Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Transportation topics in KC
Post Reply
enough
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 996
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 5:52 pm

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by enough » Fri Dec 21, 2012 5:11 pm

service changes for northland routes take effect in april. send comments on current maps and such to metro@kcata.org.

User avatar
smh
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2966
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:40 pm
Location: Central Loop

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by smh » Fri Dec 21, 2012 10:18 pm

enough wrote:service changes for northland routes take effect in april. send comments on current maps and such to metro@kcata.org.
Ha, well that explains it!

User avatar
PumpkinStalker
Bryant Building
Bryant Building
Posts: 3979
Joined: Thu Nov 06, 2003 12:04 am
Location: Waldo

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by PumpkinStalker » Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:02 pm

Question - It seems like (at least to me) that there have been a lot of ATA bus accidents this year. Are there statistics kept anywhere? I didn't see any on the ATA website and admittedly I'm basing this just off my daily news perusing and it's just a perception I have this year. A quick google search showed there were accidents on the dates below, I'm sure that's not all inclusive. I'm sure it's a combination of other driver's impatience and unsafe driving practices around busses, bus driver error, weather, and the fact that the news reports every bus crash, but not every regular car crash. Anyone have any thoughts on it?

6/22
6/26
8/8
8/30
9/13
11/4
11/20
1/4/2013

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16595
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by DaveKCMO » Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:19 pm

since bus drivers must have a CDL (for the large buses, anyway) and have a clean driving record, i'm going to go out on a limb and say the vast majority of the fault of inattentive drivers in private vehicles.

inattentive driving is a major issue. while walking to work every day, i witness a good 20-25% of drivers using their phones while driving or generally not looking up to see what's in front of them... and that's downtown, where you can expect things to dart out in front of you.

User avatar
Zorobabel
Strip mall
Strip mall
Posts: 169
Joined: Thu May 18, 2006 6:08 pm

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by Zorobabel » Fri Jan 04, 2013 12:43 pm

It's too bad Missouri has no laws against cell phone use (texting or otherwise) while driving.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6807
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by flyingember » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:12 pm

Zorobabel wrote:It's too bad Missouri has no laws against cell phone use (texting or otherwise) while driving.
not true

txting is banned under age 21

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6807
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by flyingember » Fri Jan 04, 2013 1:14 pm

DaveKCMO wrote: inattentive driving is a major issue. while walking to work every day, i witness a good 20-25% of drivers using their phones while driving or generally not looking up to see what's in front of them... and that's downtown, where you can expect things to dart out in front of you.
yeah, downtown is nasty for driving. add in delivery vehicles blocking lanes, people not using crosswalks and ignoring the walk signals, cars parking, road work, and the like and it's a mess. I'm quite amazed there aren't more accidents

User avatar
smh
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2966
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:40 pm
Location: Central Loop

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by smh » Sat Jan 12, 2013 11:18 am

Here's a question I've always had but never asked:

If get a 2hr transfer when I get on the bus, is there anything that keeps me from just using that transfer to take the same bus back the other direction? Usually when I'm making a round trip I just ask for the day pass and put in my $3.

I'm intending this more as a scientific "is this possible" question as opposed to "I'm a cheap ass help me save $1.50."

User avatar
DaveKCMO
Global Moderator
Global Moderator
Posts: 16595
Joined: Sun Nov 27, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: Crossroads
Contact:

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by DaveKCMO » Mon Jan 14, 2013 11:53 am

smh wrote:If get a 2hr transfer when I get on the bus, is there anything that keeps me from just using that transfer to take the same bus back the other direction?
no. i've done it often.

User avatar
smh
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2966
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:40 pm
Location: Central Loop

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by smh » Mon Jan 14, 2013 12:06 pm

DaveKCMO wrote:
smh wrote:If get a 2hr transfer when I get on the bus, is there anything that keeps me from just using that transfer to take the same bus back the other direction?
no. i've done it often.
Good to know. I pretty much always get the day pass just in case I decide to make a third trip. But really, I consider the extra $1.50 a donation to the ATA.

earthling
Oak Tower
Oak Tower
Posts: 4546
Joined: Sun Sep 11, 2011 2:27 pm

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by earthling » Tue Jan 15, 2013 4:28 pm

The bus system saw more than 16.1 million riders in 2012, up 3.6 percent from 15.6 million in 2011, the KCATA said in a release.
http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/n ... -ride.html

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6807
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by flyingember » Fri Jan 18, 2013 9:03 pm

saw a teenager waiting at a 142 stop tonight in the Briarcliff area just before 8pm.

he really stood out given how few people are on the streets this time of night, and there's a bar less than a block away

heatherkay
Alameda Tower
Alameda Tower
Posts: 1424
Joined: Tue Feb 14, 2006 10:39 am
Location: River Market and Rosedale

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by heatherkay » Tue Feb 19, 2013 10:18 am

