Regional Transit Coordination

Transportation topics in KC
User avatar
normalthings
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4504
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by normalthings »

DaveKCMO wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:02 pm
I don't think people realize how small our regional economy is compared to high-growth places like Austin, Phoenix, Seattle, and Nashville. Add in the political reality that not every jurisdiction will approve the same level of taxation -- I would imagine Platte and Johnson counties will be less aggressive than, say, Wyandotte and Jackson -- and you leave little room for operating support if you build a lot of rail (which requires a much higher federal funding standard for ridership and land use than BRT or basic bus).
Exactly why I posted that chart above. KC’s GDP pales in comparison to peers.

flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9065
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by flyingember »

Statistics only work when they’re real. Dave went two for four on the cities listed.

Platte County has four bus routes and the current planning says to cancel two. That’s the promise being made prior to a regional plan. Take away service and ask for more money to bring it back when they already pay the two city sales taxes. This is why promises matter.


Back to cities most systems serve the metro area so look at money there

https://apps.bea.gov/itable/iTable.cfm? ... p=1&acrdn=


Kansas City MSA was bigger than Nashville in 2018 and 99.99% the size in 2019.

Phoenix has 1.96x as much economy with 1.94x as many people. It’s the same size economy per capita.


Seattle is 3.13x larger economy for 1.84x more people. It’s economy is thus 1.7x the size of KC and they built dramatically more than 1.7x the transit in the past 20 years. They’re adding 114 miles of rail total, almost 16x our amount and 10x us based on the relative economy sizes.

Austin is 115% bigger and a smaller population with oil money. It’s a good example of economy size helping.

We’re back to not trying being the problem. To be equal to Seattle based on income differences we would have a comprehensive plan to build 70 miles of rail and working on finding funding for it.

Nashville proposed a plan for 26 miles of rail and 25 miles of BRT in 2017. They had a smaller economy than KC that year. So on a lower plan, we should have a plan to build about the same, 25 miles of new rail.

So there’s the range for what we could fund based on comparing economies, 25-70 miles of rail, any regional plan should include this much
Last edited by flyingember on Fri Jan 08, 2021 8:01 pm, edited 3 times in total.

flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9065
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by flyingember »

earthling wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:25 pm
^Another factor is that a higher % of higher income in Seattle/Austin/Phoenix/etc are more likely to actually use transit. Outside streetcar, the Main MAX line is about all I see with what might classify as higher income riders, and it's not a high %.
Our bus system primarily serves low income areas in the city with shrinking populations. It’s a self defeating situation.

User avatar
FangKC
City Hall
City Hall
Posts: 15256
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2003 10:02 pm
Location: Old Northeast -- Indian Mound

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by FangKC »

Aren't we mixing apples and oranges? Comparing Jackson County, MO, to Nashville/Davidson County? Much of our Metro GDP is outside Jackson County. Wouldn't one need to compare the regional GDP and not just Jackson County?

Johnson County, Kansas, has several financial services companies that would increase our Metro GDP by a lot: Waddell & Reed; BATS, etc. as well as all the corporations based there.

langosta
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 362
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 4:02 am

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by langosta »

The combined economies of JoCo and Jackson County roughly equal that of Nashville's anchor county. Yet, Jackson + Johnson are double the population and size.

Increased wealth lets you give each voter more benefit per percent of taxation. Lets Move Nashville proposed "26 miles (42 km) of light rail and 25 miles (40 km) of bus rapid transit and improvements to their existing transit system". Funding would come from a 1% sales tax and a bunch of taxes on tourism and hotels. Yet, the proposal failed in part due to the benefit not reaching enough citizens vs the cost. That effect would be double here where 2 counties would only get 12-13 miles of rail each at most. I think that is why people like Dave are saying that a bus heavy/only approach are the only ways for us to serve people on the regional level.

flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9065
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by flyingember »

langosta wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 1:33 am
I think that is why people like Dave are saying that a bus heavy/only approach are the only ways for us to serve people on the regional level.
We might not be able to afford to do a bus heavy approach. We need a plan that will get voted for.

It’s why a plan needs to be bigger than we can fund today and say to come with funding on a multi-decade timeline and more will be built.

The last four successful elections for transit money were for rail. (NKC is the only one outside KC proper). People say bad things about Chastain but he had the single most successful rail election in the history of KC. The plan was flawed but he showed people will support the right project.

NKC rail was effectively dead until one person saw an opportunity and restarted it. They didn’t start a process to add more bus service.
We will soon have Three rail system expansion projects underway at once.

Looking at other funding sources,
The 3/8 city transit tax didn’t require a public vote. Rsmo 94.605 looks to allow the council to approve it
I think the 1/2 bus tax was legislatively approved

I bet both would end if they went to a public vote.

User avatar
normalthings
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4504
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by normalthings »

flyingember wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 5:16 pm
langosta wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 1:33 am
I think that is why people like Dave are saying that a bus heavy/only approach are the only ways for us to serve people on the regional level.
We might not be able to afford to do a bus heavy approach. We need a plan that will get voted for.

It’s why a plan needs to be bigger than we can fund today and say to come with funding on a multi-decade timeline and more will be built.

The last four successful elections for transit money were for rail. (NKC is the only one outside KC proper). People say bad things about Chastain but he had the single most successful rail election in the history of KC. The plan was flawed but he showed people will support the right project.

NKC rail was effectively dead until one person saw an opportunity and restarted it. They didn’t start a process to add more bus service.
We will soon have Three rail system expansion projects underway at once.

Looking at other funding sources,
The 3/8 city transit tax didn’t require a public vote. Rsmo 94.605 looks to allow the council to approve it
I think the 1/2 bus tax was legislatively approved

I bet both would end if they went to a public vote.
NKC hasn’t identified a way to pay for a rail line there. A city wide 1% sales tax with rail adjacent property tax wouldn’t even cover construction and operations of a line from the north end of HOA to Armour. They have no chance of crossing the river on their own.

KCMO transit sales tax is up for renewal every 15 years. The tax is currently set to expire in 2024. I think you are right that the other tax is permanent. The tax has passed with good margins before showing solid support for bus service.

Transit operating expenses outrun inflation by a good margin. A slow growth region like ours faces falling into the same trap as St Louis and their metrolink. They built out a large network but operating expense growth curtailed the ability to expand transit without new taxes. I don’t think we can over promise with the hope that we grow enough to create future windfalls.
Last edited by normalthings on Sat Jan 09, 2021 6:51 pm, edited 3 times in total.

User avatar
normalthings
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4504
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by normalthings »

langosta wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 1:33 am
The combined economies of JoCo and Jackson County roughly equal that of Nashville's anchor county. Yet, Jackson + Johnson are double the population and size.

Increased wealth lets you give each voter more benefit per percent of taxation. Lets Move Nashville proposed "26 miles (42 km) of light rail and 25 miles (40 km) of bus rapid transit and improvements to their existing transit system". Funding would come from a 1% sales tax and a bunch of taxes on tourism and hotels. Yet, the proposal failed in part due to the benefit not reaching enough citizens vs the cost. That effect would be double here where 2 counties would only get 12-13 miles of rail each at most. I think that is why people like Dave are saying that a bus heavy/only approach are the only ways for us to serve people on the regional level.
Yes, that realization is what did it in for me. A balanced approach is needed. Maybe shoot for the moon in Jackson County first and then see how the other counties fall in line.

Really need to figure out ways to get the capital costs lower. I don’t think we suffer as much from bloated union contracts as the coastal cities do.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 18596
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by DaveKCMO »

flyingember wrote:
Fri Jan 08, 2021 7:55 pm
Platte County has four bus routes and the current planning says to cancel two. That’s the promise being made prior to a regional plan. Take away service and ask for more money to bring it back when they already pay the two city sales taxes. This is why promises matter.
I don't have to tell you -- but I guess I'll say for everyone else's benefit -- that Platte County doesn't fund transit. KCMO funds transit citywide, so at long as that's the case you'll get a system that focuses on citywide needs. The public survey indicated retaining coverage to those who need it the most, and that population is much smaller in the western part of the Northland. Geographic equity has never existed in our transit system.

That's why the initial focus is on a county-by-county funding mechanism with a small carve-out to ensure regional connectivity. That model works reasonably well in Johnson and Wyandotte, but the flaw there is that it's all general fund revenue competing with other priorities. Relying on the municipal-only model -- as we've done collectively on the Missouri side -- just doesn't work in this sprawling region.

alejandro46
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 501
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:24 pm
Location: King in the North(Land)

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by alejandro46 »

normalthings wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 6:41 pm
flyingember wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 5:16 pm
langosta wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 1:33 am
I think that is why people like Dave are saying that a bus heavy/only approach are the only ways for us to serve people on the regional level.
We might not be able to afford to do a bus heavy approach. We need a plan that will get voted for.

It’s why a plan needs to be bigger than we can fund today and say to come with funding on a multi-decade timeline and more will be built.

The last four successful elections for transit money were for rail. (NKC is the only one outside KC proper). People say bad things about Chastain but he had the single most successful rail election in the history of KC. The plan was flawed but he showed people will support the right project.

NKC rail was effectively dead until one person saw an opportunity and restarted it. They didn’t start a process to add more bus service.
We will soon have Three rail system expansion projects underway at once.

Looking at other funding sources,
The 3/8 city transit tax didn’t require a public vote. Rsmo 94.605 looks to allow the council to approve it
I think the 1/2 bus tax was legislatively approved

I bet both would end if they went to a public vote.
NKC hasn’t identified a way to pay for a rail line there. A city wide 1% sales tax with rail adjacent property tax wouldn’t even cover construction and operations of a line from the north end of HOA to Armour. They have no chance of crossing the river on their own.

KCMO transit sales tax is up for renewal every 15 years. The tax is currently set to expire in 2024. I think you are right that the other tax is permanent. The tax has passed with good margins before showing solid support for bus service.

Transit operating expenses outrun inflation by a good margin. A slow growth region like ours faces falling into the same trap as St Louis and their metrolink. They built out a large network but operating expense growth curtailed the ability to expand transit without new taxes. I don’t think we can over promise with the hope that we grow enough to create future windfalls.
Speaking exclusively Streetcar, how can the region push down capital costs long term? Unlike STL, we definitely don't want to bite off more than we can afford to run. For example, Burlington or on Linwood to TSC seem like a good reach goals, although we may end up with BRT to Truman. Bulk purchasing, stretching out train frequency (not buying as many), combining re-surfacing work with expansion, private sector partners, adding fares for expanded routes.
Project costs for recent U.S. streetcar systems have varied from approximately $27.8 million/mile (S Line, Salt Lake City, 2013) to $54.5 million/mile (QLine, Detroit, May 2017). According to 2015 data (most recent available) from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the operational cost of streetcar systems is $1.41 per passenger mile (compared to $1.09 for buses and $0.75 for LRT). However, among these modes, streetcars cover a higher percent of costs via farebox (31.8% compared to 25.7% for buses and 27.9% for LRT). Ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs can also vary from system to system. For example, Detroit’s 3.3-mile QLine estimates annual O&M costs approximately $6 million, Cincinnati 3.6-mile Bell Connector estimates O&M at $4.2 million, and Salt Lake City’s 2.0-mile S-Line estimates annual O&M at $1.5 million.
https://www.metro-magazine.com/10002957 ... rtnerships

User avatar
beautyfromashes
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 5230
Joined: Mon Mar 21, 2005 11:04 am

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by beautyfromashes »

alejandro46 wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:40 pm
Bulk purchasing, stretching out train frequency (not buying as many), combining re-surfacing work with expansion, private sector partners, adding fares for expanded routes.
This seems super smart. Make the expansion of rail look like a smaller, incremental cost instead of a huge project.

User avatar
normalthings
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4504
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by normalthings »

alejandro46 wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:40 pm
normalthings wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 6:41 pm
flyingember wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 5:16 pm


We might not be able to afford to do a bus heavy approach. We need a plan that will get voted for.

It’s why a plan needs to be bigger than we can fund today and say to come with funding on a multi-decade timeline and more will be built.

The last four successful elections for transit money were for rail. (NKC is the only one outside KC proper). People say bad things about Chastain but he had the single most successful rail election in the history of KC. The plan was flawed but he showed people will support the right project.

NKC rail was effectively dead until one person saw an opportunity and restarted it. They didn’t start a process to add more bus service.
We will soon have Three rail system expansion projects underway at once.

Looking at other funding sources,
The 3/8 city transit tax didn’t require a public vote. Rsmo 94.605 looks to allow the council to approve it
I think the 1/2 bus tax was legislatively approved

I bet both would end if they went to a public vote.
NKC hasn’t identified a way to pay for a rail line there. A city wide 1% sales tax with rail adjacent property tax wouldn’t even cover construction and operations of a line from the north end of HOA to Armour. They have no chance of crossing the river on their own.

KCMO transit sales tax is up for renewal every 15 years. The tax is currently set to expire in 2024. I think you are right that the other tax is permanent. The tax has passed with good margins before showing solid support for bus service.

Transit operating expenses outrun inflation by a good margin. A slow growth region like ours faces falling into the same trap as St Louis and their metrolink. They built out a large network but operating expense growth curtailed the ability to expand transit without new taxes. I don’t think we can over promise with the hope that we grow enough to create future windfalls.
Speaking exclusively Streetcar, how can the region push down capital costs long term? Unlike STL, we definitely don't want to bite off more than we can afford to run. For example, Burlington or on Linwood to TSC seem like a good reach goals, although we may end up with BRT to Truman. Bulk purchasing, stretching out train frequency (not buying as many), combining re-surfacing work with expansion, private sector partners, adding fares for expanded routes.
Project costs for recent U.S. streetcar systems have varied from approximately $27.8 million/mile (S Line, Salt Lake City, 2013) to $54.5 million/mile (QLine, Detroit, May 2017). According to 2015 data (most recent available) from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the operational cost of streetcar systems is $1.41 per passenger mile (compared to $1.09 for buses and $0.75 for LRT). However, among these modes, streetcars cover a higher percent of costs via farebox (31.8% compared to 25.7% for buses and 27.9% for LRT). Ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs can also vary from system to system. For example, Detroit’s 3.3-mile QLine estimates annual O&M costs approximately $6 million, Cincinnati 3.6-mile Bell Connector estimates O&M at $4.2 million, and Salt Lake City’s 2.0-mile S-Line estimates annual O&M at $1.5 million.
https://www.metro-magazine.com/10002957 ... rtnerships
Riverfront is $50 million per mile. UMKC is $100 million. Tampa streetcar P3 is around $70 million per mile with iirc 25% elevated. I suspect that we (KC and as a nation) over-engineer our transit projects. Professional service fees are a big chunk of the UMKC extension's budget.

In the 1970s, the Feds tried to standardize mass transit so that economies of scale would come into play. Boeing and Lockheed factories switched from producing Vietnam War machines to light rail vehicles. Unfortunately, the Fed's vehicle design was flawed.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 18596
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by DaveKCMO »

No one on this forum -- or probably even anyone in KC -- is going to solve the cost problem. It's so pervasive in the states. Best to just limit the amount of rail so you can maximize the amount of operational funding. In addition, all of this focus on rail cost per mile (no one has discussed BRT cost per mile) ignores the low density that pervades every part of our region outside of pockets downtown, northeast, and midtown/plaza.

earthling
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6507
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by earthling »

A rail spine from DT (possibly NKC) to UMKC will suffice for a decade+ along with crosstown BRT lines and other spokes to rest of metro. But there needs to be an effort to encourage bus fearing streetcar riders to use MAX and other bus lines. As mentioned in other threads, until UMKC streetcar expansion is complete, perhaps there should be a free streetcar extender from Union Station to Plaza using MAX buses. An announcement on streetcar arriving at Union Station can promote using the MAX buses to get to Plaza with no fare, the announcement encouraging/endorsing use as a natural extension to Plaza is key.

Understand there'd be logistical challenges with existing MAX structure but many who wouldn't take MAX would certainly at least try this approach and would highly likely improve perception to point of improving general bus ridership overall in the long term.

alejandro46
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 501
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:24 pm
Location: King in the North(Land)

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by alejandro46 »

normalthings wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:13 pm
alejandro46 wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:40 pm
normalthings wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 6:41 pm


NKC hasn’t identified a way to pay for a rail line there. A city wide 1% sales tax with rail adjacent property tax wouldn’t even cover construction and operations of a line from the north end of HOA to Armour. They have no chance of crossing the river on their own.

KCMO transit sales tax is up for renewal every 15 years. The tax is currently set to expire in 2024. I think you are right that the other tax is permanent. The tax has passed with good margins before showing solid support for bus service.

Transit operating expenses outrun inflation by a good margin. A slow growth region like ours faces falling into the same trap as St Louis and their metrolink. They built out a large network but operating expense growth curtailed the ability to expand transit without new taxes. I don’t think we can over promise with the hope that we grow enough to create future windfalls.
Speaking exclusively Streetcar, how can the region push down capital costs long term? Unlike STL, we definitely don't want to bite off more than we can afford to run. For example, Burlington or on Linwood to TSC seem like a good reach goals, although we may end up with BRT to Truman. Bulk purchasing, stretching out train frequency (not buying as many), combining re-surfacing work with expansion, private sector partners, adding fares for expanded routes.
Project costs for recent U.S. streetcar systems have varied from approximately $27.8 million/mile (S Line, Salt Lake City, 2013) to $54.5 million/mile (QLine, Detroit, May 2017). According to 2015 data (most recent available) from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the operational cost of streetcar systems is $1.41 per passenger mile (compared to $1.09 for buses and $0.75 for LRT). However, among these modes, streetcars cover a higher percent of costs via farebox (31.8% compared to 25.7% for buses and 27.9% for LRT). Ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs can also vary from system to system. For example, Detroit’s 3.3-mile QLine estimates annual O&M costs approximately $6 million, Cincinnati 3.6-mile Bell Connector estimates O&M at $4.2 million, and Salt Lake City’s 2.0-mile S-Line estimates annual O&M at $1.5 million.
https://www.metro-magazine.com/10002957 ... rtnerships
Riverfront is $50 million per mile. UMKC is $100 million. Tampa streetcar P3 is around $70 million per mile with iirc 25% elevated. I suspect that we (KC and as a nation) over-engineer our transit projects. Professional service fees are a big chunk of the UMKC extension's budget.

In the 1970s, the Feds tried to standardize mass transit so that economies of scale would come into play. Boeing and Lockheed factories switched from producing Vietnam War machines to light rail vehicles. Unfortunately, the Fed's vehicle design was flawed.
Just for some fun (?) Sim City type napkin math, here are some sample distances throughout the city (either existing, studied, or proposed lines, or routes using surface 4-lane streets) set out matrix style with average cost/mile from Troost Max, RiverMarket (which looks like $20m not $50m?), Main Street I and Main Street II, and the average 70m per mile. Total adds up to just under 100 miles.

Image
Main should total $4.1bln. Please disregard typos.

We're thinking big in this thread, I like that. I am not as concerned about density. I think once it is known an area will actually receive usable transit, it will get more dense. Isn't that how Portland expanded their system? Look at the Phoenix South Mountain line that just got $500m. Bunch of SFH and stip malls down there.

I know rail or BRT transit will probably never make it to KCI/Olathe, wherever within my lifetime or ever, and it might not from a ROI perspective go there either. I know that KC will not punch as high as Austin, Nash or more major cities like Phx or Seattle, but just wanted to run some numbers for reference, comparison and discussion.

Austin Capital Transit - 27mi $5.8bln, 214/mi. Combined w bus sytem for $7.1bln total initiative passage. Local match covered by 19.6% property tax hike (.53/$100) Passed
Lets Move Nashville - 26 mile, $5.4bln, $204/mi. Rail + BRT from outlying regions. Funded by .5% sales tax hike, bringing total to 10.25%. Rejected by voters.

flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 9065
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by flyingember »

alejandro46 wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 1:14 am
I know rail or BRT transit will probably never make it to KCI/Olathe, wherever within my lifetime or ever, and it might not from a ROI perspective go there either. I know that KC will not punch as high as Austin, Nash or more major cities like Phx or Seattle, but just wanted to run some numbers for reference, comparison and discussion.
Rail Transit to Olathe is actually not as hard as you would think. The hardest part would be freight system support. It would use existing rail that runs from downtown all the way to Gardner and beyond.

To Kearney/Excelsior and Lee's Summit are the same way where there's already rail there. Lee's Summit even has the station already.

The Sanders plan was in the $7-10 million per mile range. Those three lines are so affordable relative to all other modes that they should be on any long-range plan without question. It's not possible to widen any freeway for that little.

User avatar
normalthings
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4504
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by normalthings »

alejandro46 wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 1:14 am
normalthings wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:13 pm
alejandro46 wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:40 pm


Speaking exclusively Streetcar, how can the region push down capital costs long term? Unlike STL, we definitely don't want to bite off more than we can afford to run. For example, Burlington or on Linwood to TSC seem like a good reach goals, although we may end up with BRT to Truman. Bulk purchasing, stretching out train frequency (not buying as many), combining re-surfacing work with expansion, private sector partners, adding fares for expanded routes.



https://www.metro-magazine.com/10002957 ... rtnerships
Riverfront is $50 million per mile. UMKC is $100 million. Tampa streetcar P3 is around $70 million per mile with iirc 25% elevated. I suspect that we (KC and as a nation) over-engineer our transit projects. Professional service fees are a big chunk of the UMKC extension's budget.

In the 1970s, the Feds tried to standardize mass transit so that economies of scale would come into play. Boeing and Lockheed factories switched from producing Vietnam War machines to light rail vehicles. Unfortunately, the Fed's vehicle design was flawed.
Just for some fun (?) Sim City type napkin math, here are some sample distances throughout the city (either existing, studied, or proposed lines, or routes using surface 4-lane streets) set out matrix style with average cost/mile from Troost Max, RiverMarket (which looks like $20m not $50m?), Main Street I and Main Street II, and the average 70m per mile. Total adds up to just under 100 miles.

Image
Main should total $4.1bln. Please disregard typos.

We're thinking big in this thread, I like that. I am not as concerned about density. I think once it is known an area will actually receive usable transit, it will get more dense. Isn't that how Portland expanded their system? Look at the Phoenix South Mountain line that just got $500m. Bunch of SFH and stip malls down there.

I know rail or BRT transit will probably never make it to KCI/Olathe, wherever within my lifetime or ever, and it might not from a ROI perspective go there either. I know that KC will not punch as high as Austin, Nash or more major cities like Phx or Seattle, but just wanted to run some numbers for reference, comparison and discussion.

Austin Capital Transit - 27mi $5.8bln, 214/mi. Combined w bus sytem for $7.1bln total initiative passage. Local match covered by 19.6% property tax hike (.53/$100) Passed
Lets Move Nashville - 26 mile, $5.4bln, $204/mi. Rail + BRT from outlying regions. Funded by .5% sales tax hike, bringing total to 10.25%. Rejected by voters.
Nashville was a 1% sales tax + hotel tax + other taxes. Austin & Nashville proposed multiple billion $$$ downtown tunnels that skewers their costs.

You also need to account for interest expenses, inflation, and O&M. ($6.1 billion * 1.3)+ ($6.1*2) is closer to the true lifetime cost.

alejandro46
Western Auto Lofts
Western Auto Lofts
Posts: 501
Joined: Fri Feb 02, 2018 11:24 pm
Location: King in the North(Land)

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by alejandro46 »

normalthings wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:26 am

You also need to account for interest expenses, inflation, and O&M. ($6.1 billion * 1.3)+ ($6.1*2) is closer to the true lifetime cost.
For the Nashville and Austin plans, the larger amounts includes those fees I believe, the smaller one is construction costs only. Total Nashville plan including OpEx and inflation was $9bln.

For KCMO, any operation expenses will not increase linearly, as we can scale our system. We are a slow growth city, so any expansion to BRT/Rail won't come quickly. However, regional coordination can better align road and existing transit network and long term development plans with future expansions. In addition, I believe the construction costs are also inflated due to the required contingency by the Feds. I can't remember if the $350m includes that. I just wanted to run a few numbers for an everything plan versus what others are proposing, no matter if they are spending a deprotonate amount on tunnels.

User avatar
normalthings
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4504
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by normalthings »

alejandro46 wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 11:45 am
normalthings wrote:
Mon Jan 11, 2021 10:26 am

You also need to account for interest expenses, inflation, and O&M. ($6.1 billion * 1.3)+ ($6.1*2) is closer to the true lifetime cost.
For the Nashville and Austin plans, the larger amounts includes those fees I believe, the smaller one is construction costs only. Total Nashville plan including OpEx and inflation was $9bln.

For KCMO, any operation expenses will not increase linearly, as we can scale our system. We are a slow growth city, so any expansion to BRT/Rail won't come quickly. However, regional coordination can better align road and existing transit network and long term development plans with future expansions. In addition, I believe the construction costs are also inflated due to the required contingency by the Feds. I can't remember if the $350m includes that. I just wanted to run a few numbers for an everything plan versus what others are proposing, no matter if they are spending a deprotonate amount on tunnels.
What you could do is map out when each line would be constructed. Then apply an O&M charge per mile open.

User avatar
ToDactivist
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 173
Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2017 10:06 am

Re: Regional Transit Coordination

Post by ToDactivist »

normalthings wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 9:13 pm
alejandro46 wrote:
Sun Jan 10, 2021 8:40 pm
normalthings wrote:
Sat Jan 09, 2021 6:41 pm


NKC hasn’t identified a way to pay for a rail line there. A city wide 1% sales tax with rail adjacent property tax wouldn’t even cover construction and operations of a line from the north end of HOA to Armour. They have no chance of crossing the river on their own.

KCMO transit sales tax is up for renewal every 15 years. The tax is currently set to expire in 2024. I think you are right that the other tax is permanent. The tax has passed with good margins before showing solid support for bus service.

Transit operating expenses outrun inflation by a good margin. A slow growth region like ours faces falling into the same trap as St Louis and their metrolink. They built out a large network but operating expense growth curtailed the ability to expand transit without new taxes. I don’t think we can over promise with the hope that we grow enough to create future windfalls.
Speaking exclusively Streetcar, how can the region push down capital costs long term? Unlike STL, we definitely don't want to bite off more than we can afford to run. For example, Burlington or on Linwood to TSC seem like a good reach goals, although we may end up with BRT to Truman. Bulk purchasing, stretching out train frequency (not buying as many), combining re-surfacing work with expansion, private sector partners, adding fares for expanded routes.
Project costs for recent U.S. streetcar systems have varied from approximately $27.8 million/mile (S Line, Salt Lake City, 2013) to $54.5 million/mile (QLine, Detroit, May 2017). According to 2015 data (most recent available) from the Federal Transit Administration (FTA), the operational cost of streetcar systems is $1.41 per passenger mile (compared to $1.09 for buses and $0.75 for LRT). However, among these modes, streetcars cover a higher percent of costs via farebox (31.8% compared to 25.7% for buses and 27.9% for LRT). Ongoing operations and maintenance (O&M) costs can also vary from system to system. For example, Detroit’s 3.3-mile QLine estimates annual O&M costs approximately $6 million, Cincinnati 3.6-mile Bell Connector estimates O&M at $4.2 million, and Salt Lake City’s 2.0-mile S-Line estimates annual O&M at $1.5 million.
https://www.metro-magazine.com/10002957 ... rtnerships
Riverfront is $50 million per mile. UMKC is $100 million. Tampa streetcar P3 is around $70 million per mile with iirc 25% elevated. I suspect that we (KC and as a nation) over-engineer our transit projects. Professional service fees are a big chunk of the UMKC extension's budget.

In the 1970s, the Feds tried to standardize mass transit so that economies of scale would come into play. Boeing and Lockheed factories switched from producing Vietnam War machines to light rail vehicles. Unfortunately, the Fed's vehicle design was flawed.
Exactly the same thing the gov't did for streetcars in the 40's(?) creating the PCC standard (see Delaware trolley). STL company actually had one of these specs. Worked then but before we had overseas cheaper sources. As to costs - look to MEPs - always a huge cover your butt over-engineering. some necessary, some not.

Post Reply