5.0 public transportation - marc

DRAFT

A robust public transit and enhanced mobility network is essential to focused regional growth, an increased quality of life for all residents, and a healthy environment and economy. Public transit offers an affordable, equitable means of transportation and an alternative to personal vehicle ownership.

Public transit and enhanced mobility transportation serve many purposes for a range of constituencies — children who ride the bus to school, teens traveling to their first jobs, young adults who are pinching pennies, seniors who can no longer drive safely, people with physical or mental limitations, and those who choose to limit driving to conserve resources. With shifting demographics, the number of people who use public transit and enhanced mobility services is projected to increase.

Current servicesFixed route

The region’s transit system is a network of services provided by five area transit agencies: the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority (KCATA), Johnson County Transit, Unified Government Transit, City of Independence Transit and the Kansas City Streetcar Authority.

5.0 PUBLIC TRANSPORTATION

Public transportation includes various types of multiple-occupancy vehicle services, such as bus, streetcar, rail and demand-response options.

5.0 Public Transportation l Transportation Outlook 2040 5.1 2015 Update

DRAFT


Kansas City Area Transportation Authority /The Metro

Johnson County Transit / The JO

Unified Government Transit

City of Independence / IndeBus

Kansas City Streetcar Authority

Created 1965 1982 1978 2012 2012

Services MAX bus rapid transit, commuter express, local fixed route, flex demand-response, ADA complementary paratransit and vanpool.

Connex enhanced bus, commuter express, flex bus, paratransit.

Enhanced bus and local fixed routes (operates five intracity routes and contracts with KCATA to operate five additional intercity routes).

Local fixed route and paratransit.

Streetcar not yet operational

Funding FTA Section 5307 funds, 1/2-cent and a 3/8-cent sales tax in Kansas City, Missouri, and local general funds from cities contracting for service.

County general funds, state, federal revenue and funds from cities contracting for service.

County general funds, state, federal fare revenue, and other funds.

City general funds, federal and fare revenues

City general funds, federal and transportation development district

Geography Served Jackson, Clay and Platte counties in Missouri and Wyandotte and Johnson counties in Kansas. (District also includes Leavenworth County, Kansas, and Cass County, Missouri, though no services are currently provided).

Johnson County, Kansas, with connections into Kansas City, Missouri.

Kansas City, Kansas, and Wyandotte County with connections into downtown Kansas City, Missouri.

City of Independence, Missouri

Downtown Kansas City, Missouri

Transit Centers Served

10th and Main, Independence Square, Antioch Center, Boardwalk Square, 39th and Troost, 31st and Van Brunt, US-71/Red Bridge, Bannister/Hillcrest, Rosana Square, Downtown KCK and Midtown KCK.

Mission Transit Center, 10th and Main

Downtown Kansas City, Kansas, Midtown Kansas City, Kansas, and 10th and Main in Kansas City, Missouri.

Independence Square 3rd and Grand and 10th and Main

2012 Ridership 16,517,506 671,121 1,317,663 102,659 n/a

2012 Operating Funds Expended

$79,642,462 $10,323,206 $4,454,496 $967,341 n/a

2012 Capital Funds Expended

$10,999,455 $5,159,201 $10,853,632 $0 n/a

Fleet size 225 vehicles 108 vehicles n/a n/a n/a

Average age of fleet 7.04 years 8.01 years n/a n/a n/a

DRAFT


Coverage

Transit coverage is measured by how many residents live within a half-mile of a transit route or stop. It is used to measure progress toward transit system expansion in Greater Kansas City. According to 2010 U.S. Census data, 41 percent of the region’s residents have access to transit within one-half mile of their homes. Transit coverage forecasts for 2040 show that the population within a half-mile of transit will decline to 35 percent — a move in the wrong direction.

Transit coverage analysis also considers the number jobs located within proximity of transit routes. Based on 2010 U.S. Census data, 60 percent of the region’s jobs are located within a half-mile of transit; by 2040, this is expected to decrease to 50 percent. MARC’s Technical Forecast shows that, with the exception of downtown Kansas City, Missouri, the areas of the region that are expected to have the highest population and employment growth are the areas currently underserved or unserved by transit. More information related to transit coverage disparity can be found in the Land Use and and Equity chapters of this plan.

Figure 5.1 captures the geographic extent of current transit service in the region, but does not reflect the availability of service by time of day or day of the week.

CASS

MIAMI

CL AY

JACKSON

PLA TT E

JOHNSON

LEA VEN WO RT H

WYAND OT TE

Figure 5.1: Current transit routes available in the Kansas City region

Regional transit service providers

Johnson County Transit

IndeBus


KCATA

DRAFT


Peak-hour transit service

Nearly all routes in the regional transit network offer service during peak travel times (Figure 5.2). Peak hours, commonly known as rush hours, are the times of day where traffic volumes are at their highest, which usually occur twice each weekday and correspond with travel to and from work.

Eighteen transit routes only provide service during peak hours, catering primarily to work trips. Most of these routes are express routes that carry riders from suburban locations in to the central business district with few stops in between.

Figure 5.2: Transit service available at peak travel times in the Kansas City region

CASS

MIAMI

CL AY

JACKSON

PLA TT E

JOHNSON

LEA VEN WO RT H

WYAND OT TE

Peak-only service

Peak and non-peak service

DRAFT


Midday transit serviceMidday transit service primarily provides service between peak travel times. Figure 5.3 shows transit routes that offer midday service segmented by frequency, or how often a bus stops to pick up riders.

The majority of service falls into the 31–60 minute frequency range and is concentrated in Kansas City, Missouri, Kansas City, Kansas, and areas just north of the Missouri River. Higher frequency service, including both the 10–20 and the 21–30 minute ranges, are concentrated in the urban core of Kansas City, Missouri, and are fewer in number. By nature of frequency, these services are more convenient for riders and afford more local trips for a multitude of purposes.

The most frequent transit network – routes with 20-minute service or less during midday – include the following routes:• Main Street Metro Area Express (MAX)• Troost Avenue Metro Area Express (MAX)• Prospect Avenue• Independence Avenue• 31st Street

• 39th Street

Figure 5.3: Transit service frequencyCASS

MIAMI

CL AY

JACKSON

PLA TT E

JOHNSON

LEA VEN WO RT H

WYAND OT TE

—— 10–20 minute frequency




DRAFT


Daily service

Of all routes in the current transit system, only 25 provide service seven days per week. As shown in Figure 5.4, these routes cover a limited geographic area of the region, primarily concentrated in the city of Kansas City, Missouri. This is a significant limitation on using transit to access employment in suburban areas or for jobs that do not have traditional Monday-through-Friday shifts.

Figure 5.4: Transit service available seven days per week

CASS

MIAMI

CL AY

JACKSON

PLA TT E

JOHNSON

LEA VEN WO RT H

WYAND OT TE

DRAFT


Nighttime service

The current network of nighttime transit service is also limited. Night transit service includes routes that operate after the last peak travel period ends, usually around 7 p.m.

Only 10 routes provide service after midnight on weekdays. With the exception of the Main Street Max, which stops service at 2 a.m., these routes end service by 1 a.m.

CASS

MIAMI

CL AY

JACKSON

PLA TT E

JOHNSON

LEA VEN WO RT H

WYAND OT TEFigure 5.5: Nighttime transit services

DRAFT


Figure 5.6: Average daily transit ridership

Ridership

In 2012, the four transit operators carried an average daily ridership of approximately 50,000 passenger boardings. Transit ridership has increased since 2004, and the average daily transit ridership is expected to reach 57,093 by 2040.”

0

10,000

20,000

30,000

40,000

50,000

60,000

70,000

80,000

90,000

100,000

1972

1974

1976

1978

1980

1982

1984

1986

1988

1990

1992

1994

1996

19

98

2000

2002

2004

2006

2008

2010

2012

National Transit Database

Regional transit service providers

Johnson County Transit

IndeBus


KCATA

DRAFT


Enhanced mobility services

Many types of enhanced mobility services exist in the Kansas City region, but Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) complementary paratransit services provide the greatest number of one-way trips. Federal regulations require that each transit provider operating fixed-route services must also provide ADA-complementary paratransit service for any person with a disability whose trip origins and destinations fall within three-quarters of a mile on either side of any local fixed-route service. Regulations define minimum service thresholds for this service to be considered equivalent to the fixed-route service it complements. ADA-complementary paratransit services are demand-response services, and passengers generally schedule door-to-door trips through a call center.

KCATA provides paratransit services for elderly and disabled persons in portions of Clay, Platte and Jackson counties in Missouri. Unified Government Transit operates paratransit services in Wyandotte County, Kansas. The city of Independence, Missouri, operates paratransit services within its city limits. The JO operates a commuter service and, therefore, is not required to offer ADA-complementary paratransit service. If the commuter status of The JO’s service changes in the future, it will require the addition of ADA-complementary paratransit service. The JO currently operates a Special Edition service for persons with disabilities.

There are many other types of enhanced mobility services available in the region. Municipalities, volunteer-based organizations, mill levy boards and public-private partnerships provide most of these services. Link for Care (www.linkforcare.org) has a comprehensive, searchable online database of transportation services in the region. Figure 5.7 lists some examples of enhanced mobility services available.

Complementary ADA and non-ADA services providers by public transit agencies

City of Independence: IndeAccess and IndeAccess Plus

Johnson County Transit: Special Edition and SWIFT

KCATA: Share-a-Fare

Unified Government Transit: Dial-a-Ride

Municipal services

City of Olathe

City of Liberty

City of Shawnee

City of Excelsior Springs

City of Lee's Summit

Volunteer-based services

Johnson County Catch-a-Ride

JET Express

Missouri State Senate Bills 40 and 240 Boards

Platte County Board of Senior Services

Clay County Board of Senior Services

EITAS in Jackson County

Private for-profit providers

10-10 Taxi

Yellow Cab

Checker Cab

Figure 5.7: Partial list of enhanced mobility services in the Kansas City region

https://www.linkforcare.org/

DRAFT


Transportation-disadvantaged populationsPublic transit is particularly important to people who are considered transportation disadvantaged. The U.S. Census defines transportation-disadvantaged populations as adults age 65 and older, people with low incomes, people with disabilities, and those who don’t own a car (even if by choice) and would therefore be vulnerable in an emergency.

Persons age 65 and older

Figure 5.8 shows estimates of the 65-and-older population in the eight-county region — approximately 12 percent of the total population. The largest concentration of this group is found in Jackson County, Missouri, and the smallest concentration in Miami County, Kansas.

Figure 5.9 shows the percentage of persons 65 and older by census tract in each county. The older adult population is fairly well dispersed throughout the region, with no outstanding concentrations, except where residential communities designed for older-adult living are located.

Total population estimate

Population 65 years and older

Percent 65 years and older

Johnson 546,046 60,354 11%

Leavenworth 76,227 8,534 11%

Miami 32,546 4,301 13%

Wyandotte 157,274 16,978 11%

Cass 99,394 13,617 14%

Clay 222,048 25,215 11%

Jackson 672,784 84,413 13%

Platte 89,567 10,156 11%

Total 1,895,886 223,568 11.7%

Figure 5.8: Population estimates of persons 65 and older

Source: 2008-2012 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimate

DRAFT


2.0–3.0

0.7–1.0

0.3–0.6

0.0–0.2

Figure 5.9: Concentrations of population 65 and older (persons per acre)

DRAFT


People with disabilities

People with disabilities often have the most varied transportation needs. Disabilities may be physical, mental, emotional, developmental or a combination of any of these. Figure 5.10 shows that Wyandotte, Leavenworth, and Jackson counties have the highest percentage of disabled persons, while Johnson and Jackson counties have the largest disabled total numbers. Of the 11 percent of people in the region who are 65 and older, approximately 36 percent have a disability of some kind.

Total civilian non-institutionalized population

Total civilian non-institutionalized population with a disability

Percent of civilian non-institutionalized population with a disability

Johnson 542,294 43,926 8%

Leavenworth 68,465 9,106 13%

Miami not available not available not available

Wyandotte 156,114 22,324 14%

Cass 98,375 11,412 12%

Clay 220,339 23,797 11%

Jackson 666,427 84,636 13%

Platte 88,663 8,778 10%

Total 1,840,677 203,979 11%

Total 65 and older Total 65 and older with a disability

Percent 65 and older with a disability

Johnson 58,137 17,964 31%

Leavenworth 8,154 3,253 40%

Miami not available not available not available

Wyandotte 16,422 7,324 45%

Cass 13,015 4,672 36%

Clay 24,381 8,704 36%

Jackson 81,294 30,729 38%

Platte 9,872 3,475 35%

Total 211,275 76,121 36%

Figure 5.10: Population estimates of people with disabilities


DRAFT


1.5–2.6

0.9–1.4

0.4–0.8

0.0–0.3

Figure 5.11: Concentrations of persons with disabilities (persons per acre)

DRAFT


Low-income residents

The U.S. Census provides annual poverty data that can be used to identify low-income populations. Figure 5.12 shows low-income population estimates by county. Jackson and Wyandotte counties have the largest low-income populations in the region. There are also high concentrations of low-income populations in eastern Johnson, Leavenworth and Cass counties.

Total estimate for population identified with poverty status

Population with income in the past 12 months below poverty level

Percent of population below poverty level (past 12 months)

Total 65 years or older

Percent of impoverished residents aged 65 or older

Johnson 540,574 34,765 6.4% 2,689 5%

Leavenworth 70,167 6,738 9.6% 746 9%

Miami 31,771 2,847 9.0% 186 5%

Wyandotte 155,246 36,334 23.4% 1,910 12%

Cass 98,008 8,218 8.4% 623 5%

Clay 219,242 18,303 8.3% 1,221 5%

Jackson 661,689 112,611 17.0% 6,967 9%

Platte 88,663 6,498 7.3% 452 5%

Total 1,865,360 226,314 8.2% 14,794 8%

Figure 5.12: Population estimates of low-income persons in the Kansas City region


DRAFT


Figure 5.13: Concentrations of persons living below the poverty level (persons per acre)

41%–69%

26%–40%

16%–25%

8%–15%

0%–7%

DRAFT


Vehicle ownership

Zero-car household data provides a snapshot of the number of people who either cannot afford car ownership or choose to not own a car. Transportation-disadvantaged populations include both of these groups because even those who choose not to own a car can be vulnerable in emergency situations. In the eight-county region, Jackson and Wyandotte counties have the highest percentage of zero-vehicle households.

Figure 5.15 shows that zero-vehicle households are concentrated near the urban core of the region.

Occupied households Percent of households with zero vehicles

Johnson 214,640 3.3%

Leavenworth 26,167 4.8%

Miami 12,154 2.7%

Wyandotte 57,356 10.0%

Cass 37,220 2.9%

Clay 86,701 4.4%

Jackson 270,645 9.8%

Platte 36,104 4.2%

Total 740,987 6.4%

Figure 5.14: Population estimates of workers in zero-car households


DRAFT


Figure 5.15: Concentrations of zero-vehicle households in the region (households per acre)

0.69–2.27

0.15–0.68

0.04–0.14

0.0–0.03

DRAFT


Veterans

While veterans are not considered a transportation-disadvantaged group, they often face transportation barriers and have other transportation-disadvantaged characteristics. Figure 5.17 shows that approximately 10 percent of people living in the region are veterans, with a high concentration in Leavenworth County, home to the Fort Leavenworth U.S. Army Garrison. Of the total number of veterans living in each county, Johnson County has the highest concentration of veterans aged 65 or older.

Total estimated civilian population 18 and older

Total estimated veterans

Percent of estimated population who are veterans

Percent of veterans over the age of 65

Johnson 403,187 34,329 8.5% 44%

Leavenworth 55,171 9,584 17.4% 24%

Miami 23,382 2,419 10.3% 38%

Wyandotte 112,695 10,572 9.4% 36%

Cass 73,012 9,013 12.3% 41%

Clay 164,958 18,137 11.0% 38%

Jackson 507,512 51,215 10.1% 40%

Platte 67,308 7,876 11.7% 33%

Total 1,407,225 143,145 10.2% 37%

Figure 5.17: Population estimates of veterans and veterans over the age of 65 in the region


DRAFT


Figure 5.18: Concentrations of veterans (persons per acre)

0.80–2.01

0.41–0.79

0.18–0.40

0.0–0.17

DRAFT


Unmet needs

A closer look at the location of people with known transportation-disadvantaged characteristics shows locations where public transportation services are most needed.

