Generic ongoing KCATA thread

[shinatoo]

https://53studio.com/products/kansas-ci ... 572e&_ss=r

[KC_Ari]

https://53studio.com/products/kansas-ci ... 572e&_ss=r

KC used to have an electric intercity rail as well as the streetcar network? Man that's depressing

[FangKC]

The Strang Line is what caused Roeland Park, Mission, and Overland Park to develop.

https://kchistory.org/index/william-b-s ... ffset%5D=2

https://kchistory.org/index/kansas-cit ... ffset%5D=4

https://kchistory.org/index/overland-p ... ffset%5D=7

[TheLastGentleman]

https://53studio.com/products/kansas-ci ... 572e&_ss=r

KC used to have an electric intercity rail as well as the streetcar network? Man that's depressing

And overhead wire trolley buses!

[GRID]

Or would they run it mostly along the former St. Joseph Interurban rail right-of-way (that sits east of the airport) along Congress down Green Hills to NW Waukomis Drive through Northmoor and RIverside to the RR tracks? This has the benefit of also building some dense TOD nodes at rail stops along the line.

If it happens, I hope they use this corridor (same general corridor of the city backed light rail plan). Commuter rail running way out in the boonies would be a waste of time and money. Would be much better to spend that money on a nice airport bus route using coach buses with luggage racks that run every 15 minutes.

I still think that is what needs to be done for the world cup anyway (and permanently till LRT can be built which is decades out). Simply run coach style buses from KCI direct to downtown every 15 minutes. Not sure why that's so hard. It would cost a fraction of rail and be far more efficient for airport users than trains which will take at least twice as long to make the same journey with many stops. Especially if it's street running light rail. That will take over an hour to get from KCI to downtown. A bus will take 15-20 minutes.

LRT to KCI will be more about building up the corridor between downtown and KCI than serving KCI. You will get more people to ride a bus if their destination is KCI and they are originating downtown.

LRT will have more total ridership because it will server a much broader area, but KCI will not be the driver of ridership for a LRT line.

[im2kull]

why even say that Lucas. There is 0.0% chance that could happen in 3 years.

Prep work has been done.

[Anthony_Hugo98]

https://53studio.com/products/kansas-ci ... 572e&_ss=r

KC used to have an electric intercity rail as well as the streetcar network? Man that's depressing

300 plus miles of streetcar line at that. Somewhere I read it was over 700-800 miles of interurban total, unsure how accurate that one is, as there’s less info floating around about the interurbans. Regardless still a massive regional system. You could ride on a train from Paola all the way to St Jo making 1-2 total transfers.

[KCPowercat]

why even say that Lucas. There is 0.0% chance that could happen in 3 years.

Prep work has been done.

Lol ok

[langosta]

why even say that Lucas. There is 0.0% chance that could happen in 3 years.

Prep work has been done.

Lol ok

May not be totally off base. A major decision maker had brought up this project a while ago

[DaveKCMO]

Guys, it's not possible. You are totally off base. The Mayor is wrong. Consider this:

- The tax generates ~$35 million a year, which already supports our anemic bus system. Just replacing the North Oak bus with LRT doesn't get you there. It only runs 30/60 minute headways today.
- You can't redirect money from a federally-funded bus system to federally-funded light rail (here's one reason why and here's another)
- The $350 million the tax would raise is not enough to build a $2 billion light rail line without federal funding.
- The federal process simply would not allow planning, design, and construction in three years.
- Even if the tax revenue could be bonded to build something in three years, you wouldn't have any money left to operate it.
- The 10-year term is insane for funding a light rail line, which has to be maintained in a "state of good repair" for 25 years if you accept federal money (which is why the streetcar TDD lasts 25 years).
- Would this or the next Council buy off on such a project given what we went through to get the streetcar starter line and extensions approved? Those weren't all unanimous votes and stakes were much lower.

The Mayor isn't going to tank the sales tax renewal with this talk, but he will lose credibility by telling people it can happen when it can't. Let me be clear that there are no technical experts advising him that this is possible.

The sad thing is they could be proposing an additional 1/8-cent that is authorized but has not be put in front of voters. That would have at least added some new bus service.

[langosta]

They think they can build this rail for extremely cheap by using mostly existing ROW. Same strategy as the commuter trail.

[DaveKCMO]

They think they can build this rail for extremely cheap by using mostly existing ROW. Same strategy as the commuter trail.

That’s what Clay Chastain thinks, too. Just go out and trace the interurban ROW yourself and see what the ridership potential might be.

[langosta]

They think they can build this rail for extremely cheap by using mostly existing ROW. Same strategy as the commuter trail.

That’s what Clay Chastain thinks, too. Just go out and trace the interurban ROW yourself and see what the ridership potential might be.

I don’t particularly think it’s doable but that is the thought process as I understand it. If you can truly build out the corridor for super cheap low ridership is less of an issue. + can ensure future construction and reconstruction is denser and more urban.

I would vote yes on a tax for this project *if* they actually can deliver at a low cost per mile. If it’s apples to apples we are just wasting our time when we should be doing east west or Waldo or even OP.

[im2kull]

They think they can build this rail for extremely cheap by using mostly existing ROW. Same strategy as the commuter trail.

That’s what Clay Chastain thinks, too. Just go out and trace the interurban ROW yourself and see what the ridership potential might be.

I don’t particularly think it’s doable but that is the thought process as I understand it. If you can truly build out the corridor for super cheap low ridership is less of an issue. + can ensure future construction and reconstruction is denser and more urban.

I would vote yes on a tax for this project *if* they actually can deliver at a low cost per mile. If it’s apples to apples we are just wasting our time when we should be doing east west or Waldo or even OP.

+1