I still don't understand the inability to transfer from Green/Blue to Red or vice versa at Tower City.  Someone mentioned it was for historical reasons? 

 

Couldn't this be solved with a walkway between the two platform lobbies?

 

I don't think prestige has anything to do with it.  It's just easier for many passengers ... Part of the problem is the historical, and clunky, old Shaker Rapid "pay enter, Eastbound" "pay leave, Westbound".  This problem is compounded by RTA's refusal to extend the POP (proof of payment) fare system to the Blue and Green lines... So in order for westbound Blue/Green passengers (like me) to transfer to the westbound Red Line, it's far easier to do so at Tower City; I don't have to have exact change (which I do if I have to walk up and pay the driver at the fare box -- while holding on as the train bounces around before coming to a stop at either E. 55 or 34th).  Tower City is Blue/Green's only off-board fare paying station where I can purchase a farecard (usually the nifty $5 All Day pass) at vending machines with credit or debit cars, or even get change to pay in cash.... Much easier.  And Tower City is busier and seemingly safer than the other aforementioned stations.  I don't see what's so difficult about the current system at Tower City -- again, though, I think the lack of Blue/Green POP hampers LRT service considerably in terms of train speed and efficiency.

^ It has been branded the Waterfront Line. Some people might believe your suggestions don't hold any water. (bad pun intended)

 

Of course, you are correct in calling it an extenskion of the Blue Line. However, it is a unique 2.2 mile track with special attractions. When you say "Blue Line", I think of nice homes. When you say "Waterfront Line," I think of football and rock-n-roll and the air show.

 

I have not heard anyone inside RTA who is considering a name change.

 

I hear you, Jerry, but I agree with CbusTransit's suggestion... To you and me, plus a bunch of UOers, it's quite simple, but to most non-regular Rapid users -- visitors and occasional Cleveland riders -- the designation of a Waterfront Line, the only line of the 4 not designated with a color, I'm sure is confusing.  To make matters worse, some of those maps RTA has in the new visitor's info guides (more on these, later) now even depict the Waterfront Line in a grayish color that is neither blue nor green.  And when you compound this with the poor Tower City signage I mentioned earlier, well ... And if I recall, I've even seen some RTA WFL promo documentation that doesn't make it clear to Blue and Green line passengers that you merely need to stay on board the train at Tower City to proceed to the Waterfront -- although, to their credit, most westbound Blue/Green line drivers state this fact as their trains are approaching the TC platform.

 

The Waterfront designation was made nearly 2 decades ago as a kind of sexy way to induce people to ride the new rail line to new destinations along the waterfront such as the Flats and the 2 museums at the 9th street pier, esp the Rock Hall... It would be less confusing to go with something like "Blue/Green Waterfront."

I suggested the use of the Cuyahoga Valley line equipment for commuter runs on that thread, since the people there know several hundred times more about the topic than me.  My followup to one reply belongs here:

 

I've asked CVSR about this. CVSR considers itself an educational organization, so its trains serve an educational purpose -- providing a way to experience the history, wildlife and recreational opportunities of the Cuyahoga Valley. Even if they wanted to run commuter trains, they would continue to have an extremely difficult time getting CSX permission to run trains on its tracks, north into downtown. GCRTA would also have to give its permission, as GCRTA is the state-authorized transit agency for Cuyahoga County. I don't foresee GCRTA blocking it, however. But CSX would block a commuter service because they've blocked CVSR and the National Park Service so far. There is always a way to get something accomplished, but the price tag may be too high to make this worthwhile. And that's why the extension north to downtown, either as a commuter service or as an excursion service, hasn't happened.

 

Now, having said all of that, there are some on CVSR's board who -- if they ever got CSX permi$$ion to run north of Independence -- would probably operate the Cleveland extension as a short shuttle train back and forth between downtown and the Rockside Station. The first train south from downtown would probably have to depart about 8:30 a.m. or so to connect with the first excursion train of the day which departs Rockside at 9 a.m. And where is CVSR's train yard? In the very southeast corner of Independence, off old Fitzwater Road. In fact, CVSR crews simply call this facility "Fitzwater." So that first train has to get to downtown to load up passengers. Well, that's a long way to go as a "deadhead" move -- not carrying any revenue passengers. So CVSR would probably sell tickets to ride. And if commuters happen to be some of their passengers, they won't kick them off the train....

 

In fact, CVSR does carry a few commuters into downtown Akron on its Wednesday-Thursday-Friday runs that operate from May to November. They've carried students and some office workers who use the Akron Metro RTA shuttle from Akron Northside Station to their final destinations.

 

BTW, CVSR desperately wants to improve linkages at the north end. Their ridership estimates show they would increase their existing, record-breaking ridership of 200,000 in 2012 by AT LEAST another 100,000 annual riders if they could get to downtown Cleveland.

 

So GCRTA has veto power over any and all mass transit establishment in Cuyahoga County, even privately run???

I suggested the use of the Cuyahoga Valley line equipment for commuter runs on that thread, since the people there know several hundred times more about the topic than me.  My followup to one reply belongs here:

 

I've asked CVSR about this. CVSR considers itself an educational organization, so its trains serve an educational purpose -- providing a way to experience the history, wildlife and recreational opportunities of the Cuyahoga Valley. Even if they wanted to run commuter trains, they would continue to have an extremely difficult time getting CSX permission to run trains on its tracks, north into downtown. GCRTA would also have to give its permission, as GCRTA is the state-authorized transit agency for Cuyahoga County. I don't foresee GCRTA blocking it, however. But CSX would block a commuter service because they've blocked CVSR and the National Park Service so far. There is always a way to get something accomplished, but the price tag may be too high to make this worthwhile. And that's why the extension north to downtown, either as a commuter service or as an excursion service, hasn't happened.

 

Now, having said all of that, there are some on CVSR's board who -- if they ever got CSX permi$$ion to run north of Independence -- would probably operate the Cleveland extension as a short shuttle train back and forth between downtown and the Rockside Station. The first train south from downtown would probably have to depart about 8:30 a.m. or so to connect with the first excursion train of the day which departs Rockside at 9 a.m. And where is CVSR's train yard? In the very southeast corner of Independence, off old Fitzwater Road. In fact, CVSR crews simply call this facility "Fitzwater." So that first train has to get to downtown to load up passengers. Well, that's a long way to go as a "deadhead" move -- not carrying any revenue passengers. So CVSR would probably sell tickets to ride. And if commuters happen to be some of their passengers, they won't kick them off the train....

 

In fact, CVSR does carry a few commuters into downtown Akron on its Wednesday-Thursday-Friday runs that operate from May to November. They've carried students and some office workers who use the Akron Metro RTA shuttle from Akron Northside Station to their final destinations.

 

BTW, CVSR desperately wants to improve linkages at the north end. Their ridership estimates show they would increase their existing, record-breaking ridership of 200,000 in 2012 by AT LEAST another 100,000 annual riders if they could get to downtown Cleveland.

 

So GCRTA has veto power over any and all mass transit establishment in Cuyahoga County, even privately run???

 

That may be the case but, as KJP notes, it would be unlikely that RTA would block CVSR from entering downtown, even though I seriously doubt that the Calabrese-led agency will do anything to assist CVSR from doing so ... On the other hand, doesn't Akron Metro RTA run (or at least fund) CVSR trains south to Canton?  And IIRC, Akron RTA was interested in expanding commuter train service onto other routes as well.  It sounded great -- and something big brother RTA in Cleveland should pursue, although I don't know where Akron is on this proposal at the moment.

^For sure!  Even if I had an all day pass to begin with...turnstyles at E 9th had gates open, no staff.  Ok so I guess we just walk on?  Driver on WFL stops us to dip the card on the train.  Swipe the card again to exit TC WFL, swipe again to enter Red.  Exit OC station, no turnstyles at all.  Board again at OC, no way to pay.  Douple swipes again at TC.  Then driver makes you dip it again aboard WFL to exit the train at E 9th.  My companion was thouroughly perplexed...just told him to do whatever they ask, the system is weird.

 

I'm familiar with the system somewhat (and have ridden systems all over the world), I feel sorry for out-of-towners that try to use it.

 

It's a shame, because the actual ride was quick and easy...no long waits at any point at all, and trains were clean.

 

Your last statement is true.  The Rapid system is generally running faster (trains every 15 mins) and more efficiently (at least 2-car Red Line cars at all times) than it has in recent times... Sorry the fare confusion marred your friends' RTA experience... and yes, RTA could do a lot of good requiring a Dale Carnegie course for its personnel.  Courtesy and RTA often are not synonymous.  These people often leave a bad taste in visitors' mouths about the City.

So GCRTA has veto power over any and all mass transit establishment in Cuyahoga County, even privately run???

 

I suspect the answer is in here:

http://codes.ohio.gov/orc/306

^Personally I think the major stations should be manned and should have turnstiles. This keeps the system fast, safe, friendly, and cuts down on farehoppers.

 

 

Staffed stations are way too expensive for a light-density rail system like ours.

 

I guessssss. Ha! It just something I liked when using other systems in other cities. We would have to have a lot more ridership to justify it I suppose. A lot. About 20 times that of the Brookpark station, our second highest ridership station at 1400.

 

 

Overall the ride was fine, cars were clean, but in need of upgrading.

 

Funny story.... A colleague of mine was in town from Washington DC a couple weeks ago. We rode all the rail lines in the system. We rode the light-rail lines last. When we got on board the trains, he remarked at nice the light-rail cars were. I told him they are actually several years older than the heavy-rail cars on the Red Line. He was stunned. It's amazing what a mid-life overhaul can do for your rolling stock!

 

Funny. I have a friend who is a west sider and takes the red line often but never took any east side rail. He came with me on the Green Line to Shaker Square and he liked the light-rail a lot more that the red line vehicles.

 

I suggested the use of the Cuyahoga Valley line equipment for commuter runs on that thread, since the people there know several hundred times more about the topic than me.  My followup to one reply belongs here:

 

I've asked CVSR about this. CVSR considers itself an educational organization, so its trains serve an educational purpose -- providing a way to experience the history, wildlife and recreational opportunities of the Cuyahoga Valley. Even if they wanted to run commuter trains, they would continue to have an extremely difficult time getting CSX permission to run trains on its tracks, north into downtown. GCRTA would also have to give its permission, as GCRTA is the state-authorized transit agency for Cuyahoga County. I don't foresee GCRTA blocking it, however. But CSX would block a commuter service because they've blocked CVSR and the National Park Service so far. There is always a way to get something accomplished, but the price tag may be too high to make this worthwhile. And that's why the extension north to downtown, either as a commuter service or as an excursion service, hasn't happened.

 

Now, having said all of that, there are some on CVSR's board who -- if they ever got CSX permi$$ion to run north of Independence -- would probably operate the Cleveland extension as a short shuttle train back and forth between downtown and the Rockside Station. The first train south from downtown would probably have to depart about 8:30 a.m. or so to connect with the first excursion train of the day which departs Rockside at 9 a.m. And where is CVSR's train yard? In the very southeast corner of Independence, off old Fitzwater Road. In fact, CVSR crews simply call this facility "Fitzwater." So that first train has to get to downtown to load up passengers. Well, that's a long way to go as a "deadhead" move -- not carrying any revenue passengers. So CVSR would probably sell tickets to ride. And if commuters happen to be some of their passengers, they won't kick them off the train....

 

In fact, CVSR does carry a few commuters into downtown Akron on its Wednesday-Thursday-Friday runs that operate from May to November. They've carried students and some office workers who use the Akron Metro RTA shuttle from Akron Northside Station to their final destinations.

 

BTW, CVSR desperately wants to improve linkages at the north end. Their ridership estimates show they would increase their existing, record-breaking ridership of 200,000 in 2012 by AT LEAST another 100,000 annual riders if they could get to downtown Cleveland.

 

So GCRTA has veto power over any and all mass transit establishment in Cuyahoga County, even privately run???

 

That may be the case but, as KJP notes, it would be unlikely that RTA would block CVSR from entering downtown, even though I seriously doubt that the Calabrese-led agency will do anything to assist CVSR from doing so ... On the other hand, doesn't Akron Metro RTA run (or at least fund) CVSR trains south to Canton?  And IIRC, Akron RTA was interested in expanding commuter train service onto other routes as well.  It sounded great -- and something big brother RTA in Cleveland should pursue, although I don't know where Akron is on this proposal at the moment.

 

 

i dk where any of that talk went either, but i seem to recall metro wanted to connect it to CAK, which is beyond great, its truly world class potential. can you imagine what rail service linking two airports would do for the regional economy someday? oh wait, hopkins would probably fight it behind the scenes because their flight fares are higher lol!

 

 

 

 

Canton's SARTA has hourly bus service between downtown Canton, Belden Village, CAK Airport and downtown Akron. SARTA also has three express weekday round trips Canton-Cleveland. And Akron Metro RTA has 11 weekday round trips between Cleveland and Akron (plus connecting service with GCRTA's #77 via the old VA in Brecksville) to provide more midday trips and a late-night connection. http://www.akronmetro.org/route-schedule.aspx?Route=101

 

The Cleveland-Akron-Canton route is the longest transit route in Ohio (60 miles) and offers some fairly frequent service (on weekdays) considering the route length. For weekends, best to consider Greyhound or even ride the Casino buses to Akron and to Canton which arrives and departs the Prospect Avenue side of the casino. There are local transit connections at the Akron and Canton stops for the Casino buses which cost $10 (and you get free chips to play casino games).

There are no alerts but the Redline is running late and ridiculously slow. I'm sitting here putting along under 30 mph westbound to the airport from tower city. The train was almost 10 minutes late and it took 15 minutes just to get to W117. The driver said something about minor delays due to traffic signals. An alert would have been nice.

 

Edit: Took about 45 minutes including wait time at tower city. Nothing ridiculous but not very convenient.

That delay may have been storm related. The high winds were just starting to kick up by then. There was no better alternative on the roads. I got a ride from my sister out of downtown to visit a family member at Hillcrest Hospital. It took us a half-hour just to get out of downtown during afternoon rush due to numerous accidents in the driving rain and just the general "I forgot how to drive in rain since last week" behavior of Cleveland commuters. I-90 east and west was stopped or slow going. We didn't reach the speed limit until we passed Bratenahl, and it was worse westbound due to accidents on I-90, I-490 and I-77.

Greetings, I am back from a week-long trip to Amish Country, where "llife in the fast lane" means you have TWO horses pulling your buggy, and Twitter is only for the birds.

Welcome back!

 

Please tell the folks in the bus division I have a bone to pick with them on the operation of the #26. On Sunday, I waited for 20 minutes for the eastbound bus at 2:30 p.m. at Detroit and Winchester Avenue in Lakewood. I got tired of waiting. So I walked east on Detroit ....... all the way to the West Boulevard Red Line station ...... without seeing a single eastbound #26 bus. However two westbounds (about 30 minutes apart, as scheduled) went by during my 50 minutes waiting and walking along Detroit.

 

I tweeted about this situation as it was happening and used the @GCRTA in my message. So I hope someone at GCRTA saw it already. But two citizens responded to my tweet and said they also have had experienced reliability issues with eastbound #26 buses.

 

Also, when will the slow orders be lifted on the Red Line between the West Boulevard and Ohio City stations? One of them is for the construction of the pedestrian bridge over Madison Avenue. But we limped along from West 65th to about Fulton Road where we briefly picked up speed again before slowing for the Ohio City station. Then we waited outside the Tower City for a track to open up (normal Browns game traffic).

 

So I walked out of my Gold Coast condo in Lakewood at 2:30 p.m. Sunday and arrived at the West Third Street-Browns station at 4 p.m. That's a distance of about 5 miles, or an average of 3.33 mph.

That sucks... My limited usage of RTA buses, aside from the Health Line, tends to buttress your experience... And even once on a daytime HL bus, I waited so long at CSU that a bunch of us jumped off the platform and ran when we saw a Trolley heading to Public Sq. (which we barely made)... A regular RTA bus rider once told me, you might as well line your bird cages with RTA bus schedules, because that's a more reliable use than reading them to gage bus times... Damn shame.

^Other than in bad weather or if there's some major traffic issue because of construction or an accident the RTA busses have been reasonably reliable (+/- 5 minutes) for me. The HL has been the worst from my experience but YMMV.

Systemwide, RTA's on-time performance is in the 78-80 percent bracket. A bus or train is on time if it arrives 0-4 minutes after its scheduled stop. It is not on time if is early.

My 11 a.m. EB #55 was right on time today. But Sunday's experience has discouraged me from considering the #26 again. The next time I take transit on the weekends, I will either take the #78 to West 117th station or drive to it.

 

I tweeted about this situation as it was happening and used the @GCRTA in my message. So I hope someone at GCRTA saw it already. But two citizens responded to my tweet and said they also have had experienced reliability issues with eastbound #26 buses.

 

 

One of these was mine.  I have twice waited 55-65 minutes in the evening at the transition point between 20 and 30 minute service frequency.  I'd feel a bit better if there weren't occasional odd NextConnect issues making it difficult to predict whether a scheduled run had "disappeared".  One can't be sure if the data is bad, or if an incident has occurred like this past Wednesday...  I waited ~5:30pm for the westbound #22, which didn't arrive at its normal 5:42.  About ten minutes later, 3 articulated #22 buses drove past nose-to-tail eastbound opposite my stop at E 9th. 

 

The good news this week is that Tuesday the NextConnect sign at W 25th and Lorain displayed a bus as "Departing" (normal behavior, and accurate within a minute or two) and then displayed "#22 West Park - Scheduled to Depart" in italics.  This is a fantastic feature if it can be rolled out to the signs and the website to let riders know when the times displayed are schedule-based estimates rather than location-based predictions.  Unfortunately I've never gotten a response from the NextConnect email address to kudos, questions, or criticisms.  Hopefully someone has some insights on this.

There are many flaws with the next connect interface, but the biggest in my opinion is that there is no dedicated mobile interface.  It works marginally well on a computer, but completely fails when used on a mobile device.  The live departure times page reloads with every selection from a drop down.  Basically, it is bad web programming. 

 

Additionally, I have rarely seen the live departure times deviate from the scheduled departure times.  Even when I receive notifications from Commuter Alerts that a train is late.  There seems to be a disconnect with the data.

The NextConnect can't possibly use actual location information. It is nowhere close to being correct for the Healthline or RedLine in my experience.

We discuss this every few months; RTA's location information only works about 2/3rds of the time (much less for the red line) for a variety of reasons (some technical, some operator caused). When NextConnect cannot find the bus/train because the information loading into it is bad, it guesses that the bus/train will be on time.

NextConnect needs to indicate somehow whether it is giving as Estimated or an Actual time.  Otherwise, it is unreliable and basically useless.

I LOVE this photo! This is the Case Western Reserve University Spartans football team riding the Red Line about 18 miles to Cleveland Hopkins International Airport where they will fly to St. Louis to play the Washington University Bears. At the St. Louis end, the team can ride from its Airport on its MetroLink rail system directly to the Washington University campus (on their Blue Line). These are the little benefits of having a rail system -- benefits we often take for granted.

 

http://athletics.case.edu/sports/fball/2013-14/releases/201311059nso1e

 

There are many flaws with the next connect interface, but the biggest in my opinion is that there is no dedicated mobile interface.  It works marginally well on a computer, but completely fails when used on a mobile device.  The live departure times page reloads with every selection from a drop down.  Basically, it is bad web programming. 

 

 

Don't use the regular interface as you would on a computer.  Use the "Text-only/Accessible Site" link.  This is mobile friendly, and allows you to bookmark stops/routes you use most often.  Even more convenient on Windows Phone, as I can pin my regular stops, or sets for a long trip, directly to the start screen.

November 10. 2013 4:30AM

Greater Cleveland RTA is riding wave of momentum

Increase in ridership is above national norm, sparking more ambitious plans for region

By JAY MILLER

 

Joe Calabrese's eyes sparkle when he relates a recent conversation he had with the head of a large local employer.

 

The company wanted to move some downtown employees to a suburban office building, but the boss was getting resistance, especially from younger employees.

 

“They told him, "We don't want to go; there's no good public transit,' ” said Mr. Calabrese, general manager of the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20131110/SUB1/311109977?template=mobile&X-IgnoreUserAgent=1#ATHS

When does the little Italy station actually break ground?

When does the little Italy station actually break ground?

 

You mean when do construction crews appear on site? If so, good question! The groundbreaking ceremony was Oct. 22. http://www.riderta.com/majorprojects/littleitalyuc

If you haven't done so already, check out the main website at http://www.riderta.com. Each route is now given a distinct "landing page", with a URL of the format http://www.riderta.com/routes/<routenumber> for buses, or <routename> for named routes like the HealthLine, all heavy & light rail lines, and the trolleys (just /routes will get you the master list of all routes, which can be filtered by mode).

 

These landing pages are your "one stop shop" for information on any specific route, including an interactive map, narrative description, Service Alerts, timetable (in both HTML and printable PDF formats), related news items, fare information, and, yes, integrated NextConnect departure information. All pages on the new site are optimized to adapt to any screen size or orientation - no watered-down mobile sites here.

 

Give them a try, and let us know what you think. Send comments, questions, or suggestions to [email protected].

Looks good.  I do like the route pages.  However, on the route list, I noticed that most routes have an Alert icon, but only a few of them actually had a Service Alert.

Looks good.  I do like the route pages.  However, on the route list, I noticed that most routes have an Alert icon, but only a few of them actually had a Service Alert.

 

Thank you. We're checking into that inconsistency now.

Is there any update regarding the Smart Cards and the route changes and schedule changes this December?

Is there any update regarding the Smart Cards and the route changes and schedule changes this December?

 

Route and schedule changes for December will take place December 15. Detailed information is in production and should be released shortly.

 

Smartcards are an entirely separate issue. I have no information on that timetable at this time. If you've heard of Chicago's difficulties with implementing Ventra, you'll understand why this is proceeding at a very measured pace.

Just saw this. Glad to see the work is about to get underway!

 

Legal Notices

INVITATION FOR BID/REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL Rebuilding of Rapid Transit Electrical Motors, As Specified & As Required, for a Period of Three Years IFB No. 2013-185 Copies of the Request For Proposal/Invitation for Bid package is available and may be obtained on the GCRTA Website www.riderta.com and are located under Doing Business, Contract Opportunities. The provisions of 49 CFR Part 26, and 41 CFR Part 60-1, as applicable to Federal grants regarding equal employment practices and Disadvantaged Business Enterprise participation are applied to these procurements. BY ORDER OF THE BOARD OF TRUSTEES GREATER CLEVELAND REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY Joseph A. Calabrese, CEO General Manager - Secretary/Treasurer p.d. nov. 11, 2013 3015966

 

http://classifieds.cleveland.com/?allclassifieds=yes&category=results&keywords=legal&orig_prop=cleveland.com&property=cleveland.com&temp_type=browse&tp=ME_cleve

I absolutely love that the parking lot at the Brookpark station has been repaved and upgraded. I don't think I will be seeing my mechanic as often now.

 

However I was wondering about the station replacement.  Per the landing page for the project the design was to be completed by mid 2013 and construction should begin in September.  Well unless I am living in a time warp I think that has come and gone.  Is there a new estimate for the timeframe that should be expected now?

We'll update the Brookpak station page. The station design is more than 90 percent complete. An 18-24-month conxstruction project will begin after funding is confirmed (80 percent federal shares on most stations), bids are advertised, and contracts are awarded. The station will remain open, except perhaps for some weekenend shutdowns that are track and safety related.

Re: Little Italy. The first work will be to demolish one of the existing bridges, and that will be later this year.

Re: Smart cards.

 

"IF" RTA's two vendors -- GFI and ACS -- complete all their pre-requisite work, RTA "may" begin rolling out smart cards, in phases, sometime in 2014. Right now, that's all I can say on that. (That statement has never stopped you before).  It's way too premature to say much.

Re: Smart cards.

 

"IF" RTA's two vendors -- GFI and ACS -- complete all their pre-requisite work, RTA "may" begin rolling out smart cards, in phases, sometime in 2014. Right now, that's all I can say on that. (That statement has never stopped you before).  It's way too premature to say much.

Smart cards have been coming "next year" for almost as long as this thread has been going. Is RTA is catching the "next year" disease from the Browns/Indians/Cavs? ;-)

On Tuesday, RTA will discuss a major bus purchase with the Board of Trustees -- about 270 buses bought over several years. The discussion will include a recommendation from staff that the buses be fueled by compressd natural gas (CNG). RTA stopped buying CNG vehicles several years ago because of the high cost of maintenance. However, a recent study/comparison by RTA found that the technology has improved. There is now an economic advatange, as well as an environmental one, to use CNG. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation will be posted as soon as possible after the meeting. I'm sure that will answer most of your questions.

Would it be possible to denote when a time is based on real time data and when it is the scheduled departure time from the routes landing page?  Also, for the stops it would be more useful (at least in my mind) if they were to follow the route of the line; ie on the Redline, once west is choosen, stops should go Airport, Brookpark, Puritas, etc.  Right now they are listed alphabetically.  Which isn't so bad if there aren't many stops, but on something like the Healthline everything reads Euclid and seems to scroll forever.

 

The reason why watered down mobile sites are nice is that they load considerably faster.  However the RTA site is much better than the NextConnect interface.  Props to that.

Would it be possible to denote when a time is based on real time data and when it is the scheduled departure time from the routes landing page?  Also, for the stops it would be more useful (at least in my mind) if they were to follow the route of the line; ie on the Redline, once west is choosen, stops should go Airport, Brookpark, Puritas, etc.  Right now they are listed alphabetically.  Which isn't so bad if there aren't many stops, but on something like the Healthline everything reads Euclid and seems to scroll forever.

 

The reason why watered down mobile sites are nice is that they load considerably faster.  However the RTA site is much better than the NextConnect interface.  Props to that.

 

You've brought up some points that we've already addressed to the vendor.

 

At this time, the data stream that is available to us for integration doesn't have any indicators for real-time versus scheduled time. This has been, by far, the highest-demand feature request we've had. As far as sorting the stops by sequence based on direction, again, a very high-demand item, but there is nothing in the data stream that allows us to do that. The only possible thought might be keying on changes in latitude/longitude, but even that would be a mess when it comes to routes that loop, double back, or in any way follow anything but a straight line, i.e., every one of our routes.

 

We're working on various back-end improvements to make the mobile site load faster. It's a bit of a balancing act between implementing proper caching while not being so aggressive as to preclude visitors from seeing updates to the site's information in a timely fashion. Some steps have already been taken, but we're not done yet. I suspect you'll see improvement as time goes by.

We'll update the page. The station design is more than 90 percent complete. An 18-24-month conxstruction project will begin after funding is confirmed (80 percent federal shares on most stations), bids are advertised, and contracts are awarded. The station will remain open, except perhaps for some weekenend shutdowns that are track and safety related.

 

Its great that this station will finally be replaced. But with all due respect this station is now and has been an embarrassment for so long. Its bad enough locals have had to deal with it but it's also one of the first impressions for out of owners coming from the airport. The new station is three years away, in the meantime can we at least give it a fresh coat of paint. I really don't understand leadership that allows something to look like this for so long.

Would it be possible to denote when a time is based on real time data and when it is the scheduled departure time from the routes landing page?  Also, for the stops it would be more useful (at least in my mind) if they were to follow the route of the line; ie on the Redline, once west is choosen, stops should go Airport, Brookpark, Puritas, etc.  Right now they are listed alphabetically.  Which isn't so bad if there aren't many stops, but on something like the Healthline everything reads Euclid and seems to scroll forever.

 

The reason why watered down mobile sites are nice is that they load considerably faster.  However the RTA site is much better than the NextConnect interface.  Props to that.

 

You've brought up some points that we've already addressed to the vendor.

 

At this time, the data stream that is available to us for integration doesn't have any indicators for real-time versus scheduled time. This has been, by far, the highest-demand feature request we've had. As far as sorting the stops by sequence based on direction, again, a very high-demand item, but there is nothing in the data stream that allows us to do that. The only possible thought might be keying on changes in latitude/longitude, but even that would be a mess when it comes to routes that loop, double back, or in any way follow anything but a straight line, i.e., every one of our routes.

 

We're working on various back-end improvements to make the mobile site load faster. It's a bit of a balancing act between implementing proper caching while not being so aggressive as to preclude visitors from seeing updates to the site's information in a timely fashion. Some steps have already been taken, but we're not done yet. I suspect you'll see improvement as time goes by.

 

JD, thank you for the response.  It is rather unfortunate that this information is not available, but system restraints were the exact problem I was afraid of.  It would be nice to be able to bid out the work and see if other vendors offer a better solution, but from a previous conversation I believe that the current vendor is who your stuck with, mostly due to all the back end systems.  And I am sure replacing those would be a problematic undertaking in itself. 

 

Good luck and godspeed, working with vendors that are entrenched can be an extremely frustrating process.

On Tuesday, RTA will discuss a major bus purchase with the Board of Trustees -- about 270 buses bought over several years. The discussion will include a recommendation from staff that the buses be fueled by compressd natural gas (CNG). RTA stopped buying CNG vehicles several years ago because of the high cost of maintenance. However, a recent study/comparison by RTA found that the technology has improved. There is now an economic advatange, as well as an environmental one, to use CNG. A copy of the PowerPoint presentation will be posted as soon as possible after the meeting. I'm sure that will answer most of your questions.

 

I have been saying this for several years. Some friends of mine in the transit industry are still stuck on old CNG technologies and they still consider CNG to be a big waste of time. Be prepared to have updated facts & figures.

 

BTW, a bill (HB 336) was recently submitted in the Ohio House of Representatives to tax CNG and use the proceeds for roads and bridges. Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't transit one of the biggest users of CNG in Ohio? So shouldn't transit be eligible to apply for funding from a CNG tax? Rail is also a growing user of CNG and LNG for locomotives, especially on intrastate activity. Apparently HB 336 was assigned to the House Finance Committee.

 

Here are a couple of recent tweets on the matter.....

 

Sam Spofforth ‏@samspofforth 21h

Fred Pausch at Cty Eng Assn of OH likes that #HB336 includes #CNG tax for roads and bridges. Jason Phillips @CleanFuelsOhio

 

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio 21h

@samspofforth An Ohio CNG tax should provide revenues for public transportation too! Buses increasingly use CNG. #HB336 @CleanFuelsOhio

Looks good.  I do like the route pages.  However, on the route list, I noticed that most routes have an Alert icon, but only a few of them actually had a Service Alert.

 

Thank you. We're checking into that inconsistency now.

 

It took a few days, and necessitated a non-insignificant bit of code rewriting, but we appear to have resolved the issue of the Routes page showing inconsistent indication of Service Alerts. Now, the Alert icon will only be displayed when the route genuinely has an active alert.

 

As a side benefit, the page now loads much faster, with few (hopefully none) of the AJAX callback errors some users were reporting. Check it out and let us know what you think.

Looks good.  I do like the route pages.  However, on the route list, I noticed that most routes have an Alert icon, but only a few of them actually had a Service Alert.

 

Thank you. We're checking into that inconsistency now.

 

It took a few days, and necessitated a non-insignificant bit of code rewriting, but we appear to have resolved the issue of the Routes page showing inconsistent indication of Service Alerts. Now, the Alert icon will only be displayed when the route genuinely has an active alert.

 

As a side benefit, the page now loads much faster, with few (hopefully none) of the AJAX callback errors some users were reporting. Check it out and let us know what you think.

 

Two thumbs up!

<<Its great that this station will finally be replaced. But with all due respect this station is now and has been an embarrassment for so long. Its bad enough locals have had to deal with it but it's also one of the first impressions for out of owners coming from the airport. The new station is three years away, in the meantime can we at least give it a fresh coat of paint. I really don't understand leadership that allows something to look like this for so long.>>

 

The Brookpark station was the last one to be built on the West Side, so it's also the last one to be re-built. Your glass is half-empty, mine is half-full. Look at all the great rail stations that RTA has built -- always one on each side of town at the same time. That helps keep construction from interrupting service so much. Maintaining infrastructure resources is a complex task, and choices always have to be made. Thanks for writing, and thanks for ridng.

Today, the RTA Board approved spending up to $28.9 million for 60 new CNG-powered buses, to be delivered in March 2015, and up to 240 CNG coaches over the next five years. After this conversion, RTA's fleet of approx. 415 buses will still have about 100 vehicles -- such as trolleys and MCIs -- that use clean diesel fuel. As soon as the press release for Board highlights is posted, you can review a pdf of the PowerPoint presentation. It includes many interesting numbers.

Today, the RTA Board approved spending up to $28.9 million for 60 new CNG-powered buses, to be delivered in March 2015, and up to 240 CNG coaches over the next five years. After this conversion, RTA's fleet of approx. 415 buses will still have about 100 vehicles -- such as trolleys and MCIs -- that use clean diesel fuel. As soon as the press release for Board highlights is posted, you can review a pdf of the PowerPoint presentation. It includes many interesting numbers.

Here's the story

 

RTA plans to buy 245 natural gas-fueled buses

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio -- RTA board members voted this morning to start buying natural gas-powered buses, authorizing $28.3 million to purchase the first 60 in 2015.

 

All told, the agency expects to replace 245 buses in its fleet with buses that use natural gas, staggering the purchases over four years. RTA's fleet currently has 415 buses, all of them running on diesel fuel.

 

The natural gas buses will cost $472,000 each, higher than the $426,000 price tag for a diesel bus. But the difference will be offset in less than two years by the money saved because natural gas is cheaper and more efficient than diesel, said Frank Polivka, head of procurement for the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2013/11/rta_plans_to_buy_245_natural_g.html#incart_river_default

 

 

Greater Cleve RTA ‏@GCRTA  1m

Shuttle buses to replace Blue & Green line trains btwn Tower City & end of lines until further notice.