RFQ-St. Louis Streetcar Feasibility Study

wabash · PostFeb 27, 2013#1262013-02-27T15:52+00:00

Alex Ihnen wrote:Ultimately, if south city businesses and residents want a streetcar, they will organize and proposed a taxing district. Get Ameren, Purina and AB-InBev on board and you're there.

So have the near-North/ONSL interest groups been more vocal and organized and come to the table more than those from the near Southside?

Also, will a near-North line help in qualifying for (Small Starts) Federal Funds more than a near-South line? Will it help more for Congestion Mitigations and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds?

I think getting the line to ONSL is a great idea, and the fact that a new 14th Street bridge could be cost prohibitive is a great point. But simply saying, "it had to go north for federal funding reasons" is pretty opaque. Will more low-income and disadvantaged residents be served by a near-North line than a near-South line? Is that even a consideration of the FTA when doling out funds?

mill204 · PostFeb 27, 2013#1272013-02-27T16:12+00:00

Environmental Justice refers to the fair treatment and engagement of the people regardless of race, income, or national origin in the development or implementation of environmental regulations. The alignment traverses through neighborhoods with disadvantaged populations on the north-south alignment and the east-west alignment. Figure 9 provides the median household incomes for the entire corridor. The light blue areas indicate areas with disadvantaged populations. In the next phase of the project, further analysis will determine whether or not the direct, indirect, and cumulative effects would disproportionately burden these populations.

Alex Ihnen · PostFeb 27, 2013#1282013-02-27T16:14+00:00

wabash wrote:
Alex Ihnen wrote:Ultimately, if south city businesses and residents want a streetcar, they will organize and proposed a taxing district. Get Ameren, Purina and AB-InBev on board and you're there.
So have the near-North/ONSL interest groups been more vocal and organized and come to the table more than those from the near Southside?

Also, will a near-North line help in qualifying for (Small Starts) Federal Funds more than a near-South line? Will it help more for Congestion Mitigations and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds?

I think getting the line to ONSL is a great idea, and the fact that a new 14th Street bridge could be cost prohibitive is a great point. But simply saying, "it had to go north for federal funding reasons" is pretty opaque. Will more low-income and disadvantaged residents be served by a near-North line than a near-South line? Is that even a consideration of the FTA when doling out funds?

I think most of those answers are in the nextSTL write-up. This is being pushed by the Downtown Partnership and SLU/WU/etc. seem on board - at least in theory. That's what it takes to get something like this going.

MattnSTL · PostFeb 27, 2013#1292013-02-27T16:32+00:00

I obviously can't speak for any other organization, but ONSLRG is supportive and "at the table." However, as Alex said, this is a Partnership led project, not a north or south or east or west group. FWIW, Paul McKee is in support...

It's a good point that a streetcar going south could use Broadway or 7th, and I considered that when looking at the situation. I used the logic that the line would continue on 14th since it will tie in with MetroLink and the Multi-Modal Station, and in essence serve as a replacement for the proposed south Metro line. Of course, there is no reason it has to.

Another point for consideration, and I think that's all we can do with it, is there are a couple of representatives from Metro on the steering committee. I don't know what that actually means.

Presbyterian · PostFeb 27, 2013#1302013-02-27T17:33+00:00

I hope they take some version of the Central West End #2 option and take a track to Euclid and Lindell before turning south. The intersection of Lindell and Euclid is arguably the best real estate in St. Louis. The intersection is teeming with pedestrians day and night, and three of the four corners are ripe for high density development. A streetcar stop at the front door could foster millions in new development.

It would also give us a Whole Foods stop.

I wonder whether it would be feasible to have the line continue south down Euclid through the Medical Center so it could terminate at the Metrolink station. The lack of Metro connection is the one huge drawback to the option as presented.

ealfotd · PostFeb 27, 2013#1312013-02-27T19:20+00:00

If you refer to the referenced Streetcar and Trolley map from 1910 you will see that streetcars previously traveled on Park and Russell as far east as 9th Street and then north/south on 9th Street adjacent to Soulard Market (this route would not be entirely feasible due to I-55): http://trackingprogress.org/wp-content/ ... -louis.jpg

Awesome link, thanks for sharing. Someone once told me that the old lines were never dug up, but were instead paved over. 1) Does anyone know if this is true? 2) If so, does anyone know if it would be possible to dig out the old lines and reuse them instead of build new ones? Seems like that could majorly decrease the cost and make the project very easy to expand.

jakektu · PostFeb 27, 2013#1322013-02-27T19:23+00:00

True. When they added the planter medians to S Tucker they had cut some of the old track out.

mill204 · PostFeb 27, 2013#1332013-02-27T19:26+00:00

^^ 1) Yes, bit of old rail are visible all over the city where the asphalt has worn down. 2) No.

