From Scene Magazine:

If Cleveland Had a Bigger, Better Metro Railway, This is What it Might Look Like

 

Posted By Sam Allard on Wed, Jan 18, 2017 at 10:47 AM

 

    Jake Berman, Studio Complutense

 

All credit to Jake Berman, who posted this imaginary map to reddit.

 

Given that Ohio can't be bothered to adequately fund public transit, and given RTA's menu of impending financial disasters, the above is merely a pipe dream. But imagine!

 

Mr. Berman left no stone unturned. In the "Special gameday service" box, he envisions the following promotion: "Show your ClemCard at Browns Stadium [sic] and get one free paper bag with every Browns ticket!"

 

http://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/archives/2017/01/18/if-cleveland-had-a-bigger-better-metro-railway-this-is-what-it-might-look-like

^Good for Scene.  Yeah, their expanded rapid-rail network may be an imaginary pipe-dream, but at least Scene is thinking about expanded mass transit, unlike most people/media/leaders in Cleveland.

^Technically, Scene didn't come up with it. They just posted something from Reddit user. (I wonder if Berman is a UO member :) )

 

 

Regardless, that is awesome. Three suggestions at first glance:

~* Have the western terminus of the "E" line extend to the Clague and Westlake P&R

~* Somehow work in the North Olmsted P&R with either the "D" or "E" lines

~* Extend the eastern terminus of the "A" line out to the Euclid P&R

 

^The Beachland Ballroom Line!?

That's a pretty awesome little concept,.. wasn't there also talk of extending the cuyahoga scenic rail up to cleveland?  If do where would that come in at?  Or is it even possible ?

That's a pretty awesome little concept,.. wasn't there also talk of extending the cuyahoga scenic rail up to cleveland?  If do where would that come in at?  Or is it even possible ?

 

Lots of conversation about that here:

https://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,3566.0.html

This publication is not specific to mass transit but it includes a really interesting article -- why don't we do a better job designing the transit experience?

http://carfree.com/cft/i085.html

 

This publication is not specific to mass transit but it includes a really interesting article -- why don't we do a better job designing the transit experience?

http://carfree.com/cft/i085.html

 

What a great read!  It is regrettable that people in power and special interests can't see the benefit (and eventual inevitability) of mass transit.  If these things are thought of now and implementation begins early and gradually, it can be smoother and a more pleasant transition.

This publication is not specific to mass transit but it includes a really interesting article -- why don't we do a better job designing the transit experience?

http://carfree.com/cft/i085.html

 

 

Because the passenger is not really a consideration.  Budgets, "efficiency", and all too often egalitarianism are considered more important.

 

Monopolies do that.

This publication is not specific to mass transit but it includes a really interesting article -- why don't we do a better job designing the transit experience?

http://carfree.com/cft/i085.html

 

Because the passenger is not really a consideration.  Budgets, "efficiency", and all too often egalitarianism are considered more important.

 

Monopolies do that.

 

I agree that financial considerations (and prejudices about Those-Who-Use-Transit) issues dominate, but I disagree that it's a monopoly issue. 

 

Competition does not guarantee a better experience.  As an example, consider US Airline Travel (trending negative passenger experience despite (because of?) intense competition within the industry). 

 

I can think of at least one instance where the lack of direct competition has not prevented a great travel experience -- the Shinkansen (Japanese bullet train).  I expect that the excellent service allows them to charge a higher fare and maintain sufficient ridership, but there are no other bullet train operators in Japan. 

 

On the other hand, the Shinkansen does have "competition," but it is in alternative travel modes -- airlines, "local" trains, and cars -- each of which has different pros/cons and the markets for each mode partially overlap but are not identical.

 

Similarly, RTA's competition is primarily personal cars, which provide more mobility, but also higher costs.  A better rider experience might convince more people to ride RTA's buses and trains, but there would still be people who want/need a personal car and the flexibility that provides -- the market for personal car drivers and RTA's services only partially overlap.  So despite RTA's "monopoly" of transit in Cleveland, there is some competition and some reasons to improve the customer experience.

