Transit Action Network (TAN)

Advocates for Improved and Expanded Transit in the Kansas City Region.

Archive for the ‘Local Transit Issues’ Category

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

Commuter Corridors Advisory Group Has First Meeting

Posted by Transit Action Network on September 8, 2011


The first meeting of the Jackson County Commuter Corridor Alternatives Analysis Stakeholder Advisory Panel was held on August 31. Project manager Shawn Dikes of Parsons Brinckerhoff said the study team is “starting from scratch,” and that they are not here to validate some pre-determined solution.  TAN advocates Janet Rogers and Mark McDowell are on the panel.

The study team offered a wider range of options than a lot of people expected: several bus alternatives; streetcar or light rail on a couple of alignments; and several “commuter rail” alignments that had not previously been seen in public. Dikes admitted, however, that they chose to eliminate such options as subways, monorails, and gondolas.  (That got a laugh.)

By consensus the group eliminated a commuter rail route that would terminate at the north edge of the river market.

Dikes reminded the panel that FTA funding for rail projects that are doing well in an AA are currently receiving a maximum of 50 % of the capital costs to build the system. Asking for less money increases a project’s chances of being federally funded.

Whether a suitable so-called “common line” can be found westward from near the sports complex into downtown Kansas City may turn out to be the critical question for commuter rail. At the meeting, TAN expressed concern that one of the routes would go through a disadvantaged community in the vicinity of 18th and Topping. Project work has to comply with Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of 1964.  Disadvantaged communities affected by the project have to be included in the planning process and the project cannot adversely affect the community. Lawsuits have been field against rail projects in other cities related to this issue.  MARC is already discussing these issues with community leaders.

Dikes said that the FTA would not fund rail that hurts bus service.  The rail service in this study would likely differ enough from express bus routes, that the express buses could not be eliminated in order to help pay for rail.

Transit Action Network posted some concerns a couple of weeks ago about the commuter rail concept as developed in last year’s corridor study: https://transactionkc.com/2011/08/16/consultants-face-big-challenge-studying-regional-rapid-rail/

The consultant team has drafted a “Purpose and Need” statement and is currently developing an executive summary.

According to the FTA: “(A) study “purpose and need” establishes the problems that must be addressed in the analysis; serves as the basis for the development of project goals, objectives, and evaluation measures; and provides a framework for determining which alternatives should be considered as reasonable options in a given corridor. … This information provides the context for performing the analysis and for identifying the measures against which alternatives strategies will be evaluated. It also serves as an introduction for decision makers, stakeholders, and the general public to the study area and its transportation problems and needs.”

The FTA goes on to say that “the purpose and need statement serves as the cornerstone for the alternatives analysis.” The statement should not point to one solution, but be as concise as possible, focusing on the primary transportation issues addressed in the alternatives analysis.

The first public meeting on the alternatives analysis will be from 4:00 to 7:00 p.m. on September 27, 2011 at the Ennovation Center, 201 N. Forest Avenue, Independence, Mo. The focus of the meeting will be on the purpose and need for the project and the range of alternatives being considered. Four public meetings are planned. Details will follow as they become available.

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues, Meeting Reports, Rail, Regional Transit Issue, Transit Studies | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Excitement at Union Station – Modern Streetcar – Hybrid MAX bus -Information on DCAA

Posted by Transit Action Network on August 23, 2011


Inside Union Station or outside in the bright sun, Kansas City came out in droves to view a new Modern Streetcar, compare it to the new Hybrid MAX bus and find out more about the Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis (DCAA) at the second public open house. Transit Action Network advocates had a time great taking pictures and talking about transit with such an interesting and enthusiastic group of people.

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues, Rail, Transit Studies | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Downtown Streetcar Would Be on Main or Grand

Posted by Transit Action Network on August 21, 2011


If a Downtown Streetcar line is built, it will be on Main Street or Grand Boulevard.

That was the big announcement from the Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis (DCAA) study team on Thursday, August 17, at the monthly meeting of the City’s Parking and Transportation Commission (PTC).  That body is acting as the study advisory committee for the DCAA.

Complete information has been posted on the project website maintained by Mid-America Regional Council:

http://www.kcsmartmoves.org/projects/downtowncorridor.aspx 

That site has links to all study documents, including:

+ The August 17 Technical Memorandum, which analyzes each potential route:

http://www.kcsmartmoves.org/pdf/downtownAA/KC-DCAA-Tier1-Screening-Tech-Memo.pdf

+ The August 17 consultant team presentation to PTC:

http://www.kcsmartmoves.org/pdf/downtownAA/KC-DCAA-Presentation-Parking-Transportation-Commission-8-17-11.pdf

+ A map of the two alignments for further study:

http://www.kcsmartmoves.org/pdf/downtownAA/KC-DCAA-Tier2-Alignment-Alternatives-Map.pdf

DCAA study manager Charlie Hales of HDR presented the recommendations to the Commission.  Seven possible routes were considered:  four were bi-directional routes (i.e., using the same street for both northbound and southbound tracks), and three were couplets (i.e., north on one street and south on another).  In all cases the end-points are 3rd and Grand on the north, and Pershing Road on the south.  The Grand route would terminate at Pershing and Main, while the Main route would terminate at Pershing and Grand.

Each of the two finalist routes has pluses and minuses. Grand offers the widest right-of-way (100 feet for nearly all of the distance), it is the straighter of the two, and it is closer to the government district and its concentration of jobs.  Main is closer to the geographic center of Downtown, closer to hotels, the Convention Center and Performing Arts Center, and closer to the center of the River Market district.  It also serves Union Station more directly.

Main gives less right-of-way to work with (about 60 feet), while Grand suffers from the prospect of having to be closed for major events at the Sprint Arena.  (That is a sticking point that the City never should have allowed to exist, in our opinion.  Letting a few transit vehicles through an on-street event should not be a big deal.)

With approval of these two potential routes by the PTC, the team will subject them to more intense study and present a recommendation for adoption at the September 21 meeting of PTC.

Selection of a route might be the most visible decision to be made, but it is far from the most important.  Other factors to get careful consideration include:

– What operating speed and level of service will be provided on the route?  Count us as among the many who have assumed from the beginning that this two-mile line would be the first segment of a longer rail line that would extend at least to the Plaza, and perhaps beyond.  We favor frequent service and as high a speed as can be accommodated in the corridor to make the service attractive.

– What fare collection mechanism will be used?  An off-board system is preferable since that would speed boarding and permit faster trips.  Some advocate making this a no-fare line — an attractive alternative but perhaps not practical.  Clearly a climb-on-board-and-put-cash-in-the-farebox system is undesirable.

– Would the streetcars travel in a reserved lane on the chosen street (preferable for a line that will ultimately serve as the last two miles of a longer line), or in “mixed traffic” (which may be acceptable for a local circulator line that might never run very fast).

– How will the streetcar work with existing transit routes?  KCATA has said it would reconfigure bus routes to work with the streetcar, but it’s not clear if that would be a tweaking of routes, or major shifts that might encourage more riders to use the streetcar to get to one end of the line or the other and then transfer to a bus for the rest of their trip.

– How will the streetcar be financed?  It’s been assumed all along that property owners and/or businesses and/or residents of the corridor would pick up a significant part of the cost of the line.  Just how that will happen is yet to be determined.

Those are among the questions that citizens should be asking at upcoming public meetings and events.

Formation of a Transportation Development District (TDD) is likely to be part of the funding mechanism, and under that arrangement only those most directly affected would go to the polls.  Out of concern for that question and the importance of building support from within the project area, Transit Action Network met early with leaders of the River Market Neighborhood Association, Downtown Neighborhood Association, and Crossroads Neighborhood Association.  Out of those meetings came Streetcar Neighbors:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Streetcar-Neighbors/265998336746337

We expect that group to play an ongoing leadership role in shaping this project as it evolves.

Finally, while this study is often referred to as a Downtown Streetcar study, it is officially an alternatives analysis, and all modes are being actively considered and evaluated against one another, including an upgraded MAX bus line.

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Rail, Transit Studies | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

TAN Support for Downtown Streetcar and Streetcar Neighbors

Posted by Transit Action Network on August 18, 2011


Transit Action Network recently sent this letter to the Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis Project Team.

Residents of the Greater Downtown Kansas City area are passionate about improving the state of transit downtown. Evidence for the importance of transit to Downtown residents, and their desire to improve it, is seen in their consistent support for transit ballot initiatives. Transit is also a critical part of realizing the goals of the Greater Downtown Area Plan and extending the benefit of investments already made.

As transit plans have come and gone, disunity between interest groups has weakened previous proposals to the extent that Kansas City continues to sit on the sidelines of the modern transit revolution. However, the latest proposal for a Downtown Streetcar represents a tremendous opportunity to make a significant improvement for Downtown and a lasting contribution to the city’s transit culture.

A group of downtown residents have recently come together to found Streetcar Neighbors to support the deployment of a downtown streetcar.

The downtown streetcar is the most realistic opportunity yet to bring rail transit to Kansas City. TAN would therefore like to express our support for the streetcar project and for the work of Streetcar Neighbors in bringing it about. It is our belief that this plan is feasible, economically sensible and, most importantly, achievable. We would encourage the project team to be innovative and consider any local funding options that can help make the project a reality and to do so as quickly as is prudent, setting aggressive timelines to begin realizing the benefits of this system as soon as possible.

We also endorse the following recommendations of Streetcar Neighbors and downtown neighborhood associations and other downtown organizations:

·         The system should utilize modern streetcar technology, capable of delivering a rider experience comparable to light rail in its speed and comfort.

·         To reduce rider confusion, the route should utilize a single street for both directions of travel, with considerations made for the best solution for the ends of the route.

·         The route should serve the River Market neighborhood on the north and adequately serve Crown Center and Union Station on the south.

Summary:_______________________________

             1. Modern streetcar
            2. Single street
            3. River Market terminus
            4. Include Crown Center / Union Station
            5. Open to local funding options
            6. Support aggressive timeline

Mark McDowell

Chair, TAN Downtown Streetcar Working Group

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Rail | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Consultants Face Big Challenge Studying Regional Rapid Rail

Posted by Transit Action Network on August 16, 2011


Parsons Brinckerhoff  (PB), a highly-respected transit consulting firm, has begun work on the $1.2 million Jackson County Commuter Corridors Alternatives Analysis. This analysis will evaluate two corridors from the Regional Rapid Rail (RRR) concept — one through Blue Springs using the Kansas City Southern line, and one through Lee’s Summit using the old Rock Island line — and compare commuter rail to alternatives such as express buses.

 The RRR concept, widely presented around the region last year, proposed six commuter rail corridors using underutilized and abandoned rail lines to provide a rail system from the suburbs into Union Station. After preliminary review of the concept in MARC’s Smart Moves Transit Implementation Plan Phase II: Commuter Corridors Study, it was determined that only two of the corridors warranted further study in the near term. Studying the other corridors was postponed due either to insufficient ridership or being too costly given the projected ridership.

 The two corridors now being studied provide plenty of issues to resolve. Perhaps the biggest unresolved issue is the so-called “Common Line,” which the two routes would share. There is no underutilized track for the 7 miles between Leeds Junction (just west of the Truman Sports Complex)  and Union Station. Nor is there readily usable right of way for the 2 miles immediately east of Union Station.  Therefore, several alternatives are being considered. These include running on city streets (e.g., Truman Road) at a maximum speed of 25 mph, or perhaps along the I-70 right-of-way. The former requires moving or hardening utilities, while the later requires modifications to bridges and exit and entrance ramps. TAN doubts that projected ridership can justify the cost entailed in any of these alternatives.

