urbanSTL

Can these MoDESA funds be used for things such as intelligent traffic-light timing?



One of my greatest pet peeves when visiting STL is the traffic-light timing. (I'm at a red light downtown (or south city, etc), it turns green, and when I get to the next intersection, the light turns red.What!? AHHH!)



After living in Chicago and, now, New York I find myself incredibly impatient when driving around STL. This manifests itself in the form of laying on the horn at slow-on-the-draw drivers, with the accompanying, inevitable, perplexed dirty look. Speeding is also a favorite as is the occasional blown red light.



Anyway, I tried searching the forum for updates on this subject and recall reading mayorslay.com several months, maybe a year or more, ago where he discussed the matter. Does anyone know the status of this project?

Kansas City has been on Modesa like white on rice since it has been established

Actually, it was on it before MoDESA was established. The legislation was written to create public financing for a particular Kansas City project.



The opportunities for other cities to identify eligible projects, write and approve special development plans, create local DESA boards, and get the projects approved by the state were added to the bill in order to broaden the KC financing plan's legislative appeal.

zas wrote:One of my greatest pet peeves when visiting STL is the traffic-light timing. (I'm at a red light downtown (or south city, etc), it turns green, and when I get to the next intersection, the light turns red.What!? AHHH!)

Yeah, I remember being able to zip back home to 23rd once I got out of the holland tunnel on 8th...that was nice!



Retiming the lights would do wonders for drivers' frustration. The county already has cameras installed for auto-adjusting signals based on live traffic patterns.

This BusinessWeek article discusses cleaner air through a certain type of concrete. It has TiO2 added to it, which acts as a catalyst when light is present. The end result is breaking down pollutants in the air faster.



Since a massive part of downtown will be repaved at some point in the near(ish?) future, several miles of a well-travelled Interstate may be redone, and there are streetscape improvements being proposed in other parts of the City (CWE, the Grove), has this been looked into for use in our region?

An idea - no poured concrete sidewalks. Sidewalks must be real or faux stone. I'm stealing this idea from downtown D.C.

I'd particularly like to see nicer sidwalks around Macy's. That place deserves to be so much more special in so many ways.

An idea - no poured concrete sidewalks. Sidewalks must be real or faux stone. I'm stealing this idea from downtown D.C.

Unfortunately I would imaging that this will be cost prohibitive. However, I've seen some stamped concrete that is OK - much, much better than plain poured slabs.

At this point, I'll take anything over what we currently have in many blocks downtown.

Paved sidewalks might cost more up front, but I suspect that they are cheaper in the long run. After a few years when the ground begins to settle, concrete sidewalks often crack under the uneven load. A paved sidewalk simply shifts up or down creating a slightly uneaven surface. Once it gets real bad the entire concrete surface will have to be replaced whereas the paved walk can be reworked in sections and requiring almost no new materials. With that said, I do not have a problem with pured walks as long as they are kept up and replaced as necessary, instead of neglected as is normally done.

DeBaliviere wrote:At this point, I'll take anything over what we currently have in many blocks downtown.

I agree. I would like to see a good breakdown of how the city allocates money for this

crbswiss wrote:Paved sidewalks might cost more up front, but I suspect that they are cheaper in the long run. After a few years when the ground begins to settle, concrete sidewalks often crack under the uneven load. A paved sidewalk simply shifts up or down creating a slightly uneaven surface. Once it gets real bad the entire concrete surface will have to be replaced whereas the paved walk can be reworked in sections and requiring almost no new materials. With that said, I do not have a problem with pured walks as long as they are kept up and replaced as necessary, instead of neglected as is normally done.

I think labor is the issue. Installation (or re-installation) of pavers is much more time-consuming than poured concrete. It's the same reason we see all of the ugly pre-cast concrete warehouse buildings popping up along suburban interstates.



But that being said, there's no reason a "prettier" concrete mix couldn't be used. Maybe something with a deeper color or that sparkle effect that used to be popular 60 years ago, and then stamped into a pattern as Ihnen suggests.

Why not install rubber sidewalks? I've heard that not only are these more enviormentally friendly(they use recycled tires, and doesn't kill trees), but they are far more resiliant and cost mush less than concrete over time.



http://www.rubbersidewalks.com/default.aspx

http://www.rubbersidewalks.com/rubbersi ... smoney.asp

http://www.rubbersidewalks.com/rubbersi ... strees.asp

http://www.rubbersidewalks.com/rubbersi ... strees.asp

http://www.rubbersidewalks.com/whyrubbe ... kswork.asp

Rubber tracks at high school stadiums don't seem to have a problem.

shadrach wrote:Interesting.



From the site I noticed there's a city in New York state with rubber sidewalks. I was curious if the cold and freezing temperatures made them brittle and prone to cracking.



I our heat they may swell like a peep in a microwave.

The sidewalks are not made of raw rubber. They will not crack in the cold any more that the tires on your car do(which they don’t). Also the tires are processed and mixed with a resilient epoxy. This further improves its thermal properties. But don’t take my word for it. Per their own test specs(they even followed ASTM engineering standards during their tests...very thorough):

Freeze-Thaw ASTM C 1026: Product exposed to 15 cycles of freeze-thaw at 0 Degrees for 90 days. No change. No facial defects. No signs of crazing, chipping, spailing or cracking. Product frozen at 0 degrees was subjected to impact with no change.

http://www.rubbersidewalks.com/specifications.asp

I know we're not a rich city ...yet. But I think, for downtown at least, we should be a little classier than rubber sidewalks. I'd rather see the real deal.

^Take a look at the pics, they look pretty good to me. It's just a different shade of color than your traditional sidewalk. What specifically are your aesthetic objections?



And actually these are more expensive up front(if you're equating cost to class), their argument is that once maintenance costs are taken into account, it is cheaper than concrete over time.

I agree, although I'm sure it is a great product I can't see it giving the feel of quality and strength that our city so strongly needs to convey. Also, with the location being such a high traffic area (hopefully [-o< ) I would imagine that stone, brick, concrete would far outlast the rubber surface.

Don't get me wrong, I'm open to ideas. For some reason I'm just skeptical about this. It's probably something I'd have to see and feel for myself to make a call about.

I guess if people really feel that way then maybe we shouldn't install it.



However:

I'm sure it is a great product I can't see it giving the feel of quality and strength that our city so strongly needs to convey

But visually it looks nearly just like concrete. And you can dye it to make pattens, just as you can with concrete.

I would imagine that stone, brick, concrete would far outlast the rubber surface.

Maybe, but I don't know. Any construction guys out there know the Taber-Abrasion for concrete? Without that we can't say that stone or concrete would last longer than synthetic.



I think people are getting hung up on the word "rubber" and forming biases.

I wasn't necessarily refering to the "look" of the product, but more the feel underfoot. Also although the color may match closely it will never look like one of the affor mentioned materials in person. Plus a lot more goes into the look of a quality product than just color. I think that this would be a great application in neighborhoods and suburban areas, just not DT, and especially not in the CBD.

The best comparison that I can come up with is with banks. There is no reason that banks today need to be build like fortresses (the greater majority of transactions are all electronic). However, you still see the wide use of granite, stone, and quality materials that give the patron the feeling that their money is safe within these walls. I think the same can be said of the streetscape of any DT.

I agree with UE. I think people are getting hung up on the word "rubber".

I would love to see St Louis get these.



It wouldn't say "not classy" to me but cutting-edge. Not classy is the cracked uneven concrete that constantly needs reparied in our environment.

Banks are bulit like a fort because of strict FDIC regulations. Bank robbery is still very much a problem not only in St Louis city but also in the surrounding suburbs. Yesterday there were 3 bank robberies and 1 attempt in Jefferson County alone.