a report to marc

Kansas City Region Commuter Rail StudyInitial Corridor Screening

A Report To

MARCMid-America Regional Council

TC

Submitted By

R.L. Banks & Associates, Inc.Washington, DC

In Association With

Bucher, Willis & RatliffKansas City, MO

HNTB CorporationKansas City, MO

Taliaferro & Browne, Inc.Kansas City, MO

E InstituteOlathe, KS

SG Associates, Inc.Annandale, VA

March 20, 2001


Table of ContentsPage

Executive Summary………………………………………………………..………....ES-1Introduction ............................................................................................ 1

Study Process and Schedule .................................................................. 1Public Involvement Plan ........................................................................ 2Geographic Setting ............................................................................... 2Previous Transit Studies ........................................................................ 5Characteristics of Rail Modes and Services.............................................. 9Commuter Rail ..................................................................................... 9Heavy Rail ..........................................................................................10Light Rail ............................................................................................10Commuter Rail Success Factors ............................................................12Shared Use.........................................................................................14

Rail Corridors and Lines...........................................................................15Corridor A - St. Joseph .....................................................................16Corridor B – Excelsior Springs ............................................................17Corridor C – Richmond......................................................................18Corridor D - Odessa ..........................................................................18Corridor E - Warrensburg ...................................................................19Corridor F - Belton ............................................................................20

Corridor G – Olathe and Paola............................................................21Corridor H - Topeka ..........................................................................22

Prospective Kansas City Region Commuter Rail Service...............................23Potential Station Locations ...................................................................23Station Components/Amenities .............................................................24Layover Facilities.................................................................................25Commuter Rail Equipment ....................................................................25

Safety Standards..............................................................................25Diesel Multiple Units vs. Locomotive-Powered Trains ............................25Equipment Recommendation ..............................................................26

Sample Schedules ...............................................................................26Environmental Considerations ...............................................................29

- i -


Table of Contents(continued)

Page

Ridership Estimation……………………………………………………………………..31Current Travel Patterns……………………………………………………………..31Land Use Characteristics……………………………………………………………33

Population Density…………………………………………………………………33Employment Density……………………………………………………………… 33Activity Centers…………………………………………………………………… 33

Existing Transit……………………………………………………………………….33Highway Travel Characteristics……………………………………………………39Development of Ridership Forecasts……………………………………………..39Commuter Rail Corridors……………………………………………………………40Rail Ridership Results………………………………………………………………. 42Environmental Justice Considerations……………………………………………43

Capital Cost……………………………………………………………………………….44Track and Signal Improvements………………………………………………….. 45Passenger Facilities: Stations, Parking and Layover…………………………..46Equipment……………………………………………………………………………..46Capital Cost Summary………………………………………………………………46

Rail Line Capacity and Conflicts……………………………………………………….47Operating Cost……………………………………………………………………………50Conclusion and Recommendations……………………………………………………51

Tables

ES-1 Corridor Characteristics ES-4ES-2 Projected Commuter Rail Ridership ES-5ES-3 Corridor Summary ES-81 Typical Design Criteria for Rail Transit Systems 112 Kansas City Rail Lines and Corridors 163 Sample Commuter Rail Schedules 274 Forecasted Travel Times to Union Station (Year 2020) 39

- ii -


Table of Contents(concluded)

Page

Tables(continued)

5 Commuter Rail Ridership and Market Share (Year 2020) 426 Capital Cost Summary 477 Passenger/Freight Conflict Potential 488 Operating Cost Estimates 509 Corridor Screening Measures 5110 Corridor Summary 55

Figures

ES-1 Rail Corridor Recommendations ES-21 Kansas City Regional Rail Corridors and Lines 42 County Journey to Work Patterns (selected counties) 323 Study Area Population Density 344 Metropolitan Population Density 355 Metropolitan Employment Density 366 Local Municipal Boundaries and Major Activity Centers 377 Commuter Rail District, Corridors and Station 418 Daily Freight Trains 499 Projected Daily Ridership per Route 5410 Rail Corridor Recommendations 56

Appendices

A. Rail Line InventoryB. Proposed Rail Line Improvements and Costs

- iii -

Executive SummaryKansas City Region Commuter Rail Study

Initial Corridor Screening

IntroductionThis report represents the first step in evaluating commuter rail’s potential role in thegreater Kansas City region over a 20 year planning horizon. The study issponsored by the Mid-America Regional Council (MARC), the Metropolitan PlanningOrganization for the bi-state Kansas City metropolitan area, and performed by aconsultant team led by R.L. Banks & Associates, Inc. (RLBA). The study’s purposeis to determine whether existing rail corridors or rights of way could effectively servethe region’s needs, and to identify strategies to assess commuter rail feasibility anddevelopment and implementation steps, if warranted.

Study ProcessThe study may be thought of as a two-phase process, with an ongoing publicinvolvement program. In the first, addressed in this report, all potential corridors areevaluated as to their potential for commuter rail service. (See Figure ES-1.) MARCand the consultant team will select two or three corridors with the greatest initialpotential to receive a more detailed examination in the second phase of the study.A commuter rail implementation strategy addressing the selected corridors will bedeveloped during the second phase, and a draft comprehensive final report will beproduced by the end of 2001. The study comes at a time when increasing attentionis being paid to transit’s potential role in the region’s future, as explored in theFOCUS Long-Range and Strategic Plan and the Metropolitan Transit Initiative –Demand Assessment.

Commuter rail’s greatest advantage lies in reduced capital and operating costsavings achieved through its sharing of track with conventional freight andpassenger operations. This avoids the need to acquire and construct new right-of-way, making commuter rail significantly less expensive to implement than light railor heavy rail. However, that track sharing comes at a cost.

ES-2

Atchison

Jefferson

Shawnee

Douglas Johnson

LeavenworthWyandotte

Buchanan

Andrew

Ray

Lafayette

Jackson

Johnson

Cass

Franklin Miami

Paola

Mosby

Topeka

Ottawa

Eudora

Olathe

Belton

Weston

Holden

Odessa

Camden

Lawson

Gardner

De Soto

Lansing

Raytown

Liberty

Buckner

Kearney

Lawrence

Atchison

Richmond

GrandviewGreenwood

Oak Grove

Lexington

Osawatomie

St. Joseph

KingsvilleSpring Hill

Leavenworth

Kansas CityKansas City

Sugar Creek

WarrensburgKnob Noster

Lee's Summit

Blue SpringsHigginsville

Harrisonville

Pleasant Hill

Missouri City

Excelsior SpringsBN

SF

UPIM

RL

UPBNSF

BNSF

1

2 3

4

5

19

Independence

Platte

Clay

A

B

C

UPBNSF

BNSF UP

KCS

UP

UP

UP

NSBNSF 7 6

8

9

1010x

1011

12

14

BNSF

13

15

16

BNSF

13

1617

18

14

D

F

G

H

E

GW

Figure ES-1 Rail Corridor Recommendations

Corridors Recommended For Further Study

Destination Points

Potential Rail Lines

N

ES-3

Commuter service must be reliable if it is to succeed, requiring commuter trainsto receive preference over freight trains in the event of a track occupancyconflict. Thus, commuter service may consume significant portions of a railline’s capacity; the resultant impact upon freight service depends upon thenumber and schedules of freight trains. Commuter rail sponsors should expectto fund most or all capacity improvements required for shared track use bypassenger and freight trains.

Eight commuter rail corridors containing 19 rail lines radiating from downtownKansas City were identified. The corridors are analogous to markets and aredefined in terms of the geographic area around rail lines from which potentialcommuter rail passengers might be attracted. Corridor G is the subject of theJohnson County I-35 Commuter Rail Project which currently is in thePreliminary Engineering phase. Because of that ongoing implementationplanning, Corridor G was not evaluated in these preliminary feasibility analysesand will be treated in the second phase of this study as an operating part of theregion’s transit system. Within each corridor, the line deemed to be the bestprospect in terms of serving potential ridership generators was used to developservice, ridership and cost projections. Key characteristics of the corridors andselected lines are contained in the following table. Rail travel time to UnionStation is displayed; selection of a different central terminal would changetravel times slightly.

ES-4

Table ES-1

Corridor Characteristics

Corridor(Market)

MajorHighways

Rail LineNumber

andOwner

Distanceto UnionStation(miles)

Travel Timeto UnionStation

(minutes)

DailyFreightTrains(1)

Tracks:Single orDouble

A St. Joseph I-29 1 BNSF 62.7 83 43 SingleB Excelsior Springs U.S. 69 3 UP 28.5 50 10 DoubleC Richmond MO 210 5 BNSF 39.4 56 7-35(3) SingleD Odessa I-70 9 KCS 39.5 62 5 SingleE Warrensburg U.S. 50 10 UP 65.3 92 33 SingleF Belton U.S. 71 12 KCS 28.5 48 15 SingleG Olathe(2) I-35 13 BNSF 23.0 40 30 DoubleH Topeka I-70,

KS 1017 BNSF 64.0 86 Over 70

east ofHoliday,6 west

Single

Notes:

(1) All corridors except G use tracks of the Kansas City Terminal Railway (KCT) toaccess Kansas City Union Station. There are approximately 76 daily trains on thisportion of the KCT.

