Transit Action Network (TAN)

Advocates for Improved and Expanded Transit in the Kansas City Region.

Archive for July, 2014

Sense or Nonsense? Streetcars and Development

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 31, 2014


There is a lot of talk about the streetcar generating development. The following information attempts to shed light on this issue. Answers have been gleaned from the sources indicated below.

This article will be updated periodically as we become aware of additional information and the series will be available on the website under the tab “Special Topics” – Sense or Nonsense?

Construction along Cleveland's Health Line

Construction along Cleveland’s Health Line

Only light rail systems generate development.

Thumbs downNOT SO.

 As the photo of the Cleveland Bus Rapid Transit system makes clear, development can be encouraged by any form of mass transit, whether light rail, streetcar or bus-rapid-transit. More important than the transit mode, keys to development around transit are additional government incentives. These are most typically in the form of rezoning and traditional development subsidies, but can also include tangible improvements such as streetscaping, in the case of Cleveland, or Denver’s $1.4 billion redevelopment of their Union Station as a transit and commercial hub.

****

Sources:

 Streetcars

1. System(s) studied: Streetcars in Tampa, Seattle and Portland

Summary of findings: Vacant and underdeveloped land just beyond walking distance to the city center offers the most potential for appreciation. However, much depends on local conditions. The increase in average property values along the Tampa streetcar, although large, were less than increases in the county as a whole. A large component of property appreciation is the effect of rezoning to higher use. In the case of Seattle and Portland increases in value were due to a major development project in each city which included development of a streetcar along with other infrastructure, and up-zoning of a large swath of under utilized land.

Institution: Center for Transit Oriented Development, Reconnecting America

Contact: http://www.ctod.org/

Title: “Value Capture and Tax-Increment Financing Options for Streetcar Construction”

Authors: Not given, Date: circa 2009

Cleveland's BRT-1

Cleveland’s BRT

Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) – Yes, MAX style buses can be used effectively for development. 

(Listed in chronological order of publication.)

2. System(s) studied: 21 different systems including the Kansas City MAX (BRT), Cleveland HealthLine (BRT), Portland MAX (light rail), Portland Streetcar, Seattle South Lake Union Streetcar, and 16 more.

Summary of findings: Strongest predictor of success in achieving development around transit is government support – financial, regulatory and marketing. The second most important factor is the strength of the land market surrounding the transit corridor prior to the introduction of new transit service. Light rail, streetcars and Bus Rapid Transit can all stimulate major investment in a corridor. But, Bus Rapid Transit is far more cost-effective.

Institution: Institute for Transportation and Development Policy

Contact: (212) 629-8001, www.itdp.org

Title: More Development For Your Transit Dollar, an Analysis of 21 North American Transit Corridors

Authors: Walter Hook, Stephanie Lotshaw, and Annie Weinstock, Date: 2013

3. System(s) studied:. Cleveland HealthLine, Bus Rapid Transit

Summary of findings: The HealthLine has been a catalyst for development along the route. A key factor was designing the system with amenities more typical of light rail systems and upgrading the streetscape all along the route.

Institution: Urban Land Institute

Contact: Trisha Riggs, Vice President of Communications: 202-624-7086; e-mail: priggs@uli.org

Title: “HealthLine Drives Growth in Cleveland”, in “UrbanLand”

Authors: Jason Hellendrung, Date: July 13, 2012

Cleveland's BRT - 2

Cleveland’s BRT – Amenities at Station

4. System(s) studied: BRT in Seoul, South Korea

Summary of findings: “Land price premiums of up to 10% were estimated for residences within 300 m of BRT stops and more than 25% for retail and other non-residential uses over a  smaller impact zone of 150 m. The research findings underscore the importance of introducing zoning and other land regulatory changes prior to the initiation of BRT improvements….”

Institution: Elsevier

Contact: Tel.: +1 510 642 1695; fax: +1 520 642 1641

Title: ” Bus rapid transit impacts on land uses and land values in Seoul, Korea”, in “Transport Policy”

Authors: Robert Cervero, Chang Deok Kang, Date: 2011

5. System(s) studied: Boston, Silver Line BRT

Summary of findings: BRT generated an average price premium on the sale price of condominiums along the route of 7.6% – comparable to what is seen for light rail.

Institution: Federal Transit Administration / University of South Florida, National Bus Rapid Transit Institute

Contact: National Bus Rapid Transit Institute, http://www.nbrti.org

Title: “Land Use Impacts of Bus Rapid Transit: Phase II….”

