Cleveland Union Terminal Tower, as it originally was called. The station on the lakefront was called Cleveland Union Depot until CUT opened in 1930, but Pennsylvania Railroad continued using it until the late 1950s.

 

I don't have the Red Line's historical ridership data handy (Jerry Masek gave it to me two years ago for an article I wrote). But the Red Line's ridership dipped to about 4 million per year in the early- to mid-1990s and has risen fairly steadily since to about 5.5 million today. Jerry can provide more specific numbers, however. But the ridership peak for the Red Line was in 1960 when 18 million people per year rode the line -- back before factories along the route closed, East Cleveland imploded and downtown retailers opened outlets next to new highways in the suburbs.

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 crosstown 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.

 

Dead on accurate.  (Yep, I too spent some my geeky youth reading about the Rapid and other Cleveland history)... Voters in the 1920s rejected funds for the subway (Boston-style depressed streetcar lines around Public Sq, if I recall) while the Vans moved forward with their Shaker Rapid but, then, approved funds in the 50s for a downtown subway loop, only to be defeated by Albert S. Porter, County Engineer... As KJP notes, the RFC funds were limited and the old CTS built the Rapid on a shoestring budget, hence some of the cheap stations, a few of which still exist.  So building a rapid line up Euclid was not an option; it was either build on the Van right-of-way or have no heavy rail Rapid (today's Red Line) at all...

 

I sometimes play the "what if" game, and imagine all the density in our central corridor and all those lost apartment buildings and complexes supplemented by more if a subway; subway/elevated line been built "up the gut" down Euclid... Certainly that amazing "2nd Downtown" -- Doans Corners, at Euclid & E.105 would still be thriving... In a way, the Rapid-influenced Shaker Square was almost a relocation/rebuilding of Doan's Corners to the Southeast side, as the City's wealth and high-density building relocated from the Euclid Corridor to the SE side and Heights along extended Rapid and streetcar lines of the era's real estate entrepreneurs.

 

Funny how history works...

 

 

Jerry, here's a suggestion...

 

One of the really GOOD RTA innovations over recent years is the departure signs at major Rapid stations, including the "Next 3 Trains" rolling signs at the really busy stations, like the Airport and Tower City... However, why not extend these signs to outside the stations themselves, and into other parts of the building? ... In Philly, train-leaving signs are in various places in their airport terminal so, even if passengers aren't at the Regional Rail station immediately, they can plan their activities ahead of time so as not to have to rush.  I think we should put our siimilar Rapid signs at various locations around Hopkins and Tower City for the same purpose, including some even on the outsides of these buildings... A discreet sign could even go in Tower City's Public Square foyer, but not in any way to harm that gorgeous architectural interior space.

^ I agree with that idea, especially at the airport.  I have heard many people react surprised (out of towners) when I told them that Cleveland has a train that runs from the airport to downtown.  Many people are confused as to what a "rapid transit" is IF they even see the signs.  "Trains to downtown" seems to be a little less confusing. 

  On another note, has RTA ever considered using automated announcements for the rail lines (like that in Chicago: this stop is___, next stop is___, doors closing)?  It is much more audible and reliable.  I realize that the operator is SUPPOSED to announce every stop, but this doesn't always happen.  Sometimes when it is announced, it is very hard to understand what the operator even said.  For me, I have no problem, but for occasional users or out of towners, this could be a reason to not use the rail line again (missing stops or being lost).

Although the El doesn't tell you when the next train is coming until approx. 1 min. before it approaches the station.  15 min. waits take forever when you don't know how long you have to wait.  I think just about every Metro station in Paris has indicators for how long the wait time is and the best thing is they're never more than 5 min!!!  Talk about a system to emulate!

 

I agree though, we need automated stop indicators b/c 90% of the time, you can't understand the operator. Today, however, I had a pleasant suprise when I heard automated stops on the #20.  That was the first time I heard that all summer!

Make that the #22, whoops.

 

By the way, it sounds like they use some program from 1997 to make the computerized voices--I think I heard the same corny voice in jr. high computer class.  The El guy on the trains sounds nice.  The lady at the platforms has the most obnoxious midwest/chicago accent ever!

