Manhattan Development & Aggieville Parking

[Rage Against the McKee]

pretty k-state0 attitude

Also lets not forget that Riley is one of the poorest states in KS.  The general community would see a great benefit from public transportation.  Only a dumbass would think that it doesn't help a poor community.  People need to get to jobs, public transportation makes that cheaper and easier.  It increases the labor supply, makes it easier for people to get to better jobs which might be across town, and gives employers a more diverse work pool.

Those seem like pretty good reasons for the city of Manhattan to fund a bus system. I'm not sure why you think K-State should be contributing, though.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Well played...

"intrepid bicycle commuter (and SFist commenter) John Murphy has given the new lanes a test drive and has some feedback to share with the bike activists over at Streetsblog. Observe:  The new bike lane through here is completely asinine."

I saw that, but I'm sure it will get better over time. When Manhattan finally gets a new bus system, I'm sure it will be very easy to get a handful of townies to comment on how asinine it is.

[ednksu]

pretty k-state0 attitude

Also lets not forget that Riley is one of the poorest states in KS.  The general community would see a great benefit from public transportation.  Only a dumbass would think that it doesn't help a poor community.  People need to get to jobs, public transportation makes that cheaper and easier.  It increases the labor supply, makes it easier for people to get to better jobs which might be across town, and gives employers a more diverse work pool.

Those seem like pretty good reasons for the city of Manhattan to fund a bus system. I'm not sure why you think K-State should be contributing, though.

because the student population would use it too.  Lets not make it seem like the Manhattan metro could survive right now without the University there.  Students have used the ata bus system when they have gone out to UC with great success. 

[wabash909]

You are really creating a problem that just doesn't exist here. Most top notch students with tons of options are not going to choose K-State, and a mass transit system is not going to be the deciding factor. If you can't live on campus, just find a house or apartment right next to campus. It's not hard at all. Also, the university not having enough housing for incoming freshmen seems like a completely different problem than needing a mass transit system. Maybe the university should build a new dorm. I mean, at least those actually make money.

1.  Your long term goal for the university is to simply settle for status quo mediocrity.  Go ahead and send the memo over the Animal to put a halt on 2025, because it aint happening and we're wasting our time pouring resources into it.

2.  If you don't have a car, renting an apartment near campus because K-State can't provide student housing on campus attempts to solve one part of the problem.  Getting to a job and access to basic services in the community is equally important to students that don't have a car and far more difficult without public transportation options.

3.  Yes, the university should be building more on campus housing.

[Rage Against the McKee]

pretty k-state0 attitude

Also lets not forget that Riley is one of the poorest states in KS.  The general community would see a great benefit from public transportation.  Only a dumbass would think that it doesn't help a poor community.  People need to get to jobs, public transportation makes that cheaper and easier.  It increases the labor supply, makes it easier for people to get to better jobs which might be across town, and gives employers a more diverse work pool.

Those seem like pretty good reasons for the city of Manhattan to fund a bus system. I'm not sure why you think K-State should be contributing, though.

because the student population would use it too.  Lets not make it seem like the Manhattan metro could survive right now without the University there.  Students have used the ata bus system when they have gone out to UC with great success.

Students would also pay fares, sales tax, and have their rent set based upon property taxes, so I guess I just don't see why you think they should pay a larger share through increased tuition than other Manhattan residents who see the same, if not a greater, benefit.

[wabash909]

pretty k-state0 attitude

Also lets not forget that Riley is one of the poorest states in KS.  The general community would see a great benefit from public transportation.  Only a dumbass would think that it doesn't help a poor community.  People need to get to jobs, public transportation makes that cheaper and easier.  It increases the labor supply, makes it easier for people to get to better jobs which might be across town, and gives employers a more diverse work pool.

Those seem like pretty good reasons for the city of Manhattan to fund a bus system. I'm not sure why you think K-State should be contributing, though.

because the student population would use it too.  Lets not make it seem like the Manhattan metro could survive right now without the University there.  Students have used the ata bus system when they have gone out to UC with great success.

Students would also pay fares, sales tax, and have their rent set based upon property taxes, so I guess I just don't see why you think they should pay a larger share through increased tuition than other Manhattan residents who see the same, if not a greater, benefit.

Manhattan residents and students will both receive the benefits and should both contribute, thus the Manhattan / K-State partnership. 