Authors: Victoria A. Perk, Martin Catala, Steven Reader, Ph.D, Date: July 2012

6. System(s) studied: Pittsburg, BRT

Summary of findings: Values of single-family homes increase as the property gets closer to a BRT station.

Institution: Federal Transit Administration / University of South Florida, National Bus Rapid Transit Institute

Contact: National Bus Rapid Transit Institute, http://www.nbrti.org

Title: “Land Use Impacts of Bus Rapid Transit: Effects of BRT Station Proximity….”

Authors: Victoria A. Perk, Martin Catala, Date: December 2009

Contributor: Mark McDowell

 

 

Advertisements

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Rail, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Video, Podcasts, Cartoon – VOTE NO On MO Amendment 7

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 30, 2014


Votenoon 7 billboardThe Missouri election on a 10-year 3/4 percent sales tax increase for transportation is next Tuesday August 5th.

Missourians for Better Transportation Solutions recorded this video about the bill. http://bit.ly/1qIbeJL

Recent radio show podcasts discussing the election:

KCUR 89.3 FM July 28: Examining Tax Proposals In Missouri (second half is on Amendment 7- first half is on KC streetcar election)  http://kcur.org/post/examining-tax-proposals-missouri

KKFI 90.1 FM Community Radio,  July 22:  Mo Amendment 7 – Not All Taxes Are Created Equal http://content.blubrry.com/kkfi901fm/RadioActive_Magazine_2014-07-22.mp3 (Correction: The widening of Interstate 70 across rural Missouri remains the most expensive item in the project list. This project would receive $500 million (not $500,000) from this tax, with the rest of the $1.5 billion cost coming from existing revenue sources. The $1 billion that is already identified is enough to re-build I-70.)

Transit Action Network believes we shouldn’t pass a constitutional amendment to radically change the way we pay for roads and bridges. Section 30 of the Missouri Constitution states clearly that transportation projects are to be paid for with gas taxes, sales taxes on vehicle purchases, and vehicle license fees. We shouldn’t pay for roads based on how much we shop instead of how much we drive. Don’t let trucks off the hook. The trucking industry won’t pay hardly any additional taxes to fix roads and bridges based on this bill, yet they do the most damage. Missouri sales tax for everyone else will increase 18%.

What happens to the difference between money collected and money spent on approved projects? 

There is a $1.3 billion difference between the $4.8 billion project list MoDOT put together to spend the receipts of this sales tax and the $6.1 billion of revenue Governor Nixon predicts the tax will generate. Our understanding is that MoDOT did not calculate any increase in the yearly sales tax revenue for the whole 10 years, which is an extremely conservative approach for estimating the revenue generated from this tax. Governor Nixon averaged a yearly 1.5% increase, which seems reasonable. In the bill HJR 68, which is what we are voting on with Amendment 7, our legislators instructed MoDOT to create a list of approved projects, to be paid for by this tax, to put before the voters. Once MoDOT runs out of that list, what happens to any remaining money, since the bill says it can’t be transferred to another account?

Transit Action Network asked BOB BRENDEL, Special Assignments Coordinator for MoDOT and he replied,According to the language in Amendment 7, revenues will be distributed into three funds: County Aid Transportation Fund, Municipal Aid Transportation Fund, and the Transportation Safety and Job Creation Fund. In the event there are additional funds available beyond the estimated amount, the funds would be distributed across the state based on the approved distribution formula.” In other words, MoDOT can build whatever it pleases with potentially an additional $1 billion, not just the approved projects.  That is not what legislators intended. Passing this bill may give MoDOT up to 1/6 of the tax money to build whatever it wants.

So why is the sales tax increase so much? MoDOT Director Dave Nichols says he needs an annual construction budget (i.e., the money over and above routine operations like mowing and maintaining signs and signals and such, to replace worn-out sections of roads and bridges) of $485 million, and that beginning in 2017 MoDOT expects to have only $325 million.  That’s a shortfall of just $160 million annually, yet Amendment 7 would give MoDOT nearly three times that amount.  Why so much? Ask the highway construction lobby!NO ON 7

Cartoon: http://bit.ly/1mUDpNc

Governor Nixon’s statement: ” We can all agree on the need for a robust discussion about Missouri’s long-term transportation infrastructure needs. Along with a highly-skilled workforce, quality schools, and healthy communities, well-maintained roads and bridges are key to our economic competitiveness.  However, any proposal to change how we fund transportation must be considered in the context of the overall tax policy of our state and funding for other priorities like education.”

