FTU Staff Editorial: Jax Can't Afford Mobility Plan's Streetcar

[thelakelander]

Yeah we definitely needed a new courthouse.  The current one is a shit hole.

We needed a new courthouse but it didn't have to cost half a billion and swallow as many blocks.  By the same token, we needed reliable mass transit, but it didn't have to come in the form, path or cost of the skyway.  Looking back, our skyway cost more to construct and operate annually than San Diego's initial LRT line.  Who do you think ended up getting more bang for their buck?

[thelakelander]

You're not going to change this guy's mind by correcting the inaccurate facts in his column.   He raised some legitimate points that deserve a more direct response.

He's received this and the point isn't to change is mind.  Everyone is free to have their own opinion and choice.  It's to have the right information in hand to write a proper column based on the facts we have at this point instead of bad data. 

Now if he still chooses to lobby against it, that's certainly within his right.  Nevertheless, even if one were to attempt to provide a more direct response to every point raised, you can't do that without pointing out the inaccuracies first because they were clearly used to shape the opinion shown in the editorial.

[cline]

He raised some legitimate points that deserve a more direct response.

Not really.  His points were based on misinformation and sheer ignorance. 

[Dashing Dan]

He raised some legitimate points that deserve a more direct response.

Not really.  His points were based on misinformation and sheer ignorance.

This response is exactly what concerns me the most. 

[cline]

He raised some legitimate points that deserve a more direct response.

Not really.  His points were based on misinformation and sheer ignorance.

This response is exactly what concerns me the most. 

So you're concerned about streetcars coming to Riverside, paid for by the mobility plan?

[thelakelander]

Excluding pedestrian and bicycle network funds, which are in addition to this particular $50 million for this mobility zone, what are some alternative mobility ideas people would like to see implemented instead of fixed transit that can achieve the same mobility plan goals (reducing VMT, greenhouse gas emissions, stimulating TOD, multimodal mobility, slowing sprawl growth, etc.)? 

From my understanding, the mobility plan can be modified every five years, so by that time we should have some money generated that can either go for this streetcar project or some alternative that can be proven to deliver the same goals.

[cline]

Excluding pedestrian and bicycle network funds, which are in addition to this particular $50 million for this mobility zone, what are some alternative mobility ideas people would like to see implemented instead of fixed transit that can achieve the same mobility plan goals (reducing VMT, greenhouse gas emissions, stimulating TOD, multimodal mobility, slowing sprawl growth, etc.)? 

From my understanding, the mobility plan can be modified every five years, so by that time we should have some money generated that can either go for this streetcar project or some alternative that can be proven to deliver the same goals.

I think you'd be hard pressed to find another mode of fixed transit that could accomplish all of the mobility plan goals you mentioned and fit in with the characteristics of the neighborhood.  The current trolley system (PCTs), aside from not being fixed route, have not proven to spur development.  For the Riverside neighborhood I think streetcar is the logical mode choice.  It is a shame that people like the TU writer only view it as a gimmick.  Like you said, all you have to do is look at our peer cities and you can clearly see that it is most definitely not a gimmick.

[exnewsman]

It's crazy that the streetcar project is too expensive but multi billion dollar outer beltway dreams are just fine.

The mobility plan has $50 million for a streetcar between DT and Riverside and $30 million (local match for FTA funds) for a DMU commuter rail line between DT (JRTC) and the airport.  For $80 million Jax could end up with a starter fixed transit system stretching from Riverside and downtown through Durkeeville, Springfield and the Northside to River City Marketplace in five to ten years. 

For comparisons sake, taxpayers paid more than $80 million for two Kernan Blvd overpasses at Beach and Atlantic.  Seriously, are we going to have to debate which mobility investment will Jax benefit from the most?

One that gets you to the next stoplight a minute faster or one that connects most of Jacksonville's densest and transit friendly areas to DT, multiple medical centers and the airport?

I'm not arguing the need for more mobility, but those two Kernan intersections were the most dangerous in the city. In fact, according to JSO, Atlantic/Kernan was the MOST dangerous over the past 6 years. Since the B/K overpass went up, it's not even in the top 10. JSO is expecting A/K to see the same results. So is $80M worth keeping a few more of our citizens safe and/or alive. I think so.

Now would somebody please school Phil Fretz on the mobility plan so he can write something factual. It's easy to put words on the page. A bit harder to make them factual and make them count. Do some research Phil.

[cline]

That's an expensive safety improvement.  Is the only way to make an intersection safe to spend $40MM?

[thelakelander]

^exnewsman, I don't doubt them being a safety improvement.  However, if I had to compare public ROI for both of these projects, I'd say that a $80 million public transit upgrade is a much more massive safety improvement with a ton of additional benefits than $90 million for two isolated overpasses.  So if someone is going to rail against such an amount being spent on public transit that impacts a larger area of town, the cost and ROI should at least be directly compared with the amount of spending we do on other projects that return less to the taxpayer. Not saying either is right or wrong but just establishing a cost factor directly related to things we approve on a regular basis without a peep of dissent.

[Dashing Dan]

He raised some legitimate points that deserve a more direct response.

Not really.  His points were based on misinformation and sheer ignorance.

This response is exactly what concerns me the most. 

So you're concerned about streetcars coming to Riverside, paid for by the mobility plan?

I think it would be neat for Riverside to have a streetcar line again, but my personal opinion is not pertinent to this thread.

My concern is over the strategy for moving ahead with the streetcar project.

[fsujax]

What strategy would you suggest?

[thelakelander]

^Yes, now would be a great time to talk strategy for moving forward since there is a funding mechanism to pay for its construction. 

Are there other mobility alternatives that should be considered? How should it be operated?  What type of technology should it use?  Are there public/private partnerships that could be put together to stretch capital?  How should O&M be paid for?  What's the best route to use?  What's the anticipated economic impact?  How should the bus system be modified around it?  Should land use policies be modified in areas like Brooklyn to support it?

All of these are questions we need to asking and working to answer now and in the next couple of years, which will help nail down costs and ensure proper installation instead of making false accusations, claiming skyway II failure and keeping opinions in the dark, imo.

[Dashing Dan]

But I don't think that its wise to let Phil Fretz choose the battleground, which is what I think DapperDan is suggesting.  And Dan, please correct me if Im wrong, and forgive me if I am---your posts have been unusually cryptic on this subject.

If I understand correctly, DDan has referred to legitimate points being made by Phil that should be addressed.  Reading the essay, I believe Dan is talking about the various criticisms of downtown development.


Dan if this is not what you are talking about, please feel free to correct me.

I don't mean to be cryptic but I have other things that I am supposed to be doing today.  All in all I think you've caught the main points that I am trying to make.

I'm not as bullish on streetcars as most others on this site, but in no way should that mean that I am opposed to streetcars.  In terms of their potential for generating redevelopment opportunities, I think they make more sense downtown than in Riverside, which will do fine with or without them.  But in any case, my personal feelings about streetcars are not related to the points that I am trying to make today on this thread.

As a side note I want to change my screen name.  It's too similar to Dapper Dan's, and Duval Dude has a prior claim on DD as a nickname. 

How about RR Bartender?  That was my summer job when I was in college.

[cline]

So what are you bullish on for improving mobility in the Riverside area?