Speaking of "leadership"... what do we need to do to make mass transit into a major election issue? Between existing ridership that depends on Metro and we urbanauts that want to see more, it seems like a good bloc of voters would get behind candidates who promised to work hard on increasing support.
- 1,610
^But existing bus riders, who comprise a long constituency in the City, largely don't see the benefits of expanded rail transit. How do you appeal to those who feel that money for rail competes with money for buses? And sadly, those who really only want money for roads encourage bus interests to blame rail for their problems.
^ you mean the bus constituency doesn't believe in the "trickle down" economic benefit from streetcars? 
- 2,005
phobia wrote:Congressman Clay has been talking about streetcars for the City for years. He's not exactly in a position to spearhead any project, but it's comforting to know there is support there if anyone ever pulls more together.
Those 'streetcars' Clay has been pushing for are the vintage 4 rubber tire kind.
I know there have been some appropriations for purchasing the trolleys, but I don't ever recall seeing any downtown, am I wrong?Which is why I worded "mass transit" rather than "streetcars". It's foolish by any measure to discuss streetcars independently from bus routing. Streetcars and light rail likely have a positive impact on bus service in the long term by drawing more riders; the bus-averse might still take a quick ride to/from a station. The short-term impact is negative, though, as resources are allocated to transporting yuppies and tourists rather than those who truly need public transportation.southslider wrote:But existing bus riders, who comprise a long constituency in the City, largely don't see the benefits of expanded rail transit.
So, growing them together, while even harder than winning support for shiny new streetcars, might draw constituents together enough to steal some funding from the concrete cartel.
At this point, even if we revived the automotive lobby's support of busses over rail, we'd be better off than we are now.
phobia wrote: The short-term impact is negative, though, as resources are allocated to transporting yuppies and tourists rather than those who truly need public transportation.
Depends where those resources are coming from. If they're coming straight from Metro's pocket, then yes. If they're coming largely from a special assessment on businesses along the proposed rail route, or from increased rates at city-owned parking facilities, then no. I assume some non-zero percentage of funds might be taken from bus funding, it's just a question of how much is the right amount.
Also, with an increased network of rail transit, some of these yuppies may choose to live without a car, or share a car, and thus may "need" public transportation as much as anyone else.
Well, it seems like a near southside line has gotten the most support so far. I?d feel comfortable calling it the first ?official? line of our plan. I?d like to get the route ironed out.
Most have favored a line heading down either Tucker/12th or Broadway/7th. I?d favor the line at least starting out on Broadway, since this would serve the Chouteau?s Landing/Lake area, the new ballpark, and the bars along south Broadway. Heading further south, it could hit Soulard Market. It could then make a right on Russell, serving Soulard?s main bars, and turn south down 12th st. At 12th and Sidney, you?re within walking distance of Niche and Sidney St. Caf? in Benton Park. From there it could go left onto Lynch back down to Broadway, passing right in front of the brewery?s main entrance. Heading south on Broadway, it would terminate at a Lemp Brewery/Cherokee Antique Row stop.
In case you can?t tell, I?m obsessed with the idea of involving the redevelopment of the Lemp Brewery complex with this line. As far as I know, no developers are interested in the place right now; a streetcar line connected to downtown could be just the incentive to get someone to take that project on. Also, I think the Cherokee Antique district would be an awesome day trip for people staying downtown.
You could do a bigger loop with the line to try and involve Lafayette Sq., perhaps heading up Jefferson, but I think the above line offers the most bang for the buck. It makes sense to concentrate on the shortest lines with the most potential at first. As soon as you start involving a bunch of extra track and streetcars, the chances increase that it would be seen as something other than an unqualified success. Also, I think Lafayette Sq. could be served by a future Chouteau line (Metrolink or streetcar).
Any thoughts on this?
Most have favored a line heading down either Tucker/12th or Broadway/7th. I?d favor the line at least starting out on Broadway, since this would serve the Chouteau?s Landing/Lake area, the new ballpark, and the bars along south Broadway. Heading further south, it could hit Soulard Market. It could then make a right on Russell, serving Soulard?s main bars, and turn south down 12th st. At 12th and Sidney, you?re within walking distance of Niche and Sidney St. Caf? in Benton Park. From there it could go left onto Lynch back down to Broadway, passing right in front of the brewery?s main entrance. Heading south on Broadway, it would terminate at a Lemp Brewery/Cherokee Antique Row stop.
In case you can?t tell, I?m obsessed with the idea of involving the redevelopment of the Lemp Brewery complex with this line. As far as I know, no developers are interested in the place right now; a streetcar line connected to downtown could be just the incentive to get someone to take that project on. Also, I think the Cherokee Antique district would be an awesome day trip for people staying downtown.
You could do a bigger loop with the line to try and involve Lafayette Sq., perhaps heading up Jefferson, but I think the above line offers the most bang for the buck. It makes sense to concentrate on the shortest lines with the most potential at first. As soon as you start involving a bunch of extra track and streetcars, the chances increase that it would be seen as something other than an unqualified success. Also, I think Lafayette Sq. could be served by a future Chouteau line (Metrolink or streetcar).
Any thoughts on this?
The only real concern I have with an extension south along Broadway all the way down to Cherokee and the Lemp Brewery is my concern that a streetcar line, with its many stops, starts getting long at that point, making the idea of a quick trip downtown for say shopping at Famous less atractive. But then again, with any longer loop you can have the same problems. To reach AB the line must be long. People could always say sacrafice access to the brewery (ie. the line turns at broaway and Russel or Broaway and Sidney, but will never reach Lynch). The upside ofcourrse, is that combined with good signage, a station that were say a 5 minute walk from the brewery tour enterance would encourage people to walk in soulard and maybe create the pedestrian foot traffic to get more retail in the far southern end. Also it might convince AB to pull the enterance to the tour up to Lynch, thereby improving the streetscape in the area.
Of course the most important concern is what are the areas of SOulard that still need some help. My mind tells me that its the areas closer to the Brewery, those near 1-55 and 12th, and those along Broadway. In which case, any line should try and link up some of those locations. Maybe a loop line that was...
Broadway to Sidney or Victor, then north on 13th, then onto Gravois, then Tucker, to Spruce, to 7th, To Gratiot to Broadway.
Of course the most important concern is what are the areas of SOulard that still need some help. My mind tells me that its the areas closer to the Brewery, those near 1-55 and 12th, and those along Broadway. In which case, any line should try and link up some of those locations. Maybe a loop line that was...
Broadway to Sidney or Victor, then north on 13th, then onto Gravois, then Tucker, to Spruce, to 7th, To Gratiot to Broadway.
- 2,005
Going with the idea that streetcars are economic development tools, I think that the northside needs a streetcar line to complement a near southside line.
The potential of a North Broadway loft district is too great to ignore especially with the new loft construction moving farther west. A line could begin at the ballpark village, go north along Broadway past the bottle district, the Broadway lofts cross I-70 at St. Louis Ave. It would then go north on 14th and loop around Hyde Park.
The potential of a North Broadway loft district is too great to ignore especially with the new loft construction moving farther west. A line could begin at the ballpark village, go north along Broadway past the bottle district, the Broadway lofts cross I-70 at St. Louis Ave. It would then go north on 14th and loop around Hyde Park.
JMedwick wrote:The only real concern I have with an extension south along Broadway all the way down to Cherokee and the Lemp Brewery is my concern that a streetcar line, with its many stops, starts getting long at that point, making the idea of a quick trip downtown for say shopping at Famous less atractive.
If we're talking about a single track line, running down and back, then yes length is a big consideration. I was thinking a double tracked line though. With this setup, someone in Soulard could ride downtown just as quickly if the line went all the way to Lemp or stopped in Soulard. A longer line would just offer more access.
The loop you're talking about would run in both directions right? Looking at both options, I think we're talking about 7-8, or maybe 10 at the most, stops. That's not too bad for all the areas we're talking about.
^Yes, the line would run both directions.
As for a northside line, I agree that it would be a nice addition to such a system, but I wonder if it would be too far south coming all the way into the ballpark. Once we know more about the proposed downtown loop, then the ideal situation would be streetcar lines that run in such a way as to make transfers onto the more regional metrolink system using the loop around downtown. Idealy, such a system, if combined with a streetcar system, might be a ride free zone to encourage free transfers through downtown.
