Print Article
The History of the S-Line
Map of S-Line Greenway
Red = Completed S-Line Greenway
Yellow = Proposed S-Line Greenway Extension
Green = JTA/TPO/COJ Mobility Plan potential North Commuter Rail corridors
Green Circles = Potential north commuter rail station locations
The Atlantic, Gulf and West India Transit Railroad built the Fernandina & Jacksonville (F&J) railroad from Yulee to the downtown Jacksonville waterfront in the summer of 1880.
In 1881, a group of British and Dutch investors under Sir Edward Reed bought the struggling railroad. On March 5, 1884, Sir Edward Reed and company merged the F&J with the Florida Transit, the Peninsular, and the Tropical Florida Railroad to form the Florida Railway and Navigation Company.
Despite having a network of 500+ miles of track, the company still couldn't maneuver a car of freight from East Bay Street to Myrtle Avenue without going through Yulee and Baldwin. To resolve this problem, the company built a three-mile connector between its two Jacksonville terminals in 1886: the Jacksonville Belt Railroad. In 1899, the Florida Railway and Navigation Company was purchased by the Williams/Middleton Group, who christened the Seaboard Air Line Railroad (SAL). Thus, the S-Line was born.
During the early 20th century, several Jacksonville neighborhoods sprung up around industries served by the S-Line corridor. These neighborhoods include Panama Park, Brentwood, Springfield, New Springfield, Durkeeville, New Town, and downtown Jacksonville itself. The S-Line's decline parallels downtown Jacksonville's fall. In the mid-1950s, the SAL's downtown freight terminal and the wharfs it served, were removed for the construction of Sears, which relocated to Regency Square Mall itself in 1981. With the merger of the Seaboard and Atlantic Coast Line railroads, the Jacksonville Belt Railroad, (which roughly duplicated a superior former ACL route directly from the north side to the massive Moncrief Yard in the northwest side) trackage became redundant. Relocation of Jacksonville's Amtrak station to the Northside, and the bankruptcy of Railway Express, and subsequent closure of Myrtle Avenue's Railway Express Terminal (reputed to be the worlds largest)in the early 1970s, the railroad's need for the former Jacksonville belt railroad vanished, and by the early 1980s it was abandoned and donated to the City of Jacksonville.
S-Line Corridor of the Past
Rail service to Winn and Lovett's Beaver Street warehouse. This building is occupied by Load King today.
The Springfield Warehouse District's Swisher International had a day care center for it's employees on the manufacturing plant's roof during the 1940s.
Looking down the S-Line from North Liberty Street.
Springfield's Coca-Cola Bottling plant utilized the S-Line for rail shipments. Below, a look inside the Coca-Cola bottling plant in 1948.
North Main Street in New Springfield from the S-Line.
Inside the Moore Dry Kiln Company in 1965. This company is now known as United States Natural Resources (USNR).
S-Line Corridor of the Present
Remnants of an old USNR rail siding just south of Kings Road.
An old siding to Myrtle Avenue's Flowers Baking Company. The old bakery was demolished in 2003.
Averaging over 5,000 residents per mile, despite continued population decline since 1950, neighborhoods adjacent to the S-Line are still some of the densest in Jacksonville.
Springfield's Warehouse District is an example of an urban commercial district that could benefit economically from bringing the S-Line back to life.
A vision of the Springfield Warehouse District from the City of Jacksonville adopted Urban Core Vision Plan. Established walkable neigborhoods where significant public infrastructure already exists could become the site of new Transit Oriented Developments (TOD), historic preservation and adaptive reuse projects throughout the Northside. You can't encourage TOD without first investing in the "T".
Norwood Plaza is immediately adjacent to the S-Line corridor.
Returning Rail to the S-Line
The fight to utilize the S-Line as a mass transit corridor and economic revitalization stimulant was began by Metro Jacksonville in 2005. At the time, the Jacksonville Transportation Authority (JTA) and its consulting team, were in the midst of planning a dedicated Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) corridor between downtown and Gateway Mall that would utilize the I-95 right-of-way. Knowing that this alignment would further create a barrier between Northside neighborhoods, and inadequately serve or economically benefit the transit users,
Metro Jacksonville suggested the use of the S-Line corridor as an alternative transit route. However, instead of rubber-wheeled transit, fixed transit on the city-owned S-Line property was recommended; this would supposedly be significantly cheaper than building elevated BRT along I-95 and spur needed economic redevelopment and job creation throughout neighborhoods whose populations had declined nearly 50% since 1950. Originally spurned by JTA, Metro Jacksonville launched public crusade to expose the dedicated busway plan for the expensive fallacy that it was, while also promoting the S-Line as a viable alternative for future transit in Jacksonville. The results of this crusade included the modification of JTA's BRT plans, resulting in hundreds of millions of future tax dollars saved and the eliminating of downtown's Adams Street being converted into a bus-only arterial with buses utilizing the corridor every 30 seconds. In addition, the crusade led to JTA and the North Florida Transportation Planning Organization's (TPO) incorporating the S-Line into their future commuter rail plans.
