May 15, 20205 yr Author 13 minutes ago, Cleburger said: I did see Trump bragging on Twitter that he gave the largest ever grant to NJ Transit, Chicago MTA and some others. Is RTA on the Coronavirus dole? Yes, they're expecting a little more than $100 million. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 7, 20205 yr Author Memories....not all of them good "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 8, 20205 yr I like the CTS logo better than RTA's. I feel it could be tweaked easily to be quite modern and iconic and simple. I don't know why I hate RTA's so much, but I do.
June 8, 20205 yr I adore the RTA logo! I honestly think it'd be iconic if we were more of a major city. It's very clever, and instantly recognizable. The New York MTA logo is the only other one I know of where the letters form a silhouette of a train like that, and hell the NYMTA might have stole the idea from Cleveland because I think their current logo is only from the 90s or so whereas RTA's is from the 70s I think. I hope they never, ever change it. Edited June 8, 20205 yr by mu2010
June 8, 20205 yr Author Big track improvement projects coming up. The Blue/Green Lines trunk (East 55th-Shaker Square) is the biggie.... And "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 27, 20204 yr RTA to increase frequency on four popular bus routes, including HealthLine, starting Sunday https://www.cleveland.com/news/2020/06/rta-to-increase-frequency-on-four-popular-bus-routes-including-healthline-starting-sunday.html CLEVELAND, Ohio — The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority on Sunday will increase the frequency of buses on four popular routes, in conjunction with other routine service changes for summer. The lines that will increase in frequency are the HealthLine along Euclid Avenue, MetroHealth Line (No. 51) along West 25th Street, the No. 1 St. Clair, and the No. 3 Superior. The changes are intended to accommodate increases in travel as more people return to work or participate in summer activities, RTA said in a news release. RTA in April had temporarily reduced its service by 15% in response to the pandemic. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
June 27, 20204 yr Author An interesting development..... SATURDAY, JUNE 27, 2020 GCRTA may unify its rail system with single rail car fleet For those who like the idea of being able to take one train without transfers from Shaker Heights to the airport or possibly from University Circle to the Van Aken District, then a new challenge-turned-opportunity may be of interest. The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) needs to replace its two aging rail fleets with a single type of rail car that can operate on any of GCRTA's three rail lines. This is big news because GCRTA had been considering replacing its two old rail fleets with two new rail fleets, continuing an inefficient practice set into motion nearly 80 years ago. MORE: https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/06/gcrta-may-unify-its-rail-system-with.html "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
June 27, 20204 yr This seems like great news. I really hope they capitalize on this opportunity!! It’s now or never
June 27, 20204 yr It’s great to see that there are fiscally responsible reasons for merging the fleet, considering all the other benefits of that unification. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
June 29, 20204 yr On 5/16/2019 at 8:26 AM, CbusTransit said: Have you looked at the evaluation pdf on the rail car study? It is here: http://www.riderta.com/sites/default/files/events/2019-04-16RailCar.pdf Sanity check here - it's a REALLY bad look that LTK missed this when the did the evaluation last year, right? I mean, the whole point of that Evaluation Project Review was to identify the critical factors in rail replacement. I think "new HRV won't fit our fancy maintenance facility" is pretty critical. Wow that's a bad miss by LTK. (RTA should have hired @KJP for this evaluation in the first place!) At least RTA is figuring this out now before any actual orders get placed. @KJP's article this week was awesome and educational, as always. I went back over some of our conversations last March about the potential for merging to a single LRV system. There's one thing I'm still unclear on - if the Red Line is retrofit for LRV, that means the old cars can't run on it (because the platforms would be wider and the wider HRV wouldn't have clearance). So how would RTA handle the de-bugging period? My understanding is that sometimes you end up occasionally using the old cars for as much as a year while the bugs on the new cars are worked out. Would RTA have to occasionally run the Bredas on the Red Line? Are there even enough Bredas to make that work? How to convert to a single rail car type: - Convert existing HRV (Red Line) to LRV - Widen platforms at Red Line stations to minimize gap w narrower LRV vehicles (for ADA compliance) - Raise track at stations (easy 1-2 week project at most stations, but more difficult at a few where tracks are embedded in concrete or near bridges) - Accommodate for de-bugging of new LRV vehicles - process