I like that blue line, (I like both of them), but would it make more sense to link it in to one of the UMSL stops so you could transfer lines?
Wasn't the County's intention for putting the Metro vote on the ballot was to generate funding for the Daniel Boone extension (Clayton to Westport) and North extension coming off between the airport and N. Hanley station headed towards Florrisant CC? I would love to see that get back on the ballot this year. Like Southslider suggests, I think these extensions make more sense for a much better price because of the dedicated right of way in place.
Also, doesn't Metro & the City have a much bigger concern in the immediate future. Where to get the money to rebuild the original line that was built on the cheap (cheap ballast, cheap cross ties, used rail)? It is hard to imagine how St. Louis is going to afford the North/South line and bring the originally line back,
Also, doesn't Metro & the City have a much bigger concern in the immediate future. Where to get the money to rebuild the original line that was built on the cheap (cheap ballast, cheap cross ties, used rail)? It is hard to imagine how St. Louis is going to afford the North/South line and bring the originally line back,
- 667
Dredger wrote:Wasn't the County's intention for putting the Metro vote on the ballot was to generate funding for the Daniel Boone extension (Clayton to Westport) and North extension coming off between the airport and N. Hanley station headed towards Florrisant CC? I would love to see that get back on the ballot this year. Like Southslider suggests, I think these extensions make more sense for a much better price because of the dedicated right of way in place.
Also, doesn't Metro & the City have a much bigger concern in the immediate future. Where to get the money to rebuild the original line that was built on the cheap (cheap ballast, cheap cross ties, used rail)? It is hard to imagine how St. Louis is going to afford the North/South line and bring the originally line back,
I like this plan they have for the city, especially the blue line that runs along Natural Bridge. The area at 8th-Pine will make a nice transit hub for people switching trains and lines.
I do have a beef though with the upcoming ballot. I remember the county voted for a quarter of a cent sales tax increase back in '94. Then in '97 another increase was voted down. I hope this 50 cent sales tax increase gets voted down. However, I would vote for this when Metro shows some comprehensive plans for St. Louis County expanision i.e. lines, routes, and cities it plans to serve with Metrolink. I don't want to see this sales tax increase as a money grab bag for the county and Metro execs. They need something set in stone before misusing and playing around with taxpayer's money. We already pay enough in sales tax and on outrageous property taxes. My property tax alone increased almost 20% from 2005-07!
I agree with Throatybeard that the Northside line should intersect with the original line at UMSL. It would be so much more useful to the northside neighborhoods to have an easy transfer to Lambert, rather than only being connected with downtown and Flo Valley. I think reconnecting the north-city line to the original would increase the utility of both.
As for all of the talk about the Daniel Boone and North COUNTY lines and the tax hikes that are concerned with them, they should be on a different thread. This thread is for North and South CITY.
PS: Nice Beard.
As for all of the talk about the Daniel Boone and North COUNTY lines and the tax hikes that are concerned with them, they should be on a different thread. This thread is for North and South CITY.
PS: Nice Beard.
- 8,905
10-intuition wrote:
I do have a beef though with the upcoming ballot. I remember the county voted for a quarter of a cent sales tax increase back in '94. Then in '97 another increase was voted down. I hope this 50 cent sales tax increase gets voted down. However, I would vote for this when Metro shows some comprehensive plans for St. Louis County expanision i.e. lines, routes, and cities it plans to serve with Metrolink. I don't want to see this sales tax increase as a money grab bag for the county and Metro execs. They need something set in stone before misusing and playing around with taxpayer's money.
Is this what they're telling everyone in Chesterfield? I'm not saying it's not true, but this sounds a hodgepodge of misinformation and conspiracy.
Every Great city has an organized, extensive public transit system. Approving this tax increase is the next step for St. Louis.
Wabash, I don't think comments on Metro on a whole within this thread is too far off the beatan path considering that I got on the Metro Wednesday in St. Louis County, transferred at Forest Park within the city, and proceeded to take the Metro back through the county to get to Lambert which is owned by the city. Heck, can't we talk about spanish since they talked about chinese on the Hwy 40 thread. Okay, last sarcastic comment a little bit over.
On a serious note, Does an increase in city sales tax for transit require the county to raise their tax also? I thought that is what the state required as part of the last go around or at least what I understood from the P-D.
On a serious note, Does an increase in city sales tax for transit require the county to raise their tax also? I thought that is what the state required as part of the last go around or at least what I understood from the P-D.