 The Common Line is critical to the feasibility of the RRR system. If a cost effective solution to the Common Line remains elusive, or if a potential solution undermines operating speed, then the whole RRR concept falls apart.

 There have been two previous studies of commuter rail in the I-70 corridor through Blue Springs using existing rail. In both cases ridership was insufficient to justify the cost of using existing rail into downtown Kansas City.  The RRR concept and the most recent study take that conclusion — plus the freight railroads’ assertion that they will not allow commuter rail on existing tracks into Union Station — and propose a Common Line on new rail as the solution. 

 There are several other outstanding concerns from the Phase II study, and there have been lively and skeptical discussions within the MARC Transit Committee. TAN has been vocal in expressing our skepticism. Cost estimates, travel times, and the absence of credible ridership projections have generated great concern too. All of these issues remain today for PB to resolve.

 An Alternatives Analysis involves consideration of multiple modes. There are new technologies and innovative ways to make Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and/or express buses compare favorably with rail.  Buses are efficient, cost-effective and can be used to effectively combat congestion. The fact that they can offer greater flexibility and a higher level of service for riders means that rail is not the only possible solution to our transit needs. Nor is rail necessarily more environmentally sustainable than modern buses, particularly where ridership is relatively low. 

 TAN has maintained a consistent position regarding transit service in commuter corridors. If rail is shown to be cost effective, to function well enough to attract additional commuters, and to qualify for FTA funding, then it should be implemented, along with the necessary local bus routes to support it. However, if rail is found not to be viable, and if express buses are again found to be the more feasible alternative, then the region should expand its commuter transit system using express buses. We should not continue to put off improving the region’s transit system just because rail isn’t practical at the present time. We need to build a system that serves commuters today, and that makes sense for our region for the future. The Alternatives Analysis should guide the region to an appropriate decision.

 TAN has sought and been granted a formal role on the AA Advisory Committee, and we have already met with the study team.  In addition, we’ll closely follow the study through our representation on MARC’s Transit Committee.

 What will be the best way to provide mobility from the suburbs into the central business district?  Stay tuned.  The Kansas City region definitely needs to improve its public transit system, and this study will help us decide how best to meet that need.

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Rail, Regional Transit Issue, Transit Studies | Tagged: , | 1 Comment »

Council Should Delay Chastain Vote

Posted by Transit Action Network on August 15, 2011


Councilman Russ Johnson is asking the full Council to defer action on an ordinance that would put Clay Chastain’s initiative petition on the ballot.  We understand the Council has sixty days to act, and that delay would move any such vote from November to early next year.  Transit Action Network fully supports delay because the initiative proposal is almost certainly unworkable, and because further discussion of it at this time would interfere with and confuse the current study and discussion related to a proposed Downtown Streetcar.  The streetcar appears to be eminently doable, and has a growing level of support within the River Market to Crown Center corridor.
Let the voters decide on the Chastain initiative — just not quite yet.

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Rail | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Grand Boulevard Streetscape Plan – 1st Community Meeting-Aug 17

Posted by Transit Action Network on August 12, 2011


The architectural firm BNIM and Kansas City, MO are in the first phase of visioning and planning for what the Grand Boulevard corridor might look like, and would like to have your participation in the process. The study area boundaries are generally defined as Grand Boulevard from Missouri River Levee Road at ASB Bridge to E. 28th Street and Main Street.

When: Wednesday, August 17th, 6-8pm

Where: UMB Bank Auditorium

1010 Grand Blvd, Kansas City, MO

Print the invitation and post it around town and at work. Invitation: 1st Community Meeting-Grand Blvd

Visit the project website  to learn more and view two slide shows about the project.

This project has potential to encourage multi-modal transit options, serve as a catalyst for economic development, improve connections to major activity centers, and serve as an icon and precedent for creating complete streets in Kansas City.  The project team is working closely with the Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis team to determine the best route for a potential streetcar. Your input is invaluable to the future of this project.

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues | Leave a Comment »

EPA in the Lenexa Corporate Wilderness-update

Posted by Transit Action Network on August 9, 2011


As we reported in our recent article GSA and EPA Make a Bad Move, the current owner of the EPA building in Kansas City, Kansas, Urban America, protested the GSA bid process to the Government Accountability Office Bid Protest Forum. The GAO has published the results of that case. Urban America filed the case under the address name of 901 North 5th Street, LLC. To no ones surprise Urban America lost and the EPA will be moving to Lenexa.

We feel so sorry for the EPA employees. This location site is awful, even if you drive. It is in the middle of nowhere in the far western suburbs of the region. The building is so far back from the street that you can barely see it at the end of the huge parking lot. They certainly aren’t going to walk to lunch or take transit to work. Walking down these busy streets would be dangerous since so many of them don’t have sidewalks.  These pictures were taken about half way into the parking lot.

Here is the short version of the result. The decision was made in two parts, both in favor of the GSA.

DIGEST

 1.  Protest that agency’s evaluation and selection decision were flawed is denied where the record shows that both the evaluation and the resulting selection decision were reasonable and consistent with the solicitation’s evaluation factors.

 2.  Protest that agency failed to comply with terms of Executive Order 12072 is dismissed; our Office does not normally review allegations of an agency’s failure to comply with executive branch policies.

See the complete GAO decisions. GAO Decision 901_NORTH_FIFTH_STREET__LLC vs GSA

In the report the GAO explains that Executive Order 12072 prescribes policies and directives regarding the planning, acquisition, utilization and management of federal facilities. Since it is not mentioned in the solicitation, GAO would not rule on it.

In law there are deadlines for bringing cases or objecting. All of the complaints about what was or was not in the solicitation should have been made before the submission deadline, but no one was paying attention. No one involved raised the red flag, challenged the selection area in the solicitation, questioned that multiple Presidential Executive Orders  were ignored, or complained that clearly defined governmental goals and principles were ignored before the bids were completed.

