November 22, 20159 yr Author FYI: a presentation by GCRTA Board member Valarie McCall at a Nov. 19 meeting of Sustainable Cleveland: http://freepdfhosting.com/f6cc359364.pdf "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
November 25, 20159 yr Public Meeting on December 10th about proposed elimination of the #21 and #45A and rerouting the #45 Effective: Dec 10, 2015 RTA is seeking comments on a proposal to replace the current routes #21 and #45-45A with a revised route #45. The purpose of this proposal is to improve service along Clark Avenue and West 73rd St. from daytime-only service 5 days a week, to daytime and evening service 7 days a week. If the proposal is implemented, the revised route #45 from downtown would travel west to W 25, south to Clark, west to W 73, south to Denison, and continue via Ridge (comparable to the current route) to Parma Transit Center and Tri-C West, with limited service to North Royalton. Because the #45 would no longer operate on W. 65th St., a public hearing is required before any final decision is made. Public Hearings will take place on Thursday, December 10, 2015 from 4:00-5:00pm and 6:00-7:00pm at Max S. Hayes High School, 2211 W. 65th St., Cleveland, OH 44102 http://www.riderta.com/service-alerts/public-hearing
November 25, 20159 yr Public Meeting on December 10th about proposed elimination of the #21 and #45A and rerouting the #45 Effective: Dec 10, 2015 RTA is seeking comments on a proposal to replace the current routes #21 and #45-45A with a revised route #45. The purpose of this proposal is to improve service along Clark Avenue and West 73rd St. from daytime-only service 5 days a week, to daytime and evening service 7 days a week. If the proposal is implemented, the revised route #45 from downtown would travel west to W 25, south to Clark, west to W 73, south to Denison, and continue via Ridge (comparable to the current route) to Parma Transit Center and Tri-C West, with limited service to North Royalton. Because the #45 would no longer operate on W. 65th St., a public hearing is required before any final decision is made. Public Hearings will take place on Thursday, December 10, 2015 from 4:00-5:00pm and 6:00-7:00pm at Max S. Hayes High School, 2211 W. 65th St., Cleveland, OH 44102 http://www.riderta.com/service-alerts/public-hearing Wow, no more bus service from the W. 65-Eco Village Red Line station to Gordon Square... That really sucks. Economics are slowly chipping away at RTA's continued viability thanks to the stinginess of conservative state pols. Why is nobody questioning our Governor, John Kasich, about this on his presidential campaign trail?
November 27, 20159 yr The PD finally joined the party RTA board to weigh fare hike, service cuts By James Ewinger, The Plain Dealer Follow on Twitter on November 27, 2015 at 6:21 AM, updated November 27, 2015 at 7:41 AM CLEVELAND, Ohio -– RTA board members are expected to discuss a fare hike and service cuts at a committee meeting Tuesday, Dec. 1. No decisions have been made and there will be no vote Dec. 1. http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/11/rta_board_to_weigh_fare_hike_s.html
November 27, 20159 yr The PD finally joined the party RTA board to weigh fare hike, service cuts By James Ewinger, The Plain Dealer Follow on Twitter on November 27, 2015 at 6:21 AM, updated November 27, 2015 at 7:41 AM CLEVELAND, Ohio -– RTA board members are expected to discuss a fare hike and service cuts at a committee meeting Tuesday, Dec. 1. No decisions have been made and there will be no vote Dec. 1. http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/11/rta_board_to_weigh_fare_hike_s.html There were 2 words a UOer up-thread used to describe this situation: death spiral. Last month Scene noted the 40th anniversary of RTA. Ironically RTA was created to replace the old Cleveland Transit System because CTS was ... broke, raising fares and cutting service.
November 30, 20159 yr The PD finally joined the party RTA board to weigh fare hike, service cuts By James Ewinger, The Plain Dealer Follow on Twitter on November 27, 2015 at 6:21 AM, updated November 27, 2015 at 7:41 AM CLEVELAND, Ohio -– RTA board members are expected to discuss a fare hike and service cuts at a committee meeting Tuesday, Dec. 1. No decisions have been made and there will be no vote Dec. 1. http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/11/rta_board_to_weigh_fare_hike_s.html There were 2 words a UOer up-thread used to describe this situation: death spiral. Last month Scene noted the 40th anniversary of RTA. Ironically RTA was created to replace the old Cleveland Transit System because CTS was ... broke, raising fares and cutting service. It was also created to merge in the better run suburban systems, which it eventually absorbed at its own level. Removing competition was never a good answer.
November 30, 20159 yr ^I suspect that those municipal systems were as unsustainable at CTS or the Shaker Rapid. I understand why people associate absorption with declining service, but I doubt the causation is really very tight.