For some unknown reason, the multi-use path, constructed a few years ago, was built in a fashion that consumed a 60-foot-wide corridor instead of leaving space for additional mobility uses. The image below illustrates how Detroit's Dequindre cut multi-use path was constructed to preserve right-of-way for future mass transit.
Image by Andrew Jameson at http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Dequindre_Cut_Detroit_a.JPG
While this crusade was taking place, the City of Jacksonville's Parks & Recreations Department was moving forward with the conversion of the S-Line into a rails-to-trails multi-use path.
Unsuccessfully, Metro Jacksonville attempted to work with the department to design the path in a manner to where the 60-foot-wide rail corridor could accommodate both a multi-use path and fixed transit. Nevertheless, the department eventually constructed an isolated, short path that has predictably been seldom used, due to its surrounding physical context and a lack of consideration on how such a corridor would connect to a city-wide bicycle network. If the S-Line's return to service takes place in the future, this multi-use path will have to be replaced with a path that is located on the edge of the right-of-way instead of at the center.
Existing Pedestrian & Employment Generators Along The S-Line Corridor
Looking down Boulevard Street, just south of the S-Line corridor, near Shands Jacksonville.
Planning for the future in an urban core environment means one must understand and acknowledge the history of that environment and how that has played a role on present day conditions. A brief review of Jacksonville's Northside and downtown clearly indicates that their growth and downfall are directly related to the maritime and railroad industries usage of the urban core. Specifically speaking, neighborhoods just north of downtown Jacksonville economically benefited from the S-Line's influence in the development of both the Myrtle Avenue and Springfield Warehouse districts. While these two districts have declined, utilizing the corridor for fixed mass transit provides them the opportunity for rebirth as "market rate", mixed-use loft districts - something that many peer communities have benefited from, due to collaborative planning efforts.
Nevertheless, several economic generators still exist within a quarter-mile walking radius of the S-Line corridor. The following destinations, along with a relatively dense, transit-dependent residential population base, make the S-Line a great option in serving as a transit spine for existing transit services, while also stimulating needed redevelopment in the communities surrounding it.
Gateway Mall
Originally completed in 1959, this mall served as the largest in Jacksonville for several decades. Today, it remains an anchor for commerical development for many neighborhoods that lack services taken for granted, such as grocery stores and pharmacies. Simply restoring fixed transit services to the S-Line immediately makes a destination like Publix or Walgreens one transit stop away for thousands of Northside residents.
Swisher International
Established in 1924, Swisher has grown to become the largest manufacturer of cigars in the world. Occupying over 700,000 square feet along the S-Line, it employees 1,100 Jaxons who produce as many as 8.5 million cigars a day. Simply restoring fixed transit services to the S-Line immediately presents many of these workers with an alternative mobility option to access this facility.
Shands Jacksonville
Employing 3,500, Shands Jacksonville was created in 1999 when Gainesville-based Shands HealthCare purchased two adjacent medical facilities - University Medical Center and Methodist Medical Center. In addition to Shands, the UF Proton Therapy Institute, Duval County Health Department, and VA Clinic all operate large facilities within walking distance of the S-Line corridor. Thus, restoring the S-Line not only provides better mobility for the thousands of employees at these facilities, but places thousands of residents one quick transit stop away from a variety of medical services.
James P. Small Park
Myrtle Avenue's James P. Small Park is a 4.82-acre public space that is a direct link between present day Jacksonville and Negro League baseball of the early 20th century. Originally constructed as Durkee Field in 1936, it was home to the Negro League's Jacksonville Red Caps. Famed names to pass through this site include Henry Aaron, Leroy "Satchel" Paige, Roy Campanella, James "Cool Papa" Bell and William "Judy" Johnson. Renovated in 2006, it includes the historic stadium, green space and a playscape in an area of town where greenspace is limited. Restoring the S-Line makes this asset more accessibile to a large segment of the urban core's residential population base.
Edward Waters College
Edward Waters College is Florida's oldest institution of higher education for African-Americans. It's also Jacksonville's oldest and most urban institution of higher education. Located on Kings Road since 1908, it has over a thousand students, many of whom reside within walking distance of the S-Line. Restoring the S-Line provides an additional means of connectivity between this expanding Northside asset and downtown.
Jacksonville Farmers Market
In operation since 1938, the Jacksonville Farmers Market is Florida's oldest farmers market in operation. It provides a forum in which customers can buy directly from over 200 farmers and vendors seven days a week year round. Covering nine acres, the market now owns a 28,000-square-foot building that will eventually house meat, seafood, and bakery vendors. Although located a half mile from the S-Line, the stretch in between is a former S-Line siding that could easily be converted into additional green space and a connecting multi-use path. Restoring the S-Line, along with a short multi-use path, provides better transit, pedestrian, and bicycle accessibility between the farmers market and the rest of the city.
Jacksonville Terminal (Prime Osborn Convention Center)
During its early years, the S-Line funneled thousands of rail passengers to this former downtown rail terminal. In fact, it was the largest railroad terminal in the South, recording nearly 10 million passengers on 40,000 trains and employing 2,000 workers in 1944 alone. For comparison's sake, 5.6 million passengers utilized Jacksonville International Airport in 2010. Today, it's the Prime Osborn Convention Center. Future JTA plans call for this terminal to be reopened as an intermodal transportation center. Rail utilizing the S-Line will become one of those modes that will feed thousands of pedestrians into downtown via the skyway. Restoring the S-Line helps funnel thousands of urban core transit riders into the skyway and downtown, thus significantly increasing skyway ridership and market-rate, private-sector investment opportunities in downtown Jacksonville.
Freight Benefits
K&G Box Company is one of many existing manufacturing plants along the S-Line corridor that could benefit from access to direct rail service, removing additional truck traffic from inner-city streets, and generating revenue to the city to help recover annual mass transit operation costs.
Rebuilding the S-Line would provide direct connectivity between FEC's Bowden Yard and this intermodal yard at JAXPORT's Talleyrand Terminal.
It's not a coincidence that the S-Line provides a direct rail connection between JAXPORT's Talleyrand Terminal and the Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad's Bowden Yard on the Southside. Now that this connection no longer exists, freight bound for FEC is shipped to the Southside by truck, speeding up the destruction of publicly maintained roads such as Emerson Street. The current JAXPORT intermodal railyard proposed for Dames Point will do nothing to improve better connectivity between the port and FEC. However, restoring the S-Line creates a direct link between the railroad and Talleyrand. In addition, there are several companies, such as Load King, USNR, Big D Design Center, Main Metal, and Smurfit-Stone, along the S-Line corridor that could become freight rail clients if fixed rail were restored.
New Town's Load King Manufacturing, a leading provider of food service industry turnkey modular stores, occupies a 300,000-square-foot building along the S-Line. Approximately 13-21% of New Town residents rely on public transportation to journey to work.
United States Natural Resources'(USNR) plant originally started off as the Moore Dry Kiln Company in 1910. The hump in the road was once a S-Line crossing.
A glance inside one of USNR's buildings along West State Street indicates some of these buildings still buzz with economic activity.
Now a part of USNR's complex, Blanche Street's former S-Line rail spur can be seen beneath the pavement.
Main Metal Recycling is a scrap metal recycler near the intersection of West Beaver Street and Myrtle Avenue.
Blessed with significant historic building fabric still remaining, available structures such as this 1922-era May-Cohen appliance and furniture warehouse, would be attractive for adaptive reuse ventures such as lofts, galleries, etc. with the return of the S-Line.
As a publicly owned rail corridor, freight revenue generated by port connectivity and other industries could be used to support annual mass transit operation costs that occur along the S-Line. Such a set up would not be unique. Sunbelt examples of freight services utilizing publicly owned commuter and light rail corridors include San Diego's Trolley, Austin's Capital Metrorail, and Dallas' Trinity commuter rail and DART light rail.
Passing freight cars on while travelling inside of a San Deigo Trolley car. The San Diego Trolley is one of the few LRT systems in the United States to share tracks with freight operations. Owned and operated by RailAmerica, the San Diego and Imperial Valley Railroad (SDIY) serves several industrial clients along 33 miles of the San Diego Trolley line. In 2008, the SDIY hauled 6,500 carloads, in which the main commodities were petroleum, agricultural products, and wood pulp. The issue identifying a revenue source for passenger rail annual O&M costs is something that most public agencies struggle with. The San Diego Trolley is innovative with funding because by sharing tracks with freight service, freight profits can be used to help maintain passenger operations and services. Such a set up allows for a community to provide mass transit without being forced to raise taxes.
