Mandarin residents see I-295 edge closer to homes; bypassed by benefit

[Ocklawaha]

Because when you replace the ground that can absorb water with something that doesnt,  especially in Florida,  you have  to remediate it.  Rather than have rain runoff just flow randomly, FDOT designs tiered retention ponds that can collect so much water before it flows through an exit grate into either another tiered retention area or into a purpose made natural area.

A good example of tiered retention is 295 East Beltway south of Baymeadows to Philips Highway. The forest to the west of 295 is owned by FDOT to assist with noise and water absorption along with retention ponds and specially graded runoff zones.

Otherwise all the runoff in this area would rush to the Durbin Creek Basin and cause flooding. 

So the ponds represent the first level of water management along highways. 

Admittedly in years past state DOT's were terrible at water runoff plans and made simple culverts. In the last 20 years there has been much advancement in water management in overall highway design.

The other critical need in Florida which is growing by the day is our freshwater well water levels are falling at an alarming rate, in the Oviedo area of Central Florida wells are pumping salt water. The ponds can serve as spuwho said, as a pollution control device, allowing for sediment and solar action to settle and clean up the water which is then released into the next series of ponds. Much of this water returns to our underground supply. In the World Golf Village, every pond is linked with another in series so by the time it is discharged into Trout, and 6-Mile Creek, it's as clean as the river.

Here's a bit more:
Retention basins are among the most frequently implemented storm water management systems. They are used to collect surface runoff and to improve the quality of water by natural processes such as sedimentation, decomposition, solar disinfection and soil filtration. In comparison to dry ponds (which hold runoff for a limited period of time and then release the stored water at once), retention basins constantly keep standing water, allowing the development of a new habitat. This also allows settled particles to be treated biologically (GDSDS 2005). Water from retention ponds can then be reused for groundwater recharge, irrigation or any other purpose, optionally requiring further treatment. As a natural system, retention basins do not need energy or high-tech appliances.

[Know Growth]

Giant Yawn. 

State Road 16 footprint " " Beltway ""  incursions will be particularly telling.

[southsider1015]

None of the proposed stormwater management facilities are retention ponds.

All of the ponds are wet detention.  They are designed to detain water temporarily to allow treatment to occur and will not retain water.

Why does it seem that all of these projects require large stormwater ponds?  It's because of Florida's extensive permitting requirements set forth by FDEP and the Water Management Districts.  As some have mentioned, they are necessary for both water quality and quantity (flooding) purposes.

Stormwater management is an ongoing and important topic of conversation in the civil engineering community, especially in Florida.

[southsider1015]

It's been the general opinion that FDOT, both statewide and district-wide has not done a very good job in explaining the purpose and need for Express Lanes (aka Managed Lanes).   And frankly, the conversation needs to be extended to include FHWA and DOT at the federal levels as they relate to transportation financing.

Whether it's FDOT's fault for the lack of information provided, OR the fact that the information CONTINUES to fall on deaf ears, there is, without a doubt, a real breakdown in communication.

This project is the first, and arguably, the most needed and corridor-ready, segment of I-295 which will function as piece of a future system of Express Lanes which are designed to only guarantee a specific level of service for motorists.  The project will be ADDING Express Lanes only, and will NOT be removing or converting ANY of the existing General Use Lanes.  Therefore, capacity will be ADDED to the corridor.  Without a doubt, this will benefit Orange Park motorists since they will be able to use the Express Lanes.  However, since the traffic that does use the Express Lanes won't use the General Use Lanes, this will reduce traffic on the General Use Lanes for Mandarin traffic.

This is such a misunderstood and important point of this project (and the future Express Lane segments of I-95/I-10/I-295). 

I strongly encourage the MJ community to start getting educated on these types of projects, because they ARE coming to Jacksonville over the next 10 years. It would be helpful if we could get a thread going first before a large article from Ennis is written without the benefit of all of the experience/knowledge/opinions/comments of the many informed MJ contributors here.

