JTA Skyway Expansion Loses: 2013 TIGER Grant Awards

[Tacachale]

Bummer this lost out, but hopefully they'll find a way to make it happen regardless. I'm with Lake, they should go with a cheaper station if need be to get it done. The haters are dead wrong; this is a good project that definitely will improve access around Downtown.

It's interesting that transportation projects are chiefly considered "boondoggles", "pathetic", and "WRONG" only when they're downtown, while spending the same amount or more on new construction rarely draws a second thought.

[FSBA]

Yes, instead we'll spend a couple of hundred million on a 15-mile segment of the First Coast Expressway (formerly Outer Beltway) and SR 9B and be forever tied to the financially subsidizing responsibilities that will come with them. 

As for JTA and the Brooklyn extension, my advice would remain the same as it has been for the last few years.  Go "no-frills" and add a cheap at-grade station at that location.  You generate the same ridership for a fraction of the costs.  Yes, you may not be able to extend it to Forest Street but if the streetcar comes to fruition, you won't necessary have to do that anyway.

I wasn't aware the Skyway was currently turning a profit

[thelakelander]

Yes, it's a gold mine compared to JTB, the Outer Beltway, 9B, the average neighborhood cul-de-sac or even the subsidization of parking in downtown.

Profits from investing in transportation infrastructure don't come from the fare box and charging tolls. They come from that infrastructure's ability to assist a region's efforts to stimulate economic development, increase tax rolls and enhance the area's quality-of-life.  When it comes to mass transit, there's also gains by reducing the amount of mobility subsidies needed to support a growing region.  Without transit, you'll spend a lot more by focusing too much on roads.

So, how much money we really want to make off the Skyway and any other form of mobility?  It's really up to us. If we were smart, we'd utilize it as an urban infrastructure backbone for high density TOD and infill within 1/4 radius (walking distance) of its path.  Our chamber is scheduled to be take a trip up to Charlotte later this month.  Someone needs to ask Charlotte's leaders about impact of actually coordinating land use policy with infrastructure investment.  It's not a sexy topic but it's a major underlying reason why Charlotte's new LRT line is stimulating urban core infill development and the lack of not applying similar concepts is a major reason why DT Jax struggles.

[jaxlore]

well damn, well at least JTA is still upbeat about getting it done.

[fsujax]

I know a lot of time and effort when in to getting that grant application put together. I thought it looked pretty impressive. I have a feeling it will get built with or without federal help. The cost will probably come down to! :-)

[thelakelander]

^That's the type of outlook we need to position our community to take advantage of greater economic opportunities. That mindset is a major difference between the haves and the have nots when it comes to cities.

[simms3]

We still would have lost.  We just got +$10 million in TIGER grant money two years ago.  I'm not sure that project has even broken ground yet.

1) I see plenty of metros there that have won money once or even more than once in the last few rounds, so I don't think that's necessarily stopping anyone.

2) Well if we haven't even broken ground on the last TIGER grant project that we won, of course the feds won't make the same mistake twice and give Jax money.  This is all supposed to be for shovel ready projects that are just waiting for that grant to go!  There's a statute with this money, right?  I'm sure there's another stipulation that an agency can't apply for money until it's put the prior to work...but the prior went to another agency, not JTA if I recall.

Yes, instead we'll spend a couple of hundred million on a 15-mile segment of the First Coast Expressway (formerly Outer Beltway) and SR 9B and be forever tied to the financially subsidizing responsibilities that will come with them. 

As for JTA and the Brooklyn extension, my advice would remain the same as it has been for the last few years.  Go "no-frills" and add a cheap at-grade station at that location.  You generate the same ridership for a fraction of the costs.  Yes, you may not be able to extend it to Forest Street but if the streetcar comes to fruition, you won't necessary have to do that anyway.

Now it's hard to take JTA's pitch seriously when the numbers they threw out defy logic in so many ways, and many of their numbers are clearly finger in the wind whole number guesses, but I don't think "no frills" is possible.  Of the $19.738mm cost of the project, only $6.4M appears to be for the station itself, and as you pointed out, if the Skyway were to ever be expanded down more length of Riverside, it would need to be elevated, requiring that $990K elevator for ADA compliance, and likely the bulk of costs that make the station more expensive than "no frills".  The remainder is for things like Command and Control ($5mm), track ($3.6mm), future vehicle maintenance ($1.2mm), guiderail ($3.3mm), etc.  So would an at-grade still require that $5mm Command and Control to align it into the system?  That defeats "no frills" right there.



Personally, I'm all for transit.  But JTA can't piggyback and talk about TOD with this project when 220 Riverside is already UC and the other apartments are already in the pipeline.  The Y is not TOD and the retail project is a strip center meant for going home vehicular traffic given that the bulk of its revenue will come from nat'l pharmacy and a nat'l grocer.  Speaking on behalf of the development side since I work for one, I can guarandamntee you that no developer there is banking on a skyway spur and they know that their apartment residents will still rely on cars, with or without the skyway.

Even if JTA were going for TOD, they'd need to do it on a more bang for the buck system.  Land use policy and transportation policy are not joined at the hip in any area or in any legal way in Jacksonville.  The feds would want to see a comprehensive plan and effort by multiple agencies, and likely a larger plan, like a streetcar or LRT line that goes through a prime blighted area that has been granted TIF status and re-zoned for density/infill with design criteria to make it a walkable area with an affordable housing component.  That's what the feds want to see before they throw money at transit.  Hasn't JTA learned by now?

Oh, as we're all on the same page...they're too busy building more roads to know or to care.

[JeffreyS]

Yes, instead we'll spend a couple of hundred million on a 15-mile segment of the First Coast Expressway (formerly Outer Beltway) and SR 9B and be forever tied to the financially subsidizing responsibilities that will come with them. 

As for JTA and the Brooklyn extension, my advice would remain the same as it has been for the last few years.  Go "no-frills" and add a cheap at-grade station at that location.  You generate the same ridership for a fraction of the costs.  Yes, you may not be able to extend it to Forest Street but if the streetcar comes to fruition, you won't necessary have to do that anyway.

I wasn't aware the Skyway was currently turning a profit

When did the government become a for profit enterprise? Now if you want to talk bang for the buck at least that is a reasonable conversation to have.

[FSBA]

Yes, instead we'll spend a couple of hundred million on a 15-mile segment of the First Coast Expressway (formerly Outer Beltway) and SR 9B and be forever tied to the financially subsidizing responsibilities that will come with them. 

As for JTA and the Brooklyn extension, my advice would remain the same as it has been for the last few years.  Go "no-frills" and add a cheap at-grade station at that location.  You generate the same ridership for a fraction of the costs.  Yes, you may not be able to extend it to Forest Street but if the streetcar comes to fruition, you won't necessary have to do that anyway.

I wasn't aware the Skyway was currently turning a profit

When did the government become a for profit enterprise?

It never has been. One reason I'm in favor of privatizing roads

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyPEgIDhj5s

[thelakelander]

We still would have lost.  We just got +$10 million in TIGER grant money two years ago.  I'm not sure that project has even broken ground yet.

1) I see plenty of metros there that have won money once or even more than once in the last few rounds, so I don't think that's necessarily stopping anyone.

2) Well if we haven't even broken ground on the last TIGER grant project that we won, of course the feds won't make the same mistake twice and give Jax money.  This is all supposed to be for shovel ready projects that are just waiting for that grant to go!  There's a statute with this money, right?  I'm sure there's another stipulation that an agency can't apply for money until it's put the prior to work...but the prior went to another agency, not JTA if I recall.

$9 billion worth of projects submitted for only $474 million total in TIGER V awards.  It's definitely a crap shoot that should not be counted on for funding local projects, IMO. 

Yes, instead we'll spend a couple of hundred million on a 15-mile segment of the First Coast Expressway (formerly Outer Beltway) and SR 9B and be forever tied to the financially subsidizing responsibilities that will come with them. 

As for JTA and the Brooklyn extension, my advice would remain the same as it has been for the last few years.  Go "no-frills" and add a cheap at-grade station at that location.  You generate the same ridership for a fraction of the costs.  Yes, you may not be able to extend it to Forest Street but if the streetcar comes to fruition, you won't necessary have to do that anyway.

Now it's hard to take JTA's pitch seriously when the numbers they threw out defy logic in so many ways, and many of their numbers are clearly finger in the wind whole number guesses, but I don't think "no frills" is possible.  Of the $19.738mm cost of the project, only $6.4M appears to be for the station itself, and as you pointed out, if the Skyway were to ever be expanded down more length of Riverside, it would need to be elevated, requiring that $990K elevator for ADA compliance, and likely the bulk of costs that make the station more expensive than "no frills".  The remainder is for things like Command and Control ($5mm), track ($3.6mm), future vehicle maintenance ($1.2mm), guiderail ($3.3mm), etc.  So would an at-grade still require that $5mm Command and Control to align it into the system?  That defeats "no frills" right there.

$5 million is significantly less than $20 million.  I'd consider the difference....."no-frills."  Also, assuming a streetcar line is eventually extended into Riverside from downtown, the need/validity for extending the Skyway to Forest goes away, IMO.  With that in mind, I'd be in favor of a much cheaper at-grade terminal station than the elevated station proposed.

Personally, I'm all for transit.  But JTA can't piggyback and talk about TOD with this project when 220 Riverside is already UC and the other apartments are already in the pipeline.  The Y is not TOD and the retail project is a strip center meant for going home vehicular traffic given that the bulk of its revenue will come from nat'l pharmacy and a nat'l grocer.  Speaking on behalf of the development side since I work for one, I can guarandamntee you that no developer there is banking on a skyway spur and they know that their apartment residents will still rely on cars, with or without the skyway.

Coordinating land use policy with transportation infrastructure is much larger than a single entity like JTA or attracting a development firm like the one you work for.  Several entities need to be involved when it comes to land use policy because it literally can reshape the built environment of the entire city. With that in mind, even the Skyway itself is an insignificant piece of the overall puzzle.  Nevertheless, it's a discussion and focus that's long overdue in Jacksonville.

Even if JTA were going for TOD, they'd need to do it on a more bang for the buck system.  Land use policy and transportation policy are not joined at the hip in any area or in any legal way in Jacksonville.  The feds would want to see a comprehensive plan and effort by multiple agencies, and likely a larger plan, like a streetcar or LRT line that goes through a prime blighted area that has been granted TIF status and re-zoned for density/infill with design criteria to make it a walkable area with an affordable housing component.  That's what the feds want to see before they throw money at transit.  Hasn't JTA learned by now?

I agree that the coordination of land use policy and transportation policy isn't exactly where it needs to be in Jacksonville.  I think JTA may understand the importance moreso than COJ, which has to be a willing partner and leader in the overall concept. The mobility plan/fee was setting up to swiftly move us in that direction but unfortunately much of that momentum died with the mayoral change a few years back.

[thelakelander]

It never has been. One reason I'm in favor of privatizing roads

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LyPEgIDhj5s

This has always made little sense to me.  Maybe you can answer the question that bothers me about such a concept.  Across the country and even in this region, most of our roads are local.  Why would a private entity want to assume ownership and financial responsibility for a road like Phoenix Avenue, Post Street or Arlington Road?  Quite frankly, if you have money to invest, there are a million more options out there that are available, which will result in a higher ROI.

[simms3]

[$5 million is significantly less than $20 million.  I'd consider the difference....."no-frills."  Also, assuming a streetcar line is eventually extended into Riverside from downtown, the need/validity for extending the Skyway to Forest goes away, IMO.  With that in mind, I'd be in favor of a much cheaper at-grade terminal station than the elevated station proposed.

The $5mm was simply to integrate the new station, elevated or at-grade.  $3.6mm for track (which would also be for at-grade).  Future vehicle maintenance ($1.2mm), also for at-grade.  Guiderail ($3.3mm), also for at-grade.  I don't think "no frills" for $1-2mm or even $5mm is possible given JTA's estimates for things that come with both elevated and at-grade.

Also, if we go streetcar, why spend money at all on this spur?  Can't we wait for the streetcar to come through with a station there?  God help us if they build a streetcar that requires an "almost there" end of line transfer to the Skyway to get into downtown.  That would be the stupidest idea ever.

[thelakelander]

Going at-grade should result in the reduction of cost for the track (you could also single track it for further savings) and guiderail.  Also, why would future vehicle maintenance be included?

Also, if we go streetcar, why spend money at all on this spur?  Can't we wait for the streetcar to come through with a station there?  God help us if they build a streetcar that requires an "almost there" end of line transfer to the Skyway to get into downtown.  That would be the stupidest idea ever.

Because, the way Jax is going, it could be years before a streetcar comes online and the Skyway is already there.  It's a short term multimodal option to utilize downtown's existing fixed circulator system to connect the Northbank and Southbank with complementing development in Brooklyn that's already adjacent to the Skyway's operations center.  Also, I notice that JTA owns land between McCoys Creek and the proposed Brooklyn Riverside development.  I wonder why it isn't being positioned as a potential infill development?  A land lease or something could potentially be beneficial to JTA and add more people to the cluster starting to develop in Brooklyn.

[Tacachale]

Also, if we go streetcar, why spend money at all on this spur?  Can't we wait for the streetcar to come through with a station there?  God help us if they build a streetcar that requires an "almost there" end of line transfer to the Skyway to get into downtown.  That would be the stupidest idea ever.

Because, the way Jax is going, it could be years before a streetcar comes online and the Skyway is already there.  It's a short term multimodal option to utilize downtown's existing fixed circulator system to connect the Northbank and Southbank with complementing development in Brooklyn that's already adjacent to the Skyway's operations center.  Also, I notice that JTA owns land between McCoys Creek and the proposed Brooklyn Riverside development.  I wonder why it isn't being positioned as a potential infill development?  A land lease or something could potentially be beneficial to JTA and add more people to the cluster starting to develop in Brooklyn.

There's also the fact that the Skyway track is already connecting the Skyway to Brooklyn. Though streetcar track would be cheaper, you'd still have to factor in that additional distance of track.

[thelakelander]

To be honest, the cost of streetcar track would probably be a non factor in comparison. For $16 million more, you could install enough streetcar track to connect Downtown to Five Points (3 miles of track).  The major difference is you'd also end up connecting the front door of every major destination between the Florida Theatre and Five Points. 

Costs are the Skyway's largest negative.  It costs more to extend, construct and maintain this type of system than nearly every commonly used fixed transit option out there.  That's why I probably wouldn't push for anything above "no-frills" solutions to improve its effectiveness.