The Role Of Mass Transit In Brooklyn's Renaissance

[thelakelander]

From your quoted source above:

By the start of the 1980s most politicians had lost interest in the concept and the project was repeatedly de-funded in the early 1980s. Only two APMs were developed as a part of the People Mover Program, the Metromover in Miami, and the Detroit People Mover.

While they mistakenly excluded the Skyway, this is what I've already explained about the Downtown People Mover Program. Only three of these systems were constructed in urban settings in the US: Jacksonville, Miami, and Detroit.  To date, Jax and Detroit's have been failures.  Miami's has fared much better in recent years due to it being fed riders from Metrorail and Tri-Rail and that municipality modifying their land use policies to encourage pedestrian scale transit oriented development. 

If we'd follow the Miami Metromover model, we'd invest in a station at Brooklyn to tap into that new development, extend a short leg to San Marco to tap into that existing population base, and invest in other modes to penetrate various areas outside downtown, which also end up feeding riders downtown circulator (the Skyway in our case).  In fact, Detroit is now following this model by going with modern Streetcar, BRT, and building a city wide bike network that will become a part of a connected transit network that includes the existing Detroit People Mover.

Btw, while it's an APM (automated people mover), Canada's Vancouver SkyTrain system is designed in a different manner from the US version of APMs that were apart of the Downtown People Mover program.



To serve a similar role as the Skytrain in Vancouver, we'd have to literally shut the Skyway down and rebuilt the entire system.  You'd be better off building LRT all over the city, which is what the majority of the US has done over the last 30 years.

[thelakelander]

Um.. okay.  In closing, the Skyway is just a name.  There are no "Skyways". What we refer to as the Skyway was originally designed as a peoplemover and the technology has been changed into a monorail but it still serves it's purpose as a downtown circulator.  Quite different from the EL and NYC Subway, which are heavy rail systems.
If the key factor in your argument is you desire an elevated system, then that's another topic altogether.

Nevertheless, I think anyone who truly understands transit knows what I was trying to explain and why it matters in a discussion like this.  Anyway, let's get back on track about discussing the validity of connecting Brooklyn with the rest of downtown.

[thelakelander]

If the skyway is just a name, why spend so many paragraphs polemicizing the 'terminology'?

I was originally trying to get further detail on understanding why you were advocating a more expensive and inefficient solution to tufsu1's question. Then as you started to veer into our side discussion, I wanted to clear up some things you mentioned as transit truths that were wrong so the average reader would not be confused. I think, if we're going to try and talk about transit from a professional level, we have to keep things professional. If not, the battle for correct implantation is already defeated.

It doesn't matter a hill of beans what the technology is, except in terms of cost and implementation.

It really does matter if you want a workable mass transit system. If your corridor calls for commuter rail, it makes no sense to put in heavy rail, a people mover, or streetcar.

[thelakelander]

NYC build underground tunnels for their transit system for the same reason San Diego and Denver built at-grade LRT. It was deemed the best viable solution for that specific urban environment. In the same manner, given our circumstances in Brooklyn, a ground level skyway station seems to a viable transit solution.

[Ocklawaha]

There are a couple of other reasons too: ONE: I've got a hunch that changing the way we build the Skyway would result in a massive reduction in construction costs.

Compared to the original cost of the Skyway or compared to the capital costs of other modes?

The original cost of the system should have been enough to prevent it from ever being built, a classic "I told you so," case. That being said, a large chunk of that went to the electrical, signaling and computer system, not to mention the railroad yard and shop building and equipment. Today all we need to build is track and the track doesn't have to be built inside a elevated channel, build it like the Disney system.

TWO: Sending a streetcar down Bay Street whilst dealing with game day traffic is a suicide wish as far as public trust.

My advice would be to simply take a lane out of Bay and use it as fixed transit ROW, if that's the exact route to be used.  Bay Street isn't that much different in the width of streets Houston's LRT runs down
With the Skyway, we apparently don't even need to lose a lane.



Also, you can change the direction of game day traffic much easier than you can build a streetcar or Skyway extension.  We shouldn't let that be a major influence of planning transit.

With the Skyway, we don't even need to lose a lane and it won't change the new directional traffic pattern. Again, that restores the public trust in getting our money's worth out of the directional traffic control on Bay. 

Streetcar is MUCH better suited to private right-of-way and for that reason I wouldn't take it to Shand's or the stadium.

Jacksonville owns these streets and the urban core has a gridded street network. There's no reason public ROW can't be used exclusively for transit so that it doesn't mix with cars.  I believe mixing fixed transit with regular street traffic on any Jacksonville street would be a huge mistake.

When a musician "takes a ride," he is not talking about transportation, and when a transportation geek says private right-of-way it simply means a physical separation from all other modes regardless of who owns the real estate. 

I want to invite my engineer friends and perhaps a representative or two from the industry to go over the Skyway with me and see what we can come up with.  As you know I was able to get a fairly firm quote on streetcar track for $4 million a mile, with another million or so for overhead, signaling and minimal stations.

I'd love to see what they come up with.  However, when you put together these estimates, they can't just be for the installation of track, overhead, etc.  You've got to factor in every thing it costs to start from their design on paper to their actual operation because John Q. Public is going to have to pay for it.

Yes, this ought to be interesting.

I think Stephen and I speak for the whole of Jacksonville when we say Bay Street belongs to the Skyway.   

Count me in as the exception. When I started in the transportation planning industry I was a big fan of a Skyway Bay Street extension.  However, at that time, I viewpoint was also on seeing the Skyway completed without really studying all options available to our disposal or understanding the true path of what it takes to get these projects off the ground in our environment.  Now I'm not locked into it anymore for a variety of reasons already explained.

However, getting back to the Skyway and Brooklyn, an extra station at the operations center to tie into Riverside Place and 220 Riverside, makes all the sense in the world.  Here, we have the same issue the Skyway has with San Marco.  A major activity center just outside the Skyway's service area.  The major difference with Brooklyn is that the Skyway is already there.  All it needs is a simple no-frills station.

I not a huge fan of the Skyway, but we have it, it's major expenses are behind us and I think it's time we make a serious effort to figure out what it would cost to make it work for the whole downtown core. It might turn out that something else is better then the Skyway but we should be careful not to continue to ignore that investment least it turn out to be found valueless.

ANY stations beyond what we currently have should be minimalist in their design (except where the station could be within a building or serve as a historic preservation effort such as Fire Station 5) but your right, JTA should launch on the Brooklyn stop immediately allowing construction workers access via Skyway. It's WAY past time for some ink to start flowing in the engineers office.

[thelakelander]

The original cost of the system should have been enough to prevent it from ever being built, a classic "I told you so," case. That being said, a large chunk of that went to the electrical, signaling and computer system, not to mention the railroad yard and shop building and equipment. Today all we need to build is track and the track doesn't have to be built inside a elevated channel, build it like the Disney system.

As you know from our previous discussions and planning sessions, I'm we'll aware of that, which it why I'd say we'd be lucky to get it in the $30 million/mile range.  That number is significantly cheaper than what we've already invested, yet still significantly higher than some other modes.

TWO: Sending a streetcar down Bay Street whilst dealing with game day traffic is a suicide wish as far as public trust.

My advice would be to simply take a lane out of Bay and use it as fixed transit ROW, if that's the exact route to be used.  Bay Street isn't that much different in the width of streets Houston's LRT runs down
With the Skyway, we apparently don't even need to lose a lane.



Also, you can change the direction of game day traffic much easier than you can build a streetcar or Skyway extension.  We shouldn't let that be a major influence of planning transit.

With the Skyway, we don't even need to lose a lane and it won't change the new directional traffic pattern. Again, that restores the public trust in getting our money's worth out of the directional traffic control on Bay.

You just need to spend three times as much.  Bay already has four lanes. Without a detailed study, I'm not sold the extra money spent is worth saving a lane, especially when a major side benefit in a reduced Bay is a more pedestrian friendly/bike friendly corridor in the heart of the Northbank.

Streetcar is MUCH better suited to private right-of-way and for that reason I wouldn't take it to Shand's or the stadium.

Jacksonville owns these streets and the urban core has a gridded street network. There's no reason public ROW can't be used exclusively for transit so that it doesn't mix with cars.  I believe mixing fixed transit with regular street traffic on any Jacksonville street would be a huge mistake.

When a musician "takes a ride," he is not talking about transportation, and when a transportation geek says private right-of-way it simply means a physical separation from all other modes regardless of who owns the real estate. 

However, we all know its much easier to secure "private" ROW on ROW already owned by the entity implementing the system.  So if COJ wants to invest in transit on its streets, it controls its own destiny.  Start trying to get ROW from entities like CSX, FEC, or the private sector and your implementation process just got a little more difficult and expensive.