Full text of Governor’s statement: http://governor.mo.gov/news/archive/gov-nixon-issues-statement-transportation-tax

 See Missourians For Better Transportation Solutions website for more information. http://www.votenoamendment7.com
Previous TAN article with more information and links. :http://wp.me/pV5fE-2pS

Posted in Action, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Sense or Nonsense? Streetcars and Increased Property Values

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 29, 2014


There is a lot of talk about the streetcar increasing property values. The following information attempts to shed light on this issue. Answers have been gleaned from the sources indicated below.

This article will be updated periodically as we become aware of additional information and the series will be available on the website under the tab “Special Topics” – Sense or Nonsense?

Does rail increase property values?

 Thumbs-upMAKES SENSE

Generally, streetcars and light rail increase property values for 1/4 to 1/2 mile around stops. The greatest beneficiaries are residential properties and properties that are rezoned to higher use (for example from “light industrial” to “multi-story office”). The extent of increase is dependent on many extraneous factors as well. Likewise, because rail is just one of the factors that affect property values, other areas of a city may see greater appreciation than those served by rail.The extent of increase is dependent on many extraneous factors as well. Likewise, because rail is just one of the factors that affect property values, other areas of a city may see greater appreciation than those served by rail. There is some evidence that the extent of value appreciation is tied to savings from reduction in transit time of the rail mode compared with alternative modes. Rail typically decreases property values along the right-of-way between stops, but to a small extent. Streetcars may have stops sufficiently close together so that every property is located near a stop.

****

Sources:

Streetcar Study:

1. System(s) studied: Streetcars in Tampa, Seattle and Portland

Summary of findings: Vacant and underdeveloped land just beyond walking distance to the city center offers the most potential for appreciation. However, much depends on local conditions. The increase in average property values along the Tampa streetcar, although large, was less than increases in the county as a whole. A large component of property appreciation is the effect of rezoning to higher use. In the case of Seattle and Portland increases in value were affected by major development projects in each city. In Portland this included large infrastructure investments including streets, sewers and utilities, along with a streetcar, and rezoning of an abandoned rail yard. In Seattle it was affected by the rezoning of six blocks of light industrial properties to multi-story office and the commitment of Amazon to build eleven office buildings on the site.Portland illustration hope-2

Institution: Center for Transit Oriented Development, Reconnecting America

Contact: http://www.ctod.org/

Title: “Value Capture and Tax-Increment Financing Options for Streetcar Construction”

Authors: Not given, Date: circa 2009

Light Rail Studies:

Listed in chronological order of publication -newest studies first

2. System(s) studied: Hudson – Bergen light rail (New Jersey)

Summary of findings: This was a longitudinal study looking at resale values over a seventeen-year period. Properties near stations had high property value appreciation. Properties along the line away from stations experienced lower than average appreciation.

Institution: Transportation Research Board

Contact: Transportation Research Board, 500 Fifth Street NW, Washington, DC 20001

Title: “The Impact of Hudson-Bergen Light Rail on Residential Property Values”

Authors: Kyeongsu Kim and Michael L. Lahr, Date: 2011

3. System(s) studied: River Line (rail using DMU’s in New Jersey)

Summary of findings: Line is highly successful with ridership near capacity. Nevertheless the impact on property values is neutral to slightly negative with residences in low-income census tracks near stations appreciating while more distant properties showing no or negative changes.

Institution: University of California

Contact: dgc@berkeley.edu

Title: “Evaluating the Economic Impacts of Light Rail by Measuring Home Appreciation: A First Look at New Jersey’s River Line”

Authors: Daniel G. Chapman, Nicholas K. Tulach, Kyeongsu Kim, Date: May 25, 2011

4. System(s) studied: Charlotte light rail

Summary of findings: Study looked at neighborhoods around light rail stops rather than just areas close to stops. Light rail resulted in neighborhood value increases for up to a mile from stops. There was no impact on commercial properties.

Institution: University of North Carolina-Charlotte

Contact: stephen.billings@uncc.edu

Title: “Estimating Value of a New Transit Option”

Authors: Stephen B. Billings, Date: March 15, 2011

5. System(s) studied: Minneapolis Hiawatha Line (light rail)

Summary of findings: Residential, both single and multi-family, near stations on the west side of the line saw significant increase in property values after the 2004 opening. The east side of the line is comprised largely of industrial properties, which saw no increase in value.

