user

It seems like this is being done as badly and ugly as possible as a way for the city to prove a point. It is really disappointing, especially since this seems to work elsewhere. That said, I think the barriers will likely be at the edges of the existing curb ramps. Ramp users will likely still be behind the barriers (I'm guessing they will be placed at the angle of the painted lines) and then proceed to the (new) intersection to cross. Then the opposite maneuver gets repeated on the other end. Not really elegant or ideal, but likely will preserve ADA access.

FTA grants final extension to March 7 to resume bus service on Superior or repay $12M http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2017/02/feds_give_rta_two_more_weeks_t_1.html#incart_river_mobile_home

Apparently I failed at copy and paste, should be working now.

From the Plain Dealer: "A letter from RTA to the federal government indicates that Public Square eventually will reopen to buses, but the city of Cleveland has not yet agreed to the return. The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority is asking the federal government for more time to reopen the square while it works with the city on lingering safety and security issues." Link to article. Edited to correct URL.

Yes, he is quite well known. And as far as pro-transit cities, it's really hard to view Cleveland as being "pro-transit" after having lived elsewhere. It's clear by the blatant bus lane violations and non-enforcement in the supposedly dedicated transit lanes downtown that nobody cares. Similarly, what is Cleveland doing locally to support fixing the transit funding situation? Other cities have nice public spaces that are traversed by transit like Seattle's Westlake Park, including a plaza-like design on the street that King County Metro buses use: https://www.downtownseattle.com/2015/12/westlake-parks-winter-village/ There isn't any reason that it wouldn't work in Cleveland.

Depends who you ask. I see people using it most times that I go by there. Other people say it's "always" empty, which just isn't true. It isn't always empty -- there are frequently between one and five skaters during normal operating hours (and more on weekends during favorable weather conditions.) I wonder if Public Square will release their ticket sales numbers for the season because it would be interesting to compare to the number of daily bus riders being impacted by the city's decision to close Superior for the safety of ice skaters and "large crowds of people" :roll:

Following FTA's notice of debt, RTA asked the city to reopen Superior on Jan 9 and for the city to pay for any FTA penalties, and the city says they still want to proceed with further study and creation of a mitigation plan. Full document is here, RTA's letter is on p. 25, the city's response begins on p. 27: https://www.documentcloud.org/documents/3248857-Public-Square-Docs.html#document/p25 These are from the document dump at the end of Ginger Christ's Dec 30, 2016 article: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2016/12/federal_agency_demands_rta_rep.html Edited to attach images.

Some good info gleaned via records request from Mark Naymik Key points include: FTA is opposed to closing Superior and says it violates the funding agreement The mayor and the city have a laundry list of objections (confused motorists might not understand that Superior is only for buses, impaired motorists could present a risk, there aren't any significant delays, the roadway looks too much like a unified square and kids in the splash park would be confused, it makes Public Square a potential target, too many events are held there, etc.) FTA considers August 1 the date at which RTA went into violation RTA proposed reopening on Oct 31 The Mayor's office wanted to make reopening Public Square contingent upon RTA assuming any risk. Full piece on cleveland.com including some of the correspondence: http://www.cleveland.com/naymik/index.ssf/2016/11/heres_what_rta_and_city_hall_r.html (Edited for clarity.)

I agree with much of the above about Hopkins (and the author's conclusion that Detroit is more likely than Cleveland and the other listed cities.) That said, I believe Qatar and Etihad have smaller equipment and Emirates is said to be deciding between the 787 and A350: http://seekingalpha.com/article/4009288-boeing-one-order-save-year As far as fifth freedom routes, Hungary just awarded fifth freedom rights to Qatar (http://www.arabianbusiness.com/qatar-wins-fifth-freedom-aviation-rights-with-hungary-648662.html#.V_8IyvkrKCg) and the UAE is also reportedly interested: http://english.alarabiya.net/en/business/aviation-and-transport/2016/03/18/Emirates-makes-Hungary-latest-front-in-Gulf-US-battleground.html Not that I think Budapest would be a hot or likely market for Cleveland, but I also wouldn't be surprised to read about a new fifth freedom route from Qatar Airways in the not-too-distant future. (Edited to correct Al Arabiya URL.)

This is a little old but there is some interesting speculation about where a ME3 carrier might target for their next US route. Cleveland is one of a few larger markets that doesn't have access to a ME3 carrier within 100 miles driving distance, but Cleveland drops considerably when looking at GDP: http://www.airlinereporter.com/2016/01/playing-us-will-me3-fly-2016-guessing-game/ Also worth noting is that Emirates already has cargo service in Columbus (at Rickenbacker) so they already have some relationships in Columbus. I wonder how likely a ME3 carrier would be to launch a fifth-freedom route between somewhere like Cleveland/Columbus/Pittsburgh and a European market with continuing service to a Middle East hub. (Edited for typo/to spell city names.)

Nelson\Nygaard's final report... I don't have the Phase I data showing signal delays for the first batch of intersections (including Superior and W 3rd which is of particular interest because it seems to be especially delay prone for buses turning left onto Superior from W 3rd) but here is the link; hopefully this will be useful data: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3M2XkEFDB65ZmE5SmZuRW5DWXdVNkNsQlhTUUpENGE4eGFv

Thanks for posting this. I wonder if there may be some missing routes, though -- the stop signage installed on Public Square includes stops for route 26 as well as one of the trolley routes. Next time I'm there (likely tomorrow) I'll take a closer look. Whoops! Can't believe I missed the 26. I'll do the math on that and add it to my spreadsheet. I was going through all the routes manually, so it was more of an art than a precise science. Mea culpe. No problem, great info and I appreciate the compilation of the data.

Thanks for posting this. I wonder if there may be some missing routes, though -- the stop signage installed on Public Square includes stops for route 26 as well as one of the trolley routes. Next time I'm there (likely tomorrow) I'll take a closer look.

Today around 4:30pm I rode an eastbound 55 around Public Square. It took over nine and a half minutes from when the light turned green at W 3rd and Superior to make it to E 3rd and Superior (200 Public Square.) That said, I chatted with RTA staff following today's board meeting and was told that the city has yet to adjust the signal timing. Apparently a big part of the problem is that the pedestrian signal in front of Tower City only changes after being requested by pedestrians who want to cross, so it is difficult to coordinate with the other signals. One other thing that was mentioned was the that there isn't enough space behind the pedestrian signal. From what I have seen in front of Tower City there is room for a couple buses, but there are often more than one or two buses at a time (not to mention cars using the bus lane to skip backed-up traffic in the regular lane.) My bus actually didn't hit the pedestrian signal or the Ontario St. signal, most of the wasted time was waiting to turn on to Superior from W 3rd and waiting for W Roadway to clear (likely due to other traffic that did hit the ped signal, Ontario St., and maybe Euclid.) Although things can only improve with adjusted timing, I was told that if Superior was open today "we wouldn't be having this conversation."

Sure thing. Hopefully you can gain some miles... maybe enough claims will attract the attention of someone. I worked in a baggage control role at another airport for a different carrier. While we didn't specifically have a baggage delivery guarantee we did have an internal 20 minute metric, and any late bags were logged and popped up on a report. I wouldn't say that anyone was fired due to late bags but trends were monitored and staffing was adjusted accordingly.