unknown (at least to me) Benefits: - New LRV can use existing E55 maintenance facility. (New HRV cannot use this without massive, expensive rebuild that would take it out of service for months - can the Bredas even be maintained if that thing is out of service?) - Long term maintenance savings of having a single fleet - New service options on existing track, e.g. Shaker Square to Ohio City, Brookpark Rd, and the Airport; or Shaker Square to UC to Windemere via E55 - might be indirect, but single seat service boosts ridership) - Easier to justify rail expansion Key posts from the previous discussion: On 6/27/2020 at 2:11 PM, KJP said: An interesting development..... SATURDAY, JUNE 27, 2020 GCRTA may unify its rail system with single rail car fleet For those who like the idea of being able to take one train without transfers from Shaker Heights to the airport or possibly from University Circle to the Van Aken District, then a new challenge-turned-opportunity may be of interest. The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) needs to replace its two aging rail fleets with a single type of rail car that can operate on any of GCRTA's three rail lines. This is big news because GCRTA had been considering replacing its two old rail fleets with two new rail fleets, continuing an inefficient practice set into motion nearly 80 years ago. MORE: https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/06/gcrta-may-unify-its-rail-system-with.html On 3/26/2019 at 11:24 AM, KJP said: Cleveland's light rail cars have to be 13 inches narrower than its heavy rail cars. It would be much less expensive to retrofit 15 Red Line stations to accommodate the narrower light rail cars. But the assumption by RTA that it would be cost prohibitive is RTA's lack of interest in being innovative. There are two ways RTA could address the 6-1/2 inch gap (3 inches is the maximum gap allowable under federal law) that would result from using light-rail cars at heavy-rail stations. One is to order light-rail trains that have a retractable gap filler at high-floor doors on the trains ..... or, to replace the 2-foot-deep, plastic tactile edges at Red Line stations with 2-1/2 foot deep nonferrous metal tactile plates. They would be as strong as bus lift plates to support the weight of an occupied, motorized wheelchair. Crews should be able to replace these tactile edges at one station per day which means it would take about 2 weeks to replace them at all the Red Line stations. Thus you could shut down the west half of the Red Line's stations in one week and then shut down the east half the other week. By the way, RTA thinks that they can simply replace a rail fleet as they receive the new cars, such as a couple of cars per month. They cannot. Rail systems with more experience at replacing rail cars know they need as much as a year for all of the new railcars to be de-bugged. So this overly hurried effort is silly because it's not going to happen anyway. On 5/16/2019 at 2:09 PM, KJP said: Red Line platforms are designed for three-car Red Line trains. Each Red Line railcar is 85 feet long. There's a couple of feet between them. So while the platform length needs to be only 260 feet, not every driver can "hit the target." And there should be some leeway for part of the platform being out of service for maintenance/repairs. On 5/16/2019 at 4:06 PM, CbusTransit said: If you are widening the stations to fit a smaller light rail vehicle, wouldn’t the wider heavy rail vehicle then collide with the station... On 5/16/2019 at 9:48 PM, KJP said: The wheel bogies are the same width regardless of vehicle. Low-level platforms for narrower light-rail vehicles wouldn't come up higher than the bottom of the wheel bogies, so they wouldn't be high enough to hit the carbodies of a heavy rail vehicle. On 5/19/2019 at 2:00 PM, KJP said: See my really eloquent post from May 16 above? Disregard it. It's BS. I completely missed out on a rather important piece of info...... The floors of rail cars operating on the Red Line have to be 48 inches above the rail to be level with the Red Line's platforms. Guess what? There's no light rail car with a 48-inch floor height. The Siemens S200 cars or something like it (ie: anything offering high/low boarding) would have to be equipped with retractable gap fillers AND be jacked up 14 inches above the wheel bogies. That's last part is the deal killer. Fourteen inches is a huge step up/down from low-level platforms. The Siemens S200 cars have floor heights of 34 inches -- five inches less than the tallest floors in the dual-platform boarding light-rail cars in Pittsburgh and Buffalo. Sorry for offering hope. Now, the best hope is that RTA will order heavy-rail and light-rail cars from the same manufacturer and have lots of interchangeable parts. On 5/20/2019 at 9:11 AM, KJP said: Assuming RTA could get the Federal Transit Administration to agree to it (FTA paid 80 percent of the cost of building those station platforms) and even get FTA to pay to re-rebuild them (which would cost perhaps $1 million per station), each station platform retrofit could require two to three weeks to do. And how do you do it? You'd have retrofit the outer half of Red Line stations on each side of town first, make the conversion to the new, skinnier trains, then rebuilding the inner half of stations. And that assumes that the new trains are introduced without any bugs found. That's not going happen. All new trains have bugs that require you to keep the old trains around for weeks or months. The old wider Red Line trains cannot serve stations retrofitted with wider platforms. Only the Breda cars on the Blue/Green line trains could. And there aren't enough of those left to run the Blue/Green services, let alone serve as a back-up for the Red Line. Edited June 29, 20204 yr by Boomerang_Brian typo When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