This publication is not specific to mass transit but it includes a really interesting article -- why don't we do a better job designing the transit experience?

http://carfree.com/cft/i085.html

 

Because the passenger is not really a consideration.  Budgets, "efficiency", and all too often egalitarianism are considered more important.

 

Monopolies do that.

 

I agree that financial considerations (and prejudices about Those-Who-Use-Transit) issues dominate, but I disagree that it's a monopoly issue. 

 

Competition does not guarantee a better experience.  As an example, consider US Airline Travel (trending negative passenger experience despite (because of?) intense competition within the industry). 

 

I can think of at least one instance where the lack of direct competition has not prevented a great travel experience -- the Shinkansen (Japanese bullet train).  I expect that the excellent service allows them to charge a higher fare and maintain sufficient ridership, but there are no other bullet train operators in Japan. 

 

On the other hand, the Shinkansen does have "competition," but it is in alternative travel modes -- airlines, "local" trains, and cars -- each of which has different pros/cons and the markets for each mode partially overlap but are not identical.

 

Similarly, RTA's competition is primarily personal cars, which provide more mobility, but also higher costs.  A better rider experience might convince more people to ride RTA's buses and trains, but there would still be people who want/need a personal car and the flexibility that provides -- the market for personal car drivers and RTA's services only partially overlap.  So despite RTA's "monopoly" of transit in Cleveland, there is some competition and some reasons to improve the customer experience.

 

I tend to agree.  Regarding monopolies, I think e.rocc is focusing on the days when suburban services like the Maple Hts Transit (bus) service existed along with the old CTS and Shaker Rapid Transit, among other local services, before RTA was created and absorbed all of those services.  The days of these smaller services is long gone; very few cities, especially major cities even as large as New York, have multiple municipally-owned transit services (note the only exceptions in New York are transit services from other states, like New Jersey Transit and PATH, which is owned by the NY/NJ Port Authority). 

 

As you note, the main competition we should be focusing on is between the automobile and transit.  While I agree, there is obviously a necessary and important place for cars in the Greater Cleveland transportation complex, transit, RTA that is, is losing out in areas where it should, if not dominate, be more important factor such as transportation in/out of downtown and dense neighborhoods like University Circle, Shaker Square and Ohio City...

 

... Quite obviously the inability to convince local pols to even get seriously interested in issues like RTA's operational funding or TOD is extremely disheartening.  The fact that, as KJP has repeatedly pointed out, that the transit GM and his top managers mistakenly believe that declining operational dollars means the agency cannot plan for the future or extend service, is absurd.  And the fact that only a few people even seem to know, or care about this, ... well, what can you say? 

 

I was on an outbound Blue Line train a few weeks ago that broke down at E. 79th, where all passengers had to wait for: 1) another train could be dispatched from the E. 55th street yard to push it away, and 2) for the next (extremely delayed) Green Line train to come and ferry us to Shaker Square.  It's well known that these near 40-year-old trains are falling apart with no source of repair components, other than cannibalizing parts from deactivated cars, and that it may force the system to shut down in a few years.  And yet RTA has no firm plans to replace these cars, apparently with the mentality that it can't make such plans because its collective finger is in the dike plugging the operational funding hole.  This is inexcusable.

:wtf:

 

Not sure, but RTA's Blue/Green line failure during the Cavs' parade and subsequent struggles for even Browns' games may have scared a lot of folks away from the trains.

More context on this post?

I live in Shaker and I know a number of neighbors and friends in this area opt out of the Rapid for big events downtown when, in the past, it was the go-to option.  For St. Paddy's day, one neighbor drove and parked near CSU and walked in... they would never do that in the past.  RTA does pretty good in the day-to-day commute, but big events? 

I live in Shaker and I know a number of neighbors and friends in this area opt out of the Rapid for big events downtown when, in the past, it was the go-to option.  For St. Paddy's day, one neighbor drove and parked near CSU and walked in... they would never do that in the past.  RTA does pretty good in the day-to-day commute, but big events? 

