Citizens For Modern Transit

Post Editorial

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Thu, 28 Aug 2008 22:47:00 +0000

Today, the Post published an editorial which put the isolated security incident near MetroLink that took place last month into perspective. To read the editorial, click here.

Transit Summit

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 23:09:00 +0000

Alan Dunston, Madison County Board Chair; St. Louis Mayor Francis Slay; St. Clair County Board Chair Mark Kern; and Mike Jones, policy advisor to St. Louis County Executive Charlie Dooley were panelist at the July 31 Transit Summit on the campus of Washington University.

Some 200 area leaders gathered to learn about Metro's future and the need to continue to expand MetroLink. Voters in St. Louis County will be asked to asses an additional half-cent sales tax in November to support Metro and some road projects. Metro plans to use half the money to sustain the current operation and half to expand MetroLink. A line to Westport Plaza from Clayton is high on the County's list.

To read a perspective of the summit go to the St. Louis Beacon Web site by clicking here.

Gubernatorial Debate

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Sat, 26 Jul 2008 01:07:00 +0000

To see a video clip of Kenny Hulshof and Sarah Steelman's answer to a transportation funding question in a debate in Springfield, click here.

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Fri, 25 Jul 2008 15:25:00 +0000

Has anyone else noticed the increase in bikes and scooters? When I was coming home last night on MetroLink, a biker boarded at Union Station and when I got off, two more bikers were waiting to get on the train. It will be interesting to see if the new bikers continue this fall and winter. I usually walk to MetroLink year round. Basically, if you dress for it, it's just a matter of getting use to it.

I will try and get some biking statistics from Metro and publish them.

Click here To read a story in the Vital Voice about other ways to commute other than by car.

Metro on Line July 23

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 21:30:00 +0000

Metro, the St. Louis region's public transportation authority, is seeing increased ridership but is also facing budget constraints, possible fare increases and service reductions. Todd Plesko, Chief of Planning and System Development for Metro, will be answering readers questions about the bus and light-rail service Wednesday, July 23, 2008 01:30 PM CDT on STL Today.

Click here.

Register to Vote

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Sat, 19 Jul 2008 20:38:00 +0000

Voters in St. Louis County apparently will have an opportunity to vote in November to increase funding for Metro so the transit agency can expand MetroLink and secure its operation for years to come. The St. Louis County Council is expected to begin the process of putting the measure on the ballot. If you would like to vote, you must be registered. For information on registration, to go to the St. Louis County Board of Elections, Click here.

If the voters approve a half-cent increase in the County sales tax, it is expected to trigger a quarter-cent sales tax that St. Louis City passed in 1997, but has not been collected since the vote failed in the county in '97. Together, the measure would generate an added $80 million or so per year for Metro.

Salt Lake City Tribune Editorializes on the Benefits of Transit Oriented Development

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Fri, 13 Jun 2008 14:20:00 +0000

In our new "energy-restricted" economy, condos and high-rises will become the new "McMansions." Train tracks and sidewalks the new highways. Buses and bicycles the new SUVs.
Many of us will abandon our big gas-guzzling vehicles and forsake new land-guzzling, auto-dependent suburban developments in favor of commuter hubs and "new urbanism" communities clustered near mass-transit stations.
We'll live sensibly for a change. We'll walk to the market and the park and the restaurant, and we won't have to walk far in our mixed-use neighborhoods.
We won't go kicking and screaming, either. Just give it a little more time. Let the air pollution and traffic congestion and gas pumps that ring up $50, $60, $70 in a blur sink in, and we'll embrace smart growth and new urbanism and commuter hubs like grandmas hug babies and babies hug puppies.
It's already starting to happen in Murray and Midvale, Farmington and South Salt Lake, where transit-oriented communities are planned or under construction; developments where you won't have to jump in the car every time you leave home.
But there's still one big obstacle, developers and planning experts told local officials at a transit-oriented development seminar this week in Salt Lake City. If commuter hubs and bus stop/train station developments are going to become the norm, if we're going to change our wasteful ways and ease the burden on our environment and pocketbooks, local governments have to lead, or at least get out of the way.
"High density" can no longer be dirty words. Commercial and residential zones must be melded. Those tired old requirements of two parking spaces for every doorstep have to go. Transit-oriented, new urban and infill developments must be supported with tax credits, expedited permitting and generous infrastructure assistance, while developers who promote sprawl and three-car garages, and people who settle in those communities, must pay a premium.
Obviously, we won't all want to live this way. There will still be Drapers and Bluffdales, places where the old American dream - big house, big yard, RV and SUV - hangs on, or dies hard.
But eventually, that lifestyle will be as outdated as last year's calendar. Pressure - financial, ethical, environmental, governmental - will be brought to bear. Change is inevitable. It's up to government to make it happen sooner, not later.

Obama Discusses High Speed Rail

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Fri, 06 Jun 2008 15:41:00 +0000

By Kathy Kiely, USA TODAY

BRISTOL, Va. — As he begins the general election contest for the White House, Democrat Barack Obama is targeting the voters he had the hardest time winning in the primaries: those who are white and working class.

The Illinois senator told USA TODAY Thursday that his appearance here in a small town on the Virginia-Tennessee border represented the first stop in a 2½-week tour about economic issues. The trip will also take him to several states won by his rival, Hillary Rodham Clinton, during the Democratic primaries, including Pennsylvania, Ohio and Florida.

Obama laid out his campaign plans during an interview in the library of Bristol's Virginia High School.

"What we're going to do over the next 2½ weeks is focus on the economy, which is what is pressing on the American people so severely," Obama said.

During the tour, he said he plans to "offer some very concrete solutions as to how we deal with both the short-term squeeze that (working-class Americans are) under and how over the long term we right the economic ship."

Obama also touched on his search for a vice presidential nominee, his plans to visit Iraq and a conversation he had yesterday with John McCain, the presumptive Republican nominee.

To start, he laid out ambitious plans to increase funding for a host of domestic programs, including a 10-year, $150 billion "Apollo-style program" to develop new energy sources.

On the economy, his agenda includes "significant investment" in the nation's transportation system. Obama said he'll also discuss plans to expand retirement accounts — with the addition of matching funds from the U.S. government — and to pump more money into the nation's education system.

Obama did not discuss details or costs of these proposals. But he said he'd pay for his programs by raising taxes on wealthy taxpayers, eliminating corporate tax loopholes and ending the war in Iraq, which is costing the U.S. government $10 billion a month.

Among his ideas to address climate change and the skyrocketing cost of fuel, he said he favors a major expansion of high-speed rail service.

"We could connect the Midwest with a high-speed rail system that would provide immediate jobs," he said, adding that it would also be a "much more energy-efficient" alternative to air transport.

The senator, who has faced criticism for not wearing a flag pin on his lapel, sported one here. He initially resisted wearing a flag pin because "my attitude was my patriotism is what's in my heart," Obama said. He changed his mind after an Internet rumor campaign about his patriotism.

"I just wanted to make sure that nobody was confused because there were e-mails going out that somehow I didn't say the Pledge of Allegiance and so forth," he said. "I just wanted to knock down those lies."