November 30, 20159 yr Public Meeting on December 10th about proposed elimination of the #21 and #45A and rerouting the #45 Effective: Dec 10, 2015 RTA is seeking comments on a proposal to replace the current routes #21 and #45-45A with a revised route #45. The purpose of this proposal is to improve service along Clark Avenue and West 73rd St. from daytime-only service 5 days a week, to daytime and evening service 7 days a week. If the proposal is implemented, the revised route #45 from downtown would travel west to W 25, south to Clark, west to W 73, south to Denison, and continue via Ridge (comparable to the current route) to Parma Transit Center and Tri-C West, with limited service to North Royalton. Because the #45 would no longer operate on W. 65th St., a public hearing is required before any final decision is made. Public Hearings will take place on Thursday, December 10, 2015 from 4:00-5:00pm and 6:00-7:00pm at Max S. Hayes High School, 2211 W. 65th St., Cleveland, OH 44102 http://www.riderta.com/service-alerts/public-hearing Wow, no more bus service from the W. 65-Eco Village Red Line station to Gordon Square... That really sucks. Economics are slowly chipping away at RTA's continued viability thanks to the stinginess of conservative state pols. Why is nobody questioning our Governor, John Kasich, about this on his presidential campaign trail? Clvlndr, can we reasonably assume you'll be offering comments on this proposed change, either in person or in writing, prior to the comment deadline? As is noted, "a public hearing is required before any final decision is made". No, this forum does not count as an official comment channel.
November 30, 20159 yr Is there anywhere online (or in anyone's personal computer collection) to find archived maps of RTA's bus system over recent years? Having just moved back to Cleveland last year, I don't really have a good perspective of how the routes have changed in the last few years. I'd be interested to see what specific lines have been cut, consolidated, etc.
November 30, 20159 yr Public Meeting on December 10th about proposed elimination of the #21 and #45A and rerouting the #45 Effective: Dec 10, 2015 RTA is seeking comments on a proposal to replace the current routes #21 and #45-45A with a revised route #45. The purpose of this proposal is to improve service along Clark Avenue and West 73rd St. from daytime-only service 5 days a week, to daytime and evening service 7 days a week. If the proposal is implemented, the revised route #45 from downtown would travel west to W 25, south to Clark, west to W 73, south to Denison, and continue via Ridge (comparable to the current route) to Parma Transit Center and Tri-C West, with limited service to North Royalton. Because the #45 would no longer operate on W. 65th St., a public hearing is required before any final decision is made. Public Hearings will take place on Thursday, December 10, 2015 from 4:00-5:00pm and 6:00-7:00pm at Max S. Hayes High School, 2211 W. 65th St., Cleveland, OH 44102 http://www.riderta.com/service-alerts/public-hearing Wow, no more bus service from the W. 65-Eco Village Red Line station to Gordon Square... That really sucks. Economics are slowly chipping away at RTA's continued viability thanks to the stinginess of conservative state pols. Why is nobody questioning our Governor, John Kasich, about this on his presidential campaign trail? Clvlndr, can we reasonably assume you'll be offering comments on this proposed change, either in person or in writing, prior to the comment deadline? As is noted, "a public hearing is required before any final decision is made". No, this forum does not count as an official comment channel. I'd be happy to offer the comments online.
November 30, 20159 yr Author Is there anywhere online (or in anyone's personal computer collection) to find archived maps of RTA's bus system over recent years? Having just moved back to Cleveland last year, I don't really have a good perspective of how the routes have changed in the last few years. I'd be interested to see what specific lines have been cut, consolidated, etc. Here's a 2007 GCRTA system map, the year before RTA cut 40 percent of its bus service miles (although RTA picked the right ones to cut because it lost "only" 20 percent of system ridership).... http://freepdfhosting.com/8b071887cf.pdf I have some hardcopy maps going back to the 1990s but they're much too large to scan here at home or the office. I think there's some system maps going back to the 1970s in the back of the some of the reports I have, but they're very small and don't list the route numbers (if I remember right). I'll see what I've got. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
December 1, 20159 yr Good stuff. But looking at that 2007 map is painful when you realize how much service we lost... and how much we're going to lose, potentially, with the latest proposed round of service cuts. This is a time when Cleveland should be expanding mass transit options, not limiting them.
December 1, 20159 yr Author I also found several large, hardcopy system maps from the 1990s, the oldest being from February 1990. The system didn't change much over that decade. But it looks like nearly every county, state of federal road had bus service on it. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
December 1, 20159 yr East side Red Line shut down on Dec 5-6 and Dec 12-13 because of the demolitions of the East 79th Street bridge and E 120th station. http://www.icontact-archive.com/R9rHabb8A1UMzVDmMG-v35Y1DWCqXRNm?w=2 Also, more media coverage. Cle 19 on the potential fare increase: http://www.cleveland19.com/story/30634311/rta-riders-could-see-fare-increase-in-2016
December 1, 20159 yr Interesting choice of photo for the article RTA service cuts possible, fare increases likely By James Ewinger, The Plain Dealer Follow on Twitter on December 01, 2015 at 1:48 PM CLEVELAND, Ohio -- The RTA board's finance committee said today that any service cuts would be minor. No routes have been designated for cuts, said Linda Krecic, RTA spokeswoman. Any cutbacks would be to bus service, not rail. http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/12/rta_fare_increases_likely_but.html
December 1, 20159 yr Author Interesting choice of photo for the article A PD reporter other than Ewinger accompanied the photographer on that tour of Central Rail. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
December 1, 20159 yr Interesting choice of photo for the article A PD reporter other than Ewinger accompanied the photographer on that tour of Central Rail. The photo would seem to fit for a story about looming issues with RTA's rail fleet...
December 3, 20159 yr Just in case anyone has an issue with GCRTA's advertising, it could be much worse....