I've talked about the automated voice idea for a while because some drivers don't say anything and others are difficult to understand.  I think it'd be a great touch for service.

 

It could easily be recorded (probably for free or near to it), how about implementation costs?

Clvndr's idea about putting the "next train coming" in Tower City and the Airport proper would be a great advertisement for the system, and it would show people the frequency with which the train runs.  I like it!  Put one in the food court, one at the baggage claims, one in Public Square- or team up with Cleveland+ to have it run across their existing scrolling marquee.

^ Sometimes when it is announced, it is very hard to understand what the operator even said.  For me, I have no problem, but for occasional users or out of towners, this could be a reason to not use the rail line again (missing stops or being lost).

 

I recently had that exact problem.  I rode the red line from Brookpark and nearly missed my stop at E116th because of the mumbled jargen I could barely make out from the operator.  Automated announcements would be a large improvement.

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.

Thanks.  I had heard this frightful idea of ditching the Blue and Green lines and replacing them with "express" buses.  I may have seen one of you post that on the cleveland.com/forums .  Gotta stomp that dumb idea out when it appears.

...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.

 

That is your opinion. Here are the facts.

 

1. Both Cleveland and Lakewood, as well as the nearby Cudell Improvement Corp., were involved in the formation of the design.

 

2. The effort was led by Maribeth Feke, Chief RTA planner, and John Goodworth, who is the project manager. Both are respected professionals. Feke is often asked to speaks at transit conferences.

 

3. A rail station must be designed to meet the needs of the buses, trains, and passengers. It must be ADA compliant. meet safety standards, and be accepted by the neighborhood.

 

4. This design was not conceived in a closed-door meeting. RTA held numerous public meetings with elected officials, community leaders and residents and business people from the area. Ask around, and you will find out...they are "thrilled" with the new facility.

 

5. All RTA stations follow the same design formation policy...we seek a station that meets transit needs as well as community needs, one that compliments existing architecture, one that is an asset to the neighborhood. Some, like Triskett and West 25th Street, are community landmarks.

 

6. If you would like to be included in the design process for other transit facilities, just write to me at [email protected]. I will forward your address to the design team, and you will be notified of public meetings. I am sure you will agree -- that is certainly a better use of your energy than to sit back, do nothing, and then be critical of the final product. Why be part of the problem, when you can be part of the solution?

 

Well, put, Mr. Masek.

 

Much better response then I was going to give last night when I first read the critique.

 

BTW, I saw the drawings for proposed West 150th/Puritas Station.

Very nice. I love how there is the commuter component and the residential component.

Any chance you can post the renderings here? I was not able to secure a copy.

 

 

 

I don't have the Red Line's historical ridership data handy (Jerry Masek gave it to me two years ago for an article I wrote). But the Red Line's ridership dipped to about 4 million per year in the early- to mid-1990s and has risen fairly steadily since to about 5.5 million today. Jerry can provide more specific numbers, however. But the ridership peak for the Red Line was in 1960 when 18 million people per year rode the line -- back before factories along the route closed, East Cleveland imploded and downtown retailers opened outlets next to new highways in the suburbs.

 

I am looking now to try to find better ridership numbers, but I can offer you some food for thought. Last year, RTA had 57.2 million riders. Generically, the approx percentages are: 85 percent bus, 10 percent heavy rail, 5 percent light rail.

Great ideas about the automated "next stop" announcements. I'll bet RTA drivers would be interested in them, too.

 

I, for one, like the design of West 117th. But the greater amount of input doesn't mean you'll necessarily get a good design. Like the old quip says: "A camel is what happens when a committee tries to design a thoroughbred horse."

There's no surer way to UrbanOhio popularity than to post renderings and construction photos of urban projects! :wink:

...I saw the drawings for proposed West 150th/Puritas Station.

Very nice. I love how there is the commuter component and the residential component. Any chance you can post the renderings here?

