I think the problem is that many people think MetroLink should serve the function of commuter rail, even though (as you observed) it really isn't.wabash wrote:There are some key differences like station density, frequency, continuity, and rolling stock that make Metrolink nothing like commuter rail.jstriebel wrote:One of the biggest flaws of Metrolink is that it borderline IS commuter rail.
- 1,868
I understand the logistics of Metrolink are very much not like commuter rail. But nonetheless, we've built a system that's largely based on park-and-ride. And in my opinion, that's a commuter rail principle.
We limit the impact Metrolink can have on the region and the people it can serve by focusing it in that way. Less park-and-ride, and more Metro where the people actually live.
We limit the impact Metrolink can have on the region and the people it can serve by focusing it in that way. Less park-and-ride, and more Metro where the people actually live.
^^ Agreed. Metrolink tries to do too much. There should be a separation of services that work in conjunction.jstriebel wrote:I understand the logistics of Metrolink are very much not like commuter rail. But nonetheless, we've built a system that's largely based on park-and-ride. And in my opinion, that's a commuter rail principle.
We limit the impact Metrolink can have on the region and the people it can serve by focusing it in that way. Less park-and-ride, and more Metro where the people actually live.
- 1,868
I don't think the P&R thing would be a problem if the non-P&R stations got the focus their potential for TOD deserves. I mean, why not extend the line an extra couple miles to a highway-side parking lot?
- 985
Agree, more TOD is needed. It does seem the system as designed now is good in connecting job centers and entertainment venues, but not so much residential areas.
Lines going to the denser neighborhoods would help along with developing residential around stations. Furthermore, more reliable in frequency and speed bus service connecting to metrolink between areas would help.
Lines going to the denser neighborhoods would help along with developing residential around stations. Furthermore, more reliable in frequency and speed bus service connecting to metrolink between areas would help.
- 9,562
MoDOT and FHWA hosting a Road Diet workshop in Missouri. 
April 9, 2015
Road Diets (Roadway Reconfiguration)
Four-lane undivided highways experience relatively high crash frequencies--especially between high-speed through traffic, left-turning vehicles and other road users. One option for addressing this safety concern is a Road Diet, which typically involves converting an existing four-lane undivided roadway segment to a three-lane segment consisting of two through lanes and a center two-way left-turn lane.
This reconfiguration has many benefits:
Safety.
Road Diets can make the roadway environment safer for all users. Studies indicate a 19 to 47 percent reduction in overall crashes when a Road Diet is installed. For pedestrians, Road Diets result in fewer lanes to cross and provide an opportunity to install refuge islands.
Low Cost.
Road Diets make efficient use of limited roadway area. When planned in conjunction with reconstruction or simple overlay projects, the safety and operational benefits of Road Diets are achieved essentially for the cost of restriping pavement lanes.
Quality of Life.
Road Diets can make shared spaces more livable and contribute to a community-focused, “Complete Streets” environment. On-street parking and bike lanes can also bring increased foot traffic to business districts.
As part of the safety focus area of the Every Day Counts (EDC) initiative, the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) is promoting Road Diets. This EDC Exchange will highlight how local agencies are using this low cost safety countermeasure to improve safety, operations, and livability in their communities. This Exchange will be of interest to Safety Engineers, Transportation Planners, Pedestrian and Bicycle Coordinators, Safe Routes to School Coordinators, Local Public Agency Coordinators, and Transportation Alternatives Program Managers.
Please join FHWA, the Missouri Local Technical Assistance Program Center and the Missouri Department of Transportation for a presentation on Road Diets via a live webinar on April 9, 2015 from 1:00 pm to 3:00 pm Central Time.
The following are locations for your participation:
• TMC of the Ozarks , 1107 W. Chestnut Expressway, Springfield, Training Room
• Kansas City District Office, 600 NE Colbern Road, Lee’s Summit, Conference Room 136
• 830 MoDOT Drive, Jefferson City, Purple Conference Room
• St. Louis District Office, 1590 Woodlake Drive, Chesterfield, Conference Room 160
St. Louis politics is frustrating to say the least but I'm absolutely stumped on why the Cross County extension to I-55 seems to go by the wayside. Maybe I'm missing something but wouldn't it be easier to qualify for Federal Funds to extend this line rather than build Daniel Boone? Shouldn't a route have already been picked and agreed up (either down River Des Peres or alongside BNSF ROW)? Shouldn't an Environmental Impact Statement and Preliminary Engineering been started on the moment the first revenue metrolink train called on Shrewsbury? Shouldn't funding needs be less on an incremental extension and therefore doable under Prop A?.
.
Can't help to think that any other metro region and transit agency would have their ducks in a row to extend a transit line that was built to be extended in the first place.
.
Can't help to think that any other metro region and transit agency would have their ducks in a row to extend a transit line that was built to be extended in the first place.
Yep. But a system that connects jobs & entertainment has limited value if you can't walk from where you live to get on that system.imperialmog wrote:Agree, more TOD is needed. It does seem the system as designed now is good in connecting job centers and entertainment venues, but not so much residential areas.
Lines going to the denser neighborhoods would help along with developing residential around stations. Furthermore, more reliable in frequency and speed bus service connecting to metrolink between areas would help.
As much as I love actual rail, trolleys etc. it just seems like they are cost-prohibitive. What if we had modern transit buses that LOOKED like a modern, at grade rail system? How cool would it be to see these bad boys running up and down: kingshighway, Lindell, Washington Ave-Broadway-market-Jefferson loop downtown, Grand, Skinker, gravois, etc. certainly, they look cool, sleek and modern and you don't have to pay the HUGE cost of tracks.
http://www.inlander.com/spokane/streetc ... id=2189979
Website of bus maker based in Belgium.
http://www.exquicity.be/en/
http://www.inlander.com/spokane/streetc ... id=2189979
Website of bus maker based in Belgium.
http://www.exquicity.be/en/
For me (and many others) a big part of the bus vs. train debate is: The train always runs on the same tracks and stops at the same stations.
I go to SLU for a basketball game, the Grand metrolink station is gonna be in operation.
If I want to take the bus, buses supposedly don't run down Compton after SLU basketball games (except when they do, because I've seen them there). They don't run down certain streets that are closed for fun runs, festivals or whatever. And none of this reroute information is easily accessible when you just want a ride from point A to point B.
I can hop on the metrolink, or I can spend 10 minutes trying to figure out what bus routes will be running at the time and place I need them.
Then if I'm five minutes late, I have to start all over on the bus trip planning due to poor bus headways. And google maps is only somewhat useful, because it doesn't take into account most of the reroutes listed above. I've even been screwed on google maps when its database had a Monday schedule loaded instead of what should have been a holiday schedule.
I go to SLU for a basketball game, the Grand metrolink station is gonna be in operation.
If I want to take the bus, buses supposedly don't run down Compton after SLU basketball games (except when they do, because I've seen them there). They don't run down certain streets that are closed for fun runs, festivals or whatever. And none of this reroute information is easily accessible when you just want a ride from point A to point B.
I can hop on the metrolink, or I can spend 10 minutes trying to figure out what bus routes will be running at the time and place I need them.
Then if I'm five minutes late, I have to start all over on the bus trip planning due to poor bus headways. And google maps is only somewhat useful, because it doesn't take into account most of the reroutes listed above. I've even been screwed on google maps when its database had a Monday schedule loaded instead of what should have been a holiday schedule.
I think it's pretty incredible that MetroLink utilizes existing rights-of-way and century-old tunnels, and still manages to hit so many important centers. It's even more amazing that St. Louis managed to get it done in a state that is downright hostile towards transit and its big cities in general. Many cities in the country would kill for our rail system (Cincinnati, Milwaukee, KC, Detroit, etc). Even Pittsburgh's current rail system, which interestingly upgraded its last remaining streetcar lines to light rail, mainly serves downtown and the south hills (south suburbs), and does not serve its major medical, educational or cultural centers, as MetroLink does.
Where MetroLink falls short is the glaring lack of T.O.D. in logical locations. The DeBaliviere parking lot, the empty SLU fields on the southern end of the Grand viaduct, the Clayton "hole" where Trianon was proposed several years ago, the big empty lot just west of the Delmar station and others are begging for development, it's almost stupid that nothing has materialized on any of them. If out-of-town developers knew the opportunities here, they'd be fighting to develop those parcels. It's very frustrating see such prime land wasted that literally a stone's throw from rail transit.
Where MetroLink falls short is the glaring lack of T.O.D. in logical locations. The DeBaliviere parking lot, the empty SLU fields on the southern end of the Grand viaduct, the Clayton "hole" where Trianon was proposed several years ago, the big empty lot just west of the Delmar station and others are begging for development, it's almost stupid that nothing has materialized on any of them. If out-of-town developers knew the opportunities here, they'd be fighting to develop those parcels. It's very frustrating see such prime land wasted that literally a stone's throw from rail transit.
- 1,868
How much of the cost of trains is the actual rails, as opposed to stations, tunnels, vehicles, grade separation, etc?
- 9,562
EWG long range plan draft should be out for comments fairly soon
- 9,562
A lot of solid " tier 1" projects (2016-2025 timeframe) but funding is still questionable
define solid?dbInSouthCity wrote:A lot of solid " tier 1" projects (2016-2025 timeframe) but funding is still questionable
- 3,235
Missouri must improve its transportation system.
http://m.stltoday.com/news/opinion/impr ... touch=true
http://m.stltoday.com/news/opinion/impr ... touch=true
- 9,562
I love RITA! and nobody goes stats better then RITA!
http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita. ... _11x17.pdf
and nobody goes stats better then RITA! http://www.rita.dot.gov/bts/sites/rita. ... _11x17.pdf
Well after A7 failed I said this was coming and now it's here with support from Nixon, speaker of the house and senate leader a 6 cent gas tax (2 cents over 3 years) + indexed to inflation has been introduced in the senate and also as predicated it leaves behind other modes unlike a7. And this one doesn't have to go to the voters.
