St. Augustine commission supports commuter rail to Jacksonville

[thelakelander]

TOD is a fantastic concept but I think development if any along the new Sun Rail in the Orlando corridor would be a better comparison for our purposes albeit premature as its not completed.

It will depend on the type of commuter rail service and frequency being offered, in addition to land use policies to support transit corridors.  From studies produced to date, you have two different animals on the three proposed JTA corridors.  The North corridor is more similar to what you may find in Austin, New Jersey and Oceanside, CA.  The other two corridors appear to have more in common with what Sunrail will resemble in Orlando.

The problem is Jacksonville has not planned for or executed on a transportation plan that promotes smart growth or creates opportunities for development of new TOD.  Extending the people mover to Brooklyn or the Shipyards is not enough to promote real development changes beyond a few downtown parcels.

We do have a plan.  It's called the 2030 Mobility Plan and it includes a Mobility Fee and transit supportive land use policies to lead us into a different path. 

http://www.coj.net/departments/planning-and-development/community-planning-division/transportation-planning/mobility-plan.aspx

It was approved by COJ in late 2011.  Unfortunately, we can't get council to let it take full effect. In any event, we're farther along than most believe.

How do we plan for a system that serves the biggest constituency and promotes use of mass transit over automobile? How do you reverse decades of lack of planning on our City's part?

Incremental change but all these options will do is provide viable mobility choices.  We're not going to have an environment where the masses choose mass transit over the automobile.  Even Metropolitan NYC doesn't have that.  Btw, what's the biggest constituency?

[fieldafm]

I have never heard the word TOD thrown around when it comes to development in Austin and while real estate folks in most cities love to tout transit and throw around words like TOD, Austin is without these tranist-enthusiastic words and I have personally heard private sector leaders' distaste for what they deem as a failed system.  New development in Austin is far away from the rail line.  Even the local papers have come out with articles basically asking "where's the transit oriented development?".  It's a failure by all accounts and it has taken a toll on transit political will in the city.

I can tell you from very, very personal experience that there is TOD in Austin. 

[simms3]

Hmm. We ran an article about their system when it opened a few years back.  What do they call these?







Here's a link with images of other projects there: http://www.capmetro.org/uploadedFiles/Capmetroorg/Future_Plans/Transit-Oriented_Development/asg_insert.pdf

Listen I only know what I hear in the industry I work in...the multifamily real estate play in Austin is not the rail system and nobody is touting that system as a success.  And I can point to articles questioning the system in their own media within the past year alone:

http://www.statesman.com/news/news/local/a-look-at-development-around-metrorails-nine-stati/nRmSk/

Two years after the trains began running, and more than seven years after voters approved the 32-mile line, transit-oriented development has been sparse at MetroRail's nine stations. A stop-by-stop summary:

Daily ridership of 2,800 on average, over 32 miles.  That's Skyway ridership over 16x the length...LOLROFLMAO, that's a success?!?

[thelakelander]

So success is defined only by ridership in the early years of operation?  I'd think, in determining ROI, there would be a lot more factors at play and a significantly longer timeline to evaluate.  Factors would include:

- Capital and O&M cost of system
- Jobs created
- Property tax revenue increase along corridor
- Businesses and residences created along corridor
- Public costs saved by investing in long term transit network implementation over roadway capacity expansion, etc.

Considering they put up a 32 mile system for an insanely cheap price of $120 million, it would seem they're off to a great start.  Place a dollar figure on the development that's taken place within walking distance of it's stations, and you already have more private investment than public. For me, that's a success in and of itself and as time goes on, numbers will only multiply.

Also, simply following the line on Google Earth (which includes settings for before and after aerials), reveals all you need to know on if there's TOD or not.  No articles or opinions from any other sources are needed.

[icarus]

You can't foster transit oriented development without transit.  The Federal, State and Local governments have pushed single family home ownership and automobile centric development for decades.