Gateway City · PostFeb 27, 2013#1342013-02-27T22:41+00:00

Will certain cars only run around a certain portion of the circuit? I.e., a Northside-Downtown car that would just loop around downtown and head back up north, and repeat? There could be several of these for each area covered - - CWE, MT, DT, and NSTL. Then there could be a few cars that traverse the entire circuit. This would reduce the amount of time people would have to wait for the next car to arrive. Also, it could give us the opportunity to design different cars for different areas. That is, while perhaps a car that goes through the ENTIRE circuit could be a modern streetcar model, perhaps a Northside-Downtown car could be vintage. The cars in each individual circuit could have their own look to them that fits in better with those specific areas. Also, whenever the cars are being designed, I think it would be a great idea to present several, very different versions for the people of St. Louis to vote on.

kmurph42 · PostFeb 28, 2013#1352013-02-28T02:04+00:00

Personally, I think the estimated daily boardings around SLU are far too conservative. 173 daily boardings at Lindell/Grand is insanely low, especially next to a campus of 8,000 undergrads, plus faculty.

A little over a decade ago, SLU gave Metro passes to their students/faculty, just as Wash U. does now. However, not enough people used them. I would hope SLU would offer similar passes for a streetcar, and that alone would prompt more than 173 daily boardings.

Alex Ihnen · PostFeb 28, 2013#1362013-02-28T03:19+00:00

^ Yes, some of the number seem unreasonably low.

UrbanCentrist · PostFeb 28, 2013#1372013-02-28T03:26+00:00

I am very pleased to see that this proposal is being guided by influential and very capable people; the list of names and organizations comprising the study team is some reason to hope that this project could actually get off the ground. This proposal appears to be firmly rooted in realistic economic assessments of both present conditions and future possibilities. I have long believed (dreamed is a better description) that tying together the CBD, SLU/Midtown/Grand Center and the CWE with user-friendly transit is the key to enabling development to take off along the entire central corridor - and Lindell Blvd. has long seemed to me the obvious choice for the main route.

While Metrolink is useful for express trips between the CBD and the CWE, for the majority of this route, it runs through the old, valley-like railroad corridor which bifurcates our city - this location makes Metrolink less than ideal for shorter trips, since many stations are not within easy walking distance of major destinations; e.g. the Grand viaduct station is not convenient to Grand Center and is only marginally so with regard to accessing SLU. Bravo to all involved! I’m completely on board – and hope to be so physically within the next 10 years.

jakektu · PostFeb 28, 2013#1382013-02-28T13:28+00:00

Olive-Lindell line makes a lot of sense to strengthen the Central Corridor, fill in the gaps between some of the major neighborhoods/density and spur additional development and investment.

14th street does not. I don't see enough development potential on this route other than North of Wash Ave, and I don't think the multi modal connection is that important for the street car. Instead a 4th/broadway line is more important to strengthening the CBD, and spurring development between Laclede's Landing to Chouteau's Landing and getting the CBD better connected and developed near the River.

Oh, and build the blvd.

wabash · PostFeb 28, 2013#1392013-02-28T15:45+00:00

Alex Ihnen wrote:
wabash wrote:Will a near-North line help in qualifying for (Small Starts) Federal Funds more than a near-South line? Will it help more for Congestion Mitigations and Air Quality (CMAQ) funds?

Simply saying, "it had to go north for federal funding reasons" is pretty opaque. Will more low-income and disadvantaged residents be served by a near-North line than a near-South line? Is that even a consideration of the FTA when doling out funds?
I think most of those answers are in the nextSTL write-up. This is being pushed by the Downtown Partnership and SLU/WU/etc. seem on board - at least in theory. That's what it takes to get something like this going.

Actually, none of these questions are addressed in the article or the Feasibility Study. The bottom line is that a Southside line was not part of the study. There's no mention of it as an alternative or even a consideration. It's not clear why it wasn't considered, it's also not clear why the northside line is included at all. It (by far) has the slowest projected absorption rate for development, and has lower projected ridership. So, what is it bringing to the project? How is it strengthening its feasibility?

Also, I'm pretty sure the DT Partnership, WU, and SLU would be on board whether the line went north or south, or didn't go to either. Their interests are entirely served by the E-W line. Just because they've approved of the project doesn't mean this is the best possible design for it.

I like the idea of the line going to ONSL. I just think, unlike the Loop Trolley, that this project lays the foundation for a legitimate streetcar network. It should be given the best opportunity to succeed among residents, riders, and developers. I don't think taking it to St. Louis Ave. right off the bat achieves that.

Alex Ihnen · PostFeb 28, 2013#1402013-02-28T17:04+00:00

Good points. We'll be at the open house to learn more.

pat · PostFeb 28, 2013#1412013-02-28T18:02+00:00

wabash wrote:

I like the idea of the line going to ONSL. I just think, unlike the Loop Trolley, that this project lays the foundation for a legitimate streetcar network. It should be given the best opportunity to succeed among residents, riders, and developers. I don't think taking it to St. Louis Ave. right off the bat achieves that.

It also needs to be given the best opportunity to succeed in getting federal funding.

