30 minutes ago, Pugu said:

 

Did you forget Bibb was an RTA Board Member? He actually could have made a difference back then if he knew anything about transit.

How would have Bibb made a difference?  Calabrese ran the show with Dixon.  All Calabrese wanted was to get nice contract extensions with pay raises and bonuses.  As long as "somebody" looked the other way concerning various transgressions, Dixon with his 26 years as a board member and 24 of them being president of that board, was perfectly happy to have Calabrese have his way.

 

Over the last 32 years, Mayors White, Campbell and Jackson, the county's leaders and the collection of suburban mayors who named the members of RTA's Board of Trustees (4, 3 and 3 members respectively) were the ones who put together the trustee members.  Why didn't they name people with transit insight?  Who were the people who thought Calabrese was the person best capable to run RTA in 2000?  Want to trace back RTA's falling apart?  Look at that decision in 2000 and the continued rewarding of Calabrese's abysmal performance the way they did over and over again.

4 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

There’s only one person denying the truth here. 

 

Spoken like a pure Trumpist. Trump is saving 'Merica and can and has done no wrong. The truth is we have yet to see how Bibb will be. He's done nothing before entering office of any positive consequence for Cleveland so we have to wait and see. But for you, you're suggesting, Bibb, with four weeks in office, is a godsend and fully capable and able to fix Cleveland, though we have no evidence of such. So what is the truth? You can see the future and its glorious? Are you his chief of staff, lover, friend, mother, or something, and biased to his greatness no matter what he does? Why? We need time to see how he does, that's the truth.

I too am curious if Boomerang Brian is Bibb's lover or mother. What a completely rational and well thought post.

3 hours ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

How would have Bibb made a difference?  Calabrese ran the show with Dixon.  All Calabrese wanted was to get nice contract extensions with pay raises and bonuses.  As long as "somebody" looked the other way concerning various transgressions, Dixon with his 26 years as a board member and 24 of them being president of that board, was perfectly happy to have Calabrese have his way.

 

Over the last 32 years, Mayors White, Campbell and Jackson, the county's leaders and the collection of suburban mayors who named the members of RTA's Board of Trustees (4, 3 and 3 members respectively) were the ones who put together the trustee members.  Why didn't they name people with transit insight?  Who were the people who thought Calabrese was the person best capable to run RTA in 2000?  Want to trace back RTA's falling apart?  Look at that decision in 2000 and the continued rewarding of Calabrese's abysmal performance the way they did over and over again.

 

The job of the board members is to oversee the GM, pure and simple. If the head of the board is blind or corrupt, a skillful board member (any board member) would have found a way to find resolution. Sounds like you're saying all the board members under the powerful might corrupt fist of Dixon were pointless or incompetent--which would mean Bibb was too. I did not mean to single out Bibb over other board members, was just responding to a post above to say that we should not expect brilliance from Bibb around RTA management given his past. But who knows, maybe he'll pleasantly surprise us, but probably best not to hold your breath. 

3 minutes ago, TBideon said:

I too am curious if Boomerang Brian is Bibb's lover or mother. What a completely rational and well thought post.

 

That was a joke. I see there is no sense of humor when it comes to Bibb. He's like Trump to the Trumpists, I know. And there are many on this board. But, for some reason, Boomerang_Brian KNOWS Bibb is all that and he's heaven-sent, even though he shown otherwise in his past around RTA management.

1 hour ago, Pugu said:

 

The job of the board members is to oversee the GM, pure and simple. If the head of the board is blind or corrupt, a skillful board member (any board member) would have found a way to find resolution. Sounds like you're saying all the board members under the powerful might corrupt fist of Dixon were pointless or incompetent--which would mean Bibb was too. I did not mean to single out Bibb over other board members, was just responding to a post above to say that we should not expect brilliance from Bibb around RTA management given his past. But who knows, maybe he'll pleasantly surprise us, but probably best not to hold your breath. 

Dixon was very powerful and knew how to get away with his "theft" of medical coverage and gross mis-use of the cell phone provided by RTA for the sole intent of conducting agency business.  Dixon was named to the RTA Board of Trustees by Mike White when Bibb was in elementary school.  Calabrese was named RTA's general manager when Bibb may have been entering high school.  They had many years to craft cover-ups and deception.  Why else did it take YEARS for it to be finally uncovered?  RTA had people on staff for a very long time whose jobs were to analyze finances who were unable to discover (or were complicit in aiding and abetting) these actions.  The depth of these actions was so great and so many people were fooled that RTA even named its board room after Dixon.  Not counting Bibb, there were eight other board members on the board and I don't know how many other board members served over a total of nearly a quarter century that were fooled, many of which served much longer than Bibb.   

