Metro Jacksonville

This article mentions the BRT system to cost taxpayers $750 million or roughly $26 million per mile.  It also mentions the system should be up and running by 2025.  Overall, in the article Richard Clark and Brad Thoburn have good ideas and intentions, but we don't have to spend $750 million and wait 20 years for a inferior bus system, if we take advantage of what we already have.

Quote07/26/2007

Clark eyes mass transit strategies[/size]

by David Ball

Staff Writer

City Council Member Richard Clark, chair of the Transportation, Energy & Utilities Committee, told Council President Daniel Davis Tuesday that it’s time to look at the long-term strategy of mass transit in Jacksonville, specifically transit oriented development.

“We can’t widen the roads anymore,” Clark said at the meeting with Davis and members of the Planning Department and Office of General Counsel. “We need to find a way to get cars off the streets.”

Clark expects the meeting to be the first of many to make sure all entities involved in developing future mass transit projects â€" planning department, City Council and JTA â€" are approaching it efficiently and with the same goals in mind.

“I want to take a big-picture look as we’re getting started in this,” Clark told the Daily Record. “My understanding of transportation oriented development is a simple one â€" how to get cars off the road and get people to use mass transit.”

Clark said the meeting was spurred by the Kings Avenue Station project, which is slated to be JTA’s first Transportation Oriented Development (TOD) located near I-95 on the Southbank.

The $60 million project is being developed by Chase Properties, which is leasing the land adjacent to the existing Kings Avenue Garage (that sits mainly unused) and Skyway station in order to build hotels, retail and possibly residential elements that incorporate pedestrian and mass transit and reduce automobile traffic.

Chase initially stated they would break ground in June, but JTA Director of External Affairs Mike Miller said work will likely begin by early September.

“In this case, we already have the Skyway station and we’ll be enhancing it with more connectivity to development,” said Miller. “We also plan to incorporate bus rapid transit, and we’re looking to expand the trolley to that station.”

JTA’s proposed $750 million bus rapid transit system â€" a system of dedicated highway-based and high-speed bus routes set to be built by 2025 â€" is one of the key components to transit oriented development, Clark said.

City ordinance 2007-803 lists 16 proposed bus rapid transit stations as being suitable locations for a transit oriented development zoning overlay district, which Planning Director Brad Thoburn said gives density bonuses to encourage mixed-use development.

“JTA is investing a whole lot of money in developing this system, and the transit doesn’t really work very well if people are spread out,” said Thoburn. “It’s sort of trying to figure out how to adjust land development patterns to support the transit system, so there’s more options than just the automobile.”

Another big issue is funding, said Clark, who devoted much of Tuesday’s meeting to discussion of fair share assessments charged to developers for impacts to roadways and transit infrastructure.

Miller said JTA, as the owner of the Kings Avenue Station development, can use its $811,000 fair share payment to improve amenities at the station itself instead of writing a check to the city and having it dispersed among bulk road improvement projects.

“We can install electronic signs alerting arrivals and departures, make improvements to intersections where buses come in and out and construct shelters...to enhance to the experience for our riders,” said Miller. “It’s all permissible under the new TOD act.”

Although improving mass transit in Jacksonville will take decades, Clark said he hopes to make some important progress while in his chairmanship this year.

“This is going to take years to come to fruition,” said Clark. “But I think we can set the goals, set the structure, and have the methodology in place...and to create the framework to allow that to happen.”

http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=48078 (http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=48078)

How can other cities build light rail for half the cost and commuter rail for one-tenth the cost? Doesn't anyone feel ripped off spending $750 million on buses?

Orlando's 69 mile commuter rail system is coming in under $750 million.

*Central Florida Commuter Rail: 61 miles for $615 million = $10.1 million per mile

JTA Bus Rapid Transit: 29 miles for $750 million = $25.9 million per mile

**San Diego Sprinter DMU: 22 miles for $440 million = $20 million per mile

* - Orlando's commuter rail project is being jointly funded locally by all four counties that it serves.
**- The Sprinter DMU costs so much because they are tearing up the existing freight rail, raising the entire corridor's grade and then laying new track.  When complete, DMU cars will use the line during the day and freight traffic will run at night.

Also, why do they keep saying the this system will remove cars from the road?  All it will do is provide the choice of a transit friendly development.  Those that chose to drive will still sit in the same traffic they did before.  If our growth was stagnant then maybe I could see this argument, but in our high growth environment for every one car taken off of the roads there will be two more to take its place.  Just because 100 people chose to live in a TOD and reap the benefits doesn't mean that everyone else will have to deal with less traffic.

Unfortunately, BRT has not been very effective in attracting transit oriented development.  This is due to it's "flexible" nature.  Why invest millions on a transit dependent site to only have the bus route pick up and move somewhere else five or ten years down the road?

The way this system is being proposed to be built, I don't think it will be going anywhere!

