That was a softball? Damn, sounds like a request for a dissertation!

the monthly pass, weekly pass, is a benefit for loyalty and frequent use rather than attracting passengers.  One needs to make 20 round trips on a bus in a month or RTA has made money on the deal, and alas: there are typically 20 working days in a month.

 

Maybe they could start by charging a 19-day rate for the monthly pass so that there would be SOME reason to buy it and use it.  Chances are many riders wouldn't use all 19 days anyway, between days off and occasional alternative transportation (cars/taxis/bicycle/etc.)

E Rocc, whether you realize it or not your comments are definitely classist and borderline racist.

 

Ooo.... next you should call him a Nazi. :roll:

 

Please :roll:

Alright kids....

Airlines have been attracting passengers for years with their frequent flier/miles programs (as ill conceived as some of them are).

 

I think a key difference is that airlines compete against one another for passenger loyalty.  RTA is RTA, they're competing against cars (and bikes and bipedalism) and the monthly pass, weekly pass, is a benefit for loyalty and frequent use rather than attracting passengers.  One needs to make 20 round trips on a bus in a month or RTA has made money on the deal, and alas: there are typically 20 working days in a month.

 

So maybe it would be nice to add some kind of fringe benefit to buying a weekly or monthly farecard to entice a user who works 5 days a week but knows will needs to drive his/her car one night of the week and during the weekends.  Some promotion with food or retail outlet, I don't know.

 

That's an awesome idea. Monthly RTA pass holders should get discounts on..... GAS! Just kidding :) I think the extra incentive idea would be great.

I'm a bar security guy (we don't like to use the "b word")...I have to have a thick skin.  >:)

 

What I'm saying is the middle and outer ring suburbanites that tend to avoid RTA do so in part because they are uncomfortable with some aspects of inner city culture.  Calling that "racism" is simply the use of ad hominem to avoid discussing that belief

 

 

I'm a bar security guy (we don't like to use the "b word")...I have to have a thick skin.  >:)

 

What I'm saying is the middle and outer ring suburbanites that tend to avoid RTA do so in part because they are uncomfortable with some aspects of inner city culture.  Calling that "racism" is simply the use of ad hominem to avoid discussing that belief

 

 

 

I'm not calling you racist, but do explain "cultural caution."

I think it's defined (in some cases) as fear without factual basis.

There should be a partnership between Continental and RTA. Convert ground miles to air miles or cash in air miles for bus passes.

1. What is RTA's criteria for providing service? 2. Why do some areas get a Circulator?  3. How often do you reevaluate customer needs and allocate resources accordingly? 4. How do we get more rail lines in Cleveland? 

 

1. RTA has detailed criteria for each kind of service. For instance, there has to be X number of daily riders at a bus stop before it becomes a bus shelter.

 

2. Many cities ask for Circulators, (for some, it a source of community pride), and RTA has a prioritized waiting list. Circulators work well in certain areas, like Lakewood, where there is a high population density, simple routing and strong community support. Lakewood's Circulator consistently ranks #1 in the system in ridership. If RTA is asked to add a Circulator to Ward x, then our first question is...what service can we cut to pay for it? Otherwise, we just duplicate service, compete against ourselves for riders, and waste limited financial resources. Over the years, RTA has developed a list of criteria of what works and what does not, and when Ward X asks for a Circulator, we analyze the request against the criteria.

 

3. Service needs are constantly being modified. Bus routes change four times a year, and a systemwide service plan is introduced each fall, as part of the budget process.

 

4. Smarter minds than mine are wrestling with this issue. If you mean building more RTA rail lines, I would say winning the next Mega Millions jackpot might be a good start. New rail lines are very expensive, and federal funding is needed. Typically, federal funds go to cities that are growing. Cleveland is not. That is why RTA is putting its emphasis on the Euclid Corridor BRT project. If you are talking about using existing rail lines for passengers as well as freight...there are persons on this forum who could address that issue better than I.......but thanks for the softball.

I was thinking along the lines of Amtrak's Guest Rewards Program, in which frequent riders get more points the more they ride. GRP members can turn in their points for discounts on hotels, rental cars, merchandise etc. Amtrak has more than 35,000 GRP members just in Ohio -- a state with very poor Amtrak service.

 

What about similar partnerships between GCRTA and businesses in Cleveland? Doesn't anyone find it bizarre that if you park at Tower City Center, you can get your parking ticket validated at customer service and receive a discount if you buy something at Tower City -- yet no similar benefit exists for transit riders?