 

They did fine on the west side for St. Paddy's day. RTA had 4-5 people working the station, handing out $5 St. Patrick's farecards -- yet there was hardly a crowd waiting to board one hour before the parade. The crowd downtown wasn't as big as in year's past either. I posted a few pics on the AAO twitter account.

^Good to hear the Red Line ran smoothly... The way things are going, the Red Line may be Cleveland's only Rapid line the way RTA is managing things.

25% of retail sales are occurring online, and state law doesn't allow counties or transit agencies to assess sales taxes on online purchases. This amount will continue to grow, and worsen greatly starting this year when Medicare MCO purchases through insurance companies can no longer be assessed sales tax. For Cleveland RTA, that will mean a 10 percent drop in sales tax revenue. It's time to modernize the sales tax...

 

America’s Retailers Are Closing Stores Faster Than Ever

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-07/stores-are-closing-at-a-record-pace-as-amazon-chews-up-retailers

 

25% of retail sales are occurring online, and state law doesn't allow counties or transit agencies to assess sales taxes on online purchases. This amount will continue to grow, and worsen greatly starting this year when Medicare MCO purchases through insurance companies can no longer be assessed sales tax. For Cleveland RTA, that will mean a 10 percent drop in sales tax revenue. It's time to modernize the sales tax...

 

America’s Retailers Are Closing Stores Faster Than Ever

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2017-04-07/stores-are-closing-at-a-record-pace-as-amazon-chews-up-retailers

 

 

It may be time to follow Mitt Romney's lead and put in place a VAT nationally.

It may be time to follow Mitt Romney's lead and put in place a VAT nationally.

 

We pay VAT for services in Europe.  It's no more complicated than a sales tax on products.

Don't look now, but NOACA just got $200,000 from the state to begin planning a multi-county transit system for Northeast Ohio.

I just wish I could get from downtown Medina to downtown Cleveland on a bus without it taking over 2 hours.

25% of retail sales are occurring online, and state law doesn't allow counties or transit agencies to assess sales taxes on online purchases.

 

That's not true. At the end of the year, you're supposed to claim and pay all sales tax on anything​you bought, online or elsewhere, if the vendor did not charge it for you. Nobody, and I mean nobody, does this.

You're right, mu2010. Plus, Amazon pays local sales taxes on Internet purchases.

25% of retail sales are occurring online, and state law doesn't allow counties or transit agencies to assess sales taxes on online purchases.

 

That's not true. At the end of the year, you're supposed to claim and pay all sales tax on anything​you bought, online or elsewhere, if the vendor did not charge it for you. Nobody, and I mean nobody, does this.

 

True, though companies with a physical location in the state (this includes Amazon) will charge the state tax.  But not the local and county ones and they aren't covered on the state forms.

 

People will avoid taxes when they can.  How many of us buy tobacco and alcohol in the surrounding counties when we can? 

 

I'm not against a VAT as long as it's offset by cuts to income and/or corporate taxes.  Probably the latter.  Trump is right that US corporate taxes are ridiculously high and this exports jobs.

25% of retail sales are occurring online, and state law doesn't allow counties or transit agencies to assess sales taxes on online purchases.

 

That's not true. At the end of the year, you're supposed to claim and pay all sales tax on anything​you bought, online or elsewhere, if the vendor did not charge it for you. Nobody, and I mean nobody, does this.

 

True, though companies with a physical location in the state (this includes Amazon) will charge the state tax.  But not the local and county ones and they aren't covered on the state forms.

 

People will avoid taxes when they can.  How many of us buy tobacco and alcohol in the surrounding counties when we can? 

 

I'm not against a VAT as long as it's offset by cuts to income and/or corporate taxes.  Probably the latter.  Trump is right that US corporate taxes are ridiculously high and this exports jobs.

 

Do we a sum certain VAT for transit?  Will it be enough to harm state corporations, especially larger ones, to the extent they would threaten to leave the State over it?  Could there not be other state bennies state and local govts toss their way to placate them?

I don't think that's accurate either. Sellers with a nexus with Ohio (aka physical presence) are required to pay sales taxes including the applicable local levied taxes.

