Re-evaluating the Skyway

[thelakelander]

There really is no debate.  However, planning for things a decade in advance should be happening now, regardless of current economic conditions.  This is why its crazy that Jax had no representation at the HSR and intercity passenger rail workshop last week.  With a long range plan in hand, when the time for expansion comes on line, we can actually move forward with implementing something instead of spending an extra decade or two on more studies.

[Coolyfett]

^Even if all of those units had people, that is about 600 residential units.  Assuming 2.5 kids (which highrise condos don't get) that is 1500 people, or about .2% of Jacksonville.  Seems a bit expensive to me to build it for that.

Bottom line, it wouldn't make sense until we have at least one transit arm extending to a residential neighborhood.

Its a start, why did you hit me with the "bottom line" Steve? There are 3  neighborhoods I know that would be perfect for it. So what are we promoting here, Rail? or More Roads? Doesn't Jax have enough roads? Since Jacksonville has existed, how much has been invested in roads? Wasn't Friendship Fountain expensive? How about the Riverwalk (both banks), were those cheap? The Pier at JaX Beach?? Not everyone likes to fish, who cars about a fountain?, people can WALK in their suburban neighborhood, so why have all these things that cost money? They make Jacksonville a better place. More stations would make Jacksonville a better place, just like the other things I mentioned.

People say they don't support the Skyway, because it does not make tons of money? Does the Jacksonville Zoo or MOSH makes tons of money?? Will the Jacksonville Skyline look the same in 2039 as it looks in 2009? I doubt it, but when the people eventually get there (and they will) then the cost for expanding is way up. Its like the city of Jacksonville never plans for the future, they just play everyday by ear, its annoying.

[stjr]

Developer's credo:

PLANNING?  What's that?  Could you spell it?  Sounds expensive.  Is that some California wacko environmentalist-liberal-commie-yankee-al queda-united nations taking-over-the-world concept?  Or some other subversive movement?  Out to end life like we know it.   If nothing else, it's just too much work.  That land is my land.  Don't you tell me what to do with it.  This is the land of freedom and property rights - to do what you want without thinking or being considerate of the greater community or the future.  Everyone for themselves.  I ain't working with no one else.  Just leave me alone.  All about making big $$$ for my little 'ol self.  And, don't raise my freakin' taxes.  Who cares the consequences!  The future - that's the next generation's problem.  I don't believe in that 1 + 1 = 3 stuff, either!  Nothin' I do affects anyone else.  I live in a vacuum.  Society - I didn't ask to join it so not partipatin'.  Time to steam roll my neighbors and buy off some more politcos.  

[Coolyfett]

The estimates you quote yourself ARE for the COMPLETE SYSTEM which is what NOW EXISTS.

The 8 Stations that exist are not the complete system. The system is incomplete. 8 stations for 3 lines??

[Ocklawaha]

Bottom line? To scrap it would probably cost more then to complete it.

Scrap it and we get zero return on our investment.

Scrap it and we'll end the subsidy for operations.

Scrap it and we'll have to cover the loss of dozens of hi-tech jobs.

Complete it and we'll be certain to increase it's usefulness.

Connect it to residential, other transit, garages, hospitals, sports, night spots and we'll see a surge in riders.

It will NEVER make money, but if it can recover 25% of it's operating costs it will have reached the national average for all transit systems. This does not include the possible income from leasing space to vendors and advertisers within the stations.

OCKLAWAHA

[heights unknown]

Bottom line? To scrap it would probably cost more then to complete it.

Scrap it and we get zero return on our investment.

Scrap it and we'll end the subsidy for operations.

Scrap it and we'll have to cover the loss of dozens of hi-tech jobs.

Complete it and we'll be certain to increase it's usefulness.

Connect it to residential, other transit, garages, hospitals, sports, night spots and we'll see a surge in riders.

It will NEVER make money, but if it can recover 25% of it's operating costs it will have reached the national average for all transit systems. This does not include the possible income from leasing space to vendors and advertisers within the stations.

OCKLAWAHA

I agree Ocklawaha; send the damn thing somewhere and to other places around the city and the metro, and then maybe, just maybe it will live up to its utmost potential.  As it is now it is not useful in no way, shape or form and is not living up to its intended use.  Send it to Riverside, Southside, San Marco, Sports Complex, Northside, Westside, and then we're talking steak and potatoes and not raiman noodles.

Heights Unknown

[mtraininjax]

fine, you guys go ahead and plan. When the money and more importantly, IF THE MONEY AND BUILDINGS COME, we can re-evaluate the plans at that time.

Till then, I enjoy looking at the dirt patches along Riverside in the Brooklyn area.

[Charles Hunter]

mtrain, over in the Sail Jacksonville thread, you commented that the fireworks were "mediocre" - the important question is: did the fireworks make a profit?

[Ocklawaha]

fine, you guys go ahead and plan. When the money and more importantly, IF THE MONEY AND BUILDINGS COME, we can re-evaluate the plans at that time.

Till then, I enjoy looking at the dirt patches along Riverside in the Brooklyn area.

Hey MTrain, what other Florida metropolis can boast of natrual Florida or "Florida Forever" land in it's downtown core?

mtrain, over in the Sail Jacksonville thread, you commented that the fireworks were "mediocre" - the important question is: did the fireworks make a profit?

Oh God Charles, now some member of some good ol' boy political machine is gonig to figure out how to produce a hand held metering device for the fireworks shows. "Punch One Dollar to see the Hearts", "Punch Two Dollars to see the Happy Faces"... Here we go!

OCKLAWAHA

[stjr]

The estimates you quote yourself ARE for the COMPLETE SYSTEM which is what NOW EXISTS.

The 8 Stations that exist are not the complete system. The system is incomplete. 8 stations for 3 lines??

Sorry, Cooly.  We already debated this subject once and you are wrong.  I wish you proponents would stop repeating myths so often that you start to really believe them.  You are damaging your own position because you are undermining your own credibility with me and other taxpayers who are tired of being grossly mislead on the $ky-high-way.  Until you admit its weaknesses and have specific solutions to them, you are failing to persuade those who are more objective in viewing this subject.  The cycle of arguments the proponents are putting forth today are just a rehash of the thinking used to build the original COMPLETE system.  See below for a post from a prior MJ thread: 

Ock:

Y'all might like to know that the SKYWAY "COMPLETED" is now back on the city's radar.

Sorry, Ock.  I agree with all your other comments on rail but I disagree with you on this one.  For two reasons: (1) It's a rat hole to put more money down it and (2) do this, and you can count on losing the FRAGILE community support for fixed mass transit projects such as street cars, light rail, and suburban rail because this will give it all an even bigger BLACK EYE (not everyone has your passion for rail, ya' know).

The $ky-high-way IS a COMPLETE SYSTEM.  See below.  New comers to Jax are being sold a bill of goods not knowing we have been down this path before.  Extending the $ky-high-way is not the HIGHEST and BEST use of our LIMITED MASS TRANSIT dollars or worthy of growing our multi-million dollar annual subsidy by LOCAL taxpayers.  When everything else is done, you can come back and play with this toy some more  .  P.S. Any politician pushing this is committing political career suicide.

ABC NEWS
$200 Million Ride to Nowhere
Almost No One Is Riding $200 Million Skyway

By Charles Herman
J A C K S O N V I L L E, Fla., July 29, 2002

The 2.5-mile Jacksonville Automated Skyway Express is a model of efficiency. Completely automated and controlled from a central operation center, the Skyway makes eight stops throughout the northeastern Florida city that is split in two by the St. John's River.

The only problem: hardly anyone rides it.

"It's strictly a waste of money from beginning to end," decried longtime Jacksonville critic Marvin Edwards. He blames the builder and supporter of the Skyway, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority (JTA).

"They lied about ridership projections," explained Edwards. "They said 56,000 a day at first, then dropped that to 30,000, then last it was 18,000 to 19,000."

Currently, the Skyway sees 3,000 riders per day who pay 35 cents a trip. In fiscal 2001, the Skyway brought in $513,694 in revenue but its expenses were $3.5 million.

Fights for Funding

The Skyway was first proposed back in 1971. It took more than a decade before the funding federal, state and local could be secured to start construction. At the time, the goal was mainly for development so the Skyway to connect the downtown core with parking facilities away from downtown.

The Jacksonville Skyway was part of three demonstration projects to see if "people-mover" systems could stimulate business expansion in downtown centers. Detroit and Miami received federal funds for similar projects.

Some officials within the Department of Transportation's Federal Transit Authority questioned the ridership projections for the Jacksonville Skyway.