Hopefully two good things come out of this debacle.

1. Cities and companies take a proactive position to make sure government solicitations are in line with the current understanding of the requirements at the beginning of the process. GSA could have been challenged at that point and the solicitation requirements may have been changed.

2 These government offices are writing the siting recommendations that will incorporate the larger government sustainability goals that were ignored in this solicitation. They have already had two drafts.

U.S. Department of Transportation, U.S. General Services Administration, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, U.S. Department of Defense, U.S. Department of Homeland Security

They need to hurry up and implement the Recommendations for Siting Federal Facilities so GSA stops undermining many of the sustainability goals of the government.

Contact the EPA and GSA and tell them both to implement the “Recommendations for Sustainable Siting of Federal Facilities”.

 GSA

Washington D.C.- Administrator of the General Services Administration,

Martha N. Johnson (202) 501-0800  martha.johnson@gsa.gov

Two special email addresses have been established to collect comments about this move

Washington D.C. office kc-epa@gsa.gov

Local office kansasepa@gsa.gov

EPA 

Washington D.C.- Administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency

Lisa P. Jackson jackson.lisap@epa.gov

Local EPA Office Phone: (913) 551-7003

Region 7 EPA REGIONAL ADMINISTRATOR

Karl Brooks x7303  Brooks.Karl@epa.gov

Posted in Action, Local Transit Issues, National Transit Issues, Regional Transit Issue | 3 Comments »

State Ave. Connex Open House-AUG 10

Posted by Transit Action Network on August 6, 2011


Attend the second open house for the State Avenue Connex Transit Improvement Project and learn about the exciting transit improvements being made.

Where: Unified Government Neighborhood Resource Center (4601 State Avenue, Suite 84) in Kansas City, KS. The center is located in the lower level of Indian Springs Mall. Access is available from the southeast entrance.  (Route information to the open house)

When: 3 to 5:30 p.m. on Wednesday, August 10, 2011

More than $10 million in transit improvements are being made on the Minnesota/State Avenue route in Kansas City, Kansas.  Over the next two years commuters will benefit from the enhancements on this major east-west route in Wyandotte County. State Avenue links jobs, neighborhoods and activity centers from Kansas City’s urban core to newer development in the Village West area. These improvements are being paid for through the federal government TIGER grant.

For more route information and schedules, log on to http://www.kcata.org or call 816-221-0660 from 6 a.m. to 7 p.m. on weekdays.

Questions?

Keith Sanders, Project Manager
Kansas City Area Transportation Authority
816-346-0359
ksanders@kcata.org
http://www.kcata.org

Emerick Cross, Interim Transit Manager
Unified Government Transit
913-573-6784
ecross@wycokck.org
http://www.wycokck.org

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Meet the TIGER

Posted by Transit Action Network on August 4, 2011


Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) is producing a video series about how our bi-state area is using the federal TIGER grant we received.

TIGER (Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery) grants were born out of the recession. TIGER is a national discretionary and competitive grant program of the U.S. Department of Transportation funded by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. The Kansas City bi-state region received $50 million in federal funds for transportation infrastructure projects along several regional transit corridors and in the Green Impact Zone in Kansas City, Mo. David Warm, MARC director, says these investments will improve sustainability, competitiveness and position us for success in the 21st century economy.

The series will be produced over the next few years to document the Kansas City regional TIGER improvements.

View the TIGER Introductory Six-Minute Video on the MARC website or YouTube. Future videos are expected to be shorter and focus on individual projects, event/activities and interviews.

To monitor our regional TIGER grants visit the MARC TIGER website or track the 120 projects funded by this grant.

Congress is making a third round of TIGER grants available. These grants are replacing a lot of earmarks. MARC will probably prepare a TIGER III application and potential submissions are being discussed.

Posted in Local Transit Issues, National Transit Issues, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

How Our Region Should Respond to the Brookings Report

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 22, 2011


The recent Brookings Institute report on transit access to jobs, “Missed Opportunity: Transit and Jobs in Metropolitan America,” was released more than two months ago.  It ranked our region 90th out of the top 100 urban regions in our ability to get people to jobs by transit.  That got the attention of many of the region’s leaders — at least for a couple of weeks.

Some might quibble with the study methodology (and Brookings would probably admit to some flaws), but we can all agree that the current transit network doesn’t do a very good job of getting people to jobs here in the Kansas City region.

The question is: What do we do about it?

It’s obvious that the region needs to invest more in transit.  We already knew that.  Missouri invested only $119,000 in the KCATA last year, compared with the $10’s of millions that many other states with large urban areas invest in their transit systems. Even Kansas invests more in its urban transit systems than does Missouri.

But we don’t just have just a transit problem, we have a job sprawl problem.  New employment keeps getting scattered out on the edges of our region in places that are beyond the current transit network and would be costly to serve by transit.

Our region’s economic development people apparently give little or no consideration to transit availability when they try to attract new employers, and competing local jurisdictions seem to fall all over themselves to hand out tax breaks — again, without considering transit availability.

We’ve known for a long time that two-thirds of transit riders are going to work, or going in search of work.  The Brookings report helps to re-frame the transit issue as one of equitable access to jobs and other opportunities.  People who need and want jobs often can’t get to them — can’t even get to a job interview — because they don’t have a reliable car and transit service is lacking.  The situation is just going to get worse in the future as gas prices continue their upward trend and more people need to turn to transit.

Mid-America Regional Council and the transit agencies are actively engaged in many transit studies and projects: the Smart Moves Transit Plan, Downtown and Commuter Corridor  Studies, and investments to make additional corridors “BRT-ready”. These are all good, but Transit Action Network’s impression — and we hope we’re wrong — is that the region doesn’t intend to do much more than it is already doing.  Unfortunately, that isn’t enough to rectify the problems identified in the Brookings Report.

