Jackson County Regional Rail Plan

Transportation topics in KC
Post Reply
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17186
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by GRID »

mean wrote:
That said, I'm wondering why it would have to take an hour or more. That seems like an awful long time when all you're doing is stopping a few times for 30-60 seconds, then transferring to a MAX bus to go downtown.
You leave your house at 6:30.  Drive to P&R, walk to train station, park and walk to the platform and wait for a train. (typically 5-10 minutes longer than driving to the bus P&R and waiting for a bus that will come almost to your car, less prep time to be in place for a bus).  Then you take the train downtown to union station.  Now this could be only 35 minutes if everything they do works out perfect.  Freight trains and Amtrak are not in the way, they improve the tracks to keep the average speeds up to 40mph or so, have few stops and build a new connection through the eastside to connect to union station (very expensive, would be the first thing cut from budget) vs using the tracks through the east bottoms to the river front area.  If any of that stuff is not the case, you are looking at more like 45-60 minutes.  Then you have to exit the train and walk to where ever the max buses are be it up on the Main Street Viaduct or at some location near a station in the riverfront area.  Then you take a slow and very full max bus that could get you to your final destination in anywhere between 10-20 minutes from the time you step off the train.   If you go all the way to the midtown or plaza area, it could be much longer.

So if things are perfect, I think you could reach the Federal Building in an hour once you left your Blue Springs home.  If things are not perfect it gets longer.  That's all.  I'm just saying that it would be an hour trip minimum on most days.  There are very few days when you will be delayed more than 10-15 minutes on 70 all the way into downtown.  8 years of driving downtown from BS.  The stupid scout signs usually say 16 minutes east of little blue.  That number rarely goes above 20, even during peak times.

It just seem like a billion dollars would be much better spent on building something that will give the city a true return on its investment.  But just like the stadium issue.  It just is not going to happen.  People will not vote for it.  So in the end, you will get a half ass commuter rail system that will be underfunded before it ever opens serving a city that is still one of the only cities left that has not built a central city fixed transit spine and serving a city with a bus system that is 1/4 the size that it should be and again, giving people a new reason to live in Lone Jack and one less reason to live Downtown.

But people will vote for this.

Because it goes to the airport.  They will never use it to go to the airport, but damn doesn't that sound like fun to take the choo choo train to the airport.

Waste of money.

Light rail will never happen.  So as it goes in KC.

Better than nothing...


dangerboy wrote: The trains would only average 30-40 mph, at most, in most of the metro area.  In addition to freight congestion there are also many at-grade crossings and at-grade rail junctions.  Current Amtrak journeys between Union Station and Lee's Summit are 50 minutes. Our existing rail system would need massive investments to allow commuter rail to get up to the theoretical speeds of 70 mph.
They might reach 70mph for about 3 seconds.  The rest of the line will be 20-50mph.  Unless they build brand new rr corridors.  Much of the existing tracks are loaded with curves, track crossing etc.

I take that back, once away from the metro, they could probably get up to that speed.  Some of the lines, like the one that goes along the east side of KC to Grandview?  Trains go about 15 in that corridor today and it would take a ton to improve that.
User avatar
GRID
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 17186
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2003 12:20 pm
Contact:

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by GRID »

Spend a billion and build a light rail line from the Plaza north to downtown and then east to the stadiums and terminate it at about US-40 with a P&R.

Expand it from there.

Triple the bus system and do BRT or commuter coaches to KCI, Liberty, Grandview etc.

Done

That would do more for the city than a 1000 miles of this commuter rail BS.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by KCMax »

Real problems with commuter rail
Here's the breakdown of other recent rail projects similar to the I-70 plan that applied for federal funding.  To quote the study: "This comparison suggests that increases in ridership and decreases in costs would be needed to make the I-70 corridor more competitive" for funding.