Economic realities and changing demographics are what is going to change the focus of development to clustered and more dense developments. I think Simms3 and theLakelander all raise good points but it all comes down to timing and planning. Jacksonville needs a lot of work on both points.

I still say that the focus should be on establishing effective local mass transit with plans on how to integrate commuter rail and other regional and supra-regional transportation at a later date.

[thelakelander]

Correct, you can't foster TOD without transit.  That was a huge reason for the mobility fee funding the majority of starter transit projects within the urban core mobility zones. Transit also won't sprout TOD if the land use regulations aren't supportive.  The Mobility Plan also addressed this as well by modifying the comp plan to allow for more dense, mixed use development along existing and future transit corridors.

With that said, luckily we aren't starting from scratch.  We've accomplished a lot, in terms of planning and coming up with unique funding strategies over the last five years.  It's a great time to build upon those things to make some of this stuff a reality, sooner rather than later.

I still say that the focus should be on establishing effective local mass transit with plans on how to integrate commuter rail and other regional and supra-regional transportation at a later date.

This appears to be what new JTA CEO Nat Ford is doing, which makes a ton of sense. 

Topping Ford’s to-do list is a plan to totally revamp the bus route structure, creating one that is more direct, quicker, and attracts more riders. He also said he'd like to study an expansion of the much-maligned Skyway Express into Riverside. For more on Ford's plans to improve mass transit, see Friday's Jacksonville Business Journal.

http://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2013/05/16/new-jta-ceo-ford-wants-to-tie-together.html

[simms3]

So success is defined only by ridership in the early years of operation?  I'd think, in determining ROI, there would be a lot more factors at play and a significantly longer timeline to evaluate.  Factors would include:

Also, simply following the line on Google Earth (which includes settings for before and after aerials), reveals all you need to know on if there's TOD or not.  No articles or opinions from any other sources are needed.

Well articles on MetroJax itself have touted other systems as exceeding original expectations, and thereby resulting in success in that respect.  For such a progressive smaller city, Austin's rail transit has actually fallen short.  Also - especially in conservative areas like Jax/the sunbelt, any transit projects should be run at least a little like a business.  People in rich liberal cities like Boston may have more patience to see public dollars bear fruit, but people in Jax will have no patience, especially in regards to transit.  Anything built must have some sort of built-in guarantee that it will work...as we so frequently discuss on these boards, public perception is everything...wouldn't want to destroy any inkling of will for more transit in the public's eye by an investment that takes years or even decades to pan out, all whilst serving a few hundred folks!

I did what you said in Austin - did the most updated bird's eye view actually.  I could find 3 examples of "TOD" on a visible scale from above built within the past 5 years.  The rest is already built environment from 10+ years ago before the rail was a thought (and mostly garden style multifamily).  It's a horrible example for rail.  It's anticlimactic, which is what we don't want to happen in Jax.

[simms3]

Besides, will Jax commuter rail be more like Austin's, or Tri-Rail/Nashville Star?  All three are failures in my book and I wouldn't support my taxpayer dollars going towards such plans - and I'm a liberal, especially with transit!  LoL

I've used express busses and seen how they work - express busses should be used between SJC and Jax.  Cheaper than commuter rail, less of a political hastle, AND they are used by the same demographic.  They don't spur TOD, but I am highly suspicious of any claims that commuter rail between St. Aug and Jax will either.  You have express busses that run between St. Aug and Jax, perhaps with one that stops or ends at the Avenues, and you have another route that does Avenues to DT Jax.  You can do busses to Orange Park.  To the beaches (and not city busses, but those charter busses where one-way would be $1-2 more), etc etc.

If we want a successful system for ridership and especially for TOD/economic development and use by young millennials looking to live in the city, then an LRT line similar to Charlotte's or a streetcar line similar to those in Seattle's SLU area would likely be MUCH better, and still relatively inexpensive overall due to smaller scale/length (and certainly if ROW is planned well).

[thelakelander]

So success is defined only by ridership in the early years of operation?  I'd think, in determining ROI, there would be a lot more factors at play and a significantly longer timeline to evaluate.  Factors would include:

Also, simply following the line on Google Earth (which includes settings for before and after aerials), reveals all you need to know on if there's TOD or not.  No articles or opinions from any other sources are needed.

Well articles on MetroJax itself have touted other systems as exceeding original expectations, and thereby resulting in success in that respect.

We tend to focus on the fiscal aspect of systems like Austin's.  It's a perfect example of a no-frills solution of creating an operational line at an affordable cost:

Rail on a Budget: Austin's MetroRail (September 2007)

It's also a great example at stimulating TOD for a commuter rail line (which is different than what you would witness on a streetcar or LRT line that features shorter headways:

Metrorail Commuter Line Opens in Austin (May 2010)

We've mentioned ridership exceeding estimates on new LRT lines in the past but even those stories were more economic development and sustainability driven.  By the same token, we've also looked at failed transit projects to serve as examples of what not to do:

Syracuse: When Rail Fails

For such a progressive smaller city, Austin's rail transit has actually fallen short.

It's only a four year old system but what exactly has it fallen short on and in comparison to what (just trying to better understand your point of view)? 

Also - especially in conservative areas like Jax/the sunbelt, any transit projects should be run at least a little like a business.  People in rich liberal cities like Boston may have more patience to see public dollars bear fruit, but people in Jax will have no patience, especially in regards to transit.

Do you consider the implementation of transit over the last decade in cities like Houston, Dallas, Phoenix, Charlotte and Salt Lake City a success?

Anything built must have some sort of built-in guarantee that it will work...as we so frequently discuss on these boards, public perception is everything...wouldn't want to destroy any inkling of will for more transit in the public's eye by an investment that takes years or even decades to pan out, all whilst serving a few hundred folks!

To me, that's the economic development factor.  Public perception is everything.  When you start to see redevelopment occurring in places that were desolate for decades, that typically spurs expansion into other areas.  That's the case in cities like Charlotte, Salt Lake City, San Diego, St. Louis, Denver, Dallas, Houston, etc. in recent years.

I did what you said in Austin - did the most updated bird's eye view actually.  I could find 3 examples of "TOD" on a visible scale from above built within the past 5 years.  The rest is already built environment from 10+ years ago before the rail was a thought (and mostly garden style multifamily).

You maybe looking for a certain style of development.  TOD doesn't have to be mixed-use and multiple floors.  It can also be single family infill, such as the development at the MLK Station.  It can also be adaptive reuse of existing building stock. Anyway, the link you posted is a great run down of what's along that 4-year old commuter rail line.  It also mentions what's on the way. For example, a college purchasing the vacant mall at the line's Highlands station is a huge deal, even if classes won't be in session for a few years from now. 

With that being said, the one Crestview Station TOD project has just as many multi-family residential units as the two Brooklyn projects combined.  Something like that would be a huge boost for an area just outside downtown like New Town or Brentwood.

It's a horrible example for rail.  It's anticlimactic, which is what we don't want to happen in Jax.

It's a horrible example if you're comparing it to a recently built LRT or streetcar line. It's a great example for creating a starter commuter rail system at an affordable cost and encouraging new development in areas that had been in decline for decades.   Those two things alone, make it worthwhile for us to take a look at it.  It's ridership numbers and current operations are another.  We can also learn from those as well.

[thelakelander]

Besides, will Jax commuter rail be more like Austin's, or Tri-Rail/Nashville Star?  All three are failures in my book and I wouldn't support my taxpayer dollars going towards such plans - and I'm a liberal, especially with transit!  LoL

It will be like whatever we set it up to be.  Will it have 15, 30, 60, 120 minute headways?  Will we create TIF districts around its stations to encourage TOD?  Will we coordinate the rest of the transit network to funnel riders into it?  Will it be ran like a transit spine or a traditional commuter rail system?  If AAF expanded to Jax and offered hourly service to St. Augustine and BRT runs on Philips, is it even worth it on the FEC?

