KCRag Forum

.

I don't see how it gets done without a TIGER grant.

pash wrote:OK, so studies are done, cost is estimated. What's the inside word on how likely this route is to get built, and in what timeframe? Is it the case that it's probably going to happen if there's a decent amount of federal money available, and not otherwise?

Lets assume money becomes available with a tiger grant or direct from the 2018 budget

Maybe 9 months for engineering, city council actions, contractor selection, all the construction lead times, utility work
It's about a mile so maybe a year for construction.
Using same trains on hand, testing could begin immediately and that's 3-4 months because it's just the track, not the trains and a much simpler segment.

Guessing two years best case. So 2020?

you need one additional vehicle.

DaveKCMO wrote:you need one additional vehicle.

So 2.5 to 3 years depending on train lead time.

Given my 9 months guess for prep work is probably pushing it and the train arriving would set the schedule 2 years is probably ultimate case and 3 years more reasonable.

So opening 2021 if people started pulling triggers today to get funding lined up and more likely 2022-2023

So, about the same time as the southern extension opens.

beautyfromashes wrote:So, about the same time as the southern extension opens.

Probably 1-3 years before unless the funding for both can be bundled, which I would be surprised if this doesn't happen

Wait, he doesn't the DT TDD get a vote on the riverfront extension like they do on the Midtown extension?

beautyfromashes wrote:Wait, he doesn't the DT TDD get a vote on the riverfront extension like they do on the Midtown extension?

no. a riverfront TDD -- when it's put forward -- would very likely not include any residents (and thus voting reverts to the property owner, which is portKC).

DaveKCMO wrote:

beautyfromashes wrote:Wait, he doesn't the DT TDD get a vote on the riverfront extension like they do on the Midtown extension?

no. a riverfront TDD -- when it's put forward -- would very likely not include any residents (and thus voting reverts to the property owner, which is portKC).

http://www.joplinglobe.com/news/local_n ... 31eca.html

This article does a great job of explaining TDD voting rules with a real world problem around them.

It's why a riverfront TDD will happen before anyone moves into the new apartments

DaveKCMO wrote: no. a riverfront TDD -- when it's put forward -- would very likely not include any residents (and thus voting reverts to the property owner, which is portKC).

Seems inconsistent. When the Midtown expansion joins the DT district, everyone (including DT) gets a vote. When the riverfront expansion joins the district, DT does not get a vote.

beautyfromashes wrote:

DaveKCMO wrote: no. a riverfront TDD -- when it's put forward -- would very likely not include any residents (and thus voting reverts to the property owner, which is portKC).

Seems inconsistent. When the Midtown expansion joins the DT district, everyone (including DT) gets a vote. When the riverfront expansion joins the district, DT does not get a vote.

I think that the northern route may be partially or completely included in the current zone

Update: Nevermind

.

The Port Authority could join the existing TDD without any public vote, just have to petition the circuit court. this would be the easiest path as long as they like the tax rates of the downtown TDD

rsmo 238.208

The owners of property adjacent to a transportation district formed under the Missouri transportation development district act may petition the court by unanimous petition to add their property to the district.

to form a new district real property owner (no resident) TDDs must hold an election except for with one situation, a unanimous agreement sent via petition to the courts.
In this case clearly it would be unanimous since there's one owner but you can't say there wouldn't be a vote ever

238.216

If all the owners of property in the district joined in the petition for formation of the district, such owners may cast their ballot by unanimous verified petition approving any measure submitted to them as voters pursuant to this chapter. Each owner shall receive one vote per acre owned. Fractional votes shall be allowed. The verified petition shall be filed with the circuit court clerk. The filing of a unanimous petition shall constitute an election under sections 238.200 to 238.275 and the results of said election shall be entered pursuant to subsection 6 of this section.

if they don't get to vote on it, they will not have to pay for it either.

this is as true as making the same statement about current district
A sales tax is charged to all people who shop inside the TDD
real property taxes would be directly paid by the property owner but this could/would be part of the rent for renters of the space being built


three things are correct in that list
1. they don't need to form a TDD
2. people downtown shouldn't expect to vote on one that is formed, there's easier paths
3. one formed doesn't need to merge with the existing TDD

https://twitter.com/kclightrail/status/ ... 3600527363

advancing to 15% design and start of environmental work (NEPA), funded by portKC.

.

pash wrote:What's a 15% design?

a step beyond feasibility. such projects typically hit several milestones/deadlines: 30%, 60%, 90%..

prospect MAX is mostly at 90%, for example.

DaveKCMO wrote:

pash wrote:What's a 15% design?

a step beyond feasibility. such projects typically hit several milestones/deadlines: 30%, 60%, 90%..

prospect MAX is mostly at 90%, for example.

Just being pedantic here, not critical, but how can you be "mostly at 90%"? Wouldn't that be like 85%.

Some aspects are 90%, some are 60%.

Maybe percentages aren't the best way to denote progress since you can't readily quantify it in those increments. Maybe just say the feasibility phase is finished? Or maybe it doesn't matter. Maybe nothing matters. There will never be a streetcar that can cover the vastness of the void we live in.