Taxis - Better for Jax Than Trains

[thelakelander]

simms3 is saying that we need higher densities in Jacksonville.  I agree, especially downtown and in Springfield and Brooklyn, where there's nothing like a zoning overlay standing in the way of higher densities.

Can fixed rail transit make higher densities happen?  Not all by itself.

Exactly, you're preaching to the choir but ignoring the rest of the service.  You can't build density without transportation infrastructure that stimulates pedestrian scale development patterns.  So you'll need to do more than modify land use policies.  That's why the mobility plan was configured to combine the two and included incentives for infill development along transit corridors.  However, as long as there is a moratorium, expect status quo.

So what do we do in the meantime? Rubber tire trolleys?  Bike sharing? Car sharing?

Why fool around with a rubber tired trolley?  You're better off going with a bus since it gives you the same thing.  Bike sharing, car sharing, etc. should be pushed regardless of where reliable mass transit stands.  These are complementing services.  This isn't a chicken and egg pattern.  We need to learn to multitask.

How about making it harder to develop land at the fringes?  The mobility fee takes a stab at this, but there's an indefinite moratorium in effect.  Besides, I'd like to see something that might be more effective than just charging a higher fee for development further away from the core.

Right now, with a moratorium you have nothing.  The easiest and quickest thing to do at this point is seriously advocate for the sunsetting of the mobility fee moratorium.  While the fee is actually generating cash, you can still work on all these alternatives.

[thelakelander]

RE: Taxis.

People on this board have been describing situations in which they would use a streetcar from Riverside to Downtown to avoid drinking and driving, but lacking are the situations in which they would use the streetcar for actual commuting.  I posed taxis as an alternative answer half humorously, but not even taxis would work in Jax as nightlife is spread too thin and there are not daytime tourists/conventioneers.

In my responses about planning, I'm not talking about trips to nightclubs or isolating particular corridors and modes.  I'm talking about the incremental integration of a seamless city wide transit system.  With this in mind, it doesn't matter how long the skyway or an initial streetcar segment is.  Whatever it is, it has to be well integrated, directly serve a variety of destinations and be fed riders by the existing bus system.  Taxis have nothing to do with achieving the economic and multimodal mobility goals expressed by the mobility plan, the LRTP or the city's adopted visioning plans.

[Anti redneck]

Trains would probably be the least of my worries as well, at least until the city grows (if it ever does) and develops (is it possible with Jacksonville's mentality?) into what it could. Sounds like JTA is doing a reform right now and might focus more on mass transit. If that's the way they want to go, then so be it. If Jacksonville moves toward mass transit, then I won't hold them back. Maybe trains could help. Afterall, you look at at Miami, New York, Chicago, etc. and where would they be without trains? Yeah, they got the landfill, but still. And yes, Jacksonville is far from being able to do what any major city in America could do. Not a step in the wrong direction, though. My point on this post, if that's the route they go, then let them. If we end up with a nice skyway/trolley/monorail and it still doesn't do anything, then we can do the "I told you so" stuff. Besides, a train would be cheaper than a taxi.

[Dashing Dan]

simms3 is saying that we need higher densities in Jacksonville.  I agree, especially downtown and in Springfield and Brooklyn, where there's nothing like a zoning overlay standing in the way of higher densities.

Can fixed rail transit make higher densities happen?  Not all by itself.

Exactly, you're preaching to the choir but ignoring the rest of the service. 

What do you mean by "the rest of the service"? 

What I'm trying to say is that we need to look at everything, including land use policies, car sharing, bike sharing, and rubber tire trolleys buses.

[thelakelander]

Thanks Lake, but one question.  How do you explain the complete lack of infill going on right now in Jacksonville?  What are developers waiting on?  Why aren't people moving into the core en masse as has been the case literally across the board elsewhere, even in smaller cities with hardly a bus service?

What exactly do you consider infill and what boundaries would you like to see this infill in?  Right now, there’s really been no incentive on a land use, mobility, and zoning level for large scale new construction infill to take place.  In fact, I’d say our land use and zoning practices make it more difficult for large scale infill to happen.  The mobility plan’s land use component begins to address this but without the financial incentive (the mobility fee’s credit adjustment system), it has no teeth, thus no effect.  The best thing that Jax can do at this particular point is to let the mobility fee moratorium expire this fall.