Public meeting this afternoon in Rosedale about a proposed line on SW Blvd.

http://us2.campaign-archive1.com/?u=fbf ... 9902dfcfe0

enough
Colonnade
Colonnade
Posts: 996
Joined: Sat May 21, 2005 5:52 pm

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by enough » Tue Mar 05, 2013 8:08 pm

city council voted in 2010 (ordinance 100951) to restore funding from half-cent sales tax to kcata for public transit.

now city council wants to go back on that promise and force kcata to spend down its reserves and/or cut service and/or raise fares.

ordinance 130173, to be heard wednesday (tomorrow) morning in finance committee, would make all that "legal."

read the alert on transit action network blog:
http://wp.me/pV5fE-1pR
and be prepared to get more than a little angry.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6807
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by flyingember » Wed Mar 06, 2013 12:15 pm

enough wrote:city council voted in 2010 (ordinance 100951) to restore funding from half-cent sales tax to kcata for public transit.

now city council wants to go back on that promise and force kcata to spend down its reserves and/or cut service and/or raise fares.

ordinance 130173, to be heard wednesday (tomorrow) morning in finance committee, would make all that "legal."

read the alert on transit action network blog:
http://wp.me/pV5fE-1pR
and be prepared to get more than a little angry.
it helps to read the laws in question so one knows the actual picture

city code 68-471-472.1
Sec. 68-471. - Imposition of tax.

Pursuant to the authority granted by and subject to the provisions of RSMo 92.400—92.421, inclusive, a sales tax for transportation purposes enumerated therein is hereby imposed upon all persons in the city who are or hereafter shall be engaged in the business of selling tangible personal property and taxable services subject to a sales tax under the provisions of RSMo 144.010—144.510, referred to in this article as the sales tax statute, for the privilege of engaging in such business in the city, in the manner and to the extent provided in the sales tax statute and the rules and regulations of the director of revenue issued pursuant thereto. The rate of the tax shall be 0.5 percent on the receipts from the sale at retail of all tangible personal property or taxable services at retail within the city if such property and services are subject to taxation by the state under the provisions of the sales tax statute.

(Code of Gen. Ords. 1967, § 32.170; Ord. No. 43171, 9-7-73; Ord. No. 46094, 11-26-75; Ord. No. 50864, 9-27-79)

Sec. 68-472. - Effective date; collection of tax.permanent link to this piece of content

The tax imposed by this article shall become effective on January 1, 1980, shall apply to all sales made subsequent to December 31, 1979, and shall be collected and enforced as provided in RSMo 92.400—92.421, inclusive.

(Code of Gen. Ords. 1967, § 32.171; Ord. No. 39847, 6-18-71; Ord. No. 40577, 12-17-71; Ord. No. 41327, 6-16-72; Ord. No. 42073, 12-20-72; Ord. No. 43171, 9-7-73; Ord. No. 46094, 11-26-75; Ord. No. 50864, 9-27-79)

Sec. 68-472.1. - Distribution of tax.

After deducting the city's two percent cost of handling authorized by RSMo 92.418 and fulfilling any tax increment financing obligations, at least 95 percent of the remaining sales tax for transportation imposed by section 68-471 of this article and deposited in the city's public mass transportation fund shall, by May 1, 2014, be appropriated and paid by the city to the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority for purposes as provided in RSMo. 92.400—92.421 inclusive. Any portion of this appropriation and payment in excess of that designated by contract as being due the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority for performing its contractual obligations to the city shall be utilized by the Kansas City Area Transportation Authority for its general purposes in providing a public mass transportation system.
rsmo 92.418
what the miney may be used for
for the primary benefit of a public mass transportation system and motor pool operations operating within the city.
so the first item is a TIF may be paid off before the KCATA gets anything. right there the funding amount may legally decrease.

notice how it appears the city excluded 92.418 for the purposes of the money

here's the relevant law mentioned in the code

Distribution of tax to transportation authority--use of funds (Kansas City).

92.421. 1. Not later than the tenth day of each month, the director of revenue shall distribute all moneys due the interstate transportation authority as determined by the director of revenue pursuant to section 92.402 received by him from proceeds of the tax authorized in sections 92.400 to 92.421 in the previous month, less one percent for the cost of collection which shall be deposited in the state general revenue fund, to the interstate transportation authority for the city in which the tax was levied. The director of revenue may authorize the state treasurer to make refunds for erroneous payments and overpayments, and may redeem any dishonored checks and drafts used in payment of the tax.

2. The interstate transportation authority shall use the proceeds of the tax solely for capital improvements for the system.