[thelakelander]

Better yet, it would be great for other informed experts to submit articles with their viewpoints on transportation solutions like this. We'd certainly run well put together articles on the front page. I personally believe it is great to have and showcase different perspectives on projects like this.

The concept definitely isn't new....just new to Jacksonville. Here are a few of the old threads.

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php?topic=22633.0

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php?topic=20467.0

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php?topic=15341.0

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php?topic=15309.0

http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2014-jan-i-295-express-lanes-get-ready-to-open-your-pocketbooks

The expense of building and maintaining roads are major reasons for managed lanes. They don't make a profit and there's not enough tax money coming in to keep building them like we have in the past. Managed lanes are an innovative pay-to-play option. They don't generate enough cash to cover the capital costs but they can cover the long term maintenance for these facilities, which reduces the overall burden on the taxpayer. Other examples are paying fares to ride transit and toll roads.

Although I know some in the transportation industry don't like the name, I've called them lexus lanes in the past and still consider them to be.  There is a good segment of the general population who can't afford to pay congestion pricing on a regular basis. However, I'm also supportive of charging an additional fare, tolls or whatever, to help fund expensive road projects.  If we're going to build them, some extra cash is going to be needed to maintain them. Ultimately, if you don't want to pay tolls, hear jet noise, train horns, etc., don't move to areas of town that place you in such a certain situation on a regular basis. So personal responsibility also plays an important role.

Whether it's FDOT's fault for the lack of information provided, OR the fact that the information CONTINUES to fall on deaf ears, there is, without a doubt, a real breakdown in communication.

This project is the first, and arguably, the most needed and corridor-ready, segment of I-295 which will function as piece of a future system of Express Lanes which are designed to only guarantee a specific level of service for motorists.  The project will be ADDING Express Lanes only, and will NOT be removing or converting ANY of the existing General Use Lanes.  Therefore, capacity will be ADDED to the corridor.  Without a doubt, this will benefit Orange Park motorists since they will be able to use the Express Lanes.  However, since the traffic that does use the Express Lanes won't use the General Use Lanes, this will reduce traffic on the General Use Lanes for Mandarin traffic.

This is such a misunderstood and important point of this project (and the future Express Lane segments of I-95/I-10/I-295).

I personally believe we should just be real and state to the public the financing dilemma of building and maintaining highways. They cost a pretty penny and we really should look into more sustainable long term solutions that possibly mean changing the way we've done things since WWII. Unfortunately, that's not the most politically expedient thing to do in a state where many have a vested interest in the road construction and land development industries. So I guess managed lanes will have to do for now.

As for creating extra capacity, I'm not sure it's a viable long term solution. As long as our land development form remains the same, any extra capacity created will eventually be consumed by new trips. So, 10-15 years down the road, we'll be debating the need to invest another billion or so in expanding once again. It's sort of like having a weight problem and choosing to buy bigger belts instead of changing our unhealthy eating habits. At some point, we have to put the beer and chips down, get off the couch and head to the gym.

[southsider1015]

Great response!  I wasn't trying to point fingers at you, lake, at least with my response.  But now looking at the threads you've posted, with the articles that you've written, and the responses in the threads, it seems that the conversation is stale, full of negatives, and hasn't seemed to help the dialogue (yet). 

"I-295 Express Lanes: Get Ready To Open Your Pocketbooks", "Lexus Lanes", and the somebloggingguy.com picture.

I feel like you have a good understanding of the facts about what's happening based on your threads and posts.  But the way it's being delivered is slanted negatively, and I don't think it's helping to spark dialogue and inform folks.  I get that the majority of your readers hate FDOT, hate roadway construction, hate taxes, hate pork barrel, and hate, hate, hate.  But the rhetoric is only fueling the anger of uninformed readers, and also those who are informed and might know better.

I haven't been around MJ much lately (too busy working on Lexus Lanes and wasting taxpayer dollars, but I'll start coming around more and contributing my informed opinions.

[thelakelander]

Oh, no hard feelings southsider1015. I'd love for you to submit a piece on this subject that we can publish and promote thought provoking conversation. It is true that the general public (not just MJ readers) tends to have a slanted view towards DOT in general. However, to be honest, it you look at the history of urban development in this country, you can't blame them.  Some major ills have taken place in the past, with respect to our urban development form. These have to be taken in consideration right along with the positives. If you think discussion on MJ is slanted, take a look at this recent thread from a global forum:

Midwest Cities Eviscerated By Expressways & "Urban Renewal": 1950 vs. Today sliders
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=214741

Better yet, check out the aerial sliders from this website that serves as the focal point for that SSP discussion:

http://iqc.ou.edu/2014/12/18/60yrssoutheast/

60 Years of Urban Change: Southeast
by Shane Hampton | Dec 18, 2014 | Blog | 1 comment

60 years has made a big difference in the urban form of American cities. The most rapid change occurred during the mid-century urban renewal period that cleared large tracts of urban land for new highways, parking, and public facilities or housing projects. Fine-grained networks of streets and buildings on small lots were replaced with superblocks and megastructures. While the period did make way for impressive new projects in many cities, many of the scars are still unhealed.

We put together these sliders to show how cities have changed over half a century. In this post, we look at Southeastern cities in Florida, Georgia, North Carolina, Alabama, Louisiana, Kentucky, and Tennessee.

The last slider shown is Jacksonville. I'll admit I'm kind of honored that the University of Oklahoma Institute for Quality Communities utilized Metro Jacksonville as a source for background historical information for their study. Nevertheless, the aerials of 60 years of change for cities all across America, provide a glimpse into why the general public's opinion has come to be what it is in 2014. There probably will never be a general lovefest with FDOT but that shouldn't be any DOT's primary concern anyway. Being honest, working the extra mile to integrate mobility needs with community visioning and continuing to strive to better stewards of public tax dollars is about the best way to go.

Like you, I work in the transportation industry, just from the planning side of things. It's just when these things get to my desk, I tend to push hard and heavy for context sensitive solutions that integrate transportation infrastructure investment and surrounding land use policy. But at the end of the day, I tend to be a realist who'll let the statistical data and community opinion to determine the final answer.

Btw, I do not believe people here or in general, hate taxes. With the BJP, local taxpayers have shown in the past that they are willing to pay a little more for things viewed as a quality-of-life benefits. Roads, libraries, mass transit, parks, schools, etc. all fall into this category. From my experience, both as a public activist and a transportation consultant, what the public really doesn't like is being railroaded into certain solutions. This is something I've seen happen several times in the transportation industry and it really doesn't have to be that way.

Personally, I have no problem with the theory of managed lanes, lexus lanes, etc. (the name really doesn't matter in the grand scheme of things) but them being forced on communities across the state could be a major contributor of the public engagement problem. When true public engagement takes place, sugar coated sales jobs aren't needed and we will most likely end up in situations where the one-size fits all solutions aren't always the best answer to transportation problems.

When real engagement and partnership is in effect, perhaps managed lanes ends up as being the desired solution for one community and something else ends up as the end solution for another.

A year or two ago, I had the opportunity to hear the former FDOT secretary come to Jax and act like a big baby in the response to local community opposition regarding the Outer Beltway. He basically made a threat that that if we didn't allow toll road, then he'd take his DOT money to other areas of the state that would. Then I watched the local politicos literally get on their knees, bow to the dude and ask for forgiveness. I've also been witness to other situations were demands have been made that automobile capacity would not be reduced in favor of other modes......regardless of what communities living with the everyday negative impacts of projects railroaded down their throats had to say. This not the proper way to engage people and it is the true type of activity that negatively impacts public perspective on some projects.....even when they are good ones.

[southsider1015]

The fact of the matter is that FDOT (and DOT, for the matter) is a government agency  which spends taxpayer money for something (infrastructure) that this country, as a whole, takes for serious granted.  So, regardless of their actions, FDOT is casted in a negative light because of the complete mistrust of our government and its other bureaucracies.  Let's move on to other topics because this issue deserves its own thread to really hash out.

In response to the so-called ills that have taken place by FDOT on urban development, my thoughts are:  What is the mission of FDOT?  Is it to form the the urban core of Jacksonville, and other cities around the state?  No, isn't this COJ's job?

From the FDOT website:  "FDOT's primary statutory responsibility is to coordinate the planning and development of a safe, viable, and balanced state transportation system serving all regions of the state, and to assure the compatibility of all components, including multimodal facilities. A multimodal transportation system combines two or more modes of movement of people or goods. Florida's transportation system includes roadway, air, rail, sea, spaceports, bus transit, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities."

I don't see words such as urban or development.  Sure, transportation is a feature of the urban core, but its one feature.  We can't ignore that FDOT has an impact on urban development, of course.  IMHO, FDOT, due to its budget and visibility, has become THE target when blaming someone for our cities issues with urban development. 

Moving on, no one likes taxes.  Period.  We're a capitalist society that promotes self-interest, and taxes, although necessary for our civilization, is simply unpopular.  It's SO easy to try to point our government waste when we THINK we see it.  "Building a road that I'll never drive on?  Waste.  Widening on the Westside?  Waste.  Lexus Lanes that I can't access on I-295?  Waste."  Kudos to COJ for getting BJP and other gas tax funding approved.  It literally shocks me that this is even feasible in a city like Jacksonville.

Another misunderstanding of the Express Lanes is the purpose of the dynamic pricing of the tolls.  The primary goal of dynamic pricing is NOT to fund the construction and maintenance of the facility.  It's to GUARANTEE a certain level of service (flow of traffic) to get from point A to point B.  With General Use Lanes, a level of service cannot be guaranteed because there aren't any controls to change the demands of the facility.  With a controlled price point, motorists CHOOSE to either use either lanes based on the price.  Therefore, some drivers will CHOOSE to use a facility when it makes financial sense to do so.

Given the purpose and responsibility of FDOT, the available funding that the current revenue streams provide, and the complete ignorance of the voting public, it only makes sense that Express Lanes are the only viable solution. 

Let's save FCOB/FCX for another thread, shall we?  It's a different discussion that does involve FDOT obviously, but one that doesn't necessarily add to the conversation here.

[thelakelander]

The fact of the matter is that FDOT (and DOT, for the matter) is a government agency  which spends taxpayer money for something (infrastructure) that this country, as a whole, takes for serious granted.  So, regardless of their actions, FDOT is casted in a negative light because of the complete mistrust of our government and its other bureaucracies.  Let's move on to other topics because this issue deserves its own thread to really hash out.

FDOT's image, like any government agency's can be improved over time. However, I wouldn't go as far as blaming all negativity received on other bureaucracies. No entity is perfect and complete without blame.

In response to the so-called ills that have taken place by FDOT on urban development, my thoughts are:  What is the mission of FDOT?  Is it to form the the urban core of Jacksonville, and other cities around the state?  No, isn't this COJ's job?

From the FDOT website:  "FDOT's primary statutory responsibility is to coordinate the planning and development of a safe, viable, and balanced state transportation system serving all regions of the state, and to assure the compatibility of all components, including multimodal facilities. A multimodal transportation system combines two or more modes of movement of people or goods. Florida's transportation system includes roadway, air, rail, sea, spaceports, bus transit, and bicycle and pedestrian facilities."

No argument from me on responsibility. I'd love to see the coordination and development of a safe, viable, and balanced transportation network. Heck, I'm a huge advocate of this responsibility. But I'm also a realist. Balanced doesn't mean forcing things into communities, regardless of whether they fit or not. Also, looking at our existing roadway design standards and bicycle/pedestrian death rates as compared to the rest of the country, I'd say we have a lot to improve upon and we....especially FDOT....can do better.  The day we reach a properly balanced state transportation system will be a day of great image enhancement not only for FDOT, but Florida all across the board.

I don't see words such as urban or development.  Sure, transportation is a feature of the urban core, but its one feature.  We can't ignore that FDOT has an impact on urban development, of course.  IMHO, FDOT, due to its budget and visibility, has become THE target when blaming someone for our cities issues with urban development.

My focus isn't so much on sugar coating or burning down FDOT's image. To be honest, I could ultimately care less. Whether it's FDOT, VDOT, GDOT, JTA, COJ, JaxPort or whoever, all I desire coordinated, cost effective and wise investment of public tax dollars that results in an enhanced quality of life for the communities subsidizing the operations.

Moving on, no one likes taxes.  Period.  We're a capitalist society that promotes self-interest, and taxes, although necessary for our civilization, is simply unpopular.  It's SO easy to try to point our government waste when we THINK we see it.  "Building a road that I'll never drive on?  Waste.  Widening on the Westside?  Waste.  Lexus Lanes that I can't access on I-295?  Waste."  Kudos to COJ for getting BJP and other gas tax funding approved.  It literally shocks me that this is even feasible in a city like Jacksonville.

Initiatives like BJP or MAPS in Oklahoma City passed because taxpayers saw a benefit in making the investment. As in the case of Greenlight Pinellas and TSPLOT, when they don't they fail.

"Building a road that I'll never drive on?  Waste.  Widening on the Westside?  Waste.  Lexus Lanes that I can't access on I-295?  Waste."

Not all taxpayers take this narrow-minded view. I suspect, most taxpayers don't think a second thought about transportation infrastructure. As long as they have a job, a home, well feed kids and routine trash collection, etc. they're fine. I for one, try to evaluate every project on an individual basis. Some projects, like the Outer Beltway are more politically motivated than actually needed to resolve transportation issues and others, such as the I-95/JTB Improvements will actually improve traffic flow. That's just the world we live in.

Another misunderstanding of the Express Lanes is the purpose of the dynamic pricing of the tolls.  The primary goal of dynamic pricing is NOT to fund the construction and maintenance of the facility.  It's to GUARANTEE a certain level of service (flow of traffic) to get from point A to point B.  With General Use Lanes, a level of service cannot be guaranteed because there aren't any controls to change the demands of the facility.  With a controlled price point, motorists CHOOSE to either use either lanes based on the price.  Therefore, some drivers will CHOOSE to use a facility when it makes financial sense to do so.

Sure that's one of the goals but it's debatable, I'll let it rest though. Looking at ROI, I'd rather have managed lanes than the old "viable" solution of widening to 8-10 lanes.

Given the purpose and responsibility of FDOT, the available funding that the current revenue streams provide, and the complete ignorance of the voting public, it only makes sense that Express Lanes are the only viable solution.

I assume you're just talking about I-295's managed lanes in Mandarin? However, if so, I don't know why the ignorance of the voting public matters. This is one of those projects where I'm not aware of the public demanding a regular widening or express lanes. In recent years, we've had quite a few projects pop up out of thin air across the state. So, I wouldn't get too caught up over a random article where the newspaper writer most likely doesn't understand the nature of the project either. Perhaps this is an area where FDOT can improve its image over time (assuming it's a real concern)? It's an easy thing to do and a solution that should be viable with current revenue streams.

[southsider1015]

My voter ignorance comment is more directed and tied to infrastructure funding in all levels of government.

New projects popping up are likely based on leadership decisions made at the top of the food chain.  Without a doubt, with the relection of Scott, FDOTs budget will continue to grow.  Scott is dedicated to spending more money on infrastructure in Florida, and as the needs of the state grow, we'll have the funding to address our problems.   The 5-year program is continusouly updated as projects are needed before the crises occur.  We no longer need to wait years and years to see our tax dollars at work.

[thelakelander]

I'm just hoping we can change some of our design standards sooner rather than later, so that money can be spent on projects that actually do better balance the state's transportation network. The community literally had to fight to get the bike/ped components added to I-95/JTB and Fuller Warren Bridge projects. With proper community engagement and coordination, early in the process, it shouldn't have to be that way. Some of the districts south of us are setting the type of precedence that should allow us to easily follow.

[cline]

I would agree that FDOT has done an abysmal job at explaining what these lanes are and how they are going to function.  The public involvement person I've been seeing on the news either has no idea how the lanes will function or is incapable of effectively conveying how they will function.  Its really not that hard.  Maybe they should make a video or something like they have done with other projects. 

This project is the first, and arguably, the most needed and corridor-ready, segment of I-295 which will function as piece of a future system of Express Lanes which are designed to only guarantee a specific level of service for motorists.  The project will be ADDING Express Lanes only, and will NOT be removing or converting ANY of the existing General Use Lanes.  Therefore, capacity will be ADDED to the corridor.  Without a doubt, this will benefit Orange Park motorists since they will be able to use the Express Lanes.  However, since the traffic that does use the Express Lanes won't use the General Use Lanes, this will reduce traffic on the General Use Lanes for Mandarin traffic.

I will only partially agree with you on this point.  This project, viewed by itself, probably won't have a huge effect.  That said, it is obviously a cog in a larger wheel that, when viewed collectively with the other managed lane projects on I-295, could have a real impact.  This project would have been much more effective had it extended across the Buckman past 17 however, that would require widening the Buckman which would increase costs exponentially (although it is quite clear that this project will be a catalyst for the eventual widening of the bridge).

I'm just hoping we can change some of our design standards sooner rather than later, so that money can be spent on projects that actually do better balance the state's transportation network. The community literally had to fight to get the bike/ped components added to I-95/JTB and Fuller Warren Bridge projects.

I realize that FDOT's mission statement says that it is multmodal- let's be real though, its all about roads and it always has been (i.e. the Department of Roads) and it will continue to be about roads. Look at how hard it was to get the ped overpass on the Fuller Warren.  That was only done after massive public outcry and is only few million bucks. 

[thelakelander]

I will only partially agree with you on this point.  This project, viewed by itself, probably won't have a huge effect.  That said, it is obviously a cog in a larger wheel that, when viewed collectively with the other managed lane projects on I-295, could have a real impact.  This project would have been much more effective had it extended across the Buckman past 17 however, that would require widening the Buckman which would increase costs exponentially (although it is quite clear that this project will be a catalyst for the eventual widening of the bridge).

Assuming a developing a balanced transportation network was really a priority, in the event express lanes crossed the Buckman, they'd become a prefect transit corridor between Orange Park/Clay County and the Southside. Since we're spending all the cash to widen, might as well throw in a  parallel shared use facility (aka. Suncoast Parkway Trail or New River Greenway as a part of the I-595 Express Lane projects).

Sort of like, give the impacted communities an amenity they can actually use, which can also serve as a mobility alternative to keep some of the short auto trips off the highways.

[coredumped]

Correct me if I'm wrong lake, but isn't the Suncoast trail funded by someone other than the highway (someone other than FDOT?). If that is the case, who would be the one to fund it here for us?

[cline]

I will only partially agree with you on this point.  This project, viewed by itself, probably won't have a huge effect.  That said, it is obviously a cog in a larger wheel that, when viewed collectively with the other managed lane projects on I-295, could have a real impact.  This project would have been much more effective had it extended across the Buckman past 17 however, that would require widening the Buckman which would increase costs exponentially (although it is quite clear that this project will be a catalyst for the eventual widening of the bridge).

Assuming a developing a balanced transportation network was really a priority, in the event express lanes crossed the Buckman, they'd become a prefect transit corridor between Orange Park/Clay County and the Southside. Since we're spending all the cash to widen, might as well throw in a  parallel shared use facility (aka. Suncoast Parkway Trail or New River Greenway as a part of the I-595 Express Lane projects).

Sort of like, give the impacted communities an amenity they can actually use, which can also serve as a mobility alternative to keep some of the short auto trips off the highways.

I think that's a great idea.  Are there any JTA routes that utilize I-295?  If so, would they be able to use the express lanes free of charge?