# Kansas City Light Rail



## chertling (Nov 6, 2008)

For those who may not be aware, the cities of Kansas City, MO and North Kansas City, MO voted on separate (yet inter-related) light rail sales tax questions on Tuesday. The 1/2 cent sales tax in North Kansas City and 3/8 cent sales tax in KCMO would have funded a fourteen mile light rail "Starter Line" running from Vivion Road and North Oak Trafficway in Kansas City, south into and through the city of North Kansas City, Downtown Kansas City, Crown Center and the Country Club Plaza before reaching its southern terminus at Bruce R. Watkins Parkway (US 71) and 63rd street.

As a member of the NKC Rail campaign organization and the NKC City Council, I am pleased to share that the sales tax question in North Kansas City passed, with 56% voting in favor. However, the Kansas City Missouri sales tax question failed, with 56% voting against.

North Kansas City's sales tax was never intended to provide full funding to build and operate the two mile segment of light rail that was planned for the city. The cost to build and operate the portion of the line within NKC's city limits was to be shared by NKC and its much larger neighbor Kansas City, MO. The sad truth is that we now have to return to square one. The NKC Light Rail sales tax will not take effect.

There are plans in the works, spearheaded by KCMO's Mayor Funkhouser, to bring a true regional light rail plan to voters sometime in the next few years.


----------



## DaveKCMO (Nov 6, 2008)

what is north kansas city's plan to deal with their vote? will the council repeal?


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Nov 6, 2008)

Keep trying to pass this.

Here in Calif, Sonoma and Marin counties _finally_ passed the SMART light commuter rail transit initiative after failing to pass by 2/3 vote in 2006. We'll have ours running by 2014. Don't give up!

Here's a link to what we're buying.

Sonoma-Marin Area Rail Transit

BTW I just found this page of rail initiatives and results on the 2008 ballot.

EDIT: sorry, it's commuter rail, not light rail. We will be using DMUs (Diesel Multiple Units) on existing freight rail.


----------



## Joel N. Weber II (Nov 6, 2008)

PetalumaLoco said:


> BTW I just found this page of rail initiatives and results on the 2008 ballot.


It mentions the Honolulu rail project is going to be elevated. I hope it doesn't end up being as vaguely annoying to walk under as the Chicago El. Though the bike path along Nimitz Highway under the H-1 Interstate Highway isn't terrible.


----------



## sechs (Nov 7, 2008)

Joel N. Weber II said:


> It mentions the Honolulu rail project is going to be elevated. I hope it doesn't end up being as vaguely annoying to walk under as the Chicago El. Though the bike path along Nimitz Highway under the H-1 Interstate Highway isn't terrible.


I guess you're spoiled by having a maze of tunnels dug under Boston? That's not something that you can do extensively on a volcano....


----------



## chertling (Nov 7, 2008)

DaveKCMO said:


> what is north kansas city's plan to deal with their vote? will the council repeal?


Unfortunately, without KCMO's participation, the sales tax approved by NKC won't generate sufficient funding to proceed with our two mile segment. The most likely action by the council will be for us to repeal the sales tax, which I admit is unfortunate given the time and effort that was put into this ballot measure by myself and many other community members.

A less likely, but still possible course of action (one which I would prefer) would be for us to delay the implementation of the voter approved Light Rail sales tax until such time as KCMO approves a plan that follows the same general route specified in the language that established NKC's "Light Rail Transit Development District." (IE: running North-South roughly following Burlington or Swift) What we would need to determine is whether the Hancock Amendment (the Missouri Constitutional Amendment that restricts the implementation or increase of taxes) would require us to get voter approval again if we were to delay implementation of the sales tax beyond a year or two.

I am sure this will be a topic of discussion in either our next business meeting (Tuesday) or our next work session (a week from Tuesday)


----------



## sechs (Nov 7, 2008)

How can this have been so poorly written as to not be contingent upon the project proceeding as planned?


----------



## chertling (Nov 7, 2008)

sechs said:


> How can this have been so poorly written as to not be contingent upon the project proceeding as planned?


