'What We Have Here Is A Failure To Communicate'

[AaroniusLives]

And seriously...DC's streetcars have been a money suck, resource suck disaster.. Nobody with any degree of intelligence or self respect should hold up the DC Streetcar as anything but an example of how NOT to implement a transit program. Bowser saying she would "reevaluate the entire project" is code for "quietly shut this nonsense down." And this is in a city where gondola transportation is seriously being considered!

[thelakelander]

My point is that there are plenty of places that have found success with BRT, plenty of "leading cities" from Chicago to DC to Paris and beyond that have found success with BRT,

I hate to get into BRT vs streetcar arguments because we really shouldn't be playing transit modes against each other.  All work in certain situations and should be a mode of choice, dependent on the context a corridor serves and the end goal of each individual community.  If your primary goal is to stimulate economic development, without a doubt, fixed transit is your better solution....streetcar, LRT, whatever.... If your primary goal is to provide reliable mass transit for an affordable price and stimulating economic development is a secondary goal, then BRT-lite is your solution.

and that while a streetcar in mixed traffic may spur economic development, it doesn't exactly function as a transit solution. (Tampa's slow moving, noisy "historical" and poorly used mess of a streetcar could be the poster child for this paradigm. "Look! I went a distance I could easily walk, and I'm uncomfortable! Just like the old days.")

Tampa's streetcar has spurred over $2 billion in TOD. However, it's a tourist train and is operated like one.  It doesn't serve the local population and barely penetrates DT Tampa. Furthermore, service doesn't start to 11am, so that should tell us just about all we need to know about it.  With that said, since it's not operated as a true local transit solution, we probably shouldn't damn it for not effectively serving as a local transit solution.

If anything, Metrojacksonville should focus on getting Jax's Diet NotBRT to have exclusive ROW, either now or as a second phase. And to not miss that boat.

We actually successfully stopped this from being a true dedicated BRT project about 8 years ago.  That would have cost taxpayers $1 billion and still would not have provided access to areas of town that happen to be growing now.  I actually feel better about what's proposed now than what was attempted in the past. Neither will result in TOD but the current option does provide us with 4 major reliable bus routes with decent headways, for significantly less. We probably shouldn't call it BRT because its really BRT-lite, but it's an improvement over what we have today and rail isn't really a viable option for the selected routes anyway.

As for the Healthline not driving development, we're going to agree to disagree. The existing medical centers and colleges could have very well created car oriented development. Or none at all, considering that it's Cleveland and not exactly growing. And that its in a downtown with existing assets doesn't and shouldn't detract from clever, smart and working transit policies as it relates to BRT.

The problem here is that the corridor has always been dense and somewhat transit friendly. The heavy rail system serving it has been operating since 1955 (1920 if you count the interurban line before it). The new BRT line only compliments density that was already in place. 

That's a completely different animal from JTA running a bus down Philips Highway and expecting similar results. Doesn't matter if they dedicate a lane to buses or not. The existing context is apples and oranges. Philips is suburban and littered with warehouses, mobile homes and strip clubs.  On the other hand, the Health Line was built on a former streetcar corridor already anchored by DT Cleveland, Cleveland State University, Case Western Reserve University, Cleveland Clinic, University Hospital, Little Italy, etc. Everything I've named was built in a walkable manner decades before the Health Line was dreamed of.  Now what I really like about the Health Line is that it's moreso a context sensitive streets project than specifically BRT. They spent a pretty penny (+$25 million/mile) but Euclid was completely rebuild to include dedicated bus lanes, medians, pedestrian refuges, bike lanes, wider sidewalks, landscaping, new lighting, fiber optics, etc. In other words, an aging blighted thoroughfare was transformed into a new "grand bouelvard" that also happens to have great reliable bus service with a few extra stops between the three heavy rail stations along the corridor.

We can agree to disagree on whether University Hospital built their new cancer center on their medical campus only because of BRT, but we can't debate if the major activity centers were already present or not.  That's fact.

If we want BRT in Jax to deliver what is happening in Cleveland, expect to drop over $25 million/mile and select to upgrade a corridor that's already transit friendly with a number of urbanized walkable nodes already in place.

I do agree that they over promise, but c'mon. Doesn't every transit agency over promise? Wasnt the SkyWay supposed to be a gateway to our Epcot dreams?

Yes, but that doesn't make it right.  We're still trying to overcome the wild projections of the Skyway from a few decades back.  Lying about what a transit project can deliver only hurts future transit investment due to the previous investment being seen as a failure when it doesn't live up to unachievable expectations.

Where we've gone off the rails, as it were, is in using transit in non-exclusive lanes as a tool for real estate development, versus as a long term, effective way to move people quickly that also tends to spur real estate development. We're putting the cart before the horse and then buying a house cat to drag it.

This depends on a community's long term goals.  If you want a walkable city, you modify your land use and invest in the type of transit system that breeds the desired type of environment. I think we've gone off the horse by focusing too much on the details of various transit modes instead of spending the necessary time to identify what type of environment we really want to be.  The desired environment should be the thing that drives the land use policy and specific transit solution best suited to help us make the dream a reality.

[AaroniusLives]

Tampa's streetcar has spurred over $2 billion in TOD. However, it's a tourist train and is operated like one.  It doesn't serve the local population and barely penetrates DT Tampa. Furthermore, service doesn't start to 11am, so that should tell us just about all we need to know about it.  With that said, since it's not operated as a true local transit solution, we probably shouldn't damn it for not effectively serving as a local transit solution.

Then you shouldn't praise it, either. It's listed at the top of the article as an example of streetcar superiority. TOD is great, but is it really "transit oriented development" if, as in the case of the TECO streetcar, only 600 people get on the thing we shouldn't damn, as noted by this very site? Or, to put this another way, this streetcar which spurred economic development from Ybor to Harbor Island, actually carries next to none of them. So, really, that's a development plan selling a lifestyle versus a transit reality. All those condo dwellers are driving to Publix, and clearly a majority of tourists are bypassing the pretty, atmospheric choo-choo for actual transit, most likely of the car variety.

