The creature in red is sh*t and deserved to have its ass beaten then and there.
- 173
And no one came to his defense either. I've had to use pepper spray twice on buses, though neither time was in the St. Louis area. It's the only way to deal with some, I'm afraid.onecity wrote:The creature in red is sh*t and deserved to have its ass beaten then and there.
- 25
The kid acted like a complete a** for sure, and deserves to be held accountable, but he is a human being... Your language is dehumanizing and offensive.onecity wrote:The creature in red is sh*t and deserved to have its ass beaten then and there.
- 9,565
Anyone attend the EWG long range plan meeting tonight and ask metro about this?
http://nextstl.com/2015/05/monsanto-1-b ... t-hq-move/
The Creve Coeur headquarters is along the Westport Plaza line, right? If Monsanto were to announce that they were planning to shut to campus down, would that basically kill the so-called green line?
The Creve Coeur headquarters is along the Westport Plaza line, right? If Monsanto were to announce that they were planning to shut to campus down, would that basically kill the so-called green line?
Maybe, but he line would still serve the Danforth Plant Science Center, and an Ashby/Warson or Lindbergh stop would still connect with a number of major North county bus routes. Also the new Chesterfield Monsanto location would be directly along the tracks going out to Chestrrield Valley if they ever choose to take it out that far.
^ I would argue that the green line, or I guess the Daniel Boone line for what I recall, is a Dansforth pet project for the county and his plant science center and Monsanto had cared less about it. Don't forget WWT is going to do their big HQ build out at Westport for where I understand the green line will terminate. If anything, my bet is county picked up a big corporate supporter in WWT and would lose nothing political by the Monsanto move.
Still perplexed why cross county extension to at least I55 is not on the radar. Every other transit agency who builds out there fixed system find ways to expand there current route map and follows through with an end game. But then again, St Louis county is at a loss to me on why they fully funded the cross county line to begin with, spent millions more to bury it around Wash U, and then demand little or not out of the communities that it serves let alone the thought of extending it so that workers CBD have a south county commute option that is meaningful. Just to really show a lack of vision the county proposes the south connector to appease those who still blame Webster Groves for ruining their commute by stopping I-170 in its tracks.
Still perplexed why cross county extension to at least I55 is not on the radar. Every other transit agency who builds out there fixed system find ways to expand there current route map and follows through with an end game. But then again, St Louis county is at a loss to me on why they fully funded the cross county line to begin with, spent millions more to bury it around Wash U, and then demand little or not out of the communities that it serves let alone the thought of extending it so that workers CBD have a south county commute option that is meaningful. Just to really show a lack of vision the county proposes the south connector to appease those who still blame Webster Groves for ruining their commute by stopping I-170 in its tracks.
Did BJC/WashU pay for a new station at Cortex?hebeters2 wrote:http://www.theatlantic.com/business/arc ... on/392711/
^ I believe the new Boyle station is paying paid for with TIGER grant award (federal tax dollars) and CORTEX funds which I assume come from the TIF, which in turn is essentially local tax dollars going back into specific CORTEX projects instead of the cities general revenues.
I believe BJC/Wash U did provide funding to MoDOT for part of the I64 (Hwy 44) bridge replacements nearby including the new Boyle Ave interchange. However, their is a whole other argument considering that BJC/Wash U are non-profits and what they pay and don't pay for in terms of city services.
I would give BJC/Wash U give credit for involvement in its surrounding infrastructure even thought their is definite plus on their end to have better metrolink and freeway access. I think it is one of the reason why you see success in the central corridor.
I believe BJC/Wash U did provide funding to MoDOT for part of the I64 (Hwy 44) bridge replacements nearby including the new Boyle Ave interchange. However, their is a whole other argument considering that BJC/Wash U are non-profits and what they pay and don't pay for in terms of city services.
I would give BJC/Wash U give credit for involvement in its surrounding infrastructure even thought their is definite plus on their end to have better metrolink and freeway access. I think it is one of the reason why you see success in the central corridor.
- 9,565
BJC/Wash U paid about $9.8million (half of project cost) for the 64 bridges/interchange work
Steve Peterson has spoken on N/S and he thinks its bad....so there is that.... 
http://www.urbanreviewstl.com/2015/05/n ... hborhoods/
http://www.urbanreviewstl.com/2015/05/n ... hborhoods/
Its odd to speak out against a transit expansion project that doesn't exist and likely won't for a very long time...if ever.