 

Why not offer a "Gold Transit Pass" in which RTA pays a nominal but escalating fee to participating retailers based on the number of Gold Transit Passes sold? GTP holders could get discounts at participating retailers, grocery stores, restaurants, City Wheels, even taxis, etc.

 

And, to take it a step further, let's say a new store is proposed on an RTA route and it becomes a GTP partner before it opens. The retailer would be eligible for a variance on the city's parking requirements and not have to provide as much parking (10 percent less, to pick a figure). That's a tidy savings for the retailer, which translates into reduced merchandise prices. And the transit riders would be eligible for the GTP discount. After all, why should transit riders subsidize the cost of building and maintaining the store's parking lot every time they make a purchase?

 

Think of all the retailers along RTA lines, even just the top-10 busiest lines. If RTA could get 5 percent of them to participate (might be best to go with the local chains first), that's still a significant sum and would be worth it for transit riders to buy a Gold Transit Pass for slightly more money than a regular pass. And they could be offered in 1-month, 6-month or annual passes.

^I've noticed, for years, Tower City seems to favor drivers/parkers over Rapid riders; in most Tower City literature, including the last website version I viewed months ago, FCE really played up parking in TC's garage while not even mentioning RTA at all... I think they're playing on the mindset -- shared by way too many people, of course -- that Rapid riders are of a lower economic status than drivers who will be greater shoppers and better customers in TC's stores, esp the few really high-end ones.

 

Also, let's face it, even though fares recently went up to $1.75 for a single rail ride, these fares are already subsidized by taxes and the govt and are a tremendous bargain.  So unless you're really poor, such fares at the current level won't be a psychological barrier to most County residents (and others, beyond), esp when you figure in the flat fee of $3.50 for a day's worth of unlimited rides -- a deal that, I believe, is unparalleled in American rail-based transit.

 

Pay parking downtown, on the other hand, is a psychological barrier to most people who, knee-jerk, expect it to be high.  Add to that the fact it’s a hassle (for many/most suburbanites and even those in the outer parts of Cleveland proper) to drive downtown through traffic lights (and maybe traffic/ticket cameras) and/or freeway traffic and, then, pay often a substantial fee, even if reduced by purchases as TC does, as opposed to the nearby shopping center or mall where you can park for free -- and no incentive pressure to buy mall products to insure such free parking.

 

And in FCE's defense (oooh, I hate even the sound of that proposition), whether rich or not-so-rich, there's only so much merchandize customers can (comfortably) schlep on the Rapid or bus as opposed to throwing it in the trunk or back seat of a car … esp if that car is an SUV.

 

But no reaction to the Gold Transit Pass idea?

I think the GTP is an awesome idea- I like the prospects of using it to tie together transit rides with discounts on City Wheels and taxis.  I wonder if rental cars, Greyhound, or Amtrack could be potential partners as well.  What I see is that this could be a way to boost car free living by linking together the alternatives in an attractive financial package.

I think it is a great idea too.

 

Gracias, I was just ragging on Clvlndr because he focused on the Tower City question I raised -- which was a small part of what I was proposing.

Is it really possible that no one posted this yet?

 

There are pics at http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2007/09/regional_transit_authority_unv.html

 

 

Regional Transit Authority unveils exciting plans for University Circle

Posted by Plain Dealer Architecture Critic Steven Litt September 04, 2007 18:35PM

Categories: Breaking News

 

A master plan for a new RTA rapid transit station in Little Italy incorporates a larger plan for the University Arts and Retail District in University Circle - shown here publicly for the first time.

Hi Jerry, welcome to the forum!

 

Here are a couple more direct questions/comments:

 

1. I've filled out multiple online comment forms and not one has elicited a response from a GCRTA rep.  On the other hand, I had a conversation one day with a rep on the phone about the hours of service for buses on the Red Line.  I got a package in the mail one week later with all the additional info I needed.  So, there's ups and downs as far as that's concerned.

 

There are a few problems to be found in this next one:

 

2. I've noticed over the years that the Red Line's booths are poorly staffed, which leads to front-door-only boarding and a dearth of available customer service reps.  Case in point, this morning around 8:30, I boarded the train at W. 65th with about a dozen people.  I had only a $5 bill and the vending machines are either for weekly passes or change.  (imagine if I'd only had a $20 bill!)  So, I took my 20 quarters down to the platform.  With people like me dropping change into the fare box, it takes a good 2 minutes for everyone to board the train.  This stinks during rush hour and it happens on both ends.  I board at University Circle in the evenings and after 5:00 or so, it's back to the front door on/off and a big line.  It's 10x worse when I have my bike with me and I have to roll it down the crowded aisle after I've paid...

