Then I found this image and description on Cozad Commercial Real Estate’s website which shows the next phase of development.

Sunnen’s goals for Sunnen Station are to establish a master plan that will allow for future growth, development and adaptability to change in our constantly changing real estate market; as well as promote the lifestyle of the development, including access to transit, greenways and an urban mix of uses as a highly desirable place to work.

What a load of crap.

Cross-posted at nextSTL.

The “Streetcar Named No Desire To Nowhere,” which will radically change our City Scape, must be put to a vote of the University City electorate.

First off, I would like to thank the citizens of University City for having the foresight to narrow Delmar, a change made 50 years ago, that led to and created the vibrant Delmar Loop streetscape we all know today.

That being said, why are their always calls to put public transportation projects to a public vote, but never highway projects? Also, only a portion of the Loop Trolley route goes through University City; the majority of the route travels through the City of St. Louis. As much as I sympathize with reasons of its critics, the Loop Trolley should not be held hostage by a city that has so little at stake and so much to gain from the streetcar’s construction and implementation.

Of greater and severe importance — can we the 35,000 people of University City financially afford the lawsuits which will come due to the Public Safety Factor which will develop as a result of the First Responders creeping behind a streetcar while attempting to answer a call to save a life or put out a house fire? Frankly, I would hate to be a resident of Parkview Subdivision under this trolley plan. My life and property would be in jeopardy.

What is it about rail-based public transit that makes seemingly ordinary and smart people suddenly so fearful and paranoid?

There will be a Loop Trolley informational meeting this evening at the University City Public Library Auditorium located at 6701 Delmar Boulevard from 6:00 – 8:00 PM.

Ever considered having a MetroLink Station between the Central West End and Grand Avenue stations?

We need to hear from you! The St. Louis Development Corporation in partnership with CORTEX and the Missouri Botanical Garden will host a community work session to get your input on a potential MetroLink station in your neighborhood.

BE HEARD! Tell us how to make this station work for you and your neighborhood.

Refreshments will be served.

Any Questions? Contact Rachel Powers of Vector Communications at 314-621-5566 or rpowers@vector-comm-corp.com.

See this nextSTL article for the backstory on the development planned for the potential station’s vicinity.

Tuesday, May 15, 2012
5:00 – 7:00 PM
CORTEX Building Lobby
4320 Forest Park Ave
St. Louis, MO 63108

Some residents in University City are protesting the possible loss of 55 trees that line the Ackert Walkway between The Loop and Washington University.

The university and Great River Greenways would like to improve the trail, in particular by widening it from 8 ft to 10 ft. The large sweet gum trees that currently line the trail, disliked by some for the spiky gum balls they drop, would be replaced with 80 new trees of varying species that are less apt to litter the pathway.

I’m sympathetic to the residents fighting to preserve the trees. The trees are mature and, to my untrained eyes, appear very healthy. Mature trees provide much more shade and soak up much much more carbon dioxide than new trees. However, I support the argument to widen the path given the volume of pedestrians and bicyclists that utilize it. Designed appropriately, I believe this section of the Ackert Walkway could become much improved from everyone’s perspective.

Unfortunately, WU and GRG have already somewhat botched the pathway design both north and south of this section of trail. Hopefully, they won’t botch this section, as well.

The Kingshighway viaduct over the railroad tracks just south of I-44, one of the most decrepit bridges in St. Louis, will finally get rebuilt next year.

Originally built in 1936, the viaduct is literally crumbling apart and is in dire need of replacement. The sidewalk passageways on both sides of the viaduct, which were once bus stops, have been closed for ages.

The City of St. Louis will hold a public hearing on Wednesday, May 2 to gather people’s opinion on the proposed changes. From the Notice of Public Hearing document released by the city:

Present viaduct will be demolished and replaced with a new viaduct having 3 lanes in each direction with 5 foot sidewalks on each side of the roadway and concrete barriers on the outsides. New roadway will be 90 feet wide within existing 100 foot right-of-way, and the existing side roads leading down to Daggett Avenue and to the UPRR tracks will be eliminated. Much of the open space currently under the roadway will be filled in. Shaw Blvd., east of Kingshighway, will be re-configured to the south and a south-bound turn lane will be added in Kingshighway to allow left turns onto east-bound Shaw. Aesthetically designed features consistent with the adjoining neighborhoods will be incorporated into the bridge railings and lighting fixtures.

If there’s a complaint to be had, it’s that pedestrians deserve better (i.e. wider) than the minimum 5-ft wide sidewalks currently planned for the new sidewalk. Small portions of The Hill will also lose some accessibility due to the closure of Daggett at Kingshighway, but it’s unlikely anything can be done about that.

Kingshighway Viaduct Public Hearing
Wednesday, May 2, 2012
4:00 PM
St. Louis City Hall, Room 210
1200 Market Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63103

Enhancing passenger rail and improving freight rail access are among the top recommendations included in the new draft State Rail Plan, the Missouri Department of Transportation’s 20-year strategic framework for passenger and freight rail development in Missouri.

The plan reflects input from freight railroads operating in Missouri, shippers, economic and transportation agencies and citizens. MoDOT wants to know what you think. Join us at an upcoming public meeting, or by reviewing the draft plan online at www.morail.org.

Thursday, April 26, 2012
4:30 – 6:00 PM with a presentation at 4:45 PM
Kirkwood Train Station
110 West Argonne Dr
Kirkwood, MO 63122

Comments will be accepted until May 4.

Metro has postponed fare increases for the past two years in the wake of the passage of Proposition A in 2010 as it sought to restore and rebuild service. The proposed fare increase is part of Metro’s Moving Transit Forward plan for periodic fare increases to sustain transit services.

Between the three options being presented, I’m not sure whether option 2 or option 3 is best. I’m against option 1 as it seems unfair for transit riders who utilize and depend on Metro the most to bear the entire burden of sustaining transit services. Option 1 would mean an almost 10% increase in fares for monthly pass holders.

Monday, April 16, 2012
5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.
East St. Louis City Hall
Rotunda (1st Floor)
301 River Park Drive
East St. Louis, Illinois 62201

Wednesday, April 18, 2012
11:30 a.m. – 1:30 p.m.
St. Louis City Hall
Rotunda (1st Floor)
1200 Market Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63103

Wednesday, April 18, 2012
4:00 p.m. – 6:00 p.m.
St. Louis County Government Center
Second Floor
41 South Central
Clayton, Missouri 63105

Thursday, April 19, 2012
5:00 p.m. – 7:00 p.m.
Metro Headquarters
Board Room
707 North First Street
St. Louis, Missouri 63102

Metro is accepting public comments on the fare increase until April 27. Besides attending one of the public meetings above, comments can be submitted by phone at 314-335-3433 or by email at FareIncrease2012@metrostlouis.org.

Much as when the NPS revealed and opened up their environmental assessment for public comment, it is very important for everyone to take the time to submit comments to MoDOT with opinions on how this most dear of projects to St. Louis should proceed.

During the meeting, MoDOT engineers will be on hand to discuss several proposed alternatives for the Park over the Highway portion of the CAR2015 project, to include what the department believes is the preferred alternative. Engineers will also be able to discuss potential impacts of each alternative.

This meeting will allow the public to provide input, and comments, either directly to the engineers or in written comments, on the alternatives presented. This meeting is part of the process to complete necessary Federal requirements for the project.

Since there are no formal presentations during the public meeting, participants may attend at any time during the open house.

Tuesday, April 10, 2012
3:00 – 5:00 PM
St. Louis City Hall
Board of Aldermen boardroom (on the second floor)
1200 Market Street
St. Louis, Missouri, 63103

Update (April 9): Unsurprisingly, MoDOT has said that they are not considering the removal of I-70 due to the inability to complete such a project by the October 2015 deadlined imposed by CityArchRiver 2015.

The NPS Environmental Assessment will in fact assess the impacts of the proposed “lid” on the visitor experience, but only in the context of the proposed west entrance, revitalized Luther Ely Smith Square, and connectivity with the Old Courthouse.

It’s been a few weeks since I published the correspondence between myself and the National Park Service regarding the scope of and the commentary to the environmental assessment study of their CityArchRiver projects. Let me finally take this opportunity to detail my opinions more clearly.

The crux of my opinions regarding the project to renovate and re-imagine the Arch grounds revolve around the complete and utter lack of public input sought thus far by CityArchRiver. By public, I do not mean agencies that serve the public interest such as Great Rivers Greenway and MoDOT, but the general public itself.

