I attended one of discussions on the rapid transit connector study (Bus Rapid Transit - BRT) by Metro this evening at UMSL. The presentation was made twice, once at 5:30 PM and again at 6:30. They said there were several people at the 5:30 talk but the 6:30 was very sparsely attended. They have two other meetings with the public planned in the next few days in other parts of the metro. Here is the link to their site:

http://www.movingtransitforward.org/stl ... fault.aspx

In this pitch, they said they wanted to get comments from the public on the study area they have chosen. They are studying primarily the North and Central city and county, Grand Avenue, I-70 to St. Chuck, and I-64 to Chesterfield for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) feasibility. In June or so, they will have a second round of discussions.

Since there were so few, we were able to sit in front and have an informal discussion about the study. They heard feedback on what it may take for the public to see this as an experience closer to metro link rides than a bus ride. Fast, fixed routes, frequent-as-metrolink, accessible without deploying ramps, few stops, smooth ride, and gradual starts and stops were mentioned. Also, automated fare collection and realtime schedule info at the stops.

They said they hope to get Federal funding eventually, but are competing with other cities going after the same dollars. Also, it may take a year for a company just to build the bus, and more time if special road work is required. They could go BRT - light and use existing roads, but they see this in service no sooner than 5 years from now.

They said they heard the criticism that the Arch planners did not seek enough public input, and they seem genuinely interested in public input to this study to avoid similar criticism. But most in attendance agreed that they needed to publicize the meetings widely next time.

I went to the meeting tonight and was pleased to hear that real-time bus info is coming. In two years unfortunately, but it's coming.

Also bigger buses for the Grand bus are coming this fall.

Bus Rapid Transit in St. Louis is looking for input and suggestions to their Virtual Meeting material by May 13th, 2013. Here is the link:

http://www.movingtransitforward.org/stl ... tings.aspx

I was at a Special Service Area (think STL's tax-levied Community Improvement Districts) forum with some other service providers/delegate agencies today in Chicago and got to see the City's preferred alternative for bus rapid transit.

Rather than the sprawl-serving highway lines being pitched here, Chicago's transportation division instead was recommending a center-lane system along the north-south Ashland Avenue route from 31st street to the south through to the 1900 block to the north (50 blocks total). Center-lane platforms would be accessible via existing crosswalks and raised so that they would be at-level to the floors of the BRts, helping to expedite the load-in process.

Other cool pieces of the project include: bus-to-light communication so that the greens and yellows can actually hold a few seconds to allow an approaching BRT a little extra time to push through the intersection; pre-pay and double-door entry to reduce loading time; dedicated stop lights which would receive priority green lights over left-turning cars. The initial phase is projected to cost about $10 million/mile.

It's important to note that the Ashland corridor (older versions here) for Phase One doesn't service any "main attractions" of Chicago. Actually, the whole length of it sits on the "wrong" side of the Kennedy Expressway (not that there really is much of a wrong side anymore). No, this route was recognized by CDOT/CTA as an ideal north-south connector which, if fully-implemented, promises to significantly reduce travel times (upwards of 50% in some studies), connect through to basically every major east-west bus route along the way, and implement a much-needed street diet and beautification effort on a less-than-appealing Chicago stretch.

I think this should be the thought process considered here in St. Louis. One (or all) of our main north-south streets -- likely Grand, Kingshighway and Jefferson -- should undergo the same treatment Chicago's Ashland (and later, Western Ave.) is receiving. We suffer no lack of in-bound highways, but what we don't have is a true north-south system to quickly and efficiently get citizens from one end to the other. An inner-city BRT will accomplish this and for much less construction cost than either a streetcar or light-rail could (though let it be known I desperately want to see a Metrolink line in the De Soto right-of-way...).

St. Louis is a long city and that, as much as any other circumstance, stereotype or struggle, may contribute to the City's sustained segregation. A north-south BRT might get citizens accustomed to using alternative transportation and experience more of the City.

^No. The priority is in area that is bounded by 40 and 70. That boundary is based on their traffic studies. So the BRT line will most surely be on one of those highways.

^ Maybe my thoughts are correct or not, but getting the impression that Metro is intentionally putting any thought of metrolink expansion on the back burner even though a specific portion of Prop A funding was suppose to be dedicated as such. Though of Goat's comments from yesterday on another Thread.

The reason to me that makes sense is that county preferred option is to see the build out of Danial Boone/Westport line even though initial studies might suggest that the line wouldn't have sufficient ridership levels to meet targets for federal funding. Speculation on part. In other words, do nothing on metrolink and pursue Rapid Transit connector study that might meet standards for federal matching funds with a different cost structure even though ridership levels might not be as great or lower.

Public Meetings Sept 10, 11, and 12

http://movingtransitforward.org/stlrapi ... tings.aspx

Possible BRT Routes

http://movingtransitforward.org/stlrapi ... ssion.aspx

The routes are better than I was expecting as they are not all on highways, however, I'm rather unhappy about their disregard for the streetcar project (metro's on the board!). Having a BRT and a streetcar down Olive/Lindell would be a very poor idea. My other beef is that their proposed scheduling is 6am-11pm and 8am-8pm on holidays. None of the major bus routes currently (70, 95, 11) close up shop before 12:00. They continue to try to attract commuters that have cars for late-night trips rather than trying to make our city car ownership optional, which really needs to change.

That being said I like the W Florrisant/Natural Bridge route the most (though that still overlaps with the streetcar). I think it serves transit/pedestrian friendly neighborhoods the most of each of the alignments.

A couple of the routes seem okay, but yes, the priority continues to be park and ride.

There is no effort to connect the densely populated south and southwestern neighborhoods to downtown or the north. I understand they feel they must make this a regional system, but the regional system must have a strong core to be effective.

I live in St. Louis Hills currently (although that may change in the next 6 months). If I wanted to get to work downtown, I could either (A) drive 10-20 minutes (I mix it up between taking Gravois and taking 44) or take a 50-60 minute bus ride including 10 minute walks to get to and from the bus.

I want to rely on my car as little as possible and use alternative transportation, but it'd be crazy to not drive in my situation.

Maybe you could argue that the demographics in my area are less likely to use public transit. Fine. But I don't think that applies to the more eastern neighborhoods of South City.

I know there's a lot of factors in play, but it seems preposterous to me that the priority isn't connecting our neighborhoods.

I have been told a couple of times by people who would seem to know on Twitter or by email that a BRT line on Grand WILL be happening, though there's no specifics to go along with that. I just wish they'd also explore one that runs from Chippewa to Gravois to Tucker. There's room on those streets to make it happen.

Maybe I'm being picky, but I'm vehemently against parking and riding, when the difference between the ride to the station and the ride to my destination is about ten minutes. Just doesn't seem worth it. If I'm getting into the car, I might as well go the whole way.

However, biking would be an interesting option, so let me take a look.

It appears I could bike to the station, catch the blue line from there to the stadium station and then walk 10 minutes to work. It lists the travel times as 40 minutes, but that does not include my bike ride which would probably be 10 minutes itself.

That's not absurd by any means, but (1) it is still enough added trip time that I'm unlikely to do it, and (2) it just seems to me that it should be easier. There are so many people in that area, I feel like there should be better service options.

roger wyoming II wrote:^ curious.... would park or bike & ride to the Shrewesbury station be a possiblity for St. Louis Hills residents?

Even were it so, that's still not terribly practical for someone going downtown. The jog up to Clayton means it's a 40 to 45 minute ride from that station to the downtown stops just on the Metro. Add drive/bike time and it's no faster than the buses.

It'd be really nice to have something more direct for SoSTL'ers to get downtown.

-RBB

^ 31 minutes from Shrewsbury to 8th and Pine. FYI.

That time isn't so bad if a walk to the station wasn't another 26 minutes (from Francis Park basically).

Biking from Francis Park to Shrewz Station takes 8 or 10 mins. Getting downtown from Francis Park in 40-45 mins via public transit seems pretty reasonable considering its not a particularly transit friendly neighborhood in the first place.

It takes me 15 minutes to drive.

If the goal is to encourage public transit, it's just not going to happen by extending their trip 45 minutes and making them do work. I'm gung ho about using public transit, and I won't do that.

However, you're right this is a particularly non-transit friendly neighborhood. But you go just a little east and those neighborhoods are set up in a way that could be, but you still don't have good options to use it.

To be sure, there are wide swaths of densely-populated neighborhoods in St. Louis with very limited transit options. That's why the next Metrolink expansion or BRT effort needs to be a north-south solution. Doubling down on the central corridor or far-reaching suburbs is a recipe for further disinvestment/flight from the the City.

An intra-urban BRT line along Gravois would seem like the best bet for connecting the City's southwest neighborhoods to downtown. It could terminate at River Des Peres (with an opportunity for a later expansion or spur out to Affton or Sunset Hills?) and move right on into Tucker and beyond. Still not entirely convenient for residents of St. Louis Hills, but it gives an additional option. With that and the Shrewsbury Metrolink spur though, the system becomes particularly convenient for those living south and north of St. Louis HIlls.

I think you could have that Gravois line or an offshoot of it actually go down Chippewa. Or, of course, you could just have a regular bus on Chippewa that connects you to a station on Gravois.

You're still not talking about 15 minutes, but you might be talking about 35, and I'd be willing to do that.

I've done very light analysis of this. If you had a BRT line that ran from roughly Chippewa at Jamieson to Gravois and on up Tucker (how far north would depend on what if anything the street car projects have become), and a BRT line N-S on Grand, you'd connect something like 42 neighborhoods, many of which are densely populate in the south (and many others that might come to be more populated through projects like this in the north).

That's over half the city on these two alone. Factor in the existing lines, and you're really making a dent.

But instead we'll probably just try to bring some more people from Chesterfield into downtown for an evening.

bprop wrote:^ 31 minutes from Shrewsbury to 8th and Pine. FYI.

That may be ride-time (though by memory that seems optimistic) but doesn't include time waiting for the train. Going by experience I've found I need to budget 45 minutes to from parking at the Shrewsbury station to arriving downtown. And that doesn't include time spent travelling to the Shrewsbury stop. That's fine for special occasions (going to a ball game or a parade, for example) but when you're going to work every day the time saved by driving is significant; at least it would be for me, and I think I'm echoing jstriebel here.

I doubt anyone needs it to be minute-for-minute the same as driving. but the Metro line and bus routes are circuitous at best. A straighter line, be it light rail, BRT, or just a regular ol' express bus to downtown IMO would be quite useful for South City and near South County residents.

-RBB

From Walkscore, here are the areas one can travel from 8th & Pine in 30 minutes and 40 minutes. They are roughly equal to east of Grand and east of Kingshighway.


Francis Park/St. Louis Hills is actually one of the most poorly served neighborhoods in the City. As this map shows, coverage in parts of St. Louis Hills is worse than Carondelet, Patch, Richmond Heights, Maplewood, Clayton, and most of U. City. Ouch.


Nonetheless, I absolutely agree that Gravois is the ideal candidate for BRT, streetcar, or (ideally) elevated metrolink.

Also, they should have built the Shrewsbury Station at Chippewa in the first place. Do many people hop off 44 to get on Metrolink? I'd think the Shrewsbury station would mostly serve the surrounding area and South County, which would be just as convenient, if not moreso, at Chippewa than Lansdowne.

^ Interesting stats/visuals -- I expect I'll dump a few hours into the Walkscore site now (thanks a lot...).

Re: an elevated train the length of Gravois, I'd hazard against it (not that it would ever happen anyway). In all but very rare instances, elevated commuter trains eschew main street footprints. In Chicago, for instance, the vast majority of trackage is installed along alleyways. And in most cases, this alley trackage is either limited to rear-building access or flat out removes through-traffic. Sure, downtown they have the elevated Loop lines, but that's a relatively compacted portion of trackage condensed to the city's largest employment center (the Red Line, as such, runs underground through the same location).

Besides the enormous price of going high along Gravois, the end-result would be an ugly hodge-podge of steel, pre-fab concrete (more likely), and retaining walls.

Given my d'ruthers, I like BRT along Gravois, a Metrolink line in the existing De Soto ROW (I know, I know, Union Pacific still uses this stretch) curving around TGP or possibly going underneath the park, express buses along/on 1-55 and I-44 and increased bus service on Chippewa and Grand (with the potential of a future BRT/Streetcar on Grand -- and possible Broadway?!).

Now where'd I put the blank check that eccentric trilllionaire gave me...