urbanSTL

I wonder if they're running a full slate of the test trains from the start or just doing partials?



Could be interesting leaving the ballgame going west tonight.

Today was "Everyone Can Ride" day.

Metro's site wrote:"Everyone Can Ride" Day is an orientation day for members of the ADA community. Persons with disabilities and organizations who serve this audience are invited to visit the new MetroLink stations along the Cross County alignment. Metro personnel will be available to identify the accessible entrances and explain how to use the system from these new locations.

Also, Metro will be doing simulations for major downtown events. Basically, trains with headboards heading for Shrewsbury will take people as far as the Forest Park station and an empty Lambert train will follow behind to take them the rest of the way. Find out more here

I saw a new sign for the Metrolink on East-bound 40/64 around the Brentwood exit that said to use exit 32A. But < 1/2 mile later the large signs in the center of the highway say that both the Hanely North exit and the Hanley South exit are 32B. Obviously the Hanley South exit should be labeled 32A, and the Hanley South exit should be 32B. The sign on the Hanley South exit ramp correctly reads 32A, but this doesn't give you adequate time to switch lanes.

I did see the new Metrolink road sign as I was taking my mom home from the baseball game last night. I got excited, and my mom told me I was weird.

This is what I get for being lax! I saw the signs last night on I-44 and got excited as well! It seems more real now.

Zezuz wrote:I saw a new sign for the Metrolink on East-bound 40/64 around the Brentwood exit that said to use exit 32A. But < 1/2 mile later the large signs in the center of the highway say that both the Hanely North exit and the Hanley South exit are 32B. Obviously the Hanley South exit should be labeled 32A, and the Hanley South exit should be 32B. The sign on the Hanley South exit ramp correctly reads 32A, but this doesn't give you adequate time to switch lanes.

Technically I guess both are correct. While the hard right turn onto Eager from the Hanley South exit and heading to the Brentwood station would be shorter drive. There's no reason you couldn't head north on Hanley and park at one of the Clayton stations.



I noticed the other day you can't get from the Dierbergs lot down to the Metro station. You must walk up around, cross the Eager bridge and back down the other side and enter from the Best Buy side. Kinda odd.

Technically I guess both are correct. While the hard right turn onto Eager from the Hanley South exit and heading to the Brentwood station would be shorter drive. There's no reason you couldn't head north on Hanley and park at one of the Clayton stations.

You're right- but someone definitely needs to fix the mismarked highway signs. Out-of-towners would completely miss the exit.

dweebe wrote:I noticed the other day you can't get from the Dierbergs lot down to the Metro station. You must walk up around, cross the Eager bridge and back down the other side and enter from the Best Buy side. Kinda odd.

That you can't access the Brentwood/Eager Metrolink station from the Dierbergs parking lot is really stupid and shortsighted, though I think the reasoning was that the shopping center didn't want their lot to become congested from commuters; but you can get to it without crossing Eager. Behind the left side of Dierberg's, there's a small employee parking lot? from which there's an opening in the fence with a long sidewalk back to the station.

Mill204 wrote:

dweebe wrote:I noticed the other day you can't get from the Dierbergs lot down to the Metro station. You must walk up around, cross the Eager bridge and back down the other side and enter from the Best Buy side. Kinda odd.

That you can't access the Brentwood/Eager Metrolink station from the Dierbergs parking lot is really stupid and shortsighted, though I think the reasoning was that the shopping center didn't want their lot to become congested from commuters; but you can get to it without crossing Eager. Behind the left side of Dierberg's, there's a small employee parking lot? from which there's an opening in the fence with a long sidewalk back to the station.

I didn't see that opening back there.



Will be interesting to see how parking for Metrolink plays in that area until the garage behind Best Buy is completed.



I was also thinking about that small plaza there at the corner of Big Bend/FPP where the copy place and Dominos are. I could see some people parking there that shouldn't be. Kind of like the strip plaza just north of the DeBaliviere station.



Looking at the new Metro handout Clayton, Brentwood and Shrewbury stations are the only ones on the new line listed with Park-n-Ride parking.