As for a northside line, I agree that it would be a nice addition to such a system, but I wonder if it would be too far south coming all the way into the ballpark. Once we know more about the proposed downtown loop, then the ideal situation would be streetcar lines that run in such a way as to make transfers onto the more regional metrolink system using the loop around downtown. Idealy, such a system, if combined with a streetcar system, might be a ride free zone to encourage free transfers through downtown.
brickandmortar wrote: A line could begin at the ballpark village, go north along Broadway past the bottle district, the Broadway lofts cross I-70 at St. Louis Ave. It would then go north on 14th and loop around Hyde Park.
You could have the northside line begin at the Dome/Bottle District or, conversely, you could also think about the near northside and southside lines as being one big line connecting via broadway. Either way, I think a near northside line is something we would discuss more very soon.
We could always tinker with the lines to help them dovetail into a Metrolink downtown loop. The streetcar system should be convenient not just for people transferring onto Metrolink, but people using it to get to major points downtown and elsewhere. That?s where I think you look at extending the northside line all the way to the ballpark and connecting with a southside line.
JMedwick wrote:Broadway to Sidney or Victor, then north on 13th, then onto Gravois, then Tucker, to Spruce, to 7th, To Gratiot to Broadway.
A smaller loop like the one you propose offers the advantage of hitting more neighborhoods, and increasing the area served (a circular route covers more area than a linear route), so I see the benefit there. I still prefer the idea of the line being anchored by two major brownfield sites (Chouteau?s landing and Lemp Brewery). Looking at a map, a Lemp/Cherokee stop really doesn?t seem that far away from downtown.
The loop concept would technically hit Laf. Sq. at Lafayette avenue, but just north of this you?re separated from the neighborhood by Truman Parkway and public housing development, and to the south by the ?black hole? of the 44/55 interchange. I think Lafayette Sq. would be better served by some sort of Chouteau rail connection, particularly if Praxair could be replaced with some sort of mixed use development.
Well looks like we generated some good ideas for a near southside line, let's get some ideas for the Chouteau line, there seems to be some support for that as well.
There are a couple of neat things we can do with this. The original idea was to link Chouteau's Landing and FPSE via a straight shot down Chouteau/Manchester. The only thing I don't like about this is the large stretch of Chouteau between Jefferson and Grand that is largely industrial/storage, and I don't see it being redeveloped as anything else anytime soon. It would put you within about 4 blocks of Lafayette Park though.
Another proposal might be to combine the Locust and Chouteau lines. This line would head from downtown to Grand Center on Locust, then south on Vandeventer or Grand to Chouteau and west to FPSE, thus avoiding that industrial stretch of Chouteau. Going down that stretch of Grand would hit Metrolink, which would allow people coming in from the suburbs on Metro to catch it north to Grand Center, and possibly provide the seed for a future extension north or south along Grand.
Or we could just forget this line altogether and concentrate on the downtown/grand center line and the near northside line. But I think FPSE is a good candidate from the economic development perspective.
Any opinions?
There are a couple of neat things we can do with this. The original idea was to link Chouteau's Landing and FPSE via a straight shot down Chouteau/Manchester. The only thing I don't like about this is the large stretch of Chouteau between Jefferson and Grand that is largely industrial/storage, and I don't see it being redeveloped as anything else anytime soon. It would put you within about 4 blocks of Lafayette Park though.
Another proposal might be to combine the Locust and Chouteau lines. This line would head from downtown to Grand Center on Locust, then south on Vandeventer or Grand to Chouteau and west to FPSE, thus avoiding that industrial stretch of Chouteau. Going down that stretch of Grand would hit Metrolink, which would allow people coming in from the suburbs on Metro to catch it north to Grand Center, and possibly provide the seed for a future extension north or south along Grand.
Or we could just forget this line altogether and concentrate on the downtown/grand center line and the near northside line. But I think FPSE is a good candidate from the economic development perspective.
Any opinions?
