I know this is behind the paywall so just gonna include a couple tidbits:
QuoteBrad Thoburn, JTA vice president of planning, development and innovation, presented the most detailed plan to date for the Ultimate Urban Circulator (U2C). U2C will be the name of the Skyway once it is retrofitted to accommodate autonomous vehicles in the next few years.
At the event, Thoburn presented a future route rendering for the transit system. U2C will extend from the Skyway's 2.5 mile elevated track into Springfield, San Marco, Riverside and other sites via off-ramps that will allow autonomous vehicles to descend to roadways.
QuoteJAA CEO Steve Grossman is optimistic about the authority's air service future, he told the event crowd. He pointed to several recent developments, including new flights through Frontier and Southwest (NYSE: LUV) out of Jacksonville International Airport. Grossman said the authority is also working with one or two European carriers to bring European routes to Jacksonville.
"No city the size of Jacksonville has trans-Atlantic flights," he said, acknowledging the up hill battle.
Grossman was more hopeful of landing flights to and from Los Angeles.
"LA is our biggest unserved market," said Grossman. "It just so happens, we are LA's biggest unserved market. So we've got a shot."
https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2017/10/24/jax-agencies-start-major-transportation-efforts.html
Also a video presentation about the skyway-u2c
https://www.facebook.com/JBJNews/videos/1663826140315664/
"U2C"? C'mon, folks.
So they're going to build a new bride across the river just for this little automated car? Uh huh. ::)
Quote from: Tacachale on October 25, 2017, 11:45:35 AM
"U2C"? C'mon, folks.
It'll be perfect after we land HQ2. You just don't get it cause you weren't paid $100k to come up with the name.
Quote from: acme54321 on October 25, 2017, 01:29:47 PM
So they're going to build a new bride across the river just for this little automated car? Uh huh. ::)
The bridge already exists. They'll be adding Spurs to the current termination points
Quote from: jaxjaguar on October 25, 2017, 01:55:50 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on October 25, 2017, 01:29:47 PM
So they're going to build a new bride across the river just for this little automated car? Uh huh. ::)
The bridge already exists. They'll be adding Spurs to the current termination points
No, it looks like a new bridge over the St. Johns, between the Main Street and Hart. Hmm.
Quote from: Tacachale on October 25, 2017, 02:07:55 PM
Quote from: jaxjaguar on October 25, 2017, 01:55:50 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on October 25, 2017, 01:29:47 PM
So they're going to build a new bride across the river just for this little automated car? Uh huh. ::)
The bridge already exists. They'll be adding Spurs to the current termination points
No, it looks like a new bridge over the St. Johns, between the Main Street and Hart. Hmm.
This... That's a big HMMMMM too. Kind of makes the whole pitch of this lose credibility in my eyes. JTA should know that's pie in the sky.
Quote from: Tacachale on October 25, 2017, 11:45:35 AM
"U2C"? C'mon, folks.
Pretty sure that's just the project name. No real branding/marketing would be done yet at this point. But U2C is easier to say than Ultimate Urban Circulator.
Quote from: acme54321 on October 25, 2017, 02:17:39 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on October 25, 2017, 02:07:55 PM
Quote from: jaxjaguar on October 25, 2017, 01:55:50 PM
Quote from: acme54321 on October 25, 2017, 01:29:47 PM
So they're going to build a new bride across the river just for this little automated car? Uh huh. ::)
The bridge already exists. They'll be adding Spurs to the current termination points
No, it looks like a new bridge over the St. Johns, between the Main Street and Hart. Hmm.
This... That's a big HMMMMM too. Kind of makes the whole pitch of this lose credibility in my eyes. JTA should know that's pie in the sky.
Its a new bridge according to Thoburn. It would be for the U2C, pedestrians and bicycles. No other motor traffic. Based on the location, it would connect the Shipyards are wit The District/Southbank. Its not like you would need massive infrastructure like the Hart Bridge if you not carry heavy traffic. My biggest question mark is clearance for boating traffic.
Clearance would be an issue...unless it's a drawbridge.
I guess they're going for something like the John Seigenthaler pedestrian bridge in Nashville, but with a SkyWay lane? It would definitely make the game day experience better / potentially open up land for game day parking on the south bank. Then you could use more of those lots surrounding the stadium for garages, entertainment, lodging, etc.
Quote from: exnewsman on October 25, 2017, 02:25:29 PM
Quote from: Tacachale on October 25, 2017, 11:45:35 AM
"U2C"? C'mon, folks.
Pretty sure that's just the project name. No real branding/marketing would be done yet at this point. But U2C is easier to say than Ultimate Urban Circulator.
We could just go with the initials: UUC. Pronounced, "UCK". That'll be a winner!
You've got a lot of issues with building a bridge in that spot. It would need at least 75' clearance, the river is a third mile wide and 50' deep with a ripping current through there, and it ends in the middle of the district which I'm pretty sure would have no interest in that. Big time money.
Quote from: jaxjaguar on October 25, 2017, 02:54:31 PM
I guess they're going for something like the John Seigenthaler pedestrian bridge in Nashville, but with a SkyWay lane? It would definitely make the game day experience better / potentially open up land for game day parking on the south bank. Then you could use more of those lots surrounding the stadium for garages, entertainment, lodging, etc.
That's 500 feet across that river (granted the approaches make it 2,150 feet) with little need for clearance.
Something here would be longer and need a 135' clearance to match the Main St bridge.
Can I just mention how much I LOATHE this whole 'Autonomous Vehicle People Mover' thing. It seems like the whole monorail idea all over again. I feel like the city is trying to act all hip and cool with some buzzword heavy technology and taking a huge risk while ignoring the tried and true rail tech. Rail might be boring but it's proven and it creates a nice foundation that I think the city needs.
