Foraker

I'm not knocking the work that Mr. Calabrezze is doing in his lobbying efforts, but I don't see things getting better for a very long time, if ever. Also, not everyone agrees that increasing the gas tax to provide more money for transit is a bad idea during a recession. Accepting the current transportation funding formula, which spends money on bad choices, and waiting for better days does not make any sense. RTA should continue to push for more funding, even if that means raising taxes. Do not wait Mr. Calabrezze, keep pushing for changes in the funding formula. I'm willing to pay more for gas to have a better transit system, and I am not alone! (If gas prices were higher, as in Europe, perhaps we would have a higher percentage of the population calling for better transit.)

Doc Broc -- what's going on across the street from you at the tech center. Is the new parking lot open to anyone or is it being used by workers in the tech building?

Sprawl costs regional households and economy http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2012/06/northeast_ohio_sustainable_com_1.html

I was being a little bit of a trouble-maker, but my intent was to highlight how much more other states like PA subsidize public transit. Looking at these numbers, how much of those operating costs per-passenger come from the respective states? From this site: http://www.apta.com/resources/reportsandpublications/Documents/survey_state_funding_FY_08.pdf In 2008, Ohio spent $1.37 per capita on transit. In the same year PA spent $91.16 per capita. (From page 23, Table 1-9). $91.16 vs. $1.37! :drunk: Once you start laughing and crying, that is why I (snarkily) suggested that PAAC might have an easier time funding their $5.88 per passenger operating budget vs. GCRTA's $5.00 per passenger operating budget.

Regarding the salary differences at the top, the Allegheny job has been somewhat easier given PA's traditionally higher subsidy for transit. :lol: That may no longer be true given state budget cuts, however.

It wouldn't cost much to put some concrete bollards across the road to close off Ontario where it passes through the square. Then they can worry about improvements and funding over time. The only reason to delay doing so would be to give RTA time to make whatever changes need to be made. Hopefully RTA has the resources to plan for that, at least as a contingency...

What efficiencies are gained by privatizing? A private company will need to turn a profit rather than break even. I find it hard to believe that a private company can get asphalt patch or fuel for mowers cheaper than the state. So where are the savings? From workers only being seasonal? I expect that it means minimum-wage, no-benefit, temporary workers, right? WRONG! ODOT worker typical day (PM me to find out how I know) 7:30: punch in, sit around & drink coffee & read the paper till 8:15. *** 4:00 punch out. Often times the private contractors will pay higher hourly wage than what the ODOT worker gets, but much more is delivered in quantity of work. Private worker drives his own vehicle to the jobsite usually, starts working at 7am he goes home at the end of the day. The incentive is to work, make money, and keep working. There is no incentive at ODOT because they all have a job for life and they know it, so the only incentive is to barely do enough to not get caught sleeping on the job. If this is how ODOT is run, then we need to get on our Governor and legislators to improve their oversight. Throwing up our hands and paying someone with a profit motive to do it would be more expensive than doing it right in the first place. But I understand your point, and if current the system is too corrupt to do it right in the first place (consistently throughout the state) then we will probably be better off in the short term by having our friends in the for-profit sector take over for a while. We still need better oversight, however. See Jimmy Dimora and company for what will happen if no one is paying attention.

Those are only construction costs. What are operating costs over 20 years? One benefit of a subway is all-weather operation. No slowdowns for snow would be a nice advantage in Cleveland. (I would not expect the savings from lack of snow-removal to be significant enough to justify subway over surface rail, unless the costs of the inconvenience were really huge, which I doubt.)

KJP -- what do you know about the Steel Interstate Coalition: http://steelinterstate.org/ I like the phrase "steel interstate system."

I think cities/townships can decline to take over roads built by developers (can anyone confirm?), and if they can't assess developers for the incurred costs, then maybe they should do so more often.

What efficiencies are gained by privatizing? A private company will need to turn a profit rather than break even. I find it hard to believe that a private company can get asphalt patch or fuel for mowers cheaper than the state. So where are the savings? From workers only being seasonal? I expect that it means minimum-wage, no-benefit, temporary workers, right?

Well, we do have a problem (as noted above) with building new infrastructure (mostly more and more lane-miles of roadway) that we cannot afford to maintain. So on that front, paying more attention to what we're buying with those federal transportation dollars is important. But while I would welcome increased scrutiny and better decision-making, I don't think an across-the-board cut to transportation funding makes any sense. In my opinion, Congress has its priorities all wrong when they don't want to spend $50 billion for transportation but complain about planned cuts to the $1 trillion military budget, particularly when (a) Congress already agreed to cut the Defense budget, and (b) the Defense Department says those cuts are manageable! I would also argue in favor of making the gas tax a % tax rather than a flat rate, and increasing the tax above the current % rate, so that revenues will more closely follow petroleum prices. This is particularly important when it is petroleum products that are used to build and maintain the roads, so if the price goes up maintenance costs also go up.

the Ohio Education Credit Union appears to be open to all graduates of Ohio schools -- that could potentially include most Ohioans, but it's not clear from the website whether that means public Ohio universities or high schools. With a CSU branch, it's worth looking into for anyone working in the area.

I think Federal and State aid is going to continue to decline. Let's suppose that is the case. The question of how we are going to pay for the maintenance and replacement of our infrastructure is going to be up for debate a lot more frequently in the coming years. We really need to make smart long-term investments because we're going to have to pay more of our local transportation costs with local dollars. That means we have to start thinking not just about the initial capital cost, but maintenance, repair and replacement costs also need to be considered on every infrastructure project. In some cases it will make more sense to spend more for lower long-term costs. And in some cases it will make more sense to tear up or downgrade the road or bridge. Hard work and hard choices ahead.

My perception is different when riding the train than riding a bus. I don't know why. Maybe it's that there are fewer stops. Maybe it's that the train cars are further from the street.

The old Chevy dealership across the street also would be an excellent site for redevelopment. Unfortunately, the width of Mayfield in that area really isn't very pedestrian-friendly.

Interesting article on a study that finds a natural evolution of subway systems. This could be useful to someone at RTA for planning future rail systems. As well as being pretty interesting in its own right. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-18072627

At one time there was discussion (speculation?) that the Healthline buses would be outfitted with transponders to "trip" the traffic lights and thus improve travel times. Was that ever in the official plan? If so, was it implemented? And if not, why not? Does anyone know whether this has been done in any other cities? Just curious. The thought came out of the recent discussion about buses backing up on Euclid and problems with signal timing.

Every neighborhood needs a "downtown" commercial district to service the local residents. Dry cleaner, bank, post office, insurance agent, dentist, accountant, convenience store, grocery, local bar, ice cream shop, bookstore, theatre, whatever. It doesn't necessarily have to be a draw for residents from throughout the county, and in fact we can't all have local business districts that draw from a county-wide area, it just isn't practical. Just think of how this project could really improve the neighborhood. It could create a lot of small business opportunities (jobs) too. Here's hoping it works out that well.

Jerry -- what about a new sticker for the machines, something along the lines of "Smile, you're on candid camera!"

The mayor has already said that the money will be used as originally intended -- to pay off outstanding debt.

PR blunder for CSU. They probably could have insisted that any structures built on the leased property follow public construction requirements, but they didn't. I would be that they might the next time CSU pursues this kind of arrangement.

Or they could make I-490 eastbound and I-90 westbound....

Not 100% certain, though my guess is protest. Still looking for a news article about it. Their signs seem to be from the carpenter's union, something about the contractor not paying prevailing local wage.

I favor extending the WFL to make it a peripheral downtown loop. For one, it would increase the potential ridership of that line. With construction proceeding and tenants coming to the Flats, the combination seems likely to lead to much higher ridership on the WFL than there is now. Second, I think it would benefit RTA's rail system overall, but placing stops much closer to a larger pool of employers. In a small sampling over lunch I found a few people in our office near CSU who do not ride RTA because of the "difficulty" in transferring from the Red Line to the bus. They would have to exit the train at TT, walk out to the street, wait for a bus, and then walk from Euclid to our office. I say "difficulty" because it really doesn't seem that hard, but apparently it makes a difference to some people. They all thought that if the WFL were extended to come closer to the office, they would be willing to wait at TT for a transfer and then walk from the closer stop to the office. Even if it saved no time, they thought that this would be "easier" and they would be more likely to use RTA in that way. Most thought they could live with one transfer but not two. I don't know why (bus prejudice?) but there you go. Anecdotal at best, I know.