KCRag Forum

markf wrote: Advocrat,

I agree that commuter rail might be the best start.  We may not have the density for light rail, but we certainly have the sprawl for commuter rail.

It's just my opinion but I wonder if Gardner is missing a golden opportunity with the inter-modal hub that BNSF wants to put in.  They could ask BNSF for a commuter rail line into downtown KC and in one step jump over Olathe and Lenexa as the preferred Kansas suburb in which to live.

http://www.forsythe4kc.com/2006/07/long ... ning.shtml

My downtown streetcar route idea was made in keeping with the theme of this thread. But, I am really interrested in commuter rail, which I think is critical to mitigating Kansas City's unrelenting sprawl. I mentioned in another thread the news about Albuquerque's "Railrunner" commuter service which began operations on July 14. I hope that someday Kansas City develops its own.

back in June I shared an idea for commuter rail lines in Kansas City, a pretty ambitious plan (I admit) but no more elaborate than what a about 20 other cities now have.  The following is a repost, and it is not meant to compete with the ideas being shared about downtown streecars or BRT. I really just want to see improved rapid transit that allows commuters to avoid the Interstates, the tractor trailor rigs and $6 a gallon gasoline.

I am very interested in every proposal, idea and comment about light-rail and commuter rail and consider opinions of proponents and critics as objectively as possible. I can’t understand why anyone would object to, or try to stop the development of light/commuter rail services in Kansas City. Our present highway system may be ok, but it isn’t perfect, at best it is just less stressed than other major metro areas. Improvements are being made but pressure continues to mount. And fuel prices and maintenance are taking a toll on us.

I think it is possible to start small and develop an effective commuter rail system by using expanded AMTRAK service for morning and afternoon commuters. AMTRAK currently runs two trains daily out of Kansas City Union Station, one in the morning and the other in the afternoon eastbound for St. Louis. The morning train sits idle at Union station overnight after completing the return run from St. Louis.

If this 200 seat train were positioned overnight in Gardner (at the BNSF fascility) or Olathe it could make a rush hour run from Olathe into Union Station, making stops in Olathe, Lenexa, Merriam and Rosedale, and into Union Station. Eastbound stops for outbound commuters or intercity travelers would be made in Independence, Noland Road, Lee’s Summit and Pleasant Hill. The increased number of commuter will boost the overall revenue of this morning train.

If AMTRAK scheduled two additional morning and afternoon trains from Pleasant Hill, a complete circuit for westbound rush hour service would then be complete.

It would work like this:

        Morning                                                        Afternoon
Gardner                Pleasant Hill                      >St.Louis            >Topeka
Olathe                  Lee’s Summit                    Pleasant Hill        Lawrence   
Lenexa                  Noland Road                      Lee’s Summit      DeSoto
Merriam                Independence                    Noland Road        Shawnee at I-435
Rosedale              Union Station                      Independence    I-635/Turner
Union Station        I-635 Turner                        Union Station    Union Station
Independence      Shawnee at I-435                Rosedale            Independence
Noland Road        DeSoto                                Merriam            Noland Road
Lee’s Summit        Lawrence                              Lenexa              Lee’s Summit             
Pleasant Hill        >Topeka                                Olathe              Pleasant Hill
>St.Louis                                                          Gardner          >St. Louis

Timetables for all of this can be synchronized for intercity passenger service that already exists, even though this adds an intercity train to Topeka. This requires no great deal of public funding for a good handful of suburban platforms at points along this route. More service to other parts of the metro could build from this start.

Railroads, Kansas City (metro) and AMTRAK must cooperate, but this could be an easy and very economical start to improving transportation options for the greater community and commuting good.

advocrat wrote: If this 200 seat train were positioned overnight in Gardner (at the BNSF fascility) or Olathe it could make a rush hour run from Olathe into Union Station, making stops in Olathe, Lenexa, Merriam and Rosedale, and into Union Station. Eastbound stops for outbound commuters or intercity travelers would be made in Independence, Noland Road, Lee’s Summit and Pleasant Hill. The increased number of commuter will boost the overall revenue of this morning train.

markf wrote: I totally missed your post!  Sorry about that.  Credit where credit is due.

From what I understand a commuter line would have to have it's own roadbed because the logistics of sharing traffic with freight is too difficult.  DaveKCMO commented on my blog about no ridership and sharing the line with communities in between like you mentioned.  I wasn't implying that Gardner have an express straight in to downtown but since they would be the ones brokering this deal they should bet the most say in route, development rights, etc.  As far as no ridership, probably true at first but it wouldn't take long for an urban village to spring up around Gardner's train station.  The ridership would come.

Of course this is all just pie in the sky and the powers that be would scoff at such lofty ideas.

dangerboy wrote: Most American commuter rail does indeed run on freight tracks, as those are usually the only tracks remaining.  Even Chicago's extensive Metra system uses mostly leased freight tracks.  It would be almost impossible to acquire right of way in a built environment.  Every study of commuter rail in KC has been on existing freight lines.

DaveKCMO wrote: true 'dat, but in this instance, BNSF should have plenty right-o'-way between gardner and union station to add maybe just one more track to allow more frequent sidings (allows passenger trains to pass a freight train). it's an interesting idea to leverage with the railroad lobby that's gonna come down hard on this little town. negotiate or fight 'til the end???

advocrat wrote: My railbuff friends also say that this will never happen because the Halls/Nichols/Kempers zand other power brokers are either not supportive or opposed to commuter rail.  The voters seem to swing their majority vote to the opponents position with even the mention of words like"bi-state" , "claychastain", "Northtown opposition."

dangerboy wrote: I don't see how this is anything more than a place holder, or like Dave said to keep us on the radar.  The Feds have been clear that these need projects must already be designed, and just waiting on the money to start building.  I don't see how LRT could qualify under any criteria currently being discusses in DC.