Earlier, in a high school gym, Obama told an enthusiastic crowd of about 2,000 it's no accident he chose to make his first appearance as the party's presumptive nominee here — in a community where the population is mostly white and the median income is well below the national average.

The community represents "so many people who have been forgotten," Obama said. "Washington hasn't been listening to you and hasn't been paying attention to you."

The last Democratic presidential candidate to win Virginia was Lyndon Johnson in 1964. The last one to visit the southwestern corner of the state, said local Democratic congressman Rick Boucher, was John F. Kennedy in 1960.

Obama told reporters on his campaign plane he had a jovial conversation with McCain, when his rival gave him a congratulatory phone call Wednesday.

"We joked if you'd asked any of the pundits a years ago whether it would be him and me as nominees, you wouldn't have gotten many takers," he said.

He's "definitely interested" in McCain's proposal for a series of unmoderated town hall meetings, Obama said. In the interview and in his appearance here, Obama criticized McCain's tax and health care policies as being skewed toward the wealthy.

Among his other comments:

• On picking a running mate. When asked whether considering Clinton, Obama demurred, saying she'd be on anybody's short list.

Earlier in the day, the Clinton campaign said she was not angling for a spot on the ticket. "She is not seeking the vice presidency, and no one speaks for her but her," communications director Howard Wolfson said. "The choice here is Senator Obama's and his alone."

Obama is in no hurry to make a choice, naming "before the (late August) convention" as his deadline. He'll seek "somebody I could trust to be president" and "somebody with integrity," he said.

•On Iraq. "I will be going to Iraq, I'm almost certain, before the election," said Obama, who has made withdrawing U.S. troops a priority of his platform. "One of my most important tasks is to deal effectively with the situation in Iraq, in Afghanistan and with the threat of terrorism generally."

•On race. Obama alluded to his historic status as the nation's first black nominee of a major party during his appearance here, telling the audience that "I'm proud of America for giving me this opportunity because obviously we all know it's a sign of enormous growth in this country."

•On campaign finance. Obama said he'll accept public financing for his campaign — which would limit the amount of spending — only if McCain agrees to curb spending by the Republican National Committee. "I won't disarm unilaterally," he said.

Obama has raised about $265 million to date, while McCain has raised about $90 million.

After appearing here, Obama traveled to a rally in northern Virginia's D.C. suburbs, then headed back to his hometown of Chicago to take the weekend off. He's looking forward to "a date" tonight with his wife, Michelle, a round of golf on Saturday ("the best I can do is the low 80s," Obama said) and a bike ride with his children on Sunday.

Not that he is expecting it to be entirely relaxing. On Saturday night, Obama will face a challenge familiar to many American parents: Eight 7-year-olds are due at his house for a birthday sleepover in honor of his daughter, Sasha.

"These kids are planning to make pizza so who knows what our kitchen will look like," Obama said. "They shouldn't call these sleepovers. They should call them wake-overs."

Conservative Paul Weyrich Supports Street Cars

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Wed, 04 Jun 2008 13:32:00 +0000

The National Ledger, LLC (TNL) is a new media independent news publication. Recently it a carried an article by Paul Weyrich, noted conservative, who supports the building of streetcars in United States Cities.
By Paul M. Weyrich Jun 3, 2008

I belong to the National Streetcar Coalition, which pushes policies favorable to the return of streetcars throughout the nation. Each month we hold a conference call with member participants who explain what is happening in their communities. This month I was blown away at the level of activity from one end of the country to the other. Portland, Oregon is the poster child for a successful streetcar system. Intersecting with Portland’s prolific light-rail system this eight-mile modern streetcar line has attracted over 100 other communities in the USA and even foreign countries which are looking to bring back streetcars.

Streetcars Are Returning, In Spite of Bush Administration Opposition (Image: Wenn)

Despite an extraordinarily well run streetcar line, which has attracted $3.5 billion in stipulated investment which would not have occurred without the streetcar, the George W. Bush Administration refuses to partially fund a new line to the other side of town. Mind you, these investment properties have voted to voluntarily tax themselves to support the operation of the car line. So what is the Bush Administration pushing? So-called bus rapid transit. In fact, despite the legislative history of the small-starts program which was established to fund starter streetcar lines, the Bush Administration Department of Transportation authorities will have none of it. They only fund bus rapid transit. In fact, they have a whole unit limited to promotion of one mode. They do not do this for any other technology. They hold conferences. They have staff that goes on location to push bus rapid transit. They have a web page devoted solely to bus rapid transit. There is only one problem. People don’t like to ride buses. They will tolerate riding a bus that feeds a rail line but they really don’t buy what the Administration is pushing.

Many communities are funding starter streetcar lines on their own. That is well and good but the elitist “public be damned” attitude of the Bush Administration is reprehensible. The Federal Transit Administrator seems to be reasonably in favor of streetcars. But someone is giving him orders not to fund rail. There is an irony in the current campaign to do away with earmarks. The current law requires Congress to earmark funds for transit projects. If earmarks are abolished, and I certainly am no defender of the earmark practice, should Congress violate the law and not set aside money for transit projects? That presently is the only way rail projects are funded.

There is suspicion of a sort of symbiotic relationship between the Bush Administration and the manufacturers of buses and their component parts. It is hard to comprehend what goes on here. Yes, rail is more expensive to build but it is less costly to operate, so in the long run it pays to have rail. Riders identify with fixed guide-way rail lines. They know rail lines are unlikely to disappear. A bus route can be changed overnight. I have no idea what the next Administration will do about this issue. One never can tell. President Jimmy Carter turned out to be a much more determined opponent of Amtrak than did President Ronald Reagan, who talked of defunding Amtrak but always gave in to the strong pro-Amtrak sentiment in the Congress. None of the candidates for President thus far has been asked about streetcars so we simply don’t know how the current controversy will be resolved.

Meanwhile, interest in streetcars is reaching critical mass. Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), the chief Congressional proponent of streetcars, is optimistic. He believes this is an idea whose time has come. He thinks with so many cities and towns considering restoring streetcars no Presidential Administration would be able to resist this idea in the long run. He is considering introducing a stand-alone bill to fund streetcars. We know President Bush would veto such a bill but we don’t know what the others would do. We know that Senator John S. McCain, III has been a fierce opponent of Amtrak but we don’t have much clue which way he would go on this issue.

I spent much of my young life going to photograph last runs of streetcar systems. I even ran two charters just before the Milwaukee system was abandoned. Today if I spent my remaining years doing little else I still couldn’t get to the openings of all of the streetcar lines under construction. This was a technology which came close to dying out completely in the 1970s. It is difficult to suppress a good idea. Yet I never thought I would live to see this day.

Nancy Pelosi Outlines Transit Needs

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Tue, 03 Jun 2008 19:41:00 +0000

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi spoke to the American Public Transit Association Rail Conference yesterday in San Francisco. In the speech she gives her thoughts about the nation's infrastructure needs including more funding for transit.