Figure 5.19 illustrates which parts of the region have service deficiencies and which areas have adequate service capacity to meet current demands. Analysis was conducted for each census tract with service-dependent populations (older adults, persons with disabilities, low-income populations and veterans) and data was normalized with the number of persons per acre. All transportation service providers in the Link for Care database were contacted; number of vehicles counts and seats of available per fleet (depending on providers) were obtained to determine capacity. By applying a standard deviation to the scale of need and capacity, a number was generated to each quartile, and the difference between need and capacity was calculated for each census tract. This difference is displayed show balanced needs, greater needs or greater capacity.

Figure 5.19: Available service capacity for concentrations of combined service needs populations

Greater need

Balanced need and capacity

Greater capacity

Constrained Transportation Outlook 2040 transit projects

DRAFT


Challenges Suburbanization of povertyPopulations that most often need public transportation, especially low-income residents, are no longer heavily concentrated in the region’s urban core where transit services are more plentiful. The region is experiencing a suburbanization of poverty, similar to many peer metro areas, and its suburban-style development patterns create challenges for convenient transit service. One of the greatest current and future challenges is responding to the region’s public transportation service needs.

Growth and development patternsOver the last few decades, most of the population and employment growth in the Kansas City region has taken place beyond the urban core and first suburbs. This development pattern makes it difficult to provide efficient, sustainable transit service. Only a few areas in the region — those with more walkable, dense development patterns and mixed land uses — can sustain frequent, reliable service.

MARC’s population and employment forecasts show that the trend of population and employment gains at the outer edges of the region will continue into the future. Where outward growth is inevitable, new development patterns that are more transit-friendly and walkable can become the new status-quo.

Population and employment growth is also expected in already-developed areas of the region. For the first time in decades, significant new areas of redevelopment are emerging, and communities are becoming more proactive in planning for redevelopment and infill. This momentum benefits the entire region and makes transit and enhanced mobility transportation services more sustainable in the long run.

FundingFinancial challenges further compound the difficulty of providing reliable transit services in the region. State and federal resources have largely funded the construction of road and highway infrastructure in the region, with less significance placed on long-term operations and maintenance costs. However, the expansion of public transit and enhanced mobility service has not received the same level of continuous funding. Funding for operations and maintenance of services is particularly difficult to come by, and a dedicated local funding source is typically required.

An aging populationWith an aging demographic, the Kansas City region is — and will continue to be — faced with an increasing demand for more transit and on-demand specialized, paratransit services in the coming years. Currently, older adults who cannot use fixed-route transit service have very few affordable transportation alternatives. Although more than 40 transportation services work to meet the needs of disadvantaged populations, including older adults, some limitations exist due to inadequate capacity, high costs, narrow geographic service coverage and limited hours of operation.

Evaluation of service availability and the locations of transit-dependent population locations are steps toward progress. A collaborative assessment of public transit needs has been undertaken through a peer exchange among many service providers in the region. Stakeholder input from users and providers suggests that the unmet need is great, and the gaps between needs and available capacity will continue to climb as the region’s population ages and disperses, as life expectancies increase, as the population of the infirm and disabled increases, and as income gaps widen.

DRAFT


Preparing for the futureSmart Moves regional transit vision

The Smart Moves Regional Transit Vision, adopted in 2008, was created to guide and focus transit investments to respond to the growing needs of residents. This vision was developed in partnership with the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority, Unified Government Transit and Johnson County Transit. Extensive public engagement and research guided the plan’s development. The vision includes goals and action steps that support a service concept that includes regional and community-based service networks.

Regional service network

The Smart Moves service concept breaks transit corridors in the regional network into three types: urban, commuter and major fixed-route. Together, these routes connect important activity centers, such as major employment centers, cultural destinations and areas with high concentrations of transit-dependent populations. While bus service is currently available to all corridors in the regional network, Smart Moves envisions a system

Figure 5.20: SmartMoves conceptual transit map

Commuter routes Major fixed routes Urban routes

DRAFT


of high-demand corridors that transition to bus rapid transit service or rail (modern streetcar or light rail). These interconnected regional services also provide the structure for local community-based services. Figure 5.20 is a conceptual map that shows the relationship between the different types of corridors and the underlying network of local service.

