Transit Action Network (TAN)

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

Archive for the ‘Regional Transit Issue’ Category

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »

Discussion About The Regional Rail Alternative for the JCCCAA

Posted by Transit Action Network on February 20, 2012


In the third of our four interviews, Lisa Koch, senior planner with Parsons Brinckerhoff, discusses the Regional Rail alternatives for the Southeast Corridor (the unused Rock Island line through Raytown and Lee’s Summit) and the Eastern I-70 Corridor (the underutilized Kansas City Southern line through Blue Springs).

Diesel Multiple Unit -DMU

Lisa describes the routes being considered, along with traffic control elements that would be required by the Federal Railroad Administration for a Diesel Multiple Unit (DMU) train to use new rail on the streets of Kansas City and Independence to reach a commuter rail terminal in the Freight House District, north of Union Station.

For a closer look at the display board Lisa uses during the interview, see JCCCAA display-board-nov2011 or print page 11 of the second open house display boards. JCCCAA-Open-House-Display-Boards-Nov2011


Following is the proposed map for the Regional Rail system being studied in the Southeastern and Eastern Corridors of Jackson County. MP (Mile Point) is the distance in miles from Union Station.

Click To Enlarge


Details of all the alternatives are changing as the study continues.

The Jackson County Commuter Corridors Alternatives Analysis is scheduled for completion in late Spring 2012.

Our fourth interview, covering combinations of streetcars, DMU and BRT, will be posted later this week.

Link to the first interview: MARC And Parsons Brinckerhoff Discuss The Current Status Of The Commuter Corridors Altenatives Analysis

Link to the second interview: Parsons Brinckerhoff Consultant Discusses Three Alternatives In The JCCCAA

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Rail, Regional Transit Issue, Transit Studies, Videos-Transit | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Parsons Brinckerhoff Consultant Discusses Three Alternatives In The JCCCAA

Posted by Transit Action Network on February 17, 2012


Lisa Koch, a senior planner with the lead consulting firm for the study, Parsons Brinckerhoff,  discusses three of the alternatives being studied in the Jackson County Commuter Corridors Alternatives Analysis (JCCCAA) with Transit Action Network.

No Build

Transportation Systems Management

Enhanced Express Bus (part of TSM)

Lisa also describes the travel demand model used to estimate ridership for each mode in the study’s forecast year of 2035.

The study is in the second phase, called Tier Two, where a detailed analysis of the remaining alternatives is conducted and the alternatives are narrowed down to come up with a Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA). The study is scheduled to be completed in late Spring 2012.

http://vimeo.com/36946225

This map is the current proposed map of the Enhanced Express Bus System. It has different colors to represent the different express bus services being considered. Some services are new. PR stands for Park and Ride lots. The map is subject to change.

In 2007 there was an I-70 Commuter Corridor Alternatives Analysis (AA).  In the Summary Report the consultant’s near-term recommendation was to improve the Express Bus system. The AA also studied the underutilized Kansas City Southern (KCS) Railroad line. In that study, the KCS line traveled to the Knoche Rail Yard and then new rail  was needed from there (near the Missouri River) up to Third St. and Grand.  In another variation the KCS line connected to the Trench, the Kansas City Terminal Railroad tracks that run past Union Station. Neither of those rail alternatives were recommended in 2007 and both of those options were eliminated from the current study in the Tier One evaluation.

Link to the first interview: MARC And Parsons Brinckerhoff Discuss The Current Status Of The Commuter Corridors Altenatives Analysis

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Rail, Regional Transit Issue, Transit Studies, Videos-Transit | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

MARC And Parsons Brinckerhoff Discuss The Current Status Of The Commuter Corridors Altenatives Analysis

Posted by Transit Action Network on February 15, 2012


Last week Transit Action Network sat down with Tom Gerend, Assistant Director of Transportation and Project Manager at Mid-America Regional Council (MARC), and Lisa Koch, Senior Planner with Parsons Brinckerhoff,  in a series of four video interviews to discuss the Commuter Corridors Alternatives Analysis currently underway in Jackson County.

MARC is on the Partnership Team overseeing the study and Parsons Brinckerhoff is the lead consulting firm conducting the study.

