Festival ‘Sparks’ Ridership Boom on Skyway

[Ocklawaha]

It's going to be quite interesting to see what JTA comes up with.

Expanding the skyway is a waste.  It would cost tens of millions just to get a few hundred, maybe a couple thousand more daily riders at most.

For not much more you can basically build a light rail/tram system to somewhere that will serve far more people and in general be far more useful.

Light-rail is going to cost about the same as a monorail expansion, the key being 'monorail' and not 'people mover.'  The Skyway is WAY overbuilt and could serve the city better if all future expansion were to follow a more traditional monorail model beamway. Questions of speed and per hour capacity are also addressed by taking a logical step toward system completion.

Expand the Skyway to Everbank Field and it could be like this every weekend. This is not to mention what it would be like all week with some expansion! It would also bring us one step closer to being a world class city! Come on JTA ... You can do it! (The Little Train that could - pun intended) :0)

That little rinky dink skyway is definitely not meant to handle football stadium crowds.  Holy smokes!  That would be an F'ing nightmare.  A full on heavy rail system has a hard enough time handling crowds of tens of thousands of fans, let alone this thing.  It would be deemed an immediate failure after just one game.  Can you imagine advertising "Park N Ride the Skyway" to the game, so that's what fans do?  And right off the bat there is a 2 hour wait to get over there as there is simply not enough car capacity and long headways and slow speeds...it would totally ruin the game day experience for thousands of fans.

I don't think that is what DJ was saying Simms.  The skyway could however be a nice addition to the current stadium transportation needs.  However as already stated, the money and will to do such an expansion is not there.  I know that it was really nice to be able to park and ride the rail during One Spark though.  Folks were loving it. 

It would be a horrible idea.  What's worse than implementing no idea/nothing?  Implementing a horrible idea.  Imagine you as a fan having gone through the Skyway debacle once...now after a season the thing in general is known as a debacle, but then media reports that ridership lines have drastically gone down, etc etc.  Then do you make the decision to risk it and Park N Ride in, when perhaps thousands of other fans are thinking the same thing?

A football stadium needs to empty 70-80,000 fans in an hour.  A heavy rail line (from experience using subway post-event in several cities with varying sizes of systems) will only put a dent in this crowd...and there will still be an insane crowd and push to get on a train.

Per the link below, a line on Jacksonville's Skyway has a maximum capacity of 3,600 per hour.
https://faculty.washington.edu/jbs/itrans/jack.htm

Now the standard heavy rail line has a capacity of 30,000 per hour (assuming 10 vehicles per train, 50 seats and a load factor of 2.0 where 50 sitters and 50 standers can fit in a train, so 1,000 passengers per train, with 30 vehicle sets per hour, which equates to 2 minute headways, which is only achieved on a few rail lines globally).  I can speak from experience that at 5 minute headways and peak rush hour crowding, individual heavy rail lines are still able to move this number.  This would imply a load factor of 4.0.  It happens.

The Skyway has one of the lowest capacities for all transit systems.  It should never be connected to an arena or a football stadium, and the math is definitely there to support the logic in avoiding crowding situations like those with barely survivable transit systems like the Skyway.

If you hold that the future Skyway follow the current operational and physical model then yes, it would fail and be a disaster running to the football stadium. Updated to modern monorail standards and the Skyway would be quite satisfactory. There is nothing in the current beamway and very little in the station structure that creates a 3,600 ppdph system, it's the trains themselves that limit our system. Our beam is actually wider then the Tokyo monorail system or the new monorail system in São Paulo (highest capacity in the world).

To achieve a heavy rail like capacity figure we would need to modify the stations by narrowing the platform areas and/or setting the beam further out. This work would be restricted to the station areas and the only other track adjustment needed appears to be under the west approach to the Acosta Bridge where there is a very tight clearance. It might turn out that shifting the entire system to a modern narrow beamway would be feasible.

Nowhere, in NYC, São Paulo or the proposed system in Rio de Janeiro, does a football stadium empty at 70,000 persons per hour all going to mass transit. To be realistic, you might get 10% to 20% of that in a few isolated markets but as a whole your probably going to get just over the typical transit, shuttle usage as there are only so many area's on a system as short as ours to park and ride. At 5% of 67,164 your only putting 3,358 passengers on the Skyway and even at 20% riding transit you've just 13,432 boarding the cars. You would have to attract 70% of everyone in Everbank Field just to approach the capacity of the new São Paulo systems hourly capability.

Where do those 70% come from? Jefferson Street, Jacksonville Terminal, Kings Avenue, put together are somewhere in the 7,000 parking spaces range and if you could fill them all to capacity you might get to the 20% of the entire stadium crowd figure, but I doubt it.

The Skyway should have NEVER been built but there was simply no turning the city away from the allusion of free money giving us a transit system reflective of Gotham. The most expensive part is over, we have the bents and panels, we have the stations and we have the control and maintenance facility. We actually did the right thing by converting the horizontal elevator of a people mover into true monorail, but then we continued to build both a people mover and a monorail trackbed.

At this point some modest extension of the Skyway makes sense along with a plan for streetcar, BRT, light-rail and limited commuter rail reaching out beyond the core, integrated into the Skyway system.  Brooklyn, San Marco @ Atlantic, UF, Farm Market/Woodstock and East Jacksonville are all viable targets provided we call it DONE. From these points the lower density makes sense to use surface transportation. In short, complete the system as a small high capacity capable  monorail at the lowest possible cost.

Arguments such as these are somewhat anti-productive as we get into mindsets of specific targets such as Everbank Field, focus these efforts on an East Jacksonville extension and the 365/7 possibilities are myriad.


Hitachi Monorail Types

Hitachi produces three sizes of monorail train:

    Small: About 46 persons per carriage. Maximum speed is 60 km/h. Minimum curve radius is 60m. Length of a 4-car train is 38 meters.
    Medium: About 95 persons per carriage. Maximum speed is 80 km/h. Minimum curve radius is 100m. Length of a 4-car train is 57 meters. These are the world's second largest monorails.
    Large: 110 persons per carriage. Maximum speed is 80 km/h. Minimum curve radius is 100m. Length of a 4-car train is 61 meters. These are the world's largest monorails.

Hitachi Monorail Capacity per Hour

The following is the capacity per hour per direction for eight carriage trains with three minute headway:

    Small: 7,360 passengers / hour / direction.
    Medium: 15,600 passengers / hour / direction. (Recommended for Australian Cities.)
    Large: 18,160 passengers / hour / direction.

(*Capacity figures above assume a maximum loading of four passengers per meter2)

Hitachi "Medium" Characteristics

    Length of a 4-car train is 57 meters.
    Width of the carriages is 2.98m compared to 2.650m for a D-Class Siemens tram or 2.92m for a V/Locity train.
    Capacity of about 110 persons per carriage (4 passengers / m2)
    Maximum operational speed is 80 km/h.
    Minimum curve radius is 100m.
    Rail is 1.4m high.
    Monorail Trains may have between two to eight carriages with a claimed minimum headway of 75 seconds.
    Flat floor, walk through layout
    Hitachi monorail trains can be between two to eight carriages long with a suggested headway of three minutes.
    Hitachi has been building monorails since 1962.
    Visit the Hitachi Rail web site for the full technical specifications of their monorail products.

