^ Wow. I've seen the list of projects before, but seeing write-ups for them complete with renderings, diagrams, etc makes it that much more evident how beneficial these projects would be to the city. My personal favorites include the North-South Metrolink expansion, streetscape improvements for downtown and the redesigned Kiener Plaza. While the beautiful new, dynamic design certainly won't fix the mall, it would be a vast improvement over the post-modern trainwreck we have now.
Slay and his people have done a good job putting this together. Man, I really hope we get the money.
MattnSTL wrote:The Mayor has put out a fancy pdf of the city's request. It can be found here. Some of the pics in the Crown Village write up are mine harvested off of the ONSLRG Flickr page.
Woo hoo! I'm already behind on my reading- now I've got some new reading material! Not that I'm complaining or anything, because this looks like a nice presentation. Hopefully St. Louis will get as much off of this wish list as possible.
ENR, Engineering News Record Jan. 12th issue had an article on the House transportation and infrastructure committee's recomendation for $90 billion in infrastructure stimulus spending. I assumed this is what was used in the Democtratic stimulus proposal put out today. I haven't been able to find the story on their website to post. The article outlines the following amounts as per recommendations: $30.5 billion in Highways (using current funding formula as per the 2005 highway bill), $12 billion for transit, $5 billion for airports and $4.9 billion for passenger rail, $14.3 for water infrastructure, $10 billion for Federal Buildings and $7 billion for Corps of Engineers projects.
I believe only $1 billion was set aside for Community Block Development Grants in the proposal. Talk about dissappointing. That would equate to only $10 million for each of the top 100 metro areas. Even more dissappointing when you consider Bank of America will recieve $25 billion under TARP.
Dredger wrote:I believe only $1 billion was set aside for Community Block Development Grants in the proposal. Talk about dissappointing. That would equate to only $10 million for each of the top 100 metro areas. Even more dissappointing when you consider Bank of America will recieve $25 billion under TARP.
Heh, that's because the stock prices of Bank of America and Citi are getting closer and closer to $0/share. And those are supposed to be the strongest banks in the nation. 2009 is going to be very bad. Bank of America and Citigroup are down 18% & 15% today, respectively.
Dredger wrote:ENR, Engineering News Record Jan. 12th issue had an article on the House transportation and infrastructure committee's recomendation for $90 billion in infrastructure stimulus spending. I assumed this is what was used in the Democtratic stimulus proposal put out today. I haven't been able to find the story on their website to post. The article outlines the following amounts as per recommendations: $30.5 billion in Highways (using current funding formula as per the 2005 highway bill), $12 billion for transit, $5 billion for airports and $4.9 billion for passenger rail, $14.3 for water infrastructure, $10 billion for Federal Buildings and $7 billion for Corps of Engineers projects.
I believe only $1 billion was set aside for Community Block Development Grants in the proposal. Talk about dissappointing. That would equate to only $10 million for each of the top 100 metro areas. Even more dissappointing when you consider Bank of America will recieve $25 billion under TARP.
Looks like the urban areas are going to get screwed as usual. I hope this isn't the final deal, what happen to all of that talk about FDR style infrastructure spending? Very disappointing looking.
goat314, I think you have to look at the context of how those funds will be doled out. The ENR article writes about your posting. Essentially, Highways funds would go to states through their DOT's (DOT not responsible for N. Tucker Bridge as an example). Transit funds would go through the Feds (St. Lou still have to compete for any North/South rail funds and the region would still have to pay its share of it). Many of the Fed requirements including cost benefit analysis would still be in place. Then look at the city requests and a lot of the streetscapes, bridges and other projects are Block Grants.
Moorlander, your right on with the expectations. However, I do wish the government would start getting back to basics instead of believing that a consumer driven society dependent on the Financial Market providing cheap money is the solution. My basis for that statement is the $500 & $1000 tax credit offered in the stimulus package while Bank of America was given another $20 billion to prop up itself, equates to $45 billion so far.
I do think the city put in some legitimate projects such as rebuilding N. Tucker and Compton Ave bridges and street improvements. At the same time, I do think the expecation for a new light rail line is completely out of whack.
I was praying for light rail, but I knew it was an unbelievable pipe dream. I was expecting more money spent on urban infrastructure. Rebuilding cities that had been neglected for so long in the form of block grants, but now I see we are obviously headed for politics of the past. Highway expansions here we come!
just read through STL's request. Seems good. They put in virtually everything I would ask for.
just curious - why has everyone come to the conclusion that the "stimulus package" wont fund the metrolink expansion? Did I miss something? I know it was always a long shot but I don't believe a decision has been made ... right?
Correct on that front, nothing been decided upon and I'm merely speculating. I'm basing my opinion on how the Feds currently distribute transit funds, current progress of the project itself (no enivornmental impact studies nor preliminary designs - both requirements for full funding match I believe) and the fact I haven't read anything that stipulates that it would be any different. Plus, Obama has been explicit about no earmarks. The light rail line with the most progress is actually the south county extension to Cross County. Compliments of Gephardt with an earmark to pay for some of the preliminary engineering if I'm not mistaken.
markofucity wrote:
just curious - why has everyone come to the conclusion that the "stimulus package" wont fund the metrolink expansion? Did I miss something? I know it was always a long shot but I don't believe a decision has been made ... right?
As far as Metrolink expansion goes, the elephant in the room here is funding operations once it's built. Slay's document throws out a $900 million cost to build, but doesn't say a thing about the expenses to run it.
Metro's own presentation from December when they approved the cuts said the chosen reduction plan is not sustainable into 2010, so deeper cuts will be made then. And from everything I gathered, it sounded like Prop M would only fund operations to the scope they were at in '08, and not yield the kind of cash necessary to run a third Metrolink alignment. It's pretty clear that if it's built, Metro can't afford to run it.
I would love to see this line built, especially as I start looking at houses in Tower Grove East and imagine being able to hop over to a train on Jefferson. But realistically, it's just not going to happen anytime soon.
^Not only is there not enough money to operate it, but you can't build something using 10% design plans. More MetroLink is not shovel-ready, and frankly, it cheapens the credibility of St. Louis to even request it. Otherwise, all cities would have requested their pipe-dream projects too.
^ Southslider......I really doubt this "cheapens" St. Louis's credibilty. It may very well be pipe-dreaming, but I don't think it was unreasonable to let the feds know what type of projects our city would fund if funding became available. Also the North-South Metrolink extension was FAR from being the most frivolous project on the list.
I think everybody needs to calm down when it comes to discussions about the future of St. Louis area public transit and stop dwelling on doomsday scenarios. Metro had to cut its budget, but many other public transit agencies around the country are having the same issues. As far as our current infrastructure goes WE HAVE 45 MILES OF LIGHT RAIL after 15 years of service. It may seem pathetic if you compare us to Chicago or New York, but I think people need to start putting the St. Louis region into perspective.
St. Louis is:
1) An area metropolitan area of just under 3 million people
2) An area that lacks substantial state funding or support
3) A slow growth region
4) A fractured and segregated region and government
Even with these issues we still have managed to produce more light rail than any of our peer cities (Cincy, KC, Cleveland, Pittsburgh). We even have more rail than Minny and Phoenix (which just started and have already made service cuts due to funding concerns). Lets not even talk about Detroit!
We must also remember that Prop M was barely defeated on Nov. 4 and that was with a bad economy, bad press, and lack of campaigning by Metro. Demand for public transit is only going to grow in the future as the County ages and diversifies. I wouldn't be surprised in 20 years if St. Charles is whining about rail, its only a matter of time.
Also think about all the TOD that started popping up around the original alignment before the credit crunch. Once the market bounces back we will see those same demands and within a decade much of the cross county line will be built out with TOD. Remember the article about Clayton focusing on TOD, the TOD zoning that just got proposed. The County already took heat about "wasting" money on the Cross County extension, so you bet your ass they are going to develop every parcel of land surrounding that cross county line to prove their investment was worthwhile.
My Point: St. Louis isn't done with transit, its just going to take time.
I think Busdad had a good idea posted on another thread and wish Slay and Dooley would take it up quickly. The idea is to establish that a Transit Development District be set up within the I-270 border. I think this makes a lot of sense. It focuses transit on where it will succeed both in the literall sense as well as politically & economic sense. The urban split to me is actually in the county where as many of us in the inner suburbs of the county support a decent level of transit service as well as TODS/urban zoning versus a completely different mindset in West County.
The region still needs to find a way to make transit work where transit makes sense. A massive Metrolink buildout is not needed, but a some metrolink extensions make sense within I-270 where as Express Bus service to employment centers is more then adequate and much more cost effective on I-64/I-55, I/70, Hwy 364-Page Ave corridors for the entire region as a whole. You could fund Missouri's metrolink share with the Transit Development District and the county can use a portion of its 1/2 cent transportation tax for area bus service.
goat314 wrote:I was praying for light rail, but I knew it was an unbelievable pipe dream. I was expecting more money spent on urban infrastructure. Rebuilding cities that had been neglected for so long in the form of block grants, but now I see we are obviously headed for politics of the past. Highway expansions here we come!
Well, it's not always easy spending hundreds of billions of dollars. Typically, oversight is necessary to make sure most of our monopoly money isn't wasted. Since it would likely be very expensive to conduct oversight for all the programs in the city plan (decentralized in comparison to the state's plan), they likely decided to go with the state and its lovely highway programs. Oversight is easier in a more centralized form of welfare.
And to think, the city bill would have likely gone through had Florissant, MO not requested its $35 million, "Music Hall of Fame."
It seems to me that what we have in this country is a "crisis of mismanagement". Pardon me while go trademark that phrase.
Things are too large, too uncontrollable, too UNMANAGEABLE. Sure, some people are just incompetent but even the most competent person couldn't manage some of the large and complex problems we have. Bailout anyone? These were the smartest people around and Richard Fuld didn't know until the last minute. STILL isn't sure what happened. SO much money is wasted it is unbelievable. In a way, we need to get smaller.
This country built a railroad system and highway system all over the West across mountains and the desert and we can't build one from North Side to the South Side.
This country built a railroad system and highway system all over the West across mountains and the desert and we can't build one from North Side to the South Side.
Ha-ha. Good point. Things are so bogged down in bureaucracy and arguments, actual action is tough to accomplish. But I'm still optimistic that (at some point) we can get it built... somehow, anyhow.
The draft "stimulus" bill has only $10 billion total for transit, of which only $1 billion is set aside for new major capital projects to add to FTA's $2.4 billion in pre-approved projects. The Northside-Southside project had an estimated $900 million pricetag per its conceptual engineering study. Clearly, St. Louis would be dreaming to think it should receive all of the stimulus, or even half of the nation's total, should a cash-strapped city and transit agency like St. Louis and Metro even scrounge up a 50% local match.
Here pasted is Pelosi's own description of the transit piece of the "stimulus" bill (with those items having added emphasis of mine bolded):
New Construction: $1 billion for Capital Investment Grants for new commuter rail or other light rail systems to increase public use of mass transit to speed projects projeccts already in construction. The Federal Transit Administration has $2.4 billion in pre-approved projects.
Upgrades and Repair: $2 billion to modernize existing transit systems, including renovations to stations, security systems, computers, equipment, structures, signals, and communications. Funds will be distributed through the existing formula. The repair backlog is nearly $50 billion.
Transit Capital Assistance: $6 billion to purchase buses and equipment needed to increase public transportation and improve intermodal and transit facilities. The Department of Transportation estimates a $3.2 billion maintenance backlog and $9.2 billion in needed improvements. The American Public Transportation Association identified 787 ready-to-go projects totaling $15.5 billion. Funds will be distributed through the existing formulas.
In other words, no new major projects not previously evaluated by FTA. And the existing formulas for repairs and minor projects do not reward cities that have cut back the passenger route miles or are declining in populaton.
leeharveyawesome wrote:It seems to me that what we have in this country is a "crisis of mismanagement". Pardon me while go trademark that phrase.
Things are too large, too uncontrollable, too UNMANAGEABLE. Sure, some people are just incompetent but even the most competent person couldn't manage some of the large and complex problems we have. Bailout anyone? These were the smartest people around and Richard Fuld didn't know until the last minute. STILL isn't sure what happened. SO much money is wasted it is unbelievable. In a way, we need to get smaller.
Oh, believe me... That money is not lost due to incompetence. It's stolen!
Richard Fuld knew and he was a lying sociopath a**hole. Why else would they create over-leveraged derivatives created by physicists that no analyst knew how to evaluate? It's called greed.
Yes. It's really complex but yet, ultimately, at the same time it is very simple. It's just seems like everything has turned into a some sort of minor scam on all fronts. An almost acceptable scam.
Actually, I believe that unchecked white-collar crimes have played a large role in what is happening and will continue to happen. It's hard to prosecute, it is difficult for many to grasp what exactly is going on and it has become so widely accepted that nobody feels like they are doing anything wrong.
I heard this somewhere..... we are very good at TRADING wealth but not very good at CREATING it anymore. Things don't exist tangibly anymore. It's all on paper. It's a game, a house of cards.
Before somebody writes me off as a "blue-collar" type who doesn't think the people in "suits" aren't really "working" you would be wrong.
The NY mag article about Fuld is pretty phenomenal. Fuld may well be a sociopath but he's just the LEADER of a whole gang of sociopaths. That's just one gang. There are lots of gangs, each with many sociopaths.
Trust me, if they were "thugs" and robbed you in the middle of the street in South City instead of thugs wearing Armani and robbing you some other way the sh*t would splattering from the fan.
Since the world has a finite amount of resources, I believe wealth is also finite. We can manipulate material and immaterial things to create value, but in the end wealth is just redistributed from here to there. Civilizations rise and fall, but wealth seems to become more highly concentrated in the hands of the few. Interestingly enough, wealth was also very unevenly distributed in Communist states such as the Soviet Union and China.
At the end of the 20th century, wealth is concentrated among the G8 and Western industrialized nations, along with several Asian nations. An EIA report stated that OPEC member nations were projected to earn a net amount of $1.251 trillion in 2008 from their oil exports, due to the record crude prices.
A study by the World Institute for Development Economics Research at United Nations University reports that the richest 1% of adults alone owned 40% of global assets in the year 2000, and that the richest 10% of adults accounted for 85% of the world total. The bottom half of the world adult population owned barely 1% of global wealth. Extensive statistics, many indicating the growing world disparity, are included in the available report, press releases, Excel tables and Powerpoint slides.[6] Moreover, another study found that the richest 2% own more than half of global household assets. Despite this, the distribution has been changing quite rapidly in the direction of greater concentration of wealth.[8]
innov8ion wrote:Civilizations rise and fall, but wealth seems to become more highly concentrated in the hands of the few.
Not always. In fact, the trend line in the U.S. and Western Europe from the end of WWII up until the 1970s was in the opposite direction, toward less concentration and polarization.
Then came the return of laissez-faire conservatives like Thatcher and Reagan, and the steady dismantling of wage standards and the social safety net. The result was a movement back toward higher concentration of wealth. Government policies do matter.
