urbanSTL

addxb2 wrote:VN is rated silver last time I checked. The best rated BRT route is in Connecticut (also silver) but not necessarily comparable to STL. Cleveland is second best in US (silver) and is the best comparison in my opinion. $44M per mile in 2026 dollars.

You're correct I don't know why I thought VNBRT was gold.

Cleveland's Health Line gets ~5.7k daily riders and that's a much beafier route than this one. It also lost its signal priority at some point, so it wouldn't get silver anymore.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

Trololzilla wrote:

StlAlex wrote: ↑

11:22 PM - Jun 24

-Spencer described BRT as "the technology of the future."

Literal lol.

Idk if this is what she’s referencing but transportation consultants, especially the big engineering firms like HNTB, are starting to ramp up this narrative due to outlook of autonomous vehicles and AI enabled traffic control. It’s a conference hot topic this year.

addxb2 wrote: ↑

1:20 PM - Jun 27

Trololzilla wrote:

StlAlex wrote: ↑

11:22 PM - Jun 24

-Spencer described BRT as "the technology of the future."

Literal lol.

Idk if this is what she’s referencing but transportation consultants, especially the big engineering firms like HNTB, are starting to ramp up this narrative due to outlook of autonomous vehicles and AI enabled traffic control. It’s a conference hot topic this year.

Self driving technology is 100% still not safe and we are still decades away from it being any sort of norm. This is just austerity. Places with resources and common sense are still and will continue to build trains for the foreseeable future.

goat314 wrote:

addxb2 wrote: ↑

1:20 PM - Jun 27

Trololzilla wrote: Literal lol.

Idk if this is what she’s referencing but transportation consultants, especially the big engineering firms like HNTB, are starting to ramp up this narrative due to outlook of autonomous vehicles and AI enabled traffic control. It’s a conference hot topic this year.

Self driving technology is 100% still not safe and we are still decades away from it being any sort of norm. This is just austerity. Places with resources and common sense are still and will continue to build trains for the foreseeable future.

For high quality BRT, it’s very close if not already there which will make rail lines on the margin a whole lot less attractive imho.

ldai_phs wrote: ↑

4:42 PM - Jun 27

goat314 wrote:

addxb2 wrote: ↑

1:20 PM - Jun 27

Idk if this is what she’s referencing but transportation consultants, especially the big engineering firms like HNTB, are starting to ramp up this narrative due to outlook of autonomous vehicles and AI enabled traffic control. It’s a conference hot topic this year.

Self driving technology is 100% still not safe and we are still decades away from it being any sort of norm. This is just austerity. Places with resources and common sense are still and will continue to build trains for the foreseeable future.

For high quality BRT, it’s very close if not already there which will make rail lines on the margin a whole lot less attractive imho.

Gold standard BRT is basically light rail on wheels. With higher maintenance costs. BRT is an austerity program because American municipalities are broke and transit agencies lack the institutional expertise to build rail which shoots the cost of mile for basic rail through the roof.

Anyone saying BRT is the future needs to take a look at who is exclusively building it: Places with low costs of labor and places where the capital interest seeks to milk as many public dollars as they possibly can out of the taxpayers.

Real cities and real places that want to develop into the future are building trains because they are by far the preferable technology in pretty much every way besides up-front capital costs.

In America, we are not allowed to make the changes necessary to make trains cheaper because that would stop the free flow of public dollars to private firms, so we have to use a lesser technology that still allows that flow to continue.

So it's in HTNB's best interest to pretend BRT is the technology of the future and it's the job of bought-and-paid-for politicians to reiterate what they say.

Also we have had fully automated trains for like literally 50+ years.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

This project will almost certainly use New Flyer Xcelsior articulated buses because they're one of the only 60-ft, battery electric buses made in the US (a requirement for federally funded projects) and we already have a small fleet of them so there will be familiarity/maintenance efficiency benefits. Considering this and the center street running alignment with frequent intersections will almost guarantee this will not be a "driverless" route for at least a few more decades.

I saw a few graffiti around that says SAY NO TO BRT . I wonder who is doing that. I mean, 99% of the people around here has no idea what that even means. Of course, I'm in the 1% who does know what it means. Yes, I'd love a "subway system". But all that was flubbed decades ago. And people need stop chastising me for advocating "trackless trams". Haha. The street grid was made for streetcars. That's why we have all those wacked intersections on Gravois and elsewhere right? Idk, trackless trams kinda have the "look and feel" of light rail without the damn tracks!

Trololzilla wrote: ↑

7:13 AM - Jun 28

Gonna keep harping on the need to make them trolleybuses.

I love trolleybuses, wish more planners considered them, battery electric buses do come with limitations (and are very heavy).

leeharveyawesome wrote:I saw a few graffiti around that says SAY NO TO BRT . I wonder who is doing that. I mean, 99% of the people around here has no idea what that even means. Of course, I'm in the 1% who does know what it means. Yes, I'd love a "subway system". But all that was flubbed decades ago. And people need stop chastising me for advocating "trackless trams". Haha. The street grid was made for streetcars. That's why we have all those wacked intersections on Gravois and elsewhere right? Idk, trackless trams kinda have the "look and feel" of light rail without the damn tracks!

Do you even understand that a trackless tram would be illegal to build using federal funding? Building a subway is literally closer to the realm of possibility.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

I'm not trying to die a some trackless tram hill. I'm talking about something like in the link below. I'd make it three cars so it REALLY looks like light rail.

Did I know it wouldn't be eligible for federal funding you ask? Yes, vaguely.

But you may not even need it. Run it up Gravois and see how it goes. It accomplishes multiple things. First, people mover. It also creates constant activity and maybe most importantly it reduces lanes on Gravois which really dumb people use to do really dumb things like run over people on bicycles.

I just feel like that if a city didn't nurture its existing public transport that was already in place 100 years ago then, well, you failed and it's on to plan B and why not be a leader with plan B. Some of these people clamoring for a "subway system" would also like to come complete with really awesome graffiti so its gritty and cool right out of the box. I mean, it's ridiculous. It's a fantasy, one of which I like to dream about but it's never going to happen. This was decided 70 years ago.

I'm sure here in St. Louis something horrible would probably happen with a trackless tram, you know, like a Dodge Charger plowing into at 80 mph and killing dozens of people but you have to at least try something manageable.

https://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/news/li ... source=nba

Once again these are the realities we are working with for this project: A) The route has been decided, over a 9 month process with public involvement. B) This project will almost certainly require federal funding (we only have $110m currently and projected costs are $360m to $590m). C) Federally funded projects require rolling stock to be manufactured in the US. D) There are no manufacturers of trackless trams in the United States and likely won't be in the next ~4 years when the Green Line is completed. Even if there were to be, that would have to be budgeted and planned for and they would be more expensive than buses and be untested technology. E) Trolleybuses are not being considered or designed for currently. Is it still maybe possible to get them to switch to this mode, but up front infrastructure costs of overhead wires, additional medians for poles, additional complex engineering and utility relocation costs, substations/grid upgrades, a new trolleybus depot along the route, etc. would add millions to the per mile cost and be the first things on the chopping block when the inevitable value-engineering takes place in the design process. New Flyer is the single manufacturer of trolleybuses in the US today. 

Clearly I am no public transport infrastructure expert and clearly I don't care about embrassing myself. There's no wires on the newest tech right? I won't post any trackless trams YouTubes because there's a lot to look through from the UK to Australia to China and everyone can look for themselves.

Who knows, maybe someday when these know nothings out there think St Louis they might think 1) Cardinals 2) ARCH 3) murder capital 3) the city with the awesome trackless tram transport system with no wires.

Take the lead. I'm joking here but I feel like I could get a pretty cool three car trackless tram system with no wires required that can carry 200 people delivered from Alibaba by the end of next week for 100k.

Board Bill #59 has been filed at the BOA to hold an election April 6, 2027 on reallocating Metrolink sales tax proceeds to Bus Rapid Transit. (Note that the proposed language change adds BRT to the list of allowable spending but keeps light rail expansion in the verbiage.)

They also asked Congress to cut transit spending and move it to highways.

Sent from my SM-S936U using Tapatalk

More proof that the idea that BRT is more feasible than LRT and the Trump administration is more favorable to any kind of transit is total bs. We should just keep saving money until the next administration and/or attempt to collaborate with the county to build a true regional N-S line that would be more federally competitive. We probably should even rethink the kind of line we want to build. There is a lot of ROW along I-70 and I-55 that could preserve our grade separated feel. I know that's unpopular to many who like the streetcar type systems, but Metrolink has always been designed to be more of a regional commuter type of system.

^
My guess is that somehow the administration plans to condition funding based on political affiliation/alignment or some other "unconventional" means of tying funding to a broader administration goal (e.g., a given region's cooperation with ICE/deportations).

At any rate it seems destined to cause downstream delays, if not outright cancellations for more marginal projects.

There is no way of involving the County geographically without tripling the cost and the County's low density does not generate equivalent ridership to justify doing so. The money you unlock from St. Louis County would not outpace math of $ per rider. Best solution is St. Louis County support whatever line the City draws and agrees to redirect their revenue to that regardless of whether it involves the County. As we all know, that isn't happening. 

Even in Biden's infrastructure prime, the 2023 Jones administration route for Northside Southside was uncompetitive. Needed 50-100% more ridership than even the best projections and still further cost reductions. 

addxb2 wrote: ↑

7:39 PM - 1 day ago

There is no way of involving the County geographically without tripling the cost and the County's low density does not generate equivalent ridership to justify doing so. The money you unlock from St. Louis County would not outpace math of $ per rider. Best solution is St. Louis County support whatever line the City draws and agrees to redirect their revenue to that regardless of whether it involves the County. As we all know, that isn't happening. 

Even in Biden's infrastructure prime, the 2023 Jones administration route for Northside Southside was uncompetitive. Needed 50-100% more ridership than even the best projections and still further cost reductions. 

Yep. And sadly, costs per mile for light rail construction are not likely to go down or even remain static. Meanwhile, our regional population is spreading outward but not upward. That's the wrong combo to be banking on a future light rail line.