St. Louis Streetcar Solution

One is Such a Lonely Number

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Tue, 10 Aug 2010 19:05:00 +0000

Reader [killsonjastrauss] asks:

What about the 97 bus?

How can you justify adding a trolley line that duplicates the 97, when the 97 isn't even at capacity?

GREAT QUESTIONS!

Adding the Loop Trolley along the same route as the 97 is justifiable for at least two major reasons: The Loop Trolley will be more convenient than the 97 as a choice for riders in the Loop. And, it may seem odd for a streetcar-advocate blogger, but I believe that the Loop Trolley will increase the number of riders on the 97; thereby benefiting the public transit system as a whole.

The 97 is a principal East-West MetroBus line that starts at the Clayton MetroBus Center on the west side, and downtown on 14th & Spruce on the east side of its route. A significant portion of the 97's route follows Delmar Boulevard, traveling through the Loop.

When the Loop Trolley begins operation, it will most likely operate side-by-side with the 97, and the 97's ridership will doubtfully increase or decrease. Additionally, the 97 will most likely be the best public transit option for riders who already use it, because the access it provides from Clayton to downtown. From the map, above, I have placed a thick red line along the 97 route, showing the portion of the route the 97 and the Loop Trolley will overlap. You can see that it is not by much. Moreover, there is the possibility that riders will not be able to transfer between the bus and the Loop Trolley; riders will have to buy two separate tickets.

The Loop Trolley riders, however, will most likely find the Loop Trolley to be a more convenient transit option, because it is projected that Loop Trolley riders can catch the Loop Trolley every 10-15 minutes, whereas a 97-rider has to wait 30 minutes between buses. That's 3 Loop Trolleys for every 97!

Therefore, in the beginning, and for several years, the Loop Trolley may not be an alternative to taking the 97. However, as a whole transit system, the Loop Trolley shall benefit public transit. Metro is projecting that the presence of the Loop Trolley will increase public transit ridership along its route by 50% to 60% over the use of a bus traveling the same route [the 97]. From that, there is always the potential that some of those 50% to 60% will become more comfortable using public transit, and may consider riding the 97 from University City to Clayton or to downtown; thereby increasing the number of passengers on the 97.

In the future, the 97 and the Loop Trolley may compliment each other. The Loop Trolley may attract more riders to our public transit system. I, of course, think that the streetcar is the most environmentally friendly option to replace buses as public transportation. I believe that any transit option, however, that increases ridership and reduces trips taken by car is successful and justifiable.

Is Being Self-Serving Necessarily Evil?

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Wed, 28 Jul 2010 20:53:00 +0000

In Yonah Freemark's blog post, "St. Louis’ Loop District Gets Endorsement from Feds with Grant for Streetcar" (http://www.thetransportpolitic.com/2010/07/26/st-louis-loop-district-gets-endorsement-from-feds-with-grant-for-streetcar/), Yonah makes the case for Joe Edwards' self-serving interest in the construction of The Loop Trolley by conflating the mobility aspects of two entirely different modes of transportation: the light rail and the streetcar. Although self-serving aspects of The Loop Trolley are arguable and not necessarily evil, the reality of the mobility benefits of The Loop Trolley stand alone in comparison with the regional mobility provided by Metrolink.

In a previous blog posting, I described the difference between a light rail system and a streetcar system. Briefly, there exists a difference in service-scale between a light rail system and a streetcar system. A light rail system connects regions and a streetcar system connects neighborhoods.

Yonah debates the effectiveness of access gained by the existence of the streetcar along the current proposed alignment:

"From an operations perspective, the project won’t do much to improve access, since its most distant station is less than a mile from an existing Metrolink stop. With nine proposed stations on the short line and vehicles running only every ten minutes, it will in many cases be faster to walk."

Because I live within several blocks of the proposed alignment, the "access" metric does not accurately measure the benefit the streetcar will provide for persons wanting to travel from the Forest Park Metrolink/Trolley stop to the Delmar Loop. From the Forest Park Metrolink/Loop Trolley stop, to the Loop, the alignment will travel through an undeveloped portion of Delmar Boulevard most persons would take pause to travel by foot. Many persons, however, may be more apt to travel this route, using a streetcar from the Forest Park Metrolink/Loop Trolley stop, to the Loop.

Additionally, there is not a significant time difference between trains on Metrolink and the proposed Loop Trolley. The Loop Trolley proposes 10 minute lead times between streetcars, not significantly different than the lead times experienced on Metrolink:

"[The Metrolink], [a] fleet of 31 electric Light Rail Vehicles provides service every seven minutes during rush hour and at 10 to 15-minute intervals otherwise from 5am to 1am daily. (APTA: Does Transit Work? A Conservative Reappraisal, Weyrich, 2009, page 1)."

Finally, Yonah debates Joe Edwards' vision for extending the Trolley toward the City of St. Louis, using old streetcar alignments:

"Edwards, the neighborhood developer, has been a proponent of eventually extending the streetcar route all the way to the riverfront, mirroring the route of the city’s old trolley network. Yet this would needlessly duplicate the services already provided by Metrolink. Rather, extensions south along Big Bend Boulevard, passing by the University City Metrolink Station, the two campuses of Washington University, and reaching Richmond Heights, could be truly valuable since it would encourage transit use by students for local-area commutes and connect dense areas with a corridor not currently serviced by rapid transit [emphasis added].

Again, from Weyrich, "Metrolink crosses the Mississippi River on the Eads Bridge, built in 1874. It passes under downtown St. Louis in an old railroad tunnel, opened at the same time as the bridge. Most of the rest of Metrolink runs on the right-of-way of the former Wabash Railroad." Old railroad alignments were not meant to serve residential communities, they were aligned to move freight. Moreover, "Metrolink's availability is excellent in terms of destinations. However, the line does not serve many residential areas directly....(ibid. at 1)."

Yonah concludes, "Moreover, whether transport planners like it or not, these systems are in reality a lot more oriented towards fulfilling economic development goals than providing increased mobility." I do not believe the two goals are at all mutually exclusive, and in fact, the sum of the two may produce something even greater. That is at least the policy objectives of the Obama administration and the HUD-DOT-EPA Interagency Partnership for Sustainable Communities, which recently awarded The Loop Trolley $25 million.

The Partnership for Sustainable Communities

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Tue, 27 Jul 2010 22:05:00 +0000

http://www.epa.gov/smartgrowth/partnership/

The above link is a link to the HUD-DOT-EPA Partnership for Sustainable Communities! We must challenge St. Louis Metro to incorporate these policies into future planning and spending decisions!

From the HUD website,

"The Partnership for Sustainable Communities established six livability principles that will act as a foundation for interagency coordination:

Provide more transportation choices.
Develop safe, reliable and economical transportation choices to decrease household transportation costs, reduce our nation's dependence on foreign oil, improve air quality, reduce greenhouse gas emissions and promote public health.

Promote equitable, affordable housing.
Expand location- and energy-efficient housing choices for people of all ages, incomes, races and ethnicities to increase mobility and lower the combined cost of housing and transportation.

Enhance economic competitiveness.
Improve economic competitiveness through reliable and timely access to employment centers, educational opportunities, services and other basic needs by workers as well as expanded business access to markets.

Support existing communities.
Target federal funding toward existing communities - through such strategies as transit-oriented, mixed-use development and land recycling - to increase community revitalization, improve the efficiency of public works investments, and safeguard rural landscapes.

Coordinate policies and leverage investment.
Align federal policies and funding to remove barriers to collaboration, leverage funding and increase the accountability and effectiveness of all levels of government to plan for future growth, including making smart energy choices such as locally generated renewable energy.

Value communities and neighborhoods.
Enhance the unique characteristics of all communities by investing in healthy, safe and walkable neighborhoods - rural, urban or suburban.

Will The $44 Million Loop Trolley Project Bring $2.8 Billion of Investment to St. Louis?

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Mon, 26 Jul 2010 16:18:00 +0000

http://www.stlurbancorps.org/polls.html

Today I received an email from the St. Louis Urban Corps regarding taking a poll about The Loop Trolley. There was one question, and my answer was as follows:

"Will the St. Louis Trolley Project yield benefits for the city worthy of the $44 million price tag?"

I chose answer: "Yes, I believe it will."

The other answer choices were: "No, I don't think it will." and "Not sure, but it's worth spending money to find out."

I derived my answer from what Portland experienced as a result of investing in a streetcar project for their city. From the Portland Streetcar Concept Plan, the first 2.4 miles of the Portland Streetcar system was constructed at a cost of $55 million:

http://www.portlandonline.com/transportation/index.cfm?c=46134

In Portland, in 2001, they opened the first 2.4 miles of their modern streetcar line. By 2008, private developers had invested $3.5 billion within two blocks of the alignment, including over 10,000 new housing units and 5.4 million square feet of office, institutional, retail and hotel construction. [Portland Streetcar System Concept Plan, 1-1].

The Loop Trolley is different than the Portland system, because Portland's first alignment connected two employment centers: Legacy Good Samaritan Hospital and Portland State University. Obviously, The Loop Trolley is connecting leisure and entertainment centers: Forest Park, the Missouri History Museum, and the Delmar Loop.

Therefore, private money may not flow as fast along The initial Loop Trolley alignment. Weekday ridership may be more attractive to private investors. The Loop Trolley ridership may be elevated only on the weekends, and not during the weekdays.

A few brave investor souls, however, may invest in developing office space and housing units along the initial Loop Trolley alignment, especially along the eastern section of Delmar Boulevard, past the Pageant to DeBaliviere. Thereby, increasing ridership during the weekdays.

Portland's initial investment of $55 million essentially appreciated 63.63% to $3.5 billion of investment along their streetcar alignment. Can St. Louis realize an appreciation of $44 million to $2.8 billion?

The Proposed Model for the future Loop Trolley

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Thu, 22 Jul 2010 22:23:00 +0000


Memphis Streetcar

In July of 2009, the East-West Gateway Council, in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, decided to move in a different direction than the vintage streetcar models stationed at the Missouri History Museum and on Delmar Boulevard in the Delmar Loop.

The streetcar, above, can be fitted with ramps, operable by the streetcar operator, to allow for passengers with special needs to board the streetcars.

What is the "Livability Initiative"?

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 18:09:00 +0000

http://www.fhwa.dot.gov/livability/

What is Livability?

"Livability is about tying the quality and location of transportation facilities to broader opportunities such as access to good jobs, affordable housing, quality schools, and safe streets. This includes addressing safety and capacity issues on all roads through better planning and design, maximizing and expanding new technologies such as ITS and the use of quiet pavements, using Travel Demand Management approaches to system planning and operations, etc."

Congratulations, Loop Trolley!

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Wed, 21 Jul 2010 15:33:00 +0000

"U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood announced nearly $25 million in federal funding for the St. Louis Loop Trolley Project on July 8. More than $400 million was awarded nationally through the federal Urban Circulator Program which is part of Obama administration's "Livability Initiative". The City of St. Louis is the sponsor on the project."

http://www.looptrolley.org/loop_trolley_news.html

###

Citizens for Modern Transit

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Mon, 19 Jul 2010 14:52:00 +0000

Today I joined Citizens for Modern Transit! For $20 I became an "Activist"! Hopefully the start to an exciting journey!

How much does it cost, annually, for the City of St. Louis to patch road surfaces with exposed streetcar tracks?

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Mon, 29 Mar 2010 17:42:00 +0000

These are pictures of the road surface on Pershing Avenue, just east of the intersection of Pershing Avenue and DeBaliviere Road in St. Louis, Missouri, near 5630 Pershing Avenue 63112.

EWGCOG message to the City of St. Louis, “Fine then, walk”.

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Mon, 30 Mar 2009 02:01:00 +0000

Sadly enough, the East-West Gateway Council of Governments gave the City of St. Louis exactly what we wanted out of the ARRA. Of the City’s $255,909,276 of requests, the EWGCOG granted the City a whopping $35,893,363 of streetscapes, streetlights, bridge repair and traffic signal adjustment! Mayor Slay expressed in his blog that he was not happy with the amount of money flowing into the City of St. Louis from the stimulus package. I think that to jump on the sustainable development bandwagon, we need to learn to ask for money for the right projects, at the right time. And now is the perfect time to ask for a lot of money to bring back our sustainable-propulsion St. Louis Streetcars.

I was reading EWGCOG’s Legacy 2035 plan, again, trying to make sense of their decision-making strategy for our region’s mass transit, especially their long-range plan for sustainable development. I think we all understand that the green movement and sustainable development are very popular terms in today’s media, and we are all trying to figure out what it all means, including the EWGCOG. On page 71, of Legacy 2035, EWGCOG defines the field of play:

Although no consensus has been reached as to how sustainable development is defined, two distinct principles have emerged. The first is making responsible use of natural and built resources by conserving non-renewable resources and preserving and renewing built resources that present generations value. This is a matter of stewardship. The second emphasizes maximizing the potential of human resources by ensuring that all people have real opportunities to learn, work, thrive, and be involved in decisions that affect their lives. This is a matter of justice. Sustainability, then, is about taking thoughtful and proper care of all resources, and ensuring that all have the opportunity to share in the benefits thereof (sic).

From the “Along for the Ride” blog, Chesterfield Mayor John Nations takes a stab at defining sustainable development for the Chesterfield Valley. Nations “learned that Metro’s bus service cutbacks would cut off workers from hospitals, nursing homes and retail centers.” Nations “considered it a ‘call to action’” to ask for federal grant money and local business donations, because “Public transportation is a vital element of creating sustainable economic development.” [http://www.stltoday.com/blogzone/along-for-the-ride/along-for-the-ride/2009/03/deal-keeps-buses-rolling-to-west-st-louis-county/#comment-1525]. To Nations, “sustainable economic development” is keeping hospital, nursing home, and retail workers bussed into Chesterfield Valley.

How does the City of St. Louis define “sustainable development” for itself? Walking.

On February 13^th, 2009, the deadline for asking for federal funds under the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act, occurred. What exactly did the City of St. Louis ask for? The City of St. Louis asked for $255,909,276 worth of projects.

I have broken down the City of St. Louis requests into ten broad categories from the “ARRA of 2009-St. Louis Urbanized Area-Submitted Projects and Programs-February 17,2009” PDF [http://www.ewgateway.org/InfrastructureApp/infrastructureapp.htm], as follows:

	requests
streetscape	$86,123,686
resurfacing	$11,011,175
multi-use pathways	$3,675,200
signage	$760,150
sidewalks	$18,590,000
parking structures	$29,744,000
signals	$14,575,000
bridges	$82,135,001
lighting	$3,050,000
intersection const.	$6,245,064

total	$255,909,276

Our largest ask at 35% was for streetscapes, followed by bridge repair at 32%, and parking structures at 12%. “Streetscape” is a broad category that is akin to street beautification, including landscaping and sidewalk repair.

Of our $255,909,276 of requests, the EWGCOG granted the City of St. Louis a grand total of $35,893,363, broken down in the table as follows:

	granted
streetscape	$11,768,363
signals	$2,450,000
bridges	$19,025,000
lighting	$2,650,000

total	$35,893,363

The EWGCOG heard our cries loud and clear. On February 25^th, 2009, the EWGCOG published their list of ARRA Approved Projects. St. Louis City residents wanted prettier streets, more cohesive looking business districts, more places to park our fuel-thirsty cars, and safe bridges to drive them over. The EWGCOG gave us what we asked for.

St. Louis City Mayor Slay was none-too-happy about our ARRA haul. On his blog at MayorSlay.com, for March 6, 2009, Mayor Slay pleaded with MoDOT, through his appearance on CNN, to direct more money into economically distressed areas. In all honesty, I think MoDOT gave us what we asked for. We asked for streetscapes, bridge repair, and parking structures. We got signals, streetscapes and bridge repair.

In all due respect to our government leadership in the City of St. Louis, we don’t even know what we want and then we don’t know how to ask for it. It is obvious from the EWGCOG’s Legacy 2035 long-range plan that “sustainable development” has yet to be fully defined, it is a grey area. Chesterfield Mayor Nations feels comfortable enough to use it in a sentence. How would the leadership in the City of St. Louis use it in a sentence? We need to figure out what we are asking for, and then ask for it.

The EWGCOG has defined the field of play, “making responsible use of natural and built resources”, “conserving non-renewable resources”, “stewardship”, “maximizing the potential of human resources”. The electric streetcar would achieve all of those things for the City of St. Louis. We have to prove to the EWGCOG that this is an important effort toward sustainable development, or we’ll get a whole boat-load of streetscape.

Sustainable Development is Not a High Priority in St. Louis

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Sat, 21 Mar 2009 18:35:00 +0000

Modern streetcars are a mode of sustainable transportation. They do not use gas or diesel, and even though they would draw electric current produced by Missouri coal power plants, in the future, coal can be replaced by wind, geothermal, solar, or even water flow from the Mississippi River. It seems like a no-brainer that there would not be more talk about modern streetcars in St. Louis, or that we hear absolutely no talk of Recovery Act money funding projects in St. Louis. To that end, I wanted to find out more about how federal money flows into the St. Louis Area, and if sustainable projects are on St. Louis’ transportation radar.

How do federal transportation dollars flow into the St. Louis regional area? And, how are those federal dollars allocated locally? The easy answer is that federal dollars flow through the East-West Gateway Council of Governments or EWGCOG [www.ewgateway.org]. The EWGCOG, an MPO, or Metropolitan Planning Organization, was created in 1965, in response to the Federal-Aid Highway Act of 1962 (FAHA), which created the federal requirement for urban transportation planning, largely in response to the construction of the Interstate Highway System and the planning of routes through and around urban areas. To receive FAHA monies, the EWGCOG had to produce a plan based on a 3C process of “continuing, comprehensive and cooperative planning” [About MPOs, The Association of Metropolitan Planning Organizations, http://www.ampo.org/content/index.php?pid=15].

In the 1970s, at the time of the energy crises and after the Interstate Highway System was largely complete, MPOs, including the EWGCOG, actually shifted their planning focus to the needs of local areas, requiring shorter-range capital improvement programs along with long-range plans “to better integrate urban transportation planning at the local level”, [http://www.ampo.org/content/index.php?pid=15] and to relieve automobile congestion. However, at the same time MPOs focused more attention on local concerns, they removed the reins of broad federal government oversight, only submitting proposals for government money through the TIP, or transportation improvement program. “The result was an urban transportation program and process that languished, and the loss of much of the technical capacity that has been built up in the MPOs” [http://www.ampo.org/content/index.php?pid=15].

In order to lift MPOs out of the muck of myopic local interests, the federal government passed the ISTEA, or Intermodal Surface Transportation Efficiency Act, to strengthen the metropolitan planning process by refocusing attention toward “integrated, modally mixed strategies for greater system efficiency, mobility and access” [http://www.ampo.org/content/index.php?pid=15]. As an aside, St. Louis is on Corridor 2, or the “Avenue of the Saints Corridor” from St. Louis to St. Paul, Minnesota.

So, now I have a better understanding how federal dollars flowed into the St. Louis region, but what happened once they got here? In 1995, the East-West Gateway Coordinating Council drafted “A Plan for the Region’s Future: Transportation Redefined." It’s a 267 page document located in the Library section of www.ewgateway.org. What most caught my eye was Section X “Choices”, which included the graph I crudely photographed and pasted above. It’s a very hard graph to explain, but the text next to the graph states that

“[t]he bold line which is positioned diagonally on the chart encloses a ‘budget envelope” which indicates the total amount of funds available to support the plan or the improvement program. That line will pivot up or down from the lower left axis point depending on funding, enclosing as many projects as can be financed. It is anticipated that projects from all seven focus areas would be funded in any given selection cycle, but more projects would be selected from the higher ranking priority areas than from the lower.”

What most surprised me, from this 1995 graph, was the priority of “Sustainable Development". Out of the seven possible categories, it ranks 6^th. And things don’t get better. In 1999, The East-West Gateway Coordinating Council drafted “Transportation Redefined II, Building a Solid Foundation for 2020”. On page 25 of that report, Sustainable Development still ranked 6^th out of 7 program priorities.

Most recently, in July 2007, the East-West Gateway Council of Governments released “Legacy 2035”, another planning document. The graph is no longer part of the report, but on page 71, we’re treated to a section on Sustainable Development. The section starts out by stating, “[s]ustainable development is a multifaceted concept that encompasses principles of environmental stewardship, social equity, and economic viability.” Wow, it’s scary to think that such heavy principles were ranked 6^th out of 7 categories.

This is a modern streetcar blog, and I was excited when I read Legacy 2035, further:

“[m]ost could not disagree that given the finite level of human fiscal, and natural capital that exists, pursuing strategies to implement a more sustainable approach to development and transportation investment is desirable. Widespread uncertainty exists, however, about how to go about achieving sustainability goals. Sustainable development is a subject matter that goes well beyond traditional transportation planning, and there are many obstacles and challenges in the path to achieving it.”

Streetcars are a sustainable solution that can only get better when wind, solar, and geothermal are added to our power portfolio. Sustainable development must get higher priority in St. Louis’ mass transit decisions. To look for potential help, I looked up President Obama’s Urban Policy agenda. Part of the current administration’s urban policy includes “strengthening core infrastructure” through the use of a National Infrastructure Reinvestment Bank [http://www.whitehouse.gov/agenda/urban_policy/]. This bill was originally introduced by Senators Chris Dodd and Chuck Hagel in 2007, and it has since stalled, but it can be tracked at www.thomas.gov as Senate Bill 1926 and in the House as H.R. 3401.

St. Louis City Streets are Trained

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Fri, 20 Mar 2009 02:45:00 +0000

Living in the City of St. Louis and driving its streets, I’ve noticed there are intersections that just don’t make sense. Mostly, the parts that don’t make sense are the intersections that have very shallow turns where two or three streets come together. To me, the person that designed those intersections clearly did not have the automobile in mind.

Then I Google-d “St. Louis streetcar map”, or something to that effect, and on Ebay I actually found the ONLY 1906 Streetcar Map of St. Louis left in the world(!), for $18.99, plus shipping. Well, I embellished a little, it was the only 1906 Streetcar Map of St. Louis for a few days, until New World Maps, Inc. of Lake Worth, Florida, posted the exact same map for sale the very next week. I took a picture of the map, above. All of the gray lines you see? Those are not roads, those are tracks.

To help prove my point, I pulled my helicopter out of the hangar and took a picture of the intersection that shows the alignment of our streets were meant for streetcars, and not automobiles. Then I tried to zoom in on the 1906 map to compare the same intersection. Because I don’t have a super-zoom expensive camera, we’re going to have to make due with the camera on my phone. And, because of that, I was only able to capture the blurry-ish image below.

In the aerial picture above, I have labeled the Moolah Theatre and Lindell Boulevard. The street that juts off between the Moolah and Lindell is McPherson Avenue. In the 1906 map I placed a red oval over the same spot as in the satellite image in the aerial picture. You will notice in the red oval on the 1906 map, a rail line comes in the right side of the oval, which is also Lindell Boulevard, and continues up McPherson Avenue, to northwest St. Louis City.

Great alignment for a streetcar, and makes for weird driving in a car.

With the United States Congress' Permission

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 01:03:00 +0000

Despite the picture, this is not a bash-Metro post. However, it’s hard to deny that this one-in-2300 sign [“Metro begins covering ‘suspended’ bus stops”, Along for the Ride, Ken Leiser, 2/20/2009], is not indicative of the problem that I think streetcars can help resolve.

