urbanSTL

STL526 wrote: ↑

Jan 17, 2018

No, you're right. It seems like that is the standard for most rapid transit/subway systems, though I can't imagine why. Although last time I was in NYC, I could have sworn all the trains that I took had longitudinal seats... Maybe I'm just mixing up my NYC Subway experiences with the Tube.

I haven't been on a NYC subway in about 10 years so I will fully admit I could be remembering that one wrong (or I guess they could have changed).

I just googled NYC subway and at least some of the cars seem to be longitudinal now. So you are probably right about those.

In NYC the vast majority of train cars only have seats running along the length/side of the train facing inwards. Only a couple lines - the B and D - have a sort of hybrid approach where some seats face forward/back and some are along the length/side facing inward.

Getting back to Metrolink. I recently came across this very early - and amateurish and inaccurate - Metrolink poster from 1988 or '89. Perhaps part of some early presentation or awareness campaign(??). Anyways, it's an interesting oddity. One of the many random elements I like is how much emphasis there was on getting to the mall back then. That continued a bit with Cross County and the Galleria, but I feel like today no one - including County dwellers - gives two s**ts about getting to a mall. It's also interesting that they (whomever it was) were already thinking about a (much discussed on this forum) Union Pacific-De Soto line expansion. It's also funny to consider a St. Charles County extension was even envisioned. Perhaps at that early stage there were some more opens minds across the Missouri about what the system could be.

MetroLink could someday run west to Franklin County under proposal

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... the-latest

Apparently Franklin County wants to be part of Bi-State. What I find interesting is that the past few years representatives from outlying counties (Jefferson and Franklin) have talked about one day wanting Metrolink and Bus service, yet Stenger can't even agree to Metrolink expansion in the county and St. Charles is still using the racially coded talking points from the 1990s. What's going on?

^^This story struck me as somewhat absurd. I just don't see the average rural MO resident in a county that voted overwhelmingly for Trump to have any interest in passing a tax to finance a transit program. And that's not even taking into account the "city folk coming out to our area to cause crime" hysteria. Additionally, I can't imagine the cost/ridership ratio on laying Metrolink track all the way out to Franklin county.

goat314 wrote: ↑

Jan 24, 2018

MetroLink could someday run west to Franklin County under proposal

http://www.stltoday.com/news/local/govt ... the-latest

Apparently Franklin County wants to be part of Bi-State. What I find interesting is that the past few years representatives from outlying counties (Jefferson and Franklin) have talked about one day wanting Metrolink and Bus service, yet Stenger can't even agree to Metrolink expansion in the county and St. Charles is still using the racially coded talking points from the 1990s. What's going on?

My guess has to do with the people who moved to Franklin and Jefferson Counties have a different reason and situation than St. Charles County. Mainly of those who moved in it was not white flight and was either spillover from South County or people who have lived there all their lives. Also geography and distance could be a role, the areas people fear are much further away from Jefferson and Franklin counties.

Also this would really help push for commuter rail to complement Metro and it seems Pacific is keen on doing that, possibly could be tied to improving their city center since a few towns in Franklin County, particularly Washington has been working on infill development and densification of their downtown areas with a lot of 3-5 story mixed use development.

I think some members of the Franklin County Board has also mentioned putting up to a vote joining Zoo-Museum district since they think it could pass in part due to Shaws Garden already there and possibly raise money for local institutions or annexes to city ones. Likely other regional things could also be looked at like expanding Great Rivers Greenway district since expanding it South and West would allow possibility of trails tying the urban areas to the rural and hilly lands.

San Luis Native wrote: ↑

Jan 24, 2018

^^This story struck me as somewhat absurd. I just don't see the average rural MO resident in a county that voted overwhelmingly for Trump to have any interest in passing a tax to finance a transit program. And that's not even taking into account the "city folk coming out to our area to cause crime" hysteria. Additionally, I can't imagine the cost/ridership ratio on laying Metrolink track all the way out to Franklin county.

Seems like sloppy writing and assumptions, since they assumed Metrolink when its obviously not feasable for many reasons. Commuter rail would be more viable and cheaper options, especially when the tracks are already lined up well for it.

imperialmog wrote: ↑

Jan 24, 2018

Seems like sloppy writing and assumptions, since they assumed Metrolink when its obviously not feasable for many reasons. Commuter rail would be more viable and cheaper options, especially when the tracks are already lined up well for it.

It's like saying "Under city/county merger plan, the Arch grounds could someday extend to Chesterfield."

Hey guys, I just wanted to add my two cents...

Bi-State Development currently represents the city of St. Louis and Madison, St. Clair, Monroe, Jefferson, St. Louis and St. Charles Counties. (Video:

Of those counties, only three -- St. Louis city, St. Louis County and St. Clair County -- have public transportation contracts with Metro. Counties like Madison and St. Charles have their own public transportation systems.

If Franklin County is approved to be a part of Bi-State Development, it would be up to the people of Franklin County to decide who would operate their public transportation and what that would look like.

Trump's new Infrastructure "Plan" is to divert the 200 billion the federal government will use for bridges and roads from public transit. That's what we need more cars that are causing much of the problem!

The Trump Infrastructure Plan Just Might Have One Good Idea for Cities
https://slate.com/business/2018/02/trum ... -good.html

China builds new railway station in nine hours.

in china this is possible because its considered a successful job if only 5 people die on it...

Falling transit ridership poses an ‘emergency’ for cities, experts fear
https://www.washingtonpost.com/local/tr ... b3b345c4dc

http://www.stltoday.com/news/traffic/al ... f6239.html

Wonder if this will hold the city up as well at all or speed things up?

Infuriating. Not surprising based on Stenger’s track record, but infuriating nonetheless.

Ridership is down year to year for 2017 in 31 of the 35 largest systems in the US....i think we have passed the "transit is sexy" time and its going to be a downhill fall for a while. car ownership is on the raise (again), people have other options like uber, lyft and others like it, there are bike shares, scooter shares and driver less cars are coming. At this point it would be financially irresponsible to spend 100's of millions to metrolink expansion.

I couldn’t disagree more. At this point I think it’d be irresponsible not to spend 100’s of millions on Metrolink expansion. It’s something that City and County voters have both supported. Hopefully Stegner gets some heat and fewer votes for his blatant foot dragging.

It's easy to forget that the system has seen some significant expansion in the last 20 years:

Illinois allocated $96 million for MetroLink expansion to MidAmerica.
https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/inf ... H59Td2e4Ds

addxb2 wrote:Illinois allocated $96 million for MetroLink expansion to MidAmerica.
https://www.masstransitmag.com/rail/inf ... H59Td2e4Ds

Seems like a pointless expansion. That airport isn’t that busy.

^I think $96 million would get you pretty close. It helps that this would be greenfield construction. The 2003 College to Shiloh-Scott extension was paid for with 80% Illinois funds and 20% St. Clair funds. I wouldn’t be surprised if this is a comparable match.