Hey I'm pretty new to the board but I have been a longtime skyway supporter and thought I would throw my two cents in on this issue. I often go downtown on weekends when I am off and like to use the skyway to go to the southbank and library. However it seems that the stations and regularity of service are going slowly downhill. This weekend alone I have seen 3 stations where one or more of the escalators are down. I have seen lights out in the stations that have not been replaced in months. I have also seen the stairs at Central Station closed down for over four months now. Not to mention the fact that today on a saturday it appeared that although there are at least 10 trains, there were only 3 running. Just one for each route and not nearly enough to make the system quick and reliable. Anywho I know this is like beating a dead horse bringing this issue up but its just sad that one of the distinct things in our city is falling apart like this.
Operating costs - up
Revenues - down
= deferred maintenance and less service
and, yes, it sucks
I was with my daughter at Central Station with no change and no change machine available. Not wanting to be a fare beater, I walked over to greyhound in an attempt to make change. No can do. I just happen to stick my finger in the coin return of the coke machine and came up with 50 cents. Thus, we walked back to Central Station where I paid a fare and had my daughter walk under the turnstile. Not exactly what I call a great fare collection system. She did love the train though. Wanted to ride it over and over. I would also, only if it went to more places. :(
Email the mayor and your city council representative and let them know your concerns. We all hope that one day they will start to listen. ::)
(http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3094/2866119790_6610098b3e.jpg)
Hello: JAX_OTAKU and friends. QuoteHey I'm pretty new to the board but I have been a longtime skyway supporter and thought I would throw my two cents in on this issue. I often go downtown on weekends when I am off and like to use the skyway to go to the southbank and library. However it seems that the stations and regularity of service are going slowly downhill. This weekend alone I have seen 3 stations where one or more of the escalators are down. I have seen lights out in the stations that have not been replaced in months. I have also seen the stairs at Central Station closed down for over four months now. Not to mention the fact that today on a saturday it appeared that although there are at least 10 trains, there were only 3 running. Just one for each route and not nearly enough to make the system quick and reliable. Anywho I know this is like beating a dead horse bringing this issue up but its just sad that one of the distinct things in our city is falling apart like this.
You might want to check out: http://jacksonvilletransit.blogspot.com/search/label/Skyway
Also here on MetroJacksonville: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/918/116/
We have been preaching and teaching the gospel of finishing something for a couple of years, so far the City if still in Terror of the Skyway, seeing it as certain political death. I disagree, in fact the Councilman or woman that finally listens to reason, and gets this thing done will reap long term rewards. Charles said:
QuoteOperating costs - up
Revenues - down
= deferred maintenance and less service
and, yes, it sucks
Yes Charles, this was the Chicago, Rock Island and Pacific Railroad's secret to success. By 1960 the Rock Island Lines was a household word in song and legend. About 1961 THE ROCK had the chance to merge the Union Pacific into the family. Railroading (including monorails) is highly cash intensive, so the new bright bulbs over at The Rock filed the applications, and for spending money, defered all maintenance, system wide.
Little did anyone know the Interstate Commerce Commission would take nearly 10 years to make up their mind. When they finally gave approval, The Rock was experiencing derailments of freight cars sitting in the yards - NOT MOVING! The condition of the road was so bad that Union Pacific had moved it's "overhead traffic" bound for Chicago off of the Rock and onto the Chicago Northwestern. The Rock was left at the alter, there would be no marriage. In the early 1980's, the Rock became the largest railroad abandonment in the history of the United States.
Anyone see where the same concept is going to get our Skyway? ABANDONED! I promise. OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: Ocklawaha on January 04, 2009, 09:52:52 PM
You might want to check out: http://jacksonvilletransit.blogspot.com/search/label/Skyway
Also here on MetroJacksonville: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/918/116/
We have been preaching and teaching the gospel of finishing something for a couple of years, so far the City if still in Terror of the Skyway, seeing it as certain political death. I disagree, in fact the Councilman or woman that finally listens to reason, and gets this thing done will reap long term rewards.
I say "ABANDON the Skyway!"
Ock, I have read your posts here for quite some time and I fully support your push for some form of rail mass transit and not using the BRT system the way it is being proposed. But I have to differ with you on the Skyway. It was only built because we didn't want those Federal dollars going elsewhere but no one played up the Feds don't subsidize the operations so us locals take the hit every year to the tune of millions of dollars that could be far better used improving our bus services.
Downtown, the Skyway structure has destroyed most of the streetscapes, casting its elephantine shadows on pedestrians below making such streets look more like dark alleys. It carries a mere fraction of the passengers predicted for the EXISTING legs some 20 years ago, much less for today, by prostituting consultants for the JTA. It is slow, costly per mile to build, and limited, compared to rail, to a relatively low capacity of passengers. Practically speaking, who is going to leave their suburban house, fight road traffic by driving 10 to 15 miles, more or less into town, to a fringe Skyway station, park and walk to the station, board the Skyway and poke along to downtown, disembark, go down an escalator to street level, walk a few blocks to an office building, and then ride the elevator to their floor. This scenario gets even sillier, if one drives to a suburban train station, then takes it to a Skyway station!
With fixed rail to the suburbs, you park or are dropped off, get on the efficient train, get off at your final station, and walk to your destination as is proven and successfully done in most every major city in the developed world.
Trying to justify expanding the Skyway because we are already so invested in it is the same logic our political leadership uses too many times to avoid making the hard decisions. There comes a point where you admit it isn't worthwhile to continue the effort and you move on.
There are only so many dollars for mass transit. We made a huge mistake with the Skyway. We need to get it right the next time. You will only have one option and it needs to be rail, not the Skyway and not BRT. It would be shear madness to operate local buses, BRT, rail, and the Skyway all at once as even MJ has pointed out the overlaps. Simplicity is best. In every major city I have visited, where they have rail in some form, it works great and its all you really need other than local bus connections to the various stations. We should improve the beauty of downtown by tearing down the Skyway (let's finally admit the "emperor is naked!"). The money we save every year in operating losses will more than make it worthwhile to abandon it and we can invest that money in something that really works.
How do O & M costs for the skyway compare to light or heavy rail? I thought the monorail wasn't too bad since it's fully automated.
stjr, I disagree with your expectation that simplicity trumps a good transit mix. In public transit, I agree with what Ock has said before, that more options are better in the long run. I don't believe that the commuter trains in and around NYC, or the Metra here in Chicago would be half as popular as they are if not for the comprehensive subway/elevated train systems that service the urban cores. In your scenario, if I were to drive and park, or ride the bus, to a commuter rail station and ride into downtown Jax...why would I want to do that only to get dumped off at some centralized train station without any way to get around downtown? I'd only do so if there were also an efficient system to get me to work/lunch/whatever else I might need. "Most every major city in the developed world" that you speak of has both suburban lines and complementing urban transit systems.
If you still with to tear down the skyway, you just might be able to justify doing so, but then you'd have to replace it with streetcar, or some other alternative to get riders to their final destinations!
PM, I think you missed my point. There are limited resources and Jax is not New York. We have enough of an uphill battle getting funding, public support, and people out of their cars here to not make this that complex on Day 1. You can always add to it later.
I have no problem with street level interconnections to rail (buses, trolleys) which are flexible, cheaper to implement, and much more user friendly than the Skyway albatross that flies overhead. The millions lost annually operating the Skyway could pay for a lot of buses and trolleys that you advocate for!
My main point is in this era of even more limited resources than before, we need to lose money only operating one major fixed mass transit system, not two. The Skyway will never be as popular as buses, trolleys, or fixed rail because it is a flawed concept. The fact that most agree that it would never be built today based on its cost/benefit is the best proof that it needs to finally be buried 6 feet under. Expanding it will just expand the losses further. It's pure fantasy to expect that ridership from the extension will more than offset the additional investment and operational costs of same. That's the BS we have heard to justify its original construction and expansion over the river. Just do this and that and the riders will be coming. Always excuses for the failures to deliver on even 10 to 15% of the projections (That's right - what would you do to someone you paid that is off by over 80% on everything they tell you ???. )
If I gave you a blank sheet and $x millions of dollars for mass transit and said spend it where you get the most bang for the buck, the Skyway would likely fall to the bottom of the list. Regardless of present decisions, I will almost guarantee you someone with foresight and vision and real leadership in this area will remove the Skyway from the landscape in less than the next 50 years (maybe when the accountants have fully depreciated it and they can say they got "their money's worth"! ;). )
If you want any credibility with politicians and the taxpayers, you better push aside the Skyway sideshow and focus on the rail. Let's admit the Skyway is a fiasco and turn the corner to a brighter future with a fresh and focused new start!
QuoteThere are limited resources and Jax is not New York. We have enough of an uphill battle getting funding, public support, and people out of their cars here to not make this that complex on Day 1. You can always add to it later.
All I'm going to say right now is we already have local money to get Phase 1, of a regional wide rail integrated plan, off the ground. Even JTA's preliminary feasibility study shows that a streetcar system between Downtown and Five Points could be built for $65 million. The commuter rail numbers are lower than that per mile. To top this off, we're sitting on nearly $100 million set aside for rapid transit. Its time we look at a map and figure out where money should be spent first on the backbone a regional wide rail based mass transit system.
The way I see it, we should move forward without waiting for FTA approval or funding. History has shown the federal process typically results in long project delays and higher implementation costs. Plus, if the initial line proves to be a success, it will help the city gain federal funding for expansion more so than sitting around doing nothing. Because of this, a larger number of cities are finding creative ways to start without initial federal funding help. Jacksonville should jump on board.
Certainly we aren't new york, but MY point was that a commuter rail system from our "suburbs" into the Prime Osborn (or wherever the central station would be) needs to have an integrated urban system to complement it, or I see no reason I would ever ride the train. Of course we don't have the resources of the major cities in this country, but there must be a balance struck between cost-effectiveness and an efficient and comprehensive transit network, as shown by our very own skyway system. And the fact that we don't have the same resources as new york is all the more reason we should work with and improve what we have. We don't have the money to tear down whats already in place.
And again, with regards to the skyway, your displeasure of its aesthetic quality and the inconvenience of having to climb one story to embark are more or less legitimate dislikes, and I could be persuaded to agree to some degree. However, your claim that "The fact that most agree that it would never be built today based on its cost/benefit is the best proof that it needs to finally be buried 6 feet under" is illogical. The initial investment has been made, I don't see how saying that we shouldn't have originally made that investment translates to we should throw that investment away now. Although that would be Jax in a nutshell...waste millions on something that shouldn't be built and then tear it down.
btw, I've been keeping an open mind to your idea of tearing down the skyway. I wonder if that could possibly reap benefits that I hadn't even considered. That said, your given justifications for tearing it down haven't convinced me in the least.
The skyway's sibling in Miami must be working. The City of Miami is asking Obama for $150 million to expand it west of downtown to connect with the proposed Florida Marlins baseball park.
The difference between the skyway and metromover is the Miami system has heavy and commuter rail lines feeding riders into it. This is really evident at Miami Heat home games.
maybe so...but an extension to the old Orange Bowl site is ridiculous!
They should have stayed with the downtown site along the water in Bicentennial Park....its already served by a station....or, alternately, provide a link off the metrorail station at Jackson Memorial....that's much closer to the stadium site than the current downtown people mover!
It is a good distance from the current line. I don't know how it all lays out, but maybe its a part of a plan to redevelop that entire section of the inner city, west of the Miami River?
In any event, you'll never know what the answer will be if you don't ask. We have to give them credit for adding their dreams to the stimulus package list (this is not a "ready-to-go" project). Considering the worst that can happen is the Feds saying no, we should add a few requests (ie. DT streetcar, 100% JTC funding, commuter rail, etc.) as well.
Hey Lake, do you know the answer...how are O&M costs of our Skyway when compared to average commuter rail?
The skyway's O&M costs are significantly higher than a typical streetcar, light rail or commuter rail system. Nearly $4 million a year for a small 2.5 mile line.
QuoteSkyway Operations required a transfer from Bus Operations of $414,662 above and beyond the budgeted subsidy of $3,414,457 in order to breakeven for the year.
http://jaxpolitics.wordpress.com/2008/12/24/city-finances-challenged/
I'll post the O&M costs of some other systems for comparison's sake later tonight.
So the Stations have become worse than they were? Escalators broken? I have seen that before, but never more than one. Sad sad sad, well what can you do, what can you say. The city leaders are pro automobile and pro road building. My optimism is slowly slowly dying for the Skyway and the potential it has/had because the powers that be don't want to help it.
Until (unless) the City Council, by super majority vote (11 ayes, instead of the normal 10), changes the BJP, it includes $100 million for rapid transit right of way. We are not "sitting on nearly $100 million set aside for rapid transit" that could be spent on a street car system, or commuter rail, or any of those things.
Although details have still not been released (or did I miss it?), the early reports are that the Mayor wants to take some or all of that $100 million for other projects - perhaps near the port. I think the political chances of getting Council to remove the "right of way" restriction on that $100 million are in the range of "negligible to nil".
And to return to the title topic of this thread (sorta), other than electricity, would extensions down Riverside to Blue Cross, the Southbank to San Marco, and east to the Sports Complex, increase operating costs? How much more system could the current command center and staff handle? (I'm speaking of operating costs, of course there would be capital costs of track and new cars and stations.)
Quote from: Charles Hunter on January 05, 2009, 09:48:11 PM
Until (unless) the City Council, by super majority vote (11 ayes, instead of the normal 10), changes the BJP, it includes $100 million for rapid transit right of way. We are not "sitting on nearly $100 million set aside for rapid transit" that could be spent on a street car system, or commuter rail, or any of those things.
If that's what it takes, consider that possibly being a good plan. As long as its there and the council has the option of slightly changing the terminology, its a stronger possibility than dealing with the Feds.
QuoteAlthough details have still not been released (or did I miss it?), the early reports are that the Mayor wants to take some or all of that $100 million for other projects - perhaps near the port. I think the political chances of getting Council to remove the "right of way" restriction on that $100 million are in the range of "negligible to nil".
We'll see. Where there's a will, there's a way. I never thought we would get JTA to alter the original BRT plan. Three years later, I now see my initial assessment was wrong. Nevertheless, at this point, the main goal should be to keep Peyton from stealing the money to use on other over budget BJP projects (ie. courthouse and roads).
QuoteAnd to return to the title topic of this thread (sorta), other than electricity, would extensions down Riverside to Blue Cross, the Southbank to San Marco, and east to the Sports Complex, increase operating costs? How much more system could the current command center and staff handle? (I'm speaking of operating costs, of course there would be capital costs of track and new cars and stations.)
The skyway is overbuilt. The command center is built to handle a much larger system. The increased ridership from short extensions would probably more than cover any potential increase in O&M costs.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 05, 2009, 05:32:48 PM
The skyway's O&M costs are significantly higher than a typical streetcar, light rail or commuter rail system. Nearly $4 million a year for a small 2.5 mile line.
QuoteSkyway Operations required a transfer from Bus Operations of $414,662 above and beyond the budgeted subsidy of $3,414,457 in order to breakeven for the year.
http://jaxpolitics.wordpress.com/2008/12/24/city-finances-challenged/
I'll post the O&M costs of some other systems for comparison's sake later tonight.
O&M costs for various streetcar systems across the United States:
Portland StreetcarLength: 5.6 miles
Frequency: 12-15 minute headways
Operating Budget: $4.9 million (FY 2008)
Ridership: 11,800 weekday; 3.6 million annual
Seattle South Lake UnionLength: 1.3 miles
Frequency: 15 minute headways
Operating Budget: $2 million (FY 2008)
Ridership: 1,780 daily (July 2008); 330,000 annual projected (2008)
Tacoma Link StreetcarLength: 1.6 miles
Frequency: 10 minute headways
Operating Budget: $2.5 million (FY 2008)
Ridership: 2,925 average weekday; 920,000 annual
Little Rock River Rail StreetcarLength: 3.4 miles
Frequency: 25 minute headways
Operating Budget: $650,000 (FY 2007)
Ridership: 170,000 annual (2007)
Tampa TECO StreetcarLength: 2.4 miles
Frequency: 15 minute headways
Operating Budget: $2.5 million (FY 2008)
Ridership: 1,082 weekday; 440,000 annual (2007)
Kenosha StreetcarLength: 1.9 miles
Frequency: 15 minute headways
Operating Budget: $335,000 (FY 2008)
Ridership: 170 weekday; 62,000 annual (2007)
Memphis StreetcarLength: 12 miles
Frequency: 5-10 minute headways
Operating Budget: $3.9 million (FY 2005)
Ridership: 1,031,168 annual
New Orleans Canal Street StreetcarLength: 5.5 miles
Frequency: 5-10 minute headways
Operating Budget: $7.0 million
Ridership: 31,400 daily
Columbus Streetcar (proposed)Initial Length: 2.8 miles
Frequency: 10 - 15 minute headways
Operating Budget: $4.5 million
Ridership: 6,600 weekday (projected)
Tucson Streetcar (proposed)Initial Length: 3.6 miles
Frequency: 10 - 20 minute headways
Operating Budget: $4.5 million
Ridership: 4,200 daily (projected)
Austin Streetcar (proposed)Initial Length: 4.4 miles
Frequency: 10 minute headways
Operating Budget: $4.5 million
Ridership: 32,200 daily (2030 projected)
Cincinnati Streetcar (proposed)Initial Length: 3.9 miles
Frequency: 10 - 20 minute headways
Operating Budget: $2.0 - $2.7 million
Ridership: 3,700 to 5,600 daily (2010 projected)
I'm one of those guys that finds the People Mover a Major eyesore, hate the way it dominates the landscape an shadows the ground, the pillars are particularly offensive. My vote is for High explosives and to remove it from the city scape.
Quote from: civil42806 on January 05, 2009, 10:59:29 PM
I'm one of those guys that finds the People Mover a Major eyesore, hate the way it dominates the landscape an shadows the ground, the pillars are particularly offensive. My vote is for High explosives and to remove it from the city scape.
If it wasn't already here, I would agree. However, it is here, and the problem is that the money isn't just spent on the guideway (which is seriously overbuilt, hopefully if they ever expand, it would be more sleek), but on the O&M center, which cost a pretty penny.
If you had to start from scratch, I wouldn't build it, but it's here now (unfortunately)
If it wasn't already here, I would agree. However, it is here, and the problem is that the money isn't just spent on the guideway (which is seriously overbuilt, hopefully if they ever expand, it would be more sleek), but on the O&M center, which cost a pretty penny.
If you had to start from scratch, I wouldn't build it, but it's here now (unfortunately)
Unfortunately it is, but just because you spent some money doesn't mean you want to burn more money after that. At some point you have to admit you made a mistake and correct the problem, though thats hard. I can"t imagine any kind of expansion that would justify the expense.
The other option to not burning money is to make an effort to finish the regional transportation system that was supposed to feed riders into it. While I agree it is expensive and overbuilt, its also incomplete. It's not going to be successful until there's a viable mass transit source stretching to the suburbs that feeds riders into it.
Boy lakelander the problem here there really any demand, significant from day to day, for the burb residents, of which in disclosure I am one, really to go downtown? I worked downtown from 95 to 98 and honestly other than jaguar games, some suns games, and some concerts, haven't been down there since.
Quote from: civil42806 on January 05, 2009, 11:08:27 PM
Unfortunately it is, but just because you spent some money doesn't mean you want to burn more money after that. At some point you have to admit you made a mistake and correct the problem, though thats hard. I can"t imagine any kind of expansion that would justify the expense.
Actually, I disagree - there are some places where I think the Skyway holds the key to some of Jacksonville's transportation challenges. A perfect example is in San Marco - the Trolley failed there for a couple of reasons (doing a loop that big was completely asinine), but one of the other reasons was because of the railroad tracks - you had to cross the tracks, which inevitably meant getting caught by a 1/2 mile train, that goes through there at about 25 miles an hour. An expansion of the skyway to Atlantic Blvd (1/2 mile), you now have an opportunity then to connect San Marco Square downtown, using a combination of Skyway and Streetcar/trolley.
Now, I would agree that such an expansion should take a backseat to a regional commuter rail system, but the possibilities are there.
Quote from: civil42806 on January 05, 2009, 11:22:05 PM
Boy lakelander the problem here there really any demand, significant from day to day, for the burb residents, of which in disclosure I am one, really to go downtown? I worked downtown from 95 to 98 and honestly other than jaguar games, some suns games, and some concerts, haven't been down there since.
The idea is that public transit and a successful downtown really can go hand in hand. A regional transportation system I believe is vital to the success of downtown. I think this was mentioned somewhere else, but the Miami MetroMover was considered a huge failure for it's first 20 years. Then, once Miami figured out how best to use it, it has become a vital part of their transit network.
The same thing can happen here, and it could be a key to revitalizing downtown.
Quote from: Steve on January 05, 2009, 11:23:09 PM
Quote from: civil42806 on January 05, 2009, 11:08:27 PM
Unfortunately it is, but just because you spent some money doesn't mean you want to burn more money after that. At some point you have to admit you made a mistake and correct the problem, though thats hard. I can"t imagine any kind of expansion that would justify the expense.
Actually, I disagree - there are some places where I think the Skyway holds the key to some of Jacksonville's transportation challenges. A perfect example is in San Marco - the Trolley failed there for a couple of reasons (doing a loop that big was completely asinine), but one of the other reasons was because of the railroad tracks - you had to cross the tracks, which inevitably meant getting caught by a 1/2 mile train, that goes through there at about 25 miles an hour. An expansion of the skyway to Atlantic Blvd (1/2 mile), you now have an opportunity then to connect San Marco Square downtown, using a combination of Skyway and Streetcar/trolley.
Now, I would agree that such an expansion should take a backseat to a regional commuter rail system, but the possibilities are there.
I'm sorry Steve, but the overpowering presence of the sky way would Destroy San Marco, yes I am an esthectics person. Where would we put the huge pillars, in front of bistro Aix or European street or destroy the neighborhoods to run a line around? Connecting to Atlantic blvd would be great but your talking about crossing the river which means an addition to the bridge, which escalates the cost.
I think you are thinking the wrong area - let me post a picture. I also am into preservation, and I'm not saying run the thing into San Marco Square.
Quote from: Steve on January 05, 2009, 11:26:43 PM
Quote from: civil42806 on January 05, 2009, 11:22:05 PM
Boy lakelander the problem here there really any demand, significant from day to day, for the burb residents, of which in disclosure I am one, really to go downtown? I worked downtown from 95 to 98 and honestly other than jaguar games, some suns games, and some concerts, haven't been down there since.
The idea is that public transit and a successful downtown really can go hand in hand. A regional transportation system I believe is vital to the success of downtown. I think this was mentioned somewhere else, but the Miami MetroMover was considered a huge failure for it's first 20 years. Then, once Miami figured out how best to use it, it has become a vital part of their transit network.
The same thing can happen here, and it could be a key to revitalizing downtown.
I agree to certain degreee Steve, but I unfortunatley don't believe that the transit system leads a vibrant downtown, but vice versa. I spent many fond years in Downtown Savannah, boozing, and Wh**ring at the bars and clubs, and rode the buses back to my apartment. I just don't believe that mass transit no matter how successfull will lead to the revitalisation of the downtown of my childhood.
I'm having trouble uploading a file I just created. In any event, take a look at where Atlantic Blvd Crosses the railroad tracks. Extend the skyway there. This is 1/2 mile, and it presents some opportunities to bring it lower along JTA property, keeping costs under control (remember, much of the total cost of the project was spent on one time costs, like the O&M center). This spot could also be a commuter rail stop with the system that JTA is studying. Then run a streetcar line from that point down Atlantic blvd to the square, and you could extend it up San Marco Blvd up to the railroad tracks near Baptist.
Anyway, take a look on Google Earth or Mapquest to see what I mean. Trust me, I'm not advocating taking the thing through the core of San Marco; I'm just using it to get over the railroad.
Quote from: Steve on January 05, 2009, 11:48:11 PM
I'm having trouble uploading a file I just created. In any event, take a look at where Atlantic Blvd Crosses the railroad tracks. Extend the skyway there. This is 1/2 mile, and it presents some opportunities to bring it lower along JTA property, keeping costs under control (remember, much of the total cost of the project was spent on one time costs, like the O&M center). This spot could also be a commuter rail stop with the system that JTA is studying. Then run a streetcar line from that point down Atlantic blvd to the square, and you could extend it up San Marco Blvd up to the railroad tracks near Baptist.
Anyway, take a look on Google Earth or Mapquest to see what I mean. Trust me, I'm not advocating taking the thing through the core of San Marco; I'm just using it to get over the railroad.
I'll certainly do that, thank you. Always try to keep an open min about our options.
Quote from: civil42806 on January 05, 2009, 11:22:05 PM
Boy lakelander the problem here there really any demand, significant from day to day, for the burb residents, of which in disclosure I am one, really to go downtown? I worked downtown from 95 to 98 and honestly other than jaguar games, some suns games, and some concerts, haven't been down there since.
Studies show that some areas of our community have to longest commutes in the state. We also don't have the money to continue to expand major highways or build new ones. So we must take the creative, cost effective approach.
The development of a mass transit system should not be dependant on downtown alone. One of the best things I like about a regional transit system is it will connect various destinations all over town. For example, it would enable someone to get to the airport from the Southside without the use of a car. One could also live in Orange Park and attend school at FCCJ Kent without the getting caught in rush hour on Blanding or Roosevelt. It also ecourages infill development, which gives the community a chance to increase its tax base without straining existing infrastructure. Its also more affordable than continuing to invest in the expansion of arterial highways. A system, based on downtown alone will fail, but one that considers the needs of the entire county will enhance the community's quality of life.
Quote from: civil42806 on January 05, 2009, 11:35:56 PMI agree to certain degreee Steve, but I unfortunatley don't believe that the transit system leads a vibrant downtown, but vice versa. I spent many fond years in Downtown Savannah, boozing, and Wh**ring at the bars and clubs, and rode the buses back to my apartment. I just don't believe that mass transit no matter how successfull will lead to the revitalisation of the downtown of my childhood.
Savannah's metro is about 1/2 the size of Jacksonville, so it's kind of apples and oranges. However, the neighborhood has mass transit (just not rail).
You would be hard pressed to find me a downtown of a metro area that has 1 million people or more that has both a vibrant downtown and no rail-based mass transit.
Now, with that said, I'm definitely not saying that a mass transit system alone will make up for the disaster that Downtown Jacksonville is, but it is an ingredient in the process
Quote from: thelakelander on January 05, 2009, 11:52:40 PM
Quote from: civil42806 on January 05, 2009, 11:22:05 PM
Boy lakelander the problem here there really any demand, significant from day to day, for the burb residents, of which in disclosure I am one, really to go downtown? I worked downtown from 95 to 98 and honestly other than jaguar games, some suns games, and some concerts, haven't been down there since.
The development of a mass transit system should not be dependant on downtown alone. One of the best things I like about a regional transit system is it will connect various destinations all over town. For example, it would enable someone to get to the airport from the Southside without the use of a car. One could also live in Orange Park and attend school at FCCJ Kent without the getting caught in rush hour on Blanding or Roosevelt. It also ecourages infill development, which gives the community a chance to increase its tax base without straining existing infrastructure. Its also more affordable than continuing to invest in the expansion of arterial highways. A system, based on downtown alone will fail, but one that considers the needs of the entire county will enhance the community's quality of life.
I agree with you fully Lakelander, the shame is that the JTA has made getting from one area to another very difficult. There insistance that you have to change buses downtown is infuriating. Had a friend many years ago, had a wife from overseas and couldn't drive, he was trying to get her to her job on phillips highway, but they inisited that she ride the san jose bus to past her plant on phillips and change buses downtown and ride back down pillips to the old gm plant.
Regarding San Marco and the railroad tracks, maybe this image helps.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-7072-skyway-map-1.jpg)
Once over the tracks near Kings Avenue Station, the stretch to Atlantic Blvd. could be built at ground level to minimize costs. If a city leader with concrete connections made a civic donation (hint, hint), the costs would really decrease.
(http://www.metrojacksonville.com/photos/thumbs/lrg-6970-p1150892.JPG)
You're not alone in those stories - JTA sure has had their bumps in the road.
Quote from: civil42806 on January 05, 2009, 11:59:39 PM
I agree with you fully Lakelander, the shame is that the JTA has made getting from one area to another very difficult. There insistance that you have to change buses downtown is infuriating. Had a friend many years ago, had a wife from overseas and couldn't drive, he was trying to get her to her job on phillips highway, but they inisited that she ride the san jose bus to past her plant on phillips and change buses downtown and ride back down pillips to the old gm plant.
Yes, the current system is a mess. It needs to be revamped.
Thank you lake! I tried to upload a quick image that I did, but I was denied by our FTP server
You might want to check out: http://jacksonvilletransit.blogspot.com/search/label/Skyway
Also here on MetroJacksonville: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/918/116/QuoteI say "ABANDON the Skyway!"
Ock, I have read your posts here for quite some time and I fully support your push for some form of rail mass transit and not using the BRT system the way it is being proposed. But I have to differ with you on the Skyway. It was only built because we didn't want those Federal dollars going elsewhere but no one played up the Feds don't subsidize the operations so us locals take the hit every year to the tune of millions of dollars that could be far better used improving our bus services.
In reality, the FEDS DO SUBSIDIZE transt operations, all over the nation, all modes, everywhere. We certainly "Played Up" the monorail at the time it was built. It was even "suggested" by the City that I leave Jacksonville at that time, uh, for my health. I was in the path of the Skyway, there was no way to network, no internet, but the Jacksonville Journal and I took a nasty fight to city hall. We lost, they won, but we cut their legs off at the knees in what should have been an all or nothing battle. I think we so poisioned the Skyway that it quit before reaching it's potential. Downtown, the Skyway structure has destroyed most of the streetscapes, casting its elephantine shadows on pedestrians below making such streets look more like dark alleys. It carries a mere fraction of the passengers predicted for the EXISTING legs some 20 years ago, much less for today, by prostituting consultants for the JTA. It is slow, costly per mile to build, and limited, compared to rail, to a relatively low capacity of passengers. Practically speaking, who is going to leave their suburban house, fight road traffic by driving 10 to 15 miles, more or less into town, to a fringe Skyway station, park and walk to the station, board the Skyway and poke along to downtown, disembark, go down an escalator to street level, walk a few blocks to an office building, and then ride the elevator to their floor. This scenario gets even sillier, if one drives to a suburban train station, then takes it to a Skyway station!I have no argument about shadows in downtown, but frankly on a rainy summer day or a day with blistering heat, more then once I pick the Skyway as a sheltered walk, so do many others. I realize it must be more then that, but there is nothing wrong with the concept, the trains, or the technology involved. Even "The Monorail Society" questions WHY - WHY - WHY did Jacksonville go with that darn people-mover track, plus sidewalls, plus monorail beams, when it expanded the system AFTER giving up the People Mover. We paid for 2.5 systems. One might get the idea that some powerful force in the city was making big bucks in the concrete business...(Smile). To hit on some of your points:
Dark streets - or - shady streets, not a problem.
It carrys a fraction of the passengers projected over 28 years ago, because it was NEVER finished, not one leg of the system was ever done to plan.
Prostituting consultants? REALLY? haven't lived with a hooker since 1978... Hee Hee.
It is not slow, in fact it has been up to 50 MPH in tests. Acceleration is superior to buses and the same as light rail. The average City transit bus speed is close to 12 MPH, the Skyway is far faster.
Driving to the edge of downtown, parking and using the Skyway is quite a plesant experience, many more people would do it IF JTA would build stations and parking facilities with easy on-off access from freeways or other transit modes. For example, one can't leave the Kings Avenue Garage and jump on the freeway, even ramps to the south side of Atlantic both entry and exits would enhance the garage and Skyway. Ditto, the Matthews/Hart Bridge/sports area, The Riverside/Blue Cross/95 area, The Union Terminal/95/Farm Market area.
Why would riding the Commuter Train up from St. Augustine, pulling into Atlantic/San Marco Station, jumping on the Skyway and off at the ATT building, be a problem? Wouldn't it be the same as riding in and catching a bus from the depot to the building area? What about those at the beaches? Catch a bus to rail, ride the train to downtown, ride the bus to a factory on Commonwealth? No difference then catching the Skyway, except the Skyway is: 1. silent, 2. faster, 3. won't stop at traffic lightsQuoteWith fixed rail to the suburbs, you park or are dropped off, get on the efficient train, get off at your final station, and walk to your destination as is proven and successfully done in most every major city in the developed world.
No one, is going to ride this efficient train if they have to walk in a three piece suit or dress from LaVilla to
the new Federal Courthouse. How much better would our system be with a matrix of more skyway + streetcar + commuter rail + bus and trolley bus. QuoteTrying to justify expanding the Skyway because we are already so invested in it is the same logic our political leadership uses too many times to avoid making the hard decisions. There comes a point where you admit it isn't worthwhile to continue the effort and you move on.
The big bucks were spent in the support system, the yards, car barn, automation, and silly 2.5 track systems.
Not one bit of this big spending would need to be done again to extend several of the lines out a mile or two. QuoteThere are only so many dollars for mass transit. We made a huge mistake with the Skyway. We need to get it right the next time. You will only have one option and it needs to be rail, not the Skyway and not BRT. It would be shear madness to operate local buses, BRT, rail, and the Skyway all at once as even MJ has pointed out the overlaps. Simplicity is best. In every major city I have visited, where they have rail in some form, it works great and its all you really need other than local bus connections to the various stations. We should improve the beauty of downtown by tearing down the Skyway (let's finally admit the "emperor is naked!"). The money we save every year in operating losses will more than make it worthwhile to abandon it and we can invest that money in something that really works.
It would be shear genius to operate local buses, BRT, rail, and the Skyway all at once as MJ has pointed out with intersecting not overlapping lines. In the table below, some conventions have been followed.
(http://www.riveroaksapartments.org/BayHogan.jpg)
· AGT â€" refers to elevated guideway systems with small-profile stock, usually with rubber-tired trains. Some but not all of these operate "driverless."
(http://www.railway-technology.com/projects/miamimetrorail/images/1-miami-metrorail.jpg)
· RRT â€" refers to rail rapid transit ("heavy rail" transit), a full-scale subway or metro.
(http://www.lightrailnow.org/images02/cha-lrt-crowd-at-stn-20071200br_carolinatim.jpg)
· LRT â€" refers to light rail transit. This typically operates in a variety of alignments, including streets, but is capable of operating in trains, and usually includes well-defined passenger stations or transit stops, perhaps with prepaid or other more specialized types of fare collection.
(http://www.railwaypreservation.com/vintagetrolley/Tampa_advertising_cars_sm.JPG)
Streetcar LRT â€" refers to a more traditional streetcar operation with tracks built in roadways, usually with onboard collection of fares and without single-person operation of multiple-car trains.
(http://www.wildnatureimages.com/images%202/040204-092..jpg)
Monorail â€" refers to both suspended and straddle-beam type monorail transit systems.
Comparative O&M Cost: Various Transit Guidedway Modes in Japan and the USA
City/System Transit Mode O&M per Passenger-Mile
Salt Lake City LRT $0.15
San Diego LRT $0.17
St. Louis LRT $0.21
Tokyo/Eidan RRT $0.25
Atlanta RRT $0.25
New York/NYCTA RRT $0.25
San Francisco-BART RRT $0.26
Hiroshima-suburban LRT (1999) LRT $0.27
Tokyo/Toei RRT $0.27
Portland LRT $0.29
Los Angeles LRT $0.29
Philadelphia-PATCO RRT $0.31
Tokyo Monorail $0.31
Chicago RRT $0.31
Kobe RRT $0.32
Washington DC MetroRail RRT $0.34
Yokohama RRT $0.36
Tokyo "Yurikamome" AGT $0.37
Osaka RRT $0.38
Denver LRT $0.40
Nagasaki Streetcar LRT $0.40
Tokyo/Saitama "New Shuttle" AGT $0.40
Boston RRT $0.41
Sacramento LRT $0.42
Nagoya RRT $0.43
Tokyo/Toei Streetcar LRT $0.43
Philadelphia-SEPTA RRT $0.44
New York/PATH RRT $0.46
Miami RRT $0.46
Cleveland RRT $0.46
Hiroshima "Astram Line" AGT $0.46
Osaka "New Tram" AGT $0.48
Baltimore LRT $0.49
Osaka Monorail $0.49
Fukuoka RRT $0.49
Sapporo RRT $0.50
Baltimore RRT $0.52
Tokyo/Tokyu Corp (1999) Streetcar LRT $0.52
Kitakyushu/Chikuho Elec Ry LRT $0.54
Kitakyushu Monorail Monorail $0.54
Dallas LRT $0.55
New Orleans Streetcar LRT $0.56
Boston LRT $0.56
Kyoto/Keifuku Elec Ry (1999) Streetcar LRT $0.57
Hiroshima-Urban lines (1999) Streetcar LRT $0.59
Enoshima Elec Ry LRT $0.60
Sendai RRT $0.61
Los Angeles RRT $0.62
Tokyo/Tama Monorail $0.63
Kobe "Portliner"+"Rokkoliner" AGT $0.63
Shonan Monorail $0.63
Cleveland LRT $0.64
Philadelphia/SEPTA LRT $0.64
Kagoshima Streetcar LRT $0.67
Yokohama "Kanazawa Seaside Line" AGT $0.68
Kumamoto Streetcar LRT $0.69
Takaoka Streetcar LRT $0.77
Toyohashi (0.4 mi/1999) Streetcar LRT $0.77
Toyama (1.7 mi/1999) Streetcar LRT $0.78
Okayama Streetcar LRT $0.83
Kochi Streetcar LRT $0.83
Osaka/Sakai Streetcar LRT $0.84
Pittsburgh LRT $0.84
San Francisco/Muni LRT $0.85
Hakodate Streetcar LRT $0.92
Kyoto RRT $0.92
Buffalo LRT $0.94
Chiba Monorail $0.97
New York/Staten island RRT $0.97
Seattle Monorail $1.02
San Jose LRT $1.07
Otsu/Keihan Elec Ry (1999) LRT $1.08
Sapporo Streetcar LRT $1.15
Newark+HBLRT (NJT) LRT $1.27
Gifu (1999) Streetcar LRT $1.37
Matsuyama (1999) Streetcar LRT $1.44
Komaki "Peachliner" AGT $1.73
Tokyo/Seibu Ry Yamaguchi Line AGT $2.09
Memphis Streetcar LRT $2.31
Osaka OTS Line AGT $2.45
Tokyo-Toei/Ueno Park Monorail (1999) Monorail $2.65
Seattle Waterfront Streetcar Streetcar LRT $2.88
Yukarigaoka AGT $2.91
Miami MetroMover AGT $3.42
Inuyama "Meitetsu Monkeyu Park Monorail" Monorail $4.10
Nagoya/Guideway Bus Guided Bus $5.06
Detroit People Mover AGT $6.07
Jacksonville Skyway Monorail AGT $10.71
I'll issue a challenge to the City, the Mayor or JTA, put out a RFP to make the current Skyway more attractive to riders. We'll double the income and/or ridership within two years without the extensions. Let us unleash the power of transit savvy thinking on our Skyway. OCKLAWAHA
Always a man of few words, Ock.
AMEN!
OCKLAWAHA
Thanks for bringing the pictures and numbers, Ock.
It is my understanding that if the city were to remove or even cease operation of the Skyway, it would be liable to repay the Federal portion of the construction cost. It is therefore cost- effective to maintain it, even if it were down to one train a day. This should serve as a warning to the incoming administration of the pitfalls of ill-conceived public works projects.
Quote from: jaxtrader on January 06, 2009, 11:03:42 AM
It is my understanding that if the city were to remove or even cease operation of the Skyway, it would be liable to repay the Federal portion of the construction cost. It is therefore cost- effective to maintain it, even if it were down to one train a day. This should serve as a warning to the incoming administration of the pitfalls of ill-conceived public works projects.
Well, that's what's wrong with government processes. As a taxpayer, I don't care if it's wasted Federal, state, or local money, I am paying for it. If the overall project is a waste, all its partners should get together to pull the plug. Feeding the bureaucracy is a bad reason to do or maintain anything.
Has it been proven that its an overall waste? After all, it and the regional system that was supposed to feed riders into it was never completed. By the same token, should the Dames Point Bridge (another money pit) be torn down if it crossed the river, but stopped short of Heckscher Drive and Merrill Road?
Lake and Ock, thanks for your detailed responses. In some cases, I think you overlooked my points, such as I admitted to connections from a central downtown rail station via buses or trolleys - just not the Skyway.
The bigger picture is that I think Skyway extension supporters are chasing rainbows and imaginary pots of gold. Ridership estimates are historically as much as 10x or more overly optimistic and have no credibility whatsoever. I might as well pick numbers out of a hat. If people don't ride it now, adding another mile here or there isn't going to change things much as needs and habits remain the same.
Again, an additional issue is what basket do mass transit proponents want to put their eggs in. I don't see the political or resource support for multiple expensive mass transit systems in this City. IMHO, the Skyway is not feasible for longer distance commuting compared to rail and it is longer distance commuting where the real needs, benefits, and potential are. People move about downtowns with far greater distances in major cities just fine with walking, bikes, cabs, buses, and using the downtown stops of the rails that also serve outlying areas. If I want to go 5 blocks, I can walk it faster than you can pay, elevate, wait....wait...wait, ride, de-elevate, and exit the Skyway (and possibly walk some morel).
As to abandoning it, in the business world, when mistakes are made, buildings or equipment are obsolete, or overexpansions take place, abandonment is not uncommon (just think of all the buildings, often not very old, that have been demolished and replaced with newer ones). It is often cheaper to abandon than to maintain or preserve something when looking at it objectively. We can't afford to wax sentimental about this beast.
I don't think we are going to change each others minds so I guess we will just have to agree to disagree on this one.
Quote from: thelakelander on January 06, 2009, 12:57:26 PM
Has it been proven that its an overall waste? After all, it and the regional system that was supposed to feed riders into it was never completed. By the same token, should the Dames Point Bridge (another money pit) be torn down if it crossed the river, but stopped short of Heckscher Drive and Merrill Road?
Lake, it is not accurate to portray the system as partially built. Your rosy predictions about the impact of an expansion was exactly the argument used to justify the Skyway's current configuration. Back then, consultants (prostitutes for JTA) made rosy projections for what is there NOW and they were 90% off, even some 20 years later! I don't doubt for a minute those same consultants can't reappear for an encore and produce some kind of justification for an expansion - I just won't believe them and I think the odds are in my favor for my predictions turning out better than theirs.
What is there now is what was sold to the taxpayers. When you build your additions and they fail to deliver I am sure someone will again come along and say if it was just a bit further it would fix all the ills. This just provides a continuous gravy train to contractors. Everyone else loses. Let's get off this treadmill. You are hanging the carrot out on the stick that can never be caught.
Why is it not accurate? the original route was supposed to connect to the stadium district. The thing was also supposed to feed by regional rail system. Neither of these things were built. Furthermore, the master plan that incorporated its use was never followed and its not coordinated properly with the existing bus service. Its more difficult to use the thing than it is to drive downtown and park right at your destination. But its not the technology that failed, we as a community failed to stay on track with a long term vision.
This does not mean I don't think those original ridership estimates were cooked (they definitely were as well as the costs, imo). But this thing is really simple to me. No matter what you construct, if it does not go where people want to go, it will not work. I think we can both agree it fails in that regard. So now the question becomes, if its worth solving that problem or giving up altogether.
Giving up on it is clearly not the answer, as so many of our peer and superior cities have demonstrated time and time again with light rail and regional transit.
Lake - phenomenal analogy regarding the Dames Point. Or really any bridge for that matter.
I remember reading stories about how JTB originally was a similar white elephant. "The highway to nowhere," and the like. It has since served as the impetus for explosive growth along its own corridor in the Southside, Intracoastal, and Beaches areas. Now granted, that's not the kind of growth we advocate, but one cannot deny the "build it and they will come" impact that JTB had. Thanks to direction from JTA and City Hall.
What's to say that a similarly-dicated direction couldn't come down from on high once again to complete the transit system that should have been, and could again be, anhcored by the Skyway?
Nothing. It should be done. It must be done.
They said the same thing about Tri-Rail in Miami. Now look:
QuoteIf Tri-Rail trains seemed more crowded than ever last year, it wasn't your imagination.
The commuter railroad carried more than 4 million passengers in 2008, the first time it surpassed that mark in its 20-year history.
With 4.3 million passengers, Tri-Rail's ridership jumped nearly 23 percent over 2007. As gas prices tumbled below $2 a gallon, the number of weekday riders has dipped slightly but still hovers between 15,000 and 16,000 riders per day.
Ridership has more than doubled since 2005, after Tri-Rail finished building a second track, increased the number of weekday and weekend trains and added rush-hour service every 20 minutes.
"These statistics show that the trend of double-digit growth that we have experienced over the past three years is continuing," said Joseph Giulietti, Tri-Rail's executive director.
But Tri-Rail's future remains in doubt unless it gets legislative approval this spring for local dedicated funding, such as a rental car fee, to cover operating expenses.
http://www.sun-sentinel.com/business/custom/consumer/sfl-flbrail0106sbjan06,0,510835.story--
From my understanding, the rental car fee bill, they are pushing for, will also help with the O&M of other future rail systems (like Orlando's) in Florida.
Quote from: stjr on January 06, 2009, 01:14:28 PM
Quote from: thelakelander on January 06, 2009, 12:57:26 PM
Has it been proven that its an overall waste? After all, it and the regional system that was supposed to feed riders into it was never completed. By the same token, should the Dames Point Bridge (another money pit) be torn down if it crossed the river, but stopped short of Heckscher Drive and Merrill Road?
consultants (prostitutes for JTA) made rosy projections for what is there NOW and they were 90% off, even some 20 years later! I don't doubt for a minute those same consultants can't reappear for an encore and produce some kind of justification for an expansion
Ya know stjr, I've lived with a few prostitutes, slept with a couple, and have been consulting in Transportation for a long time - But I've never prostituted myself or my LOUD opinion. Working for Volusia County back in the 80's, a group of county commissioners and Voltran folks met at my house near Deland. The next day I got a call that "I was their boy," there was just one minor detail... "Please take the old Confederate Flag off your office wall - bad for politics..."
"Let me give you a message sir. I'm a Southerner, my father was a Southerner, his father was a Southerner and HIS FATHER served in Company E, 5Th Arkansas infantry, CONFEDERATE STATES OF AMERICA. You tell your #*@& Commission, I'm not taking my flag down for them, for the Governor or the$*#*$ President! GOOD NIGHT TO YOU SIR!" click.
No, when I'm fighting for something I damn near killed in the first place, I've REALLY got to be convinced this can work. Trust me, it CAN.
Like I said yesterday, myself and another MJ player just ask the city to do a RFP on improvements to the Skyway. We will double the ridership AS-IS within two years. OCKLAWAHA - The Hooker's pal
Wow the Skyway doubt has really become strong on this one. Funny thing is, everyone knows the system is not finished, everyone knows there is much undeveloped land near Skyway Stations, We all know it does not go where people live (Riverside, Springfield & San Marco). Saying that bringing the Skyway to San Marco would destroy San Marco is ridiculous. Just run it down Hendricks and you are fine. Bottom line the Skyway is about 13 Stations sure of being complete. If you build the stations and properly develop the land around the stations it has no choose but to work. People saying it looks ugly, It looks fine to me. If you don't like it in San Marco move further south where you can not see it. Not everyone wants to drive, and I really don't understand those that want to force everyone to use an automobile. All the Skyway is, is an OPTION. An unfinished option. It will not grow on its own. Its an amenity just like the Jaguars, something that makes the city better. Too much undeveloped land in Downtown, Springfield, Riverside to even call it a waste. Later Turtles.
I definitely wouldn't run it down Hendricks. The route shown above is my option.
Quote from: stjr on January 06, 2009, 01:14:28 PM
What is there now is what was sold to the taxpayers. When you build your additions and they fail to deliver I am sure someone will again come along and say if it was just a bit further it would fix all the ills. This just provides a continuous gravy train to contractors. Everyone else loses. Let's get off this treadmill. You are hanging the carrot out on the stick that can never be caught.
That's definitely not true. we have a rendering on this site of the ORIGINAL route of the people mover. Line one was from University Hospital to The Gator Bowl. Neither of these destinations are served now.
Are we ever going to see the numbers estimated years ago? Defnintely not. I think we could extend this to the beach and not see those numbers. To me, it's no longer about "Salvaging" the Skyway, it's about providing a reliable transit network to Jacksonville. In business, salvaging an idea means make it a moneymaker. That isn't going to happen with transit - it doesn't make money. If it did, JTA would be a private business.
My feeling is that the Skyway is an asset to Jacksonville, because it is built. I would like to run it to a few more places (Stadium, Brooklyn, and Atlantic Blvd) as shown above. Where does this fit in the priority list? Nowhere near the top. My belief is that first priority should be a regional transit system to get people downtown, because there aren't enough people that are willing to fight traffic to get downtown to then use transit to go the last mile, which is what the standalone skyway is.
I'm convinced by you guys...the success of the skyway depends more on the complementing commuter rail than the completion of its own system. Previously, I would've said extensions to the stadium, as well as developments like brooklyn park and jackson square when completed, should be priorities. But if I have to choose now, I guess I'd go with a starter commuter line.
Quote from: Steve on January 06, 2009, 05:17:35 PM
I definitely wouldn't run it down Hendricks. The route shown above is my option.
Was that not Hendricks in the photo? What was that North South street it was running down? It looked like Hendricks.
Ock, if I read your numbers correctly, you appear to be strongly supporting my position and hurting yours.
The most expensive system to operate on your list (see below) by far is our Skyway at $10.71 vs. the cheapest at $0.15. At least 7 of the 12 most expensive systems to operate are "AGT's" like the Skyway. It's near twins in the "big cities" of Detroit and Miami are #2 and #5 most expensive! ALL of the top twelve least expensive are RAIL systems. Most streetcars appear to be between $0.67 and $0.92 or between 91% and 93% LESS expensive than our Skyway.
The heretofore claimed "successful" Miami mover with "all that traffic" (by the way, its FREE to use!* That's not a fair comparison! :o) is about 20 TIMES the cheapest systems, all some form of rail.
Let's assume we expand the Skyway at ZERO costs and add ZERO additional operating costs for the larger system! And DOUBLE the riders! That would bring Jax down to $5.35 (hey, I even rounded down a penny to help you out!). At that rate, we are #2 most expensive instead of #1. If we TRIPLE the riders, we are at $3.57. That's good for #4 on the list. If we QUADRUPLE the riders, we are at $2.68. That is #7 on the most expensive list and still over 17 times the expense of the bottom of the list! At TEN times the riders, we are at $1.07, still over SEVEN TIMES the cheapest system and some 16% to 73% HIGHER than the midrange streetcar systems. Even you would have to agree that a 10 fold increase in riders of the Skyway has a very healthy dose of optimism. :D Of course, an expansion won't cost anything near zero to build (remember, construction cost = maintenance, replacement, and repair = depreciation = an operating expense) and operate.
Remember too, that operating costs multiply over the 50 to 75 or 100 year life (NYC subways still going strong!) of the system. NOT taking advantage of SAVING up to 90% to 95% EVERY YEAR in such costs is like overlooking a financial Mt. Everest. ::)
So again, put on your "common sense" hat and allocate the taxpayer's precious and limited resources. Based on your own data, I think you will find the answer obvious. :)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
* From official Miami-Dade Transit web site propaganda: Metromover is a free automated people-mover system that serves downtown Miami from Omni to Brickell and connects with Metrorail at Government Center and Brickell stations. There are 20 conveniently-located wheelchair-accessible Metromover stations, one about every two blocks.
