1. Ernie and Co. at St. Louis County can cough up the Bi-State budget they’re withholding (and then some) or Bi-State can walk away, leaving county/city with a potentially larger issue.
2. This can’t get much worse. Bi-State would manage it properly. Once ridership/profit inevitably increase, media will be kind to the org that stepped in to save the day for STL.
"There is absolutely no reason to believe that the trolley will ever be profitable" The Loop Trolley is a boondoggle. What is now occurring is a plea for "who will take this money hole of a boondoggle". I told you so? Yes I have.
hebeters2 wrote:"There is absolutely no reason to believe that the trolley will ever be profitable" The Loop Trolley is a boondoggle. What is now occurring is a plea for "who will take this money hole of a boondoggle". I told you so? Yes I have.
When does public transit (even if people disagree that this is real public transit) make money?
Isn't the point to be something the people and government pay for as a whole for common good? Great if it can recoup some operating expense through fares. But at this point, I don't see how fares keep Metro or Trolley afloat.
When does public transit (even if people disagree that this is real public transit) make money?
Isn't the point to be something the people and government pay for as a whole for common good? Great if it can recoup some operating expense through fares. But at this point, I don't see how fares keep Metro or Trolley afloat.
I disagree. People would pay for a reliable and safe system that can replace their cars. What does the average car cost to run including gas, insurance and everything? Charge accordingly. It is a healthier way to travel. We need to think of transit as something for the middle class, not the poor. As the US car manufacturers keep losing ground to others, maybe the feds can stop supporting that industry and invest in building up infrastructure in cities that would boost manufacturing.
^The evidence would suggest you are mistaken about that. So far as I know there isn't a single major public transportation system in the western world that makes money. New York's MTA loses money. CTA loses money. BiState loses money. The tube in London. British passenger rail. BundesBahn. TGV. They all require public support to operate. Which makes sense, since automotive infrastructure is itself heavily subsidized, though maybe not in ways we all see. Your local road network is largely paid for out of property taxes, and it greatly favors automobiles. By design, even. (Gas taxes barely cover the highways. And they don't always even manage that.) Heck, every mode of transportation gets some subsidy, since we have this crazy idea that mobility is good. (Airports get grants for improvements. ATC is partially funded out of taxes. Locks on the river are built and sometimes operated with federal funds. The railroads got land grants and low interest loans. The subsidies aren't evenly distributed, but they're always there.) So it doesn't bother me that a given mode of transportation doesn't fund itself. That's just . . . life. Even when it does, we tend to favor convenience and things where the cost is invisible: few of us count our insurance as a cost of operating an automobile. It's a part of the default background of life. We're paying it whether we use a car or take the bus. It's just there. Sunk cost. Sure, there are those as choose to go without cars (or insurance.) But the number is still a fairly small minority in the West. (And the U. S. in particular.) It's growing, so maybe one day you'll be right and transit could be self funding. But that day isn't here yet, so . . . subsidize! It matters. The day will get here quicker if we do.
But the Loop Trolley, cute as I think it is, is not and never was transit. Trouble is it will affect our ability to actually build transit, so we need to find a way to keep this thing on the rails. At the lowest reasonable cost and the highest possible good.
^The evidence would suggest you are mistaken about that. So far as I know there isn't a single major public transportation system in the western world that makes money. New York's MTA loses money. CTA loses money. BiState loses money. The tube in London. British passenger rail. BundesBahn. TGV. They all require public support to operate. Which makes sense, since automotive infrastructure is itself heavily subsidized, though maybe not in ways we all see. Your local road network is largely paid for out of property taxes, and it greatly favors automobiles. By design, even. (Gas taxes barely cover the highways. And they don't always even manage that.) Heck, every mode of transportation gets some subsidy, since we have this crazy idea that mobility is good. (Airports get grants for improvements. ATC is partially funded out of taxes. Locks on the river are built and sometimes operated with federal funds. The railroads got land grants and low interest loans. The subsidies aren't evenly distributed, but they're always there.) So it doesn't bother me that a given mode of transportation doesn't fund itself. That's just . . . life. Even when it does, we tend to favor convenience and things where the cost is invisible: few of us count our insurance as a cost of operating an automobile. It's a part of the default background of life. We're paying it whether we use a car or take the bus. It's just there. Sunk cost. Sure, there are those as choose to go without cars (or insurance.) But the number is still a fairly small minority in the West. (And the U. S. in particular.) It's growing, so maybe one day you'll be right and transit could be self funding. But that day isn't here yet, so . . . subsidize! It matters. The day will get here quicker if we do.
But the Loop Trolley, cute as I think it is, is not and never was transit. Trouble is it will affect our ability to actually build transit, so we need to find a way to keep this thing on the rails. At the lowest reasonable cost and the highest possible good.
That is not evidence against my argument. I am saying people would pay more (a few hundred a month) for reliable service that can get them just about anywhere they need to go within the metro area. I'm a car guy but cars are a pain in the ass and are expensive to own. Commuting is a waste of time and unhealthy.
I don't know the details of those organizations but you can't include intercity rail service like you did. Those are big money losers and another topic. From looking at the balance sheet of Metro you can see how much they waste in salaries which leads me to believe that their goal is not a transport system but a political tool to create jobs, make unions happy, make big construction companies happy, etc.
If they actually tried to make a system that was financially self sufficient or close to it I think it would be much easier to get the funds to actually build something. Otherwise it'll be a long long time before we get anything built. I don't think people are going to vote for a huge tax increase. A company would take the risk if it thought it could make money.
I like that one proposal that came out a while ago. Don't recall the name. They had private hanging cars and were saying they could do it without public money. Let's build that. I think the city could even provide some underused streets as right of ways.
You are right that the goal of public transit authorities is not to make money; it is to provide quality mass transit options to residents in order to reduce congestion/traffic. The Loop Trolley's mission is something else entirely and thus doesn't have the same reasons for the public to support it with more tax money (it is already getting some I believe).
Can the loop trolley tracks hold streetcars? Or would it require another investment to do something like that?
It uses a standard gauge so the tracks can run modern streetcars. electrification system may need to be up from 600 V to 750 V (most modern streetcars in the use run on 750, some 650). 600 is mostly heritage like Loop Trolley (although Bostons light rail is 600 V) our metrolink is 750V
You are right that the goal of public transit authorities is not to make money; it is to provide quality mass transit options to residents in order to reduce congestion/traffic. The Loop Trolley's mission is something else entirely and thus doesn't have the same reasons for the public to support it with more tax money (it is already getting some I believe).
The end goal of public transit is not to reduce traffic. It's to provide transportation. There might be various different reasons to support public transportation, I do so for socioeconomic equity and health, but that's still not the end goal of public transit.
I say this because I believe that better transit would eventually make traffic worse. Increased transit ridership will correlate with a more robust urban environment and a stronger economy, both of which will increase car traffic. The other reason I say that public transit will never improve traffic: traffic will always fill the amount of capacity you give it. If car travel gets faster due to reduced congestion, more people will choose car travel over transit because of the much shorter travel time outweighs the increased cost. The system will find a balance.
That is such an inane nitpick, and your opinion is not even close to central to the argument here. The Loop Trolley is not public transit by any stretch of the imagination and pretending that it might be under new management is laughable.
I didn't think the trolley line could support modern streetcars. If it can, then I hope Bi-State takes over and replaces the heritage cars with them.
At the very least, the trolley should be part of the Metrolink system, which I think would instantly increase ridership.
Quite a few apartments are being built near the DeBaliviere metro and trolley stops. I think you could see a number of people living there, or traveling through there, take the trolley to The Loop for dinner and drinks - especially if it was on the same card that was getting them to work or school everyday.
^Two of the cars Loop Trolley bought were the modern replica cars from Portland. At least one of those is, in fact, operating. And Portland operated both the "heritage" cars and modern streetcars alongside one another. There's no technical reason it couldn't be done. You could probably even adapt the current heritage cars to use 650V or 750V if you wanted to make the investment. (New motors, new electrical systems, new pickups, and so forth.) Would probably cost as much or more than a new car, though. None of which deals with the question of whether this could be made to take anyone where they want to go in a timely manner, which would be tricky at best, even with a more organic connection to Metrolink. I don't know. I don't want to see this become a burden on the rest of our transit needs. It's not really designed to fit with anything other than an entertainment vision so far as I can tell. It's cute. I enjoyed my ride. But I don't see how you get more butts in seats without making the Loop itself a much bigger draw. Make it free and add modern cars? I have no magic bullets here.
I realize I'm trolling the haters but on my way home my heart skipped a beat when I spotted the red trolley turning from Delmar to Debalivere. Full of people and decked out in wreath/garland.
^Two of the cars Loop Trolley bought were the modern replica cars from Portland. At least one of those is, in fact, operating. And Portland operated both the "heritage" cars and modern streetcars alongside one another. There's no technical reason it couldn't be done. You could probably even adapt the current heritage cars to use 650V or 750V if you wanted to make the investment. (New motors, new electrical systems, new pickups, and so forth.) Would probably cost as much or more than a new car, though. None of which deals with the question of whether this could be made to take anyone where they want to go in a timely manner, which would be tricky at best, even with a more organic connection to Metrolink. I don't know. I don't want to see this become a burden on the rest of our transit needs. It's not really designed to fit with anything other than an entertainment vision so far as I can tell. It's cute. I enjoyed my ride. But I don't see how you get more butts in seats without making the Loop itself a much bigger draw. Make it free and add modern cars? I have no magic bullets here.
I'm at the belief that three things should happen with first sounding like an likely outcome
1) Bi State/Metro takes over ops
2) Forest Park Forever funds park tracks/wires to zoo and additional two cars
3) Becomes free with operating costs covered by in place tax and shortfall made up by museum district tax.
The last might be very hard to make happen but I think it goes to what symphonicpoet is getting at. Loop Trolley is not transit but can play a very important role for both Forest Park & Loop going forward and therefore the city and county in general. Just think of visitors staying downtown or Clayton CBD and having the option to catching metrolink & free trolley ride to these areas. Or someone coming into Forest Park for the day and catches a free trolley back & forth to grab lunch or dinner in the loop. Or even another boutique hotel or two spring up on Delmar.
Its not haters. This project was a waste of money and a boondoggle. On Dec 29th it closes.
Of all the money we've wasted over the years though (the airport runway, the dueling outlet malls, the Stan Musial bridge, 300+ million for glorified landscaping at the arch grounds etc etc) at least this 'boondoggle' inspires me. And others apparently, leading to three mixed-use projects along its path with another 3-4 in the pipeline.
Its not haters. This project was a waste of money and a boondoggle. On Dec 29th it closes.
Of all the money we've wasted over the years though (the airport runway, the dueling outlet malls, the Stan Musial bridge, 300+ million for glorified landscaping at the arch grounds etc etc) at least this 'boondoggle' inspires me. And others apparently, leading to three mixed-use projects along its path with another 3-4 in the pipeline.
I just can't put much credit to the fact that the Loop Trolley was a factor in those development decisions, maybe way off base. The recent mixed use proposals as of late are either next to/walkable to current metrolink stations, have bus service and or manageable walk from the Loop to Wash U campus via Skinker. I think you see a rebounding area that already has strong connections to institutions, parks and transit options without the Trolley. Fixed transit helps the perception but the Loop Trolley wasn't built to that perception either.
I do like the vision of one day of maybe adding a low floor modern street car down East Delmar and then making a hard right down Euclid and or Boyle coming to stop at either respective metrolink station in CWE/CORTEX. I think that would be a big boost for Delmar Divide in providing fixed transit to huge jobs hub. But their is a good argument that you could go in with better, electric buses and much more frequency as a better transit solution.
