I found this on Urban St. Louis...

kman · Post by **kman** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:09 pm

man, oh man, oh man.

http://www.urbanstl.com/viewtopic.php?t=583

KansasCityCraka · Post by **KansasCityCraka** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:14 pm

I wish KC could land something like that..but for right now I think we are fine without it. Where would ours go to? The plaza, westport, crown center, and DT KC? I geuss we could do it...I doubt it will ever get approved here in the near future though.

kman · Post by **kman** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:19 pm

^at this point who cares where it goes. just get the thing STARTED. you can add to it later.

KansasCityCraka · Post by **KansasCityCraka** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 5:21 pm

We can't start any projects without having the parking issue solved..especially for this project..lol

Post by **mean** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 6:50 pm

Be glad we're not doing it. Building 19th century transportation infrastructure in the 21st century is el stupido grande.

cdschofield · Post by **cdschofield** » Fri Mar 18, 2005 7:31 pm

This reminds me of a KC anti LRT website that had a link to some guys website about how KC should have an underground LRT system because of the type of limestone the city is built on. The guy obviously had lots of time on his hands as the site was quite detailed with info on costs of tunneling in KC's existing underground warehouses. Schematics of how the system would go underground next to Crown Center. Info on the new generation of tunnel boring machines. I thought I bookmarked the site but I can't find it. His argument was that it would be cheaper for KC to build an underground instead of above ground system because of the city's unique limestone.

JivecitySTL · Post by **JivecitySTL** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 11:52 am

mean wrote:Be glad we're not doing it. Building 19th century transportation infrastructure in the 21st century is el stupido grande.

lol!

scooterj · Post by **scooterj** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 1:01 pm

It looks cool... but if this had been in KC instead of STL then after the article I saw this morning this project would be taken as "just another typicasl KC failure" by many...

[quote]
Posted on Sat, Mar. 19, 2005

Light rail extension far over budget

ST. LOUIS â€” A MetroLink light rail extension project is behind schedule and perhaps more than $100 million over budget, Metro president and chief executive officer Larry Salci said on Friday.

Salci's comments came a day after the St. Louis Post-Dispatch said the project was over budget by as much as $50 million.

Salci said the project extending the light rail system to the west was flawed from the beginning, with a design that was â€œnot buildable.â€

JivecitySTL · Post by **JivecitySTL** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 1:15 pm

Setbacks and budget overruns are expected with any infrastructure project in every city. Look at the Big Dig in Boston-- way behind schedule, way over budget. Look at the CTA transit studies in Chicago-- behind schedule, over budget. No big deal. So the MetroLink Green Line extension went over budget. It's no surprise to anyone. In fact, it would have been more surprising if it didn't go over budget.

WoodDraw · Post by **WoodDraw** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 3:24 pm

At least they are doing something. Just spent a week in Chicago and coming back here was depressing. The people there bitch about CTA but at least their transportation authority doesn't border on pure incompetence.

kman · Post by **kman** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 4:01 pm

WoodDraw wrote:At least they are doing something.

AMEM.

KCK · Post by **KCK** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 4:06 pm

Its pretty sad when there are more posts at the kcskyscrapers website about the St. Louis subway, than there are posts at urbanstl website.

JivecitySTL · Post by **JivecitySTL** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 4:34 pm

I don't get it, why is that sad?

KCK · Post by **KCK** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 4:53 pm

JivecitySTL wrote:I don't get it, why is that sad?

Not much activity on that website.

JivecitySTL · Post by **JivecitySTL** » Sat Mar 19, 2005 5:04 pm

It's not sad though, who really cares.

Post by **KCMax** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 4:21 pm

No big deal.

As long as its not YOUR money.

JivecitySTL · Post by **JivecitySTL** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:09 pm

As a St. Louis City taxpayer, it is my money. And I don't care if it's over budget and behind schedule. EVERY SINGLE PROJECT of this magnitude in any city is over budget and behind schedule. That's the cost of doing huge infrastructure improvements-- it's very, very expensive. The initial MetroLink line was over budget and behind schedule too, and look at it now-- successful enough to make this expansion project possible. I guarantee the final product will make it worth the cost and time.

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 6:16 pm

JivecitySTL wrote:As a St. Louis City taxpayer, it is my money. And I don't care if it's over budget and behind schedule. EVERY SINGLE PROJECT of this magnitude in any city is over budget and behind schedule.

That's why whenever a city official says that a project will cost X, I double the amount and ask myself if it's still worth voting for.

JivecitySTL · Post by **JivecitySTL** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 8:51 pm

^And for something like public transit, it usually is. Come on, you can't tell me you wouldn't love for KC to have this kind of infrastructure. I don't believe it.

KC0KEK · Post by **KC0KEK** » Mon Mar 21, 2005 9:41 pm

What would it cost to build a system here that's comparable to MetroLink in terms of miles?