The most sensible option is to do what Iowa State and Oklahoma State have done in adopting a student privilege fee (just like what you currently pay to fund an expansion to the Rec which you may or may not use) and allow for free ridership to all students.  The Manhattan community would pay for ridership, most likely a percentage sales tax increase of some sort, and would receive federal subsistence. 

This isn't a complex problem or ridiculous proposition.   And for a real starter system to get up and running, we're probably talking about 10-15 buses.

[Belvis Noland]

pretty k-state0 attitude

Also lets not forget that Riley is one of the poorest states in KS.  The general community would see a great benefit from public transportation.  Only a dumbass would think that it doesn't help a poor community.  People need to get to jobs, public transportation makes that cheaper and easier.  It increases the labor supply, makes it easier for people to get to better jobs which might be across town, and gives employers a more diverse work pool.

Those seem like pretty good reasons for the city of Manhattan to fund a bus system. I'm not sure why you think K-State should be contributing, though.

because the student population would use it too.  Lets not make it seem like the Manhattan metro could survive right now without the University there.  Students have used the ata bus system when they have gone out to UC with great success.

Students would also pay fares, sales tax, and have their rent set based upon property taxes, so I guess I just don't see why you think they should pay a larger share through increased tuition than other Manhattan residents who see the same, if not a greater, benefit.

Because students wouldn't pay fares.  Hence, the student fee.  Say you impose an annual transit fee of $15/per student, or $1 per credit hour.  Welp, there's a +$300K annual funding source.  I'm not sure how much it would cost to fund a fleet of 10 city buses and say, 20 stations.  If you got funding from feds, state, I think you could balance the remainder of the funding between City property taxes and student fees and it wouldn't be burdensome in the slightest. 

[ednksu]

pretty k-state0 attitude

Also lets not forget that Riley is one of the poorest states in KS.  The general community would see a great benefit from public transportation.  Only a dumbass would think that it doesn't help a poor community.  People need to get to jobs, public transportation makes that cheaper and easier.  It increases the labor supply, makes it easier for people to get to better jobs which might be across town, and gives employers a more diverse work pool.

Those seem like pretty good reasons for the city of Manhattan to fund a bus system. I'm not sure why you think K-State should be contributing, though.

because the student population would use it too.  Lets not make it seem like the Manhattan metro could survive right now without the University there.  Students have used the ata bus system when they have gone out to UC with great success.

Students would also pay fares, sales tax, and have their rent set based upon property taxes, so I guess I just don't see why you think they should pay a larger share through increased tuition than other Manhattan residents who see the same, if not a greater, benefit.

big issue, they would probably use it a disproportionately larger amount and second two funding issues.  Students don't pay property taxes and the university I thought had some weird sales tax rules they were exempt from, not retail sales obviously. 

[sys]

Let me just hop on my 10 speed and peddle on down to the airport in my slacks, sport jacket, and dress shoes with my computer bag and and carry on stuffed into a couple bike bags.  Oh, and it's February and I've got a 6.30AM departure.  Seems pretty practical.

biking to the airport is obviously Fake Sugar Dick (WARNING, NOT THE REAL SUGAR DICK!) in mhk.  but hey, putting a bus system in mhk is marginal at best as well.  public transport of any kind is marginal at best in a midwestern american town of 50k.

in fresno, biking to the airport would have been great for me, yesterday, and would probably be useful in general.  lots of people go to airports for reasons other than flying.  hundreds of employees, me yesterday to rent a car, etc.  plus the airport isn't out in the middle of nowhere, there's offices and crap all around it.

[sys]

Public transportation in a college town is dumb.   


Top Notch Student with A Lot of University Academic Options:  “I’m considering K-State but I don’t have a car”.

K-State:  “We’re all about attracting the best and brightest and elevating our University profile in the next 20 years.  But as a freshman, we’re probably not be going to be able to get you housing on campus and we don’t have any way for you to actually get to campus or way for you to gain access to basic services within the community.  Maybe just buy a car or a hover board”.

it'd probably be cheaper just to loan all of the top notchers a car for 4 years.

[sys]

You would have to have a deposit that costs more than the bike is worth.

i don't think most of the bike thieves are bike share patrons.

[Rage Against the McKee]

big issue, they would probably use it a disproportionately larger amount and second two funding issues.  Students don't pay property taxes and the university I thought had some weird sales tax rules they were exempt from, not retail sales obviously.

