urbanSTL

^We should learn from our mistakes and figure out a way to get it done now before it gets even more expensive.

N/S line needs to be under construction yesterday.

^ People have said the N/S line is a "white elephant", but in all honesty it is probably the only extension that would qualify for substantial federal funding under the new FTA regulations. New lines have to meet real "sustainable" criteria now. Zoning has to be transit supportive, urban density has to be there, and lines must serve transit dependent communities. The Westport line would not be very competitive against truly urban lines with the new merit based system.

The N/S line, particularly the North portion, would be an absolutely gigantic catalyst for development in that area of the city. If the city doesn't have someone lobbying in Washington full time for funds for this project, we need to hire one.

Is this still dead? Seems like the N/S extension needs to get a group together similar to the City to River campaign. Alex? Thoughts?

Where is "north". Like are we talking about downtown being the most northern spot?

I think north means the north neighborhoods, Old North, Hyde Park etc

ImprovSTL wrote:Is this still dead? Seems like the N/S extension needs to get a group together similar to the City to River campaign. Alex? Thoughts?

I wouldn't mind contributing to a group interested in southward expansion. There is no way I could take lead though. I would love to have a group focused transportation and TODs in STL.

I think it's still in the works, but that the Daniel Boone (Westport/270 & Page) alignment has priority in terms of Metrolink build-out. My understanding is that the county was basically promised the next expansion for passing Prop A.

I also think we're more likely to see a Grand BRT (and perhaps even another Metrolink expansion in St. Clair County) before a Metrolink expansion to the north & south sides of the city.

wabash wrote:I think it's still in the works, but that the Daniel Boone (Westport/270 & Page) alignment has priority in terms of Metrolink build-out. My understanding is that the county was basically promised the next expansion for passing Prop A.

I also think we're more likely to see a Grand BRT (and perhaps even another Metrolink expansion in St. Clair County) before a Metrolink expansion to the north & south sides of the city.

I would much rather see BRTs implemented first to test the potential of a MetroLink expansion. If the Grand BRT is successful, might we see more emphasis placed on BRT lines as tests for Link expansion? I think this would be the best course of action, especially if it keeps us from making bad decisions with the Link. It much more expensive to create light-rail lines and figure out they are not right/less than optimal. Plus, any excitement that the BRT generates could help create a better approach to development supportive of transit.

I agree with both of you. I think the Westport/Daniel Boone alignment would result in a bunch of under-used stations (similar to Sunnen) with the exception of perhaps a Lindbergh and Westport as potentially successful Park-n-ride stations (similar to North Hanley).

STLGasm: You're absolutely right that transit should be used to recenter the region around the CBD, but unfortunately the County would prefer to recenter the region around their CBD aka Clayton. With two lines converging in Clayton (Shrewsbury I-44 & Westport I-270), it would continue to help Clayton in positioning itself as the center of the region. As you mentioned, the Daniel Boone would certainly do very little for transit dependent riders and have much higher barriers to true TOD than a N/S Line.

zun1026 wrote:It much more expensive to create light-rail lines and figure out they are not right/less than optimal.

I think the right course of action is to design light rail correctly the first time. We shouldn't shy away from it for fear of getting it wrong. Metrolink's design makes it effective both in the urban landscape and as a more suburban/rural commuter train. While this versatility is expensive due to the necessity of exclusive right-of-way I think the benefits of a properly designed southside metrolink (connecting some of the densest neighborhoods in the city, with important feeder roads in south county: Bayless, Reavis Barracks, 55, Lindbergh, 270) are worth the added expense.

Unfortunately, unless there is a City-County merger I'm willing to bet there will be a Metrolink Station in Olivette long before there is one in south St. Louis City.

Seems to me that the Metrolink is trying to do too much. Be a commuter line and a neighborhood city transit system. St. Louis has an incredible advantage of being such a compact city in terms of square miles, an inner city light rail system really wouldn't be too cost prohibitive.

Then you study the use of commuter lines that use railroad tracks or the BRT.

These should be two completely different project, IMO.

^ I don't really think that metrolink is trying to do to much. It connects the majority of the regions institutions, downtown & CBD, sporting stadiums and such. However, I do think you can have too much without giving the region any benefit (Daniel Boone Line as example) and really think you can mess up a good opportunity even when it is built (think cross county extension where your have great opportunities for mixed used developments).

I would much rather see the existing Metrolink lines extended on the Missouri side before the Daniel Boone Line. Any new line I would argue is for Illinois side to SIUE for the simple fact that you might actually get funding on all levels and would take a connection to SIUE over Westport.

The reality of NS Line is that there is no political support or monies. Tack on the Dome Issue and Arch Grounds Improvements, another easy billion plus and the NS Line for the city becomes wishful thinking at best.

Instead, I would play small ball - Getting the newer and bigger buses on Grand will be a plus, adding frequency would be a bigger plus. Getting SLU/Grand Center/City teamed up to pursue a Grand/mid town street car line is doable. Just as Joe Edwards pursued Loop trolley but have a better chance of being more successful in my mind.

Metro pursuing a downtown bus center for the express buses will be another plus and much more doable in the immediate future. In time, push for employers downtown, better rail service with Amtrak and you will see commuter rail line as a possiblity in the long term. Getting Downtown Now/businss leaders/city teamed up for downtown circular is doable Designing the circular to allow North, South and Westerly offshoots to me makes sense. Otherwise, your back to wishful thinking of all or nothing NS line.

zink wrote:Where is "north". Like are we talking about downtown being the most northern spot?

For the metrolink north line, north starts at 14th & delmar. Then left to N Florissant, then left to Natural Bridge.

Question. Any Westport or Daniel Boone line, would it be an express line? aka commuter line? or would they attempt to have stations every mile?

Question #2. Would express/commuter lines save significant dough for other things? (BRT, increased running times, etc.) I guess I'm asking, what % of expansion is for building new track and what % is for building new stations?

I think really any Metrolink Expansion at this point would be great.

One thing to remember about the N/S line is that it might not generate a large new ridership but rather shift existing riders from bus to Metrolink. With the Daniel Boone line though, new ridership could be added to the overall system and bus lines should be enhanced along the line to increase other ridership too. Just a thought...

Right, I know that Old North becomes a lot more attractive to me as a person looking for a neighborhood if it has a metrolink near by. Light rail is also a huge help to bus riders. Getting them faster to a transfer bus route in many cases.

Alex Ihnen wrote:^ That's probably true, but I think that highlights the pitfalls of transit planning/funding. Shouldn't we be building transit to create a more dense, sustainable, livable city and region? If we build solely based on immediate ridership potential, then Westport it is.

I agree on how we should be building transit. And building based on immediate ridership is completely short sided. I hope that Westport line doesnt happen.

I guess I must be in the minority that thinks building out to Westport isn't such a bad idea. After all, the Westport area is the biggest remaining job center unconnected to MetroLink. Sure, development there is currently very unsuitable for transit accessiblity, but that could change.

^Do that many people that work in Westport need transit? I figure there's not a lot of lower income workers there that need it.

And Westport really isn't the entertainment area in was 10 years or so ago when there was a lot of talk of expanding Metrolink there.

I guess I get it, but associating mass transit with only low income workers is a perception that needs to change in STL.