* this varies, for example for the city of STL, while it gets about $14M from car driver fees idk how much it actual spends on roads and how much from general revenue. For MO state maintained system- 100% of state revenue is from users and of the fed $ 75% is from users and rest from GR but if 15% of gas tax didnt fund the federal transit account there wouldnt be a need to supplement the Highway account with GR monies.mill204 wrote: ↑Jan 23, 2017^ 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.
- 9,564
$14M wouldn't even cover 1/4 of just basic resurfacing in the city. Missouri receives about $1.17 for every dollar in federal gas tax so the state is already being subsidized by the Fed Gov as is. You're also leaving out how much each municipality spends on roads as well so it's not revenue neutral for our streets.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 23, 2017* this varies, for example for the city of STL, while it gets about $14M from car driver fees idk how much it actual spends on roads and how much from general revenue. For MO state maintained system- 100% of state revenue is from users and of the fed $ 75% is from users and rest from GR but if 15% of gas tax didnt fund the federal transit account there wouldnt be a need to supplement the Highway account with GR monies.mill204 wrote: ↑Jan 23, 2017^ 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.
- 1,868
You're also counting taxes as user fees for roads, while ignoring taxes paid by Metrolink riders. Not really apples to apples.joelo wrote: ↑Jan 24, 2017$14M wouldn't even cover 1/4 of just basic resurfacing in the city. Missouri receives about $1.17 for every dollar in federal gas tax so the state is already being subsidized by the Fed Gov as is. You're also leaving out how much each municipality spends on roads as well so it's not revenue neutral for our streets.dbInSouthCity wrote: ↑Jan 23, 2017* this varies, for example for the city of STL, while it gets about $14M from car driver fees idk how much it actual spends on roads and how much from general revenue. For MO state maintained system- 100% of state revenue is from users and of the fed $ 75% is from users and rest from GR but if 15% of gas tax didnt fund the federal transit account there wouldnt be a need to supplement the Highway account with GR monies.mill204 wrote: ↑Jan 23, 2017^ 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 Transit
- 9,564
City spends $5M a year on resurfacing....i know, its sad.joelo wrote: ↑Jan 24, 2017
$14M wouldn't even cover 1/4 of just basic resurfacing in the city. Missouri receives about $1.17 for every dollar in federal gas tax so the state is already being subsidized by the Fed Gov as is. You're also leaving out how much each municipality spends on roads as well so it's not revenue neutral for our streets.
Page 6
https://www.stlouis-mo.gov/government/d ... uide-1.pdf
Fed gas tax pays for federal roads in MO, like interstates and national highway system roads...that isnt subsidizing, its user fee paying the road the said user used. and the .17 extra cents MO may get makes up for all the out of state travel that passes on 44 and 70.
- 3,432
I've been plotting St. Louis metro data by zip code and thought this looked interesting. I put two plots roughly related to commuting on the same plot even though they are not technically related. The brown dots show percent of people in these zip codes that use public transportation. The blue dots show the average commute times for these zip codes. Both are plotted against as-the-crow-flies zip code distance from St. Louis City Hall on both sides of the river.
In one zip code in the city nearly 25% of the population use public transportation.
In one zip code 45 miles out, average commute time is nearly 50 minutes.
![]()
St. Louis Metro Public Transportation & Commute Times by Gary Kreie, on Flickr
In one zip code in the city nearly 25% of the population use public transportation.
In one zip code 45 miles out, average commute time is nearly 50 minutes.
St. Louis Metro Public Transportation & Commute Times by Gary Kreie, on Flickr$120/mile now? I have a hard time believing this thing will ever see the light of day, without county support. I think we will end up with possibly a streetcar with BRT overlay. County will build Westport and that will be it for rail expansion in the city.
link: http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/st-louis ... /414145646
link: http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/st-louis ... /414145646
For the city I don't see how that would be a bad outcome. It is already being proposed as a street running system within the city, N-S is also being proposed as being independent of current metrolink line and if actually built as a bigger modern street car system it might be cheaper.goat314 wrote: ↑Feb 25, 2017$120/mile now? I have a hard time believing this thing will ever see the light of day, without county support. I think we will end up with possibly a streetcar with BRT overlay. County will build Westport and that will be it for rail expansion in the city.
link: http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/st-louis ... /414145646
As far as county, my two cents is extend Shrewsbury down the Des Peres to I-55 before building Westport built doubt that will happen.
- 3,432
^ To what end, though? To increase ridership? Even Metro has said that Metrolink has the effect of pulling non transit riders out of their cars. Of what benefit is building a train system to offset people who already ride buses?
What are they using golden tracks? There is no reason for it to cost this much. Could we have a national tender for construction? I think that if they were really trying to get this done they could build it for way less. We already get everything from China, let them build it.goat314 wrote: ↑Feb 25, 2017$120/mile now? I have a hard time believing this thing will ever see the light of day, without county support. I think we will end up with possibly a streetcar with BRT overlay. County will build Westport and that will be it for rail expansion in the city.
link: http://www.ksdk.com/news/local/st-louis ... /414145646
Makes sense to me to enhance service where it's already popular rather than take a big leap where it's not popular and hope it's embraced.
For example let's double the bus frequency, give signal priority, and improve bus stops on the proposed streetcar route near term (mainly the #10 bus), see if ridership grows. If it does it'll help justify the proposed streetcar.
I think it's less risky.
- 3,432
Interesting question. We spent a lot of money building a line to Clayton, but this shows not many Clayton residents use it. Of course, it doesn't show how many people who live in other zip codes use metrolink to get to work in Clayton. I just think that if there are a lot of folks in a zip code who do not have access to a first or second car to get to work, we could almost guarantee high use and high ridership if we put the lines in those zip codes and make their commute a little faster and better.
To me the other question concerns development. I think their is a legitimate argument that some form of fixed transit will give you development and denser development if you embrace it where as buses will give ridership but not the development. That's where I see benefit of N-S streetcar in city and why N-S into the county not so much because county has shown no desire to push for the type of development that you should expect for fixed transit. Heck, the Sunnen thread in the county is a great example of why any additional light rail development in the county should be very limited.quincunx wrote: ↑Feb 27, 2017Makes sense to me to enhance service where it's already popular rather than take a big leap where it's not popular and hope it's embraced.
For example let's double the bus frequency, give signal priority, and improve bus stops on the proposed streetcar route near term (mainly the #10 bus), see if ridership grows. If it does it'll help justify the proposed streetcar.
I think it's less risky.
- 6,123
I can't believe everyone within the N/S footprint rides transit. In fact, I can guarantee that they don't, as I live in the footprint and don't generally ride busses. (But I do ride Metrolink from time to time to get Downtown or to Clayton. Just . . . not so much the #10 bus that could logically get me to Metrolink.) So the reason this makes sense to me is severalfold: The established ridership and demonstrable demand are only the first part. The second is that it could grow ridership. Possibly quite a bit.
. . .gary kreie wrote: ↑Feb 26, 2017These two graphics shows why the St. Louis region needs to build the North - South Metrolink line
Say Gary, would you want to do a graph that makes it obvious at a glance what that percentage actually is, and not just where it's highest? That could help to illuminate how much growth potential is there. (And I'm guessing it's quite a bit.)
And the third part of the justification is pretty much what dredger was driving at: it will encourage development. N/S goes through a mix of fairly classic urban neighborhoods. It could help to stabilize those that are struggling and bring new development to those that are hardest hit. There's a risk that it will bring some gentrification, but I think most of us can live with that. And it goes through a wide enough swath that I don't see it taking the whole thing out of the realm of the affordable anytime soon.
- 3,432
Actually, in the top map with blue bars, I labelled one of them. It's not obvious but the one with a label has a number at the end of 0.22. That means 22% of the people who live in that zip code take public transportation to work. The other bars around it are similar. I haven't found a good way to show percent numbers on every bar in XL Maps without cluttering up the whole thing. But here is a scatter plot of the zip codes in the City and County closest to city hall out to where all the rest in the county have only single digit use of public transportation. There is only one County zip code with double digit ridership, 63133. Is this what you had in mind?
![]()
Can you try highlighting the City zips a different color and see how they fall? Looks like they might all land onthe lower percentage.
- 131
According to this website, Earth City's zip code has three residents: http://www.unitedstateszipcodes.org/63045/
Edit: But 63102 has a large industrial area not unlike Earth City. And it has many more residents who may not need to drive to work: http://www.unitedstateszipcodes.org/63102/
Edit: But 63102 has a large industrial area not unlike Earth City. And it has many more residents who may not need to drive to work: http://www.unitedstateszipcodes.org/63102/
- 6,123
I suppose what I'm thinking would require either multiple bars, which could indeed get cluttered, or an entirely different kind of map, which might not be possible with XL. (Not familiar with the software in question, unless you mean Microsoft XL. And if that's what you mean . . . I am impressed. Wouldn't have thought you could do that with ye olde spreadsheet.) Anyway, that does make it clear that there is indeed a great deal of room for expansion. 89% of folks in my own N/S accessible zip use other means. That's a lot of folks that could potentially be enticed onto the train.
- 3,432
Take a look at this plot. It shows per cent within each zip code that take public transportation to work (purple) and per cent that DO NOT drive a car to work (blue). So the difference is people who work from home (which I assume includes farmers), and people walk to work, and people who bike to work. Notice how many people who live in Grafton do not drive to work.
![]()
Here are a couple more with 4 modes of transportation to work in stacked bars. Car, Public Trans, Walk/Bike, Work at Home. The first shows per cent in each zip code stacked, so the total alway adds to 100%. The second shows those percentages multiplied by the zip code population to show counts of people in each transportation category. As you can see, the car dominates all transportation to work in general.
![]()
![]()
- 6,123
Thank you! 
It does indeed make it apparent that there's a lot of room to expand everywhere.
It does indeed make it apparent that there's a lot of room to expand everywhere.If anyone knows there the Brentwood MetroBus Facility is, I was just by there and saw a new bus that I guess we are going to have our on the roads soon. It is on the Marshall Road side of the building and looks weird. It says Battery Powered Bus.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk