Clay Chastain coming back with light rail

[aknowledgeableperson]

okay, who's hanging mr. lever first? 10-12 years? when did st. louis start their process? the wikipedia entry for metrolink says their starter line started construction in 1990 and opened in 1993.

The trouble is we are far, far away from even starting construction.  Just look at the postings here concerning the route.  The ballot specified a route but it is not the best and probably not the one to be used.  Another election will be needed (in all probability) to change the route.  Then, of course, we have to get Federal and State funds that will take years. On and on.

[Burton]

The frou frou comment was from Cleaver in or around 1997. That wasn't connected to the light rail election five years ago. Barnes was Mayor for the 2001 vote, and she endorsed that plan. Lack of support from City Hall didn't sink that proposal.

Correct. The KC Chamber of Commerce played a big role in killing the 2001 plan.

[Tosspot]

Correct. The KC Chamber of Commerce played a big role in killing the 2001 plan.

The biggest gaggle of status quo farts this side of the Mississippi River.

[kcdcchef]

a lot of people really tend to blame emmanuel cleaver for light rail dying when in reality it was a lot more chamber and council killed then cleaver killed. cleaver could have taken his head out of his ass more on the matter, but cleaver's thinking he has said again and again was kansas citians should be more focused on reviving their urban core, an arena, bringing the p&l to fruition, not transit. in a way he was right, but the reality is we needed both.

oh well, we are one step closer folks.

[Paintfumes]

Did you know 5 years ago it would of cost $80 million to build a bridge for lightrail over the Missouri River?

It's probably alittle more than that now.  :lol:

Again thank you former Mayor Cleaver for not building a lightrail transit system. Just think, by now they would of been adding on toward the airport. 
Former Mayor Cleaver is the one who didn't want anything to do with the Liberty Memorial. 

[carfreekc]

Correct. The KC Chamber of Commerce played a big role in killing the 2001 plan.

I am pretty sure the biggest death knell came from the voters who said no.

[Burton]

I am pretty sure the biggest death knell came from the voters who said no.

I guess you don't believe that fear-mongoring exists in KC Politics? Anyways, here's the Chamber's resolution on the 2001 plan.

Resolution of The Board of Directors for The South Kansas City Chamber of Commerce

The Board of Directors for the South Kansas City Chamber of Commerce ("the Board"), assembled this 12th day of July, 2001, states as follows:

WHEREAS the Board generally supports the principles of "new urbanism" as articulated in the Focus Plan of Kansas City, Missouri and in "Creating Quality Places" and the "Principles of Transit-Supportive Development" published by the Mid-America Regional Counsel, and

That the Board is not opposed to the concept of light rail for the Kansas City area and is willing to consider supporting proposals for light rail, and

Nevertheless, that the Board has examined the light rail plan that is to be brought to a vote of the City's residents on August 7, 2001, and has the following concerns:

That the plan includes development zones that may deploy the use of eminent domain for private business which will displace current property owners and erode the property tax base for the area,

That the plan appears to lack integration as part of a metro-wide transportation vision, seems ill-suited to relieve traffic congestion, and fails to adequately serve the transportation needs of the metropolitan area and,

That the plan appears to lack a direct benefit to the South Kansas City area that is served by this chamber,

Now, therefore, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED, that the Board formally opposes the August 7th ballot proposal for a 1/2-cent sales tax for light rail.

Resolution approved by a vote of 12 in favor, none opposed, one abstaining, and five not present.

9201 Ward Parkway
Suite 100
Kansas City, Missouri 64114

(816) 361-2757
Fax (816) 361-0044
E-Mail: skccc@swbell.net

Here's the "bombing run" map that they used to scare everyone with. Typical ass-backward thinking that Transit Oriented Development zones are BAD for development. I guess they never saw the studies that the values of properties along light-rail routes go UP in value.
http://www.kansascitylightrail.com/Map2.html

[Highlander]

The trouble is we are far, far away from even starting construction.  Just look at the postings here concerning the route.  The ballot specified a route but it is not the best and probably not the one to be used.  Another election will be needed (in all probability) to change the route.  Then, of course, we have to get Federal and State funds that will take years. On and on.

This is exactly what the council states in the video (several posts earlier)....not voting on whether to do the thing or not but a need for a vote to make the absolutely necessary changes to the project.  Here is something that should be regarded as fact:  The final product, every aspect of it, will bear little resemblance to the ballot issue and there will be a myriad of challenges along the way.  Give the council a break, they are now stuck between a rock and a hard place trying to implement an impractical, poorly concieved and underfunded "plan". 