Transit Action Network believes this is a good time to bring everyone up to date since the last public open house was the end of November 2011. The next open house won’t be held until after the Stakeholders Advisory Panel on March 6. (update-the third open house will be March 13-15 rescheduled)

These interviews provide background on the study as well as the current information about the three corridors and the multitude of alternatives being studied.

Keep in mind that none of the alternatives have been chosen to implement at this point and the situation changes as new information becomes available and decisions are made. Since the last open house, more analysis has been done and another alternative has been eliminated. Consultants and engineers continue to look for the best solutions to challenges presented by the options.

Join us on this first interview with Tom for an introduction to the series and background on the study.

The study website is KCSmartMoves.org

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Rail, Regional Transit Issue, Transit Studies, Videos-Transit | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

Public Workshop on Bus/Bike Route Planning – Jan 10

Posted by Transit Action Network on January 3, 2012


Bus and Bike

Need help finding your personal transportation routes combining buses and bikes? When is it better to wait for the next bus and when is it better ride?

Eric Bunch, Director of Education, at BikeWalkKC is offering a free public workshop to give you the skills and knowledge to plan your local bus/bike trips.

Google Trip Planner doesn’t allow a user to unlock the full potential of combining modes like bus and bike. The only way to know is by getting out the transit map and learning the routes.

The class will look at the regional bus routes and the MARC bike map and help each participant chart their commute or other transportation needs using these modes.

January 10, 6:00-8:00 PM
Tony Aguirre Community Center
2050 W. Pennway Terrace, KCMO

Link to the registration and information page:

http://bikewalkkc.org/civicrm/event/info?reset=1&id=107

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

Independence Transit Committee Recommends First Transit

Posted by Transit Action Network on December 22, 2011


In a move characterized as a “new integrated transit system,” the Independence City Council Transit Committee recommended First Transit to operate their intra-city (local) routes beginning Monday, July 2, 2012.  KCATA would continue to operate inter-city routes.  Final action by the full City Council is anticipated in January 2012.

The committee’s recommendation is to:

(1) contract with KCATA to continue certain current services including inter-city and commuter bus routes (Routes 24 and 24x), paratransit service (Share-A-Fare) for inter-city and eligible intra-city trips, grant filings and FTA reporting, and regional transit information center operations

(2) contract with First Transit to provide local fixed route and deviated fixed route service, paratransit service for intra-city trips, and senior transportation service (Dial-A-Ride). First Transit is the contract operator for Johnson County Transit.

Independence says its revised transit plan will provide a 40% increase in service area, 32 additional miles of routes, and a 30 percent increase in hours of operation. Local service will be provided using specially designed new buses, tentatively branded “IndeBus.” Waiting times between buses will increase on some routes due to extending the length of the route without adding additional buses.

Independence expects coordinated scheduling between the two systems to minimize waiting times. Fares will be the same for both systems and Independence expects to work out an agreement with KCATA so there will not be a fare impact on the riders using passes or transfers.

Still unresolved are some funding issues, including how much federal “formula” money Independence will receive as pass-through from the KCATA allocation. Independence will presumably qualify for federal funds related to routes operated by KCATA, but regulations related to employee protections under Section 13(c) of Federal Transit Law could make it difficult or even illegal to use federal formula funds for the Independence local routes (see previous article). This issue — how much federal money will be passed through to Independence — could significantly change the transit funding situation in Independence. Discussions and legal research are ongoing between and among Independence, KCATA, the FTA, the Amalgamated Transit Union, and MARC.

A publicity campaign is planned to start in April, including public meetings, route maps, publication in the Independence newsletter CityScene and information on City 7, the public access cable channel. Bus stop and schedule signs will be replaced and First Transit will work with the businesses in the new service areas for locating stops.

Although its total cost of transit service will rise slightly, Independence expects ridership to increase at least 15% with the increased route coverage. In addition, the City plans to seek grants to supplement money from its General Fund.

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

Independence Ponders Transit Options

Posted by Transit Action Network on December 6, 2011


In August, 2011, Independence issued a Request for Proposals (RFP) to operate their local transit routes and local para-transit service, Dial-A-Ride. The local or “intra-city” routes are currently operated by KCATA and are the routes identified by colors as well as numbers. The inter-city routes connecting Independence with Kansas City would continue to be operated by KCATA.

