Is U2C serious? Help me make it make sense....

[thelakelander]

The Jacksonville Transportation Authority's proposed Ultimate Urban Circulator is designed to convert the Skyway tram structure into an elevated track for autonomous shuttles, with ramps connecting to surface streets.

On Dec. 11, the JTA board approved a contract that will determine whether that truly is the best approach, whether a different design would be preferable or whether that portion of the project should be built at all.

Gillis said a potential outcome of the study could be developing the entire system at ground level versus using the Skyway track.

https://www.jaxdailyrecord.com/news/2024/dec/11/jta-board-approves-contract-to-determine-whether-to-adapt-skyway-into-u2c/

[marcuscnelson]

You can't help but laugh. Eight years now of claiming that the only way to Keep-Modernize-Expand the Skyway was this gambit and yet... wow.

[thelakelander]

^True clown show but hoping this is a move in the right direction to step back from a slow moving train wreck. For what the U2C project has become, it makes no sense to play around with the Skyway infrastructure. Just run the vans on the regular street (drops the price), so when ridership fails to materialize, at least we haven't blown away hundreds of millions in LOGT money.

[Ken_FSU]

Just run the vans on the regular street (drops the price), so when ridership fails to materialize, we don't blow all that LOGT tax money away.

^When you look at how wildly inefficient the existing Skyway is, I think the best long-term alternative would be to abandon running whatever the thing is on elevated guideways. It would be obscenely expensive to convert the Skyway rails for clown car, with little concrete benefit, and it's also obscenely expensive to keep running monorail on the track.



Don't hate the idea of just leaving the guideways as is for now, and then maybe one day converting them into an elevated Highline-ish pedestrian extension of the Emerald Trail.

Would take it one step further and eliminate the AV component altogether.

When you strip out all the fancy tech jargon and look at what we're actually building, it's effectively a low capacity, low-speed bus/van loop.

The only reason it's expected to cost $450 million+ is because we're layering in an unnecessary level of complication by insisting that the entire system is driverless.

The city could purchase a dozen electric trolleys at $1.2 million each ($14.4 million), deploy them on the same paths with more capacity and faster headways, and run them for 14 hours a day, 365 days a year for around $9.2 million a year (based on $150 per service hour transport benchmarks). That's already cheaper than the $17 million a year we're currently spending for Skyway operations. You could run the trolleys for FIFTY YEARS at zero cost for the same amount it will cost (in a best case scenario) to build this boondoggle. You get to the same result (but with better capacity and headways), people would actually use the trolley, you don't run the very real risk of the entire system shutting down when a robot runs over a pedestrian or drives a dozen visiting Colts fans into the St. Johns River, and you save a boatload of gas tax money to actually improve real transportation problems in Jacksonville, rather than shooting your entire transportation wad to "fix" a non-existent four-mile problem so someone can land a dream job in Dubai.

Streetcar would be an even better long-term investment because of the TOD it would generate, but that feels like a pipe dream at the moment.

[jaxlongtimer]

Don't hate the idea of just leaving the guideways as is for now, and then maybe one day converting them into an elevated Highline-ish pedestrian extension of the Emerald Trail.

I  and others have been advocating for this outcome for years.  Nothing other than an elevated "Highline" walk or tearing the whole thing down makes sense.  A or B, pick your poison.  There is no rational case for putting more money into "salvaging" the track for vehicles - period.  JTA has just been grabbing at imaginary straws and bamboozling its Board, the Council and Mayors.

I can't tell you how many City/Downtown "insiders" I have spoken to that agree on this.  Unfortunately, they are either intimidated, scared or unwilling to speak out.  Break through the thin dam wall and it will be a flood of relief.  This study may be a setup for a "graceful" way to kill the project.  Whatever works at this point.

[thelakelander]

I'd prefer leaving the Skyway for fixed mass transit. We're not locked into running that peoplemover up there. There are other options available if Jax is wiling to seriously explore things outside of the U2C concept.

[jaxlongtimer]

I'd prefer leaving the Skyway for fixed mass transit. We're not locked into running that peoplemover up there. There are other options available if Jax is wiling to seriously explore things outside of the U2C concept.

Lake, what mass transit vehicle would move more people and faster than the Skyway?  It appears the track structure and design would both limit vehicle size and speeds to bring us back to a Skyway-type performance.  Not to mention it doesn't currently serve many corners of Downtown or the urban core.  Thus, would it be worth making more of an investment in the current infrastructure or in any future expansion of same?  I would be interested in comparing it objectively to other alternatives to either invest in at surface level or maybe starting over with something else that is elevated.  Common sense keeps telling me anything is better than salvaging the current track for any vehicles so show me the way... 

To be transparent (pile on?!), I just don't see the current track as anywhere near being an attractive option, functionally, financially or aesthetically vs. other options.

[thelakelander]

I'd prefer leaving the Skyway for fixed mass transit. We're not locked into running that peoplemover up there. There are other options available if Jax is wiling to seriously explore things outside of the U2C concept.

To be transparent (pile on?!), I just don't see the current track as anywhere near being an attractive option, functionally, financially or aesthetically vs. other options.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but in your mind there's no such thing as attractive, aesthetically pleasing grade separated (elevated) fixed transit. If so, that's a view that limits one of the most effective forms of mass transit reliability. A subway here is a no go, so anything at-grade that mixes with existing vehicular traffic is less safe and reliable because of the environment we force that fixed transit mode into (without spending a billion to close streets and build a modern traditional LRT system). The points I make for keeping the infrastructure have little to do with aesthetics and everything to do with functionality and taking advantage of a fixed transit infrastructure that Jax already has in place.

Lake, what mass transit vehicle would move more people and faster than the Skyway?  It appears the track structure and design would both limit vehicle size and speeds to bring us back to a Skyway-type performance.

We'd first need to define or understand what the ultimate goal would be for speed, connectivity, etc. and if investment on a single mode of transit to serve every part of the city even makes sense (i.e. it doesn't). So without getting too detailed in routing, ridership numbers, regionalwide system design, etc., here are some forms of fixed transit the platform could possibly be modified to support.

Updated Peoplemover - It's possible. Miami has done it and there are examples at most major airports.


Streetcar - As long as we're willing to stay away from larger modern streetcar vehicles, there are forms of streetcar that are light and small enough to operate on that infrastructure. The benefit here is that streetcar can also run at grade for potential extensions.


Lightweight LRT - Just like JTA wants to be leaders in AV technology, smaller lightweight trains and trams are also a thing. In this picture, both vehicles can operate on the same track. However, one is designed to be smaller and lighter weight.

Not to mention it doesn't currently serve many corners of Downtown or the urban core.  Thus, would it be worth making more of an investment in the current infrastructure or in any future expansion of same?

I wouldn't worry too much about what the existing platform does and doesn't serve today. If extension of elevated or at-grade lines are desired, there are ways to move in either direction while taking advantage of the infrastructure....like the Acosta Bridge, that is already in place. Ripping that out without seriously looking into ways to better utilize would be wasteful and not necessarily cheaper.

I would be interested in comparing it objectively to other alternatives to either invest in at surface level or maybe starting over with something else that is elevated.  Common sense keeps telling me anything is better than salvaging the current track for any vehicles so show me the way...

To have an objective comparison, we'd first need to identify what the end goal is. Is the end goal ultimate city wide transit connectivity? Is it allowing a people mover to be and work like a people mover or comparing a people mover to a regional LRT line? Those are two totally different forms of fixed transit that should work together, not be an either/or, as they serve different types of ridership needs.

IMO, Jax has always struggled to define a unified end goal or vision. Instead, we have a history of various entities foolishly going willy nilly on solutions when not fully understanding the problem holistically or having a true publicly vetted vision plan. If we can get to a point of knowing where we want to end up, it makes it much easier to objectively look at the pros and cons of existing things in our urban landscape like the Skyway.

[Zac T]

As a DT resident, I would use the Skyway almost everyday if it was actually efficient and convenient to local destinations as would other residents I've spoken to. A Brooklyn extension is a no brainer and would probably double ridership the day it opens as Northbank and Southbank residents and visitors could conveniently access Brooklyn and vice versa without having to drive/bike/walk or pay for a scooter. It's also important to remember even in it's dilapidated state, many DT service workers still ride the Skyway daily to and from the JRTC as that's where most bus routes begin and terminate.

The system in Miami is great and is a great model if we got serious about the Skyway reaching its full potential. The Skyway is a failure because the city failed it. A fully built out, modernized version as Lake indicated can 100% be efficient and effective especially if any of the development currently proposed around DT comes to fruition.

[thelakelander]

^When I worked for a downtown company that required me to physically be in the office 40 hours a week, I used the Skyway daily. It was very convenient. The U2C in any fashion that JTA wants to sell, won't match that reliability. However, as someone who has been involved in transportation and used the Skyway since its early years, I saw and experienced first hand, the level of maintenance decline, which has led to a poor user experience today. I don't have enough fingers and toes to count the number of times I've been stuck on the Acosta Bridge or isolated sections of track because of mechanical failures. I've seen the Frankenstein-mix of dead rolling stock parts being used to keep what's left going. It almost felt as if JTA has purposely let the thing fall a part, in hopes of gaining public and political support to get the U2C AV technology thing off the ground.  The thing really fell off a cliff after the modernization talk started up a decade ago. Back in the day, it was nice having 3 minute headways during peak usage times.

I mention that to say, I'm all for a true evaluation of technologies about what can work best for Jacksonville. That's certainly not the Skyway in its current state for a number of reasons that have long been discussed here over the years. However, the failures of our past and how we maintain things today should not be used to prove or suggest that the elevated infrastructure should be demolished or used for non-transit uses. We ought to figure out exactly what this city's vision is and how transit should support that vision. Knowing that is how we truly determine the pros and cons of various technologies, routes and if/how the investment made in the Skyway infrastruction then, can (or not) play a role in getting us to the future desired outcome. As of now, the most frustrating thing to me is that we don't have that vision, but every Tom, Dick and Harry comes up with a siloed solution, without knowing or looking at the holistic big picture.

[Ken_FSU]

As a DT resident, I would use the Skyway almost everyday if it was actually efficient and convenient to local destinations as would other residents I've spoken to. A Brooklyn extension is a no brainer and would probably double ridership the day it opens as Northbank and Southbank residents and visitors could conveniently access Brooklyn and vice versa without having to drive/bike/walk or pay for a scooter.

The absolute biggest miss imaginable with the current iteration of the Skyway. I work in the CBD, typically travel to Brooklyn 3 or 4 times a week to get lunch, and would use the Skyway every single time rather than pulling my car out of the garage if this simple addition would be added. You open up so much more connectivity for the entire system by including Brooklyn.

It almost felt as if JTA has purposely let the thing fall a part, in hopes of gaining public and political support to get the U2C AV technology thing off the ground.

The conspiracy theorist in me says that the only logical reason that the JTA would cancel the low-cost, no-frills expansion of the existing Skyway into Brooklyn was because they were afraid it would make the current Skyway more successful.

However, the failures of our past and how we maintain things today should not be used to prove or suggest that the elevated infrastructure should be demolished or used for non-transit uses.

It would be insane to demolish the existing elevated infrastructure, regardless of what system ends up being built. It's not hurting anything, it could always be reused for something, and it seems like it would be obscenely expensive to tear down. Removing another thing shouldn't be a priority in the city's CIP for decades. And if we do want to demolish an elevated structure, let's finish the job with the Hart Bridge ramps.

[Jax_Developer]

There seems to be a consistent them among transit authorities that these older stock people movers are all not manufactured anymore. Meanwhile, where are other places around the world getting similar stock from?? Any truth to that at all?

[fieldafm]

The conspiracy theorist in me says that the only logical reason that the JTA would cancel the low-cost, no-frills expansion of the existing Skyway into Brooklyn was because they were afraid it would make the current Skyway more successful.

That and they ran out of money due to the hemorrhaging taxpayer money reallocation scheme, better known as the U2C.

That driverless van with driver pilot program in Brooklyn lasted all of what, two weeks?

[thelakelander]

It's hard to find those old green colored kitchen appliances anymore. TVs that weigh more than an entire family of four's combined weight are also hard to come across. Nevertheless, there are new tvs and kitchen appliances. The same applies with peoplemovers. Yea, it may need modernization and replacement of some technology. Hell, it should after +30 plus years of wear and tear. However, that doesn't mean we have to tear down the entire house to replace the appliance. That's my position with the Skyway.

[fsu813]

That driverless van with driver pilot program in Brooklyn lasted all of what, two weeks?

But the memories, fieldafm.....

The memories will last a lifetime.