How to Pay for Skyway Extension

Started by dougskiles, May 24, 2013, 05:37:21 PM

Charles Hunter

Quote from: dougskiles on May 25, 2013, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on May 25, 2013, 05:41:39 PM
As to the premise of a regional tax, that's the job of the newly created Regional Transportation Commission

So they just automatically have enough taxing authority to fund a regional transit system?

Or do they have to go out and sell the idea to the member counties?

They would have to sell the idea to the voters in the member counties. 
The Legislature could give them the authority to levy taxes without referendum, or vote by the member County Commissions, but in this anti-tax environment, that seems quite unlikely.  The Legislature wouldn't even let Miami-Dade (or someone) hold a referendum on raising their own taxes.

Ocklawaha

The width and height kills it without a major rebuilding of bridge piers under the Acosta at Riverside, no doubt it can be done but it's going to be expensive. Just a glance at those dimensions indicate that we'd be anywhere from a 1.3 to 2 feet off on width, and height is a great unknown as rail vehicles are measured from the top of the rail to the top of the car. In this case we need the dimensions from the roadbed to the top of the beam and the top of the cars, remember too that we'll need trolley pole clearance - though that can be quite low.

I think the idea should be looked at - which as we type JTA IS doing, but for the costs involved it might just be cheaper to go with new monorails. Either way the vehicles can be built to a unique standard in size, it's done all of the time in the EU, narrow gauge streetcars for example. American 3' foot gauge (the Z00 Ry) was once quite common, it is cheaper to build but your equipment might have to be from a off-shore design, only a couple of US plants build streetcars. Could United Streetcar or Brookville build a narrow gauge car fleet? They could do it in a heartbeat, but you'll surrender capacity while probably increasing equipment costs. On the flip side, narrow gauge is lighter, including the track which could easily be in the neighborhood of 90 pounds-to-the-yard:

Here are a few from Wiki that are common lightweights.

90 lb/yd (44.6 kg/m) (ARA)
100 lb/yd (49.6 kg/m) (AREA)
105 lb/yd (52.1 kg/m) New York Central Railroad
115 lb/yd (57.0 kg/m) (AREA)

thelakelander

#17
I think being too unique is the problem now.  You can always have something custom built but that solution will cost you an arm and a leg. Any type of conversion would be a major rebuild, considering you'd be taking out the concrete guideway and replacing it with new track.  However, I doubt width and height would significant stumbling blocks for going with some more common form of rolling stock. The key issue that would standout to me is if the rebuild is significantly more cost effective in the long run verses keeping and maintaining an obsolete AGT system that will never be truly cost feasible.
"A man who views the world the same at 50 as he did at 20 has wasted 30 years of his life." - Muhammad Ali

Ocklawaha

The main expense would be simply lifting the guide beam from the bridge deck. The main trouble spot would be under the Acosta/Riverside junction.

Actually different gauge or smaller profile cars wouldn't be as much of a deal killer as you might think. Fact is in many countries track gauges are different, even more so for 'trams.' The streetcar companies were often required to use different gauge track (Los Angeles Yellow Cars-example) to prevent them from 'stealing' the freight business from the mainline railroads. Because of that fact, virtually every car and locomotive builder in the world has a shop floor 3 to 5 rails, rather then two.

Noone

Quote from: Charles Hunter on May 25, 2013, 11:36:09 PM
Quote from: dougskiles on May 25, 2013, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on May 25, 2013, 05:41:39 PM
As to the premise of a regional tax, that's the job of the newly created Regional Transportation Commission

So they just automatically have enough taxing authority to fund a regional transit system?

Or do they have to go out and sell the idea to the member counties?

They would have to sell the idea to the voters in the member counties. 
The Legislature could give them the authority to levy taxes without referendum, or vote by the member County Commissions, but in this anti-tax environment, that seems quite unlikely.  The Legislature wouldn't even let Miami-Dade (or someone) hold a referendum on raising their own taxes.

But back To the TIF and the new DIA can do it. They have their own new Authority zone.

dougskiles

Quote from: Noone on May 26, 2013, 09:37:28 AM
Quote from: Charles Hunter on May 25, 2013, 11:36:09 PM
Quote from: dougskiles on May 25, 2013, 05:46:42 PM
Quote from: tufsu1 on May 25, 2013, 05:41:39 PM
As to the premise of a regional tax, that's the job of the newly created Regional Transportation Commission

So they just automatically have enough taxing authority to fund a regional transit system?

Or do they have to go out and sell the idea to the member counties?

They would have to sell the idea to the voters in the member counties. 
The Legislature could give them the authority to levy taxes without referendum, or vote by the member County Commissions, but in this anti-tax environment, that seems quite unlikely.  The Legislature wouldn't even let Miami-Dade (or someone) hold a referendum on raising their own taxes.

But back To the TIF and the new DIA can do it. They have their own new Authority zone.

DIA doesn't have any authority to levy new taxes.  They will be working with the current TIFs in the current downtown boundary.  What I am talking about are new TIF districts set up in the neighborhoods just be outside of downtown that would specifically set up to fund transit.