Independence redesigned its local routes to cover more miles and extend service hours. Of course, longer routes without adding more buses means the time between buses increases, which creates longer waiting times for riders.  So service miles and service hours may increase but service level will decrease. Independence also wants to “brand” its buses with a unique Independence design. (Prototype of branded buses from the RFP  Inde Bus)

Several proposals were received, and in October the city staff made a preliminary recommendation to the City Council Transit Committee. They recommended First Transit over KCATA as operator for the local routes.  The Transit Committee recommendation to the full City Council is planned in December because a final decision has to be made by February 1, 2012, in order to implement the desired changes by July 1, 2012.

Transit Action Network understands and appreciates the financial realities Independence faces to maintain transit service for its residents, as well as its right to contract for the most cost-effective transit service. The Independence budget for transit comes out of general revenue. Independence does not have dedicated transit funding like Kansas City, nor do they have taxing authority from the state to even ask for a dedicated transit tax. Their ½ cent transportation sales tax is all used for streets. Like most Eastern Jackson County municipalities, Independence has been waiting for the county to get involved in funding transit.  County transit funding was the original promise of the regional “Smart Moves” transit concept nearly a decade ago.  But county funding hasn’t materialized yet, and general revenue has declined as costs continued to rise, and something had to give. Independence has assured TAN that its goal is to provide the best transit service they can.

Several snags have arisen, however. The biggest one deals with the allocation of federal “formula” funds for transit in this region. As the Congressionally created transit authority for the Kansas City region, KCATA is the federally designated recipient of federal formula funds, and that means KCATA decides how this money is to be allocated around the region. Legally they do not have to allocate any funds to municipalities that don’t contract with them, but historically KCATA has allocated funds to other operators, such as Johnson County Transit, a well as the municipalities that contract with them. The current annual federal formula fund allocation is approximately $15 million, but may decrease based on Congressional action. Independence believes it has a right to a share of this money, even if it goes with a private contractor.

Even if the KCATA Board wants to continue to allocate a share of the federal formula funds to Independence, it may be illegal if they contract with a private operator.  This issue arises because federal transit law has a section that protects transit employees who are affected by federal transit funding. If Independence changes to a private operator there could be a negative impact on public transit workers. Based on the current allocation of money, this law (Section 13(c)) could lose Independence $600,000.  All parties have their lawyers looking into the implications of Section 13(c).

Another big issue is the effect on the para-transit riders in Independence if a different operator gets the contact for the intra-city routes. TAN is concerned that para-transit users wanting to go between Independence and Kansas City would have more transfers and higher costs if KCATA does not operate the intra-city routes. If Independence para-transit riders have to use both the Independence Dial-A-Ride and KCATA Share-A-Fare services for the same trip, the cost would double from $4 for the round trip to $8. Independence City Manager Robert Heacock said that Independence could consider picking up the additional cost for para-transit riders needing to go to KCMO. At an average of 12,000 rides to the city per year, this could amount to an additional cost of $48,000 for the city, but the inconvenience for riders would still be present.

Most important, TAN has significant concerns about the impact another operator could have on all transit riders. Unless Independence gives careful attention to “seamless transit” principles, adding another transit provider could cause complexity, confusion and additional cost for riders, and that would both inhibit ridership and limit access to opportunities throughout the region, while undermining the goal of a truly regional transit system. We have discussed our concerns regarding seamless transit with elected officials including Council member Gragg, Chair of the Transit Committee, and with City staff.

What is “Seamless Transit?”  It’s the term being used in a regional effort to make transit easier to use, thereby building ridership and enabling more people to have access to opportunities throughout the region.  Seamless transit is achieved by meeting basic rider expectations and eliminating the impact of multiple transit operators on the transit experience.

Some of the seamless expectations that TAN has discussed with Independence include:

1.  A uniform fare structure, and transfer and pass reciprocity. Independence has assured TAN that they will use the same fare structure and compatible fareboxes as KCATA so that transfers and monthly passes are accepted on both systems. They have told us they could do an allocation of revenue between the two systems at the end of the month for passes, although the details haven’t been discussed, since an operator hasn’t been chosen.

2.  Good connectivity between the two systems is another concern. TAN has been told schedules will be adjusted to co-ordinate transfer locations and schedule times so inter-system connections can be made effectively.