 

The tricky part though, is that Ohio requires sales taxes to be collect where the order is taken, not where the consumer is located. So urban counties like Cuyahoga (and by extension RTA) may* not benefit from having Amazon located in Licking County.

 

 

Edit, see below*

 

25% of retail sales are occurring online, and state law doesn't allow counties or transit agencies to assess sales taxes on online purchases.

 

That's not true. At the end of the year, you're supposed to claim and pay all sales tax on anything​you bought, online or elsewhere, if the vendor did not charge it for you. Nobody, and I mean nobody, does this.

 

True, though companies with a physical location in the state (this includes Amazon) will charge the state tax.  But not the local and county ones and they aren't covered on the state forms.

 

People will avoid taxes when they can.  How many of us buy tobacco and alcohol in the surrounding counties when we can? 

 

I'm not against a VAT as long as it's offset by cuts to income and/or corporate taxes.  Probably the latter.  Trump is right that US corporate taxes are ridiculously high and this exports jobs.

^ Does the Amazon store on Euclid Avenue have an effect on this?

I guess it depends on how Amazon "receives the order." So I'm not really sure, but this is what state law says:

 

If vendor does not capture the location where the order is received, or if the order is received at a location outside Ohio, the sale is sourced to the location where the consumer (or the consumer's donee) receives the tangible personal property.

So while you're all pre-occupied with sales tax minutae, you're overlooking the big story. This is what we've (OK maybe just me?) been waiting for to create a truly regional transit system....

 

Don't look now, but NOACA just got $200,000 from the state to begin planning a multi-county transit system for Northeast Ohio.

KJP, do you have anymore details about this planning? Was this published in the TIP? It isn't part of their AIM Forward document, right?

KJP, do you have anymore details about this planning? Was this published in the TIP? It isn't part of their AIM Forward document, right?

 

Yes, they're part of the AIM Forward plan. The funds are to be awarded by ODOT in the State Fiscal Year 2018, which actually starts July 1 of this year.

Definitely a bombshell, KJP... so many questions to answer, starting with: which counties (other than Cuyahoga, of course)?  Why is this happening now, politically?  I mean, is this strictly a Grace Gallucci initiative or is it shared widely?  Just curious because it could give some indicator as to the potential success or failure of this initiative.

 

Obviously this is a Halleluiah moment for many of us.

Grace Gallucci led this effort for the plan, but it's an outgrowth of the Vibrant NEO plan: http://vibrantneo.org/vibrantneo-2040/initiative-goals/

 

There are five counties in NOACA (Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain, Medina) but for this regional transit plan to have any value, it must include the three counties of the AMATS service area (Portage, Summit, Wayne) since no two Ohio counties have more commuting between them than Cuyahoga and Summit. And from what I know of this effort, there will be a strong desire to include the Canton and Youngstown/Warren areas too in any regional transit plan.

BTW, if this stuff interests you, come find out more this week. It's not too late to RSVP......

 

"Transportation in Northeast Ohio-Where’s the equity?" Find out 7 pm 6/14, Urban Community School, 4909 Lorain Ave, Cleveland

 

http://teachingcleveland.org/transportation-in-northeast-ohio-wheres-the-equity/

A couple of recent pics of the GCRTA station at Hopkins Airport....

 

 

 

Which dovetail nicely with this story....

 

Mayor Barry looks at privatizing Nashville airport to generate transit funds

Joey Garrison and Nate Rau , The Tennessean Published 2:13 p.m. CT June 26, 2017

 

Mayor Megan Barry's administration is exploring privatizing the operations of the city-owned Nashville International Airport to an outside management company to generate funding for mass transit in Middle Tennessee.

 

The mayor's office confirmed hearing a presentation in May from representatives of Oaktree Capital Management, a California-based investment firm that has also made bids to run government-owned airports in other cities.

 

Barry's Chief Operating Officer Rich Riebeling downplayed the meeting as "preliminary," but he did say the privatization of the Nashville International Airport is something the city is looking at to help fund a $6 billion proposed transit system in the region.

