When will we get funding for the studies for the alignments? Because in 2005, the MetroSouth Corridor was deferred due to a lack of funding for the locally preferred alternative. Can we get the funding?
- 8,912
Let's hear what our leaders have to say... From Today's BJ
Francis Slay
Where should the next Metrolink expansion be?
The next expansion of public transportation should be within its existing system — in the form of improved connectivity and rapid-transit buses. Through the complete streets ordinance, the city of St. Louis is working to make our streets friendlier for all types of travelers, including those who take buses, ride bikes, or walk. Buses can take people to and from MetroLink stations. They can carry people — and people’s bicycles, scooters and wheelchairs. An expanded, on-time, efficient bus service would be excellent for residents who rely on Metro or rely on the people who rely on Metro.
Charles Dooley
Where should the next Metrolink expansion be?
The expansion of MetroLink is in the hands of the citizens of this region. They will determine the route they want through their citizen input.
Francis Slay
Where should the next Metrolink expansion be?
The next expansion of public transportation should be within its existing system — in the form of improved connectivity and rapid-transit buses. Through the complete streets ordinance, the city of St. Louis is working to make our streets friendlier for all types of travelers, including those who take buses, ride bikes, or walk. Buses can take people to and from MetroLink stations. They can carry people — and people’s bicycles, scooters and wheelchairs. An expanded, on-time, efficient bus service would be excellent for residents who rely on Metro or rely on the people who rely on Metro.
Charles Dooley
Where should the next Metrolink expansion be?
The expansion of MetroLink is in the hands of the citizens of this region. They will determine the route they want through their citizen input.
Their is some good logic to Slay's response and I think some political reality of the next couple of years in that their will not a lot of funds coming from the feds. I can see the region supporting an extension of the current system or finding meaningful ways to improve the current service.
As far as Dooley, has anybody told him that the election is over?
Like Slay or not, his comments that Moorlander has posted from the BJ at least give a clear idea on direction he wants to see the region go, from re-entry into the county to an emphasis on the bus service, bus rapid transit.
As far as Dooley, has anybody told him that the election is over?
Like Slay or not, his comments that Moorlander has posted from the BJ at least give a clear idea on direction he wants to see the region go, from re-entry into the county to an emphasis on the bus service, bus rapid transit.
^I agree. The big ideas and projects are important. But should not be focused on by City Hall at the expense of details like sidewalks, newer, brighter street lights, etc. It's been my experience that our mayor usually makes a lot of sense. I like his focus that still moves public transit and the discussions surrounding it forward even in the current federal deficit climate.
As far as Mr. Dooley, I'd like to see the context of his comments. Talk about a punt. I'm not an expert, but I believe a leader is required to present SOME form of vision. Everyone might not agree with Mayor Slay, but we at least have something to frame the discussion.
As far as Mr. Dooley, I'd like to see the context of his comments. Talk about a punt. I'm not an expert, but I believe a leader is required to present SOME form of vision. Everyone might not agree with Mayor Slay, but we at least have something to frame the discussion.
I just moved from stl to dc a couple months ago and have been riding the metro to work. I just heard a stat in the news that about 14% of the metro area rides the subway. Any idea what the figure in stl might be? I thought the percentage was low at first but I guess 14% of the Dc metro population is a pretty big number.
- 542
What was up with all the Po-Po at the Forest Park Metro today around 5:30p? The blue line coming from Shrews stopped for about ten minutes.
I've been in D.C. and NY the past week visiting family. Been riding the metro and subway everywhere. The majority of the time I sat there wishing we could just force metrolink expansion down people's throats whether they want it or not. Politicians whine about the costs, but the benefits to a city and its citizens far outweigh the costs. Once they use it, they'll want it. Its such a good instrument for creating density and business. Drunks don't need to drive. Students don't need to drive. The poor get to work. People get some exercise. Tourists are more apt to come when getting around is so convenient.
If Saint Louis is ever going to be considered a global city, its going to need the transit system of one.