Believe it or not, North Kansas City had no say in the wording of the ballot language. Given the fact that we are a "Third Class City" the state of Missouri places certain restrictions on how we obtain funds. The only mechanism allowed for us to collect additional taxes for transit is through a "Transit Development District" or TDD. To create the TDD and place the sales tax on the ballot, we had to petition the Clay County Circuit Court. Since the state laws surrounding TDDs dictated the ballot language to the letter, we did not have the ability to legally alter the language to make the tax contingent on the passage of KCMO's sales tax.

Once our population exceeds 5,000 (we were at 4,700 in the last census), we have the option of creating our own City Charter. As a "Charter City" we would have been able to utilize other means of putting the sales tax on the ballot and we could have used our own ballot language, instead of language mandated by the state.


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Nov 7, 2008)

sechs said:


> Joel N. Weber II said:
> 
> 
> > It mentions the Honolulu rail project is going to be elevated. I hope it doesn't end up being as vaguely annoying to walk under as the Chicago El. Though the bike path along Nimitz Highway under the H-1 Interstate Highway isn't terrible.
> ...


Follow lava tubes?


----------



## GG-1 (Nov 7, 2008)

PetalumaLoco said:


> sechs said:
> 
> 
> > Joel N. Weber II said:
> ...


Aloha

Well the water table in most areas where people live is only a few feet down, construction would be a bear. The flatter areas on Oahu are more often coral above the lava making tunneling even harder. So the system must be built at or above grade. I hope that as the last phase this year the council will switch to a Monorail as the structure and cost of construction will be cheaper. I think the elevated structures like I have seen on the mainland past the Harbor and other places will be obscene, while the sections down the middle of the highway doesn't matter.


----------



## George Harris (Nov 7, 2008)

OK, so this isn't Kansas City, but Honolulu: Unfortunately, wheter monorail or standard rail, the size of the gideway will be about the same. Basically, you have a box carrying people that will end up being 9 to 10 feet wide, two of them side by side, plus reasonable space between them, plus room for a walkway on each side, plus a solid wall high enough to provide reasonable shielding of the noise. This gives you a structure that will be about 35 feet wide regardless of what supports the vehicles.

You say, but the Seattle monorail does not have walkways along it. True, but it was built before the FTA decreed that there must be continuous evacuation walkways alongside transit lines. It could not be built today in the form that it currently has.


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Nov 7, 2008)

George Harris said:


> OK, so this isn't Kansas City, but Honolulu: Unfortunately, wheter monorail or standard rail, the size of the gideway will be about the same. Basically, you have a box carrying people that will end up being 9 to 10 feet wide, two of them side by side, plus reasonable space between them, plus room for a walkway on each side, plus a solid wall high enough to provide reasonable shielding of the noise. This gives you a structure that will be about 35 feet wide regardless of what supports the vehicles.
> You say, but the Seattle monorail does not have walkways along it. True, but it was built before the FTA decreed that there must be continuous evacuation walkways alongside transit lines. It could not be built today in the form that it currently has.


You don't necessarily need double track, it has been done in single track.


----------



## Green Maned Lion (Nov 7, 2008)

PetalumaLoco said:


> Keep trying to pass this.
> Here in Calif, Sonoma and Marin counties _finally_ passed the SMART light commuter rail transit initiative after failing to pass by 2/3 vote in 2006. We'll have ours running by 2014. Don't give up!
> 
> Here's a link to what we're buying.
> ...


Those look like CRCs. Thats bad, because they are not doing too well.


----------



## AlanB (Nov 7, 2008)

George Harris said:


> OK, so this isn't Kansas City, but Honolulu: Unfortunately, wheter monorail or standard rail, the size of the gideway will be about the same. Basically, you have a box carrying people that will end up being 9 to 10 feet wide, two of them side by side, plus reasonable space between them, plus room for a walkway on each side, plus a solid wall high enough to provide reasonable shielding of the noise. This gives you a structure that will be about 35 feet wide regardless of what supports the vehicles.


Just put one walkway in the middle, no need for two.

As for noise, the noisiest thing on the monorail is the AC, and that's not very loud at all.


----------



## George Harris (Nov 7, 2008)

PetalumaLoco said:


> > You say, but the Seattle monorail does not have walkways along it. True, but it was built before the FTA decreed that there must be continuous evacuation walkways alongside transit lines. It could not be built today in the form that it currently has.
> 
> 
> You don't necessarily need double track, it has been done in single track.


Two words: Line capacity.

Alan: True. That is the way it is on both BART and WMATA. Even with that, the guideway is about 30 feet wide.


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Nov 7, 2008)

Green Maned Lion said:


> Those look like CRCs. Thats bad, because they are not doing too well.


What's a CRC? How are they not doing well?


----------



## AlanB (Nov 7, 2008)

PetalumaLoco said:


> Green Maned Lion said:
> 
> 
> > Those look like CRCs. Thats bad, because they are not doing too well.
> ...


Colorado Rail Car, a company that is trying to sell DMU's to US commuter ops and even Amtrak, that are built here in the US. But they are having big problems, lack of orders, delays in meeting the production goals of the few orders that they do have, and performance/quality issues with a few of the new cars that have been delivered.


----------



## sechs (Nov 7, 2008)

George Harris said:


> You say, but the Seattle monorail does not have walkways along it. True, but it was built before the FTA decreed that there must be continuous evacuation walkways alongside transit lines. It could not be built today in the form that it currently has.


And didn't they have that problem with the trains running into one another? Not exactly the best design.


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Nov 8, 2008)

AlanB said:


> PetalumaLoco said:
> 
> 
> > Green Maned Lion said:
> ...


Didn't know that. I'll keep my eye on what this commuter rail proposes. Thanks.


----------



## GG-1 (Nov 8, 2008)

George Harris said:


> OK, so this isn't Kansas City, but Honolulu: Unfortunately, wheter monorail or standard rail, the size of the gideway will be about the same.


Aloha

George You are correct about the with for a Monorail but as someone else noted the safety walkway can be between the Double track. But My preference for the Monorail is due to the reason the track is smaller and like Vegas the walkway is a form of grate letting more light through and in between stations considerable smaller. Also the Monorail is so much quieter than "Steel on steel" That sound masking is mostly not needed.

I understand your experience , but just think of a structure like the elevated Bart through downtown and past the harbor. I believe a Vegas Structure would be much nicer, As long as we don't copy their mistakes, and build more like Orlando Florida and the green around theirs.

But Let us hope Honolulu gets off its ... and finally does something for its future.

Mahalo

Eric


----------



## chertling (Nov 11, 2008)

DaveKCMO said:


> what is north kansas city's plan to deal with their vote? will the council repeal?


I was able to speak with our City Legal Counsel this evening prior to our council meeting regarding Light Rail and where we go from here...

By law, since the voters approved the North Kansas City Light Rail Transit Development District, the City MUST take action to create the district. However, the TDD (which will be a separate governmental body) will be under no obligation to levy the 1/2 cent sales tax at this time. In fact the TDD will not be able to levy the voter approved tax until there is a workable plan for Light Rail that meets the specifications in the language that was approved by the voters (IE: a line that runs north-south roughly following Burlington or Swift)

At this time, we are awaiting KCMO's next move. If there is another attempt at a "Starter Line", North Kansas City's funding is already secured. If the voters approve a true regional plan, funded by county-level sales taxes, the NKC Light Rail TDD would become redundant and could be dissolved.


----------



## Guest (Nov 12, 2008)

PetalumaLoco said:


> Keep trying to pass this.
> Here in Calif, Sonoma and Marin counties _finally_ passed the SMART light commuter rail transit initiative after failing to pass by 2/3 vote in 2006. We'll have ours running by 2014. Don't give up!
> 
> Here's a link to what we're buying.
> ...


My understanding is that SMART intends to use non-FRA compliant DMUs, similar to on the Sprinter line north of San Diego. Given small capacity (two-car trains), passenger-only right of way, non-FRA multiple-unit trains, and frequent service, it seems reasonable to call SMART (and Sprinter) "light rail" even if they are also in many ways "commuter rail".


----------



## PetalumaLoco (Nov 12, 2008)

Guest said:


> PetalumaLoco said:
> 
> 
> > Keep trying to pass this.
> ...


I see what you're saying, good point.


----------

