KC Light Rail

Your source for news and information on Kansas City’s light rail progress

Troost BRT nets more federal funding

Missouri Sen. Kit Bond has confirmed that the Troost BRT project will receive another $6 million in federal funding. The press release notes the ATA's aging fleet while repeating the myths that MAX has signal priority and exclusive lanes.

Humorous side note: The Business Journal brief incorrectly notes that this money will help the ATA buy 100 buses; obviously they haven't been shopping for buses lately!

Regardless, this is very good news for a project that was part of Kansas City's only hope for improved transit before November 2006. Recent discussions about light rail on Troost have fizzled, in lieu of the route the ATA was already planning, thus eliminating the concerns that this BRT expansion was threatened.

6 Comments so far

  1. Eric July 16th, 2008 10:27 pm

    I swear I’ve seen MAX hold green lights, so I’m not sure that part is a myth. My theory is that there is so little congestion in KC that it’s not needed. Or when the BRT is late it’s really late, and holding the light doesn’t make enough difference.

  2. doinkman July 17th, 2008 6:59 am

    Good job Kit Bond (even if he did suggest Katrina caused no oil spills the other day on Hardball)…

    Have the location of the stops for the Troost Max line been determined yet?

  3. Dave July 17th, 2008 8:57 am

    the problem with just saying “signal priority” is that is doesn’t convey the reality, which is that MAX does not have signal priority over everything else on the road as a general rule. MAX has “some” signal priority, but only when it’s behind schedule. true signal priority over all other traffic would dramatically reduce travel times.

    as for dedicated lanes, they are only dedicated during rush hour. during non-peak times, people can legally park in the bus lane almost the entire length of main street.

    the truth is that almost all BRT implementations in the US fail at some level when compared to rail (and i say that because everyone DOES compare it with rail). the low capital cost and flexibility of the bus actually end up working against most routes, versus the in-depth planning and route simplicity of rail (driven by higher capital cost).

    regardless, an older presentation i saw listed these stops:

    - 10th & main transit center
    - city center (11th/12th & main)*
    - 11th/12th & grand*
    - 11th/12th & oak*
    - 11th/12th & holmes/charlotte
    - crossroads east (18th & holmes/charlotte)
    - hospital hill (24th & holmes/charlotte)
    - beacon hill (27th & troost)
    - midtown (31st & troost)
    - squier park (armour & troost)
    - metro center (39th & troost)
    - manheim park (43rd & troost)
    - discovery center (47th & troost)
    - universities (51st & troost)
    - 49/63 neighborhood (55th & troost)
    - 59th & troost
    - the landing (63rd & troost)
    - southtown (67th & troost)
    - gregory & troost
    - 75th & troost
    - 81st & troost
    - 85th & troost (trolley track trail terminus)
    [may terminate between 81st & 85th, likely depends on bannister redevelopment]
    - bannister & troost (park and ride)
    - bannister transit center (93rd & hillcrest)

  4. doinkman July 17th, 2008 6:27 pm

    Thanks Dave!

    The Express Bus that runs down Wilshire in LA has the ability to ‘hold’ green lights just long enough that they can get through. Dave’s right that true priority would screw all the crossbound traffic.

    There is a funny story about the engineers that created that signal priority system. They made a copy and installed it on their car. Eventually the traffic command post in downtown LA took notice and they got busted. Lots of people in LA would pay big bucks for that type of traffic priority.

  5. Dave July 18th, 2008 8:41 am

    actually i would like to screw the cross-bound traffic (it’s already screwed by our lack of signal synchronization). full signal priority over all other traffic (except emergency) is a good thing for the lowly bus! public transit can barely make inroads based on cost, so why not make it compete on time (especially when it’s possible?). regardless, real signal priority will be implemented for the street-running light rail, so then you’ll see what we’re talking about.

  6. JJ December 11th, 2008 2:38 pm

    BRTs do hold lights its part of the intelegent system stream lining the travel, its called signal priority. Other examples of this can be seen in the kiosks giving real time travle updates w/ onboard bus gps.

Leave a reply