http://www.riderta.com/pressreleaselist.asp?listingid=776

 

RTA News

 

Wednesday, July 27, 2005

 

Mid-year report: RTA ridership up 5 percent

 

CLEVELAND – Boosted by high gas prices, RTA ridership continues to climb. In fact, ridership has risen for eight straight quarters. The last time that happened was 1996-1998, when the Waterfront Line began operation.

 

Ridership for the first six months was up 4.9 percent, or 1.3 million rides, over the same period last year.

 

“I believe this increase is the result of two factors,” says Joe Calabrese, RTA CEO & General Manager. “One factor is the increasing price of gasoline, and the other fact is that the quality of our service continues to improve. In a recent survey, more than 75 percent of customers interviewed rated our service value as good to excellent.”

 

Looking at individual modes, Paratransit was up 40.5 percent, Circulators 10.4 percent, heavy rail 9.5 percent, light rail 7.7 percent and big bus 4.0 percent. These figures represent:

 

• The largest ridership increase since Circulators began operation in 1997.
  
• The largest bus ridership since 2000.
  
• The largest total Red Line ridership since 2001.
  
• The largest total Light Rail and total Rapid ridership 2002.

 

RTA’s average weekday ridership is now more than 197,000, up 5.5 percent from last year.

 

In June, Community Circulator ridership grew for the 13th straight month. June’s ridership was 194,437 – about 10,000 more riders than June 2004.

 

The Lakewood Community Circulator continues to lead the pack, followed by Euclid, Tremont and Kamm’s-Puritas.

 

The $3 All-Day Pass continues to be popular, as it usage grew 7.4 percent in June.

 

END

Well, at least it shows the people have a modicum of good sense even though RTA and local officials are necessarily helping them that much.

OK, surprise, I'll toss Joe C. a rare rose: the $3 all day pass along w/ eliminating cumbersome transfers was the smartest fare innovation I've seen on virtually any transit system, let alone Cleveland's.  The next step, though, is going barrier free, Euro/proof of purchase (or Smartcard), so that rail drivers (and bus drivers, perhaps on heavy lines, too) can stop having to put their vehicles in park to count coins... It's such a doggone waste.

http://www.riderta.com/pressreleaselist.asp?listingid=792

 

RTA News

 

Thursday, Sept. 22, 2005

 

High gas prices pump up RTA ridership figures

 

CLEVELAND – Have recent high gas prices increased ridership at the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA)?

 

YES !

 

August ridership figures released this week show a 13.2 percent increase in heavy-rail ridership over August 2004. Overall, Rapid Transit ridership was up 9.6 percent in August, and systemwide ridership was up 4.9 percent in August, or about 222,000 rides.

 

Year-to-date, total ridership is up 4.1 percent over 2004.

 

“Overall, ridership has been increasing steadily for 3.5 years,” says Joe Calabrese, RTA CEO and General Manager. “Now, we are seeing definite increases in people using our rail stations and Park-N-Ride lots. This tells us that those who have cars are trying to drive them less. We are pleased to welcome them as customers.”

 

“In fact, our Park-and-Ride lots have become so popular, the demand is exceeding our capacity. This week, we reached an agreement with ODOT to expand our facilities in North Olmsted, Westlake and Strongsville. We plan to start construction in 2006 and open them in 2007,” Calabrese says.

 

Other ridership increases:

 

+ Bus, 3.9 percent in August, 3.5 percent year-to-date

+ Heavy rail, 13.2 percent in August, 8.5 percent year-to-date

+ Light rail, 3.5 percent in August, 2.4 percent year-to-date

+ Total Rapid Transit, 9.6 percent in August, 6.4 percent year-to-date

+ Paratransit, 25.8 percent in August, 35.5 percent year-to-date

+ Total ridership, 4.9 percent in August, 4.1 percent year-to-date

+ RTA’s average weekday ridership grew to 194,000

 

END

How does that weekly ridership number compare to other cities similar to the size of Cleveland?  Just curious.

good question, gotribe.  I would imagine that growing cities would se numbers larger than these, but other cities like Cleveland who haven't made significant additions (new transit lines, etc) to the system in recent years would be a good indicator of whether or not it's the gas prices or the service or something altogether different that's affecting ridership numbers. 