 

As for Calabrese, the decline of the agency was so protracted and severe, he should have been booted long before he left on his own accord.  Yet, year after year of rider losses, it just ended up seeing Calabrese getting rewarded with contract extensions and more money.  The board of trustees just rubber-stamped anything Calabrese wanted and that started long before the general public heard of Justin Bibb. 

 

The responsibility of naming RTA's board members fell on the various mayors of Cleveland, the county's leadership and the suburban mayors.  When they name people to those positions, it is their responsibility to name the best and most qualified individuals.  I wouldn't believe that the suburban mayors would lend much in the way of transit experience to fill those three positions. However, one would think that of the four named by the mayor of Cleveland and the three from the county, at least one would have some sort of transit knowledge.  Unfortunately, in the world of politics, that thinking is unrealistic.  The true reality is that the seven from Cleveland and the county are perfect examples of political favoritism/cronyism.  Want to assign blame?   Blame the mayors of Cleveland, the county leaders and the suburban mayors who have named trustees over the decades.  They were the ones that put the board members in place.  The suburban mayors and county appointees did nothing to stop the erosion of service outside of Cleveland.  Look at RTA's numbers.  The bus was run off the cliff long before Bibb came around.

 

One other thing.  I am holding a wait and see attitude on Bibb.  I don't know if he can turn things around or not.  The thing is that I am not going to dump the blame on him when the agency was so broken for so long, dating to the time when he was in elementary or middle school.  With the power team in charge of running RTA for so many years, I have a strong feeling that even somebody with transit knowledge would have been shut down or ignored.

Edited February 7, 20223 yr by LifeLongClevelander

12 hours ago, Pugu said:

 

Did you forget Bibb was an RTA Board Member? He actually could have made a difference back then if he knew anything about transit.

Yeah, I’m not interested in hearing you push your weird anti obsession about Bibb in here. 

 

15 hours ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

The responsibility of naming RTA's board members fell on the various mayors of Cleveland, the county's leadership and the suburban mayors.

According to the Mayor's website, the 100 day tracker mentions under the Equity in Action section "Appoint a civilian advocate for equity to the RTA Board."

2 hours ago, infrafreak said:

According to the Mayor's website, the 100 day tracker mentions under the Equity in Action section "Appoint a civilian advocate for equity to the RTA Board."

It is unfortunate that no place has the statement that at least one trustee should have mass transit insight or experience.  That should be part of the board composition guidelines.  The current RTA board consists of a member of the clergy (board president), Cleveland immigration attorney (vice president), three suburban mayors, business manager for a laborers union, a chief communications director for Cleveland, Jump Start project manager, Xerox Corp. Business Systems Analyst and Executive Director, Office of Institutional Advancement, Cleveland Metropolitan School District Executive Director of the Office of Institutional Advancement.  Former Board President George Dixon was a restaurateur.  After Dixon resigned, a suburban mayor became board president.  Other labor and community members have served as board members.  If it isn't feasible to have a board member meet this requirement, then perhaps an outside advisor with mass transit knowledge needs to be available to the trustees to tell them when they are being fed garbage. 

 

There are no limits fort number of terms on the board.  Dixon was on the board for 26 years before he resigned.  Jessie Anderson served 24 years before stepping down.  There needs to be a maximum number of 3-year terms for a trustee and a limit to the number of years that one person can serve as board president. 

How far will this go towards addressing our maintenance backlog?

 

Cleveland transit gets $22 million from bipartisan infrastructure bill 

 

https://www.cleveland.com/news/2022/02/cleveland-transit-gets-22-million-from-bipartisan-infrastructure-bill.html

The press release from Sherrod Brown (on which the cle.com article was based) has no paywall....

 

https://www.brown.senate.gov/newsroom/press/release/brown-announces-down-payment-735-million-ohios-public-transit-systems

Does anyone know why the Healthline corridor has dedicated bus lanes all the way from PS until Stokes but lose priority afterward? The UH and Case area have the most congestion and would benefit the most from dedicated bus lanes. Did a particular group advocate against it? Or was there some other reason to drop lanes there? Its kind of ridiculous to continually see a "BRT" stuck in traffic at rush hours.

47 minutes ago, daplemmo said:

Does anyone know why the Healthline corridor has dedicated bus lanes all the way from PS until Stokes but lose priority afterward? The UH and Case area have the most congestion and would benefit the most from dedicated bus lanes. Did a particular group advocate against it? Or was there some other reason to drop lanes there? Its kind of ridiculous to continually see a "BRT" stuck in traffic at rush hours.

 

IIRC, GCRTA did not want to undertake any demolitions in UC.

^I think it was more that UH, CWRU and other big traffic generators were concerned that losing travel lanes on Euclid would create congestion.  

4 hours ago, StapHanger said:

^I think it was more that UH, CWRU and other big traffic generators were concerned that losing travel lanes on Euclid would create congestion.  

 

Isn't that just the other side of the same coin? They couldn't demolish anything to add more lanes, unlike in MidTown, without turning Euclid into a slalom course.

4 hours ago, KJP said:

 

IIRC, GCRTA did not want to undertake any demolitions in UC.

Yeah, I can see that.

 

However, I'm of the opinion that they could paint the right lanes as dedicated bus/emergency vehicle lanes through that stretch with very little additional construction (probably none). It seems they just didn't want to. I'm guessing the reason being probably what StapHanger said. I really think that would be low-hanging fruit if they are serious about improving the convenience of Healthline service.

Soooooooooo I've been thinking about the TOD strategy Cleveland (and honestly most cities do). So in Cleveland wouldn't it make more sense to build affordable housing near rail stations to increase ridership versus market rate housing? I'm not saying people who live in market rate housing wouldn't ride rail but people who have lower incomes are already GCRTA's backbone for ridership. Building more affordable housing near rail would make more sense to me. That income demographic already has a more accepting view towards transit so it wouldn't take much convincing to ride rail versus investing millions of dollars in a project in HOPES that they ride it. 

 

It also would allow for more dense development because less people have cars already so they'd be less likely to car about parking requirements. A prime example of where the affordable housing model would work is by Superior station. It serves an income demographic that drives less than those who live in market rate housing and due to riders in that area riding transit due to necessity versus convenience, you're more likely to create more rail riders. 

 

Just my thoughts. 

Edited February 9, 20223 yr by MyPhoneDead

12 hours ago, MyPhoneDead said:

So in Cleveland wouldn't it make more sense to build affordable housing near rail stations to increase ridership versus market rate housing? I'm not saying people who live in market rate housing wouldn't ride rail but people who have lower incomes are already GCRTA's backbone for ridership. Building more affordable housing near rail would make more sense to me. That income demographic already has a more accepting view towards transit so it wouldn't take much convincing to ride rail versus investing millions of dollars in a project in HOPES that they ride it. 

 

It also would allow for more dense development because less people have cars already so they'd be less likely to car about parking requirements. A prime example of where the affordable housing model would work is by Superior station. It serves an income demographic that drives less than those who live in market rate housing and due to riders in that area riding transit due to necessity versus convenience, you're more likely to create more rail riders.

Good idea.  Funding is the issue.  Low-income housing requires government subsidies and there just isn't a lot of money.   Cleveland is doing this -- see this article about Woodhill Station.

https://neo-trans.blog/2021/08/09/circle-square-ohio-city-van-aken-district-woodhill-station-show-whats-possible/

 

Cleveland needs to be doing a lot more TOD.  And that TOD should include low-income housing, but financially it's more likely to be mixed-income (and that might be a good thing -- as long as the volume of low-income housing units is significant).

 

2 hours ago, GISguy said:

 

It all remains to be seen of course, but  it looks like Bibb is trying to take a bit of a different approach to some of the board appointees, which often come from the ranks of political insiders.  If there is one thing we need less of on these boards it's political insiders. 

Edited February 9, 20223 yr by gildone

On 2/6/2022 at 11:26 PM, LifeLongClevelander said:

One other thing.  I am holding a wait and see attitude on Bibb.  I don't know if he can turn things around or not.  The thing is that I am not going to dump the blame on him when the agency was so broken for so long, dating to the time when he was in elementary or middle school.  With the power team in charge of running RTA for so many years, I have a strong feeling that even somebody with transit knowledge would have been shut down or ignored.

 

Someone (since suspended) also said:  Did you forget Bibb was an RTA Board Member? He actually could have made a difference back then if he knew anything about transit.

 

I agree with LifeLongClevelander.  It's doubtful one person in a sea of political insiders would have been able to make much difference. 

 

Whatever anyone's personal opinion is of Bibb, he just started his term.  A city the size of Cleveland with the entrenched political interests it has isn't exactly an easy ship to turn.   It's going to take more than Bibb and more than one 4-year term to turn things around.  Let's be realistic.  The yardstick by which to measure success for one mayor and one term isn't to turn everything around in one term.  It's chipping away at enough things to start edging the ship in the right direction.  If the mayor wins re-election, then edge the ship some more toward the right direction.  If he doesn't, you hope the next mayor's offers a fresh set of eyes but keeps up the momentum and doesn't revert to the entrenched ways of the past.  Eventually, the city gets turned around, if we're lucky.  

 

To keep this on-topic:  the same applies with changing RTA, which we all agree needs a lot of change.  It's going to take time too.  I agree that there should be people with transit/transportation experience on the RTA board, but just replacing some of the political insiders (see the comments in my previous post) is a step in the right direction.  I think having a couple people who are regular RTA riders is a good thing to have on the board.  I doubt many of the politically entrenched appointees even use/d RTA (or if they do, it's just the rapid once in a while), which creates a disconnect between the board and the riding public. 

 

P.S.  Some of the comments about Bibb in this thread thread belong in the topic dedicated to him in the UO politics forum. 

Edited February 10, 20223 yr by gildone

1 hour ago, gildone said:

@JBwrote:  Did you forget Bibb was an RTA Board Member? He actually could have made a difference back then if he knew anything about transit.

 

I agree with LifeLongClevelander.  It's doubtful one person in a sea of political insiders would have been able to make much difference. 

 

Whatever anyone's personal opinion is of Bibb, he just started his term.  A city the size of Cleveland with the entrenched political interests it has isn't exactly an easy ship to turn.   It's going to take more than Bibb and more than one 4-year term to turn things around.  Let's be realistic.  The yardstick by which to measure success for one mayor and one term isn't to turn everything around in one term.  It's chipping away at enough things to start edging the ship in the right direction.  If the mayor wins re-election, then edge the ship some more toward the right direction.  If he doesn't, you hope the next mayor's offers a fresh set of eyes but keeps up the momentum and doesn't revert to the entrenched ways of the past.  Eventually, the city gets turned around, if we're lucky.  

 

To keep this on-topic:  the same applies with changing RTA, which we all agree needs a lot of change.  It's going to take time too.  I agree that there should be people with transit/transportation experience on the RTA board, but just replacing some of the political insiders (see the comments in my previous post) is a step in the right direction.  I think having a couple people who are regular RTA riders is a good thing to have on the board.  I doubt many of the politically entrenched appointees even use/d RTA (or if they do, it's just the rapid once in a while), which creates a disconnect between the board and the riding public. 

 

P.S.  Some of the comments about Bibb in this thread thread belong in the topic dedicated to him in the UO politics forum. 

Hey Gildone, @JB didn’t make those comments - plz edit your post so we don’t give JB a bad name. The person who did make those comments was suspended specifically for the same reasons you cite. @MayDay clarified those actions in the Bibb thread. 

3 hours ago, gildone said:

@JBwrote:  Did you forget Bibb was an RTA Board Member? He actually could have made a difference back then if he knew anything about transit.

 

I agree with LifeLongClevelander.  It's doubtful one person in a sea of political insiders would have been able to make much difference. 

 

Whatever anyone's personal opinion is of Bibb, he just started his term.  A city the size of Cleveland with the entrenched political interests it has isn't exactly an easy ship to turn.   It's going to take more than Bibb and more than one 4-year term to turn things around.  Let's be realistic.  The yardstick by which to measure success for one mayor and one term isn't to turn everything around in one term.  It's chipping away at enough things to start edging the ship in the right direction.  If the mayor wins re-election, then edge the ship some more toward the right direction.  If he doesn't, you hope the next mayor's offers a fresh set of eyes but keeps up the momentum and doesn't revert to the entrenched ways of the past.  Eventually, the city gets turned around, if we're lucky.  

 

To keep this on-topic:  the same applies with changing RTA, which we all agree needs a lot of change.  It's going to take time too.  I agree that there should be people with transit/transportation experience on the RTA board, but just replacing some of the political insiders (see the comments in my previous post) is a step in the right direction.  I think having a couple people who are regular RTA riders is a good thing to have on the board.  I doubt many of the politically entrenched appointees even use/d RTA (or if they do, it's just the rapid once in a while), which creates a disconnect between the board and the riding public. 

 

P.S.  Some of the comments about Bibb in this thread thread belong in the topic dedicated to him in the UO politics forum. 

Honestly, I don't know what Bibb could have done when he was appointed to RTA's Board of Trustees in 2018.  When he was named, the agency was neck-deep in dealing with the fallout from Dixon's scandals.  RTA was in extremely serious trouble and a new board member was in no position to bring up agency-wide sweeping changes.  RTA was in survival mode and even if a new board member was named who had decades of major transit experience was named to fill that position, would have been able to do nothing.  It made matters worse when the board was being "fed" information by Calabrese who was blaming people who weren't even in certain positions when Dixon started abusing the system.  In addition, Calabrese was blowing smoke screens stating he was going to get to the bottom of the situation when he did nothing.  RTA's board was handcuffed by deception, mis-information and incompetence from within.  Looking back, it amazing that state or Federal control didn't happen at that time.

 

As for Bibb naming actual system riders to be on the board, it is a start.  I believe the only board member who regularly uses the system is Lucas and he does so due to his being handicapped.  Otherwise, the others probably rarely or never use the system at all.

1 hour ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

As for Bibb naming actual system riders to be on the board, it is a start.  I believe the only board member who regularly uses the system is Lucas and he does so due to his being handicapped.  Otherwise, the others probably rarely or never use the system at all.

Roberta Duarte is a regular user. She was named to the board prior to Bibb. 

Whoa whoa whoa, I did not write that.

1 hour ago, JB said:

Whoa whoa whoa, I did not write that.

 

My sincerest apologies for the misquote!   I edited my comment to remove the attribution.

Edited February 10, 20223 yr by gildone

3 hours ago, JB said:

Whoa whoa whoa, I did not write that.

Nope, it's set in stone now lol 

The plot thickens…

 

And the RTA board needs a shakeup, so I have no problem with this more aggressive approach. 
 

This is the seat he intends to name Lauren Welch to. (She’s one of the previously discussed transit user nominations.)

 

 

 

 

 

This is at City Club - more details here:

 

https://www.cityclub.org/forums/2022/02/25/connecting-to-the-community?mc_cid=3386a19eee&mc_eid=2193ced7c0

 

 

On 1/24/2022 at 11:31 PM, Pugu said:

What's keeping this fire going? And couldn't running over live fire damage some stuff on the underside of the rail cars? And do they start and lay fires for miles and miles? Seems kindof crazy/irresponsible---what if wind picks up some embers and burns down some houses or something? What am I missing here?

Basically there's kerosene heaters under the moving parts of the switches that keep them from freezing up. There's a bunch of different ways to do it Metra just happens to have some particularly large flames which I think is cool

 

 

 

I use this station daily and the lack of upkeep is sad. What’s even worse is there are always at least two RTA police there who probably are locked into million dollar pensions, who are there to enforce “fare evasion”. Great use of the funds.

28 minutes ago, Clefan14 said:

I use this station daily and the lack of upkeep is sad. What’s even worse is there are always at least two RTA police there who probably are locked into million dollar pensions, who are there to enforce “fare evasion”. Great use of the funds.

Defund transit police and spend the money on actual transit. 

1 hour ago, freefourur said:

Defund transit police and spend the money on actual transit. 

I do not think defunding transit police is the answer.  But rather their focus needs to be on safety and not on fares.  They also should be riding at times.  If we want more people to ride the transit which in turn will bring in more revenue we need them to feel safe.  And for some (I know not all and I know this feeling leans white) having police around brings a sense of security.

24 minutes ago, cle_guy90 said:

I do not think defunding transit police is the answer.  But rather their focus needs to be on safety and not on fares.  They also should be riding at times.  If we want more people to ride the transit which in turn will bring in more revenue we need them to feel safe.  And for some (I know not all and I know this feeling leans white) having police around brings a sense of security.

The problem is that they have a hugely bloated police force that mostly acts as fare enforcement, which does not improve safety at all.  Cut the police force in half and focus only on safety not fare enforcement. That's why i say defund them.  Reduce the budget by half and make the other work. 

Edited February 23, 20223 yr by freefourur

There has been a lot of discussion recently on line in transit circles about fare-free transit, including lots of pushback from fairly sophisticated transit advocates, but Cleveland is a city where it could make sense: low farebox recovery; decrepit fare collection system needing replacement soon; heavy reliance on buses, weird payment routines on trains...  

33 minutes ago, StapHanger said:

There has been a lot of discussion recently on line in transit circles about fare-free transit, including lots of pushback from fairly sophisticated transit advocates, but Cleveland is a city where it could make sense: low farebox recovery; decrepit fare collection system needing replacement soon; heavy reliance on buses, weird payment routines on trains...  

 

I agree on this. RTA needs to first get more people acclimated to using transit, because right now there's just far too many people who don't consider it as an option. It's off their radar. But I guarantee you a lot of people would rediscover the service if it was fare-free. 

51 minutes ago, surfohio said:

 

I agree on this. RTA needs to first get more people acclimated to using transit, because right now there's just far too many people who don't consider it as an option. It's off their radar. But I guarantee you a lot of people would rediscover the service if it was fare-free. 

I'm not convinced.  Reduce and simplify the fares -- round dollar amounts, all day passes with transfers, monthly passes, etc., would certainly make RTA easier to use.  But eliminating the fares will not make a significant difference in ridership.  The people who cannot afford a car are already the primary (captive) users.

 

The people I know in the outer 'burbs would never ride RTA in the first place -- because they live their lives in their car, RTA doesn't go where they want to go (and can't do so efficiently), and even when in the city they have a perception of RTA as always breaking down, being full of crime and "those other unpleasant people."  Note that "cost" is not an issue for these people, they all spend a lot more on cars (although I'm sure most have no idea what ticket to buy or how to buy it when they do have an opportunity to use RTA.)

 

Many people I know in the city and in the inner 'burbs would ride if RTA was more convenient -- safe, reliable, frequent and easy to use.  If you don't work really close to Tower City, the Rapid is not "rapid" enough; and buses and even the BRT lines are not reliable enough or fast enough.  An hour commute from University Heights vs. 20 minutes in the car?  Yeah, no thanks RTA.  There's plenty of parking available right next to my destination.  Again, it's not the cost that keeping these people off of RTA.

 

To increase ridership you have to make it attractive, and that starts with the basics -- safety, ease of use, frequency and reliability in the core of the city.  Focus on frequency and on-time stats before expanding reach.  Start downtown and work your way out.  As others have noted, transit cops should be focusing on safety and not fares, providing a visible presence -- the appearance of safety matters as much as the reality.  Simplifying or eliminating fares would make it easier, particularly for newbies.  Complete the downtown loop already so that the Rapid serves more destinations.  Get those orders in for new trains that are more reliable.  Get signal prioritization on the BRT lines to increase speed and on-time reliability. 

 

Even a 40-minute bus ride from University Heights to downtown is bearable if it's safe, clean, and right on time every time.  Make me wait 15 minutes and we're back to an hour commute that I hadn't planned for, and I'm going back to the car.  That's what has happened.

 

 

4 minutes ago, Foraker said:

 

 

To increase ridership you have to make it attractive, and that starts with the basics -- safety, ease of use, frequency and reliability in the core of the city.  Focus on frequency and on-time stats before expanding reach.  Start downtown and work your way out.  

 

 

 

 

This is kind of what the redesign was meant to do and kind of did (depending where in the city you live). 

 

As far as city vs county reach, I think @LifeLongClevelanderhas done a good job weighing those pros and cons. 

2 hours ago, Foraker said:

I'm not convinced.  Reduce and simplify the fares -- round dollar amounts, all day passes with transfers, monthly passes, etc., would certainly make RTA easier to use.  But eliminating the fares will not make a significant difference in ridership.  The people who cannot afford a car are already the primary (captive) users.

 

The people I know in the outer 'burbs would never ride RTA in the first place -- because they live their lives in their car, RTA doesn't go where they want to go (and can't do so efficiently), and even when in the city they have a perception of RTA as always breaking down, being full of crime and "those other unpleasant people."  Note that "cost" is not an issue for these people, they all spend a lot more on cars (although I'm sure most have no idea what ticket to buy or how to buy it when they do have an opportunity to use RTA.)

 

Many people I know in the city and in the inner 'burbs would ride if RTA was more convenient -- safe, reliable, frequent and easy to use.  If you don't work really close to Tower City, the Rapid is not "rapid" enough; and buses and even the BRT lines are not reliable enough or fast enough.  An hour commute from University Heights vs. 20 minutes in the car?  Yeah, no thanks RTA.  There's plenty of parking available right next to my destination.  Again, it's not the cost that keeping these people off of RTA.

 

To increase ridership you have to make it attractive, and that starts with the basics -- safety, ease of use, frequency and reliability in the core of the city.  Focus on frequency and on-time stats before expanding reach.  Start downtown and work your way out.  As others have noted, transit cops should be focusing on safety and not fares, providing a visible presence -- the appearance of safety matters as much as the reality.  Simplifying or eliminating fares would make it easier, particularly for newbies.  Complete the downtown loop already so that the Rapid serves more destinations.  Get those orders in for new trains that are more reliable.  Get signal prioritization on the BRT lines to increase speed and on-time reliability. 

 

Even a 40-minute bus ride from University Heights to downtown is bearable if it's safe, clean, and right on time every time.  Make me wait 15 minutes and we're back to an hour commute that I hadn't planned for, and I'm going back to the car.  That's what has happened.

 

 

As a relatively new RTA rider who lives in a suburb, albeit about a mile from the border with Cleveland (northern edge of Parma), I can offer a suburban perspective.  I have recently been taking the 45 bus from near Ridge/Snow to connect with the HealthLine downtown in order to get to my office in Midtown.  The buses are usually on time, so it's not an issue, but it's probably about 50 minutes total travel time, and I only really go into the office as needed, so I'm not commuting a lot.  The RTA does a decent job with running bus lines into the suburbs, but I don't think they run as frequently.  At least as far as I know, most of the lines that run through Parma only run every hour on "off-peak times".  One of the lines that I wish ran more frequently is the Brookpark bus, because that's the only line closest to me that connects right to the rapid station in Brookpark, and even if it ran every 30 minutes or so, I probably wouldn't have to drive to the rapid station.  Also, that bus stops running at like 8:30pm or something like that, which is a bit early in my opinion.  I think making some of the bus routes that run farther into the suburbs more frequent would definitely increase ridership outside of the city.  I also saw someone mention a possible Parma Circulator bus on an Instagram post for the RTA in the comments, and that got me thinking and it would definitely help in getting around the city, and would also provide nice connections to the rest of the bus routes in the city.  Also, maybe some of the cities could possibly trial bus-only lanes, just to see what happens??  If the bus gets its own lane, it can be competitive with the regular traffic that it currently travels with on every route except the HealthLine.  I know definitely from riding the 45 home that a bus-only lane on Ridge Road would be nice, considering that it slows to a crawl near Ridge Park square because of the dang 480 exit!!!  Anyways, I always appreciate the discussion in this forum and look forward to helping advocate for a better RTA!

3 hours ago, Foraker said:

To increase ridership you have to make it attractive, and that starts with the basics -- safety, ease of use, frequency and reliability in the core of the city.  Focus on frequency and on-time stats before expanding reach.  Start downtown and work your way out.  

 

To make it attractive requires more investment. One way to do that is to create more stakeholders who will demand better services, to make this politically viable. I still believe making it "free" does that to get the ball rolling. 

 

My main point is that's the fastest way to change things for the better. 

Edited February 23, 20223 yr by surfohio

5 hours ago, jofrko14 said:

As a relatively new RTA rider who lives in a suburb, albeit about a mile from the border with Cleveland (northern edge of Parma), I can offer a suburban perspective.  I have recently been taking the 45 bus from near Ridge/Snow to connect with the HealthLine downtown in order to get to my office in Midtown.  The buses are usually on time, so it's not an issue, but it's probably about 50 minutes total travel time, and I only really go into the office as needed, so I'm not commuting a lot.  The RTA does a decent job with running bus lines into the suburbs, but I don't think they run as frequently.  At least as far as I know, most of the lines that run through Parma only run every hour on "off-peak times".  One of the lines that I wish ran more frequently is the Brookpark bus, because that's the only line closest to me that connects right to the rapid station in Brookpark, and even if it ran every 30 minutes or so, I probably wouldn't have to drive to the rapid station.  Also, that bus stops running at like 8:30pm or something like that, which is a bit early in my opinion.  I think making some of the bus routes that run farther into the suburbs more frequent would definitely increase ridership outside of the city.  I also saw someone mention a possible Parma Circulator bus on an Instagram post for the RTA in the comments, and that got me thinking and it would definitely help in getting around the city, and would also provide nice connections to the rest of the bus routes in the city.  Also, maybe some of the cities could possibly trial bus-only lanes, just to see what happens??  If the bus gets its own lane, it can be competitive with the regular traffic that it currently travels with on every route except the HealthLine.  I know definitely from riding the 45 home that a bus-only lane on Ridge Road would be nice, considering that it slows to a crawl near Ridge Park square because of the dang 480 exit!!!  Anyways, I always appreciate the discussion in this forum and look forward to helping advocate for a better RTA!

Between 1995 and 2000, RTA started 9 community circulator bus services.  They ran multiple community-type loops for West Park, Slavic Village, St. Clair-Superior, Lee-Harvard, Euclid, Lakewood, Tremont, Southeast and Westshore.  Another 3, Southwest, Severance and Coventry-Shaker Square started operation in 2005-2006.  The routes were assigned numbers in the 8xx-series.  I don't recall the routes they covered, so I cannot say how much if any of Parma was served.  Some of the routes served the park-n-ride/transit centers.  They operated smaller than standard buses and eventually were painted red.  In a round of transit route eliminations, all of the community circulator routes were eliminated in September 2009.  Some of the larger circulator buses were re-purposed as additional downtown trolley-type buses, but the others saw little use afterwards.  They have all been long since disposed of by RTA.

10 hours ago, surfohio said:

 

I agree on this. RTA needs to first get more people acclimated to using transit, because right now there's just far too many people who don't consider it as an option. It's off their radar. But I guarantee you a lot of people would rediscover the service if it was fare-free. 

 

9 hours ago, Foraker said:

I'm not convinced.  Reduce and simplify the fares -- round dollar amounts, all day passes with transfers, monthly passes, etc., would certainly make RTA easier to use.  But eliminating the fares will not make a significant difference in ridership.  The people who cannot afford a car are already the primary (captive) users.

 

The people I know in the outer 'burbs would never ride RTA in the first place -- because they live their lives in their car, RTA doesn't go where they want to go (and can't do so efficiently), and even when in the city they have a perception of RTA as always breaking down, being full of crime and "those other unpleasant people."  Note that "cost" is not an issue for these people, they all spend a lot more on cars (although I'm sure most have no idea what ticket to buy or how to buy it when they do have an opportunity to use RTA.)

 

Many people I know in the city and in the inner 'burbs would ride if RTA was more convenient -- safe, reliable, frequent and easy to use.  If you don't work really close to Tower City, the Rapid is not "rapid" enough; and buses and even the BRT lines are not reliable enough or fast enough.  An hour commute from University Heights vs. 20 minutes in the car?  Yeah, no thanks RTA.  There's plenty of parking available right next to my destination.  Again, it's not the cost that keeping these people off of RTA.

 

To increase ridership you have to make it attractive, and that starts with the basics -- safety, ease of use, frequency and reliability in the core of the city.  Focus on frequency and on-time stats before expanding reach.  Start downtown and work your way out.  As others have noted, transit cops should be focusing on safety and not fares, providing a visible presence -- the appearance of safety matters as much as the reality.  Simplifying or eliminating fares would make it easier, particularly for newbies.  Complete the downtown loop already so that the Rapid serves more destinations.  Get those orders in for new trains that are more reliable.  Get signal prioritization on the BRT lines to increase speed and on-time reliability. 

 

Even a 40-minute bus ride from University Heights to downtown is bearable if it's safe, clean, and right on time every time.  Make me wait 15 minutes and we're back to an hour commute that I hadn't planned for, and I'm going back to the car.  That's what has happened.

My employer is located downtown and offers free transit passes for all employees.  Even when RTA provided much better service (frequency, reduced travel time, better comfort), a large number of my co-workers refused to ride RTA, even though it was free for them.  They would rather drive to work or if they had the option of using Laketran, would use that service instead.  Now with the route changes and eliminations that have occurred in recent years, the downgraded services hold zero interest in luring them as riders.  As some of these changes have been in place for years and alternatives to using mass transit have been in place for a long time, it is very doubtful that even improved services would lure them to use RTA for commuting.  Once riders have been lost, it is extremely difficult and maybe impossible to gain them back.

12 hours ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

My employer is located downtown and offers free transit passes for all employees.  Even when RTA provided much better service (frequency, reduced travel time, better comfort), a large number of my co-workers refused to ride RTA, even though it was free for them.  They would rather drive to work or if they had the option of using Laketran, would use that service instead.  Now with the route changes and eliminations that have occurred in recent years, the downgraded services hold zero interest in luring them as riders.  As some of these changes have been in place for years and alternatives to using mass transit have been in place for a long time, it is very doubtful that even improved services would lure them to use RTA for commuting.  Once riders have been lost, it is extremely difficult and maybe impossible to gain them back.

Exactly -- until we decide to make car use more difficult than transit, transit will struggle.

 

Improving RTA service as best as limited resources allow, and increasing TOD density, building on surface parking lots, making great places for pedestrians that are readily transportation-accessible is a start.

 

Car-free districts/zones will be something to consider in the future, but I don't think we're there yet.  If we restricted part of the downtown core to transit and bikes only, for example, I think it would just push companies to locate outside that area so that their employees can drive. 

25 minutes ago, Foraker said:

Exactly -- until we decide to make car use more difficult than transit, transit will struggle.

 

Improving RTA service as best as limited resources allow, and increasing TOD density, building on surface parking lots, making great places for pedestrians that are readily transportation-accessible is a start.

 

Car-free districts/zones will be something to consider in the future, but I don't think we're there yet.  If we restricted part of the downtown core to transit and bikes only, for example, I think it would just push companies to locate outside that area so that their employees can drive. 

 

Don't want to be misconstrued as combative, but the issue isn't so much with downtown it's where the job centers are. Think back to the Paradox Prize - getting people from where they live to where they work. Manufacturing is on the fringes of the county and going from Cleveland to Solon on a bus/to a plant isn't exactly worthwhile. I know I've noted this example in the thread before, but someone I know without a license/car got a job at amazon in Euclid, they lived in Maple Heights- his round trip bus travel would be like 3 hours to go a total of 40 miles to go work 8 hours. For comparison that's a 20-25 minute drive. Needless to say, he worked there for like two days.

 

I've gotten worked up over all the highway expansions and nothing going towards transit when we have a stagnant population but it's hard to be optimistic when we're in Ohio. 

I recently rode Pittsburgh's "T" system and was amazed at how much better it was than the Rapid. The downtown area is a free fare zone, and the trains seem to have a frequency of every few minutes. I don't think their system is that much larger than ours but I could be mistaken. Just being able to hop on and get around downtown and over the river (there are multiple stations downtown) with frequent service was eye-opening. The fact is that the Rapid is not convenient or efficient for most people. With only one downtown stop (now that the Waterfront line is not operating), and the fact that if you miss a train you might have to wait 30 minutes, its no wonder the majority of people who have the option to drive don't even consider using public transit. Combine that with all the maintenance and service issues and it is in a sad state.

On 2/23/2022 at 9:36 AM, Clefan14 said:

I use this station daily and the lack of upkeep is sad. What’s even worse is there are always at least two RTA police there who probably are locked into million dollar pensions, who are there to enforce “fare evasion”. Great use of the funds.

 

Two+ at 117th and I haven't see any at 65th in years. If I had a choice I would rather see some type of RTA ambassador or someone like that at every station. 

19 minutes ago, viscomi said:

 

Two+ at 117th and I haven't see any at 65th in years. If I had a choice I would rather see some type of RTA ambassador or someone like that at every station. 

 

There used to be someone on duty all the time at the University Circle station turnstiles.