2008 Estimated S-Line Capital Costs
In 2008, Metro Jacksonville's Robert "Ocklawaha" Mann worked with rail contractor Balfour Beatty to develop a preliminary cost estimate for the reconstruction of rail along the 4.5-mile S-Line corridor between the convention center and Gateway Mall. The estimated cost at the time was $30.7 million.
Those numbers included:
23,760 feet (4.5 miles) of main line single track
6,000 feet (3 x 2,000 ft) of platform tracks
4,500 feet (3 x 1,500 ft) of passing sidings
14 turnouts
7 stations (9 platforms & canopies)
20 road grade crossings
1 bridge
The numbers exclude permits, design and engineering, property acquisition, and potential environmental remediation.
2030 Mobility Plan & Fee: Funding The S-Line
10 Year CIE Priority Projects by Mobility Zone. A portion of the S-Line is identified as a mobility plan priority project for Mobility Zone 9.
Unlike many of the economic dreams and proposals being tossed around, this one actually comes with its own funding mechanism - a funding mechanism that doesn't call for a raise in taxes for all the fiscal conservatives out there. This mechanism is commonly referred to as the 2030 Mobility Plan and Fee, which was officially adopted by the Jacksonville City Council in September 2011.
What Does The Mobility Fee Money Go Towards?
The money from these fees will be used to support and fund rail, car, pedestrian and bicycle mobility projects. Chief among the planned projects to be funded by this new fee is a streetcar system that will connect Downtown Jacksonville with Riverside.
All of the mass transit based projects in the 2030 Mobility Plan
With that in mind, the mobility fee generates $31.25 million for Jacksonville to utilize the S-Line as a fixed transit corridor for the urban core, as opposed to additional highway construction that has decimated the area over the last 60 years. This $31.25 million is intended to be a local match needed to land federal transit dollars to make the project a reality. A suggestion to speed things up would be to utilize the $31.25 million for the reconstruction of the S-Line, and then utilize the S-Line's value to land federal dollars to pay for extensions north of the Imeson Industrial Park and Jacksonville Zoo.
Comparing Capital Costs
A brief comparison of S-Line capital costs associated with other redevelopment projects considered for investment over the last decade:
$23 million - Mathews Bridge Repainting
$25 million - Jacksonville Equestrian Center
$32 million - S-Line (funded by mobility plan)
$47 million - Atlantic/Kernan Overpass
$63 million - Interstate 95 Pavement Rehabilitation (Atlantic Blvd. to Greenland)
$95 million - Jacksonville Public Library
$130 million - Jacksonville Veterans Memorial Arena
$291 million - First Coast Outer Beltway (first 15-mile segment)
$350 million - Duval County Courthouse
$1.8 billion - First Coast Outer Beltway (entire 45-mile project)
The Problem: A Mobility Fee Moratorium
The image above illustrates a struggling Regency Square Mall. With thousands of homes being foreclosed and high commercial vacancy rates across the city, attempting to artificially spur new construction in an overbuilt market may not be the best economy boosting idea out there?
Shortly after the City Council approved the mobility fee, they approved a moratorium allowing the development community to not pay a fee that had been required the last two decades. Flying in the face of true market demand, the hope was that not collecting this impact fee would encourage the short term construction of more homes and development. While there is no proof that such a plan has ever worked in reality, it does place the financial burden associated with new private-sector construction on the backs of the council's constituents (the individual taxpayer). In addition, it holds Jacksonville back from investments and land-use strategies that could quickly lead to downtown development, distressed neighborhood economic revitalization, private-sector development, job creation, and the enhancing of JAXPORT's freight accessibility. The Mobility Fee moratorium is expected to sunset later this year. It will be up to the public to encourage the council to do the right thing and let this restricting public policy die a quick death.
Conclusion
Could this scene be possible for the Northside's S-Line? The only thing holding the urban core's potential back is ourselves and our ability to make the revitalization process more difficult, time consuming, and expensive than it has to be.
When one openly lays out the benefits associated with the S-Line, its difficult to comprehend why it should not be evaluated by the City of Jacksonville just as much as any other redevelopment scheme concerning downtown, JAXPORT, and the surrounding urban core. Unlike most, the right-of-way is alread owned by the City, the users are in place, building fabric is in place for immediate reutilization, and there's a funding mechanism ready to be put to use to make it a reality. We've done enough planning and we've been producing slick redevelopment marketing schemes for decades. Let's start implementing.
Thousands of jobs and billions in private sector transit oriented developments have taken place around San Diego's (shown above), Charlotte, Salt Lake City's fixed rail corridors, stimulating market rate downtown development in the process. When will Jacksonville abandon sixty years of failed policy decisions and join the party?
Article by Ennis Davis.
Share this article
RSS
justinthered
February 22, 2012, 05:11:25 AMSo does the funding for this already exist through the mobility plan? What is the quickest timeline for this plan to happen?
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 06:37:50 AMOnly about $60,000 in funding exists at this point. The mobility plan is intended to generate funding for a variety of projects that would be completed over a 20 year period. It was approved and a moratorium was placed on the fee shortly after. At the time, a Family Dollar had already paid $60,000 into it.
It can't generate the funds necessary to construct anything without council letting the moratorium sunset this fall. If that happens, the initial (roadway/transit) mobility plan projects are expected to occur over a five to ten year period. The bike and pedestrian projects could happen a lot quicker because they are significantly cheaper.
JeffreyS
February 22, 2012, 08:32:44 AMThe city council's betrayal of it's constituents to provide favors to their GOB developer insiders will not soon be forgiven or ever forgotten. (by me anyway)
It really seems like the council wants more pedestrians killed and less economic development.
strider
February 22, 2012, 08:34:00 AMGreat article. This does seem exactly what needs to happen. The activity something like this will generate will allow many of the issues people have with the urban areas to self correct. The article also illustrates both the good and the bad about Jacksonville. It's political leaders actually know what do to (they passed the mobility plan) but are too afraid (or greedy?) to actually allow it to be implemented (as shown by being intimated by the development lobby and passing the moratorium.).
toi
February 22, 2012, 09:18:28 AMThe mobility fee funds once collected are currently set to be divvied up into 20 separate accounts - 2 for each of the 10 mobility zones. Each zone has a bike/ped account, into which about 10 percent of the fees collected in that zone will go, with the other 90 percent into the road/rail account. Unless this structure is changed, it is safe to say we won't see much in the way of bike/ped improvements in the short term, even though they are much cheaper. One way to change it is to allow the City to direct a much greater proportion of the funds collected towards bike/ped improvements in the early years of its implementation -- that way we can see some meaningful results and improve public safety more quickly. In terms of non-automotive modes of mobility, bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure are the cheapest thing going: no capacity issues, almost no operating costs, small footprint, and often achievable without need for new right-of-way. The current mobility plan will result in funds sitting in accounts for a long time before being spent, until the big dollars are accumulated to build one road or streetcar improvement (not to mention the operating cost issue).
I think the author overstates the significance of the moratorium in terms of collecting funds. Instead of focusing on how we can extract more money from a mostly-dead real estate development market, how about focusing on how we can promote redevelopment and infill? The constituents who live and work in such projects will become the future advocates for improved infrastructure in these areas. For example, what signal are we sending to would-be developers in Riverside-Avondale with the current debate over a relative handful of parking spaces in the King Street area?
The listing of various road and infrastructure projects and their cost underscores that our collective focus and priorities matter a great deal. Long term, it is less about the money than it is about what we want. It is unrealistic to collect substantial funds for projects that lack widespread support, no matter how unpopular or small the group is that we try to collect the funds from.
stephendare
February 22, 2012, 09:26:05 AMThe author of this article is fairly knowledgeable about the mobility fund, I would posit.
Your post, while well taken, seems to take out of account the concept of stewardship and professional planning, doesnt it? While I agree that it is important to have consensus and an actual real time usefulness for larger projects, I think that you might be underestimating the significance of the moratorium in terms of collecting funds. For some reason this mechanism of funding transportation has become a politicized issue.
I wonder if you wouldnt mind explaining your highlighted claim?
Welcome back to the forums incidentally.
