Laserfiche WebLink
Session 1679, Minutes <br />September 30, 1996 <br /> <br />Page 12 <br /> <br />she has often observed the buses that transport University students are rarely full, which means the <br />ridership on the spur would be low. She felt a healthy ridership would be assured along the 1-64 route. <br /> <br />Mr. Edward Ruesing, 7309 Kingsbury, felt the Millbrook/Forest Park route is the logical way to connect <br />MetroLink between the existing line and points west through the Clayton business district. He suggested <br />the area in University City east of the Ritz Carton in Clayton would have a high potential for develop- <br />ment if this route is chosen. He also said property values near the Forest Park station in St. Louis have <br />increased, not decreased, and he urged Council to work for this spur. <br /> <br />Ms. Marian Steefel, 7023 Westmoreland, agreed that the University's buses operate with few riders and <br />that the Millbrook spur was not needed. <br /> <br />Mr. Victor Wickerhauser, 7047 Kingsbury, said he was strongly in favor of the Millbrook spur as he felt <br />it would significantly reduce auto traffic in the area. He suggested that speakers at this meeting could <br />not make decisions about neighborhoods along the proposed 1-64 route. He was strongly in favor of <br />public transportation within a short distance of the Loop business district and his house in particular. <br /> <br />Ms. Donna Harper, 7044 Lindell, said all of the plans she has seen appear to show MetroLink on grade, <br />and she was concerned about her children having to cross tracks to get to school. She also felt this spur <br />would literally divide the neighborhood. <br /> <br />Mr. Stephen J. Larnkin, 201 Westgate, said if the City waits to take a position until after East/West <br />Gateway makes a decision on an east/west route, it will be too late to protect residents' interests. He <br />did not feel the Millbrook route would help the Loop, noting the Delmar-Wabash station is only a short <br />walk from the Loop. Also, that route does not support the heart of University City, but primarily sup- <br />ports Washington University. He urged Council to oppose the Millbrook route, and to support the 1-64 <br />route by resolution now. <br /> <br />Mr. Charles Caspari, 7330 Maryland, supported the 1-64 route because he felt it would serve a large <br />number of people and institutions and be best for the entire area. The Millbrook route does not serve <br />many people, except those at the University. He said residents voted for MetroLink because they felt <br />it would be good for St. Louis, but the Millbrook spur would not be good for University City. <br /> <br />Mr. Robert Klepper, 6355 Washington, said he lives adjacent to the Loop and enjoys it. He felt the <br />Millbrook route would help the City in many ways--with new and expanding businesses, it would ease <br />congestion, reduce illegal parking, and bring more people to the Loop. He said property values are a <br />legitimate issue, but suggested that other areas with light rail be studied to see what happened when it <br />was implemented. He said the Council should do what is best for University City. <br /> <br />Mr. Carl Hoagland, 7120 Washington, suggested it was premature to pass a resolution endorsing the <br />1-64 route since the East/West Gateway engineering study is not finished and adequate information is <br />not yet available. He said studies of light rail in other cities show that property values near the line have <br /> <br /> <br />