literal piece of paper the JTA provided to the Business Journal, outlining the costs and details of the options, the plan has the most advantages and fewest disadvantages.
But Thoburn maintains the JTA doesn't favor any option: Should the committee and advisory group recommend that Skyway is torn down, it's something the board will listen to. The board of directors will make the final decision.
"When the JTA board makes the decision," he said, "they're going to really look at why the advisory group felt that way."
For what should be determined, Davis said it comes down to what kind of Downtown Jacksonville wants to have.
"It comes down to what the goals for the future of Jacksonville's urban core and Downtown are," he said. "If you want an exciting place that's walkable, fixed transit has to play a role. If you don't really care and you're find with Downtown looking like Baymeadows Boulevard or the Town Center, then put in buses and parking lots and that's what you get."
Full article: http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2015/09/15/next-phase-for-skyway-will-cost-more-than-50.html
I think I may have confused her during out phone conversation. I basically presented an argument for exploring modification with new (commonly used) vehicles that utilize existing elevated infrastructure in downtown, while also having the ability to effectively operate at-grade. This provides the city with the option of having a single fixed mode in the downtown core, that can also be expanded to surrounding neighborhoods for a cheaper long term cost.
On the second question, I was asked how to choose what option to select? IMO, it all depends on what type of downtown Jacksonville wants. If you want a vibrant pedestrian scale one with pedestrian friendly infill, the Skyway/fixed transit will play an important role. If you don't really care, replace it with buses, keep building parking lots and accept the fact that we'll have one of the deadest downtowns in the country for the foreseeable future.
I am moving to downtown on Oct 1st with my 2 teenage sons. I picked downtown specifically because they can be mobile without me having to buy them cars. Losing the Skyway would be a huge step backwards and would have me reconsidering living in Jax period.
I drive by the cars every day too and from work. The trains seem to be pretty filled most times I see them. People are riding them.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 15, 2015, 05:42:20 PM
I think I may have confused her during out phone conversation. I basically presented an argument for exploring modification with new (commonly used) vehicles that utilize existing elevated infrastructure in downtown, while also having the ability to effectively operate at-grade. This provides the city with the option of having a single fixed mode in the downtown core, that can also be expanded to surrounding neighborhoods for a cheaper long term cost.
On the second question, I was asked how to choose what option to select? IMO, it all depends on what type of downtown Jacksonville wants. If you want a vibrant pedestrian scale one with pedestrian friendly infill, the Skyway/fixed transit will play an important role. If you don't really care, replace it with buses, keep building parking lots and accept the fact that we'll have one of the deadest downtowns in the country for the foreseeable future.
Hear hear! It's time to give up the dream of a vibrant downtown and embrace a kick ass suburban landscape of linked communities. Parking a plenty for everyone and density at the focal points of each neighborhood. It works in other places and could work in Jax. And save hundreds of millions in misplaced downtown visioning and development. downtown can be what it wants to be, a prison, a coffee plant and the seat of government and courts.
You are what you are.
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on September 15, 2015, 05:59:25 PM
I drive by the cars every day too and from work. The trains seem to be pretty filled most times I see them. People are riding them.
You're correct. Recent ridership data has the Skyway setting a new record this year at more than 1.3 million trips. Its been averaging around 112K a month. Considering how few people actually live downtown that's a pretty good number. One Spark helps for a few days, as does Art Walk 1x/month, but its really the regular ridership increase that has made the difference.
I hope this new committee will make the right choice and invest in the Skyway and the future of Downtown.
I hope this new committee understands the importance of a good mass transit system and the positive impact it can have on downtown.
Quote from: exnewsman on September 15, 2015, 06:45:34 PM
Quote from: jcjohnpaint on September 15, 2015, 05:59:25 PM
I drive by the cars every day too and from work. The trains seem to be pretty filled most times I see them. People are riding them.
You're correct. Recent ridership data has the Skyway setting a new record this year at more than 1.3 million trips. Its been averaging around 112K a month. Considering how few people actually live downtown that's a pretty good number. One Spark helps for a few days, as does Art Walk 1x/month, but its really the regular ridership increase that has made the difference.
I hope this new committee will make the right choice and invest in the Skyway and the future of Downtown.
Don't forget the Skyway is FREE.
(http://photos.metrojacksonville.com/Learning-From/Downtown-Miami-2015/i-74jnDJd/0/L/DSCF7411-L.jpg)
Miami's Metromover is free as well.
I highly doubt they recommend to demolish. The decision will be whether to upgrade or to rebuild for a different mode. I'm all for converting to light rail. Lake, any reason you now think it can indeed be modified when previously you were waiting to hear/learn more?
^I doubt LRVs will work. Reading the article, I think the writer got confused about the modes. During our conversation, I mentioned what other cities had done with LRT, streetcars, and other forms of fixed transit, integrated with supportive land use policies. I don't remember specifying a certain type of fixed transit for a Skyway retrofit outside of saying it would be ideal to have something that could utilize the existing infrastructure and still have the ability to operate at-grade. With that in mind, the vehicles would certainly have to be lighter than heavy rail vehicles, but I don't have the necessary info to claim that a LRT conversion is feasible.
Seems like it would...but might need either a large, low grade ramp to work or something to assist it getting that high, right?
Quote from: thelakelander on September 15, 2015, 10:59:23 PM
^I doubt LRVs will work. Reading the article, I think the writer got confused about the modes. During our conversation, I mentioned what other cities had done with LRT, streetcars, and other forms of fixed transit, integrated with supportive land use policies. I don't remember specifying a certain type of fixed transit for a Skyway retrofit outside of saying it would be ideal to have something that could utilize the existing infrastructure and still have the ability to operate at-grade. With that in mind, the vehicles would certainly have to be lighter than heavy rail vehicles, but I don't have the necessary info to claim that a LRT conversion is feasible.
