urbanlife

although i agree that this is money well spent, i think the article reinforces the education gap that exists within the general public regarding transit costs - whether it be the cost to buy buses, or the amount of of each fare that goes toward providing operating service. imo, 1 million can and does sound like a lot of money if you aren't aware of the details involved of operating a transit bus for 12 or 14 years in cleveland and if you have never bid out a road construction project.

in the downtown section this has to do with the presence of underground vaults. basically all of euclid ave from public square to e18 had underground vaults connected to the basements of buildings. many were used for utilities or storage, but some, like the one in front of the statler at e12 was actually a former bar. kind of sad to see this go, although it hadn't been in use for years. the building owners could either pay to have the vaults renovated and restored, or filled in. Many of the buildings had the vaults filled in, and today, there are trees that now grow where vaults were. some buildings, the playhouse square area and the rotunda for example still have working vaults, and therefore no sidewalk trees. there will be some aboveground plantings in certain sections (playhouse square), and there are already automatic water connections under the brick sidewalks in the future locations for these large "pots" that will sit on top of the sidewalk.

you most likely did hear a "ding ding". the buses have the same electro-mechanical bell that is on all of the light rail vehicles. this was a small add on in the effort to make this line as close to a train like experience as possible. apparently they tried numerous digitized ding noises but couldn't get it right, so went with the same system from the train.

Two different markets and with different amounts of developable space. I don't think 20 years ago that would fly in chicago either. Cleveland also has ordinances limiting parking / surface parking lot creation in the CBD. Basically, you "can't" tear down an existing building and create permanent parking, the lot can only be used for "temporary parking" for a certain period. the idea is that a building owner can't tear down a building to gain a better (in the near term) revenue stream from parking at the long term expense of the neighborhood, density, public transit, etc. but, time and again this isn't enforced. house of blues bus parking area is one example. corner of carnegie and e9 is another.

had a chance to try this place this week. nice dinner menu, reasonably priced and good selection. now, the service on the other hand was terrible. i suppose that things will eventually get better, but it appeared that everyone was learning on the fly and hadn't even had basic training on the menu or point of sale system. it took a long time to get our food (and it wasn't busy), a long time to get drinks, and a long time to cashout.

in the city club presentation by RTA it was mentioned that the E line would go back to 7am until 7pm once the HealthLine opens, so sometime in late October. apparently there was an agreement with CSU to keep the longer hours until the new line is operational. i was hoping for service expansions on this popular route, not reductions and imo this is moving the service levels in the wrong direction - especially in the early dark and often cold months ahead.

was there ever consideration of having a multi-modal facility by combining the waterfront line e9 station with amtrak? it seems like a perfect opportunity to combine facilities.

It basically has to do with the RTA competing against private bus companies. The new rule doesn't allow RTA (or other transit agencies) to offer special services that don't exist outside of events, the rationale being that transit agencies may unfairly be competing against private operators, who could be providing this service. EDIT: Here is an article discussing the details of the new rule and the impact in Seattle: http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/localnews/2004404873_metro10m.html?syndication=rss Here is the text of the new rule, adopted in January 2008: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20081800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2008/pdf/08-86.pdf

The Volunteer Action Committee of the Citizens Advisory Board has posted the agenda for the meeting this Friday, Sept 5 at 8:30am at RTA's headquarters. It looks like there will be a presentation on the Transit Waiting Environments project that will be rolling out to a number of bus stops in the near future. http://www.riderta.com/CAB/docs/VAC_Agenda_200809.pdf

I walked around the site this afternoon. It appears that the pile of dirt is actually some sort of brick structure that used to exist there (or still functions, say for sewer access). What was on this lot before it became a parking lot?

I have had multiple run ins with him downtown, and after the first time, just ask him if he still hasn't fixed the problem from x days or x weeks ago when I last saw him. He just smiles, and walks away. I had a rebar man sighting last night. He parked his bike and locked it to a street lightpole near e105 and MLK, and he was walking up toward Euclid in his tattered construction vest, so he seems to be working the entire corridor and not just downtown.

Are there any existing legal opinions on this section in Ohio? It seems there is a good argument that this provision states that it applies to vehicles used on public highways, which leaves off road and construction equipment fuel taxes available for diversion, similar to what other states have done. I'd like to either see a strong movement to change the language or, in the meantime, someone to start distributing funds from the taxes to transit, and wait for a challenge in the courts to resolve the language. It feels like we are still sitting around in Ohio, when at least a few other states have tackled these types of restrictions a few years ago.

I think we should also put things into context, globally, which is where I hope Cleveland is aiming to compete with proposed investments like the OC. In Europe, where fuel prices have been high for years and I would argue there are far superior and more successful rail and public transit linkages, in the EU 27 country average, 81.8% of passenger km are made by passenger car. In countries like France (83.9%) and UK (86.5%) of pkm are made by passenger car. Urban rail (tram and metro) makes up around 1% of pkm. Source: http://www.irfnet.eu/media/press_release/statistics/erfeuropean_road_statistics_2008_booklet_150x210mm_v08_press_passenger_transport.pdf For the inland transport of goods, the EU 27 moved 76.7% on roads, 17.7% on rail and the rest on inland waterways (2006). Source: http://www.irfnet.eu/media/press_release/statistics/erfeuropean_road_statistics_2008_booklet_150x210mm_v08_press_goods_transport.pdf I think it is far more likely that we will begin to model the EU forms of land use and transportation systems over the coming decades as fuel prices rise and climate change regulations are implemented, but if the EU is our model, then we will still be making a number of trips by a personal vehicle and via a roadway, and a lot of local shipping will occur over roadways. Our personal autombiles and trucks may be powered by other sources, we may devise smarter and more efficient ways to combine trips, and the end products may cost more, but I don't see a large number of roadway trips going away in the lifespan a new roadway construction - especially in an urban area -even when gasoline is $7,8,9 or 10 a gallon.

the maps that are going in the back lighted section of the kiosk will include a route map, a zoomed in portion of the map that shows the streets and 5 or 10 attractions around the stop (with information on these attractions), frequency information and fare information. the mock ups look pretty good. hopefully RTA can find a way to incorporate similar signage/maps at all of the rail stations, as many of the stops today do not have very good maps or information on activities/attractions that surround the stops.

I had heard, and I think saw a rendering somewhere, that the building that could support an addition was on the northeast west corner of euclid and e13 and not these 2 buildings. If you look at the roof of that building, it looks like it could structurally be continued upward. but, perhaps these are different plans. there was also a plan for the building behind these 2 buildings to have a vertical addition as well.

there was also a large ship parked in the port area at the end of w9 that had a crane type attachment on it. EDIT: but after reviewing the photos, there certainly is a crane parked on site. as for infrastructure, they are actively relocating a gas pipeline.

i thought it was sold for a dollar as well, which is one of the reasons the development went there as opposed to on a parking lot in the warehouse district (for example) which would have added a couple of million to the cost. plus, the city has a land bank where they are selling properties for 1 to 100 dollars in some neighborhoods. how does that work?

it is my understanding after reading the city taxi regulations that you are allowed to hail a cab anywhere in the city, but cabs can't cruise looking for pickups - they have to be coming from a drop off and going to a designated taxi stand area (which there are a number of downtown on the street, in front of hotels, etc.) so, in practice, it isn't that hard to hail a cab downtown as they are usually going toward a pickup area.

In the last few days I've notice more 1 car trains that have been coupled with other 1 car trains (operator areas at both ends of a single car, meaining 4 areas on a 2 car train) it seems like the 100 series cars have operator areas at both ends of single cars, and the 300 series has an operator area at only 1 end, and is usually coupled with another 300 series train. can anyone provide a breakdown of how the heavy rail fleet is broken down? and, does this occur more frequently and I just haven't noticed it, or are some of the 300 trains out of service?

are those solar panels or vents? it doesn't really say on the website, but would be pretty cool if the lights were solar powered.

the Chicago Metropolitan Planning Authority has "borrowed" a BRT vehicle from Cleveland for their press release on expanded BRT in Chicago...it looks like they twisted the front though... http://www.metroplanning.org/articleDetail.asp?objectID=4399

The healthline is proof of payment, however there will be ticket vending machines at each station. The vending machines have not been installed yet, but there is wiring for them inside the station shelter.

Cleveland Magazine does a suburb rating each year. Although the methodology and ranking can be debated depending on what you feel is particularly important and the report generally does not favor suburbs closer to the city, it does gather a lot of data from the various suburbs and puts it in one place. It is available online for $15 or you might be able to find a back print copy. http://www.clevelandmagazine.com/suburbs

were the initial studies on infrastructure improvement ever completed or reported? I thought that they were looking at water, sewer, electric, gas, etc. to see what would need upgraded to support the development - perhaps they are ready to tie a number to the improvements required?

what this area needs is 1 true sports bar. instead, it is a bunch of bars that show sports and are located near the venues.