urbanSTL

npav wrote:

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jan 21, 2022

wabash wrote: ↑

Jan 21, 2022

I think you're spot on. Grand is an ideal BRT corridor, including its direct Metrolink connectivity. You don't need to study it for 15 months to figure that out:

1. The 70 is the busiest bus route in the system.
2. Grand is one of the busiest Metrolink stations largely because of the 70.
3. Some of the City's largest employers (SSM, VA Hospital), institutions (SLU, Fox, Powell), commercial districts (Grand Center, South Grand), and parks (Fair Grounds, Tower Grove, Carondelet)

Its a corridor that people are traveling through and to with direct connectivity to the Metrolink system.

8 miles gets you from N 20th to Carondelet Park, 10 miles from Broadway-Taylor Transit Center to Carondelet Park, 15 miles from Riverview Transit Center to Catalan Transit Center.

It's honestly a pretty good bus as it is. I live near the south end of the 70 line. Pre-plague I could fairly consistently get from my house to the airport in an hour, which is barely a half hour longer than driving. Add in parking time and it's probably darn near beak even. In the end, I think, the more important thing than BRT would just be to get the timings back.  I'm still not sold on BRT. It feels like a more expensive bus that's still a bus. If DB is right about the 70-75% of the cost of light rail figure then BRT sounds like bad math. It'd be a pretty marginal improvement for a whole lot of money. I figure if you're going to build a dedicated right of way with platforms and separation from automotive traffic stick rails in it and make it comfortable and efficient. Otherwise . . . bump up driver pay and fix this mess. (Actually . . . just do that last part no matter what else you do. We HAVE a good system entirely as is. Metrolink/Metrobus has great routes and the drive times aren't at all bad. We just need shorter headways. )

All that said, if you want to lay rail Grand would be a good place for it. But I think I'm to the point where I want to see BRT put to bed. It really starts to sound like a waste of money.

I agree with your statement on BRT.  If we're finally going to build the N/S line, do it right.  MetroLink runs on time 97% of the time, is a much better experience than Bus.  I'd feel much more confident planning a new LRT line on dedicated rail for just about 25% more than setting up a BRT that is a little cheaper but a worse experience.

I hear Cincy's 15 mile BRT line isn't doing so great.  Keep expanding the MetroLink system and connection stations and neighborhoods.  Our current rail sucks at connecting dense population areas.  Running rail through places like Holly Hills, Dutchtown, TGE, Benton Park, Midtown, and connecting them to the rest of the network will go a loooooong way in making a practical system.  Let's not cheap out and go half-ass on a project that's already been a decade+ in the making.

Cinci’s and Indy’s BRT lines are not doing so good! Indy’s electric Buses were supposed to ride for a day or 235 Miles and they riding for about 3-4 worth or 120-140 miles a day at most.

Like you’ve stated is better to spend 25% more and have a great system than something cheaper that doesn’t work on time and maintenance can be a nightmare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

JJ Taino wrote: ↑

Jan 21, 2022

npav wrote:

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jan 21, 2022

It's honestly a pretty good bus as it is. I live near the south end of the 70 line. Pre-plague I could fairly consistently get from my house to the airport in an hour, which is barely a half hour longer than driving. Add in parking time and it's probably darn near beak even. In the end, I think, the more important thing than BRT would just be to get the timings back.  I'm still not sold on BRT. It feels like a more expensive bus that's still a bus. If DB is right about the 70-75% of the cost of light rail figure then BRT sounds like bad math. It'd be a pretty marginal improvement for a whole lot of money. I figure if you're going to build a dedicated right of way with platforms and separation from automotive traffic stick rails in it and make it comfortable and efficient. Otherwise . . . bump up driver pay and fix this mess. (Actually . . . just do that last part no matter what else you do. We HAVE a good system entirely as is. Metrolink/Metrobus has great routes and the drive times aren't at all bad. We just need shorter headways. )

All that said, if you want to lay rail Grand would be a good place for it. But I think I'm to the point where I want to see BRT put to bed. It really starts to sound like a waste of money.

I agree with your statement on BRT.  If we're finally going to build the N/S line, do it right.  MetroLink runs on time 97% of the time, is a much better experience than Bus.  I'd feel much more confident planning a new LRT line on dedicated rail for just about 25% more than setting up a BRT that is a little cheaper but a worse experience.

I hear Cincy's 15 mile BRT line isn't doing so great.  Keep expanding the MetroLink system and connection stations and neighborhoods.  Our current rail sucks at connecting dense population areas.  Running rail through places like Holly Hills, Dutchtown, TGE, Benton Park, Midtown, and connecting them to the rest of the network will go a loooooong way in making a practical system.  Let's not cheap out and go half-ass on a project that's already been a decade+ in the making.

