Why Build A Streetcar in Jacksonville?

[stjr]

Let us know when you read the actual archived skyway documents in the Special Collections Department (4th floor of the main library, check in and ask to go behind the information counter) and not random newspaper articles that were written 25 years later.  I promise your eyes will be opened to a new wealth of information regarding the Skyway system.

seriously, STJR?

You are going to quote the critics of the program whose outright sabotage is the reason it didn't work in the first place?

Lake,  I am reflecting what the taxpaying public has been told and sold.  I have backed it up numerous times with figures, quotes, articles, etc., much of it from JTA, City, and Federal sources on the record.  And, these officials, seriously, Stephen, are not quotes from critics, but supporters and those who saw to the Skyway's construction and operation.  So, where is your beef coming from?

Why is it that every time I step up to the new and ever rising bar you guys request, the bar is moved still higher?  Why don't you go to the library and produce those documents you think support your case?  And, while your are it, reconcile them with what the public was presented with.

For such well informed people, I am really surprised how myopic you seem to be about this subject.  This system has failed in every sense of the word for WHATEVER reason.  That is a fact.  The only question for discussion is whether to pour more taxpayer dollars into it, especially given alternatives in mass transit for using the money much more effectively (such as the streetcars we all agree upon).  I have demonstrated here over and over that the arguments offered today for expanding the Skyway are deja vu.

You can have your opinions but attacking my support with allegations not documented and reconciled to public statements is not going to make your case with me or a lot of others.

P.S. As I recall, the T-U was as big a booster of building the Skyway as anyone.  For them to later question its viability in more recent editorials would have to be described as a "conversion" of sorts of an advid proponent to at least a doubting Thomas.

[stjr]

Here is evidence of the tide beginning to turn at the Times Union.

It does reference an advisory committee plan for 4.6 miles but then concludes that the assumptions made for growth and other factors changed it.  The record shows that the final plan was deemed to be a viable system WITHOUT needing the other 2.1 miles.  If this was not the case, the projections should have been different and the other 2.1 miles should have been represented as clearly defined Phase 3.  Instead, the 2.5 miles built were sold to taxpayers as a self contained system capable of delivering 30,000 plus (pick your number) riders a day.  And, all mention of any more expansions was not given as a quid pro quo to making it work successfully.  This conclusion is also consistent with the fact that officials have never given an additional expansion as a cause for the system's gross failures.

This is partly why I push on that expansion is not the panacea proponents make it out to be, the other part being there are far better ways to spend the money and get better results.

Published Tuesday, November 7, 2000

TRANSPORTATION: 1972 dream realized

By The Times-Union

With the Skyway now in full operation, an assessment of its performance can begin.

But, until that assessment is done and proves favorable, any extension of the Skyway should be kept off the table.

Officials of the Jacksonville Transportation Authority continue to talk of extending the Skyway to Alltel Stadium and into Riverside, or even north into Springfield.

They are likely to find that going beyond the talking stage will be extremely difficult.

Until the 2.3 mile system can prove that its benefits exceed its $183.9 million cost, there is almost no chance of public support.

The Skyway has been a hard sell all along.

Conceptual study of it began in 1972, while Richard Nixon was president. Jacksonville was one of seven cities chosen by the federal government to build an automated system as a demonstration program.

In 1978, a feasibility study got under way and a task force and citizens advisory committee drew plans for a 4.6-mile system that would move people around in the central business district, including workers who would park on the fringes, or transfer from mass transit.

But as the project dragged on through the bureaucracy amid political opposition, the assumptions made for growth on the routes and other factors changed. Early, ambitious ridership projections never have been realized. Currently, the system claims about 2,300 rides on the line daily.

Still, that represents a certain amount of traffic that would have been in the downtown area otherwise. Also, it is elevated, so the trains do not disrupt street traffic or slow for traffic lights.

Miami's Metromover, a 4.4-mile elevated system that is linked to rail, cost nearly $400 million. It claimed 13,700 boardings daily last year.

We have supported the Skyway, optimistically, because it had considerable support from citizens and planners who believed it would be successful. One argument they advanced is true: Unlike other mass transit, the Skyway's big cost is in construction, and three-fourths of that came from state and federal taxpayers. It is relatively inexpensive to operate and should last for many years. Thus, the biggest financial hurdle is cleared.