But I get Steve's point. The N/S line would need to be something that interacts well with the street and isn't just a highway on rails. He's right in that regard. However, I still think you could have that necessary street/pedestrian interaction with Metrolink. You would have to design it differently than what is typically done.
But I get Steve's point. The N/S line would need to be something that interacts well with the street and isn't just a highway on rails. He's right in that regard. However, I still think you could have that necessary street/pedestrian interaction with Metrolink. You would have to design it differently than what is typically done.
This is only a part of a series of critiques he's made of light rail, he's quite strongly opposed to the idea of urban light rail in general. While I understand his points, I think his logic is flawed. People want speed and people want mobility. If streetcars are just buses that are trains, with no dedicated ROW, there's zero mobility improvement for people, especially those that are transit dependent. In that case streetcars only function would be economic development and attracting a richer clientele who might be squeamish about riding the bus.
Transportation infrastructure should be much more than that.
Transportation infrastructure should be much more than that.
- 8,155
^ I think he would like dedicated row for a slower Streetcar system... I wish he took a look at the Dallas LRT system in the denser part of town or perhaps the Minneapolis/Saint Paul LRT to see how it works in more comparable neighborhoods.
- 9,565
State Rep. Gina Walsh spoke out about it in a bigger paper on Nov 1 2014...and i believe she was elected by more then 500 people 
http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/ma ... d34b2.html
http://www.stltoday.com/news/opinion/ma ... d34b2.html
The people want N-S, the politicians and crony capitalist want Westport. The debate is really the people versus the corporations in upcoming Metrolink expansion debate.
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/prin ... ll-an.html
http://www.bizjournals.com/stlouis/prin ... ll-an.html
- 8,912
Regardless of whether the study looks at only one or all three of the possible corridors, Metro’s COO Ray Friem said all the extensions likely will be constructed eventually. “The system was designed with those types of expansions in mind,” Friem said. “I would expect the system will look different 10 years from now.”
^ I remember telling people months ago that Westport had already been bought and paid for by the major regional players along that line. If the feds deny the Westport app, the county will simply bond it out like they did Cross County. Westport is happening whether we like or not. Personally, I don't think Westport is a bad line and would welcome any expansion of the system, but the N-S is really the key piece to the system. I also think the County needs to be way more proactive with zoning, CC was a disaster from that perspective.
I could also see Metro getting creative with funding in the future, remember the CMT-STL funding study should be coming out soon. What really concerns me is the silence from top city leadership. Yeah, Olgivie and Spencer spoke out, but where is Slay on this? Regionalism to the detriment of the city again?
Overall, yeah the lie that Metro was broke was just that a lie and a way to distract people from the fact that the people's choice "Northside-Southside" would not be getting built. Notice he said all of the extensions would eventually get built. The idea we will have the same system in 2040 was stupid at best, It will look way different by then. We may not even be looking at the same variation of the N-S line by then.
I could also see Metro getting creative with funding in the future, remember the CMT-STL funding study should be coming out soon. What really concerns me is the silence from top city leadership. Yeah, Olgivie and Spencer spoke out, but where is Slay on this? Regionalism to the detriment of the city again?
Overall, yeah the lie that Metro was broke was just that a lie and a way to distract people from the fact that the people's choice "Northside-Southside" would not be getting built. Notice he said all of the extensions would eventually get built. The idea we will have the same system in 2040 was stupid at best, It will look way different by then. We may not even be looking at the same variation of the N-S line by then.
- 8,912
I assume the answer is no (due to federal funding constraints) but can anyone see any scenario where StL County and StL City both move forward with separate lines simultaneously. Man that would really be something!
- 9,565
^No.
Issue with Federal Funds...which ever line is chosen (if i was a betting man i would bet on none) there is no federal funds until 2024 at earliest....New Starts Program is $2b a year but it has agreements in place for all of its future allocations til 2024 at least and the agreements also have a clause that says fed can bail since future admin can cancel the program (very likely with GOP president in 2017). so with that being said this will have to be 100% local or it wont be at all.
Issue with Federal Funds...which ever line is chosen (if i was a betting man i would bet on none) there is no federal funds until 2024 at earliest....New Starts Program is $2b a year but it has agreements in place for all of its future allocations til 2024 at least and the agreements also have a clause that says fed can bail since future admin can cancel the program (very likely with GOP president in 2017). so with that being said this will have to be 100% local or it wont be at all.
- 8,912
Ya, that's pretty much what i assume (as I was laughing as I typed) but it is fun to think about, if only for a second.