In an interview with ABCNEWS' John Martin in 1994, Federal Transit Administration official Gordon Linton said, "We and this department, this administration and previous administrations, have not supported it."

Nevertheless, Congress eventually provided more than half the funds for the $182 million Skyway.

In 1987 construction began on the first 0.7-mile portion of the system.

"It was mainly for political reasons, not transportation reasons," explained former Rep. Bob Carr, who chaired the committee that approved funding for transportation projects in the early 1990s. "Like so many projects, they get a camel's nose under the tent and then it gets very very difficult to stop them."

Few Riders From the Start

In 1989 the first section was completed and opened to the public. Jacksonville's transit leaders projected more than 10,000 people would ride the Skyway a day on this 0.7-mile starter section.

Instead, only 1,200 rode the Skyway.

In 1993 Transit Authority member Miles Francis defended the system to ABCNEWS. "Until this thing is finished, there's no way to measure its performance or its potential."

Now it's finished and the Jacksonville Transit Authority is still waiting for the riders to come.

Open for Business

In November 2000, the complete Skyway opened to the public. Nearly two years later, with ridership at an average of 3,000 a day, the Skyway has not met even the projections for the starter section.

"No one will argue with the fact that ridership is not where we would like it to be," admitted Steve Arrington, director of engineering with the Jacksonville Transit Authority. He says the lack of riders is attributed to economic recessions in downtown Jacksonville in the early 1990s that led to a decrease in development in the area.

"Any number of things predicted to occur that didn't occur development-wise has an effect," he added. "Fuel prices, parking prices."

Arrington still believes in the Skyway and expects to reach its ridership goals. "You don't build a system like this or a roadway for the next four years," said Arrington. "You try to built it for the next 20 to 30 years."

Riding an empty car from one station to another, critic Edwards disagreed. "This really is a public rip-off and a total waste of money that could have gone for something not quite as fancy, but a lot more practical."

ABCNEWS' Jeffrey Kofman contributed to this story.

See:  http://www.metrojacksonville.com/forum/index.php/topic,4566.30.html#quickreply

[stjr]

Sorry, Ock, I just couldn't let you go unchallenged on this one. My responses in RED:

Bottom line? To scrap it would probably cost more then to complete it.  Really?  Care to back that up with a study?  It defies common sense to say this when we know that a loss of millions of dollars a year to operate it currently will grow further if it is expanded.  The costs to scrap it equals the cost of a wrecking ball less the proceeds from selling recycled concrete!


Scrap it and we get zero return on our investment. Zero return is better than a NEGATIVE return.  Not only is it hardly used but it costs lots more to subsidize than almost any alternative mode of transport.

Scrap it and we'll end the subsidy for operations.  Who is subsidizing operations?  The taxpayers, and local ones at that.  This kind of thinking is what makes government so inefficient in the eyes of the taxpayers and undermines support for projects that genuinely could do a much better job.


Scrap it and we'll have to cover the loss of dozens of hi-tech jobs. Replace it with a better and more successful project and those jobs will come back in even bigger numbers while Jax traffic and our environment will be better than ever.  Not to mention that higher return on investment we are all looking for.

Complete it and we'll be certain to increase it's usefulness. That's not saying very much since it is almost completely useless now. 


Connect it to residential, other transit, garages, hospitals, sports, night spots and we'll see a surge in riders.
Where is the comparison to other options?  You have offered many yourself and you know they are all better than the $ky-high-way since you have admitted if it didn't already exist you would never promote it.  JTA has said for over 25 years that a "SURGE in riders" was coming and we are still waiting.  It's not a rider-friendly system.  It's hard to access versus street level, it is hard to locate due to its size and technology, and it will thus never be convenient to the average rider.  Street level transit is far superior and that is what you should be putting at the top of the list.


It will NEVER make money, but if it can recover 25% of it's operating costs it will have reached the national average for all transit systems. This does not include the possible income from leasing space to vendors and advertisers within the stations. I am not advocating a mass transit system that makes money, just one that serves far more people for a lot less in losses.  Anything, just about, will beat the $ky-high-way numbers and everyone involved knows it.  Let's not make this a case of the "emperor's new clothes" where no one wants to admit our dirty little secret:  The $ky-high-way is a huge pork barrel project failure and a blight on the City of Jacksonville that is costing the taxpayers dearly when such money could be used to run a much more successful solution.  P.S. The extra income from station leases and advertising is a wash since any alternative system would have the same opportunities.  This is grabbing at straws.

OCKLAWAHA

Ock, I am with you on most of your subjects but I think you are blinded by the light on this one.  I know you say you were against it originally and I suggest you go back and revisit that position again.  Remember, my assertion is that any energy and resources put in promoting the $ky-high-way will undermine all else that you advocate for.  There simply are NOT ENOUGH RESOURCES or POLITICAL CAPITAL to grant all your wishes.  The $ky-high-way is the sick limb on the tree.  Prune it or the whole tree may die.

[Coolyfett]

Jacksonville would be a better city if the Skyway system had more stations, its really too bad it is not finished.

[Ocklawaha]

SYDNEY

In an interview with ABCNEWS' John Martin in 1994, Federal Transit Administration official Gordon Linton said, "We and this department, this administration and previous administrations, have not supported it."

Nevertheless, Congress eventually provided more than half the funds for the $182 million Skyway.

In 1987 construction began on the first 0.7-mile portion of the system.

Talk about a stretch, the Federal Government is out and out lying to us through smoke and mirrors. UMTA = Urban Mass Transit Administration of the FEDERAL GOVERNMENT then change the name to the FTA = FEDERAL TRANSIT ADMINISTRATION, then claim you had NOTHING to do with it. Now THIS is funny!

A Brief History of UMTA's Downtown People Mover Program

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

In 1966, Congress created the Urban Mass Transportation Administration (UMTA) and gave it responsibility for the development of new types of transit systems. UMTA funded a variety of research and development projects during its first few years and then in late 1970 let a contract to West Virginia University for construction of the first automated people mover in the U.S. In 1971, UMTA funded four companies at $1.5 million each to set up a demonstration of their automated guideway transit (AGT) development results at a transportation exposition, called TRANSPO '72. It was held at the Dulles International Airport near Washington, D.C. One of the objectives of  TRANSPO '72 was to try to stimulate cities around the nation to get interested in ordering one of these four systems which had been developed with federal funds.. While a few systems were ordered for airports and zoos, as of 18 months later, no urban area had ordered an AGT system. This was quite disappointing to UMTA and Congress.

A little later, the Downtown People Mover (DPM) program was initiated by a recommendation from the Office of Technology Assessment, an agency of the U.S. Congress. On September 10, 1974, the Transportation Subcommittee of the Senate Committee on Appropriations requested an assessment of Personal Rapid Transit and other new systems. Mr. Clark Henderson (of the Stanford Research Institute) chaired the OTA Panel on Current Developments in the United States. This panel reported: "With $200 million invested in Automated Guideway Transit installations, it is unfortunate that there is no such installation in a city to ascertain feasibility. There should be a concerted effort by the Federal government, municipalities, and the transportation industry to initiate a first urban application promptly." A key finding in the OTA report to Congress stated: An urban demonstration project for Shuttle Loop Transit (SLT) appears justified."

In addition, Congressional pressure was increased on UMTA to show some positive results from their research and development expenditures. So, in 1975 UMTA announced its Downtown People Mover Program and sponsored a nationwide competition among the cities, offering them the federal funds needed to design and build such a system. Since UMTA was prepared to pay most of the costs of planning and building these systems as part of  its demonstration program, the response from the cities was almost overwhelming.

In 1976, after receiving and  reviewing 68 letters of interest and 35 full proposals and making on-site inspections of the top 15 cities, UMTA selected proposals from Los Angeles, St. Paul, Minnesota, Cleveland and Houston. It also concluded that Miami, Detroit and Baltimore would be permitted to develop DPMs if they could do so with existing grant committments. In 1997, the U.S. House of Representatives and the Senate Appropriations Conference Committee told UMTA to include Baltimore, Indianapolis, Jacksonville and St. Louis as part of the program. UMTA also added Norfolk, Virginia to the program. Cleveland and Houston were the first to withdraw from the program. Later, St. Paul also withdrew after its voters did not approve their project.

