Professionals Make Mistakes, Need Oversight

Via Green Car Congress comes an interesting story. It seems the transit agency for the Sacramento suburb of Elk Grove bought a fleet of 17 hybrid buses for “high-speed commuter transport on freeways.” Smart move? Well, not really. It seems none of the professionals that approved the plan stopped to consider that hybrid vehicles perform better in stop-and-go traffic.

I think most people grasp the basic concept that hybrids are able to regenerate the electrical power they need through braking. This is why their in-town mileage is often as good or better than the highway mileage. Putting hybrid buses on highway commuter lines is simply foolish.

Yet an entire transit agency and likely some sort of regional agency that disburses federal funds had to approve the project. Apparently the folks in the Seattle area realized the same thing after they received their diesel-hybrid buses (full story):

At times, the New Flyer hybrid articulated buses have gotten worse mileage than the often-maligned 1989 dual-mode Breda buses they are replacing. Yet the hybrid buses cost $200,000 more each than a conventional articulated diesel bus.

The Elk Grove agency is now contracting to purchase CNG (Compressed Natural Gas) buses for the commuter routes into Sacramento. I’d love to know if anyone pointed out to the professionals behind this blunder the potential problems? This is exactly why we need citizens and critics watching the process and questioning logic along the way.

– Steve

MetroLink’s 8-Mile Cross County Extension To Open August 28th

Metro, the St. Louis regional transit agency, is expected to announce today the ribbon cutting for the 8-mile ‘Cross County’ will be held on Saturday August 26, 2006 with regular service commencing on Monday, August 28, 2006. Limited, but free, sample rides are expected on the 26th & 27th.

The 28th is a big day of changes as new bus routes will take affect to coincide with the new light rail. New fares for bus and rail service will also make their debut on the 28th. Regular bus fare will increase from $1.65 to $1.75. A one-way ticket on MetroLink will increase from $1.75 to $2.00.

For more information on schedules and fares see Metro.

– Steve

A Sneak Peek at MetroLink’s Cross County Line on August 22

Rail advocacy group Citizens for Modern Transit are offering a unique opportunity — a chance to ride the new Cross County extension of the MetroLink system before the opening to the general public:

Metro is on the brink of opening the next major extension of MetroLink for the St. Louis Region. It is an exciting time especially for members of CMT/WTS/COMTO – here is your chance to have a Sneak Peek Ride of the new alignment before it opens to the general public. Seating is limited so please reserve your spot early.

You will need to arrive at the Shrewsbury-Lansdowne I-44 Park-Ride Lot on Lansdowne at River Des Peres between 5 and 6:30 p.m. Rides will run on the new alignment between 5 and 7 p.m. Make history with Metro and CMT . . . get on board today!

I’ve already signed up for the August 22 event with a cost of only $5 for CMT members ($10 for non-members). To register click here.

This gives us a clue about the official public opening of MetroLink — sometime after August 22nd. I’m guessing it will be sometime the following week or perhaps just a few days later. It has been many years and many hundreds of millions in the making but I’m glad we are finally at this point. Our region is about to get a renewed interest in rail transit.

– Steve

Vespa Petitioning to Convert Some Auto Parking to Two-Wheel Parking

Vespa is the most well known of scooter makers and you’ll see plenty of the Italian jobs on the streets of St. Louis. But they are also pretty determined to create an even bigger market for themselves and their competition. They realize parking is an issue keeping more people from using a small and efficient scooter over the family SUV. Enter the Vespa Petition, or Vespatition:

Parking for All! Sign the Vespatition to convert some automobile spaces to two-wheel spaces!

By signing the Vespatition, you are promoting the conversion of some automobile parking spaces to two-wheel spaces. The results will be publicized and sent to your local mayor.

Just as parking spaces for compact cars and handicapped parking stalls have increased efficiency and convenience in urban and suburban communities, officially designated two-wheel parking facilities can do the same.

Government agencies should consider removing the two-wheeler from the four-wheeler parking space and placing it in its own, scaled down zone. This is a simple concept that can be embraced by city councils, urban planners, local merchants, contractors, shopping center management and private businesses whenever parking for motor vehicles is provided.

Here are some suggestions for motorcycle/scooter parking that we are proposing:

Street-legal parking – convert a number of existing parking spaces every couple of streets to motorcycle/scooter parking

•Spaces can be metered or un-metered
•The smaller size of two-wheel vehicles allows them to fit into unoccupied areas on streets and sidewalks, creating efficiencies in urban planning and increasing city revenues (if metered).
•Six motorcycles, scooters or limited-access motorcycles carrying from six to twelve people can be parked in the area normally taken up by one automobile. If, however, no motorcycle parking facility is provided in the area, one would possibly find those six motorcycles occupying up to six separate automobile spaces.

Convert unused space – cement curbs of a certain size can be converted to two-wheel parking. A specialized parking area for motorcycles and scooters not only leaves more space for the automobiles, but also caters to the riders’ needs by providing a well-lit, convenient and secure location in which they may confidently leave their vehicle. Such facilities can be small in area and can usually be located near a building entrance or at the end of a parking island.

Parking garages – designate parking spaces in municipal garages for two-wheel vehicles. Create a more equitable rate structure for two-wheel vehicle parking in private garages.

Sidewalk parking – permit scooters and motorcycles to be parked in designated areas on sidewalks and locked to structures which currently accommodate bicycles.

Designating scooter/motorcycle parking is one of the most urban things we could do in the St. Louis region. This ranks up there with actually having designated bicycle racks! This petition from Vespa is part of their Vespanomics website — a platform on oil dependence and how two-wheel transportation can help with the issue. It only has a few links to their main website — it is not a thinly veiled attempt at the environment just to sell you a scooter. In fact, Vespa has done a good job overall about being inclusive of other competing brands.

Local and national government leaders are charged with establishing transportation policies that address both short-term and long-term problems, are environmentally responsible and truly benefit the American consumer. With the support of federal, state and local governments, new options like scootering can bring immediate and substantial economic and environmental benefits to Americans and the communities in which they live.

To facilitate the adoption of scootering, U.S. Mayors and other elected officials should consider providing dedicated parking for scooters and motorcycles.

Now is the time to broaden the dialogue about America’s addiction to oil and its dependency on foreign imports in a way that includes technological as well as behavioral solutions.

I ask that everyone of you reading this take a minute and click on the above link to sign the petition. Doesn’t matter if you have a scooter or not or where you live. Just fill out the form to help support a more friendly policy toward parking for two-wheeled vehicles.

Of course if Vespa sends this to Mayor Slay they are kinda wasting their time as the Mayor’s office has little control over parking in the city. Our planning agency has little say either! No, parking in St. Louis is the responsibility of the Treasurer! Yes, Treasurer. Presumably accounting types know best when it comes to parking. The logic being parking is a revenue source so that belongs to the Treasurer. Not sure when this became part of the city’s charter but it is F’d up if you ask me. Larry Williams has been Treasurer of St. Louis since 1981. As you might expect, he ran unchallenged in the last election in 2004.

While we are on parking, we need to switch from individual meters and marked spaces to the more free-flowing parking model of progressive cities and institute a “pay-n-display” system for paying. The reason is short cars like mine do not need anywhere near as much as a Chevy Suburban or a Hummer. With more and more shorter cars around we can likely squeeze in another space per block. With four sides to a block and a good 40 blocks in the CBD we could easily get another 160 cars right in front of local businesses. Of course, using some of this newfound space for scooter/motorcycle parking would be wise.

Related Prior Posts:
•St. Louis Region Needs to Address Parking for Scooters & Motorcycles, April 2006
•Parking on Washington Avenue — Finally!, February 2006

Again, please sign the Vespatition!