Cinci’s and Indy’s BRT lines are not doing so good! Indy’s electric Buses were supposed to ride for a day or 235 Miles and they riding for about 3-4 worth or 120-140 miles a day at most.

Like you’ve stated is better to spend 25% more and have a great system than something cheaper that doesn’t work on time and maintenance can be a nightmare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That's what the BRT proponents don't seem to grasp. BRT is a purely political tool that is meant to placate transit advocates who would desire real rail transit. Indy's system has been plagued with mismanagement and hasn't been the economic driver it was reported to be. People have reported that the system is confusing to use, breaks down all the time, and constantly being hit by drivers. The fact is that BRT is simply not implemented correctly in US and I highly doubt St. Louis will be the one city that changes that trend.

JJ Taino wrote: ↑

Jan 21, 2022

npav wrote:

symphonicpoet wrote: ↑

Jan 21, 2022

It's honestly a pretty good bus as it is. I live near the south end of the 70 line. Pre-plague I could fairly consistently get from my house to the airport in an hour, which is barely a half hour longer than driving. Add in parking time and it's probably darn near beak even. In the end, I think, the more important thing than BRT would just be to get the timings back.  I'm still not sold on BRT. It feels like a more expensive bus that's still a bus. If DB is right about the 70-75% of the cost of light rail figure then BRT sounds like bad math. It'd be a pretty marginal improvement for a whole lot of money. I figure if you're going to build a dedicated right of way with platforms and separation from automotive traffic stick rails in it and make it comfortable and efficient. Otherwise . . . bump up driver pay and fix this mess. (Actually . . . just do that last part no matter what else you do. We HAVE a good system entirely as is. Metrolink/Metrobus has great routes and the drive times aren't at all bad. We just need shorter headways. )

All that said, if you want to lay rail Grand would be a good place for it. But I think I'm to the point where I want to see BRT put to bed. It really starts to sound like a waste of money.

I agree with your statement on BRT.  If we're finally going to build the N/S line, do it right.  MetroLink runs on time 97% of the time, is a much better experience than Bus.  I'd feel much more confident planning a new LRT line on dedicated rail for just about 25% more than setting up a BRT that is a little cheaper but a worse experience.

I hear Cincy's 15 mile BRT line isn't doing so great.  Keep expanding the MetroLink system and connection stations and neighborhoods.  Our current rail sucks at connecting dense population areas.  Running rail through places like Holly Hills, Dutchtown, TGE, Benton Park, Midtown, and connecting them to the rest of the network will go a loooooong way in making a practical system.  Let's not cheap out and go half-ass on a project that's already been a decade+ in the making.

Cinci’s and Indy’s BRT lines are not doing so good! Indy’s electric Buses were supposed to ride for a day or 235 Miles and they riding for about 3-4 worth or 120-140 miles a day at most.

Like you’ve stated is better to spend 25% more and have a great system than something cheaper that doesn’t work on time and maintenance can be a nightmare.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't think Cincy has BRT yet, but is working on it. Although I believe their streetcar has struggled with low ridership.

I would love to see a north-south light rail but also would not be upset if we wound up spending the money on upgrading bus service--simplifying some routes, beefing up frequencies, etc.

What do people think about adding some sort of express routes along long north-south lines like Kingshighway, Grand, Jefferson, etc.? I was thinking about a line that had fewer stops to make it practical to take one of those lines to move between high-density nodes with stopping at every little stop along the way, which is something that has made a bus trip or MetroLink-->bus not practical for me under some circumstances.

For Grand, thinking something like the Broadway/Taylor transit center, Fairgrounds Park/Natural Bridge, Page, something around the VA/Lindell/SLU/Grand Center, Grand MetroLink station, SSM/SLU Hospital/SLU med school/Cardinal Glennon, Tower Grove Park, somewhere along the South Grand business strip, Grand/Gravois/Cherokee, Grand/Meramac, Carondelet. Maybe even take it through to the Loughborough shopping center or River City Casino. That might be too many stops, but you get the idea.

Spend some money on branding, wrap the buses differently to make sure people don't get on it thinking it is the local, bigger bus shelter, etc. It wouldn't be BRT but would still represent a level of service above what we have and would be a lot simpler, cheaper, and faster to roll out.

I think it could help ridership by making these long distance trips faster, closer to par with driving than they are now with a stop almost every block, and maybe could serve as a pilot route showing the practicality of making a bigger investment in legit BRT.

Maybe Metro has already done the studies and it wouldn't work, I don't know, just throwing it out there.

Unfortunately federal money can't be used to just improve our existing bus services, a lot of it is restricted to projects that have a dedicated ROW for mass transit, so either BRT or LRT.

