KC's light rail system will cost half a billion more
- Thursday, August 09 2007 @ 01:36 PM CST
- Contributed by: filbert
- Views: 1,782
He gets it wrong.
Color me surprised.
From the Kansas City Star:
It remains less than obvious to me why Kansas City, one of the least densely populated major metropolitan areas in the country, needs a light rail system.A new report says Kansas City’s voter-approved light rail plan faces a funding shortfall of $433 million to $545 million — even if the federal government pays half of the construction costs.
Officials with HNTB discussed the estimate with the city council’s Transportation Committee this morning and copies were provided to reporters,
“The money is not sufficient to do what was voted on in November, 2006,” said Mark Huffer, general manager of the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority.
Clay Chastain, who proposed the November 2006 ballot measure, did not attend the meeting this morning and was not immediately available for comment.
. . .
Engineers also estimated operating costs at $11 million in the first year, with fares and other revenue paying for $6.2 million of that. The total operating shortfall, the report says, would total $73.7 million, in 2007 dollars, through 2034.
Total shortfall considering construction and operating costs: $489 million, assuming the midpoint construction estimate.
(The Kansas City metro area's population density in 2000 was 328 people per square mile. The average for all metro areas in the U.S. is about 320. New York's metropolitan population density is 2,028 per square mile.)
Kansas City DOES NOT HAVE THE POPULATION DENSITY to support a light rail system. Nor do most cities in the U.S--even those where a light rail system has been rammed down the throats of ambitious or ignorant taxpayers. It WILL LOSE MONEY if you're stupid enough to actually build the damn thing. That's why people are starting to ask for another vote on this manifestly dreadful idea of light rail in Kansas City.