^ Well this plan is useless for me. If I have to cross Grand -- which I already live 6 blocks west of -- I might as well pick up the Metro at Grand over the railyard. But it does look like a good development opportunity for that stretch of south Jefferson, and it has the potential to quickly bring park-n-ride commuters from SoCo to downtown.
It has the potential to quickly bring park-n-ride commuters from SoCo to downtown.
I have not seen a proposed rail schedule for the southside, but I doubt if it will be a fast service.
The Current 40X I-55 Express takes about 12 minutes from Reavis Barracks Park Ride Lot to the Civic Center Station in downtown.
A train operating as proposed, with all the stations and signals would probably take 35 minutes to Civic Center Station. Perhaps longer.
The draft plan has quite a few stations and operates in the street for quite a while. I wonder if it would be any faster than the South Grand Express which isn't a speed demon.
That doesn't mean its not got some value, but speed for South County Commuters is probably not going to be one of its strengths.
- 923
Busdad - I think Metro would probably run a few express trains in the peak hours, bypassing the stations with lighter boarding stations. That would save a ton of time off the commute. Figure one express train every half hour? So, you'd have an express running between Bayless and Cherokee, then stopping all stations into the city?
- 359
This latest North-South plan is a joke. Why waste all of that money on North St. Louis? 
stlmizzoutiger wrote:This latest North-South plan is a joke. Why waste all of that money on North St. Louis?
are you serious?
Give me a break.
- 1,282
Knock it off stlmizzoutiger
Light-rail line could share city streets
By Ken Leiser
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
10/01/2007
St. Louis — Regional planners see a future where trains could share the road with cars through St. Louis neighborhoods and the downtown business district.
have drawn plans for a nearly 17-mile path where a light-rail MetroLink line would run from Goodfellow Boulevard and Interstate 70 in the north to Bayless Avenue in the south. It would wind through downtown St. Louis, reach Interstate 55 and Jefferson Avenue and then follow the I-55 right of way to Bayless.
But, local officials warn, the dream has a long way to go before it ever becomes reality. The plan has a price tag approaching $1 billion — in 2007 dollars — and, as of now, no money.
It also comes at a time when the agency that runs MetroLink has warned that it will need more money just to operate what it already has. Advertisement
For the new 17-mile line, the region would first have to prepare environmental studies, compete for federal money and raise a significant local share of the cost.
Elected leaders sitting on the East-West Gateway Council of Governments later this month will take up the idea.
"This could happen," St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay said last week. "Funding is a huge issue here. If we wait until the funding is available to start the planning, we'll be left out. There is a lot of competition at the federal level for funds for mass transit."
East-West Gateway hired HNTB Corp., a transportation consultant, to work on the proposal. Kenneth Kinney, director of transit planning for HNTB, told the council last week that the line was drawn up after public meetings and talks with St. Louis political leaders and city staff.
Several corridors in the region are being eyed for future light-rail growth. The 17-mile line through the city would have to jockey for position with other local plans.
St. Louis County, for instance, is preparing to ask voters to increase the county sales taxes up to a half-cent to help fund MetroLink expansion in the county.
Metro, the agency that operates MetroLink, buses and paratransit services in the area, opened an eight-mile line from Forest Park to Shrewsbury last year and has warned that it needs additional money to continue its existing operations.
In this latest proposal, the concept is for light-rail trains to run alongside cars, Kinney said, "not in mixed traffic like the old street car, but in separate rights of way on streets."
On the north side, trains would run from Goodfellow down Natural Bridge Avenue to North Florissant Avenue to 14th Street. It would run "through the heart" of commercial and residential neighborhoods, Kinney said, and could stimulate future development.
Once it reached downtown St. Louis, MetroLink would continue to run on two parallel tracks before splitting into separate one-way tracks at Ninth and 10th streets.
Kinney said the proposed alignment was the "cleanest, simplest" approach to serve downtown.
Read More
Light-rail line could share city streets
By Ken Leiser
ST. LOUIS POST-DISPATCH
10/01/2007
St. Louis — Regional planners see a future where trains could share the road with cars through St. Louis neighborhoods and the downtown business district.
have drawn plans for a nearly 17-mile path where a light-rail MetroLink line would run from Goodfellow Boulevard and Interstate 70 in the north to Bayless Avenue in the south. It would wind through downtown St. Louis, reach Interstate 55 and Jefferson Avenue and then follow the I-55 right of way to Bayless.
But, local officials warn, the dream has a long way to go before it ever becomes reality. The plan has a price tag approaching $1 billion — in 2007 dollars — and, as of now, no money.