I always thought bus lanes were illegal in Missouri.

rbeedee wrote:I would love to see a north-south light rail but also would not be upset if we wound up spending the money on upgrading bus service--simplifying some routes, beefing up frequencies, etc.

What do people think about adding some sort of express routes along long north-south lines like Kingshighway, Grand, Jefferson, etc.? I was thinking about a line that had fewer stops to make it practical to take one of those lines to move between high-density nodes with stopping at every little stop along the way, which is something that has made a bus trip or MetroLink-->bus not practical for me under some circumstances.

For Grand, thinking something like the Broadway/Taylor transit center, Fairgrounds Park/Natural Bridge, Page, something around the VA/Lindell/SLU/Grand Center, Grand MetroLink station, SSM/SLU Hospital/SLU med school/Cardinal Glennon, Tower Grove Park, somewhere along the South Grand business strip, Grand/Gravois/Cherokee, Grand/Meramac, Carondelet. Maybe even take it through to the Loughborough shopping center or River City Casino. That might be too many stops, but you get the idea.

Spend some money on branding, wrap the buses differently to make sure people don't get on it thinking it is the local, bigger bus shelter, etc. It wouldn't be BRT but would still represent a level of service above what we have and would be a lot simpler, cheaper, and faster to roll out.

I think it could help ridership by making these long distance trips faster, closer to par with driving than they are now with a stop almost every block, and maybe could serve as a pilot route showing the practicality of making a bigger investment in legit BRT.

Maybe Metro has already done the studies and it wouldn't work, I don't know, just throwing it out there.

When I lived in Seattle, there were plenty of express routes and they just had the number followed by an X to denote that. Worked well and I always felt lucky catching one and speeding up my trip.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

What’s being studied;

Corridor Technological Alternative Analysis is a regional collaboration currently underway and worthy of a gold star as St. Louis City, St. Louis County and Bi-State Development come together for this 15-month effort. The study will examine the light rail and bus rapid transit possibilities that exist within the City – including Goodfellow to Bayless, 1-55 and Broadway, Grand to Chippewa and rethinking downtown as it relates to Market Street, highway interchange issues, the ability to serve Civic Center and emerging densities to the west and more. The county is looking into opportunities for extension in North County via Florissant to the North County Transit center, as well as in South City and County via I-55 and Broadway. A lot has changed since the study was initially completed in 2018, and new demographics, rider impact due to COVID, changing sales taxes, advancements in technology and the county’s participation all need to be taken into consideration. This process includes engagement with stakeholders and the community at-large and will include stakeholder interviews, small group meetings (virtual/in-person), connecting with existing meetings, demonstrations, door-to-door outreach and more. The timeline is critical due to federal funds available for transit through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. It is very critical that this effort moves forward. It must be examined from a regional perspective in order to improve accessibility for all and be a successful candidate for this funding.

dbInSouthCity wrote:What’s being studied;

Corridor Technological Alternative Analysis is a regional collaboration currently underway and worthy of a gold star as St. Louis City, St. Louis County and Bi-State Development come together for this 15-month effort. The study will examine the light rail and bus rapid transit possibilities that exist within the City – including Goodfellow to Bayless, 1-55 and Broadway, Grand to Chippewa and rethinking downtown as it relates to Market Street, highway interchange issues, the ability to serve Civic Center and emerging densities to the west and more. The county is looking into opportunities for extension in North County via Florissant to the North County Transit center, as well as in South City and County via I-55 and Broadway. A lot has changed since the study was initially completed in 2018, and new demographics, rider impact due to COVID, changing sales taxes, advancements in technology and the county’s participation all need to be taken into consideration. This process includes engagement with stakeholders and the community at-large and will include stakeholder interviews, small group meetings (virtual/in-person), connecting with existing meetings, demonstrations, door-to-door outreach and more. The timeline is critical due to federal funds available for transit through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. It is very critical that this effort moves forward. It must be examined from a regional perspective in order to improve accessibility for all and be a successful candidate for this funding.

That last part sounds promising


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Metrolink had 3.3m rides from July to Dec 2021. That just isn’t going to play for Federal monies for expansion. In 2013 a 6 month period would have about 9.7 million rides.

Metro bus had 6.03m

dbInSouthCity wrote:Metrolink had 3.3m rides from July to Dec 2021. That just isn’t going to play for Federal monies for expansion. In 2013 a 6 month period would have about 9.7 million rides.

Metro bus had 6.03m

The pandemic led to Seattle’s light rail losing 75% of its passengers. They haven’t updated since 2021 Q1 so they may have regained some since then, but I hardly think St. Louis is alone in this.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑

Jan 22, 2022

Metrolink had 3.3m rides from July to Dec 2021.  That just isn’t going to play for Federal monies for expansion.    In 2013 a 6 month period would have about 9.7 million rides.  