- 1,610
It used to be the case that any sales tax levy for transit needed to pass both the City and County to go into effect, but state legislation has since decoupled them. Essentially, County leaders wanted a guarantee that any tax increase in the County would go to system expansion within the County.
With decoupling the tax, there was also talk about having the previously voter-approved quarter-cent in the City that never went into effect when the County simultaneously voted it down in 1997. However, if collected now, such City sales tax increase would only be able to support operations and maintenance of the existing system.
With decoupling the tax, there was also talk about having the previously voter-approved quarter-cent in the City that never went into effect when the County simultaneously voted it down in 1997. However, if collected now, such City sales tax increase would only be able to support operations and maintenance of the existing system.
You have a good point dredger, I just get frustrated hearing so much about County Metrolink expansion, when I believe it will result in a system that goes to a lot of nowhere park-n-ride lots and pedestrian unfriendly areas. Then hearing that a city tax increase would only go towards maintenance thanks to the cross-county expansion..... it's hard to swallow.
- 1,610
^Even an equal rate of one quarter-cent in the County would likewise go to system preservation. However, if the County were to go for a half-cent, then it would raise enough for both sustained operations and limited (2 branch extensions of only 3-5 added stations each) expansion.
The City, on the other hand, would have to go for a full-cent tax levy to even begin to pay for independent expansion because it has far less sales tax base. And unfortunately, the City lines studied are much more expensive in total (nearly $1 billion), because they are much longer in total length than even the combination of two extensions in the County.
In other words, it's a mismatch of needs and resources. The County not only has the more cost-effective expansion options, but also the larger sales tax base, albeit flat or not growing.
And Metro's financial woes (especially pre-law suit) are not due to Cross-County as much as all government support for transit now coming entirely from local sales tax dollars (Feds only subsidize capital projects, while Missouri provides less than one percent of Metro's total budget).
By comparison, Charlotte's county of Mecklenburg has a half-cent sales tax that raises $77 million a year and growing, more than ample to pursue an aggressive expansion plan. There again, Charlotte is a 260-square mile city approaching 700,000 in a county approaching 1 million. In other words, imagine if the City of St. Louis went to I-270 and was a part of St. Louis County. No doubt that rapid growth gives Charlotte a huge advantage over St. Louis, but the lack of fragmented government (the transit authority is even a city department) helps tremendously as well.
The City, on the other hand, would have to go for a full-cent tax levy to even begin to pay for independent expansion because it has far less sales tax base. And unfortunately, the City lines studied are much more expensive in total (nearly $1 billion), because they are much longer in total length than even the combination of two extensions in the County.
In other words, it's a mismatch of needs and resources. The County not only has the more cost-effective expansion options, but also the larger sales tax base, albeit flat or not growing.
And Metro's financial woes (especially pre-law suit) are not due to Cross-County as much as all government support for transit now coming entirely from local sales tax dollars (Feds only subsidize capital projects, while Missouri provides less than one percent of Metro's total budget).
By comparison, Charlotte's county of Mecklenburg has a half-cent sales tax that raises $77 million a year and growing, more than ample to pursue an aggressive expansion plan. There again, Charlotte is a 260-square mile city approaching 700,000 in a county approaching 1 million. In other words, imagine if the City of St. Louis went to I-270 and was a part of St. Louis County. No doubt that rapid growth gives Charlotte a huge advantage over St. Louis, but the lack of fragmented government (the transit authority is even a city department) helps tremendously as well.
Would it be possible to build the North-South line in sections to spread the expense over a longer period of time? That is, could they, for example, get started on an original line from say South Broadway to North Grand, and once it is up and running, add a station northward and southward every year or two until the entire line was complete?
^ Sure, they could try that, but the issues, as Southslider said before, are:
A. Most of these lines would be in the City
B. The City would need to pass large tax increased to pay for the expansion itself
C. The City tax base is not growing
D. The County has a larger tax base but only wants to expand within the County
By doing what you propose, there is no way the City could get County funds to pay for portions of the expansion because neither line would expand into the County. The best possible hope would be that County residents would support such expansions because they would link into a wider county system. That way, the County could foot 25% to 50% of the local cost of both lines. Of course for this to happen, the County would need to see proposed routes extend further into the County.
A. Most of these lines would be in the City
B. The City would need to pass large tax increased to pay for the expansion itself
C. The City tax base is not growing
D. The County has a larger tax base but only wants to expand within the County
By doing what you propose, there is no way the City could get County funds to pay for portions of the expansion because neither line would expand into the County. The best possible hope would be that County residents would support such expansions because they would link into a wider county system. That way, the County could foot 25% to 50% of the local cost of both lines. Of course for this to happen, the County would need to see proposed routes extend further into the County.
Can we just F***ing merge the city and county already so we can actually progress as one metropolitan region instead of getting all hung up about an ancient invisible boundary line??? Seriously, I am no expert but it seems to me, if you build it they will come......sorry for the bad movie quote... But neighborhoods tend to grow around mass transit, county or city.
- 923
Magnatron wrote:Can we just F***ing merge the city and county already so we can actually progress as one metropolitan region instead of getting all hung up about an ancient invisible boundary line??? Seriously, I am no expert but it seems to me, if you build it they will come......sorry for the bad movie quote... But neighborhoods tend to grow around mass transit, county or city.
I don't see a need for a merger frankly
and i'll explain why - Here in melbourne, the city proper (about the geographic equivalent of St. Louis) is it's own city, while the surrouding areas are separate cities as well, yet have as much an urban feel if not more so than the city proper (see Clayton, U-City, etc) They push and pull with each other as much as our fiefdoms do (though to be fair, they amalgamated the governments so instead of 74 they now have 31), but they move together as a region because we have a state planning authority that forces cohesive and coordinated development and planning.
A merger isn't necessary if people are willing to concede power to a regional or state planning authority - but I suspect IT WILL NEVER EVER EVER happen in the USA. I've seen what a regional "authority" (EW-Gateway) does in action, and it's little more than a bureacratic rubber stamp, and even then, it's just for transport.
Having separate cities allows St. Louis to be very unique in terms of neighborhoods localities, etc - so there's no need to rid ourselves of that - but a centralized planning authority would cut through the BS.
Friday, December 26, 2008
St. Louis Business Journal - by Lisa R. Brown
St. Louis city, county request $4.3 billion
Missouri legislators can expect to add a little something to their holiday reading lists: a 200-page detailed report on projects St. Louis County is angling to get funded through President-elect Barack Obama’s economic stimulus proposal and a 400-page report from the city of St. Louis.
Copies of the two-inch-thick report by St. Louis County officials were mailed this week to state legislators and the county’s federal lobbyist, B&D Consulting. The county is requesting $1.8 billion for 95 projects. The report lays out in detail the estimated cost of each project, possible construction start dates and job creation estimates.
The city of St. Louis has compiled its own list and expects to send the reports to Missouri legislators by Jan. 1. The city’s infrastructure-needs report includes 150 projects totaling $2.5 billion. A bulk of the city’s request, $900 million, would go toward extending MetroLink north and south of downtown. The county also is requesting $105 million to go toward Metro funding.
READ MORE/ENTIRE ARTICLE:
http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... tory1.html
St. Louis Business Journal - by Lisa R. Brown
St. Louis city, county request $4.3 billion
Missouri legislators can expect to add a little something to their holiday reading lists: a 200-page detailed report on projects St. Louis County is angling to get funded through President-elect Barack Obama’s economic stimulus proposal and a 400-page report from the city of St. Louis.
Copies of the two-inch-thick report by St. Louis County officials were mailed this week to state legislators and the county’s federal lobbyist, B&D Consulting. The county is requesting $1.8 billion for 95 projects. The report lays out in detail the estimated cost of each project, possible construction start dates and job creation estimates.
The city of St. Louis has compiled its own list and expects to send the reports to Missouri legislators by Jan. 1. The city’s infrastructure-needs report includes 150 projects totaling $2.5 billion. A bulk of the city’s request, $900 million, would go toward extending MetroLink north and south of downtown. The county also is requesting $105 million to go toward Metro funding.
READ MORE/ENTIRE ARTICLE:
http://stlouis.bizjournals.com/stlouis/ ... tory1.html
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that somehow this happens. I really think it would be the biggest impact project the city has had in the last 50 years. It would provide better access to downtown and start to re-shift the center of the region downtown. I think if these lines became a reality, we could definately see a revival of retail and office development downtown. Additionally, I would love to see the rehab/development that would popup along both the north and south city lines.
- 5,433
Magnatron wrote:Can we just F***ing merge the city and county already so we can actually progress as one metropolitan region instead of getting all hung up about an ancient invisible boundary line?
This is a metropolitan area where a typical welcome involves asking where you attended high school.
