urbanSTL

downtown2007 wrote:The South County Connector will provide very little benefit to the City while providing some short term benefits for South County. However in the long run, the county could be hurt as well since it will shorten commute times, and further increase sprawl into Jeff Co losing a tax base to pay for the connector. The City needs to try and prevent this from happening and make the city a place to live instead of a place to pass through at high rates of speed.

In the long run the Connector will be a detriment to the entire region.

I don't know about that. The South County Connector has the potential to increase connectivity between far south St. Louis City and Clayton, which is a major employment center. There's no easy way to get to Clayton from my house near Carondelet Park. People who work in Clayton don't look for houses in my neighborhood for that reason, but might if the South County Connector were completed. I think the roadway has the potential to increase the desirability of several south city neighborhoods. Frankly, I think the roadway should have been planned for decades ago when the decision to not extend 170 further south was made.

Of course, I also think that the project should extend to I-55, include the re-engineering of the River Des Peres into an actual river and the replacement of the slab housing on the south side of River Des Peres Blvd with modern, mid-rise multi-family housing.

^True

All this road will do is help people between Manchester and 40 get to the highway in 9 minutes instead of 10.

I can see this being built, everyone using it all at once and causing bottle necking, then people complaining that it didn't do anything to relive traffic (just like 40), and the (insert government agency) saying that wasn't the design intent of the project.

After reading the EIS http://www.southcountyconnector.com/eis_docs.html I'm more disappointing with this project than I thought I would be. It reduces park space, displaces existing and future GRG bike trails, increase noise in residential neighborhoods, and as a limited access roadway, adds zero adjacent developable parcels. Bike & Ped design will be an after thought to an after thought, and is clearly listed as such. Not to mention, we JUST BUILT METROLINK TO THIS EXACT AREA. The good news, I suppose, is that a substantial part of the project is in the City of St. Louis, and YOU should be able to apply considerable pressure to get the City to say "No thanks." Its essential that you submit a response to this EIS here http://www.southcountyconnector.com/ContactForm.html before July 19th.

Scott Ogilvie
24th Ward Alderman

The study does make a good point about Shrewsbury station. It's the closest Metrolink park-and-ride to half the county, and getting to it is like a geocaching expedition. They don't need to drill an interstate to Clayton but if they have a Metrolink station there it might as well be accessible.

The study does make a good point about Shrewsbury station. It's the closest Metrolink park-and-ride to half the county, and getting to it is like a geocaching expedition. They don't need to drill an interstate to Clayton but if they have a Metrolink station there it might as well be accessible.

Why do you need a park n' ride at that location near the city limits? If you've driven that far to the Shrewsbury station, you should just take the highway.

A few things that piss me off.
1. St. Louis continues to focus on highway expansion while economically competitive cities are focusing on light rail expansion.
2. MoDOT and the Missouri legislature remain vehemently opposed to public transportation.
3. Moving Transit Forward/Prop A passes 3 years ago, no word from local leadership on plans on future light rail.
4. Municipalities, developers, public officials have not embraced the concept of walkable communities, quality of life, TOD.
5. St. Louis land use, economic development, and transportation planning stuck in 1955.

This money should go toward a southside MetroLink line. This city needs better fixed-rail transportation. We have been saying for years now that we want the N-S MetroLink, not a damn south county connector!

Alex Ihnen wrote:But shouldn't park and ride be the last, or at least very secondary, consideration with MetroLink stations? First, the area around stations should be zoned for dense development and disallow say, oh, car dealerships from being built immediately next to new transit stations.

Maybe with MetroLink stations in general, but key Park 'n Ride stations are the first public transit experience most St. Louisans have. TOD is great, but if the majority of your prospective transiteers can't find the station, it doesn't really matter what's around it.

Edit: Coincidentally, I parked at Shrewsbury this weekend for the Cardinals' game and got lost finding my way back to the interstate.

Why would anyone want to live near transit if they have never had a good transit experience?

Because even though not everyone has a good experience taking transit 100% of the time it still beats the misery of being car dependent and relying on one option. It still beats the isolation, lack of options, financial cost, and health risks a car dependent lifestyle affords.

dweebe wrote:Just a wild guess: but I'm thinking that the type of people who want this built have zero interest in ever setting foot on any sort of public transit.

Well, I'm not going to comment on the specific connector proposals, but I would improved road connectivity to Shrewsbury and I use public transit every chance I get (which is rare).

Well, I'm not going to comment on the specific connector proposals, but I would improved road connectivity to Shrewsbury and I use public transit every chance I get (which is rare).

Would you want this connector built next to your house?

pat wrote:

Well, I'm not going to comment on the specific connector proposals, but I would improved road connectivity to Shrewsbury and I use public transit every chance I get (which is rare).

Would you want this connector built next to your house?

Well, the idea is to get traffic on the connector and out of residential neighborhoods. So, the net benefit to the local residences depends on the specifics.