the funding issue with light rail is the local match(at least 20% of the project) not so much the federal appropriation. The orginal MetroLink was fortunate to have abandoned railroad right-of-way to use for a match. Cross County used Prop M to pay for all of it(Beats me why they didn't ask for federal match) St Charles County had its chance, but they dropped the ball. St. Clair County had the sales tax passed way back when to pay for their share. It had nothing to do with Chicago. By the way the Chicagoland area pays it's fair share and then some for the state of Illinois since most of the population lives there.
Cross County is all local funding because-
1. Everyone and their brother wants a light rail line these days, making the fight for federal funding more of a battle than it used to be.
2. Federal funding requires more extensive, and more expensive environmental impact studies.
The decision to use all local funds really came down to time, although it ended up being delayed a couple of years anyway.
It's possible that we may be able to use the money spent on Cross County for a future local matching share.
1. Everyone and their brother wants a light rail line these days, making the fight for federal funding more of a battle than it used to be.
2. Federal funding requires more extensive, and more expensive environmental impact studies.
The decision to use all local funds really came down to time, although it ended up being delayed a couple of years anyway.
It's possible that we may be able to use the money spent on Cross County for a future local matching share.
Matt Drops The H wrote:Not to be rude to our neighbors on the East Side, but why was so much money poured into East Metrolink expansion? Why not have put some of that to the more dense urban areas of South and North City, and even Mid-County, as is being done now?
Was it just because it was less costly to expand into more undeveloped areas since no infrastructure had to be interfered with, or am I totally off base? I will acknowledge that I have very little knowledge of the East Side.
We wanted it, we set up a good plan, paid extra taxes and so forth. Madison County is growing through its plans as we speak. People there were impressed by what St. Clair County has. I will say, things like light rail plans go through faster in Illinois, it seems. Perhaps, this is because of the many urbanites from Chicago running things in Springfield. The urban minded government of Illinois works well for us, but the elitist mentality of some Chicagoans is what challenges that. This is in addition to the ignorance we're beginning to wipe away from people in our own metro area. We're becoming more accepted. Still, it's a shame the home builders and businesses are only now noticing us, because they so happened to run out of space in Missouri.
- 1,517
Xing wrote:Matt Drops The H wrote:Not to be rude to our neighbors on the East Side, but why was so much money poured into East Metrolink expansion? Why not have put some of that to the more dense urban areas of South and North City, and even Mid-County, as is being done now?
Was it just because it was less costly to expand into more undeveloped areas since no infrastructure had to be interfered with, or am I totally off base? I will acknowledge that I have very little knowledge of the East Side.
We wanted it, we set up a good plan, paid extra taxes and so forth. Madison County is growing through its plans as we speak. People there were impressed by what St. Clair County has. I will say, things like light rail plans go through faster in Illinois, it seems. Perhaps, this is because of the many urbanites from Chicago running things in Springfield. The urban minded government of Illinois works well for us, but the elitist mentality of some Chicagoans is what challenges that. This is in addition to the ignorance we're beginning to wipe away from people in our own metro area. We're becoming more accepted. Still, it's a shame the home builders and businesses are only now noticing us, because they so happened to run out of space in Missouri.
Trust me...there's more space in Missouri. I wonder how far west they'll move before it's no longer the St. Louis area. Wentzville is the new "It" City. Sorry O'Fallon, MO.
- 1,768
I wonder how far west they'll move before it's no longer the St. Louis area. Wentzville is the new "It" City. Sorry O'Fallon, MO.
The STL metro area is made up of no less than 11 counties. It'll take a while before we max out.[/quote]
- 1,517
TheWayoftheArch wrote:
I wonder how far west they'll move before it's no longer the St. Louis area. Wentzville is the new "It" City. Sorry O'Fallon, MO.
The STL metro area is made up of no less than 11 counties. It'll take a while before we max out.
Yes, I know, but I wonder how many people in Warrenton really consider themselves St. Louisans.
Matt Drops The H wrote:Xing wrote:Matt Drops The H wrote:Not to be rude to our neighbors on the East Side, but why was so much money poured into East Metrolink expansion? Why not have put some of that to the more dense urban areas of South and North City, and even Mid-County, as is being done now?
Was it just because it was less costly to expand into more undeveloped areas since no infrastructure had to be interfered with, or am I totally off base? I will acknowledge that I have very little knowledge of the East Side.
We wanted it, we set up a good plan, paid extra taxes and so forth. Madison County is growing through its plans as we speak. People there were impressed by what St. Clair County has. I will say, things like light rail plans go through faster in Illinois, it seems. Perhaps, this is because of the many urbanites from Chicago running things in Springfield. The urban minded government of Illinois works well for us, but the elitist mentality of some Chicagoans is what challenges that. This is in addition to the ignorance we're beginning to wipe away from people in our own metro area. We're becoming more accepted. Still, it's a shame the home builders and businesses are only now noticing us, because they so happened to run out of space in Missouri.