Thinking about proposals for streetcar lines and the importance of economic development potential for the area, it is also important to think about how such a project could be built. In the past I have suggested ideas such as the rerouting of the earnings tax. Other notable ideas from others include METRO building the lines (not very likely). A third, thought not talked about as much, is a private company building the lines. If this option were to move forward, it would take a project of extraordinary size to make this feasible. So I wanted to try and map out how such a project might work.
My thinking was that a developer might consider the streetcar investment to and from a site (think the near north side into downtown) if the cost of such a line were less than the marginal revenue the developer would gain by having say direct rail access from the development into the city.
Under such a plan, the availability of not simply developable land, but cheap and easily acquirable large groupings becomes important. Therefore, the developer would be interested in say acquiring all the properties within the standard 5-minute walk from a proposed station stop and since the developer or a series of developers would be building the line, they would want to acquire all or most of the land around all of the proposed stops (save say downtown).
In a Soulard line like I proposed, this might say be the model for a developer acquiring say the City Hospital, the land in southern Soulard near the Brewery, land fronting Broadway, and the proposed Chouteau?s Landing area. One developer or a series of developers pooling money for all sites to see the development of a common rail link to increase the profits each would see from the development sites.
With this in mind, I think it is important to consider the cheap availability of large chunks of land near the lines to make this sort of private development possible. A good site to consider when thinking about such lines then might be the LCRA website, looking for areas where the city already owns large contiguous chunks of land.
To that end, a north-side line that went to the St. Louis Park area might be a good choice, as there are many vacant lots, and the city already owns large amounts of the area. Think of a line running west on Delmar, North on Jefferson, East on W. St. Louis Ave, South on N. 22nd, East on N. Market, South on N. 20th, East on Carr, and south on N. 9th . Such a loop line would hit many abandoned lots, cover areas near, but not so much directly overlapping a north-side Metrolink line.
My thinking was that a developer might consider the streetcar investment to and from a site (think the near north side into downtown) if the cost of such a line were less than the marginal revenue the developer would gain by having say direct rail access from the development into the city.
Under such a plan, the availability of not simply developable land, but cheap and easily acquirable large groupings becomes important. Therefore, the developer would be interested in say acquiring all the properties within the standard 5-minute walk from a proposed station stop and since the developer or a series of developers would be building the line, they would want to acquire all or most of the land around all of the proposed stops (save say downtown).
In a Soulard line like I proposed, this might say be the model for a developer acquiring say the City Hospital, the land in southern Soulard near the Brewery, land fronting Broadway, and the proposed Chouteau?s Landing area. One developer or a series of developers pooling money for all sites to see the development of a common rail link to increase the profits each would see from the development sites.
With this in mind, I think it is important to consider the cheap availability of large chunks of land near the lines to make this sort of private development possible. A good site to consider when thinking about such lines then might be the LCRA website, looking for areas where the city already owns large contiguous chunks of land.
To that end, a north-side line that went to the St. Louis Park area might be a good choice, as there are many vacant lots, and the city already owns large amounts of the area. Think of a line running west on Delmar, North on Jefferson, East on W. St. Louis Ave, South on N. 22nd, East on N. Market, South on N. 20th, East on Carr, and south on N. 9th . Such a loop line would hit many abandoned lots, cover areas near, but not so much directly overlapping a north-side Metrolink line.
True, the loop you propose hits many areas that need development. You didn't mention Pruitt-Igoe, but that is one of the biggest advantages of such a line. A main consideration should be the ability to get developers to take on difficult brownfield projects. If the city builds the line, it almost functions like a tax incentive as far as spurring development in difficult areas.
I wouldn't be against a private developer(s) building the lines. If there's money in it, I would ask why it hasn't happened yet. If you're asking the city to grant powers of eminent domain to developers, you're opening a whole other can of worms. If several developers can work together and the large amounts of land (as you say anything within a 5-minute walking radius of stops) can be acquired, it may be an option to look at. Perhaps it is doable, but there don't yet exist developers sophisticated enough to pull it off. And maybe different funding options could be looked at for different lines, with private developers assuming more of the cost of lines that have more developable land. The northside may have more, the southside line will still have some, but maybe supported also by the sale of bonds and special assessments along the line.
