urbanSTL

Why not connect the Westport and airport lines to crate a loop ?

moorlander wrote:Why not connect the Westport and airport lines to crate a loop ?

It looks like it might not be too much of a hassle to do that, mainly use the property that was bought out by the airport for the runway and have the tracks run along that line which could take it to the other side of 270 just on that. There is the issue of the Westlake landfill after that, but it could mean cheap land for ROW there and then it will go through Earth City area which would be good for hooking it with an employment center.

The rail line that is mentioned on a Westport line, is that used much or could it be utilized for metrolink? (also it would be a great corridor for a cross county bike trail too but there is a utility corridor to the south that would work too) This would be really good if say around Earth City/Maryland Heights area some transit oriented development along the line takes place and creating a more urban core in that area.

Hope we get this soon

Pittsburgh Post-Gazette - New app provides real-time bus info

Aaron Steinfeld's iPhone told him the next Port Authority bus would arrive at the Oakland stop at Forbes and South Neville avenues in two minutes and that it would be a 69 Trafford.

A few minutes later, it also accurately forecast the arrivals of a 61D Murray and a 61A Wilkinsburg.

Welcome to the big time of real-time, Pittsburgh transit riders.


Read more: http://www.post-gazette.com/business/te ... z3AlyE8oq9

http://www.post-gazette.com/business/te ... 1107280433

It's been a few weeks, has the NoOn7 camp started working on an alternative proposal to sales tax that they will present to MO legislature?

…because if they haven't that totally means amendment 7 was the best and only way to fund transit!

dbInSouthCity wrote:It's been a few weeks, has the NoOn7 camp started working on an alternative proposal to sales tax that they will present to MO legislature?

I think the anti-7 ideas have been clear for years; basically, do everything to raise funds that A7 would have outlawed, and maybe stick online sales taxes in the mix on top of that. But I think the Republicans who control the legislature were divided between "no taxes" and "only regressive sales taxes" as funding mechanisms, so I don't expect any motion on bills in the near future. Maybe when the businesses that depend on I-70 get desperate enough to lobby for tolls and gas taxes.

The conversation continues. CMT will be hosting a breakfast featuring Chuck Marohn of Strong Towns on Oct 9. $15 for CMT members, $25 for nonmembers.



http://cmt-stl.org/cmt-breakfast-discus ... ican-city/

Maybe they'll finally listen to what people of Missouri are wanting & not what MoDot wants or the crooked politicians want & if they want to rebuild 70 rebuild it from Downtown Saint.Louis to Downtown Kansas City

Well since fuel tax is on deck this time around it should be fairly simple, the amendment 7 list is back minus everyone not on the MoDOT road system. Still waiting to hear back from No on 7 about how to fund transit and other modes.

Is Metro going to bring these smart, real time apps for smartphones to St. Louis? That might encourage an entirely new clientele to ride the bus. I would certainly consider it if I knew I could walk out of my front door and only wait two minutes or so for a bus.
At the same time, I've heard rumors that they are considering some rather fancy office locations downtown..

How about a 10 year moratorium on 'new' highway construction so we can focus all the monies on bridges and maintenance?

^ But does it really? Uninhibited, 80mph travel between destinations isn't a right of life. The system in place right now effectively reduces travel times, even if there's occasional back-up or log-jam delaying your momentum.

It's an important, if subtle, difference between getting what you want and having what you need. I-70, with maintenance, provides what is needed.

dweebe wrote:

STLEnginerd wrote: As anti-sprawl as I am: at least in my opinion I-70 does need another lane cross-state.

adding a 3rd lane across the state wont increase sprawl beyond regular migration that's happening now. its common sense to do it....I took 70 back from KC few weeks ago, the stretch from 70/54 to 70/64 interchange is 60 miles, it took me 2 hours and 20 min and there was no visible accidents on the way.

onecity wrote:The only challenge I ever have heading west on I-70 is State Patrol presence limiting my speed around Boonville and west of Concordia.

The money spent on an additional lane is money that could be better spent building viaducts at 21st, Ewing, Thurman/Sarah, Spring, Edwin-SLU, Marconi-Manchester, Dale-Tamm, etc., and maybe a Hampton-Union tunnel under FP. Plus covering the depressed section and getting ride of raised parts of 70 to reconnect Old North and the riverfront. All of these are better ideas.

Most of the 70 3rd lane would happen outside the MoDOT-St.Louis District, so its not the same money.

onecity wrote:The only challenge I ever have heading west on I-70 is State Patrol presence limiting my speed around Boonville and west of Concordia.

The money spent on an additional lane is money that could be better spent building viaducts at 21st, Ewing, Thurman/Sarah, Spring, Edwin-SLU, Marconi-Manchester, Dale-Tamm, etc., and maybe a Hampton-Union tunnel under FP. Plus covering the depressed section and getting ride of raised parts of 70 to reconnect Old North and the riverfront. All of these are better ideas.

Wish I-64 was a tunnel through FP (or not built at all). It's so noisy.

Ill be at the CMT annual meeting/lunch tomorrow, i think the MoDOT director is one of the speakers. Should be interesting to hear what their plan is going forward, also Mayor Slay is speaking

dbInSouthCity wrote:

Kevin B wrote: I-70, with maintenance, provides what is needed.

problem is it cannot be maintained anymore, its 60 year old road designed for 20 years...sure the driving surface looks nice but its like putting a bandaid on a broken bone. adding a 3rd lane would be part of that rebuild and can be done within the existing right of way.

I was thinking. If you do need a complete rebuild of the highway, how much more costwise is an extra lane each way at the same time? I would picture the marginal cost wouldn't be all that much as a percentage of overall cost.

I think the issue is not sprawl so much as truck traffic on a lot of rural highways. There is also a number of highways that need improvements due to safety concerns.

Wonder if another thing related to cross-state travel is look at rail infrastructure too. If that could be rebuilt for a better rail line for higher passenger and freight train speeds and loads.

Are there other rural stretches of 70 that are 6 lane divided? What about other midwestern interstates?