We remain willing to give the Skyway reasonable time to prove its value before condemning it as a complete waste of time. [/b]But the clock is ticking now.

[thelakelander]

Let us know when you read the actual archived skyway documents in the Special Collections Department (4th floor of the main library, check in and ask to go behind the information counter) and not random newspaper articles that were written 25 years later.  I promise your eyes will be opened to a new wealth of information regarding the Skyway system.

seriously, STJR?

You are going to quote the critics of the program whose outright sabotage is the reason it didn't work in the first place?

Lake,  I am reflecting what the taxpaying public has been told and sold.  I have backed it up numerous times with figures, quotes, articles, etc., much of it from JTA, City, and Federal sources on the record.

I'm just telling you the actual reports show something completely different and proves several of the quotes you've been using to validate your argument are completely off base and inaccurate.  Although I don't agree with you're position, I'm not trying to change your viewpoint.  I just want you to be aware of the system's true history.  For all we know, once you look into it, it could make your argument stronger.

Why is it that every time I step up to the new and ever rising bar you guys request, the bar is moved still higher?  Why don't you go to the library and produce those documents you think support your case?  And, while your are it, reconcile them with what the public was presented with.

I've always stood by my position that what exists today is smaller and not what was originally planned.  In fact, I've already produced documentation backing my position.  Here are a few scans from front page articles about the skyway that we've run on this site.







http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2008-nov-the-forgotten-skyway-plan







http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2006-oct-downtown-frankenstein-the-skyway-screwing-up-the-idea-of-mass-transit

This last image shows what we have today overlayed over one of the early alignments.  A few things stand out at me with this particular graphic.  

1. Ridership would have been significantly higher if it ran from Shands/Springfield to the Northbank waterfront and County Courthouse.  These are actual destinations.  A seldom used conference hall and an isolated out-of-the-way parking garage are not.

2. Future extension to Gateway Mall, the Gator Bowl, Riverside Avenue and San Marco are indicated.

Need more proof that the system was supposed to be more extensive.  Check out the 2000 Downtown Master Plan.



I offer these graphics above as proof to refute the claims of that what exists today is the complete system.  With this said, I also question if original ridership numbers critics cry about were based on a more extensive system that actually went somewhere or the scaled down incomplete version that exists today.

For such well informed people, I am really surprised how myopic you seem to be about this subject.  This system has failed in every sense of the word for WHATEVER reason.  That is a fact.  The only question for discussion is whether to pour more taxpayer dollars into it, especially given alternatives in mass transit for using the money much more effectively (such as the streetcars we all agree upon).  I have demonstrated here over and over that the arguments offered today for expanding the Skyway are deja vu.

You can have your opinions but attacking my support with allegations not documented and reconciled to public statements is not going to make your case with me or a lot of others.

I don't love the skyway that much to sit here and make up graphics during a work week.  So I offer the scans of documents I've researched in the Special Collections department as factual proof of my particular position.

[thelakelander]

Here's further indication that what exists is not as extensive as what was originally proposed.  This is an editorial in 1997 from a long time critic, Ron Littlepage.

Limousines would be cheaper than the Skyway

The Florida Times-Union - Monday, January 6, 1997
Author: Ronald L. Littlepage, Times-Union columnist

No, you are not dreaming.

Yes, it is a nightmare.

The folks at the "we screwed up the roadways and the bus system, what can we do next?" Jacksonville Transportation Authority are making their plans for 1998.

At the top of the list is dumping more money down the rathole -- my apologies to rats everywhere -- popularly known as the Automated Riderless Express.

Never mind that most of the time the cars of the little train that couldn't, when it happens to be running, go back and forth empty.

Never mind that when the 2.5mile system is finally completed late this year, the official price tag will be $185 million of taxpayer money.

Go ahead and figure it out. That comes to almost $75 million per mile.

As has been pointed out before, it would have been cheaper to hire chauffeured limousines to carry the few people who ride the Skyway to their destinations.

From the beginning, the silly train has been billed as a "demonstration project," which is how the JTA got the federal government to ante up a pile of money so that people in places like Wyoming would help us folks in Jacksonville pay for the thing.

Now that the "demonstration" has proven to be a flop, you'd think that would be the end of it.

