Comments on: Shawnee mayoral candidates talk light rail

By: Eric Rogers

Eric Rogers — Sun, 16 Mar 2008 14:46:26 +0000

This is a great example of the fatal flaw of using the language “light rail” in place of a broader transportation discussion. With it’s low-density suburban development, it might never make sense for Shawnee to have light rail. It might be much more appropriate (and cost effective) to serve Shawnee with high quality express buses and Bus Rapid Transit. But now light rail is on the table and anything less will be seen as bait and switch.

We don’t need a “regional light plan.” We need a “regional transportation plan” that identifies priority corridors and then finds the appropriate mode for each corridor.

By: Shay

Shay — Fri, 14 Mar 2008 19:02:18 +0000

I recently moved to Shawnee, and Meyers’ backwards-looking attitude is pretty much what I’ve come to expect from the city. First, the two answers are not so terribly different – both want to be sure Shawnee doesn’t pay for what doesn’t benefit it. Second, I personally think that light rail does have some issues and we might be better talking about alternative transit options rather sucking all the air out of the room with a “light rail or bust” attitude.

But that aside – it irritates me terribly that Meyers would dismiss any proposal outright. Good for Pflumm.