Heck, even Miami's Metrorail has spurred a ton of TOD along its US1 stretch, but those condo dwellers and tourists are driving to Publix, too. Seriously, 73,000 people per weekday is PATHETIC, and in the 22 years since I stopped taking it to high school, they've only added 8,000 ish riders? And that's with all that snazzy TOD?

This depends on a community's long term goals.  If you want a walkable city, you modify your land use and invest in the type of transit system that breeds the desired type of environment. I think we've gone off the horse by focusing too much on the details of various transit modes instead of spending the necessary time to identify what type of environment we really want to be.  The desired environment should be the thing that drives the land use policy and specific transit solution best suited to help us make the dream a reality.

Agreed...to a point. I think, in this day and age, where most of the country has either been rebuilt for the car or purpose built for the car, the goal for a mass transit system has to be comprehensive coverage. Unfortunately, you have to convince people that they can get from point A to point B in a time frame approximating a car ride (but obviously not beating it, unless you're in true mess of traffic,) and demonstrate the time/savings benefits. (DC's Metro is currently having the 'holy heck, it's wicked expensive and thus people would rather sit in traffic" issue. I don't but my job subsidies my fare.)

If you can get exclusive ROW and the mode happens to be BRT...and at the relative bargain of $25-$30 million per mile...and you get gorgeous boulevards out of the deal, that's not too shabby. And if you start with 40 miles, you're much further along than you would be otherwise.

Jacksonville's old BRT plan was a mess. The "central elevated lanes in the highway" thing was bonkers (and indeed, it was your takedown of that plan that attracted me to this site.) Where I think your site and the region made a mistake was in not working to make that plan better and more feasible, versus getting it trounced for rail that's not forthcoming. But, that's just an opinion, and I don't live there. If you're dead set on the superiority of rail, then go for it.

I just dislike distortion of any kind, and to present the cancelled Arlington streetcar and the curtailed DC Streetcar in your laundry list as "examples of streetcar success" is distortion. To present the TECO line as anything but a vanity train adding atmosphere but little actual transit is distortion. To present a Grand Rapids streetcar project that has yet to be built or funded, outside of the context of Grand Rapids recently launched BRT system being a leading reason why the Center for Transportation Excellence is holding their next conference in "the learning laboratory for leaders around the country" is distortion. I'm pretty sure you can find other examples of that, for example:
In Kansas City, which is still building its first streetcar segment, voters have overwhelmingly rejected a plan to extend it. 
In August, San Antonio's city and county leaders pulled financial support from their streetcar plan.
It's fine to list the systems, but list the obstacles, the challenges, the failures. Otherwise you're just as bad as the transit agencies over promising. Inform, debate, retort. Don't distort.

[I-10east]

^^^Excellent post!!! Straight down the middle with no bias.

[thelakelander]

Tampa's streetcar has spurred over $2 billion in TOD. However, it's a tourist train and is operated like one.  It doesn't serve the local population and barely penetrates DT Tampa. Furthermore, service doesn't start to 11am, so that should tell us just about all we need to know about it.  With that said, since it's not operated as a true local transit solution, we probably shouldn't damn it for not effectively serving as a local transit solution.

Then you shouldn't praise it, either. It's listed at the top of the article as an example of streetcar superiority. TOD is great, but is it really "transit oriented development" if, as in the case of the TECO streetcar, only 600 people get on the thing we shouldn't damn, as noted by this very site? Or, to put this another way, this streetcar which spurred economic development from Ybor to Harbor Island, actually carries next to none of them. So, really, that's a development plan selling a lifestyle versus a transit reality. All those condo dwellers are driving to Publix, and clearly a majority of tourists are bypassing the pretty, atmospheric choo-choo for actual transit, most likely of the car variety.

Heck, even Miami's Metrorail has spurred a ton of TOD along its US1 stretch, but those condo dwellers and tourists are driving to Publix, too. Seriously, 73,000 people per weekday is PATHETIC, and in the 22 years since I stopped taking it to high school, they've only added 8,000 ish riders? And that's with all that snazzy TOD?

To be clear, I didn't write the article. Ocklawaha did.

[thelakelander]

Agreed...to a point. I think, in this day and age, where most of the country has either been rebuilt for the car or purpose built for the car, the goal for a mass transit system has to be comprehensive coverage.

I agree, but we're talking about two different things. Comprehensive coverage means there is no one size fits all solution out there. Some corridors BRT may work best, others perhaps streetcar, LRT, or community shuttles.  Your existing context and desired land use goals should help drive this more than anything else.

Unfortunately, you have to convince people that they can get from point A to point B in a time frame approximating a car ride (but obviously not beating it, unless you're in true mess of traffic,) and demonstrate the time/savings benefits. (DC's Metro is currently having the 'holy heck, it's wicked expensive and thus people would rather sit in traffic" issue. I don't but my job subsidies my fare.)

Even in NYC, the majority of the MSA drives. You don't have to "convince" people unless you believe that's your desired end goal...and if you do, you're setting yourself up for a losing battle.  You develop your land use in a supportive way that creates an environment where mass transit is a reliable alternative. At the end of the day, you're giving your community viable choices.  When true vibrancy is reached, most will walk anyway.

If you can get exclusive ROW and the mode happens to be BRT...and at the relative bargain of $25-$30 million per mile...and you get gorgeous boulevards out of the deal, that's not too shabby. And if you start with 40 miles, you're much further along than you would be otherwise.

It all depends. No need to have exclusive ROW if you don't need it.  In Jax's case, the selected BRT routes aren't congested. Taking lanes off streets like Philips and Blanding for a bus to run every 15 minutes in suburbia (where the land uses aren't compatible for mass transit) would be a waste of money.

Jacksonville's old BRT plan was a mess. The "central elevated lanes in the highway" thing was bonkers (and indeed, it was your takedown of that plan that attracted me to this site.) Where I think your site and the region made a mistake was in not working to make that plan better and more feasible, versus getting it trounced for rail that's not forthcoming. But, that's just an opinion, and I don't live there. If you're dead set on the superiority of rail, then go for it.

It didn't get trounced for rail. It got modified into something more realistic that now stretches to the beach as opposed to something that only reached Gateway and Regency Malls originally. I count that as a success.

I just dislike distortion of any kind, and to present the cancelled Arlington streetcar and the curtailed DC Streetcar in your laundry list as "examples of streetcar success" is distortion. To present the TECO line as anything but a vanity train adding atmosphere but little actual transit is distortion. To present a Grand Rapids streetcar project that has yet to be built or funded, outside of the context of Grand Rapids recently launched BRT system being a leading reason why the Center for Transportation Excellence is holding their next conference in "the learning laboratory for leaders around the country" is distortion. I'm pretty sure you can find other examples of that, for example:
In Kansas City, which is still building its first streetcar segment, voters have overwhelmingly rejected a plan to extend it. 
In August, San Antonio's city and county leaders pulled financial support from their streetcar plan.
It's fine to list the systems, but list the obstacles, the challenges, the failures. Otherwise you're just as bad as the transit agencies over promising. Inform, debate, retort. Don't distort.

You'll have to talk with Ock about that one.  I didn't write this particular article and I don't necessarily agree with everything in it.

[AaroniusLives]

I agree, but we're talking about two different things. Comprehensive coverage means there is no one size fits all solution out there. Some corridors BRT may work best, others perhaps streetcar, LRT, or community shuttles.  Your existing context and desired land use goals should help drive this more than anything else.

And I don't agree with this in a cynical world, as in your environment you're swimming upstream against a dearth of effective transit, a physical environment defined by automobile travel, and a public aversion to mass transit. You need to get as much of the premium transit as you possibly can for the best cost to investment ratio to launch the largest, most comprehensive system at once, and thus demonstrate comprehensive coverage. If that's LRT or BRT or gondola, get as much as you can and build as much as you can.

I am not a big supporter of incremental transit improvements, as they don't demonstrate comprehensive coverage, can easily be just that: a one time improvement that never gets expanded again (ahem...SkyWay,) and don't offer a method to get as many people possible connected to the transit system at once. To use the $25 million a mile for Cleveland's BRT, that's 40 miles of a system for your $1 billion.

Up here, Montgomery County is putting together what will probably be the country's most comprehensive BRT system...but they are making the mistake of building it one corridor at a time, which doesn't get coverage and gives your opponents more time and more opportunity to NOT build out a comprehensive coverage transit system.

Even in NYC, the majority of the MSA drives. You don't have to "convince" people unless you believe that's your desired end goal...and if you do, you're setting yourself up for a losing battle.  You develop your land use in a supportive way that creates an environment where mass transit is a reliable alternative. At the end of the day, you're giving your community viable choices.  When true vibrancy is reached, most will walk anyway.

Yes, but we are talking about an enormous MSA here, and we are talking about a MSA with comprehensive coverage for those that move from an environment where they drive to one where they walk...easily. It's easy for the soccer mom to get on a commuter rail when she needs to. We're also talking about a MSA that is looking at BRT because rail is too expensive.

To your point, however, NYC's MSA features all forms of transit that work together comprehensively. To mine, Jacksonville doesn't even have the backbone, the canvas to base that multiple mode upon, whereas NYC has the subway, Washington has the Metro, etc. If you can get as large as backbone up at once, do it, do it, do it. And to be fair, this isn't exclusive to Jax. Pretty much everywhere in America has crap transit that doesn't remotely offer comprehensive coverage.

It all depends. No need to have exclusive ROW if you don't need it.  In Jax's case, the selected BRT routes aren't congested. Taking lanes off streets like Philips and Blanding for a bus to run every 15 minutes in suburbia (where the land uses aren't compatible for mass transit) would be a waste of money.

I don't agree with either side of this statement. In the first place, why run an upgraded bus route on a not congested route? In the next, offering suburbia a way to connect to transit and to begin the retrofit of the land use is the best move you could make.

And my point on distortion still stands...as a general, royal "we" referring to the site and the content it chooses to present. One loses credibility via distortion, and especially if one is not coming at the issue from a place of dominance. To put this another way, MetroJacksonville could have chosen to foster an interesting conversation on the place of streetcars in metro areas, how and where and why they work and don't, instead of offering a distorted perspective.

[thelakelander]

I agree, but we're talking about two different things. Comprehensive coverage means there is no one size fits all solution out there. Some corridors BRT may work best, others perhaps streetcar, LRT, or community shuttles.  Your existing context and desired land use goals should help drive this more than anything else.

And I don't agree with this in a cynical world, as in your environment you're swimming upstream against a dearth of effective transit, a physical environment defined by automobile travel, and a public aversion to mass transit. You need to get as much of the premium transit as you possibly can for the best cost to investment ratio to launch the largest, most comprehensive system at once, and thus demonstrate comprehensive coverage. If that's LRT or BRT or gondola, get as much as you can and build as much as you can.

Regardless of length, it needs to be efficient and successful in achieving whatever goals the community has established. In the world we live in our context and finances will limit us. When I look at Jax, it's a 30 square mile city built by streetcar, surrounded by 770 square miles of low density suburbs. Houston's METRO is a great example. The initial segment was only 7.5 miles in length but effectively linked two major urban core destinations. High ridership has resulted in additional expansions. San Diego and Salt Lake City offer similar examples of successful mass transit implementation in the Sunbelt.

I am not a big supporter of incremental transit improvements, as they don't demonstrate comprehensive coverage, can easily be just that: a one time improvement that never gets expanded again (ahem...SkyWay,) and don't offer a method to get as many people possible connected to the transit system at once.

The Skyway would be a bad example of incremental implementation. LRT systems in Salt Lake City, San Diego, Houston and BRT in Cleveland and Kansas City would be good examples of incremental implementation. Working in transportation planning, I'll tell you our reality is incremental transportation improvements, due to the nature of our available funding mechanisms. I'm not aware of any place in the US that built their comprehensive system all at once. 