December 3, 20159 yr Just in case anyone has an issue with GCRTA's advertising, it could be much worse.... Still not as bad as Columbus imho. "Get Caught Driving Drunk and You'll End Up Like the Other Losers on This Bus!!!!"
December 4, 20159 yr OMG where was this? Somewhere in Michigan. The picture was posted on Reddit a few days ago: I suppose this is where we should say, let's get back on topic..?
December 5, 20159 yr So the PD's transportation coverage is basically just a regurgitation of RTA's press releases RTA seeks public comment on proposed route change By James Ewinger, The Plain Dealer on December 05, 2015 at 7:30 AM, updated December 05, 2015 at 11:57 AM CLEVELAND, Ohio – RTA wants public input on a proposal to replace two current bus routes, 21 and 45-45A, with a revised route 45. The transit authority is sounding out public opinion at the request of Ward 15 Cleveland Councilman Matt Zone. Public hearings will be 4-5 p.m. and 6-7 p.m. on Thursday, Dec. 10, at Max Hayes High School, 2211 West 65th Street. www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/12/rta_seeks_public_comment_on_pr.html
December 5, 20159 yr Interesting choice of photo for the article A PD reporter other than Ewinger accompanied the photographer on that tour of Central Rail. The photo would seem to fit for a story about looming issues with RTA's rail fleet... And here we have it Until RTA can afford new rail fleet, it strips aging trains to keep others rolling: Michael K. McIntyre's Tipoff By Michael K. McIntyre on December 05, 2015 at 7:00 AM, updated December 05, 2015 at 7:05 AM The 74 active train cars in the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority's commuter rail fleet are survivors. Placed into service in the late 1970s, they've labored long past their 30-year life expectancy. They look remarkably good for their age. But beneath the skin, the stress is starting to show. http://www.cleveland.com/tipoff/index.ssf/2015/12/as_rta_struggles_to_fund_repla.html
December 6, 20159 yr Author RTA fare increases would be hardship for many: LaQueta Whorley, Mary Jones By Guest Columnist/cleveland.com on December 06, 2015 at 12:00 PM, updated December 06, 2015 at 12:03 PM Guest columnists RTA riders LaQueta Whorley is a crossing guard, and Mary Jones works as a janitor for a downtown Cleveland office building. We strongly object to RTA's proposal to increase fares for one-way passes from $2.25 to $2.50. RTA also proposes raising fares for para-transit from $2.25 to $3.50 and cutting bus service by 1.3 percent. As daily bus riders, we know first-hand that many riders struggle to make ends meet. Although we understand RTA has budget problems, riders like us cannot continue to make up the difference at the farebox for budget shortfalls. This is not just our opinion but the opinion of hundreds of other RTA riders. The Ohio Organizing Collaborative and SEIU Local 1 recently spearheaded a survey of more than 450 RTA riders. Volunteers hit the street and surveyed riders by canvassing RTA stations and transit hot spots such as West 25th Street, Shaker Square and Public Square. Surveys were also posted on social media sites and distributed through local social service agencies. MORE: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/12/rta_fare_increases_would_be_ha.html "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
December 6, 20159 yr Interesting choice of photo for the article A PD reporter other than Ewinger accompanied the photographer on that tour of Central Rail. The photo would seem to fit for a story about looming issues with RTA's rail fleet... And here we have it Until RTA can afford new rail fleet, it strips aging trains to keep others rolling: Michael K. McIntyre's Tipoff By Michael K. McIntyre on December 05, 2015 at 7:00 AM, updated December 05, 2015 at 7:05 AM The 74 active train cars in the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority's commuter rail fleet are survivors. Placed into service in the late 1970s, they've labored long past their 30-year life expectancy. They look remarkably good for their age. But beneath the skin, the stress is starting to show. http://www.cleveland.com/tipoff/index.ssf/2015/12/as_rta_struggles_to_fund_repla.html So finally, after many if not most of Greater Cleveland's media outlets covered this story, ...along comes the PD bringing up the rear. I don't understand Calabrese. Yes, he has for many years has spoken about RTA's lack of government funding for transit system maintenance. But why is he resisting acknowledging that the long term (more like midterm) viability of his rail fleet appears to be in serious jeopardy? And why does he seem to be defensive about it? Theoretically, if external funding isn't coming in because of backwards, misguided pols, it's not his fault (again, theoretically) if there's simply no money to replace these worn out trains. But the fact that Joe's crack maintenance team is expertly cannibalizing parts from mothballed disabled trains to keep the current system running, tends to refute Joe's whistling past the graveyard mantra. With all due respect, and as much as applaud their efforts, it shouldn't come down to a 501©(3) transit advocacy organization like All Aboard Ohio, and particularly KJP, to inform the public of a situation RTA should have been more forthcoming about. KJP also correctly asserts in the PD article, as he's been telling UOers for some time, that RTA and the community need to also focus on the bigger picture of where transit is. and where it could and should be in terms of taking this community to the next level ... like expanded services such as the Red-Line-to-Euclid proposal ... that we must have "the conversation." When KJP told the PD: "No one is inspired by merely surviving," he hit the nail directly on the head.
