Clay Chastain coming back with light rail

[kcdcchef]

So skip the jog over to Grand and use Main the entire way.  I think making short jogs to hit specific locations is a bad idea.  Crown Center is a short walk from Main & Pershing.  Main would also allow for a stop at the 10 & Main transit plaza.

yes but the bulk of people that these lines will appeal to and also the bulk that will use rail do not think like a bunch of us urban design nuts on a website, they think walking anywhere sucks. now, you guys can all bitch all day about the suburban idiots that depend on their cars, and whatever rhetoric will get thrown out there, ( toss ) but the reality is you will need their ridership, not them saying screw this, i am not using it.

further, a lot of the empty nesters that will take up a new life in an office tower turned condo tower in the coming years are also of this school of thought, they are pretty much all moving into developments where the parking is right next door, under them, or combined into the building. and they are not about walking from main and pershing to go see a concert at crown center, and or to work.

so, the route better reflect the major areas having a route DIRECTLY THROUGH THEM or this thing will fail, and that would include going right through crown center.

flame away lockandload, but the reality is the target demographic for light rail thinks this way.

[Stockton]

And maybe no jog through Crown Center would encourage the development to become less insular. Couldn't Crown Center become more interactive with the street on the Main St side?

[kcmetro]

I was wondering how the LTR will affect the P&L Dist. if it goes through there. I'm wondering if Cordish will have some say in how its route is designed through there or where it's located. I wouldn't think they'd have a problem with LTR going through the district, but I'm just curious as to how that will play out.

[Stockton]

yes but the bulk of people that these lines will appeal to and also the bulk that will use rail do not think like a bunch of us urban design nuts on a website, they think walking anywhere sucks. now, you guys can all bitch all day about the suburban idiots that depend on their cars, and whatever rhetoric will get thrown out there, ( toss ) but the reality is you will need their ridership, not them saying screw this, i am not using it.

If the LRT line did a straight shot through the loop down Grand or Main, couldn't some creativity connect the spread out destinations? I'm not sure how it works in other cities, but couldn't select east-west streets be used as way-finding corridors for those hopping off the line but unfamiliar with downtown? Those corridors could be chosen perhaps on existing building stock available for street-interactive/retail and current retail, which would make the walk even more pleasant. Is foot traffic from light rail stops to destinations something businesses would want to be a part of? I know it's been said before on this website, but the businesses could even advertise on the line.

This could potentially be a good way to provide some sort of critical mass for the spin-off of retail and restaurants that want to be near the power and light district.

[KCMax]

yes but the bulk of people that these lines will appeal to and also the bulk that will use rail do not think like a bunch of us urban design nuts on a website, they think walking anywhere sucks.

This is how we convince them that walking is a-ok. If people really hate walking that much, they won't use this. There is no way a light rail system will be able to drop everyone off at the front door of where they are going.

Having a stop at Main and Pershing might help bring vibrancy to that area a bit. I don't think people will mind walking if they pass interesting buildings and vendors rather than empty surface parking lots.

[moderne]

Don't forget federal funding went into the skywalks over Pershing and Main as part of mass transit funding with the understanding future light rail was going down Grand and so some pedestrian connectivity was needed for future commuter rail at US.  That was the rationale of the powers that be at the time.

[Highlander]

And maybe no jog through Crown Center would encourage the development to become less insular. Couldn't Crown Center become more interactive with the street on the Main St side?

My own view is that the rail line will need to stand on its own merits.  I do not believe it will be a success if it is burdened by too many attempts to go out of the way to influence development (in this case, I do not really think it will matter though as either way works).  Both Chef and L&L are correct, too many jogs and the system becomes too slow and expensive but require people to walk too far and people will simply drive.   That is why I think routes really need to be carefully thought through to achieve an optimum configuration and some places will simply need to be left off (I have several I would suggest for this category).  

[KC0KEK]

Plus, having a station (stop) at Main and Pershing forces as many people who use the rail and commute to the IRS to walk past or through the Union Station.  Foot traffic is always good. 

Good point, especially when you consider the size of the IRS complex and that many employees get half-hour lunches. (I recall reading that somewhere on this board.) Those two factors reduce the likelihood that they'll venture outside the facility for lunch. So you've got to catch them going to or from work.

[kard]

WIKI!

I started a wiki here:  http://www.kcskyscrapers.com/wiki/index ... Light_Rail

Please feel free to update it.  I've not sourced by references yet but will do that tonight.  Be sure to source your info with tags.

If you're editing it then you might want to follow a format that other light rail articles use.  Check Wikipedia entries for Portland, etc.

[lock+load]

Reading the Star articles, it appears the 3/8 cent tax will not go to light rail until 2009, after it was originally set to expire.  I think that makes the talk of drastic bus service cuts very misleading.  The tax is there for as long as it was ever going to be there.  The ATA can go back to the voters in 2009 for an extension just as they would have done anyway.

[kcdcchef]

This is how we convince them that walking is a-ok. If people really hate walking that much, they won't use this. There is no way a light rail system will be able to drop everyone off at the front door of where they are going.

Having a stop at Main and Pershing might help bring vibrancy to that area a bit. I don't think people will mind walking if they pass interesting buildings and vendors rather than empty surface parking lots.

where are you going to put vibrancy at pershing and main? the westin is not going anywhere. the city will never forfeit washington park, union station and liberty memorial are not going to come down, so, where is this said vibrancy going to go?

look, i am all for trying to get people to walk more, but there is a specific reason so many bus routes go through crown center, it is one of the main points of the city, as is the cbd and the country club plaza.

along a lrt route, you will spur development, but not along main around pershing, crown center/hallmark owns the land, and they already have plans for where they want another office tower to go and another condo tower, and union hill has been planning more apartments for up there since they have been around. the areas that will benefit from a light rail line is midtown, and the area between the cbd and the crossroads.

people do not mind walking, but the THOUSANDS of people that work in the crown center complex are not going to walk from pershing and main. from in front of the crown center shops, where all the busses presently stop, sure, they will walk. but trying to build up that area along main between the westin and liberty memorial may never happen guys.

as far as all the people at the irs and union station, and the post office, i am sure they will walk from a stop at pershing and main as the lrt turns the corner to head over to grand, just as people working at hallmark hq will walk up the hill after getting out at the crown center shops. but be reasonable, bypassing the heart of crown center to spur development along main, much of which is already planned by hallmark, is kind of bizarre.

[lock+load]

but be reasonable, bypassing the heart of crown center to spur development along main, much of which is already planned by hallmark, is kind of bizarre.

Skipping a short stint down Grand should be more for efficiency and speed, not to spur develpment on Main.  The left turn onto Pershing is often a major time waster. 

[LenexatoKCMO]

where are you going to put vibrancy at pershing and main? the westin is not going anywhere. the city will never forfeit washington park, union station and liberty memorial are not going to come down, so, where is this said vibrancy going to go?

Actually It would be very easy to retrofit a street facing entrance to the Westin/Crown Center out to Main.  They already built a passage out in that direction for the link to US.  All that sits on that coner right now is a lawn with a Westin Sign on it - very easy location to build a nice zero lot line, corner addition and if there were a light rail station sitting out there than the Westin/Halls would have every financial incentive in the world to build it.  

[carfreekc]

Reading the Star articles, it appears the 3/8 cent tax will not go to light rail until 2009, after it was originally set to expire.  I think that makes the talk of drastic bus service cuts very misleading.  The tax is there for as long as it was ever going to be there.  The ATA can go back to the voters in 2009 for an extension just as they would have done anyway.

No, they can't--as it stands now--just go back for another 3/8-cent tax to replace what they're using now. The most they could ask for within KCMO is 1/8-cent--which would still likely mean at least some service cuts. IF voters passed such a tax anyway, which is not a guarantee. Without that (or something else), yeah, there will have to be harsh service cuts at that point. The original 1/2-cent tax receipts were down and the state cut funding to the ATA, which is why this 3/8-cent tax was passed in 2003 in the first place.

From the Nov. RTA newsletter http://www.kctransit.org/newsletter.htm:

Kansas City has a 1-cent state authorization for transit sales taxes. Currently Kansas City is using 7/8-cent to support the transit system. This 7/8-cent tax consists of 1/2-cent as a long-term base, and a voter approved 5- year 3/8-cent tax that will expire in 2009.
If voters pass Question 2 on November 7:
• The 3/8-cent tax that provides the vital funding for the current level of transit service would be diverted
to the Chastain proposal beginning in 2009. The KCATA would have only the 1/2-cent base tax to
continue running the Metro, and would cause an immediate 40% cut from the current level of transit
service.
• This would leave the KCATA with no choice but to turn to the voters once again to try and secure the
remaining 1/8-cent tax for transit. That would only restore a fraction of the current service.

Before anyone says, "But Clay's plan included buses"--money to BUY buses and money to RUN buses are two different things. And there won't be enough money in there to run enough buses to make up the difference.

[ShowMeKC]

What is bad about cutting services if those services already suck and are barely used? Better to spend money on a few good lines plus light rail than spend money on a few good lines and a bunch of bad ones.

[lock+load]

No, they can't--as it stands now--just go back for another 3/8-cent tax to replace what they're using now. The most they could ask for within KCMO is 1/8-cent--which would still likely mean at least some service cuts. IF voters passed such a tax anyway, which is not a guarantee. Without that (or something else), yeah, there will have to be harsh service cuts at that point. The original 1/2-cent tax receipts were down and the state cut funding to the ATA, which is why this 3/8-cent tax was passed in 2003 in the first place.

I stand corrected.  However, why does the bus system have priority over light rail for any particular portion of the 1 cent authorization?  Should additional funding be needed for the bus system, we can ask the state to increase the sales tax authorization, raise fares, reconfigure routes, etc.  The 3/8 cent tax would have to have been reapproved anyway, and that wouldn't have been a sure thing. 

We cannot stand still because we are afraid of upsetting the status quo.  The public wants light rail.  There are 2 1/2 years to figure out what to do with the bus system. 

[JDluu]

Video segment from the Star:
http://pointers.audiovideoweb.com/stcas ... v/play.asx

[KansasCityChiefs]

They're going to take the issue back to voters and hope to god it goes the other way.

[warwickland]

What is bad about cutting services if those services already suck and are barely used? Better to spend money on a few good lines plus light rail than spend money on a few good lines and a bunch of bad ones.

because there are a good number of people who barely get by as is relying on these sucky lines for transportation. you sound like you are interested in the east side, this is the reality for more people that you might think.

did you ever hear or read about what happened in LA when existing bus service was drastically cut for light rail funding? more funding must be secured one way or another to truly improve transit all around in kansas city...which is what i think we all want in the end.

[GRID]

I for one hope they only try another vote as a last resort.  This passed primarily because it was under the radar.  Another real light rail vote would bring out he opposition in full force and make it very tough to pass this in a city like KC.