Purpose & Need Open House – SUMMARY

Page: | 1 | 2 | 3 |

VISITOR INPUT AT DISPLAY BOARD STATIONS

Of the comments received, many landowners in the area expressed concern about the impact of additional traffic and truck traffic that could occur if there are new roads in the study area. Impact to the rural character and environmental features of the area was also mentioned. Many study area residents were also concerned about impacts to property values and their perception that any type of new road would lower their property value. There were comments regarding the relationship between this study and the intermodal facilities. Additionally, there were questions about the exact location for any of the concepts presented. One landowner noted, “My husband and I prefer that no upgrades be made to the existing roads. We moved here to be in a rural setting, with all that it includes.”

Some comments identified a need for additional investments in roadways within the study area to improve safety for the traveling public and provide better access for those in the study area. One commenter noted, “I would like to express my strong desire for implementation of the South Metro Connect. I am a current landowner of property at 175th and Kenneth Road and feel that the area is in desperate need of road improvements.” Regarding transportation investment in the study area, many noted the need to improve north-south routes either in conjunction with east-west routes, or instead of improving east-west routes. U.S. 69 was noted as needing additional lanes.

Station 3: Previous input from residents, Partnership Advisory Board Members and the public

Station 3 summarized input the study team received from the Listening Session, held in June 2006, input from the Partnership Advisory Board Members, input received from a questionnaire mailed to the initial mailing list, and preliminary results from the regional telephone survey.

=== Issues and Concerns Exercise ===

At the meeting, participants were asked to identify the single most important issue or concern to them in the South Metro Connection study area by placing a dot sticker next to the issue listed. Issues not listed could be written in by hand. The list of issues and concerns was developed based on information from the Listening Session and the Partnership Advisory Board meeting.

Generally, most people attending the meeting participated in the "dot exercise"’ and expressed their opinion. The majority indicated that maintaining the existing quality of life and rural character was most important to them in the study area.

The full list of issues identified from boards at both stations are shown below:

ISSUES AND CONCERNS	TOTAL
Not wanting additional traffic in the area	15
Additional traffic is coming and it needs to be safely handled	12
Truck traffic is not desired on county roads	14
Maintaining existing quality of life/rural character	93
Growth in jobs, population, and development is coming and needs to be planned for	8
Maintaining environmental integrity of area	13
Impact to property values – they will decrease	25
Impact to property values – they will increase	6
Needing to take portions of private properties should be minimized	7
Projected land use in question – it won’t change	0
Projected land use in question – continued development is going to happen	7
North/south routes also needed	1
Existing road conditions are adequate	3
Existing roads won’t handle future traffic and need improvements to be made	12
Limiting commercial development	3
Intermodal facilities	3
Other – write in other issues
• Cass County has not connected with 191st Street, 199th Street, or 183rd Street on the Johnson County side.  Now they want a highway?!!	2
• How about widening Kenneth Road where it crosses into Johnson County and becomes 151st Street and replacing that stupid wood plank bridge?	2
• Who will pay?	1
• Improve interchanges at 151st and US 69
• I-35 to 291 across at 207th Street
• Alternatives – Why not take a good hard look and study the Kansas City abandoned railroad yards, stockyards, old Fairfax and Armco Steel facilities – Let’s try to get those areas revitalized and leave the rural area RURAL!  DO NOT BRING OUT THE DEVELOPERS to pave over more farmland.  We’re losing America.
• Air and water quality issues
• Transit concerns (the need for transit)
• Improve existing roads but not to handle truck traffic	4

(NOTE: The total dots add up to more than the number of people that attended the meeting. While we tried to encourage one dot per person. At times the stations were unattended and people placed extra dots on the board or were adamant about having more than one dot.)