Metromover links many of downtown Miami's major office buildings, hotels, and retail centers, the Stephen P. Clark Government Center, the Cultural Plaza (Miami Art Museum, Historical Museum, Main Library), and the Brickell business district. With Metromover cars arriving frequently, getting around downtown is fast and convenient
--------------------------------------------------------------------------
Per Ock posting:
Comparative O&M Cost: Various Transit Guidedway Modes in Japan and the USA
City/System Transit Mode O&M per Passenger-Mile
Salt Lake City LRT $0.15
San Diego LRT $0.17
St. Louis LRT $0.21
Tokyo/Eidan RRT $0.25
Atlanta RRT $0.25
New York/NYCTA RRT $0.25
San Francisco-BART RRT $0.26
Hiroshima-suburban LRT (1999) LRT $0.27
Tokyo/Toei RRT $0.27
Portland LRT $0.29
Los Angeles LRT $0.29
Philadelphia-PATCO RRT $0.31
Tokyo Monorail $0.31
Chicago RRT $0.31
Kobe RRT $0.32
Washington DC MetroRail RRT $0.34
Yokohama RRT $0.36
Tokyo "Yurikamome" AGT $0.37
Osaka RRT $0.38
Denver LRT $0.40
Nagasaki Streetcar LRT $0.40
Tokyo/Saitama "New Shuttle" AGT $0.40
Boston RRT $0.41
Sacramento LRT $0.42
Nagoya RRT $0.43
Tokyo/Toei Streetcar LRT $0.43
Philadelphia-SEPTA RRT $0.44
New York/PATH RRT $0.46
Miami RRT $0.46
Cleveland RRT $0.46
Hiroshima "Astram Line" AGT $0.46
Osaka "New Tram" AGT $0.48
Baltimore LRT $0.49
Osaka Monorail $0.49
Fukuoka RRT $0.49
Sapporo RRT $0.50
Baltimore RRT $0.52
Tokyo/Tokyu Corp (1999) Streetcar LRT $0.52
Kitakyushu/Chikuho Elec Ry LRT $0.54
Kitakyushu Monorail Monorail $0.54
Dallas LRT $0.55
New Orleans Streetcar LRT $0.56
Boston LRT $0.56
Kyoto/Keifuku Elec Ry (1999) Streetcar LRT $0.57
Hiroshima-Urban lines (1999) Streetcar LRT $0.59
Enoshima Elec Ry LRT $0.60
Sendai RRT $0.61
Los Angeles RRT $0.62
Tokyo/Tama Monorail $0.63
Kobe "Portliner"+"Rokkoliner" AGT $0.63
Shonan Monorail $0.63
Cleveland LRT $0.64
Philadelphia/SEPTA LRT $0.64
Kagoshima Streetcar LRT $0.67
Yokohama "Kanazawa Seaside Line" AGT $0.68
Kumamoto Streetcar LRT $0.69
Takaoka Streetcar LRT $0.77
Toyohashi (0.4 mi/1999) Streetcar LRT $0.77
Toyama (1.7 mi/1999) Streetcar LRT $0.78
Okayama Streetcar LRT $0.83
Kochi Streetcar LRT $0.83
Osaka/Sakai Streetcar LRT $0.84
Pittsburgh LRT $0.84
San Francisco/Muni LRT $0.85
Hakodate Streetcar LRT $0.92
Kyoto RRT $0.92
Buffalo LRT $0.94
Chiba Monorail $0.97
New York/Staten island RRT $0.97
Seattle Monorail $1.02
San Jose LRT $1.07
Otsu/Keihan Elec Ry (1999) LRT $1.08
Sapporo Streetcar LRT $1.15
Newark+HBLRT (NJT) LRT $1.27
Gifu (1999) Streetcar LRT $1.37
Matsuyama (1999) Streetcar LRT $1.44
Komaki "Peachliner" AGT $1.73
Tokyo/Seibu Ry Yamaguchi Line AGT $2.09
Memphis Streetcar LRT $2.31
Osaka OTS Line AGT $2.45
Tokyo-Toei/Ueno Park Monorail (1999) Monorail $2.65
Seattle Waterfront Streetcar Streetcar LRT $2.88
Yukarigaoka AGT $2.91
Miami MetroMover AGT $3.42
Inuyama "Meitetsu Monkeyu Park Monorail" Monorail $4.10
Nagoya/Guideway Bus Guided Bus $5.06
Detroit People Mover AGT $6.07
Jacksonville Skyway Monorail AGT $10.71
See what a Las Vegas Monorail CONSULTANT had to say about our Skyway and other people mover projections! - even after major EXPANSIONS as further advocated here by some:
-----------------------------------------------------
Some of the most inaccurate ridership projections have occurred with respect to local circulator projects similar to the proposed LLC Monorail.
Miami's Metromover (people mover) was projected to carry 41,800 riders daily by 1988 and missed its projection by nearly 75 percent. The system is carrying 13,400 daily riders in 1999 --- 68 percent below projection despite a more than doubling of the route's length.(8)
Jacksonville's downtown monorail was to have carried 10,000 daily riders in its original alignment and 38,000 when completed. In 1996 the monorail was carrying under 1,000 daily riders --- 90 percent below the 10,000 projection.(9) The system has since been nearly tripled in length, and ridership has risen to 1,800. Two new stations will be added to the present seven in 2000. It seems doubtful that ridership on the completed system will reach 2,500 and that the 38,000 daily ridership projection will be missed by more than 90 percent. [My NOTE: It appears after adding the two stations, ridership actually went DOWN! According to figures from APTA, average weekday ridership in first quarter 2008 was 1,700, about 30% below the previous year's figure.]
Detroit's downtown people mover was projected to carry 67,700 daily riders in the late 1980s. In 1996, the system carried fewer than 7,000 daily riders, approximately 90 percent below the projection.(10)
A recent National Academy of Sciences report evaluated the international experience in transportation system projections (such as fixed guideways) and found:(11)
Traffic forecasts that are off by 20 to 60 percent when compared with actual development are frequent in large transportation projects.
------------------------------------------------------------
Now please tell me again how expansion of the Skyway is going to save the day.
------------------------------------------------------------
See the whole report at http://www.publicpurpose.com/ut-lvmono1.htm
Here is the transcript from the SECOND (followup) ABC News story on the Jax Skyway in 2001/2002. It backs up my contention that, indeed, the FULL original system was COMPLETED! Since then, there are two more stops and ridership has DROPPED nearly 50%. See if the promises and excuses sound like deja vu! Where does it end? How quickly we forget!
-------------------------------------------------------------
Riderless Express
Skyway
Almost No One Is Riding $200 Million Skyway
By Charles Herman - ABC NEWS.com
J A C K S O N V I L L E, Fla., July 29 â€" The 2.5-mile Jacksonville Automated Skyway Express is a model of efficiency. Completely automated and controlled from a central operation center, the Skyway makes eight stops throughout the northeastern Florida city that is split in two by the St. John's River.
The only problem: hardly anyone rides it.
"It's strictly a waste of money from beginning to end," decried longtime Jacksonville critic Marvin Edwards. He blames the builder and supporter of the Skyway, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority (JTA).
"They lied about ridership projections," explained Edwards. "They said 56,000 a day at first, then dropped that to 30,000, then last it was 18,000 to 19,000."
Currently, the Skyway sees 3,000 riders per day who pay 35 cents a trip. In fiscal 2001, the Skyway brought in $513,694 in revenue but its expenses were $3.5 million.
Fights for Funding
The Skyway was first proposed back in 1971. It took more than a decade before the funding â€" federal, state and local â€" could be secured to start construction. At the time, the goal was mainly for development so the Skyway to connect the downtown core with parking facilities away from downtown.
The Jacksonville Skyway was part of three demonstration projects to see if "people-mover" systems could stimulate business expansion in downtown centers. Detroit and Miami received federal funds for similar projects.
Some officials within the Department of Transportation's Federal Transit Authority questioned the ridership projections for the Jacksonville Skyway
In an interview with ABCNEWS' John Martin in 1994, Federal Transit Administration official Gordon Linton said, "We and this department, this administration and previous administrations, have not supported it."
Nevertheless, Congress eventually provided more than half the funds for the $182 million Skyway.
In 1987 construction began on the first 0.7-mile portion of the system.
"It was mainly for political reasons, not transportation reasons," explained former Rep. Bob Carr, who chaired the committee that approved funding for transportation projects in the early 1990s. "Like so many projects, they get a camel's nose under the tent and then it gets very very difficult to stop them."
Few Riders From the Start
In 1989 the first section was completed and opened to the public. Jacksonsville's transit leaders projected more than 10,000 people would ride the Skyway a day on this 0.7-mile starter section.
Instead, only 1,200 rode the Skyway.
In 1993 Transit Authority member Miles Francis defended the system to ABCNEWS. "Until this thing is finished, there's no way to measure its performance or its potential."
Now it's finished and the Jacksonville Transit Authority is still waiting for the riders to come.
Open for Business
In November 2000, the complete Skyway opened to the public. Nearly two years later, with ridership at an average of 3,000 a day, the Skyway has not met even the projections for the starter section.
"No one will argue with the fact that ridership is not where we would like it to be," admitted Steve Arrington, director of engineering with the Jacksonville Transit Authority. He says the lack of riders is attributed to economic recessions in downtown Jacksonville in the early 1990s that led to a decrease in development in the area.
"Any number of things predicted to occur that didn't occur development-wise has an effect," he added. "Fuel prices, parking prices."
Arrington still believes in the Skyway and expects to reach its ridership goals. "You don't build a system like this or a roadway for the next four years," said Arrington. "You try to built it for the next 20 to 30 years."
Riding an empty car from one station to another, critic Edwards disagreed. "This really is a public rip-off and a total waste of money that could have gone for something not quite as fancy, but a lot more practical."
Quote from: Coolyfett on January 06, 2009, 07:41:21 PMWas that not Hendricks in the photo? What was that North South street it was running down? It looked like Hendricks.
No - that was part on JTA ROW, and the other part was on Kings Avenue.
In regards to Miami's ridership numbers, your numbers are out of date. In 2007 according to the Miami Dade Transit Technical Analysis Report, the ridership in the FY ending June 2007 was 30,250. Since 1999, the Miami Transit System has surged in ridership. One of the main reasons - the double tracking of Tri-Rail, which caused more riders from the suburban sprawl along the I-95 corridor in South Florida. In other words, the system doesn't work on it's own, but it can work when regional transit is incorporated with it.
Detroit's Problem is similar to Jacksonville's - no regional transit to hook into it. Detroit also has the same problem that the San Marco Trolley had - it was a one direction loop.
Finally, you quoted Ock's O&M Costs per Passenger Mile. The numbers above that have dates are all from 1999. Assuming that is true, then based on current ridership numbers, the O&M per Passenger Mile would be 1.51. Basically, if you increase ridership with the same line (which a regional train would definitely do - that is something that I will guarantee), the O&M costs will go down.
Again, if I was starting from scratch, I would go streetcar long before I do this (remember, we build really multiple systems with the skyway, since we decided to shut it down, and rebuild the system as a monorail). However, it is here now, would cost millions to demolish and replace with something more economical.
Also, you keep mentioning the expansion. Yes, I would like to do it someday. However, I would never do it without implementing a regional transit system, because I don't know of an extension that would actually add riders (unless it is of a ridiculous distance).
Of the expansions (when the time comes), I think the Southbank one makes the most sense, because you now put it on the edge of a residential neighborhood. Coordinated with other transit improvements, I think it could be beneficial.
The other one that has been discussed is the one to the stadium. This would be EXACTLY 1 mile from Bay and Newnan to Bay and A Phillip Randolph, 1.2 to Adams and Georgia. On gamedays, it would gain thousands of riders. Also, you could move the park and ride that is over there to the parking lot adjacent to this, adding riders, and freeing up the trolleys that run this (and the drivers that drive them) to serve other areas and/or increase headways on other routes. Now, the other side of this, is how much would this increase overall ridership for the year - I don't know for sure. I think this is something that we would need to study.
Quote from: Steve on January 07, 2009, 12:21:54 AM
In regards to Miami's ridership numbers, your numbers are out of date. In 2007 according to the Miami Dade Transit Technical Analysis Report, the ridership in the FY ending June 2007 was 30,250. Since 1999, the Miami Transit System has surged in ridership. One of the main reasons - the double tracking of Tri-Rail, which caused more riders from the suburban sprawl along the I-95 corridor in South Florida. In other words, the system doesn't work on it's own, but it can work when regional transit is incorporated with it.
Detroit's Problem is similar to Jacksonville's - no regional transit to hook into it. Detroit also has the same problem that the San Marco Trolley had - it was a one direction loop.
Finally, you quoted Ock's O&M Costs per Passenger Mile. The numbers above that have dates are all from 1999. Assuming that is true, then based on current ridership numbers, the O&M per Passenger Mile would be 1.51. Basically, if you increase ridership with the same line (which a regional train would definitely do - that is something that I will guarantee), the O&M costs will go down.
Again, if I was starting from scratch, I would go streetcar long before I do this (remember, we build really multiple systems with the skyway, since we decided to shut it down, and rebuild the system as a monorail). However, it is here now, would cost millions to demolish and replace with something more economical.
Also, you keep mentioning the expansion. Yes, I would like to do it someday. However, I would never do it without implementing a regional transit system, because I don't know of an extension that would actually add riders (unless it is of a ridiculous distance).
Of the expansions (when the time comes), I think the Southbank one makes the most sense, because you now put it on the edge of a residential neighborhood. Coordinated with other transit improvements, I think it could be beneficial.
The other one that has been discussed is the one to the stadium. This would be EXACTLY 1 mile from Bay and Newnan to Bay and A Phillip Randolph, 1.2 to Adams and Georgia. On gamedays, it would gain thousands of riders. Also, you could move the park and ride that is over there to the parking lot adjacent to this, adding riders, and freeing up the trolleys that run this (and the drivers that drive them) to serve other areas and/or increase headways on other routes. Now, the other side of this, is how much would this increase overall ridership for the year - I don't know for sure. I think this is something that we would need to study.
Steve, you are joining others in missing the point. This system is a failure and putting all the lipstick on this pig isn't going to fix it.
Using your own 2007 number of 30,250 riders daily in Miami, this is well below 20 year old projections for 1988! Just like Jax projections, worthless. Why do you and other defenders think that comparing apples and oranges by getting ridership numbers 20 years later with bigger systems and greater populations following massive losses and unanticipated improvements justifies going forward with more. You are simply advocating, using faulty logic, for perpetuating the silliness and mistakes of the past. I don't get your thinking.
>>>>Miami's Metromover (people mover) was projected to carry 41,800 riders daily by 1988 and missed its projection by nearly 75 percent. The system is carrying 13,400 daily riders in 1999 --- 68 percent below projection despite a more than doubling of the route's length.<<<<
Regarding Ock's costs, you don't show me how you revised it to $1.51 today from his $10.71. What Ock's chart is good for is showing RELATIVE costs of various systems and I think it supports my position well. I stand by my conclusions based on the information presented.
Using football games to justify an extension to the stadium is pure folley. First, there are less than a dozen games a year. Second, the Skyway would carry a mere pittance of the fans to the game and it would take hours to do that. Third, the Jaguars could leave town at any time and then what would the Skyway be good for? Also, we have subsidized them enough with taxpayer dollars, we don't need to do more (even though I love the Jags).
Demolition of the Skyway would be paid with just a year or two worth of saved operationg losses ($4million per year or so). Hey, maybe it could be converted into an elevated downtown BIKE PATH (a la rails to trails) ! No need to demo it then.
Please pay attention to my points. NO ONE has built or expanded a people mover that ever met expectations or has been considered a true success (political posturing aside) from what I am aware of. Why would we follow others and our previous selves over the cliff again?!!!!
Its been said, in the past, that we would have to repay the feds their investment if demolished. If true, how long would it take to pay off $184 million?
Lake, it appears there are MJ posters who speak with JTA. Maybe one could call them and ask if this is true. I have never heard of something like this anywhere. If it was in an agreement, it may have an expiration date or at least a proration for time existing. Also, with the use of political clout, it could probably be amended to be voided if that was the sole issue to abandonment.
Based on my web research, the whole people mover concept was a politically motivated (pork barrel?) experiment of a mass transit concept that the Feds allowed to be "tried out". It appears even they conceded it was a failure. As such, I don't know why they would hold a gun to our heads to keep it alive. We shouldn't be penalized forever for being a guinea pig in a failed experiment.
Most of the Federal UMTA grants were done as are the current FTA system. Use it or lose it. This is why JTA is backed into a corner with BRT. Millions in available dollars to get our feet wet, do some studies, and help with the construction, but the community CLEARLY doesn't want it. All that money handed out for the Arlington, Southside, Southwest, downtown corridors will be flushed if we don't "build as planned". This is also why they have shifted to a VERY Lite-BRT system to the north. The balance of the funding may be gone forever.
Ditto the Skyway, the choice is either transfer it to another city that qualifys or give it back. Either route would be a horrible waste.
No matter what the "other" consultants have said or done in the past, the formula for success is simple:
1. Dense Residential connected to Dense Employment + attractive mode = success
2. Muti-Transit feeders connected to Dense Residential and Dense Employment + attractive mode = success
3. Dense Residential connected to Dense entertainment = success
How do you define success? I'd say when we start seeing free transfers between modes that are resulting in standees in the Skyway, IE: more the 6 seated per car. Also when the headways are closer and still require the addition of the middle cars (which we own the rights to, but have never been added).
Looking at my formula for success right now the Skyway illness is easy to spot:
1. ________________ connected to Dense employment + attractive mode = ?
2. ________________ connected to ________________ and Dense employment + attractive mode = ?
3. _________________ connected to ________________ + attractive mode = ?
Kind of easy to see where we are missing the vital parts of the Skyway isn't it? The really strange thing is with great care it could be expanded by just 2 - 3 miles @ $20 Million a mile (true single CONCRETE beam monorail) and we could fill in all of those blanks.
How hard would it be to reach:
Times-Union, DuPont, St. Joe, Fidelity, Blue Cross and upper 5-Points.
Kings Avenue Hilton, San Marco Village.
Bay Street Club District, Berkman, Baseball, Arena, Football, Meropolitan Park, Kids Campus.
FCCJ, First Street.
OCKLAWAHA
The repayment requirement of the $184M Federal portion of the construction cost stems from the program under which the grant was made. These monies were allocated to projects promoting mass transit and alleviating road congestion. Therefore, if we close the project (skyway) down, we have to repay the Fed DOT its share...though I believe it would be exclusive of accrued interest. One of my sources for this is information is a city council meeting in which former Councilwoman Jenkins inquired about the feasibility of removing the skyway.
Quote from: stjr on January 07, 2009, 12:13:06 PM
Lake, it appears there are MJ posters who speak with JTA. Maybe one could call them and ask if this is true. I have never heard of something like this anywhere.
This was told to us specifically by JTA
Quote from: stjr on January 07, 2009, 10:49:48 AMPlease pay attention to my points. NO ONE has built or expanded a people mover that ever met expectations or has been considered a true success (political posturing aside) from what I am aware of. Why would we follow others and our previous selves over the cliff again?!!!!
Out of curiosity, how much do you think it would cost to expand the skyway 1/2 mile? I can guarantee the number is not taking the total cost (184 million), figuring out what has been spent per mile, and using that number. I don't know the number, but I personally don't think it would be this unbelieveable number you seem to think it is.
BTW, the miami system was the 1.51, not the Jacksonville system. Our costs will remain where we are until we do something that can bring in riders (and that ISN'T expanding it).
Quote from: Steve on January 06, 2009, 11:27:57 PM
Quote from: Coolyfett on January 06, 2009, 07:41:21 PMWas that not Hendricks in the photo? What was that North South street it was running down? It looked like Hendricks.
No - that was part on JTA ROW, and the other part was on Kings Avenue.
JTA Row? I am guessing that is not an actual street.
Clearly, there must be a time after which repayment is not required. Also, there may be specific circumstances or exceptions. I still say, if we want out, the politicians could probably engineer it.
I see Ock thinks it can be expanded for $20 million a mile. Hmmm... since street cars, buses, rail are alleged to be cheaper, what is their equivalency to $20 million?
Ock, I support mass transit and hate the bad wrap it gets from fiasco's like the Skyway. Unlike you, I don't think we can or will get it all. I want to see us get behind something that is more efficient, will serve more people, and make a bigger impact on the entire city/metro area. We can create your interconnectivity to a much higher degree by redeploying our resources from the Skyway to buses, street cars, and rail.
I believe our most fundamental difference is I think resources and political support are finite (i.e the genie will grant you only one wish, not three!) and you think they are much more elastic. That certainly pushes us to different courses of action.
How much would the Skyway have cost if it was not overbuild? You know like with the one beams design. Right now the price tag is 184 Million, what would it have cost if built right the first time?
What if I told you that both the Skyway AND the Streetcar could self finance, thrive and expand with just a kick-off from the city?
Would you get on my train then?
Bottom line, I can't say how, but some of the MJ crew know my formula - and I don't think there is a single one that thinks it CAN'T be done. In fact played right the "Jacksonville Traction Company" could be a force in the community with jobs, expansions, and ties to JTA's planned BRT Lite, and Commuter Rail.
The Skyway suffers from a lack of will and creativity, more then it does from any ill's of Jacksonville.
OCKLAWAHA
Quote from: Coolyfett on January 07, 2009, 06:30:49 PM
How much would the Skyway have cost if it was not overbuild? You know like with the one beams design. Right now the price tag is 184 Million, what would it have cost if built right the first time?
Hard to tell, since we started this crap in the 1980's. Monorail costs vary quite a bit, and since there aren't all that many, it's hard to tell
I don't know that we should get out. There are some benefits to the thing that other transit methods downtown don't have. Remember, building a Jacksonville subway is really not cost feasible (certainly not today). One of the advantages that the Skyway has is that it is capable of very tight headways (I believe that with enough cars, 90 seconds is feasible). This is impossible with a streetcar. This is particularly beneficial because our train station is on the edge of downtown, unlike most cities who's train stations are in the center of downtown, and almost everyone who arrives by commuter rail will have to transfer to something.
I think we are on the same page about moving our resources to a transit method that better serves the public as a whole (like commuter rail). My point is that the Skyway can be a piece of the puzzle. It will never be the core, despite earlier predictions from JTA, but it can definitely serve as a vital link.
Quote from: Coolyfett on January 07, 2009, 06:30:49 PM
How much would the Skyway have cost if it was not overbuild? You know like with the one beams design. Right now the price tag is 184 Million, what would it have cost if built right the first time?
With the skyway, its hard to tell. It was overbuilt for $36.8 million per mile, making it twice as much as "no-frills" light rail. However, Indianapolis Clarion Health people mover was built for $14.3 million per track mile in 2003.
link: http://www.schwagerdavis.com/pdf/14_JR14ClarianJR.pdf
Quote from: stjr on January 07, 2009, 06:21:33 PM
I see Ock thinks it can be expanded for $20 million a mile. Hmmm... since street cars, buses, rail are alleged to be cheaper, what is their equivalency to $20 million?
BUS - Light Rail Lite-BUS RAPID TRANSIT model $4-10 million.
STREETCAR - $6-12 million.
MONORAIL (Skyway) - $28-40 million.
LIGHT RAIL TRANSIT - $30-60 million.
BUS -BRT (quickway model) - $52-100 million.
http://www.metrojacksonville.com/content/view/918/116/
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/TRANSIT%20monorail%20and%20Skyway/SKYWAYUMIIITrainBombardier.jpg)
Don't give up on the "step child of JTA". This is what our train would look like COMPLETE, from the original supplier.
My numbers say between $6 Million and $85 Million a mile. The reason for the gap is partly because of the many expensive urban area's where monorails have taken root - such as throughout Japan. Yet there is a low end that JTA and FDOT as well as COJ continue to thumb their collective noses at. THEME PARK SUPPLIERS.
... and THEY can do it for as little as $6 Million a mile, and do it RIGHT. Did you know that Walt Disney World is the number one monorail transit system on earth? In terms of miles, in terms of passenger loads, in terms of speed, in terms of comfort, across the board, while we sit in Jax and twist our collective craniums.
MORE? UNIVERSITY OF MONTANA:
The project is funded with a grant from the U.S Department of Transportation. The secret ingredient is hydrogen power:
On Friday, the team of researchers gave a public demonstration of their monorail system on a working model about a fifth of the size of a real monorail.
The car hovers atop opposing magnets. When it passes through a gate, the motor senses its presence and releases an electrically charged magnetic pulse, powered by hydrogen fuel cells, which then pushes the car along.
Williamson said the monorail would cost about $1 million per mile.
Seattle decided not to build the Green Line, but the Montana researchers expect "to have a full-size monorail by the end of their four-year grant period, which they are now halfway through," says the paper
And what would a Skyway size train look like if it came from the THEME PARK PEOPLE? Same thing, for a fraction of the cost and a hell of a lot more test miles under it's belt.
(http://i196.photobucket.com/albums/aa111/Ocklawaha/TRANSIT%20monorail%20and%20Skyway/SkywayThailand.jpg)
OCKLAWAHA
Today I walked from the southbank over the main street Bridge to downtown to eat at one of my favorite lunch time haunts. It took me to approxmiately 17 minutes to walk from the Stein Mart building to Hemming plaza.
I boarded the skyway at Hemming plaza to save time and get back to the Southbank. After waiting at least 5 minutes I traveled to central station. I had to get off and transfer....I waited at least 10 minutes for a tram , even though the display said trains arrive every 2 minutes. I even saw the same skyway trams run short trips to to Jefferson station back. Another one went to Hemming Plaza/Rosa parks stations and back before I was able to cross the river.
By the time I had returned to work from my lunch break had spent nearly 20 minutes traveling the skyway to get back.
I'm all for the concept of the skyway, but in it's current state it's just not an efficient or timely form of transit travel. I can bike or even walk to points downtown faster than skyway can transport me.
I really hope JTA is looking into a San Marco trolley again because when I worked on the northbank I did utilize the Riverside trolley quite often and found it to be more reliable than the skyway experience.
Seriously doubt they will consider a San Marco trolley - the FEC trains come through too often, and block the crossings for too long for the service to be reliable at lunch time. Unless they extend the Skyway across the FEC (going south from Kings Avenue station, as has been suggested elsewhere on this board), this will always be a problem.
There must have been a problem (mechanical) with the Skyway, it usually runs more often than that. At least I hope that's the problem, and not that they have cut back service.
I know the train's schedule all too well. I lose a lot of time stuck behind them on Hendricks on my 1.1 commute to & from work, but what if the service times were lowered to compensate for the lost time waiting on the train?
There's always the detour option over the Fuller Warren as well, but I won't even begin to think of what other logistical problems that may bring.
As for my trip yesterday on the skyway, it did seem the trams weren't coming as frequent as usual since I've rode it often in the past, but I was never comparing the transit times on it to how long it takes the walk the distance it covers. Since there's not many lunch options on the immediate southbank, I'm sure I'll time it again. If I can get from Riverplace station to Hemming plaza in less than 10 mins during a lunch break I'll definitely use it on a weekly basis. .
Alright, I've taken the skyway several times a week over the past month at my new job.
I'm going with my original impression: It's just not reliable enough for most people to use during a one hour lunch break.
Walking from Southbank (Treaty Oak) to the Northbank (Hemming Plaza area): 15 minutes
Skyway transit time: it's averaged closer to 20 minutes because I'm forced to exit at Central station and wait 5-10 minutes for a transfer to Hemming.
There's frequent departures for the Convention center from Central at during the lunch hours which baffles me as they're almost always empty. Wouldn't it make more sense to have one or two dedicated tram to run from Kings Ave to FCCJ station and make those going to Jefferson/Conv station exit and wait for a transfer?
It seems if it could be tweaked to have faster transit times you could get the Southbank lunch crowd to use it more often.
In fairness the route I take to walk to get to the Northbank is only 1 mile...I believe the skyway route is a little over 2 miles so that's why I'm able to beat the times on foot, but still. You'd think it could travel the 2 miles in under 10 minutes. Put some nitrous on those go-karts!
$ 0.02
Great observations. Are there others riding the same route as you?
Quote from: David on February 18, 2009, 12:59:24 PM
Wouldn't it make more sense to have one or two dedicated tram to run from Kings Ave to FCCJ station and make those going to Jefferson/Conv station exit and wait for a transfer?
It seems if it could be tweaked to have faster transit times you could get the Southbank lunch crowd to use it more often.
This makes a lot of sense.
Quote from: BridgeTroll on February 18, 2009, 01:05:56 PM
Great observations. Are there others riding the same route as you?
There's usually a handful, but not very many. The last couple of times i've rode on it it's been pretty desolate.
Hah, maybe I should get some numbers on those riding from the Conv Center/Jefferson Station to Fccj/Rosa Parks before being too hard on the skyway, but as it stands right now most people on the Southbank won't get much use out of it.
QuoteThere's usually a handful, but not very many. The last couple of times i've rode on it it's been pretty desolate.
And, to my chagrin, there are those here pushing for expansion of this albatross. They will just be "extending" the current and deep level of disappointment. I am all for rail and street cars, but not this white elephant.Common sense bowls me over ;) Ugly, gangly, slow, expensive, low capacity, hard to expand, street killer, proprietary devices, a psychological hurdle to approach vs. a street level device, absurd estimates by consultants at any level of completion that are off by 90% some 20 years later yet .... With due respects to Lake and Ock, I just can't make myself drink this Koolaid.
I never said it should be a part of an initial rail expansion phase. However, it should be a part of an integrated transit system. If we have a regional rail system and streetcar system bringing riders into the downtown area, the skyway will be feed with a steady stream of users. With the other components in play, short extensions make sense. As long as it remains an isolated transit component, ridership will be dismal.
Quote from: David on February 18, 2009, 12:59:24 PM
Alright, I've taken the skyway several times a week over the past month at my new job.
I'm going with my original impression: It's just not reliable enough for most people to use during a one hour lunch break.
Walking from Southbank (Treaty Oak) to the Northbank (Hemming Plaza area): 15 minutes
Skyway transit time: it's averaged closer to 20 minutes because I'm forced to exit at Central station and wait 5-10 minutes for a transfer to Hemming.
let us know how that walk is in July!
hah
#1, that walk in July will be just across the street from my work, or followed up by a shower.
#2, I just wish the current skyway we had would run in a more timely manor. It's not the best, the hopes of expansion are bleak, but at least tweak the current system to run a bit more efficiently.
#3, maybe turning it into a nitrous based tourist attraction isn't such a bad idea afterall.....
Quote from: David on February 19, 2009, 02:12:08 AM
#3, maybe turning it into a nitrous based tourist attraction isn't such a bad idea afterall.....
You mean like a roller coaster ride? That would be so cool! Couple that with the gondolas and zip-lines across the river...and I'm picturing something on a level similar to Ocean Park in Hong Kong.
OK, maybe not quite the same level. And OK, I'm just kidding about all of this. But it would be cool to flip, twist, dive and all that good stuff over the river, with the stadium and Modis seemingly under my feet...just for a day.