Your comments are appreciated. RTA is working closely with neighborhood groups from Bellaire-Puritas and Kamms Corners. The design will be completed in late 2008, when a 24-month construction period begins. Estimated cost: $6.5 million. How about if I post the renderings to rideRTA.com, and give you the link here? That is easier for me to do.

Sounds good to me.

Welcome to urbanohio Mr. Masek! It's a welcome change to have a representative from a major public institution with regional impact be so outward in announcing their presence on this public forum.

 

Any thoughts on passing along the ideas generated here to the Citizen Advisory Board or VAC?  I know that they CAB now has a Google Group, which means that it would be possible, via RSS to automatically send updates from this thread to the Google Group.

 

Also, to all UrbanOhioans, please note that RTA's Citizen Advisory Board now has a meeting schedule with agendas and minutes posted at > http://www.riderta.com/CAB/

This is welcome news indeed!

 

 

Hey Guv, how's the new house?

 

And there are others from RTA (in a managerial capacity) on this forum, but they haven't made their identities apparent.

FYI, from 1998 through 2006, Red Line ridership ranged from 5.6 million to 4.5 million annually. I am still looking for older numbers.

...There are others from RTA (in a managerial capacity) on this forum, but they haven't made their identities apparent.

 

There have been times in my life when I found it more valuable to keep my identity and opinions to myself. Often while riding the Rapid, I will hear two people in an adjoining seat having an RTA-related conversation. I listen to see how much they really know about the subject at hand. That gives me some indication of well our public awareness efforts are going. I am often amazed (and keenly disappointed) that one uniformed John Doe will ask another uniformed John Doe about an issue, and then believe everything he hears. I guess that is just human nature.

 

The bottom line: people sign up for this forum for different reasons, and I respect that. My reason is to make sure RTA has a seat at the table...now let's eat.

..I've been one of the tougher critics of RTA, in particular, of your boss.  I have not been particularly impressed with his commitment to expansion, esp rail, and it's potential to lead in the smart growth of the city which, while doing better in many ways, has many, many ills (you're not here to discuss crime and the sub-prime/foreclosure debacle that's turning Cleveland into a ghost town, but...), among them, its no-growth sprawl which, I believe, judicious rail growth could arrest. The Lakefront East and the planned West Shore commuter rail proposal, among the ideas which I'd think RTA would embrace.

 

In the not-too-distant future, RTA hopes to have Joe Calabrese host a chatroom, so some of your issues can be answered. Once, when George Voinovich was running for governor, a newspaper editorial noted that if George could walk door-to-door, and meet every voter in Ohio, there would be no reason for an election. When you have a chance to talk to him one-on-one, he is very engaging, informative and sincere (as his former mayoral press secretary, I know that). Anyway, I can say the same thing for Joe Calabrese. In 2000, I started at RTA just six weeks before he did, so I have seen him in this job since Day 1. I have no doubt that some people may disagree with RTA policy, but if you have a chance to talk to Joe Calabrese one-on-one, and listen to him with an open mind, you will be impressed with his knowledge of transit (30 years and counting), his love of Cleveland, his strong managerial and people skills, and his firm desire to make RTA one of the best transit systems in the nation. He may not yet be willing to "fight some fights" that you deem important, perhaps because the timing is not right. He is not shy about sharing his opinions, and he welcomes the chance to talk transit.

 

A word about regionalism...Calabrese believes that RTA is not truly "regional"...we are, in effect, a countywide system. In NY state, where he worked for years, systems are truly "regional", with one transit system serving a central city, and all surrounding counties. How would such a system work here? It is an interesting thought.

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.

 

You mean transit-oriented development...like at the Puritas station, where both the LaQuinta Inn and the National City Bank Center parking lot rent space from RTA...like the Windermere Station, where RTA worked with Headstart to build a first-class day care center next to the Station, to support a community need...like the Brookpark Rapid Station, where RTA sought (without success, so far) to find hotels and restaurants that wanted to build in our parking lot (that story is still being written)...like Eco Village, the wonderful townhouses that were built next to the West 65th Station...like projects that are going up all along the light-rail lines.