3.  Currently riders only have to make one phone call to get transit information. They can use Google transit to do online trip planning, and with GPS on all the current buses, real-time information is becoming available via cell phone or mobile device. TAN has asked that these seamless communication features be available to Independence riders if there is a change in operators, but has not been given any reassurances .

To get more details of the planned route changes or read the minutes of the meetings visit the Independence City Council Transit Committee website

Seamless transit issues between JCT and KCATA prompted TAN to get the MARC Transit Committee to form a Seamless Transit Work Group last year. (TAN’s Seamless Transit In the Kansas City Region document) Now many of the same issues will need to be addressed with Independence if it changes operators for its intra-city routes.

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

Comment on Jackson County Commuter Corridors Alternatives Analysis and Watch Video of the Open House

Posted by Transit Action Network on December 2, 2011


The second open house for the Jackson County Commuter Corridors Alternatives Analysis was held this week. The meetings in Lee’s Summit, Blue Springs and Kansas City, consisted of displays explaining the project, process and alternatives. Project consultants answered questions and explained the project. On Wednesday Nov 29th at the Gamber Center,  a welcome from Lee’s Summit Mayor Rhoads was followed by presentations from Jackson County Executive Mike Sanders and Project Leader Shawn Dikes of Parsons Brinckerhoff.

The project team is moving from the first stage, Tier One, to the more quantitative stage, Tier Two. Some of the original alternatives have been eliminated and two new alternatives have been added that include additional rail options.

The purpose of the open house is to gather public input. Read the open house handout explaining the alternatives that are advancing to Tier Two JCCCAA-Open-House-Handout-Nov2011, then view the display boards from the meeting for more information. JCCCAA-Open-House-Display-Boards-Nov2011

After viewing the project materials please go to the project website and make your comments.

There was an excellent turnout for the main meeting. Watch portions of the presentations on TAN’s first video.

http://vimeo.com/33047816

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

Sanders Commits to Transit

Posted by Transit Action Network on November 3, 2011


County Executive Mike Sanders, in his State of the County Address today, made a strong commitment to regional public transit.

After describing past accomplishments of his administration, Sanders clearly had his eye on the next generation when he closed by talking about transit.

We have decisions to make, he said. It’s time for a new vision to meet the transportation needs of the next generation.

We have a rich tradition of public transit, and Sanders said he is committed to a modern public transit system.

Sanders cited a Brookings report earlier this year — the one that ranked our region 90th of 100 at getting people to jobs by transit — and pointed out that while only some of us ride transit, all of us need it.

Sanders said the region has recently gotten $2 million in federal money to study how to meet transit needs in major commuter corridors, and he is working with regional partners to complete those studies.

Sanders closed with what he called one simple question: What do we want to do for the next generation?

He asked people to join with him on the next journey, building a regional transit system.

In his speech Sanders made no reference to any particular form of transit. That’s appropriate because the requisite studies have not been completed. Nor was there a hard-and-fast target date. That, too, is appropriate because funding is uncertain.

County Executive Mike Sanders made a strong leadership commitment to regional transit, and that is truly significant.

Posted in Meeting Reports, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Missouri State Rail Plan – Open House Nov. 2

Posted by Transit Action Network on October 29, 2011


Missouri Department of Transportation will host an open house and discussion about the movement of goods and people by freight and passenger rail.

Where: Sermon Center North Room, 201 N. Dodgion Ave, Independence

When: 5:30 – 7 p.m. Wednesday, November 2, 2011

VISION

Missouri’s rail vision is to provide safe, environmentally friendly transportation options supporting efficient movement of freight and passengers, while strengthening communities and advancing global competitiveness through Inter-modal connectivity.

STATE RAIL PLAN

The Missouri Department of Transportation is developing a Statewide Rail Plan that will provide the strategic framework for the development of both freight and passenger rail service in Missouri for the next twenty years.

Discussion items include:

  • An overview of the Plan and Federal Rail funding
  • The current state of freight and passenger rail in Missouri
  • The business case for rail including it’s importance to Missouri’s economy
  • Increased demand and interest in intercity passenger rail
  • The role of publicly funded improvements to move people and goods on privately owned railroad systems.
  • The importance of different types of rail projects compared to other infrastructure needs, given likely funding limitations.

MoDOT wants your input. If you cannot attend the public open house, the presentation and public comment forms are available at the MoDOT State Rail Plan website.  The virtual meeting and comment period will be accessible through November 18.  Public Meeting Presentation  Please spread the word.

Posted in Events, Rail, Regional Transit Issue | 1 Comment »

First Open House – SEPT 27- Jackson County Commuter Corridors Alternatives Analysis

Posted by Transit Action Network on September 22, 2011


The first open house for the JCCCAA will be September 27 at the Ennovation Center, 201 N. Forest, Independence from 4 pm to 7 pm. Jackson County Executive Mike Sanders and the Parsons Brinckerhoff Project Manager Shawn Dikes will give short presentations at 4:30 pm and 5:30 pm. Be there to see maps of the alternatives under consideration for upgrades to commuter transit service from eastern Jackson County (and beyond) into downtown Kansas City in the I-70 Corridor and the Rock Island corridor.


There are two additional opportunities for public comment. The project boards from the open house will be displayed at key locations in the corridors from 9 a.m. to 7 p.m.  Project partnership and consultant team staff will be on hand to answer questions from 5 to 7 p.m.  These additional meetings will take place according to the following schedule.

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

So Many Studies, So Little Transit

Posted by Transit Action Network on September 14, 2011


In September of 2009, Brad Cooper of the KC Star wrote an article titled “KC’s rail dreams prove costly; Area has little to show for its money, but advocates say every study moves city closer to a solution.” Brad writes about Kansas City’s “love-hate relationship with transit that has cost taxpayers nearly $17 million, mostly in federal cash”.

In 2011 the Brookings Institution ranked the Kansas City region as 90th of 100 cities in our ability to get people to work using transit.

After decades of transit studies and a MARC developed regional transit plan called Smart Moves, why do we still have such limited transit service in the region?

Will the two “Alternatives Analysis” studies currently being conducted turn this pattern around?

Janet Rogers, co-founder of Transit Action Network, is convening a Communiversity course to discuss these issues and more on Oct 8. Be there!

From the Communiversity catalog:

Social Concerns Section

8002A
Millions and Millions of Dollars for Transit Studies-Where’s the Transit?
Why does the KC region have transit studies but rarely add any additional transit? What are our chances of getting a downtown streetcar or commuter rail? What happened to Smart Moves? What is an alternatives analysis? What can we do to improve the situation? Get the transit scoop from a co-founder of Transit Action Network and transit advocate for over a decade. Bring $2 to class for handouts. Janet Rogers worked to save the Eastern Jackson County commuter buses and restore KC transit funding.
CONVENER: Janet Rogers
CLASS FEE: $9.00
Sec. A: 1 session(s); Beginning Saturday, October 08, 2011 1:00 PM;
Flarsheim Hall, Rm. 260, 5110 Rockhill Rd., UMKC Campus, KCMO, Rockhill Rd. south of 51st.;
LIMIT: 30

Communiversity Online Class Registration Site.

https://ecomm2.umkc.edu/commu/

Course page  https://ecomm2.umkc.edu/commu/BrowseDetail.aspx?category=social

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

New ID Card Puts Transit in UMKC Student Pockets

Posted by Transit Action Network on September 10, 2011


After years of discussion, UMKC students now enjoy public transit as part of their activity fee.

UMKC students who are currently enrolled and have a NEW “One Card” student ID have full access to MAX and other Metro bus routes.  Students just “swipe” their One Card through the farebox and ride in style.

Students voted last spring that all students would pay an additional $14 per term to get full access to the KCATA transit system. What’s more, the spring term card is good all summer, so the cost is only $28 dollars a year.

UMKC  is served by both Troost MAX and Main Street MAX, routes that have the highest level of service in the entire region. It’s less than a month into the program and already students are using their cards nearly 1,000 times a day, far more than projected.

To TAN’s surprise and pleasure, KCATA included access to its premium express routes from the suburbs. The Blue Springs, Lee’s Summit and Liberty routes are normally $3 each way, but the pass is also valid on these KCATA routes.

KCATA has posted a UMKC New Rider Starter Kit  on it’s website. The best part though is the link to a YouTube video the students made about the new service. We should all have that much energy! We do have that much enthusiasm for transit and the possibilities and options it provides: savings for students, plus a boost in ridership for The Metro.

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

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 »

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 »

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 »

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 »

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 »

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 »

« Previous Entries
Next Entries »