Skyway Could Be Torn Down.....In 2036!

[ChriswUfGator]

San Diego has milder weather than Jax.  It probably is more important to limit transfers here but I think some act like a transfer is this monster problem.

I wish the broader conversation in this city was more like on this site.  We talk about what routes and modes are the best where as the bulk of this city just wants to not pay for anything and have parking for their monster truck.

Nobody has ever argued that "A" transfer is a problem, that's misstating the facts.

6 transfers to go a few miles is, on the other hand, a huge problem.

[iMarvin]

JTA doesn't even offer transfers like a REAL transit system would. Even across the platform transfers wouldn't help that streetcar on Bay Street when game traffic is turned loose. An SINGLE exclusive transit lane would just reduce road and streetcar capacity. Even if you could build an exclusive lane, the streetcar would be powerless to assist with stadium traffic unless you had two transit lanes/tracks for bidirectional running. With two lanes we just cut the automobile access along Bay in half. The only logical route to the stadium for streetcar is Beaver Street and/or Monroe Street.  Beaver would include a few blocks of private right of way over Hogans Creek, if it turned south and hooked up with Duval East of the Randolph parking garage for a return loop then we'd only lose one traffic lane prone to stadium rush.

The Skyway is superior to the stadium for the same reasons it is to San Marco; 1. It's already poised to go either way. 2. Above the stadium rush. Streetcar however is superior to all of the above between Gateway/Shand's and the Stadium since it would all be on private right of way and it's a hell of a lot cheaper.

OCKLAWAHA

Another reason I didn't think about! Not only would you have to take up at LEAST one lane of traffic on Bay St, but in the process of doing that, traffic would be even more clogged during game days! This makes the skyway make even more sense to me now.

Are there plans for a streetcar to go to Gateway? I thought that would be commuter rail...

[JeffreyS]

Chris I don't think you have argued any unreasonable positions.  That comment is a reference to many posts about transfers over the years here.  I think there has been a lot of reasonable give and take on this thread.

[iMarvin]

I would also like to know where the streetcar was supposed to go over the river. If we build the streetcar going over the river, the skyway would get even less riders.

[ChriswUfGator]

JTA doesn't even offer transfers like a REAL transit system would. Even across the platform transfers wouldn't help that streetcar on Bay Street when game traffic is turned loose. An SINGLE exclusive transit lane would just reduce road and streetcar capacity. Even if you could build an exclusive lane, the streetcar would be powerless to assist with stadium traffic unless you had two transit lanes/tracks for bidirectional running. With two lanes we just cut the automobile access along Bay in half. The only logical route to the stadium for streetcar is Beaver Street and/or Monroe Street.  Beaver would include a few blocks of private right of way over Hogans Creek, if it turned south and hooked up with Duval East of the Randolph parking garage for a return loop then we'd only lose one traffic lane prone to stadium rush.

The Skyway is superior to the stadium for the same reasons it is to San Marco; 1. It's already poised to go either way. 2. Above the stadium rush. Streetcar however is superior to all of the above between Gateway/Shand's and the Stadium since it would all be on private right of way and it's a hell of a lot cheaper.

OCKLAWAHA

Another reason I didn't think about! Not only would you have to take up at LEAST one lane of traffic on Bay St, but in the process of doing that, traffic would be even more clogged during game days! This makes the skyway make even more sense to me now.

Are there plans for a streetcar to go to Gateway. I thought that would be commuter rail...

I think it's rather silly to plan Downtown's development around the few days a year there's a football game on.

More than silly, actually.

[thelakelander]

How is a streetcar any more efficient and better for pedestrian scale than the skyway?

See the pics below:

Streetcar/LRT line






Skyway




Increasing pedestrian traffic an retail/entertainment at street level is a major goal for the revitalization of downtown.  One mode does this better than the other, plus it happens to cost significantly less.

[iMarvin]

JTA doesn't even offer transfers like a REAL transit system would. Even across the platform transfers wouldn't help that streetcar on Bay Street when game traffic is turned loose. An SINGLE exclusive transit lane would just reduce road and streetcar capacity. Even if you could build an exclusive lane, the streetcar would be powerless to assist with stadium traffic unless you had two transit lanes/tracks for bidirectional running. With two lanes we just cut the automobile access along Bay in half. The only logical route to the stadium for streetcar is Beaver Street and/or Monroe Street.  Beaver would include a few blocks of private right of way over Hogans Creek, if it turned south and hooked up with Duval East of the Randolph parking garage for a return loop then we'd only lose one traffic lane prone to stadium rush.

