KCRag Forum

I suppose that would be OK. SW BLVD and 18th/Vine need regular service from Union Station.

Danger, I ride those lines daily and yes, they are only 20-minute gaps approximately. It used to be a little better before Jan but then they made some cuts.

Truely useful transit is when you can stop at a store, pick up a bag and hop on the next bus w/out much wait. But 20-minutes is too long, especially if you barely miss the last bus... another 20-minutes. I used to take 56/57 on my way home from Crown Center to Osco, pick a few things up and then pick up the next bus to home on the Plaza. But it's now too infrequent to bother.

This is what fluid urban/pedestrian living is about yet the ATA thins out the lines into suburbia instead of building solid service in the core. What good is sporadic suburban service if there is not consistent service once in the core? They should spend what they have for a solid core and then spend what's left on suburbia.

I don't blame it on the ATA, they have a lot of area to cover with a bare bones budget....if Prop B would have passed, none of this would be an issue.

My only problem with the BRT lite line is it's almost like they are testing it out for a future BRT line....which wouldn't be a fair test with the time gap and lack of priority at the lights.

ignatius, i haven't used other US bus systems much, but I spent some time in London recently where they have a very extensive mass transit system. The buses go all over from the city center to suburbs. I used them for everything from siteseeing to a bachelor party to getting to/from the airport - and 20 minutes was the typical interval on most routes even during rush hour. It was only the tubes (subways) and light rail lines that ran on schedules approaching 10 minutes, and that was often theoritical.

I was just in London last Nov and noticed 20-minute bus as well. But it is of course in addition to other options. Most urban cores in denser US cities that only have bus systems have 5-10 minute service at least through rush hour and lunch. KC's core used to back in the 80s before ridership and funds plummeted.

I agree KC that the ATA is strangled with funds. But given that we have excessive amounts of per capita roads and infrastructure in surburbia, it justifies spending a significantly larger portion of the transit $ in the core to make if functional. That ATA chose to build sub-par service spread out instead of good service in a core area that is more pedestrian oriented. If they chose the latter, those w/out a car may chose to live in the core.

I ride buses every chance I get and there are times in them middle of a weekday that I will walk from crown center to downtown before a bus comes. Main drag in the middle of a major city connecting two large business districts. There should always be a freaking bus.

We need the BRT to inject life back into the system. The system is failing, even the poor are not using it anymore because it's been cut back so much.

Either fix it or scrap it and use the money for other things, I hope they fix it.

ignatius wrote:That ATA chose to build sub-par service spread out instead of good service in a core area that is more pedestrian oriented

Those suburban services are largely funded by the suburban cities, as well as higher fares on those routes. That's why it is constant struggle to keep bus service in Independence, Liberty, Blue Springs, etc. The sub-par urban service is a result of the ATA's dependence KCMO sales tax revenue, which declined 5% in the past year - despite all of the TIF-subsidized retail developmen in the Northland and the Plaza.

dangerboy wrote:ignatius, i haven't used other US bus systems much, but I spent some time in London recently where they have a very extensive mass transit system. The buses go all over from the city center to suburbs. I used them for everything from siteseeing to a bachelor party to getting to/from the airport - and 20 minutes was the typical interval on most routes even during rush hour. It was only the tubes (subways) and light rail lines that ran on schedules approaching 10 minutes, and that was often theoritical.

Which is why I advocate something (here it comes again) like SkyTran. On-demand transit. No waiting 20 minutes, or 10, or 5, just hop on and go from point A to point B, anywhere in the metro (and, hopefully, anywhere in the region or nation). Plus it's cheaper and safer and more environmentally friendly, doesn't contribute to traffic congestion, discourages driving...

I'd like to work on a SkyTran proposal to submit to MARC and/or the city council, but I'm not sure where to start...

send the link to somebody's email at marc.org and see what they say.

I saw the sskytran site last year. It looks like a good concept. I wonder how well in real life it would work. The RiverCrownPlaza route could be an excellent demonstration route to test feasiblity.

I also hope that they market the new route, soon to be BRT, better than they did the downtowner. that was a great route and so very convienent. I rode it fairly regularly with my students to teach them skills in riding the bus. often we were the only people on the bus. To me, that was shocking, considering the cost ($.25) and the frequency (10 minutes). The BRT route has the potential to really boost ridership, if it is reliable and clean.

ignatius wrote:I was just in London last Nov and noticed 20-minute bus as well.

The other thing I noticed in London was that they have far fewer bus stops, but they are nicer. We have bus stop signs at least every two blocks, and on many routes they are every block. In London the bus stops were at least 1/2 mile apart if not more. However, almost every stop had a nice shelter, some seating, timetables for routes that called there, and maps of the surrounding neighborhood and connecting routes. I only saw very few of the lone sign on a pole that we have here. It really made the bus seem faster because it made fewer stops. 1/2 mile seems reasonable to walk for a transit stop. It's only 5-6 blocks.

plus that if you are paying attention, its only a quarter mile to walk. That's nothing, but would people do it? Buses d othe same thing out here, though, they stop every couple feet and open their doors for nobody to get in or out. If God didn't want us to walk he'd have given us wheels!

actually, i've seen two bus stops on one block. Its crazy!

from the rta:

Dear RTA Members-

You're invited to learn and provide input on Kansas City Area Transportaiton
Authority's plan for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT)in a corridor connecting River
Market, Downtown, Crown Center, Westport and the Plaza South.

BRT is a form of fixed guideway and supported in the Regional Transit
Alliance's Advocacy Agenda. It is based on the idea: "Think Rail - Use Bus"

Bus Rapid Transit Public Input Meeting
April 22nd, an Open House, Drexel Hall
3301 Baltimore
Kansas City, MO 64111
Hall, 5 - 7 pm.

For more information call 816-474-4240

Mark McDowell
RTA Chairman, Fixed Guideway Committee

I'm sure anybody would be welcome if they would like to go, just contact Mark.

KC wrote:I bet 56/57/51 are discontinued and made into E-W feeder routes.

I sure hope not. The 56 is the only one that I know of that runs really late, and the one that'll get me to work at 11 PM, if we move to where I think we're moving.

bahua wrote:

KC wrote:I bet 56/57/51 are discontinued and made into E-W feeder routes.

I sure hope not. The 56 is the only one that I know of that runs really late, and the one that'll get me to work at 11 PM, if we move to where I think we're moving.

I went to the BRT open house yesterday. Jim Pritchett (the ATA planner who also worked on light rail) said that BRT would replace the 56. If you take the 56 south of 47th now, you would be able to take every two out of three BRT buses to 75th, where the 56 ends now. Those frequencies would be about every 20 min. south of 47th.

The 57 would continue to provide local stops as it does now. BRT would run every 10 minutes during rush hour (7-9am & 4-6pm), every 15 min. the rest of the day, and every 20 min. in the evenings. Frequencies would be a little different on weekends (since we don't have rush hours then).

Obviously all this is subject to change.

The 56 is it for me after 7pm where I live now. It sounds like BRT might end up being slightly more frequent (ev. 20 vs. 30 min.) in the evening than what I have now.

I hope.

carefree, first off, welcome.

second, now the showing you went to, was this the "temp" BRT line that they are trying to get running this summer or the plans for the "permanent" line that will come later?

Reason I ask is I like those times much better than the 20 minutes stated before so I hope it's the line this summer for the test.

Thanks, good to find this forum! That was for the BRT line. The Downtowner-Plus (for lack of anything else to call the non-BRT service starting this year) would be in addition to the 56+57--at least that's what I was told a few months ago (at the League of Women Voters forum about the Smart Moves transit plan). I was worried it would replace the 56+57 and leave those us of south of 47th stranded. I don't know if that's still the case, but I haven't heard anything about it replacing the 56+57. Of course, if funding continues hellbound, those two might make more tempting targets for cuts....but what won't be.

So anyway, if the service starting soon remains in addition to the 56+57, it should still be decent frequencies.

I'll ask Pritchett about that and post if I hear anything. I had a few more questions after the meeting that I wanted to ask yet.

keep us up to date....you have the most solid information so far and as you can tell by this thread, many are interested in this service.

Great info carefree. I was hoping to make that meeting but forgot about it. So when is the temp BRT suppose to begin? May? Summer?