ATTEND JTA's Plan To KILL RAIL, 4-7 MON.

[tufsu1]

I don't think their overall vision is bad....they just haven't thought out some of the details enough...and are progressing in the wrong order on the BRT routes

[thelakelander]

While not a fan of BRT, the question remains, what comes first?

Do you set up the transit path and then have the city do appropriate zoning around it?

Or do you wait until there is a requisite density and then you build out your solution?

This is an easy question to answer.  Its sort of like, what comes first, the McDonalds or the road to get to it.  Rail builds density, not the other way around.  That's the way it's been for well over a century now.  It's happening in sprawling cities like Charlotte, Houston and Phoenix right now with their new rail starter lines.  

The problem here is that we have neither. You have two marginally connected entities acting as standalone organizations.

We have density within the urban core (preconsolidated city).  Recent success stories in the cities mentioned above obviously prove this since we happen to denser than some of them.  That's where you should start first with better mass transit investments that directly link major destinations together.

In addition, it's not really a "if you have the density" situation.  Mass transit works best when you provide reliable service that directly links major destinations where your riders want to go.  Get that right and you'll be just as successful in Salt Lake City as you will in NYC or Chicago.

JTA builds the routes, but the city does nothing to promote transit based zoning around it.

The city approves new development, but takes no effort to make sure it can accommodate transit.

On this level, we have room to improve on multiple sides.  However, those improvements can come hand in hand and at the same time instead of sitting around debating who should be the chicken or egg.

So while it is easy to blame JTA for all things, it's poor city leadership in failing to express or legislate transit based directives in its civic code.

Don't know if you've been following the 2030 Mobility Plan stuff over the last few months but the city is addressing what you say their not above.  Lets hope the JTA can get on board.

Btw, if interested in reading it, here is a link to the land use policy changes in the works:

http://www.coj.net/Departments/Planning+and+Development/Community+Planning/Mobility+Plan.htm

http://www.coj.net/NR/rdonlyres/exmxvuunsr5mvhrvg2mijrtk5euzukiuwvhlb4oe7dkhvnj4i3sddx75ignklflz32yo55h4tuvpyzhsd3ivkfdvjlc/2030+Mobility+Plan+DRAFT_1-20-10.pdf

[tufsu1]

I don't think their overall vision is bad....they just haven't thought out some of the details enough...and are progressing in the wrong order on the BRT routes

They don't have an overall vision.

And that is bad.

http://www.jtafla.com/JTAfutureplans/

this is the same basic transit plan that is included in the City's 2030 Mobility Plan and the TPO's 2035 LRTP

[fieldafm]

I don't think their overall vision is bad....they just haven't thought out some of the details enough...and are progressing in the wrong order on the BRT routes

The one good point made was that 'We really need to better connect the Northside with employment centers'.  And on that point, no one could agree more.  However, the other BRT lines(Phillips and DT) really just seem to be nothing more than a federal money grab and bag.  And one that will ultimately hurt existing fixed transit(skyway) or hurt the potential for additional fixed transit options(commuter rail).  This is a non-sarcastic, non-condensing honest question... how does that fit into any sort of comprehensive long term vision for transit in our fair city?

[tufsu1]

A "plan" isnt the same thing as having 'vision'.  Its whats so annoying about the clownish self importance of the TPO here.  No vision.

but wait...the JTA plan is the same as the one the City and TPO now have....and I thought you were a huge fan of the City's Mobility Plan and have noted the vision of folks at the Planning Department?

[fsujax]

Where did the transit elements of the City's Mobility Plan come from?

[tufsu1]

Where did the transit elements of the City's Mobility Plan come from?

I believe JTA

[tufsu1]

Which you fully know, and if you are claiming that there is a final transportation plan that is going to be executed with dedicated funds, then that would make you a liar.

nope....would never make that assertion....in fact, there is no transportation plan in Florida that inclues dedicated funds for anything more than 5 years.  

[tufsu1]

having a plan and having "dedicated funds" are 2 very different things.

unless we're talking about a short-range plan (usually no more than 5 years)

[CS Foltz]

My turn............as have said "No vision, No plan and no funding! This BRT escapade for Philips is just a sponge for Federal Funding (our tax dollars........one more time) When completed, great we have BRT and see how good it does the job? Too bad there are no legs to South Point so workers might take advantage of that but hay.....they can park and ride at the Philips side and then walk along JTB! Or maybe join traffic and ride their bikes! JTA is at it again........no vision, no plan and no funding, unless Uncle Sugar coughs up some more!

[spuwho]

While not a fan of BRT, the question remains, what comes first?

Do you set up the transit path and then have the city do appropriate zoning around it?

Or do you wait until there is a requisite density and then you build out your solution?

