KCRag Forum

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 8:46 am

Eon Blue wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 8:12 am Is that different from previous concepts? I recall the alignment following River Front Road in an off-street alignment.

Yes, base of the bridge to keep the cost down.

I'm souring on this whole extension. Seems silly at this point. Build a ped/bike along Grand and we can accomplish about the same thing.

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 9:03 am

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 8:46 am

Eon Blue wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 8:12 am Is that different from previous concepts? I recall the alignment following River Front Road in an off-street alignment.

Yes, base of the bridge to keep the cost down.

I'm souring on this whole extension. Seems silly at this point. Build a ped/bike along Grand and we can accomplish about the same thing.

So you would exclude the disabled from having easy access to the park?

Also, where do you think the money is coming from to build a pedestrian path to the park?

flyingember wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 9:41 am

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 9:03 am

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 8:46 am

Yes, base of the bridge to keep the cost down.

I'm souring on this whole extension. Seems silly at this point. Build a ped/bike along Grand and we can accomplish about the same thing.

So you would exclude the disabled from having easy access to the park?

Also, where do you think the money is coming from to build a pedestrian path to the park?

Yes that's exaclty my reasoning. That doesn't make a lick of sense.

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 9:03 am

DaveKCMO wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 8:46 am

Eon Blue wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 8:12 am Is that different from previous concepts? I recall the alignment following River Front Road in an off-street alignment.

Yes, base of the bridge to keep the cost down.

I'm souring on this whole extension. Seems silly at this point. Build a ped/bike along Grand and we can accomplish about the same thing.

The application made it sound like the $6 million bike/ped bridge will be funded by KCMO.

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 9:54 am

flyingember wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 9:41 am

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Tue May 26, 2020 9:03 am

I'm souring on this whole extension. Seems silly at this point. Build a ped/bike along Grand and we can accomplish about the same thing.

So you would exclude the disabled from having easy access to the park?

Also, where do you think the money is coming from to build a pedestrian path to the park?

Yes that's exaclty my reasoning. That doesn't make a lick of sense.

It appears that the longer option would cost about $10 million more then this short one. The goal may be to build some streetcar to spur additional development and then use those funds to finish the extension.

If you read the actual letter around funding the Port Authority is going to pay $5 million worth with the KCATA handling the debt issuing.

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

On top of that
$500k comes from Section 5307 funds, which looks to be a FTA-centric funding rule.
The Streetcar Authority will provide $500k

https://kcstreetcar.org/wp-content/uplo ... -18-Mo.pdf

So far the city has offered $0 towards it.


There is a $6 million funding of the UMKC extension, but that's not entirely from the city either.

https://www.kcur.org/community/2018-12- ... al-funding

Gerend also told the board the Streetcar Authority may here back from Washington within two- to three weeks about its funding application for the separate plan to extend the streetcar line to Berkley Riverfront Park.)

https://cityscenekc.com/breaking-feds-g ... streetcar/

$14M from the Feds is green lit. We are going North (just a little bit) kids.

https://www.kansascity.com/news/busines ... 24675.html

Only one stop at Union apartments for now; the Casino extension may come at a later date:

The northern extension will not reach the Isle of Capri casino. Port KC, the landlord for the casino, envisions an eventual stop there that could serve as a transit hub, providing a place for riders to park their cars and hop on the streetcar to go downtown or board a bus for Kansas City International Airport.

Editorializing, I never really got on board with this extension path without the Casino portion. "The Urban Angle" posted a compelling argument to have a stop on the S. end of the HoA bridge with access to park via elevator and stairs to the lower landing. http://urbanangle.net/getting-riverfront-rail-right/ and focus instead to put this money towards crossing the bridge- long seen as an impassable financial obstacle. The problem is long term, we built to Berkley and then what? End of line- there are no expansion opportunities down there.

I am persuaded by a park and ride opportunity at the casino that would benefit the Casino greatly as well, and so this is disappointing that the proposed line will not extend there in this initial build out and we continue to be at square 1 in regards to connecting NKC to down town.

I hate to be a debbie downer on this but I'm only really excited for the bike/ped path addition. Feel like the streetcar part is just going to add length to my trip.

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:31 am I hate to be a debbie downer on this but I'm only really excited for the bike/ped path addition. Feel like the streetcar part is just going to add length to my trip.

Agreed, the bike bridge is the best part of this.

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:31 am I hate to be a debbie downer on this but I'm only really excited for the bike/ped path addition. Feel like the streetcar part is just going to add length to my trip.

Fact- frequency is a function of the number of vehicles running at once relative to the length of the track.

If the frequency at which a vehicle passes by any stop remains the same the only way you will spend more time on a vehicle is if you get on at 5th and Main and are heading SB.

The solution is easy, you will need to figure out if hopping on at 5th means less overall time before you reach your destination or if there's a train waiting at the riverfront and you should walk to the stop on Delaware.

Basically, don't necessarily hop on a NB stop and then double back when looking for the optimum way to go SB. The loop spoiled us.

alejandro46 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:22 am The problem is long term, we built to Berkley and then what? End of line- there are no expansion opportunities down there.

There's a huge expansion opportunity down there.

The east bottoms.

There's still single family homes in the east bottoms and huge parking lots ready for infill development like with the west bottoms, be it industrial or residential.


The major problem is the Front St overpass is too short to lay track under (as I recall it needs to be 16 feet tall from the Northrail meetings when people asked about going to NKC Hospital) and the alternative is the old row right next to the slope. It's probably an expensive engineering project to get track past I-35

GTFO of here east bottoms.

alejandro46 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:22 am The problem is long term, we built to Berkley and then what? End of line- there are no expansion opportunities down there.

Well, dave always says rail is dead after river to UMKC....... IMHO, aside from east/west streetcar, any wider-reaching system should be comprised of lightrail and not streetcar. My vision is a Northland LRT line that runs down HOA down ok to CC and then out east or south or maybe even west.

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:31 am I hate to be a debbie downer on this but I'm only really excited for the bike/ped path addition. Feel like the streetcar part is just going to add length to my trip.

Didn't think about that. If you catch the streetcar on the south river market stop, it will go to riverfront and back.

I honestly don't get the extension. The river front has very little room for major development and the development that is going in seems to be suburban style stuff that is way to low density to justify such an expense and it's only going to the foot of the grand bridge basically.

If it went all the way to the casino and the casino was a true destination casino/resort hotel, not the joke that is there now and the riverfront was densely developed that would be different, but this makes little sense to me. Should have spent the money help push the line south of UMKC or across the MO river.

GRID wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:08 pm

KCPowercat wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:31 am I hate to be a debbie downer on this but I'm only really excited for the bike/ped path addition. Feel like the streetcar part is just going to add length to my trip.

Didn't think about that. If you catch the streetcar on the south river market stop, it will go to riverfront and back.

I honestly don't get the extension. The river front has very little room for major development and the development that is going in seems to be suburban style stuff that is way to low density to justify such an expense and it's only going to the foot of the grand bridge basically.

I think this is the biggest chance to improve upon. Let's NOT make it suburban style stuff. Not that I want to make this a new affordable housing bloc but we have a chance to create a lot of good housing here with higher density with this rail investment. That's been the big point on KC urban twitter since this announcement

If it went all the way to the casino and the casino was a true destination casino/resort hotel, not the joke that is there now and the riverfront was densely developed that would be different, but this makes little sense to me. Should have spent the money help push the line south of UMKC or across the MO river.

I agree and this does lay the foundation to get to the casino for an attraction and a park and ride. The Isle was just bought and new owners promise a huge improvement.

normalthings wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:54 am

alejandro46 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:22 am The problem is long term, we built to Berkley and then what? End of line- there are no expansion opportunities down there.

Well, dave always says rail is dead after river to UMKC....... IMHO, aside from east/west streetcar, any wider-reaching system should be comprised of lightrail and not streetcar. My vision is a Northland LRT line that runs down HOA down ok to CC and then out east or south or maybe even west.

I don't think I used that word, but it's very unlikely given our land use and resulting low property values. Thus, regional funding would be the next method and you'll get all of the expected geographical infighting that will make any route choice... well, it won't be pretty.

Let's give this latest win some time to soak in. It's been a long slog.

normalthings wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:54 am

alejandro46 wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 11:22 am The problem is long term, we built to Berkley and then what? End of line- there are no expansion opportunities down there.

Well, dave always says rail is dead after river to UMKC....... IMHO, aside from east/west streetcar, any wider-reaching system should be comprised of lightrail and not streetcar. My vision is a Northland LRT line that runs down HOA down ok to CC and then out east or south or maybe even west.

That is not what Dave says, what he said was there is no chance of funding it under the current TDD model as there isn't the density to support it. But there are other funding models (full city tax, regional tax or county tax). Correct me if Im wrong Dave.

I’m a bit confused on the funding. What’s the source of the local match and will the new properties contribute to the tdd? Will port kc issue the bonds? New vehicles?

WoodDraw wrote: ↑Thu Sep 10, 2020 12:45 pm I’m a bit confused on the funding. What’s the source of the local match and will the new properties contribute to the tdd? Will port kc issue the bonds? New vehicles?

Starts on page 14: https://kcstreetcar.org/wp-content/uplo ... -18-Mo.pdf