 

and, finishing on a positive note:

 

3. Love the bike racks on the buses...one of the best moves by RTA over the past few years.

Wow.  Very cool stuff.  Can't wait to see how the designs evolve for all these interrelated projects.

Is it really possible that no one posted this yet?

 

Who cares about a glorious new train station?! Give me more of that hot hot information about the retirement center in suburban Orange that Musky posted!

Hey, hey, hey.

I'm just filling in the hole grasscat left.

Don't shoot the messenger (especially a very fragile, loosing-his-mind messenger).

^^Thank you, while many people on this board may already know all of that, I found it informative.

Just wanted to include the images of the planning process so far from Litt's blog. Not the greatest in terms of size and detail, but they still manage to give an exciting glimpse into the future of this area. I'm probably most excited about this area than any other in Cleveland. I think the potential architectural uniqueness can really give Cleveland an even firmer footing in terms of excellent design, etc.

 

 

 

 

 

4. Smarter minds than mine are wrestling with this issue. If you mean building more RTA rail lines, I would say winning the next Mega Millions jackpot might be a good start. New rail lines are very expensive, and federal funding is needed. Typically, federal funds go to cities that are growing. Cleveland is not. That is why RTA is putting its emphasis on the Euclid Corridor BRT project. If you are talking about using existing rail lines for passengers as well as freight...there are persons on this forum who could address that issue better than I.......but thanks for the softball.

 

Building new rail isn't ALWAYS very expensive (see streetcars in numerous cities, including in some tiny towns). And federal funding isn't ALWAYS needed (see Albuquerque, St. Louis [not a growing city], Denver, etc). And while it's true that federal funding in recent years has gone to growing cities (due to FTA's goofy scoring criteria since the 1990s) it wasn't always that way. And FTA is responding to heat from Congress to alter their criteria to something more reasonable.

 

Transportation can either be in response to economic development or an instigator of it, especially if it reduces the cost of living and of doing business. If we want to grow, we have to invest in public transportation that is has a little sizzle, follows a permanent and identifiable route, while supporting an urban lifestyle that is an attractive alternative to suburban isolationism, blandness and monotony.

 

i like the super park.

Exciting times for UC.

Great to see this stuff finally moving forward. I hope the insular folks in Little Italy (though they're getting fewer) and the Citizens Against Virtually Everything dwellers on Hessler don't muck it up.

Citizens Against Virtually Everything dwellers on Hessler

 

:laugh:

 

I agree with Pope - although I think the entire project is great and very cool, the idea of a park over those tracks is intriguing....potentially a terrific connection....

Yeah. I'm really hoping for this design to work out. I think it's fantastic. I would love to see more innovative uses of public spaces in Cleveland along these lines.

 

I'm not saying that Cleveland needs to have innovative public spaces everywhere. But things like this and the proposed pedestrian bridge at North Coast Harbor could really add some  uniqueness and innovation to Cleveland's architectural landscape.

It's like a lil' baby Highline. Love it!

I don't know how I feel about the buildings along Euclid.  Why are they all seperated like that?  Why not build them up to each other?  Consistent streetwalls would make for a much better urban space along Euclid Ave.

I am glad RTA is not "abandoning" the Red Line to East Cleveland as I had expected they would after completing the Euclid Corridor bus-rapid-transit installation.

...decentralization. 15-20 years ago, I recall a suburban politician saying RTA was too downtown-oriented. It was true then, and if anything, downtown is less important to the business world than it was then.

 

Cleveland is the largest city in this region, and most community leaders would agree that its health is critical to the health of this region. Downtown is the center of Cleveland, and a major employment center (300,000+ from what I have heard, but I never actually counted). CTS, and later RTA, used a transit model of bringing surbanites downtown in the AM, and take them home in the PM. Large masses of people used this model, so it made sense for transit to follow it. In today's market, we see Westlakers working in Euclid, and Beachwoodians (??) commuting to Berea. It makes the job of providing transit much more challenging, because the number of people needing any single route may not be very large.

 

Does RTA provide lots of service to downtown? Yes.

Do 30,000 people a day use the Tower City Station? Yes

Is there too much service (considering the Browns, Indians, Cavs, Air Show, auto races, parades and festivals)? No.

Can RTA do a better job of serving the suburbs? Yes, but it can be compared to hitting a moving target. Society today certainly does not stand still, and what may be a trend today can be gone tomorrow.

 

 

2007

 

Mid-October, RTA will officially dedicate the new station at West 117th Street. It will be called Highland Square, a name from our area's history. Please stop in, the facility looks great.

 

2008

Saturday, Oct. 25, the target date for the grand opening of the Euclid Corridor, RTA's new Silver Line. Joe Calabrese announced this date to the Board of Trustees on Sept. 4. You heard it here first. Yes, it may change, but for now, that's the date.

^Maybe RTA needs to start positioning itself to coordinate with developers in creating dense, transit oriented neighborhoods that slow down this moving target.  I think the progress that is being made at the E120th/Mayfield Station in terms of building new infrastructure in conjunction with mixed use, should have been going on for the past 30 years.  But at least this is a start, and a successful cooperation on that project will hopefully teach RTA what other transit agencies throughout the world already know, mass transit can be the spark of development of urban spaces, instead of simply reacting to it population movements.

I must say that the design of the new W117th Street Station scares the hell out of me.  It is an urban multimodal transit station, and I couldn't imagine a more inappropriate, neo-traditional, Wendy's restaurant-like composition.  Design-wise, regardless of its shabbiness, the old station was far and away a superior structure.  RTA should be striving for more compelling stations that exude a sense of contemporary city life, not a clumbsy nostalgic ripoff.

I do have hope for the Cedar Hill and E120th/Mayfield stations however...

I don't know how I feel about the buildings along Euclid.  Why are they all seperated like that?  Why not build them up to each other?  Consistent streetwalls would make for a much better urban space along Euclid Ave.

 

Yeah, I didn't like that either and am hoping it is very preliminary tower massing and nothing more (though even in that case it ain't so hot).  My source told me that the developers had hired but then canned the design consultants that MOCA  used to select FOA, so I'm a little worried about the Triangle project design...

 

 

Thanks for posting those jpop.  What I particularly love about the Mayfield entry to the new station is that it isn't through some dank underground corridor- just up some nice wide stairs right to the platform.  I'm guessing building separate platforms for each track makes it a whole lot more expensive though.

 

Not sure I really get the High Line comparison- aren't those all active freight lines?  Isn't this some kind of super-cap?  Well whatever it's compared to, I definitely dig the proposed super cap.

The two CSX tracks have up to 60 freight trains per day on them, and the two NS tracks have up to 30 freight trains per day on them. That's, uh, 90 trains a day for you kids who went to school on the east side. Oh, wait, I'm one of them!

The two CSX tracks have up to 60 freight trains per day on them, and the two NS tracks have up to 30 freight trains per day on them. That's, uh, 90 trains a day for you kids who went to school on the east side. Oh, wait, I'm one of them!

 

between those tracks, two major hospitals (and associated helicopters and ambulances), and a police station/precinct I can sleep through anything!

The question is, are you going to be able to sleep through the relative quietness of the west side when you move?

Speaking of red line stations, even during the 80s when I sometimes took it to school I often wondered why the University Circle station was so far from the center of the circle and there was no station anywhere near Cleveland Clinic.

wow! ok so this is officially the most exciting thing being built in cleveland...

The Red Line was built "on the cheap." It follows a right of way originally built by the Van Swerigen brothers in 1930, including bridges, graded alignment and, in some sections, poles for the overhead electric wires. The Vans' selected that alignment because it was next to the tracks of the Nickel Plate Railroad Co., which the Vans' owned. And it was next to the tracks they built for passenger trains serving the Cleveland Union Terminal.

 

So when the Cleveland Transit System got a federal Reconstruction Finance Corporation grant of $29.5 million in 1951 to build a cross-town rapid transit line, the affordable routing for it was the Vans' right of way. It wasn't necessarily the best routing -- the Euclid Avenue route which was proposed for a subway going back to the 1910s was better but much more expensive.

How do you remember all of this stuff?

You all might find this interesting.....

 

According to the 2000 U.S. census, the following are the cities with a population over 100,000 with the highest percentage of commuters who use public transit:

 

1. New York, New York 54.35%

2. Jersey City, New Jersey 40.26%

3. Washington, D.C. 34.47%

4. Boston, Massachusetts 33.07%

5. San Francisco, California 32.64%

6. Newark, New Jersey 26.81%

7. Chicago, Illinois 26.71%

8. Cambridge, Massachusetts 26.46%

9. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 25.93%

10. Arlington, Virginia 24.12%

11. Yonkers, New York 23.61%

12. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania 20.99%

13. Baltimore, Maryland 19.94%

14. Berkeley, California 19.93%

15. Hartford, Connecticut 18.87%

16. Seattle, Washington 18.44%

17. Oakland, California 18.18%

18. Daly City, California 18.12%

19. Alexandria, Virginia 16.69%

20. Atlanta, Georgia 15.61%

21. Minneapolis, Minnesota 15.07%

22. Elizabeth, New Jersey 14.91%

23. East Los Angeles, California 14.4%

24. New Orleans, Louisiana 14.05%

25. Portland, Oregon 12.89%

26. Buffalo, New York 12.52%

27. Paterson, New Jersey 12.36%

28. Cleveland, Ohio 12.2%

29. Honolulu, Hawaii 12.02%

30. Miami, Florida 11.6%

31. New Haven, Connecticut 11.36%

32. Stamford, Connecticut 11.14%

33. St. Louis, Missouri 10.9%

34. Los Angeles, California 10.64%

35. Milwaukee, Wisconsin 10.44%

36. Cincinnati, Ohio 10.35%

37. Concord, California 9.97%

38. Naperville, Illinois 9.52%

39. St. Paul, Minnesota 9.01%

40. Detroit, Michigan 8.81%

41. Denver, Colorado 8.75%

42. Santa Ana, California 8.62%

43. Bridgeport, Connecticut 8.49%

44. Richmond, Virginia 8.46%

45. Rochester, New York 8.33%

46. Inglewood, California 7.62%

47. Providence, Rhode Island 7.48%

48. Madison, Wisconsin 7.39%

49. El Monte, California 7.38%

50. Syracuse, New York 7.17%

 

Gracias, I was just ragging on Clvlndr because he focused on the Tower City question I raised -- which was a small part of what I was proposing.

 

My bad, KJP, I was more trying to make sense of (and attacking) FCE more than weighing in on your idea, which I think is a good one and should be presented to Jerry.

I am glad RTA is not "abandoning" the Red Line to East Cleveland as I had expected they would after completing the Euclid Corridor bus-rapid-transit installation.

 

This was just some loose speculation given Mr. Calabrese's strong backing of BRT and seeming contempt of rail.  Most realize, in reality, how utterly foolish such a move would be.

I read my first books and articles about Cleveland Union Terminal when I was 13 years old in 1980. I was bound to learn a few more things in the succeeding 27 years and retain some of it. ;)

I don't know how I feel about the buildings along Euclid.  Why are they all seperated like that?  Why not build them up to each other?  Consistent streetwalls would make for a much better urban space along Euclid Ave.

 

I'm with you X, the current model makes no sense.  That north-side Euclid parcel is the center piece of planning; vacant for decades and prime for solid mixed-use street frontage.  Hopefully, this model is only a loose concept...

 

... Once again, it's amazing that, as positive as this news is, it still could collapse if opposition rises (Hessler Rd).  This is such a key area at the retail heart what should be Cleveland's pride 'n joy neighborhood.  But you've got insular Hessler, on one side, seemingly disinterested and, indeed, historically oppositional to development in protecting it's narrow interest... One another, you have Little Italy, who historically could care less about U. Circle and fought doggedly for decades the logical Rapid station relocation to its doorstep for fear it would bring in "others" (read blacks); then you have disorganized UCI who, for years, was merely in CC and UH's back pocket; there's prestigious yet broke CWRU that shot its wad doing the right thing in building a homey, beautiful new dorm complex on dank, desolate, dreary grounds, ... only to be relentlessly, and foolishly, pounded by the PD's architecture critic who thinks only we unsophisticated boobs in Cleveland would have any liking to CWRU's new dorm architecture...

 

... and what do you call this mess? ... Classic Cleveland ... where, always,  seemingly big-time, positive potential development always stalls and always somehow becomes... "controversial."... Let's hope, after decades and decades of inaction, THIS TIME'S finally the charm... pray for it.

Union Terminal, Terminal Tower (overlooking a lake that's Erie), or both?

 

That all makes a ton of sense, indeed it's close to my "racist" proposal for building a commuter rail pilot line on existing tracks. 

 

Did Red Line commuter ridership ever recover from the decline during the early 80s that I saw while it was being heavily used for school transportation?