As I understand it, the council can also legally revoke the the entire plan and tax....no need to even take it back to the voters to do this.  Give them credit for at least saying at this point that they will try to implement some form of the plan.  But, implementation is going to be a painful process as neighborhoods fight it out for service from a drastically scaled back plan (shades of Watkins Drive).  Whoever said most people will just be glad to get something up and down Main does not understand how fractionalized the city can be when it comes to area-specific services.   While I am glad to see some form of light rail at least on the horizon, I am extremely concerned that this could turn into an  extremely protracted process for KCMO and the region as a whole and set back real transit in the city for years.  The PVP and gondola clauses are absolute jokes and should be the first part of this thing that are cut out.   

[DaveKCMO]

The PVP and gondola clauses are absolute jokes and should be the first part of this thing that are cut out.   

i still don't get why people are so protective of PVP. other than a few annual events, i NEVER see people use this park the way a good urban park should be used. who goes to PVP on their lunch break? do you see couples strolling along its paths? do you see children playing anywhere? do you see teenagers playing soccer on the wide-open lawns? give me one good reason other than pure aesthetics and regard for City Beautiful that we should protect the sanctity of PVP.

protecting the sightlines of liberty memorial and union station are one thing, but the park? come on!

[tat2kc]

I'm confused about the uproar over the fact that 37% said they'd never use it. Why is that odd? Its one line, that serves only a porton of the city.  It does not travel near a lot of homes, and many people will likely not ever even see the trains, depending on where they live or work.  It seems a reasonable percentage.

[lock+load]

i still don't get why people are so protective of PVP. other than a few annual events, i NEVER see people use this park the way a good urban park should be used. who goes to PVP on their lunch break? do you see couples strolling along its paths? do you see children playing anywhere? do you see teenagers playing soccer on the wide-open lawns? give me one good reason other than pure aesthetics and regard for City Beautiful that we should protect the sanctity of PVP.

protecting the sightlines of liberty memorial and union station are one thing, but the park? come on!

Agreed.  Pen Valley Park itself is the joke.  While definitely not necessary, the gondolas are not that bad.  Everyone:  imagine how you feel about the gondolas.  That is how the majority of the area feels about light rail.

http://www.kansascitylightrail.com/Map2.html

Paintfumes....is this your website?

[49r]

Is a light rail room needed?

I vote yes.

[anniewarbucks]

Go ahead powercat it will free up this room up for other issues.

[eliphar17]

Go ahead powercat it will free up this room up for other issues.

Why doesn't light rail fit perfectly into this room? There are other rooms with multiple threads on a topic. See the Sports room for Chiefs threads or Downtown about parking.

[KCMax]

Hey! A somewhat positive editorial from the Star on light rail!

However, what was surprising to me is the reaction from the establishment that Chastain has long battled.

Instead of calling Tuesday’s result a calamity, Chastain awoke Wednesday to hear them proclaim his success as an opportunity.

A frustrating opportunity, yes. But an opportunity just the same for this town of ours to be better than it might have been.

Who would mind being an accomplice to that?

[KCMax]

Two days after ballot measure, city gets to work on the details.

On Tuesday, Kansas City voters ordered light rail for the city. On Thursday, the City Council started trying to figure out how to get the trains rolling.

Mayor Kay Barnes said she will ask one of the city’s Washington lobbyists, a transportation expert, to analyze the plan that voters approved and see if it is feasible. She said she hopes for a report by January but noted that the responsibility for dealing with the light-rail vote will rest largely with a new mayor and council elected next spring.

“This is going to go on for years,â€

[kard]

I heard on NPR that the vote they come back to voters with would be to approve the revisions OR to reject light rail all together.  It's too early to know if that will be the case but they're already talking about it.

[shaffe]

i'm fine with an april '08 vote for the "final" plan.  i don't think clay's plan is totally feasable, but it's got a lot of good points to it.  hopefully the city council takes this seriousely and finds a way to make it all work, in a GOOD plan, and gets resounding voter approval at the polls in two aprils.

[DaveKCMO]

gggrrrrrr! why even offer the chance to reject the plan entirely? did anyone count the yes votes? 72,222... yes, over seventy THOUSAND yes votes. hendricks' article said that "combined, the “yesâ€

[ShowMeKC]

I think we need to continue writing to City Hall, telling them we cannot settle for no light rail.