April 4, 20232 yr 18 minutes ago, Ethan said: I guess my thought isn't so much about the airport, as it is the relative uselessness of the waterfront line in its current incarnation, and the TOD potential of the red line stops up through W117 assuming 5 minute redline frequency. I think the waterfront line should at least operate to the flats on a regular basis. Running beyond that seems unnecessary unless there is a special event.
April 4, 20232 yr Great reporting, @KJP. I don't think I realized the full implications of moving to one type of railcar vs. two. Having a green line/blue line route to the airport could be extremely valuable. It also seems like long-term we could get some tram extensions on smaller roads that could plug into the red line (I'm thinking Detroit Ave. west of the West-Cudell station; W.25/Pearl Rd. south of the W. 25 station; maybe even Cedar Rd. east of the 105 station or Mayfield Rd. east of the Little Italy station). Some of those trams could be super useful because even if they were going 20-25 mph with stop lights for the whole tram stretch, they could speed up to 50 when they hit the existing lines. That would lead to some pretty good travel times. Speaking of which, I'm curious if anyone knows the background of why Cleveland has no trams at all? It seems like most other midsized cities with rail rely pretty heavily on tram lines. EDIT: and just to be clear, I'm excluding green and blue lines here because they don't really share the road with the cars; they've got these huge barriers and are placed in the median. So in my mind that's not a true tram. Edited April 4, 20232 yr by LlamaLawyer
April 4, 20232 yr Author 1 hour ago, LlamaLawyer said: Speaking of which, I'm curious if anyone knows the background of why Cleveland has no trams at all? It seems like most other midsized cities with rail rely pretty heavily on tram lines. Most US cities don't have tram lines, except for very short, recently built lines. RTA hates them, BTW. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 4, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, Ethan said: I guess my thought isn't so much about the airport, as it is the relative uselessness of the waterfront line in its current incarnation, and the TOD potential of the red line stops up through W117 assuming 5 minute redline frequency. I would be extremely supportive of extending a Shaker line to the west side as far as any new ToD on one of the existing awful park and ride lots. And W117 has the best potential. The beauty of the rail consolidation is that you don’t have to extend the line until the ToD happens (RTA still needs to conserve operating costs). It would need to be properly scaled though - the Eco Village at West 65th was supposed to be this, but it just isn’t anywhere near enough housing units and businesses. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 4, 20232 yr Author What's interesting is that Norfolk Southern chose to detour freight trains and shut down its line through Lakewood for weeks in December. It kept the freight tonnage for the year from eclipsing a level that would trigger federal regulations that require NS to install a more expensive signal system. If NS doesn't really need the line through Lakewood, then why don't they sell it to RTA so it can run rapid transit trains on it? "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 4, 20232 yr 10 minutes ago, KJP said: What's interesting is that Norfolk Southern chose to detour freight trains and shut down its line through Lakewood for weeks in December. It kept the freight tonnage for the year from eclipsing a level that would trigger federal regulations that require NS to install a more expensive signal system. If NS doesn't really need the line through Lakewood, then why don't they sell it to RTA so it can run rapid transit trains on it? I thought you had said NS wanted to tear all that track out completely? Could track be used for the S200 LRV from 5:30-1am, then freight in the middle of the night? Or does it have to be separate track? When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 4, 20232 yr 4 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: Yes, all the track connections exist. Keep in mind that the red line and the Shaker lines use the same track and catenary in Tower city, East 34th, and East 55th stations. It’s just separate platforms for each rail car type. One cool aspect of this is that now the shaker lines will be able to use the high-level platforms at those three stations, thus speeding up loading and unloading. Furthermore, future shaker line station renovations could install high-level platforms. For example, a brown line train would come into TC from South Harbor via the waterfront tracks from the west and have to go back out to the west on the red line tracks to get to the airport. I am not sure what it would have to do, or even if my understanding of the existing track layout is up to date. Edited April 4, 20232 yr by urb-a-saurus
April 4, 20232 yr 45 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: I thought you had said NS wanted to tear all that track out completely? Could track be used for the S200 LRV from 5:30-1am, then freight in the middle of the night? Or does it have to be separate track? I would expect to do that you'd run into all sorts of trouble with having to comply with FRA mainline train rules i.e. PTC and crashworthiness requirements.
April 4, 20232 yr My only gripe with the new trains is the seating arrangement. I simply prefer longitudinal seating, it makes more sense that side by side. Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
April 4, 20232 yr 2 hours ago, urb-a-saurus said: For example, a brown line train would come into TC from South Harbor via the waterfront tracks from the west and have to go back out to the west on the red line tracks to get to the airport. I am not sure what it would have to do, or even if my understanding of the existing track layout is up to date. Oh I see - yes, that one would require using crossover track somewhere and reversing direction. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 4, 20232 yr I may have missed this upthread, but who / what is paying for the trains? Are the station improvements required for their operation paid for as well? Or will we have to cross our fingers about remaining hurdles? With all this talk of new lines, I’m very curious to know how it will get done.Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
April 5, 20232 yr 8 hours ago, KJP said: Cleveland RTA reveals its new trains By Ken Prendergast / April 4, 2023 For the first time in four decades, Greater Cleveland is about to get a new Rapid. While NEOtrans revealed in January what type of new rail car Greater Clevelanders will be riding for the next two to three decades, that news was made official today by the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA). Much more detail about the new rapid transit trains also was provided. MORE: https://neo-trans.blog/2023/04/04/cleveland-rta-reveals-its-new-trains/ 36 minutes ago, ASP1984 said: I may have missed this upthread, but who / what is paying for the trains? Are the station improvements required for their operation paid for as well? Or will we have to cross our fingers about remaining hurdles? With all this talk of new lines, I’m very curious to know how it will get done. Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Ken’s article does cover most of this. It looks like they have plenty of funding for the first order to replace the Red Line cars, but still need to solidify funding sources for the larger follow up order to replace Shaker Line cars. Yes, Red Line station platforms will have to be modified as well as the mini-platforms for wheelchairs at many Shaker Line stations. Presumably Red Line station track would need to be raised a bit also, but I didn’t see that mentioned in any of today’s docs. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 5, 20232 yr If NS doesn't really need the line through Lakewood, then why don't they sell it to RTA so it can run rapid transit trains on it? I would legitimately get rid of my car I’d have no use for it, if that ever worked out A stop behind the stadium, a stop at whiskey island, battery park, Lakewood park-ish, rocky river metro parks, bay metro parks, avon lake etc would be great for the west side I’m sure most of those suburbs would put up a massive fight but it would be great
April 5, 20232 yr Ken’s article does cover most of this. It looks like they have plenty of funding for the first order to replace the Red Line cars, but still need to solidify funding sources for the larger follow up order to replace Shaker Line cars. Yes, Red Line station platforms will have to be modified as well as the mini-platforms for wheelchairs at many Shaker Line stations. Presumably Red Line station track would need to be raised a bit also, but I didn’t see that mentioned in any of today’s docs. Cleveland. Com mentions a $7 million shortfall and that RTA is banking on money from the infrastructure bill coming through. The article mentioned that if the money doesn't come through they'll have to scale back. https://www.cleveland.com/news/2023/04/rta-selects-maker-for-new-railcar-fleet-funding-still-uncertain.htmlSent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
April 5, 20232 yr 24 minutes ago, BoomerangCleRes said: I would legitimately get rid of my car I’d have no use for it, if that ever worked out A stop behind the stadium, a stop at whiskey island, battery park, Lakewood park-ish, rocky river metro parks, bay metro parks, avon lake etc would be great for the west side I’m sure most of those suburbs would put up a massive fight but it would be great Sorry, nothing east of West Blvd - that’s NS mainline. It’s not going anywhere. Ken is talking about the NS spur that goes straight west from the West Blvd rapid station area through Lakewood and Rocky River and all the way to Avon. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 5, 20232 yr 8 hours ago, KJP said: The rail car presentation is now posted on the GCRTA website. Here is the link to the presentation: https://www.riderta.com/events/2023/4/4/committee-meetings The Rail Car replacement starts at 1:02:15. I watched the rail car part (at 1.5x speed to protect my sanity). Here are my notes on the presentation: - As I expected, the "map" was simply an example of one benefit of the flexibility of a single car fleet. There was no suggestion of near term planning related to these additional routes. - The "RT1-2020 design standards" is the newest crash-worthiness testing. - Cars will still be engineered and modified to fit the system. Not clear in what way. - It appears that they are planning for the middle two doors to be high level and the front and back to be low level with steps. Yuck. This is going to be slower for load/unload compared to all door boarding. I'm interpreting this as meaning that we don't get the nifty mechanized steps like SF Muni. Perhaps this decision is based on the mechanized steps maintenance issues that transit Twitter has complained about. - Side-by-side seating. I don't understand - I agree w @MyPhoneDead - longitudinal is better. Especially since these vehicles are narrower. Maybe we could get longitudinal in one half of the car of the first order to do comparisons? - Vertical bike racks look great! I wish there were more than 4 per vehicle. - Trains will be more similar to the Calgary version (of the S200) than the San Fran version. - They have awarded and committed funding of $213M - more than enough for the initial 24 car order ($124M) and up front engineering work ($40M); that said, Caver did acknowledge that as they work through the process they may not have sufficient funding for 24 vehicles (I suppose based on "awarded" but not "committed"), but it might also be more vehicles in the initial order. I'm not sure on the station modification costs. More funding will need to be secured to place the follow-up order (Shaker Line vehicles) - Red Line and Shaker Line stations will require modification, primarily related to platform width. This will include the "mini-high platforms" for wheelchair access at Shaker Line stations. - 48 months from the time the contract is signed until delivery of all 24 vehicles that will enable Red Line system switchover. Ugh, 4 more years of the current garbage. First test vehicles will arrive 33-36 months after contract signed. - I thought Val McCall's comments after the presentation were quite good. She emphasized the need to establish a fund for future rail car purchases. She pointed out that we should simplify the terminology, e.g. "These are the new trains, the latest-and-greatest technology" rather than getting hung up on the Heavy Rail vs Light Rail arguments that consume transit Twitter but make normies' eyes glaze over. (I'm paraphrasing on that.) She talked about the desire to eventually replace Euclid Corridor BRT with LRT. She hit on how it's an opportunity to generated excitement around transit. Just a bunch of good comments. - Board voted in favor of the proposal. Does this mean Birdsong can sign the contract? There is a rail car committee meeting on April 10. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 5, 20232 yr 10 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: Sorry, nothing east of West Blvd - that’s NS mainline. It’s not going anywhere. Ken is talking about the NS spur that goes straight west from the West Blvd rapid station area through Lakewood and Rocky River and all the way to Avon. Would that spur not continue to around W25 like this map shows? I know this would be redundant of the current red line and not continue north along the lake, but would the double tracks from around W25 to the West Blvd station be beneficial if we increase the routes/frequency on the westside?
April 5, 20232 yr Author 18 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: I thought you had said NS wanted to tear all that track out completely? Could track be used for the S200 LRV from 5:30-1am, then freight in the middle of the night? Or does it have to be separate track? NS stopped using the line for an extended period at the end of 2022. I just checked the NS Cleveland District forum at Facebook (https://www.facebook.com/groups/924541947664575) and saw that except for a weekly local and an occasional general freight, NS didn't use the line through Lakewood from about Nov. 10, 2022 to Jan. 10, 2023. The section not being used was from the Cloggsville Connection near Fulton Cemetery in Cleveland to just west of State Route 83 crossing in Avon. Just west of that, NS was using it to serve the Ford Plant but only from its South Lorain Branch from the mainline through Elyria and from the west to the Chicago Line connecting tracks at Vermilion. I shot this photo near my home in Lakewood, looking west from Fry Avenue on Jan. 5, 2023. Look at that rust on the rails!! 17 hours ago, jawn said: I would expect to do that you'd run into all sorts of trouble with having to comply with FRA mainline train rules i.e. PTC and crashworthiness requirements. Some light-rail transit lines share track with lightly used freight services as long as there is a time of day (temporal) separation from freight traffic. Baltimore does that with its north line up to Hunt Valley and the New Jersey's RiverLine has a temporal separation as well as an at-grade crossing with a relatively busy freight track just west of the Pennsauken station. NS could retain trackage rights with a temporal separation and continue to run its weekly local freight train through Lakewood at night. I created a diagram a long time ago to show how the existing Red Line infrastructure could be used to create a "flying junction" so light-rail trains diverging to the Lakewood line could do so without delaying Red Line trains. I'll see if I can find it. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 5, 20232 yr 13 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: - Side-by-side seating. I don't understand - I agree w @MyPhoneDead - longitudinal is better. Especially since these vehicles are narrower. Maybe we could get longitudinal in one half of the car of the first order to do comparisons? What is the advantage to the side-by-side seating? To me, they take up a lot of space and limit the amount of bikes, wheelchairs, and strollers. Is there a way to give feedback to RTA on this?
April 5, 20232 yr 23 minutes ago, DJx500 said: What is the advantage to the side-by-side seating? To me, they take up a lot of space and limit the amount of bikes, wheelchairs, and strollers. Is there a way to give feedback to RTA on this? One of many questions I hope get asked at the rail committee meeting on April 10. I’m intending to put together a Tweet thread of open questions, but I don’t have any influence. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 5, 20232 yr 1 hour ago, DJx500 said: What is the advantage to the side-by-side seating? To me, they take up a lot of space and limit the amount of bikes, wheelchairs, and strollers. Is there a way to give feedback to RTA on this? I believe the "advantage" is that you can have seating for more people.
April 5, 20232 yr Red Line station ridership numbers. All kinds of interesting info. Station rankings (Red Line only) 1. TC 2. Stokes-Windemere (I assume bus transfers drive this) 3. W117 - surprise! 4. W25 / OC 5. West Blvd / Cudell 6. Airport 7. Brookpark 3-7 are all really close. It’s interesting to me that Airport station is the one closest to its pre-pandemic usage. To me it’s a reminder that the primary users of the airport station are airport employees. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 5, 20232 yr 3 minutes ago, freefourur said: I believe the "advantage" is that you can have seating for more people. This seems like another one of RTA's many oversights. They way current ridership looks, we don't need seating for more people. And on the heavy ridership days (Browns etc), we need more standing room. It seems like a no-brainer to go with the lateral benches in our market.
April 5, 20232 yr 7 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: Red Line station ridership numbers. All kinds of interesting info. Station rankings (Red Line only) 1. TC 2. Stokes-Windemere (I assume bus transfers drive this) 3. W117 - surprise! 4. W25 / OC 5. West Blvd / Cudell 6. Airport 7. Brookpark 3-7 are all really close. It’s interesting to me that Airport station is the one closest to its pre-pandemic usage. To me it’s a reminder that the primary users of the airport station are airport employees. Does anyone know the methodology of counting riders from stops without turnstyles?
April 5, 20232 yr 5 minutes ago, Cleburger said: This seems like another one of RTA's many oversights. They way current ridership looks, we don't need seating for more people. And on the heavy ridership days (Browns etc), we need more standing room. It seems like a no-brainer to go with the lateral benches in our market. This is the same reason I’m concerned about only half of the doors working at each set of platforms. On events, the slower load/unload is going to be bad. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 5, 20232 yr 11 minutes ago, freefourur said: Does anyone know the methodology of counting riders from stops without turnstyles? Even for tower city, a decent number of people use mobile tickets. The scanning system for those haven't worked for months. Sometimes this results in a line of people showing their ticket to the attendant and walking through the handicap gate. I'm not sure if they are all getting counted, or getting counted as a single person.
April 5, 20232 yr This is all super exciting news!!! Below are a few of my thoughts: 1. It's huge that we'll have a unified fleet for SO many reasons. 2. I wish we could've got Heavy-Rail cars instead of Light-Rail. However, I'll take what we can get and be happy, because many cities don't even have rail. 3. Having updated features on our trains will make the experience much nicer for the riders. 4. I would prefer to have bench seating, I thinks it's easier to move around the train. I also like to stand mostly and the bench style makes that easier as well. Also, I prefer the non-cloth cloth seats(plastic or metal-whatever the standard), I think its easier to clean and makes me feel more comfortable with sitting on those surfaces for that reason. 5. Another massive benefit will be having enough of the same cars to do a rotation for maintenance and not have to impact service consistency for riders. 6. It was EXTREAMLY exciting to hear the RTA mention, not us or a friend of a friend, but the RTA mention switching the Euclid Health Line from bus to rail! That would be AMAZING! As I've stated before, I love Rail and do not like bus, so to me the more rail and less bus the better. It would be great if this gains legs quickly and potentially impacts the planned Metro/W.25th street BRT that's in discussion, changing that plan to LRT. I think the ways to most impact transit and increase ridership would be to have rail in the following locations: A Downtown Loop. A CBD to UC Line (via Euclid or Chester). A W.25th line from the Ohio City station to at least Brookpark Rd, if not all the way to ParmaTown or Tri-C West. Whether they did these as a Subway Line, an Elevated Line or Street-Car (that's my order of preference), any way of expanding rail to these locations(without increasing our taxes) would be huge! By chance @KJP @Boomerang_Brian @Cleburger since hearing the comment about switching the HealthLine from BRT to LRT, would you happen to have spoken to any of your transit contacts to find out how far along in the process/discussions they are ... and how serious it is? I'm just trying to see if I should get my hopes up at all. 🙂 Finally some good RTA news that we can get excited about in this thread! Looking forward to more of that in the future. 😁
April 5, 20232 yr 31 minutes ago, NR said: By chance @KJP @Boomerang_Brian @Cleburger since hearing the comment about switching the HealthLine from BRT to LRT, would you happen to have spoken to any of your transit contacts to find out how far along in the process/discussions they are ... and how serious it is? I'm just trying to see if I should get my hopes up at all. 🙂 Switching the Euclid corridor from BRT to LRV was a wishful comment by an outgoing board member. I would characterize it as extremely unlikely. The incoming board members are very much pro-transit, but are also pragmatic and much more bus-centric. Jeff Sleasman (Bibb nominee for the board) is a big fan of the Curitiba, Brazil model, which is entirely BRT and works very well. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 5, 20232 yr 8 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: Jeff Sleasman (Bibb nominee for the board) is a big fan of the Curitiba, Brazil model, which is entirely BRT and works very well. Of all places. Curitiba. I guess it depends on your definition of "working well." I just hope he doesn't try to put in the plastic tube shelters like Curitiba as well.
April 5, 20232 yr 39 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: Switching the Euclid corridor from BRT to LRV was a wishful comment by an outgoing board member. I would characterize it as extremely unlikely. The incoming board members are very much pro-transit, but are also pragmatic and much more bus-centric. Jeff Sleasman (Bibb nominee for the board) is a big fan of the Curitiba, Brazil model, which is entirely BRT and works very well. My boss worked for one of the engineering firms that did the HealthLine - he says a major reason for it looking like it does (mostly w/raised platforms) was to make it kind of feel like a train. Honestly signal prioritization on Euclid (maybe we'll get that by the end of Bibb's term?) should make it feel like a train. But as of right now, you can bike faster than the "BRT" in too many sections of it.
April 5, 20232 yr 57 minutes ago, Cleburger said: Of all places. Curitiba. I guess it depends on your definition of "working well." I just hope he doesn't try to put in the plastic tube shelters like Curitiba as well. I will allow no Curitiba slander - it freaking rules and its transit system is absolutely world class! Yes, we all like trains better, but “real” BRT is also quite effective and Curitiba is a great model. 24 minutes ago, GISguy said: My boss worked for one of the engineering firms that did the HealthLine - he says a major reason for it looking like it does (mostly w/raised platforms) was to make it kind of feel like a train. Honestly signal prioritization on Euclid (maybe we'll get that by the end of Bibb's term?) should make it feel like a train. But as of right now, you can bike faster than the "BRT" in too many sections of it. The raised platforms enable level boarding, which speeds loading and unloading. In that way it does feel like a train. The signal prioritization is critical. And Proof of Payment big time would speed it up. Added bonus of using all doors which also speeds load/unload. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 6, 20232 yr Red Line station ridership numbers. All kinds of interesting info. Station rankings (Red Line only) 1. TC 2. Stokes-Windemere (I assume bus transfers drive this) 3. W117 - surprise! 4. W25 / OC 5. West Blvd / Cudell 6. Airport 7. Brookpark 3-7 are all really close. It’s interesting to me that Airport station is the one closest to its pre-pandemic usage. To me it’s a reminder that the primary users of the airport station are airport employees. That drop in ridership at Stokes from 2018 was brutal......until I saw the decline at Tower City, Jesus Christ [emoji3061]Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
April 6, 20232 yr Insufficient effort. And still no public announcement as to the reason for the closure (at least as far as I know) When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 6, 20232 yr 16 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: I will allow no Curitiba slander - it freaking rules and its transit system is absolutely world class! Yes, we all like trains better, but “real” BRT is also quite effective and Curitiba is a great model. The raised platforms enable level boarding, which speeds loading and unloading. In that way it does feel like a train. The signal prioritization is critical. And Proof of Payment big time would speed it up. Added bonus of using all doors which also speeds load/unload. I had no intention of slander! :) I know nothing of the service--just wasn't a fan of the plastic tube shelters! I can only imagine if RTA was tasked with maintaining those!
April 6, 20232 yr 10 minutes ago, Cleburger said: I had no intention of slander! :) I know nothing of the service--just wasn't a fan of the plastic tube shelters! I can only imagine if RTA was tasked with maintaining those! Yeah those shelters are ugly, but still much better than the non-existent shelters at so many bus stops in Cuyahoga! And the service really is quite good there. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 6, 20232 yr 10 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: Insufficient effort. And still no public announcement as to the reason for the closure (at least as far as I know) Signage at Tower City is better at least (as of today anyway).
April 8, 20232 yr Author This is most welcome "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
April 10, 20232 yr And another east side rail closure. Will we get an explanation for this one? When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 10, 20232 yr Whenever RTA has the new trains in service I really hope there is a huge PR campaign to announce what is basically a "new" rail system. I feel like we are going to get to the point where people totally lose confidence in the current rapid... and ridership is not going to stop falling with the endless shutdowns and issues. These trains are not going to make it 3-4 more years at this rate.
April 10, 20232 yr Whenever RTA has the new trains in service I really hope there is a huge PR campaign to announce what is basically a "new" rail system. I feel like we are going to get to the point where people totally lose confidence in the current rapid... and ridership is not going to stop falling with the endless shutdowns and issues. These trains are not going to make it 3-4 more years at this rate.That's what I was thinking. I mentioned that they should do at least a weekend, preferably a week, of free rail service to show people the new flexibility and reliability of the new rail system. Sent from my Pixel 7 using Tapatalk
April 12, 20232 yr On 4/10/2023 at 2:20 PM, MyPhoneDead said: I mentioned that they should do at least a weekend, preferably a week, of free rail service to show people the new flexibility and reliability of the new rail system. Hell make it one full summer season. Give lots of folks reason to just try it out, not just for work but for all kinds of special events.
April 13, 20232 yr RTA had a Committee of the Whole meeting on Monday (April 10, 2023) and the main topic was the rail car replacement project. I watched the posted recording of the meeting on YouTube. Public meeting web page, including pdf of rail car presentation: https://www.riderta.com/events/2023/4/10/committee-of-the-whole-meeting Here's a summary of what I found interesting: - RTA management is recommending that the board approve the proposal at the Board meeting on April 18. Based on the comments from the two meetings I've watched, I'm confident the Board will approve the proposal. If approved, there are follow-up actions required by RTA management, but I don't think they add too much time. So I think we can start our four year countdown clock. - They made a correction to the previous presentation - current seating capacity is 72 on both HRV (Red Line) and LRV (Shaker Lines). Seating capacity on the new LRV would be 52. Total capacity (incl standing) is 238 for current HRV, and 254 for new LRV due to additional standing space (I missed the current LRV total capacity). There was discussion about how its usual low ridership, but then very high ridership for events, so reducing seats to increase standing capacity is a good tradeoff. Staff pointed out that the trains are fast and comfortable, and transit users in larger cities generally expect to stand on the train. (I fully agree on all points.) - Lots of discussion around ADA, bike racks, and strollers. Staff clarified that the middle door boarding is for both high platforms (Red line) and the mini-high platforms at ADA-compliant Shaker Line stations. This clarification was appreciated by the board. - Project will start with formal engineering period. I interpret this as there is still opportunity to influence some design decisions, particularly with regards to seating. - Initial order is for "up to 24" vehicles, which staff believes would be sufficient to run the Red Line. "Up to" is because some grant money is not yet approved. If grants are not approved, staff intends to get feedback and debriefs, and then resubmit for future grant funding. Staff comments that this process has been successful in the past. - Some members seemed very excited about alternate routes, and clearly RTA wanted to have future flexibility, but I think it's important to note that they do NOT have near term plans to introduce those alternate routes. It was purely about future flexibility. - Discussion about only having a single vendor. RTA staff explains that once the decision was made to consolidate the fleet into a high floor LRV, only three vendors make this type of train. The other two did not submit bids (because of the relatively small size of the order, even with the fleet consolidation). - The vendor that submitted a bid in the previous round that was rejected was not able to prove "Made in America" requirements for Federal funding. - Delivery from the Siemens Sacramento factory will be via rail. RTA will make some type of rail connection at Brookpark or the Port of Cleveland to accept delivery. - Vehicles will undergo 1000 miles of testing before being put into service. - RTA will make modifications and upgrades to Brookpark and E55th maintenance facilities to accommodate new vehicles - RTA is still making plans for how to implement the Red Line station modifications. (Specifically, the platform extenders to reach the narrower new LRV.) It could be that they shut down one side or the other to implement in phases. One key thing to remember is that once modifications are made to the high level platforms at E34th and E55th, the wider current trains would no longer be able to pass through. - RTA anticipated this need during recent W117 station renovations - they claimed the platforms have a provision that will make it easier to attach the platform extenders. - Future vehicle orders will be in sets of 6 and Siemens can build 4 per month. Contract states vehicles shall be purchased in up to 7 years, but RTA is clearly trying to do it more quickly. They just need funding. - Contract has a provision that explicitly defines cost increases related to material and labor inflation. - There were board questions about the ice-cutters and staff described how helpful it will be to have these on every train and how that addresses some current operating challenges. (I'm curious if having the ice-cutters means that it's a one-way vehicle in icy conditions - there is a separate pantograph for the ice-cutter - or if it's more important to just be cutting ice with every passing train and direction doesn't matter as much.) - During public comment, a person requested more flexibility for strollers, walkers, and similar situation. She suggested making it so some of the chairs fold up to accomodate these types of uses. I thought this was a great suggestion! - LOTS of excitement from the board about this project. Based on what I've learned from these meetings, here are my top questions: - Since events drive large ridership, attention should be given to the event riding experience. Specifically, load and unload times for large crowds should be considered. All door boarding and level platform boarding are two key features that improve load/unload times. Would RTA consider provisions that would enable all door (and level) boarding for high platforms using either the mechanical steps used on the Siemens S200 by San Fran muni, or even a simpler level-platform step cover used on international passenger rail? (On passenger trains, it's just a simple metal plate that folds down over the steps.) Trains on existing Red Line could have these simple inserts used when running the Red Line, and then easily removed for use on the Shaker Lines. I think this might also require a different door design, but I think the benefits are strong. - Would RTA consider a phased replacement of existing low level platforms to be replaced by high level platforms for faster boarding and superior ADA implementation? The beauty of the consolidated fleet is that this project could be done literally one station at a time. I'd probably prioritize the W3rd / stadium station since it's mainly about handling big crowds. - Would RTA consider more longitudinal seats instead of side-by-side? This increases total capacity at the cost of seating capacity - probably a good tradeoff for a system that normally has low ridership but sometimes has huge ridership. - Will there be fare validator stations on board to simplify Proof-of-payment implementation? YouTube link: Slide highlights: When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 13, 20232 yr A lot of that sounds good, one thing I noticed is that they still have fare boxes on the train for the blue/green line. With a unified system, wouldn't it make more sense to have a full POP system? The farebox system slows things down. Also I do agree that it would make more sense to make all platforms and stations high level, especially for events, those Browns games get PACKED and only being able to leave out of select doors would be a nightmare.
April 13, 20232 yr could they build two mini-high platforms at both waterfront stations and tower city (or 1 doublewide mini-high) so passengers can use all 4 doors for high volume stations?
April 13, 20232 yr 13 minutes ago, Whipjacka said: could they build two mini-high platforms at both waterfront stations and tower city (or 1 doublewide mini-high) so passengers can use all 4 doors for high volume stations? A “mini-high” would have limited capacity and therefore wouldn’t solve the load/unload speed problem. I think they should just go high platform wherever they can. The challenge is that the simplest vehicle solution (a fold down step cover for high platform level boarding) would probably require all the stations on a given route to be high platform. I’m envisioning something simple that can be changed at the end of a run, but probably wouldn’t be fast enough changeover to do between stations. The mechanized steps of the San Fran Muni S200 LRV would give more flexibility, but I’ve heard rumors that they are a maintenance challenge (and they probably add cost to the vehicle). When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
April 13, 20232 yr This is all very exciting, and it would basically almost be a brand new system. I hope they consider adding more stops and creating TOD areas especially on the west side. The stops are too far apart IMO for such a small system!
April 13, 20232 yr I will also add, you guys do have some really nice buses from the pics I see on here. Ours in Chicago are really beat down and old at this point. The train system (red line) is getting a huge nice overhaul though, which was badly needed, but the bus fleet has gotten pretty bad and old. My rush hour express bus service downtown on Lakeshore Drive is crappy old short buses that arrive occasionally if ever ( they disappear from tracker)and are packed and pass stops of people waiting. No new drivers, and unreliable old buses are the culprit. People are literally running into traffic banging on the door at the last stop before it gets on LSD but there is no room. I feel bad for the drivers.
April 15, 20232 yr I'm hoping that RTA implements one of these two ideas to enable all door, level boarding at high platform stations. I think doing this solution at just the two doors planned for low level platforms (front and back) would be fine - most of the low platform stations are low capacity anyway. The middle sets of doors could remain as fixed high platform level boarding. (Especially considering that many low platforms already have the "mini-high platforms" for ADA compliance.) When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
Create an account or sign in to comment