Institution: University Of Minnesota, Center for Transportation Studies

Contact: NA

Title: “The Hiawatha Line: Impacts on Land Use and Residential Housing Value”

Authors: Edward G. Goetz, Kate Ko, Aaron Hagar, Hoang Ton, Jeff Matson, Date: Feb. 2010

6. System(s) studied: Sacramento Light Rail

Summary of findings: No relationship between property values and proximity to a light rail station or line.

Institution: Bay Area Economics

Contact: Taiwo Jaiyeoba, (916) 557-4536, Alexander Quinn (530) 750-2195

Title: “Sacramento RT Economic Impacts of Light Rail”

Authors: Bay Area Economics, Date: September 8, 2005

7. System(s) studied: Portland Light Rail

Summary of findings: “….there have been some positive effects of rail on single-family  property values.”

Institution: Center for Urban Studies, Portland State University

Contact: (503) 725-4020

Title: “Effects of Light Rail Transit in Portland, Implications for Transit Oriented Development Design Concepts”

Authors: Kenneth J Dueker (duekerk@pdx.edu), Martha J. Blanco (martha@upa.pdx.edu), Date: 1998

Multi-modal studies:

8. System(s) studied: Meta-study of earlier studies of 7 rail systems including BART (San Francisco, heavy rail), Metrorail (Miami-Dade County, heavy rail), PATCO (New Jersey, heavy rail), SEPTA (Philadelphia; commuter rail), MAX light rail (Portland), MARTA (Atlanta, heavy rail), Spadina Ave. line (Toronto, streetcar); plus one narrowly focused study of five systems in Northern California

Summary of findings: Rail systems increase property values. A residence will most likely increase in value if it is in a lower to middle income, stable neighborhood, and within 1/4 to 1/2 mile of a station but not adjacent to a station. The more extensive the rail system, the larger the increase in property values. The amount of increase in property values is closely tied to the time savings of rail versus other transportation alternatives.

Institution: Booze Allen Hamilton Inc.

Contact: Roderick B. Diaz

Title: Conference Proceedings Paper; American Public Transit Association Rapid Transit Conference

Authors: Roderick B. Diaz, Date: May 1999

Contributor: Mark McDowell

 

Posted in Local Transit Issues, Rail, Regional Transit Issue | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

Transit Talk July 22- Not All Taxes are Created Equal – Vote No On Amendment 7

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 22, 2014


KKFI 90.1 FMTransit Action Network discusses the Missouri 10-year 3/4 percent Amendment 7 Transportation Sales Tax on KKFI 90.1 FM Community Radio with public policy specialist and transit advocate Sheila Styron of the Whole Person, Linda Smith, President of the League of Women Voters and David Kingsley, retired statistics professor from the department of health policy & management at Kansas University Medical Center.

When Tuesday, July 22 at 6 pm

Where: KKFI 90.1 FM Community Radio, Radio Active Magazine (They also stream live) KKFI.org

Podcast of show: http://content.blubrry.com/kkfi901fm/RadioActive_Magazine_2014-07-22.mp3 (Correction: The widening of Interstate 70 across Missouri remains the most expensive item in the project list. It would receive $500 million (not $500,000) from this tax, with the rest of the $1.5 billion cost coming from existing revenue sources.

HJR 68 Full text of bill, which is both a sales and use tax increase and on the Aug 5th ballot. HJR68

Not all taxes are created equal. The idea that we should pay for roads based on how much we shop rather than how much we drive is a radical change on how we pay for roads and bridges. Find out why you should Vote No on this state sales tax for transportation.

Anyone wondering why this sales tax is a constitutional amendment needs to understand that the state is really trying to change the way we pay for road work, by pushing the tax  burden onto  middle and low-income individuals, working families and seniors, instead of the main users of roads, the trucking industry.  Currently Section 30 of the Missouri Constitution states clearly that transportation projects are to be paid for with gas taxes, sales taxes on vehicle purchases, and vehicle license fees.

Why don’t we raise the fuel taxes since Missouri has had this level since 1996?

fuel taxes

Changing to a sales tax gives the trucking industry a free ride even though they use the roads the most and do the most damage. Trucking corporations don’t even pay a sales tax when they purchase a truck in Missouri since they have an exemption. In addition, the heavy construction industry has lobbied heavily for this bill since it would continue the unprecedented amount of roadwork MoDOT has been doing using federal stimulus money.

This is the largest tax increase in Missouri history, $6.1 billion dollars, and the Missouri sales tax will rise 18% from 4.225% to 4.975%. Total state and local taxes will be over 11% in many places. This combined rate is already 14th highest in the nation and this increase will put us 9th in the nation (ahead of Illinois and just behind New York and California).NO ON 7

We agree with Governor Nixon in our opposition to this bill and  “on the need for a robust discussion about Missouri’s long-term transportation infrastructure needs.”  Governor’s position https://governor.mo.gov/news/archive/gov-nixon-issues-statement-transportation-tax

Missourians for Better Transportation Solutions, www.votenoamendment7.com, which we joined for this effort, along with over 40 groups and individuals, put together a list of reasons to vote against the bill.

Reasons to Vote No On Amendment 7

Summary from this document

  • The tax unfair – Trucking Industry gets a free ride
  • The tax is excessive – largest increase in our history
  • This is the wrong investment for Missouri – The recent binge in highway construction hasn’t created significant economic development
  • Amendment 7 is bad for Missouri Investment – total combined sales tax will be above 10% many places creating further incentive for internet purchases and a lost of revenue for local businesses.

One reason to be against Amendment 7 we rarely see mentioned is how bad it is for cities and counties. Although the state has multiple taxing methods it can use to pay for needs, cities don’t, and adding a ¾ percent sales tax from Missouri cripples the ability of local governments to raise sales taxes for local needs, like police and fire departments. In fact, politicians and planning agencies all over the state rejected this idea of a sales tax for roads earlier this year, when lobbied to support an initiative petition to do this same thing.  After being rejected statewide, the lobbyists convinced our elected officials in Jeff City to put this sales tax on the ballot anyway.

Good articles explaining why you should VOTE NO ON 7

Terry Garney ‘s article in the Columbia Daily Tribune addresses the “radical departure from the way Missouri pays for roads.”

“ The amendment would make Missouri’s average combined state and local sales tax rates among the highest in the nation, exceeding 11 percent in some areas. The statewide average would be ninth-highest in the nation.”   http://bit.ly/1qt5oeY

***

Jim Fitzpatrick in Kansas City has published two insightful blogs about the campaign http://bit.ly/1qwrqxt and http://bit.ly/1mhAduT

“This time, I’m sorry to say, Freedom Inc. sold out to the Heavy Constructors, commonly called “the heavies.” They’re called that for more than the obvious contraction of their name. They bring a lot of political pressure to bear in any number of places, including the Missouri General Assembly, which voted to put Amendment 7 on the ballot.”

“That (gas) tax has stood at 17 cents a gallon – sixth lowest in the nation as of last year — since 1996, or almost 20 years. If the Missouri General Assembly and the “concrete cartel” (essentially, the heavy constructors, the engineering companies and the materials suppliers) want to raise more money for transportation needs, they should come back to us with a proposal to raise the gas tax.”

***

The Show-Me Institute has written an op-ed about why they are against Amendment 7. The Southeast Missourian ran a version of it http://bit.ly/UkMyHO. Someone remarked that it is rare when Governor Nixon and the Show-Me Institute agree on something.

Anticipating the funding bonanza, local governments around the state have put forward wish lists that would tap into sales tax money. Rather than confining themselves to critical transportation needs, cities and counties put forward lists filled with expensive wants.”

“Paying for highways based on how much people shop, and not how much they drive, creates a free-rider problem. It promotes congestion, road degradation, and sprawl. It also is fundamentally unfair to force occasional drivers to pay as much or more for new roads as interstate trucking companies.”

***

Good Roads MO (http://www.goodroadsformo.org/) continues to have good information on their website.

“This new tax would again divert sales taxes to rural areas while most of the taxes are paid by urban Missourians. The distribution of the tax to local governments is heavily weighted based on rural land value.

“Missouri’s combined state and local sales tax rates are already the 14th highest in the country. Should Amendment 7 be approved, Missouri will have the 9th highest sales tax rate in the nation (ahead of states like Illinois, just behind states like New York and California). ”

***

Transit Action Network supports well-maintained and safe roads and bridges, good transit and bike and pedestrian facilities, but we reject paying for them with a huge sales tax increase.  Not only is a sales tax the WRONG Tax for paying for roads and bridges but are all of the projects really needed?

Just because MoDOT and regional planners had a feeding frenzy piling on projects, doesn’t mean all the projects are needed or should be paid for at the state level. For instance, vehicle traffic on I-70 is down 9% from its peak in 2005-2006.  Do we really need to subsidize the trucking industry so they can have 6 lanes across rural Missouri? Afterall, the trucking industry will pay next to nothing for all this roadwork if we pass this sales tax. Instead the tax burden will fall on middle and lowe-income individuals.

Although we can’t speak for the project lists from the rest of the regions, we feel the transit portion of the Kansas City region was hijacked.

Here is how MoDOT explained the process to choose projects.

“After incredible feedback from Missourians across the state, MoDOT and planning partners (Mid-America Regional Council – MARC in the KC region) have finalized a list of regional and community priorities that would be completed if Amendment 7 were to pass. Each region’s list of priority projects reflects the local needs as communicated by citizens and local leaders. “

However for the KC transit portion of the list, that is not what happened.

Here is the list the citizens and local leaders came up with through public meetings for  Transportation Outlook 2040 (Region’s Long-range Transportation Plan) , the Regional Transit  Coordinating Council (RTCC) and the Total Transportation Policy Committee (TTPC).Original KC_Regional_Trans_Priorities

During all three of these open and transparent meetings Kansas City had the opportunity to make the case that the Streetcar expansion was more valuable to the community than most of the projects and the streetcar should replace the vast array of projects spread around the region. They never made that case.

At RTCC, when the streetcar wasn’t even listed, KCMO asked for a token $5 million, which the group granted. Over the weekend, the city started its behind closed door campaign and got MARC to move the amount to $32 million, which is what you see on the list TTPC approved. This list was sent to MoDOT to reflect the local needs.

As MoDOT reviewed the list, they had closed-door meetings with Kansas City, and together, maybe with others, eliminated most of the original transit projects, and replaced them with $124 million for the KC Streetcar Expansion plan and reduced transit dollars from 30% to 26% with the difference going to more roads.  Many of the projects are good and need to be done with alternative funding to a sales tax,  but the region’s priorities should have been honored instead of cutting deals for support.

MoDOT’s final project list for KC region. Compare it to the original list.

http://www.modot.org/MovingForward/Regions/documents/FINALDistrictProjectList-KC.pdf

With this change, Mayor James decided to support of this unfair, unjust bill. We understand people with political power will use it, but rarely is it done in such a blatant, aggressive manner. MARC, all the other regional partners and the original transit project list were totally pushed aside and MoDOT and Kansas City  “made sure” the new list was approved at MARC.

Some specific projects that were eliminated so Kansas City could take most of the money for the streetcar expansion  

$11 million for mobility management including “Coordination of Paratransit Services (for the disabled)

$13.5 Million for “Regional/KCATA Downtown Transit Center/Super Stops (KCATA just had public meetings for this planned improvement)

Urban Corridor program (new MAX lines)

  • $16.5 million North Oak-CBD to Barry Rd or MO 152 (Northland misses out again)
  • $8.5 million Independence Ave – CBD into Eastern Jackson County

Trails

Decrease of $36 million – Purchase and construction of Rock Island ROW for the Katy trail-not enough money to pay for it now.

***

Most people who are for this bill are either connected to the construction or trucking industry, believe the projects are so important that the taxing method doesn’t matter to them, they are afraid this is the only way to get money, or they are getting a project they want so badly that they hold their nose and vote for a sales tax anyway. None of these reasons are valid reasons to saddle the whole state with a huge inappropriate, unfair tax for 10 years.

Posted in Events | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

Attend Public Meetings – Redesigning Downtown KC Transit – July 17

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 14, 2014


redesign_downtown_transitKCATA is working on a comprehensive long-term downtown transit plan and they want your input. Brief presentations will introduce the downtown service concept to simplify and enhance transit options for downtown transit customers.KCATA

KCATA is proposing new/improved transit centers at 3rd and Grand, Crown Center/Union Station, West Center Loop and East Village, as well as changes to 35 different routes.

Map of Downtown Concept

Map of Downtown Concept

They want to create a more intuitive, faster, and integrated system including:

  • Transit emphasis corridors along Grand Blvd. (north and south) and 11th and 12th streets (east and west)
  • Dedicated bus lanes and improved transit stations
  • Two new transit hubs

Learn more, ask questions and tell them what do you think.

