Lolleeharveyawesome wrote: ↑Nov 10, 2016I can't believe people on an urbanism website aren't excited about having a builder as President!
But seriously though, my sources tell me that major and serious infrastructure projects are a big part of the plan. Maybe we get our North South metrolink fast tracked? The Trump line? Yes?
- 166
my sources tell me that major and serious infrastructure projects are a big part of the plan
What specific plans and from whence is the financing coming from?
What specific plans and from whence is the financing coming from?
This post was from 2016, right after Trump was elected. Obviously he was lying, we know because we are in the future. Came across it looking through old threads and thought it was funny.BarryGlick wrote: ↑Oct 22, 2025my sources tell me that major and serious infrastructure projects are a big part of the plan
What specific plans and from whence is the financing coming from?
My bad, should have made that clear.
From Megan Green's Facebook page:
"Without the federal funding necessary for the MetroLink expansion, the Mayor's office and Bi-State Development opted to pause the project.
The Board of Aldermen is considering putting the sales tax back on the ballot to support bus rapid transit—a cheaper, more flexible form of public transportation.
The Budget & Public Employees Committee will meet tomorrow, December 10th, at 10am to discuss the feasibility and hear from residents. This will be the first of several hearings.
We hope to see you there!![]()
Link: https://stlouismo.portal.civicclerk.com/
"
"Without the federal funding necessary for the MetroLink expansion, the Mayor's office and Bi-State Development opted to pause the project.
The Board of Aldermen is considering putting the sales tax back on the ballot to support bus rapid transit—a cheaper, more flexible form of public transportation.
The Budget & Public Employees Committee will meet tomorrow, December 10th, at 10am to discuss the feasibility and hear from residents. This will be the first of several hearings.
We hope to see you there!
Link: https://stlouismo.portal.civicclerk.com/
"
Without the federal funding? It's not like we were denied. Nobody even tried to get the federal funding. Spencer is using word salad and deception to deliver a crappy bus project.PeterXCV wrote: ↑Dec 09, 2025From Megan Green's Facebook page:
"Without the federal funding necessary for the MetroLink expansion, the Mayor's office and Bi-State Development opted to pause the project.
The Board of Aldermen is considering putting the sales tax back on the ballot to support bus rapid transit—a cheaper, more flexible form of public transportation.
The Budget & Public Employees Committee will meet tomorrow, December 10th, at 10am to discuss the feasibility and hear from residents. This will be the first of several hearings.
We hope to see you there!
Link: https://stlouismo.portal.civicclerk.com/
"
That’s Greens language, not Spencers. I’m supportive of anyone challenging the City and Bi-State but primarily because I’d like to see the reports that influenced decision making.
My interpretation of the messaging is that Green and BoA mostly agree with the decision and want the City to build BRT. They see an opportunity to distance themselves (primarily Green) from the unpopular decision and politically Spencer. I think Green doesn’t believe the current tax language would survive BRT and sees an easy opportunity to be champion of the voters. Considering it will pass.
My interpretation of the messaging is that Green and BoA mostly agree with the decision and want the City to build BRT. They see an opportunity to distance themselves (primarily Green) from the unpopular decision and politically Spencer. I think Green doesn’t believe the current tax language would survive BRT and sees an easy opportunity to be champion of the voters. Considering it will pass.
Not going to vote before next November.
Yeah, I watched some of the hearing. Seemed like the alders were supportive, but thought the public had little idea of what BRT was, thus they wanted more time to explain it to voters.
- 9,525
I suggested to Greens CoS to move it to November and not risk it being with e tax in a bad economy in April
Here is roughly five miles of a fantasy map just for fun.
![]()
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Thankfully the new map includes an actual downtown connection. Civic Center is the systems transfer station, as it always should’ve been.
![]()
![]()
- 2,620
I would really like to hear their reasoning for excluding Russell AGAIN. It was a flimsy excuse before.
It’s a draft and I think you have the best odds to bring it back if you share that feedback now. It was removed because of cost when LRT.
Where did you get these from? Who are you suggesting we submit feedback to?
very much so
It can be depressing but if the ridership doesn’t deliver St. Louis will never make a large capital investment in transit ever again. So when it comes time to cut the ribbon, y’all better show up.
We will all be dead before this ever happens.addxb2 wrote:It can be depressing but if the ridership doesn’t deliver St. Louis will never make a large capital investment in transit ever again. So when it comes time to cut the ribbon, y’all better show up.
Sent from my SM-G990U2 using Tapatalk
- 6,117
You mean show up to oppose this? Sure. I'll show up. This is not what I voted for. This is not what we passed. It does not have my support.addxb2 wrote: ↑12:15 AM - Jan 16It can be depressing but if the ridership doesn’t deliver St. Louis will never make a large capital investment in transit ever again. So when it comes time to cut the ribbon, y’all better show up.
- 139
Just not an alternative as far as uplifting development in the city.
And agreed, we need to create a BRT system if this is going to be the alternative.
Can’t believe they just threw the money spent on the green line and years of N-S down the drain because federal funding wouldn’t be coming in the next two years
And agreed, we need to create a BRT system if this is going to be the alternative.
Can’t believe they just threw the money spent on the green line and years of N-S down the drain because federal funding wouldn’t be coming in the next two years
Yeah but a straight line going down Jefferson with a terrible UNDERPASS MetroLink transfer station and no Downtown connection wasn’t what I voted for. Not to mention that route was going to cost nearly as much as a complete rebuild of the airport.symphonicpoet wrote:You mean show up to oppose this? Sure. I'll show up. This is not what I voted for. This is not what we passed. It does not have my support.addxb2 wrote: ↑12:15 AM - Jan 16It can be depressing but if the ridership doesn’t deliver St. Louis will never make a large capital investment in transit ever again. So when it comes time to cut the ribbon, y’all better show up.
The mistake of Loop Trolley was wanting it so bad that STL ignored the facts and data.
In the last five years, there have probably been more development projects inspired by Indy’s BRT system than projects inspired by existing MetroLink stations. STL has the opportunity to show it can leverage rail to bring development right now, why doesn’t it?keepstlbrick wrote:Just not an alternative as far as uplifting development in the city.
And agreed, we need to create a BRT system if this is going to be the alternative.
Can’t believe they just threw the money spent on the green line and years of N-S down the drain because federal funding wouldn’t be coming in the next two years
Threw money away each of the four times they changed the route between the 2017 vote and today. Remember it was 17 miles, then 10 miles, then 5 miles. The federal funding for a rail version of this project is closer to six years away and would require STL reroute AGAIN to connect Downtown to increase ridership. STL would also need to reduce initial length AGAIN to 2 miles given current construction costs.
You were probably looking at 2036 opening for 2 miles of downtown only streetcar. This you’re looking at 2030 opening of 10 miles BRT.