urbanSTL

sc4mayor wrote: ↑

Jun 12, 2020

No more East/West lines should be built in this region until North/South gets at least one.  That’s where the most density and the most people that don’t have access to a car are In St. Louis!!

A dedicated lane BRT with frequent headways along FPA/Market or Olive/Lindell with a loop in the CBD would accomplish what an east/west streetcar would for a fraction of the cost.

Agree with Sc4Mayor

I believe a fixed transit North/South investment would be much more beneficial to the city as whole as it might help extend central corridor investment into North City while anchoring South.   My two cents that it would a manageable 3-4 mile line for either 

1) Grand Ave
2) Jeff Ave/NGA
3) or simply build upon N-S metrolink alignment.  Use BRT to extend N-S into county.  
4) If that doesn't work, a Broadway streetcar connecting old North St Louis, East Downtown/Arch, Busch/BPV with near southside neighborhoods such as Soulard/Lemp Brewery  

Also, don't build a streetcar if you can't make it fare free.  It is a development tool just as much as transit so approach any streetcar the same way KC did.   Probably one of the biggest mistakes with Loop Trolley is not making it fare free.   Loop trolley is a tourist amenity and development not a meaningful transit option so it would do wonders if it could come back as fare free.

sc4mayor wrote: ↑

Oct 15, 2020

I was searching around for some maps of Vancouver's old streetcar lines and stumbled upon these today.  Was kind of surprised I hadn't seen them, my apologies if they've been posted here before.  Looks like they were made in mid/late 2019.  First one is a look at the city's various streetcar systems in 1897.  Second one is really interesting, I've never seen the city's 1926 rapid transit plan mapped out before.

Awesome. The interconnectivity of the city in 1897  

How much money has been wasted on metrolink/BRT/modern streetcar planning? Never again. You have the perfect blue print right here. 

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

By SeattleNative

NextSTL - Looking back on streetcars running through St. Louis’ west side

https://nextstl.com/2021/12/looking-bac ... west-side/

I’m sorry I know some people hate on the KC street car and claim it’s not real public transit but I have to admit it’s a great addition to the city. Why can’t we start looking at some of this. Seems significantly less expensive and in line with BRT costs.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think a streetcar system would do wonders for downtown & surrounding communities in the city I don’t see why we can’t do the same here as in KC Portland & other cities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

PlatinumBlues wrote: ↑

3:31 PM - Feb 07

I think a streetcar system would do wonders for downtown & surrounding communities in the city I don’t see why we can’t do the same here as in KC  Portland & other cities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know why they ran right to BRT when KC has a succesful streetcar across the state. We could have easily consulted with them to see how it's done. Was it because the Loop Trolley was a disaster, does streetcar have a bad name now?

KC builds two miles at a time through their central corridor. It’s the equivalent of STL building a streetcar down Olive. A taxing district down Olive with a match from the NS MetroLink fund could get it done quickly.

goat314 wrote:

PlatinumBlues wrote: ↑

3:31 PM - Feb 07

I think a streetcar system would do wonders for downtown & surrounding communities in the city I don’t see why we can’t do the same here as in KC  Portland & other cities.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I don't know why they ran right to BRT when KC has a succesful streetcar across the state. We could have easily consulted with them to see how it's done. Was it because the Loop Trolley was a disaster, does streetcar have a bad name now?

I agree with you. The loop trolly was never suppose to be some real form of transportation in the first place it was simply a failed gimmicky tourist trap thingy that pretty much just covered the loop so I’m not sure why it would have such a negative impact on pursuing a real street car system. I think the loop trolly failed because most people chose to save their money & walk the few blocks to get where they wanted to be. I thought It was cute but shouldn’t have never been allowed to move forward unless it became apart of a real bigger transportation system within the city-county. If the city ever wants to actually grow population & possibly see abandoned neighborhoods redeveloped I think the best form of transportation is definitely a streetcar system not to knock BRT I just don’t see that type of development happening with it. I just think what Cara has done is simply foolish & can really reduce her to a 1 term mayor I already have friends that voted for her upset about it so we’ll see..


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I wish they would look at a streetcar.
I’ve always thought Broadway would be a good option to connect downtown to Soulard as that would really benefit the appeal of downtown. An initial phase could get AB, Soulard Farmers Market, several music venues, Busch Stadium, Arch and Convention Center on an easy to use line for downtown visitors and tourists. You could extent south to grab Cherokee St and then west from the Convention Center on Wash Ave (or a couple blocks south on Olive) out to Grand Center theaters

I really wish they would take a look at an interconnecting streetcar, I think it would do more for infill development and attracting foot traffic

If they are so set on BRT

Supposedly Indianapolis is starting to push their legislature to end the rail ban so that they can also build a KC style system.

gone corporate wrote:

I've advocated for a while that we give a serious look at "trackless trams" that operate on rubber wheels and follow dash lines for either piloted or automated driving. 

A major consideration is that such things could be utilized to further "initial development" of a route with rails. For example, we could have something like this going up and down Jefferson, validating the Green Line before full construction of a streetcar-style light rail goes in. We could theoretically see the "trackless tram" operating on one part of the street while the streetcar infrastructure is constructed on the other. Afterwards, other routes could be considered and run on the "trackless tram" while political will and new capital are sourced; for example, the route for Soulard to Downtown that @Ragtimer mentioned in his post above. If that route gets validated, then the "trackless tram" gets moved again to another candidate route, then another and another, building up ride usage while streetcar routes are constructed. 

This could seriously create a full streetcar system in the City, building a user base while construction takes place, and earning revenues for Metro while it's making capital expenditures on new transportation infrastructure. 

Addn.: It's a hell of a lot cheaper. A route was completed in Jakarta that cost them about $4.5MM/kilometer, about $7.25/mile. 
How much was the Green Line anticipated to cost? $190MM/mile. This would lower costs by 96%. 

This is really no different than a true BRT line

Hmm, I'd rather have a brt trolleybus than a diesel trackless tram. A bus that looks like a tram, eh, i dont really think that's a big improvement but no gas fumes and better driving distance than battery powered buses would be a big plus imo

gone corporate wrote:

I've advocated for a while that we give a serious look at "trackless trams" that operate on rubber wheels and follow dash lines for either piloted or automated driving. 

A major consideration is that such things could be utilized to further "initial development" of a route with rails. For example, we could have something like this going up and down Jefferson, validating the Green Line before full construction of a streetcar-style light rail goes in. We could theoretically see the "trackless tram" operating on one part of the street while the streetcar infrastructure is constructed on the other. Afterwards, other routes could be considered and run on the "trackless tram" while political will and new capital are sourced; for example, the route for Soulard to Downtown that @Ragtimer mentioned in his post above. If that route gets validated, then the "trackless tram" gets moved again to another candidate route, then another and another, building up ride usage while streetcar routes are constructed. 

This could seriously create a full streetcar system in the City, building a user base while construction takes place, and earning revenues for Metro while it's making capital expenditures on new transportation infrastructure. 

Addn.: It's a hell of a lot cheaper. A route was completed in Jakarta that cost them about $4.5MM/kilometer, about $7.25/mile. 
How much was the Green Line anticipated to cost? $190MM/mile. This would lower costs by 96%. 

The median income in Jakarta is below Missouri's poverty line.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

gone corporate wrote: ↑

5:16 PM - Feb 26

I've advocated for a while that we give a serious look at "trackless trams" that operate on rubber wheels and follow dash lines for either piloted or automated driving. 

A major consideration is that such things could be utilized to further "initial development" of a route with rails. For example, we could have something like this going up and down Jefferson, validating the Green Line before full construction of a streetcar-style light rail goes in. We could theoretically see the "trackless tram" operating on one part of the street while the streetcar infrastructure is constructed on the other. Afterwards, other routes could be considered and run on the "trackless tram" while political will and new capital are sourced; for example, the route for Soulard to Downtown that @Ragtimer mentioned in his post above. If that route gets validated, then the "trackless tram" gets moved again to another candidate route, then another and another, building up ride usage while streetcar routes are constructed. 

This could seriously create a full streetcar system in the City, building a user base while construction takes place, and earning revenues for Metro while it's making capital expenditures on new transportation infrastructure. 

Addn.: It's a hell of a lot cheaper. A route was completed in Jakarta that cost them about $4.5MM/kilometer, about $7.25/mile. 
How much was the Green Line anticipated to cost? $190MM/mile. This would lower costs by 96%. 

I wouldnt't necessarily be opposed to this but has this been implemented in the US before? 

Ragtimer wrote:

gone corporate wrote: ↑

5:16 PM - Feb 26

I've advocated for a while that we give a serious look at "trackless trams" that operate on rubber wheels and follow dash lines for either piloted or automated driving. 

A major consideration is that such things could be utilized to further "initial development" of a route with rails. For example, we could have something like this going up and down Jefferson, validating the Green Line before full construction of a streetcar-style light rail goes in. We could theoretically see the "trackless tram" operating on one part of the street while the streetcar infrastructure is constructed on the other. Afterwards, other routes could be considered and run on the "trackless tram" while political will and new capital are sourced; for example, the route for Soulard to Downtown that @Ragtimer mentioned in his post above. If that route gets validated, then the "trackless tram" gets moved again to another candidate route, then another and another, building up ride usage while streetcar routes are constructed. 

This could seriously create a full streetcar system in the City, building a user base while construction takes place, and earning revenues for Metro while it's making capital expenditures on new transportation infrastructure. 

Addn.: It's a hell of a lot cheaper. A route was completed in Jakarta that cost them about $4.5MM/kilometer, about $7.25/mile. 
How much was the Green Line anticipated to cost? $190MM/mile. This would lower costs by 96%. 

I like this idea quite a bit, it seems like it would cost a lot less than BRT and also be easier to upgrade to a full tracked streetcar in the future. It looks like a good way to test out new routes and make easy modifications while in the testing phase. 

It is fundamentally the same as building BRT. Any change in cost will be the decision to built more or less durable station infrastructure. Vehicles are more expensive.

Ragtimer wrote:

gone corporate wrote: ↑

5:16 PM - Feb 26

I've advocated for a while that we give a serious look at "trackless trams" that operate on rubber wheels and follow dash lines for either piloted or automated driving. 

A major consideration is that such things could be utilized to further "initial development" of a route with rails. For example, we could have something like this going up and down Jefferson, validating the Green Line before full construction of a streetcar-style light rail goes in. We could theoretically see the "trackless tram" operating on one part of the street while the streetcar infrastructure is constructed on the other. Afterwards, other routes could be considered and run on the "trackless tram" while political will and new capital are sourced; for example, the route for Soulard to Downtown that @Ragtimer mentioned in his post above. If that route gets validated, then the "trackless tram" gets moved again to another candidate route, then another and another, building up ride usage while streetcar routes are constructed. 

This could seriously create a full streetcar system in the City, building a user base while construction takes place, and earning revenues for Metro while it's making capital expenditures on new transportation infrastructure. 

Addn.: It's a hell of a lot cheaper. A route was completed in Jakarta that cost them about $4.5MM/kilometer, about $7.25/mile. 
How much was the Green Line anticipated to cost? $190MM/mile. This would lower costs by 96%. 

I like this idea quite a bit, it seems like it would cost a lot less than BRT and also be easier to upgrade to a full tracked streetcar in the future. It looks like a good way to test out new routes and make easy modifications while in the testing phase. 

It would almost certainly cost a lot more than BRT.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

ldai_phs wrote: ↑

5:25 PM - Feb 26

gone corporate wrote:

I've advocated for a while that we give a serious look at "trackless trams" that operate on rubber wheels and follow dash lines for either piloted or automated driving. 

A major consideration is that such things could be utilized to further "initial development" of a route with rails. For example, we could have something like this going up and down Jefferson, validating the Green Line before full construction of a streetcar-style light rail goes in. We could theoretically see the "trackless tram" operating on one part of the street while the streetcar infrastructure is constructed on the other. Afterwards, other routes could be considered and run on the "trackless tram" while political will and new capital are sourced; for example, the route for Soulard to Downtown that @Ragtimer mentioned in his post above. If that route gets validated, then the "trackless tram" gets moved again to another candidate route, then another and another, building up ride usage while streetcar routes are constructed. 

This could seriously create a full streetcar system in the City, building a user base while construction takes place, and earning revenues for Metro while it's making capital expenditures on new transportation infrastructure. 

Addn.: It's a hell of a lot cheaper. A route was completed in Jakarta that cost them about $4.5MM/kilometer, about $7.25/mile. 
How much was the Green Line anticipated to cost? $190MM/mile. This would lower costs by 96%. 

This is really no different than a true BRT line

Agreed, this has almost no benefit over BRT using articulated electric buses, which are already manufactured in the US, cost significantly less, and Metro has experience with the 14 they own. You'd also have to build a new depot to house them along the line since you can't run a heavy 100+ foot long vehicle through city streets to get to the bus depots. The guideway they run on has to be heavily reinforced and smooth since it creates ruts from running the same path at their weight, and the superficial fenders that cover the rubber wheels underneath require gentle slopes and no obstacles or bumps. They have not been proven to work in cold or snow prone climates as the markings have to remain clear. They are currently only manufactured in China, which would disqualify them from using federal dollars for purchasing due to Buy America regulations. I also cannot see Metro or the city having these be driverless/autonomous, which is one of the main selling points of them.

Regarding the sentiment that this could be "graduated" to light rail, it's nice to be hopeful but let's set realistic expectations here; it would be highly unlikely a guideway that is decently pricey to begin with (for either buses or these trackless trams) would be torn up to replace it with rails unless there's a huge ridership that warrants it which is unlikely, or it's at the end of its useful life (which I would hope to be multiple decades, where the stations would have to be rebuilt as well). 

kg2024 wrote:

ldai_phs wrote: ↑

5:25 PM - Feb 26

gone corporate wrote:

I've advocated for a while that we give a serious look at "trackless trams" that operate on rubber wheels and follow dash lines for either piloted or automated driving. 

A major consideration is that such things could be utilized to further "initial development" of a route with rails. For example, we could have something like this going up and down Jefferson, validating the Green Line before full construction of a streetcar-style light rail goes in. We could theoretically see the "trackless tram" operating on one part of the street while the streetcar infrastructure is constructed on the other. Afterwards, other routes could be considered and run on the "trackless tram" while political will and new capital are sourced; for example, the route for Soulard to Downtown that @Ragtimer mentioned in his post above. If that route gets validated, then the "trackless tram" gets moved again to another candidate route, then another and another, building up ride usage while streetcar routes are constructed. 

This could seriously create a full streetcar system in the City, building a user base while construction takes place, and earning revenues for Metro while it's making capital expenditures on new transportation infrastructure. 

Addn.: It's a hell of a lot cheaper. A route was completed in Jakarta that cost them about $4.5MM/kilometer, about $7.25/mile. 
How much was the Green Line anticipated to cost? $190MM/mile. This would lower costs by 96%. 

This is really no different than a true BRT line

Agreed, this has almost no benefit over BRT using articulated electric buses, which are already manufactured in the US, cost significantly less, and Metro has experience with the 14 they own. You'd also have to build a new depot to house them along the line since you can't run a heavy 100+ foot long vehicle through city streets to get to the bus depots. The guideway they run on has to be heavily reinforced and smooth since it creates ruts from running the same path at their weight, and the superficial fenders that cover the rubber wheels underneath require gentle slopes and no obstacles or bumps. They have not been proven to work in cold or snow prone climates as the markings have to remain clear. They are currently only manufactured in China, which would disqualify them from using federal dollars for purchasing due to Buy America regulations. I also cannot see Metro or the city having these be driverless/autonomous, which is one of the main selling points of them.

Regarding the sentiment that this could be "graduated" to light rail, it's nice to be hopeful but let's set realistic expectations here; it would be highly unlikely a guideway that is decently pricey to begin with (for either buses or these trackless trams) would be torn up to replace it with rails unless there's a huge ridership that warrants it which is unlikely, or it's at the end of its useful life (which I would hope to be multiple decades, where the stations would have to be rebuilt as well). 

LA and KC both built “BRT” and replaced / are replacing with rail after the FTA’s minimum operational period. It’s somewhere between 11 and 20 years for BRT iirc. Have to repay the Feds if you stop operating it early.


STL could just built BRT and an actual streetcar and call it a day.