At this point, things are so conceptual, it remains to be determined if the system is fully feasible as proposed.  Considering we're still a decade away from any sort of commuter rail running, it's up to us to lay down the foundation to shape that distant reality now.

If we want a successful system for ridership and especially for TOD/economic development and use by young millennials looking to live in the city, then an LRT line similar to Charlotte's or a streetcar line similar to those in Seattle's SLU area would likely be MUCH better, and still relatively inexpensive overall due to smaller scale/length (and certainly if ROW is planned well).

What makes the Seattle SLUT (or whatever they are calling it now) a success and all these other systems failures? It certainly isn't ridership. The Skyway gets double the daily ridership. To me, the greatest thing about the SLUT, and half of these other systems, is their ability to encourage infill growth and development.

[simms3]

Good points.  You seem to see things from a planner's/architect's perspective.  I look at things through an entirely different lens.  I think my expectations and those of peers in my industry are probably set a lot higher.  For instance...I don't think Atlanta's streetcar will be a success story, and I believe that others involved in real estate looking for a catalyst for new development opportunities feel the same way.  Yet those in the CVB, DT Atlanta Progress, and Invest Atlanta are pretty optimistic about the system and Cousins is praying that it means a turnaround for DT Atlanta office so they can exit! 

Also, keep in mind Austin's growth, not only in terms of sheer population, but in terms of renter population.  It's undeniably an overheated development market right now, and of the new development in the past 5 years and that UC and proposed at this point in time, an immaterial percentage has been tied to the rail line.  Most of it is suburban away from rail but near employment, or right in DT or on the other side of the university, or along the waterfront.

Contrast to Charlotte...literally the bulk of its new construction has been around LYNX with a few projects downtown, a few projects in Southpark, and a few suburban projects around Ballantyne.

With the way Austin is growing, how dynamic the city is, I would have expected a lot more along the rail, and I think others would have too...they see all the cranes up, just not in sight of Metrorail (and I think as heard like as developers are...a few developers did not see the usefulness of the city and passed...whereas in Charlotte developers saw and predicted correctly the usefulness of the system...)

Metrorail in Austin = 2,800 riders over 32 miles
LYNX in Charlotte = 14,800 riders over 9.6 miles

density of population around each is similar, maybe higher in Austin...one was clearly done better than the other and provided more opportunity for development, and it wasn't the commuter rail option.

[simms3]

What makes the Seattle SLUT (or whatever they are calling it now) a success and all these other systems failures? It certainly isn't ridership. The Skyway gets double the daily ridership. To me, the greatest thing about the SLUT, and half of these other systems, is their ability to encourage infill growth and development.

Perhaps you're right about SLUT because most of the development in that area is arguably not due to the trolley, though 2,500 riders on 1.3 miles is in a sense comparable to 5,400 riders on 2.5 miles, and SLUT charges $2.50/ride whilst the Skyway is free.

But, I still think Tri-Rail, Capital Metrorail, and Nashville Star among other commuter rail systems are failures.  They are a waste.  If we can dramatically change land use and zoning and gather the political support from the community to incorporate complete streets and limit sprawl growth (all of which Portland did), then I'd sing a different tune.  For now, I just want to see a really good transit line put in so that we can use it as a shining beacon...I do not want to spend money, time or effort on a system that won't be a good public example that allows us to leverage increased political will for more transit and better zoning/planning.

[thelakelander]

At this point, I don't have a strong opinion on the Atlanta Streetcar, other than I believe it would have made better sense for it to actually penetrate neighborhoods.  I seriously doubt it's going to turn around their downtown office market.

When I look at Austin's line, it travels through sections of the city where growth had long stopped, such as older obsolete industrial areas and lower income neighborhoods.  From my perspective, without it the infill that's occurring in those areas would not be happening.  Instead, development activity in those neighborhoods would be just as absent as it is in New Springfield and Panama Park (despite Austin's rapid growth). 

Charlotte is a different animal because they have a LRT line and strong land use policies to densify around it.  With LRT, it costs you more, but the service is more frequent and reliable, which generates more use and associated development. Connectivity is also enhanced with the bike trail that parallels the rail line.  You can literally build anywhere along that line and your residents will still have easy access to its stations.

With that said, the fact that we're talking about commuter rail locally, what's proposed will be more like Tri-Rail or Sunrail, than Charlotte's LRT.

[thelakelander]

But, I still think Tri-Rail, Capital Metrorail, and Nashville Star among other commuter rail systems are failures.  They are a waste.  If we can dramatically change land use and zoning and gather the political support from the community to incorporate complete streets and limit sprawl growth (all of which Portland did), then I'd sing a different tune.  For now, I just want to see a really good transit line put in so that we can use it as a shining beacon...I do not want to spend money, time or effort on a system that won't be a good public example that allows us to leverage increased political will for more transit and better zoning/planning.

Out of everything proposed locally, the best opportunity is the DT-Riverside streetcar line the mobility plan would fund 100%.  It's short enough ($3.5 miles) to not be a major expense but long enough to tie together two areas of urban activity.  It hits Brooklyn and LaVilla, which both could serve as environments where we can evaluate the impact of fixed transit and denser infill development.  It can also be stretched through the Cathedral District and Springfield with ease.

On top of that, given that it's a streetcar, it could be designed to operate similar to LRT and serve as a transit spine for funneling westside and northside riders into downtown, which results in higher daily ridership.

[chrsjrcj]

What makes the Seattle SLUT (or whatever they are calling it now) a success and all these other systems failures? It certainly isn't ridership. The Skyway gets double the daily ridership. To me, the greatest thing about the SLUT, and half of these other systems, is their ability to encourage infill growth and development.

Perhaps you're right about SLUT because most of the development in that area is arguably not due to the trolley, though 2,500 riders on 1.3 miles is in a sense comparable to 5,400 riders on 2.5 miles, and SLUT charges $2.50/ride whilst the Skyway is free.

But, I still think Tri-Rail, Capital Metrorail, and Nashville Star among other commuter rail systems are failures.  They are a waste.  If we can dramatically change land use and zoning and gather the political support from the community to incorporate complete streets and limit sprawl growth (all of which Portland did), then I'd sing a different tune.  For now, I just want to see a really good transit line put in so that we can use it as a shining beacon...I do not want to spend money, time or effort on a system that won't be a good public example that allows us to leverage increased political will for more transit and better zoning/planning.

(Long time lurker here)

I completely disagree about Tri-Rail, and you cannot place it in the same camp as the Nashville Star and Capital Metrorail. South Florida is completely sprawled out between Jupiter and Homestead, a completely different environment than Austin and Nashville where people drive to downtown in the morning and to the suburbs in the afternoon. Tri-Rail serves West Palm Beach, Boca Raton, Cypress Creek, Fort Lauderdale, and Miami (via Metrorail) and have a number of people originating or detraining there throughout the day. It's probably one of the most unique metro areas in the United States based on that aspect. Ridership has bounced back after the financial crisis, carrying a record amount of passengers last year. Service this year expanded to hourly weekend service, and there are plans to run additional trains on the Florida East Coast line through downtowns, in addition to the current service along I-95.

As far as Jacksonville, St. Augustine to Jacksonville makes the most sense at the moment. The Florida East Coast is a well maintained railroad, and is now very interested in passenger rail on there track (Amtrak, AAF, and Tri-Rail). Capital cost would probably be the lowest of all the routes proposed because of the well maintained tracks. Add some sidings, build stations, buy equipment, and voila! It might not even be a bad idea to have the line go all the way down to Bunnell (Palm Coast). Extend the Palm Coast Parkway west to the FEC ROW for your Palm Coast stop. Unfortunately, there aren't a lot of people between St. Augustine and I-295, and St. Augustine and Palm Coast.

The southwest line to Green Cove Springs is also very appealing population density wise, but CSX would probably be much more demanding.