KC Light Rail

Ordinance 080693 for the KCMO light rail starter line advanced from today's Transportation & Infrastructure Committee and is on its way to the full council. Approval is expected since all of the councilmembers have signed on as co-sponsors and route compromises enabled total concensus. This moves Kansas City another step closer to the 3/8-cent sales tax question appearing on the November ballot. Now all that's left is council approval — likely next week — before the Aug. 26 ballot deadline.

Some changes were made to the ballot language, basically codifying the route in the actual ballot language (versus leaving it in the separate non-binding resolution):

For the purpose of funding a light rail passenger system running from the area around the intersection of Bruce R. Watkins Roadway and 63rd Street on the south to the area around the intersection of Northeast Vivion Road and North Oak Trafficway on the north, which can ultimately connect to a regional public transportation system, shall the City of Kansas City impose a sales tax of 1/4 % under the authority of Section 94.577, RSMo, and a sales tax of 1/8 % under the authority of Section 94.600, RSMo, both for a period not to exceed 25 years, beginning April 1, 2009, and which may include the retirement of debt under authorized bonded indebtedness?

UPDATE: Here's The Star's coverage of today's meeting.

This update from last week's third regional transit summit poses an interesting dilemma: at what cost rail? On one side, the normally pragmatic Mayor Funkhouser pushes for commuter rail and on the other side suburban mayors push for new bus service. Both will take some time to implement, as the waiting list for new buses has jumped to nearly two years due to crushing demand. Commuter rail, on the other hand, isn't experiencing quite the mad dash due to the higher capital cost and limited number of systems up and running.

Opponents of commuter rail cite:
- higher capital cost
- limited route options
- demand for existing bus service
- freight railroad insistence on expensive capacity upgrades
- freight congestion
- encouragement of sprawl and limited development potential

Proponents of commuter rail cite:
- higher fuel efficiency and similar operational costs as a bus
- higher passenger capacity per trip than buses
- limited exposure to severe weather and traffic congestion
- potential for electrification
- willingness of at least one freight railroad (KC Southern) to be a partner
- acknowledgment of sprawl

What do you think? Share your thoughts in the comments section.

Councilman Russ Johnson will introduce a compromise tomorrow for the proposed starter line that will extend the current terminus from Brush Creek to 63rd Street along Bruce R. Watkins Drive. The effort is intended to secure support from the other council districts that aren't as well served by the route as the 2nd and 4th districts. While at first it may appear to be a "me too" grab, there are true benefits to terminating at 63rd (although they're not the ones you're hearing about):

- Directly serves Research Medical Center
- A potential shot in the arm for the struggling Citadel Plaza project and the Kansas City Zoo
- Utilization of reserved light rail ROW along Watkins Drive

What you are hearing is grandstanding from the 3rd, 5th, and 6th districts about transit-dependent populations and decades of economic neglect. While those are both undeniably true, they won't affect the federal decision-making process as much as job and population density.

So how will we pay for the extra two miles? The Star article references some potential cuts, but we're hoping a successful spring vote for regional funding makes that unnecessary.

And no, the gas tax doesn't cover the entire cost. Get the full report here (hat tip to Streetsblog).

It's almost too good to be true: Could we be voting on a regional transit plan by spring? Prime Buzz has the update. Take note that the next regional discussion (8:30 a.m. Friday) will have time set aside for public comment.

Prime Buzz has a good recap of the operational and cost details from this week's light rail presentations to the City Council. We've added a few more details that were mentioned that didn't make their post:

– The new 3/8-cent tax would be exempt from TIF.
– Operation would not require any general fund support.
– Construction would not require the city to issue or back any of the project's debt.
– Cost estimates represent the 5-10% design level.
– Project costs include construction of a BRT line on Prospect (so by the time construction is complete the line will be fed by at least three BRT lines — State, Troost, and Prospect avenues).
– Locations for a 15-acre maintenance facility have been scouted, but no final decisions made.
– Platforms will be limited to hosting 2-car trains, so any increase in capacity would require shorter headways (not longer trains).
– North Kansas City has indicated they may synchronize their sales tax vote with KCMO.
– Ridership estimates will be available prior to the November vote.
– The Downtown Council was present to confirm their support for the project.

No indication of when any of this information will be formally released to the public or even when it will appear on the KCATA light rail website (which hasn't been updated since April?).