Author Topic: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?  (Read 26726 times)

southsider1015

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #30 on: February 06, 2015, 06:59:16 AM »
301 is unsafe, slow, and is a terrible route for trucking.  Its a terrible commute that is only a decent option given its directness. 

and yet I make the 200 mile trip to Tampa in 180 minutes....how is that slow?


You drive 65+ mph the entire way, thru Waldo and the others?  Not buying 180 minutes.

It's not even the local/regional commuters, it's for commercial trucking.

southsider1015

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #31 on: February 06, 2015, 07:04:08 AM »
I don't mind people living the urban, suburban or rural lifestyle. To each his own. Having the ability to make your own choice is one of the reasons this is a great country. However, choice should come with responsibility.  Problems (no matter what type of environment one prefers) tend to arise when people expect others to subsidize their preferred lifestyle for them.

Agree.  But what delivered your food to your plate?  The clothes your wearing?  The other services and materials that urban life still requires?

It's the is huge misunderstanding that all of this highway spending is simply for rural and suburban folks, when really, it's for transportation for all goods, services, and citizens throughout the region.

Cold we have better land development codes? Absolutely.  More up to date construction standards?  Yes please.


southsider1015

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #32 on: February 06, 2015, 07:11:28 AM »
Yeah, no offense, but that's one of the sillier comments in this discussion. If anything, the exact opposite is the truth: it's continually reinforced that the "suburban" lifestyle is the best, most desirable way to live, and that it's worth almost any cost to achieve.

In reality, there's plenty of room in this state for all types of lifestyles. But we shouldn't subsidize only one lifestyle and expect everyone to foot the bill.

And there's something of a false dichotomy here: you can have a yard, landscaping, a 20 minute commute and "quiet" fairly easily in an urban neighborhood.

None taken of course.  Not silly either, consider the latest trends and opinions in modern planning.

Every major metro region in the world has expensive highway systems thru and to/from their urban center.  Infrastructure spending IS expensive, but so is defense spending and Social Security. 

The US is so behind China and BRIC on infrastructure spending, its depressing.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29775
    • Modern Cities
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #33 on: February 06, 2015, 07:20:32 AM »
I don't mind people living the urban, suburban or rural lifestyle. To each his own. Having the ability to make your own choice is one of the reasons this is a great country. However, choice should come with responsibility.  Problems (no matter what type of environment one prefers) tend to arise when people expect others to subsidize their preferred lifestyle for them.

Agree.  But what delivered your food to your plate?  The clothes your wearing?  The other services and materials that urban life still requires?

It's the is huge misunderstanding that all of this highway spending is simply for rural and suburban folks, when really, it's for transportation for all goods, services, and citizens throughout the region.

Cold we have better land development codes? Absolutely.  More up to date construction standards?  Yes please.



Don't forget the rail and ships that did the heavy lifting......including the delivery of the raw materials used to build roads. Look, I'm not railing against "roads". I have a problem against unnecessary and unsustainable spending.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

southsider1015

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #34 on: February 06, 2015, 07:32:34 AM »
Right.  But your railing opinion is that roadway spending is unnecessary and unsustainable. 
We're not changing America over night.  Weve built this country this way, and have to continue the systems to work.  The process to change is through minor tweeks and small bumps along the way so that the systems continue to operate.  I'm getting pretty broad here, but the concept still applies to this specific project.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29775
    • Modern Cities
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #35 on: February 06, 2015, 07:47:57 AM »
I never said ALL roadway spending is unnecessary. 
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Josh

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 459
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #36 on: February 06, 2015, 07:57:13 AM »
301 is unsafe, slow, and is a terrible route for trucking.  Its a terrible commute that is only a decent option given its directness. 

and yet I make the 200 mile trip to Tampa in 180 minutes....how is that slow?


You drive 65+ mph the entire way, thru Waldo and the others?  Not buying 180 minutes.

It's not even the local/regional commuters, it's for commercial trucking.

Um, "Waldo and the others" represent such an insignificant amount of roadway that they could practically be school zones and still not present a major delay on that trip. I'm guessing tufsu1 drives like most sentient Florida drivers (for better or worse) and goes 70 mph on 301 in the 65 mph zones between towns, and does 80 mph on 75.

