The Jaxson

Community => Transportation, Mass Transit & Infrastructure => Topic started by: KenFSU on August 08, 2018, 02:11:24 PM

Title: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on August 08, 2018, 02:11:24 PM
To run from the new Regional Transportation Center to TIAA Bank Field:

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2018/08/08/exclusive-a-63-million-innovation-corridor-could.html

Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Captain Zissou on August 08, 2018, 02:19:12 PM
Yeah lets totally do this rather than fix current road conditions and enhance pedestrian amenities.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Tacachale on August 08, 2018, 02:47:28 PM
Some quick thoughts:

Quote

What is the innovation corridor?

The innovation corridor is meant to be a proof of concept for two current initiatives: JTA's Ultimate Urban Circulator (U2C) and the TPO's Integrated Data Exchange. The U2C is the future of Jacksonville's aging Skyway. It will deploy a fleet of autonomous vehicles that will descend from the Skyway's 2.5-mile elevated infrastructure via off-ramps onto surface streets throughout downtown and surrounding neighborhoods, expanding the people-mover system into a 10-mile network.


Quote

Where is it going?

The corridor runs along Bay Street from the Jacksonville Regional Transportation Center to TIAA Bank Field. JTA CEO Nat Ford previously told the Business Journal that the U2C will support a barbell-like downtown. The JRTC will anchor one end by funneling bus rapid transit, fixed route buses, intercity buses and commuter rail into downtown and TIAA Bank Field, Daily's Place Amphitheater, the future Shipyards development project and other entertainment options will anchor the other end. The U2C, along with bikeshares and rideshares, will move people within the downtown to the apartments, campuses, retailers and restaurants in between.


The JTA portion of this sounds unfeasible. This track implies ripping out the current Skyway entirely, plus adding another mile+ on the street. That's going to cost a lot more than the $13.9 million that this article show them receiving (and that money is split by both JTA and JEA).

Then there's the matter that the technology isn't here yet to do what they're wanting it to do. When we were writing our articles on the Skyway proposals, Ennis shared a report from an AV company that says we're still 15 years away from implementation. At best, this will serve as a testing route for an unproven technology that's already being tested in cities like Atlanta, Ann Arbor and Las Vegas. The problem gets worse if the vehicles are mixing in traffic instead of having their own dedicated lanes (which is necessary for a working transit system). We're even farther away from having robot buses that can handle traffic.

The proposed Bay Street route also totally conflicts with the COJ's plans for the same corridor. Again, no right dedicated lanes, no proposed places for new stations.

And all that's contingent on them actually getting this money. If they don't, we're pushed back another few years on seeing anything happen with the Skyway.

I'm sure Ennis will be weighing in soon with even more commentary!
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on August 08, 2018, 03:35:39 PM
I have nothing much to say on this one. 2,500 passengers a day.......good luck!
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: marcuscnelson on August 09, 2018, 12:17:26 AM
I can't help but wonder when JTA is finally going to stop deluding itself with this pie in the sky fantasy of clown cars mingling with downtown traffic and just build a normal streetcar system like they should have planned to do in the first place.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: bl8jaxnative on August 12, 2018, 01:34:20 PM
I can't help but wonder when JTA is finally going to stop deluding itself with this pie in the sky fantasy of clown cars mingling with downtown traffic and just build a normal streetcar system like they should have planned to do in the first place.

There's a special kind of ideological zealotry required to go from invoking delusion over robo minibuses only to immediately invoke using a technology that was made obsolete 90s years ago.

The problem with the skyway is that it requires a huge amount of resources.   It's fixed costs are sky high and it's more expensive to operate than the new BRT routes that are 3 times longer and carry 5 tiimes as many people.   The Skway is a resource hog that's completely unsustainable.

Today here are ZERO minibuses on the market that are designed to also operate on the Skyway.  JTA's Skyway equipment is at the end of it's life, constantly failing nearly every day.   The only thing keeping those decrepit cars running is some duct tape and really talented mechanics.   

The only thing JTA should be lobbying for at this time is for explicit permission to mothball the Skyway.  That is if there really is an issue with those Federal grants.   That's not entirely clear; it's a claim JTA has been reluctant to publically back with evidence.

TPO's data exachange plan is fantastic.  IIRC they're already providing / selling realtime traffic data to 3rd parties like Waze using blue tooth dectors.   Having data about pedestrian movements, parking spots, autos, etc on the corridor would be a great stepping off point into more sophisticated planning.