“Thank you, Nat [Ford]. Nat does an excellent job leading the SFMTA in managing San Francisco’s ground transportation system, which includes our transit system, Muni, one of the oldest and greenest transit systems in the United States. Under his tenure, San Francisco has opened a new light rail line and established the largest municipal bio-diesel fleet in the nation, with bio-diesel fuel now utilized in all Muni’s diesel fleet vehicles.

“I would also like to acknowledge the leadership of our great Mayor, Gavin Newsom, who has been instrumental in ensuring a 21st century transportation system for San Francisco.

“I would also like to recognize APTA President Bill Millar. For more than 10 years, Bill has been a tireless advocate for public transit in the halls of Congress. We rely on his leadership to move a public transportation agenda forward.

“Two hundred years ago, around the time of the Lewis and Clark expeditions and the Louisiana Purchase, President Thomas Jefferson realized that for commerce to flow in America, for people to move, and for our country to flourish, we needed to build the infrastructure of our country

“Our nation was growing, but it was also still a young experiment in democracy. Our population was sparse, and after decades of war, so was our national treasury.
These realities did not deter President Jefferson, or his Secretary of the Treasury, Albert Gallatin, who submitted a plan to Congress to develop the infrastructure of America. These challenges inspired these great men. For America to be great, they believed it needed to invest in its future strength.

“The Erie Canal, the Cumberland Road, and of particular interest to you, the transcontinental railway stand today as legacies of this vision.

“To finance this infrastructure, these early Americans had the great foresight to see that the long-term benefit of these investments far outweighed the costs. Because of that, public capital, and not just private resources were necessary.

“As Albert Gallatin said, roads and canals to unite our young nation could not ‘be left to individual exertion.’

“It was in that tradition that 100 years later, in 1908, President Theodore Roosevelt launched a similar commitment by convening a White House Conference on Conservation to preserve America’s natural beauty. That led to the creation of the National Park Service and helped a growing America remain a great America and continue to be an even greater America.

“Today, again, we stand at a crossroads with another opportunity to unite our nation.

“200 years after we first committed to national infrastructure, Congress is prepared to observe the accomplishments of Presidents Thomas Jefferson and Theodore Roosevelt by seizing opportunities for innovation and progress. We must invest in our nation’s infrastructure, and we must reverse climate change. By investing in public transit, we can do both at the same time.

“In Congress, it is our responsibility to protect the American people, grow our economy and create good paying jobs, strengthen America’s families, and preserve our planet and promote energy independence.

“All of these can be accomplished through rebuilding our infrastructure.

“Our nation faces great infrastructure challenges: crumbling roads and deficient bridges, insufficient maintenance of the electricity grid, aging pipelines, overloaded ports, and most devastating of all – the levee failures during Hurricane Katrina.

“All of you know best how the rising demand for public transit is placing enormous strain on rail transit systems, which around the country are in desperate need of upgrades, expansions, and operating funds.

“But in this litany of challenges is an opportunity to think in new and different ways. These challenges are opportunities to strengthen our nation.

“That includes serious investments in rail transit systems, which are in desperate need of upgrades, expansions, and operating funds.

“The challenge of our crumbling infrastructure is also an opportunity to think in new and different ways to strengthen our nation.

“Rebuilding America is a national security issue. Ninety percent of our oil imports are used for transportation. Public transportation, more efficient roadways, and a broadband backbone that removes commuters from roads, we can reduce our dependence on foreign oil and reduce its implications on our foreign policy.

“Rebuilding America is an economic issue. By improving our efficiency, we improve our competitiveness and create the next generation of good-paying jobs.

“Rebuilding America is an environmental issue. Making greener choices will bring us cleaner air and water, reduce sprawl and congestion, and cut greenhouse gases, to the benefit of the American people and our planet.

“Rebuilding America is an equality issue. When I held an Infrastructure Forum in the Capitol, Darren Walker of the Rockefeller Foundation spoke eloquently to us about transportation as a matter of basic fairness. As he said, the civil rights movement in America was sparked by one brave woman, Rosa Parks, and one public bus. Transportation – especially public transit – is the road to opportunity.

“As Speaker of the House, my flagship issue is energy independence and reducing global warming. That is because I believe preserving our planet for future generations is our most urgent challenge. As we renew and rebuild America, at every step of the way we must also combat climate change.

“Last year, Congress took major steps to reduce global warming pollution, passing sweeping legislation to increase vehicle fuel efficiency to 35 miles per gallon by the year 2020. The reduction in greenhouse gas emissions in the year 2020 alone will be the equivalent of taking 28 million of today’s cars and trucks off the road.

“But it is not enough to improve vehicle efficiency and promote biofuels. We must also address total ‘vehicle miles traveled,’ which are growing at two and a half times the rate of population growth.

“In that regard, you are in the lead – getting people out of their cars and onto light rail, light rail, trolleys, and commuter rail, for example. Already, public transit saves our nation 1.4 billion gallons of gasoline every year.

“The fuel savings from using transit are magnified when we add in the ‘smart growth’ that springs up around transit, especially rail transit stations. People use transit for more of their daily needs, such as running errands, and the nation saves 4.2 billion gallons of gasoline annually. In San Francisco alone, use of the Muni’s system results in an estimated 25 million gallons in oil savings.

“Last year, public transportation ridership reached its highest level in 50 years. While this upward trend it tremendously encouraging, it is overloading many of your systems, and making the need for infrastructure investment all the more pressing.

“The question is not whether we must invest in our nation’s infrastructure, but rather, how do we pay for it? How do we proceed in a fiscally sound way?

“One idea being considered is an infrastructure development bank to promote public and private investment in projects of regional and national significance, including public transportation projects. The bank would be an independent federal entity that would evaluate major infrastructure proposals and finance the best of them using a variety of financial tools.

“For example, the bank could have the authority to issue bonds with maturities of up to 50 years. The benefits of infrastructure projects are long-term, and we need financial tools that will align financing with the benefits of the investments. Long-term investment opportunities could draw additional funding sources into infrastructure, such as pension funds.

“We must also consider whether we need a capital budget, not just an operating budget. Corporations and states have them, but the federal government does not. This would give us a means of differentiating between short-term expenditures and longer-term national investments.

“The task we face is so large that it demands the involvement of every level of government and the private sector.

“States, local communities, and the federal government are finding new ways to work together – new public-public partnerships that will strengthen our efforts at every level of government.

“In my state of California, the voters—fed up with congestion—approved $20 billion dollars in transportation infrastructure bonds to build on existing public funding sources. This included billions for public transit modernization and improvement. Public agencies are also finding ways to harness the knowledge and ingenuity of their own workers to increase their efficiency and save public dollars.

“Private investment is playing an increasingly larger role in public infrastructure. Innovative public-private partnerships are appearing around the country, bringing much-needed capital to the table. It is important to ensure that the public interest is well-served in public-private partnerships, since they are here to stay and likely to grow in importance.

“User fees have always been part of the structure of public transit; now they are playing an increasingly larger role in financing other types of infrastructure.

“With the economy slowing down and job losses accelerating, we must also look for opportunities to take advantage of the stimulative effect of investing in infrastructure.

“In conversations with the White House, leaders in Congress have placed a number of proposals on the table, including funding for infrastructure projects – transit, clean water, passenger rail, highways - where dirt will fly and people will be put to work that simply lack the funds to begin now.

“Right now, both the House and Senate are at work on legislation that has the greatest potential to address climate change yet: a cap-and-trade system. The ‘cap’ refers to an overall limit on annual greenhouse gas emissions from the United States. ‘Trade’ refers to the trading of greenhouse gas allowances, to ensure greater economic efficiency and generate revenues for public purposes, such as developing new low-carbon technologies. Some of these revenues could be used for investments such as public transit that further reduce greenhouse gas emissions.

“The Senate will begin floor debate on the Lieberman-Warner bill this week. It currently includes $171 billion in funding for public transportation through 2050. The House is also drafting cap and trade legislation, and we welcome your ideas as we move forward on this critical endeavor.

“In order to invest in rebuilding our nation, we need to engage the public in our 21st century vision.

“In the Congress, Congressman Earl Blumenauer of Oregon is leading the way, with legislation for a new national commission that would involve the public, members of Congress, and stakeholders all around the country to determine our priorities and look at all the dimensions of this challenge together.

“New technologies have the opportunity to offer new solutions.

“In that regard, this November, voters in California will have a chance to vote to build high-speed rail, and bring to America a system enjoyed around the world.

“This investment will create good-paying jobs, boost the economy, relieve gridlock and congestion, and offer an environmentally friendly and economically viable transportation alternative.

“California will set a new golden spike for rail travel as we break ground on an 800-mile system with trains traveling speeds of 220 miles per hour, transporting passengers from the Transbay Terminal right here in San Francisco to Union Station in Los Angeles in just two and a half hours.

“I know you have a keen interest in the reauthorization next year of the surface transportation bill, SAFETEA-LU.

“Congressman Jim Oberstar of Minnesota, Chairman of the House Transportation and Infrastructure Committee, was born to lead on these issues of transportation and infrastructure. He is deeply committed to rebuilding America, and doing it a sustainable, climate-friendly way.

“Working with Highways and Transit Subcommittee Chairman Peter DeFazio of Oregon, Jim Oberstar and the committee members are already immersed in the issues involved in reauthorization.

“House Democrats are committed to robust public investment in public transportation. We are committed to advancing a bill that – at a minimum – honors the historic 80/20 funding split between highways and transit. The reduction of transit’s share below 20 percent that occurred in the 2005 reauthorization will not be repeated.

“We are committed to reforming the New Starts process for funding rail transit projects. Many of you have worked long and hard to develop New Starts projects, only to have the Bush Administration move the goal posts, forcing you to comply with new criteria. This must stop.

“It is essential that the environmental and economic development benefits of rail transit become fundamental criteria in the decision-making process for New Starts. We see with each new light rail system – whether the location is Dallas, Minneapolis, or Portland – a tremendous upsurge in transit-oriented development around rail lines and stations. Transit and the high-density development that accompanies it both have tremendous value in reducing greenhouse gas emissions and putting us on the path to a low-carbon economy.

“In the 21st century, we will face scarcity of any number of resources.

“But in this room, there is no scarcity of ingenuity, no scarcity of urgency, and no scarcity of commitment.

“When the history is written of our work to rebuild America and protect the planet from global warming, because of your example of thinking entrepreneurially, acting regionally, and for succeeding in preserving the entire planet, the contribution of APTA members will be writ large.

“As Speaker of the House, but more importantly, as a grandmother of seven, I come here today to thank you for your leadership.”

Source: Speaker Nancy Pelosi

St. Louis County to Seek Transit/Road Funding

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Fri, 16 May 2008 16:51:00 +0000

Veteran St. Louis Post-Dispatch Reporter Phil Sutin recently wrote the background on St. Louis County's effort to fund transportation. Sutin has covered this topic for years and his article that was on the Political Fix website provides great background to the issue. Click here to read the article.

What the Post-Dispatch should have said

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 15:34:00 +0000

One of the issues facing the new Congress and President in 2009 will be the federal role in our nation’s surface transportation policy. The current transportation bill, SAFETEALU, expires in September of 2009 with the highway trust fund projected to be in a deficit situation by then and the Transit Trust Fund going into the red by 2011.

The debate will occur at a time when energy prices are at historic highs, there is an urgent need for energy independence which is integral to national security, fossil fuels are identified as a major contributor to climate change, an aging population means greater numbers of people looking for alternatives to driving alone, plus a recognition that our transportation infrastructure is literally collapsing and hasn’t the capacity to serve a growing population.

In anticipation of this looming crisis, Congress created the National Surface Transportation Policy and Revenue Study Commission in 2005, a bi-partisan panel charged with recommending a new approach to building and funding transportation in the United States.

Earlier this year, the Commission issued its report which noted that congestion was costing the American economy an estimated $78 billion in 2005, measured in terms of wasted fuel and workers’ lost hours. The report says “contributing to the scale of the problems is a deeply entrenched over-reliance on the personal automobile for travel in urban corridors. Strategies to shift more trips to public transit will play a large role in any forward-thinking efforts to reduce congestion. Similarly, intercity passenger rail offers opportunities to reduce the reliance on the auto for longer-haul trips. In many places, we also will need new highway capacity as well.”

The commission says to achieve this goal, the nation should spend al least $225 billion annually for the next 50 years to upgrade our existing transportation network to a good state of repair and to add more advanced facilities for the US to remain competitive internationally. “We are spending less than 40 percent of this amount today,” the commission reports.

This report will frame the discussion over the next 18 months about the future direction of federal transportation policy in America. How different this national discussion is as compared to continued proposals in Missouri for more highways and dedicated truck lanes while all signs point toward a greater federal emphasis on public transit and intercity rail.

How will Missouri address its transportation needs of the 21^st century in a climate of $4 per gallon gas, the prospect of carbon taxes and the desire for people to live in more energy efficient green areas? While the nation appears to be headed to a more robust multi-modal system that helps mitigate these changes, Missouri could be left at the station if it continues its policy of funding highways, leaving its citizens to endure high gas prices and crowded highways with little choice to live a more energy efficient life.

A recent Post-Dispatch editorial which suggested transferring the meager amount of money the legislature devoted to passenger rail to public transit misses the point entirely. Moving six million dollars from Amtrak to public transit would not nearly address transit needs, while eliminating Amtrak between St. Louis and Kansas City just at the time when passenger rail is booming elsewhere in the country and throughout the civilized world.

What Missouri needs is a new vision for transportation in the 21^st century. The Post should have suggested that Missouri needs to help build Kansas City and St. Louis in partnership with the federal government to build light rail lines to all corners of the metropolitan regions. Strengthening the bus and paratransit service throughout Missouri, especially smaller cities, towns and rural communities should be a priority in light of an aging population prone to isolation. New light rail stations could serve as anchors for new and revitalized urban development which we have just started to see near MetroLink stops.