Moreover, MARC and the transit agencies can’t do everything that’s needed.  City and county public officials must be aware of the problem, must take it seriously, and must implement many of the necessary steps.

Transit Action Network makes the following recommendations to the region’s leadership:

1 – Identify the 500 largest job locations (including major “opportunity locations” such as health care, shopping, higher education) in the region, measure how well our transit network serves those locations, promote better transit service to these locations where needed, and track how we improve the situation over time.

2 – Track local, state and federal money used to operate our public transit systems over time, adjusted for inflation.

3 – Publish an annual “Transit Access to Opportunities Report Card” based on the information gathered, and share it with elected officials and the public.

In addition to collecting and reporting data:

4 – Continue to work for additional transit funding.

5 – Impress upon local and regional economic development people, as well as local public officials, the importance of guiding development to existing “activity centers” and transit-served corridors when new employers are courted, or when current employers relocate. That’s called for in our region’s policy on new development, and it requires a new kind of “affirmative action” by local jurisdictions to make sure it happens.

6 – Identify transit friendly land use and zoning policies, and provide municipalities with appropriate templates to assist in adopting such policies.

7 – Discourage public subsidies or incentives for employers who locate beyond the reach of public transit.

8 – Work with state, federal, and private organizations involved with the financing of multi-family housing to make sure it’s located near employment and transit.

9 – Improve coordination of services currently provided by our three transit providers to make using transit more “seamless” for transit riders.

If the Kansas City region is to avoid falling behind in its struggle to compete with other cities, we must place higher priority on getting people to jobs by transit.

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Open House in Independece July 19 and July 23 -Potential Transit Alternative

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 19, 2011


The Independence City Council Transit Committee is seeking public input on the potential changes to the transit system.

Open House meetings for the Potential Transit System will take place on:

  • Tuesday, July 19, 2011
    • 2:30 pm to 4:30 pm at Noland Road Baptist Church, 4505 S. Noland Road
    • 5:30 to 7:30 at Hawthorn Place Apts Gymnasium, 16995 Dover Lane
  • Saturday, July 23, 2011
    • 1:30 pm to 3:30 pm at Palmer Center, 218 A North Pleasant Street

There are no cuts planned to the current service.

The goal is to:

  • Improve Efficiency of Resources
  • Increase Ridership
  • Improve Access to Public Facilities
  • Increase Opportunities to Shop Local
  • Improve Access to Employment

Take the online survey or print the  Potential Transit System survey and mail it. You can listen to a detailed description of the changes on the website.  Independence Open House

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Johnson County Transit Open House – July 19

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 18, 2011


Johnson County Transit is having an open house, to present the transit investments along  Metcalf Avenue and Shawnee Mission Parkway that are being funded by the federal government  Transportation Investment Generating Economic Recovery (TIGER) Grant.

  • When: Tuesday July 19
  • When: 5 to 7 pm
  • Where: Matt Ross Community Center at 8101 Marty, Overland Park, KS 66204

Significant improvements will be made to passenger facilities in this transit corridor as well as improving the transit signal priority system.  The project will include:

  • Eighteen transit stations;
  • Two park-and-ride facilities;
  • Pedestrian access improvements along Metcalf Avenue from 87th Street to College Boulevard;
  • Pedestrian access improvements at Broadmoor and Martway;
  • A transit signal priority system, which will improve bus movement, timing and efficiency; and
  • A transit center adjacent to Mission’s downtown, to support existing transit service and future local bus service.

Representatives from Johnson County Transit (JCT), the cities of Overland Park, Mission and Roeland Park and project team members will be available to answer questions.

Open House Invitation

TAN hopes that these improvements will encourage Johnson County to devote more money to additional transit services.

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

GSA and EPA Make A Bad Move

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 16, 2011


As transit advocates the hypocrisy of the local General Services Administration (GSA) and local Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to move the Region 7 EPA offices from downtown Kansas City, Kansas to a building in Lenexa, Kansas is almost unbearable.

The EPA facility is moving from a transit rich location in a city center in the middle of the region to an extreme western suburb with a deplorable level of transit service.

Keep in mind that the decisions around this move were made locally and deliberately. This move is not the decision of some bureaucrat in Washington, D.C. who doesn’t know the difference between Kansas City, KS and Kansas City, MO. The GSA office is local. They knew that leaving the current EPA facility meant they would leave downtown Kansas City, Kansas since there isn’t another qualified building for the EPA needs in that vicinity.  Deciding to stay in Kansas meant they would move to the suburbs. Although the GSA Solicitation For Offers has a “city center neighborhood” location option, this was a false choice since they eliminated that possibility by not allowing Missouri to compete. They had just failed after three years to negotiate a new lease with the only qualifying building in a city center in Kansas. Unless the bid submission for the current EPA building changed drastically from earlier negotiations, they were on their way to the suburbs.

Even if the area is stuck with this result we should complain to the heads of the GSA and EPA and tell them to get their internal house in order and instruct their employees to abide by government goals, priorities and Presidential Executive Orders. Federal facilities are supposed to be located in sustainable locations in sustainable communities. According to a government website sustainable communities are places that have a variety of housing and transportation choices with destinations close to home.

The local GSA office made the worst location decision possible.

 When the GSA couldn’t find enough qualified bidders close to the Science and Technology lab in KCK they extended the search area from the lab and limited the search to Kansas. They had to go out 20 miles to even include this Lenexa building. Google transit calculates a 20-21 mile drive to this building from the science lab.  This was the wrong decision.

It is common knowledge in this region that the EPA used to be located in Missouri. It was moved from Missouri to downtown Kansas City, Kansas apparently due to congressional pressure to help revitalize downtown KCK. (Timeline)

The GSA says they had congressional approval to extend the search distance and stay in Kansas, However, the local GSA made this determination and then submitted it to Congress for approval and received this reply, “The GSA Contracting Officer was directed to consider the expansion approved if Congress had not responded by Dec. 16, 2009. No inquiry from Congress was received.” EPA Regional Office Background April 20, 2011. So they got permission for this search area by default.

TAN believes if the rationale for being in KCK is abandoned then the reason to limit the search to Kansas is void and Missouri should have been included in the central business district search. In this case, there may not have been a need to extend the distance out to the extreme western suburbs of the region.

The federal government agrees with this position. Presidential Executive Order 13514 on Federal Leadership In Environmental, Energy, and Economic Performance clearly states federal facilities should “Operate high performance sustainable buildings in sustainable locations” and ensure “that planning for new Federal facilities or new leases includes consideration of sites that are pedestrian friendly, near existing employment centers, and accessible to public transit, and emphasizes existing central cities …”

Executive Order 13514 had been in place for over a year when the GSA Solicitation For Offers (SFO) for a new location was released. Previous executive orders covering sustainability issues have been in effect since Nixon. What happened here doesn’t appear to abide by either the letter or the spirit of the Order by either the local GSA or the local EPA.

 Although the EPA didn’t make the decision to move, and they don’t contract to lease buildings for federal facilities, EPA isn’t blameless. The EPA Program For Requirements document and the GSA Solicitation ignored Executive Oder 13514 and ignored sustainable communities and sustainable locations. The EPA document even fails to list their Office for Sustainable Communities.  (EPA “Program Requirements” starts on page 83 of the Executed Lease Agreement)

GSA has added a page to its website regarding this move and its commitment to Executive Order 13514. It states “GSA has enthusiastically embraced that direction “, but cost was a bigger factor. This contains only a kernel of truth. Sustainable buildings have been enthusiastically embraced.  However the evidence shows there was no mention of sustainable communities or locations in either the GSA or EPA “Sustainability” section of their documents. They didn’t even pretend to abide by this part of the Presidential Executive Order. Of course lower bids can be obtained if major factors are left out of the solicitation.

Transit Situation

 The building at 11201 Renner Boulevard, Lenexa doesn’t qualify as a sustainable location.

 The transit situation at this location is awful. Either the buses don’t cover a long enough workday or they are too far away. If you are disabled and can’t drive or afford a $50,000 specially equipped van, you may not be able to get to work. Area ADA transit services either don’t go to Lenexa or are already overbooked. Add to this the fact that the buses are so slow hardly anyone uses them.

GSA says that less than 5% of the EPA employees use public transit. They aren’t counting all of the public transportation services. Another 75 people use the KCATA vanpool service, AdVANtage. Johnson County Transit (JCT) doesn’t have a vanpool program. So between the buses, vans and ADA public transportation services provided by KCATA and Unified Government Transit (UGT) that is closer to 100 of the 670 employees, or 15%. That is a significant number of employees who are going to lose their public transportation options.

Johnson County, where Lenexa is located, is basically a “transit desert” except for some commuter routes into downtown KCMO and the K-10 Connector to Lawrence, KS. The lack of transit service and the job sprawl in this part of the metro area are the main reasons that Kansas City rated 90 of 100 in the recent Brookings Institute report on job accessibility in the top 100 cities. JCT has no money to start new services, even though they are located in one of the richest counties in the US, but they may be able to change the routes to be closer to the facility.

Lenexa will benefit significantly if the EPA relocates there. TAN would like to see Lenexa step forward to support increased transit funding in Johnson County to improve the transit situation.

The cost issue

GSA cites the cost difference as the major reason for the choice of the new location. Of course everyone wants to save the government lots of money. However in this economic climate there is every reason to believe that a facility in Missouri, in the city center and much closer to the Science lab, could have made a comparable offer. We won’t know though since the GSA eliminated that possibility.

 Conclusion

We can’t turn back the clock and have GSA and Urban America, the owner of the current EPA building in Kansas City, Kansas, agree to a lease. Unfortunately the lease for the Lenexa building was signed April 4, 2011. (Executed Lease Agreement)

Urban America has filed an official bid protest with the General Accountability Office (GAO) Bid Protest Forum. By July 25, 2011 the GAO has to rule on whether federal procurement law was violated. The GAO bid protest process can only result in a recommendation. Since the contract has been signed even if Urban America wins the bid protest, the likely outcome would be a recommendation to pay Urban America for the cost of the bid process. (Timeline)

There is a terrible irony to moving the EPA and the Region 7 Sustainable Communities Office to this new location. How can government agencies move employees to a location that undermines what they stand for and the work they are committed to do?

TAN believes that the federal government must lead by example as stated in the Executive Order. The federal government should not add to the job-sprawl in Johnson County in direct conflict of a Presidential Executive Order, especially when there was such an obvious alternative by allowing Missouri facilities to compete.

Even if the GSA is not found guilty of breaking the law it doesn’t mean we shouldn’t complain to keep this from happening again.

Contact the EPA and GSA to let them know what you think about their actions and tell them both locally and in Washington, D.C. to implement the “Recommendations  for Sustainable Siting of Federal Facilities”.

 GSA

Washington D.C.- Administrator of the General Services Administration, Martha N. Johnson (202) 501-0800  martha.johnson@gsa.gov

Two special email addresses have been established to collect comments about this move: Washington D.C. office kc-epa@gsa.gov, Local office kansasepa@gsa.gov

EPA 

Washington D.C.- Administrator for the Environmental Protection Agency, Lisa P. Jackson jackson.lisap@epa.gov

Local EPA Office Phone: (913) 551-7003, Region 7 EPA Regional Administrator – Karl Brooks x7303  Brooks.Karl@epa.gov

Additional reading – Kaid Benefield’s blog http://switchboard.nrdc.org/blogs/kbenfield/epa_region_7_we_were_just_kidd.html

Posted in Action, Local Transit Issues, National Transit Issues, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Please Comment on the Downtown Corridor (Streetcar) Alternatives Analysis

Posted by Transit Action Network on June 28, 2011


More than 100 people attended the first open house for the Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis. However if you missed the open house you can still see the presentation and the maps, and include your comments about the study.

See the first presentation  DCAA Overview-Presentation1

These are the various alignment alternatives being considered for the streetcar.

A.”Bi-directional” options – both tracks running north and south on a single street.

Grand Avenue

Walnut Street

Main Street

Baltimore Avenue

A reason to use single streets is expressed in the Nelson/Nygaard Comprehensive Service Analysis currently underway for the KCATA bus system.

“Routes should operate along the same alignment in both directions to make it easy for riders to know how to return to their location of trip origin. All routes should operate along the same alignment in both directions, except in cases where such operation is not possible due to one-way streets or turn restrictions.”

B. “Couplet” options – one direction runs on one street while the other direction runs on an adjacent street. All couplet options contain streets that are currently configured for two-way auto traffic (in whole or just sections).

Grand/Walnut Couplet

Main/Walnut Couplet

Main/Baltimore Couplet

A reason to use couplets, when not necessary due to street constraints, is for the potential of greater economic development. Many people see rail as an engine of economic development and if the route is split onto two streets then it may generate additional development.

South of 20th Street, all streetcars run on Main or Grand. Baltimore options divert to Main at 10th Street. The River Market is a large loop in all scenarios.

View the maps for the various alignments. DCAA-Alignment-Alternatives-Map

COMMENT FORM: Be sure to fill out a comment form about the plan.

Visit KCSmartMoves to keep up-to-date with the study.

Posted in Action, Local Transit Issues, Rail, Transit Studies | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

KCATA Board to Consider Draft Transit Service Guidelines

Posted by Transit Action Network on June 19, 2011


As part of its Comprehensive Service Analysis (CSA), KCATA and the Nelson Nygaard team have developed proposed service guidelines for KCATA “Metro” transit services.  This is a draft report and subject to change, yet it is developed to the point that the study team is presenting it to the Board of Commissioners on June 22.

From the Board Briefing:

The service guidelines are intended to aid KCATA in designing route service, setting appropriate service levels, establishing minimum levels of service performance, and continuously evaluating route performance.   

In the context of the CSA, the proposed service guidelines will also serve as a primary tool in developing recommended service plans and educating riders and stakeholders about the plan and route design principles.

At the June 22 KCATA Board Meeting staff will provide an overview of the draft transit service guidelines.

In the near future there will be an opportunity for public comment. In the meantime you can read the draft here.  KCATA CSA Draft Transit Service Guidelines June 2011

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Transit Studies | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

June 21 – First Open House for Downtown Corridor (Streetcar) Alternatives Analysis

Posted by Transit Action Network on June 13, 2011


June 21, 2011: The partnership team for the Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis will hold the first public open house to learn about the study and alignment alternatives for a possible starter line. The open house is between 4-6:30 pm in the Helzberg Auditorium at the Central Branch of the Kansas City Public Library at 10th and Main. Short, identical presentations will be given at 4:30 and 5:30 p.m.

Read the news release: Open house scheduled for Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis

Comment or RSVP at the FACEBOOK event page: Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis Open House #1

The partnership team has set up a Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis webpage. Under Study Materials get the FAQ and Fact Sheet #1 which includes a map.

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues | Tagged: , , | 1 Comment »

June 13 – WHY KC Region Ranked 90th of 100 and What To Do About It

Posted by Transit Action Network on June 8, 2011


The MARC TRANSIT COMMITTEE is sponsoring a Special Forum to present the study and the findings on the Brookings Institution Report

Presenter: Brookings’ co-author Elizabeth Kneebone

When: June 13 at 1:30 pm

Where:  Kauffman Foundation Conference Center, Paseo Room-changed to Town Square Room, 4801 Rockhill Road. Kansas City, Mo 64110

This forum will focus on the report Missed Opportunity: Transit and Jobs in Metropolitan America which ranks the top 100 cities for transit access to jobs. Following the presentation, there will be an open discussion on current transit initiatives and the crafting of a regional response to this report. This meeting is open to the public.

Brookings divided the metro area into the CITY and the SUBURBS. The CITY is defined as both the city of Kansas City and the Unified Government of Wyandotte County. Everything else in the metro is the SUBURBS. Unfortunately the suburbs in their study go so far out that a lot of rural area is included.

The report evaluates the ability of people within ¾ mile of a transit stop or station to get to work in 90 minutes using public transit. Brookings is measuring if transit is even possible to take to work. We don’t fully agree with Brookings approach, for instance many people in the suburbs who live farther than ¾ mile from a transit stop have transit access to work using park and ride lots.

Even with our concerns about the report, it does point out the seriousness of our transit situation. 80% of the CITY has transit coverage but only 25% of the jobs in the metro area are accessible by that transit. The report says only 33% of the suburbs have transit coverage but only 10% of all jobs are reachable by transit in 90 minutes from the suburbs. The overall KC job access rate for the metro area is calculated at 18%.

Of course the biggest question is how will the region use this information to better serve the needs of the community with transit.

TAN doesn’t agree with the Brookings ranking, and we can certainly quibble with their methodology, but we can all agree that our transit-to-jobs situation needs work.  While we don’t have all the answers, we do have some thoughts about tentative actions:

  • Additional funding for transit is needed
  • A set of relevant and objective local measures are needed to track our future progress in making transit available to more people
  • Since it will take more than “throwing money at transit” to achieve these ends, such as providing a transit option to more of the region’s residents for access to jobs and other opportunities, it will take deliberate attention to where future development is located, especially when public incentives are involved.
  • Although there are notable improvements recently, continued efforts are needed between the transit providers to provide a seamless transit experience for riders.

This forum is open to the public and if you are interested in transit please come take part. TAN will be present to make sure we understand WHY we rated so low and to help develop a response.

Multiple comments and criticisms relating to the new transit report are showing up in the media and on the blogs including TAN’s article last week. You may find them interesting reading. One item that seems to drive several bloggers crazy is that New York didn’t come out on top and it was beaten by some small cities. Honolulu came out number one.