To use the $25 million a mile for Cleveland's BRT, that's 40 miles of a system for your $1 billion.

If we had $25 million/mile to spend on transit, I wouldn't waste it on 40 miles of BRT in Jax.  We don't need that type of coverage, given the local population, density and land development patterns.  We'd be better off creating a well connected, comprehensive transit network in areas that can support it with existing context, destinations, and supportive land use policies. You'd have to evaluate various environments on their own merit but at the end of the day, you'd probably end up with a mix of Skyway, BRT, streetcar, transit systems, better local bus routes, etc.

Up here, Montgomery County is putting together what will probably be the country's most comprehensive BRT system...but they are making the mistake of building it one corridor at a time, which doesn't get coverage and gives your opponents more time and more opportunity to NOT build out a comprehensive coverage transit system.

You could very well be right. I'm not familiar with this project or its rollout. What's the overall cost of the project?

Even in NYC, the majority of the MSA drives. You don't have to "convince" people unless you believe that's your desired end goal...and if you do, you're setting yourself up for a losing battle.  You develop your land use in a supportive way that creates an environment where mass transit is a reliable alternative. At the end of the day, you're giving your community viable choices.  When true vibrancy is reached, most will walk anyway.

Yes, but we are talking about an enormous MSA here, and we are talking about a MSA with comprehensive coverage for those that move from an environment where they drive to one where they walk...easily. It's easy for the soccer mom to get on a commuter rail when she needs to. We're also talking about a MSA that is looking at BRT because rail is too expensive.

From what I can tell, most MSAs are looking at a variety of mode expansions, depending on the desired goal for particular types of urban environments.  Locally, we're looking at BRT, commuter rail, streetcar, and Skyway expansion. The entire bus system overhaul goes live tomorrow as well.  Then there's All Aboard Florida, which will probably expand into Jax within the next decade.

To your point, however, NYC's MSA features all forms of transit that work together comprehensively. To mine, Jacksonville doesn't even have the backbone, the canvas to base that multiple mode upon, whereas NYC has the subway, Washington has the Metro, etc. If you can get as large as backbone up at once, do it, do it, do it. And to be fair, this isn't exclusive to Jax. Pretty much everywhere in America has crap transit that doesn't remotely offer comprehensive coverage.

Unfortunately, Jax, like most 2nd and 3rd tier cities its size, doesn't have the finances to build a comprehensive system from scratch.  So we're forced to grow and improve incrementally.  Coordination will be critical to our success. In the past, it's been our downfall.

It all depends. No need to have exclusive ROW if you don't need it.  In Jax's case, the selected BRT routes aren't congested. Taking lanes off streets like Philips and Blanding for a bus to run every 15 minutes in suburbia (where the land uses aren't compatible for mass transit) would be a waste of money.

I don't agree with either side of this statement. In the first place, why run an upgraded bus route on a not congested route? In the next, offering suburbia a way to connect to transit and to begin the retrofit of the land use is the best move you could make.

The best thing one can do for suburbia is retrofit the zoning regulations and land use policies. The worse thing we can do is invest in an expensive transit retrofit without having the land use policies in place to support and grow around it. This is what happened with the Skyway.  But this is one of the reasons I've come to the conclusion that this BRT-lite plan isn't BRT against Rail. The corridors selected for BRT-lite aren't idea corridors for rail anyway. In fact, I'm kind of skeptical of commuter rail on the FEC between DT Jax and St. Augustine. Considering that corridor will have BRT-lite, AAF and perhaps Amtrak (California corridor style), commuter rail seems like overkill and waste of transit resources.  IMO, any extra cash saved up should probably be shifted to improving transit in another underserved area of town.

And my point on distortion still stands...as a general, royal "we" referring to the site and the content it chooses to present. One loses credibility via distortion, and especially if one is not coming at the issue from a place of dominance. To put this another way, MetroJacksonville could have chosen to foster an interesting conversation on the place of streetcars in metro areas, how and where and why they work and don't, instead of offering a distorted perspective.

You are a part of Metro Jacksonville. We routinely feature articles and opinion pieces from a variety of perspectives and individuals.  It's one of the reasons, I started making people sign their names to their articles. We don't always share the same view in many of these pieces as well, which is why debates tend to happen.  However, the debates is where we all truly learn and where the best ideas tend to grow out of.

Just on this topic, I can tell you, Ock and I have different opinions.  For the most part, I'm fine with the modified BRT-lite system and route optimization project.  I'm also glad the JRTC design has been modified.  I'm also not a big fan of spending money on major Skyway extensions.  As for this particular article, I agree with what you have to say about distorting perspectives.  Luckily, our debate brings some of these issues to light and hopefully Ock will respond with his own position and thoughts about what he put together.

[simms3]

Tampa's streetcar has spurred over $2 billion in TOD. However, it's a tourist train and is operated like one.  It doesn't serve the local population and barely penetrates DT Tampa. Furthermore, service doesn't start to 11am, so that should tell us just about all we need to know about it.  With that said, since it's not operated as a true local transit solution, we probably shouldn't damn it for not effectively serving as a local transit solution.

Then you shouldn't praise it, either. It's listed at the top of the article as an example of streetcar superiority. TOD is great, but is it really "transit oriented development" if, as in the case of the TECO streetcar, only 600 people get on the thing we shouldn't damn, as noted by this very site? Or, to put this another way, this streetcar which spurred economic development from Ybor to Harbor Island, actually carries next to none of them. So, really, that's a development plan selling a lifestyle versus a transit reality. All those condo dwellers are driving to Publix, and clearly a majority of tourists are bypassing the pretty, atmospheric choo-choo for actual transit, most likely of the car variety.

Heck, even Miami's Metrorail has spurred a ton of TOD along its US1 stretch, but those condo dwellers and tourists are driving to Publix, too. Seriously, 73,000 people per weekday is PATHETIC, and in the 22 years since I stopped taking it to high school, they've only added 8,000 ish riders? And that's with all that snazzy TOD?