No.

The JTA is seriously considering further demonstrating its ability to screw up by spending $85 million more to extend the Skyway to Alltel Stadium.

This will get interesting.

Mayor John Delaney, who has appointed some of his buddies to the JTA board, prides himself on fulfilling campaign promises.

Some of us remember what he said about the Skyway when he was running for office in 1995.

He called it a "disaster" and a "turkey." His campaign literature said, "We're through building the people mover." He pledged not to put any more local money into the project.

Because the opposition of a mayor, particularly a popular one like Delaney, would likely end any talk of extending the Skyway , the question becomes: Will Delaney stick by his promises or will he undergo a conversion at the altar of the Skyway as his predecessor did once he was in office?

The JTA is pushing the Skyway extension to Alltel Stadium as a way to get fans to Jaguar games and as a shuttle for downtown workers, who the JTA hopes to entice to park there during the week.

Forget it.

For three years now, we've proven that fans can get to Jaguar games quite nicely, thank you.

As far as downtown workers, $85 million would hire a lot of limousine drivers.

Gee. Shuttle buses would be even cheaper.

Nearly every single skyway plan called for the people mover to serve the Stadium District.  There's even a stub for the future Bay Street corridor.  So what was planned was a much larger beast. One that actually would have connected major destinations.  However, under much criticism, JTA gave up on it.

[stjr]

Lake, see my last post before your above.  There is a very public record of what officials have represented to the public.  Concepts and discussion plans are fine, but that isn't what was finally adopted, funded, and built.

Look, it's common sense, more stops and expansion will produce more riders.  I can't quibble with that.  But... will it produce anywhere near the riders to justify the money needed to make the expansion a reality?  I and others say the long track record gives us a pretty clear answer: "no."  Meanwhile, the track record for streetcars, buses, and even the lowly PCT Trolley is far better in carrying traffic per dollar spent to build and operate their systems.

When I look at the history of the Skyway, I focus on what was actually built and the specific promises and representations that went with it.  The academic and discarded visions and plans that were not incorporated in this process don't seem to have much relevancy as those visions and plans were never pursued and/or required as a prerequisite to justifying the system built and its success.

Not to mention that we now have 23 years of operating experience with the Skyway that show it really isn't the best way to do mass transit (far from it).  It was a demonstration project for Jax and the country and, if we abandon it, all is not lost.  It will have done its job "demonstrating" it is not the best solution for mass transit versus other options.  That is not a a bad thing.  Imagine, if every city in the country had built one of these systems only to find out what we have.  How set back would mass transit nationally be?  Let the Skyway be a sacrificial lamb.  We can always bronze a car to memorialize it.  

[stjr]

Here's further indication that what exists is not as extensive as what was originally proposed.  This is an editorial in 1997 from a long time critic, Ron Littlepage.

...Nearly every single skyway plan called for the people mover to serve the Stadium District.  There's even a stub for the future Bay Street corridor.  So what was planned was a much larger beast. One that actually would have connected major destinations.  However, under much criticism, JTA gave up on it.

Lake, 1997 is 10 years AFTER it opened and some 25 or more years after it was first hatched.  That is a johnny-come-lately to me and merely resembles the current discussion.

Be glad that that leg was not built.  Because, given the dearth of development in that direction since 1997, that is one expansion that would likely have added few, if any riders, except a few football fans headed to the stadium a dozen times a year.  Hardly significant use for a model system that should run 15 to 20 hours a day, 7 days a week.  Nor, a great return on $85 million plus additional operating expenses.  And, Littlepage reached my conclusion, that shuttle buses, etc. do the job fine of transporting people to the stadium without the expense of expanding the Skyway, so why bother?  Remember, some people thought all those convention center users were going to use the Skyway.  That hasn't happened.

[thelakelander]

Lake, see my last post before your above.  There is a very public record of what officials have represented to the public.  Concepts and discussion plans are fine, but that isn't what was finally adopted, funded, and built.

My point remains the same.  Initial ridership numbers came from a more extensive system that was never constructed and based on a vibrant downtown that does not exist.  However, I really do wonder why the current configuration ended up being constructed?  If we want to talk about bad planning on a public level, that's one thing, but the system that exists is a product of the sick environment its built to serve.  We can rip it and install a streetcar, but if a similar route is chosen and not properly integrated into the regional transit network and with complementing land uses, it will fail as well.