 

I would also say that it's fairly certain that a percentage of the ridership increase is due to my return to Cleveland! 

OK, here's the skinny, from the American Public Transportation Association. I've pulled up transit statistics for a few metro areas, some of which have more than one transit agency. The following are the average number of weekday trips in the first quarter of 2005 (Ohio cities in bold)....

 

Atlanta - 463,900

Austin - 119,700

Baltimore - 288,000

Buffalo - 84,000

Canton - 52,000

Charlotte - 83,100

Cincinnati - 77,400

Cleveland - 197,800

Columbus - 51,000

Dallas - 198,900

Dayton - 38,400

Denver - 222,800

Detroit - 149,500

Houston - 335,000

Indianapolis - 25,900

Miami - 377,800

Milwaukee - 193,500

Minneapolis - 229,900

Nashville - 18,900

Phoenix - 149,900

Pittsburgh - 233,000

Portland OR - 335,400

St. Louis - 140,900

Salt Lake City - 125,500

San Antonio - 121,100

San Diego - 215,400

Seattle - 412,000

Tampa - 35,800

Toledo - 18,300

Youngstown - 4,400

 

And, just for fun, here's how the big transit cities stack up....

 

Boston -  1,130,500

Chicago - 1,745,400

Los Angeles - 1,477,200

New York City - 9,117,800

Philadelphia - 1,059,500

San Francisco - 972,400

Washington DC - 1,173,500 (2004 data)

 

Data was found at:

http://www.apta.com/research/stats/ridershp/riderep/documents/05q1rep.pdf

 

KJP

Atlanta, Minneapolis & Miami have more than cleveland.  I've never seen a bus in any of those place! wow

 

 

Great data, KJP!  Looks like Cleveland had greater ridership increases (by %) than cities like Portland, Phoenix and Pittsburgh, who've each had major infrastructure upgrades in recent years.  Also, Portland and Phoenix have rapidly growing populations.

 

Columbus, who's population continues to grow, saw a ridership DEcrease...

 

BTW, MTS, it looks like Cleveland edged out Milwaukee by several thousand riders...

Houston and Phoenix surprised me.  Not that they are great ridership numbers, but for what are generally thought of as the two most autocentric big cities, they have ok numbers.  Actually, Houston's aren't bad at all.  At least as far as US cities go.

 

Edit:  Also, 52,000 for Canton?  That's a huge number.  Must be everyone riding the subway down there, huh?

Canton has more than Columbus......?

I was also surprised by Canton having more than Columbus. But Canton (Stark County) has had a sales tax supporting their transit system for a long time, allowing them to have a more stable transit system than Columbus.

 

Also, you'll note that Akron Metro RTA isn't in the list. The reason why is that they aren't a member of the American Public Transportation Association, so APTA didn't include them. Cleveland's transit data also includes Laketran, but not Lorain County Transit, since LCT isn't a member of APTA either. So there's going to be some anomolies in the data, as it's likely that other cities didn't have their suburban transit systems included either. For example, APTA didn't have data for the Licking County (Newark) transit agency, which should be counted in Columbus' data.

 

KJP

 

BTW, MTS, it looks like Cleveland edged out Milwaukee by several thousand riders...

 

Doooh! :-o  thats what i get for reading UO without my contacts in or glasses on!

Indy has just 26K?  That's not a misprint?  Also, I'm surprised Dayton only has 38K w/ it's excellent trolley buses.  With such a low number, I wonder if those trolleys aren't in jeopardy.

Nope, you're right, the report says what it says.  I wonder how the avg rapid rail numbers shake out.  I believe I've heard D.C. was #2 on that list, but some say Chicago.  ... I know we rank pretty low in rapid rail patronage.

The low numbers should come as no surprise.  Most transit systems are limited in the amount of money they can spend on marketing to attract riders.  GCRTA is the exception in Ohio.  They have run a very agressive radio and print campaign to capitalize on driver frustration with gasoline prices.  It's paid off for them.

 

But the bigger problem is that transit in Ohio, and most other states, is still underfunded.  They can barely service the ridership levels they have now, much less offer new or innovative services... like light rail, bus rapid transit, suburb to suburb commuting routes, etc.  Sales tax revenues, upon which most Ohio transit systems depend, are way down and have been for several years.  The only way they can increase funding is to keep going back to the voters for new levies, but are handicapped by the "Catch-22" of not being able to show much for what they already have.

 

If there was ever a time which we as a society need to rethink how we fund local transit, it is now.

Unfortunately, the Ohio Public Transit Association's lobbying efforts have been pretty disappointing in this regard. I can't cite specific examples, but I vaguely recall some of their recent educational efforts as not very inspired.

 

KJP

The PD also ran a number of stories about PD writers' experiences in taking transit to work. Maybe if these downtown commuters didn't live practically out of state and resided in town, then the time comparison would have been more equal. I didn't care much for their choice of routes or wording. But, here they are, and you decide....

 

KJP

___________________

 

http://www.cleveland.com/news/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1128850358291450.xml&coll=2

It takes a little more time, but it doesn't lack comfort

Sunday, October 09, 2005

Marc Bona

 

Nice to know it's there in an emergency.

 

Bus route: The X61, from West Point Market and Summit Mall in the West Akron area, then on to Euclid Avenue and East 13th Street in Cleveland.

 

_______________________

 

http://www.cleveland.com/entertainment/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/living/1128850802291450.xml&coll=2

 

A penny saved, certainly, but almost an hour lost

Sunday, October 09, 2005

Bill Lubinger

 

Could be real handy in snow belt[mst: cq lowercase: ]-NT%> season.

 

Bus route: First drive to Eastgate Shopping Center at SOM Center and Mayfield roads in Mayfield Heights, then take 9X RTA bus downtown.

 

............

clvlndr,

 

For your entertainment. 

 

The DC Metro is in fact, the 2nd busiest subway system in the country.  Right now, average weekday ridership on the rail system is slightly above 700,000 passengers.  This an increase of about 50,000 passengers per day from a year ago (about 8%).  Rumor has it the the buses are a bit more crowded too, although I don't have any hard numbers on that.  Metro has started to post rail ridership numbers on its website:  http://wmata.com/riding/viewReportList_update.cfm 

 

The CTA rail system in Chicago carries a bit more than half a million passengers a day, which I believe makes it the fourth-busiest rail system.

 

I think smart cards would be a wonderful technology to implement in Cleveland, and since RTA has a flat fare system, it would be relatively simple.  The payment system on the Rapid is cumbersome at best.  I know that I absolutely love not having to worry about whether or not I have exact change for the bus!

 

New poll at http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=5574.msg53628#msg53628

 

check it out!

I rode a #25 bus last week during afternoon rush hour that was so crowded people couldn't get on... I felt like I was back in Guatemala -- or at least New York...

it's kinda invigorating when it happens every once in a while...like riding the any of the rapid lines after a ball game...but i'm just glad it's not like that EVERY time I ride... It also indicates that demand is exceeding supply...so, run more buses...or create a streetcar line!!!

 

I rode a #25 bus last week during afternoon rush hour that was so crowded people couldn't get on... I felt like I was back in Guatemala -- or at least New York...

 

Bienvenidos a Cleveland!  Ahora, salga de mi asiento!    :wink:

it's kinda invigorating when it happens every once in a while...like riding the any of the rapid lines after a ball game...but i'm just glad it's not like that EVERY time I ride... It also indicates that demand is exceeding supply...so, run more buses...or create a streetcar line!!!

 

 

The old shaker cars, which were all be retrofitted when the line was being renovated, would be great for a streetcar line up on streets Clifton or lake; Payne or hough; central & broadway; euclid hts. blvd.; .  places where there is high density currently or places where they could test to see how the line runs to see if light rail would be feasible.  or use them as feeders of current rail station in the city itself.

hell, the rails are probably still there, just buried under asphalt now... KJP?

Correct. Most of the streetcar tracks were never removed. Just the overhead wires (though most of the poles are still standing -- look for those metal poles along city streets!), the substations and, of course, the streetcars themselves.

 

KJP

More good news from RTA...

 

RIDERSHIP: The Board learned that ridership in September was up 2.6 percent over last year. Rapid Transit ridership was up 8.4 percent, including 11.9 percent on the Red Line. Year-to-date, systemwide ridership is up 3.9 percent, and Red Line ridership is up 8.9 percent.

 

And....

 

See the press release below about Red Line schedule changes. From what I can tell from the new timetable, there have been only slight adjustments during peak travel times, and midday schedules have been speeded up by a minute over the 18-mile Red Line route. With Red Line ridership 10 percent higher than last year, the only way I can see how this faster trip possible is to keep more stations staffed during midday hours. I've noticed midday trains stopping for long periods of time at some stations (especially West 117th) while the larger groups of passengers pay their fares aboard the train.  KJP

_______________

 

RTA News

 

Tuesday, Oct. 18, 2005                         

 

All RTA rail schedules change Sunday, Oct. 30

 

CLEVELAND – All rail schedules for the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA) will change on Sunday, Oct. 30.

 

The new schedules are part of RTA’s on-going efforts to improve reliability and on-time performance. The new schedules will help to handle increased rail ridership.

 

The hours of service operation will not change. Frequency will continue to be 7-15 minutes during rush hour and 15-30 minutes during off-peak times.

 

New timetables will be available soon. To obtain a new schedule, go to:

 

> RTA’s Customer Service Center at the Tower City Station. Representatives will be there from 7 a.m.-6 p.m. Monday-Friday and the timetable display is open at all hours.

> RTA’s Main Office, 1240 W. Sixth St.

> www.rideRTA.com

 

To receive a timetable by mail, call the RTAnswerline, 216-621-9500, from 6:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m. Monday-Friday, and 8 a.m.-4:30 p.m. Saturday.

 

For more information, call the RTAnswerline, 216-621-9500.

they are staffing the stations with "light duty" employees that have been injured or cannot perform their normal functions but can collect fares before trains arrive.

 

they are also adding cars to the runs, but i think this is ony changing the single cars that run in off peak times to 2-car. It would be great to actually see 3 or 4 train cars go by like a true rail system.   

One thing to note is that RTA's Red Line cars are much longer than on most other rapid transit systems and seat more people (80 seats per car). In Japan (where the Red Line Tokyu cars were made), they are used for regional, commuter-type service, extending farther out, beyond the subways.

 

Chicago's El, for example, uses shorter rail cars that have 39 seats per car. Chicago's cars do have more room for standees, and the broader floor space enables faster boarding/deboarding of passengers, reducing the time that trains stay stopped at stations.

 

But when you see a two-car RTA Red Line train, it's very comparable to a four-car CTA El train. Granted, CTA often uses 6-, 8-, 10-car trains during rush hours on its busiest lines. But trains on its other lines, like the Ravenswood (Brown Line) or the Midway (Orange Line), often do not exceed four cars.

 

Someday, when RTA replaces its rail fleet, hopefully with new, shorter LRVs (like the Shaker lines), the Red Line trains will look more impressively long. But size isn't everything...

 

KJP

KJP, if I'm not mistaken, the Red Line cars are 75 feet long, which would put them equivalent to Washington Metro cars or NYC Subway cars on the "lettered" routes.

Chicago CTA cars are 48 feet long, and are equivalent to the NYC Subway cars on the "numbered" routes. 

 

In any event, Cleveland Red Line stations are typically designed to only handle two-car trains at maximum, so I don't think longer trains are in the cards.  I do think it kind of quirky that the Red Line is the only heavy rail line in the world powered by overhead catenary.  Any insight as to why the Red Line was designed as a heavy rail system, but with such limited capacity?  If you're going to limit the capacity of the line to two-car trains, it would seem that light rail would make more sense.

 

Got to sit in on both the Design Review and City Planning Commission hearings (yesterday and today) for the new E. 55th Street station.  There are definitely great features to the station, but a few shorcomings (in my opinion) as well.  I plan on registering my comments with RTA.  For the most part, though, the form and function of the station will be top notch. 

 

Relating to recent comments on this thread, the Red Line platform will apparently be long enough to handle 3 cars!  I don't know if that means anything, but it's something that caught my ear!

 

PS: anyone else take the four-page survey that was being handed out today by RTA/City Year?

I paid more attention riding today, and it appears that most of the stations can not handle 3 car red line trains.  Tower City can.  It is good to hear that new stations will be built with ability to handle longer trains.

 

Some other good news is that they have started installing the new security cameras at the stations/platforms using some fed security money.  There were new cameras at W.25, Tower City and University/Cedar.  One thing that confuses me is that they don't publicize the cameras.  They are very hard to notice unless you look for them.  I would think that they would post some signs saying that "this areas is under video survielance" or similar language to act as a deterrant. 

I do think it kind of quirky that the Red Line is the only heavy rail line in the world powered by overhead catenary.

 

naaah, the blue line in boston has'em for one

 

I paid more attention riding today, and it appears that most of the stations can not handle 3 car red line trains.  Tower City can.  It is good to hear that new stations will be built with ability to handle longer trains.

 

Some other good news is that they have started installing the new security cameras at the stations/platforms using some fed security money.  There were new cameras at W.25, Tower City and University/Cedar.  One thing that confuses me is that they don't publicize the cameras.  They are very hard to notice unless you look for them.  I would think that they would post some signs saying that "this areas is under video survielance" or similar language to act as a deterrant. 

 

I've been on four car red line trains.  IIRC the Brookpark-Towercity Red line trains were all four car trains, with the airport windermere being three car trains at all times.  Now, when I use the Red line (from towercity to the airport) I am usually on a  two car train  Some the platforms in the system are HUGE as some have dual access points, yet RTA only uses a portion of the platform.

 

I know The shaker stations were built to accomodate three car trains.  The blue line trains used 3 car during rush hour and the green line alternated between 1 & two car trains.  Then RTA went to two car trains for both lines. 

 

If RTA builds new stations that only accomdate two car trains they have no faith in our rail system.

 

KJP, what sort of increase in ridership do think would convince the RTA board that a rapid transit expansion was not only economically viable, but needed?

One- Joe Calabrese, on the Red Line, to the airport and out of town.

^Very clever. Actually, all that's being said here about Red Line stations being limited to two cars isn't correct. And I'm not just talking about the old stations. RTA occasionally runs three-car Red Line trains -- most recently during the International Children's Games, and I remember riding them during the city's bicentennial. Of course, before 1990, they ran 3-car trains all the time. Granted, there are signs posted trackside for Rapid operators to spot their trains at the platforms based on whether they are operating a one- or two-car train. There is no sign marked for a three-car train. But that doesn't mean the platforms aren't long enough to handle longer trains.

 

If rail ridership got up above 30,000 or 40,000 per day, then I think RTA and community leaders will take note. But, to reach those levels, the ridership-generation capacity of areas surrounding rail stations will have to be expanded a great deal. And I'm not talking about adding parking spaces, which will produce only two Rapid trips per day (one to work and the other one home). If residential, retail/restaurant, office, live-work, schools, hotels, theaters, etc. etc. are built in tight, walkable clusters around each and every rail station, then you will one person making multiple trips on the Rapid each day -- to work, to get groceries, to visit a bank, to have dinner, to watch a show, to head for a night cap, to head home, and so on. Creating a lifestyle around the Rapid will not only boost ridership to where it needs to be, but it will cause officials in other parts of the metro area to say "me too."

 

KJP

I'd rather they bump up the headway by a couple of minutes than add another car.  Two cars or three makes no difference to me at all.  Ten minute headways or 12 does.

agree the time between trains is usually more important to riders than how crowded they are (ie., how many cars). it is to me.

 

i grew up with the common 3 car rapid days and it is weird to see only 2 nowadays, but even as just a visitor i am much more concerned with frequency. ditto for busses too of course (which is why i dislike the newish articulated busses in nyc, since they are double-sized there are less of them & they come less often).

i think they added more cars tonite.  9pm on a Sunday at E120th had a 2 car train.  and as i was going by the main yard i saw a lot of 3 car groups ready to go for tomorrow. 

Good to hear. More often than not lately, when I ride from W. 25th to Tower City or vice-versa, it's a one-car train!

From my perch upon high in Cleveland Browns Stadium yesterday, I saw two-train Waterfront Line trains going by every 5 minutes or so before, during and after game-time.  I know this is a 10-times-a-year phenomenon as it pertains to Browns games, but why not, in such cases, run 3-car trains?  The only time I've ever been OVER crowded (not just crowded) on a Green or Red-line train has been during a commute to or coming home from a game.  Gladly, I can walk to both now, but back when that wasn't an option, this used to baffle me!

KJP had an article this week in the West Side Sun News about the increase in the redline's ridership.  There is one quote that I found perplexing:

 

"In September, Cleveland City Council approved what's called a transit zoning overlay, applying it to the $200 million Euclid Corridor bus rapid transit. It requires new buildings in the corridor to be on the sidewalk, have ground-floor retail, and be at least three stories tall. Chris Ronayne, Mayor Jane Campbell's chief of staff, said the zoning overlay also could be applied to other areas of the city, such as around rail stations. Cleveland Planning Commissioner Robert Brown called the transit zoning the city's greatest planning accomplishment in decades."

 

Its is sort of sad that Mr. Brown considers this the city's greatest planning accomplishment in decades.  One would hope that the overlay zoning should be a no-brainer and an easy thing to get done.  Presently, there is an active push to do the same ovelay zoning for Lorain Ave from W.25th to W. 65th.

True that...my sources say the same thing about Lorain...it's an effort by three council people, CSU faculty and other experts.  Cimperman is also working on a different sort of overlay for the "real" warehouse district in the east 30s-50s along Hamilton, St. Clair and Lakeside.  This would be for more live-work, light industrial type development.

IMO, I think all properties located on major corridors in the city should be zoned "mixed-use".  Think street-level retail fronting on the sidewalk with apartments and offices above.  Benches, bike racks, and bus stops on the sidewalk to promote a variety of transportation modes.  Agreed that Cleveland does need more focus on TOD--you could build a brand-new neighborhood just in the parking lot of the Triskett rapid station. 

Wimwar, I was at that meeting and actually discussed this with Mr. KJP himself! It may seem like overstatement on Brown's part, but just look at the legacy of the city's planning decisions of the past few decades: dozens of surface parking lots fronting on formerly pedestrian-friendly commercial arteries. (Detroit Avenue, Lorain, St. Clair, Superior, etc etc)

Minor though it may appear, this type of overlay zoning does in fact represent a huge step forward for our city, and seems to be popping up all over town, as MGD says. It just took us a little longer to get to this point than, say, Boston.

....Especially if the zoning overlay is used extensively yet appropriately (ie: not in the area where the steel mills are, to use an overexaggerated example). It's use could be quite significant, if combined with redevelopment incentives, a helpful City Hall and so on.

 

KJP

By the way, as I understand it the zoning overlay proposed for Lorain between 25th and 65th is slightly different than what's happening along the Euclid corridor. Lorain would get "form-based" zoning, as opposed to the mixed-used overlay on Euclid, Carnegie and Chester. Form-based zoning requires a general respect for the type of building that already exists in an area, for the sake of creating a cohesive (and therefore more visually appealing) whole. I don't think the guidelines are as specific as for the mixed-use districts (MMUD's) along the Euclid Corridor, which require buildings at least 3 stories, no set-back, retail on ground floor.

I worry a little about requiring retail on the ground floor of too much of the city.  It has been a problem in some other cities that have either encouraged or required mixed use(Seattle, for example) where too much mixed-use retail was built and didn't find an occupant, thus sitting empty for years.  I would think we should prioritize this approach to have it required only in a few particularly important places- important innersections such as E. 55th and Broadway or successful retail districts such as W. 25th through Ohio City or maybe even portions of Euclid. 

 

It think that building pedestrian friendly and vibrant main streets can be more flexible than a zoning code that requires retail.  Perhaps it would be more important for example, to require pedestrian lighting, street entrances every certain distance, a minimum amount of glazing, etc.  Vacant retail, after all, isn't going to create much vibrancy.  I guess I'd be interested in knowing more about this "form based zoning" that you mentioned blinker12.  It sounds like the right track to me.

 

btw, I am also glad to hear that Cimperman has grasped the potential of the warehouses along Lakeside and Hamilton.  I think that area, as well as the area of warehouses around 40th and Commerce/Perkins are two of Cleveland's best opportunities to create unique and truly urban neighborhoods.

When I think of retail, I think of everything from restaurants, to nightclubs, to coffee shops, to laundromats, to storefront churches and so on. I think the thing is to have lots of doors along the sidewalks (as opposed to the design of too many new buildings along Euclid Avenue -- Applied Industrial Technologies, Cleveland Clinic, etc). Retail as a conditional use that specify the inclusion of various other permitted uses, or certain forms of commercial zoning (ie: general business classifications), seem to allow that diversity.

 

KJP