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 09:41:42 AMI'm glad you mentioned this, Toi. The mobility plan actually is set up to do just this. In addition to the fee structure, the plan integrated comprehensive land use policies with proposed mobility improvements. The fee itself is actually set up to encourge redevelopment and infill by leveling the cost of doing just that. For example, infill and redevelopment projects with higher densities along existing and future transit corridors pay a significantly lower fee. Those that don't, end up paying a higher fee. Like the mobility fee, the land use changes were approved, so there are a chunk of areas within this city that higher densities are now allowed. However, there's no real incentive to take advantage of these policies without the complementing fee.
full City of Jacksonville Mobility Plan presentation: http://www.metrojacksonville.com/article/2010-dec-2030-mobility-plan-presentation
In addition, if we want to truly promote infill pedestrian scale development, we need to invest in the infrastructure that stimulates that development pattern. At this point, you'll be hard pressed to find a pattern where development occurred before the infrastructure was put in place. That's the same for an urban core and suburbs.
Unfortunately, in Jacksonville we have a problem with veering from the proven path of reality, and over complicate these issues with strategies that are typically based on unproven opinions and fears (ex. build density than invest in infrastructure, etc.). It's a problem that we've suffered with for over 1/2 a century. At some point, we've got to admit failure, change our policies, do the right thing, and simply get out of the way and let the free market take control. It's simple and inexpensive.
toi
February 22, 2012, 09:52:07 AMSure Stephen. Look at the Business Journal's weekly reports of building permits issued, and look at the permits issued for commercial construction, week after week. For example, this past week, I see one new commercial building permit for one new building, valued at $150K. I don't know whether that particular building would have had to pay a mobility fee. There was also one new home permitted for construction in Duval County. Also, keep in mind that many projects are pre-mobility fee. While St. Johns Town Center has had construction on several outparcels in the past couple of years and recently, that is all pre-mobility fee. And yet, while Metro Jacksonville continues to rail against (no pun intended) the mobility fee moratorium, the JTA gas tax is heading towards the sunset, affecting its ability to borrow for infrastructure improvements right now. I'm not trying to be mean, here, and I appreciate all of the core group's focus on these issues. I know it is hard work to provide the researched content that you all provide. I am hopeful that the author's efforts will help show the public that other Cities have developed their infrastructure differently and with greater emphasis on things like bikeways, the pedestrian and light rail.
Article explaining 6-cent JTA tax revenues - http://jacksonville.com/news/metro/2010-06-05/story/jta-ask-council-gas-tax-increase-and-extension
Tom
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 10:07:51 AMKeep in mind the process is a marathon, not a sprint. Development happens in cycles. There will be ups and downs and everyone is fully aware that this economic cycle is in a down position. Yet if you can incentivize a method to promote quality infill development (which the plan does), you can encourage niche markets to perform better in a city that has historically made developing this niche unfeasible.
Furthermore, yes many developments are pre-mobility plan/fee. However, they have an option to modify if they choose so. In many cases, modification will save tons of money. Nevertheless, all of this is moot if no program of any kind exists. Instead of making any progress, we're simply falling further and further behind.
Last but not least, no one mentions it, but why not utilize the fee as a dedicated funding source that is used for local matching grants for various programs and P3 opportunities out there. There's multiple innovative ways to take advantage of the concept that will speed up the implementation of several items needed to trigger quality growth, development, and job creation throughout our community.
At this point, I'm actually fine with the gas tax situation. I've heard arguments from both sides but I'm of the opinion that Jacksonville may be better off if JTA were revamped into a transit only agency, leaving the roadway side of things in the hands of FDOT and COJ public works. Fixed rail discussion aside, we've got a lot to improve with our existing mass transit operations. More focus and accountability in this particular arena is needed. The fact that the gas tax is sunsetting encourages needed discussion and solution making, regarding the future of JTA and its role in making Jacksonville a better place.
toi
February 22, 2012, 10:10:40 AMEnnis - thanks for your reply. I do not disagree that the powerpoint presentation that was widely used in the promotion of the Mobility Plan emphasized the theory that infill would pay significantly less. They used an example of Jackson Square, which had something like 60 units per acre, which would pay far far less, but the reason for that was that the trip generation model calculation had a geometric reduction in trips coming from projects that were very high density -- a density that is not likely to be common in this market for many years if ever. I had argued to the point of being quite annoying that the City would better achieve the goal of promoting infill by making the standard per trip cost ($24.14) lower for a selected area of the City -- say Mobility Zones 7-10 under the City's maps (very roughly, areas that were initially developed between the City's founding and 1950). To do that, one way is to delete from the list of improvements to be funded by the older areas of the City the 25% share of the SE commuter rail line that parallels the planned BRT line, and delete the 25% share of the other two commuter rail lines, and delete the Skyway Extension, which by my calcs would have cost much more than constructing an enclosed, air-conditioned bike path along the corridor they wanted to put it. One could also argue about the need to 6-lane Philips Highway (also parallel to the BRT), whether at all or with mobility fee funds.
I am not saying, commuter rail is bad, I am just saying, the proposed way of paying for it will hurt it from ever happening, and moreover, the bigger issue is that we have gracious plenty infrastructure in our older areas to easily handle more density, so why not recognize that and not try to charge these areas a cost much greater than their impact? Instead of having standard mobility fee roughly 25% cheaper than in the less developed areas, make it 75% cheaper, at least for projects that have some minimum floor area ratio or density? In the end, the committee agreed to delete the Skyway extension but then directed staff to not change the total cost of projects funded - staying at the 444 million number. I hope we can revisit what the charges are for infill and redevelopment before the market recovers from the current depressed state.
stephendare
February 22, 2012, 10:11:58 AMIt would actually be impossible for you to be mean about the mobility fee on this forum Tom.
But I did want to cure a misperception. MetroJacksonville continues to 'rail' against the moratorium in order to keep attention focused on the issue so that the stupid thing will not be renewed.
Absolutely no one thinks that this year in this economy was on track to generate a bunch of new construction. But the moratorium itself was initiated by people who claimed that if only they didnt have to pay any impact fees at all (and I use the term loosely) then it would spur development.
Several projects were already on line to be completed this year, a few by one of the largest campaign finance machines of the election (Toney Sleiman) which we anticipate will be used as 'proof' that the moratorium led to new construction in order to renew the tax free season on developers so that all the costs of sprawl are outsourced to the taxpayers.
However this year --as you pointed out, is already disappointing in terms of new construction, proving that the moratorium did not work-----even remotely.
We anticipate that the argument will be from the developers that they need even more tax free time to develop at the taxpayers expense when the moratorium expires.
But the times will not always be this grim, and the economy will rebound, especially as the cheaply built construction of the past 40 years begins to fall apart.
The moratorium needs to end and the city needs to be working towards a development system that doesnt bankrupt us to the point of unsustainability.
Thats what this is about. really.
stephendare
February 22, 2012, 10:20:38 AMTom I think that the intrinsic problem with your proposal is its way of arbitrarily choosing an area and that is why it won't work. These politically decided geographical incentive zones have been used for a few decades by both the Feds and the State in empowerment and enterprize zones.
They don't actually work, longterm without the participation of independent small business development that follows a niche based, complex self organized system of business interdependence. Far too complex to be documented and therefore completely ignored whenever the progress reports of the various 'zones' are prepared. Officially all we ever know about the geographical zones is 'sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't'.
The fact that downtown has been so heavily incentivized for over 60 years is kind of proof in that pudding.
The genius behind the Mobility Plan, (and the reason it has been recognized nationally) is not just that it provides a funding mechanism for mobility projects----far from it.
The genius of it is that it is wholly based on the mechanism of complex self organizing economic models, recognizes its role as a trope within that system and maintains a structural flexibility that encourages and accelerates the process along lines that promote density.
Your proposed alternative would do none of that.
aclchampion
February 22, 2012, 10:27:19 AMI'm confused about a couple of details in the story. Specifically this paragraph:
"It's not a coincidence that the S-Line provides a direct rail connection between JAXPORT's Talleyrand Terminal and the Florida East Coast (FEC) Railroad's Bowden Yard on the Southside. Now that this connection no longer exists, freight bound for FEC is shipped to the Southside by truck, speeding up the destruction of publicly maintained roads such as Emerson Street."
As far as I know, the S line never directly connected Talleyrand with Bowden Yard. To go from Talleyrand to Bowden, trains have to go either to Moncrief Yard or Simpson Yard then be moved to Bowden. And Norfolk Southern and CSX both make several trips a day with 100 car piggyback trains over the FEC Bridge to Bowden. And vice versa. So that connection is very much alive.
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 10:45:22 AMI never heard of an enclosed air-conditioned bike path (sounds pretty crazy) but I can see excluding an entire section of the town from paying an impact fee is a political time bomb that could have sunk the entire plan before it even got to council. Because, you're taking from other areas to pay for improvements that have greater benefit elsewhere.
This is a project that I was originally against but it makes sense, when properly coordinated with FDOT and JTA. Philips is a rural highway with no sidewalks, poor street lighting, and dangerous biking conditions, and intersection safety crossing issues. Any new TOD along that corridor will benefit from Philips being converted into a context sensitive urban street design. Such a project would also allow enhanced bus service (its not real BRT) to operate along the SE corridor without federal dollars (freeing that request up for commuter rail). Now that JTA has continued to pursue federal funds for Philips, if granted, that will basically kill commuter rail paralleling Philips for the foreseeable future.
aclchampion
February 22, 2012, 10:47:15 AMAnd I believe this is probably a typo:
"In the mid-1950s, the Seaboard Coast Line Railroad's downtown freight terminal and the wharfs it served, were removed..."