As an unqualified statement, Jacksonville to Tampa (and vice versa) is absolutely a "3 hour drive."

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29775
    • Modern Cities
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #37 on: February 06, 2015, 09:13:14 AM »
I can make it from Jax to Tampa in 3 hours taking I-95 to I-4. The drive from my garage to my parent's driveway in Polk County typically takes me 2.5 hours. The only wildcard is getting caught up in traffic around the theme parks.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

Charles Hunter

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2693
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #38 on: February 06, 2015, 09:26:50 AM »
I can make it from Jax to Tampa in 3 hours taking I-95 to I-4. The drive from my garage to my parent's driveway in Polk County typically takes me 2.5 hours. The only wildcard is getting caught up in traffic around the theme parks.

And for the next 6 years, construction of The Ultimate I-4.

GatorShane

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 154
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #39 on: February 06, 2015, 09:55:51 AM »
^ and having that lifetsyle is fine...but us urbanites shouldn't have to be subjected to highways destroying our neighborhoods to satisfy that lifestyle.

I don't follow.  Is this I-10 I-95 specific? 
I for one would welcome this(probably in the minority) My question is what would the new highway be a 75 or a 95 spin off(i.e. I-295, I-275} or something else. Is 9B the start of I-795?  Rail would be much better with a connection to UF to make it easier to get to Gator games in Gainesville. I wish the powers that be in the FDOT would actually seriously think about rail from Jax to Tampa. SIGH!!

There is no listing with AASHTO for this corridor. Since by definition it would be a point to point type of highway (as opposed to a bypass), and if FDOT wants it to have a federal road designation, it would probably be called Interstate 6.

There is a proposal to use the I-6 name for a planned road from Arcata, CA to Reno, NV to replace CA-299, but since it was proposed in 2012, it hasn't been funded. 

9B will be signed I-795 after they finish the intersection with I-95. Based on current plans it will end at St Johns Parkway & Russell Sampson Road.

I can't find any information if the First Coast Beltway/Tollway will get a AASHTO defined number. While it will connect both I-10 and I-95 eventually, Gov. Scott allocated several million in the 2015 FDOT budget for ROW acquisition between Blanding Blvd and I-95. They can't sign it an Interstate until its 2 terminus points are finished, so I would imagine it will stay FL-23 well past 2020.

If they are serious about a north extension of the beltway into Nassau County to Yulee, it would probably be I-495.


Thanks a lot. I appreciate that.

fieldafm

  • Editor
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 4222
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #40 on: February 06, 2015, 09:59:23 AM »
301 is unsafe, slow, and is a terrible route for trucking.  Its a terrible commute that is only a decent option given its directness. 

and yet I make the 200 mile trip to Tampa in 180 minutes....how is that slow?


You drive 65+ mph the entire way, thru Waldo and the others?  Not buying 180 minutes.

It's not even the local/regional commuters, it's for commercial trucking.

I drive to Tampa and Sarasota quite a few times a year. It takes almost exactly 3 hours to get from my driveway to Channelside (downtown Tampa).

This graphic is pretty entertaining.



These projections rely on the same flawed traffic forecast modeling which have predicted that current traffic levels should be increasing by double digits each year, when they have actually been declining since 2007. These flawed traffic forecasting and trip generation forecasting models have been used to validate the need to build more roadways, but when you actually look at the data it's clear that there is far too much capacity for not only today... but for 30 years from now. There are some critical bottlenecks that need to be addressed, but for the most part much of the brand new road construction is hard to justify.

For instance, in the City of Jacksonville... out of 710 road links measured (these are simply sections of a road... as an example, Roosevelt Blvd from Edgewood to McDuff would be one 'road link'), there are only 20 sections of roadway that exceed 100% of daily capacity. That's less than 3%. So, about 3% of the roadways in Jacksonville handle more traffic than they are designed to handle. The overwhelming majority are under 50% of capacity. 