Since Portland is the only North American city to build a modern streetcar system from scratch in since WWII, I would want to look at their model of the public-private partnership, with the city building, owning, and operating the streetcar company through a non-profit, and using it as a carrot to get the kind of development (dense, mixed-use) that the city wants. The lines are funded through a myriad of sources - sale of bonds backed by an increase in parking meter rates at city garages, sponsorship of cars/stations, fundraising, of course ticket revenue, and special assessments along the line from the businesses that will benefit the most.
Here is a link that shows some of the funding sources Portland uses:
http://www.portlandstreetcar.org/pdf/capitol.pdf
I wouldn't be against a private developer(s) building the lines. If there's money in it, I would ask why it hasn't happened yet. If you're asking the city to grant powers of eminent domain to developers, you're opening a whole other can of worms. If several developers can work together and the large amounts of land (as you say anything within a 5-minute walking radius of stops) can be acquired, it may be an option to look at. Perhaps it is doable, but there don't yet exist developers sophisticated enough to pull it off. And maybe different funding options could be looked at for different lines, with private developers assuming more of the cost of lines that have more developable land. The northside may have more, the southside line will still have some, but maybe supported also by the sale of bonds and special assessments along the line.
Since Portland is the only North American city to build a modern streetcar system from scratch in since WWII, I would want to look at their model of the public-private partnership, with the city building, owning, and operating the streetcar company through a non-profit, and using it as a carrot to get the kind of development (dense, mixed-use) that the city wants. The lines are funded through a myriad of sources - sale of bonds backed by an increase in parking meter rates at city garages, sponsorship of cars/stations, fundraising, of course ticket revenue, and special assessments along the line from the businesses that will benefit the most.
Here is a link that shows some of the funding sources Portland uses:
http://www.portlandstreetcar.org/pdf/capitol.pdf
Well, it seems like this thread has sort of run out of steam, so I just wanted to summarize some of the major things I think we?ve gotten out of it in case we (or somebody) wants to take it further in the future.
It seems we?ve agreed that economic development should be the main justification for new lines. Connecting downtown to nearby neighborhoods that may be of interest to tourists and locals (and perhaps not served by Metrolink in the near future) would be second, and replacing popular bus lines (Grand) a distant third. Of course, any line that combined 2 or more of these factors would only make it more attractive.
Here are the specific lines that had the most support, in no particular order:
Near Southside:
Major points of interest ? Ballpark/Chouteau?s Landing, Soulard Market/neighborhood, A-B Brewery, Benton Park, Cherokee Antique District.
(possibly Lafayette sq. depending on size of loop)
Major areas of redevelopment ? Chouteau?s Landing, South Broadway, Lemp Brewery Complex.
Chouteau:
Major points of interest ? Ballpark/Chouteau?s Landing, Lafayette Square, FPSE neighborhood.
Major redevelopment areas ? Chouteau?s Landing, FPSE.
Locust:
Major points of interest - Convention Center, Famous-Barr/Macy's, Old Post Office, St. Louis Public Library, Washington Ave. district, AG Edwards, Grand Center, (possibly the Landing depending on how far east it traveled, although I?m envisioning it terminating at the Federal Reserve plaza at Broadway).
Major redevelopment areas ? Locust and Washington between Jefferson and Grand.
Near Northside:
Major areas of interest ? Dome/Bottle District, Landing, Old North St. Louis.
Major areas of redevelopment ? ONSL
This plan has a nice symmetry to it, treating northsiders and southsiders roughly the same ? always a concern in St. Louis transportation planning. However, if I were to pick just 2 of the 4 lines, I would go with the near Southside and Locust lines, not only because of the great balance between important sites and redevelopment potential, but because these areas do not seem likely to be served by Metrolink anytime in the near future, whereas the other two (Chouteau and Northside) do.
Any additions/amendments are welcome.
It seems we?ve agreed that economic development should be the main justification for new lines. Connecting downtown to nearby neighborhoods that may be of interest to tourists and locals (and perhaps not served by Metrolink in the near future) would be second, and replacing popular bus lines (Grand) a distant third. Of course, any line that combined 2 or more of these factors would only make it more attractive.
Here are the specific lines that had the most support, in no particular order:
Near Southside:
Major points of interest ? Ballpark/Chouteau?s Landing, Soulard Market/neighborhood, A-B Brewery, Benton Park, Cherokee Antique District.
