Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Transportation topics in KC
User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 18117
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO »

Even better cost saver: Buy Cincinnati's streetcars. They might be available soon...

https://www.wlwt.com/article/rossen-rep ... s/32895990

User avatar
normalthings
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3136
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by normalthings »

DaveKCMO wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 5:06 pm
Even better cost saver: Buy Cincinnati's streetcars. They might be available soon...

https://www.wlwt.com/article/rossen-rep ... s/32895990
Is that something we would seriously consider?

Chris Stritzel
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 397
Joined: Sun Feb 19, 2017 9:27 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by Chris Stritzel »

normalthings wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 5:09 pm
DaveKCMO wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 5:06 pm
Even better cost saver: Buy Cincinnati's streetcars. They might be available soon...

https://www.wlwt.com/article/rossen-rep ... s/32895990
Is that something we would seriously consider?
It's an interesting idea. They can be bought and used on the current system but later on down the line, and with hopeful future expansions, the battery powered trains would come in handy

flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8333
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by flyingember »

DaveKCMO wrote:
Wed Jun 17, 2020 5:06 pm
Even better cost saver: Buy Cincinnati's streetcars. They might be available soon...

https://www.wlwt.com/article/rossen-rep ... s/32895990
That’s an article about airline refunds. I think this is the correct one

https://www.wlwt.com/article/future-of- ... r/32854845

WoodDraw
Valencia Place
Valencia Place
Posts: 1714
Joined: Tue Jan 27, 2004 8:53 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by WoodDraw »

Ohh man, that article is brutal to read. Puns are not a good way to write an article.

It's interesting that we basically piggybacked onto their deal, and Kansas City has become the much more lucrative client.

Weren't they going to go fare free but instead shut everything down?
Last edited by WoodDraw on Thu Jun 18, 2020 11:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
normalthings
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3136
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by normalthings »

WoodDraw wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 1:17 am
Ohh man, that article is brutal to read. Puns are not a good way to write an article.

It's interesting that we basically piggybacked onto their deal, and Kansas City has become the much more lucrative client.

Weren't they going to go fair free but instead shut everything down?
They had a bunch of proposed extensions that they talked about in their World Cup bid. I doubt those happen now.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 18117
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO »

WoodDraw wrote:
Thu Jun 18, 2020 1:17 am
Weren't they going to go fair free but instead shut everything down?
It was being discussed, but the pandemic gave their streetcar-hating mayor a golden opportunity.

flyingember
Mark Twain Tower
Mark Twain Tower
Posts: 8333
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by flyingember »

flyingember wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 8:42 am
flyingember wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 2:06 pm

So, this isn't over.

She filed for a re-hearing the next day on Feb 15.

The motion was due March 11th. She filed for an extension which was granted.

The extension made the response due tomorrow. But with the courts largely shut down the document might be due tomorrow, it might not be. There's no entry showing it's not due at this point.
Back to fun with lawsuits. WD82459. Original case 1716-CV02051

On March 11 she got an extension to April 10. On April 13 she filed for another extension. It was given to June 15 and the entry has the text
"No Further Extensions"

This extension is for the paperwork needed to validate an appeals court rehearing or transfer to the state supreme court.


The original case was filed Jan 24, 2017. So we are 3 years, 4 months into the process.
The judgement was affirmed by the appeals court. Looks like they never filed their motion for transfer to the state Supreme Court

Three years, five months and fourteen days.

User avatar
normalthings
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3136
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by normalthings »

flyingember wrote:
Wed Jul 08, 2020 4:49 pm
flyingember wrote:
Wed May 27, 2020 8:42 am
flyingember wrote:
Thu Apr 09, 2020 2:06 pm

So, this isn't over.

She filed for a re-hearing the next day on Feb 15.

The motion was due March 11th. She filed for an extension which was granted.

The extension made the response due tomorrow. But with the courts largely shut down the document might be due tomorrow, it might not be. There's no entry showing it's not due at this point.
Back to fun with lawsuits. WD82459. Original case 1716-CV02051

On March 11 she got an extension to April 10. On April 13 she filed for another extension. It was given to June 15 and the entry has the text
"No Further Extensions"

This extension is for the paperwork needed to validate an appeals court rehearing or transfer to the state supreme court.


The original case was filed Jan 24, 2017. So we are 3 years, 4 months into the process.
The judgement was affirmed by the appeals court. Looks like they never filed their motion for transfer to the state Supreme Court

Three years, five months and fourteen days.
so she is done? When can I volunteer to take her fence down?

shinatoo
Ambassador
Posts: 6516
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by shinatoo »

I'm glad she lost, but the streetcar will never get that far.

In related news the Oaks at UMKC are comming down presently.
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 18117
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO »

shinatoo wrote:
Wed Jul 08, 2020 8:44 pm
...but the streetcar will never get that far.
This is the correct assessment.

langosta
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 301
Joined: Mon May 27, 2019 4:02 am

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by langosta »

Such little vision. Disappointing to say the least.

User avatar
normalthings
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3136
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by normalthings »

langosta wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 9:45 pm
Such little vision. Disappointing to say the least.
^^^^^

Riverite
New York Life
New York Life
Posts: 499
Joined: Fri Apr 07, 2017 5:49 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by Riverite »

Even if brook side doesn’t want it, we could always run it down Troost, or do an East west route

shinatoo
Ambassador
Posts: 6516
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by shinatoo »

Riverite wrote:
Thu Jul 09, 2020 9:49 pm
Even if brook side doesn’t want it, we could always run it down Troost, or do an East west route
That is the best answer politically and economically. I don't have "Little Vision" about streetcar in that part of town, i have a bigger one. 2.5 miles from UMKC to Waldo through fully developed residential neighborhoods doesn't really add much value, not to mention the huge legal battle that would issue, and the low chance that the area would approve the TDD (might have a better chance now that it has to be a city wide vote).

Money would be much better spent crossing through UMKC and down Troost, where development could use a shot in the arm and it would better serve communities that need access to PT.

Whole Foods to 75th and Troost would be hugely impactful 4 miles of public transport. Just getting it to 63rd street would be fantastic.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 18117
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO »

I appreciate all of the enthusiasm for more streetcar, but the reality is it's far too expensive to equitably build much more than river-to-UMKC. The ability to attract federal funding drops precipitously outside of that corridor (we know this first hand, regardless of administration -- see the failed 2008 light rail plan that went further north AND south than streetcar and didn't score well).

Our region is facing a major spatial mismatch between jobs and those that need them, and KCMO taxpayers are carrying the entire burden of useful transit in the region -- this is a drain on the regional economy. The next major transit investment MUST meaningfully address the job access issue. Replacing bus with rail does not do that, especially since we don't have right-of-way that improves travel time over running the street (the number of crossings on the CCROW slows everything down -- this was also studied in NextRail).

In short, draw any fantasy map you want but the next big investment will be focused on more basic operations (fixed and flexible bus service) that directly addresses job access throughout the region. There simply isn't enough money (taxing authority + qualified federal funding) to do that AND rail.

I fought hard for river-to-UMKC because that is the one corridor that can (and has) attracted adequate funding that didn't kill the existing bus system and had the political support for the value capture system of the TDD.

earthling
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6127
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by earthling »

River to UMKC will be a 'good enough' backbone to more MAX lines and ideally free bus elsewhere. The next goal should perhaps be to get transit timid people to explore bus, not expand more expensive streetcar. The streetcar could do a better job promoting specific popular destinations that can be accessed via bus from a streetcar stop. Need to find ways to encourage regular streetcar riders to make that jump.

shinatoo
Ambassador
Posts: 6516
Joined: Wed Jan 19, 2005 3:20 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by shinatoo »

DaveKCMO wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 1:29 pm
I appreciate all of the enthusiasm for more streetcar, but the reality is it's far too expensive to equitably build much more than river-to-UMKC. The ability to attract federal funding drops precipitously outside of that corridor (we know this first hand, regardless of administration -- see the failed 2008 light rail plan that went further north AND south than streetcar and didn't score well).

Our region is facing a major spatial mismatch between jobs and those that need them, and KCMO taxpayers are carrying the entire burden of useful transit in the region -- this is a drain on the regional economy. The next major transit investment MUST meaningfully address the job access issue. Replacing bus with rail does not do that, especially since we don't have right-of-way that improves travel time over running the street (the number of crossings on the CCROW slows everything down -- this was also studied in NextRail).

In short, draw any fantasy map you want but the next big investment will be focused on more basic operations (fixed and flexible bus service) that directly addresses job access throughout the region. There simply isn't enough money (taxing authority + qualified federal funding) to do that AND rail.

I fought hard for river-to-UMKC because that is the one corridor that can (and has) attracted adequate funding that didn't kill the existing bus system and had the political support for the value capture system of the TDD.
Thanks Dave.
Quocunque Jeceris Stabit

User avatar
normalthings
Hotel President
Hotel President
Posts: 3136
Joined: Mon Mar 30, 2015 9:52 pm

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by normalthings »

DaveKCMO wrote:
Fri Jul 10, 2020 1:29 pm
I appreciate all of the enthusiasm for more streetcar, but the reality is it's far too expensive to equitably build much more than river-to-UMKC. The ability to attract federal funding drops precipitously outside of that corridor (we know this first hand, regardless of administration -- see the failed 2008 light rail plan that went further north AND south than streetcar and didn't score well).

Our region is facing a major spatial mismatch between jobs and those that need them, and KCMO taxpayers are carrying the entire burden of useful transit in the region -- this is a drain on the regional economy. The next major transit investment MUST meaningfully address the job access issue. Replacing bus with rail does not do that, especially since we don't have right-of-way that improves travel time over running the street (the number of crossings on the CCROW slows everything down -- this was also studied in NextRail).

In short, draw any fantasy map you want but the next big investment will be focused on more basic operations (fixed and flexible bus service) that directly addresses job access throughout the region. There simply isn't enough money (taxing authority + qualified federal funding) to do that AND rail.

I fought hard for river-to-UMKC because that is the one corridor that can (and has) attracted adequate funding that didn't kill the existing bus system and had the political support for the value capture system of the TDD.
Thank you for your work. I think what you are saying about travel times in pretty interesting.

I still have strong doubts that most of our suburban regions will support a bus-only transit tax of any meaningful size. I also think that travel times regionally are going to be hard to make work unless we could have some sort of dedicated ROW rail.

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Ambassador
Posts: 18117
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Phase 2 streetcar to UMKC

Post by DaveKCMO »


Post Reply