Agreed on all points.  I'm not certain any of the projects in Channelside are billed as TOD or even marketed as such by the developers.  You can't take the streetcar into downtown, which technically you can just walk over to (I'm sure "Within walking distance of downtown" is used while "On the TECO streetcar line" is not).

As for Miami's system - I've criticized both its ridership and Tri-Rail's in my posting history, but have been rebutted by defenses of both systems.  I don't think there is much of an excuse that Miami's Metrorail has such low ridership or that Tri-rail does, either.  I don't think it will be too difficult for Tri-Rail to find higher ridership on their new route along AAF's tracks into Miami Central/DT Fort Lauderdale, with points in between.

I just dislike distortion of any kind, and to present the cancelled Arlington streetcar and the curtailed DC Streetcar in your laundry list as "examples of streetcar success" is distortion. To present the TECO line as anything but a vanity train adding atmosphere but little actual transit is distortion. To present a Grand Rapids streetcar project that has yet to be built or funded, outside of the context of Grand Rapids recently launched BRT system being a leading reason why the Center for Transportation Excellence is holding their next conference in "the learning laboratory for leaders around the country" is distortion. I'm pretty sure you can find other examples of that, for example:
In Kansas City, which is still building its first streetcar segment, voters have overwhelmingly rejected a plan to extend it. 
In August, San Antonio's city and county leaders pulled financial support from their streetcar plan.
It's fine to list the systems, but list the obstacles, the challenges, the failures. Otherwise you're just as bad as the transit agencies over promising. Inform, debate, retort. Don't distort.

Agreed.  I think Atlanta's streetcar is another one of these streetcars to nowhere projects.  For the past few years it's as if every city feels that the way it can compete is to just stick a streetcar somewhere.  In reality, a lot more goes into what NYC, DC, Boston, Philly, Chicago, SF, and LA have than an occasional new streetcar system.  The bulk of the systems now available to these top tier cities were constructed or made available (through ROW) generations ago when public works projects were common, when it was cheaper and easier to get things done (with less bureaucracy/regulation), and before the automobile took over and made general mobility more personalized (and often easier).  I think it will be next to impossible to replicate these more comprehensive systems.

Just because Little Rock created a little streetcar line and saw a little pop in downtown development doesn't mean that overall the ROI was as significant as amateurs like us (or biased proponents involved with its implementation) say it was, doesn't mean Jax should necessarily do the *exact* same thing.  Jax needs to do what's best for Jax.

Similarly, just because Nashville created a commuter rail line doesn't mean it needs to be held up as some example of success.  1,000 people a day ride it, and there was really no TOD spurred.  I predict a similar "success" if Jax brings commuter rail to FEC between Jax and St. Augustine.

As I pointed out before, even Charlotte's LYNX line doesn't have that impressive of ridership (in total or ridership per mile).  It has spurred a ton of real estate opportunities, but it's not an extremely useful mobility option, except for those yuppies who now live in new apartment complexes along it.

Real mobility?  Or economic driver?

You are a part of Metro Jacksonville. We routinely feature articles and opinion pieces from a variety of perspectives and individuals.  It's one of the reasons, I started making people sign their names to their articles. We don't always share the same view in many of these pieces as well, which is why debates tend to happen.  However, the debates is where we all truly learn and where the best ideas tend to grow out of.

Just on this topic, I can tell you, Ock and I have different opinions.  For the most part, I'm fine with the modified BRT-lite system and route optimization project.  I'm also glad the JRTC design has been modified.  I'm also not a big fan of spending money on major Skyway extensions.  As for this particular article, I agree with what you have to say about distorting perspectives.  Luckily, our debate brings some of these issues to light and hopefully Ock will respond with his own position and thoughts about what he put together.

Good points.

[Ocklawaha]

Then you shouldn't praise it, either. It's listed at the top of the article as an example of streetcar superiority. TOD is great, but is it really "transit oriented development" if, as in the case of the TECO streetcar, only 600 people get on the thing we shouldn't damn, as noted by this very site?

FROM THE ARTICLE LAKE SAID...

'What We Have Here Is A Failure To Communicate'
Metro Jacksonville's Robert W. Mann believes our leaders could be selling the public a bill of goods when it comes to realizing the true economic impact of Bus Rapid Transit, Streetcars and Light Rail Transit on our landscape. There are a growing number of cities expanding or proposing new local rail systems across the country. Could he be right? Could they be on to something that Jacksonville is overlooking?

FROM THE ARTICLE I SAID...

As we push our crippled tricycle along, Jacksonville's leaders appear to be lacking in their understanding of mass transit, with a belief that rail won't work locally. "Rail isn't a good fit for Jacksonville," has been the position either blatantly or quietly taken among the city's leadership since 1929. As we struggle to fill our downtown, several other cities investing in rail are literally rocketing right past us. Here's a few:

Certainly these cities are rocketing past us for many reasons, the streetcar (real-proposed-planned-or under construction) is a common denominator in all of them. Even with the paltry 600 riders daily on Tampa's system, had that $2 billion dollars worth of tourist and housing sites developed in downtown Jacksonville, we'd be proclaiming ourselves the next world capital. Another missed point is Tampa/HART long-range plan to build a LRT system, do any of you really believe that little streetcar line with its huge carbarn was done as an isolated thought? It wasn't, and could handle LRT trains tomorrow.

I actually didn't write anything more in the article, so the references to Ock said, or Ock ________ fill in the blank are perceptions you created as you saw the host of cities working on this. I have just 2 main points here, and that is all I want to get across:

1. While we were the FIRST city in America to 'plan' a return to heritage streetcars, yet we have continually dicked around with monorails to nowhere and billion dollar buses, having undergone a sea change with our 'free' Skyway, now claiming that 'rail is not a good fit for Jacksonville.' POINT ONE - URBAN RAIL IS JUST A GOOD OF A FIT IN JACKSONVILLE TODAY AS IN 1880.

2. In their latest version of 'mass transit suicide' they are promising huge, Bogota like results, while investing next to nothing and then labeling it 'Buses on steroids,' a transformational change in mass transit. TOD, huge ridership surges and projections, choice riders and park and ride luxury... Every bit of that is bogus. YES IT IS AN IMPROVEMENT.... that is all it is. End of story. I would be seriously surprised and happy if they actually gain 2,700 daily riders to add a cool million to their annual ridership. POINT TWO - STOP THE FALSE CLAIMS ABOUT OUR (supposed) BRT BEING THE ULTIMATE SOLUTION TO JACKSONVILLE'S MASS TRANSIT. When we invest in streetcar, we've built a railway, when one invests even heavily in BRT, all you've done is add lanes to a highway... Which usually comes with immediate demands to surrender them to automobiles (as happened in LA's Harbor Freeway BRT), this would be especially true when locals realized they built a bus expressway for a bus every 15 minutes.

I hold a firm belief that a streetcar, heritage or otherwise from and across our north bank waterfront, down through Brooklyn and into Riverside, Avondale and eventually to Fairfax/Roosevelt Plaza, would easily attain the same ridership surge along with the missing TOD they are touting with this 'something less then BRT-Lite,' excuse for BRT. For $25 Million a mile, we could easily duplicate a good deal of Cleveland's Euclid Avenue with streetcar or BRT, but over the long haul, considering the difference in TOD, labor costs, bus and road replacement, we'd be better off with streetcar. I'm also a huge proponent of using what we already have. From our Arena's back door, all the way north to Gateway Mall, we have a former railroad right of way that is city owned and could easily link on the east side of downtown with the cross-town waterfront link. On the west side of downtown, we have the old 'S' line railroad grade, city owned, all the way through Durkeeville to Springfield where it connects with the Arena-Gateway link. Running south on Myrtle Avenue we have a streetcar subway under the railroad, and streetcar width (former streetcar streets) that could send the tracks down to Roosevelt in their own lane. Light-Rail running in two car low-floor trains? The east side of the CSX line from downtown all the way to Orange Park would make for a ready right-of-way... again, part of it was, once, a streetcar line.

Enlarging on the various project sites I posted in the article gives one a pretty good handle on the why of streetcar. Nationally ridership is about 30% higher then the best of the bus options. Even those buses that do match rail, the Orange Line and Silver Line are fed by rail, or running on rail right-of-way. BRT is great where it makes sense, as I said a surface running BRT on the center lanes of the Arlington Expressway downtown to Regency could be silver or even gold standard BRT for not much more then resurfacing and station costs. Go for it!

BRT Lite is perhaps more palatable for smaller cities as it can be initiated quickly and on the cheap, but don't call it 'Light-Rail on Tires...' It simply is not.

So no buses are not our final solution, nor are they the ultimate solution for growing urban area's. However buses have a much larger presence in a city's mass transit mix then rail, as it should be. Buses hold 42 passengers with one driver, rail can literally hold hundreds with one operator.

Virginia Beach made every effort and ultimately blocked Norfolk's 'The Tide' LRT from crossing into their territory, no way, no how. After The Tide got a few miles on it, the citizens started demanding The Tide, and now Virginia Beach is working on rail. The same thing will happen wherever embryonic rail systems start, KC, DC etc. Once they start riding, the change will come.

[thelakelander]

Agreed on all points.  I'm not certain any of the projects in Channelside are billed as TOD or even marketed as such by the developers.  You can't take the streetcar into downtown, which technically you can just walk over to (I'm sure "Within walking distance of downtown" is used while "On the TECO streetcar line" is not).

I can answer this one for you and provide a few links about developers and TOD including the streetcar in their marketing. I grew up just outside of Tampa and visit the city quite often since my family is from there.  In fact, I'm just getting back to Jax from visiting family in Hillsborough for the Holiday. Here's a few links about TOD around the streetcar line.

http://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-commentary/tampas-iconic-streetcar-after-the-streetcars-revival-the-real-question-is-where-do-we-go-from-here-f-538802

"The concern was the use of public money," says Steven Polzin, a former regional transit authority board member who is a director of public transit research at the University of South Florida's Center for Urban Transportation Research. "Tampa-area roads are wanting for resources."

But the controversy did little to deter development in the Channel District, a 212-acre stretch of land where the city has agreed to grant tax breaks for developers. Developers say they were also drawn by the streetcar line. Fida Sirdar, president of Key Developers Group LLC, for example, is spending several hundred thousand dollars to build a pedestrian walkway connecting the York Station streetcar stop to his Place at Channelside, a $100 million 244-unit condominium. "It's a big plus," he says.

http://www.atdetroit.net/forum/messages/91697/105315.html

Here's links to two TOD apartments along the streetcar's route that tout the streetcar as an amenity for their location:

http://www.theplacechannelside.com/
http://www.thesladetampa.com/location.html



Anyone who's familiar with Ybor and the Channel District (before and after the opening of the TECO streetcar) knows it had a significant impact on infill development along its route.  It's a winner as a tourist train and stimulator of TOD. It's a loser when it comes to serving the pre-existing local population.  However, that's a factor of route planning and operation. Not transit mode.  Btw, DT Tampa's Marion Street Transitway is also a loser when it comes to BRT.


Marion Street Busway

As for Miami's system - I've criticized both its ridership and Tri-Rail's in my posting history, but have been rebutted by defenses of both systems.  I don't think there is much of an excuse that Miami's Metrorail has such low ridership or that Tri-rail does, either.  I don't think it will be too difficult for Tri-Rail to find higher ridership on their new route along AAF's tracks into Miami Central/DT Fort Lauderdale, with points in between.

Look no further than the traditional land use around Tri-Rail, Metrorail, and the South Miami-Dade Busway (a 13-mile dedicated BRT line that opened in 1997). With that said, when it comes to TOD, compare what's popped up around Metrorail's stations verses the South Miami-Dade Busway's stations. What's your thoughts on why the South Miami-Dade Busway has been as successful in stimulating TOD as Metrorail over the last 17 years?

The bulk of the systems now available to these top tier cities were constructed or made available (through ROW) generations ago when public works projects were common, when it was cheaper and easier to get things done (with less bureaucracy/regulation), and before the automobile took over and made general mobility more personalized (and often easier).  I think it will be next to impossible to replicate these more comprehensive systems.