December 6, 20159 yr Hopefully someone, somewhere, will raise a question about our esteemed governor-turned-presidential hopeful, John Kasich, who: - has presided over this horrible transit funding situation (and no doubt encouraged it) - had his party choose Cleveland for the 2016 RNC, largely because of good transit, principally the Rapid (which is ironic because Republicans generally, like Kasich, despise public transit as some kind of social engineering where poor and minorities ride -- Oh God, Obama and his lefty/socialist minions are coming to take our cars as well as our guns!!), and - while playing the Proud Host at the RNC despite barely spending any time in Cleveland normally (accept to push hard for the Opportunity Corridor), ... the same city where his fellow Republicans will be zipping around ... on the rapid transit system he barely funds (talk about irony)... ... maybe, just maybe, somebody will put Kasich on the hot seat on this ... well, I'll be satisfied if it's merely a warm seat. Cleveland did not win the RNC largely because of good transit (the rapid) and Cinci did not lose the RNC because of its lack of streetcars. The RNC needed to be in a city with a certain number of buses and both CLE and CIN met this requirement. CIN dropped out because of its shabby arena and CLE won due to its overall appeal. To say CLE won the RNC because it has a rapid transit system and CIN lost because it does not is misplaced. Perhaps largely is too strong a word. But Cleveland's quality public transit absolutely was a major reason the Republican site committee chose Cleveland, and why they didn't choose Columbus or Kansas City. In particular transit was cited in article after article, including this one: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2014/07/robust_public_transit_and_cent.html Of course the healthline and rapid are appealing as Cleveland does have a robust transit system. However, candidate cities had to guarantee a certain number of buses in the local transit fleet. Did the rapid, even though it is a badly planned system, help? Yes.
December 6, 20159 yr Interesting choice of photo for the article A PD reporter other than Ewinger accompanied the photographer on that tour of Central Rail. The photo would seem to fit for a story about looming issues with RTA's rail fleet... And here we have it Until RTA can afford new rail fleet, it strips aging trains to keep others rolling: Michael K. McIntyre's Tipoff By Michael K. McIntyre on December 05, 2015 at 7:00 AM, updated December 05, 2015 at 7:05 AM The 74 active train cars in the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority's commuter rail fleet are survivors. Placed into service in the late 1970s, they've labored long past their 30-year life expectancy. They look remarkably good for their age. But beneath the skin, the stress is starting to show. http://www.cleveland.com/tipoff/index.ssf/2015/12/as_rta_struggles_to_fund_repla.html So finally, after many if not most of Greater Cleveland's media outlets covered this story, ...along comes the PD bringing up the rear. I don't understand Calabrese. Yes, he has for many years has spoken about RTA's lack of government funding for transit system maintenance. But why is he resisting acknowledging that the long term (more like midterm) viability of his rail fleet appears to be in serious jeopardy? And why does he seem to be defensive about it? Theoretically, if external funding isn't coming in because of backwards, misguided pols, it's not his fault (again, theoretically) if there's simply no money to replace these worn out trains. But the fact that Joe's crack maintenance team is expertly cannibalizing parts from mothballed disabled trains to keep the current system running, tends to refute Joe's whistling past the graveyard mantra. With all due respect, and as much as applaud their efforts, it shouldn't come down to a 501©(3) transit advocacy organization like All Aboard Ohio, and particularly KJP, to inform the public of a situation RTA should have been more forthcoming about. KJP also correctly asserts in the PD article, as he's been telling UOers for some time, that RTA and the community need to also focus on the bigger picture of where transit is. and where it could and should be in terms of taking this community to the next level ... like expanded services such as the Red-Line-to-Euclid proposal ... that we must have "the conversation." When KJP told the PD: "No one is inspired by merely surviving," he hit the nail directly on the head. What is the reasoning for the ''Red Line to Euclid'' proposal? RTA should have looped the Waterfront line through the CBD, north-south along E 9th Street perhaps in the '90s. Especially now with the development in downtown and the flats where riders could move from one area to another quickly. Hell, I would extend the light-rail out to at least W 65th. Better than an extension to population-declining Euclid.
December 6, 20159 yr A Red Line extension to Euclid would have significant ridership benefits for the line. You can connect both downtown and University Circle, our two biggest employment centers, with northeast Cuyahoga Co and also Lake County. I'm not a huge advocate of the 'park and ride' concept, but with an extension, the Red Line be comes a much more attractive commuting option for people in those areas. And the right-of-way is pretty much there already. Also, it provides opportunities for significant redevelopment in the southern section of Euclid, which the city could desperately use.
December 6, 20159 yr A Red Line extension to Euclid would have significant ridership benefits for the line. You can connect both downtown and University Circle, our two biggest employment centers, with northeast Cuyahoga Co and also Lake County. I'm not a huge advocate of the 'park and ride' concept, but with an extension, the Red Line be comes a much more attractive commuting option for people in those areas. And the right-of-way is pretty much there already. Also, it provides opportunities for significant redevelopment in the southern section of Euclid, which the city could desperately use. The Red Line already has too many of its own park-n-ride stations and using another railroad ROW again limits street/pedestrian use. Again, doing rail expansion on the cheap like the 1950s. A transit system with only 1 downtown station has other priorities to address. What other areas has the Red Line led to significant redevelopment? Ohio City's recent development is not due the existence of the Red Line. Nice to have it there, but didn't lead the current development.