This is an easy question to answer.  Its sort of like, what comes first, the McDonalds or the road to get to it.  Rail builds density, not the other way around.  That's the way it's been for well over a century now.  It's happening in sprawling cities like Charlotte, Houston and Phoenix right now with their new rail starter lines.  

The problem here is that we have neither. You have two marginally connected entities acting as standalone organizations.

We have density within the urban core (preconsolidated city).  Recent success stories in the cities mentioned above obviously prove this since we happen to denser than some of them.  That's where you should start first with better mass transit investments that directly link major destinations together.

In addition, it's not really a "if you have the density" situation.  Mass transit works best when you provide reliable service that directly links major destinations where your riders want to go.  Get that right and you'll be just as successful in Salt Lake City as you will in NYC or Chicago.

JTA builds the routes, but the city does nothing to promote transit based zoning around it.

The city approves new development, but takes no effort to make sure it can accommodate transit.

On this level, we have room to improve on multiple sides.  However, those improvements can come hand in hand and at the same time instead of sitting around debating who should be the chicken or egg.

So while it is easy to blame JTA for all things, it's poor city leadership in failing to express or legislate transit based directives in its civic code.

Don't know if you've been following the 2030 Mobility Plan stuff over the last few months but the city is addressing what you say their not above.  Lets hope the JTA can get on board.

Btw, if interested in reading it, here is a link to the land use policy changes in the works:

http://www.coj.net/Departments/Planning+and+Development/Community+Planning/Mobility+Plan.htm

http://www.coj.net/NR/rdonlyres/exmxvuunsr5mvhrvg2mijrtk5euzukiuwvhlb4oe7dkhvnj4i3sddx75ignklflz32yo55h4tuvpyzhsd3ivkfdvjlc/2030+Mobility+Plan+DRAFT_1-20-10.pdf

Hey Lake,

First, I already knew the answer (transit comes first). I was posing it as an open question for the group here.

On density, there has been some arguments about our extra-urban density levels and whether they are high enough to support a "collector" which can feed a system directed to the urban core. Because of the swamp based geography here, there are many captive developments which make transit difficult to serve. I completely agree on the major destination/venue service you note.

I used to work with commercial real estate here in Jacksonville, and it never comes up. Not in design, not with potential clients, not in traffic pattern analysis. One reason Seattle has had success is that they have had the urban planning laws since the early 80's. Parking, density, transit awareness, set backs, it's all been codified so that each development gets its due. When Seattle Metro was approached to get a new stop developed, they had their checklists and requirements, we had our metrics, and the stop was approved. It was a fantastic arrangement as it actually helped nearby businesses attract more foot traffic. I would like to think it could happen here too.

COJ and JTA may be performing cooperative planning today, but my impression is that it is a more recent activity, as I struggle to locate any results as of late.

Thanks for the links, I will check them out and I look forward to further dialog.

[CS Foltz]

spuwho...............you have entered the Twilight Zone! Welcome to our world......and you are correct on the very recent co-operative planning between City and JTA! Both have plans, kinda, but there is no oversight or vision from either agency, not to mention no funding dedicated either! Transit does come first and the rest will follow unless it is zoned out of existence!

[thelakelander]

Spuwho, yes most of the activity is fairly recent. Many of the sites like this and the people participating on them are the reason for the change of events.

[Ocklawaha]

PORT AUTHORITY PITTSBURGH TRANSIT

spuwho, Interesting comments and I think you stopped just shy of a major transit advantage that Jacksonville and Seattle already share with Pittsburgh. All three of these cities are "swamp based geography" or "mountain based geography", and while it does create captive neighborhoods, it will also cause lineal development either between the waters or between the hills.  Lineal development actually works very well for fixed route mass transit as Seattle is relearning, and Pittsburgh is demonstrating. It works great in Medellin, Colombia too BTW. It is not nearly as important for an entire zip code zone to have high density as long as the vital arterial route space has it.

If bus development mirrors the automobile in its shotgun approach, rail would simulate a high powered sniper rifle. The straight-through-the-pass footprint is repeated over and over again both historically as well as today in Seattle and Pittsburgh.

Streetcar and Interurban development of the first era tended to be 1. compact, 2. dense, 3. lineal in nature 4. mixed use 5. transit oriented 6. vertical.  There is no reason why today's new fixed route transit cannot duplicate much of this style development within the inner city and inner city neighborhoods in the form of in-fill. Sprawling modern tracts and plaza style developments if not rebuildable, can certainly be altered or enhanced to embrace modern interpretations of the only purely American form of mass transit (streetcar) or other forms of fixed route transportation.


OCKLAWAHA

[CS Foltz]

Makes too much sense Ock! Until the City and JTA see the advantages we are doomed to BRT instead of a multiuse mass transit system! Stupid JTA/City Hall!