To that end, in my best Thomas Jefferson voice, I’ll tell you how the laws in place promote regional prosperity, and not that of the City of St. Louis. Boringly enough, alliances between states are illegal, without the consent of Congress. If you don’t believe me, check out Article I, Section 10, Clause 3 of the United States Constitution, which states:

No state shall, without the consent of Congress, lay any duty of tonnage, keep troops, or ships of war in time of peace, enter into any agreement or compact with another state, or with a foreign power, or engage in war, unless actually invaded, or in such imminent danger as will not admit of delay. [emphasis mine :)]

There you have it. However, such a compact was approved by Congress in 1950 as Public Law 743 (64 Stat. 568), resulting in the establishment of the Bi-State Development Agency of the Missouri-Illinois Metropolitan District. Furthermore, according to the “Background and Need for the Legislation”, as drafted in a 1995 amendment to the compact, “The Bi-State Agency was intended to promote planning, development and transportation in the area surrounding St. Louis on both the Missouri and Illinois sides of the Mississippi River and it was given specified power to facilitate such activities” [www.thomas.gov]. And any future changes to the compact will need to be approved by the United States Congress as well.

Is it just me, or do you think our members of Congress know the intimate details of our mass transit problem? Just today, Maura Judkis, of U.S. News and World Report, suggested St. Louisans should buy a bike after the trifecta destruction of service cuts, job losses, and fare increases [http://www.usnews.com/blogs/fresh-greens/2009/3/18/is-your-citys-public-transit-suffering.html?s_cid=rss:fresh-greens:is-your-citys-public-transit-suffering].

What is a Streetcar and why is this picture important? And Welcome!

noreply@blogger.com (STLStreetcar@gmail.com) — Wed, 18 Mar 2009 01:03:00 +0000

What is a Streetcar and why is this picture important? And Welcome!

What is a streetcar?!

A streetcar is defined as,

a rail transit vehicle designed for local transportation, powered by electricity received from an overhead wire। [Bring Back the Streetcars!, Weyrich and Lind, June 2002, emphasis added].

Not to be confused with Metrolink, a light rail system, light rail and streetcars work well together in other cities, and sometimes even share the same track. The main difference is purpose: streetcars are for local transportation, such as in the City of St. Louis. Metrolink serves regional transportation: the city of St. Louis and the counties of St. Louis, St. Charles and Jefferson in Missouri, and the counties of Madison, St. Clair, and Monroe in Illinois.

Why is this picture important?

You will notice on the right-hand side of this blog, I have listed a handful of American cities that already have modern streetcar systems, or are well into the stages of planning. Additionally, all of these cities have opted to use or develop a modern streetcar system, not a “vintage” or “heritage” system. There is a major difference between the three types of systems, and I want to highlight why a modern system is important and the right choice for the City of St. Louis.

So, why do I think this picture is important? Most obviously, this picture shows a Portland Streetcar, or more specifically, a Skoda streetcar, made in the Czech Republic. This car is popular for having doors on both sides and can be operated from either end. Moreover, the car is air conditioned, has a low floor, seats 30 and has standing room for 87, with big windows standees can see out of.

Next, and not-so-obvious, is the simplicity of the design. The pictured system employs a simple track structure, integrated into the existing street, and the streetcar is using an existing right-of-way. As you can see, the electric-streetcar is operating in traffic, along with internal combustion engine cars. The overhead power supply is unobtrusive. Upon closer inspection, you will notice that the overhead wire is attached to a pole that also serves as a light pole. Then you will notice the distance of the streetcar from the curb, still allowing for curbside parking. Overall, Portland’s elegant and simple design shows a streetcar system made to human scale, which fits within the city’s existing structure.

Welcome!

Welcome to St. Louis Streetcar Solution! The purpose of this blog is to examine political, financial, and legal realities that may be shaping St. Louis’ mass transit situation. I do not claim to be an authority on mass transit systems, especially in the City of St. Louis. I am on this journey with you, and I am hoping that by using information from the internet, other blogs, newspapers, and radio, I can shed some light on what’s going on with St. Louis City mass transit. Moreover, I think a modern streetcar system would be an excellent solution to our transportation woes, and would even be a commodity to the City of St. Louis. I invite your comments and questions! What should I research? Where should I look? This is our conversation space!