In August of 1980, the General Accounting Office issued a report entitled Better Justification Needed for Automated People Mover Demonstration Projects. Projects currently planned at that time were estimated to cost the federal government about $675 million. The GAO report stated that UMTA had not shown why each of the planning projects was needed to meet program objectives. They noted that UMTA officials believed that multiple projects were necessary to (a) assure that at least one project would be implemented, (b) test different technologies (even though only technologies successfully operating elsewhere were to be used), (c) minimize the risk of failure to meet project expectations (the people mover concept for downtown use could be discredited), and (d) reflect local differences such as climate and economic conditions that might affect project results.  GAO recommended that the U.S. Secretary of Transportation direct UMTA to identify the need for each of the planned projects and seek further guidance from the Congress. The DOT responded that the four projects that were added by Congress were not needed to meet program objectives but that four of the five projects not added by Congress were necessary to meet program objectives and that each would make a unique contribution toward meeting the program's objectives.

All four of the projects initially selected by UMTA later withdrew from the DPM program but Miami and Detroit stayed the course and eventually built DPMs. Both have had a stormy history but both are still in operation in 2007. The Miami system has been extended and planning for extending the Detroit system is underway.  Current developments in downtown Detroit are having some positive effects on the utility of the Detroit Mover. Additional information on both the Miami and Detroit systems is available on-line. Later, Jacksonville built a downtown people mover system and it has recently been upgraded and extended.

To assist the cities in planning DPM systems, UMTA developed a manual called Planning for Downtown People Movers to assist the the cities that wished to undertake a DPM planning effort. A draft of the manual was published in April of 1979 as part of the Transportation Systems Center's Urban and Regional Research Series under report number DOT-TSC-UM-917-PP-79-8. It was well-done and would be useful today as a guide for DPM planning studies.

Today, there are few who regard UMTA's DPM program as having been a "success". However, it should be noted that there were a great many cities that showed interest in the program, most probably motivated by the prospect of "free" federal money but also by the hope that they might be able to actually do something positive about the congestion and parking problems in their often ailing downtowns.

In 1989 the first section was completed and opened to the public. Jacksonville's transit
("AUTHORITY" LOL) leaders projected more than 10,000 people would ride the Skyway a day on this 0.7-mile starter section.

Instead, only 1,200 rode the Skyway.

In 1993 Transit Authority member Miles Francis defended the system to ABCNEWS. "Until this thing is finished, there's no way to measure its performance or its potential."

In November 2000, the complete Skyway opened to the public. Nearly two years later, with ridership at an average of 3,000 a day, the Skyway has not met even the projections for the starter section.


Now it's finished and the Jacksonville Transit Authority is still waiting for the riders to come.

Sorry ABC, CBS, STJR and everyone else, until we can board and get off in SHANDS and the STADIUM it is NOT FINISHED.

In yet another phase: Further extensions were called for and supported (at least back in the day) to ST VINCENTS and SAN MARCO SQUARE. There was also a line on their future route map into Durkeeville.

"No one will argue with the fact that ridership is not where we would like it to be," admitted Steve Arrington, director of engineering with the Jacksonville Transit Authority. He says the lack of riders is attributed to economic recessions in downtown Jacksonville in the early 1990s that led to a decrease in development in the area.

"Any number of things predicted to occur that didn't occur development-wise has an effect," he added. "Fuel prices, parking prices."

Arrington still believes in the Skyway and expects to reach its ridership goals. "You don't build a system like this or a roadway for the next four years," said Arrington. "You try to built it for the next 20 to 30 years."

Things such as millions of dollars of subsidized parking spaces built by the city, or mandated by the city that went to directly undermine the Skyway projections. I will agree with Steve Arrington that from the time it was planned until it was completed the whole face of downtown retail dried up and thousands of square feet of previously owned or leased space went vacant. Again, parking, either metered or garaged played a huge roll in this. Jacksonville and the Skyway is another classic case of the "Duck shooting the hunter..." Can't say I didn't tell them so.


SEATTLE

My point is and remains, that we can fix it to a degree, (unknown without serious study), at which a decision needs to be made. Finish it or take it down, or? Perhaps finish the San Marco, Riverside, Bay Street and Rosa Parks lines to the nearest safe downgrade ramp and convert the entire thing - AGAIN - this time to streetcar.

OCKLAWAHA

[Shwaz]

STJR everyone knows your against the skyway and everyone knows why your against the skyway... but you're at a forum where the majority of posters supports the skyway expansion whether it's before or after commuter rail lines are established and even if the original skyway plan is complete.

I once saw 2 people picketing and preaching the "good word" right in the middle of the red-light district in Amsterdam. You & Mtrain remind me of those people.

[Steve]

I just think that you can take any transit form that is not a wild success, and come up with reasons to kill it.  Should we always do that?