RuskiSTL · PostFeb 28, 2013#1422013-02-28T20:25+00:00

I really, really hope that this line uses a linear park type of design. Compare the St. Charles vs. Canal Street streetcars in New Orleans. A line connecting CWE-DT with grass,trees, protection from the street (St. Charles style) would give St. Louis a real running/biking connection that doesn't really currently exist. Hopefully someone can voice this. Would be great if Greenways could collab to make something like that happen.

stlien · PostFeb 28, 2013#1432013-02-28T22:20+00:00

wabash wrote:Actually, none of these questions are addressed in the article or the Feasibility Study. The bottom line is that a Southside line was not part of the study. There's no mention of it as an alternative or even a consideration. It's not clear why it wasn't considered, it's also not clear why the northside line is included at all. It (by far) has the slowest projected absorption rate for development, and has lower projected ridership. So, what is it bringing to the project? How is it strengthening its feasibility?

It seems to me the focus of the N-S line is strictly downtown. There's much more upside development potential around 14th north of Washington vs 14th south of Clark. That coupled with the high profile Mckee development could also be a factor. Also, 5 yrs ago they studied the southside and not much has changed since then so no need to focus on it. As ive read, street cars are more designed to attract development. So the question is not, "what is the north side bringing to the project?". I would think its more, "what is this project bringing to the northside."

Kevin B · PostFeb 28, 2013#1442013-02-28T23:13+00:00

stlien wrote:
wabash wrote:Actually, none of these questions are addressed in the article or the Feasibility Study. The bottom line is that a Southside line was not part of the study. There's no mention of it as an alternative or even a consideration. It's not clear why it wasn't considered, it's also not clear why the northside line is included at all. It (by far) has the slowest projected absorption rate for development, and has lower projected ridership. So, what is it bringing to the project? How is it strengthening its feasibility?
It seems to me the focus of the N-S line is strictly downtown. There's much more upside development potential around 14th north of Washington vs 14th south of Clark. That coupled with the high profile Mckee development could also be a factor. Also, 5 yrs ago they studied the southside and not much has changed since then so no need to focus on it. As ive read, street cars are more designed to attract development. So the question is not, "what is the north side bringing to the project?". I would think its more, "what is this project bringing to the northside."

Thank you for that. My thoughts exactly. By laying a streetcar line there, going up 14th then Florissant to Old North (and beyond?), they are investing in a new commercial stretch that will hopefully bring an economic uptick to the area through new business, construction, investment and plain old public awareness/interest.

For St. Louis to be successful, it needs to make efforts to strengthen and weave in the successful/pos-growth neighborhoods with those that are struggling. We CAN'T have a City that half the population physically and psychologically avoids. By dipping this single tendril of streetcar infrastructure "past Cass" and into the Northside, it should start to break down those preconceptions and build a stronger core for it.

In short, a City can't focus fully on success centers while resigning neighborhoods adjacent or close by to empty out. Because, in the long wrong, the degradation and disinvestment of what's "just across the street" will stymie the efforts of the area that's shown growth. It's symbiotic.

wabash · PostMar 01, 2013#1452013-03-01T17:16+00:00

RuskiSTL wrote:I really, really hope that this line uses a linear park type of design.

You're in luck! According to the Feasibility Study they're planning on including a St. Charles-like median between Grand and 14th Street. From the Study: "East of Grand Boulevard there is sufficient right-of-way width to allow the streetcars to operate in a separate guideway, avoiding operation in mixed traffic." Page 68 of the Study offers a rendering of what it will look like.

stlien wrote:It seems to me the focus of the N-S line is strictly downtown... As ive read, street cars are more designed to attract development.

I hadn't thought of this project from such downtown-centric/development-centric perspective. But, I think you're right that there is some serious potential for something completely new, transformative, and complementary to downtown. I agree that North 14th offers both more of a blank slate for new development and potentially more benefit to downtown. I guess the question is a matter of risk-aversion: should the line go to established neighborhoods that will offer more immediate ridership and infill development, or should it go to untested waters where it can really be transformative and facilitate the development of a new corridor/area.

Alex Ihnen · PostMar 01, 2013#1462013-03-01T17:21+00:00

Yep - Olive at Compton ^

Kevin B · PostMar 01, 2013#1472013-03-01T21:28+00:00

^ Probably a smart idea drawing this rather than the BP gas station and SLU garage that's actually at Olive and Compton.

EDIT: Oh, and I just thought of another reason to like this streetcar plan...three block walk to Urban Chestnut!

STLEnginerd · PostMar 01, 2013#1482013-03-01T21:37+00:00

^ But why are they planning to tear down Dink's Parish Laundry building

Alex Ihnen · PostMar 01, 2013#1492013-03-01T22:11+00:00

Kevin B wrote:^ Probably a smart idea drawing this rather than the BP gas station and SLU garage that's actually at Olive and Compton.

EDIT: Oh, and I just thought of another reason to like this streetcar plan...three block walk to Urban Chestnut!

Their rendering is mislabeled - it's really a couple blocks east of Compton.

beer city · PostMar 03, 2013#1502013-03-03T22:07+00:00

Streetcars could give St. Louis a 2 billion boost

http://www.stltoday.com/business/local/ ... 5a62b.html

RFQ-St. Louis Streetcar Feasibility Study

Choose Display Mode