It also comes at a time when the agency that runs MetroLink has warned that it will need more money just to operate what it already has. Advertisement
For the new 17-mile line, the region would first have to prepare environmental studies, compete for federal money and raise a significant local share of the cost.
Elected leaders sitting on the East-West Gateway Council of Governments later this month will take up the idea.
"This could happen," St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay said last week. "Funding is a huge issue here. If we wait until the funding is available to start the planning, we'll be left out. There is a lot of competition at the federal level for funds for mass transit."
East-West Gateway hired HNTB Corp., a transportation consultant, to work on the proposal. Kenneth Kinney, director of transit planning for HNTB, told the council last week that the line was drawn up after public meetings and talks with St. Louis political leaders and city staff.
Several corridors in the region are being eyed for future light-rail growth. The 17-mile line through the city would have to jockey for position with other local plans.
St. Louis County, for instance, is preparing to ask voters to increase the county sales taxes up to a half-cent to help fund MetroLink expansion in the county.
Metro, the agency that operates MetroLink, buses and paratransit services in the area, opened an eight-mile line from Forest Park to Shrewsbury last year and has warned that it needs additional money to continue its existing operations.
In this latest proposal, the concept is for light-rail trains to run alongside cars, Kinney said, "not in mixed traffic like the old street car, but in separate rights of way on streets."
On the north side, trains would run from Goodfellow down Natural Bridge Avenue to North Florissant Avenue to 14th Street. It would run "through the heart" of commercial and residential neighborhoods, Kinney said, and could stimulate future development.
Once it reached downtown St. Louis, MetroLink would continue to run on two parallel tracks before splitting into separate one-way tracks at Ninth and 10th streets.
Kinney said the proposed alignment was the "cleanest, simplest" approach to serve downtown.
Read More
While I get the feeling stlmizzoutiger threw that out there just to get crazy responses, the notion that building the line through north city might be a mistake at this point should not be taken so lightly. While the racial and political divides in the City make any plan to build light rail on either just the north or south sides would make any construction impossible, the theoretical idea that building just the southside component at this point is not without merit. Consider the proposed ridership:
![]()
Northside ridership is estimates to account for slightly less than 30% of the total ridership on the route. With a $1 billion total price tag and without a break down as to the cost components (ie. how much does the northside vs. downtown vs. the southside) we can take a rough guess and say that cutting the northside might cut half of the total cost while concurrently cutting less than 30% of the routes ridership.
I know the bulk of counter posts will focus on the TOD potential along the northside route, which is undoubtedly true. That said, with the need to show cost-effectiveness when applying for federal funding, without existing massive TOD projects lined up for the northside route, the route with the best chance of receiving federal funding may well be a southside-downtown loop. BTW, this all changes if and when McKee announces his redevelopment of the St. Louis Park area, as a massive redevelopment ideally would include provisions for funding part of the northside metrolink route and add much needed population to improve the total ridership of the line.
Northside ridership is estimates to account for slightly less than 30% of the total ridership on the route. With a $1 billion total price tag and without a break down as to the cost components (ie. how much does the northside vs. downtown vs. the southside) we can take a rough guess and say that cutting the northside might cut half of the total cost while concurrently cutting less than 30% of the routes ridership.
I know the bulk of counter posts will focus on the TOD potential along the northside route, which is undoubtedly true. That said, with the need to show cost-effectiveness when applying for federal funding, without existing massive TOD projects lined up for the northside route, the route with the best chance of receiving federal funding may well be a southside-downtown loop. BTW, this all changes if and when McKee announces his redevelopment of the St. Louis Park area, as a massive redevelopment ideally would include provisions for funding part of the northside metrolink route and add much needed population to improve the total ridership of the line.
- 1,610
^Actually, ridership wouldn't change much if McKee announced development. While the FTA wants planners to evaluate the full development potential of a studied corridor, the feds basically let you count only what is currently on the ground towards ridership, which greatly explains Northside's low numbers.
The modeling process is truly flawed or at least overly conservative with actual numbers almost always ending up better. But with each region competing for projects all using similar methods, everyone is undercounting, meaning federal scrutiny is still equally applied. Even within the region, such overly conservative ridership projections remain relative, meaning while Northside and Southside are both likely underestimated, Southside would still easily have significantly larger ridership.
Sadly, all St. Louis corridors for expansion (even the more politically appealing West County and Madison County plans) are less competitive than the backlog of projects in denser and/or underserved regions elsewhere in the US. Ultimately for the Northside-Southside project to ever be built in the near-future, the federal government would need a paradigm shift that would greatly expand New Starts projects nationwide as well as prioritize projects where the goals are more oriented towards urban revitalization than mobility.
The modeling process is truly flawed or at least overly conservative with actual numbers almost always ending up better. But with each region competing for projects all using similar methods, everyone is undercounting, meaning federal scrutiny is still equally applied. Even within the region, such overly conservative ridership projections remain relative, meaning while Northside and Southside are both likely underestimated, Southside would still easily have significantly larger ridership.
Sadly, all St. Louis corridors for expansion (even the more politically appealing West County and Madison County plans) are less competitive than the backlog of projects in denser and/or underserved regions elsewhere in the US. Ultimately for the Northside-Southside project to ever be built in the near-future, the federal government would need a paradigm shift that would greatly expand New Starts projects nationwide as well as prioritize projects where the goals are more oriented towards urban revitalization than mobility.
stlmizzoutiger wrote:This latest North-South plan is a joke. Why waste all of that money on North St. Louis?
I'm not surprised at this comment, but regardless I think the North-South planned route would be an instant success and could be a major tipping point in development. I think the development we are seeing now in the urban areas of town is partly a result of Metrolink. Does anyone really believe that this development would be on this scale with out the Metro? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize public transit sparks economic, residential, and commercial growth. I can't even imagine what a this new line could do for the city. Along with a few street car lines (I'm praying for the Delmar Loop line), you wouldn't be able to recognize the city. I was only gone from St. Louis a couple years and noticed a major difference when I came back. The only thing that is in the way is Federal Funding, If we can get a Democrat in the Presidency, I think Slay really does have a chance in securing those funds since we have a proven and successful light rail system. The possibilities are endless for this town, but I think expansion of the Metrolink or even adding a few street car lines would put St. Louis into a full force boom.
Those ridership numbers seem extremely low. The metro east produces over 15,000 riders a day. How the heck does the city not produce more?
And since N. St. Louis and East St. Louis are often compared, let me make clear the fact that the busiest stations in Illinois are in the East St Louis area, and also note that North St. Louis is more densely populated than East St. Louis.
And since N. St. Louis and East St. Louis are often compared, let me make clear the fact that the busiest stations in Illinois are in the East St Louis area, and also note that North St. Louis is more densely populated than East St. Louis.
Why not estimate the total cost, and raise a significant portion of the funds before going to the federal government for matching funds? My guess is it would look much more enticing if we raised $500 of a $1 billion line, and then showed the federal government that our funding is already in place. That would help prove to them that it is a viable line that would get used.
Now, if we can only figure out how to fund it...
Now, if we can only figure out how to fund it...
^ We probably have 3 years minimum to figure that one out. And $500 million is probably the minimum St. Louis will have to pony up to build the line.
And the ridership numbers are low, just not according to the FTA.
And the ridership numbers are low, just not according to the FTA.
Xing wrote:Those ridership numbers seem extremely low. The metro east produces over 15,000 riders a day. How the heck does the city not produce more?
And since N. St. Louis and East St. Louis are often compared, let me make clear the fact that the busiest stations in Illinois are in the East St Louis area, and also note that North St. Louis is more densely populated than East St. Louis.
Yeah I think people dont realize many of those poor people dont even have cars. This would definitely help a area like North St. Louis and could bring development and jobs to the area.
- 2,005
metzgda wrote:Why not estimate the total cost, and raise a significant portion of the funds before going to the federal government for matching funds? My guess is it would look much more enticing if we raised $500 of a $1 billion line, and then showed the federal government that our funding is already in place. That would help prove to them that it is a viable line that would get used.
Now, if we can only figure out how to fund it...
Problem is the current Prop M 1/4 cent sales tax collected in the City and County is being used to pay off the Cross County extension which was 100% locally funded. The additional 1/4 cent tax going to the voters this Feb in the County(City already approved it) will likely be used to maintain the existing system and prevent the Doomsday scenario of cutting bus routes because of the existing finances at Metro.
- 1,054
It is interesting to note that the Northside-Southside line would be our first light-rail line to reflect the street running light rail systems more prevalent in the nation. An arguement could be made for Forest Park Parkway and Metro.
The shift to Light-rail has been a phenomeon throughout the nation ever since ISTEA, the first Federal transportation appropriation law/Act to give monies to multimodal projects. Followed by TEA-21 and SAFETEA-LU, which is up for reauthorization in 2009. One could hope the the reissuance of SAFETEA-LU in 2009 would incorporate even more monies for transit, bike/ped systems. Additionally, throughout the nation many of the light-rail projects have been financed by local bond issues and tax increase as opposed to Federal funds. It is very likely that that 1/2 cent tax increase will have to be followed up once a Westport line starts construction and more citizens demand light-rail in all sections of the region. We will have to do what Denver did.
The shift to Light-rail has been a phenomeon throughout the nation ever since ISTEA, the first Federal transportation appropriation law/Act to give monies to multimodal projects. Followed by TEA-21 and SAFETEA-LU, which is up for reauthorization in 2009. One could hope the the reissuance of SAFETEA-LU in 2009 would incorporate even more monies for transit, bike/ped systems. Additionally, throughout the nation many of the light-rail projects have been financed by local bond issues and tax increase as opposed to Federal funds. It is very likely that that 1/2 cent tax increase will have to be followed up once a Westport line starts construction and more citizens demand light-rail in all sections of the region. We will have to do what Denver did.
- 923
Does anyone really believe that this development would be on this scale with out the Metro? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize public transit sparks economic, residential, and commercial growth.
This is true - for about 5 years. Or less.
Yes, TOD occurs, but once the station is in place, once the first wave of TOD has occurred, the area can go up or go down once the novelty has worn off. Harlem and the Bronx have plenty of subway stops - doesn't make them any more attractive for development because they've been there for so long. We've talked about ESTL. Those three stops have been there for over 15 years now, has ESTL really improved that much? Around those stations, really, how much has been accomplished? To my knowledge, not that much. Why? because the area isn't that attractive for developers, regardless of there being a metrolink stop.
And while Mizzoutiger's comments were inflammatory, he has somewhat of a point. How many bus lines run in that area? Don't forget, bus fares are cheaper than metro fares. Will the people be able to afford to even ride metrolink? I know it's not that much (.25c for a one ride, .50c for a 2 hour), but for people on a shoestring budget, it adds up. Not to mention (of course, here come the calls of racism) the issue with fare evasion. Here in Melbourne, I've taken public transport to the poorer areas many times (and not for fun, mind you), and there's always transit cops nailing people for fare evasion - and bear in mind, far more people evade than get caught. What good would it do to build a massive line that no one will actually pay to use? Yes, I know, rich white people fare evade too, but the facts are that the poor are more likely to fare evade, and in STL, the majority of them happen to live in north STL.
- 476
Well, gee guys. We just gave away close to 500 mil in Tax breaks to big developers. Damn and Blast!
[edit]: Sarcasm guys. sarcasm...
[edit]: Sarcasm guys. sarcasm...
migueltejada wrote:Does anyone really believe that this development would be on this scale with out the Metro? It doesn't take a rocket scientist to realize public transit sparks economic, residential, and commercial growth.
This is true - for about 5 years. Or less.
Yes, TOD occurs, but once the station is in place, once the first wave of TOD has occurred, the area can go up or go down once the novelty has worn off. Harlem and the Bronx have plenty of subway stops - doesn't make them any more attractive for development because they've been there for so long. We've talked about ESTL. Those three stops have been there for over 15 years now, has ESTL really improved that much? Around those stations, really, how much has been accomplished? To my knowledge, not that much. Why? because the area isn't that attractive for developers, regardless of there being a metrolink stop.
I know we missed Harlem and the Bronx on your recent day long tour of NYC Miguel, but really do a bit of research first and you will find that much like Brooklyn before it, Harlem is experiencing tremendous development pressures and "gentrification." From what I understand the Bronx is one of the few areas that has not yet been hit hard by the surge in residential development in NYC. That said, there are still very respectable middle class neighborhoods in some parts of the Bronx.
The idea that the Bronx and Harlem do not continue to benefit (economically/developmentally) from their connection to New York's subway system is inflammatory and misguided.
The population of the Bronx is over 4X that of the City of St. Louis. It is an integral part of the fabric of New York, and a city in its own right. The Bronx is experiencing a great deal of development and growth to absorb the overflow from the unaffordable over-saturated real-estate market in Manhattan.
Harlem and the Bronx do not embody the dangerous black ghetto stereotypes some may perceive them to be (i.e. people who have only been to the Bronx to see a Yankee game, or not at all). They are vibrant cultural and economic centers that continue to grow and develop with the city of New York.
Both areas are extremely "attractive for development" and their connection to the rest of New York only increases their appeal.
The population of the Bronx is over 4X that of the City of St. Louis. It is an integral part of the fabric of New York, and a city in its own right. The Bronx is experiencing a great deal of development and growth to absorb the overflow from the unaffordable over-saturated real-estate market in Manhattan.
Harlem and the Bronx do not embody the dangerous black ghetto stereotypes some may perceive them to be (i.e. people who have only been to the Bronx to see a Yankee game, or not at all). They are vibrant cultural and economic centers that continue to grow and develop with the city of New York.
Both areas are extremely "attractive for development" and their connection to the rest of New York only increases their appeal.
Wabash wrote:The idea that the Bronx and Harlem do not continue to benefit (economically/developmentally) from their connection to New York's subway system is inflammatory and misguided.
The population of the Bronx is over 4X that of the City of St. Louis. It is an integral part of the fabric of New York, and a city in its own right. The Bronx is experiencing a great deal of development and growth to absorb the overflow from the unaffordable over-saturated real-estate market in Manhattan.
Harlem and the Bronx do not embody the dangerous black ghetto stereotypes some may perceive them to be (i.e. people who have only been to the Bronx to see a Yankee game, or not at all). They are vibrant cultural and economic centers that continue to grow and develop with the city of New York.
Both areas are extremely "attractive for development" and their connection to the rest of New York only increases their appeal.
I agree with you, people act like North St. Louis is beyond gentrification. Why would you discriminate on class, poor people pay taxes too. They should be able to access public amenities too. That is like Chicago saying "we're going to cancel all El lines to South and Westsides of Chicago, because they are poor and black". Wow people in St. Louis really need to be more progressive thinking. What's next? Are we going to stop paving roads in Penrose and The Ville neighborhoods, because they're not seeing any new development.
- 11K
goat314 wrote:What's next? Are we going to stop paving roads in Penrose and The Ville neighborhoods, because they're not seeing any new development.
Have you driven in these areas? This as already happened. These neighborhoods already don't get new streetlights, sidewalks, paved alleys, etc.
Grover wrote:goat314 wrote:What's next? Are we going to stop paving roads in Penrose and The Ville neighborhoods, because they're not seeing any new development.
Have you driven in these areas? This as already happened. These neighborhoods already don't get new streetlights, sidewalks, paved alleys, etc.
Yes I was actually there less than a month ago, when I was visiting my family off of North Florrissant, but thats my point. Does anyone here actually believe the Feds will give us any money on a proposal that supports development only in White communities and not Black ones or Rich communities but not Poor ones. Not only is that race discrimination but its class discrimination too and that is the root of the problems in North St. Louis. All I'm asking is, Why doesn't St. Louis believe that it can have a mass transit system as effective as the one in a city like Chicago or New York? Obviously it wont be as extensive, because of the size differences in cities, but there has to be some kind of grass root effort. This sort of conservative thinking is why cities like Atlanta, Houston, Seattle, Dallas, Minneapolis have passed us by. While cities like Denver, Portland, Nashville, and Charlotte are going to be far ahead of us in 20 years.
- 359
goat314 wrote:Grover wrote:goat314 wrote:What's next? Are we going to stop paving roads in Penrose and The Ville neighborhoods, because they're not seeing any new development.
Have you driven in these areas? This as already happened. These neighborhoods already don't get new streetlights, sidewalks, paved alleys, etc.
Yes I was actually there less than a month ago, when I was visiting my family off of North Florrissant, but thats my point. Does anyone here actually believe the Feds will give us any money on a proposal that supports development only in White communities and not Black ones or Rich communities but not Poor ones. Not only is that race discrimination but its class discrimination too and that is the root of the problems in North St. Louis. All I'm asking is, Why doesn't St. Louis believe that it can have a mass transit system as effective as the one in a city like Chicago or New York? Obviously it wont be as extensive, because of the size differences in cities, but there has to be some kind of grass root effort. This sort of conservative thinking is why cities like Atlanta, Houston, Seattle, Dallas, Minneapolis have passed us by. While cities like Denver, Portland, Nashville, and Charlotte are going to be far ahead of us in 20 years.
I completely agree with that. My comments weren't to inflame anyone but were rather made to make a point: Get light rail to the South Side and places heavily populated that would be popular with people who tend to have a stronger voice in St. Louis area politics (just like Metro did with the recent extension through Clayton/Shrewsbury). When more and more of these people are educated about and make use of the Metro system, they will likely be more keen on expanding the system to make it more city wide and available to less prominent areas like North St. Louis.
I don't buy your argument about gaining stronger political support, when we just did that by the construction of a line through the richest, and most populated area of the metro region. What has that provided us with; lower than expected ridership, and funding issues?
While you constantly come up with an excuse for your eye turning, and ambiguously malicious comments, I can't help but suspect that your subconscious would have some disturbing revelations, regarding your antagonizing perspective.
While you constantly come up with an excuse for your eye turning, and ambiguously malicious comments, I can't help but suspect that your subconscious would have some disturbing revelations, regarding your antagonizing perspective.