Personally, I can't imagine it getting the full amount of federal funding it needs, at the $750 million number.  Several projects like this are routinely rejected.  The most recent one I can think of in Florida was Tampa's light rail proposal a few years back.

Was their trolly line part of their proposed LRT system?

QuoteJTA tweaking mass transit to attract more riders and reduce operating costs

Article reprints available.
Find out more. 07/26/2007

by Max Marbut

Staff Writer

Following the first comprehensive survey of mass-transit users in almost 20 years, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority is proposing changes to several routes in an effort to improve service and meet the needs of current and potential users.

The survey was conducted over several weeks last year and measured the opinions and preferences of more than 40 percent of JTA’s existing customers, according to the final report submitted by Abrams-Cherwony & Associates â€" a Philadelphia-based transportation consulting firm. Data from the JTA’s recent series of “Transit Talk” meetings was also considered when developing the proposed changes, which will go into effect the first week of September.

According to JTA Service Planning Manager Fred Haley, an average of 36,000 people use city buses each day. Many of them use mass transit options to avoid having to drive in congested traffic or to save money on fuel and/or to eliminate parking costs, particularly those riders who travel back-and-forth to work Downtown.

Read the rest here: http://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/showstory.php?Story_id=48081

QuoteWas their trolly line part of their proposed LRT system?

No.  The LRT was something totally different.  They were rejected because they didn't commit to a local funding mechanism before asking the Feds for their share.  Raleigh's TTA commuter rail plans were also rejected due to high costs.  Their 28 mile commuter rail proposal ended up coming out to $759 million or $27.1 million per mile.  We're already at $26 million / mile for bus system with 18 years to go before it's fully operational.  Ours will be well over a billion, based off the history of similar type transit projects.

QuoteEasy, cheap rail proves elusive[/size]

The optimistic $100 million estimate vanished as the transit agency hit roadblocks

By Bruce Siceloff, Staff Writer

Commuter trains could be built cheap! They would be running soon!
Triangle leaders trumpeted rail transit in the early 1990s as a simple bargain that would make smart use of a quiet, state-owned railroad running through the center of the region.

The tracks were positioned perfectly to whisk riders to and from Research Triangle Park, where Interstate 40 rush-hour drivers were often sitting still.

The Triangle Transit Authority said back then that it would cost as little as $100 million to get trains rolling by 2000 from West Durham to North Raleigh through RTP, Cary and downtown Raleigh. But those plans carried a big assumption: that TTA would get free access to the existing tracks, which it could share with the freight trains.

TTA also expected generous concessions from the freight railroads.

Instead, TTA learned it would have to build its own track within the railroad right of way, then that it would have to build two -- at an extra cost of more than $170 million. Inflation, spikes in construction costs and unexpected engineering challenges added millions more.

The railroads did not surrender their interests for the sake of commuter rail. They extracted concessions that added more than $74 million in unexpected expenses, TTA says.

Today, the cost of the Triangle's commuter rail system is estimated at $759 million. And it's a shorter version, with fewer stops, than TTA originally proposed. This past summer, scrambling to trim costs, TTA cut the length of station platforms in half and reduced its trains from two cars to one.

Major increases in costs aren't unusual in transportation projects, highways included. The 29-mile northern section of the Outer Loop in Wake County, for example, was expected in 1994 to cost $443 million. Today, the estimate is $757.5 million -- roughly the same as the rail system.

But highways don't get the same scrutiny as rail projects. Under new, stricter federal guidelines, the price tag threatens to prevent the rail project from winning more than $400 million needed from the Federal Transit Administration.

Was TTA foolishly optimistic in its early plans? Will costs soar even more? Did the railroads skunk the rail agency during years of negotiations?

"As more information has become available through time, those early numbers look exceedingly naive," said David D. King, deputy state transportation secretary.

"The freight rail lines pretty much have TTA over a barrel and can demand about anything they want and get away with it," said Edison H. Johnson Jr., director of the Capital Area Metropolitan Planning Organization. "When you're spending other people's money, you don't really care what it costs."

full article: http://www.newsobserver.com/1035/story/368193.html (http://www.newsobserver.com/1035/story/368193.html)

Quote from: thelakelander on July 26, 2007, 02:25:07 PM
Personally, I can't imagine it getting the full amount of federal funding it needs, at the $750 million number.  Several projects like this are routinely rejected.  The most recent one I can think of in Florida was Tampa's light rail proposal a few years back.

Tampa's LRT was not rejected....the FTA took it out of line when the County Commission refused to gurantee local funding....from what I understand, JTA has stated that they will guarantee the local match needed

They may gaurantee it, but its still $750 million for a 29 mile busway.  That's pretty excessive in that its higher/mile than several light rail systems that have been recently constructed.  On top of that, we still have 18 years to go.  Just two years ago, the $750 million was $611 million.  You can beat this thing will cost a lot more than the insanely expensive number being floated around right now.  So the true question would be...

Is this the best and most cost effective use for improving local mass transit?