Senate Bill 540
Senate Bill 540
- 9,562
each penny brings in about $40million a year, so this will bring in about $240M a year in year 3 and reading that bill it says Cities will get 15% of that and counties about 15% and MODOT gets 70%...
MoDOT- $168M a year
Cities- $36M a year
Counties- $36M a year (St.Louis County would get about $3.7M from this pot a year)
MoDOT- $168M a year
Cities- $36M a year
Counties- $36M a year (St.Louis County would get about $3.7M from this pot a year)
This would still leave MO well below the national average and five of its eight neighbors.
- 9,562
ARTBA Says Raise Fuel Tax 15 Cents, Give Taxpayers Rebates
The nation’s road builders have proposed that Congress hike the federal diesel and gasoline tax 15 cents a gallon and offset the cost for low- and middle-income people with tax rebates.
There would be no rebates, though, for truckers buying diesel at 39.4 cents a gallon compared with the current tax of 24.4 cents a gallon. The gasoline tax currently is 18.4 cents a gallon.
The fuel-tax increase would generate enough new revenue to pay for a six-year, $401 billion transportation reauthorization bill, the American Road and Transportation Builders Association said. ARTBA made the proposal March 12.
The current transportation funding law, MAP-21, was temporarily extended last year, but that extension expires May 31.
Congress has yet to come up with a new funding plan and needs about $15 billion a year in additional revenue from the fuel tax or some other source to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent.
“Over the last seven months, we have seen little progress on how Congress is going to resolve this $15 billion-plus-a-year problem,” ARTBA President Pete Ruane said.
“In fact, in recent weeks, we’ve been hearing hints from Capitol Hill, that quote ‘We might need another short-term extension,’ end of quote.”
ARTBA said its fuel-tax increase would generate enough new revenue to pay for a six-year, $401 billion transportation reauthorization bill.
Under ARTBA’s proposal, single tax filers with an adjusted gross income of $100,000 or less would receive a $90-per-year tax rebate, which ARTBA said would be the average annual cost to them of a 15-cent gas-tax increase.
Joint filers with adjusted gross incomes of $200,000 or less would receive a $180 rebate, ARTBA said.
Ruane said ARBTA is offering a “political solution” to the “perceived” political debate over how to pay for a new transportation bill.
The ARTBA plan, however, could provoke heated debate in Congress.
The rebates, for example, would only last for the life of the transportation funding bill, but the 15-cent fuel-tax increase would be permanent.
The nation’s road builders have proposed that Congress hike the federal diesel and gasoline tax 15 cents a gallon and offset the cost for low- and middle-income people with tax rebates.
There would be no rebates, though, for truckers buying diesel at 39.4 cents a gallon compared with the current tax of 24.4 cents a gallon. The gasoline tax currently is 18.4 cents a gallon.
The fuel-tax increase would generate enough new revenue to pay for a six-year, $401 billion transportation reauthorization bill, the American Road and Transportation Builders Association said. ARTBA made the proposal March 12.
The current transportation funding law, MAP-21, was temporarily extended last year, but that extension expires May 31.
Congress has yet to come up with a new funding plan and needs about $15 billion a year in additional revenue from the fuel tax or some other source to keep the Highway Trust Fund solvent.
“Over the last seven months, we have seen little progress on how Congress is going to resolve this $15 billion-plus-a-year problem,” ARTBA President Pete Ruane said.
“In fact, in recent weeks, we’ve been hearing hints from Capitol Hill, that quote ‘We might need another short-term extension,’ end of quote.”
ARTBA said its fuel-tax increase would generate enough new revenue to pay for a six-year, $401 billion transportation reauthorization bill.
Under ARTBA’s proposal, single tax filers with an adjusted gross income of $100,000 or less would receive a $90-per-year tax rebate, which ARTBA said would be the average annual cost to them of a 15-cent gas-tax increase.
Joint filers with adjusted gross incomes of $200,000 or less would receive a $180 rebate, ARTBA said.
Ruane said ARBTA is offering a “political solution” to the “perceived” political debate over how to pay for a new transportation bill.
The ARTBA plan, however, could provoke heated debate in Congress.
The rebates, for example, would only last for the life of the transportation funding bill, but the 15-cent fuel-tax increase would be permanent.
I know we like to maintain this place with a sense of decorum and civility. But for some reason this really makes me go "F*ck yeah!"
http://www.forestparkforever.org/news/2 ... akland-ave
http://www.forestparkforever.org/news/2 ... akland-ave