 

Under the arrangement, a private company would pay Metro to enter into a long-term lease for the airport's operations.

 

Although no deal is on the table, Riebeling estimated a transaction could generate in the "low billions" for transit in Nashville.

 

MORE:

http://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2017/06/26/mayor-barry-looks-privatizing-nashville-airport-generate-transit-funds/429000001/

While I'm not too crazy for that idea myself, at least they're doing something and thinking outside of the box to get transit funding. Nashville is such an awful city to drive in (and walking without any sidewalks would be death) because there's currently barely a transit system at all. Everyone is forced to drive. My mom moved down there a bit over a year ago, and ever she, who admittedly would not be a transit rider, could see the difference it creates. It was crazy at first how a smaller city could have so much more traffic. But that's what sprawl, no density, and no transit gets you.

 

They do have alot of plans now, and I wish them luck. They sure need it.

Redirected from the Cleveland business thread...

 

Absent a major funding increase from somewhere yet to be seen, the private sector paying 100% is the only way expanded service will happen now.

 

Not even then.  Remember, Ohio City, Inc. was interested in building a streetcar line down Detroit Avenue, but RTA wasn't willing to operate it.

 

RTA hates the very idea of competition.  Or even giving anyone else a say in how well they run things.

 

I'm not a transit expert but couldn't they just do it anyway and pay another transit authority to operate it like Laketran or something? Or is that illegal?

 

I'm pretty fuzzy on the law regarding transit agency competition, but I seem to recall that each state-registered, county-based transit agency has a legal monopoly. And any transit service provider operating in that county must have the permission of the transit agency to operate there. They are not entitled to the sales and use taxes that GCRTA receives and may not receive federal transit grants awarded to each urbanized area per a complicated formula unless GCRTA agrees to it (because it would reduce the urban formula funding available to GCRTA). However, state law encourages competition when awarding transit grants, namely by having transit agencies contract out more services. But most private contractor bus drivers couldn't afford to live in Greater Cleveland at the wages that private transit contractors pay.

I'm pretty certain separate agencies are barred from operating public transit within Cuyahoga county (or any other county where a similar agency to RTA is operating transit)... This apparently exempts limited private transport services like hotels and bars who shuttle customers to/from events... Like GLBC and Aloft Hotel, which shuttle patrons to/from Indians, Cavs or Browns games, or hotels that shuttle tenants to/from the airport, etc.)

 

Obviously also private entities can underwrite RTA's services, like the Health Line, the new Metro Health bus line and the downtown Trolleys.

In Italy and I assume many other countries they have all kinds of private bus operators. Urban, city buses are run by transit agencies but there are many longer haul routes out to suburbs, satellite cities, and far-flung rural towns that are run for-profit by small operators. They usually have some kind of sticker or seal on the side of the bus with the regional government or the local transit agency's logo on it, suggesting they cooperated in some way with the government or the government helped develop the routes or maybe is even subsidizing it. Seems to work well. Granted, demand is much higher there for public transport especially in outlying areas.

^From my understanding, Napoli alone has over 10 different transit companies. They are all coordinated under one agency though, Unico Campania. Northeast Ohio Region is very similar to the size and population of the Campania Region.

Yep, social democracies have more private sector involvement in the delivery of public transportation services than hyper-capitalist America does. Go figure that one out.

Yep, social democracies have more private sector involvement in the delivery of public transportation services than hyper-capitalist America does. Go figure that one out.

 

Public benefits can reduce the cost of employing people, which helps businesses as much as it helps anyone.  And in most western countries the state owns a portion of every business.  Their dividing line between the public and private sectors is blurrier than ours, which makes cooperation a lot easier.

^From my understanding, Napoli alone has over 10 different transit companies. They are all coordinated under one agency though, Unico Campania. Northeast Ohio Region is very similar to the size and population of the Campania Region.

 

How many local systems were there before the semi-coerced merger that created GCRTA?

^From my understanding, Napoli alone has over 10 different transit companies. They are all coordinated under one agency though, Unico Campania. Northeast Ohio Region is very similar to the size and population of the Campania Region.