Roadway spending and infrastructure maintenance is 100% necessary, but let's call a spade a spade and realize that this proposed highway is really being driven by enhancing the economic land owned by influential private parties... because the results (especially when you realize that the taxes being collected from the resulting development do not come close to paying for the required maintenance of said infrastructure) make you question whether it's a good investment.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29775
    • Modern Cities
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #41 on: February 06, 2015, 10:02:08 AM »
I can make it from Jax to Tampa in 3 hours taking I-95 to I-4. The drive from my garage to my parent's driveway in Polk County typically takes me 2.5 hours. The only wildcard is getting caught up in traffic around the theme parks.

And for the next 6 years, construction of The Ultimate I-4.

I know my way through Orlando's backstreets and collectors pretty well. If it gets too bad, I'll use them to get around the hot spots. They'll probably add another 15-30 minutes to the commute but save me about $10-$12 in tolls each way.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali

tufsu1

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 10975
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #42 on: February 06, 2015, 03:28:39 PM »
301 is unsafe, slow, and is a terrible route for trucking.  Its a terrible commute that is only a decent option given its directness. 

and yet I make the 200 mile trip to Tampa in 180 minutes....how is that slow?


You drive 65+ mph the entire way, thru Waldo and the others?  Not buying 180 minutes.

It's not even the local/regional commuters, it's for commercial trucking.

It is actually about 195 miles the way I go....drive 65-75 mph on the majority of US 301...speed limit through Starke, Waldo, Lawtey, and a few others....and then 70-80 on the interstate (I-10, I-75, and I-275).

And I've actually made it in just under 3 hours a few times

southsider1015

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 369
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #43 on: February 06, 2015, 11:00:20 PM »
301 is unsafe, slow, and is a terrible route for trucking.  Its a terrible commute that is only a decent option given its directness. 

and yet I make the 200 mile trip to Tampa in 180 minutes....how is that slow?


You drive 65+ mph the entire way, thru Waldo and the others?  Not buying 180 minutes.

It's not even the local/regional commuters, it's for commercial trucking.

I drive to Tampa and Sarasota quite a few times a year. It takes almost exactly 3 hours to get from my driveway to Channelside (downtown Tampa).

This graphic is pretty entertaining.



These projections rely on the same flawed traffic forecast modeling which have predicted that current traffic levels should be increasing by double digits each year, when they have actually been declining since 2007. These flawed traffic forecasting and trip generation forecasting models have been used to validate the need to build more roadways, but when you actually look at the data it's clear that there is far too much capacity for not only today... but for 30 years from now. There are some critical bottlenecks that need to be addressed, but for the most part much of the brand new road construction is hard to justify.

For instance, in the City of Jacksonville... out of 710 road links measured (these are simply sections of a road... as an example, Roosevelt Blvd from Edgewood to McDuff would be one 'road link'), there are only 20 sections of roadway that exceed 100% of daily capacity. That's less than 3%. So, about 3% of the roadways in Jacksonville handle more traffic than they are designed to handle. The overwhelming majority are under 50% of capacity. 

Roadway spending and infrastructure maintenance is 100% necessary, but let's call a spade a spade and realize that this proposed highway is really being driven by enhancing the economic land owned by influential private parties... because the results (especially when you realize that the taxes being collected from the resulting development do not come close to paying for the required maintenance of said infrastructure) make you question whether it's a good investment.

Can anyone make the link between these influential landowners, and the decision makers at FDOT?

Everyone says it likes it's so obvious.  Just curious.

thelakelander

  • The Jaxson
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 29775
    • Modern Cities
Re: A Jacksonville-to-Tampa Expressway On Its Way?
« Reply #44 on: February 07, 2015, 07:24:19 AM »


Here's a Florida Trend map showing the holdings of Florida's largest landowners. Plum Creek Timber, Rayonier and Bascom Southern have big chunks of property in or near the study area. Are any of these entities looking into new uses for their property?

We have several examples locally (especially around the First Coast Expressway, JTB, SR 9B, etc.) but I remember a few years back, J.D. Alexander took some heat for pushing the need for the Heartland Parkway.



Quote
J.D. Alexander, the now termed Frostproof legislator, has gotten what he wants time and again from Florida’s taxpayers. Most of this year’s Alexander headlines have related to his quest to create a new 12th state University in Lakeland, but his slipping of the Heartland Parkway into this year’s budget may have greater ramifications.

The following is from the Tampa Bay Times:

“Despite a $1.4 billion budget shortfall and at times heated rhetoric about finding ways to spend fewer state dollars, budget writers have tucked $34.7 million into this year’s proposed spending plan for the design of a portion of the Heartland Parkway — a long-dormant road project in Central Florida.”
 
First proposed in 2005, J.D. Alexander met repeatedly with state officials about the proposed highway. The Heartland Economic, Agricultural and Rural Task Force, or HEART, was founded in 2005 to push for the road. The non-profit organization consulted heavily with Alexander on lobbying and strategy for the road.

Charlie Crist, citing environmental concerns, very low projected traffic volume and more pressing transportation needs, wisely killed the project in 2007. The Parkway would run through largely rural areas providing little in the way of transportation benefit to Florida’s overburdened urban counties. While the road might stimulate growth through towns such as Arcadia, Wauchula and Bartow near the highway, the only way the highway could be justified would be with massive development of parts of the state that the post 1970 population boom has clearly passed by. Even more worrying would be the negative affect the road would have on the developing towns that lie on US 27, the primary route from Polk County to southern Florida.
When the legislature in 1988 authorized the extension of Florida’s Turnpike from Wildwood to Lebanon Station in Levy County and the upgrading of US19/27 northwards toward Tallahassee, an outcry came from urban counties. The extension was never built and instead the focus shifted towards toll roads such as the Apopka Connector, Veterans Expressway and Polk Parkway in populated areas.

Many of the areas that the Heartland Parkway would traverse between southwest Florida and Polk County are as sparsely populated as the Big Bend region of the state, the area where a similar project has been ignored for over twenty years. The rationale advocated by Alexander and his allies is that of a hurricane evacuation route that would also stimulate economic development and population growth in the corridor around the highway.

Rick Scott’s decision to embrace this expensive boondoggle has also exposed his continued preference for cronyism over merit in determining whom he involves in major decisions.  Moreover, Alexander stands to benefit directly from the highway. Again here we quote the Tampa Bay Times:
The proposed 110-mile road stretches through the ranches, farms and swamps of inland Florida, from Collier County to I-4. In real estate, that’s a good thing. Land prices typically skyrocket for property adjacent to newly built transportation facilities.
 
Nearly all of Blue Head Ranch, a massive piece of property controlled by one of Alexander’s companies, lies directly in the path of the proposed roadway. The company, Atlantic Blue, plans 30,000 residential units and 11 million square feet of nonresidential development on 7,500 acres of the ranch, according to its website.


The Heartland Parkway has been compared in its size, scope and possible impact to that of the Suncoast Parkway which was completed in 2001, but some very staggering differences are apparent. The Suncoast Parkway was built as an important traffic reliever for US 19 which was becoming over-burdened with cars in the late 1990s. It also connected to the Veterans Expressway, giving easy access to Tampa International Airport for residents of Citrus, Hernando and Pasco Counties. The Heartland Parkway serves no such purposes.

This appropriation comes as real transportation needs in urban areas are being ignored. In some cases Gov. Scott and his administration seek to solve Florida’s infrastructure issues by levying expensive user fees on motorists in the form of increased tolls and more “express lanes.” Existing express lanes in Miami-Dade and Hillsborough counties continue to to see steep increases in tolls, while new lanes along I-95 and I-595 in Broward County are under construction. Meanwhile, toll lanes along I-295 in Duval County and I-4 in Orange/Seminole counties are being seriously contemplated. These areas need new roads and other solutions to the pressing transportation needs of their areas, but instead are finding half solutions from state government.

While the Heartland Parkway may ultimately be useful for the counties it would run through, it is a matter of opportunity costs. With so many highways in urban areas needing enhancement or replacement, we cannot afford to waste money on this project. That is not to mention the potential environmental damage from the road, which would cut through marshland and other sensitive areas, damaging Florida’s fragile ecosystem.

http://thepoliticalhurricane.com/2012/07/10/florida-cannot-afford-the-heartland-parkway/
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life.” - Muhammad Ali