CityArchRiver has been frustratingly silent for the past 1½ years. Since the selection of MVVA as the winner of the Arch grounds design competition, CityArchRiver has not hosted a single meeting wherein the general public has had an opportunity to comment on any of the elements or changes to the final design. The only attempts at public engagement CityArchRiver has made has been a pair of yearly project update presentations at which no public comments or questions were taken.

The only agency involved with the Arch grounds project that may be worse than CityArchRiver is MoDOT, at this time at least. MoDOT is the agency responsible for major upcoming changes to the roadway infrastructure along I-70. An environmental assessment study for changes to the I-70 corridor was promised last year, but has yet to be made public. My fear is that MoDOT will attempt to expand the scope of the Mississippi River Bridge project studies to get away with making its desired changes without the need for public input.

Public commentary, by the way, is overwhelmingly in favor of removing I-70 from in front of the Arch and past Laclede’s Landing. When the National Park Service announced their environmental assessment in July 2011, they gave the public it’s first and only opportunity in almost a year to comment on the proposed changes to the Arch Grounds. And while no public meetings were held, many people took the opportunity to submit their comments to the NPS, well over 60% of which expressed support for replacing I-70 in front of the Arch with an urban boulevard.

But I was severely disappointed to see the majority of comments categorized as “out of scope”, namely every comment made in favor of highway removal. The explanation from the NPS for the comment classifications was even more disappointing. Its explanation seems to imply that the lid is fait accompli and that it had no opinion or jurisdiction over the possibility of highway removal in favor of an at-grade boulevard.

More specifically, the NPS seems singularly focused on the experience of the out of town visitor and the strip of JNEM land between the Old Courthouse and the new entrance to the Museum of Westward Expansion. The NPS seems to care not about melding the park into the city it calls home. This is unfortunate given that one of the objectives of the NPS’s EA is to “Ensure that revitalization of the park improves connections between the city and the park and from the city and the park to the river.”

The NPS has expressed an opinion before regarding the highway infrastructure that surrounds much of the JNEM. Within the 2009 JNEM General Management Plan, the NPS said that it “would prefer and strongly supports the removal of the Interstate highway between Poplar Street Bridge and Eads Bridge.”

Unfortunately, a memorandum of understanding between many of the agencies participating in the Arch grounds project seems to have silenced, for now, the NPS from publicly commenting on projects within MoDOT’s domain.

So thus far, it’s been 3 years since City to River formed. It’s been 1½ years since every design competition finalist expressed support for the removal of I-70. It’s been 1½ years since the selection of MVVA as the winner of the design competition. It’s high time we had formal public discussions about the planned changes to the Arch grounds and its environs, including the idea of replacing the highway with an urban boulevard. Removal of I-70 may very well not become reality, but the concept should be studied.

And no, public meetings focusing on a proposed sales tax increase to provide additional funding for parks and recreation won’t cut it.

• MoDOT did announce a public meeting yesterday to discuss “Park over the Highway” alternatives. It will be held on April 10 at St. Louis City Hall from 3-5 PM. More on this later. Even so, I believe my points on MoDOT still stand.

Much more fascinating, however, is a new capital project listed in the budget that Metro has not yet publicly spoken about. It seems that Metro is investigating the possibility of fully automating the MetroLink line in Illinois from JJK Center to Shiloh-Scott AFB.

Metro’s budget is unfortunately short on details. Attempts to contact Metro regarding this project were unsuccessful aside from being told that more information will be available by this summer.

Assuming Metro decides to proceed with this project, Metro would. Evoke one of the only fully automated transit systems in the US. As the project is only for the segment from JJK Center to Shiloh-Scott, MetroLink would also become the only partially fully automated transit line in the world.

Today, the MetroLink Red Line takes 75 minutes to travel the 38 miles between Lambert Airport and Shiloh-Scott. The extent of the automation project takes 37 minutes to travel between JJK Center and Shiloh-Scott. Fully automating this segment, aside from saving Metro money from a reduction in labor expenses, should enable Metro to increase service in Illinois by extending the Blue Line out from Fairview Heights all the way to Shiloh-Scott.

Automating MetroLink will require full grade separation of the transit line. The rural environment MetroLink passes through in Illinois, however, should not make this too difficult to implement as there are only a handful of grade crossings on the line.