Look, it's common sense, more stops and expansion will produce more riders.  I can't quibble with that.  But... will it produce anywhere near the riders to justify the money needed to make the expansion a reality?  I and others say the long track record gives us a pretty clear answer: "no."  Meanwhile, the track record for streetcars, buses, and even the lowly PCT Trolley is far better in carrying traffic per dollar spent to build and operate their systems.

This is where you confuse me with Ock and some others.  I'm not a fan of expanding the skyway.  I believe the best method is to establish streetcar and commuter rail corridors serve a much larger population base.  I believe that once these things are in place, like Miami's Metromover, you will see a significant increase in skyway ridership.  In the meantime, I'd rather explore ways to better utilize the existing system to reduce annual O&M loss.

When I look at the history of the Skyway, I focus on what was actually built and the specific promises and representations that went with it.  The academic and discarded visions and plans that were not incorporated in this process don't seem to have much relevancy as those visions and plans were never pursued and/or required as a prerequisite to justifying the system and its success.

Instead of looking at an individual component of the urban environment, I look at the environment as a whole.  Each individual component in that environment was complement another to combine to create a much larger significant product.  Like Metropolitan Park, the lack of dedicated parking at the Landing, disrespect of historic building stock, a bad mass transit plan (the skyway in its current state) only leads to failure on a larger level.  Btw, what exists today is not what was promised to the public in the 1970s and 80s.

Not to mention that we now have 23 years of operating experience with the Skyway that show it really isn't the best way to do mass transit (far from it).  It was a demonstration project for Jax and the country and, if we abandon it, all is not lost.  It will have done its job "demonstrating" it is not the best solution for mass transit versus other options.  That is not a a bad thing.  Imagine, if every city in the country had built one of these systems only to find out what we have.  How set back would mass transit nationally be?  Let the Skyway be a sacrificial lamb.  We can always bronze a car to memorialize it.  [/b]

To me, the skyway and the Landing are similar creatures.  The Landing has been around since the 1980s without adequate dedicated parking to secure and keep major retailers.  If we applied your skyway logic to the Landing's situation, the answer would be that the place doesn't work, we should tear it down and build something new somewhere else.  My logic is to research the history and understand why it doesn't work.  Then instead of going back to ground zero, just provide the dedicated parking the place needs to be more successful.  By the same token, my view towards the skyway is to provide the connections to destinations and neighborhoods needed to feed riders to it as originally proposed.  I believe this can be accomplished through streetcars, commuter rail and BRT.

[CS Foltz]

$kyway is a lost cause kids and the $7 Million Dollars a year it costs us to run is money down the drain! It was not designed to cover the whole of the City and what little it does cover is not the 24/7 mass transit machine that it should be or is needed! At some point, if John Boy is serious about saving money......well here is the chance to save $7 Million Dollars a year! In fact, that  money would go a long way to design, build and mantain LR/Trolly!

[thelakelander]

Here's further indication that what exists is not as extensive as what was originally proposed.  This is an editorial in 1997 from a long time critic, Ron Littlepage.

...Nearly every single skyway plan called for the people mover to serve the Stadium District.  There's even a stub for the future Bay Street corridor.  So what was planned was a much larger beast. One that actually would have connected major destinations.  However, under much criticism, JTA gave up on it.

Lake, 1997 is 10 years AFTER it opened and some 25 or more years after it was first hatched.  That is a johnny-come-lately to me and merely resembles the current discussion.

Be glad that that leg was not built.  Because, given the dearth of development in that direction since 1997, that is one expansion that would likely have added few, if any riders, except a few football fans headed to the stadium a dozen times a year.  Hardly significant use for a model system that should run 15 to 20 hours a day, 7 days a week.  Nor, a great return on $85 million plus additional operating expenses.  And, Littlepage reached my conclusion, that shuttle buses, etc. do the job fine of transporting people to the stadium without the expense of expanding the Skyway, so why bother?  Remember, some people thought all those convention center users were going to use the Skyway.  That hasn't happened.

Looking back, it would have been better and cheaper to build the entire thing on the Northbank instead of crossing the river to vertical office park dominated by surface parking lots and companies with their own commuter shuttle services.  In this scenario, a garage could have been built at the Prime Osborn and the line could have ran all the way to the stadium.  Ridership would have definitely been higher and capital costs significantly lower.  Anyway, the past is the past.  Focusing on the future, I believe is best to not extend it, yet still find ways to better utilize the existing system.

[thelakelander]

$kyway is a lost cause kids and the $7 Million Dollars a year it costs us to run is money down the drain! It was not designed to cover the whole of the City and what little it does cover is not the 24/7 mass transit machine that it should be or is needed! At some point, if John Boy is serious about saving money......well here is the chance to save $7 Million Dollars a year! In fact, that  money would go a long way to design, build and maintain LR/Trolly!

I think we all know any public mass transit system (and highway) is going to operate at a deficit. Any idea on how much that $7 million can be reduced through better utilization and integration into the existing transit network?

[strider]

Be glad that that leg was not built.  Because, given the dearth of development in that direction since 1997, that is one expansion that would likely have added few, if any riders, except a few football fans headed to the stadium a dozen times a year.  Hardly significant use for a model system that should run 15 to 20 hours a day, 7 days a week.  Nor, a great return on $85 million plus additional operating expenses.  And, Littlepage reached my conclusion, that shuttle buses, etc. do the job fine of transporting people to the stadium without the expense of expanding the Skyway, so why bother?  Remember, some people thought all those convention center users were going to use the Skyway.

I know I am a bit late to this discussion, but the above caught my eye.  It seems that in every case of permanent mass transit...meaning rails of any type, of which the Skyway could be considered part of... development takes place after the construction of the mass transit.  Evidence of that happening for more conventional rail has been presented on this forum multiple times.  Of course, even permanent rails need to go to a sensible destination to be effective as a development stimulator, but I would think the Skyway could have affected the same new development projects by the then growing sports complex area. The quick route change on a whim trolleys do nothing to inspire the confidence needed to promote new development along their routes. Using the lack of development as a reason why we should be glad the extension did not take place seems a bit misguided at best.  Mass transit only fails when the routes and stops fail the prospective riders. Not extending the Skyway may have been far more of the fault than just building it at all.

[thelakelander]

If the skyway did serve the Stadium District, that would have eliminated the "JSO evacuation" problem with major events being held down there.  People who don't want to be forced directly to I-95 could have used the skyway to access DT restaurants and bars before and after games and events.

[stjr]

Lake, to your points about better alternatives, I have already agreed with you - let's build those alternatives first.  We will then collectively come to one of two conclusions:

(1) The alternatives are so far superior to the Skyway that it is totally obvious we should not run the Skyway as a parallel or overlapping system and/or that such alternatives fail to adequately feed riders to the existing Skyway system confirming its worthlessness beyond a question.  With either result, we abandon the Skyway for something far better.

(2) Those alternatives will fulfill Ock's and your dreams to the fullest and all that "connectivity" will boost the Skyway to convincing levels versus the costs to maintain it.  It lives to see another day.

I just don't want another dollar put in "growing" the Skyway until the above is accomplished.  And, we need to pursue those alternatives "yesterday" because we are flushing tens of millions in Skyway operating expenses down the drain every year it continues as it is.  As the T-U has stated, the Skyway's clock is ticking.  Some of us already think it's time has run out.  For those who think it deserves some more time, if streetcars don't come soon, it likely will run out of time sooner than later.

[fsujax]

Lake you are right. There are reasons why the Skyway was never fully implemeneted. Its all POLITICS. Something that is out of JTA's hands sometimes. That is what happens when you have leadership change every four to eight years.

[stjr]

I know I am a bit late to this discussion, but the above caught my eye.  It seems that in every case of permanent mass transit...meaning rails of any type, of which the Skyway could be considered part of... development takes place after the construction of the mass transit.  Evidence of that happening for more conventional rail has been presented on this forum multiple times.  

Strider, the New York High Line, an ABANDONED rail line, attracted $900 million in development BEFORE it was finished.  Contrast that to the Skyway that, to my knowledge, has attracted zero (maybe even negative) development over its 23 years of existence.  Don't you think that if even one developer or larger employer/company saw promise in this system they would have stepped up to make a deal with the City over it.  Where is there even the "interest"?