December 6, 20159 yr Author Also, the area around Noble Road the tracks north of Euclid is being considered for a large development district for advanced manufacturing, research labs, etc. The area is littered with older, obsolete manufacturing buildings. Some might be saved (the vertical brick structures) and repurposed as offices, incubators, innovation labs, etc. But most of the structures in that large area could be redeveloped with modern manufacturing that's accessed by transit from the south and the interstate from the north. But this is a subject for the Red Line/HealthLine extension thread. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
December 6, 20159 yr RTA fare increases would be hardship for many: LaQueta Whorley, Mary Jones By Guest Columnist/cleveland.com on December 06, 2015 at 12:00 PM, updated December 06, 2015 at 12:03 PM Guest columnists RTA riders LaQueta Whorley is a crossing guard, and Mary Jones works as a janitor for a downtown Cleveland office building. We strongly object to RTA's proposal to increase fares for one-way passes from $2.25 to $2.50. RTA also proposes raising fares for para-transit from $2.25 to $3.50 and cutting bus service by 1.3 percent. As daily bus riders, we know first-hand that many riders struggle to make ends meet. Although we understand RTA has budget problems, riders like us cannot continue to make up the difference at the farebox for budget shortfalls. This is not just our opinion but the opinion of hundreds of other RTA riders. The Ohio Organizing Collaborative and SEIU Local 1 recently spearheaded a survey of more than 450 RTA riders. Volunteers hit the street and surveyed riders by canvassing RTA stations and transit hot spots such as West 25th Street, Shaker Square and Public Square. Surveys were also posted on social media sites and distributed through local social service agencies. MORE: http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/12/rta_fare_increases_would_be_ha.html With such eloquent and succinct writing skills you would think Ms. Whorley and Ms. Jones could have landed better careers. Then they wouldn't be pressed for a quarter fare increase.
December 6, 20159 yr Extending service to attract riders is key in avoiding fare increases though. Service to areas in the city with a growing population working or wanting access to downtown are crucial as is removing the transit stigma generally.
December 6, 20159 yr With such eloquent and succinct writing skills you would think Ms. Whorley and Ms. Jones could have landed better careers. Then they wouldn't be pressed for a quarter fare increase. I don't really see the relevance of this comment
December 7, 20159 yr With such eloquent and succinct writing skills you would think Ms. Whorley and Ms. Jones could have landed better careers. Then they wouldn't be pressed for a quarter fare increase. I don't really see the relevance of this comment It's relevant because the two woman pictured did not write that commentary. So, at a minimum, opposition to a fare increase and a general overall movement to upgrade to transit service needs to respect readers' intelligence. Complaining about a .25 increase using proxy ''poor people'' is not the way to achieve the robust transit system metro Cleveland needs.
December 7, 20159 yr I disagree that the park 'n ride aspect is reason not to build the Red Line Euclid extension. Some of RTA's busiest stations are end-of-line park 'n rides, like Brookpark, Puritas and Green Road. As TPH2 noted, the Euclid station would attract regional riders, including from Lake County and would open up University Circle to them as well as making downtown and W. 25th easier to get to. I also disagree with your comment that the West 25th station has little impact on Ohio City development, because a number of businesses have cited the station as a motivation for developing there, including the Fries & Schuele condo/townhomes, the United Bank building rehab and the Cleveland Hostel. And as for Tower City being the only downtown station: all the Waterfront Line stations, maybe with the exception of the Muni Lot terminal, are considered downtown.
December 7, 20159 yr A Red Line extension to Euclid would have significant ridership benefits for the line. You can connect both downtown and University Circle, our two biggest employment centers, with northeast Cuyahoga Co and also Lake County. I'm not a huge advocate of the 'park and ride' concept, but with an extension, the Red Line be comes a much more attractive commuting option for people in those areas. And the right-of-way is pretty much there already. Also, it provides opportunities for significant redevelopment in the southern section of Euclid, which the city could desperately use. I agree wholeheartedly... there would be great benefit. Laketran has always expressed interest in cooperating with a Red Line extension/terminus in Euclid. There are several potential uses in addition to "regular" work commuting; special events, overnight parking for those interested in using this as part of an intermodal strategy (i.e. short trips from the airport - right now I park at the Brookpark station, but if a Euclid Red Line park and ride existed, I would consider using it). However, the amount of money this would take would be astronomical compared to the funding received. This would likely have to be an issue for voters. If it came down to a vote, I find it unlikely that the citizenry would vote for an infrastructure change that not everyone would use.
December 7, 20159 yr I disagree that the park 'n ride aspect is reason not to build the Red Line Euclid extension. Some of RTA's busiest stations are end-of-line park 'n rides, like Brookpark, Puritas and Green Road. As TPH2 noted, the Euclid station would attract regional riders, including from Lake County and would open up University Circle to them as well as making downtown and W. 25th easier to get to. I also disagree with your comment that the West 25th station has little impact on Ohio City development, because a number of businesses have cited the station as a motivation for developing there, including the Fries & Schuele condo/townhomes, the United Bank building rehab and the Cleveland Hostel. And as for Tower City being the only downtown station: all the Waterfront Line stations, maybe with the exception of the Muni Lot terminal, are considered downtown. Well I never said the Red Line didn't contribute to or impact Ohio City's appeal; just that it didn't lead the redevelopment and was not the catalyst for the area's growth. The topic was Red Line to Euclid as a means of leading redevelopment there; this would be a new RTA strategy described as ''build it and they will come''. The Red Line has one downtown stop; of course the badly planned Waterfront Line is ''downtown'' but isn't very useful day-to-day. Its biggest issue is the dead-end at the Muni Lot.