Bombardier "Innovia" Characteristics

    Length of a 4-car train is 50.1 meters.
    Width of the carriages is 3.147m compared to 2.650m for a D-Class Siemens tram or 2.92m for a V/Locity train.
    Capacity of about 90 persons per carriage (4 passengers / m2)
    Maximum operational speed is 80 km/h.
    Minimum curve radius is only 46m.
    Rail is 1.22m high.
    Monorail Trains may have between two to eight carriages with a claimed minimum headway of 75 seconds.
    Flat floor, walk through layout
    Driverless operation is possible.
    Visit the Bombardier site for more information about bombardier's automated monorail 'Innovia 300' and also this


Scomi Monorail Characteristics

    Length of a 4-car train is 45.5 meters.
    Width of the carriages is 3.0m compared to 2.650m for a D-Class Siemens tram or 2.92m for a V/Locity train.
    Capacity of about 90 persons per carriage (4 passengers / m2)
    Maximum operational speed is 80 km/h.
    Minimum curve radius is 50m.
    Rail is 1.2m high.
    Monorail Trains may have between two to eight carriages with a claimed minimum headway of 75 seconds.
    Walk through layout, but not completely flat-floor.
    Visit the Scomi site for more information. See also the video of a four-carriage Scomi Monorail on their test track.


Here is a little video on the newer higher capacity monorails:
http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=65368766&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;show_title=0&amp;show_byline=0&amp;show_portrait=0&amp;color=&amp;fullscreen=1&amp;autoplay=true&amp;api=1&amp;player_id=vimeoPlayer"%20/><embed%20src="http://vimeo.com/moogaloop.swf?clip_id=65368766&amp;server=vimeo.com&amp;show_title=0&amp;show_byline=0&amp;show_portrait=0&amp;color=&amp;fullscreen=1&amp;autoplay=true&amp;api=1&amp;player_id=vimeoPlayer"%20type="application/x-shockwave-flash"%20allowfullscreen="true"%20allowscriptaccess=

[thelakelander]

I think you and Simms are in agreement.  If you're going to expand "the Skyway", whether it's monorail, LRT, streetcar or whatever, it would make sense into looking at some sort of retrofit/different rolling stock altogether over what's currently in operation. The question becomes is it worth working with the elevated structure already in place or abandoning it altogether and going with something that better fits into the surrounding urban context.

[Ocklawaha]

You know I'm onboard with with making sense out of the Skyway, originally it made ZERO sense except to starry eyed politico's with visions of 'Sears Towers', 'World Trade Centers' and 'Empire State Buildings,' dancing in their heads. Big mistake, BIG! HUGE!

I tend to lean toward leaving the current elevated line in place and end point terminals at ground level for simplicity. Short simple, slender beam monorail with new equipment reaching into the immediate surrounding urban neighborhoods. Full integrated with the balance of the system with some Surface Rail, Express Bus and BRT, complimenting a gridded network of regular city bus routes.

Once we properly address our transit and complete streets, the dreams of the Skyway's early promoters become more likely to someday happen.

[DjDonnyD]

Quote from: simms3 ----I don't think that is what DJ was saying Simms.  The skyway could however be a nice addition to the current stadium transportation needs.  However as already stated, the money and will to do such an expansion is not there.  I know that it was really nice to be able to park and ride the rail during One Spark though.  Folks were loving it. 

Hey Simms3 --- Thanks! That is just what I ment. I'm not saying lets put everybody on the Skyway every Sunday. I know that would never happen. We all love our cars to much for that and Jax is way to spread out for that. I know when i was a kid in jax in the San Marco area they bragged that someday the skyway would make is easier to get around downtown. It is nice to finally see the thing getting some real use.

And to your point of it only being used on Sundays for games.... Well almost every weekend or every week there is something going on down in that area. The Jags, The Suns, The Fair, The Horse shows, Concerts and so on.... what sooo wrong finally making use of this system? I know we will most likely never see anything else happen with the Skyway. I was just saying..... Sorry if I upset anyone.... That was not my intent... Thanks for listening and Thanks again Simms!   