In Ames, which is being used as the golden standard for us to model our system off of, 48% of the riders are students. This is with a large campus that needs its own transit system to get students from class to class, and also with rules making it illegal for students living in Ames to park their cars on campus. I would expect students to make up about 25% of the ridership in Manhattan, because we allow residents to drive to campus and park, and our campus is not big enough to make a bus system necessary. Also, why is it better to not charge students bus fares? Why not just let them purchase a bus pass for the year, just like they are currently purchasing parking passes?

[sys]

Also, why is it better to not charge students bus fares? Why not just let them purchase a bus pass for the year, just like they are currently purchasing parking passes?

if you're going to have it, you have to incentive use.  making it free to use, and charging students via fees and townies via taxes would be an easy way to do that.

[Rage Against the McKee]

Also, why is it better to not charge students bus fares? Why not just let them purchase a bus pass for the year, just like they are currently purchasing parking passes?

if you're going to have it, you have to incentive use.  making it free to use, and charging students via fees and townies via taxes would be an easy way to do that.

The students already pay the same taxes the townies do, though. Property tax is built into rent.

[Dr Rick Daris]

i think we should charge out of towners for it. hotel and rental car taxes.

[sys]

The students already pay the same taxes the townies do, though. Property tax is built into rent.

who cares, charge them triple if you can.

[sys]

i think we should charge out of towners for it. hotel and rental car taxes.

per ticket stadium infrastructure fees.

[ednksu]

big issue, they would probably use it a disproportionately larger amount and second two funding issues.  Students don't pay property taxes and the university I thought had some weird sales tax rules they were exempt from, not retail sales obviously.

In Ames, which is being used as the golden standard for us to model our system off of, 48% of the riders are students. This is with a large campus that needs its own transit system to get students from class to class, and also with rules making it illegal for students living in Ames to park their cars on campus. I would expect students to make up about 25% of the ridership in Manhattan, because we allow residents to drive to campus and park, and our campus is not big enough to make a bus system necessary. Also, why is it better to not charge students bus fares? Why not just let them purchase a bus pass for the year, just like they are currently purchasing parking passes?

people also need to realize that there are services here already and just need to be expanded.  From 2nd hand info, its been used heavily by students when it goes to areas they need.
http://www.rileycountyks.gov/index.aspx?nid=795

[eastcat]

There is nothing sexy about riding a bus. Realistically I think a street car system is the only realistic way to get something going, plus it would be unique and after the higher initial investment it would cost far less to operate over time and be more reliable.

You could have a campus loop that runs around campus up to BSFS and the hospital and back down to anderson.
A Townie loop that runs Anderson/blumont to 4th, down poyntz and up to the high school/ down sunset.
If we're going for the gold a Straight line that runs past RCPD/RCJ out to the airport and then the ogden gate of ft. Riley and back would be huge to making this a completely self sufficient system. People coming/going via the airport would have no need to rent a car.

[puniraptor]

one time i think i saw a dead homeless person on a bus but i didnt poke it or anything to be sure.

hopefully sleeping.

[Rage Against the McKee]

one time i think i saw a dead homeless person on a bus but i didnt poke it or anything to be sure.

hopefully sleeping.

probably passed out

[Belvis Noland]

There is nothing sexy about riding a bus. Realistically I think a street car system is the only realistic way to get something going, plus it would be unique and after the higher initial investment it would cost far less to operate over time and be more reliable.

The Kansas City streetcar plan is $100mil for 2 miles. 

definitely sexier, more efficient, more cost effective long term, etc.  But, not realistic in Manhattan - 50,000 people. 

[MakeItRain]

Hutchinson has bike sharing? Holy crap.

Had. Pretty sure they didn't restart it after the initial bikes were stolen the first week.

[GoodForAnother]

There is nothing sexy about riding a bus. Realistically I think a street car system is the only realistic way to get something going, plus it would be unique and after the higher initial investment it would cost far less to operate over time and be more reliable.

You could have a campus loop that runs around campus up to BSFS and the hospital and back down to anderson.
A Townie loop that runs Anderson/blumont to 4th, down poyntz and up to the high school/ down sunset.
If we're going for the gold a Straight line that runs past RCPD/RCJ out to the airport and then the ogden gate of ft. Riley and back would be huge to making this a completely self sufficient system. People coming/going via the airport would have no need to rent a car.

what you're describing would cost like a billion dollars

[GoodForAnother]

downtown KC has those bike rental kiosk thingies.  never used them but I imagine that they would be great in conjunction with a comprehensive public transportation system.  which makes you wonder why KC has them.  I remember seeing them in DC and New York just outside of subway stations and people used them like crazy.