KJP, how do you think this will affect things going forward at RTA?  Just curious, since we don't know who will replace him, how you believe this will have an impact.  Hopefully quickly positive.

It all depends on who they get to replace him. There will be a nationwide search. I want someone young (under 50), innovative, who can build partnerships, especially with the business community, not just politicians. RTA has got to build its relationship in the business community if it wants to be more than just a social service agency. It needs to be a foundation stone in Greater Cleveland's economic infrastructure, to help boost business and growth.

^Did you just nominate yourself :)

Seriously, KJP....Go for it!!

Re RTA, what do people think? Was Calabrese fired rightfully?

 

Yes, Calabrese was anti-rail to an absurd degree and his signature project-- an attempt to shift the whole conversation away from rail-- was botched.

^Did you just nominate yourself :)

 

Hell to the no.

Read GCRTA staff presentation on potential local funding options...

 

https://t.co/IE8xzyNrzu

I wonder if they are considering any options other than sales and property tax increases. I believe it was you KJP who recommended a parking tax. I really liked that idea and its stuck with me since it has two-fold benefits by both directly raising funds, and making RTA a more viable option by raising the price of downtown parking. I just wrote a note to myself to ask Mayor Welo tomorrow.

A hotel tax would be good too.  Cleveland charges less tax on hotel rooms than comparable cities.

I wonder if they are considering any options other than sales and property tax increases. I believe it was you KJP who recommended a parking tax. I really liked that idea and its stuck with me since it has two-fold benefits by both directly raising funds, and making RTA a more viable option by raising the price of downtown parking. I just wrote a note to myself to ask Mayor Welo tomorrow.

 

The RTA board only has authority to put sales or property taxes on the ballot, IIRC. The city and county could implement other kinds of taxes to fund transit though.

Under Ohio law, Cleveland is assessing the maximum parking tax. But I believe that it assessed on business revenues from parking. So if a parking use is "free" it cannot be taxed. So another approach is a land use tax that is assessed on land that is used for parking regardless of whether it is free or paid. Surface parking would thus become the least cost effective if assessed in this manner.

I just really hope if something end up on the ballot it is done right and not rushed. Koch brothers will descend on our city to try to squash something that's none of their business. They are a well oiled machine. If the naive activists at Clevelanders for Public Transit end up forcing a rushed ballot issue and that happens, it would be a shame.

 

Then again, it's probably a good year to put a transit tax on the ballot, what with the blue wave and all.

Have there been any real discussions about revenue streams outside of a sales tax? I know there were some Cuyahoga County council meetings on transit but I don’t recall hearing anything coming from them.

They are now considering a property tax too but sales tax is probably still the preferred option. There was a crains article yesterday.

 

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20180731/news/170231/rta-mulls-its-options-filling-budget-hole

I personally wouldn't mind a small property tax but I do worry about people on fixed incomes who are also contending with increases in property assessment. I wish the city/county would work creatively with RTA for more politically feasible tax.

I personally wouldn't mind a small property tax but I do worry about people on fixed incomes who are also contending with increases in property assessment. I wish the city/county would work creatively with RTA for more politically feasible tax.

 

The RTA presentation shows that a sales tax would produce more revenue at a lower cost per capita than a property tax. There is another idea out there, but it could not be put on the ballot by RTA.Here is a twitter string...

 

@jeffsleasman

So...a couple wonderful local nerds did a land use study.

 

If Cuyahoga County had an annual land use tax of just ten cents per square foot on land used for paved parking, we could have $93 million A YEAR to fund transit.

 

TAX PARKING TO FUND TRANSIT.

 

 

@BottyGuy

So for an average sized space, say 9x18 that would be $16.20/space/year

 

‏

 

@jeffsleasman

Yep.

 

So, like, 1-2 days of revenue for a downtown lot.

 

massive suburban lots would prolly just 1) shrink, or 2) charge, like, six cent a day for weekday parking--although presumably paid via rent from stores instead of putting up meters for so little.

 

 

@seanroche

Does that include private residential parking?

 

 

@jeffsleasman

Not for houses. And probably not *all* multifamily (doubtful for duplexes/triplexes). Larger commercial properties, yes.

^ The issue with a land value tax is that it would require state action.  I do not believe that municipalities or counties can impose such a tax without a referendum.  I might be wrong on this.

 

I mentioned earlier that our peer cities have much higher hotel taxes.  I think this is the route to go.  Perhaps a countywide hotel tax.  I think this is the most politically feasible route to go.

Matt Dolan should get working on that parking tax.

 

At the end of the day it'd be about getting the business community on board and mobilized, that is the only way the state GOP would ever listen.