June 29, 20204 yr Author 8 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said: @KJP's article this week was awesome and educational, as always. I went back over some of our conversations last March about the potential for merging to a single LRV system. There's one thing I'm still unclear on - if the Red Line is retrofit for LRV, that means the old cars can't run on it (because the platforms would be wider and the wider HRV wouldn't have clearance). So how would RTA handle the de-bugging period? My understanding is that sometimes you end up occasionally using the old cars for as much as a year while the bugs on the new cars are worked out. Would RTA have to occasionally run the Bredas on the Red Line? Are there even enough Bredas to make that work? The debugging may require using the Bredas (the existing Shaker fleet) and/or a transition to bus service for days or weeks at a time. Thankfully, debugging doesn't involve major safety issues and taking the entire new fleet out of service to fix things. Instead, smaller groups of cars can be removed from service as needed. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
July 10, 20204 yr Author From an interoffice memo written yesterday by interim GM Floun'say Caver..... At the July 14, 2020 meeting of the Operational Planning & Infrastructure Committee, staff will present the schedule adjustments that will take effect August 9, 2020. Service frequency will be increased on selected bus routes to ensure that enough capacity is available for fall 2020 ridership. Also, the B-Line trolley route will operate every 15 minutes on a modified alignment that serves Public Square in both directions. All three Park-N-Ride routes will be restored at a 30-minute frequency that is sufficient to accommodate customers who will not be working from home this fall. The Blue Line and Green Line rail service will be restored to the pre-shutdown schedule. System-wide (bus and rail combined) weekly vehicle-hours of service will grow to 93 percent of pre-COVID levels. ### "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
July 14, 20204 yr NOACA's making plans for the future up to 2050. Red Line Extension: Blue Line Extension: Overall Plans: Greater Area Plans: There's also some talk about Connected and Autonomous Vehicles (CAVs). Ideas included dedicated highway lanes, dedicated lanes on roads such as Superior, and shuttles for transit. Here's one of the shuttle proposals I found interesting but maybe a bit too parallel with the Healthline. Regardless, I think it would be great to activate streets and encourage development the same way the Healthline did for Euclid Ave.
July 14, 20204 yr 8 hours ago, tykaps said: NOACA's making plans for the future up to 2050. Greater Area Plans: And I thought my proposals were expensive - look at all those miles of rail! Is there anything proposed for a downtown loop, or at least a couple infill stations? That would make the other rail extension proposals much more useful. As would proper rail connection to the Clinic. Either one of those should be prioritized much higher than the extensions summarized above. Edited July 14, 20204 yr by Boomerang_Brian Typo When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
July 14, 20204 yr Author I can't take anything NOACA is doing seriously until they cease work on hyperloop. NOACA is a planning agency to guide transportation spending to meet regional needs, not a research outfit to test unproven technologies that have yet to carry a person on a test track, let alone in revenue service. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
July 15, 20204 yr It's interesting that they would have the Blue Line going down the west side of Warrensville. That would sure be alot easier and cheaper by having it only have to cross Chagrin from where it ends now (and the Warrensville right of way is huge in Shaker). But once you get out of Shaker, there are many houses and businesses built fairly close up to the road on both sides, both in Warrensville Hts and Maple. I can't see them obliterating a whole side of the street. Other than crossing the Chagrin/Warrensville intersection, it would seem going down Northfield would be alot easier/cheaper. Traffic is already much less, and it could easily have a road diet down to two lanes, with one side of the boulevard being used to carry rail tracks. Or maybe I'm looking too far into a blurry map that wasn't intended to show that sort of fine detail.
July 15, 20204 yr Author I wouldn't expect a broad brush like a regional plan to get into such details as right of way placement. I posted a 2012 presentation on the Blue Line extension study at Dropbox: https://www.dropbox.com/s/863cab3ejjvs0w4/Blue Line Ext RTA presentation 2012.pdf?dl=0 Although the study is only eight years old, it is already horribly obsolete. Since then, the Ahuja Hospital has opened (it actually opened in 2011 but it was too new to be accounted for in the study data sets), Pinecrest lifestyle center has opened, and the Amazon Fulfillment Center has opened. That's about 5,000 jobs added to the study area, not to mention tons of spin-off jobs with new restaurants and stores nearby. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
July 15, 20204 yr ^Plus there is still lots of available land for development along Highland Rd and for redevelopment along Northfield. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
July 25, 20204 yr Author 2 minutes ago, Frmr CLEder said: I think the challenge is that the Rapid was built to bring commuters in from the East and SW suburbs. Unlike other systems in the US, it was not designed to move passengers around the CBD. That's unfortunate because I think it could spur even more development. @KJP is a better one to respond since he has the expertise, but I would love to see better CBD rail connectivity within the urban core. The Healthline was a start, but its linear. The challenge is who pays for it? Again, this calls for additional revenue for GCRTA capital expansion. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
July 25, 20204 yr 34 minutes ago, KJP said: Again, this calls for additional revenue for GCRTA capital expansion. I don't see this happening without meaningful population growth for the region. Even with all the out of state license plates, we are still a long way off.
July 25, 20204 yr In case it wasn't apparent from the Healthline, urban transit does drive urban residential development. The Manhattanization of Miami is a prime example... https://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffsteele/2019/01/31/tracking-impact-of-new-train-lines-on-downtown-miami-residential-development/
July 25, 20204 yr On 6/7/2020 at 1:10 PM, KJP said: Memories....not all of them good Just came across this..love it. The old blue “cattle cars” 5 linked long trains were the best...except for the breakdowns lol. Reading some of those posts reminded me of how as young kids we were on the buses and trains without parents knowing where we were lol. Too many people today focus on the negative aspects of Cleveland’s past like this racist white flight mantra, unless you were there, one has no room to talk. Sorry anyone missed out growing up in the city during this era. Edited July 25, 20204 yr by CLENYC
July 25, 20204 yr ^ My parents worked for and met on Cleveland Transit System (CTS), driving streetcars. That was a great time and I remember them taking us to the "Car Barns" as kids. Edited July 25, 20204 yr by Frmr CLEder
July 27, 20204 yr I saw a while back that the President was tweeting about money being given to different cities for their Rail-Lines/public transit, does anyone know anything about this and is there anyway CLE can get some to repair/expand our Rapid system? Are our Rapid reps and city leaders advocating with state and federal leaders for funding to build our public rail lines along with our growing city... and to help it to continue to grow? I'm a big fan of & advocate for the Rapid(i like public train transport, not so much buses - not really a fan. but i love the train systems) and I REALLY want to see it grow and be expanded all throughout downtown, Cleveland in general and also connecting to the suburbs(as long as they help foot their part of the bill). I live in CLE & would love to be able to take the Rapid as opposed to my car all the time; but unfortunately I'm always on the go, mostly throughout CLE, but also from Strongsville all the way over to Beachwood and there just isn't enough Rail to support it. Sorry for the rant, its been on my mind and I finally had to get it out. Idk who might know, maybe @KJP ... but if anyone can shed some light i'd appreciate it.