I recieve a mailer today announcing the Cross County Metrolink opening...

here is what it said....



"Official opening Saturday August 26.. 11:00am - 12:30pm Stl county and Clayton officials cordially invite you to join them in celebrating the opening. Speakers at this historic event will be StL county executive chareles Dooley and Mayor of Clayton Ben uchitelle. With live music from the Clayton High School Jazz Band, refreshments and balloons for the kids and fun for the entire family...Ride the cross county extention FREE 12:30-10:00pm Sat 8/26 and 10-4pm Sunday..."

ALSO

"Metro Monday: August 28 730-9am Felebrate with clayton city officials

8-9 Live music from The Fabulous Motown Revue/Breakfast and coffee from Compainion Bakehouse....Win Metro passes at the Event. Clayton Combo monthly pass $80 includes ride metrolink/metrobus, park in shaw park garage."



Just thought i would share this with you all...

"Will be interesting to see how parking for Metrolink plays in that area until the garage behind Best Buy is completed.



I was also thinking about that small plaza there at the corner of Big Bend/FPP where the copy place and Dominos are. I could see some people parking there that shouldn't be. Kind of like the strip plaza just north of the DeBaliviere station.



Looking at the new Metro handout Clayton, Brentwood and Shrewbury stations are the only ones on the new line listed with Park-n-Ride parking."

~~~~~~~~

~~~~~~~~

I'm sure plenty of people will be doing "unofficial" park-n-riding. I did it quite often at the History Museum's lot when the P-n-R at Forest Park was closed.



If Shrewsbury's lot fills up fast, I can see people using the Shop n Save lot nearby. But with the way the Shrewsbury fuzz patrols, that might be risky.

So after a bike ride through Forest Park, I had the opportunity to race a Metrolink train from the History Museum to the Richmond Heights station...



Metrolink is fast: I could barely keep up with it to Skinker at 46mph whereby it proceeded to blow by me while I waited for the red light to change. I thought the race was lost as soon as it had begun when I picked it up again when it popped up in the median on it's way to the Clayton station. I started to pull ahead; and without a light remaining ahead of me, I figured the victory was mine and began to celebrate... then I noticed the ramp from the Parkway to SB I-170 was closed to construction: the race was lost, Metrolink had won!

Coming back from the Galleria tonight (went to see Talledega Nights), I was going south on Brentwood when I decided to take FPP home, instead of the highway. Turned up on 170 and saw the train coming northbound towards Clayton. So I slowed and tracked it, watched it pull through the Clayton station, then continued on (it fell behind), stopped at the Skinker station and went down into it to see if anymore trains were coming...



The guard told me that the train that went by was the last of the night. But there were still a few on the tracks doing testing or something. So I traveled on my way down FPP and saw two more trains, although they were stationary, before I got into the Park.

bpe235 wrote:Ride the cross county extention FREE 12:30-10:00pm Sat 8/26 and 10-4pm Sunday..."

The news release on Metro's site says that customers are welcome to ride the Cross County Extension free Sat. from 12:15 to 9pm. I wonder if the mailer is correct or if the site is correct.



Also, does this mean they are only running between 12ish and 10ish on Aug. 26 or that it is only free between those times? I was thinking of leaving my car at the Shrewsbury lot, catching the Flaming Lips show at the Pageant, and going back. If I had to drive up to the Loop from the new park n ride lot on the day of the opening because service ends too early on the first weekend, that would be a shame.

I was leaving work last night around 8pm and i picked up a train only going to union sta. then I waited no more then 2 mins then another train showed up. It was a train that said Shrewsbury-I-44 and my heart skipped a beat. It was only running to Forest Park but it was so nice to see the new trains and the new Metro maps inside them. Cant wait to use the Skinker sta. where i Live instead of walking to Delmar every day. I guess they where doing test runs yesterday to see how the lines work together with the games.

Last night I left work from downtown and caught a train home heading west with a “Lambert Main” end: same as usual.



Just past the train shed one train passed us going east. It had a Shiloh-Scott sign and was crammed full of ballgame passengers. Then less than 30 seconds later another train passed us! It was ½ full and had a JJK sign. We pulled into the Grand Station and just west of there another JJK signed train went by and was almost totally empty.



Three or four minutes later just after the Central West End station (in the tunnel) another eastbound train went by with a full load. Then about two minutes later not far from the Forest Park station another eastbound train went by with a very light load and a JJK sign.



So, on my ride home last night we passed 5 trains. Usually we pass 2 or 3 trains on the ride home so obviously they’re running both lines at full speed.

Metro has been conducting operational tests of a modified Shrewsbury schedule since Wednesday at 3:00 pm to so that the entire company gains experience with the more frequent headways and Forest Park Junction.



More operational tests next week and then a full new schedule will start on August 28th.



The station to station times look good. The trip from Shrewsbury to Forest Park at full speed with simulated stops is truly amazing. The views are beyond belief. The density and activity generators close by each station offer tremendous potential for ridership. Park and Ride will be short, but the bus connections will offer a great opportunity for a lot of people to avoid even starting their cars.



The feed back from new and old customers over the past two weeks of schedule and bus book distribution has been amazingly positive.



As a resident of this region, I believe this investment is an asset worth a commitment for permanent funding. St. Louis, in my opinion, will be stunned by what this community has created.

^Three questions Busdad (or anyone else), if you can answer them:



1) What is the absolute capacity of the system as currently configured? In other words, assuming you had the funding to buy unlimited cars, but no infrastructure upgrades, what is the maximum frequency of two-car trains on the stretch of track from Forest Park to say, JJK, assuming that same frequency was occuring throughout that stretch of track? I think you touched on this briefly in one of your earlier comments.



2) What are the long-term plans for the park-and-ride lot (if that is what Metro is calling it) at the Forest Park station? That seems to be the perfect place for a mixed-use, mid-to-highrise development, with retail on the ground floors, condos on top, and parking in the middle...obviously. Plus, the Skinker-DeBaliviere hood desperately needs more retail. Do you know if Metro has had any discussions with Mills about a joint venture development?



3) Related to Question 2. There was talk a long time ago from the original developer of the Meridien (don't remember if it was Sansone) about using the air rights over the Eager Road station and track to build an office and hotel development (the train would have essentially pulled into the basement of the building). This obviously didn't happen. I am curious as to whether Metro has a policy on air rights development and whether it is discouraging this concept. Or, is it actively recruiting developers of its air rights over track in high density areas such as Richmond Heights, Clayton, Skinker-DeBaliviere, the Loop, and downtown (particularly the lot just west of New Busch)? I hope to see the entire MetroLink line covered between Union Station and the Busch stop. This should be feasible from a construction standpoint (although it would cause delays) and also eventually from a market standpoint, as downtown fills in.

1) What is the maximum capacity of the system using two car trains?



The capacity, if you don't spent the money to lengthen the platforms, is constrainted by the track circuits used to for our train control system. The circuits are generally spaced 3 3/4 minutes apart. so in an ideal world you could run trains 7.5 minutes apart on each branch. 7.5 minutes apart unless you schedule to the second (which is possible theoretically) is really 7 minutes apart for one trip and 8 minutes apart for the next trip. When you overlap Shrewsbury and Lambert you obtain a train spacing of 3.5 minutes and 4 minute respectively.



Once we become good at controlling trains with 5 minute spacing, we may see if we could to 4 minutes someday. Its just doesn't leave any latitude for delay like a door problem or customer issue. Once you get behind even a little bit the delays trickle through the entire system.



What happens when the trains get too close? If two trains enter the same track circuit, the train control circuit sends a signal for the operator to slow down and increase spacing. If this doesn't occur within three seconds or so, the train is automatically brought to a stop.



In the real world, we think the practical limit for spacing is 5 minutes although trains will get closer at times.



With the completion of the Cross County, new train control circuits were installed to permit 90 second spacing between the Forest Park Station and Central West End. So in this area, trains can get very close. They will have to hold however once they leave this area.



Finally, it is also possible to operate without automatic train control. Systems with street running in automobile traffic generally operate without automatic train control. To insure adequate safety in this type of system, you will have to operate slower and depend more upon the train operator to insure a safe spacing.



With the system we have using two car trains, we can probably carry 1800 persons per hour at maximum load by direction. Now 300 persons per train, trip after trip, will be unacceptable for daily commuters based upon my experience. The maximum count on any two car train was 562 persons at Fair St. Louis a number of years ago. At baseball games you will see a lot of 350+ passenger trains. Very few times do we carry 400 on a two car train. People will put up with one 300 person train if the next train has some space. Nothing but 300 car trains will not be acceptable to most commuters over a long period of time.



Second, what interest has there been in joint development?



Metro has received some expressions of interest recently from developers interested primarily in our surface lots at Forest Park and Delmar. At Forest Park, one expressed an interest in air rights over the right of way at Forest Park. There may also be interest in Metro's headquarters, not for joint development, but for selling and providing funding to build elsewhere along the alignment. I won't go into who exactly at present.



We have not had serious discussions at present on real joint development ideas. I believe you will see such discussions once the Cross County alignment starts up and people get a sense of the value of the new alignment.



The Meridian Development did not ever involve air rights over the tracks to my knowledge. The Developer owned the land. We needed the land. The developer was willing to develop parking but Metro paid for its share of the parking and receives no ongoing revenue.



Without addiitional funds for an expansion of the system, Metro's financial needs are in the neighborhood of $48 million each year if we want to address both operating and capital match requirements for bus replacements etc .



Building over the tracks is expensive and cumbersome operationally. We may not see that become economically feasible until all more easily developed land is developed.



If you see joint development in the future, it may be to help Metro construct more structured parking lots, particularly along Cross County.



The City and Shrewsbury are interested in TOD developments at Shrewsbury, but again looking at our surface lots and sugggesting structured parking to replace that parking.



St. Clair County Transit did a good job acquiring additional land around a number of their stations to facilitate joint development. In Missouri, we have not had the money to buy much extra land.



Finally, Metro has not evaluated how joint development of air rights might help increase Metro's revenue.

^Thank you for the thorough and though-out answers! I appreciate your assistance with my edification.

Busdad wrote:Finally, it is also possible to operate without automatic train control.

Has this ever been tried on the current system? I can recall waiting for the train several times after Fair St. Louis and other large downtown events and, although I didn't actually time the trains, it seemed as though the spacing was occasionally much less than 4 minutes, so I thought maybe this was achieved by switching to manual control. Or, does the downtown stretch of track also have the 90 second interval capability?

Busdad wrote:With the completion of the Cross County, new train control circuits were installed to permit 90 second spacing between the Forest Park Station and Central West End. So in this area, trains can get very close. They will have to hold however once they leave this area.

So, assuming Metro is successful in gaining the necessary additional funding, are there plans to extend this 90 second interval capability throughout the Forest Park to JJK section? Of course, I am not sure what you would do with all of the westbound trains after they reach the Forest Park station. Is there a way to have them switch tracks and turn around without going all the way out to Lambert or Shrewsbury? - You probably answered this before, and if so I apologize, but I couldn't find the answer.

Busdad wrote:The Meridian Development did not ever involve air rights over the tracks to my knowledge.

This was a long time ago, when the Shrewsbury extension had just been announced, and the final route selected. I remember seeing someone's rendering of a MetroLink train pulling into a station inside a hotel and office development just south of Eager Road, unless I just dreamt it...



Finally, the reason I asked about joint development is that it seems to me that Metro should be a bit more proactive on development around its stations and using its air rights throughout the region. Granted, it would not make up Metro's funding shortfall, but there are opportunities for parking and retail lease revenue that I am not sure have been fully explored. In other words, Metro shouldn't wait for the developers to come to it, it should be leading the charge. And it should not just sell off its land and air rights, but instead leverage those properties - and the instant market which Metro riders create around them - to create new, sustainable revenue streams beyond just fare collection.

"Has Metro operated less than five minute intervals?"



The trains can technically operate 3 3/4 minutes apart and actually closer as long as they are on separate track circuits. Each circuit spans about 3 3/4 minutes based upon the planned speed. So if you are in circuit one and another train is in another circuit, they can technically be quite close together. However once the following train enters the same track circuit as the first train, it will immediately obtain a signal to slow down or stop. The published schedule is provided as a tool to help the train operators maintain a consistent interval.



We have operated trains using manual control for short periods of time, but not the entire rail road. If the North-South Street car line was build using true street running, we would probably need to operate without automatic train control or in manual mode. Metro truly enjoys the speed with safety that automatic train control permits and would hate to abandon that lightly.



"Does the downtown area have 90 second track circuits?"



No. It does not. Other than Forest Park to CWE, I don't think we have any other 90 second areas.



"Does Metro plan to modify the track circuits if and when it obtains stable and adequate funding?"



Metro needs to increase the number of cross overs to permit more track maintenance time. If demand expands to the point where we can not accommodate the riders without additional frequency, Metro will have to come up with a plan to provide more capacity. This could be by increased frequency --- requiring more track circuits or by investing in modifications of stations to permit a third car. (We could possibly operate additional frequency west of Forest Park if we operated a shuttle in between the regular trains.)



I do not believe we have done a fully researched analysis of the best solution. Track circuits will be expensive but perhaps not as expensive as expanded stations.



If we added an extention that added a branch to Westport or further north in Florissant or further south on the Shrewsbury branch we may be unable to accommodate the demand with 10 minute branch headways. This would mean that a major expansion would force additional investment in the core system. This investment would have to include more cross overs and closer track circuits and perhaps longer stations. Pushing the Lambert Branch or the Shrewsbury branch further out may also require that we look at a third track in areas to permit express trains. Adding more frequency to the Lambert branch may require that we get rid of the single track at the airport. This has significant impact in our ability to develop maintenance schedules except at night. All of these enhancements are expensive.



As a result, the decisions on any major investment will require input from more of the community than Metro alone.



From Metro staff's perspective, we want to leverage as much usage from the existing $1.3 billion in existing investment in Metrolink. We would like to make future investments that makes the core system faster, more reliable, and as heavily used as possible. The region may be more interested in investing in totally new alignments (Metrolink, BRT or Street cars.) This may undermine the resources necessary to invest heavily in the core system.



"Do we have other places we can turn trains around?"



We can turn trains easily with frequent headways at the new Forest Park junction and at Emerson Park. It is likely that Metro (with funding from SCCTD) will construct a pocket track just east of Fairview Heights by 2008.



We can also turn trains at any place there is a turnback as long as the headway is wide enough to permit the train operator to pull onto the oppose main line track, get out of the train and walk to the new front car, and puill up to the platform. Its reasonable to do this with a 15, 20 and 30 minute headway. Its not really possible to do with a 10 minute headway unless you have an extra operator to assist with the turn around.



"Metro should be more proactive in seeking developers around our stations."



I don't disagree with you. However, its much easier to do joint deals if you have some money to bring to the table. Building on air rights is costly for developers because of the need for building a shelter around the operating train tracks to permit continuous operation while moving heavy things over the tracks. The developers seem more interested in building on more clear sites as long as these open sites exist. Never the less, Metro should be more active in seeking joint development opportunities.



Vision and willingness to pursue seemingly impossible dreams are rare commodities for managers and boards of public and private businesses.

Wow! Very good info, Busdad. Glad you're around to give us the nitty-gritty, ins-and-outs of the system.

Busdad wrote:However, its much easier to do joint deals if you have some money to bring to the table.

Ahh, but Metro does have money to bring to the table. Money, in the form of future cash flows from the alternative revenue streams and from leveraging its assets. You put those on the table and you can sell bonds. You sell bonds and you can build pretty much anything which the future cash flows and the enhanced value of the assets will support. Once the bonds are paid off, Metro has a new, permanent revenue stream.



And, although I mentioned a local developer, Metro would be better served by looking outside of St. Louis. There are many developers around the country that have quite a bit of experience in exactly this type of development, working closely with local transit agencies and using creative financing to get complex mixed-use, transit-oriented projects built.