Oh now I get what you meant by the writer being confused. Yeah, I'm still hoping there's a way to retrofit the skyway so it's all one system in the future.
Quote from: Steve on September 15, 2015, 11:26:00 PM
Seems like it would...but might need either a large, low grade ramp to work or something to assist it getting that high, right?
If extended, it would need ramps but there's more than enough space to drop to grade (out of site) in Brooklyn and San Marco. Probably not so easy in the heart of downtown, on a street like Bay.
I hope they go with conversion.
What!? A reporter confused over the facts? That never happens! (Where is the sarcasm font?)
I wonder if they could work a deal with the state and feds to remove the DT portions of the elevated platform replace it with a streetcar system on grade, serving the same area DT plus extending out to other neighborhoods? Those elevated platforms are an eyesore DT. The elevated portions at the foot of the Acosta on the Northbank and San Marco could remain, and it brought to grade on the other side of the FEC tracks.
Are they an eyesore? Perhaps they could be painted with murals or allowed to be greened a bit. Having grade separated fixed transit infrastructure is an amenity in cities like Chicago, New York, Miami, Pittsburgh and Vancouver. If we had a vibrant downtown, grade separated infrastructure would be an important element in attracting transit riders to a mode that could fly past street level congestion.
(http://therealdeal.com/miami/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Current-and-renderings-of-the-Underline.jpg)
Instead of ridding itself of elevated transit infrastructure, Miami is created a 10-mile linear park called the "Underline". We could literally do the same thing through the Southbank and the Northbank with our Skyway, with a little more creativity. Given our weather and the elevated infrastructure's ability to provide shade, it would certainly be a better option than the suggestion of turning the Skyway into a poor man's High Line.
Convert to streetcar elevated on the current line at grade anywhere it is expanded. Expand slowly but constantly.
Depending on how my day goes, I'll try to throw together a quick article showing what Tampa, Cleveland, Miami, Pittsburgh, Newark and Toronto did when their transit systems reached where we're at today. The variety and creativity displayed is very interesting.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 16, 2015, 07:13:55 AM
Are they an eyesore?
I guess eyesore was a bad choice or words, they in themselves look fine. I do not like the way that they cover up the buildings downtown. It's just a huge imposing concrete structure that ruins the streetscape and general aesthetics of the area IMO.
Quote from: thelakelander on September 16, 2015, 07:13:55 AM
Are they an eyesore? Perhaps they could be painted with murals or allowed to be greened a bit. Having grade separated fixed transit infrastructure is an amenity in cities like Chicago, New York, Miami, Pittsburgh and Vancouver. If we had a vibrant downtown, grade separated infrastructure would be an important element in attracting transit riders to a mode that could fly past street level congestion.
(http://therealdeal.com/miami/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Current-and-renderings-of-the-Underline.jpg)
Instead of ridding itself of elevated transit infrastructure, Miami is created a 10-mile linear park called the "Underline". We could literally do the same thing through the Southbank and the Northbank with our Skyway, with a little more creativity. Given our weather and the elevated infrastructure's ability to provide shade, it would certainly be a better option than the suggestion of turning the Skyway into a poor man's High Line.
This is particularly true along a street like Hogan Street which has a) wide sidewalks b) about a two block stretch of uninterrupted existing building stock with ground level retail and c) offers the kind shade that other sidewalks in downtown don't. If you start to look at these areas of opportunity, you can easily enhance the strengths of the built infrastructure and create the kind of places where people want to spend time (and money).
Also, while its still being formulated, the Downtown Investment Authority has set aside money through the City's Art In Public Places program to enhance Skyway columns. http://www.culturalcouncil.org/artinpublicplaces/diaurbanart/ (http://www.culturalcouncil.org/artinpublicplaces/diaurbanart/)
With coordination and a dedicated focus to a specific area based on over-reaching principles of what makes successful urban environments tick... there is no reason why a few targeted blocks downtown couldn't be quickly transformed into great places. (see: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2015-apr-parklets-of-san-francisco/page/3 (http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2015-apr-parklets-of-san-francisco/page/3)
I think a Brooklyn Station (at Brooklyn Station) and a San Marco extension should be next with the idea of connecting them to at grade systems in the near future. I believe the Hart Bridge ramp along Bay should be removed and once that occurs an at grade extension towards the stadium should be completed at that time.
As long as the next stage is well thought out and forward looking, I think $50M is money well spent.
Getting newer, more sustainable cars should be step 1, but I'm worried that in order to sell people on the this, they'd have to re-sell them on the skyway in general by expanding to Brooklyn Station and/or the Stadium. And the truth is that we DO need to connect it to a larger pool of daily use riders in order to make it's value obvious again. That or connect it to downtown's biggest draw: the stadium.
Insane pipe dreams ahoy:
How amazing would it be if there were a functioning elevated light rail downtown that reaches from Riverside to the Stadium to UNF and to the Airport? I know, I know, that scope is massive. But can you imagine how many commuters, tourists, sports fans and university students would be on a train and off of I-95?
Shit UNF owns property downtown and wants to invest in it further. Maybe they would invest some cash in a direct line from their campus to downtown. Maybe Khan can be convinced to do the same with the stadium. Maybe Rummell can encourage a strong connection between Healthy Town and it's nearby station. Who knows?
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3087/2754533948_854b029747_o.jpg)
http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3087/2754533948_854b029747_o.jpg
^Perhaps there's a technology out there that could utilize the existing existing Skyway infrastructure as a base. IMO, if there is, this is the perfect opportunity to lay and implement the foundation for something that could eventually stretch all across town. This can't be achieved by simply demolishing the system (and replacing it with buses) or simply replacing the AGT vehicles.