Rage.
If Saint Louis is ever going to be considered a global city, its going to need the transit system of one.
Rage.
Agree with most. One correction: Everybody gets to work. This is what's holding MetroLink back in (not only) our region; the perception that public transportation is for the poor.pat wrote:I've been in D.C. and NY the past week visiting family. Been riding the metro and subway everywhere. The majority of the time I sat there wishing we could just force metrolink expansion down people's throats whether they want it or not. Politicians whine about the costs, but the benefits to a city and its citizens far outweigh the costs. Once they use it, they'll want it. Its such a good instrument for creating density and business. Drunks don't need to drive. Students don't need to drive. The poor get to work. People get some exercise. Tourists are more apt to come when getting around is so convenient.
If Saint Louis is ever going to be considered a global city, its going to need the transit system of one.
Rage.
^^ The main reason we cant expand... and I agree... is that St. Louis' infrastructure (highways) are too well built. It is TOO easy to get around. Of course I am comparing this to DC and NY.
On a side topic. I would like the next Metro expand to have AUTOMATED trains. I would think they could save a lot of money by going all automated as well as having the ability to provide more capacity "on demand."
On a side topic. I would like the next Metro expand to have AUTOMATED trains. I would think they could save a lot of money by going all automated as well as having the ability to provide more capacity "on demand."
zink wrote:^^ The main reason we cant expand... and I agree... is that St. Louis' infrastructure (highways) are too well built. It is TOO easy to get around. Of course I am comparing this to DC and NY.
On a side topic. I would like the next Metro expand to have AUTOMATED trains. I would think they could save a lot of money by going all automated as well as having the ability to provide more capacity "on demand."
With the continued challenges with transportation funding...i.e. ICETEA21 running out a while ago and no replacement in sight, we need to figure out a more economically viable system. We cannot continue to spend so much in a system that does not replenish itself. Thus we cannot continue to expand roads and highways. We have already outgrown our maintenance and upgrade abilities from an economic standpoint. Thus, we need to invest in a new more efficient system...transit and quit expanding our spending on the "too well built system".
I agree. Metrolink expansion isn't a major issue to everyone because they're current situation is fine. But I think the perception towards metrolink expansion needs to change.Agree with most. One correction: Everybody gets to work. This is what's holding MetroLink back in (not only) our region; the perception that public transportation is for the poor.
We need to stop looking at it as just a new tax burden and an answer to congested roads, and look at it as an investment. I think density and transit go hand in hand. If you have a lot of density in a city, you going to need more transit. But I think we can use transit (metrolink expansion) as a tool to create a denser city. Proactive vs reactive. Granted its much more complex than "If you build it, people will come." But the mindset nowadays seems to be "closer to work, less driving, go green". I think we can take advantage of that. And I think expanding metrolink now rather than when it is more pressing can be used as a tool to get new people and businesses to St. Louis.
I think you got it correct in stating that a more economically viable system is the only way you are going to expand transit for St. Louis. The region's GDP simply can't support a big build out of fixed transit. I would push expansion of current lines and Express Buses to make downtown and CBD more accessible for emplyees as well as giving employers who favor these areas an edge over any more greenfield office space.zun1026 wrote:zink wrote:^^ The main reason we cant expand... and I agree... is that St. Louis' infrastructure (highways) are too well built. It is TOO easy to get around. Of course I am comparing this to DC and NY.
On a side topic. I would like the next Metro expand to have AUTOMATED trains. I would think they could save a lot of money by going all automated as well as having the ability to provide more capacity "on demand."
With the continued challenges with transportation funding...i.e. ICETEA21 running out a while ago and no replacement in sight, we need to figure out a more economically viable system. We cannot continue to spend so much in a system that does not replenish itself. Thus we cannot continue to expand roads and highways. We have already outgrown our maintenance and upgrade abilities from an economic standpoint. Thus, we need to invest in a new more efficient system...transit and quit expanding our spending on the "too well built system".
