urbanSTL

So Residents of the city were voting in favor of possible extension of Metro Link might not get what they were voting for and voted against a new soccer stadium which likely would have been a sure given of immediate construction and a sure bet on getting an MLS team ? This is infuriating !
So now not only you aren't getting a team but you aren't going be guaranteed metro link extension which would need some federal assistance which isn't a promise ?.
Instead of Metro Link extension how about a rather extensive street car its not as fast however its dependable and still gets people where they need to be and will further accelerate revitalization in neighborhoods it traverse through .
I truly hope this works in the city's favor if not such missed opportunities! St.Louis is much better than this.

I believe if the county buys in we could relatively easily get a much longer line that stretches into the county, but that would require regionalism. I don't know if Stenger would sign on, even though he has said he would go with whatever line EWGateway said is the best.

St.Louis1764 wrote: ↑

Apr 08, 2017

So Residents of the city were voting in favor of possible extension of Metro Link might not get what they were voting for and voted against a new soccer stadium which likely would have been a sure given of immediate construction and a sure bet on getting an MLS team ? This is infuriating !
So now not only you aren't getting a team but you aren't going be guaranteed metro link extension which would need some federal assistance which isn't a promise ?.
Instead of Metro Link extension how about a rather extensive street car its not as fast however its dependable and still gets people where they need to be and will further accelerate revitalization in neighborhoods it traverse through .
I truly hope this works in the city's favor if not such missed opportunities! St.Louis is much better than this.

Did voters view the expansion and MLS as two mutually exclusive options?

I thought the N-S line was already a street car.

St.Louis1764 wrote: ↑

Apr 08, 2017

So Residents of the city were voting in favor of possible extension of Metro Link might not get what they were voting for and voted against a new soccer stadium which likely would have been a sure given of immediate construction and a sure bet on getting an MLS team ?

i'm pretty sure the ballot didn't say "if you vote for prop 1 you're for sure gonna get a Metrolink extension right away."

i'm also pretty sure it didn't say "if you vote for prop 1 you can't vote for prop 2."

County selected consultant for MetroLink Study

Posted 04/19/2017 by Kim Cella

Map of Existing Light Rail Routes and Expansion Routes to be Studied



The team led by WSP-Parsons Brinckerhoff was selected as the consultant for the Metrolink Preliminary Conceptual Study in St. Louis County. St. Louis County is in the process of initiating the scope and fee negotiation process with the consultant. The County’s goal is to be underway with the study by July 1st. The team consists of :

WSP Parsons Brinckerhoff
AECOM
Kivindyo Engineering
Vector Communications
M3
RSG
David Mason & Associates
The study will examine three corridors in St. Louis County – including the portion of the Northside/Southside Corridor that falls within the County’s boundaries – with the technical support of the East-West Gateway Council of Governments.

The 12 month study will examine MetroNorth – which was expanded in November to include the northern portion of the original Northside/Southside corridor not included in the City study, and the area west to the MetroNorth corridor including Ferguson; Daniel Boone – west from Clayton to Westport; and MetroSouth – south from Shrewsbury to I-55 and following I-55 down to Butler Hill. The MetroNorth expanded route falls within the St. Louis Promise Zone, as does most of the Northside/Southside route falling north of Downtown. HUD awarded nearly a $30 million Choice Neighborhood grant to redevelop the near-North Side neighborhoods.

MetroNorth – Preliminary studies on this corridor go back to 1995. This corridor will undergo a feasibility study as a part of the RFQ process. Route examined under RFQ: original MetroNorth Corridor from at/near North Hanley Station up to close to I-270, as well as expanding that route along 270 east to the northernmost portion of the Northside/Southside route down to the City border at Goodfellow and I-70. This area will traverse Ferguson and the area designated the Promise Zone.
Daniel Boone – Route examined under RFQ: specific route has already been identified in previous study. RFQ will collect further information.
MetroSouth – Environmental impact study done in 2005, supported from then County Executive Charlie Dooley and Congressman Gephardt. Route examined under RFQ: specific MetroSouth route already identified in previous study, and original section of Northside/Southside extending south beyond Bayless at I-55 down to Butler Hill at I-55. RFQ will collect further information.
A consulting team led by AECOM is actively looking at the Northside/Southside Study in the City of St. Louis. This 18 month study began in January and is examining a portion of the route known as the Northside/Southside that runs through Downtown St. Louis, extends north along 14th Street, North Florissant, and Natural Bridge to near I-70 at Goodfellow Boulevard, and from Downtown south along Jefferson Avenue slightly past the City limits to Bayless Road at I-55. The study will also identify and analyze an alternative to the Northside Locally Preferred Alternative alignment that would serve the new NGA site.

Both studies are projected to wrap up in the summer of 2018. The East-West Gateway Board of Directors determines the priority transit projects for the region to move forward.

http://cmt-stl.org/county-selected-cons ... ink-study/

Megan Barry appears to be pushing for a system in Nashville now

http://www.nashvillepost.com/politics/m ... il-project

Last reporting was construction starting summer 2017 for completion in 2018.

The Future of Cities Depends on Public Transit
https://blog.remix.com/the-future-of-ci ... ee70d476df

Activity at the Cortex metrolink station site: The pissoir that was lying on its side for months is gone!

Groundbreaking next month.

danke0 wrote: ↑

May 11, 2017

Activity at the Cortex metrolink station site: The pissoir that was lying on its side for months is gone!

danke0 wrote: ↑

May 11, 2017

Activity at the Cortex metrolink station site: The pissoir that was lying on its side for months is gone!

Good, I hate public urinaters.

I wonder why there hasn't been more interest in the Southside route on this map. Looking at the train line there, it appears to only be utilized by one business (Kop-Coat on Southwest). It seems like it would take minimal effort to turn it into a metro line that just connects to the existing system at the Grand station. At the south end it could connect right to the N/S line. For the minimal effort it would take (Especially compared to a street based system) it would pay huge dividends and connect a lot of great neighborhoods to MetroLink. Plus the warehouses that surround the tracks would eventually make a great spot for some dense TOD through the heart of South CIty.

GoHarvOrGoHome wrote:I wonder why there hasn't been more interest in the Southside route on this map. Looking at the train line there, it appears to only be utilized by one business (Kop-Coat on Southwest).

I agree with you, but I believe Amtrak also uses it for the Texas Eagle Route. I may be wrong.

There are options to widen the easement enough to also add MetroLink.

This route would have incredible success.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

^ I think the N-S light rail routing along the rail line also leaves open the option of city only modern low floor streetcar alignment along Jefferson Ave tying south city, west downtown/Wells Fargo Securities with NGA/Pruit Site that could happen before, during or after N-S. The only downfall is that it wouldn't have good connection with current metrolink spine line as you would have with say a Grand Ave streetcar without adding a metrolink station in the mix as well.

GoHarvOrGoHome wrote: ↑

Dec 07, 2017

I wonder why there hasn't been more interest in the Southside route on this map. Looking at the train line there, it appears to only be utilized by one business (Kop-Coat on Southwest).

There's more use for a line than simply switching industries. While the Oak Hill line isn't busy, the traffic on the line has been increasing, and I think UP is glad to have it as a bypass to get around the busy industrial lead along the riverfront. Further, if you're planning to head east across the river that line gives much better access to the MacArthur, and thus the A&S Gateway and Dupo. The south approach the bridge is really too steep to take anything of any size up without a helper, which is a non-starter now, so the riverfront line is really only useful if you're terminating at Lesperance, 12th Street, or heading west. I suspect UP would use it more if there weren't clearance issues. (It won't clear double stacks or auto racks, for instance.) That said, there's plenty of space there for Metrolink and UP. Most of that line had four tracks at one time: two mains and two switching leads. But I don't think UP is giving it up, no matter how quiet it might appear to the casual observer. It's simply too useful. (And with some clearance work it could be much more useful still.)

I go back and forth between that southside route and Jefferson. Jefferson would serve an area with more need and would connect a lot of people. But I don't see why the same can't be down with buses on dedicated ROW and save a ton of money.

I think it would be great to see the Southside route using Metrolink and then upgrade the bus system in the city to operate more like BRT. So the Red/Blue line and that N/S line using the southside route becomes a rail backbone. Then you complement that (mostly in the city) with dedicated bus lanes on the large streets, up their frequency, reduce the amount of stops, use off board fare purchase. I think that would allow our recent transit tax pass to go a lot farther. Upgrade those BRT routes to streetcars if capacity grows that much, which won't be for a long time.

I just think that we would be able to work with Union Pacific, give them everything they want and more for the route, and build the line for an order of magnitude cheaper than ripping up the streets for a N/S line. The N/S may benefit the city more, but the Southside alignment would still bring a lot of benefit for significantly less investment. Maybe I'm just a wishful thinker but this just seems to make too much sense to not at least discuss it. Especially if what you say about the easement being four tracks wide is true.

I agree that it makes a lot more sense to try to run the Metro along its own alignment instead of in the street. The on time performance of the blue line in my experience is excellent. I would say the train has been more than one minute late less than ten times in my 4 years of daily riding. This is possible ONLY because the train does not have to run along with auto traffic. Once you put it in the street, it just takes one moron to park on the tracks and ruin everyone's day. That map looks great to me. I don't have much hope of UP playing along with anything, but who knows?

danke0 wrote:I agree that it makes a lot more sense to try to run the Metro along its own alignment instead of in the street. The on time performance of the blue line in my experience is excellent. I would say the train has been more than one minute late less than ten times in my 4 years of daily riding. This is possible ONLY because the train does not have to run along with auto traffic. Once you put it in the street, it just takes one moron to park on the tracks and ruin everyone's day. That map looks great to me. I don't have much hope of UP playing along with anything, but who knows?

The proposed alignment of N/S is dedicated and separated lanes. The only delay should come from traffic lights, which can be timed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Shhh! Now we'll have to restart the third 10-year study on the feasibility!

addxb2 wrote: ↑

Dec 08, 2017

danke0 wrote:I agree that it makes a lot more sense to try to run the Metro along its own alignment instead of in the street. The on time performance of the blue line in my experience is excellent. I would say the train has been more than one minute late less than ten times in my 4 years of daily riding. This is possible ONLY because the train does not have to run along with auto traffic. Once you put it in the street, it just takes one moron to park on the tracks and ruin everyone's day. That map looks great to me. I don't have much hope of UP playing along with anything, but who knows?

The proposed alignment of N/S is dedicated and separated lanes. The only delay should come from traffic lights, which can be timed.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Oh! That's fantastic. The lights can give the trains priority then. Sweet.

I have no confidence that this will be built. People working on Project Connect say they’re totally ignoring metrolink expansion as part of their plan

dbInSouthCity wrote:I have no confidence that this will be built. People working on Project Connect say they’re totally ignoring metrolink expansion as part of their plan

Because of a lack of public match monies?