So we're talking about a whole new streetcar system, rather than a Metro Link expansion?
So we're talking about a whole new streetcar system, rather than a Metro Link expansion?
- 9,563
City needs to be careful about naming phases, naming stations and routes before that study that is figuring that out is finished. Can't have it look pre determined outcome to influence the sales tax vote... Reality is we dont know until May 2018 that the route is, where the stations will be and preferred alt could be "no build" (rare) So if they push this sales tax vote for April we are voting blind or at best voting with a 30,000 foot view.
If it were up to me if I were running the study, I would not mention any stations along the route or ideas for a little bit while research is done. Although the taxpayers of the City want to see the route before construction begins, it may not happen this year. On another note, Alderman Conway said on Channel 2 tonight that he believes that the public is much more open to supporting a Soccer Stadium then Metro Expansion. If I could debate him, I would present the following argumentdbInSouthCity wrote:City needs to be careful about naming phases, naming stations and routes before that study that is figuring that out is finished. Can't have it look pre determined outcome to influence the sales tax vote... Reality is we dont know until May 2018 that the route is, where the stations will be and preferred alt could be "no build" (rare) So if they push this sales tax vote for April we are voting blind or at best voting with a 30,000 foot view.
1. Public Transportation helps grow and heal blighted neighborhoods
2. Transit brings people together and get them there faster
3. The new N/S line could help rebuild the inner city and change our national perception.
I see your point, but is this study really going to tell us anything very different from previous studies? The highest population density is between Jefferson and Grand, the largest employment density is downtown, the highest percentage users of transit is all parts of the city, but North City especially. This line connects all those. Why would this study come to a different conclusion?City needs to be careful about naming phases, naming stations and routes before that study that is figuring that out is finished. Can't have it look pre determined outcome to influence the sales tax vote... Reality is we dont know until May 2018 that the route is, where the stations will be and preferred alt could be "no build" (rare) So if they push this sales tax vote for April we are voting blind or at best voting with a 30,000 foot view.
- 9,563
This might be getting into the weeds but why is nobody talking about how will operations be funded. We can raise this $300M bonding capacity via this sales tax hike in April but before the feds hand over the other $300 M to build this 7.8 mile lane they'll want to see 30 years of reasonably expected revenue to operate the line.
to operate the current 46 miles its about $85M a year, this new 7.8 would cost about $15m a year or $450,000,000 over 30 years. Now some will be recovered at the fare box (maybe 25%) but i would imagine 75% or more of that will be from current bus users along the route....so really Metro isn't recovering anything its just shifting revenue from bus to metro.
from the few transit planners ive talked to (local and federal) only thing that makes sense is BRT in the North and light rail in the south.
to operate the current 46 miles its about $85M a year, this new 7.8 would cost about $15m a year or $450,000,000 over 30 years. Now some will be recovered at the fare box (maybe 25%) but i would imagine 75% or more of that will be from current bus users along the route....so really Metro isn't recovering anything its just shifting revenue from bus to metro.
from the few transit planners ive talked to (local and federal) only thing that makes sense is BRT in the North and light rail in the south.
Isn't metrolink cheaper to operate then bus service? I doubt it would eliminate that much overlap but that would be a concern as well. Keep raising the sales tax can't always be the answer
It would help to live in a state that supported public transit a bit.
Any chance that right-to-work will help drop operating costs of Metro? Seems like the system is very expensive to run. Sales tax is already high in the city.
- 3,762
If the NGA alternative happens, I'd rather they just run in straight down Jefferson with a transfer station over the existing red/blue line rather than go to the trouble of going downtown.the dark orange is the NGA alternative, which would run down Delmar I believe before heading up Jefferson... wasn't at the hearing, but it sounded like this may be in greater favor now than the original 14th St/NoFlo plan for running out of downtown.
- 1,868
No, and even if it did reduce costs it would do so by reducing local wages, which would run counter to the purpose of pro-prosperity policy in the first place.
Believe Twin Cities newest line is still light rail with street running down university ave between St. Paul and Minneapolis but still physical ties in with original light rail line in downtown Minneapolis. The next proposed expansion heads from existing tracks in downtown Minneapolis to the southwest suburbs.
Someone can correct me but believe N-S has always been proposed as separate stand alone with no real connection to existing tracks. I believe their is capacity issues to connect to existing rail in downtown as well as real cost to bring it back above ground in the north city.
I still think it would be possible to have city streetcar with a future BRT coming in from the county utilizing the same RoW. You could even favor street car routing for NGIA and BRT on original proposal. Or maybe look at it as street from south city extending to NGIA with BRT from North into downtown.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 19, 2017This might be getting into the weeds but why is nobody talking about how will operations be funded. We can raise this $300M bonding capacity via this sales tax hike in April but before the feds hand over the other $300 M to build this 7.8 mile lane they'll want to see 30 years of reasonably expected revenue to operate the line.
to operate the current 46 miles its about $85M a year, this new 7.8 would cost about $15m a year or $450,000,000 over 30 years. Now some will be recovered at the fare box (maybe 25%) but i would imagine 75% or more of that will be from current bus users along the route....so really Metro isn't recovering anything its just shifting revenue from bus to metro.
from the few transit planners ive talked to (local and federal) only thing that makes sense is BRT in the North and light rail in the south.
Looks like a "Cortex Completion 2018" on the map. Can't come soon enough.
Didn't realize until now that Skinker & Delmar stations will actually be closer together than Cortex & CWE Stations.
Didn't realize until now that Skinker & Delmar stations will actually be closer together than Cortex & CWE Stations.
Pro-prosperity? Here I thought the purpose of metro was to make it easier for people to get around. Through car independence, and a much healthier lifestyle, I can see prosperity being created but I don't think that is what you meant. I certainly, and hope that our politicians, don't want tax dollars to be wasted so someone gets a job with no purpose, especially when they need to expand and lack the funds.MarkHaversham wrote: ↑Jan 19, 2017No, and even if it did reduce costs it would do so by reducing local wages, which would run counter to the purpose of pro-prosperity policy in the first place.
I think it is possible to create a system that is self sufficient and doesn't need tax dollars to function. St Louis will never catch up with the bigger cities if it tries to imitate programs that don't work.
Routing down Jefferson past downtown rather than 14th (or somewhere else through downtown) would be a mistake.
Who's riding it in that area of Jefferson west of downtown? There's barely anything there but parking lots and suburban-style offices. Nobody is walking there. Few of the workers at places like Wells Fargo would even find it convenient to ride, due to living out in the sprawl somewhere.
Down 14th, past many more attractions, housing, existing (and soon-to-be-refurbished) bus transfer center seems far, far better. Routing on Jefferson through the non-downtown portions of the route would be fine, but it'd be a giant waste to rout it through the sprawl west of downtown.
Who's riding it in that area of Jefferson west of downtown? There's barely anything there but parking lots and suburban-style offices. Nobody is walking there. Few of the workers at places like Wells Fargo would even find it convenient to ride, due to living out in the sprawl somewhere.
Down 14th, past many more attractions, housing, existing (and soon-to-be-refurbished) bus transfer center seems far, far better. Routing on Jefferson through the non-downtown portions of the route would be fine, but it'd be a giant waste to rout it through the sprawl west of downtown.
I agree, I think going down Delmar is stupid though. I would much rather see it go down Olive to 14th st before turning south.eee123 wrote: ↑Jan 20, 2017Routing down Jefferson past downtown rather than 14th (or somewhere else through downtown) would be a mistake.
Who's riding it in that area of Jefferson west of downtown? There's barely anything there but parking lots and suburban-style offices. Nobody is walking there. Few of the workers at places like Wells Fargo would even find it convenient to ride, due to living out in the sprawl somewhere.
Down 14th, past many more attractions, housing, existing (and soon-to-be-refurbished) bus transfer center seems far, far better. Routing on Jefferson through the non-downtown portions of the route would be fine, but it'd be a giant waste to rout it through the sprawl west of downtown.
^^If that's the case, then just create a transfer at Jefferson above the existing Metrolink for those that want to go downtown. Making all of those turns down Chouteau, 14th, 9th/10th, Delmar, and back to Jefferson adds a lot of time. I think it would be faster to have a transfer at Jefferson. People want transit to be fast and frequent. Additionally you cut construction costs of the new line by removing about 3 miles of new rail.
- 2,430
^ that would makes things simpler and you'd also hit East Midtown/West Downtown West better. But it would require a new Grand Ave-style Metrolink station/platform with elevators/stairs up to Jefferson so there'd be some considerable cost with that. And you'd miss more coverage of Lafayette Square and Peabody D-W, etc, But it could be worth looking at.
It certainly wouldn't be a cheap transfer. What is a good guess on cost? $50 million? The Boyle stop is either $10 or $20 million. Say the N/S metrolink is $50 million a mile. That seems like a conservatively cheap number. That's roughly $150 million you can cut out. I can't imagine a transfer like Grand would hit that number.
- 1,868
How many transportation systems in the world can you name that don't use tax dollars?
- 9,563
^ few
In STL the best performing line (grand) loses 50 cents per rider. Systemwide average is about $4.50 lose per trip taken. Unless metro wants to charge $6 per trip it will never come to a point where its not subsidizing rides. But that's ok, it doesn't have to make a profit or even come close to break even
In STL the best performing line (grand) loses 50 cents per rider. Systemwide average is about $4.50 lose per trip taken. Unless metro wants to charge $6 per trip it will never come to a point where its not subsidizing rides. But that's ok, it doesn't have to make a profit or even come close to break even
Why is that okay? Build it as a car alternative and charge the price that we need to make it run. Develop it enough to cover the city and inner suburbs to draw enough annual users and then later figure out how to make it more affordable to others. Stop selling it as an aid for the poor. The government can help with construction costs but it should be sustainable on its own.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 21, 2017^ few
In STL the best performing line (grand) loses 50 cents per rider. Systemwide average is about $4.50 lose per trip taken. Unless metro wants to charge $6 per trip it will never come to a point where its not subsidizing rides. But that's ok, it doesn't have to make a profit or even come close to break even
I'm all for expansion but half-assing another line is just a waste.
^ You do know that recent reports have calculated that the taxes and fees drivers pay only amount to about 50% of the cost to maintain road & highway infrastructure?
The Ridership vs Coverage Problem - Human TransitDevelop it enough to cover the city and inner suburbs to draw enough annual users and then later figure out how to make it more affordable to others.