July 27, 20204 yr 54 minutes ago, NR said: I saw a while back that the President was tweeting about money being given to different cities for their Rail-Lines/public transit, does anyone know anything about this and is there anyway CLE can get some to repair/expand our Rapid system? Are our Rapid reps and city leaders advocating with state and federal leaders for funding to build our public rail lines along with our growing city... and to help it to continue to grow? I'm a big fan of & advocate for the Rapid(i like public train transport, not so much buses - not really a fan. but i love the train systems) and I REALLY want to see it grow and be expanded all throughout downtown, Cleveland in general and also connecting to the suburbs(as long as they help foot their part of the bill). I live in CLE & would love to be able to take the Rapid as opposed to my car all the time; but unfortunately I'm always on the go, mostly throughout CLE, but also from Strongsville all the way over to Beachwood and there just isn't enough Rail to support it. Sorry for the rant, its been on my mind and I finally had to get it out. Idk who might know, maybe @KJP ... but if anyone can shed some light i'd appreciate it. The referenced federal money was for operating expenses, not expansion. Yes, RTA did get some of that money. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
July 27, 20204 yr Author 3 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: The referenced federal money was for operating expenses, not expansion. Yes, RTA did get some of that money. RTA got about $100 million IIRC. Yes, it was for covering operating revenue losses from the pandemic. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
July 28, 20204 yr Author "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 4, 20204 yr Author "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 8, 20204 yr Author SATURDAY, AUGUST 8, 2020 Downtown residents support new way to fund transit, downtown's growth Downtown Cleveland Residents (DCR), a community relations board, recently voted to support a rising need for more investment in public transportation, but in an innovative way that boosts economic growth and access to opportunity. Greater Cleveland needs more of both yet funding for public transportation from riders and from all levels of government has been in decline. To that end, at DCR's latest community forum conducted virtually, members of the group voted unanimously to support a resolution calling for more transit investment. The demand for transit is growing as downtown's population nears 20,000. Employers large and small are expanding downtown like Sherwin-Williams, Cleveland Cliffs, Benesch and more. And, before COVID, traffic from rideshare services clogged downtown streets. MORE: https://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/08/downtown-residents-support-new-way-to.html "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 12, 20204 yr Greater Cleveland RTA’s proposed redesign increases frequency along popular routes, reduces service on others https://www.cleveland.com/news/2020/08/greater-cleveland-rtas-proposed-redesign-increases-frequency-along-popular-routes-reduces-service-on-others.html The proposed redesign would increase service to every 15 minutes on routes along Kinsman Road, and Detroit, Lorain, St. Clair and Superior avenues, among others. Thirty-minute service also would be added on Madison and Clark avenues, and Mayfield, Ridge and Cedar roads, Director of Service Management Joel Freilich told trustees. Freilich did not identify during Tuesday’s meeting which routes might have service reduced. Higher res. map: https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/7034364/RTA-Draft-Redesign-Proposal.pdf When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
August 13, 20204 yr Author "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 13, 20204 yr Seems like Cle.com skipped the fare reduction part of the story, which I think is important.