(2) Corridor G figures are from the FTA Annual Report on New Starts, March 6, 2000, andRLBA estimates from the I-35 Commuter Rail Feasibility Study. They may be revised inthe course of the ongoing Preliminary Engineering effort.

(3) There are 25 trains between Birmingham and Maxwell and 7 trains between Maxwelland Richmond.

Source: RLBA Team & Railroad Officials.

In order to assess ridership and costs, hypothetical commuter rail service wasdefined in each corridor. Conceptual station locations were identified. (Thecritical and sometimes controversial process of selecting exact locations shouldevolve but not be completed until a corridor reaches the Preliminary Engineeringstage.) Stations, parking, layover and shop facilities and of course equipmentcomprise the passenger-related improvements necessary to operate commuterrail service. Sample schedules were produced for each corridor, based uponrunning times after recommended track improvements. At least three trainseach way daily were projected, the minimum that offers riders a reasonablechoice and spans the periods of heaviest commutation.

ES-5

Ridership is crucial to the success of a commuter rail service. If the servicedoes not attract sufficient passengers, goals such as mobility enhancement,highway congestion reduction and air quality improvement will not be attained.Travel patterns, land use patterns and the characteristics of existing andproposed transit services are all important determinants of potential ridership.The team used a mode choice forecasting approach that relied upon cost andtravel time associated with various modes. This model was applied to MARCtravel demand information and files, supplemented from other sources for theareas of interest which are beyond the geographic scope of the MARC model.Results, representing trips from all points on the corridor to/from Union Stationwith walk or transit connections to Crown Center, downtown, the Plaza anddowntown Kansas City, Kansas, are presented in Table ES-2. A more detailedassessment of commuter rail ridership will be completed in the second phase ofthe project. The selected potential commuter rail lines will be coded into theregional transit network. The mode choice component of the regional EMME/2travel model will be modified and used to develop refined commuter railridership forecasts of each selected corridor.

Table ES-2

Projected Commuter Rail Ridership(Year 2020)

Daily Work TripsCorridor Total All Modes Rail Ridership

A 17,140 720

B 13,060 930

C 4,580 80

D 33,190 4,160

E 44,370 3,800

F 43,750 1,250

H 31,680 2,770

Source: RLBA Team.

ES-6

The capital cost of passenger-related improvements necessary to operateservice was estimated for each corridor, as shown in the Corridor SummaryTable ES-3. Host freight railroads are likely to require capacity-relatedimprovements necessary to enable shared use of tracks be funded by thewould-be commuter rail sponsor; those costs are not incorporated in the capitalcost estimates. They will be investigated further in the study’s next phase, butare dependent upon negotiations with the potential host railroad and thuscannot be reliably estimated prior to such negotiations. Operating costsassociated with the provision of commuter rail service in each corridor wasestimated and is presented in the Corridor Summary Table.

Findings

The Team has developed evaluation measures in harmony with the FederalTransit Administration’s New Starts Criteria to the extent possible in apreliminary feasibility study. That approach will be carried through the nextphase, so as to facilitate decision-making and assist in moving the project tothe next stage, if warranted.

The RLBA Team believes that ridership is the most important of the screeningcriteria. The more riders, the greater the mobility improvements, environmentalbenefits, operating efficiencies, transportation system user benefits (cost-effectiveness) and the better the system supports the region’s land usepolicies. At this early stage of consideration, corridors with solid potentialridership should be eliminated from further consideration only by a genuine fatalflaw – a barrier that truly cannot be overcome or whose cost to cure is clearlybeyond reason. The Team did not discover any such flaws at this level ofexamination. The Team believes that the most difficult matter to overcome willbe the combined issue of track capacity, cost of capacity improvements andreaching an agreement with the host railroads. Results of all critical corridorevaluation factors are summarized in Table ES-3.

ES-7

While there is no magic number as to how many passengers it takes to justifystarting a commuter rail system, examination of selected existing systems(excluding long-established systems in the Northeast, Chicago and SanFrancisco) reveals that they generally handle about 3,000 or more daily ridersper route. Corridors D, E and H would qualify.

Operating cost per passenger is sensitive to corridor length as well as ridership.Corridors with more than three trains would achieve some economies of scalenot reflected in these estimates. Capital costs increase as ridership rises,primarily due to outlays for locomotives, passenger cars and parking facilities.Capital cost per rider is more appropriate for making comparisons, althoughfiscal realities necessitate attention to the total figure as well. Opportunitiesand fatal flaws are left blank for MARC reviewers to contribute insights aboutwhich lines may have special considerations that make them more or lessattractive.

The Team finds that corridors D and E are the most promising and should beselected for closer examination in the next phase of the study. Should a thirdroute be advanced, corridor H is the next most promising. Corridor G, alreadyin Preliminary Engineering sponsored by Johnson County, would otherwise bein close competition with Corridor H. Early in the study process, ranking thecorridors as to “high, medium, low and no-build” was contemplated, but theTeam believes that it is premature at this stage to establish rankings beyondadvance or don’t advance to the next phase of the study.

Table ES-3Corridor Summary

Corridor Mobility(MPH)

Daily Boardings Operating Costper Passenger ($)

Capital Cost:Track, Stations& Equipment

($ million)

Capital Costper Passenger

($ 000)

Opportunitiesand Fatal Flaws

PotentialFreight

Conflicts

A St. Joseph 45.3 720 18.34 37.5 52.1 HighB Excelsior Springs 34.2 930 6.41 39.2 42.2 Low

C Richmond 42.0 80 104.72 34.2 427.5 High/LowD Odessa 38.3 4,160 3.32 108.0 26.0 Low

E Warrensburg 42.4 3,800 6.01 90.1 23.8 HighF Belton 35.3 1,250 4.78 41.4 33.1 MediumG Olathe 34.5 2,600 6.21 30.9 11.9 MediumH Topeka 44.4 2,780 4.84 59.2 21.3 High/Low

Notes: Most favorable results in each corridor depicted in bold underline; least favorable in plain italics.Corridor G estimates were prepared using different methods than other corridors and may not be comparable. Sources: Table ES-1 Corridor G:

MPH: RLBA calculation Boardings: midpoint of range (1,400-3,800) in FTA Annual Report on New starts, March 6, 2000Operating cost per passenger: RLBA calculationCapital cost: FTA Annual Report on New starts, March 6, 2000Capital cost per passenger: RLBA calculationPotential freight conflicts: RLBA

All other: RLBA Team.

ES-8


Introduction This report represents the first step in evaluating commuter rail’s potential rolein the greater Kansas City region over a 20 year planning horizon. The study issponsored by the Mid-America Regional Council (MARC), the MetropolitanPlanning Organization for the bi-state Kansas City metropolitan area, andperformed by a consultant team led by R.L. Banks & Associates, Inc. (RLBA).The study’s purpose is to determine whether existing rail corridors or rights ofway could effectively serve the region’s needs, and to identify strategies toassess commuter rail feasibility and development and implementation steps, ifwarranted.

Study Process and ScheduleThe study may be thought of as a two-phase process, with an ongoing publicinvolvement program (described below). In the first, existing conditionsrelevant to commuter rail are inventoried, including railroad lines, projectedpopulation and job density and existing and planned transit services. Allpotential corridors are then evaluated as to their potential for commuter railservice, considering factors such as potential ridership, capital cost ofimprovements necessary for passenger service, operating cost and probablepassenger-freight interference. Upon receipt of the team’s findings, MARC andthe consultant team will select two or three corridors with the greatest initialpotential to receive a more detailed examination in the second phase of thestudy.

The second phase will include a further integration of potential commuter railand other existing and planned transportation options, a more sophisticatedridership modeling process, analysis of hub terminal location and characteristicsand a more detailed examination of passenger-freight conflicts and theimprovements necessary to ameliorate them. A commuter rail implementationstrategy addressing the selected corridors will be developed during the secondphase and a draft comprehensive final report will be produced by the end of2001.

2

Public Involvement PlanPublic involvement activities have been designed and conducted in a mannerthat is sensitive to both the preliminary nature of the feasibility study, and along and somewhat tumultuous and politically charged local history related torail transit. Ultimately, the understanding, input and support of the public atlarge will be a critical component to the success of any planning andimplementation activities. In order to foster the groundwork for a broad-basedpublic involvement program, the more immediate goal is to seek theunderstanding, input and feedback of a key group of stakeholders, communityleaders and interested parties.

In the Initial Screening Phase, a series of public involvement efforts have beenexecuted. Media relations relative to the initiation of the study, including apress release and follow-up calls, were carried out with select members of thepress. A Fact Sheet, detailing the study goals, steps, participants and a map ofthe rail lines under consideration was developed, distributed and posted on theMARC web site. In mid-October, the Leadership Focus Group comprised oftransit, railroad and community leaders, met to discuss the project and provideinput. Other activities have included development of a PowerPoint presentationfor use in speaking engagements with general interest groups, and thedevelopment of specialized presentation materials for other transit-relatedgroups. As the plan progresses, additional media relations and LeadershipFocus Group meetings are slated. Also, the Fact Sheet and PowerPointpresentation will each be updated appropriately, following the final review ofthe Initial Corridor Screening results and at the end of the Detailed CorridorReview Task.

