Proposition A - Metro funding in St. Louis County

PostApr 07, 2010#1012010-04-07T14:27+00:00

DOGTOWNB&R wrote:Itis my understanding that if PROP A passed, the funds would be used to restore service to areas where deep cuts took place last year. Somebody educate me. Will this restore all cuts made before the voters shot it down in 2008 or just some of the cuts? Also, what % of this new revenue will be used to expand MetroLink, if any. Does this new revenue really jumpstart talk of Metrolink expansion into the County? How serious is the talk of the County starting their own transit program?
Thanks in advance.

Yes, Metro is saying that all service cuts will be restored. About half of the expected $75-$80M will go toward restoring service and maintaining service. The other half will be saved then spent on either MetroLink expansion or new Bus Rapid Transit lines.

Check the blog part of urbanSTL - some of your questions will be answered here: http://urbanstl.com/index.php?option=co ... &Itemid=11

Also, blog story about STL County starting their own transit agency was an April Fool's post!

DogtownBnR · PostApr 07, 2010#1022010-04-07T14:38+00:00

^Thanks for the info! I hope Metro expansion is now one step closer to reality.

jennifer · PostApr 07, 2010#1032010-04-07T14:49+00:00

Hey guys, you can't believe how excited and happy and relieved I am this morning, too!

Courtney will be blogging about Prop A and the funds and particularly the service restoration at NextStopSTL.org today or tomorrow, and answering all of your questions. Also, you can drop by the Metro Live Chat at noon today - stop in anytime before then and leave your question, or participate live. http://interact.stltoday.com/discussion ... 0203101030

Cheers, St. Louis!

ddd5 · PostApr 07, 2010#1042010-04-07T16:34+00:00

Glad it passed.

Does anyone know what proportion of the metro budget goes to fund Call-A-Ride?

I know I've seen that on these forums some where before, but can't seem to find it.

Thanks.

midcoaststl · PostApr 07, 2010#1052010-04-07T17:18+00:00

Now lets get those buses moving and get started saving and planning and building a North-South City Line! I vote for the Orange Line!

goat314 · PostApr 07, 2010#1062010-04-07T17:29+00:00

MidcoastSTL wrote:Now lets get those buses moving and get started saving and planning and building a North-South City Line! I vote for the Orange Line!

I wonder if there is a creative way for Metro to finance the construction of the Westport and City line at the same time. Maybe a private public partnership? Bond issue? Bribery?

To me these are the too most critical lines at this point (although I'm skeptical about the whether the land use in Ladue, Creve Coeur, and Maryland Heights would be conducive to transit use). I think Metro would gain even more support regionally if people felt like we were pumping out the lines like Denver, Portland, Dallas, and Houston are. BRT is cool, but the average St. Louisan gets excited about Metrolink not fancy buses. I think further construction of rail lines all boils down to either state funding (don't hold your breath) or a larger federal push for better transit funding (could be possible in the next transportation re authorization bill). If I had to guess I think the E-W Gateway has already bought the idea that the Westport line is next. Sad if you ask me. The city should get priority next!

PostApr 07, 2010#1072010-04-07T18:16+00:00

I'm excited about the prospects of MetroLink expansion, but am intrigued by Bus Rapid Transit. Has there been any discussion as to where BRT lines would be located in St. Louis?

10-intuition · PostApr 07, 2010#1082010-04-07T18:23+00:00

^ If I remember they wanted to put a BRT route along Grand as that is one of their busiest routes. Also there is a diagram outlining proposed BRT routes Metro wants to implement, IIRC one was on 40 to Chesterfield Mall, another was I-44 to Eureka.

goat314 wrote:
MidcoastSTL wrote:Now lets get those buses moving and get started saving and planning and building a North-South City Line! I vote for the Orange Line!
I wonder if there is a creative way for Metro to finance the construction of the Westport and City line at the same time. Maybe a private public partnership? Bond issue? Bribery? To me these are the too most critical lines at this point (although I'm skeptical about the whether the land use in Ladue, Creve Coeur, and Maryland Heights would be conducive to transit use). I think Metro would gain even more support regionally if people felt like we were pumping out the lines like Denver, Portland, Dallas, and Houston are. BRT is cool, but the average St. Louisan gets excited about Metrolink not fancy buses. I think further construction of rail lines all boils down to either state funding (don't hold your breath) or a larger federal push for better transit funding (could be possible in the next transportation re authorization bill). If I had to guess I think the E-W Gateway has already bought the idea that the Westport line is next. Sad if you ask me. The city should get priority next!