I agree. No one is building heavy rail they way they did before the great depression and during the 1970s/80s. However, I'm not sure any of these smaller cities need to.

Just because Little Rock created a little streetcar line and saw a little pop in downtown development doesn't mean that overall the ROI was as significant as amateurs like us (or biased proponents involved with its implementation) say it was, doesn't mean Jax should necessarily do the *exact* same thing.  Jax needs to do what's best for Jax.

Correct. Jax needs to do what is best to achieve whatever vision Jax has.  If that vision is a walkable core with higher densities, then Jax will need to invest in transit solutions that best stimulate that type of development pattern.  If Jax wants to move people for cheap, buy a bus and call it a day.  If Jax wants a mix, depending on the neighborhood, then Jax needs to invest in multiple modes of mobility.

As for Little Rock, what stands out to me is the cost of their streetcar system. That city proves that you can implement fixed rail on the cheap. If you're paying +$30 million for streetcar, you're paying way too much. Go no frills by laying the tracks and forget about the pretty streetscape and $5k palm trees. 

Similarly, just because Nashville created a commuter rail line doesn't mean it needs to be held up as some example of success.  1,000 people a day ride it, and there was really no TOD spurred.  I predict a similar "success" if Jax brings commuter rail to FEC between Jax and St. Augustine.

Similar to Little Rock, I view Nashville's commuter rail as a success in terms of capital costs.  Your good lessons come from there.  The bad lessons come from the route selected.  It's not an idea corridor for a commuter rail line. Thus, the ridership will be low. So depending on how you look at it, Nashville's can be viewed as a success and a failure.

As I pointed out before, even Charlotte's LYNX line doesn't have that impressive of ridership (in total or ridership per mile).  It has spurred a ton of real estate opportunities, but it's not an extremely useful mobility option, except for those yuppies who now live in new apartment complexes along it.

Real mobility?  Or economic driver?

I don't believe Charlotte's 9 mile starter LRT line was intended to be a comprehensive city wide mobility option. For example, if you want to get from the airport to Uptown, you take the Sprinter (Charlotte's BRT-lite version of JTA's Flyer). However, it's real mobility for those who live and work along the corridor....like Houston's Red Line LRT.  It's also an economic driver for a part of town that was once blighted.....like Tampa's TECO Line or Portland's Streetcar.

By the same token, the First Coast Expressway (Outer Beltway) will offer me no real mobility. Other than taking pictures for MJ, I'll never pay to ride on it. However, it will offer real mobility for those who live in the tract home subdivisions and strip malls that spring up around its interchanges.  So, in that sense, it's real mobility and an economic driver for property owners in Clay County.

[Ocklawaha]

This was never the Florida East Coast, CSX or NS!

It might have been a bad choice Lake, but like Jacksonville and the FEC, it might have been their only choice. I've ridden the passenger trains in and out of the old Terminal Station downtown before Amtrak, and it was fairly impressive, but the Nashville Star route was long gone, station's boarded up, weeds ruled and the little towns declined.

The 286 mile Tennessee Central Railroad was built to haul minerals from eastern Tennessee to the markets of central and western Tennessee and Kentucky. It was built piecemeal and was NEVER very prosperous or had much traffic. Likewise the cities along the old TC never benefited from a robust railroad connection for industrial or city development. It did run a passenger train until 1955, but by 1965 the railroad, deeply in debit, gave up the ghost. Some of the trackage was taken over and other sections abandoned outright. The trackage between Monterey and Crossville was dismantled by the L&N in the 1980s, which has proven problematic to recent advocates of the restoration of passenger train service between Nashville and Knoxville. The Nashville and Eastern Railroad was formed to revive operation of the line's freight service to Old Hickory and Lebanon, approximately 30 miles east of Nashville, with occasional runs to points somewhat further east over the former L&N owned TC trackage. The N&E once participated in the operation of the Broadway Dinner Train out of Nashville. Today it hosts the Music City Star commuter rail service between Nashville and Lebanon.

The bottom line is that shortlines are all hungry for money and revenue streams, big railroads can afford to pick and choose, sometimes just screwing the small guy along the line as 'more trouble then their worth.' A shortline will sit down with you, work out deals and do business. This is why they chose that route. And why not a shortline, chances are your kids go to the same school and you probably attend the same church.

[simms3]

Agreed on all points.  I'm not certain any of the projects in Channelside are billed as TOD or even marketed as such by the developers.  You can't take the streetcar into downtown, which technically you can just walk over to (I'm sure "Within walking distance of downtown" is used while "On the TECO streetcar line" is not).

I can answer this one for you and provide a few links about developers and TOD including the streetcar in their marketing. I grew up just outside of Tampa and visit the city quite often since my family is from there.  In fact, I'm just getting back to Jax from visiting family in Hillsborough for the Holiday. Here's a few links about TOD around the streetcar line.

http://tbo.com/list/news-opinion-commentary/tampas-iconic-streetcar-after-the-streetcars-revival-the-real-question-is-where-do-we-go-from-here-f-538802

"The concern was the use of public money," says Steven Polzin, a former regional transit authority board member who is a director of public transit research at the University of South Florida's Center for Urban Transportation Research. "Tampa-area roads are wanting for resources."

But the controversy did little to deter development in the Channel District, a 212-acre stretch of land where the city has agreed to grant tax breaks for developers. Developers say they were also drawn by the streetcar line. Fida Sirdar, president of Key Developers Group LLC, for example, is spending several hundred thousand dollars to build a pedestrian walkway connecting the York Station streetcar stop to his Place at Channelside, a $100 million 244-unit condominium. "It's a big plus," he says.

http://www.atdetroit.net/forum/messages/91697/105315.html

Here's links to two TOD apartments along the streetcar's route that tout the streetcar as an amenity for their location:

http://www.theplacechannelside.com/
http://www.thesladetampa.com/location.html



Anyone who's familiar with Ybor and the Channel District (before and after the opening of the TECO streetcar) knows it had a significant impact on infill development along its route.  It's a winner as a tourist train and stimulator of TOD. It's a loser when it comes to serving the pre-existing local population.  However, that's a factor of route planning and operation. Not transit mode.  Btw, DT Tampa's Marion Street Transitway is also a loser when it comes to BRT.

