Why does metro KC have so many transit entities?

[pash]

.

[Pork Chop]

No it's not. I will (and do) walk 300 yards down a decent city street any day. I will not walk 300 yards across parking lots unless I really must.

I am not alone.

I agree. Even walking through the "East Village" (which is nothing more than a couple of buildings, fields, and surface lots) feels completely bizarre to me until I reach the west side of Oak Street (yes, I know that's outside of the E.V.) It feels like a barren waste land with very few people and a lot more cars (during rush hour). There is an unmistakable difference when venturing into the central part of the loop, which has a lot more activity on the sidewalks i.e. a lot more businesses, residential areas, etc.) It's a far more pleasant feeling when walking through that area versus the E.V.

[DaveKCMO]

...and it's adjacent to one of the densest job centers (gov) in the entire region.

[flyingember]

No it's not. I will (and do) walk 300 yards down a decent city street any day. I will not walk 300 yards across parking lots unless I really must.

I am not alone.

I get that you won't, I bet 99% of bus riders don't have the luxury to complain about the difference

the #1 reason for transit is access to jobs
the #2 reason is connection to shopping for locals
the #3 reason is connection to touristy destinations.

which the streetcar is getting very right.

I bet that if you started asking among eastside residents that there's way more bus riders that would like easy access to a walmart via transit than those that don't (to the relevant closest walmart of course). that they'll take the walk across the parking lot if there's better access from more parts of town with every 10-15 minute service 7 days a week.

read the most recent national geographic, there's a major article covering this topic about American access to food, a large part covers suburban access

[pash]

.

[flyingember]

What's your point? Just-good-enough-that-poor-people-with-no-other-options-will-use-it-but-nobody-else-will-even-consider-it is not a worthy goal.

verus your assessment that walking down a street the same distance as a parking lot is somehow special?

how will this kind of attitude help improve transit access across the city? it's the kind of elitist BS that's mocked in the suburbs.

[bobbyhawks]

What's your point? Just-good-enough-that-poor-people-with-no-other-options-will-use-it-but-nobody-else-will-even-consider-it is not a worthy goal.

verus your assessment that walking down a street the same distance as a parking lot is somehow special?

how will this kind of attitude help improve transit access across the city? it's the kind of elitist BS that's mocked in the suburbs.

To even things out, I know tons of people who will walk from the edge of TSC to a Chiefs game @ $22/game without batting an eye but will complain to high heaven about parking two blocks away from the Sprint Center for $10. That's the type of elitist BS that has people getting in their cars 10 times a day to drive 300 yards to the next space within sight of every possible pre-planned destination. It's the type of BS that gives strip malls less than a 20 year life span before people start driving 1 mile away to the newer version.

I think the larger point is that when you are walking past other businesses on your way to something else, you are more likely to be a part of the local sphere of activity. How many people spend money in local bars around Kauffman Stadium vs. Wrigleyville? People who walk past something are more likely to be a part of that something. If you walk past nothing, you have gained a connection to exactly nothing. In cities I am not familiar with, I walk towards activity, or I mentally take note of interesting things I walk by on my way to a destination. If I need to get somewhere specific, I will walk through any type of density (wasteland of parking or city streets). However, if I want to be anywhere interesting, I pretty much ignore or am turned away by anything with a vast ocean of concrete nearby.

[pash]

.