Geographic SettingAt the outset of the study, the Team examined the area within approximately a50-mile radius of downtown Kansas City to identify rail lines, populationcenters and travel patterns. From this came the identification of potentialcommuter rail corridors. The corridors are analogous to markets and are definedin terms of the geographic area around rail lines from which potential commuterrail passengers might be attracted. In many instances, rail lines are closetogether and two or more lines may serve the same general travel market orcorridor, i.e., serve the same communities and many of the same trip originsand destinations. Corridors consisting of one or more rail lines were definedand became the principal basis for evaluation of commuter rail options. Withineach corridor, the line deemed to be the best prospect for each corridor interms of serving potential ridership generators was used to develop service,ridership and cost projections. In the second phase of the study, any corridorsunder consideration will receive additional analysis to determine which specificrail line in the corridor is most desirable. End points were selected based on

3

population and journey to work patterns from the 1990 Census TransportationPlanning Package (CTPP), projected to 2020 levels based upon population andemployment projections. In some corridors, the projected outer terminal wasshort of the 50-mile radius because of the absence of potential commuter raildemand at the outer portions of the corridor.

In addition to identifying corridors, a conceptual central terminal was pinpointedat Kansas City Union Station. Detailed consideration will be given in Task 4 tothe location, configuration, connections and facilities needed at the centralterminal. The Team’s understanding of the rail lines and downtownemployment centers combined with the focus of multi-modal transit activitycalled for at Union Station in the FOCUS plan made Union Station the standoutcandidate central terminal location. All corridors except G (the I-35 service)must use main line tracks of the Kansas City Terminal Railway (KCT) forvarying distances in order to access Union Station.

Eight travel corridors radiating from downtown Kansas City have been identifiedand labeled in a clockwise manner starting at the Missouri River northwest ofKansas City:

• Corridor A: Northwest from Kansas City parallel to the Missouri Riverand Interstate 29 to St. Joseph;

• Corridor B: Northeast along Interstate 35 to northeastern Clay County(Excelsior Springs);

• Corridor C: East along U.S. Route 24 to the Richmond area;• Corridor D: East to the Odessa area paralleling the Missouri River and

Interstate 70;• Corridor E: Southeast along U.S. Route 50 to Warrensburg or

Harrisonville;• Corridor F: Southward along U.S. Routes 71 and 69 toward Belton;• Corridor G: Southwest along Interstate 35 to Olathe; and• Corridor H: Westward parallel to the Kansas River and Kansas

Turnpike/Interstate 70 through Lawrence to Topeka.

Within each corridor are two or more freight rail lines that are potentialcandidates to host commuter rail service. These lines have been numbered in aclockwise manner similar to the corridors. Figure 1 depicts a map of theKansas City metropolitan area showing the travel corridors and the rail lines ineach corridor. Ownership and operating characteristics of the rail lines will bedescribed in detail later in this report.

4

Figure 1Kansas City Region Rail Corridors and Lines

Atchison

Jefferson

Shawnee

Douglas Johnson

LeavenworthWyandotte

Buchanan

Andrew

Ray

Lafayette

Jackson

Johnson

Cass

Franklin Miami

Paola

Mosby

Topeka

Ottawa

Eudora

Olathe

Belton

Weston

Holden

Odessa

Camden

Lawson

Gardner

De Soto

Lansing

Raytown

Liberty

Buckner

Kearney

Lawrence

Atchison

Richmond

GrandviewGreenwood

Oak Grove

Lexington

Osawatomie

St. Joseph

KingsvilleSpring Hill

Leavenworth

Kansas CityKansas City

Sugar Creek

WarrensburgKnob Noster

Lee's Summit

Blue SpringsHigginsville

Harrisonville

Pleasant Hill

Missouri City

Excelsior Springs

BNSF

UPIMRL

UPBNSF

BNSF

1

2 3

4

5

19

Independence

Platte

Clay

A

B

C

UPBNSF

BNSF UP

KCS

UP

UP

UP

NS BNSF 7 6

8

9

1010x

1011

12

14

BNSF

13

15

16

BNSF

13

1617

18

14

D

F

G

H

E

GW

Potential Rail LinesDestination Points

Source: RLBA Team.

5

Previous Transit Studies Governmental bodies in the Kansas City Metropolitan Area have undertakenvarious long range planning efforts in the recent past. Examples include theCity of Kansas City, Missouri’s FOCUS Long-Range and Strategic Plan and theJohnson County Vision 2020 Plan.

Each of these plans recognizes changes that have occurred in the urban form ofthe Kansas City Metropolitan Area over the years since the end of World War II.In general, the region has become less and less dense. This trend toward lessdensity has accelerated in the recent past. From 1960 to 1990, the KansasCity Metro Area’s population increased by less that 30 percent. During thatsame period, the amount of developed land increased by 110 percent. The netresult of this type of growth pattern has been continuing growth of jobs andresidences in low-density suburban areas and a gradual abandonment of thecentral city. The double effect, of continued low-density development in thesuburbs coupled with the disinvestment in the older central city, has createdone of the lowest density major metropolitan areas in the United States.

The FOCUS Kansas City plan describes a series of transit planning conceptsthat would begin to change development patterns and provide alternatives to atransportation system dominated by the private automobile. These planningtools, although focused on transit, also are closely integrated with zoning andland use planning. The FOCUS plan suggests that the two cannot be separatedand that for mass transit to be expanded and integrated to a greater degree inKansas City, changes in land use must come about through zoning changes,incentives and market forces.

The FOCUS plan favors creation of urban villages in some areas. In order tosupport the increased density in new urban villages, the FOCUS plan stressescreation of a multi-modal transportation system. Such a system would includenumerous modes of transportation including private autos, traditional fixedroute bus service, line haul express bus service, deviated route circulator bussystems, light rail and commuter rail. The primary thesis is that transportationmust link people to jobs, health care, schools and other learning centers,recreation, cultural activities, and points of commercial activity. It was furtheranticipated that development of a multi-modal transportation system would usemobility strategies such as Intelligent Transportation Systems (ITS) andTransportation Demand Management (TDM) to improve the total transportationnetwork.

One of the principal strategies suggested in the FOCUS plan is the use ofTransit Impact Zones. Transit Impact Zones are specific areas where transitand pedestrian use predominate. Making zoning changes that would encouragemore dense levels of development around transit hubs would create such areas.

6

Transit Impact Zones would receive a higher level of public infrastructure,public improvements and public amenities. In addition, it was anticipated thatdevelopment in such areas would be aided by targeting development incentivessuch as Tax Increment Financing (TIF) and Missouri Chapters 99 and 353,which are state laws that allow for tax abatement for a limited time. Taxsavings can be used to assist with development costs or can be passed to awould-be owner.

In outlying suburban areas along commuter rail and light rail lines and alongmajor line haul express bus corridors, park and ride transportation centers weresuggested as multi-modal transportation hubs. In park and ride multi-modaltransportation hubs, transit patrons park their private automobiles and usepublic transit to make home to work or other daily trips. Circulator buses couldprovide deviated route service to transit patrons in surrounding residentialareas. Park and ride facilities could also be located at regional mixed usecenters. Regional mixed use centers would be defined as activity nodes withsuch attractions as regional shopping centers, major office developments,hotels or hospitals.

In the Central Business Corridor, that area between the Missouri River and theCountry Club Plaza, from approximately State Line to the Paseo, the concept ofmulti-modal transit and clustering development around transit nodes wasstressed even more so. Light rail transit plays a very important role in futuredevelopment plans for the Central Business Corridor. Light rail transit isplanned as a development catalyst where incentives and zoning changesaround station locations would work in concert to produce developmentopportunities. A very important major multi-modal link in the proposed systemis Union Station. Amtrak intercity passenger rail facilities are scheduled to berestored to Union Station proper in 2001, moving from an adjacent location.The station today is home to two bus transit centers at the east and west endsof the station. Those bus transit centers allow for transit mode changes tooccur at the station. Taxis and excursion tour buses also make stops at thestation. A pedestrian link is provided to the Crown Center Hotel and to theCrown Center Shops. Johnson County Commuter Rail is also proposed toterminate at Union Station. Light rail is also proposed to have major stops atUnion Station. Consequently, Union Station is planned to become acenterpiece of multi-modal transit activity.

In short, the FOCUS Long-Range and Strategic Plan, among other things,suggests making a change in local development patterns. This change wouldshift development patterns from linear strip types of development dependent onautomobiles to a more nodal development pattern centered on mass transitfacilities.

7

The Johnson County Vision 2020 Plan endeavored to develop a 20 year visionfor Johnson County. Transportation was among a number of elements thatwere examined. Envisioning a transportation system that would "stand out asone of the cornerstones of the County's continued growth and high quality oflife" the 2020 Vision Plan, as part of an overall strategy, incorporates acommuter rail system operating between the county and the metro area.Commuter rail service is seen as a means of relief of future congestion and as apart of a multi-modal public transportation system.

The Metropolitan Transit Initiative – Demand Assessment (MTI-DA) was a jointproject of the Greater Kansas City Chamber of Commerce and the Mid-AmericaRegional Council (MARC). The MTI-DA built upon the Public Transit PlanningStudy completed by the Mid-America Regional Council (MARC) in 1996. Thepurpose of the MTI-DA was to determine the appropriate level of transit servicefor the Kansas City metropolitan area and determine the level of support forincreased transit services throughout the community.