So:
a) Mothball the Skyway
b) Build the Bay Street data exchange with the smart meters, smart traffic lights, smart lighting, etc, etc. 

It's a great test bed for some cool technologies.   

Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Tacachale on August 13, 2018, 10:59:23 AM
I can't help but wonder when JTA is finally going to stop deluding itself with this pie in the sky fantasy of clown cars mingling with downtown traffic and just build a normal streetcar system like they should have planned to do in the first place.

There's a special kind of ideological zealotry required to go from invoking delusion over robo minibuses only to immediately invoke using a technology that was made obsolete 90s years ago.

The problem with the skyway is that it requires a huge amount of resources.   It's fixed costs are sky high and it's more expensive to operate than the new BRT routes that are 3 times longer and carry 5 tiimes as many people.   The Skway is a resource hog that's completely unsustainable.

Today here are ZERO minibuses on the market that are designed to also operate on the Skyway.  JTA's Skyway equipment is at the end of it's life, constantly failing nearly every day.   The only thing keeping those decrepit cars running is some duct tape and really talented mechanics.   

The only thing JTA should be lobbying for at this time is for explicit permission to mothball the Skyway.  That is if there really is an issue with those Federal grants.   That's not entirely clear; it's a claim JTA has been reluctant to publically back with evidence.

TPO's data exachange plan is fantastic.  IIRC they're already providing / selling realtime traffic data to 3rd parties like Waze using blue tooth dectors.   Having data about pedestrian movements, parking spots, autos, etc on the corridor would be a great stepping off point into more sophisticated planning.


So:
a) Mothball the Skyway
b) Build the Bay Street data exchange with the smart meters, smart traffic lights, smart lighting, etc, etc. 

It's a great test bed for some cool technologies.

Streetcar isn't any more obsolete than cars, buses and planes, which also existed 90 years ago. The main difference is that in the meantime, we've developed our cities almost exclusively around the car. Streetcars aren't suited for every environment but there are environments they're suited for as part of the transit network, as various cities have shown. Streetcars or something comparable would be a good fit for urban Jax, if it was implemented correctly.

As for mothballing the Skyway, that's a non-starter. We'd have to pay back millions in federal grants, nevermind the cost to demolish the infrastructure, to further deteriorate our transit network. There's no gain there. Replacing it would be better, just not with an unproven technology that doesn't have the capacity of the current monorails.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: vicupstate on August 13, 2018, 12:49:56 PM
Didn't the Skyway get a total revamp not that long ago, and now it is obsolete again? 

If a powerful Senator or House member [a modern day Charles Bennett] could probably get something passed to allow JAX to demo the system if JAX paid for the demolition itself. If nothing else they could get the reimbursement reduced. If was done as part of a 'demonstration' project which clearly has not been successful.

 
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Non-RedNeck Westsider on August 13, 2018, 02:33:44 PM
FIFY:

If (sic) was half-assedly done as part of a 'demonstration' project which clearly has not been given a real chance at being considered successful.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: vicupstate on August 13, 2018, 04:01:45 PM
FIFY:

If (sic) was half-assedly done as part of a 'demonstration' project which clearly has not been given a real chance at being considered successful.

Correct, 'If' was supposed to be 'It' in my initial post.

A good argument can be made that it was done half-assed, and might have been successful if completed as intended. However, that is water under the bridge at this point. 

Serious question: would it be possible/desirable to not actually demolish it but turn it into a 'high line' similar to NYC?  Yes, that would be expensive but so would demolition of the infrastructure. If it was done with the NYC level of quality, it could be a real draw for residential (and other ) development.

We'd still have to pay back the feds to rip out the transit. At that stage, we're better of replacing it.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: tufsu1 on August 15, 2018, 05:01:47 PM
I can't help but wonder when JTA is finally going to stop deluding itself with this pie in the sky fantasy of clown cars mingling with downtown traffic and just build a normal streetcar system like they should have planned to do in the first place.

It isn't just JTA - pretty much every transportation agency in Florida is drinking the kool-aid on connected & autonomous vehicles.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on August 15, 2018, 05:16:04 PM
They're the new toy of the month. Like electric scooters that are now giving bike share a run for its money, they have a role in the transportation world but it's not total disruption.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Adam White on August 16, 2018, 08:59:30 AM
I can't help but wonder when JTA is finally going to stop deluding itself with this pie in the sky fantasy of clown cars mingling with downtown traffic and just build a normal streetcar system like they should have planned to do in the first place.

