June 11, 201015 yr RTA's next technological innovation? (it might be time for a laugh, and I have nothing better to do on a Friday afternoon) So will that teleport a person from the crosswalk to the sidewalk?
June 11, 201015 yr Maybe it could have a cow-catcher type thing on the front, but all across the front and over to the sides, to throw pedestrians out of the way.
June 11, 201015 yr ^ That and a boxing glove on one of those extend arm things coming out of the side for the driver to operate to punch people out of the way! This will be the ultimate safe pedestrian bus!
June 11, 201015 yr RTA's next technological innovation? (it might be time for a laugh, and I have nothing better to do on a Friday afternoon) ^frigging awesome, C-1979!
June 11, 201015 yr Pedestrians! Look both ways! Hey, I'm talking to you, buddy! Bus...is...punching...bus...is...punching.
June 11, 201015 yr I've never witnessed that. That right before TCC and about 79 street is annoying. Remember the old trains, I think it was worse back then. ;) I've seen it on more than one occasion during rush hour esp. I don't know what your talking about re the old cars... I'm talking about the cars now in service. And, really, the issue isn't the cars themselves, but that the drivers do not have adequate training to run the cars. The way these drivers often (even usually) drive is comparable to the school kid jerking and jamming on the brakes during Drivers Ed... inexcusable for a major transit system... and, again, I see it NOWHERE but at RTA.
June 11, 201015 yr I've never witnessed that. That right before TCC and about 79 street is annoying. Remember the old trains, I think it was worse back then. ;) I've seen it on more than one occasion during rush hour esp. I don't know what your talking about re the old cars... I'm talking about the cars now in service. And, really, the issue isn't the cars themselves, but that the drivers do not have adequate training to run the cars. The way these drivers often (even usually) drive is comparable to the school kid jerking and jamming on the brakes during Drivers Ed... inexcusable for a major transit system... and, again, I see it NOWHERE but at RTA. I don't know if it's the drivers, the weather, signal systerm, poor training or a combination of all of the above. But as a life long shaker rapid user, I've never seen anyone jerked to the floor. I've been on systems in Boston, Baltimore, Philly, LA, San Diego, San Fran, NoLa, and Chicago and have experience the jerking, so it's not just in Cleveland. It's no excuse, but not just a Cleveland issue. Old cars - the drivers and/or cars jerked constantly!
June 11, 201015 yr Dogs&Cats....what is that # please. Its a city, not a RTA, trash can. The number for the Director's office at Cleveland Dept of Public Service's Division of Wast Collection is 216-662-2231.
June 12, 201015 yr Author R. A. T. A. Regional Audio Terrorist Authority There's better wording you could have chosen to express your displeasure. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 12, 201015 yr R. A. T. A. Regional Audio Terrorist Authority There's better wording you could have chosen to express your displeasure. I'm open to suggestions... I thought I was being nice. How about... &*(&&^%&!!!^&&&^%$*(_)(*)&%^$#%!!@!$$$^&((**!!! :x
June 13, 201015 yr The great news for everyone is that downtown, esp. the E. 4th Street area, is really picking up steam. On most warm nights, HOB, the Bodies exhibit, downtown cafes' al fresco tables and other activities are humming with activity, even on weekday nights when there are no pro sports in town ... The bad news is that it doesn't appear to me that the added people coming downtown are coming by rail. Coming and going on Friday evening on Memorial Day weekend, only a trickle of the crowds along E. 4th/Euclid made the easy 3-5 min stroll over to Tower City to catch a train. In fact, an informal survey of family, friends and associates, show that people are consciously avoiding it -- ready and able to pay parking lot attendants or expensive Valets like MVP over $10 (with tips) to park their cars). To me the main culprit is Joe Calabrese. He's made it easier for folks to shun the Rapid... This man has done everything to discourage/destroy interest in rail usage. People can attempt to protect him with underfunding from Washington/Columbus. I understand and sympathize with this problem and applaud Joe C with his outspoken efforts to persuade pols to increase operating funding, esp. for diesel bus fuel. But it doesn't explain such Rapid cuts like: - 20 min base trips over the Red Line, the main/heavy rail spine line for our system w/ the all-important Hopkins airport service... You simply don't do stuff like that; there's no excuse -- and the Puritas (one station) rebuild is no justification. - the practical killing off of the Waterfront Line. Yes, the Flats died and there were times there was a trickle (even a few empty cars at times) on the lines. But you just don't kill off a high profile rail transit line that does/did serve a purpose. It's very existence enhances downtown; encourages people families to come down to the North Coast Harbor and the several museums. If anything, you ENCOURAGE people in the huge Erieview complex (for example) to use the service -- and you try inexpensive construction programs, like extending stairs to near the Double-Tree Hotel/Public utilities building/Channel 3 area (at South Harbor); extend the (North Coast) stairway under E. 9th Street immediately adjacent to the huge North Pointe complex (you could even make an enclosed connection to that building from the WFL station. For one thing, it's a short line (2.2 miles) and a mere short extension of Blue/Green trains that already enter downtown/Tower City... Killing the service isn't saving all that much money -- at most $300,000/600,000 that even RTA publicly admits. That's not much money and I can point to (and have) a bunch of empty/near empty buses RTA keeps running to and around downtown that would more than make up that sum. (example -- the Muni Parking-Public Sq. loop buses that duplicate the WFL route that are empty/near empty even during rush hour), and that's only one... I don't care (in the true negative Cleveland tradition) how much of "mistake' people want to continue argue against the WFL, ... normal cities just don't kill off rapid transit service like this -- -- Then there's RTA/Joe C.'s proposals to seek Federal funding to run BRT buses to compete with rail -- like over the Opportunity Corridor and along Buckeye Road a block from the main Blue/Green trunk line... Jerry Masek denied the Buckeye proposal, but I've seen it written elsewhere and Karen Farkas, the PD reporter who reported it, is a competent writer who didn't pull it from the sky... There are other things have already been mentioned ad museum, like the dirty cars/stations/ROWs that I need not repeat here ... Bottom Line: Joe Calabrese should not be allowed to kill off RTA's most valuable service: RTA rail -- despite his new love affair with the HL and BRT in general. Sorry that this went a little long...
June 13, 201015 yr You can't use RTA rail for a night out downtown, because the service cuts off just after midnight.
June 13, 201015 yr Do the lines shut down that early because of some kind of city or state code? Or is there just not the demand to keep them open? Have there ever been any 2 or 3 am train lines running, presumably during summer?
June 13, 201015 yr Just as Healthline supposedly has stirred lots of interest in re-developing Euclid.... I see the Waterfront Line positioned in a similar way. It is the basic infrastructure that should attract development/re-development/interest around it. You lay a road...you open the doors for sprawl. With the WFL, ideally, I would think it would be a spark for interest around it. To be doing away with rail is regressing, naturally...But again, as the poster (Clvndr) above alluded to, the management has been a big problem with making it seem like rail is not going to be supported. All said, I do not think this line should be done away with. Thoughts anyone? Btw... I would guess that if trains ran at 3AM they would mostly serve as transport for trouble makers or those looking for trouble...who's day begins at 2:00 AM and ends at 7:00 AM....when they will sleep till 4:00 PM!
June 13, 201015 yr Btw... I would guess that if trains ran at 3AM they would mostly serve as transport for trouble makers or those looking for trouble...who's day begins at 2:00 AM and ends at 7:00 AM....when they will sleep till 4:00 PM! I don't think that's true at all. There are plenty of good people who work odd shifts, and plenty more who enjoy a late night on the town. Many successful and recommendable cities offer fun times till almost sunrise. Cleveland alone can't change Ohio's bible-belt liquor laws, but RTA can certainly help Cleveland make the most of the opportunities it has. It's a fact that much of the investment going on downtown and in the neighborhoods revolves around nightlife. RTA needs to get on the same page and be a helpful part of that growth. Cities that are fun make young people want to visit, and stay, and start businesses. Not all of those businesses will be bars... but a healthy bar scene helps to attract those entrepreneurs. Cleveland can't afford to be no fun, and RTA can't keep stranding people in the middle of the night.
June 13, 201015 yr ^ I agree with you in that being the ultimate goal/vision...... But not everyone who comes here from near or afar, if that is the case, is going to be into the "bar scene" I have said again and again and again......we need to diversify the offerings or the bar/restaurant thing will get old really fast. What about considering those who would like to come downtown if there were more than mostly bars? That is an untapped market we cannot afford to ignore. A new aquarium, or added functional retail/interesting shops/galleries...for example, will be a key to attracting others who want to visit the city who are not simply into bar scenes... If we have only bar offerings we become a one trick pony; a town that is not very dynamic. That really type-casts us economically...and sells us short on our real potentials. If you want to attract more than the bar crowd, you must give them what they will go visit. My reference to the after hours trouble makers was addressing the few bad apples that will spoil the bunch, adage....and until we have more create attractions that will attract a more diverse array of visitors, running trains at the wee hours, in the current status of what we offer...with not enough "eyes" on the streets, surely will draw some unsavory activity. It only takes one or two individuals out of 50 to start a problem. Most crimes are committed in the wee hours of the morning. All I am saying is that I just don't think we are in a position to offer that service at this time. Let us continue to add the extra draws beyond bars/restaurants....and then open up the trains until 3. Even in Sydney, the trains take a break for a while. Am I saying this should stop is from proceeding? No...Its just that we need to take it step by step. One incident happens and we start a paranoia of bad image and fear. I am not ready to risk that until I know we have people visiting in bigger numbers.
June 13, 201015 yr If you're with more than one person it's cheaper to park your car at one of those lots downtown, say for $10 and about 1000 times more convenient than to take that Red Line (or Whatever Line.) We were hanging out on East Fourth yesterday and found street parking (free) without much of a problem, even on an Indians game day.
June 14, 201015 yr Yes, but we cannot let rail slip away... Lots of things can be done to make the existing service more appealing, but whether they do it or not is another thing (RTA) But the "funding" excuse card will be dealt.
June 14, 201015 yr Do the lines shut down that early because of some kind of city or state code? Or is there just not the demand to keep them open? Have there ever been any 2 or 3 am train lines running, presumably during summer? There is no State or City code. Some of our service, including the HealthLine, operates 24/7. In years past, the rail has operated later, and was not widely supported. The ridership was not there to warrant. Specifically, the Waterfront Line opened in 1996, when the Flats nightlife was still active. Service lasted until around 2 a.m., but the ridership was not there. Now, as RTA faces decreased funding, we have to ask ourselves which is more important -- making sure people can get to work, or making sure people can get to nightlife? RTA, and public transit in general, has always held work trips as a high priority. I do not expect that to change.
June 14, 201015 yr RTA is not "killing off" the Waterfront Line, has was referred to above. The Line was built when the Flats were packed. Employees and party-goers alike used rail to reach their destinations. Now, they have mostly left. RTA has been widely criticized for keeping the line operating at all while cutting bus service that was used by more people. Now, the WFL operates on weekends and during special events, such as the upcoming Tall Ships event. When the Flats East Bank development grows, you will see the Line growing as well. RTA continues to maintain the track and stations. The infrastructure is not being ignored.
June 14, 201015 yr From my perspective, the WFL should be cut back as it has been. With the exception of the handicapped, most people can walk from Tower City to E 3rd or E 9th faster than WFL can get them there anyway. Until something gets built in the flats or RTA gets a real leader that wants to extend the WFL (either as a loop or to the East) there's not a point in running empty trains when RTA doesn't have an extra $300,000 lying around.
June 14, 201015 yr Agreed! And if the Trolley's E-Line hours could be expanded in the future, it would make it a lot more convenient for the nightlife crowd. Train --> Trolley --> Martini
June 14, 201015 yr I've got it! One great way to make the talking buses go away would be to have the city of Cleveland pass some sort of anti-noise/speakers on the exterior of vehicles ordinance. Since Cleveland is the largest municipality in the county, I can't see there being an on/off switch for the talking buses when they cross the city line; it would be far easier to kill the idea entirely. Etheostoma Caeruleum, I think you need to start working on city council members with regards to the effects of noise pollution. :)
June 14, 201015 yr Author While in downtown Pittsburgh Saturday evening, I was surprised to hear their buses beep every time they make turns at intersections. They aren't talking though -- yet. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 15, 201014 yr The Waterfront Line was never correctly marketed by RTA (or the City). It was always marketed as a mere tourist line geared toward the Flats and Rock Hall. However, a few hardy Shaker riders (as well as some transferring from the Red Line), used to access the Erieveiw area, even the Galleria, from the Line. I always though ex-mayor Jane Campbell could have set a great example by taking a Blue/Green train from her Shaker Square area home directly to City Hall which sits next to the E. 9th/North Coast Station. I mean, the woman grew up in Shaker Heighs along the Shaker lines, for cryin' out loud! (but hey, this is Cleveland -- why support quality transit when you can worship the almighty auto and sit back and bittch about how much money we waste on rail transit -- or how smart/how much we save by not building it?) No one has ever addressed why, for a relatively small sum, modifications couldn't be made -- like stairwells, and maybe an elevator, to office buildings along Lakeside, the WFL could be better accessed. My brother used to work at North Pointe building and when the Waterfront Line first opened, and trains were serving the WFL every 15 mins during rush hour, he loved it. That building sets adjacent to the WFL, (although you have to cross wide/busy E. 9th to get there)... Of course when you begin cutting service to the bare minimum, people stop riding, and then transit systems justify cutting service even more -- the old transit chicken-egg trick. From my perspective, the WFL should be cut back as it has been. With the exception of the handicapped, most people can walk from Tower City to E 3rd or E 9th faster than WFL can get them there anyway. Grumpy, I don't agree that anybody arriving downtown by Rapid can out-walk the Waterfront Line to E. 9th (from Public Square)... I hear that all the time, though. If you figure (for logic's sake) 1/3 of all rail passengers enter downtown on the Blue/Green Lines, no way those passengers can get off the Rapid, ride the escalators to Public Square and walk or bus to the Erieview complex anywhere near what a 1-seat Rapid could do... Even transferring Red Line passengers could still beat walking/busing given that the Tower City transfer was so easy (again, as opposed to going all the way up to Public Square and catching a bus)... ... but of course, if WFL service becomes crappy, it again justifies cutting it when people aren't not using it... and that's what RTA has done. First it was cutting trains (to about every 1/2 hour which is absurd for rush hour) then removing rush-hour fare takers (which meant drivers had to sit and count coins for every passenger, and obviously much slower service (than the normal 5 mins from E. 9th to Tower City ride)... Yeah, why ride what could/should be a signature RTA service?
June 15, 201014 yr From my perspective, the WFL should be cut back as it has been. With the exception of the handicapped, most people can walk from Tower City to E 3rd or E 9th faster than WFL can get them there anyway. Grumpy, I don't agree that anybody arriving downtown by Rapid can out-walk the Waterfront Line to E. 9th (from Public Square)... I hear that all the time, though. If you figure (for logic's sake) 1/3 of all rail passengers enter downtown on the Blue/Green Lines, no way those passengers can get off the Rapid, ride the escalators to Public Square and walk or bus to the Erieview complex anywhere near what a 1-seat Rapid could do... Even transferring Red Line passengers could still beat walking/busing given that the Tower City transfer was so easy (again, as opposed to going all the way up to Public Square and catching a bus)... It's been a couple years, but when I first started working in the Federal building I was driving to Shaker Heights and catching the Blue line to Tower City everyday. From there I got off and walked because it saved me at least a couple minutes over taking the WFL around to the E 9th station and then walking up the hill and crossing lakeside. I timed it several times and I was always better off walking time wise. Though maybe I walk faster than you. EDIT: As of my morning break today, I can walk from the door at the Federal building to the bottom of the stairs at Tower City in under 9 minutes. According to RTA (http://www.riderta.com/pdf/67-67A.pdf) the WFL takes 10 minutes to get from Tower City to the Muni Lot. If you subtract 2 minutes from that, it should take about 8 minutes to get from Tower City to E 9th. So for the WFL to be faster I'd have to have been able to go up the stairs, out the door of the E 9th station, climb the hill up E 9th, and cross lakeside in less than 1 minute. I walk fast, but not that fast.
June 15, 201014 yr I have no doubt that walking beats the WFL. If the WFL offered door-to-door service to offices on 9th street, perhaps not, but it doesn't come close to that. As it stands now, the only destination that makes sense to reach via WFL is the muni lot. Its construction should have been accompanied by concrete plans, if not immediately actionable ones, to extend it along the lakeshore. A taste of something greater. The failure of the WFL was a failure of vision.
June 15, 201014 yr guys, we have a whole thread dedicated to the wfl and what could / should be done or pie in the sky ideas for it.
June 15, 201014 yr RTA park-and-ride lots and bus bicycle racks are popular with riders Published: Tuesday, June 15, 2010, 8:15 AM Karen Farkas, The Plain Dealer CLEVELAND, Ohio - Two investments by RTA -- parking lots in suburban areas and bike racks attached to the front of buses -- have helped attract riders and keep the transit agency solvent. This month marks 20 years for park-and-ride lots and 10 years for bike racks. Both remain highly popular, said Joe Calabrese, general manager of the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority. "We are helping save commuters money because if they have a car they drive it less and get lower insurance rates," he said. "It reduces congestion and is good for the environment." http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/06/rta_park-and-ride_lots_and_bus.html
June 15, 201014 yr Umm . . . I'm having trouble parsing the article . . . since RTA's costs are not close to being recovered by the farebox, "attracting riders" and "keeping the agency solvent" are mutually exclusive goals. The more riders, the more costs, without any comparable increase in revenue, and vice versa. So which is it? And am I the only person that sees how absurd this entire situation is?
June 15, 201014 yr The conditions are not mutually exclusive, and the situation is far from absurd. RTA, as any transit agency, provides as a core service the ability to get people from where they live to where they work, and back. Keeping that economic engine going enables those employed individuals to spend money, which increases local sales tax revenues. Those sales tax revenues form the bulk of RTA's operating funding. Methinks the article was a victim of overzealous editing that simplified the situation.
June 15, 201014 yr ^They're not exactly mutually exclusive- there's no marginal expense to adding ridership if you don't increase service. But I agree the article doesn't really explain the connection between solvency and these routes/features. The only way the park and ride lots are helping solvency is if they are turning an operating profit. Seems unlikely, but not totally inconceivable given their relatively low frequency- and don't they have higher fares?
June 18, 201014 yr Some may think this is off topic... But I really think this relates to educating the public as well as institutions like RTA. I hope that the following Newsweek article will help RTA and others to better understand the value in striving for a less noisy environment and to see why implementing noisy talking buses is just adding to a growing problem. An Unquiet Nation Audio ecologist Gordon Hempton talks about America's vanishing quiet spaces, and how our lives can be helped by listening to the silence. "There are no words that can tell the hidden spirit of the wilderness, that can reveal its mystery, its melancholy, and its charm." —Theodore Roosevelt, 1910 "The day will come when man will have to fight noise as inexorably as cholera and the plague." —Nobel Prize–winning bacteriologist Robert Koch, 1905 Silence is something you assume you will always be able to find if you need it. All you have to do is drive far enough in the right direction, trek through quiet fields or woods, or dive into the sea's belly. For true silence is not noiselessness. As audio ecologist Gordon Hempton defines it, silence is "the complete absence of all audible mechanical vibrations, leaving only the sounds of nature at her most natural. Silence is the presence of everything, undisturbed." Read the whole article at: http://www.newsweek.com/2010/01/27/an-unquiet-nation.html
June 19, 201014 yr Some may think this is off topic... But I really think this relates to educating the public as well as institutions like RTA. I hope that the following Newsweek article will help RTA and others to better understand the value in striving for a less noisy environment and to see why implementing noisy talking buses is just adding to a growing problem. An Unquiet Nation Audio ecologist Gordon Hempton talks about America's vanishing quiet spaces, and how our lives can be helped by listening to the silence. "There are no words that can tell the hidden spirit of the wilderness, that can reveal its mystery, its melancholy, and its charm." —Theodore Roosevelt, 1910 "The day will come when man will have to fight noise as inexorably as cholera and the plague." —Nobel Prize–winning bacteriologist Robert Koch, 1905 Silence is something you assume you will always be able to find if you need it. All you have to do is drive far enough in the right direction, trek through quiet fields or woods, or dive into the sea's belly. For true silence is not noiselessness. As audio ecologist Gordon Hempton defines it, silence is "the complete absence of all audible mechanical vibrations, leaving only the sounds of nature at her most natural. Silence is the presence of everything, undisturbed." Read the whole article at: http://www.newsweek.com/2010/01/27/an-unquiet-nation.html lost all credibility when you said "newsweak" That garbage!
June 19, 201014 yr ^ Oh really? Did you even bother to read the article and discover the worth in it? This was not about a story that just appeared in Newsweek, it appeared in other publications and online as well and they picked up on it. Not a fan of this pub, but this is something of value. In fact, when I heard of the project, it was not through mainstream media at all. I'll bet if the article was saying something about how wonderful Cleveland is, you'd be all for it. But, since you are personally tired of the subject relating to noise, and acting as though it is exclusively an issue that is important to me only....you cannot resist the opportunity to poo poo this particular article. So, that means you lose all credibility with me. By the way...... "lost all credibility when you said "newsweak" That garbage!" How do you know this is not worthy or credible? Where are your facts to back up the opinion that ALL in Newsweek is not credible? Cite examples...times, dates.... who, when and where???? :lol: Sorry... Just doing the best MTS impersonation I know how.
June 19, 201014 yr ^I think Newseek is a competitor to a magazine in MTS's corporate family- I don't think he meant to be snippy. EC, I appreciate the article (and very much appreciate quiet more than the average guy- no joke), but I don't think the article really has much to do with RTA. Take away the bus noises, and in a major metro area like ours, you still have a lot of noise- not silent wilderness. I'm not calling it quits on annoying noise, just trying to keep you from veering off topic...
June 19, 201014 yr ^ Straphanger...I understand what you're saying, but I thought the article can help illustrate the growing problem with excessive noise---even in areas where we'd never expect it and to show how adding more, does not help anything. Indeed, there is still a lot of other excessive noise at street levels as you say, but by adding tooting, beeping, and talking buses...such simply becomes a part of the problem and helps to escalate it. I like the part that talked about more natural sounds being like a music of sort...in contrast to the artificial sounds that grow to the pollution part. I thought it good that it talks about how something as simple as the right to reasonable peace is something we can all take for granted and think we can always go someplace to find it---and that we are losing that simple pleasure. Landscapes can be polluted, and so can sound-scapes. I just thought it showed how the problem is growing. Personally, I believe it keeps creating a problem where we have to always become louder and louder to be heard over the din of other noises...to the point of hearing damage. If more quiet is striven for, we won't have to yell over the other guy and can be heard at healthy audible levels. Anyway, thanks for seeing the worth in it somehow. :-)
June 19, 201014 yr I love the cars that screech on the rails on the curves near Union Terminal here in Cincinnati. It's louder than any tooting, beeping and talking bus out there.
June 19, 201014 yr guys, we have a whole thread dedicated to the wfl and what could / should be done or pie in the sky ideas for it. I'd hardly call spending $1M or so to connect the existing WFL into business downtown to make it more viable a "pie in the sky" idea, ... but direction to the WFL thread would be worthwhile... ... btw, if you ride a WFL bound Blue/Green Line train into downtown, by the time you get thru the turnstile, up the escalator and out the Terminal Tower door, the train you left is through the Flats and 1 min from E. 9th... The only way you beat it to City Hall/Fed Build/Erieview/North Pt on foot is if you're Usain Bolt. ... btw 2, the E. 9th incline up to Lakeside is no greater (and shorter) to the one down the Rock Hall (and across 2 Shoreway exit/entrances)... Last time I looked, a whole lot of elderly folks walk up/down the stretch easily every day... I think you're reaching.
June 19, 201014 yr guys, we have a whole thread dedicated to the wfl and what could / should be done or pie in the sky ideas for it. I'd hardly call spending $1M or so to connect the existing WFL into business downtown to make it more viable a "pie in the sky" idea, ... but direction to the WFL thread would be worthwhile... ... btw, if you ride a WFL bound Blue/Green Line train into downtown, by the time you get thru the turnstile, up the escalator and out the Terminal Tower door, the train you left is through the Flats and 1 min from E. 9th... The only way you beat it to City Hall/Fed Build/Erieview/North Pt on foot is if you're Usain Bolt. ... btw 2, the E. 9th incline up to Lakeside is no greater (and shorter) to the one down the Rock Hall (and across 2 Shoreway exit/entrances)... Last time I looked, a whole lot of elderly folks walk up/down the stretch easily every day... I think you're reaching. The problem with the WFL (when it's running) is the 30 minute headways...if you don't arrive into Tower City close to departure time..it's indeed faster to walk.
June 19, 201014 yr Ok, this is the last post I will post on noise related issues with RTA. The following letter basically sums up the problem with adding unnecessary noise to an already noisy environment--which is exactly what RTA is doing with the talking, tooting, beeping buses. Louis H. is an MD in California who has been very active in the reduction of excessive noises in communities---as well as very well versed on the issue. His address to a writer who apparently offered a one sided view of making hybrid vehicles louder for the impaired, is similar to the scenario of RTA adding the noisy buses. Again, I hope that this will illicit some deeper critical thinking amongst the unaware as to the issues of noise in communities. This IS related to this thread and on topic, and I could send a similar one to RTA. Letter... Dear Mr. Motavalli, I am a retired physician with an interest in the medical, social, and economic effects of noise pollution. I have been following the concerns about pedestrian safety that electric and hybrid vehicles create. I have also read your recent articles in the NY Times. I feel compelled to write to you because, it seems to me, you have given a one sided - and therefore unbalanced - presentation of the issue. As noted by the World Health Organization environmental noise is one of the major problems in urban settings, worldwide. This fact has been long recognized by the US Government as well. Domestic tranquility is one of the six guarantees in the United States Constitution, a guarantee that is echoed in some form or other in every state constitution. In 1972, a Noise Control Act was passed by Congress (Title 42 United States Code Section 4901 et seq.). The legislative intent of the Act reads, “(a) The Congress finds - - (1) that inadequately controlled noise presents a growing danger to the health and welfare of the Nation’s population, particularly in urban areas; (2) that the major sources of noise include transportation vehicles and equipment, machinery, appliances, and other products in commerce; and (3) that, while primary responsibility for control of noise rests with State and local governments, Federal action is essential to deal with major noise sources in commerce control of which require national uniformity of treatment. (b) The Congress declares that it is the policy of the United States to promote an environment for all Americans free from noise that jeopardizes their health or welfare. To that end, it is the purpose of this chapter to establish a means for effective coordination of Federal research and activities in noise control, to authorize the establishment of Federal noise emission standards for products distributed in commerce, and to provide information to the public respecting the noise emission and noise reduction characteristics of such products.” (Emphasis added.) As noted by the World Health Organization, noise produces defense and startle reactions, damages hearing, disturbs communication, disrupts sleep, impairs cardiovascular function, interferes with teaching and learning, reduces productivity, harms relationships, provokes unwanted behaviors, and increases accidents. It is a major source of recurring annoyance, leading to stress which may not be recognized but which degrades the quality of life and adversely affects health. Many of these effects take place outside of conscious awareness. Cardiovascular effects can be detected even while we sleep. Motor vehicles are major sources of urban noise. Individuals ride around in vehicles whose mufflers no longer muffle; instead they produce a low rumbling roar that is audible at great distances. They ride around in vehicles with sound systems whose power rivals that of major public address systems. Making electric vehicles noisy will do two things. It will provide an additional source of noise in an already noisy world. It will also provide creative individuals an opportunity to modify the factory installed sound - as some have suggested - to one of their choosing that is certain to draw attention and most assuredly will be loud. I have no argument with making the environment as safe as possible for the blind and other people with disabilities. I do have an argument with adding noise to our already noisy environment. Certainly, there must be a way to meet the needs of the blind without polluting the environment with additional unwanted, unnecessary, and unhealthy noise. I hope you will consider this side of the issue in your further writings on this subject. Louis Hagler, MD Oakland, CA
June 22, 201014 yr I'm just curious... why hasn't RTA (or anybody here) mentioned extending a branch from the Red Line Rapid (at West Blvd) west along the N-S railroad to the center of Lakewood, about 3 miles away? This distance is about equal to the Van Aken Blue Line east from Shaker Square (shorter than the Green Line)... Lakewood is the 2nd most densely populated city between Philadelphia and Chicago. Such a Red Line extension would pass within 2.5 blocks from the uber-dense/beautiful Gold Coast. The Detroit corridor along the route is growing with new condos/townhouses, like Rockport (?) just west of W. 117th Street. Downtown Lakewood near Detroit & Warren Rd is also growing as a restaurant/entertainment hub. The N/S (and potential Rapid terminal there) is 1/2 block behind the building line. As the West Shore commuter rail plan is slowly moving forward, it would make great sense to have a combined Rapid/Train transfer terminal/station for RTA commuters (say from Univ. Circle) to go into Lorain county (or Lorain county folks to transfer for an Airport connection, among others). Personally, I'd try and seek Fed money to elevate the railroad and eliminate the Lakewood generations-old fuss about the trains at street level -- which could easily be done because the elevated train ROW, like the Chicago L (and the East Cleveland RR/Red Line) would be invisible behind the Detroit building line. But a cheaper (I know Cleveland loves cheap) surface-level Rapid extension could work, too -- unlike Chicago with live 3rd rails at street level in some limited areas, our trains use centenary, which is safely up and away from track level -- just that a surface route would not quite as efficiently. I just wonder why this hasn't been considered, esp with the Red Line corridor skimming the fringe of Lakewood already? I’m sure this line would draw a lot of riders because its close to large numbers and goes where a lot of people go (downtown Lakewood is also a sizable employment destination, esp w/ Lakewood Hospital there) Why is everybody so gung-ho about BRT (on Clifton or Detroit) esp given that a Clifton BRT wouldn't adeequately serve this area as well anyway? ... because BRT is cheap? Will Cleveland always be defined by doing things cheaply as opposed to efficiently?
June 22, 201014 yr Author The WestShore Corridor Alternatives Analysis will allow for such ideas to be considered for federal funding. Discuss it here: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,1916.0.html "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 22, 201014 yr I'm just curious... why hasn't RTA (or anybody here) mentioned extending a branch from the Red Line Rapid (at West Blvd) west along the N-S railroad to the center of Lakewood, about 3 miles away? This distance is about equal to the Van Aken Blue Line east from Shaker Square (shorter than the Green Line)... Lakewood is the 2nd most densely populated city between Philadelphia and Chicago. Such a Red Line extension would pass within 2.5 blocks from the uber-dense/beautiful Gold Coast. The Detroit corridor along the route is growing with new condos/townhouses, like Rockport (?) just west of W. 117th Street. Downtown Lakewood near Detroit & Warren Rd is also growing as a restaurant/entertainment hub. The N/S (and potential Rapid terminal there) is 1/2 block behind the building line. As the West Shore commuter rail plan is slowly moving forward, it would make great sense to have a combined Rapid/Train transfer terminal/station for RTA commuters (say from Univ. Circle) to go into Lorain county (or Lorain county folks to transfer for an Airport connection, among others). Personally, I'd try and seek Fed money to elevate the railroad and eliminate the Lakewood generations-old fuss about the trains at street level -- which could easily be done because the elevated train ROW, like the Chicago L (and the East Cleveland RR/Red Line) would be invisible behind the Detroit building line. But a cheaper (I know Cleveland loves cheap) surface-level Rapid extension could work, too -- unlike Chicago with live 3rd rails at street level in some limited areas, our trains use centenary, which is safely up and away from track level -- just that a surface route would not quite as efficiently. I just wonder why this hasn't been considered, esp with the Red Line corridor skimming the fringe of Lakewood already? I’m sure this line would draw a lot of riders because its close to large numbers and goes where a lot of people go (downtown Lakewood is also a sizable employment destination, esp w/ Lakewood Hospital there) Why is everybody so gung-ho about BRT (on Clifton or Detroit) esp given that a Clifton BRT wouldn't adeequately serve this area as well anyway? ... because BRT is cheap? Will Cleveland always be defined by doing things cheaply as opposed to efficiently? Who is "everybody"? I'm not.
Create an account or sign in to comment