 

How many local systems were there before the semi-coerced merger that created GCRTA?

 

Good question. I don't have that info though.

I believe only two systems were immediately merged in 1975 when GCRTA was created -- the Cleveland Transit System and the Shaker Heights Rapid Transit. Both were municipally owned transit operators and in desperate need of capital improvement and modernization. So were other systems around Cuyahoga County in the years before and after the 1975 formation of GCRTA....

 

https://www.chicagorailfan.com/clesub.html

 

Several independent private or municipal suburban bus systems existed in the Cleveland area. Some systems were eventually absorbed by the Cleveland Transit System (CTS) during its years of operation. After the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) was formed in 1975, additional systems were initially operated under contract with GCRTA, and subsequently absorbed by GCRTA.

 

How these routes evolved into routes operated by GCRTA, is covered at the Route History page: https://www.chicagorailfan.com/cledate.html (much of this is out of date)

 

Berea Bus Co. - began operations in 1919, filling a void left by the relocation of the Cleveland Southwestern & Columbus Railway interurban line, originally connecting with interurban line. Direct service to downtown Cleveland introduced in 1923, and local routes introduced after World War II. Downtown service speeded up in 1966 by opening of new expressway. Acquired by CTS in 1968.

 

Brecksville Road Transit - operations absorbed by GCRTA in 1984.

 

Broadview Bus Co. - began operations in 1950 with service between Broadview and downtown Cleveland. Acquired by CTS in 1961.

 

BIC Transit - operations absorbed by GCRTA in 1975.

 

City Of Euclid - local municipal bus system began operations in 1935, route to downtown Cleveland introduced in 1970. Operations absorbed by GCRTA in 1979.

 

Garfield Heights Coach Lines - susidiary of Cleveland Southeastern Bus Co., which in 1932 succeeded Northern Ohio Traction & Light interurban line between Cleveland and Bedford, which was abandoned at that time. Garfield Heights Coach Lines service between Garfield Heights and Cleveland introduced in 1947. Operations absorbed by GCRTA in 1982.

 

Lakewood Rapid Transit Co. - began operations in 1937 with service between Lakewood and downtown Cleveland. Acquired by CTS in 1954, discontinued.

 

Maple Heights Transit - municipal bus system began operations in 1935, with route to downtown Cleveland and another route connecting with Shaker Heights Rapid Transit. Absorbed by GCRTA on March 25, 2005.

 

North Olmsted Municipal Bus Lines - municipal bus system began operations in 1931 with line into downtown Cleveland, succeeding Cleveland Southwestern Railway & Light Co. interurban line, which was abandoned at that time. Various additional lines were created in subsequent years. Absorbed by GCRTA on March 25, 2005.

 

Redifer Bus System - began charter and sightseeing operations in 1926. In 1937, introduced service between Cleveland and University Heights, but was ordered to cease service in 1940 upon objections by Cleveland Railway. In 1942, introduced routes between downtown Cleveland and various eastern suburbs. In 1947, acquired Shepard Bus Co., also serving same general territory. Some service sold or abandoned during 1960's. Remaining service acquired by CTS in 1968.

 

In addition, there existed Cleveland-Lorain Highway Coach, operating into Lorain County, outside the GCRTA service area.

^CTS and the Shaker Rapid were the biggest kids on the block, as well.

Sixty years ago, #CLE leaders connected downtown's fortunes to the fate of a subway loop. https://t.co/BotIAFszJ5

The sewer district is using tunnel-boring machines to build overflow retention tunnels to handle storm surges. 

 

I would love it if RTA was ready with a plan to put those tunnel boring machines to use building subway tunnels once the sewer district was done with them.

The sewer district is using tunnel-boring machines to build overflow retention tunnels to handle storm surges. 

 

I would love it if RTA was ready with a plan to put those tunnel boring machines to use building subway tunnels once the sewer district was done with them.

 

I would love it if this region and sdtate was ready with sustainable transportation funding for RTA to even consider such a plan.