Also I have consistently mentioned and agreed with corridor situations as you point out.  I don't think Jacksonville has its corridors in a row, either.  And do you believe that the lack of public transit in Jacksonville is its most pressing issue?  My whole point is that it is not the most pressing issue, but may turn out to be an issue much further down the line.

I believe there are a lot of significant issues facing urban Jacksonville as a whole.  Mass transit, public education, maintenance of public parks, public policy overregulation, poor municipal leadership, etc. are all issues that come to mind.  However, I don’t believe you can resolve one particular issue without working on another.  We’re going to have to multitask and that includes finding ways to improve mass transit in the short term.

Also, re: Atlanta, my comparison was just to point out the tax situation.  Mobility Fee or not, Jacksonville does not have the tax basis or the taxes levied to support itself.

But it’s not an end all to the mobility improvement situation, which is what the topic of this thread is.  As evidence, I’ve given you an example (the mobility fee) as an innovative funding mechanism that has the ability to generate hundreds of millions regardless of Jax’s current tax situation.

Re: Seattle, as plays into my point about timing, in one of the most liberal and transit friendly cities in America it took decades to get what they have now.  Jacksonville is one of the most conservative, anti-transit cities in America.  It will take even more will and effort to get anything done.

But this is what we’re doing right now.  Some like Ock have been at it for over 30 years now.  We’re going to keep giving more effort until change happens.  In the six years MJ has been at it, we’ve radically modified JTA’s original BRT plan, have gotten streetcar and commuter rail projects into the LRTP (can’t get federal funding without it), and into the mobility plan (local funding mechanism for a few corridors).  In addition, we’ve helped a movement to get the land use situation modified to support future mass transit corridors and stand in a great position to get a new transit director to help revamp JTA. 

And while the city as a whole may have lost population until the 1980s, the streetcar did not serve all of the central area and yet all of the central areas have seen steady construction for a while now, and certainly before any additional lines were added in the 2000s.

That’s okay.  You can’t build Rome in a day.  Implementing incrementally is the only workable method.  There’s no Bill Gates that’s going to drop down on Jax and give us a billion to do anything extensive any time soon.  However, that doesn’t mean you can’t apply tactical urbanism concepts to incrementally improve.

Bellevue has seen and is seeing its own surge in infill, and yet is not connected to transit.  When I think of corridors and satellite cities evolving around transit stations, I really think of DC.  Somehow I don't picture the demolition of our urban neighborhoods for the construction of high-rises and mid-rises.  Do you?

Bellevue is a suburb of a large city with a land mass restricted by water.   In this situation, it’s more similar to South Beach than Jacksonville.  Personally, I’d rather see small scale infill.  I’d be perfectly happy with a network of pedestrian scale one to two story buildings filling up our surface parking lots than having all of those units piled 30 stories high.  Luckily, despite this city’s continued insistence of killing small business growth and infill, it’s happening (ex. Julie’s Urban Grocery, Aardwolf Brewing, King Street, Murray Hill’s Edgewood Avenue, etc.) in several urban core neighborhoods. 

Re: Minneapolis, a population loser, as well, but that doesn't explain the whole story - population shifts do.  Similarly, Atlanta is pretty steady in its population, sometimes losing sometimes gaining, but there is just an absurd amount of infill.  Lower income residents have been priced out and higher income white collar workers are moving in.  That is what has occurred in Minneapolis, as well.  How do you explain all the infill that is not near their light rail line?

In no case have I stated that you can’t have any infill without fixed rail.  However, you can’t deny the fact that fixed rail generates pedestrian scale infill, which over time becomes a part of the population and density that supports it.  Nevertheless, I’d totally disagree with you if you think you can just densify your way into being able to support rail.  Historically, rail builds large scale connected density.  Without it, you’ll get sporadic pockets of density.  Atlanta is a place that has lots of examples of both.  Nevertheless, it’s also five times larger than urban Jacksonville.  When comparing the two, you have to take that into account.

Is the number one driver of infill and the urbanization of cities the presence of transit, or is it a deeper more fundamental issue?

The number one driver of pedestrian scale development is transportation infrastructure that generates that style of development pattern.  So yes, in the last twenty years, fixed rail is probably the greatest driver of large scale urban development.  However, it’s not the only and without land use policies to support, infill opportunities can be limited.

And finally, if you had $500M to spend for Jacksonville would you choose:

A) Transit, and the options are limitless to the price tag.  You're the planner, you get to choose.  Maybe even set aside money for incentives for TODs, too.

B) The following improvements: a new mid-size convention center on courthouse site, waterfront park on Shipyards site, incentives for corporate relocations to downtown, and perhaps some incentives for downtown rehab/new dev.

Which do you think would go further in today's climate towards economic development?

I can be a pretty cheap guy.  Give me a $100 bucks and I'll stretch it out for a few weeks.  For $500 million, I could do them all.  I think most of our problems can be resolved without throwing millions at them.  I’m of the belief that our transit system is better off being initially reduced in scale to effectively become reliable in areas best suited to support it.  So I rather be great in one part of the county (we call this a city but it’s really a county) than bad in all of it.  Thus $100 million on mass transit (on top of the bus system modification I’d immediately do to save existing cash) would be more than enough to link downtown with most of the denser pre-consolidated city.  A change in the mentality of Public Works and I’d start doing lane diets on most streets in Jax to build up safe bike/ped connectivity to support mass transit operations.  That leaves $400 million for a ton of other things.  I’d throw another $100 million into a pot to make historic preservation more feasible for the private sector. 

The modification of zoning regulations wouldn’t cost me anything but would result in bringing in the most market rate changes.  As for DT incentives, I’d simply create a 10-year tax abatement zone for downtown and most of the Northside’s distressed communities.  It also wouldn’t cost me anything other than time to lobby for direct connectivity with proposed regional rail systems (FEC/Amtrak, All Aboard Florida, etc.).  At that point, I have a good 32 square mile area with true urban living is really possible with direct connectivity to a few suburbs and the rest of the state via intercity rail options.

That leaves me with $300 million to throw into parks, public education, etc. and this city would be radically changed at the end of a decade.   As for roads, I’m willing to substitute vehicle capacity to make alternative modes more feasible and the city’s financial conditions more stable.  That change in policy mentality would make this situation similar to Richard Pryor’s Brewster’s Million’s. 

Also for public education, I’d consider making urban core (neighborhood schools are more important in walkable neighborhoods than autocentric subdivisions) magnet schools “district” magnets, meaning if you live within a certain boundary of a magnet, your kid can automatically attend that school.  I believe that would be a great method for the repopulation of higher educated families in communities such as Durkeeville, New Town, and New Springfield.

Last, to be honest, I’d would spend much on turning the Shipyards into a park.  I’d finish the riverwalk without pavers and carve out a little park space.  The rest would be subdivided for mixed-use development (including industrial/wholesale/maritime if it made sense based on the long term mixed use vision).  So the selling off of property would actually make me money instead of costing.

Also, if today's millage rate is 18, would you be ok to increasing it to 20? 25? 30?  How high would you be willing to go personally?  How high do you think the city could afford before it taxes people out?  Do you think the city has a chance at a penny sales tax on top of the two half-pennies now?  i.e. 8% sales tax

At this point, I’d be fine with keeping the tax structure the way it is, with a focus on modifying public policy and better taking advantage of what we already have.  When that’s in place, I’d have a better picture as well as the public’s support to consider tax increases, if necessary.

[thelakelander]

simms3 is saying that we need higher densities in Jacksonville.  I agree, especially downtown and in Springfield and Brooklyn, where there's nothing like a zoning overlay standing in the way of higher densities.

Can fixed rail transit make higher densities happen?  Not all by itself.

Exactly, you're preaching to the choir but ignoring the rest of the service. 

What do you mean by "the rest of the service"? 

What I'm trying to say is that we need to look at everything, including land use policies, car sharing, bike sharing, and rubber tire trolleys buses.

You are correct.  A mass transit system (fixed or rubber wheeled) is no good if it is planned in isolation.  I was under the impression that you felt the focus on fixed transit was being done in isolation, which it isn't.  It was just a particular mode that Simms3 chose to isolate in this particular thread.

[Dashing Dan]

You are correct.

I was figuring that it would take at least a day or two before we would get to this point.  What do we do now?

[thelakelander]

Lol, I still say we continue to multitask.  Push for the sunsetting of the mobility fee moratorium because you could have a local funding mechanism generating cash for mass transit, bike, and ped improvements before the year is up.  It makes everything else more viable, imo.  In the meantime, there's no reason not to lobby for a new JTA head who values transit as a higher priority than road building, or plan for complementing things such as bike sharing, etc.

[Anti redneck]

Btw - what is the update on the "new JTA" and their gear toward mass transit?

[simms3]

Thanks.  Personally I'm still not convinced, but I will agree that land use policies in Jacksonville are abominable, probably one of the biggest situations holding the city back.  I believe if there is a demand and a will for people to live intown, developers will capitalize on that and build, regardless of the kind of transit in place.  Having transit never hurts, but right now there aren't enough workers in any local business districts to generate much ridership and the commuting patterns aren't centralized.  There also isn't a general population enthusiastic about downtown life.  Central City Philly suffered significantly even with central commuting patterns and some of the most extensive transit in the country.  Companies and people returned when other issues were resolved and abatements were offered, but there were also fundamentals in place that Jax does not have yet.

Lots of private equity developers are looking at factors other than transit.  They are looking at demographics, quality of jobs and job growth, barriers to entry, and the general development scene - how heated it is, pricing, etc.

Also, I wish there were a way to develop the other side of Bay St because I would love to see the Shipyards become a huge grand riverfront park.  Unfortunately the city put the jail there.  While other cities put their jails, courthouses, and government buildings in undesirable areas, Jacksonville put everything on the most prime land in the city.

And by infill I mean almost anything.  It could be the Churchwell lofts replicated time and time again all over the core.  It could be stick construction that addresses the street.  High-rises obviously.  1534 Oak is a great example of infill, but in Jax right now it is the only incident of infill.  I'd love to see dozens of 1534 Oak developments going up in Riverside and Springfield and San Marco, but not only is there no demand, there are policies in place that would essentially prevent such development.  Change policies, get a pool of young professionals who would live in such infill and pay the higher costs, and perhaps there will be momentum to get streetcar lines in there.  I'm not all about giving out incentives to build infill or TODs if there is no natural demand in the first place or fundamentals in place.  That's just throwing money down the drain.  Demand comes from jobs and demographics.

[simms3]

Lol, I still say we continue to multitask.  Push for the sunsetting of the mobility fee moratorium because you could have a local funding mechanism generating cash for mass transit, bike, and ped improvements before the year is up.  It makes everything else more viable, imo.  In the meantime, there's no reason not to lobby for a new JTA head who values transit as a higher priority than road building, or plan for complementing things such as bike sharing, etc.

All of that is absolutely a must, but still the fundamental issue of jobs and job growth and attracting the right population to afford and prefer the city life is probably priority numero uno if one had to prioritize. 

[JeffreyS]

Lol, I still say we continue to multitask.  Push for the sunsetting of the mobility fee moratorium because you could have a local funding mechanism generating cash for mass transit, bike, and ped improvements before the year is up.  It makes everything else more viable, imo.  In the meantime, there's no reason not to lobby for a new JTA head who values transit as a higher priority than road building, or plan for complementing things such as bike sharing, etc.

All of that is absolutely a must, but still the fundamental issue of jobs and job growth and attracting the right population to afford and prefer the city life is probably priority numero uno if one had to prioritize. 

Transit and Urban settings attract the demographic you say we need.  QOl=Horse  Attracting new businesses and Urban people=Cart

[thelakelander]

Job preservation and job growth are extremely important.  I consider having a reliable transit system is a central component of any plan to create a community with a quality of life where companies and their employees want to relocate.  I believe that the cities willing to invest in themselves will be the ones to set themselves a part from those that don't, when it comes to job creation.  Mobility projects such as Atlanta's Beltline should not be overlooked or under estimated, imo.  Something so simple, creates a condition where livability and economic development in communities such as Atlanta's West End becomes more viable.  I believe a viable multimodal mass transit system strengthening neighborhood connectivity for Jacksonville will provide similar results.

[thelakelander]

Thanks.  Personally I'm still not convinced, but I will agree that land use policies in Jacksonville are abominable, probably one of the biggest situations holding the city back.  I believe if there is a demand and a will for people to live intown, developers will capitalize on that and build, regardless of the kind of transit in place.

However, there is a huge difference between developers capitalizing verses development happening in a manner that promotes the vision of the community.  What I'm endorsing is that the community has specified how it wants to grow.  Now policies and transportation investments need to be made to allow for that vision to eventually come reality.  As of right now, city policy makes it truly unfeasible for pedestrian scale development to take place in Jacksonville at a larger level.

Having transit never hurts, but right now there aren't enough workers in any local business districts to generate much ridership and the commuting patterns aren't centralized.  There also isn't a general population enthusiastic about downtown life.  Central City Philly suffered significantly even with central commuting patterns and some of the most extensive transit in the country.  Companies and people returned when other issues were resolved and abatements were offered, but there were also fundamentals in place that Jax does not have yet.

It seems you may be confused about the types of fixed transit and their purpose.  Quite frankly, the reason for a streetcar would have more to do with long term economic development and improved neighborhood connectivity at an affordable cost.  In addition, there is a large collection of cities that have successfully implemented streetcar lines simply for the tourism aspect, which goes against many of the points you make here.  Downtown life, city wide commuting patterns, etc. are secondary in a sense.  If we were talking about a more extensive LRT or heavy rail system, then the points you make here would be more applicable.  For some reason, it seems like you're grouping the characteristics of all forms of fixed transit into the same bag.

Lots of private equity developers are looking at factors other than transit.  They are looking at demographics, quality of jobs and job growth, barriers to entry, and the general development scene - how heated it is, pricing, etc.

I don't deny this.  Perhaps more important than private equity developers are the individual residents who may be willing to invest in smaller scale projects due to the attraction of an urban lifestyle at an affordable price point.  Another major factor could be urban core destinations on constrained properties that ccould benefit from reliable transit connectivity.  For example, medical centers like Shands and St. Vincent's could benefit.  In Orlando, the prescene of Sunrail is allowing Florida Hospital to expand by hundreds of thousands of square feet without providing a significant number of additional parking stalls. 

Also, I wish there were a way to develop the other side of Bay St because I would love to see the Shipyards become a huge grand riverfront park.  Unfortunately the city put the jail there.  While other cities put their jails, courthouses, and government buildings in undesirable areas, Jacksonville put everything on the most prime land in the city.

And by infill I mean almost anything.  It could be the Churchwell lofts replicated time and time again all over the core.  It could be stick construction that addresses the street.  High-rises obviously.  1534 Oak is a great example of infill, but in Jax right now it is the only incident of infill.  I'd love to see dozens of 1534 Oak developments going up in Riverside and Springfield and San Marco, but not only is there no demand, there are policies in place that would essentially prevent such development.  Change policies, get a pool of young professionals who would live in such infill and pay the higher costs, and perhaps there will be momentum to get streetcar lines in there.  I'm not all about giving out incentives to build infill or TODs if there is no natural demand in the first place or fundamentals in place.  That's just throwing money down the drain.  Demand comes from jobs and demographics.

It appears that Brooklyn should be seeing some form of infill later this year.  However, I truly believe the sunsetting of the mobility fee could enhance the potential of infill because developers get incentives for developing infill projects.  Such mobility plan credit adjustments could easily add up into the millions saved or in additional profits for developers.

[Dashing Dan]

Jacksonville would be much more attractive for young professionals if we did more to exploit our outdoor recreation opportunities, e.g. urban kayaking and surfing.

The Southern Off Road Bicycle Association (SORBA) is also doing good work.  It's pretty flat around here, so anything we do to promote bicycling would also help us to attract young professionals.