[jaxjaguar]

^exactly... I don't know why everyone assumes people would only use the skyway for the Jags games. There are constantly events going on at the arena, fairgrounds, baseball grounds, metro park, etc. An extension to this area would only help with traffic, planning, and space. It would allow for events to essentially close down that entire area (think blues fest on steriods)

[simms3]

How many of you pro-Skyway people are current transit riders?  This AM I took a bus to an underground light rail station then took that into a meeting.  Then hopped on a streetcar to slide down Market to work.  I take heavy rail to sports games.  We are all sad to hear the Warriors go to Mission Bay, which is only served by light rail.  Fans here no that nothing short of heavy rail is going to get people to and from games.  There is theory, there is impractical vision born out of isolation (ie being in Jax), then there is wisdom through experience.  The Skyway is a turd that should be abandoned.

[Tacachale]

Brilliant idea, abandon functional infrastructure funded by money we'd have to pay back.

[jaxjaguar]

Brilliant idea, abandon functional infrastructure funded by money we'd have to pay back.

^amen... Something else no one seems to understand. If we tear it down or stop using it, we have to pay back the money the federal government spent to build it in the first place.

[simms3]

My wording was poor.  But why try to save a sinking ship?  Why double down on an obsolete concept?  Why use a dated business model?  Why invest more in the Skyway?  Use what we have, sure, but don't expand it!  Why tie ourselves down more to federal financing obligations by using federal dollars to expand or "vastly improve" the Skyway?  The city/JTA should come up with a comprehensive, feasible plan for superior transit infrastructure that is cost effective.  Vastly improving the bus system using fewer dollars than expanding the Skyway by 1 station and a quarter mile of track will be more useful to more people and potentially have further reaching effects.

Brooklyn isn't developing because there is transit there.  TOD is a moot point as the chicken came before the egg.  We can't have all this stuff built through private means using the concepts of supply and demand, then build some instigating effect and say that transit was a causation and that Brooklyn developments are TOD.  Not how it works.  Build an effective transit system as the egg, and then the chicken will hatch in the form of real TOD, born out of demand increased through market reactive agents (transit).

[tufsu1]

We are all sad to hear the Warriors go to Mission Bay, which is only served by light rail. 

and don't forget the Niners leaving for a city more than 1 hour away!

[simms3]

^^^Well that's a totally separate issue.  Where the Niners were (Candlestick Point) is going to be turned into mass planned high rise market rate and affordable residential, and a mix of commercial and institutional uses (Vancouver style planning), which is desperately needed in the city far more than a football stadium and surrounding surface lots.  Many cities have been shipping their NFL teams out to suburban areas.

However, an arena and a ballpark are a different story and done appropriately can really become a catalyst for a specific type of mass redevelopment.  So the Warriors' move into SF is seen as a plus for the city overall.  And Oakland is trying to see how it can partner with the A's and community redevelopment agencies to do something similar over there.

However, those of us who take public transit to games (not as common for football, but predominant for arena or ballpark events) are wary of logistics.  Even lay people (myself included) know the limitations of the various types of transit for specific purposes, and we know this through practical everyday application, not through studies, classes, internet boards, or hypothetical wishing.  Nothing worse than a highly necessary, but impractical transit system.  Tying transit into event usage is tricky, but must be done carefully and wisely.  If we are deathly afraid of the end result of tying the country's 2nd most heavily used LRT system to a 20,000 seat arena here in SF, you can imagine where I come from at the thought of tying a rinky dink people mover system to a 75,000 seat football stadium.  LoL

[ProjectMaximus]

What is the capacity of water taxis and bike taxis delivering people to the stadium area? Should they not function if they can't handle a certain minimum load?

I usually either completely agree or completely disagree with you Simms, but as polarizing as your views might be, on this one I'm in between. I agree with part of your conclusion though the logic you use to get there is contradictory. You argue against extension because there won't be enough usage and at the same time say that the system won't be able to handle the number of potential riders. You built an argument that Jax transit riders can't compare to SF riders and then you use SF as a comparison to make your point. It doesn't make sense, at least to me.

