http://interact.stltoday.com/blogzone/the-platform/uncategorized/2010/03/more-thoughts-on-interstate-70-downtown/

Sad that the StL region is so poorly managed and that local bloggers prefer favoritism over Complete Streets and livable communities. Think Small Live Small is the Lou.

The only thing a highway-based transit service is better than is nothing. However, if there is an opportunity to avoid a highway route, it should be avoided.

One problem is station aesthetics. Stations within a highway right of way are extremely noisy. Waiting for long periods can induce headaches. They are also disconnected from the streetscape, which can lead to a breeding ground for crime.

Even if those can be managed, you have to keep in mind that a person-trip is completed in a different way than a car trip. The car trip’s destination is not always within the proximity of the off-ramp. However, the person trip must often transfer to another vehicle to get to another destination. That’s a big penalty for a trip.

You know what’s a better way of finding out where rail riders travel? Look at your existing transit system’s ridership. The busiest rail lines will mimic the traffic patterns of the busiest bus lines.

If you don’t have busy bus lines to go by, you must take a look at what are existing busy transportation destinations and try to string them together like pearls on a necklace.

In addition, the stations place additional pressure on the elected leaders to include better pedestrian infrastructure surrounding these stations. Ideally mass transit would run through linear green parks. However favored routes by residents have been already influenced by the design and layout of our highways. Not to use this public space means mass transit has a low probability of being successful.

Living along the Extension it is not convenient and who cares about traveling to River Des Peres? I can travel faster on my bike even to downtown St Louis than I can on the Extension and it’s FREE. Time to travel to Lambert by car from the downtown Clayton is just 10 minutes while by the Extension 45 minutes. In both cases the Extension is the least attractive choice as the stations are too close together which elongates the needed time to travel. Case closed.

City to River is not a good old boys network. It is just a citizen’s group. You’re welcome to join it. There’s a discussion board on the website. This group promotes highway removal because Great Streets doesn’t, yet.

It looks like St. Louis’ 30 year plan calls for all its BRT routes to be on highways. Just as foolish as running the metrolink there. Bus stops off of highway ramps are not nice places to be dropped off. If you wanted to be on the other side of the highway, you’ll just have to try not to get killed when you make a dash for it.

Assuming that you are referring to the pedestrian connectivity issues, I agree. However, if the ROW is available, it could still be the most cost effective option.

I’ll also agree that I don’t like waiting for the “El” in the median of the Kennedy, Dan Ryan, or Eisenhower Expressways, but the alternative of having no transit at those locations is worse than transit in the freeway. That said, couldn’t they enclose stations along freeways to make the platforms less noisy and more pleasant?

I don’t want to concede this point because I view it as a great “teaching moment”. The renderings should – but clearly don’t – reflect St. Louis’ diversity. Hopefully, when the renderings are updated, more non-white people will be included.

I’m sure it’s an oversight[sic] – but these kinds of small slights are very illuminating and sadly common practie. It’s a clear message to non-white people – This project is not for you.