^I didn't loathe it before but I did think it was silly. After this presentation, I actually like it. It makes a lot of sense. Small autonomous vehicles allows for far more flexibility than traditional rail cars. You can change capacity and routes at the drop of a hat, and the individual cars linking and unlinking at speed can only happen with autonomous vehicles.
Obviously there is a con if these things are in mixed traffic too often, but I hope when the capacity is necessary they will give it dedicated lanes (as shown in the video).
Replacing fixed, mass public transit, capable of reaching speeds up to 35 mph, with a dumbed-down Uber that uses 15 mph clown cars and competes with existing traffic.
Cool.
Just watched the video for the first time. To be honest, this is the same thing/same routes that JTA proposed last year. It's just illustrated in video instead of a map or power point presentation. My guess is by the time we actually get to implementation the vehicles and technology will have changed and advanced to something else. Also, I believe a lot of this, like the extra bridge crossing, is just conceptual. As it evolves, I would hope they focus more on not mixing this thing in mixed-traffic. I know some get caught up on the idea of "flexibility" but I'd argue in this case, "flexibility" can be a negative. Give it its fully dedicated lanes, build actual barriers or landscaping to separate it from cars and fully incorporate supportive land use policies around all of its stations/stops.
Is JTA focused on encouraging more Transit Oriented Design? It seems like the Vestcor project in LaVilla is the only example of it I see around town.
It seems like the TOD focus is on linking current proposed projects. It would be good for more coordination on TOD and infill around existing stations as well. Central, Jefferson, Rosa Parks, San Marco Blvd, Riverplace and Kings Avenue should all have Miami Metromover style infill development around them, IMO. They offer immediate opportunity. If they actually happen, full development at sites like the District and Shipyards is decades away from materializing.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 26, 2017, 07:42:50 AM
It seems like the TOD focus is on linking current proposed projects. It would be good for more coordination on TOD and infill around existing stations as well. Central, Jefferson, Rosa Parks, San Marco Blvd, Riverplace and Kings Avenue should all have Miami Metromover style infill development around them, IMO. They offer immediate opportunity. If they actually happen, full development at sites like the District and Shipyards is decades away from materializing.
Yes, JTA should launch a TOD/Infill Initiative for the city. The Vestcor project can be a template. Affordable housing linked (at pedestrian scale) with a transit station/covered stops, that helps to give at least some of the population mobility options besides total reliance on a car. Having said that, I've been reading facebook posts for the stations and seeing consistent complaints about bus delays due to drivers chatting with their friends.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 25, 2017, 10:52:17 PM
I know some get caught up on the idea of "flexibility" but I'd argue in this case, "flexibility" can be a negative. Give it its fully dedicated lanes, build actual barriers or landscaping to separate it from cars and fully incorporate supportive land use policies around all of its stations/stops.
To clarify, speaking for myself, when I touted flexibility of capacity and route I mean this within the context of fixed routes ideally. The flexibility refers to the ability to increase the number of linked cars at any moment, and to have empty cars switch track if there are passengers waiting at a particular station. Forget shorter headways, this would be on-demand transit without additional cost.
Yes, I understood your point about on-demand. Although not AV technology, the automated people mover in Indy offers on-demand service now. The skyway, in its current state probably could too. My reference to flexibility is the type that generally mentioned in transportation circles. For example, you'll hear BRT and ride share advocates tout flexible routing as a benefit that fixed routes don't offer. In reality, it depends on the ultimate goal of what you want the system to achieve. If integrating transportation and land use together, in a manner that builds a walkable environment, fixed routes are superior on that end.
I love the on-demand and scalability factors. But the weaving in and out of vehicle traffic and the 'bridge' are not well conceived.
Quote from: thelakelander on October 26, 2017, 09:22:02 AM
Yes, I understood your point about on-demand. Although not AV technology, the automated people mover in Indy offers on-demand service now. The skyway, in its current state probably could too. My reference to flexibility is the type that generally mentioned in transportation circles. For example, you'll hear BRT and ride share advocates tout flexible routing as a benefit that fixed routes don't offer. In reality, it depends on the ultimate goal of what you want the system to achieve. If integrating transportation and land use together, in a manner that builds a walkable environment, fixed routes are superior on that end.
Good, I was just clarifying cause your comment came after mine and didnt want it to be confused with the usual bus rallying cry.
iirc the ones in WV and Indy are the only two that are on-demand. I've seen the Indy one travel passed me a few times.
Maybe instead of worrying about robot cars, let's get JTA up to the standard of other comparable cities' bus systems.
A lot of reliability and route issue that need addressing.
Anyone else feel like the cars are too small?
I feel like it's pretty conceptual and once things get to a point of implementation, things will dramatically be different from what they are now.
Article on Bloomberg
https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2018-02-08/a-florida-monorail-makes-way-for-the-robot-bus-of-tomorrow?utm_campaign=news&utm_medium=bd&utm_source=applenews
^Key part to me:
QuoteWork on a more complete [cost] estimate is underway but, he cautioned, the unprecedented nature of the plan makes even rough projections difficult.
Who will pay for it? Ford has proposed a mix of federal funds and private-sector partnerships, including development deals around new stations or the sharing of future fare revenues.
"I would be curious as to what that looks like," said Ginger Goodin, director of the Transportation Policy Research Center at Texas A&M University. "I'm not seeing a lot of private-sector companies step forward."
P.S. Has anyone heard any updates on the First Coast Flyer East/Beach corridor?