I get excited when I see a Novabus LFS. I don't get excited when I see those dull Gilligs Metro uses extensively in their fleet. Both the Gillig Phantom and the Gillig LF models are horrible when it comes to looks and ride. I wish Metro would look into the Nova LFS, even if its the articulated version for the BRT route, maybe even the New Flyer LFA coach.

PostApr 07, 2010#1092010-04-07T18:45+00:00

DeBaliviere wrote:I'm excited about the prospects of MetroLink expansion, but am intrigued by Bus Rapid Transit. Has there been any discussion as to where BRT lines would be located in St. Louis?

http://urbanstl.com/index.php?option=co ... sportation

PostApr 07, 2010#1102010-04-07T19:20+00:00

Alex Ihnen wrote:
DeBaliviere wrote:I'm excited about the prospects of MetroLink expansion, but am intrigued by Bus Rapid Transit. Has there been any discussion as to where BRT lines would be located in St. Louis?
http://urbanstl.com/index.php?option=co ... sportation

Interesting. Any idea as to how many stops these lines would have? I'm guessing that BRT would require its own stations/platforms along the lines?

PostApr 07, 2010#1112010-04-07T19:43+00:00

^ Here are some pics of Cleveland's Health Line BRT...the only difference from a regular bus stop is that the curb is maybe 10in higher, though some stops are just regular bus stops. At those stops there's a step down off the vehicle instead of having a level exit.

You can see the curb height here:

Regular curb height station:

jennifer · PostApr 07, 2010#1122010-04-07T21:29+00:00

Nothing is final, of course, but we've been touting low-floor buses for BRT that wouldn't require a step up. And yes, BRT would have dedicated stations with a higher level of amenities, more similar to MetroLink stations than current bus stops.

As for routes, don't be discouraged by the MTF maps. Grand is the only currently "planned" route in the City but that's only because it would serve as a model for busy corridors. The MTF plan is meant to be a living document that would be regularly updated, and if Grand BRT were successful, then there would be other places that could/should be studied where it could be implemented within the City. This is what I've been told by Jessica Mefford-Miller, Metro's Chief Planner.

Also re: EWG, please remember that East-West Gateway partnered with Metro in developing and putting forward the long-range plan. EWG's Board adopted the plan. EWG officials participated in the public meetings and saw all the feedback, along with Metro's team, so they heard loud and clear that the public actually prefers the North-South corridor. [See http://movingtransitforward.org/whatsmy ... sults.aspxfor the workshop results.] At this point I would not make any assumptions about one corridor being already the "chosen" corridor over any other. There are a lot of considerations that go into the choice, not just transit science but also where we have the best chance of getting federal funding, the impact a new route would have on the transit system as a whole, expected ridership, development potential, the ability to connect job centers with people's homes, and also what most would deem to be plain old "politics". There's just no way to call something that complex at this stage of the process.

I'm checking on your question re: % of budget to Call-A-Ride and will post it here when I find out.

southsidepride · PostApr 07, 2010#1132010-04-07T22:27+00:00

Of course the geniuses on STL Today have been chiming in all day. Mostly sore losers who didn't see this coming:

Look at this gem from "Reality Czech"

Can someone list me the major employers that relocated to STL along a Metro line? I'm trying to think of one, but all I can see is downtown emptying out and the areas along the lines being "Escape from New York" sets in miniature.

stldotage · PostApr 08, 2010#1142010-04-08T00:11+00:00

Don't want to read 500+ Stltoday comments on Prop A?

I've broken them down for us here:

http://stldotage.blogspot.com/2010/04/s ... -post.html

benya31 · PostApr 08, 2010#1152010-04-08T00:17+00:00

YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!! I was out at my school harassing people to vote! Well, not harassing but close to it.