It's also a region where people refer to the main east-west interstate highway as Highway 40 even though it's been Interstate 64 for almost 25 years.
So, the short answer is no.
That said, I agree completely with what you said.
back to Metro North/South Line discussion.
there are other threads about the city/county merger.
Thanks.
there are other threads about the city/county merger.
Thanks.
metzgda wrote:I'm keeping my fingers crossed that somehow this happens. I really think it would be the biggest impact project the city has had in the last 50 years. It would provide better access to downtown and start to re-shift the center of the region downtown. I think if these lines became a reality, we could definately see a revival of retail and office development downtown. Additionally, I would love to see the rehab/development that would popup along both the north and south city lines.
I Agree! That's all I was hoping for too, but somehow everyone felt it was necessary to bombard me with comments about my so called naivety. I just would rather try to have a positive outlook on the future of Metrolink. If Obama really is going to change policies regarding transit, Metrolink does have a future. One of the main reasons transit agencies around the country have been suffering is directly related to the lack of federal funding. Obviously we have to do our part locally and on the state level, but I think a properly campaigned Prop M could pass and Mayor Slay has already said he and other local leaders will lobby the state for more money soon. I think the fact the city even put this 900 million dollar request at the top of stimulus list shows that there is a desire for expanded Metrolink (maybe just inside the 270 loop). Even if a project like this is 10-15 years down the line cant we at least dream about all the BILLIONS in rehabilitation and reconstruction that would happen in the city.
Slay has been doing a lot of transit talking in his agendas lately:
http://www.mayorslay.com/desk/display.asp?deskID=1166
http://www.mayorslay.com/desk/display.asp?deskID=1160
We still need to borrow the 2.4 billion from the Chinese. Perhaps we can get Paul McKee on that.
Check out the details on page 103 of the Mayor's economica recovery plan. Running down the middle of the streets is new to me. I was hoping for the route to run closer to Soulard. I can't tell what streets it is on downtown, 8th northbound and 9th southbound?
- 42
Those maps in the proposal are confusing as hell. The "Above: Existing . . ." map clearly shows some other proposed expansion alignments in green. Either way, the bottom one makes a lot more sense in terms of opportunities for TOD and sustained job creation.
Also, everyone please stop talking about a merger. The debate seriously died in like 1970. What's more, it is pretty well accepted that the biggest urban problems of the next few decades will be in post-WWII suburbs. St. Louis County now has more people living below the poverty line than the City. A merger would only annex the County's increasing problems to the City's (relatively) decreasing problems.
Also, everyone please stop talking about a merger. The debate seriously died in like 1970. What's more, it is pretty well accepted that the biggest urban problems of the next few decades will be in post-WWII suburbs. St. Louis County now has more people living below the poverty line than the City. A merger would only annex the County's increasing problems to the City's (relatively) decreasing problems.
I think the upper picture is an older one showing potential routes. In that one the southside route uses the UP right-of-way and would be constructed like the existing routes, seperated as much as possible from the roadways.
Whereas the lower picture is what they'd do if they get money to build the routes quickly under the big stimulus package. I prefer this route over the one in the upper picture.
Perhaps they should go for the gold and ask for the same thing all the way along Grand.
Whereas the lower picture is what they'd do if they get money to build the routes quickly under the big stimulus package. I prefer this route over the one in the upper picture.
Perhaps they should go for the gold and ask for the same thing all the way along Grand.
- 1,610
quincunx wrote:I was hoping for the route to run closer to Soulard. I can't tell what streets it is on downtown, 8th northbound and 9th southbound?
The conceptual engineering of the Northside-Southside Study picked 9th northbound and 10th southbound as the preferred downtown route. You can thank the superblock of the Convention Center/Dome for pushing the route so far west. And you can thank the Cardinals, the new Stadium and their still-unbuilt Ballpark Village for killing a Soulard route, since that would require leaving Downtown via 7th St (4th-Broadway nixed by NPS and Old Courthouse). However, using the 14th St viaduct as the connection between Downtown and the Southside would save travel time for those South City commuters tranferring at Civic Center to CWE, Clayton, etc.
cumulonimbus wrote:Official Website of North and Southside Metrolink Studies
The transportation projects I'm most interested in is the Northside/Southside alignments.
Did I miss something? Metro take the site down?
- 1,054
It seems that way even though the City is asking for nearly the entire cost or $900 million for the 16.something mile alignment. If part of the stimulus/Recovery package, this alignment would definitely give eastern city a boost.