August 13, 20204 yr Author 4 hours ago, Enginerd said: Seems like Cle.com skipped the fare reduction part of the story, which I think is important. Looks like they had it in a separate story.... Edited August 13, 20204 yr by KJP "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
August 13, 20204 yr 12 hours ago, KJP said: Cool. Hopefully that E75th street hill stabilization was the section where it looked like rebar and old rail ties pounded in to the ground was the only thing holding up the rail bed. Edited August 13, 20204 yr by sizzlinbeef
September 1, 20204 yr I took a long break from UrbanOhio, but I posted here some a few years back. I was intrigued by the post, I guess probably by the indefatigable KJP, just up above a bit in this thread, about the possibility of RTA cars that can operate on all of RTA's track. I took quite an interest a few years ago in the idea of one-seat rail trips from the Shaker Lines to University Circle. At the time I was worked at CWRU but I no longer am, and I never lived in Shaker. But lots of CWRU faculty live in Shaker and there were some who professed to be interested in riding transit but whom it was difficult to motivate to try their 2 main options: Getting off rail at Shaker Square and switching to a bus; and riding the Shaker Lines to E 55th -- which overshoots their destination -- and doubling back on the Red Line. One thing I thought was worth noting was that the doubling-back could be reduced if it were possible to use the segment of track that spurs south from the Red Line just east of E 79th, and intersects the Shaker tracks a little bit south of there. I don't know if I posted about it here, but I consulted some knowledgable people and what really ruled this out as far as a one-set trip was that the same cars could not operated on both lengths of track. Could this be possible if the interoperable cars become a reality? The trains would still be going out of their way to the west, but less so than if they had to go all the way to E 55th. I'd be interested in reading replies from anyone with an interest in this. Thanks
September 1, 20204 yr Good news: Greater Cleveland RTA reduces all-day pass prices, rescinds future fare increases https://www.cleveland.com/news/2020/09/greater-cleveland-rta-reduces-all-day-pass-prices-rescinds-future-fare-increases.html CLEVELAND, Ohio — The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority Board of Trustees on Tuesday reduced the price of all-day passes and rescinded fare increases scheduled for 2021 and 2022. The policy changes, approved by a unanimous vote, mean the price of a standard all-day pass will be reduced from $5.50 to $5, starting Oct. 4. The board also rescinded proposed policy changes that could have resulted in the price of a single trip increasing from $2.50 to $2.75 in October 2021, and paratransit fares increasing in 2021 and 2022. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
September 2, 20204 yr 8 hours ago, joethejalapeno said: I took a long break from UrbanOhio, but I posted here some a few years back. I was intrigued by the post, I guess probably by the indefatigable KJP, just up above a bit in this thread, about the possibility of RTA cars that can operate on all of RTA's track. I took quite an interest a few years ago in the idea of one-seat rail trips from the Shaker Lines to University Circle. At the time I was worked at CWRU but I no longer am, and I never lived in Shaker. But lots of CWRU faculty live in Shaker and there were some who professed to be interested in riding transit but whom it was difficult to motivate to try their 2 main options: Getting off rail at Shaker Square and switching to a bus; and riding the Shaker Lines to E 55th -- which overshoots their destination -- and doubling back on the Red Line. One thing I thought was worth noting was that the doubling-back could be reduced if it were possible to use the segment of track that spurs south from the Red Line just east of E 79th, and intersects the Shaker tracks a little bit south of there. I don't know if I posted about it here, but I consulted some knowledgable people and what really ruled this out as far as a one-set trip was that the same cars could not operated on both lengths of track. Could this be possible if the interoperable cars become a reality? The trains would still be going out of their way to the west, but less so than if they had to go all the way to E 55th. I'd be interested in reading replies from anyone with an interest in this. Thanks Red Line and Shaker Line tracks and operating voltage are the same, so cars can run on either track (as they do from Tower City to East 55th); HOWEVER, Red Line cars are wider and the floors are much higher above the tracks. So they can't use the same platforms. This is why the Shaker to University Circle route you describe cannot exist on the current system. This changes if the Red Line is converted form Heavy Rail to Light Rail as described in @KJP's article. One note on your other question - the rail line that crosses both Rapid lines east of 79th is a grade separated freight line. There is no connection. Even if there was, FRA safety rules generally do not allow subway/light rail cars to share track with freight rail. (By comparison, Passenger Rail / commuter rail could share track, and the Amtrak from Cleveland to Pittsburgh uses this line.) So that line is not an option for the Rapid. That said, if the Red Line is converted to Light Rail as @KJP outlined in his article, in theory RTA could offer single seat service from the Shaker Lines connecting to the Red Line to get to University Circle, with reversing direction at East 55th. This would provide a single-seat trip that is not an option today. KJP has previously proposed this somewhere, although I can't find that post right now. The single-seat trip option improves ridership. I'm curious @KJP - any update on RTA's thinking on converting Red Line to Light Rail? Additional details from previous posts: Edited September 2, 20204 yr by Boomerang_Brian *FRA, not FTA When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
September 2, 20204 yr Author 8 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said: I'm curious @KJP - any update on RTA's thinking on converting Red Line to Light Rail? Still studying it. Should have an answer this fall, I think. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
September 3, 20204 yr On 9/1/2020 at 2:14 PM, joethejalapeno said: I took a long break from UrbanOhio, but I posted here some a few years back. I was intrigued by the post, I guess probably by the indefatigable KJP, just up above a bit in this thread, about the possibility of RTA cars that can operate on all of RTA's track. I took quite an interest a few years ago in the idea of one-seat rail trips from the Shaker Lines to University Circle. At the time I was worked at CWRU but I no longer am, and I never lived in Shaker. But lots of CWRU faculty live in Shaker and there were some who professed to be interested in riding transit but whom it was difficult to motivate to try their 2 main options: Getting off rail at Shaker Square and switching to a bus; and riding the Shaker Lines to E 55th -- which overshoots their destination -- and doubling back on the Red Line. One thing I thought was worth noting was that the doubling-back could be reduced if it were possible to use the segment of track that spurs south from the Red Line just east of E 79th, and intersects the Shaker tracks a little bit south of there. I don't know if I posted about it here, but I consulted some knowledgable people and what really ruled this out as far as a one-set trip was that the same cars could not operated on both lengths of track. Could this be possible if the interoperable cars become a reality? The trains would still be going out of their way to the west, but less so than if they had to go all the way to E 55th. I'd be interested in reading replies from anyone with an interest in this. Thanks FYI, Shaker Square to University Circle can be done easily and quickly via the 48/48A. I'd way rather transfer to that than to overshoot, then still have to do the 10-15 walk between the UC station and most of the CWRU campus. The 48/48A takes you at least a bit closer to most of it.
September 11, 20204 yr Heard RTA got $15 million Fed grant for new rail cars. How far does this go? @KJP
September 11, 20204 yr 6 hours ago, Mov2Ohio said: Heard RTA got $15 million Fed grant for new rail cars. How far does this go? @KJP Greater Cleveland RTA gets $15 million federal grant to buy new railcars https://www.cleveland.com/open/2020/09/greater-cleveland-rta-gets-15-million-federal-grant-to-buy-new-railcars.html The article doesn’t answer @Mov2Ohio’s question, so I also look forward to Ken’s reaction. RTA needs 34 cars for the Red Line ASAP and the Shaker cars don’t have much time either. When is the last time I-71 turned a profit?
September 11, 20204 yr Author @Mov2Ohio @Boomerang_Brian It will pay about 12-14 percent of the cost of replacing the Red Line cars. But GCRTA already has about $118 million committed thus far, and I seem to recall that GCRTA was close to the number that they needed to place an order to replace the Red Line cars. So I would think that this $15 million from the feds might be enough to put GCRTA over the finish line. And then there's the Blue/Green Line cars.... "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
September 11, 20204 yr 44 minutes ago, KJP said: @Mov2Ohio @Boomerang_Brian It will pay about 12-14 percent of the cost of replacing the Red Line cars. But GCRTA already has about $118 million committed thus far, and I seem to recall that GCRTA was close to the number that they needed to place an order to replace the Red Line cars. So I would think that this $15 million from the feds might be enough to put GCRTA over the finish line. And then there's the Blue/Green Line cars.... @KJP how does this money affect the possibilities you wrote about here? http://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/06/gcrta-may-unify-its-rail-system-with.html
September 11, 20204 yr Author 25 minutes ago, infrafreak said: @KJP how does this money affect the possibilities you wrote about here? http://neo-trans.blogspot.com/2020/06/gcrta-may-unify-its-rail-system-with.html The funding has no strings attached. It forces RTA to do nothing. It helps them buy whatever rail equipment they ultimately decide to buy. Also, RTA and I had this Twitter exchange.... Edited September 11, 20204 yr by KJP "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
September 11, 20204 yr I watched the board meeting on August 11 and I believe the recommended scenario was the unified fleet. They went over both options but the presentation highlighted how maintaining two separate fleets is more costly in the long run. Hopefully the unified fleet is the way they decide to go.
September 11, 20204 yr I will personally miss heavy rail ? but I understand it makes the most sense financially.
September 11, 20204 yr Heavy rail is a much nicer ride, but if this unification is what keeps the system afloat then they need to do it.
September 11, 20204 yr Admittedly I don't know much about the differences in rail cars etc... so maybe one of you can fill me in. @KJP @Enginerd @jam40jeff From what you're all saying and from a quick online search, it sounds like Heavy Rail is better than Light Rail... so wouldn't it be better if they switched fully over to Heavy? Please see my questions below: -Is it just that upfront cost would be more? Would the money they have now, with the fed money, be enough to cover a switch to Heavy? -Is our current setup built for one more than the other -Is one more reliable? -Does one cost more or less to maintain? -Looking to the future, would one be better than the other(Like If/when we grow; would we extend/add subways below the city, go with elevated trains like Chicago or go with my least favorite - street cars like SanFran)? I'm a big fan of Rail transport, especially subways. ? I hope CLE Rail grows more than the bus system. Sorry for this long list of questions, just trying to understand. Thanks in advance!
September 11, 20204 yr Author "Heavy" refers to the extent of construction/infrastructure, not necessarily weight. In fact, the GCRTA light-rail cars are actually heavier than the heavy-rail cars. So "heavy" in this case would be akin to the difference between an Interstate highway and, say, a boulevard. Yes, the Interstate carries more people/vehicles faster because it's built in high travel-demand corridors with all grade-separated rights of way and fewer access points. But building them in most locations would be a misapplication of resources. By comparison, a boulevard might be a better application in more locations considering its lesser extent of infrastructure (at-grade intersection, more access points, less intrusive to neighborhoods, etc). The Red Line is the Interstate highway of transit lines. If it had enough rail cars and high-density station-area development, it would/could carry as much or more people than an Interstate highway at high speeds and high frequencies. If it ran with 4- to 6-car trains every few minutes, the Red Line could carry 26,000 people per hour (650 people per train with standees) like New York, Toronto, Chicago, Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco. The Red Line was originally designed to do this with its high-capacity signal systems, high-level station platform boarding, off-train fare payment, grade-separation etc. Instead, it carries fewer than 26,000 people on a non-pandemic weekday. A light-rail line grew out of streetcars running on a dedicated rights of way, rather than in the middle of the street. That's what the Shaker Lines were designed as in the early 20th century. They ran in the median of boulevards before transferring over to streetcar tracks into Cleveland to reach downtown. They started running in 1913 and didn't gain a grade-separated, high-speed "rapid transit" er "heavy rail"-like right of way west of Shaker Square to East 37th Street until 1920 or a route from East 37th into Cleveland Union Terminal until 1930. Increasingly, since the 1980s, there has been a blurring of the lines between heavy and light rail. The Shaker Lines west of Shaker Square are very similar to a heavy rail operation. And of course they share the tracks with the heavy-rail Red Line operation between Tower City and East 55th. So all we're doing is running light-rail vehicles (that may or may not be physically heavier than a heavy-rail vehicles) throughout the RTA rail system, 33 out of 39 route-miles of which is built with some features that are found on heavy-rail or at least rapid transit networks (ie grade separated rights of way, gentle curves, etc). "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
September 11, 20204 yr 2 hours ago, jam40jeff said: Heavy rail is a much nicer ride, but if this unification is what keeps the system afloat then they need to do it. My take: A unified fleet always seemed to me to make more sense, presuming the stations can be retrofitted accordingly. We don't have the ridership, now or in any foreseeable future, to require more than the capacity that light rail can offer. We can and do run light rail cars on the same tracks as heavy rail now, albeit, by necessity, with separate platforms to accommodate the height and width differences. Converting the Green/Blue/Waterfront lines to use standard heavy rail cars would be a lot of work and expense, compared to converting the Red Lines to lower and wider platforms (to accommodate the more narrow light rail cars). So if we're to have a unified fleet, which I think is ideal, light rail simply makes more sense than heavy.
Create an account or sign in to comment