Nate Silver’s Five Thirty Eight column in the New York Times

On the Economics of Mass Transit and the Value of Common Sense

Brookings has responded to Nate’s comments with further explanations about the report. New York has a great transit system but not everyone in the suburbs has access which lowered its ranking.

Maintenance on Silver’s Transit Line by Alan Berube and Robert Puentes

Other commentaries

Kaid Benfield on the NRDC staff blog

Warning: transit data may not mean what you think they mean

Richard Layman from Urban Places and Spaces

The weird findings on transit from the recent Brookings Institution

Noah Kazis on Streets Blog

Do 12 American Regions Have Better Transit Access Than NYC? Doubtful.

Alon Levy on Pedestrian Observations

Brookings Folly

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Upcoming Public Events

Posted by Transit Action Network on May 30, 2011


First Partners Congress on Creating Sustainable Places

MARC is holding the first Partners Congress, to learn more about Creating Sustainable Places and provide your input — through facilitated breakout sessions and electronic polling. Sustainable places require good transit options.

When: Wednesday, June 1, 2011, 9 a.m. – noon, (Registration at 8:30 a.m.)

Where: Jack Reardon Convention Center, 500 Minnesota Ave., Kansas City, KS 66101

Who Should Attend: Anyone from the public or private sector who is interested in creating a more resilient and adaptable region.

Registration: There is no cost to attend, but registration is required. Register online or call 816-701-8234.

Open House for State Avenue Corridor Transit Improvements

 The Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (KCATA) and the Unified Government of Wyandotte County-Kansas City, Ks. (UG), are holding an open house to discuss preliminary design plans for the Minnesota/State Avenue transit corridor.

When: Tuesday, June 7, 2011, 4 p.m. to 6 p.m.

Where: McCarthy Gallery Room, Jack Reardon Convention Center, 500 Minnesota Ave., Kansas City, KS 66101

Who Should Attend: Any area residents, businesses and commuters wanting to review project exhibits and provide comment. KCATA and UG staff, along with consultant design team members, will be on hand to answer questions and discuss issues and/or concerns.

Registration: No registration required.

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: , | 1 Comment »

We Rank 90th of 100 – Is Anybody Surprised?

Posted by Transit Action Network on May 22, 2011


Last week the Brookings Institution released a report, Missed Opportunity: Transit and Jobs in Metropolitan America, examining the ability of America’s 100 largest cities to get people to work by transit. It should come as no surprise to residents of the Kansas City region that we came in 90th.

Click on table to enlarge

MARC has posted a preliminary response in their online newsletter, Transportation Matters

KCATA General Manager Mark Huffer has also responded to the study on the KCATA website.    KCATA Responds To Brookings Institution Report

The Brookings report is not about quality, as Huffer notes. The KCATA customer satisfaction is over 90%, its buses are on time over 92% of the time and the cost per mile is significantly under the national average.

This report is about quantity of transit service. We don’t have enough transit in the region to get people to work. This problem directly relates to a lack of transit funding. Our region provides very little money for transit compared to our peer cities. Mr. Huffer cites the need for a regional funding mechanism, and TAN agrees wholeheartedly.  MARC proposed a regional transit concept and funding strategy over 10 years ago with Smart Moves. Some parts of that plan are gradually being implemented, like the MAX buses, but funding has remained elusive. Nothing major can change without more money.

The big question is how the region will respond to being ranked 90th.  Will the region’s leaders shrug and proceed with business as usual?  Or will they take the ranking seriously as a challenge to our viability as an urban region, roll up their sleeves, and confront the problem.

We have an abundance of ‘good intentions’ already in place including MARC’s new policy direction regarding future development, a new Long Range Transportation Plan, the recent HUD Sustainable Communities Planning grant, the First Suburbs Coalition, Imagine KC, multiple Alternatives Analysis studies, multiple phases of Smart Moves, and even a broad-based regional commitment to being America’s Green Region. But are they enough?  Will good intentions translate into actions?

We have not developed a transit system relevant to our region’s population or our situation. The Kansas City region has sprawled out in every direction, and therefore lacks the density needed for some of the more capital-intensive transit infrastructure investments. Unfortunately, jobs have sprawled along with residents and retail, and “job sprawl” is especially hard to serve by transit. Even better transit to downtown would address only part of the problem since fewer than 14% of the region’s jobs are now located in Kansas City’s Central Business District.

Getting people to jobs that are dispersed all over the region makes for a daunting task for our underfunded transit agencies.

What do we do?  The Brookings Institution makes three main recommendations, but will we move to implement them?

  • Transportation leaders should make access to jobs an explicit priority in spending and service decisions, especially given the budget pressures they face.
  • Metro leaders should coordinate land-use, economic-development, and housing strategies with transit decisions to ensure transit reaches more people and more jobs efficiently.
  • Federal officials should collect and publicize standardized transit data to enable public, private and nonprofit entities to make more informed decisions and maximize the benefits of transit for labor markets.

Transit Action Network offers the following preliminary recommendations for MARC and the region:

– Evaluate the methodology used by Brookings to be sure it doesn’t misrepresent us.

– View this low ranking as a challenge to improve public transit and, at least as important, assure that most of the region’s future development is accessible by transit.

– Accept that we have not provided a realistic transit choice for getting most people to work, and increase our efforts to get broad-based transit funding, perhaps county-by-county.

– Acknowledge the “good intentions” that the region has in place, but carefully examine whether they are enough, and then adopt new policies and actions as necessary.

– Adopt and implement a set of measures to track our progress toward improving our ranking. If we measure it, we have a lot better chance of making progress.

The Brookings report and a regional response will be the major issue for discussion at the June meeting of MARC’s Transit Committee.  TAN will be there and actively participating in the discussion.

Posted in Action, Local Transit Issues, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »