KCRag Forum

flyingember wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 3:56 pm What does that mean practically speaking if received?

More federal funding allowing for a smaller local tax?
Full funding sooner but just the asked for amount?
Extra money that can be used to do more, like better stops, a full crossover, or an extra train for more operations?

Reviewing the House text and APTA summary, it sounds like this funding is meant to cover the local match. That is, it could be additional funding over the previously applied for Federal match.

So in other words, cities that vote to pay for their own projects get a bonus, encouraging more towns to not aim for the minimum amount.

Smart idea.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Sun Oct 04, 2020 11:08 pm Now that federal money been received, doesn’t that kick off property taxes to start being collected according to the election? When will that start?

The TDD board has not activated the special assessments or sales tax yet. We're past the deadline for this year's tax bill, as far as special assessments go, so I would expect them to appear on next year's bill if the project receives all of its funding (which is now possible before end of this calendar year). Sales taxes work differently since they're collected by the state (rather than county) and there is lag from when they're approved to when they start being collected (it's a weird formula based on the start of a new revenue quarter).

In short, if we get the Full Funding Grant Agreement and the TDD board authorizes the two revenue sources to start before the end of the year:

- Sales tax collections might start at the beginning of the 2nd or 3rd quarter 2021
- Special assessments would appear on the end-of-year tax bill in 2021

Anything can change, so don't take that as gospel.

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 3:57 pm

flyingember wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 3:56 pm What does that mean practically speaking if received?

More federal funding allowing for a smaller local tax?
Full funding sooner but just the asked for amount?
Extra money that can be used to do more, like better stops, a full crossover, or an extra train for more operations?

Reviewing the House text and APTA summary, it sounds like this funding is meant to cover the local match

There is enough spending authorization to fund the entire Main Street extension before the CR was approved. Nothing new required.

As for the riverfront, it's going through the BUILD program and not CIG/New Starts. It would need to make application to CIG/New Starts to receive any of that funding (and it may not qualify if judged as a standlone -- which it would be).

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 4:07 pm

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 3:57 pm

flyingember wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 3:56 pm What does that mean practically speaking if received?

More federal funding allowing for a smaller local tax?
Full funding sooner but just the asked for amount?
Extra money that can be used to do more, like better stops, a full crossover, or an extra train for more operations?

Reviewing the House text and APTA summary, it sounds like this funding is meant to cover the local match

There is enough spending authorization to fund the entire Main Street extension before the CR was approved. Nothing new required.

As for the riverfront, it's going through the BUILD program and not CIG/New Starts. It would need to make application to CIG/New Starts to receive any of that funding (and it may not qualify if judged as a standlone -- which it would be).

Reading the House text and the APTA review, every FY2020 project would be eligible for a proportional piece of the $2.5 billion (I provided an estimate above). Funding would be allocated within 7-14 days of the bill passing. This grant doesn't count towards the federal limit. So what would we use the funds for? Or would we turn them down?

Thanks Dave. Currently, the Main St CID funds maintenance along the St. I believe this is mostly funded by the Federal Reserve money. Could this money be used for something else since the streetcar authority will be responsible after the line opens? Perhaps, all those funds could go to Penn Valley Park or other projects in Midtown.

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 4:15 pm

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 4:07 pm

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 3:57 pm

Reviewing the House text and APTA summary, it sounds like this funding is meant to cover the local match

There is enough spending authorization to fund the entire Main Street extension before the CR was approved. Nothing new required.

As for the riverfront, it's going through the BUILD program and not CIG/New Starts. It would need to make application to CIG/New Starts to receive any of that funding (and it may not qualify if judged as a standlone -- which it would be).

Reading the House text and the APTA review, every FY2020 project would be eligible for a proportional piece of the $2.5 billion (I provided an estimate above). Funding would be allocated within 7-14 days of the bill passing. This grant doesn't count towards the federal limit. So what would we use the funds for? Or would we turn them down?

I guess I should clearly state that the HEROES Act isn't law and no one is planning for it to be.

But, okay, to indulge for a moment because it's just the internet: I would reduce the bond sale (or the local match), since that is debt the city would likely need to back (as it did for the starter line). I would not add scope to the project or reduce the assessments or sales tax because construction isn't done and operations hasn't started.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 5:58 pm Thanks Dave. Currently, the Main St CID funds maintenance along the St. I believe this is mostly funded by the Federal Reserve money. Could this money be used for something else since the streetcar authority will be responsible after the line opens? Perhaps, all those funds could go to Penn Valley Park or other projects in Midtown.

Local streetcar funding will not cover the work the Main Street CID performs today (or improvements to PVP) -- at least no one is proposing that and I would not support it since it would not be "the project" described in the TDD to voters or the State of Missouri. It's very possible that the Main Street CID will generate more revenue for services since it is partially based on assessed value: https://midtownkcnow.org/?page=mscid

Same applies to the Downtown CID and the starter line.

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 7:46 pm Local streetcar funding will not cover the work the Main Street CID performs today (or improvements to PVP) -- at least no one is proposing that and I would not support it since it would not be "the project" described in the TDD to voters or the State of Missouri. It's very possible that the Main Street CID will generate more revenue for services since it is partially based on assessed value: https://midtownkcnow.org/?page=mscid

Same applies to the Downtown CID and the starter line.

Wouldn’t the streetcar authority be responsible for shelter maintenance, signage, street and some sidewalk snow removal: all the things that they do on the current line? There seems to be some overlap in work. Currently, the Federal Reserve voluntarily donates their tax revenue to the CID. Couldn’t they decide to move those funds to a new PVP CID? The park, Liberty Memorial really could use the funds and it seems now that Main St is more than covered.

beautyfromashes wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 9:55 pm

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Mon Oct 05, 2020 7:46 pm Local streetcar funding will not cover the work the Main Street CID performs today (or improvements to PVP) -- at least no one is proposing that and I would not support it since it would not be "the project" described in the TDD to voters or the State of Missouri. It's very possible that the Main Street CID will generate more revenue for services since it is partially based on assessed value: https://midtownkcnow.org/?page=mscid

Same applies to the Downtown CID and the starter line.

Wouldn’t the streetcar authority be responsible for shelter maintenance, signage, street and some sidewalk snow removal: all the things that they do on the current line? There seems to be some overlap in work. Currently, the Federal Reserve voluntarily donates their tax revenue to the CID. Couldn’t they decide to move those funds to a new PVP CID? The park, Liberty Memorial really could use the funds and it seems now that Main St is more than covered.

Streetcar only does those for very limited areas. I don’t think they plow the streets, just sweep the rail clear of ice and sand clumps. Signage outside of the streetcar stops me thinks is a no.

This is kind of interesting: the KC Streetcar Extension project office used to be the homes of 2 prestigious families. Around the 1940s, the families moved south and these lots were converted to cultural institutions, union halls, and businesses. In 1997, those were bulldozed for the office building that remains there to this day.

I wonder if we see more single-family homes bulldozed and converted to denser uses with the streetcar.

For a brief period in the early years of 1900, there was not a more prestigious area of Kansas City than Armour around Main Street.

http://midtownkcpost.com/mansions-at-ar ... eplaced-2/

Hopefully it could mean a riverfront extension as originally envisioned, going east to near the Bond bridge. Or some kind of terminus from the riverfront to a crossing to NKC and a north route in the near future.

KCMO to lease land from UMKC for a substation.

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/liveweb/Docum ... 8jY8qVTldt

This schedule was provided to Main Street extension stakeholders on Friday:

TDD:
- TDD activation and transition anticipated in early 2021,
subject to Board approval
- Anticipate property tax assessment to be issued in late 2021
- Anticipate sales tax assessment starting in mid 2021

I bet this is the presentation from the meeting. There's some good details in it.

https://kcstreetcar.org/wp-content/uplo ... _FINAL.pdf

It is great to see the busier stops will be upgraded to light rail style. I am also loving the double-tracked station at UMKC. My only gripe is the parking lot next to the Plaza station. I remember hearing that no structures are allowed to be constructed in the KCATA owned Country Club Route parcels. Is that the reason for the parking lot?





I absolutely love the UMKC station. This design would look great at the Riverfront or for a future lengthening in Brookside/Waldo. I hope that having 2 nub tracks came about with that in mind.

Yeah, that UMKC stop stood out more than any other. The two sided crossover is a great idea. Probably been around forever but I thought it was cool.

shinatoo wrote: ↑Mon Nov 23, 2020 11:49 am Yeah, that UMKC stop stood out more than any other. The two sided crossover is a great idea. Probably been around forever but I thought it was cool.

Not unique to KC but the first time this design has surfaced here. Glad to see they are adding features and not stripping them out.

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:56 am It is great to see the busier stops will be upgraded to light rail style. I am also loving the double-tracked station at UMKC. My only gripe is the parking lot next to the Plaza station. I remember hearing that no structures are allowed to be constructed in the KCATA owned Country Club Route parcels. Is that the reason for the parking lot?

North of 51st is city owned, effective tomorrow. The rest transfers Dec 31

It's a railbanked cooridor. If you cut up the corridor so it couldn't have track laid down on it again the rights tend to go away and the property returns to private ownership. The DeJanes lawsuit was reliant on this.

There's a couple encroachments around 80th and Wornall but they don't block laying track and the city could have the buildings removed from the corridor if they like. With the lawsuit win on file, with an appearl, the next one would be much easier.

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/liveweb/Docum ... 3SnolNLgPk

flyingember wrote: ↑Mon Nov 23, 2020 12:13 pm

normalthings wrote: ↑Mon Nov 23, 2020 10:56 am It is great to see the busier stops will be upgraded to light rail style. I am also loving the double-tracked station at UMKC. My only gripe is the parking lot next to the Plaza station. I remember hearing that no structures are allowed to be constructed in the KCATA owned Country Club Route parcels. Is that the reason for the parking lot?

North of 51st is city owned, effective tomorrow. The rest transfers Dec 31

It's a railbanked cooridor. If you cut up the corridor so it couldn't have track laid down on it again the rights tend to go away and the property returns to private ownership. The DeJanes lawsuit was reliant on this.

There's a couple encroachments around 80th and Wornall but they don't block laying track and the city could have the buildings removed from the corridor if they like. With the lawsuit win on file, with an appearl, the next one would be much easier.

http://cityclerk.kcmo.org/liveweb/Docum ... 3SnolNLgPk

So that ugly parking lot could be a city development TOD RFP if they wanted?