Share
2,925
Life MemberLife Member
2,925

PostSep 24, 2025#2126

What @dbInSouthCity posted is a lot more important than what most of you all are recognizing. The law was specific. The nine figures of money garnered so far were amassed by a specific tax to spend exclusively on the North/South Line. It came into being from a public vote. It'll take at minimum a new public vote to access those funds for anything other than the North/South Line. So, let's not go crazy thinking these monies will be freed up anytime soon for Bus Rapid Transit or anything other than the North/South Line. 


Also, let's not blame everyone local for what's happening federally. We all knew that the Trump administration was not going to be jumping up and down to allocate hundreds of millions, if not a billion dollars worth, of federal monies to a blue city, in a red state, that wants to build new public transportation, in a neighborhood that's largely poor and black. We've all really known that this wasn't going to happen since election night last November. We don't necessarily like it, but let's not delude ourselves to thinking that this isn't going to happen just because of local events in the past 24 hours. Hell, I see City Hall's actions towards potential BRT here as seeking new, self-led solutions to existing needs that neither Jefferson City nor Washington, DC can derail -- not the surrendering of hope so many of y'all are committed to. 

In the end, right now, those monies gathered by the tax cannot be touched. New options are emerging, and I'll listen. Then again, maybe the best option is to just let those monies earn compounded interest until January 2029. 
2,052
Life MemberLife Member
2,052

PostSep 24, 2025#2127

^and a darn shame we weren't ready to go when Biden was in office... 
2,925
Life MemberLife Member
2,925

PostSep 24, 2025#2128

The best time to plant a tree is 20 years ago, so you could enjoy its shade today... 

The second best time to plant a tree is right now. 
13K
Life MemberLife Member
13K

PostSep 24, 2025#2129

stldotage wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
I don't think we can overstate the lingering impacts of the Loop Trolley debacle on rail transit/federal grants in this region. Regional/city leadership was always going to face an uphill battle convincing the public of a billion-dollar project serving relatively few riders. I realize the Loop Trolley was a much shorter route and duplicative of existing MetroLink service. Still, the hangover of that bad decision, including the wasted federal dollars and the negative press, still looms large. A "Loop Trolley 2.0" Green Line with less-than-projected ridership would be the official death knell of rail expansion on the Missouri side of this region (if the Loop Trolley 1.0 wasn't already).

Second, the omnipresent crime topic -- do we think Metrolink now has turnstiles because frequent riders demanded them? Or was it an attempt by Metro to silence critics in the media, the vast majority of whom seldom or never ride transit and just consume click-bait news articles reading "Another shooting on Metrolink"?  I think we urbanists on this site forget that a huge portion of the St. Louis market believes Metrolink to be unsafe and worse, that it furthers crime instead of bringing investment. A BRT line being less flashy may be at least partly the point -- it won't be scrutinized the way a new rail line would be with regards to public safety OR return on investment.

This isn't me saying "don't build transit expansions" because a bunch of uninformed suburban non-riders are scared -- but we do have to own up the fact that St. Louis City is already a small percentage of the region's population and is declining/de-densifying. Any pushes for expensive transit dollars allocated at a regional level are going to be scrutinized heavily and sadly need to address concerns of both return on investment and perceptions of crime.

A well-designed BRT (with future LRT conversion capabilities) seems to be the best balance for the moment--especially if it's possible to simultaneously plan an additional BRT line down Grand at still less the cost of a single Green Line rail project.
Th double standards are infuriating. The Musial bridge cost as much. What was the expected ROI? What has been the ROI? Any economic or population growth in the city that can be attributed to it?
2,425
Life MemberLife Member
2,425

PostSep 24, 2025#2130

If Kansas City figured out how to expand their streetcar system, St. Louis needs to get with the program. I agree with Auggie about rail vs. bus transit- real cities build rail.  Are we in the big leagues or not?  I believe we are but we sure don't act like it when we've now shelved the green line TWICE.  It's pathetic that transit expansion is such an afterthought in the region if we expect to compete in any meaningful way with faster growing metros.  
2,925
Life MemberLife Member
2,925

PostSep 24, 2025#2131

^There's no money coming from the federal government for Metrolink expansion. The only money we have for it is the ~$110MM from the local tax. I want to see rail transit on the North/South "Green" Line, but I'm not holding my breath for it. If we can find a way to make it happen, I'm all for it. However, it's just not conceivable right now. Let's remember how funding has been slashed across the federal government already this year. And the North/South Line needs that federal government funding to happen. 

I'm interested in what other alternatives could be put in place. I'm also curious to see Streetcars return to STL -- not what the Loop has, but what KC and Portland have. 

Could a "trackless tram" be a viable option until we have the federal money to lay rails on Jefferson and Natural Bridge? 
2,260
Life MemberLife Member
2,260

PostSep 24, 2025#2132

stldotage wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
I don't think we can overstate the lingering impacts of the Loop Trolley debacle on rail transit/federal grants in this region. Regional/city leadership was always going to face an uphill battle convincing the public of a billion-dollar project serving relatively few riders. I realize the Loop Trolley was a much shorter route and duplicative of existing MetroLink service. Still, the hangover of that bad decision, including the wasted federal dollars and the negative press, still looms large. A "Loop Trolley 2.0" Green Line with less-than-projected ridership would be the official death knell of rail expansion on the Missouri side of this region (if the Loop Trolley 1.0 wasn't already).

Second, the omnipresent crime topic -- do we think Metrolink now has turnstiles because frequent riders demanded them? Or was it an attempt by Metro to silence critics in the media, the vast majority of whom seldom or never ride transit and just consume click-bait news articles reading "Another shooting on Metrolink"?  I think we urbanists on this site forget that a huge portion of the St. Louis market believes Metrolink to be unsafe and worse, that it furthers crime instead of bringing investment. A BRT line being less flashy may be at least partly the point -- it won't be scrutinized the way a new rail line would be with regards to public safety OR return on investment.

This isn't me saying "don't build transit expansions" because a bunch of uninformed suburban non-riders are scared -- but we do have to own up the fact that St. Louis City is already a small percentage of the region's population and is declining/de-densifying. Any pushes for expensive transit dollars allocated at a regional level are going to be scrutinized heavily and sadly need to address concerns of both return on investment and perceptions of crime.

A well-designed BRT (with future LRT conversion capabilities) seems to be the best balance for the moment--especially if it's possible to simultaneously plan an additional BRT line down Grand at still less the cost of a single Green Line rail project.
St. Louis has been "owning up to [this] fact" for literal decades. All it does is further kill the city because austerity is a horrible policy. Capitulating to these soup-brained morons and their insane delusions just kills cities and we have seen that first hand in St. Louis, a great pathway to losing another 80,000 people.
167
Junior MemberJunior Member
167

PostSep 24, 2025#2133

quincunx wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
stldotage wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
I don't think we can overstate the lingering impacts of the Loop Trolley debacle on rail transit/federal grants in this region. Regional/city leadership was always going to face an uphill battle convincing the public of a billion-dollar project serving relatively few riders. I realize the Loop Trolley was a much shorter route and duplicative of existing MetroLink service. Still, the hangover of that bad decision, including the wasted federal dollars and the negative press, still looms large. A "Loop Trolley 2.0" Green Line with less-than-projected ridership would be the official death knell of rail expansion on the Missouri side of this region (if the Loop Trolley 1.0 wasn't already).

Second, the omnipresent crime topic -- do we think Metrolink now has turnstiles because frequent riders demanded them? Or was it an attempt by Metro to silence critics in the media, the vast majority of whom seldom or never ride transit and just consume click-bait news articles reading "Another shooting on Metrolink"?  I think we urbanists on this site forget that a huge portion of the St. Louis market believes Metrolink to be unsafe and worse, that it furthers crime instead of bringing investment. A BRT line being less flashy may be at least partly the point -- it won't be scrutinized the way a new rail line would be with regards to public safety OR return on investment.

This isn't me saying "don't build transit expansions" because a bunch of uninformed suburban non-riders are scared -- but we do have to own up the fact that St. Louis City is already a small percentage of the region's population and is declining/de-densifying. Any pushes for expensive transit dollars allocated at a regional level are going to be scrutinized heavily and sadly need to address concerns of both return on investment and perceptions of crime.

A well-designed BRT (with future LRT conversion capabilities) seems to be the best balance for the moment--especially if it's possible to simultaneously plan an additional BRT line down Grand at still less the cost of a single Green Line rail project.
Th double standards are infuriating. The Musial bridge cost as much. What was the expected ROI? What has been the ROI? Any economic or population growth in the city that can be attributed to it?
I definitely agree. Any focus on ROI and not on potential transformational change is short-sighted...but alas, regional leadership has been so suburban-dominated for generations now that any transit project only in City limits (and especially one with a big price tag) is becoming unlikelier by the day. Some members of this forum may have been correct that Tishaura's all-in approach to the Green Line may have been the last chance for rail expansion in the City--but again, I'd caution against viewing Metrolink versus BRT as a big win vs. a disappointing loss. The stakes are lower for a BRT system to succeed based on that unfair ROI demand while the benefits are similar if not better, especially if multiple BRT lines can be built.
2,260
Life MemberLife Member
2,260

PostSep 24, 2025#2134

pattimagee wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
^and a darn shame we weren't ready to go when Biden was in office... 
You mean the last time the then-mayor tried shifting to BRT?
1,793
Never Logs OffNever Logs Off
1,793

PostSep 24, 2025#2135

The buyer’s remorse on Cara is hilarious. Have fun getting snowed in again and still having your trash picked up late.
2,260
Life MemberLife Member
2,260

PostSep 24, 2025#2136

stlgasm wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
If Kansas City figured out how to expand their streetcar system, St. Louis needs to get with the program. I agree with Auggie about rail vs. bus transit- real cities build rail.  Are we in the big leagues or not?  I believe we are but we sure don't act like it when we've now shelved the green line TWICE.  It's pathetic that transit expansion is such an afterthought in the region if we expect to compete in any meaningful way with faster growing metros.  
KC got hundreds of millions in federal grants and I believed used some of their ARPA money for it. Pretty sure the KC streetcar is also part of the Obama-era streetcars, which were, as normal, a horrible capitulation and failure by Democrats, but I digress.
3,541
Life MemberLife Member
3,541

PostSep 24, 2025#2137

Auggie wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
pattimagee wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
^and a darn shame we weren't ready to go when Biden was in office... 
You mean the last time the then-mayor tried shifting to BRT?
The do nothing Krewson administration and the Stenger felon regime was responsible for that.
2,260
Life MemberLife Member
2,260

PostSep 24, 2025#2138

goat314 wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
Auggie wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
pattimagee wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
^and a darn shame we weren't ready to go when Biden was in office... 
You mean the last time the then-mayor tried shifting to BRT?
The do nothing Krewson administration and the Stenger felon regime was responsible for that.
Yep. Imagine if we put together a real plan from 2017-2020. Could have gotten funding under Biden or even used ARPA money to help build. But no. We paused, ***** around, and missed. And we are doing that again! Yay!!!
167
Junior MemberJunior Member
167

PostSep 24, 2025#2139

Auggie wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
stldotage wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
I don't think we can overstate the lingering impacts of the Loop Trolley debacle on rail transit/federal grants in this region. Regional/city leadership was always going to face an uphill battle convincing the public of a billion-dollar project serving relatively few riders. I realize the Loop Trolley was a much shorter route and duplicative of existing MetroLink service. Still, the hangover of that bad decision, including the wasted federal dollars and the negative press, still looms large. A "Loop Trolley 2.0" Green Line with less-than-projected ridership would be the official death knell of rail expansion on the Missouri side of this region (if the Loop Trolley 1.0 wasn't already).

Second, the omnipresent crime topic -- do we think Metrolink now has turnstiles because frequent riders demanded them? Or was it an attempt by Metro to silence critics in the media, the vast majority of whom seldom or never ride transit and just consume click-bait news articles reading "Another shooting on Metrolink"?  I think we urbanists on this site forget that a huge portion of the St. Louis market believes Metrolink to be unsafe and worse, that it furthers crime instead of bringing investment. A BRT line being less flashy may be at least partly the point -- it won't be scrutinized the way a new rail line would be with regards to public safety OR return on investment.

This isn't me saying "don't build transit expansions" because a bunch of uninformed suburban non-riders are scared -- but we do have to own up the fact that St. Louis City is already a small percentage of the region's population and is declining/de-densifying. Any pushes for expensive transit dollars allocated at a regional level are going to be scrutinized heavily and sadly need to address concerns of both return on investment and perceptions of crime.

A well-designed BRT (with future LRT conversion capabilities) seems to be the best balance for the moment--especially if it's possible to simultaneously plan an additional BRT line down Grand at still less the cost of a single Green Line rail project.
St. Louis has been "owning up to [this] fact" for literal decades. All it does is further kill the city because austerity is a horrible policy. Capitulating to these soup-brained morons and their insane delusions just kills cities and we have seen that first hand in St. Louis, a great pathway to losing another 80,000 people.
By all means, be an optimist here.  If we could self-fund and build either a BRT or light rail (not needing regional, state, or federal approval) I and thousands of others would be all aboard, literally. 

Unfortunately our state government doesn't fund transit and our regional government is very suburban biased. Instead of learning the lesson about divesting itself from its namesake urban core, regional and state leaders just continue to drift farther from it. See: downtown Chesterfield proposal; state offices leaving downtown for Chesterfield; Ameristar convention expansion; constant coverage of downtown woes; and dozens of other examples. It seems to me that we're moving in the wrong direction--now both the city and larger region are losing population and with it, funding, influence, national relevance and the ability to compete with other cities. I'm not personally convinced the Mayor (any Mayor, that is) can single-handedly turn all of that around (nor is a Green Line with rails the linchpin for the city's future). But I am truly happy to see optimistic folks like you and others on here who don't mind the exhausting upstream swim. 
2,260
Life MemberLife Member
2,260

PostSep 24, 2025#2140

https://www.stltoday.com/news/local/gov ... -top-story

ST. LOUIS — The decision this week to scrap plans for a new Metrolink rail line linking the city’s north and south sides could make way for a faster, more bike- and pedestrian-friendly project on the same route, officials said Wednesday.

In interviews Wednesday morning, Mayor Cara Spencer and Bi-State Development Agency chief Taulby Roach said a proposed high-speed bus route along the same Jefferson Avenue corridor would be several hundred million dollars cheaper than the $1.1 billion rail line.

Roach said the cost savings could mean a longer route stretching into neighborhoods previously left off the proposed rail corridor — and a route that could be ready years earlier than the rail line. And Spencer said the extra money could go toward new bike lanes, pedestrian improvements and road safety work that may not have been affordable otherwise.

“I think what we could do is have a multimodal option, which could greatly improve the walkability, bikeability, and other transit mobility of the region,” she said.

The remarks offered an initial glimpse of what’s next for one of the highest-profile public projects in recent memory.

Officials have spent years planning for the new Green Line, and collecting special taxes to cover part of the cost. Former Mayor Tishaura O. Jones championed the project as a way to bridge the city’s north-south divide, draw investment in struggling areas and connect residents to jobs downtown and at the new National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency campus on the near North Side.

But the past couple of years have brought headwinds. The new line, expected to carry 5,000 riders daily, ranked as one of the most expensive projects seeking federal funding in the country on a per-rider basis.

And Spencer, who defeated Jones for re-election in April, almost immediately called for a review of the project’s viability.
913

PostSep 24, 2025#2141

City, County and Bi-State need to be working together now for the prospect of N-S. The money built up will have to be used for that and they need to have all the plans, studies, etc they need for any prospect of any funding that may come available in the next 10 years. Scrapping this all together is such a short sighted decision that will make us miss the next time we could get funding and build this thing (which could literally be in 3-4 years). I mean imagine Buttigieg announces a run and is the front runner in just two years, how stupid is it going to be that we won’t have a bid at the top of the pile for whatever funding we know someone like him would make sure is put together. Absolutely NO VISION from the leadership in St. Louis City or County on this. So narrow minded
3,541
Life MemberLife Member
3,541

PostSep 24, 2025#2142

delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
City, County and Bi-State need to be working together now for the prospect of N-S. The money built up will have to be used for that and they need to have all the plans, studies, etc they need for any prospect of any funding that may come available in the next 10 years. Scrapping this all together is such a short sighted decision that will make us miss the next time we could get funding and build this thing (which could literally be in 3-4 years). I mean imagine Buttigieg announces a run and is the front runner in just two years, how stupid is it going to be that we won’t have a bid at the top of the pile for whatever funding we know someone like him would make sure is put together. Absolutely NO VISION from the leadership in St. Louis City or County on this. So narrow minded
I just looked up Indy's Purple Line. 15 miles of street paint and a few fancy bus stops for $150 Million. I don't see how it would be a game changer or attract any type of a development that would transform the region.
2,260
Life MemberLife Member
2,260

PostSep 24, 2025#2143

goat314 wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
delmar2debaliviere2downtown wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
City, County and Bi-State need to be working together now for the prospect of N-S. The money built up will have to be used for that and they need to have all the plans, studies, etc they need for any prospect of any funding that may come available in the next 10 years. Scrapping this all together is such a short sighted decision that will make us miss the next time we could get funding and build this thing (which could literally be in 3-4 years). I mean imagine Buttigieg announces a run and is the front runner in just two years, how stupid is it going to be that we won’t have a bid at the top of the pile for whatever funding we know someone like him would make sure is put together. Absolutely NO VISION from the leadership in St. Louis City or County on this. So narrow minded
I just looked up Indy's Purple Line. 15 miles of street paint and a few fancy bus stops for $150 Million. I don't see how it would be a game changer or attract any type of a development that would transform the region.
And IndyGo ridership is down this year despite it opening with "great ridership".

BRT is objectively an improvement over the baseline, but it doesn't drive transformational change. It doesn't take people out of cars and it doesn't attract new development.
117
Junior MemberJunior Member
117

PostSep 25, 2025#2144

Auggie wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
 But the past couple of years have brought headwinds. The new line, expected to carry 5,000 riders daily, ranked as one of the most expensive projects seeking federal funding in the country on a per-rider basis.
I would like to know why the costs were so high when we compare this to other projects both in the US and globally. If we don't find ways to lower cost of construction we aren't going to be able to build projects in the public interest. I get it's frustrating when there are road projects just downstream in places like Jefferson County with the I-55 one more lane bro project that's $250 million. That said, if we don't get buy-in from County and State these projects just end up impossible. 
2,260
Life MemberLife Member
2,260

PostSep 25, 2025#2145

Fraydog wrote: ↑
Sep 25, 2025
Auggie wrote: ↑
Sep 24, 2025
 But the past couple of years have brought headwinds. The new line, expected to carry 5,000 riders daily, ranked as one of the most expensive projects seeking federal funding in the country on a per-rider basis.
I would like to know why the costs were so high when we compare this to other projects both in the US and globally. If we don't find ways to lower cost of construction we aren't going to be able to build projects in the public interest. I get it's frustrating when there are road projects just downstream in places like Jefferson County with the I-55 one more lane bro project that's $250 million. That said, if we don't get buy-in from County and State these projects just end up impossible. 
It's all about how you wanna frame the construction costs. Here's some other major rail projects that have either recently opened or are in planning:

-Seattle 2 Line: $205.6M/mile
-Phoenix South Central: $243.6M/mile
-Minneapolis Blue Line extension: $238.8M/mile
-Austin Project Connect: $724.5M/mile
-New York IBX: $392.9M/mile
-Maryland Purple Line: $595.6M/mile
-Los Angeles A Line extension: $164.8M/mile

-Seattle 2 Line: $336.4k/daily rider
-Pheonix South Central: $242.5k/rider
-Minneapolis Blue Line extension: $302k/rider
-Austin Project Connect: $237.5k/rider
-New York IBX: $47.8k/rider
-Maryland Purple Line: $132.4k/rider
-Los Angeles A Line extension: $136.4k/rider

Green Line: $196.4M/mile, $220k/rider

The reason why US and Canadian transit costs are so high are because of a wide array of needless regulations, political pushback (see the hundreds of millions CAHSR has spent on lawsuits), and a lack of internal knowledge on both the side of transit agencies and private consultants and construction companies. It's a rabbit hole.
7
New MemberNew Member
7

PostSep 25, 2025#2146

Can STL use this pivot to lead the nation in the adoption of an autonomous/digital rail rapid transit line instead?

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Autonomou ... id_Transit


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
2,260
Life MemberLife Member
2,260

PostSep 25, 2025#2147

So BRT but costs more.
12
New MemberNew Member
12

PostSep 25, 2025#2148

BRT down Jefferson would still require the construction of a new Metrolink station where it intersects the line, no? Its going to be a lot ($$$) of work to get that area suitable for pedestrians and even then it would have little utility beyond transfers.

An alternative could be North to South Jefferson>Market>Grand, but that probably requires a rebuild of the whole Market/Grand/FPP area.
985
Super MemberSuper Member
985

PostSep 26, 2025#2149

I keep thinking local officials should seriously start asking abroad for the money. This would be a way to poke at state and federal government. There was the example in the 70s where a West Virginia community was ignored in an infrastructure need and asked the Soviet Union for help. That immediately got the state to pay for it due to the bad publicity and not wanting to give the USSR a propaganda victory. So why not ask China?
2,672
Life MemberLife Member
2,672

PostSep 26, 2025#2150

ccbstl wrote: ↑
Sep 25, 2025
BRT down Jefferson would still require the construction of a new Metrolink station where it intersects the line, no? Its going to be a lot ($$$) of work to get that area suitable for pedestrians and even then it would have little utility beyond transfers.

An alternative could be North to South Jefferson>Market>Grand, but that probably requires a rebuild of the whole Market/Grand/FPP area.
Here is what I emailed the Mayor and Staff. I don't expect anyone will read it or respond but sometimes I feel the need to say something just in case someone hasn't already thought of or considered it.
---

I recommend a phased approach that immediately strengthens competitiveness, generates local funding, and maintains the City's commitment to constructing light rail:
  1. Construct the Jefferson MetroLink Station
    This new station appears in all alternatives and can be advanced as a stand-alone improvement to the FTA, similar to the successful Cortex Station process. The lower cost and strong local match would position this as a competitive project within one year. Once built, consolidating MetroBus Routes 4 and 11 into a single Jefferson Avenue route could reveal minor opex savings.
  2. Develop the Green Line MetroLink (Cass to Lafayette)
    Advance construction contingent on passage of a Transportation Improvement Sales and/or Property Tax along the 2.2 mile corridor, following the Kansas City Streetcar funding model. This TID would create a dedicated revenue stream for operations while leveraging the City’s North-South MetroLink fund for capital matching.
  3. Implement a Green Line BRT Connector (Chippewa to North Grand)
    Establish a BRT overlay along the Green Line corridor to provide frequent-stop service to an extended area. Over time, segments could be incrementally replaced by MetroLink expansion as additional funding is secured. Since this BRT service directly supports the Green Line extension and would share similar infrastructure, I anticipate it could also draw upon remaining proposition funds.
Read more posts (142 remaining)
Share