Oceanside-Escondido Rail Corridor
San Diego, Calif.
Length: 22 miles
Capital Cost: $351.5 million
Avg. weekday ridership: 19,000
Cost per rider: $72.60

South West Corridor
Chicago
Length: 12 miles
Capital Cost: $198.1 million
Avg. weekday ridership: 13,800
Cost per rider: $56.30

Weber County to Salt Lake City Commuter Rail
Length: 43 miles
Capital Cost: $611.7 million
Avg. weekday ridership: 11,800
Cost per rider: $203.30

North Central Corridor Commuter Rail
Chicago
Length: 18.6 miles
Capital Cost: $225.5 million
Avg. weekday ridership: 8,400
Cost per rider: $105.30

Northstar Corridor Rail
Minneapolis
Length: 40 miles
Capital Cost: $265.2 million
Avg. weekday ridership: 5,600
Cost per rider:  $185.70

Union Pacific West Line Extension
Chicago
Length:  8.5 miles
Capital Cost: $134.5 million
Avg. weekday ridership: 3,900
Cost per rider: $135.30


Wilsonville-Beaverton Commuter Rail
Washington County Oregon
Length: 14.7 miles
Capital cost: $117.3 million
Avg. weekday ridership: 3,000
Cost per rider: $136.10

South County Commuter Rail
Providence, R.I.
Length: 20 miles
Capital Cost: $43.7 million
Avg weekday ridership: 2,300
Cost per rider: $74.50

East Corridor Commuter Rail
Nashville, Tenn.
Length: 32 miles
Capital Cost: $41 million
Avg. weekday ridership: 1,900
Cost per rider: $84.60

I-70 Corridor
Kansas City
Capital cost: $168.9 million
Avg weekday ridership:  1,425
Cost per rider: $464.80

I-70 Corridor (phased approach)
Kansas City
Capital cost:  $102.8 million
Avg, weekday ridership: 1,425
Cost per rider: $282.90
SAVE THE PLAZA - FROM ZOMBIES! Find out how at:

http://twitter.com/TheKCRag
User avatar
dangerboy
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 9029
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 8:28 am
Location: West 39th St. - KCMO

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by dangerboy »

In 2007 MARC did  detailed study of the KCS line.  It estimated an average speed of 48 mph from Odessa to Union Station.  The average speed was only 30 mph between Independence and Union Station.
mean
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 11238
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:00 am
Location: Historic Northeast

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by mean »

I guess my thing with the deal is that while we may not need it right now, these highways will be getting progressively more and more congested, especially if downtown continues to rebound following the current economic yuck. I'm not saying, yeah, let's do this cause we need it; I'm saying get this started now because we WILL need it in a few years. At least, we should need it if things are going well, and it is something I think people might actually vote for.

Look back to 1998. The public and political attitude was, LOL WE DONT NEED NO LIGHT RAIL. Our mayor implied that nobody lives downtown or in midtown... this crap would be just for tourists, since they're the only ones who spend time in the city. Oops. Should have built it then, but we didn't. Let's not have a repeat. The attitude toward light rail in KC is tainted because of all that nonsense. Let's not brush commuter rail with the same poo poo stick.
"It is not to my good friend's heresy that I impute his honesty. On the contrary, 'tis his honesty that has brought upon him the character of heretic." -- Ben Franklin
User avatar
dangerboy
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 9029
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 8:28 am
Location: West 39th St. - KCMO

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by dangerboy »

mean wrote: I guess my thing with the deal is that while we may not need it right now, these highways will be getting progressively more and more congested
Not necessarily.  There is a very strong national trend in people driving fewer miles, even in places in KC where they can't always switch to transit.  And the downward trend has continued even as gas prices have dropped and the economy has stabilized.  Travel times have actually dropped on many of the radial highways in our region.
User avatar
staubio
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 6958
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 11:17 am
Location: River Market
Contact:

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by staubio »

dangerboy wrote: Not necessarily.  There is a very strong national trend in people driving fewer miles, even in places in KC where they can't always switch to transit.  And the downward trend has continued even as gas prices have dropped and the economy has stabilized.  Travel times have actually dropped on many of the radial highways in our region.
...and if we create further incentives for people to live out on the fringes my making it easy for them to commute to far flung jobs, I don't know if we are doing ourselves any favors, even if it does mean them not bringing cars downtown.
User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 20063
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by DaveKCMO »

staubio wrote: ...and if we create further incentives for people to live out on the fringes my making it easy for them to commute to far flung jobs, I don't know if we are doing ourselves any favors, even if it does mean them not bringing cars downtown.
too late. it's already easy. those places are built. people choose to live there (blue springs!!!!), even though there are dramatically cheaper options in our beloved urban core. i simply do not buy the argument that commuter rail is going to make it worse than it already is. it will likely improve (and densify) the suburban places that already exist.

it's almost like we've completely forgotten how these outlying communities were originally created: interurbans and intercity rail. does anyone think oak grove appeared because the location was intrinsically valuable? absolutely not. it was on a rail line and it was close to kansas city.

so we should just dismantle all commuter rail systems, regardless of a metro's density, and encourage only urban rail? meanwhile, all urban rail systems keep expanding outward to catch up with sprawl anyway.
mean
Administrator
Administrator
Posts: 11238
Joined: Wed Feb 05, 2003 9:00 am
Location: Historic Northeast

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by mean »

DaveKCMO wrote: too late. it's already easy. those places are built. people choose to live there (blue springs!!!!), even though there are dramatically cheaper options in our beloved urban core. i simply do not buy the argument that commuter rail is going to make it worse than it already is. it will likely improve (and densify) the suburban places that already exist.
My point exactly. People already live there. Might as well give them incentives to densify, and give them easy access to become regular downtowners.
"It is not to my good friend's heresy that I impute his honesty. On the contrary, 'tis his honesty that has brought upon him the character of heretic." -- Ben Franklin
aknowledgeableperson
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 12650
Joined: Thu Mar 11, 2004 10:31 pm

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by aknowledgeableperson »

DaveKCMO wrote: does anyone think oak grove appeared because the location was intrinsically valuable? absolutely not. it was on a rail line and it was close to kansas city.
From Oak Grove's web site:

Oak Grove is ideally located 28 miles east of Kansas City on I-70, retaining a small town atmosphere in a rural setting, yet convenient to the larger metropolitan interests.  The city was incorporated in 1878 and has a rich local history that is evident in the architecture of the downtown areas.


1878 predates those interurbans and intercity rails you talk about.
I may be right.  I may be wrong.  But there is a lot of gray area in-between.
User avatar
dangerboy
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 9029
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 8:28 am
Location: West 39th St. - KCMO

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by dangerboy »

Unfortunately I have yet to hear any of the suburban cities promise to rezone for TOD and density if they were to get a commuter rail station.  Perhaps the Feds ought to require this as a condition of any free money awarded to us.
User avatar
KCMax
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 24051
Joined: Wed Aug 04, 2004 3:31 pm
Location: The basement of a Ross Dress for Less
Contact:

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by KCMax »

dangerboy wrote: Unfortunately I have yet to hear any of the suburban cities promise to rezone for TOD and density if they were to get a commuter rail station.  Perhaps the Feds ought to require this as a condition of any free money awarded to us.
I thought Shawnee and Mission talked about building nodes around future commuter rail stops - maybe Independence as well? Of course, it was just talk - no real promise.
SAVE THE PLAZA - FROM ZOMBIES! Find out how at:

http://twitter.com/TheKCRag
User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 20063
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by DaveKCMO »

aknowledgeableperson wrote: 1878 predates those interurbans and intercity rails you talk about.
a bad example. you know what i'm talking about. if oak grove truly existed in 1878 and wasn't created by the railroads, it was probably just one homestead on a wagon trail. there are scores of surrounding communities that support the assertion.
User avatar
bbqboy
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2920
Joined: Sun Mar 27, 2005 10:25 am