^ The issue with a land value tax is that it would require state action.  I do not believe that municipalities or counties can impose such a tax without a referendum.  I might be wrong on this.

 

I mentioned earlier that our peer cities have much higher hotel taxes.  I think this is the route to go.  Perhaps a countywide hotel tax.  I think this is the most politically feasible route to go.

 

I think a mix of small tax increases should be applied, including on rental cars, hotels, sales, property, plus the privatization of parking meters/lots and the creation of transit TIF corridors in which there are no minimum parking requirements and a share of any increased tax valuation of land and buildings starting on a future date will go to the transit TIF district to support expanded operations and capital improvements in that corridor.

 

EDIT: I forgot to put the word "no" before "minimum parking requirements." It would be an incentive to developers to not have to build so much parking and it would reduce the cost of housing by nearly $20,000 per parking space.

^ If only we had some creative people at RTA willing to try to put this together instead of letting the agency whither on the vine.

^ If only we had some creative people at RTA willing to try to put this together instead of letting the agency whither on the vine.

 

There are at the staff level, but the board is scared of making mistakes (doesn't exactly lead to innovation) and unaware. It wasn't until recently that they knew they were a taxing authority and could place a levy on the ballot themselves. Problem is, the agency has no vision of its future because the GM has put the agency in triage/survival mode for so long. So no one yet knows what a levy would fund except survival/state of good repair.

 

 

RTA mulls its options for filling budget hole

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20180731/news/170231/rta-mulls-its-options-filling-budget-hole

I love the transit TIF corridors idea, KJP[/member]. That could have been done ten years ago as part of the Euclid Corridor project.

Almost every tax in practice is regressive.  It is mainly the already prosperous who write all laws including tax laws.  But transit benefits downtown property owners more than most others, by significantly lowering the cost of commuting downtown, and hence the wages and salaries people are willing to accept in order to work there.  I would like to see some of this benefit captured somehow.  As a libertarian, I believe that if there must be taxes, they should be levied on those who benefit insofar as possible.  But there is one additional consideration.  People not served or benefited by transit are going to be MUCH less likely to support any tax increase that hurts them specifically.  If you're going to levy property *or* sales taxes countywide, or even region-wide, you had better have a plan for making those taxes benefit them as well.  I'm thinking (a) big increase but coupled with (b) big improvements in service, particularly for the 50% who allegedly have a choice and choose to ride RTA anyway.  A hotel, parking, gasoline, or downtown-oriented tax, insofar as these things are possible under Ohio law, is a lot simpler to sell. 

I received a link from Clevelanders for Public Transit to write all the board members of RTA, etc. 

 

https://actionnetwork.org/letters/transit-levy-now?delivery_id=30185268

 

As an aside, how do we end up with Dennis Clough from Westlake as the President of the Board of our transit agency?

 

 

A quote from a Charlotte business article..."Ron Tober, who started Charlotte Area Transit System in 1999, applauds current CEO John Lewis for taking an aggressive approach for building three additional rail lines in the near future." 

A quite from a Charlotte business article..."Ron Tober, who started Charlotte Area Transit System in 1999, applauds current CEO John Lewis for taking an aggressive approach for building three additional rail lines in the near future." 

 

A growing taxbase is a wonderful thing. GCRTA can ask taxpayers to expand its taxbase or continue to accept a life of scarcity by living within its shrinking means.

Sorry if this derails (pun intended) the ongoing discussion a bit. I wanted to run some data by this thread to see if there's any good explanation for a trend I noticed. I recently looked at some Google transit feed datasets for GCRTA to count trip frequency change over the last decade. It appears system-wide trips have gone down a bit since 2009, as expected. However, if you isolate only light/heavy rail trips, it looks like trip frequency for rail stations has gone up in the last decade by several percent. Nothing dramatic, but not insubstantial.

Is there any good reason why this happened? Has rail service in fact slightly increased in the last decade? Is it the Little Italy Station? I can't tell if this is a result of an analysis error, or, in fact, makes sense.

 

 

Sorry if this derails (pun intended) the ongoing discussion a bit. I wanted to run some data by this thread to see if there's any good explanation for a trend I noticed. I recently looked at some Google transit feed datasets for GCRTA to count trip frequency change over the last decade. It appears system-wide trips have gone down a bit since 2009, as expected. However, if you isolate only light/heavy rail trips, it looks like trip frequency for rail stations has gone up in the last decade by several percent. Nothing dramatic, but not insubstantial.

Is there any good reason why this happened? Has rail service in fact slightly increased in the last decade? Is it the Little Italy Station? I can't tell if this is a result of an analysis error, or, in fact, makes sense.

 

 

 

Just my guess, but with all the growth in downtown, Ohio City, and University Circle, I would say it makes sense as those are all neighborhoods served by the heavy rail line. Hasn't been much growth on the light rail lines in that time frame.

^Also--probably the biggest factor, RTA terminated a lot of bus lines that ran from the burbs into downtown at rapid stations, forcing the transfer, which increased rapid ridership and let the bus be used for other things or to save operating costs.

Hmm. Thank you. One thing I failed to clarify is that this is for trips only. It doesn't reflect ridership at all. So its either new stations or less headway causing it, or both.

 

Sorry if this derails (pun intended) the ongoing discussion a bit. I wanted to run some data by this thread to see if there's any good explanation for a trend I noticed. I recently looked at some Google transit feed datasets for GCRTA to count trip frequency change over the last decade. It appears system-wide trips have gone down a bit since 2009, as expected. However, if you isolate only light/heavy rail trips, it looks like trip frequency for rail stations has gone up in the last decade by several percent. Nothing dramatic, but not insubstantial.

Is there any good reason why this happened? Has rail service in fact slightly increased in the last decade? Is it the Little Italy Station? I can't tell if this is a result of an analysis error, or, in fact, makes sense.

 

 

 

Just my guess, but with all the growth in downtown, Ohio City, and University Circle, I would say it makes sense as those are all neighborhoods served by the heavy rail line. Hasn't been much growth on the light rail lines in that time frame.

^Also--probably the biggest factor, RTA terminated a lot of bus lines that ran from the burbs into downtown at rapid stations, forcing the transfer, which increased rapid ridership and let the bus be used for other things or to save operating costs.

 

We have a winner!

^Also--probably the biggest factor, RTA terminated a lot of bus lines that ran from the burbs into downtown at rapid stations, forcing the transfer, which increased rapid ridership and let the bus be used for other things or to save operating costs.

 

We have a winner!

 

Killing a lot of ridership though, especially suburban, and, very possibly, support within those 'burbs for any kind of tax increase.  Consider the old #25.  It served what is now a thriving neighborhood on Bridge Ave., plus a struggling and now largely deserted one on Madison between 98th and 65th, as well as giving residents of southern Lakewood and Rocky River their only option for a single-seat ride downtown, or less than a double-transfer ride to any point downtown other than Tower City.  Or the #30/39.  I don't mind having to transfer at Windermere aka Stokes except at late night, but even I won't do it at night.  And the 55 minute trip from Shoregate became more than 90, much of it standing room only last time I tried (a year or two ago . . may have gotten better since, or worse).  Some of these mandatory transfers may make sense, but these, among many others, did not.  Keep in mind that there have been safety concerns at many train stations, including West Side ones which were targeted by local gang wannabes a couple years back.  This will deter those who have a choice pretty close to 100% of the time.  Also, I always though the 7. 9. 28. and 32 could have been routed down Chester, making limited stops, rather than Euclid where those and the local #6 always interfered with one another.  (Transferring to the HealthLine back when we had traffic signal priority wasn't a terrible thing, but now that that is gone . . . )  RTA now offers attractive service to the suburbs *only* via the Park & Rides, which I'm told is about the least cost-effective service, besides paratransit, that we have.  I promise you that if you want support from other than the transit-dependent, then, in general, you're going to have to give them a better reason than what they have right now.

How quickly could the old #9 or #32 get downtown from their eastern termini?

How quickly could the old #9 or #32 get downtown from their eastern termini?

 

I have old RTA timetables. I will let you know...probably this weekend.

Borrowed from the Tower City thread....

 

^Could be due to historic preservation issues? Not sure if the complex is bound by any of that but if it is I'm sure that would make signage more complicated.

 

There could be preservation issues.  But a sign could be placed on the plaza identifying the retail center and transit station.

 

Is it also problematic that the Terminal Tower and Tower City have different owners but are conjoined? Specifically the Public Square entrance.

 

But I agree the wayfinding is BAD. I don’t think a visitor would know stores, a movie theater or the rapid station lies behind those doors.

 

RTA should/could benefit from some classic signage.

 

NTD = National Transit Database

 

@twkovach

 

Just pulled the NTD numbers for GCRTA through June.

 

YTD, GCRTA has had 17.38M riders, down 12.9% compared to June 2017.

 

Based on previous years, this puts the agency on track to record just 34.98M rides in 2018, an 11.5% decrease (larger than the 10.4% drop last year).

Kelley Britt resigns as member of RTA board of trustees

https://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2018/08/kelley_britt_resigns_as_member.html

Wanted to share with you guys - I have become a regular rush hour rider of the Waterfront line, believe it or not, and I have been surprised at how many people are on the trains. Today it was particularly crowded.

Wanted to share with you guys - I have become a regular rush hour rider of the Waterfront line, believe it or not, and I have been surprised at how many people are on the trains. Today it was particularly crowded.

 

What, six people?? Just kidding -- how many were on board?

Today, 25-30 on the train. Lots got on with me at E. 9. Many times more like 15 or 20. Not sure what was going on, tourists maybe. Usually 5-10 use E. 9, 5-10 use Flats East, one or two at Settler's. People that work at the EY building are using it, albeit in small #s.

Today, 25-30 on the train. Lots got on with me at E. 9. Many times more like 15 or 20. Not sure what was going on, tourists maybe. Usually 5-10 use E. 9, 5-10 use Flats East, one or two at Settler's. People that work at the EY building are using it, albeit in small #s.

The only stats I could find (couple years ago) said the Waterfront Line carries a few hundred riders per day.

 

Lexington Av. line in NYC carries over 50,000 riders EVERY HOUR.  More than a million daily.

 

I'm not suggesting we abandon the WFL.  I am suggesting we find a way to make it worth *not* abandoning.

Let's not compare the Waterfront Line to the Lexington Avenue line, please. Let's compare it to something more relevant, like the rest of the Green/Blue lines.

 

ID highest and best uses that would add traffic generators to the WFL. Scanning along the WFL, the mind fills in so many voids within a short walk of stations along the route with uses that could generate more interaction with each other via rail. And they all offer views of the river or lake, which real estate developers will tell you is a magical combination. FEB-Phase3 will help, but we need about 10 of them to make a big difference.

With Amazon ready to open up in North Randall next month, I would hope someone at RTA is talking about service extensions to that area (and Euclid to in the near future). With a tax increase likely next year, I would want to see something from them on a meaningful expansion. Common sense looking at a map would call out for Van Aken being turned into some kind of "east suburban transit center". If a Blue Line expansion is off the table with a parking garage supposed to be built to block it in, why not some new BRT lines? Run one down Northfield and have it end at the Rocksino. Another could run down Chagrin before turning south on Richmond. It could end at the industrial area before Cannon, or continue around Cannon (with some improvements to the narrow roadways) and down Harper/Cochran into Solon. They would hit a number of large employers and easily open them up to inner city residents. Side benefits would be boosting Blue Line ridership, and increasing the value in the retail space in Van Aken.

With Joe C out of the picture, this notion of blocking off the blue line needs to be revisited.

What's this about the parking garage blocking it? The currently existing parking garage at Van Aken district is northeast of the terminus of the tracks, along Warrensville, not blocking expansion. Not sure about future phases.

^^^As I'm guessing you already know, the Blue Line terminus is already a bit of a hub, with bus service east, to the Chagrin Blvd corridor/Pinecrest; west, serving Mt. Pleasant, the Forgotten Triangle, and Central; North, along Warrensville Road, to University Hts, Cleveland Heights and East Cleveland; and South, along Warrensville to the Amazon project and racino, and then beyond, to Bedford, Glenwillow and Solon. But it's all local service with lousy frequency, so definitely seems ripe for improvements if more money could be injected into RTA.

The Northfield-warrensville multimodal connectivity plan addresses some of these issues including transit and trails

 

You can download it from the Cuyahoga County planning commissions website

What's this about the parking garage blocking it? The currently existing parking garage at Van Aken district is northeast of the terminus of the tracks, along Warrensville, not blocking expansion. Not sure about future phases.

 

See below. Joe C, how hard was it to tell the developers and the city that you want to reserve a 50-foot-wide right of way from the end of the Blue Line tracks to the NW corner of Chagrin/Warrensville? They wouldn't have thought any more or less of you.

What's this about the parking garage blocking it? The currently existing parking garage at Van Aken district is northeast of the terminus of the tracks, along Warrensville, not blocking expansion. Not sure about future phases.

 

See below. Joe C, how hard was it to tell the developers and the city that you want to reserve a 50-foot-wide right of way from the end of the Blue Line tracks to the NW corner of Chagrin/Warrensville? They wouldn't have thought any more or less of you.

 

Depending on how the garage is configured, you might be able to run the rail lines through the ground floor -- not much different than a tunnel -- the trick is avoiding cutting off access to the ramp.

They could even design the parking garage to incorporate a new, climate-protected light-rail station into it....if people were thinking about such things.