St. Louis and Kansas City should be connected by passenger rail travelling at 110 miles per hour with trains departing each city at least six times a day, providing a much needed alternative to Interstate 70 and Highway 50. Springfield, Mo. and points between should become a part of the state’s passenger rail network with connections to St. Louis, Kansas City and Dallas by way of Oklahoma City. And yes, highways and bridges should be smooth and safe.

A broader multi-modal transportation policy would strengthen the economic well being of St. Louis and Kansas City and provide residents in the state’s smaller communities quick access to the medical, social and cultural centers of our state.

In recent years Missouri voters have turned down on two occasions transportation programs solely focused on highways. Current proposals offer more of the same.

A state transportation program that provides a vision of high quality, multi-modal transportation choices has the best chances of catching the imagination of voters, especially those in the urbanized areas of the state who historically have been more inclined to support taxes in the past has the best chance of gaining voter approval. Recent attempts to pass highway-only measures at the ballot box have failed overwhelmingly. Perhaps it is time to give a visionary “green” multi-modal transportation alternative a try.

Obama on Mass Transit

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Fri, 21 Mar 2008 01:22:00 +0000

This if from the Charlotte Observer

Q: Charlotte just opened a new light-rail line. How do you feel about federal support for mass transit?

Obama:

I'm a strong supporter, as part of our broader energy strategy. You know, if we are designing cities, and urban communities and suburban communities around two-hour commutes, then we are destined to continue down the course of climate change. And mass transit not only is far more environmentally sound, but with oil prices sky high, and not likely to go down significantly, because of increased demand by China and India, it gives individuals much more of an incentive to look at trains and mass transit as an alternative.

New Post on Megabus

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Fri, 07 Mar 2008 15:18:00 +0000

Over at Joe Frank's blog, Ramblings by Joe Frank, there is an interesting post on Megabus adding service to Columbia, Missouri. Click here to go to the site. I posted in May on a trip I took from St. Louis to Kansas City and back over the Memorial Day weekend.

Station usage

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Wed, 05 Dec 2007 14:38:00 +0000

I will have to do some checking, my first guess is the station usage figures represent different months of the year. The summer months have the most usage and the winter months the least. Usually August is the high month of the year and February the low.

MetroLink Station Usage

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:59:00 +0000

Station%20usage.pdf

Here is some data from Metro about station usage on MetroLink. The most used station is the Central West End station which no doubt because of its high employment center as well as strong neighborhood walk up usage and the new bus transfer center.

Also what the data show is that MetroLink is carrying some 25,000 people across the Mississippi River each day. Planners have noted a drop in bridge usage the last two years, maybe it is because of MetroLink and perhaps some people are making fewer trips.

Metro Market Research On-Line

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Wed, 10 Oct 2007 21:15:00 +0000

Metro has begun posting it market research of customers on line. (To reach it, click here.) CMT also conducts its own research, although our surveys are admittedly to a self select group of riders, people who register their commute with us in order to be eligible for the Guaranteed Ride Home program. Maybe we can post ours on line soon. We keep track of historical data as well. Metro conducts an on board survey of riders. Metro's is done under a contract with the University of Missouri-Rolla.

However, despite the two methods, they pretty much show the same thing: riders are generally satisfied with the service. MetroLink generally scores better than buses in all categories. People who quit riding public transit for one reason or another, probably are out of date on the service that Metro is providing these days. On-time performance of the bus system is in the low 90th percentile and MetroLink is in the upper 90th percentile.

One of the reasons for the improved scores is the improvements in management at Metro in recent years. Ray Friem is in charge of operations and has improved on-time performance, reliability of bus service and the attititude of some drivers. Metro's year-end report. In addition Metro is far more efficient, reducing absenteeism, workers compensation claims all of which as contributed to ridership gains.

Gone are a number of folks who go their jobs via the political route of yesteryear. On board now, if a remarkable improved management team that are producing great results for the community. I hope all of this will results in a positive vote for additional MetroLink lines. The system needs to expand.

Public Health Community Gets It

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Tue, 14 Aug 2007 11:45:00 +0000

I am at the Lake of the Ozarks for a two day meeting of grantees of the Missouri Foundation for Health. CMT received a grant from MFH to get more senior citizens on public transit. We call it the "Ten Toe Express Program." The idea of the program is that people who use public transit get more exercise since public transit riders end up walking more to get to the train and bus and to get to their final destination. (Find out more about the program at our website.)

But what is encouraging about the conference is that public health community is getting to understand this. One presentation was by Trevor Acorn of Whittaker Homes about New Town St. Charles. Public Health professionals are advocates of sustainable design. Now we can all argue about the merits of a greenfield new urbanists community when there is so much to be done in the core. But Acorn readily acknowledged the need for public transit to connects new urbanist communities.

Meanwhile, its great we have new allies in our quests to build a more sustainable and healthier communities. Kudos to the public health community. Now maybe next year, the annual MFH conference can be somewhere other than the Ozarks which is auto dependent.

Denver Transit Key to Downtown Success

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Tue, 07 Aug 2007 16:02:00 +0000

I was in Denver in late July for a meeting, and was impressed with the progress Denver had made in its downtown since my last visit in 2000. A key part of the success is the light rail line that runs through downtown and which intersects with the 16th Street Bus Mall. RTD operates both the bus and light rail system as well as some regional service that serves commuters to outlying communities such as Boulder.

The C and E light rail lines serve Invesco Field, Pepsi Center and Union Station which is the west anchor of the 16th Street Mall while the D, F and H Lines loop downtown, intersecting the 16th street mall on Stout and California Streets. The buses on the 16th street mall operate about every 90 seconds to two minutes. They are hybrid buses and free.

All along with 16th street mall, people were eating out, drinking coffee and shopping. On a Friday evening I walked back to the hotel at about 10:30 p.m. and the streets were packed and the buses full. In LoDo (lower downtown) new condominium building were sprouting up along with some lofts rehab projects. As a group, the older buildings did not appear to me to be of the quality of those in St. Louis.

It is clear that the investment that Denver made in light rail and buses is paying dividends in reviving downtown. Denver has an ambitious rail expansion program called FasTracks. FasTracks is RTD's 12-year comprehensive plan to build and operate high-speed rail lines and expand and improve bus service and park-n-rides throughout the region.

FasTracks passed a Colorado voters few years back and helps serve as a reminder that Denver is moving ahead with transit investments. St. Louis needs to make a greater investment and apparently will get that opportunity in February.

Illinois investment in Amtrak Paying off

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Thu, 21 Jun 2007 16:30:00 +0000

This article about Amtrak appeared recently in the Quincy Herald Wig. Notice ridership on the Chicago to St. Louis route is up more than 100 percent.

By Doug Wilson

Herald-Whig Senior Writer

Amtrak passengers can testify to the popularity of new passenger routes that were added between downstate cities and Chicago late last year. They also know there are still a few wrinkles to be ironed out.

Amtrak passengers were about 45 minutes late getting into Quincy Wednesday night after pulling onto a siding to let a northbound Amtrak train pass by.

"It's much better now than it was" for on-time performance, said Jeff Mays of Quincy.

Marc Magliari, a spokesman for Amtrak, said on-time performance is not perfect but is improving. He did not have route-by-route comparisons today but said delays have declined in recent months.