The Skyway is superior to the stadium for the same reasons it is to San Marco; 1. It's already poised to go either way. 2. Above the stadium rush. Streetcar however is superior to all of the above between Gateway/Shand's and the Stadium since it would all be on private right of way and it's a hell of a lot cheaper.

OCKLAWAHA

Another reason I didn't think about! Not only would you have to take up at LEAST one lane of traffic on Bay St, but in the process of doing that, traffic would be even more clogged during game days! This makes the skyway make even more sense to me now.

Are there plans for a streetcar to go to Gateway. I thought that would be commuter rail...

I think it's rather silly to plan Downtown's development around the few days a year there's a football game on.

More than silly, actually.

What about concerts, Giants games, Sharks games, baseball games, the fair, and other things that happen in that area? Congestion might not be as bad or last as long but the skyway could be an easy alternative.

Btw, no one is planning downtown development on football.

[peestandingup]

But the whole question of any thing working is rendered moot as long as the supremely incompetence management over at the JTA is calling the shots.

These idiots could completely undermine the direction and laws of gravity if they only had a chance.  In fact if JTA were in charge of gravity, we would call it blueberry jelly, and it would only work three times a day.

I was getting ready to post something similar. If JTA's in charge, it'll be crap. So we're all probably arguing over nothing. I think they'll just use buses anyway no matter what & then say "See there, does the same thing as that expensive streetcar would have. What's the problem??"

actually the skyway has escalators.  and elevators.

Which, whenever I've used the skyway, granted not that often, always seem to be broken. Along with the change machines and everything else, and sometimes even the actual skyway car I'm traveling in. But I guess I digress. We're still back to my suspicion that designing a system that requires a half dozen transfers to go a few miles is not exactly going to be the epitome of convenience, nor do much to attract ridership.

The escalators have only been down for maintenance twice in three years.  so you must seriously use the skyway on extremely weird days.

Maybe, but I do try to use the Skyway (public trans in general) whenever I can (not because I have to) & something is ALWAYS messed up with the Skyway. Its usually the change machines & turnstiles. When they're broken, guess what? I don't pay. I'd GLADLY pay & am willing to do so. So I figure if they want my money, the least they could do is fix the things that, you know, allow them to actually TAKE my money. Its amazing.

In fact, at one of the stations (the one close to the landing I believe), the handicapped entry door hasn't worked for months. Why do I use that door? Because I like to take my 3 year old along for the rides (and she's in a stroller because we walk around a lot). And it wont fit through the normal turnstiles either. So you can imagine the fun of getting a screaming baby out of her stroller (if she's asleep then God help me), throwing the stroller over a turnstile, then carrying the baby over it, then putting her right back in it. "Oh crap! There went the train! Son of a!!" All because JTA is too f*cking lazy to fix something.

JTA sucks, guys. End of story. Don't try to defend them. They're horrible at their jobs. So if you're trying to include them in with the streetcar plans in any way, prepare for it to fail.

[iMarvin]

How is a streetcar any more efficient and better for pedestrian scale than the skyway?

See the pics below:

Streetcar/LRT line






Skyway




Increasing pedestrian traffic an retail/entertainment at street level is a major goal for the revitalization of downtown.  One mode does this better than the other, plus it happens to cost significantly less.

I'm not positive so I have to ask - Does the metromover in Miami not have this type of developments near it stations? I know it's not the skyway, but the two are sisters and if we could get downtown going again, I don't see why new residential or mixed-use projects couldn't be built near stations and look just like those pics of San Diego.

[thelakelander]

Well obviously I agree with you about the outer beltway and the traffic count, but the conclusion there is only tbat the outer beltway is a completely unnecessary waste of money, not that the Acosta is running anywhere near its capacity. About the route, it's firmly decided that Park Street is the route? I remember Riverside was a proposed route and I still believe that may be the better choice, given that eventually Riverside Ave will develop commercially. But then again the same thing could be said about Park between 95 and the Terminal, and that has a better shot of developing than Riverside Ave since it already has existing building fabric. So actually now that I think about it that probably is the better route.

The Acosta Bridge/Riverside interchange was never a part of any route proposal.  It was never really feasible because of the steep grades on Riverside Avenue's bridges, more limited TOD potential than other corridors in Brooklyn and it wouldn't connect with the JRTC.

[ChriswUfGator]

I would also like to know where the streetcar was supposed to go over the river. If we build the streetcar going over the river, the skyway would get even less riders.

We can't just design the streetcar system from the get-go around not rocking the skyway's boat, or else you wind up with two incomplete failed systems instead of one. The streetcar needs to be its own thing, the skyway is a just red herring in this process and shouldn't get in the way of sound planning, or even warrant consideration when designing the streetcar routes. The streetcar needs to do what it needs to do to be successful, the skyway really ought to be left out of it. The only way to utilize it is by cannibalizing the streetcar's potential to force people onto it, at which point nobody will use it since nobody in their right mind is going to make 6 transfers to go a couple miles. We really need to design this to be successful on its own, leave the skyway out of it.

[ChriswUfGator]

Well obviously I agree with you about the outer beltway and the traffic count, but the conclusion there is only tbat the outer beltway is a completely unnecessary waste of money, not that the Acosta is running anywhere near its capacity. About the route, it's firmly decided that Park Street is the route? I remember Riverside was a proposed route and I still believe that may be the better choice, given that eventually Riverside Ave will develop commercially. But then again the same thing could be said about Park between 95 and the Terminal, and that has a better shot of developing than Riverside Ave since it already has existing building fabric. So actually now that I think about it that probably is the better route.

The Acosta Bridge/Riverside interchange was never a part of any route proposal.  It was never really feasible because of the steep grades on Riverside Avenue's bridges, more limited TOD potential than other corridors in Brooklyn and it wouldn't connect with the JRTC.

Did this site not conduct a poll asking what routes people would prefer, one of which was Riverside Ave, prior to submitting its input on the design? I seem to recall it did. Whatever made it into the final proposal I wouldn't know, I don't have anything to do with it.

[thelakelander]

I'm not positive so I have to ask - Does the metromover in Miami not have this type of developments near it stations? I know it's not the skyway, but the two are sisters and if we could get downtown going again, I don't see why new residential or mixed-use projects couldn't be built near stations and look just like those pics of San Diego.

The Metromover does have some TOD along its stations in Brickell.  However, its also a part of a system that includes Heavy Rail and commuter rail.  Nevertheless, Miami is still moving forward with streetcar expansion as opposed to extending the metromover.  Considering its the most successful example of an urban people mover in America, that should speak volumes:

http://www.miamigov.com/MiamiStreetcar/pages/

[iMarvin]

But the whole question of any thing working is rendered moot as long as the supremely incompetence management over at the JTA is calling the shots.

These idiots could completely undermine the direction and laws of gravity if they only had a chance.  In fact if JTA were in charge of gravity, we would call it blueberry jelly, and it would only work three times a day.

I was getting ready to post something similar. If JTA's in charge, it'll be crap. So we're all probably arguing over nothing. I think they'll just use buses anyway no matter what & then say "See there, does the same thing as that expensive streetcar would have. What's the problem??"

actually the skyway has escalators.  and elevators.

Which, whenever I've used the skyway, granted not that often, always seem to be broken. Along with the change machines and everything else, and sometimes even the actual skyway car I'm traveling in. But I guess I digress. We're still back to my suspicion that designing a system that requires a half dozen transfers to go a few miles is not exactly going to be the epitome of convenience, nor do much to attract ridership.

The escalators have only been down for maintenance twice in three years.  so you must seriously use the skyway on extremely weird days.

Maybe, but I do try to use the Skyway (public trans in general) whenever I can (not because I have to) & something is ALWAYS messed up with the Skyway. Its usually the change machines & turnstiles. When they're broken, guess what? I don't pay. I'd GLADLY pay & am willing to do so. So I figure if they want my money, the least they could do is fix the things that, you know, allow them to actually TAKE my money. Its amazing.

In fact, at one of the stations (the one close to the landing I believe), the handicapped entry door hasn't worked for months. Why do I use that door? Because I like to take my 3 year old along for the rides (and she's in a stroller because we walk around a lot). And it wont fit through the normal turnstiles either. So you can imagine the fun of getting a screaming baby out of her stroller (if she's asleep then God help me), throwing the stroller over a turnstile, then carrying the baby over it, then putting her right back in it. "Oh crap! There went the train! Son of a!!" All because JTA is too f*cking lazy to fix something.

JTA sucks, guys. End of story. Don't try to defend them. They're horrible at their jobs. So if you're trying to include them in with the streetcar plans in any way, prepare for it to fail.

Lol. I know it wouldn't be expensive to fix the turnstiles and everything else that's wrong with the stations. That is a concern I have with the skyway, though. The turnstiles or the slot where you put change in always is messed up.

[thelakelander]

I would also like to know where the streetcar was supposed to go over the river. If we build the streetcar going over the river, the skyway would get even less riders.

The streetcar was never proposed to go over the river.  It was proposed for a certain corridor one on side of the river.  Up to date, the south side of the river would be served by a commuter rail line that would eventually link the airport area with St. Augustine.  That system would use the existing FEC bridge.  Partial funding for this project is also included as a priority in the mobility plan.