– Steve

TOD Sites Abound in St. Louis

Transit Oriented Development, TOD, is a big topic in planning circles. The basic concept is to concentrate development activity around transit such as a subway or light rail station. A good mixed-use project with retail, office and residential can keep a station busy and transit cost-effective. A developer too can maintain/increase profits while building a bigger project.

To date I don’t think we’ve done the best job maximizing the existing MetroLink light rail stations. We are starting to see some work near stations in Illinois but the density is still relatively low. Granted, many of our stations were built in existing areas, some of which are quite urban. For example, downtown was already full and as lofts fill up former offices and warehouses we can be sure rail transit access had something to do with that.

We do have several areas of our light rail system that could benefit from increased development. The first comes to mind is 8th and Spruce, just west of the new Busch Stadium. Here the Metrolink line curves to change from east-west orientation under the highway to north-south under 8th. A new corner building with MetroLink running in the basement could prove popular. With the stadium station in place just across Spruce access would be a cinch. Don’t look for any underground parking with the train in the middle of the footprint but we must get to the point where not every place has dedicated parking. Besides, that is part of the point of transit. In this new building I’d have street-level retail/restuarant space facing both Spruce and 8th, a couple of floors of office space and then residential. Maybe it is at most 6-8 stories high. Still, that would do a wonderful job of urbanizing a prominent corner as well as adding density to a transit stop that doesn’t see much activity outside of game day. This new construction and users could compliment the renovation work in the adjacent Couples Station area.

A similar opportunity exists just to the west, between 14th and 18th along Clark St. Between the Civic Center Station (14th) and the Union Station Station (18th) is development nirvana (see map). At the immediate corner of 14th & Clark we’ve got a nice grove of trees leading to the station platforms. I could see a new building design just to the west, facing Clark, that leaves this corner plaza intact. However, I’d get out the chainsaw for the right building(s) on the corner at 14th. The problem here is the big curve is closer to street grade than I’d like and lowering it might be too costly. But, from what was once 15th to 16th you’ve got a clean shot over the tracks. Same for 16th to 18th.

Concentrating more residences near 18th and Clark would create more daily users for Union Station (so it is not entirely dependent upon tourist traffic). Offering downtown residential units without included garage space might also offer affordability to those that want a car-free lifestyle but cannot currently afford to live near a MetroLink station. Of course, garage space could be built on the main and a few upper levels with retail along the street-face and office & residential over the parking. A mix of housing in numerous price ranges might be the best solution.

While I’d have no opposition to a mid or high-rise tower I don’t think it is necessary either, at least not from a design perspective. Clark and the adjacent numbered streets would have had 3-6 story buildings originally. This creates a nice friendly scale along the sidewalk for pedestrians. Even is part of the structures did get taller a shorter height at the sidewalk would still be best.

The cost-effectiveness of construction over a functioning transit line is the big problem with this plan. The cost of the required concrete tunnel may necessitate more floors just to help break even. The concept is certainly worth detailed analysis.

As Metro (Bi-State) most likely owns the right-of-way used for MetroLink a developer would need their blessing. This would involve a lease or sale of the development rights over the right-of-way. This money could help ease the currently strapped transit agency while providing new users for the system.

Moving west out of downtown I think a new stop at Jefferson Ave is needed. The replacement bridge over the tracks is currently being planned so adding a transit stop during construction would be a simple affair, relative to retrofitting to an old bridge. The site to the east of Jefferson facing Scott (and the UPS facility) is ideal for concentrated development around a transit stop (map). With a new interchange at I-64 and 22nd Street it might actually be possible to connect Scott Ave with 21st or 20th street making it possible for those living at this new area to walk to Union Station. All this is adjacent to the proposed Chouteau Greenway. I’ve already covered the TOD possibilities at Grand in a prior post.

I think our developers do a good job converting existing buildings but when it comes to new construction I think they tend to seek out large tracts. The idea of building on smaller parcels just hasn’t quite sunk in yet. This land near these transit stops is not serving anyone at the moment but if developed could help Metro, the new occupants, adjacent retailers and restauranteurs and the City of St. Louis.

– Steve