Community-based service

The concept of community-based transit service is central to the Smart Moves vision. Community-based services are designed to serve specific local needs and support access to local goods, services and employment locations — places that regional service alone might not reach. Local communities, transit agencies and private or nonprofit transportation service providers are typically responsible for these services.

In this concept, public transit, demand-response service, taxi, bike-share and other services link people to activity centers and destinations. A variety of transportation services can interact with and supplement each other at activity center locations. An activity center could be a large employment center, retail area or a traditional town center. Activity centers are connected by multiple modes of travel (walking, biking, public transit, highways and more). Ideally, activity centers include mixed uses that provide access to employment, healthy food, medical care and housing.

As part of this vision, the regional public transit network can provide connections to important local and regional centers, so that users can move from center to center with ease. Activity centers can be pivotal for those who are eligible for enhanced mobility services.

People using demand-response services, for example, could be transported to an activity center where they could access a variety of goods and services, or connect to other regional destinations by using fixed-route transit service. This coordination between services is beneficial for enhanced mobility programs with geographic limitations, and users can maintain a greater sense of independence through full access to regional offerings.

ImplementationAlthough financial challenges may slow improvement and expansion of the region’s transit system, several expansion projects, coordination initiatives and studies from the last few years have created significant momentum. The following are some of the recent projects that provide a firm basis to continue implementation activities into the future.

• Completion of Smart Moves implementation planningFollowing up on the Smart Moves Regional Transit Vision, MARC undertook planning efforts to develop costs and implementation strategies for the plan’s urban and commuter corridors, as well as regional coordination. This planning laid the foundation for additional corridor studies:

DRAFT


— Downtown Corridor Alternatives Analysis (Downtown Streetcar) In 2012, MARC, the city of Kansas City, Missouri, Jackson County and the KCATA completed an alternatives analysis of the need for a downtown transit distribution system. The locally preferred alternative was a two-mile streetcar service line on Main Street. Transportation Outlook 2040 formally adopted this alternative in Amendment #1 of the plan. The streetcar, now fully funded, will begin operations in mid-2015.

— Phase 2: Streetcar Expansion Study (NextRail) In 2013, following the successful Transportation Development District (TDD) development campaign to fund the streetcar starter line, the city of Kansas City, Missouri, completed a study to determine the optimal corridors for streetcar expansion. Three streetcar corridors (Linwood Boulevard, Independence Avenue and Main Street) and one bus rapid transit (BRT) corridor (Prospect Avenue) were identified as the best options as expansions of the starter line. Transportation Outlook 2040 adopted these preferred alternatives along with a TDD funding mechanism. The next steps for the successful implementation of this plan are the establishment of a TDD or other local revenue source and seeking potential federal funding.

— Northern Streetcar/Light Rail Extension Study (NorthRail) In 2013, MARC partnered with the cities of North Kansas City and Kansas City, Missouri, and the KCATA to identify a locally preferred alternative for a northern extension of the streetcar line across the Missouri River into North Kansas City. Bus-based and streetcar alternatives were evaluated for both the Burlington Street and Swift Avenue corridors, as well as river crossing alternatives. The preferred river-crossing solution was

the addition of a single track on the east side of the Heart of America Bridge. This option would maintain the existing number of through-traffic lanes and the bicycle/ pedestrian facilities on the bridge. Burlington Street was the preferred alignment for streetcar expansion, though the study concluded that significant funding gaps existed and additional planning and study for urban rail development is needed.