(possibly Lafayette sq. depending on size of loop)
Major areas of redevelopment ? Chouteau?s Landing, South Broadway, Lemp Brewery Complex.
Chouteau:
Major points of interest ? Ballpark/Chouteau?s Landing, Lafayette Square, FPSE neighborhood.
Major redevelopment areas ? Chouteau?s Landing, FPSE.
Locust:
Major points of interest - Convention Center, Famous-Barr/Macy's, Old Post Office, St. Louis Public Library, Washington Ave. district, AG Edwards, Grand Center, (possibly the Landing depending on how far east it traveled, although I?m envisioning it terminating at the Federal Reserve plaza at Broadway).
Major redevelopment areas ? Locust and Washington between Jefferson and Grand.
Near Northside:
Major areas of interest ? Dome/Bottle District, Landing, Old North St. Louis.
Major areas of redevelopment ? ONSL
This plan has a nice symmetry to it, treating northsiders and southsiders roughly the same ? always a concern in St. Louis transportation planning. However, if I were to pick just 2 of the 4 lines, I would go with the near Southside and Locust lines, not only because of the great balance between important sites and redevelopment potential, but because these areas do not seem likely to be served by Metrolink anytime in the near future, whereas the other two (Chouteau and Northside) do.
Any additions/amendments are welcome.
- 1,610
^Jefferson's summary of potential activity areas/routes stays mostly east of Jefferson, except Locust or Washington going to Midtown. But since streetcars are a slow ride for long distances, short feeders lines into the MetroLink hub of downtown from nearby neighborhoods makes more sense than trying to fully rebuild the historic network across the entire City.
Regional MetroLink lines though are still important to a successful transit system. As a north-south line serving the City, lines could run through Downtown on the southside via Gravois, and on the northside via North Florissant and Natural Bridge. Such lines are ultimately bound for the County, where the routing would transition from in-street medians to exclusive alignments along railroads or highways, but within the City, could have neighborhood stops every quarter- to half-mile.
And despite some folks' objections to the impacts to our streets, I think these very wide streets, like Gravois and Natural Bridge, are best suited for median operations of low-floor light-rail vehicles. Our narrower streets like Washington, Locust, Grand, Delmar and others are those more suited for modern or heritage (Delmar) streetcars. Combined, regional light-rail and localized streetcars could be an awesome system.
However, since all things take time, I still think building a north-south regional light-rail line takes priority. A north-south light-rail line will add rail transit service to many more neighborhoods than a handful of localized streetcars predominantly east of Jefferson. Via Gravois/Tucker and North Florissant, near-southside and near-northside neighborhoods close to downtown would still get stations. For example, Soulard might have a station at Russell and Gravois, while Old North St. Louis could have a station at St. Louis and North Florissant. But many more neighborhoods would also see stations with regional lines, Benton Park (near Jefferson), Tower Grove/South Grand (at Gravois), Bevo/Dutchtown, Holly Hills, etc.
A network of MetroLink lines (longer regional lines), streetcar lines (shorter feeder lines) and still many bus lines (realistically rail has limitations) is the long-range plan. But I think a north-south regional line would spread out the benefits to the most neighborhoods of any one project, albeit around an average cost of $20-30 million a mile for in-street median/reserved-lanes light-rail, compared to around only $10-15 million a mile for mixed-traffic streetcars.
Regional MetroLink lines though are still important to a successful transit system. As a north-south line serving the City, lines could run through Downtown on the southside via Gravois, and on the northside via North Florissant and Natural Bridge. Such lines are ultimately bound for the County, where the routing would transition from in-street medians to exclusive alignments along railroads or highways, but within the City, could have neighborhood stops every quarter- to half-mile.
And despite some folks' objections to the impacts to our streets, I think these very wide streets, like Gravois and Natural Bridge, are best suited for median operations of low-floor light-rail vehicles. Our narrower streets like Washington, Locust, Grand, Delmar and others are those more suited for modern or heritage (Delmar) streetcars. Combined, regional light-rail and localized streetcars could be an awesome system.