Attend: Public Community Meetings — Two meetings are being held

When: July 17, 2014

Meeting 1:

Time: 11:30am – 1pm

Where:Kansas City Central Library
Multipurpose Room, Vault Level
14 W. 10th Street, Kansas City, MO

Brief presentation at 11:45 a.m. and 12:45 p.m. followed by open house format. Parking garage at 10th & Baltimore

Meeting 2:

Time: 5 – 6:30pm

 Where: Kansas City Design Center
1018 Baltimore, Kansas City, MO

Brief presentation at 5:15 p.m. followed by open house format. On-street parking available

Fro more information and suggested transit routes to the meetings:  KCATA Downtown Service Improvement Concept

Print and post the invitation: invitation KC downtown transit

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues | Tagged: , | Leave a Comment »

Transit Talk July 8 Upcoming KC Streetcar/MAX Election KKFI 90.1FM

Posted by Transit Action Network on July 7, 2014


KKFI 90.1 FMTransit Action Network interviews Councilman Russ Johnson and KCATA Director of System Development, Dick Jarrold, about the upcoming election on August 5. In-depth discussion of the ballot for the proposed expansion of the KC streetcar system and the Prospect Avenue Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)/ MAX. The discussion will focus on how the streetcar plan differs from light rail and the MAX, what is a Transportation Development District, what is actually on  the ballot and why the ballot language differs so much from the streetcar recommendations adopted by the city.streetcar

When: Tuesday, July 8 at 6 pm

Where: KKFI 90.1 FM Community Radio

Podcast of show: Radio Active Magazine for July 8

The streetcar/MAX question is the last item on the August 5th ballot and although the ballot looks very long, several pages describe the boundaries of the Transportation Development District (TDD) (much easier to see in the picture) and several pages describe the types of taxes allowed and the maximum tax rates that can be applied, if the city gets enough money  (TDD taxes and assessments plus Federal match plus additional sources) to build a “substantial” portion of the project.

TDD boundary and proposed routes

Ballot, Resolution,Transit Studies and Interactive Map

Aug 5, 2014 Ballot (from KC election board) in parts of Kansas City, Missouri 08.05.14_sample_ballot_ISSUES

Resolution passed by city council regarding streetcar expansion Resolution 140227

SW corner of TDD

SW corner of TDD

Next Rail Final Expansion Report

Prospect MAX Final Planning Report June 2014

Link to Interactive map to identify properties (blue on the map) in the potential property assessment area (1/3 mile from potential tracks)

A summary of the KC streetcar/MAX election on August 5th:

No taxes will be collected as a result of the August 5th election for the KC streetcar expansion plan. No tax rates are even authorized for future collection.

This election sets up a taxing district and potential tax rates. If the first vote passes, then a second election on November 4th will set actual tax rates and authorize collection of  taxes.

If passed, this election would:

  1. Create the Kansas City Urban Rail Transportation Development District (TDD)
  2. Create a list of potential taxing methods –Sales tax, property assessment, and surface parking lot assessment
  3. Define the boundaries for the whole district for the potential sales tax
    1. Maximum sales tax rate is 1 percent
  4. Define the smaller boundary for the potential real property assessment (maximum of 1/3 mile from the tracks)
  5. Define potential real property assessment rates and identify which groups would pay those ratesTDD_local_revenue_sources
    1. Residential – Maximum yearly property assessment for a $100,000 property is $133
    2. Commercial – Maximum yearly property assessment for $1 million property is $1,540
    3. Kansas City – Maximum yearly property assessment for $1 million property is $3,328
    4. Non-profits, including churches and schools – Maximum yearly property assessment for $1 million property is $896 (property value of $300,000 or less pays $0)
  6. Limit the transit projects that can be built in the district and describe their general location
    1. Streetcars or light/rail and a new MAX line
    2. Generally on Main Street, Independence Ave, and Linwood Blvd. for the streetcar and Prospect Ave and 12th Street for the MAX
    3. Length of the routes or the farthest eastern or southern stops are not identified or guaranteed
  7. Create a new Board of Directors of the District
  8. Restrict collection of the taxes until the new TDD Board decides sufficient funds are collected to build a “substantial amount of the project”.
    1. Substantial is not defined
  9. If both elections pass, then the Downtown Streetcar TDD will be abolished and absorbed into this new district.

 

 

Posted in Events, Local Transit Issues | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »