gildone

^Three or four weeks ago, I sent a letter to Voinovich asking for an explanation for his vote (actually, I e-mailed his transportation staffer). No response yet.

Still, there is going to come a time when we're going to have to go with dedicated rights-of-way for some routes, just as Europe has done. We have to get used to the idea that, yes, it's very expensive, but you get what you pay for. Think of all the op-ed pieces over the years lamenting that we don't have what Europe has. Well, Europe has it because they are willing to spend what it takes to have it. Here, we have to start with plans like the Ohio Hub. But, that doesn't mean once the Ohio Hub is done, we shouldn't start making bigger plans for certain routes where dedicated right-of-way makes sense. Given the situation we're facing with peak oil, it is likely that we are going to end up with excess interstate capacity. That might give us some rights-of-way for rail in some situations. Add in the problems air travel will face as oil supplies tighten and begin their permanent decline. A lot of intercity travel is going to return to the rails, as is freight transport. As these things converge, it's going to be a whole new ball game. Ever noticed that in the US, our highways often parallel current (or former) rail lines?

^a situation like that probably would require looking for a new route. And, of course it's not cheap. Neither is buying up land for highways, but we keep doing it. I'm just saying that we're going to reach a point where we're going to have to accept the cost-- provided the country doesn't go bankrupt first. I'm not saying we should have all dedicated rights of way. I agree with BuckeyeB who said the answer is in the middle compared to what the AAR said in their release.

^How would you utilize high platform cars as a streetcar, or did it assume new, "flexible" equipment?

^we seem to have no qualms about buying up land to build and expand highways. we need to start thinking the same way about rail. Many former lines are cut up, but at some point, we're going to have to come to the realization that, for those former lines that are most useful for expanding passenger rail, we'll have to do what it takes to restore them.

Mr. Ferris has point, but until this state and this nation gets serious about supporting mass transit with real dollars and intelligent land use, there will never be adequate service after normal business hours. There is always room for improvement and they aren't perfect, but overall, I think RTA does a decent job with what they have. If Mr. Ferris thinks transit service is lacking here, he should try living in Columbus. on a separate note-- I must be misremembering about the Red Line extension. I could have sworn that the ridership numbers were part of it. Oh well, can't remember everything.

I agree that we need a medium to long range plan for European-style high speed rail. However, in you have to start incrementally with projects like the Ohio Hub in the short run. It gets us usable service now and it starts changing travel behaviors before you start spending the big bucks on dedicated rights-of-way. As you say, BuckeyeB -- the answer is in the middle. And you're right, it won't be cheap. You get what you pay for. I find it a colossal blunder that we're squandering the nation's treasure on a futile foreign policy financed by debt. I mentioned once before in one of these threads that the $600 billion we've wasted in the Middle East the past 5 years would have built 24,000 miles of european-style high speed rail here at home The economic activity generated by it would be immense and the energy security gained priceless. I fear we won't learn until after we careen off the cliff into the abyss in which all empires eventually fall.

I can't even find out where this town stands on the Ohio Hub. My council person has ignored two e-mail, and I wrote Mayor Biddlecomb 4 years ago and he never responded. Maybe Kleem will be better...

How would you get the Red Line into downtown Berea and then to Strongsville from there?

^you should e-mail Mr. Brancatelli and tell him that.

For me it doesn't. The 86 stops running south of Brook Park RTS to early on Saturday evenings and I've found the circulator in Lakewood to be mostly useless for me when I've wanted to connect to it from the Red Line on weekends because it doesn't run often enough. But, I'm just one passenger. In all honesty, not many people in Berea ride the 86 on Saturday evenings. Although, back in August, I had intended to catch the southbound 8:52 from Brook Park only to find that the schedule had been revised at some point to eliminate the 8:52 and 9:52 runs (if it ever did?). I had to get back on the Red Line and go to the airport and get a cab. I had come back from Columbus on Greyhound and was trying to get home. One other passenger got stranded at Brook Park too. She had to call someone she knew in Berea to get a ride. I wish the ridership study done several years ago for extending the Red Line to Berea and the IX Center had shown worthwhile numbers. Then the Red Line would be a 10 minute walk from my house... sigh...

Thanks. I was on vacation when these were posted. No wonder I missed them...

Is the proposed Mayfield station project still on the table? That would be fantastic. Little Italy would benefit a great deal by moving the E. 120th station to Mayfield. Although I know that some of the residents there don't favor the idea. We're already seeing some development along the corridor since construction began. Right now, it's in the form of building renovations and some new retail by CSU. I have no doubts that more development will occur. Euclid will be a beautiful street when it's done and that should beg for more development. Add in redevelopment of the Flats East Bank and the proposed "Pesht" project, and you're going to see a lot more downtown residents. That will benefit the Corridor too. Think how easy it will be for all those new residents to hop on the Silver Line on those nice roomy buses and go out to Severance Hall, the museums, Little Italy, or to work at Case or the Clinic, etc. Several of the city's finest assets are along Euclid. The Silver Line is a great way to tie them together. East of University Circle things will definitely take a longer time, but I don't think it's out of the realm of possibility that things could change for the better there too. I get to that area now and then for work. It's hard to believe that I spent the first 5 years of my life just a couple of miles from Windermere. East Cleveland was a nice place in the 60's.

Rode the #6 from CSU to Mayfield Rd today. It's already much faster and I'm looking forward to the new buses next fall. I was a bit peeved that the kiosk in Tower City that has all the bus schedules hadn't been stocked for the weekend. It appeared that there were no schedules for almost all the most common routes-- including the #6 which I needed. The LED display in the station where I picked up the #6 never changed from "next bus 5 minutes" right up until it pulled into the station. I'm sure the bugs will get worked out, though. Overall it was a good preview of what's to come. I like that the station stops are all automatically announced. Euclid sure is torn up downtown, but it's best to replace that sewer line now. All the people (like Feagler) who have been moaning about the construction don't seem to understand that not only do streets need to be rebuilt from time to time but there is a lot of infrastructure underneath them that sometimes needs work too. There is no construction fairy who can wave a magic wand and make everything perfect without temporary inconvenience. Why are the complainers incapable of looking ahead a few months in order to realize that Euclid Avenue is going to look better than it has in decades once it's all done?

The "government run" Ohio Turnpike is being managed fine. So are most other public toll roads in the US. Further enriching private interests (and in the case of the toll road consortiums-- overseas interests) isn't going to build more transportation in this country. I choose keeping the dollars here. Exactly. We need to spend transportation dollars in a way that promotes intermodalism and energy efficiency, not spending money on individual modes in a vacuum. That's how we've been doing it for decades and it has put us well behind the rest of the industrialized world, not to mention several developing nations.

^All I said was the way the numbers are sometimes presented they come across that way (and that depends on how the media reports them). I understand what RTA is saying, and I wasn't trying to imply that RTA is intentionally taking the credit. I apologize if I gave that impression.

^I disagree. If all that's going to happen from the driver's point of view is that tolls are going to go up, then the State could get the exact same result-- actually more money from it-- by just raising the tolls and earmarking the excess for other transportation projects that will help reach the new multi-modal/intermodal goals being pursued by ODOT. Why fatten the pockets of yet another already rich investment consortium when all of the money could stay in the state and do quite a bit of good here?

^I understand that it's difficult to track. However considering how dead Euclid Avenue has been for so long, particularly between CSU and the Cleveland Clinic, I don't think it's unreasonable to consider that building renovations that have recently occurred and new housing and retail, etc that goes in over the next few years is probably the result of the Silver Line. At the same time, I don't think it's unreasonable to say that the new heart center at the Clinic and the Art museum expansion would have occurred if the Silver Line were never built. Sometimes, the way that $2 billion figure is presented, it sounds like the Silver Line is responsible for all of it, which I think everyone would agree is not the case. I'm just trying to consider how this figure could be twisted around by critics and if there is a way around that. But, if it's not possible to track in a different way, then I suppose my thinking wasn't very sound from the start.

While he's right on the money for the general sentiment, I wish people would quit saying "we can't build our way out of congestion". Investing in alternatives to highways is building something. The phrase that should be used is "we can't pave our way out of congestion".

I think the writing is beginning to appear on the wall and the opponents won't be able to blockade much longer-- provided we get through January 20, 2009 without the current administration succeeding in shutting Amtrak down. Still, as a seasoned and jaundiced advocate, I don't hold my breath.

^that's more of what I was thinking. you just explained it better. thanks.

I don't disagree with the sentiment, but I think it would be useful for RTA to track development that occurs as a more direct result of Silver Line as it would be a more accurate portrayal of the economic development potential of transit projects-- something that would benefit not just RTA, but transit agencies all across the country.

I want to be sure I understand what makes up that $2 billion number. Is it all construction that has occurred/is occurring because of the Silver Line or does it include some development that would have been done anyway (like the Art Museum expansion and the Cleveland Clinic Heart Center)?

How are the smart cards ultimately going to work? I almost always travel on a day pass. Are the smart cards going to automatically debit a one-way trip fair and that's it, or will the cards be able to be programmed some other way?

^This is a great editorial. Your initial comments confuse me slightly. I thought the Dispatch has long supported the Ohio Hub and passenger rail? As I recall, when the 2-C project was killed in 2000, they published a great editorial cartoon that admonished the decision.