Metro bus had 6.03m

The Feds are going to have to adjust some of their ridership expectations.

SeattleNative wrote: ↑

Jan 22, 2022

dbInSouthCity wrote:What’s being studied;

Corridor Technological Alternative Analysis is a regional collaboration currently underway and worthy of a gold star as St. Louis City, St. Louis County and Bi-State Development come together for this 15-month effort. The study will examine the light rail and bus rapid transit possibilities that exist within the City – including Goodfellow to Bayless, 1-55 and Broadway, Grand to Chippewa and rethinking downtown as it relates to Market Street, highway interchange issues, the ability to serve Civic Center and emerging densities to the west and more. The county is looking into opportunities for extension in North County via Florissant to the North County Transit center, as well as in South City and County via I-55 and Broadway. A lot has changed since the study was initially completed in 2018, and new demographics, rider impact due to COVID, changing sales taxes, advancements in technology and the county’s participation all need to be taken into consideration. This process includes engagement with stakeholders and the community at-large and will include stakeholder interviews, small group meetings (virtual/in-person), connecting with existing meetings, demonstrations, door-to-door outreach and more. The timeline is critical due to federal funds available for transit through the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act. It is very critical that this effort moves forward. It must be examined from a regional perspective in order to improve accessibility for all and be a successful candidate for this funding.

That last part sounds promising


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Sounds like a lot of it has nothing to do with N-S from what I read.  

I see a couple easy low hanging fruit for the county and the city in that statement.   Specifically, for the county doing  a metrolink extension off the spine via Florissant to the North County Transit Center.   I believe that has been around a while, relatively short so very doable on funding and since it ties into existing it might be easier with Feds to accept ridership levels.   

The other easy low hanging fruit to me is the the reference to rethinking downtown it is relates to Market Street, highway interchange issues.  Talk about a great opportunity to remove the parkway stretch FPP & Market, put FPP & Grand at grade intersection, along with incorporating a new multimodal & brickline stretch funding.    Those two seem like pretty good candidates for a host of Fed and FTA funding.   

Biggest issue with Metrolink exp. is STLMetro refuses to take ownership. Almost no one on the board is qualified to set & lead transit policy. Executive Director just deflects “it’s up to…”. You’re the experts in this, lead. Say what you want and need, let’s electeds say yes or no

Sampling of board members who set metros policy. Like i am positive these are all very nice people with tremendous accomplishment in other fields but there is nothing transit related here. Heck ones entire career is with car building union.

I think all the municipalities should give over all transportation, planning, and zoning authority to East-West Gateway. Take the politics out of these kind of land use issues. Local leadership is usually not educated or informed enough to make these decisions.

It'd be so cool if they could go down Florissant from the North County Transit Center to Tucker, through downtown, then down Gravois to Grant's Farm or something similar.

You'd want a new station at Tucker for the existing system, though. There are a bunch of stations already around there, but I still feel like it'd be worth it to make Tucker a transfer station.

Then you'd want an extension from the red line, and another for the blue line from the Shrewbury station, to connect with the new line to create a little spoke.

Of course, if I can keep playing, I'd love a Grand line from the Grand Avenue Water Tower to Carondolet Park Rec Center, with a transfer station at Florissant Ave in North City and Gravois in South City.

I think that'd be a great start to an awesome system.

Edit: I don't reasonably expect this.

Trololzilla wrote: ↑

Apr 26, 2022

St. Louis Mayor Tishaura Jones shuns Freeholders, says north-south transit expansion should be light rail

Not a whole lot on N/S in that article, but Mayor Jones seems to be pretty adamant on light rail being the proper transit solution here.

Doesn't change the issue of a low federal score despite my wishes for a train

This looks great - lets get it going!

Imagine trying to pitch 5 miles of light rail for $800,000,000 in todays environment with 500 page list of things STL needs to fix.

Cost of this is $600-800m and for $100m you can accomplish the same thing on this stretch with a high end BRT and have it open in 2 years and not a decade like light rail

pattimagee wrote:

Love the simplification, but as Dennis brought up, this should just be completed as BRT to 1) save a ton of money but 2) get it up and running ASAP rather than 10 years down the line.

Agreed that BRT would be better. 

On the subject of the plan, I assume this means they would plan to build a new Jefferson station along the red/blue? 

I understand the benefits of straight north/south route over a circuitous one through downtown, but I think the new North side alignment is somewhat worse in terms of serving people. Going up Tucker then North Florissant hits up several populated neighborhoods, whereas North Jefferson is basically empty.