3. The interstate transportation authority shall within ninety days after August 28, 1989, promulgate rules and regulations for a minority/disadvantaged and women business enterprise program for the purchase of goods and services and construction of capital improvements for the authority.
notice how .421 applying to kansas city specifically overrules .418 which is more flexible in the use of transportation taxes.
KC also specifically excluded 418 for the purpose of the money in the city code on purpose

effectively KC is paying this tax to expand the bus system only and nothing else

the 95% may not be legally used for operations of the service



here's the conundrum.
if the fares aren't sufficient to operate the system, adding more funding for capital improvements won't help that.




but here's the main point, if the point of the tax is 100% to grow transportation, then, yes, it is completely legit to take a *generic* transit tax and change it to the KCATA doesn't get the 95% they were offered in city code. the process was handled poorly but it's legal to do that.

they're not looking to change the purpose of the tax at all, just how it's distributed. it would have been legit to fund The Jo inside KC with this tax. it can fund the streetcar all the same. it could be used to fund megabus facilities inside KC. Amtrak I could go either way on.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6807
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by flyingember » Thu Mar 14, 2013 10:29 am

if you want to see another bad map where they didn't try to follow the map before publishing it

http://www.kcata.org/images/uploads/230mwk.gif

the key issue is they put 152 hwy in the wrong spot. As such they have the 431 route taking imaginary ramps and they have Prairie View taking an imaginary underpass.

If you were a guest to the city trying to get around this would be hugely misleading. There's hotels along this bus route

User avatar
smh
Broadway Square
Broadway Square
Posts: 2966
Joined: Tue Jun 08, 2010 10:40 pm
Location: Central Loop

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by smh » Thu Mar 14, 2013 10:46 am

flyingember wrote:if you want to see another bad map where they didn't try to follow the map before publishing it

http://www.kcata.org/images/uploads/230mwk.gif

the key issue is they put 152 hwy in the wrong spot. As such they have the 431 route taking imaginary ramps and they have Prairie View taking an imaginary underpass.

If you were a guest to the city trying to get around this would be hugely misleading. There's hotels along this bus route
Can you be more specific? I don't see any "imaginary underpass".

EDIT: Actually, upon closer inspection I see what you mean. 152 should be further up on the map.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6807
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by flyingember » Thu Mar 14, 2013 11:16 am

smh wrote:
flyingember wrote:if you want to see another bad map where they didn't try to follow the map before publishing it

http://www.kcata.org/images/uploads/230mwk.gif

the key issue is they put 152 hwy in the wrong spot. As such they have the 431 route taking imaginary ramps and they have Prairie View taking an imaginary underpass.

If you were a guest to the city trying to get around this would be hugely misleading. There's hotels along this bus route
Can you be more specific? I don't see any "imaginary underpass".

EDIT: Actually, upon closer inspection I see what you mean. 152 should be further up on the map.
No, 152 should be further down the map. neither skyview nor prairie view cross south of 152.

If you look at the layout with the road design they improperly marked Old Tiffany Springs as 152 improperly and then marked Tiffany Springs Pkwy as Old Tiffany Springs.

they left out the 152 line completely yet marked one as it.


Tiffany Springs Marketplace is on the wrong side of skyview
Airworld doesn't exist south of 110th and as well, the street they have marked as it is really Ambassador
Last edited by flyingember on Thu Mar 14, 2013 11:27 am, edited 1 time in total.

shaffe
Penntower
Penntower
Posts: 2347
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 2:51 pm
Contact:

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by shaffe » Thu Mar 14, 2013 11:21 am

flyingember wrote:if you want to see another bad map where they didn't try to follow the map before publishing it

http://www.kcata.org/images/uploads/230mwk.gif

the key issue is they put 152 hwy in the wrong spot. As such they have the 431 route taking imaginary ramps and they have Prairie View taking an imaginary underpass.

If you were a guest to the city trying to get around this would be hugely misleading. There's hotels along this bus route
So. Much. Awful. That map is maybe half right as far as street names/alignments. The gist of the route is there, but I pity anybody who doesn't know the area really well who tries to use it.

flyingember
One Park Place
One Park Place
Posts: 6807
Joined: Tue Jul 17, 2012 7:54 am

Re: Generic ongoing KCATA thread

Post by flyingember » Thu Mar 14, 2013 11:28 am

shaffe wrote:
flyingember wrote:if you want to see another bad map where they didn't try to follow the map before publishing it

http://www.kcata.org/images/uploads/230mwk.gif

the key issue is they put 152 hwy in the wrong spot. As such they have the 431 route taking imaginary ramps and they have Prairie View taking an imaginary underpass.

If you were a guest to the city trying to get around this would be hugely misleading. There's hotels along this bus route
So. Much. Awful. That map is maybe half right as far as street names/alignments. The gist of the route is there, but I pity anybody who doesn't know the area really well who tries to use it.
I figured out the core problem

they left out the 152 line completely yet marked a street as being it.

the path makes sense when you put an imaginary line between Barry and Old Tiffany Springs

edit: and the clover intersection is really 152. So that one is marked wrong too. which means Barry is missing from the map and the roads that cross it are really crossing 152

Post Reply