The study reaffirmed the regional transit center concept as the preferred transitservice concept. The transit center concept is framed around a collection ofcommunity-based transit centers or service areas. The community-basedservice areas would be connected together by higher frequency, higher speedexpress transit service, that could be provided by bus or rail transit asappropriate. The recommendation responded to a need to provide for non-radial oriented transit service in addition to radial transit service oriented to theKansas City, Missouri, Central Business District (CBD).

Regional transit connections between these sub-regions were studied as part ofthe MTI-DA. The MTI-DA also included extensive market research of transitneeds. It included guidelines for transit service types, frequencies ridershipforecasts. The report concluded that there was an opportunity to increasetransit ridership significantly with only a modest increase in transit investment.Research conducted as part of the study also found that rail transit is adesirable component of the transit system.

The October 1999 I-35 Commuter Rail Eastern Connections Planning Studywas an effort to help frame the scope of preliminary engineering for the nextphase of the I-35 Commuter Rail study process. Earlier studies investigated thefeasibility of commuter rail between Olathe, Kansas and Union Station inKansas City, Missouri. The primary goals of the I-35 Commuter Rail EasternConnections Planning Study were:

• assessment of the cost effectiveness of extending commuter rail to the areaof 18th and Vine/Prospect Avenue in Kansas City;

8

• assessment of timed bus transit service to connect Kansas City, Missourineighborhoods east of Union Station to a possible commuter rail terminus atUnion Station; and

• review of transit connection options between the Westside Community andthe 18th and Vine District.

It was determined that bus transit would provide the most feasible transitconnection between Union Station and the neighborhoods to the east.Extension of commuter rail to the area may necessitate construction of a fourthmainline track along the Kansas City Terminal Railway Corridor within theKansas City central core. Terminating rail service east of Union Station wasconsidered operationally difficult and expensive in relation to the few additionalriders expected.

The 1998 New Century Commuter Railway System study, conducted byprivate citizen Michael Webb, examined the feasibility and development ofpublicly funded alternative rail lines to replace those used by area freightrailroads within high-density population centers in Johnson County, Kansas.Access made available by rerouted through freight traffic would be used toserve commuter rail and local freight traffic. The Burlington Northern Santa Fe(BNSF) owned rail lines in Johnson County, rail lines 13, 16 and 17 of thisreport, were the subject of the three phases outlined in the New Century study.

Phase I envisioned the construction of a double main line track running north-south along the western edge of the old Sunflower Army Ammunition Plantproperty connecting the BNSF line that runs between Topeka and Kansas City,Missouri, (rail line 17) just west of DeSoto, Kansas, with BNSF's lineconnecting Ottawa with Kansas City, Missouri, (rail line 16) just east ofEdgerton, Kansas. Dubbed the Sunflower Bypass, this stretch of track wouldremove or at least substantially decrease freight traffic on rail line 16, freeing itup for use as a commuter line. An additional track would be added to rail line17 between Desoto and Argentine Rail Yard to handle the additional freighttraffic. It was assumed the freight railroads would still have access tocustomers on rail line 16, but the County would control their access.

Phase II featured the diversion of active freight operations from the BNSF linethat links Paola and Spring Hill, Kansas with Kansas City, Missouri, (rail line 13)via an alternative double track mainline to be constructed from a point justnorth of Spring Hill to the Sunflower Bypass at a point just east of Edgerton.Called the Mo-Kansas Bypass, this rail line would move freight traffic from railline 13 to rail line 17, making rail line 13 more readily available for commuterservice.

9

Phase III had two components: the construction of a double main track downthe K-10 corridor connecting rail line 16 with the Sunflower Bypass and theupgrading of both the Sunflower and Mo-Kan Bypasses with the addition of athird track dedicated to commuter service. At the completion of Phase III,freight traffic arriving in Kansas City from the Southwest will be diverted to railline 17 and commuter service will be available almost exclusively on rail line 13and 16 as well as the to be constructed bypasses and rail line 17.

Characteristics of Rail Modes and Services It is important to recognize exactly what "Commuter Rail" is, how it is defined,and what are its distinct advantages and disadvantages as compared to othertypes of rail transit.

The American Public Transportation Association defines three distinct types ofrail transit operations:

Commuter RailRailroad local and regional passenger train operations between a central city, itssuburbs and/or another central city. It may be either locomotive-hauled or self-propelled, and is characterized by multi-trip tickets, specific station-to-station

fares, railroademployment practicesand usually only one ortwo stations in thecentral business district.Also known as"suburban rail."Commuter rail usuallyshares trackage withconventional freight orpassenger trains.

10

Heavy RailAn electric railway with the capacity for a"heavy volume" of traffic and characterized byexclusive rights-of-way, multi-car trains, highspeed and rapid acceleration, sophisticatedsignaling and high platform loading. Alsoknown as "rapid rail," "subway,” "elevated(railway)" or "metropolitan railway (metro)."This is the most expensive of the rail modes toconstruct.

Light RailAn electric railway with a "light volume" traffic capacity compared to heavyrail. Light rail may use shared or exclusive rights-of-way, high or low platform

loading and multi-car trains orsingle cars. Also known as"streetcar," "trolley car," and"tramway." Light rail oftenoperates in city streets for aportion of its route; the othertwo rail transit modes are notsuitable for street operation.Light rail cannot share trackswith conventional rail servicesbecause light rail vehicles arenot designed to meet the

structural strength requirements for passenger cars operating on theconventional railroad system.

The American Railway Engineering and Maintenance Association (AREMA) hasdeveloped typical design criteria for these three type of systems as shown inTable 1.

11

Table 1Typical Design Criteria for Rail Transit Systems

Design Criteria Heavy Rail Light Rail CommuterRail

Right of Way & TrackExclusive Grade Separated Right-of-Way Always Seldom SomeDedicated Grade-Level Right-of-Way Seldom Often UsuallyStreet Running Never Often SeldomMaximum Speed (MPH) 50-80 50-55 70-100Station Spacing – Downtown .5 Mile 1 or 2 Blocks 1 MileStation Spacing – Outlying 1-2 Miles .5 - 1 Mile 5 MilesEquipmentSeating Capacity 40-80 50-85 80-185Maximum Capacity 100-175 110-175 120-185Acceleration Rate (mph per second) 2.5-3.0 3.0 0.5Deceleration Rate (mph per second) 2.8-3.2 3.0-4.0 2.0Cars per Train 6-10 1-4 6-8

Source: AREMA Chapter 12, Section 2.6.

Heavy rail, with its ability to move large numbers of people, is the mostexpensive to build. Constructed underground or on elevated structures, itsmassive capital cost is a major hurdle. Examples of heavy rail systems are theNew York subway system, MARTA in Atlanta, the Washington D.C. METROand the subway systems in Boston, Philadelphia and Chicago.

Light rail is a less intensive type of system with the flexibility of operating oncity streets, underground, on elevated structures and combinations of all three.Its mission often is to provide frequent service throughout the day, distributingpeople within a metropolitan area, as well as providing trips to and from work.With the exception of some trolley lines that are historical in nature (such asNew Orleans), light rail systems in the United States have been built almostexclusively on new alignments and use new equipment. Although lessexpensive than heavy rail, this new construction makes the introduction of anew light rail system more expensive than commuter rail.

Commuter rail's hauling capacity falls somewhere between heavy and light rail,but it has distinct cost advantages. Commuter rail generally is the longdistance component of a region’s transit service. Due to federal safetyregulations (explained below), it is the only type of rail transit that can operateon existing freight tracks, negating the need for real estate acquisition andexpensive construction techniques. There also exists a sporadic market for

12

used commuter rail equipment, which when refurbished may be acceptable fora new system at less than the cost of new.

Heavy and light rail operate on their own separate systems or on tracks“shared” with conventional railroad operations using strictly segregated timeperiods. This temporal separation is possible only on lightly used freight lines,and is not an option on the lines under study in this project.

Rail transit systems that operate on the same tracks at the same time asconventional freight trains are subject to the regulations of the Federal RailroadAdministration (FRA). Rail passenger equipment that meets the FRA PassengerCar Safety Standards is termed "compliant". Non-compliant equipment isgenerally lighter and therefore costs less, requires less power, consumes lessfuel, and may have better braking characteristics compared with compliantequipment. Heavy rail and light rail equipment are "non-compliant" due to anumber of factors, not the least of which is their lower compressive strengthwhich would make them more vulnerable to crushing in the event of a collisionwith conventional rail equipment. Hence rail transit service that shares trackswith conventional freight service uses compliant equipment and takes on mostor all of the characteristics of commuter rail from the above table as opposed toheavy or light rail.

Commuter Rail Success FactorsExperience has shown a number of factors that work to make commuter rail asuccess. Among these factors are:

• A high volume of existing trips from outlying suburbs to a city'scentral business district;

• Reasonable trip times that are equal to or less than driving time;• Safe, reliable, frequent service that the commuter can trust;• Longer distances that make it worthwhile to switch from automobiles

to transit;• Feeder/distribution systems, often on both ends of the transit trip

(includes feeder busses as well as light and heavy rail systems); • Adequate parking at outlying stations;• Reasonable fares; and• Clean, comfortable equipment.

The following are brief descriptions of some of the more successful commuterrail services that have begun service in the last ten years:

13

Los AngelesThe Southern California Regional Rail Authority began its Metrolink commuterrail service in 1992. Today this system is made up of six lines totaling 416route-miles. Service is provided to 49 stations with a fleet of 119 passengercars and 33 locomotives. Due to the high demand for commuter service, anadditional 28 cars and 2 locomotives are on order. All six lines combined carryan average of 30,000 boardings (defined as passengers traveling in onedirection) per weekday on 111 scheduled trains, representing an 8 percentincrease in ridership in the past year.

Washington D.C.The Northern Virginia Transportation Commission and the Potomac andRapahannock Transportation Commission formed a partnership to create theVirginia Railway Express (VRE), which began running commuter trains in 1992.The service is provided on two lines in Northern Virginia and the District ofColumbia utilizing 30 stations over 81 route-miles. VRE currently operates 30weekday trains utilizing 60 passenger cars and 17 locomotives. Averageweekday ridership currently stands at 9,265, having increased nearly 20percent in the past year.

San DiegoThe North County Transit District in Sand Diego instituted its Coastercommuter rail service in 1995. Each weekday, 18 trains serve 8 stations onthe 41-mile system, utilizing 22 passenger cars and five locomotives. Dailyridership now exceeds 4,300 per day, also an increase of nearly 20 percentover the previous year.

Various conditions must exist for the successful startup of commuter railservice. Rail lines chosen must be able to support certain speed levels, provideadequate passenger train safety and have the capacity to support commuter railoperations as well as existing and future freight uses.

Travel time is among the most important determinants of success for acommuter rail system. Ridership declines rapidly as train travel time exceedsauto travel time by wider margins. Commuter rail systems throughout theUnited States average between 25 and 40 miles per hour, including stationstops, so it is necessary for the top speed to be well in excess of the averagespeed in order to make up for the time taken up by acceleration, deceleration,waiting in stations and traversing sections of track where physical layoutconstrains speed. Generally speaking, a commuter train must be able to attainspeeds of 50 to 60 miles per hour throughout most of its run in order toachieve acceptable travel times. Most, although not all, of the lines in theKansas City area support these speeds today. The infrastructure improvement

14

cost to support commuter train speeds is included in the capital cost estimate(shown later in this report) for each line.

Since commuter rail service often will have shared use of track with heavyfreight trains, passenger safety is perhaps the most important factor in itsoperation. A number of infrastructure components combine to promotepassenger safety:

• Track• Signals• Grade Crossing Warning Devices• Equipment• Station Facilities

The track improvements contemplated in this study not only will serve toincrease train speed but also to provide a measure of safety for the commuterservice. Some of the lines do not currently have a train traffic control signalsystem; costs to install such a system are included in the capital cost estimatesfor these lines. No commuter rail system in the United States that operates atthe speeds necessary to compete with the automobile operates on trackswithout signal systems, except perhaps at slow speeds in terminals. Operatingwithout such a system is not recommended. Installation of new and upgradesto existing highway grade crossing warning systems are also included wherelines will see increases in train speeds in order to increase the level of safetynot only for the commuter rail passenger but for automobile travelers as well.Equipment contemplated for this service will either be new or rebuilt and mustmeet FRA passenger car safety standards, which are probably the moststringent in the world. As station facilities deteriorate over time, they tend tobecome less safe unless properly maintained. Station facilities that would beinstalled for commuter service in Kansas City would be in new condition andtherefore quite safe.

Shared UseOne of the attractive attributes of commuter rail is that it can share existingtracks with freight trains, negating the need to build a completely separateinfrastructure. This sharing of rail lines keeps the typical cost of commuter railimplementation down to a manageable level. Capital cost estimates for recentand current commuter rail start-ups and extensions range from $1 million to$10 million per mile. By contrast, light rail lines usually cost $20 million permile or more, while heavy rail systems (like urban highways) can cost upwardsof $100 million per mile.

15

This shared use, however, comes with a price. Freight railroads arestockholder-owned, for-profit corporations whose value lies largely in theirfranchise, i.e. where their tracks go. They are extremely reluctant to permitany additional use of their operating properties if they feel such use could inany way jeopardize their ability to move freight efficiently.

In the not too distant past, many railroads simply refused to even discuss thepossible implementation of commuter rail service on their lines. This attitudenow appears to be changing, albeit gradually. The freight railroads realize thatcommuter projects can bring large amounts of infrastructure improvementdollars to the table, improvements from which they can benefit. However, thespecific physical, operational and service characteristics of each specific linewill continue to be crucial to shaping railroad reaction to commuter railproposals. Most railroads require the following three things in negotiation ofshared use agreements:

• The implementation and ongoing operation of the commuter railservice will not burden the freight railroad with additional costs;

• The commuter service will not impede or interfere with existingfreight customers; and

• The present capacity for future freight traffic growth and industrialdevelopment must be maintained.

The last two requirements often require that the commuter agency, as part ofthe cost of establishing service, either pay for capacity improvement projects orcommit to such payment at some point in the future. Capacity improvementprojects will be discussed in more detail in the Capital Cost section.

Rail Corridors and LinesKansas City Region rail corridors and lines examined in this report weredepicted on Map 1 and are summarized in Table 2 below and described in detailfollowing the table. As previously indicated, within each corridor, the linedeemed to be the best prospect in terms of serving potential ridershipgenerators was used to develop service, ridership and cost projections.Further, end points of proposed service were selected based on population andjourney-to-work patterns, causing some service to be shorter than the originallydefined corridors.

16

Table 2Kansas City Rail Lines and Corridors

LineNumber

Corridor OperatingRailroad

Length Direction Endpoint

1 A BNSF 62.7 NW St. Joseph 2 B BNSF 29.1 N Kearney 3 B UP 35.2 NE Lawson 4 B IMRL 35.2 NE Lawson 5 C BNSF 39.4 E Richmond 6 C BNSF 37.0 E Camden 7 C NS 37.6 E Camden 8 D UP 43.2 E Lexington 9 D GWWR 53.2 E Higginsville

10 E UP 65.3 SE Warrensburg 10X E UP 25.4 SE Pleasant Hill

11 E MNA 44.1 S Harrisonville12 F KCS 28.5 S Belton13 G BNSF 23.0 S Olathe14 G UP 42.8 SW Paola15 F UP 51.2 SW Paola16 G BNSF 57.1 SW Ottawa17 H BNSF 64.0 W Topeka18 H UP 67.9 W Topeka19 A UP 71.6 NW St. Joseph

Source: RLBA.

Corridor A - St. JosephThis corridor extends northwest from Kansas City parallel to the Missouri Riverand Interstate 29 to St. Joseph. The corridor has the potential to serveRosecrans Memorial Airport and Missouri Western State College.

Line 19. St. Joseph – Kansas City Union Station (71.6 miles)Connecting St. Joseph, Missouri with Kansas City, Missouri, is a 71.6-mileroute via Atchison, Kansas. It utilizes a 45-mile segment of Union Pacific’s(UP) Falls City Subdivision between Kansas City and Atchison, then connectsacross the Missouri River to utilize the BNSF St. Joseph Subdivision for thefinal 18 miles to St. Joseph. The entire line consists of a single main track andis governed by a Centralized Traffic Control (CTC) signal system. UP operates

17

24 trains per day over the line between Kansas City and Atchison, and BNSFoperates 43 trains per day on the line between Atchison and St. Joseph.Commuter trains would operate over 6.4 miles KCT track between NorthCypress Junction and Union Station. Currently, there is no passenger serviceon this line.

Line 1. St. Joseph – Kansas City Union Station (62.7 miles)This segment of the St. Joseph Subdivision owned and operated by BNSF,connects St. Joseph, Missouri with Kansas City, Missouri and consists ofpredominantly a single main track with approximately 3 miles of double track.BNSF operates 43 trains per day over this line. The signal system ispredominantly CTC. Commuter trains would operate over the Kansas CityTerminal Railroad for the final 3.8 miles into Union Station. Currently, there isno passenger service on the line.

Corridor B – Excelsior SpringsThis corridor extends northeast along Interstate 35 to northeastern Clay County(Excelsior Springs). The Liberty Transit Center, identified in the MTI-DA report,is on the corridor. Corridor features include William Jewell College and theJesse James Bank Museum.

Line 2. Kearney – Kansas City Union Station (29.1 miles)Referred to as the Kearney Spur, this 29.1-mile line owned by BNSF andoperated on by both BNSF and Norfolk Southern Railway (NS) consists of onemain track and no signal system. Commuter trains would utilize 3.8 miles ofKCT track between the junction at Ustick Tower and Union Station as well as8.4 miles of BNSF’s Brookfield Subdivision between Ustick Tower andBirmingham, Missouri. There is no passenger service on this line.

Line 3. Lawson – Kansas City Union Station (35.2 miles)Owned by UP and operated jointly with I&M Rail Link (IMRL), this 35.2-milesegment of the Trenton Subdivision links Lawson, Missouri with Kansas City.The line consists of two main tracks (with the exception of a single-trackdrawbridge) and the signal system is all CTC. UP jointly operates 10 trains perday with IMRL over this line. Between Airline Junction and Union Station,commuter trains would use 5.2 miles of KCT trackage. Currently, there is nopassenger service on this line.

Line 4. Lawson – Kansas City Union Station (35.2 miles)Owned by IMRL and operated jointly with UP, this 35.2 mile segment of the 1st

Subdivision links Lawson, Missouri with Kansas City. The line consists of twomain tracks, except for a single-track drawbridge, and is governed entirely byCTC. IMRL jointly operates 10 trains per day with UP over the line. Commuter

18

trains would operate over 5.2 miles of KCT track between Air Line Junctionand Union Station. There is no passenger service on the line at this time.

Corridor C – RichmondThis corridor extends east along U.S. Route 24 to the Richmond area.

Line 5. Richmond – Kansas City Union Station (39.4 miles)Owned and operated by BNSF, this segment of the Brookfield Subdivisionconnects Richmond, Missouri with Kansas City. The line consists ofapproximately 9 miles of double main track and approximately 27 miles ofsingle main track. The entire line is governed by a CTC signal system. BNSFoperates 7 trains per day over this line. Approximately 17 miles of the line isshared with NS, over which BNSF and NS jointly operate approximately 35trains and which is subject to NS operating rules. Commuter trains wouldutilize 3.8 miles of KCT track between Ustick Tower and Union Station.Currently, there is no passenger service on this line.

Line 6. Camden – Kansas City Union Station (37.0 miles)This segment of the Marcelline Subdivision, owned and operated by BNSF,connects Carrollton, Missouri with Kansas City. Most of the line consists oftwo main tracks, while 1.4 miles of the line consists of a single main track.There is also a 6-mile segment consisting of three main tracks. BNSF operates47 trains per day over the line. The line is equipped with CTC and AutomaticTrain Stop. Commuter trains would utilize 7 miles of KCT trackage betweenCongo and Union Station.

Line 7. Camden – Kansas City Union Station (37.6 miles)Owned and operated by NS, this segment of NS’s Kansas City Districtconnects Carrollton, Missouri with Kansas City. The line consists of doublemain track and single main track, as well as joint operation between NS andBNSF over a third main track. The NS portion of the line is all governed byAutomatic Block Signals (ABS), while the BNSF portions are all controlled byCTC. Each railroad operates between 30 and 47 trains per day over the line.Commuter trains would operate over 3.8 miles of KCT track between UstickTower and Union Station.

Corridor D - OdessaThis corridor extends east to Odessa paralleling the Missouri River andInterstate 70. The East Independence/Blue Springs Transit Center, identified in

19

the MTI-DA report, is on the corridor. Corridor features include theIndependence Airport, Harry S. Truman Regional Airport and HigginsvilleIndustrial Municipal Airport.

Line 8. Lexington – Kansas City Union Station (43.2 miles)Owned and operated by UP, this segment of UP’s River Subdivision connectsLexington, Missouri with Kansas City. UP operates 17 trains per day over thesingle main track line. The signal system is predominantly ABS. Commutertrains would occupy 7 miles of KCT track between Congo and Union Station.

Line 9. Higginsville – Kansas City Union Station (53.2 miles)Owned and operated by Kansas City Southern Railway (KCS), this 53.2 milesegment of the former Gateway Western Railway (GWWR in Table 2)Subdivision No. 3 hosts five freight trains per day. The line consists of onemain track, with no signal system and is controlled by Track Warrants (TWC).There is no passenger service on the line. The maximum train speed is 40 mph.Commuter trains would use 6.2 miles of KCT track between Rock CreekJunction and Union Station.

Corridor E - WarrensburgThis corridor extends southeast along U.S. Route 50 to Pleasant Hill andWarrensburg. The Lee’s Summit Transit Center, identified in the MTI-DA report,is on the corridor. Corridor features include Graceland College, Harry S.Truman National Historical Site, Harry S. Truman Library and Museum,University of Missouri - Kansas City, Harry S. Truman Children’s NeurologicalCenter and Cerebral Palsy Foundation, Jackson County Public Hospital andMcComas-Lee’s Summit Memorial Airport.

Line 10. Warrensburg – Kansas City (65.3 miles)Owned and operated by UP, this single-track segment of the SedaliaSubdivision is part of UP’s major route between St. Louis, Missouri and KansasCity, Missouri/Kansas. Between Rock Creek and Kansas City, commuter trainswould utilize the KCT’s belt line. Missouri and Northern Arkansas (MNA)—aregional carrier, uses UP tracks between Pleasant Hill and Rock Creek Junction.UP and MNA trains are permitted to run up to 55 mph. UP (and MNA) operatea total of 34 trains per day over the line. In addition, the Sedalia Subdivisionhosts three Amtrak passenger trains: the Kansas City Mule, the St. Louis Muleand the Ann Rutledge. Amtrak trains are restricted to a maximum speed of 70mph.

Line 10X. Pleasant Hill – Leed’s Junction (25.4 miles)This line is an alternate route to a portion of Line 10 and is designated as 10X.This former Rock Island line is currently owned by UP and is referred to as the

20

KC Industrial Lead. Commuter trains would use the KCT between UnionStation and Sheffield, then KCS to Leed's Jct., then UP's KC Industrial Leadbetween Leed's Junction and Pleasant Hill, a distance of approximately 25miles. The UP Sedalia Subdivision would then be utilized for the final 30 milesbetween Pleasant Hill and Warrensburg, for a total service length of 64.4 miles.

From Pleasant Hill where line 10X presently connects with UP (Line 10), theformer Rock Island trackage extends west through Chilhowee and eventually toSt. Louis. This is a single-track line with no signal system that has been out ofservice since the early 1980's. It was acquired from the Rock Island by UP andthen sold to the Missouri Central in 1999. The line is being operated betweenSt. Louis and Union, Missouri, on the east end, but there are no immediaterehabilitation plans for the west end of the line to Pleasant Hill. Because theline was idle and does not serve Warrensburg, the portion of the line east ofPleasant Hill was not further evaluated. Should this corridor be selected forfurther examination in Phase 2, any apparent advantages to using this segmentwill be considered.

Line 11. Harrisonville – Kansas City Union Station (44.1-miles)Operated and owned in part by MNA, this line consists of three distinctsegments. The first of which is the 10.1-mile stretch of track betweenHarrisonville, Missouri and Pleasant Hill, Missouri both owned and operated byMNA. The line hosts 6 trains per day and is governed by TWC.

The second section of Line 11 is a 27.7-mile segment of UP's SedaliaSubdivision, over which MNA trains operate via trackage rights. Asaforementioned, this line consists of a 5.6-mile section of double main trackand approximately 52 miles of single track—all of which is governed by CTC.UP hosts 34 trains per day over the line.

The last section of Line 11 consists of 7 miles on KCT between Rock CreekJunction and Union Station, over which commuter trains would operate.

Corridor F - BeltonThis corridor extends south from Kansas City along U.S. Routes 71 and 69 toBelton. The Grandview Transit Center, identified in the MTI-DA report, is on thecorridor. Corridor features include the Electronics Institute, Olympic Stadium,Harry S. Truman Sports Complex, Arrowhead Stadium, Royals Stadium, KansasCity Missouri Municipal Farm, Youth Home and Village, Richards-GebaurIntermodal Yard and Swope Park.

21

Line 12. Belton – Kansas City Union Station (28.5 miles)This segment of the KCS Pittsburg Subdivision connects Belton, Missouri withKansas City. The entire line consists of one main track and the signal system ispredominantly CTC. KCS operates 15 trains per day over the line. Betweenthe KCS crossing and Union Station, commuter trains would use 5.2 miles ofKCT track. Currently there is no passenger service on the line.

In earlier years, another rail line in the corridor was operated by the St. Louis-San Francisco Railway Company (the “Frisco”, later merged into BurlingtonNorthern, which is now BNSF). A field check revealed that only a portion ofthis line remains. The line starts just north of the underpass of the KCS inGrandview, MO (between Martha Truman Rd and Blue Ridge Ext.) Thealignment runs south through Grandview and continues to Belton and stops justNorth of East Cambridge Rd. on the south side of Belton, MO. That portion ofthe track is being operated by the KCS now. The Belton, Grandview & KansasCity Railroad Company (BGKC) owns approximately five miles of trackageparalleling Route 71 between 155th Street and 179th Street. BGKC is avolunteer organization that operates a museum/tourist service with no freightservice at this time. According to BGKC, reinstitution of freight service is beingconsidered. Beyond that area and Harrisonville, the track is removed althoughmost of the roadbed and bridges are still in. At several locations in Peculiar theright of way has been used for convenience store and a large storage building.This line is not a good prospect for commuter service due to the need toreplace track that has been removed and because it did not have its ownaccess to downtown or even to the KCT, but had to rely on trackage rightsover UP to reach KCT tracks.

Corridor G – Olathe and PaolaThis corridor extends southwest from Kansas City to Olathe and, potentially,beyond to Paola. It is served by lines 13, 14 and 15. Commuter rail service inthe corridor using Line 13 is in Preliminary Engineering sponsored by JohnsonCounty. While this study does not conduct a separate analysis of potentialservice in the corridor, information about its three lines is included forcompleteness. The Olathe and Shawnee West Transit Centers, identified in theMTI-DA report, is on the corridor. Corridor features include Sauer Castle,Wyandotte County Mental Health and Guidance Center, Calvary Bible College,University of Kansas Medical Center, T. H. Benton Home, Wesleyan Clinic,Shawnee Mission Medical Center, Kansas City College and Bible School,Johnson County Community College, Mid-America Nazarene College, MahffieFarmstead and Stage Coach Stop Historical Site.

22

Line 13. Olathe – Kansas City Union Station (23.0 miles)Owned and operated by BNSF, this segment of BNSF’s Ft. Scott Subdivisionlinks Paola and Spring Hill, Kansas with Kansas City. The line consists ofdouble main track and is governed by CTC signal system. BNSF operates 30trains per day over the line. Between the junction of KCT with BNSF to UnionStation, commuter trains would utilize 0.8 miles of KCT trackage or a newconnecting track constructed as part of the commuter rail project.

Line 14. Paola – Kansas City Union Station (42.8 miles)Operated by UP as the Parsons Subdivision, UP utilizes a 39.9-mile segment ofBNSF Fort Scott Subdivision, over which UP exercises trackage rights. Thattrackage consists of approximately 23 miles of double main track with theremainder single track. A CTC signal system controls train movements on theline. This line hosts between 28 and 30 trains per day. As in line 13, betweenthe junction of KCT with BNSF, commuter trains would be required to utilize0.8 miles of KCT (or newly constructed) trackage to Union Station.

Line 15. Osawatomie – Kansas City Union Station (51.2 miles)Owned and operated by UP, this segment of the Coffeyville Subdivisionconnects Osawatomie, Kansas with Kansas City. The line consists entirely of asingle main track with a CTC signal system. UP operates between 19 and 28trains per day over the line. Commuter trains would use 5.2 miles of KCT trackbetween Sheffield and Union Station.

Line 16. Ottawa – Kansas City (57.1 miles)Owned and operated by BNSF, this segment of the Emporia Subdivisionconnects Ottawa, Kansas with Kansas City. The line hosts 62 freight trainsper day and is also the route used by Amtrak’s Southwest Chief on its runbetween Chicago and Los Angeles. Track speeds on the line are relatively high,with the maximum passenger speed at 79 mph, 55 mph for freight trains. Theline is governed by a CTC signal system. This line consists of approximately45 miles of two main tracks, 4 miles of three main tracks and 8 miles of fourmain tracks. Commuter trains would utilize KCT track for approximately thelast mile to Union Station.

Corridor H - TopekaThis corridor extends west from Kansas City along the Kansas River and theKansas Turnpike/I-70 through Lawrence to Topeka. The West WyandotteTransit Center, identified in the MTI-DA report, is on the corridor. Corridorfeatures include the Capital, University of Kansas, Bland Airport, SpencerMuseum of Art, Lawrence Memorial Hospital, Philip Billard Municipal Airportand Haskell Indian Nation University. The former Sunflower Ammunition Plant,

23

part of which is the proposed site of the Oz Entertainment Company's plannedtheme part and resort area, is located alongside a rail spur that connects to Line17 (described below) of the corridor.

Line 17. Topeka – Kansas City Union Station (64 miles)Owned and operated by BNSF, this segment of the Topeka Subdivisionconnects Topeka, Kansas with Kansas City. The entire line consists of onemain track with ABS and ATS. BNSF operates 6 trains per day over the line.The Topeka Subdivision ends at Holliday, Kansas, and commuter trains wouldutilize BNSF’s Emporia Subdivision for 14 miles between Holliday, Kansas andKansas City. Commuter trains would also utilize KCT track for approximatelythe last mile to Union Station.

Line 18. Topeka – Kansas City Union Station (67.9 miles)Owned and operated by UP, this segment of the Kansas Subdivision connectsTopeka, Kansas with Kansas City. The entire segment consists of double maintrack. More than 45 miles of the total line is governed by CTC, with a 16-milesection of ABS. UP operates 68 trains per day over this line. Commuter trainswould use 4 miles of KCT trackage between Minnesota Avenue and UnionStation. There is currently no passenger service on the line.

Prospective Kansas City Region Commuter Rail Service

Potential Station LocationsProposed stations are conceptually located in the vicinity of concentratedpotential riders and placed for study purposes where major roads intersect orapproach the subject rail line. Exact station locations have not beenestablished at this stage of investigation. Specific locations are a matter ofgreat importance to communities and residents served and decisions should bemade with care. The following general criteria should govern future stationsiting.

Stations should be as close as possible to trip origins and/or destinations. Inother words, station locations should be useful and convenient to prospectiverail passengers. The biggest challenge to commuter rail is to lure commutersfrom their automobiles. There should be a good pedestrian and bicycle network(existing or planned) to facilitate station access/egress.

Station siting should be compatible with community land use and long rangeplans. Some communities promote growth center - based transit in order toreduce automobile impacts. Intermodal transportation nodes, including severaltransportation options, enhance use of non-automobile modes.

24

A commuter rail station requires convenient highway access, as well asaccommodation for park and ride, drop-off, and bus transit users of the railsystem.

There must be sufficient space for parking, so that no potential customer isturned away. Parking space inadequacy is the biggest defect of recent new-start commuter rail systems.

Cost must be reasonable.

Railroad-related considerations also must be recognized. Where possible,stations should be sited on tangent track, that is, straight track, so that traincrews can observe the entire station platform and liability exposure ofdetraining passengers is minimized. Also, stations should be locatedappropriate distances from crossovers, turnouts and grade crossings, so as notto interfere unduly with other railroad operation and highway traffic.

Station Components/AmenitiesStation design, configuration and construction standards are importantelements in attracting and retaining ridership. Today's commuter rail stationsrun the gamut from highly developed big-city intermodal passenger terminals(for example, Chicago Union Station) to modest platforms in semi-rural settings.

What a station must include is partly covered in the discussion above, forexample, a station must have adequate parking. In order to encourageridership, free parking is recommended. The Americans with Disabilities Act of1990 (ADA) requires provision for wheelchair boarding; this commonly is doneeither by means of short, high platforms that put disabled passengers at thesame level as the train door or by means of wheelchair lifts. Platform lighting isrecommended. It may be desirable to include at least a small shelter forinclement weather. Depending on magnitude of expected station usage, a buslane and "kiss and ride" (drop-off) lane may be appropriate. In accord with thefare payment system, the station may include ticket vending machines. Apublic address system, to inform commuters when trains are late, is anappreciated feature.

Other amenities may include newspaper or vending machines, pay telephones,system information, security cameras, benches or landscaping, and, wherewarranted by number of station users, a commuter rail representative.

Some communities have taken over "ownership," figuratively if not literally, of"their" commuter rail stations, making them into a special community location.

25

Obviously, this kind of attention tends to market the service and enhanceridership. Southern California’s Metrolink is an example of communityownership and development of commuter stations, with design guidelinesprovided by the commuter agency. By the same token, encouragement ofpassenger service retail establishments co-located with the station performs asimilar synergistic function, each reinforcing the other. Community or privateinitiative may take over here, transferring a mere commuter rail structure into a"signature" community location, destination and development node.

Layover FacilitiesLayover facilities are required for overnight train storage and servicing, anddaytime storage and cleaning between peak use service. It is preferable tolocate these as close as possible to a commuter rail line's outer terminals. Alayover facility requires enough space to store the anticipated number of trains,preferably allowing some room for expansion, 480 volt standby power (requiredto maintain train heat and cooling and operate lights and doors withoutoperating the train's power plant), crew and maintenance building, fencing andlighting. It may be possible to use (by lease, perhaps) existing rail facilities andavoid the cost of purchasing land and new construction.

Commuter Rail Equipment

Safety StandardsThe first consideration in equipment selection is the need for compliance withFRA passenger car safety standards. All routes and lines under considerationhost significant freight activity over at least a portion of their length (at aminimum the KCT segment). There is no feasible opportunity for strict timeseparation of the conventional freight (and Amtrak) services from the newpassenger service, i.e., operating freight trains only at night or tightly monitoreddaytime periods when no passenger trains are operating. Thus compliantequipment would be necessary.

Diesel Multiple Units vs. Locomotive-Powered TrainsThe next major decision involves selecting between self-propelled dieselmultiple units (DMUs) and conventional locomotive-propelled coaches. Whilespecific breakpoints at which one technology becomes more cost-effective thanthe other are not precise, one may generalize that locomotive-hauled trains aresuperior for moving large numbers of people during peak periods. DMUs appear

26

to be the better choice for relatively smaller passenger loads, especially whenthere are frequent headways.

For decades, the only option for putting compliant DMUs into service was torebuild Budd Rail Diesel Cars (RDCs), originally built in the 1950s. As of thiswriting, there is one prospect for new, compliant DMUs. Pennsylvania DOTselected AdTranz (now being purchased by Bombardier) to supply new DMUsfor Pennsylvania's Keystone Corridor service, but that procurement was put onhold pending sufficient additional orders from other buyers to make iteconomical to tool up and produce the cars.

Should locomotive-hauled trains be chosen, this type of passenger servicegenerally requires four-axle diesel electric locomotives having a minimum ratingof 2,000 horsepower, although 3,000 horsepower is more common. Severalnew start and growing systems have relied on locomotives which were rebuiltfrom four-axle freight locomotives. Coaches are available in single level andbilevel configurations. Most recent new-start commuter rail services haveopted for higher capacity bilevel cars that offer capital and operating costefficiencies. Commuter trains usually operate in push-pull mode, that is, thetrainset may be operated from either the locomotive or from the engineer'scompartment in the cab control car, a specially equipped coach located at theend of the train opposite the locomotive. As a result, trainsets need not beturned around to proceed in the opposite direction, saving time and money.

Equipment RecommendationFor purposes of this study, locomotive-hauled trainsets of one locomotive, onecab control car and varying numbers of coaches (as appropriate for projectedridership) are assumed. All trains would be accessible to disabled passengers,and most services choose to accommodate bicycles in one or more cars pertrain. In this preliminary screening, it is assumed no trainsets could reverse andmake a second peak period trip, so each peak period train trip requires adedicated trainset.

Sample SchedulesSample schedules for three daily round trips are produced for all corridorsexcept G (I-35). Some corridors would require more trains to meet expecteddemand. Schedules are based upon running times after lines are upgraded topermit 70 mph passenger speeds where not restricted by curves, interlockingsor other factors. (Existing passenger speeds as high as 70 mph are assumed

27

on lines which currently host Amtrak service.) Sample schedules and averagespeeds from other terminals to Union Station follow.

Table 3Sample Commuter Rail Schedules

Corridor AStation Distance Morning Inbound

to Union StationEvening Outbound from Union Station

St. Joseph 62.7 5:45 AM 6:30 AM 7:15 AM 5:57 PM 6:42 PM 7:27 PMRushville 44.4 6:05 AM 6:50 AM 7:35 AM 5:37 PM 6:22 PM 7:07 PMEast Leavenworth 25.9 6:26 AM 7:11 AM 7:56 AM 5:16 PM 6:01 PM 6:46 PMParkville 15.0 6:48 AM 7:33 AM 8:18 AM 4:54 PM 5:39 PM 6:24 PMUnion Station 0 7:12 AM 7:57 AM 8:42 AM 4:30 PM 5:15 PM 6:00 PMAverage speed from end terminal: 45.3 mph

Corridor BStation Distance Morning Inbound


Excelsior Springs 28.5 5:56 AM 6:41 AM 7:26 AM 5:19 PM 6:04 PM 6:49 PMLiberty 15.7 6:15 AM 7:00 AM 7:45 AM 5:01 PM 5:46 PM 6:31 PMUnion Station 0 6:46 AM 7:31 AM 8:16 AM 4:30 PM 5:15 PM 6:00 PMAverage speed from end terminal: 34.2

Corridor CStation Distance Morning Inbound


Richmond 39.4 5:45 AM 6:30 AM 7:15 AM 5:26 PM 6:11 PM 6:56 PMMissouri City 22.0 6:06 AM 6:51 AM 7:36 AM 5:05 PM 5:50 PM 6:35 PMUnion Station 0 6:41 AM 7:26 AM 8:11 AM 4:30 PM 5:15 PM 6:00 PMAverage speed from end terminal: 42.0

Corridor DStation Distance Morning Inbound


Odessa 39.5 6:05 AM 6:35 AM 7:20 AM 5:31 PM 6:16 PM 7:01 PMOak Grove 28.5 6:21 AM 6:51 AM 7:36 AM 5:15 PM 6:00 PM 6:45 PMBlue Springs 19.5 6:35 AM 7:05 AM 7:50 AM 5:01 PM 5:46 PM 6:31 PMIndependence 8.7 6:51 AM 7:21 AM 8:06 AM 4:45 PM 5:30 PM 6:15 PMUnion Station 0 7:07 AM 7:37 AM 8:22 AM 4:30 PM 5:15 PM 6:00 PMAverage speed from end terminal: 38.3

28

Corridor EStation Distance Morning Inbound


Warrensburg 65.3 5:45 AM 6:30 AM 7:15 AM 6:02 PM 6:47 PM 7:32 PMHolden 51.3 6:03 AM 6:48 AM 7:33 AM 5:44 PM 6:29 PM 7:14 PMPleasant Hill 35.3 6:21 AM 7:06 AM 7:51 AM 5:25 PM 6:10 PM 6:55 PMLee's Summit 25.1 6:35 AM 7:20 AM 8:05 AM 5:12 PM 5:57 PM 6:42 PMEast Raytown 18.5 6:44 AM 7:29 AM 8:14 AM 5:02 PM 5:47 PM 6:32 PMIndependence 11.9 6:53 AM 7:38 AM 8:23 AM 4:53 PM 5:38 PM 6:23 PMUnion Station 0 7:17 AM 8:02 AM 8:47 AM 4:30 PM 5:15 PM 6:00 PMAverage speed from end terminal: 42.4

Corridor FStation Distance Morning Inbound


Belton 28.5 5:45 AM 6:30 AM 7:15 AM 5:18 PM 6:03 PM 6:48 PMGrandview 22.5 5:53 AM 6:38 AM 7:23 AM 5:09 PM 5:54 PM 6:39 PMBannister 17.6 6:00 AM 6:45 AM 7:30 AM 5:02 PM 5:47 PM 6:32 PM63rd St. 12.8 6:09 AM 6:54 AM 7:39 AM 4:53 PM 5:38 PM 6:23 PMSports Complex 9.3 6:16 AM 7:01 AM 7:46 AM 4:46 PM 5:31 PM 6:16 PMUnion Station 0 6:33 AM 7:18 AM 8:03 AM 4:30 PM 5:15 PM 6:00 PMAverage speed from end terminal: 35.3

Corridor HStation Distance Morning Inbound


Topeka 64.0 5:45 AM 6:30 AM 7:15 AM 5:56 PM 6:41 PM 7:26 PMLecompton 51.3 5:59 AM 6:44 AM 7:29 AM 5:42 PM 6:27 PM 7:12 PMLawrence 39.9 6:11 AM 6:56 AM 7:41 AM 5:29 PM 6:14 PM 6:59 PM

Eudora 31.2 6:22 AM 7:07 AM 7:52 AM 5:18 PM 6:03 PM 6:48 PMDe Soto 24.5 6:30 AM 7:15 AM 8:00 AM 5:10 PM 5:55 PM 6:40 PM

Edwardsville 15.9 6:41 AM 7:26 AM 8:11 AM 4:59 PM 5:44 PM 6:29 PMTurner 6.3 6:55 AM 7:40 AM 8:25 AM 4:45 PM 5:30 PM 6:15 PM

Union Station 0 7:11 AM 7:56 AM 8:41 AM 4:30 PM 5:15 PM 6:00 PMAverage speed from end terminal: 44.4

Source: RLBA.

29

Environmental ConsiderationsAll but one of the potential rail lines are presently in use. Assuming that noadditional right of way will be needed for the track improvements, there shouldbe no “fatal flaws” concerning running passenger service on an existing freightline. The present right of way may be considered to be essentially free ofconstraints so far as continued rail transportation use is concerned.

Station locations may have environmental considerations. If the rail stations areconstructed on lands outside of the existing railroad rights of way, additionalenvironmental review may be appropriate. This is especially true regardinghazardous materials which may be present. Potential contamination may bepresent from two sources, railroad accidents which leaked or spilled materialswhich are now considered hazardous and former adjacent land uses that mayhave used or transferred materials now considered to be hazardous. Railroadrights-of-way vary considerably in width. The railroad may have leased land tobusinesses, that although no longer present, left behind hazardous materials ator beneath the present surface of the land. This often occurred in the pastwhen the regulations concerning hazardous materials classification, storage anddisposal were not what they are today. Even where there is some type of usepresent, such as a lumber storage yard or parking lot, it does not necessarilyrule out the fact the land is or was owned by the railroad and has been leasedout for other uses. As potential station locations are developed in the nextstudy phase, information will be obtained by visual observation and limitedarchival research will be undertaken. It will be primarily focusing on previousland use adjacent to the right of way and any hazardous materials issues thatmay be present in the vicinity of the sites considered for station locations.

The Rock Island line located in Lee’s Summit, west of downtown, is currently adormant line. Residents in both Lee’s Summit and Raytown are opposingattempts to rehabilitate the rail line and return it to service. It was neverofficially abandoned, but fell into the unused category to the point that railroadgrade crossing were paved over. Since the railroad appeared to have beenabandoned, residential developments have been built adjacent to the tracks.The FRA has stated that the no Environmental Impact Statement needs to becompleted concerning the return of rail service, since it was never abandoned.

Cultural resource issues are under consideration within the existing rail right-of-way. In phase two of this project, cultural resources investigations will beaddressed in areas where new rights-of-way will be needed and at theproposed station locations. Cultural resources include architectural-standingstructures, historical-foundations, ruins or sites, and Archeological sites.

30

The addition of commuter trains to any corridor will result in an increase innoise, associated with the locomotive engine, wheel-rail interface andlocomotive horn blowing (for example, at highway-railroad at-grade crossings).The additional noise will not be continuous, but rather will occur only at thetimes when trains pass. Train noise can be a significant factor in the publicperception, or it can be insignificant, depending upon present noise levels, theproximity of homes and offices, and other factors. The number of trains on therail lines considered most likely to host commuter rail service (Corridors D, Eand H) varies from 5 to 68 per day. On a rail line which carries 68 trains perday, it is probable that no one would notice the noise made by six additionalcommuter trains. On the other hand, residents near to a rail line carrying 5trains per day may consider the prospect of additional noise an adverse impact.

a report to marc

Documents