I think Stephen and I speak for the whole of Jacksonville when we say Bay Street belongs to the Skyway.   

Count me in as the exception. When I started in the transportation planning industry I was a big fan of a Skyway Bay Street extension.  However, at that time, I viewpoint was also on seeing the Skyway completed without really studying all options available to our disposal or understanding the true path of what it takes to get these projects off the ground in our environment.  Now I'm not locked into it anymore for a variety of reasons already explained.

However, getting back to the Skyway and Brooklyn, an extra station at the operations center to tie into Riverside Place and 220 Riverside, makes all the sense in the world.  Here, we have the same issue the Skyway has with San Marco.  A major activity center just outside the Skyway's service area.  The major difference with Brooklyn is that the Skyway is already there.  All it needs is a simple no-frills station.

I not a huge fan of the Skyway, but we have it, it's major expenses are behind us and I think it's time we make a serious effort to figure out what it would cost to make it work for the whole downtown core. It might turn out that something else is better then the Skyway but we should be careful not to continue to ignore that investment least it turn out to be found valueless.

ANY stations beyond what we currently have should be minimalist in their design (except where the station could be within a building or serve as a historic preservation effort such as Fire Station 5) but your right, JTA should launch on the Brooklyn stop immediately allowing construction workers access via Skyway. It's WAY past time for some ink to start flowing in the engineers office.

All this is good but doesn't mean we should simply expand the Skyway at all costs without seriously consideration of how it logically fits into a regional wide network and the cost effectiveness of such expansion.  That's a quick way to burn public dollars and damage the overall image of mass transit in a city where most already consider the system as a huge waste.

[thelakelander]

meh.  loaded vocabulary notwithstanding, there wouldnt be anything efficient or cost effective about implementing a streetcar system to the stadium whose primary benefit is to deliver walking traffic at grade to waiting retail.

I have to get you out of this DVI styled mindset of only focusing on this specific mile.  The streetcar I was referring to is the one already in the various transportation plans that connects the urban core neighborhoods with downtown and who's construction costs would be possibly generated by the mobility fee.  So its primary benefit is much more than possibly serving the stadium or delivering walking traffic to waiting retail.

the reason being that the street traffic generated would only happen for a few hours a month, and mostly the streets would be bare until development begins to happen at the riverfront.  But hey, at least you would be paying salaries for the operators during all the times that no one is down there.  And then still have to pay additional operators in order to handle the loads during game times.

Doesnt sound 'cost efficient' to me.

No what you describe does not sound cost efficient.  Fortunately, what you're describing is not accurate.

And yet doing nothing is not really an option.

The best economic use of trolleys is with embedded retail and commercial at the stops/stations because of the potential customer base between headways.

The best use of the skyway is getting large groups of people rapidly to and from destinations, which would help generate traffic at the core district stops.

For shits and giggles, can you explain how you've come to this conclusion?  What data are you basing your opinion upon?

I don't think you cleared up any transit 'truths' incidentally.  I suspect you were just engaging in some good old fashioned argumentation.

Let's revisit you're original post a couple pages back, which as a response to tufsu1's question to Ock:

Ock...once again I ask this...knowing you won't get both, would you rather see the skyway extended to the stadium area or a streetcar route to the area?

The skyway.  The area has been so demolished that there isn't the need for a daily high usage transit line out there.

Since I've pressed to see further explanation of your original comment above, your position has changed from favoring the skyway because the corridor doesn't need a daily high usage transit line to favoring the skyway because you think it can move masses of people rapidly like the Chicago EL or NYC Subway....but you're not confused?  I'm sorry but this is like trying to nail jello to a wall.

I think the choices have a pretty clear cut set of criteria.

1.  Is the intent to create street traffic and is there a greater benefit from walking people on the streets spending money (as in the case of Riverside Avenue perhaps?

2.  Is the intent to alleviate vehicular traffic with a premium on speed, rather than pedestrian interactivity.

If the first option is the goal, then streetcars at grade will help with economic development

If the second option is the goal then automated skyways will keep the traffic itself from becoming a deterrent and allow for capacity.

Those are the two considerations that would guide my thinking as a simple gauge, if I were thinking about either Brooklyn or the Eastside as projects on their own.

I don't think those are choices at all.  Especially, the second because neither will have a significant impact on alleviating auto traffic congestion. 

I think Ock has additional opinions on how best to serve the Eastside district.  Perhaps he can weigh in.

Where were you guys back in 2006-09 when all of this stuff was being worked into the LRTP, mobility plan, etc.?  We had this site up and information was definitely discussed here.  At what point do we stop play play debating online, roll up our sleeves and get something off the shelf?  I think we have a true opportunity with the Skyway in Brooklyn and even utilizing the mobility fee for a variety of multimodal projects if we can focus our lobbying efforts.

[thelakelander]

Btw, here is a link to the transit projects identified to be funded in the 2035 long range transportation plan.  It includes the streetcar corridor:

http://www.northfloridatpo.com/images/uploads/general/LRTP_summbrochure.pdf

[thelakelander]

NYC build underground tunnels for their transit system for the same reason San Diego and Denver built at-grade LRT. It was deemed the best viable solution for that specific urban environment. In the same manner, given our circumstances in Brooklyn, a ground level skyway station seems to a viable transit solution.

Lol.  No duh, Lake.  Outside of Jacksonville people don't normally build things because they deem them to be the worst viable solution for their specific urban environment.

What I was asking about was 'why'?  What would have been the determining factor that made it the best solution?

What does this have to do with opening a Skyway station in Jacksonville's Brooklyn?

Nevertheless, I have a feeling you want to make a point about how the opening of a subway 108 years ago in a city where roughly 16k people per mile resided, somehow applies to the Skyway serving Everbank Field in a corridor where there are more parking spaces than people.  Go for it.  However, when you do, go ahead and answer why NYC didn't apply the same solution to the Staten Island Railway, which serves an area 8 times as dense as Jax.


Staten Island Railway

[Ocklawaha]

Subways can do the same thing by running them underneath the established transitway real-estate, but obviously they are not an option here.The stadium transitway is already overwhelmed during games, and when you combine long term planning with the obvious benefits of connecting the 80 thousand patrons back into the downtown economic district, its just an obvious first expansion.

Connecting the stadium customers with Hemming Park, the Omni/Landing and the urban core would bring economic benefits that would help overcome the toxic bubble for small businesses.

Actually Stephen, a subway could be built in Jacksonville its no different then laying railroad track inside the Miami or Ft. Lauderdale tunnels. It is not an option here until we top the 4-5 million mark and that population would have to live in a dense corridor such as downtown to the beaches.

The stadium transitway is already overwhelmed during games, and when you combine long term planning with the obvious benefits of connecting the 80 thousand patrons back into the downtown economic district, its just an obvious first expansion.

Connecting the stadium customers with Hemming Park, the Omni/Landing and the urban core would bring economic benefits that would help overcome the toxic bubble for small businesses.

This is the greatest immediate effect of taking it to the stadiums, it opens up downtown to 15,000-80,000 fans rather then herding them out without an option of stopping somewhere along the way.

[You're confusing still the technology of people movers with heavy rail systems.  Peoplemovers (at least ours) aren't designed to move nearly as many people as heavy rail.  Also, any type of technology can be elevated.  However, elevation doesn't define the system, the technology used does.  The Skyway, Miami's Metromover, and Detroit's Peoplemover were the only three downtown peoplemovers funded by the UMTA's failed peoplemover program.  Also, the majority of transit systems in the US have been funded with federal dollars.

Detroit, Michigan: Detroit People Mover downtown, and ExpressTram at Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport
Indianapolis, Indiana: Indiana University Health People Mover
Jacksonville, Florida: JTA Skyway
Las Colinas, Irving, Texas: Las Colinas APT System
Paradise, Nevada: Mandalay Bay Tram
Miami, Florida: Metromover (Downtown People Mover), MIA Mover
Morgantown, West Virginia: Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit
Washington, District of Columbia: United States Capitol Subway System Dirksen/Hart Line
Queens, New York: AirTrain JFK Airport
Chicago, Illinois: ATS Chicago ORD
Dallas, DFW
Orlando, OIA

There are actually many more systems, some publicly funded and some not. The disconnect is that from 1994/95 to date the "Jacksonville People Mover," isn't a classic Automated People Mover (APM) it a 'driverless' monorail system more like a mini metro. It's only not usable as such because we clipped it's wings right after takeoff.

[tufsu1]

As lake has said, we need to stop debating and changing our minds so much....we have a plan and we need to speak with one voice to get it implemented....that's what the highway crowd has been doing for decades and our landscape shows they've been pretty successful.

Btw, as to the skyway terminology....there were/are skyway systems in other cities such as baltimore and minneapolis....and they are elevated pedestrianwalkways. 

[thelakelander]

The stadium transitway is already overwhelmed during games, and when you combine long term planning with the obvious benefits of connecting the 80 thousand patrons back into the downtown economic district, its just an obvious first expansion.

Connecting the stadium customers with Hemming Park, the Omni/Landing and the urban core would bring economic benefits that would help overcome the toxic bubble for small businesses.

This is the greatest immediate effect of taking it to the stadiums, it opens up downtown to 15,000-80,000 fans rather then herding them out without an option of stopping somewhere along the way.

On the surface, this works for any fixed mode.  However, where are you going to park the cars?  You aren't going to get that number of people driving to ride it by parking at Kings Avenue Station and the Prime Osborn.  If not implemented properly, the only immediate effect we're going to hear is the giant sucking sound of money draining from our wallets. For anything at the stadium to effectively move people in masses, you need a decent complementing system tying downtown and the Skyway (or streetcar) with the burbs.  At the very least, that could mean at least one commuter rail line to the Southside or Clay County already in operation.

[You're confusing still the technology of people movers with heavy rail systems.  Peoplemovers (at least ours) aren't designed to move nearly as many people as heavy rail.  Also, any type of technology can be elevated.  However, elevation doesn't define the system, the technology used does.  The Skyway, Miami's Metromover, and Detroit's Peoplemover were the only three downtown peoplemovers funded by the UMTA's failed peoplemover program.  Also, the majority of transit systems in the US have been funded with federal dollars.

Detroit, Michigan: Detroit People Mover downtown, and ExpressTram at Detroit Metropolitan Wayne County Airport
Indianapolis, Indiana: Indiana University Health People Mover
Jacksonville, Florida: JTA Skyway
Las Colinas, Irving, Texas: Las Colinas APT System
Paradise, Nevada: Mandalay Bay Tram
Miami, Florida: Metromover (Downtown People Mover), MIA Mover
Morgantown, West Virginia: Morgantown Personal Rapid Transit
Washington, District of Columbia: United States Capitol Subway System Dirksen/Hart Line
Queens, New York: AirTrain JFK Airport
Chicago, Illinois: ATS Chicago ORD
Dallas, DFW
Orlando, OIA

There are actually many more systems, some publicly funded and some not. The disconnect is that from 1994/95 to date the "Jacksonville People Mover," isn't a classic Automated People Mover (APM) it a 'driverless' monorail system more like a mini metro. It's only not usable as such because we clipped it's wings right after takeoff.

Ock, how many of those in this list were funded by the UMTA's downtown peoplemover program?  Which ones where they?  Also, do you know what were the others in that program that were never built?

[Ocklawaha]

As lake has said, we need to stop debating and changing our minds so much....we have a plan and we need to speak with one voice ro get it implemented....thats what the highway crowd has been doing for decades and our landscape shows theyve been pretty successful.

Btw, as to the skyway terminology....there were/are skyway systems in other cities such as baltimore and minneapolis....and they are elevated pedestrianwalkways.

True TU, the 'Skyway' was a brand applied to our monorail by JTA, just as 'People Mover' is the brand name for the city buses in Anchorage. A pedestrian sky bridge does not include use of a structure constructed primarily for automobiles, however, there is no rule saying you couldn't call a structure constructed above grade primarily to allow pedestrians to cross a city right-of-way a 'Monorail,' no matter how inaccurate that might be.

I tend to think the Skyway started off as a classic APM Automated People Mover, and ended up as a classic, albeit tiny, monorail system.

I think Ock has additional opinions on how best to serve the Eastside district.  Perhaps he can weigh in.

Where were you guys back in 2006-09 when all of this stuff was being worked into the LRTP, mobility plan, etc.?  We had this site up and information was definitely discussed here.  At what point do we stop play play debating online, roll up our sleeves and get something off the shelf?  I think we have a true opportunity with the Skyway in Brooklyn and even utilizing the mobility fee for a variety of multimodal projects if we can focus our lobbying efforts.

Well part of that time I was either 8,000 feet up in the Andes or 30,000 feet over the Caribbean Sea.

I do think that on game days the Skyway feeding in from Rosa Parks or a new stop across State Street, from Jacksonville Terminal, from Brooklyn and from San Marco at Atlantic and all terminating at a station near the stadium would be the optimum use of the Skyway.

I wouldn't take it into the stadium at the expense of all of the other venues in Fairfield/East Jacksonville. Likewise I wouldn't send a streetcar straight up Bay to the same area since the Newnan//Beaver/Lafayette/Duval loop would serve the same purpose AND put us on the road for Gateway.

Any of these ideas have to be taken as a part of a 'whole system' concept letting each mode do what it does best to compliment the others seamlessly.

[thelakelander]

Where were you guys back in 2006-09 when all of this stuff was being worked into the LRTP, mobility plan, etc.?  We had this site up and information was definitely discussed here.  At what point do we stop play play debating online, roll up our sleeves and get something off the shelf?  I think we have a true opportunity with the Skyway in Brooklyn and even utilizing the mobility fee for a variety of multimodal projects if we can focus our lobbying efforts.

Well part of that time I was either 8,000 feet up in the Andes or 30,000 feet over the Caribbean Sea.

I'm pretty sure you were in Jax when the North Florida TPO LRTP, JTA Streetcar study and Mobility Plan were being created.  You even attended a few meetings.  Were you a stakeholder or on the citizens advisory committee for either BRT, commuter rail, or streetcars?

Any of these ideas have to be taken as a part of a 'whole system' concept letting each mode do what it does best to compliment the others seamlessly.

+1,000

[Ocklawaha]

Where were you guys back in 2006-09 when all of this stuff was being worked into the LRTP, mobility plan, etc.?  We had this site up and information was definitely discussed here.  At what point do we stop play play debating online, roll up our sleeves and get something off the shelf?  I think we have a true opportunity with the Skyway in Brooklyn and even utilizing the mobility fee for a variety of multimodal projects if we can focus our lobbying efforts.

Well part of that time I was either 8,000 feet up in the Andes or 30,000 feet over the Caribbean Sea.

I'm pretty sure you were in Jax when the North Florida TPO LRTP, JTA Streetcar study and Mobility Plan were being created.  You even attended a few meetings.  Were you a stakeholder or on the citizens advisory committee for either BRT, commuter rail, or streetcars?

Absolutely Lake, but from 2006-May of 2007, I was still a resident of Colombia, a mere technicality to be sure, but honesty reigns.

As you know I was on the streetcar committee and am still serving as a part of the commuter rail committee. For BRT I was more of a royal pain in the ass having just come from Bogota (though I lived in Medellin) I was/still am wanting to wash away filth that was high frequency, dedicated bus rapid transit.

Any of these ideas have to be taken as a part of a 'whole system' concept letting each mode do what it does best to compliment the others seamlessly.

+1,000

We are in total agreement,  and fact is, the Skyway being fare free (another metrojacksonville idea) has put it on track to top 1.33 million passengers in the coming year. As I pointed out in another thread, East Jacksonville would probably bump it to the 2 million a year mark or about 20% of our total annual transit ridership. There are about 140 major events held in the Arena/Baseball Grounds/Everbank Field, not counting anything at Metropolitan Park or the Fair Grounds. If the Skyway carried only 3,600 people per event x two directions it would increase the ridership by 1,008,000, easily passing the 2 million passengers a year target.

I view planning these complimenting systems as if we could take a sunburst pattern not unlike this clock for each mode, stack the clocks one atop of the other and give each a slight twist and you'd see a multi modal program.

For Example:

Jacksonville Terminal/Blanding/Argyle/Cassatt/Post/Normandy    BRT
Jacksonville Terminal/Atlantic/Beach/JTB    BRT
Jacksonville Terminal/Pearl/Lem Turner/Dunn/JIA    BRT

Yulee/Airport Road/Panama/Springfield/Durkeeville/Jacksonville Terminal RDC/DMU or    LRT.
Green Cove Springs/Orange Park/Kent Campus/jacksonville Terminal    RDC
St. Augustine/Bayard/Avenues/Jacksonville Terminal    RDC

Gateway/Brentwood/Springfield/East Jax/Jacksonville Terminal    Rapid Streetcar/Heritage Interurban
Jacksonville Terminal/Myrtle/West Brooklyn/5-Points/Riverside/Park and King    Heritage Streetcar
Jacksonville Terminal/Myrtle/Durkeeville Stadium

Central Station/Riverplace/Kings Avenue/San Marco   Skyway
Central Station/Brooklyn/Forest    Skyway
Central Station/Rosa Parks/Health Dept/VA Clinic/Shands    Skyway
Central Station/Newnan/Police HQ/Randolph  Skyway
Central Station/Myrtle/Farmers Market-Woodstock   Skyway