Not surprised it's mentioned on apartment websites (not a top highlighted, but mentioned in blurbs about location).  Chalk it up to window dressing.  If any developer has built anything in Channelside since the implementation of TECO, they may say that the streetcar had an impact on their decisions to build something and how to build something, but most large-community apartment builders (for instance Crescent Heights, as in the owner of Slade, and Novare) have guys way smarter than that.  If there are tax credits, that has a far more significant impact than some worthless streetcar that not even tourists ride (I'd compare ridership to other tourist heavy streetcar routes, or even the Jax Skyway - TECO is not a success imo on any metric).

In fact, I feel privileged to work around the people I have for the past 4 years, and I can honestly say that I think our apartment underwriters (both on the debt and equity side as we do both) would be smart enough to see through TECO even if they were a pioneer builder and the streetcar hadn't even been built yet.  I truly believe that they would have either not put much weight on the streetcar to make decisions, or would have found someone smart enough to see through it (a partner maybe) to help them conclude that while they should build something, it shouldn't be because of some imaginary boon due to the streetcar.

Tax credits, location location location, a solid master plan and city backing, and efficient and well run RFPs by the city to develop the land by reputable builders (in addition to growing sunbelt/FL market of nearly 3 million) would be enough to attract a slew of best in class apartment developers.  Of course a streetcar could show additional commitment by the city, but it wouldn't necessarily mean much if anything more than that.  These guys were all smart enough to realize they would still need garages and high parking ratios and that nobody would ride the damn thing.

As for Miami's system - I've criticized both its ridership and Tri-Rail's in my posting history, but have been rebutted by defenses of both systems.  I don't think there is much of an excuse that Miami's Metrorail has such low ridership or that Tri-rail does, either.  I don't think it will be too difficult for Tri-Rail to find higher ridership on their new route along AAF's tracks into Miami Central/DT Fort Lauderdale, with points in between.

Look no further than the traditional land use around Tri-Rail, Metrorail, and the South Miami-Dade Busway (a 13-mile dedicated BRT line that opened in 1997). With that said, when it comes to TOD, compare what's popped up around Metrorail's stations verses the South Miami-Dade Busway's stations. What's your thoughts on why the South Miami-Dade Busway has been as successful in stimulating TOD as Metrorail over the last 17 years?

Have no idea.  Don't know anything about the busway.  I know that Miami has quite a bit of significant TOD along its metrorail - moreso than Atlanta, and a far denser population, yet far fewer riders and fewer riders per mile.  It's actually all a mystery to me.  I just think that South FL is *that* in love with the car.

[thelakelander]

Tax credits, location location location, a solid master plan and city backing, and efficient and well run RFPs by the city to develop the land by reputable builders (in addition to growing sunbelt/FL market of nearly 3 million) would be enough to attract a slew of best in class apartment developers.  Of course a streetcar could show additional commitment by the city, but it wouldn't necessarily mean much if anything more than that.

Several condo developments were linked with the streetcar when originally proposed. I'll have to dig in the newspaper archives to makes some links and quotes from that era available. You can get tax credits in several urban neighborhoods in Tampa. The location was also industrial decay and blight for decades. All that changed in the 2000s and the infill has occurred along the entire line, not just the Channel District. I have an old disk around here somewhere of pictures I took a few years before the construction and opening of the streetcar (I believe the people mover was still up then).

The TECO streetcar (in it's current state) is a failure in terms of public transit ridership but it isn't operated for that market segment and we can't deny it hasn't had a major positive impact on infill development.  We can also look at the same city (in the heart of dowtown) and not see the same development pattern occurring around the Marion Street Transitway.

Here's a good read on the TECO Line's struggles as a public transportation system:

He was the lone City Council member to vote "no" on the streetcar project when it was approved.

"If folks had come and said, 'We want to build an amenity,' that's fine," Buckhorn said. "But don't call it a means of transportation, because what they had designed — and that's not the same in every city — it was not going to be a means of transportation."

Case in point: A study by Florida State University Professor Jeffrey Brown found Tampa's public transit agency did not track transfer activity between the streetcar and buses, indicating "the agency does not view the streetcar as an integral part of their regular transit service."

People ride the streetcar because it's nostalgic, said Hale, who joined HART after the streetcar was built.

Unlike the modern streetcar used in Seattle, which the Express-News also visited, Tampa's is vintage and made mostly with vintage parts.

Full article: http://www.expressnews.com/news/local/article/Tampa-has-had-a-bumpy-ride-with-its-streetcars-4797007.php#/0

At the end of the day, it's a tourist train not MARTA or New Orleans' RTA Streetcars. The route is also littered with TOD in the form of hotels and entertainment. If it were intended to truly serve as a public transportation system, the route would have been different, it would have been better integrated into the local bus network, and the operations would not be catered to tourist. As Ock has stated, one day it may but I wouldn't hold my breath on that happening since Tampa is just as backward as Jax traditionally when it comes to mass transit.

If a city really wants to use streetcar as public transportation, I'd suggest giving it, its own dedicated lane to speed it up, going no frills (stop lumping in expensive streetscapes to the capital costs), space out stations a bit more and run the train as a transit spine.

[tufsu1]

If any developer has built anything in Channelside since the implementation of TECO, they may say that the streetcar had an impact on their decisions to build something and how to build something, but most large-community apartment builders (for instance Crescent Heights, as in the owner of Slade, and Novare) have guys way smarter than that.  If there are tax credits, that has a far more significant impact than some worthless streetcar that not even tourists ride (I'd compare ridership to other tourist heavy streetcar routes, or even the Jax Skyway - TECO is not a success imo on any metric).

the main decision on whether to build or not is demand.  And yes, from the beginning, the streetcar helped build the desirability and demand for the area.