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by bbqboy »

DaveKCMO wrote: a bad example. you know what i'm talking about. if oak grove truly existed in 1878 and wasn't created by the railroads, it was probably just one homestead on a wagon trail. there are scores of surrounding communities that support the assertion.
You're both right, I think. These were always farm to market towns, the interurban lines replaced earlier trails into the big city, where folks used to go, every so often.
User avatar
staubio
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 6958
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2003 11:17 am
Location: River Market
Contact:

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by staubio »

DaveKCMO wrote: too late. it's already easy. those places are built. people choose to live there (blue springs!!!!), even though there are dramatically cheaper options in our beloved urban core. i simply do not buy the argument that commuter rail is going to make it worse than it already is. it will likely improve (and densify) the suburban places that already exist.
I agree with this. I just don't mind making it a little more painful to make that commute. Obviously this is a better alternative than adding a bunch of lanes to I-70 but it is still continuing to ease the pain of long commutes.

Of course, it is a touchy situation as we could ultimately make suburbs turn their backs on downtown entirely. Connectivity is a good thing if all roads lead to downtown.

Really, it was a rhetorical statement.
User avatar
dangerboy
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 9029
Joined: Wed Feb 19, 2003 8:28 am
Location: West 39th St. - KCMO

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by dangerboy »

KCMax wrote: I thought Shawnee and Mission talked about building nodes around future commuter rail stops - maybe Independence as well? Of course, it was just talk - no real promise.
Johnson County declined to participate in the regional commuter rail plan, so any TOD plans in Shawnee are moot at this point.
User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 20063
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by DaveKCMO »

dangerboy wrote: Johnson County declined to participate in the regional commuter rail plan, so any TOD plans in Shawnee are moot at this point.
on top of that, they have been blatantly stating that they will *never* participate in regional transit operations. so, the best we can hope for is simple interoperability with fares, passes, and route scheduling.  **sigh**
User avatar
grovester
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4572
Joined: Thu Mar 13, 2008 7:30 pm
Location: KC Metro

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by grovester »

pshaw, they'll "never" participate until kc does their own thing (rcp), it gets rave reviews, people get more comfortable with transit and gas goes back to 4 bucks, then joco cities will be bidding to get on a connection.  might have to wait a while, but it'll happen
trailerkid
City Center Square
City Center Square
Posts: 11284
Joined: Mon Oct 07, 2002 4:49 pm

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by trailerkid »

grovester wrote: pshaw, they'll "never" participate until kc does their own thing (rcp), it gets rave reviews, people get more comfortable with transit and gas goes back to 4 bucks, then joco cities will be bidding to get on a connection.  might have to wait a while, but it'll happen
you mean the tail follows the head?
User avatar
ComandanteCero
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6222
Joined: Tue Aug 24, 2004 2:40 am
Location: OP

Re: KC Commuter Rail

Post by ComandanteCero »

http://primebuzz.kcstar.com/?q=node/20294
Sanders offer more details on regional rail plan

....

Terry stressed that this is a new concept in commuter rail, using smaller, diesel-powered trains. "It acts more like light rail, but does not use the electrical canopies overhead," Terry said.

What's more, Kansas City has a wealth of opportunity with so many miles of underused or abandoned rail corridors. The plan now calls for six major lines -- to KCI, Lee's Summit, Liberty, Legends in Wyandotte County, Blue Springs (with an Independence spur) and Grandview.

The companies that control those rail cooridors are either willing to sell or lease their rails. Terry said he wouldn't waste his time on a pie-in-the-sky plan, if access to those routes wasn't real.

Total cost: $1.03 billion for 134 miles, about $7.8 million per mile.
KC Region is all part of the same animal regardless of state and county lines.
Think on the Regional scale.
Post Reply