There's a special kind of ideological zealotry required to go from invoking delusion over robo minibuses only to immediately invoke using a technology that was made obsolete 90s years ago.

The problem with the skyway is that it requires a huge amount of resources.   It's fixed costs are sky high and it's more expensive to operate than the new BRT routes that are 3 times longer and carry 5 tiimes as many people.   The Skway is a resource hog that's completely unsustainable.

Today here are ZERO minibuses on the market that are designed to also operate on the Skyway.  JTA's Skyway equipment is at the end of it's life, constantly failing nearly every day.   The only thing keeping those decrepit cars running is some duct tape and really talented mechanics.   

The only thing JTA should be lobbying for at this time is for explicit permission to mothball the Skyway.  That is if there really is an issue with those Federal grants.   That's not entirely clear; it's a claim JTA has been reluctant to publically back with evidence.

TPO's data exachange plan is fantastic.  IIRC they're already providing / selling realtime traffic data to 3rd parties like Waze using blue tooth dectors.   Having data about pedestrian movements, parking spots, autos, etc on the corridor would be a great stepping off point into more sophisticated planning.


So:
a) Mothball the Skyway
b) Build the Bay Street data exchange with the smart meters, smart traffic lights, smart lighting, etc, etc. 

It's a great test bed for some cool technologies.

Streetcars are trams and tram systems are very successfully used in cities all over the world. Perhaps the idea is an old one, but it seems to be a very viable one.

Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Tacachale on August 16, 2018, 09:23:35 AM
I can't help but wonder when JTA is finally going to stop deluding itself with this pie in the sky fantasy of clown cars mingling with downtown traffic and just build a normal streetcar system like they should have planned to do in the first place.

There's a special kind of ideological zealotry required to go from invoking delusion over robo minibuses only to immediately invoke using a technology that was made obsolete 90s years ago.

The problem with the skyway is that it requires a huge amount of resources.   It's fixed costs are sky high and it's more expensive to operate than the new BRT routes that are 3 times longer and carry 5 tiimes as many people.   The Skway is a resource hog that's completely unsustainable.

Today here are ZERO minibuses on the market that are designed to also operate on the Skyway.  JTA's Skyway equipment is at the end of it's life, constantly failing nearly every day.   The only thing keeping those decrepit cars running is some duct tape and really talented mechanics.   

The only thing JTA should be lobbying for at this time is for explicit permission to mothball the Skyway.  That is if there really is an issue with those Federal grants.   That's not entirely clear; it's a claim JTA has been reluctant to publically back with evidence.

TPO's data exachange plan is fantastic.  IIRC they're already providing / selling realtime traffic data to 3rd parties like Waze using blue tooth dectors.   Having data about pedestrian movements, parking spots, autos, etc on the corridor would be a great stepping off point into more sophisticated planning.


So:
a) Mothball the Skyway
b) Build the Bay Street data exchange with the smart meters, smart traffic lights, smart lighting, etc, etc. 

It's a great test bed for some cool technologies.

Streetcars are trams and tram systems are very successfully used in cities all over the world. Perhaps the idea is an old one, but it seems to be a very viable one.

Right. It's an old invention but so are cars, buses and planes.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on August 16, 2018, 10:17:31 AM
The mistake we're making locally is planning in a vacuum.  We're so blown away be gadgets, toys and trying to be innovative, to the point that we forget, overlook or downplay the basics. Simply, before we debate over technology and what type of mode best serves the city, can we please decide what type of city we truly want to be and then craft our mobility and land use decisions to incrementally lead to that vision? There is no one-size fits all solution, so there will be areas where fixed transit, buses and even AVs make sense. There will also be other areas where none of them are a good fit. Unfortunately, it seems like everyone from JTA and COJ to the Jags are doing their own thing and none of the parts really effectively go together. With that said, I know for a fact representatives from all of agencies do communicate with each other but the end products clearly don't appear to be well aligned.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Captain Zissou on August 16, 2018, 10:48:05 AM
The mistake we're making locally is planning in a vacuum.  We're so blown away be gadgets, toys and trying to be innovative, to the point that we forget, overlook or downplay the basics. Simply, before we debate over technology and what type of mode best serves the city, can we please decide what type of city we truly want to be and then craft our mobility and land use decisions to incrementally lead to that vision? There is no one-size fits all solution, so there will be areas where fixed transit, buses and even AVs make sense. There will also be other areas where none of them are a good fit. Unfortunately, it seems like everyone from JTA and COJ to the Jags are doing their own thing and none of the parts really effectively go together. With that said, I know for a fact representatives from all of agencies do communicate with each other but the end products clearly don't appear to be well aligned.