As for expansion, at the present time it seems like the only ones that would ever make sense are into Brooklyn to connect to a future streetcar system in Riverside and over the FEC tracks to get to San Marco Square and connect to future commuter rail on the SE corridor. I could also imagine a logical extension farther down Bay Street that might connect to another streetcar system to the Stadium and Eastside.

[Cheshire Cat]

What is the capacity of water taxis and bike taxis delivering people to the stadium area? Should they not function if they can't handle a certain minimum load?

I usually either completely agree or completely disagree with you Simms, but as polarizing as your views might be, on this one I'm in between. I agree with part of your conclusion though the logic you use to get there is contradictory. You argue against extension because there won't be enough usage and at the same time say that the system won't be able to handle the number of potential riders. You built an argument that Jax transit riders can't compare to SF riders and then you use SF as a comparison to make your point. It doesn't make sense, at least to me.

As for expansion, at the present time it seems like the only ones that would ever make sense are into Brooklyn to connect to a future streetcar system in Riverside and over the FEC tracks to get to San Marco Square and connect to future commuter rail on the SE corridor. I could also imagine a logical extension farther down Bay Street that might connect to another streetcar system to the Stadium and Eastside.

There are several ways the connectivity to the skyway can be improved.  You have hit on a few here.  There are certainly ways to improve usage and we need to focus on those because as has been stated several times already, this is a project that the city cannot simply walk away from.  All the expended money would have to be repaid and that idea is a non starter. 

[simms3]

What is the capacity of water taxis and bike taxis delivering people to the stadium area? Should they not function if they can't handle a certain minimum load?

I usually either completely agree or completely disagree with you Simms, but as polarizing as your views might be, on this one I'm in between. I agree with part of your conclusion though the logic you use to get there is contradictory. You argue against extension because there won't be enough usage and at the same time say that the system won't be able to handle the number of potential riders. You built an argument that Jax transit riders can't compare to SF riders and then you use SF as a comparison to make your point. It doesn't make sense, at least to me.

As for expansion, at the present time it seems like the only ones that would ever make sense are into Brooklyn to connect to a future streetcar system in Riverside and over the FEC tracks to get to San Marco Square and connect to future commuter rail on the SE corridor. I could also imagine a logical extension farther down Bay Street that might connect to another streetcar system to the Stadium and Eastside.

^^^But this is where practicality is an issue as well.  I have always been super opposed to tying a streetcar system into the Skyway system, so that there is an "easy" transfer for riders looking to complete the leg into downtown.  As anyone who rides transit outside of European cities and NYC/DC knows, transfers suck.

Given the nature of the Skyway, its route and technology, upgrades that improve headways at individual stations are pretty unlikely.  So the wait alone while you transfer from one mode to another will be enough to dissuade the general public from consistent use.  But that's not all...you're talking two above ground systems in FL.  There's a constant threat of rain and extreme heat.  Having to walk in that because the city decided to force a transfer unnecessarily will not make the potential rider base happy after a couple of unpleasant experiences.

It is of my opinion, born of experience now being carless and captive to transit, that the fewer transfers between systems the better, the more protected the system in inhospitable climates the better, and the faster and more reliable the system the better.

The other big problem with systems that cannot handle capacity is delays.  I've used two light rail lines, one very extensively, that are basically at capacity.  Delays must be factored into commute times as people crowd the cars, the doors can't shut, and general chaos ensues.  This is a fear locally here that already crowded 2-car MUNI LRT trains will be an absolute clusterf**k for arena events, and this is a well founded fear.

Maybe the Skyway goes to the Stadium and puts an unnoticeable dent in fan disbursement, but to a much earlier point of mine, it will be chaos.  What was supposed to be 8 minute headways (moving a few hundred fans out of 70,000 every 8 minutes or so) will easily turn into 10 minute headways as people try to jam on and cause delays.  This will be inevitable.  It's inevitable even with heavy rail, however, advanced heavy rail systems include massively long cars and short headways that are adaptable for special events much moreso than other forms of fixed transit.