— Jackson County Commuter Corridor and US-71 Commuter Corridor Alternatives Analyses In 2011, MARC partnered with Jackson County, Missouri, the city of Kansas City, Missouri, and the KCATA, on two related alternatives analyses. The studies evaluated transit service options in Jackson County that could integrate with a downtown circulator in Kansas City, Missouri, and foster opportunities for transit-related economic development near major activity centers and town centers. The studies looked at three priority corridors from Phase 2 of the Smart Moves Implementation Plan: I-70 East, Rock Island and US-71. The locally preferred alternative for the I-70 East and Rock Island corridors included a near-term commuter bus strategy with implementation of commuter rail using diesel multiple unit (DMU) technology as a long-term strategy. The Rock Island corridor also includes a Katy Trail extension. The US-71 study study determined that, for the near-term, BRT service should be provided on Prospect Avenue as well as enhanced bus service and potentially BRT in the US-71 right-of way. In a later phase of implementation, DMU commuter rail is preferred in the US-71 right-of-way. The locally preferred alternatives for these corridors will be presented for adoption into the Transportation Outlook 2040 plan in 2015.

DRAFT


— Prospect Avenue Study (BRT) In 2014, the KCATA completed a Planning Assessment Study to evaluate the Prospect Avenue Corridor in Kansas City, Missouri, and determine transit improvements that would include implementation of MAX bus-rapid-transit service. The North/South Corridor Alternatives Analysis first identified Prospect MAX as a potential BRT corridor in 2008.

• KCATA Comprehensive Service Analysis

In 2013, KCATA completed a Comprehensive Service Analysis for its service inside Kansas City, Missouri. This analysis provided a comprehensive evaluation to determine how the agency could provide better transit service with existing resources. KCATA has implemented all of the route changes identified in the analysis.

• Unified Government Comprehensive Service Analysis

In 2013, the Unified Government also completed a Comprehensive Service Analysis to determine how to provide more efficient service within Kansas City, Kansas, using existing resources.

• Kansas City Regional TIGER Project

In 2010, USDOT awarded the Kansas City region $50 million in TIGER funds through the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. These funds were used to build enhanced transit infrastructure along the Metcalf Avenue/Shawnee Mission Parkway, State Avenue, North Oak and Truman Road corridors, and improve street, sidewalk and transit infrastructure in the Green Impact Zone in the urban core of Kansas City, Missouri. These improvements, completed over a three-year period, have revitalized disinvested areas of the city, successfully increased

ridership along key corridors, and provided economic stimulus by creating new jobs and stabilizing existing jobs. This was a coordinated effort by KCATA, Johnson County Transit, Unified Government Transit, MARC and several area cities and counties.

• Regional Transit Coordinating Council (RTCC)

In 2013, The KCATA and MARC jointly formed a new transit council to focus specifically on issues of regional transportation coordination. Members of the RTCC include executive leadership and elected representatives from Johnson County, Kansas; the Unified Government of Wyandotte County/Kansas City, Kansas; the city of Independence, Missouri; the city of Kansas City, Missouri; the Kansas City Streetcar Authority; Jackson County, Missouri; KCATA; and MARC. In addition, the RTCC created two advisory committees, the Transit Stakeholder Forum and the Mobility Advisory Committee. The Transit Stakeholder Forum meets quarterly to generate ideas and provide feedback on the issues that the RTCC undertakes. The Mobility Advisory Committee provides recommendations to the RTCC about special transportation issues, mobility management initiatives and FTA Program 5310 funding.

— Mobility Management In 2014, the RTCC began to address the significant task of creating a mobility management system. This system, once complete, will provide and coordinate affordable, convenient service throughout the region, with accessible customer-service focused information and a streamlined eligibility process.

DRAFT


— FTA Section 5310 In 2012, the region, working through the KCATA as the federally designated recipient of funds, became responsible for the programming of FTA Section 5310 funds for Enhanced Mobility of Seniors and Individuals with Disabilities. MARC is responsible for the administration of the programming process, and the KCATA handles the contractual administration of the grant with project sponsors. The 5310 funds allows for both capital and operating projects, including the purchase of vehicles.

• Veterans Transit and Community Living Initiative (VTCLI)

In 2013, MARC partnered with the University of Missouri–Kansas City and the University of Kansas Medical Center to launch a new web-based tool to help individuals find transportation options that meet their specific needs. A competitive FTA grant from the Veterans Transit and Community Living Initiative funded the new tool called Link for Care (www.linkforcare.org). Area service providers can update the database of contact and service information as needed to support the website. Link for Care provides a much-needed tool that has proven useful in serving the region’s needs. Ongoing maintenance of the website will be a top concern moving forward.

StrategiesThe following goals and strategies will guide improvements to the region’s public transit and enhanced mobility services.

5-1: Support and sustain existing services.a. Support the maintenance and operations of existing public

transportation and enhanced mobility services.

— Encourage the procurement of equipment that is eligible under federal guidance to support the operations and maintenance of existing fleets.

— Advocate for more flexible federal and state funding to support the maintenance and operations of existing services.

— Work with local and transit planning partners to seek new local funding opportunities.

b. Pursue enhanced usability of transportation services.

— Partner with local transit agencies to develop regional service standards, including transit user data and information that supports the implementation of a seamless regional transit system.

— Work with transit agencies and alternative transportation partners to identify opportunities for infrastructure enhancements that improve connectivity between public transportation services and alternative modes of transportation.

— Work with enhanced mobility and public transit providers to identify opportunities to effectively and conveniently connect riders to desired destinations.

DRAFT


— Develop and implement enhanced transit-planning and forecasting tools and methodologies.

— Develop performance standards that ensure a higher quality of service delivery.

5-2: Create a regional mobility management system. a. Support the development of a regional one-call/one-click center.

— Encourage information referral, scheduling and dispatching for all public transit agencies using one phone number.

— Encourage the inclusion and alignment of the online Link for Care resource database with the one-call center.

b. Support coordination among enhanced mobility and public transit providers.

— Encourage the development of coordinated service agreements and cost-reciprocity agreements.

— Work with regional partners to identify locations and boundaries for safe, efficient and convenient service coordination.

5-3: Expand regional public transit and mobility services. a. Promote the expansion of services for disadvantaged populations

and transportation choices for all.

b. Encourage the expansion of services that support the implementation of the Smart Moves Regional Transit Vision.

c. Encourage the procurement of equipment eligible, under federal guidance, to support expansion of existing fleets.

d. Encourage the expansion of existing transportation services and the implementation of new services that are compatible with existing state, regional and local plans.

e. Partner with local governments and area transit providers to increase and expand seamless operations and regional coordination.

f. Develop and communicate clear local and regional options for financing, and support expanded transit and enhanced mobility services.

g. Advocate for more flexible federal funding to support the maintenance and operations of new expanded services.

5-4: Integrate public transit and enhanced mobility services into the built and natural environment.a. Remove barriers — physical, perceived or other — to

transportation services.

— Support local jurisdictions and agencies in the development of accessible transit centers and stops that connect enhanced mobility services and public transit services.

— Work to maintain and improve links between local transit services and various modes of intercity transportation.

— Encourage connectivity between public transit, enhanced mobility services and pedestrian/bicycle facilities.

— Work with transit planning partners to promote benefits and mitigate negative perceptions of transit.

b. Support transit development from both regional and site-plan perspectives.

— Build partnerships between public transit, enhanced mobility providers and local planning agencies to promote transit supportive development and ensure that local planning agencies consider transit and accessibility options in the review of local plans.

DRAFT


— Work with local jurisdictions to establish and implement land use and development policies that support public transportation and other active modes of transportation.

— Encourage the consideration and integration of public transit and enhanced mobility services elements in major transportation and land use planning efforts.

5-5: Provide accurate and up-to-date information about existing and planned services.a. Coordinate public information and messaging.

— Work with transportation providers, service providers, local governments and private funding organizations to create and carry out coordinated messaging and plans.

— Support the expansion of new technologies and intelligent transportation system (ITS) to better inform the public about available transportation services.

b. Engage citizens, community and consumer groups; regional transit advocacy, business and civic leaders; local government officials, developers and major employers in the development and implementation of transit plans and services.


Transportation Outlook 2040 Policy framework strategies and goals:

5–1: Existing services

5–2: Mobility Management

5–3: Expanded services

5–4: Environmental integration

5–5: Public information

Economic vitality X X X

Placemaking X X X

Equity X X X X X

Transportation choices X X X X X

Safety and security X X X X

System condition X

System performance X X X X

Public health X X X X

Environment X X X

Climate change and energy use X X

DRAFT

5.0 public transportation - marc

Documents