But we still can't lose focus, next on the agenda: Get Charlie Dooley OUTT!! We shouldn't have been here in the first place, and i don't think I'll be comfortable with this until he's gone.

PostApr 08, 2010#1162010-04-08T14:17+00:00

benya31 wrote:YAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAA!!!! I was out at my school harassing people to vote! Well, not harassing but close to it.

But we still can't lose focus, next on the agenda: Get Charlie Dooley OUTT!! We shouldn't have been here in the first place, and i don't think I'll be comfortable with this until he's gone.

Is Dooley anti-transit or something?

10-intuition · PostApr 08, 2010#1172010-04-08T15:17+00:00

Dooley is an avid supporter transit because it brings jobs and is vital to the region as a whole. The problem with him is that he is partly responsible for increasing taxes, i.e. my property taxes have almost doubled in 5 years, yet the value of my home decreased.

jmedwick · PostApr 08, 2010#1182010-04-08T16:20+00:00

Great to see that the tax passed. I was pessimistic about its chances, but this time around Metro, CMT and other supporters seemed to do a lot more to outline both the importance of transit and give folks an idea of what the money will be used on.

With two failed tax increases in the last 15 years combined with the issues surrounding the Cross County line, Metro has been given an incredible chance to rebuild its image and increase overall support for transit in the region. Unlike the 1990's when the region wasted the incredible boost from the success of the original line, Metro cannot afford to wast this second chance. If squandered, public support for transit in the region would be irreparably damaged. Metro, with the help of East West Gateway, must move quickly and decisively to implement a plan for how the monies will be used, first in terms of system restoration followed by system expansion. Increasing ridership and expanding the geographic reach of the system in a cost-effective way must be the goal. When Metro achieves this goal, Metro must do a better job at trumpeting its successes to change its image in the region. Public transit will only get one second chance; don't screw this up.

With that out of the way, the fun stuff is thinking about how the system will expand. The North-South line is a great idea, but with the high costs and low ridership projections, Metro should focus first on layups rather than three pointers. Multiple lower cost expansion methods, such as Grand Avenue BRT, Highway 40 BRT, Highway 44 BRT and the westport light rail line seem like better focus projects to expand the geographic footprint of "flashy" public transit and thereby lay the groundwork for increased support.

dredger · PostApr 08, 2010#1192010-04-08T18:28+00:00

I think some semi BRT's or at least Bus Express service going on I-44, I-40 & I-55 would be great and show county voters that Metro is advocating cost effective means to expand transit. Don't see a need on I-70 serving west end of the county until St. Charles County feels the need to add some dedicated bus service along this corridor.

As for the city, Getting something going on Grand Ave would be absolutely great. Better yet, Biondi needs to get SLU behind this pronto. Wash U delivered big time while SLU seems non-existent on transit issues. This is great corridor with a new viaduct coming as well as a new metrolink and bus transfer to built. We need to build upon these investments.

Finally, I still advocate an expansion of the existing Metrolink lines before building new. I will back off any more Cross County expansion speeches. But, extending the Lambert Line two more stations via Airport property and I-70 median is very doable in terms of money and an expediated timeline. I picture a re-alignment along Concourse D (which would have to be demolished) into underground through station for the Main Terminal and then back to grade. You can have a station at Lindbergh Ave (would serve two hotels as well as Metro Bus Service) and terminate at I-70/Maryland Heights Expressway Interchange. Terminating at Maryland Heights Expressway gives good access to Harrah's, Verizon Wireless Amphitheater, Riverport and Earth City Industrial Park.

PostApr 08, 2010#1202010-04-08T19:25+00:00

JMedwick wrote:Metro, with the help of East West Gateway, must move quickly and decisively to implement a plan for how the monies will be used, first in terms of system restoration followed by system expansion. Increasing ridership and expanding the geographic reach of the system in a cost-effective way must be the goal. When Metro achieves this goal, Metro must do a better job at trumpeting its successes to change its image in the region. Public transit will only get one second chance; don't screw this up.

I really think that Metro is doing just this, and that's why I really supported the Prop A effort. They openly described how the new money would be spent. They've held dozens of open houses asking the public for input on various possible MetroLink extensions and the possibility of BRT AND asked the public very explicitly to consider the cost-effectiveness of light rail vs. BRT vs. bus.

jennifer · PostApr 08, 2010#1212010-04-08T20:22+00:00

Dredger wrote: Better yet, Biondi needs to get SLU behind this pronto. Wash U delivered big time while SLU seems non-existent on transit issues. This is great corridor with a new viaduct coming as well as a new metrolink and bus transfer to built. We need to build upon these investments.

I think this is a common misconception because Wash U is just so totally on board with Metro, but SLU has been a great partner and great neighbors. We've engaged with SLU re: the Grand Bridge replacement and corresponding rebuild of the Grand MetroLink Station; several of us took the plans to a meeting of SLU's Urban Planning Association; and there was a student organization in favor of Prop A on SLU's campus that worked hard and helped turn out the vote, even though the campus is in the City where the issue wasn't even on the ballot. So I certainly wouldn't say SLU has been non-existent on transit, they're just possibly quieter about it. But SLU's support and cooperation is very valuable to Metro, just as the Metro system is valuable to SLU. They know their students use & depend on transit and they know what a boon the Grand MetroLink Station is to their campus.

jmedwick · PostApr 08, 2010#1222010-04-08T20:59+00:00

Alex Ihnen wrote:
JMedwick wrote:Metro, with the help of East West Gateway, must move quickly and decisively to implement a plan for how the monies will be used, first in terms of system restoration followed by system expansion. Increasing ridership and expanding the geographic reach of the system in a cost-effective way must be the goal. When Metro achieves this goal, Metro must do a better job at trumpeting its successes to change its image in the region. Public transit will only get one second chance; don't screw this up.
I really think that Metro is doing just this, and that's why I really supported the Prop A effort. They openly described how the new money would be spent. They've held dozens of open houses asking the public for input on various possible MetroLink extensions and the possibility of BRT AND asked the public very explicitly to consider the cost-effectiveness of light rail vs. BRT vs. bus.

Certainly the outreach work was key to the recent victory, but with the proposition passed it is all the more important to show the voters that their faith in Metro was correct. It cannot be like the 1990's with many plans and ideas but nothing built; that will only lead to future failure.

southsidepride · PostApr 08, 2010#1232010-04-08T21:03+00:00

I don't know what I'm happier about--that Prop A passed so overwhelmingly or that Dana Loesch and the Tea Party folks got their heads handed to them.

OK, so I'm happier over progressive transit winning with 63% of the vote. But seeing Loesch, Hennessy and the rest of the tea partiers with egg on their face is a definite fringe benefit

mill204 · PostApr 08, 2010#1242010-04-08T21:23+00:00

JMedwick wrote:Certainly the outreach work was key to the recent victory, but with the proposition passed it is all the more important to show the voters that their faith in Metro was correct. It cannot be like the 1990's with many plans and ideas but nothing built; that will only lead to future failure.

At the same time, don't forget that impatience is what led EWGateway to put Metro (partially) in the financial mess that it was. They decided to pay for Cross County entirely with local funds because they didn't want to wait for work on the various St. Clair County extensions to finish.

brickandmortar · PostApr 08, 2010#1252010-04-08T21:56+00:00

Here's some info from back in the day...

http://www.ewgateway.org/corridor/xcorp ... o-faqs.htm

Q. Why isn't the region receiving its share of federal money for MetroLink's extension?
A. The region is, in fact, receiving the maximum amount of federal money possible. Those funds are being used on the Illinois extension currently under construction. That route will not likely be completely funded until approximately 2005. Were the region to wait for federal funds, it would probably be 10 years or more before the Cross County segment, currently being studied, would be under construction.

The region does not automatically receive a share of federal transit construction funds. Rather, the St. Louis region is competing with as many as 100 cities nationwide at any one time for an annual federal appropriation that will be approximately $900 million. The region has averaged about $30 million a year in appropriations over the last 14 years. Considering these circumstances, the Council concluded it would be well into the next century before there would be adequate federal funds to pay for the extension of MetroLink in the Cross-County Corridor were the Council to pursue federal funding. Were the region to wait for federal funds, it would probably be 10 years or more before the Cross County segment, currently being studied, would be under construction.