Station 4: Background, Information and Data

Station 4 discussed how the area has developed and presented some historic growth trends in population and employment for Johnson and Cass Counties. Input received at this station includes:

• This in another sprawl-promoting idea — to encourage and facilitate development and money-making opportunities for the few while destroying the quality of life for the existing communities.
• Why destroy our homes? Why aren’t we looking south of even 199th? The county has charged me tremendous taxes and now, “Sorry you are of lesser value because a highway is going through your property.”
• Use 215th or 223rd to connect Missouri to Gardner. I’ve lived in this area for 30 years. Not a change I want to see. Use pasture land where there is not housing and neighborhoods.
• We are tired of the same destructive solutions — building more roads, use more cars, pay more for gasoline and as a result destroy a rural quality of life. Think outside the box and set a standard for the rest of the county to follow. The answer is light rail, not more cars.
• Resources need to be put into efficient transit systems — not more highways.
• Cass County needs to improve their end of 151st and build a new bridge thru to replace that wooden-floored bridge.
• Sprawl? Use existing roads instead of going thru farms between our house and barns. Farm has been in family for 106 years. So Madison and School Road very busy with 1,320 cars and 30 buses in one hour.
• Proposed route “D” at 183rd east to 71 Highway on Station 4 map does not indicate “Other-alternate routes” south of 183rd. It should. As the route crosses proposed east to Cleveland Avenue it will run into the new development of single-family homes developed by Ms. Farmer (80-acre tract). She threatened to sue the city of Belton after they approved her already platted tract and now has built several homes at the 183rd and Cleveland development. The route has to drop further to the south via the “Proposed and Alternate” routes decided upon in the late 1990s.
• After the meeting at Stilwell, it seemed the people don’t want this! How come what the people want does not matter?
• Why not use 223rd St. to run from Missouri to Gardner? The street is located in rural southern Johnson County with very little impact on the community.
• 1- Stop assuming the problem is lack of E/W connection. The problem is lack of N/S mass transit and the lack of meaningful local economic development so people don’t need to commute to work. 2- What are the assumptions for gasoline cost? Isn’t the entire MARC plan based on an outdated model of transportation demand? 3- Where is the vision? What about mass transit and carbon tax and local economic development? 4- Global climate change!! This whole project just increases the load of air pollution our region is contributing — we are in non-compliance for air quality now! And that is not even counting greenhouse gases, which are not regulated yet.
• Johnson County has a history of eliminating our history! The residents of southern Johnson County have moved here to enjoy a quieter pace of life. Most of us are okay with driving to our destination on the “County Roads” — let’s just pave the existing roads and take our time!
• An immediate need to 199th Street is to slow down the increasing heavy truck traffic. Stop signs at 199th and Mission and 199th and Nall would be a great help to slow the speeds down now!
• How much have these studies cost for improvements? That we don’t want!
• I-35 to 291, across 203rd – 207th
• Use existing roads. No parkway thru our farm 160 acres between our house and barns — still farming trying to help feed the people.
• Crossing 175th Street crosses the Little Blue three times in Johnson County and cross other tributaries to the east. You mention historical land. Remember you are also crossing the original trails to Fort Scott. 151st Street makes more sense, as does Kenneth Road.
• If you just have to do something upgrade Hubrach Hill Road and forget about building expensive, sprawl-inducing highways to further deteriorate the quality of life in the communities.
• Be Logical! Connect the Cass County Parkway to 179th at the Highway 69 interchange that hooks into I-35.
• It needs to be a parkway! Similar to the planned Cass Parkway. 199th or south will be highway alignment.
• Station 4 shows the percentage of population at growth approximately the same while the numbers differ tremendously.
• If you are really planning for REAL growth then you would mimic 435 — build the road out of Johnson County and allow the business to buffer the residences next to it.
• Improve all section line roads to three lanes and forget about one huge new road. (Drawing of two through lanes with a turning lane in the middle)
• County growth (population and employment) trends are irrelevant. That growth can take place elsewhere in the county (e.g., redevelopment, infill) and leave the study area untouched.
• Why is Johnson County paying for a road system that will benefit Missouri? We shouldn’t!! Need more North/South roads versus East/West routes! Why ruin community of Stilwell?

Station 5: Future Conditions

Station 5 presented information on o future projections for population and employment and how those factors influence land use. Traffic projections were shown based on land-use scenarios presented. Input received at this station includes:

• When Nall Avenue in Stilwell was improved, people started speeding and it is now much more dangerous that it was before. We used to feel safe walking and now it is not so safe.
• Roads in south Johnson County are fine. Use caution where necessary
• How stupid do you think we are? You keep saying the plan only involves roads to 69 Highway when the stated intention in your contract (which Charlotte O’Hara read) is to take this to I-35. You just want to divide and conquer the residents in small groups.
• What about improving 175th between Nall Ave. and State Line in Kansas? About 1-½ miles is gravel. The low water crossings (2) are rarely a problem. Missouri should improve 175th/171st to where it ties into M-58 at Holmes Road.
• We need leadership that recognizes the very real prospects of global warming and increasing energy costs and prepares our communities for a more orderly transition that will use less fossil fuel. Building more sprawl-inducing highways does not demonstrate the kind of “solution” we need. How about focusing on urban revitalization and transit systems?

Station 6: Purpose and Need

This station showed the rationale for doing the study. There was an overall purpose statement and eight needs statements that summarized points presented at the other stations. Input at this station includes:

• I see the need but don’t want it near me.
• I am in favor of widening only existing roads that now connect East/West. Is 199th or 191st the only one?
• North/South roads are needed also.
• I agree that an East/West connection is needed, but from I-35 to 71. I also think it needs to be further south. Presentation was good though.
• Please listen to the people that have come tonight and take a VOTE next public meeting. I would really like to see exactly how many people are opposed AND how many are in support of this road.
• Please consider the need for the East/West connection farther south — outside the study area.
• Is eminent domain a given factor for acquiring the land needed if the final decision is widening and connecting? What about the long-range future of connecting the new road to I-35?
• 1- Why spend money in Kansas to solve a Missouri problem? 2- Little rural Johnson County is left — once taken, gone forever. 3- Miami County wants a road, Johnson County doesn’t, why not go to where you’re wanted? 4- If there is a road don’t build it north of 199th. Its cost would be staggering to the taxpayers due to the roughness of the terrain.
  5- Spend resources elsewhere.
• The fact that Johnson and Cass Counties are both growing does not mean that growth will or has to take place in the study area. Bullet #2 under study needs is irrelevant.
• Need to consider bicycle and bus/transit options for the study area. With the price of gas going up, people won’t be able to use cars anymore once the project is built.

Station 7: Future Concepts Being Considered

Station 7 outlined four concepts that could be studied as options for transportation investments in the future. The concepts presented were:

• Concept 1 — Improve Existing Roads (no build)
• Concept 2 — Add additional roadway connections (fill in missing links)
• Concept 3 — Parkway/expressway
• Concept 4 — Freeway

Input regarding the concepts includes:

• Put expressway further south to connect East-West highways. Let this area do its own development as south of 435 did.
• If you are going to build a multi-lane highway just make sure you put it down pasture land. Don’t take people’s homes. People moved out here to get away from traffic. The corridor should be further south than 199th Street.
• Growth statistics and projections are two different things. Those who pay for the study can get it to say whatever suits its purpose. Any study paid for by a governmental/funded organization or group is a bit biased already.
• Widen 151st Street.
• Work on existing roads and forget about this mess!
• Project needs to be done. I never would have guessed all the growth that has occurred south of I-435 and it’s going to keep growing south to the study area.
• I like Concept 1.
• Station 7 – Road concepts – Spoke with Tom Gerend – MARC on Recommendation on Road Concepts: Consider building the road to match the actual lower speed posted for the road instead of having it engineered for higher speeds! Put and enforce weight limits and no truck traffic on this road. It is being forced on people who want and need a rural setting – Paying for residential on large lots – traffic is too intrusive and high speed and lots of traffic causes people to run into yards and homes. It’s already happening – several cars and trucks have sped south on Cleveland Avenue at 183rd and run off into front yards – hitting trees, fences and narrowly missing people and livestock.
• Concept 1 — Is anyone listening to the people?
• “Linking up” empty spaces will eliminate wild animal habitat and passageways. Protected species such as timber rattlesnakes will be more endangered.
• Concept 1 — How come no one listens to what the people want?
• Definitely do not want Concept 4! Concept 3 would be ok. Concept 2 would be preferred.
• “Improving” existing road by making them blacktop is a falsehood. It just makes cars drive faster and attract more drivers. When Nall was “improved” from gravel to asphalt about 10-15 years ago it was sold as a safety improvement — now it’s not even safe to walk down that road! Who really benefits from these “improvements”? Engineering and road building companies, that’s who.
• Please leave our rural community alone. I echo all comments so far against this project. We also favor Concept 1. This will only make the rich richer!

Written comment forms submitted by visitors >>