My wishes are for the city to develop an appropriate fixed rail system along a corridor that can support higher density and new development, and for this system to go from a clear Point A directly into downtown as an initial Point B, and perhaps through downtown to another side as a Point C.  Forget the Skyway as a black box to sink more money into.

I'm even a little wishy on doing streetcar into Avondale, but mainly because I don't foresee any development opportunities there or any political will to demolish a few "historic" homes to be replaced by higher density mixed-use apartments.  But Springfield and San Marco (a north-south corridor) could potentially be fantastic.  Shands is a superb endpoint destination as is San Marco Square.  So long as higher density is encouraged.

[Ocklawaha]

^^^But this is where practicality is an issue as well.  I have always been super opposed to tying a streetcar system into the Skyway system, so that there is an "easy" transfer for riders looking to complete the leg into downtown.  As anyone who rides transit outside of European cities and NYC/DC knows, transfers suck.

Simms you are like a drama looking for a movie whenever you launch on the 'isolated (and thus ignorant) Jacksonville theme,' that permeates your posts. I would venture to say that just among those who are currently posting in this thread there are those with much more travel, world city, urban and transportation experiences. This is not to say your opinion isn't welcome, in fact the questions you pose are often raised by those outside of the industry as well as among the general public.

The major point that we all seem to agree on is that Jacksonville has lost it's will to lead to the point where you and many others seem to think it is incapable of ever revisiting it's once held regional greatness. We might never capture Atlanta's numbers but we can design the airports Atlanta flies out of. We might not have Orlando's entertainment industry, but we can sell them every napkin, shower curtain and drinking glass they use. Port Tampa carry's far more tonnage then we do but they can't off load the containers of pens they ink their contracts with. We don't smell like Bellingrath Gardens, but we manufacture the oil in the perfumes on the neck of every Belle in the place. Jacksonville isn't out of this game by a long shot and those that have answers need to step up and be counted, loud and clear.  (End of tirade  )

Given the nature of the Skyway, its route and technology, upgrades that improve headways at individual stations are pretty unlikely.

Overcome the will to move forward and the above statement is groundless, there are many ways to fix a ill planned rail system. We could streamline the whole operation with the addition of a single track switch realignment just west of Central Station. Automatic Train Control (ATC), additional and MODERN cars would go far to reshape the Skyway.


So the wait alone while you transfer from one mode to another will be enough to dissuade the general public from consistent use.

The key in downtown and in San Marco and above UF Hospital is called 'SEAMLESS CONNECTIONS' with the ATC and additional cars there shouldn't be any wait at the station for the portion of the load that is transferring. No one is suggesting that we force everyone to get off a streetcar or BRT in Brooklyn, and drive them onto the Skyway. A streetcar coming in from Brooklyn can easily head straight up Water/Independence to the Hyatt, before turning north on Newnan. A transfer station at both Brooklyn and Newnan would allow for a seamless transfer to Skyway, a ground level station at UF and San Marco, would allow seamless movement between commuter rail/light rail and Skyway. 

But that's not all...you're talking two above ground systems in FL.  There's a constant threat of rain and extreme heat.  Having to walk in that because the city decided to force a transfer unnecessarily will not make the potential rider base happy after a couple of unpleasant experiences.

Not highly likely you'd build a subway in Florida - though Jacksonville once had a very short segment known as 'The Subway.' Light rail works just fine in Minneapolis, Seattle, Cleveland, Boston and many other cites with weather far more damaging then what you've just described. This point is a non issue.

It is of my opinion, born of experience now being carless and captive to transit, that the fewer transfers between systems the better, the more protected the system in inhospitable climates the better, and the faster and more reliable the system the better.

No argument here, a single transfer is quite the world norm.

The other big problem with systems that cannot handle capacity is delays.  I've used two light rail lines, one very extensively, that are basically at capacity.  Delays must be factored into commute times as people crowd the cars, the doors can't shut, and general chaos ensues.  This is a fear locally here that already crowded 2-car MUNI LRT trains will be an absolute clusterf**k for arena events, and this is a well founded fear.

Maybe the Skyway goes to the Stadium and puts an unnoticeable dent in fan disbursement, but to a much earlier point of mine, it will be chaos.  What was supposed to be 8 minute headways (moving a few hundred fans out of 70,000 every 8 minutes or so) will easily turn into 10 minute headways as people try to jam on and cause delays.  This will be inevitable.  It's inevitable even with heavy rail, however, advanced heavy rail systems include massively long cars and short headways that are adaptable for special events much moreso than other forms of fixed transit.

Same technology, different day, Disney's monorail regular ally carries 157,000 passengers a day, and the Chongqing Rail Transit in Chongqing, China holds the record for the world's busiest monorail system with over 500,000 riders per day on average on Line 3 alone... So capacity if the system were properly rebuilt isn't our problem. Likewise light-rail can be entrained so 4 units @ 175-220 persons each? How about 8 units? Running on five minute headways for special events using all doors and remote parking facilities. 21,000+ in an hour. A four car Innovia Monorail running in 75 second headways would be able to move 24,000+ in an hour... Carriage width on any of the 4 major monorail products carriages is right at 3m+ with a couple even wider, compared to 2.650m for a D-Class Siemens tram or 2.92m for a V/Locity train ABOVE THE STREETS. It's all rather silly anyway as the locals have the highest praise for the JTA stadium shuttles and they handle no where near this load. 

My wishes are for the city to develop an appropriate fixed rail system along a corridor that can support higher density and new development, and for this system to go from a clear Point A directly into downtown as an initial Point B, and perhaps through downtown to another side as a Point C.  Forget the Skyway as a black box to sink more money into.

Which is exactly what I've been proposing for 34 years. Streetcar runs to Fairfax/Roosevelt Plaza area via Riverside-Avondale, along both Water/Independence and Duval/Monroe through downtown east-west, then north to Gateway via the old F&J (my story on 'The Electric 7'). A second streetcar route would run from Riverside @ Forrest over to Myrtle, up Myrtle THROUGH THE SUBWAY and into JTA property skirting west Durkeeville, then hooking back east on the old 'S' line to the Gateway route @ Springfield Rail Yard, this line could then continue along the CSX right-of-way (which should be city owned) to Airport Road. Both northerly S and 7 Streetcars would operate as limited stop, exclusive right-of-way rapid streetcar.

Skyway reaches UF via Springfield Park (buffer areas), San Marco @ Atlantic, Arena/East Side @ Randolph, Brooklyn @ Forrest and possibly the Farmers Market/Woodstock Park.

Add Commuter Rail (DMU/RDC) south to Green Cove Springs along the A line and St. Augustine along the FEC RY.

Highway 21/Park, Post, Cassat, Normandy, Pearl-Lem Turner,  Beach and San Jose would have basic to bronze level BRT. Arlington Expressway, Southside, JTB and a short piece of 95 South would have Silver level BRT.  Result? Comprehensive, go anywhere transit, connected by a fleet of city buses... including urban electrics.

I'm even a little wishy on doing streetcar into Avondale, but mainly because I don't foresee any development opportunities there or any political will to demolish a few "historic" homes to be replaced by higher density mixed-use apartments.  But Springfield and San Marco (a north-south corridor) could potentially be fantastic.  Shands is a superb endpoint destination as is San Marco Square.  So long as higher density is encouraged.

As you see above, I'd pass through Avondale, restoring the community to its roots. The corner of Ingle and St. Johns BTW tells it all... Ingle was the President of the Jacksonville Traction Company. The development of mid rise condos would take off around the Roosevelt Plaza neighborhoods. Shands is now UF and it would be (a block north at the old S LINE) a mini-hub for streetcar, skyway, BRT and city bus routes.