Illinois legislators put $24 million in the fiscal 2007 budget to subsidize a second daily train for Quincy, one for the Chicago-Carbondale route and two for the Chicago-to-St. Louis route. The state had paid a $12 million annual subsidy since the mid-1990s to support the existing trains.

Passenger numbers from Amtrak show that 95,426 ticketholders took the trains along the Quincy-Chicago routes between November and the end of May. That's up more than 29,500 passengers, or about 45 percent, from the previous year when only one train was operating.

Carbondale route passenger numbers are up 72 percent and St. Louis route numbers are up 107 percent.

"It seems right now like it's a good investment" of state funds said Rep. Jil Tracy, R-Mount Sterling.

Magliari said the worst delays have been on the route between Chicago and St. Louis, where four different railroads own parts of the track.

Freight railroads are paid for the use of their track and some are better than others at accommodating the passenger trains. Magliari said Burlington Northern Santa Fe, which owns much of the track between Quincy and Chicago, is one of the better freight operations at cooperating with passenger railroads.

"BNSF earns more incentive payments" for helping Amtrak arrive on time, than do other freight railroads, Magliari said.

From Amtrak's point of view, the big question this year is whether the Illinois budget will include a capital bill that might allow for some railroad improvements.

"We have needs on all three corridors," Magliari said.

Sen. John Sullivan, D-Rushville, knows that Amtrak has improved its system for alerting passengers when trains are running late or routes are canceled.

Sullivan was supposed to take a train from Quincy to Chicago late last year on a day when heavy snows had halted trains. Although he checked online, there was no alert that the train was canceled, so Sullivan and about 40 other passengers waited for hours.

"They have taken steps and measures to upgrade the system they use to tell passengers what's happening," Sullivan said.

Mays said although freight train schedules may cause many of the delays, the one Wednesday night was caused by two Amtrak trains meeting at a place where there was not "double track" that would allow both trains to continue uninterrupted.

Magliari said Amtrak is constantly making adjustments to try to avoid such delays and is making headway.

"We're not satisfied with our performance yet, but it's getting better," Magliari said.

Contact Senior Writer Doug Wilson at dwilson@whig.com or (217) 221-3372

Presidential Candidate calls for More Light Rail

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Tue, 12 Jun 2007 11:47:00 +0000

Here is an article about Presidential Candidate Bill Richardson's position on light rail. I will be on the lookout for what other candidates say and post that as well. CMT does not endorse candidates and this posting should not be considered as such.

WEST HOLLYWOOD, Calif.—In the nation's capital of gridlock, Democratic presidential candidate Bill Richardson promised Monday to create a partnership to build a light rail network and help untangle the Los Angeles region's notorious traffic.
With gas prices rising and roadways jammed, Richardson said it was time to rethink a federal transportation policy that pumps billions of dollars into new roads each year. Mass transit, he said, will be the best, cleanest way to move metropolitan residents in the future.
If elected, he said he would "make it a major effort to refocus transportation construction of roads into light rail and more energy efficient transportation," the New Mexico governor told reporters at a news conference.
"I would make light rail at least an equal partner" with highways, he said. With more rail and clean-running buses, "it's going to improve the quality of life in this country."
Richardson provided few specifics about funding, but said the construction would be financed with bonds backed by the state and federal government.
In his home state, Richardson started a commuter rail project, the Rail Runner Express, that runs along a 50-mile stretch through the state's most populous city, Albuquerque. It is not light rail; it uses existing track and conventional engines and cars. The nearly $400 million project also includes a planned extension north to Santa Fe, the capital, to help ease roadway congestion.
Richardson said the Bush White House has been "absent" when it comes to developing light rail, high-speed trains and other cleaner-running transportation systems in big cities. He said vast sums of money are siphoned off for pork-barrel road projects, which are of questionable value.
"I believe light rail is for the future," he said. "The president can be a partner, working with state and city and local communities in joint funding."
URL is:
http://www.montereyherald.com:80/state/ci_6115416

Amtrak testimony about Missouri Services Woes

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Tue, 29 May 2007 19:28:00 +0000

Near the end of the Missouri Legislative session, Ray Lang testified on the troubles Amtrak has in running the St. Louis to Kansas City routes. Here is his testimony.