This might just be symantics, but I don't believe that to be true. I would say its not likely given our current and past stance on automobile dominance. However, should we take a new approach to our transportation management, planning and design, we could develop such a system. Personally, I think we should look at the model developed in Denver as a discussion point.dredger wrote:I think you got it correct in stating that a more economically viable system is the only way you are going to expand transit for St. Louis. The region's GDP simply can't support a big build out of fixed transit. I would push expansion of current lines and Express Buses to make downtown and CBD more accessible for emplyees as well as giving employers who favor these areas an edge over any more greenfield office space.zun1026 wrote:zink wrote:^^ The main reason we cant expand... and I agree... is that St. Louis' infrastructure (highways) are too well built. It is TOO easy to get around. Of course I am comparing this to DC and NY.
On a side topic. I would like the next Metro expand to have AUTOMATED trains. I would think they could save a lot of money by going all automated as well as having the ability to provide more capacity "on demand."
With the continued challenges with transportation funding...i.e. ICETEA21 running out a while ago and no replacement in sight, we need to figure out a more economically viable system. We cannot continue to spend so much in a system that does not replenish itself. Thus we cannot continue to expand roads and highways. We have already outgrown our maintenance and upgrade abilities from an economic standpoint. Thus, we need to invest in a new more efficient system...transit and quit expanding our spending on the "too well built system".
I do agree that we need to expand services, but the real edge comes from a light rail system IMO.
Denver would be an interesting comparison. I think two big differences area evident but haven't put the time into backing up my claims. At the same time, I don't know if Denver has a higer sales tax to push their plan through. I understand that tax revenues were down and they had to pull back the throttle on some of their construction contracts or push the schedule out.
First, I believe Denver has more downtown employees to move in and out of the center. However, I couldn't find a quick way on the BLS website to breakout the numbers for comparison beyond a county to county comparison. No doubt, getting more jobs and residents in downtown ST. Louis will only help in the long term when it comes to transit agendas.
Second, Unfortunately for the St. Louis region, I believe entire Denver region is under the Fasttrak plan and thus has a bigger tax base to take from. Not having St. Charles/Jefferson county on the Missouri side in Metro hurts to some extent. I really don't that changing on the politic front any time soon
First, I believe Denver has more downtown employees to move in and out of the center. However, I couldn't find a quick way on the BLS website to breakout the numbers for comparison beyond a county to county comparison. No doubt, getting more jobs and residents in downtown ST. Louis will only help in the long term when it comes to transit agendas.
Second, Unfortunately for the St. Louis region, I believe entire Denver region is under the Fasttrak plan and thus has a bigger tax base to take from. Not having St. Charles/Jefferson county on the Missouri side in Metro hurts to some extent. I really don't that changing on the politic front any time soon
- 8,912
I'd add that not only is driving quicker but parking is too easy to find, damn near everywhere.pat wrote:I agree. Metrolink expansion isn't a major issue to everyone because they're current situation is fine. But I think the perception towards metrolink expansion needs to change.Agree with most. One correction: Everybody gets to work. This is what's holding MetroLink back in (not only) our region; the perception that public transportation is for the poor.
We need to stop looking at it as just a new tax burden and an answer to congested roads, and look at it as an investment. I think density and transit go hand in hand. If you have a lot of density in a city, you going to need more transit. But I think we can use transit (metrolink expansion) as a tool to create a denser city. Proactive vs reactive. Granted its much more complex than "If you build it, people will come." But the mindset nowadays seems to be "closer to work, less driving, go green". I think we can take advantage of that. And I think expanding metrolink now rather than when it is more pressing can be used as a tool to get new people and businesses to St. Louis.
Don't forget cheap.moorlander wrote:I'd add that not only is driving quicker but parking is too easy to find, damn near everywhere.pat wrote:I agree. Metrolink expansion isn't a major issue to everyone because they're current situation is fine. But I think the perception towards metrolink expansion needs to change.Agree with most. One correction: Everybody gets to work. This is what's holding MetroLink back in (not only) our region; the perception that public transportation is for the poor.
We need to stop looking at it as just a new tax burden and an answer to congested roads, and look at it as an investment. I think density and transit go hand in hand. If you have a lot of density in a city, you going to need more transit. But I think we can use transit (metrolink expansion) as a tool to create a denser city. Proactive vs reactive. Granted its much more complex than "If you build it, people will come." But the mindset nowadays seems to be "closer to work, less driving, go green". I think we can take advantage of that. And I think expanding metrolink now rather than when it is more pressing can be used as a tool to get new people and businesses to St. Louis.
You won't get a change in parking situation until you can attract enough business to need infill. At that point, land vaiues will dictate a higher premium on parking cost. And please, I don't buy the argument that St. Louis can price parking at a premium without demand for more downtown space first.
I think you pretty spot on with that assessment. There are ways to change this regionally and even locally, but with STL City trying to grow and the county fragmented municipally, its either going to take a lot of growth or spiking gas rates/reduced subsidies for oil.dredger wrote:
Don't forget cheap.
You won't get a change in parking situation until you can attract enough business to need infill. At that point, land vaiues will dictate a higher premium on parking cost. And please, I don't buy the argument that St. Louis can price parking at a premium without demand for more downtown space first.
- 2,929
^ You can expect oil to rise in the near future. I see the combination of domestic & global inflation, evident in commodities pricing; an increase in political discourse throughout the Middle East; and strongly increased demand in both India and China as more of their citizens now have the ability to purchase cars. We are never going to see $1.50 gas in the US ever again, even with a 100% effective means to harvest all of Canada's oil sands right into Wood River.
However, the rise in the price of oil will not by itself lead to more MetroLink, and especially with emerging inflation. As much as I'd like to see multiple lines all over StL, we must remember that StL is, relatively speaking, a poor city. There are areas where we can spend monies in redeveloping our City with much more ROI than just trains, such as our public schools and repairing social infrastructure like sewer lines. As much as I favor investment into the region's transportation infrastructure, I just don't see us having the monies available to budget major increases in the near future. Should we have a watershed moment, where new revenues just start flowing in, I'd very much vote in support of a N/S line, but until that time we just can't afford it.
Full Disclosure: Years ago, I worked with local politicians on proposals for a MetroLink line into South County, favoring the extension of Cross-County extending from the Shrewsbury stop along the River Des Peres to I-55, then parallel south to Butler Hill. I'd love, love to see this line built, but no way am I holding my breath for it.
However, the rise in the price of oil will not by itself lead to more MetroLink, and especially with emerging inflation. As much as I'd like to see multiple lines all over StL, we must remember that StL is, relatively speaking, a poor city. There are areas where we can spend monies in redeveloping our City with much more ROI than just trains, such as our public schools and repairing social infrastructure like sewer lines. As much as I favor investment into the region's transportation infrastructure, I just don't see us having the monies available to budget major increases in the near future. Should we have a watershed moment, where new revenues just start flowing in, I'd very much vote in support of a N/S line, but until that time we just can't afford it.
Full Disclosure: Years ago, I worked with local politicians on proposals for a MetroLink line into South County, favoring the extension of Cross-County extending from the Shrewsbury stop along the River Des Peres to I-55, then parallel south to Butler Hill. I'd love, love to see this line built, but no way am I holding my breath for it.
As far as the Canada's oil sands, that process is so highly destructive that it would likely result in the destruction or at the minimum a drastic increase in water prices and ecosystem restoration. Its a terrible process that has so many hidden costs that it should not be considered a viable option.gone corporate wrote:^ You can expect oil to rise in the near future. I see the combination of domestic & global inflation, evident in commodities pricing; an increase in political discourse throughout the Middle East; and strongly increased demand in both India and China as more of their citizens now have the ability to purchase cars. We are never going to see $1.50 gas in the US ever again, even with a 100% effective means to harvest all of Canada's oil sands right into Wood River.
However, the rise in the price of oil will not by itself lead to more MetroLink, and especially with emerging inflation. As much as I'd like to see multiple lines all over StL, we must remember that StL is, relatively speaking, a poor city. There are areas where we can spend monies in redeveloping our City with much more ROI than just trains, such as our public schools and repairing social infrastructure like sewer lines. As much as I favor investment into the region's transportation infrastructure, I just don't see us having the monies available to budget major increases in the near future. Should we have a watershed moment, where new revenues just start flowing in, I'd very much vote in support of a N/S line, but until that time we just can't afford it.
Full Disclosure: Years ago, I worked with local politicians on proposals for a MetroLink line into South County, favoring the extension of Cross-County extending from the Shrewsbury stop along the River Des Peres to I-55, then parallel south to Butler Hill. I'd love, love to see this line built, but no way am I holding my breath for it.
I too think the ROI could be more beneficial from an education standpoint, but I have two questions. Given the current state of affairs, would any increase in funding to city schools really help rectify the issues there? I think the only way we see a drastic turnaround is if the archdiocese either revises their financial structure for schools or if they outright relinquish their control over them. Then we would also need a strong charter school system. This leads me to my next series of questions. How do we finance this system? Does the money for the schools have any bearing on the transportation budget? Should we not work on both simultaneously? Their success could be directly related if the systems interact accordingly.
Lastly, the sewer system must be rectified, but how to we obtain the funds to finance such a massive overhaul? Personally, I believe the city should take steps to make stormwater management an on-site process. Some cities are requiring properties with new developments and even major retrofits/additions/restorations to retain stormwater on-site. Its cheaper to the city, of little cost to land owners and is much more environmentally friendly.
Can't discount another item when looking at Transit in the long term. Electric cars will become a viable option in an urban environment. In other words, they will provide a viable alternative to higher gas prices and will be in direct competition with transit for users. Do you park the car and use transit or do you trade in your car at a loss for the convenience of a Chevy volt?
I think it will be an easy answer for a lot of people St Louis who would go with the Volt where as in other large metor areas it is a different answer because the transit infrastructure has already been establish and parking is a premium.
I think it will be an easy answer for a lot of people St Louis who would go with the Volt where as in other large metor areas it is a different answer because the transit infrastructure has already been establish and parking is a premium.
- 2,929
Quick rundown:
- There is no cash to fund MetroLink expansion for years. The monies just don't exist. I wish they did, but nope, the cupboard is bare, save a statement that we're all still in debt. And being charged interest.
- Federal monies are what's about to disappear. StL City's been very good with money management (Comptroller Green) over these last few years. Look for the DC Money Faucet to dry up unless Bernacke just says he doesn't believe inflation is real, but that Santa Claus is.
- If the monies did exist, we'd hear that they should go to schools over trains, but that's just wasted monies as the School Board is incapable of effecting changes for the students' benefits.
- Speaking of the schools, How about the Archdiocese takes over. Get the nuns with their rulers and discipline back in charge. Give'em full control over the City public schools, and bet your butt we'll see some changes.
- Yes, oil sands tear up the environment. But I'm never going into the subarctic hundreds of miles north of Calgary, where nothing lives anyways other than mold on rocks & the occasional lost moose, unless I'm fortunate enough to still get in early and make a few bucks off of it. Best place in the world for a laborer to make solid six figures a year, just digging a hole.
- Electric cars are the way of the future, and they'll look like they did in Minority Report. And that'll be a long ways off. I want a Tesla Concept S, but not for a while, and I don't have fears of them running out of cars. I see roads able to charge electric cars, while they're still driving, online in 50 years, but not before.
Am still in favor of North/South expansion, not holding my breath for it.
- There is no cash to fund MetroLink expansion for years. The monies just don't exist. I wish they did, but nope, the cupboard is bare, save a statement that we're all still in debt. And being charged interest.
- Federal monies are what's about to disappear. StL City's been very good with money management (Comptroller Green) over these last few years. Look for the DC Money Faucet to dry up unless Bernacke just says he doesn't believe inflation is real, but that Santa Claus is.
- If the monies did exist, we'd hear that they should go to schools over trains, but that's just wasted monies as the School Board is incapable of effecting changes for the students' benefits.
- Speaking of the schools, How about the Archdiocese takes over. Get the nuns with their rulers and discipline back in charge. Give'em full control over the City public schools, and bet your butt we'll see some changes.
- Yes, oil sands tear up the environment. But I'm never going into the subarctic hundreds of miles north of Calgary, where nothing lives anyways other than mold on rocks & the occasional lost moose, unless I'm fortunate enough to still get in early and make a few bucks off of it. Best place in the world for a laborer to make solid six figures a year, just digging a hole.
- Electric cars are the way of the future, and they'll look like they did in Minority Report. And that'll be a long ways off. I want a Tesla Concept S, but not for a while, and I don't have fears of them running out of cars. I see roads able to charge electric cars, while they're still driving, online in 50 years, but not before.
Am still in favor of North/South expansion, not holding my breath for it.
The Archdiocese taking over would be a huge mistake. They can't even manage the schools under their control now. Why add more?gone corporate wrote:Quick rundown:
- There is no cash to fund MetroLink expansion for years. The monies just don't exist. I wish they did, but nope, the cupboard is bare, save a statement that we're all still in debt. And being charged interest.
- Federal monies are what's about to disappear. StL City's been very good with money management (Comptroller Green) over these last few years. Look for the DC Money Faucet to dry up unless Bernacke just says he doesn't believe inflation is real, but that Santa Claus is.
- If the monies did exist, we'd hear that they should go to schools over trains, but that's just wasted monies as the School Board is incapable of effecting changes for the students' benefits.
- Speaking of the schools, How about the Archdiocese takes over. Get the nuns with their rulers and discipline back in charge. Give'em full control over the City public schools, and bet your butt we'll see some changes.
- Yes, oil sands tear up the environment. But I'm never going into the subarctic hundreds of miles north of Calgary, where nothing lives anyways other than mold on rocks & the occasional lost moose, unless I'm fortunate enough to still get in early and make a few bucks off of it. Best place in the world for a laborer to make solid six figures a year, just digging a hole.
- Electric cars are the way of the future, and they'll look like they did in Minority Report. And that'll be a long ways off. I want a Tesla Concept S, but not for a while, and I don't have fears of them running out of cars. I see roads able to charge electric cars, while they're still driving, online in 50 years, but not before.
Am still in favor of North/South expansion, not holding my breath for it.
The oil sands comment just makes me wonder if you are making a joke or just made a comment for making the sake of a comment.
dredger wrote:Can't discount another item when looking at Transit in the long term. Electric cars will become a viable option in an urban environment. In other words, they will provide a viable alternative to higher gas prices and will be in direct competition with transit for users. Do you park the car and use transit or do you trade in your car at a loss for the convenience of a Chevy volt?
I think it will be an easy answer for a lot of people St Louis who would go with the Volt where as in other large metor areas it is a different answer because the transit infrastructure has already been establish and parking is a premium.
How would we produce this energy and will our development patterns stay the same? If we continue to do it the way we go about it now, we will run into similar problems that we are beginning to deal with now.
My strategy is to live close enough to work that I can use my bike to get back and forth. So long as they keep making bike tires, I won't be priced out of working. Now, I just have to buy a house...
If only
Lion of the Valley - James Neal Primm wrote:The mayor also argued that since rapid transit could never be achieved on the street surface, subways should be built, one along the central corridor from Third Street to Jefferson or Grand Avenue, and a north-south line from Chouteau to Cass Avenue (about twenty blocks). Wells conceded that subways cut through solid rock would be expensive, but well within the city's capability, especially if the Eads Bridge tunnel could be purchased and used as a nucleus for the system. Unfortunately, the free-bridge controversy that erupted during Wells's second term relegated this idea to obscurity.