December 7, 20159 yr A Red Line extension to Euclid would have significant ridership benefits for the line. You can connect both downtown and University Circle, our two biggest employment centers, with northeast Cuyahoga Co and also Lake County. I'm not a huge advocate of the 'park and ride' concept, but with an extension, the Red Line be comes a much more attractive commuting option for people in those areas. And the right-of-way is pretty much there already. Also, it provides opportunities for significant redevelopment in the southern section of Euclid, which the city could desperately use. I agree wholeheartedly... there would be great benefit. Laketran has always expressed interest in cooperating with a Red Line extension/terminus in Euclid. There are several potential uses in addition to "regular" work commuting; special events, overnight parking for those interested in using this as part of an intermodal strategy (i.e. short trips from the airport - right now I park at the Brookpark station, but if a Euclid Red Line park and ride existed, I would consider using it). However, the amount of money this would take would be astronomical compared to the funding received. This would likely have to be an issue for voters. If it came down to a vote, I find it unlikely that the citizenry would vote for an infrastructure change that not everyone would use. Citizens have voted for more extensive transit for the city and region. The derailed downtown subway in the 1950s approved by voters and the vote to create RTA in the 1970s. RTA was the empty promises entity for a regional rail system. Today, I'm not sure voters would trust the RTA as there is a stigma with it and urban transit in general. The ''there's no benefit to me'' mentality is much more common as people don't use transit as they once did. When RTA was created there were upwards of 120 million riders; today, maybe 48 million.
December 7, 20159 yr I disagree that the park 'n ride aspect is reason not to build the Red Line Euclid extension. Some of RTA's busiest stations are end-of-line park 'n rides, like Brookpark, Puritas and Green Road. As TPH2 noted, the Euclid station would attract regional riders, including from Lake County and would open up University Circle to them as well as making downtown and W. 25th easier to get to. I also disagree with your comment that the West 25th station has little impact on Ohio City development, because a number of businesses have cited the station as a motivation for developing there, including the Fries & Schuele condo/townhomes, the United Bank building rehab and the Cleveland Hostel. And as for Tower City being the only downtown station: all the Waterfront Line stations, maybe with the exception of the Muni Lot terminal, are considered downtown. Never said the Red Line has little impact on Ohio City, just that it didn't lead the development there and is not the reason for the development. The issue at-hand was bringing the Red Line into Euclid with the hope that it will lead development. There isn't a great track record for RTA on this point and for the City. Red Line has 1 downtown stop; the Waterfront Line has stops but are not useful for day to day use since, in RTA's wisdom, it dead-ends the line at the Muni Lot. Maybe if Cleveland develops some serious traffic issues the demand for RTA use will increase and people will pay for better and more extensive service.
December 7, 20159 yr Author RTA didn't ask for the Waterfront Line. The City of Cleveland did. The city and state paid for it. The Muny Lot may not stay the Muny Lot for long. Rail lines last for decades. If we don't like the current condition of ridership or development around them, then change it or, if you're not into activism, then wait around a decade or so. It will change. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
December 7, 20159 yr I disagree that the park 'n ride aspect is reason not to build the Red Line Euclid extension. Some of RTA's busiest stations are end-of-line park 'n rides, like Brookpark, Puritas and Green Road. As TPH2 noted, the Euclid station would attract regional riders, including from Lake County and would open up University Circle to them as well as making downtown and W. 25th easier to get to. I also disagree with your comment that the West 25th station has little impact on Ohio City development, because a number of businesses have cited the station as a motivation for developing there, including the Fries & Schuele condo/townhomes, the United Bank building rehab and the Cleveland Hostel. And as for Tower City being the only downtown station: all the Waterfront Line stations, maybe with the exception of the Muni Lot terminal, are considered downtown. Never said the Red Line has little impact on Ohio City, just that it didn't lead the development there and is not the reason for the development. The issue at-hand was bringing the Red Line into Euclid with the hope that it will lead development. There isn't a great track record for RTA on this point and for the City. Red Line has 1 downtown stop; the Waterfront Line has stops but are not useful for day to day use since, in RTA's wisdom, it dead-ends the line at the Muni Lot. Maybe if Cleveland develops some serious traffic issues the demand for RTA use will increase and people will pay for better and more extensive service. No, I can't argue the point. The Red Line has not spurred much development. Uptown is the most substantial and, hopefully, it will be followed this spring by the ground breaking for Intesa right which will be next to the new LI station. In Ohio City there has also been proposed the mixed-use retail/apartment building at Lorain/W. 25 intersection backing up to a rebuilt Red Line stop... We know that Cleveland went on the cheap and killed off the downtown subway in the 1950s (and similarly 1990s) which would have led to a dual-hub type extension up the Euclid corridor to Univ. Circle. But it didn't happen and Cleveland, like a most American mid-sized metro cities, opted for less expensive rapid transit routing (along RR ROWs, freeway medians or, simply, along street surfaces like old-time streetcars (hello Baltimore)) without a through-the-core subway route (ie, Denver, even with it's projected 100-mile new rail network has pretty much done the same thing as Cleveland in this regard). And of course as we've seen in Cleveland, wide freight ROW's with their industrial siding customers, thwarts much residential and/or mixed-use development. Little Italy-University Circle, W. 25 and some other stations, like W. 65, Cudell and W. 117 are the exceptions where the Rapid lines do, in fact, run close to populated neighborhoods... and we're finally seeing some TOD development/plans at these locations. Hopefully we'll more. But we need to build upon the strengths of the Rapid we've got (in the context of the region where it exists) and not what should have been built. Park-n-ride has been a successful formula for the Red line. Of course, I'm hoping a Euclid extension can spur some pedestrian-oriented development along it's 6.5 mile route, but even if it immediately doesn't, I don't think this should be a deal breaker. The park-n-ride aspect of such a line and the positive impacts it would have for congested University Circle, Downtown, W. 25 and even the airport, would make the line well worth it even though, according to KJP, such a line doesn't score well because of the small amount of walkability it may be projected to generate. ... and as for the Waterfront Line, I didn't say that it's super useful as it currently exists (or more importantly, the situation that currently surrounds its stations), but that it's stations are considered to be downtown... and as for the WFL being useful, I can't explain why the vast majority of workers in the buildings close to and accessible to the WFL line aren't using it... I personally think they're foolish for not doing so, but to each his/her own... You can't convince me that workers in the new 20-story E&Y office tower should thumb their nose at WFL trains when a station stop is literally across the street from their building. The availability of cheap parking (for now, until FEB Phase 3 gets built) is not a reasonable excuse in my book. Ditto for workers at places like North Point, the Federal building or City Hall, to name a few others.
December 7, 20159 yr Author No mode of transportation, by itself, can spur development. Could a new highway spur development without the requisite zoning such as the common "interchange service" classifcation? Or the extension of sewer lines or construction of retention basins, all paid for by the city? So why does the city's application of allow so many used-car dealerships, gas stations and single-use buildings set back from the street behind surface parking near rail stations? Because until very recently, Cleveland didn't know what transit-oriented development was and if they did, they didn't care to apply the requisite land use policies to at least permit it if not encourage it. BTW, parking downtown is not cheap for visitors but sure is cheap for employees who get their parking 100% subsidized by their employers. By some estimates, employer-paid reduces the cost of commuting downtown by 50-70 percent. Sure would be nice for all concerned if employers also offered to subsidize RTA passes. Had they offered transit subsidies but refused auto subsidies, it would probably save each company or other parking deck owner tens of millions of dollars from having to build and maintain their own parking decks). I wonder how much all those downtown parking garages cost to build and maintain? Probably hundreds of millions of dollars in present-dollars. That private sector contribution, had it been spent on public transportation instead, could have bought a pretty nice rail system for Cleveland. "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck
December 7, 20159 yr Connecting additional people to the rail system with a Red Line extension would help the entire city, especially downtown. Extending rail to the edge of the county (or beyond) will also increase city residents' access to modern job centers. The issue isn't how much economic impact we see around a certain radius of a track or a station. The issue is how well the rail network functions as a whole. Terminating the Red Line in the middle of East Cleveland and leaving the whole lakeshore corridor unserved is a lot of wasted potential. Park and ride may not be the ideal use of transit, but it's a popular one, and it helps to multiply the rail system's effectiveness. I think a downtown loop would be fun and cool, but it seems like less of a need and less of a positive impact. It doesn't take that long to traverse downtown on foot, and the majority of the attractions are along Euclid, which already has several layers of transit service. Just seems like less ROI there than for a Red Line extension.
December 8, 20159 yr Connecting additional people to the rail system with a Red Line extension would help the entire city, especially downtown. Extending rail to the edge of the county (or beyond) will also increase city residents' access to modern job centers. The issue isn't how much economic impact we see around a certain radius of a track or a station. The issue is how well the rail network functions as a whole. Terminating the Red Line in the middle of East Cleveland and leaving the whole lakeshore corridor unserved is a lot of wasted potential. Park and ride may not be the ideal use of transit, but it's a popular one, and it helps to multiply the rail system's effectiveness. I think a downtown loop would be fun and cool, but it seems like less of a need and less of a positive impact. It doesn't take that long to traverse downtown on foot, and the majority of the attractions are along Euclid, which already has several layers of transit service. Just seems like less ROI there than for a Red Line extension. A downtown waterfront line loop would be much more than cool and fun. It would offer direct CBD workers, visitors and tourists access from Gateway to the Flats. How about traversing Playhouse Sq or E 9/Euclid to the East Bank Flats on foot? Not exactly convenient but then again the rapid transit lines were never really convenient. The line/s already exist; they just need to be tweaked to go through the CBD. That's not possible with the Red Line.