However, since all things take time, I still think building a north-south regional light-rail line takes priority. A north-south light-rail line will add rail transit service to many more neighborhoods than a handful of localized streetcars predominantly east of Jefferson. Via Gravois/Tucker and North Florissant, near-southside and near-northside neighborhoods close to downtown would still get stations. For example, Soulard might have a station at Russell and Gravois, while Old North St. Louis could have a station at St. Louis and North Florissant. But many more neighborhoods would also see stations with regional lines, Benton Park (near Jefferson), Tower Grove/South Grand (at Gravois), Bevo/Dutchtown, Holly Hills, etc.
A network of MetroLink lines (longer regional lines), streetcar lines (shorter feeder lines) and still many bus lines (realistically rail has limitations) is the long-range plan. But I think a north-south regional line would spread out the benefits to the most neighborhoods of any one project, albeit around an average cost of $20-30 million a mile for in-street median/reserved-lanes light-rail, compared to around only $10-15 million a mile for mixed-traffic streetcars.
As a priority, I think MetroLink takes precedence. But that doesn't mean that you can't push for modern streetcars in the meantime. I'd like to see multiple transportation projects going on at once.
Light rail for Metro Link, combined with streetcars connecting the grid, and even some BRT if necessary.
Light rail for Metro Link, combined with streetcars connecting the grid, and even some BRT if necessary.
- 1,026
Okay I bite. What in God's name is BRT? Makes me think of "Bay Area Rapid Transit"
and let me be the first to suggest .....
MONORAIL!!!!!
insert simpsons reference here.
and let me be the first to suggest .....
MONORAIL!!!!!
insert simpsons reference here.
^BRT = Bus Rapid Transit
I don't mind if they use BRT to fill in spots not served by rail. But only after a complete rail system is implemented. I don't like it used in place of a proper rail system.
I don't mind if they use BRT to fill in spots not served by rail. But only after a complete rail system is implemented. I don't like it used in place of a proper rail system.
- 1,026
Thanks. I don't think I've ever heard that term before.
Just out of curiosity - is "bus rapid transit" essentially busses ruinning on overhead wires? Or are they just speedier buses?
Just out of curiosity - is "bus rapid transit" essentially busses ruinning on overhead wires? Or are they just speedier buses?
The only place I have seen BRT in action is in Pittsburgh. They have dedicated lanes, are equipped to trigger traffic lights when using regular streets, etc. It helps the bus move much faster, rather than fighting traffic and traffic lights. It moves people faster than a regular bus. But, in my opinion, it isn't as good as fixed rail lines. There may be people that want to argue about the value of BRTs, but I don't. Just explaining what it means, within my limited knowledge of things, and my opinion.
But, this is how I look at it. If I were buying a house in Pittsburgh, and all other things were the same, would I want the house near a light-rail stop or near BRT stop? I would choose house near the light rail stop. Seems more dedicated and committed for the long term.
But, I can see value in placing BRT in places that will NEVER see a light-rail line for whatever reason.
But, this is how I look at it. If I were buying a house in Pittsburgh, and all other things were the same, would I want the house near a light-rail stop or near BRT stop? I would choose house near the light rail stop. Seems more dedicated and committed for the long term.
But, I can see value in placing BRT in places that will NEVER see a light-rail line for whatever reason.
Actualy mark, you don't even have to go as far a pittsburgh to see BRT in action. I belive Kansas City, instead of a light rail system, just opend a BRT line this fall. Expat did a good job explaining what it is, and in some cases it can be a good option over light rail, because the cost is signifigantly less and it moves quickly, either through a dedicated right of way or lane on a street and the whole trigger the street light thing. Just remember though... people seem to love those trains.
I however do have a question. Does anyone know how much the regiona recives from the Feds because the area is in non-compliance with its air quality, as I think the feds give some money to help try and fix the situation. Second part of that question, can this money be applied to light rail as funding on the notion that is reduces car or bus travel/ emissions?
I however do have a question. Does anyone know how much the regiona recives from the Feds because the area is in non-compliance with its air quality, as I think the feds give some money to help try and fix the situation. Second part of that question, can this money be applied to light rail as funding on the notion that is reduces car or bus travel/ emissions?