Trust me...there's more space in Missouri. I wonder how far west they'll move before it's no longer the St. Louis area. Wentzville is the new "It" City. Sorry O'Fallon, MO.
Yeah, but honestly, it's quite pathetic that the development in Missouri goes as far as a one hour drive from the city center, when there are acres upon acres just a 5-10 minute drive from Downtown St. Louis, in Illinois. It shows how severely disproportioned our metro area is. This is one reason Clayton had been winning out on attracting business over Downtown STL, because many businesses want a "central location. " Population growth on the Illinois side, is a very, very, good thing for the future of Downtown St. Louis.
- 1,517
Xing wrote:
Yeah, but honestly, it's quite pathetic that the development in Missouri goes as far as a one hour drive from the city center, when there are acres upon acres just a 5-10 minute drive from Downtown St. Louis, in Illinois. It shows how severely disproportioned our metro area is. This is one reason Clayton had been winning out on attracting business over Downtown STL, because many businesses want a "central location. " Population growth on the Illinois side, is a very, very, good thing for the future of Downtown St. Louis.
I never thought about it that way. You're right.
Anonymous wrote:the funding issue with light rail is the local match(at least 20% of the project) not so much the federal appropriation. The orginal MetroLink was fortunate to have abandoned railroad right-of-way to use for a match. Cross County used Prop M to pay for all of it(Beats me why they didn't ask for federal match) St Charles County had its chance, but they dropped the ball. St. Clair County had the sales tax passed way back when to pay for their share. It had nothing to do with Chicago. By the way the Chicagoland area pays it's fair share and then some for the state of Illinois since most of the population lives there.
Sorry, my bad on the info, that was communicated to me secondhand. Correct me if I am wrong, but isn't there some sort of "que" of cities waiting for federal dollars on light rail projects, and once you recieve money (based on Gov. criteria) you are moved to the back of the que?
Didn't mean my comments on Chicago to sound like whining (looking back at the post they certainly sound that way) They were based on the notion (arguebly) that is true seat of power in the state, where as in Missouri, power seems pretty evenly distributed. (chicagoland makes up about 80% of the states pop when you max out the boundries, St. Louis reps about 45% of Mo.)
Also I was under the impression that IDOT ponied up more for the studies of the extension, not actual operating costs
I agree it's vital for expansion in Illinois for the betterment of the downtown area. It's starting to happen and Illinois will become the hotbed especially with the bridge, and just the revitalizing of the downtown area already, for those who want to be close, but not in the city.
- 2,005
New Article in todays P-D.
Metro seeks firm to study potential routes
By Phil Sutin
Of the Post-Dispatch
06/06/2005
[snippet]
Gateway sold $2.9 million in distressed cities tax credits to finance the project. The sale yielded $2.55 million for the work. The agency will add enough money from other sources to bring spending on the study to $2.9 million.
Under the rules for the tax credits, the area where Gateway can spend the proceeds from the sale is limited to St. Louis, cutting off work on these alignments in St. Louis County.
Entire Article
Metro seeks firm to study potential routes
By Phil Sutin
Of the Post-Dispatch
06/06/2005
[snippet]
Gateway sold $2.9 million in distressed cities tax credits to finance the project. The sale yielded $2.55 million for the work. The agency will add enough money from other sources to bring spending on the study to $2.9 million.
Under the rules for the tax credits, the area where Gateway can spend the proceeds from the sale is limited to St. Louis, cutting off work on these alignments in St. Louis County.
Entire Article
nice
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The 2000 study said both alignments contain a loop running counterclockwise on 14th, Market and Seventh streets and Washington Avenue in downtown St. Louis.
That study said the north alignment would leave the loop at 14th Street and go on North Florissant and Natural Bridge avenues and through industrial yards to Interstate 70 and Riverview Boulevard. The 2000 study said that line would continue in St. Louis County, ending at Florissant Valley Community College.
The south alignment, the 2000 study said, would leave downtown by crossing Mill Creek Valley on 14th Street and go on Chouteau Avenue and alongside Union Pacific railroad tracks to Loughborough Avenue and Interstate 55. The 2000 study said the line would continue in St. Louis County and join a South County extension along Interstate 55 to Butler Hill Road. The 2000 study also said a separate bus right of way along the railroad right of way was an option."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>>>>>
"The 2000 study said both alignments contain a loop running counterclockwise on 14th, Market and Seventh streets and Washington Avenue in downtown St. Louis.
That study said the north alignment would leave the loop at 14th Street and go on North Florissant and Natural Bridge avenues and through industrial yards to Interstate 70 and Riverview Boulevard. The 2000 study said that line would continue in St. Louis County, ending at Florissant Valley Community College.
The south alignment, the 2000 study said, would leave downtown by crossing Mill Creek Valley on 14th Street and go on Chouteau Avenue and alongside Union Pacific railroad tracks to Loughborough Avenue and Interstate 55. The 2000 study said the line would continue in St. Louis County and join a South County extension along Interstate 55 to Butler Hill Road. The 2000 study also said a separate bus right of way along the railroad right of way was an option."
>>>>>>>>>>>>>