December 8, 20159 yr ^ I agree that I'd love to see a looping of the WFL along the eastern part of downtown, but I have serious doubts about it capturing the ridership that it would need. You could conceivably run it down near East 18th, but I still thank that is too far off of the main E 9th corridor to make it worthwhile. Plus it would require a lot of property acquisition. Don't get me wrong, I think one day we need to solve the downtown circulation problem, but I'm not sure that's the best plan to be spending any limited political capital (and real capital) on at this time (I'd never desecrate a grave, but if someone forced me to, I know whose I'd pick--Al Porter). This is an interesting convo, but might it be better continued here: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,30302.105.html ?
December 8, 20159 yr I disagree that the park 'n ride aspect is reason not to build the Red Line Euclid extension. Some of RTA's busiest stations are end-of-line park 'n rides, like Brookpark, Puritas and Green Road. As TPH2 noted, the Euclid station would attract regional riders, including from Lake County and would open up University Circle to them as well as making downtown and W. 25th easier to get to. I also disagree with your comment that the West 25th station has little impact on Ohio City development, because a number of businesses have cited the station as a motivation for developing there, including the Fries & Schuele condo/townhomes, the United Bank building rehab and the Cleveland Hostel. And as for Tower City being the only downtown station: all the Waterfront Line stations, maybe with the exception of the Muni Lot terminal, are considered downtown. Never said the Red Line has little impact on Ohio City, just that it didn't lead the development there and is not the reason for the development. The issue at-hand was bringing the Red Line into Euclid with the hope that it will lead development. There isn't a great track record for RTA on this point and for the City. Red Line has 1 downtown stop; the Waterfront Line has stops but are not useful for day to day use since, in RTA's wisdom, it dead-ends the line at the Muni Lot. Maybe if Cleveland develops some serious traffic issues the demand for RTA use will increase and people will pay for better and more extensive service. No, I can't argue the point. The Red Line has not spurred much development. Uptown is the most substantial and, hopefully, it will be followed this spring by the ground breaking for Intesa right which will be next to the new LI station. In Ohio City there has also been proposed the mixed-use retail/apartment building at Lorain/W. 25 intersection backing up to a rebuilt Red Line stop... We know that Cleveland went on the cheap and killed off the downtown subway in the 1950s (and similarly 1990s) which would have led to a dual-hub type extension up the Euclid corridor to Univ. Circle. But it didn't happen and Cleveland, like a most American mid-sized metro cities, opted for less expensive rapid transit routing (along RR ROWs, freeway medians or, simply, along street surfaces like old-time streetcars (hello Baltimore)) without a through-the-core subway route (ie, Denver, even with it's projected 100-mile new rail network has pretty much done the same thing as Cleveland in this regard). And of course as we've seen in Cleveland, wide freight ROW's with their industrial siding customers, thwarts much residential and/or mixed-use development. Little Italy-University Circle, W. 25 and some other stations, like W. 65, Cudell and W. 117 are the exceptions where the Rapid lines do, in fact, run close to populated neighborhoods... and we're finally seeing some TOD development/plans at these locations. Hopefully we'll more. But we need to build upon the strengths of the Rapid we've got (in the context of the region where it exists) and not what should have been built. Park-n-ride has been a successful formula for the Red line. Of course, I'm hoping a Euclid extension can spur some pedestrian-oriented development along it's 6.5 mile route, but even if it immediately doesn't, I don't think this should be a deal breaker. The park-n-ride aspect of such a line and the positive impacts it would have for congested University Circle, Downtown, W. 25 and even the airport, would make the line well worth it even though, according to KJP, such a line doesn't score well because of the small amount of walkability it may be projected to generate. ... and as for the Waterfront Line, I didn't say that it's super useful as it currently exists (or more importantly, the situation that currently surrounds its stations), but that it's stations are considered to be downtown... and as for the WFL being useful, I can't explain why the vast majority of workers in the buildings close to and accessible to the WFL line aren't using it... I personally think they're foolish for not doing so, but to each his/her own... You can't convince me that workers in the new 20-story E&Y office tower should thumb their nose at WFL trains when a station stop is literally across the street from their building. The availability of cheap parking (for now, until FEB Phase 3 gets built) is not a reasonable excuse in my book. Ditto for workers at places like North Point, the Federal building or City Hall, to name a few others. The WFL, as it exists today, is not conducive for workers that are not living on or near the lines on the east side. A worker, even at E&Y tower, has to wait for the WFL train, do an inconvenient transfer and pay an additional fare, unless a monthly or all day pass is on-hand, wait for the red line train, ride to, say, brookpark, then drive to name-your-suburb here...just drive, traffic and gas prices are not an issue. Can't imagine this daily routine esp with RTAs iffy service. It's good to know the past so it's not repeated in the future. The 1950s subway was not a link to Univeristy Circle; the Dual Hub concept is a 1980s creation that ultimately let to the HealthLine, not a rail line. The 1950s subway plan was an underground loop with stops at Playhouse Square and E9th/Superior etc. The key point is the powers that be at the time thwarted what the citizens wanted, and Higbee's had a hand in killing the subway as well. The park-n-rides are useful to a point but those stations are the west side have far fewer daily cars than the past. I think a Red Line extension to Euclid is a mistake. If anything, we need to build out the light-rail system and Cleveland's current TOD is at least some progress in that area. I wonder how many techies will take the Red Line to and from work?
Create an account or sign in to comment