Good morning. My name is Ray Lang. I am the Senior Director of State and Local Government Affairs for Amtrak, based in Chicago. In this position, I am responsible for Amtrak’s day-to-day relationships with state governments all across the country. Since I’ve been in Amtrak’s Government Affairs department, I’ve spend a great deal of time here in the Capitol Building in Jefferson City and it is a pleasure to be back here this morning. Thank you for this opportunity to address you. Amtrak has been a partner with the State of Missouri in operating daily, round-trip trains between St. Louis and Kansas City since 1979. Although in some years there have been discussions about operating on a single round-trip, service frequency has been steady during the past few years at two round-trips. However, ridership on these trains has been far from steady. In fact, of all the state-supported routes managed from Chicago, the service on this route through Jefferson City is the only one to show a year-to-year ridership decline from 2005 to 2006. In the 12 months ending last September (which constitute the Amtrak fiscal year), ridership on the trains called the Missouri Mules and the Ann Rutledge fell by more than 17-thousand to end up at about 119-thousand, a nearly 13-percent drop. That’s a big fall from the nearly 140-passengers just three years ago, and a far cry from the all-time high of nearly 180-thousand passengers in 1998. And it’s down again this year, by nearly 12-percent between October and April. What’s happened? The service suffers from poor on-time performance and inconsistency due, in large part, to the extremely heavy freight traffic on this Union Pacific corridor. Over the past several years, the corridor has seen a sharp increase in the number of coal trains from the Powder River Basin and it is also a key U-P route for intermodal and general merchandise trains, with the total number of trains around 60 per day. Union Pacific indicates that train volumes will continue to rise over the next several years. The congestion problem, and thus Amtrak’s operating performance, is further aggravated by the fact that Union Pacific has been performing extensive and lengthy maintenance activities on this route for each of the past several years. Because of the nature of the physical plant and ever-increasing impacts from growing train volumes, it is anticipated that heavy maintenance activity will continue in each of the future years, thus continuing to disrupt traffic flow. Last Friday, we cancelled Amtrak trains because U-P told us the route was too congested with freight trains to operate without huge delays. The night before, one of our Kansas City to St. Louis trains arrived in St. Louis five hours late on a trip that is supposed to last fewer than six hours: that’s an 11-hour trip across Missouri that began at half-past-noon and mercifully ended at 11:25 p.m. And all of this is happening after we’ve lengthened schedules and changed departure times – with the consent of U-P and the Missouri Department of Transportation – in order to try to promise a schedule and deliver passengers according to that timetable. Unreliable trains will never be popular. In fact, on-time performance is the biggest single factor in customer satisfaction. An on-time performance figure that shows fewer than ____ of the trains on time – and several many hours late – damages your credibility and ours and leads all of us to ask if this is sustainable. Simply put, status quo with the current passenger rail service on this route is un-sustainable as practical business matter, even with congested highways and gasoline prices of more than three-dollars. Almost certainly, without a major change, our trains and your dollars can be better used elsewhere. What can be done? As you will hear in other testimony, this Union Pacific route needs a massive amount of capital spending to improve capacity in order to operate passenger trains reliably and attract passengers to relieve congestion on Interstate 70. The good news is Congress is taking up a Senate Bill 294, an Amtrak re-authorization bill that would finally provide Missouri and other states with a federal partnership for capital costs such as those sorely needed here. There are 37 co-sponsors of this bi-partisan bill. However, even if this bill or a House counterpart is passed and funded by Congress, you can count on many of the 13 other states with state-supported Amtrak service to line up with ready-to-go plans and matching funds. Some, including California, Illinois, Michigan and North Carolina, will argue the tens-of-millions they have already invested in capital costs will put them at the head of the line. And the 35 other states without state-sponsored trains, including Minnesota, Montana, Louisiana, Alabama and Mississippi, will probably want to be in queue, too. Amtrak stands ready to work with MoDOT, U-P and others to prepare a plan to make targeted improvements to this route in order to be ready if Congress acts and Missouri provides the matching funds. What else can be done? There are two other Amtrak routes in Missouri that do not now receive state-support: the Southwest Chief through Kansas City and LaPlata on its way to and from Chicago and Los Angeles and the Texas Eagle through St. Louis and Poplar Bluff and its way to and from Chicago and San Antonio. Together with this Kansas City-St. Louis route, Missouri has the makings of a passenger rail network. That’s why we were excited to work with MoDOT on a study of new service to Springfield and want to look at other routes that might be of interest to you and others in the Legislature. A network of connecting trains, some state-supported and others not, is what is leading to successes across the country. When I travel throughout the country discussing Amtrak and passenger rail, I regularly refer to the California model -- expenditures of roughly two-billion-dollars toward the expansion and upgrade of passenger rail during the last decade, with no matching Federal funds, and regular double-digit growth in ridership and revenue. Now our partnership with your neighbors in Illinois is often my point of reference. Illinois is now Amtrak’s second largest partnership. We operate passenger trains on four different State corridors, with at least three more routes being studied. Last year, the Illinois legislature more than doubled prior-year funding for Illinois D-O-T’s Amtrak program to add train frequencies on the first three of these corridors and we are looking forward to the 28-million-dollars in operating funding, plus a capital program, in the coming year’s budget. The expanded service began on October 30th of last year, and I know it is safe to say that all of us at Amtrak, as well as our partners at Illinois DOT, are thrilled with the success of the new trains. Specifically, ridership on the Chicago–Springfield–St. Louis corridor has increased by almost 45 percent since the introduction of the two new frequencies on that route last fall. Ridership on the Chicago-Quincy route has increased by more than 33 percent since the second round-trip was added, and ridership on the Chicago-Carbondale route has gone up by more than 55 percent since the second daily round-trip was added to that corridor. Two of these Chicago round-trips end within two miles of the Missouri border at Quincy and five of these round-trips go into Missouri at St. Louis. All this terrific news equals more than 100-thousand additional passengers in the first six months and demonstrates a demand for the new service, despite a noticeable need for infrastructure, equipment and service improvements. It also demonstrates the importance of the new service to the communities served. Based on experience, let me assure you that demand across the country will continue to rise as infrastructure, equipment, operating performance and service quality makes the rail alternative increasingly appealing, and as rising fuel costs, congestion and environmental concerns further enhance that appeal. And with leadership and the state and local level, it can happen in Missouri, too. We are glad to have Missouri as our partner as we move forward; we hope to be just as good a partner for you as you move forward. And, I'll say it once again, we need to move forward in Missouri to grow a network of passenger trains, where one route can step up if another is faltering, where safe and economical passenger trains are also considered reliable and comfortable. The alternative to investment and growth is un-sustainable. The annual struggle to keep running un-reliable trains is un-supportable. As passengers try trains once and say “never again” because of delays that are both un-ending and predictable, ridership will continue to tumble and the state’s contract costs will rise. If driving is faster – at least much of the time – passengers will opt out of trains almost all of the time. Thank you again for the invitation to join you this morning. I will be happy to answer any questions.

Amtrak Skeptical about St. Louis - Springfield Route

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Tue, 29 May 2007 14:07:00 +0000

Below is the press release that Amtrak issued concerning proposed service between St. Louis and Springfield. Missouri has made no significant investment in passenger rail, unlike in many other states such as Illinois where the state and freight railroads have made joint investments to improve service.

CHICAGO – Amtrak has provided a report to the Missouri Department of Transportation (MoDOT) that shows formidable obstacles to possible passenger rail service between St. Louis and Springfield, Mo. The report requested by MoDOT found strategic merit to the proposed route, including serving the state’s third largest metropolitan area, tourism potential, and connections to Amtrak’s national rail service. However, it would also require an initial significant capital investment and ongoing state operating support. The lack of a competitive trip time versus that of automobiles and a lower than expected ridership projection were also cited as concerns.

Specifically, the report found the route as-is would generate only 34,000 passengers annually, including 5,000 connecting from the current state-supported Amtrak service between St. Louis and Kansas City. This is primarily due to the lengthy travel times on the nearly 235 miles of track, largely owned by the BNSF Railway, with train speeds lower than that of the adjacent Interstate 44. The result is a trip time of almost six hours -- nearly twice that of driving -- even after building a $4 million track connection between the BNSF and Union Pacific Railroad to shorten the route and complement the current state-supported service at Kirkwood, Mo. by adding a stop there. The low speeds are mainly due to the BNSF track as it follows the undulating terrain in the scenic Ozark Foothills, with much of it as curvature.

The report estimates the direct cost of providing the service would be $4.1 million annually and would generate approximately $700,000 in ticket revenue. The initial annual state contract cost would be approximately $3.4 million. Another issue is the lack of available station infrastructure at proposed train stops in Sullivan, Rolla, Lebanon, and Springfield. Communities along the existing St. Louis to Kansas City service receive no state funding for station construction and must fund these projects locally. Proposed changes to federal regulations require all new train stations meet new standards, to include a full-length platform to serve the longest passenger train using the line. It could cost several million dollars per stop to construct the required station infrastructure. Due to cost constraints, Amtrak was not asked to study a major re-engineering of railway to achieve a higher differential for passenger train speeds versus freight trains. MoDOT’s rail section estimated the initial service would require warning system upgrades to 25 existing grade crossings at a cost of approximately $6 million. Substantial up-front costs for railcars and locomotives, crew training and other mobilization costs were also not within the study scope.

“While we were hoping for more positive news in Amtrak’s analysis of this proposed passenger rail service expansion, MoDOT will continue to seek to increase transportation options for Missourians,” said Brian Weiler, MoDOT’s multimodal director, who outlined passenger rail service expansion, including Amtrak’s report, to the Southwest Missouri Council of Governments (SMCOG) today in Springfield.

A summary table and schedule mock-up is attached to this release and the report is available for download from the state’s www.morail.org website.

Mega Bus...threat to Amtrak?

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Mon, 28 May 2007 18:11:00 +0000

Recently Megabus, the London based low cost firm, began offering daily service between St. Louis and Chicago and St. Louis and Kansas City. There are currently three round trips a day between Chicago and St. Louis and two between St. Louis and Kansas City. Sometimes fares are as low as a $1. Last week, my wife and I, on a whim, decided to take an overnight trip to Kansas City to shop on the Plaza and just see the sights. Normally we would book Amtrak for such a trip and have done so many times in the past. We love riding the train, but our enthusiasm has wained with the slow service on the Union Pacific line due to constant maintenance and capacity issues.

Last week MoDOT issued a press release criticizing the UP for being unable to deliver the trains on time. Amtrak was supposedly back to a normal schedule mid week, but my friend Ron McLinden was reporting Amtrak running two hours behind schedule late in the week. Bottom line, we decided to give Megabus a try which lists a 3.5 hour trip between St. Louis and Kansas City.

We booked our tickets on line and got two round trip tickets for $40. We looked at Southwest and it was going to be $300 for booking that late. We arrived at Union Station about 5:15 a.m. Saturday for a scheduled 5:35 a.m. departure. We drove where normally we would take MetroLink, but on Saturdays the trains just begin to arrive at Union Station about 5:30 a.m. and we didn't want to risk missing the bus. Megabus rolled in right on schedule and about 25 passengers got off, having started out in Chicago at 11:55 p.m. on Friday. We parked in a Union Station lot which we knew would be expensive, but hadn't figured a better alternative. Since parking downtown is free on weekends, we thought about street parking, but there are no parking signs downtown between 3 a.m. and 6 a.m. It seemed most people were being dropped off by others. Megbus offers no parking suggestions on its website.

The driver was a gentleman in his mid to late 60s I guess. He looked tired was pleasant enough, but not all that welcoming. About 15 people got on the bus with us that I supposed had seats for 44. The bus was new and clean on the inside, although it would have been nice if the driver had taken a moment to go through the bus after the Chicago passengers got off, to pick any stray candy wrappers. There were a few stay peanuts between the seats as well.

The bus seats seemed too small and close together to my liking. (They are smaller than Southwest and much smaller than Amtrak.) I am tall, so that is always an issue. Had there been a person in front who had reclined the seat, it would have been too cramped. There is no arm rest between the two seats so if the bus were crowded, it would seem too close for comfort if sharing a seat with a stranger. (If I were traveling alone, I might consider buying two tickets since they are so cheap, to make sure I got two seats.)

Two ladies boarded the bus and said, like us, they were trying the bus since Amtrak was unreliable.

At 5:35 a.m. we were off to KC. I had not ridden a bus very far since making a trip on Greyhound from Vancouver to Nanaimo in Canada. I remember the seats on Greyhound being roomier. The suspension on the bus was good, and the ride fairly pleasant, although not as nice as the train. There was a restroom which I did not use on either leg of the trip.

My wife engaged the driver in conversation, she was afraid he was fatigued. I-70 was pretty clear that time of the day until we got to the Kansas City suburbs. It turns out our driver had worked as a mechanic at the CTA for 40 years and was doing this job as a substitute driver. At about Independence he called to find out directions to get to the the KCATA Bus Transfer Center at 10th and Main which is the final destination, something I thought he would have done prior to the trip.

He got directions, but misinterpreted them and got off I-70 at Indiana Street, a far cry from 13th. One of the passengers apparently from KC got him straightened out and we got to our stop at about 9:40, 25 minutes past the scheduled arrival, but at a more realistic four hours. I figure it was comparable to the time it takes to fly and two to four hours faster than Amtrak and a little longer had we driven ourselves if you consider we left home at 5 a.m. for a 5:35 a.m. departure. It also was faster by 40 minutes than Greyhound which makes stops in Columbia and Boonville on its way to KC.

From the bus transfer Center we took the KCATA 57 bus to the Plaza and we walked a couple of blocks to the hotel.

While in KC, we took the cab three times for a total of $55. These were choice rides. We chose a restaurant that was off the beaten path when we had a choice of dozens of great restaurants on the Plaza and easily could have walked to one. I bring up the costs of the cab fares, because our total transportation expense for the weekend was $128 including the parking at Union Station. We chose to ride Mega Bus to avoid the pain of driving, not so much because of the cost. I might have been able to rent a car for about the same amount of money since most weekend rates are quite low.

Sunday we left KC on the 12:15 p.m. bus. This driver was younger, more engaging and looked very professional. While we were waiting to depart, three people walked up and inquired about the bus, schedules etc. One passenger was dealing with the parking problem in Kansas City. He had driven to KC from southeast Kansas to catch the bus. He ended up leaving his truck at a hotel which promised to be kind about it. He was off to Chicago. Megabus should figure something out about parking and list suggested long-term parking sites on its website and as I said earlier, a 15 minute later departure from St. Louis would enable passengers to use MetroLink to access Union Station.

We left KC right on time with 22 people on board. Passengers on both trips seemed to be of college age. There was one family. Other than one passenger on the return trip talking on his cellphone for too long (15 minutes?) everyone was well behaved, had showered recently and either slept or read.

On the return trip, the driver spent most of the trip in the left lane with cruise control set on 72 mph. He drove faster than I though necessary, but he was attentive and safe. We made the return trip in 3 hours and 45 minutes, averaging just under 70 mph.

Would I do it again? Maybe. You can't beat the price or the time. Although I would prefer the comfort, safety and amenities of the train. The state of Missouri and the federal government needs to hold UP's feet to the fire about keeping Amtrak on schedule. Missouri needs to work with the UP to increase capacity and speeds on the line from STL to KC and Amtrak needs greater frequency between Kansas City and St. Louis or else more people will learn of Megabus and cut into Amtrak's market.

US Passenger Rail Woes

noreply@blogger.com (CMT) — Mon, 09 Apr 2007 13:58:00 +0000

CMT Member Bill Heger wrote the following letter to the Post-Dispatch which was published today April, 9. It was good and I thought I would share it.

We read in "High on speed: French train tops 357 mph" (April 4) about the French TVG traveling at 375 miles per hour and wonder why we can't have that in our country. Well, it is because we have people in Washington and Jefferson City who willfully spend money endlessly on roads but refuse to give Amtrak enough money even to maintain a minimal system.

Right now, the two trains between St. Louis and Kansas City are in danger of being discontinued. This, when gas prices are rising and our oil supply is in danger of being cut off because of events in the Middle East. Yet our politicians just keep force-feeding us the petroleum/automotive industrial complex. Meanwhile, France is willing to put forth the money for such trains because it sees them as a transportation priority. In our country, we maintain a Third World passenger train system and barely keep that going.

What will it take for America to change its ways? How high will the price of gas have to get? How many more homes will be taken, fields paved and forests cut for more roads? How soon will it be before our young people are sent to a war for oil (or is that already happening)? We can do anything in the name of the almighty automobile, but when it comes to intercity rail transportation, we just sit on our hands and wait for the crisis to happen. When the crisis does happen, we will sit and wonder why.

Bill Heger | Rock Hill