ACL and SAL didn't become Seaboard Coast Line until 1967.
JeffreyS
February 22, 2012, 10:49:23 AMThis map should be reason enough to make commuter rail one of our guiding priorities.
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 11:12:09 AMYes, should have been SAL. Thanks. I'll correct that.
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 11:16:44 AMYes, the S-Line has been gone for a few decades now. At one point, it did allow access to the FEC without going to Simpson or Moncrief. Today, a good chunk of freight travels by truck to all three yards. A benefit of a publicly owned rail corridor accessing the port is that it takes the need to pull something to the NS or CSX yards before reaching FEC. Time is money. Imo, it's a positive anytime you can cut out the middle man.
aclchampion
February 22, 2012, 11:30:57 AMNot doubting your word but I am going to have to check my old maps because I do not believe that Seaboard Air Line ever directly interchanged with the FEC.
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 11:39:03 AMThanks. Be sure to let us know what you find. I'd like to know if the S-Line and SAL never physically connected to the old Jacksonville Terminal and FEC track.
aclchampion
February 22, 2012, 12:05:12 PMLooking at the old Sanborn Maps, and some other documents, the S line came east to the old F&J Yard and then turned north. There was another connection off the F&J yard that crossed 8th Street East and ran parallel to 7th St East that belonged to SAL. It branched off and one went southeast to what is now called Eastport Yard. But the other branch never reached the port area. It terminated just east of Talleyrand Ave. The only rail connections I can find belong to the St Johns River Terminal Company (Norfolk Southern) and Municipal Dock and Terminal Railroad (Talleyrand Terminal Railroad). I believe SJRTC, SAL and ACL all interchanged at F&J Yard. Still researching.
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 12:29:17 PMThanks. If the S-Line were re-established as a part of a municipal line between the F&J yard and Prime Osborn, what would stop FEC from being able to directly interchange at F&J with Talleyrand Terminal Railroad? Would you consider that a realistic possibility? Btw, for the record, I believe the city and JAXPORT would be better off buying all of the former S-Line that CSX still operates north and south of the F&J. Making it a municipal rail corridor would basically give all three major rail carriers direct access with Talleyrand and Blount Island (assuming the S-Line between downtown and the F&J was restored).
Bike Jax
February 22, 2012, 12:35:10 PMI posted this link a few days ago, but I think it is worth reposting.
"Any major American city that solely relies on streets and highways for its transportation network will fail to remain competitive and will falter economically over time. That includes cities with bus transit systems that rely on the same streets and highways."
Here is link to an excellent article in Next American City:
http://americancity.org/buzz/entry/3361/
aclchampion
February 22, 2012, 01:36:02 PMI'm not a transportation expert, Lakelander, but i can't see any reason to do that. FEC already interchanges with both CSX and NS and both go to the port. I can't imagine why FEC would ever want their own connection directly to Talleyrand. Their major port is Miami. And I just don't see how that could ever be possible anyway, since mass portions of the old S line aren't just buried, they are gone and theres this little obstruction called the JTA that might object to trains coming right through their yard.
Just my opinion.
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 01:45:41 PMAs a part of JTA's commuter rail plans, JTA's yard would be reconfigured to repair the missing link.
aclchampion
February 22, 2012, 01:47:32 PMDid not know that. That puts a whole different slant on it doesn't it?
aclchampion
February 22, 2012, 01:50:49 PMLakelander, is the original roadbed and rail buried under the asphalt of the now bike path or did they rip up the rails and ties?
thelakelander
February 22, 2012, 02:14:50 PMThe bed is still there in some parts but it will have to be completely rebuilt. You're looking at a little over $30 million (1/2 the cost of I-95's. 8-mile pavement repair project costs) for 4-5 miles of track. However, that will be generated by the mobility fee, over time, if we actual decide to collect it.
Here is a link to JTA's commuter rail feasibility study from a few years back: http://www.jtafla.com/JTAfutureplans/Rail/
BackinJax05
April 13, 2012, 12:07:43 AMPulling up the S-line was one of the stupidest things CSuX has ever done. Not only here in Jacksonville, but in Georgia too. And they wonder why the A-line is so congested.