KCRag Forum

enough wrote:good points. also, where does one go out in the real world to find an actual map of bus routes?

Library.

chingon wrote:

enough wrote:good points. also, where does one go out in the real world to find an actual map of bus routes?

Library.

Some restaurants have them (d'Bronx comes to mind) otherwise on the bus itself...

chingon wrote:

enough wrote:good points. also, where does one go out in the real world to find an actual map of bus routes?

Library.

The internet?

kboish wrote:

chingon wrote:

enough wrote:good points. also, where does one go out in the real world to find an actual map of bus routes?

Library.

The internet?

Uh, I think we all know the internet is not real.

chingon wrote:

enough wrote:good points. also, where does one go out in the real world to find an actual map of bus routes?

Library.

they have them at some of the transit stops

They will also have the full array of maps at any social services office -DSS in KCMO on independence ave and SRS in KCKS on 4th and State.

You can also go to their main office on troost I mean Paseo

I'm in the same boat, I'll miss it as well.

smh wrote:Unfortunately I'll have to miss the meeting on Thursday. However, here are a couple of my thoughts:

1. Straighten Main MAX. Somehow.

Yes!

2. Eliminate 10th & Main transit center. Replace it with a transit corridor (not a transit mall) running along Grand/Main, etc. your choice. Most buses would make stops along this corridor within a block or so of each other eliminating the need for a transit center where everyone gathers to loiter. Spread the loitering out, eliminate some of the transit center related issues.

I love this idea, too.

3. Develop a frequent network of overlapping downtown lines between the Loop and CC/Union Station. It is nearly true that you can catch a bus w/in 5 minutes of needing one if you're travelling from the Loop to Crown Center/Union Station or vice versa. This fact should be marketed. Maps and brochures should show a bold line with information to indicate any bus on this street moves you within this frequent corridor. And, of course, the ATA ought to adjust bus schedules every so slightly to ensure the existence of this frequent network.

I like this concept, but I wonder if it could gain any traction when the streetcar is going to fill this role in two years. Is two years worth restructuring the downtown transit network? Of course somebody smarter than me could probably figure out how to make something functional now and complementary to the streetcar later.

The distance is lesser, but a similar overlap going east-west would be helpful as well, perhaps on 12th Street. The Troost Max loop is much less offensive than the Main Max route, so maybe we could keep the TMax in this role while straightening MMax?

Think of transit centers logically.

This is all about transfers. Every line from the east, north or west should have a simple way to connect to a bus going south, and so on for the other direction sets.

And make it so the source bus route and the destination bus route for all possible connections require no more than a single other bus line or the streetcar line to get to it and there's no more than 2 blocks total walking between lines and none of it is uphill, we're thinking of the elderly and in wheelchairs after all

I imagine that's doable for at least 90% of the bus lines that come into downtown.

Does anybody know the reasoning used when the ATA purchases the shorter buses with one door versus two doors? I can't seem to discern any rhyme or reason here, whether it be the routes they're operated on or the times. It seems like the second door just eliminates seating.

In a related thread, does anybody know the tradeoffs between operating fewer larger buses on longer headways versus more shorter buses on shorter headways? Do the labor costs for the drivers outweigh any operational cost savings with a shorter bus compared to a longer one? Personally, as a rider I'd rather put up with a slightly more crowded bus that comes more frequently than a larger one that doesn't.

The question is what is the formula? You have the right idea but go way more complex.

It will be something like Revenue minus Fuel Cost minus Labor Cost minus Vehicle Maintenance costs. For any given hour on any given line you have a different answer. So the coverage changes as appropriate. If running smaller more often means the same number of riders and you need to maintain more vehicles and hire more staff do you do it? But what if those smaller busses use half the amount of fuel? Does that cost more than the labor?

And which bus will need replacing sooner? If they run the large bus twice as often does that mean buying new twice as quickly. Maybe the small busses have a decade more life. Maybe the parts cost more for the big bus.

KCATA's new CEO/president will be announced at noon on wednesday, feb. 18 in the chamber board room at union station. rumor mill says it's former wyco mayor joe reardon.

joe reardon is the new CEO.

http://www.kansascity.com/news/governme ... 95201.html
http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/n ... s-new.html

do you ride #51? take this survey!

http://www.kcata.org/rider_bulletins/51 ... wn_service

real-time information (when the bus will actually arrive) is now available in google maps: http://www.kcata.org/news/kcata_now_off ... oogle_maps

ATA says pick of developer for River Market land signifies new role in economic development

http://www.kansascity.com/news/governme ... 64697.html

Can someone better explain this development?

The ATA owns the park-n-ride lot on the northeast corner of 3rd and grand. They decided there was a better use for it than just a surface parking lot. This is the announcement of their selection of a developer to build on that lot, but they are requiring it to be Transit Oriented Development (TOD) that both retains (or increases) the number of available parking while building a development that is geared towards multi-modal transportation.

Because ATA will retain ownership of the project and likely issue bonds or help in the financing in some capacity- this deal also signifies ATAs entrance as a force into the development of KC...less a passive bus service and more of an active role in how our city is shaped...with a focus on transit.

kboish wrote:The ATA owns the park-n-ride lot on the northeast corner of 3rd and grand. They decided there was a better use for it than just a surface parking lot. This is the announcement of their selection of a developer to build on that lot, but they are requiring it to be Transit Oriented Development (TOD) that both retains (or increases) the number of available parking while building a development that is geared towards multi-modal transportation.

Because ATA will retain ownership of the project and likely issue bonds or help in the financing in some capacity- this deal also signifies ATAs entrance as a force into the development of KC...less a passive bus service and more of an active role in how our city is shaped...with a focus on transit.

The article also mentions Commuter Rail. Would the site also be part of that?

ldai_phs wrote: The article also mentions Commuter Rail. Would the site also be part of that?

The best answer at this point is maybe.

the entire fleet will get wifi in 2016: http://www.kcata.org/news/all_kansas_ci ... fi_in_2016