How do we start this sort of regional planning and ACTUAL implementation?  The amount of money we waste on scattershot plans and projects that fail to reach their potential has to be in the tens of millions annually, but is it the mayor who is responsible for the lack of cohesion?  I also lump the maintenance issue into this as well.  A well executed and comprehensive plan should incorporate funding and labor for maintenance.  Other metros are able to do this on a much larger scale, so why aren't we?
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: bl8jaxnative on August 18, 2018, 01:49:57 PM
Streetcar isn't any more obsolete than cars, buses and planes, which also existed 90 years ago.

Age doesn't make something obselete, having something that does something more effeciently does.  That's why we still have chairs even though they're thousands of years old.

Street cars are to transportation what the physical newspaper is to news.   It's nostagically cute but not especially useful.


Streetcars were better for getting around cities that were growing from 5,000 to 50,000 people.  But other technologies have come to be much more effecient, especially as our cities have exploded in size post-WWII from 50,000 to 250,000 to millions.





As for mothballing the Skyway, that's a non-starter. We'd have to pay back millions in federal grants, nevermind the cost to demolish the infrastructure, to further deteriorate our transit network.

It's not a non-starter:
a) JTA has never shared with the public evidence that they would have to pay anything back.  This is often repeated claim that, to date, they have refused to back-up.
b) Even if A is true, special exceptions can be made under a variety of existing and future legal vehicles.

c)  JTA SPENDS $10 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR ON THE SKYWAY

If JTA did nothing more than stop running the Skyway today, they'd have an extra $10M to do all sorts of things including paying off the pro-rated federal grants that they claim they can't walk away from.

$10 million dollars a year of an $100 million dollars is a whole hell of a lot of things that JTA could do.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Tacachale on August 18, 2018, 03:21:22 PM
Streetcar isn't any more obsolete than cars, buses and planes, which also existed 90 years ago.

Age doesn't make something obselete, having something that does something more effeciently does.  That's why we still have chairs even though they're thousands of years old.

Street cars are to transportation what the physical newspaper is to news.   It's nostagically cute but not especially useful.


You’d be correct if those assumptions were accurate. Again, there are plenty of cities and environments where streetcars and similar technologies continue to work well. There are also things that fixed rail can do that other modes can’t, like sparking TOD.


Streetcars were better for getting around cities that were growing from 5,000 to 50,000 people.  But other technologies have come to be much more effecient, especially as our cities have exploded in size post-WWII from 50,000 to 250,000 to millions.





As for mothballing the Skyway, that's a non-starter. We'd have to pay back millions in federal grants, nevermind the cost to demolish the infrastructure, to further deteriorate our transit network.

It's not a non-starter:
a) JTA has never shared with the public evidence that they would have to pay anything back.  This is often repeated claim that, to date, they have refused to back-up.
b) Even if A is true, special exceptions can be made under a variety of existing and future legal vehicles.

c)  JTA SPENDS $10 MILLION DOLLARS A YEAR ON THE SKYWAY

If JTA did nothing more than stop running the Skyway today, they'd have an extra $10M to do all sorts of things including paying off the pro-rated federal grants that they claim they can't walk away from.

$10 million dollars a year of an $100 million dollars is a whole hell of a lot of things that JTA could do.

I’m pretty sure that evidence has been published before. At any rate, Iexpect that if JTA could actually get out of paying back the grants on the Skyway, it would’ve been figured out by now. I’ve never heard the $10 million a year figure before. It might be compelling, if JTA’s goal is only to save money by cutting service. Replacing it something else would also cost money. Which is why the conversation should be about finding and meeting actual need Downtown, rather than picking an unproven technology and working backward, or shutting the entire service down with no plan to replace it.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: marcuscnelson on August 18, 2018, 04:20:26 PM
I think I know what bl8jaxnative's idea is!

Replace the Skyway system with not a new public transit system, but with… HIGHWAYS!

We're already tearing down the Hart bridges by Bay Street, so why not use the concrete to pave new elevated roads, right through downtown! We'll save millions! Suburbanites will flock to downtown with the amazing elevated highway system! Who needs a streetcar when you can use your car!

This message is sponsored by Rick Scott.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on December 05, 2018, 12:17:28 PM
More details + video:

https://www.bizjournals.com/jacksonville/news/2018/12/05/video-brings-downtown-innovation-corridor-to-life.html
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on December 05, 2018, 12:26:37 PM
Hmm.....
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Steve on December 05, 2018, 01:03:44 PM
I can’t reliably get my yard waste picked up, JTA and COJ arent exactly known for a great working relationship, and ALL of these agencies are supposed to work together!?
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on December 05, 2018, 02:11:49 PM
I've watched this video three times, and I'm still not entirely sure what they're proposing.

A fleet of 15 clown cars, I get that.

An app to hail said clown cars, I get that.

They start to lose me though when they talk about solar sidewalks, and pedestrian sensors, and flood sensors, and light-up lanes, and open-source software. Then they really lose me when they start talking about tracking flight information and TSA queues... on Bay Street... to spur development (?).

10-1 odds the blockchain is involved.

I hope we get the grant, but it just kind of feels like a bunch of unnecessary gimmicks thrown on top of an actual need - better public transit.

Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on December 05, 2018, 02:39:52 PM
A little too much on technology and too little on getting the basics right.

From the video, it appears we've eliminated dedicated lanes altogether (seriously that sucks for transit and the type of technology doesn't matter) and Bay is no longer reversible. Really it comes across as a technology oriented streetscape with 15 self driving vehicles thrown in.

Does that handle future projected transit demand? Does this include retrofitting the entire existing Skyway system? Are we integrating land use policy to spur TOD throughout the U2C system? Does promotion of single/limited occupancy vehicles mixed with regular traffic increase congestion? I have lots of questions but they aren't on solar sidewalks, flood sensors, light-up lanes and open-source software. They're focused around how we're providing time tested proven transit basics.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Steve on December 05, 2018, 03:00:55 PM
10-1 odds the blockchain is involved.

I work in IT. I’m on a plane that is relatively quiet and I just laughed so loud I’m pretty sure the flight crew heard me. Well Played, sir.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Kerry on December 05, 2018, 07:22:35 PM
The mistake we're making locally is planning in a vacuum.  We're so blown away be gadgets, toys and trying to be innovative, to the point that we forget, overlook or downplay the basics. Simply, before we debate over technology and what type of mode best serves the city, can we please decide what type of city we truly want to be and then craft our mobility and land use decisions to incrementally lead to that vision? There is no one-size fits all solution, so there will be areas where fixed transit, buses and even AVs make sense. There will also be other areas where none of them are a good fit. Unfortunately, it seems like everyone from JTA and COJ to the Jags are doing their own thing and none of the parts really effectively go together. With that said, I know for a fact representatives from all of agencies do communicate with each other but the end products clearly don't appear to be well aligned.

How do we start this sort of regional planning and ACTUAL implementation?  The amount of money we waste on scattershot plans and projects that fail to reach their potential has to be in the tens of millions annually, but is it the mayor who is responsible for the lack of cohesion?  I also lump the maintenance issue into this as well.  A well executed and comprehensive plan should incorporate funding and labor for maintenance.  Other metros are able to do this on a much larger scale, so why aren't we?

Some of you are starting to sound like me.  Any one interested in a community activist group aimed and bring walkable urbanism to Jax let me know.  If I have to live here (and I do), I might as well do what I can to make it some place I would at least like to live.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on December 05, 2018, 07:53:19 PM
10-1 odds the blockchain is involved.

I work in IT. I’m on a plane that is relatively quiet and I just laughed so loud I’m pretty sure the flight crew heard me. Well Played, sir.

Thanks Steve :D

Love me a good blockchain joke!!!
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Kerry on December 06, 2018, 08:11:32 AM
Holy crap!  I just watched that video.  How can this many people be so bad at their job?  We don't need pedestrian sensors at every intersection.  Just activate the walk sign every time, and preferably 5 seconds BEFORE the light turns green for cars.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on December 06, 2018, 08:30:54 AM
^Yes, there's some technology overload. We could stick four-way stops signs at every intersection on Bay east of Ocean and accomplish more from a pedestrian safety and traffic calming perspective. Wouldn't be as cool though and definitely wouldn't win any grants.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Kerry on December 06, 2018, 08:44:46 AM
As a taxpayer, I hope we don't get the grant because this is a monumental waste of money.  Who do I call to oppose the grant request?
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Kerry on December 06, 2018, 08:47:07 AM
If they want to innovate downtown bring back two-way streets.  This isn't rocket science.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Downtown Osprey on December 06, 2018, 10:11:08 AM
Just tweeted from Marco Rubio:

"Great news today for #Jacksonville. Working with Mayor @lennycurry @CityofJax we have been able to get @USDOT to fund both the Bay Street Innovation Corridor & the Urban Core Riverside projects. More details coming in press release. #Sayfie"

https://twitter.com/marcorubio/status/1070695596317655040
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on December 06, 2018, 10:21:06 AM
Well, I guess we'll see how this works out sooner than later. What's the Urban Core Riverside project?
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Downtown Osprey on December 06, 2018, 10:28:33 AM
^ was wondering the same exact thing.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on December 06, 2018, 10:45:19 AM
^No clue on Urban Core Riverside, but I've heard that the final piece of the Hart Bridge ramp removals were also funded.

Don't know if it's true or not, but that's be another big win if so.

Great work to all those involved were bringing home the funding.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on December 06, 2018, 10:53:35 AM
^On twitter, Curry is reporting Hart Bridge ramp money is involved.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on December 06, 2018, 10:59:45 AM
^On twitter, Curry is reporting Hart Bridge ramp money is involved.

Sweet!

I'm glad it's not coming out of the general fund.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Tacachale on December 06, 2018, 11:03:58 AM
^On twitter, Curry is reporting Hart Bridge ramp money is involved.

Part of President Trump's amazing infrastructure deal I'm sure.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Tacachale on December 06, 2018, 11:05:27 AM
Well, I guess we'll see how this works out sooner than later. What's the Urban Core Riverside project?

Just got a press release. It's a project to turn Riverside Avenue into a giant lightup keyboard that plays notes when Skyway pods drive across it.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on December 06, 2018, 11:27:23 AM
A little more detail, it's now being reported that USDOT will pick up the full remaining $12 million for the $36-$37 Hart Bridge ramp removal project.

The city has agreed to pay $12.5 million, and the state has agreed to match that $12.5 million, if the project happens.

City Council votes on Tuesday on formally appropriating our $12.5 million contribution to the project.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: copperfiend on December 06, 2018, 12:23:28 PM
Well, I guess we'll see how this works out sooner than later. What's the Urban Core Riverside project?

Just got a press release. It's a project to turn Riverside Avenue into a giant lightup keyboard that plays notes when Skyway pods drive across it.

Will it play the opening to Sweet Home Alabama?
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on December 06, 2018, 12:30:57 PM
The Bay Street Innovation Corridor proposal got $12.5 of the $62 million it needs. Also, the Urban Core Riverside project was a mistake in the tweet. That's the Hart Bridge ramp project.

http://floridapolitics.com/archives/282736-jax-transportation-money
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on December 06, 2018, 12:49:10 PM
The Bay Street Innovation Corridor proposal got $12.5 of the $62 million it needs.

Here's the breakdown of how the JTA envisions funding the project:

(https://snag.gy/2JUBoz.jpg)

The piechart makes my brain hurt:

(https://snag.gy/2la7fO.jpg)
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on December 06, 2018, 12:58:43 PM
A BUILD Grant?......hmmm.....
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: bl8jaxnative on December 16, 2018, 11:34:42 AM
Well, I guess we'll see how this works out sooner than later. What's the Urban Core Riverside project?

Just got a press release. It's a project to turn Riverside Avenue into a giant lightup keyboard that plays notes when Skyway pods drive across it.

Haha, that would be awesome!
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on January 02, 2019, 08:25:19 PM
Fascinating read from today's New York Times:

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/01/01/us/kansas-city-smart-technology.html

Quote
In High-Tech Cities, No More Potholes, but What About Privacy?

KANSAS CITY, Mo. — An algorithm predicts where potholes will emerge so road crews can resurface streets before cracks appear. Dog houses outfitted with cameras and temperature controls provide people a place to leave pets while they’re on a date or at yoga. And on Main Street, if a driver parks too long, a sensor alerts the police and a ticket is issued.

In recent months, Kansas City has become an unexpected destination for technology companies looking for a place to test ideas. The city’s goal: To be what it calls a living lab.

Far from technology centers on the coasts, Kansas City and dozens of other cities have begun competing for federal grant dollars and tech company attention. They want to remake themselves as “smart cities,” where technology is seen as a tool to help grow, improve school systems and air quality, and make traffic move faster.

“People are starting to notice us,” the mayor of Kansas City, Mo., Sly James, said. “We have people coming to town thinking there are going to be cows and tumbleweeds and coming away with a whole other idea.”

Hundreds of cities, large and small, have adopted or begun planning smart cities projects. But the risks are daunting. Experts say cities frequently lack the expertise to understand privacy, security and financial implications of such arrangements. Some mayors acknowledge that they have yet to master the responsibilities that go along with collecting billions of bits of data from residents.

Concerns have intensified as Kansas City prepares to expand its technology experiment from downtown to poor neighborhoods on the city’s East Side. The expansion will bring free wireless to homes, but also dozens of surveillance cameras and a gunshot detection system, and some residents worry that in the quest to be seen as forward thinking, the city may be handing off too much control to private companies and opening up residents to consequences it doesn’t fully understand.

“We increasingly see every problem as a technology-related problem, so the solution is more technology,” said Ben Green, a Harvard University graduate student who studies cities and technology. “And you have cities, which are caught in this devil’s bargain, where they feel they don’t have the resources to provide the services people need, and so they make these deals with tech companies that have money, but which in the long term might not be beneficial to either them or their residents.”

In Seattle, officials this year began to dismantle a network of surveillance cameras and wireless devices that the police had deemed vital in fighting crime, but that drew complaints over the network’s ability to track cellphones.

Several government officials in Toronto were fired this month after they tried to rush through a large technology project proposed by a company affiliated with Google.

And high-tech criminals have also presented problems: In Atlanta, hackers broke into the City Hall network this year and demanded a ransom to unlock it.

Supporters of “smart cities” say that the potential is enormous and that some projects could go beyond creating efficiencies and actually save lives. Among the plans under development are augmented reality programs that could help firefighters find people trapped in burning buildings and the collection of sewer samples by robots to determine opioid use so that city services could be aimed at neighborhoods most in need.

The hazards are also clear.

“Cities don’t know enough about data, privacy or security,” said Lee Tien, a lawyer at the Electronic Frontier Foundation, a nonprofit organization focused on digital rights. “Local governments bear the brunt of so many duties — and in a lot of these cases, they are often too stupid or too lazy to talk to people who know.”

Cities habitually feel compelled to outdo each other, but the competition has now been intensified by lobbying from tech companies and federal inducements to modernize.

“There is incredible pressure on an unenlightened city to be a ‘smart city,’” said Ben Levine, executive director at MetroLab Network, a nonprofit organization that helps cities adapt to technology change.

That has left Washington, D.C., and dozens of other cities testing self-driving cars and Orlando trying to harness its sunshine to power electric vehicles. San Francisco has a system that tracks bicycle traffic, while Palm Beach, Fla., uses cycling data to decide where to send street sweepers. Boise, Idaho, monitors its trash dumps with drones. Arlington, Tex., is looking at creating a transit system based on data from ride-sharing apps.

Kansas City is trying to position itself as the most forward-thinking of all.

It has promoted its use of technology with aggressive marketing, proclaiming itself the nation’s “smartest city.” It has hosted international conferences, offered advice to other cities, and its tech guru, Bob Bennett, has become the public face of a smart cities movement.

Sign Up for On Politics With Lisa Lerer
A spotlight on the people reshaping our politics. A conversation with voters across the country. And a guiding hand through the endless news cycle, telling you what you really need to know.

“Cities that fail to embrace technology today, that fail to embrace a data-driven approach, those cities will be in the digital Rust Belt 20 years from now,” Mr. Bennett said.

Much of Kansas City’s progress stemmed from its selection in 2011 as the first metropolitan area to get Google Fiber, an ultrafast internet and television service. Then five years ago, it was approached by Cisco Systems, the tech giant.

At the time, Kansas City was digging a trench under Main Street for a streetcar line. Cisco told officials that since there would be a hole in the street anyway, the city might as well install fiber optic cable and electronic sensors to monitor traffic.

The sensors, Cisco argued, would help City Hall understand how the city behaves in an unobtrusive way, and at relatively little cost.

The city also built 25 kiosks along the 2.2-mile streetcar line to provide tourist information and installed public Wi-Fi. It installed surveillance cameras and LED streetlights also outfitted with video cameras.

The city borrowed much of its $3.7 million portion of the cost. Sprint, which manages the Wi-Fi network, contributed about $7 million, while Cisco invested $5 million.

There was no competitive bidding.

The city’s downtown corridor now monitors nearly everything that happens along this stretch of road — cars, pedestrians and parking spaces. The wireless system has been used by 2.7 million people.

But some results have been modest. Despite sensors linked to traffic signals, motorists have saved only an average of 37 seconds from their commutes, according to the city.

And a crime location predictor with an algorithm that takes into account everything from 911 calls to weather patterns has yet to reduce assaults in the city’s entertainment district.

Sprint collects data from users who log onto the wireless network, including their home ZIP codes, internet searches and location.

Concerns have intensified as Kansas City prepares to expand its technology experiment from downtown to poor neighborhoods on the city’s East Side.

Some of the information — including phone numbers and other potentially identifying information — is available even if one does not log on to the wireless network, city officials and data experts said.

Sprint declined to discuss the data it collects or how it uses it.

But the company said its work was critical in cities like Kansas City, Mo., where people want access to the latest technology. (While Kansas City, Kan., also received Google Fiber, most of the technology changes are occurring on the Missouri side of the river.)

“People are ready for smart things,” said Patricia Watkins, Sprint’s director of emerging solutions. “For the first time, instead of asking why we’re doing this, they’re asking, ‘Why can’t we do this?’ It will force cities to move ahead with these things because their constituents will be asking for it.”

On Kansas City’s East Side, officials hope to extend the wireless system to reach homes of about 80,000 residents along Prospect Avenue, one of the main thoroughfares in the neighborhood. Only about 40 percent of homes there have internet access.

The city says it wants to transform the neighborhood, which has a high crime rate and is dotted with vacant buildings. It plans to install air quality sensors, water meters to detect leaks, a bus line, surveillance cameras and a gunshot detection system.

Some residents thought the changes would bring an economic boost to the area.

“I’m just elated,” said Cheryl Barnes, president of a local residents’ group. “It will provide a measure of hope to the neighborhood.”

Quinton Lucas, who represents the East Side on the City Council, said while the project represented “a psychological investment in the area,” he worried about all the surveillance.

“I have a concern about monitoring inner cities in a different way than other neighborhoods,” he said. “Is this going to accrue to the detriment of young black men?”

Mr. Lucas said he wondered whether Kansas City was moving too fast.

“When you look at the amount of change in the world — and basically we’re operating on a hunch — how are we sure if we are getting the best deal available?” he said.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on January 02, 2019, 10:23:50 PM
Hmmm so what's the innovation that we're bringing to the table?
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: KenFSU on January 03, 2019, 12:04:08 AM
^The clown cars have noise sensors.

If they hear a gunshot, they signal the USS Adams to fire a cannon at a historic building.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: bl8jaxnative on January 06, 2019, 11:33:36 AM
I think NOrth Florida TPO sees its innovation as being a data aggregator that will allow public and private parties to do some interesting things.
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: jaxnyc79 on January 06, 2019, 12:00:55 PM
"...collection of sewer samples by robots to determine opioid use so that city services could be aimed at neighborhoods most in need." Wow - startlingly vile use case
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: thelakelander on January 06, 2019, 01:43:18 PM
I think NOrth Florida TPO sees its innovation as being a data aggregator that will allow public and private parties to do some interesting things.

And this isn't already being done elsewhere? Also, nothing wrong with being a data aggregator but at what point do we place that as a higher priority over providing residents with basic reliable transit services and connectivity?
Title: Re: JTA & TPO Propose $63 million "Innovation Corridor" Downtown
Post by: Kiva on January 06, 2019, 02:13:05 PM
^The clown cars have noise sensors.

If they hear a gunshot, they signal the USS Adams to fire a cannon at a historic building.
LMAO!