 

We are doing a lot...but we can always do more.

Any thoughts on passing along the ideas generated here to the Citizen Advisory Board or VAC?  I know that they CAB now has a Google Group, which means that it would be possible, via RSS to automatically send updates from this thread to the Google Group.

 

By the way, VAC stands for Volunteer Action Committee, not VACation, as some have been led to believe. I go to many meetings (but not all) that are held by the Citizens Advisory Board. My time here is limited. I will jump in where I am needed, or when facts tend to be skipped over, but this is far from my full-time job. For now, I am planning to be more reactive than pro-active, but we will see where things go. My background includes much newspaper journalism (including The Cleveland Press), and working with the Society of Professional Journalists to protect and defend free speech. This forum is certainly in line with my background. I just trust that your opinions will be based on fact.

Jerry, got to disagree with you regarding TOD. Just because development has occurred at a transit station, doesn't make it Transit Oriented Development. I don't think a standard has been developed to define exactly what is TOD and what isn't. But suffice it to say, if the development has the same emphasis on surface parking lots, same setbacks, same lack of transit-motivating development factors, same pedestrian unfriendliness, same lack of mixed use or same lack of density as a development where little or no transit service is present, then I question calling it TOD.

 

But until such a standard is developed, the judgment of what is TOD vs. not TOD will be left to the eye of the beholder (ie: "I know it when I see it").

^Amen KJP....No Jerry, transit oriented development like in DC.

^Amen KJP....No Jerry, transit oriented development like in DC.

 

Yeah, I think of my time when I lived in Ballston (arlington, orange line) and I look back at historical photos of the area and compare it to what Ballston has turned into.

 

I know its not apples to apples here, but still....

as a person who relies solely on public transportation to get around i am concerned with RTA's lack of commitment to expand rail lines. only a small portion of cleveland is covered by rail and the lines only go to a few select places. a person like me is limited in where they can live inside the city of cleveland while being within walking distance to a rapid transit stop. you can see from figures that rapid ridership is up and i believe it would exceed ridership projections if the system expanded. it did in cities like portland, sacramento, san jose, salt lake city...all of which have a lower population density than cleveland.

 

new rapid lines would spur more density and TOD. you can say we just built a day care center next to so and so station or whatever but at the end of the day are you really building TOD? are you increasing street life, making the area more transit/pedestrian friendly, creating more mixed use, and contributing to making a more urban environment? i dont think you are when you use the examples that you have given.

 

i am very disappointed in the decision to build the euclid corridor project as a busway. this is an opportunity squandered on one of the most important economic corridors in cleveland.

 

has RTA ever discussed bringin old street car routes that existed before? this would be a cost alternative to building full fledged rapid lines and would improve the whole system ten fold in the process. the street cars we see today being used in toronto were originally built for cleveland. we sold them in 1952.

 

 

It's not in RTA's best interests to help residents further maintain an auto-centric and unsustainable lifestyle simply because of some preconceived fears and/or thinly-veiled racism. If they made the choice to move to a suburban area that's poorly served by transit, they likely won't be hopping on a bus or train in the first place. E Rocc's comments may be outside the box, but they're simply way off base for a transit agency that could help redevelop the supposedly fear-inducing inner city. If you want to look at what happens when decentralization is the M.O. of a city, go about 60 miles to the southeast and tell me how healthy Youngstown is. You don't need to be an urban planner for that.

 

well said and i completely agree

After one week on Urban Ohio, I had several observations.

 

1. I am here to inform, to make sure you know RTA's position. You each have your own opinions, and that's part of what makes our nation great. If you think a station design is flawed, so be it, I will just inform you of the process that was used to create the design. Also, I will not debate the value of, or the need for, the Euclid Corridor Project. There were hundreds of public meetings and years of public debate. Our energies are now focused on completing the project, on time and on budget.

 

2. I am an employee of a public agency, monitoring Urban Ohio on taxpayer time, using a taxpayer-owned computer. No matter how strongly I personally feel, there is no way I can say, "Sir, you are a (fill in the blank with your own favorite putdown)." I must respond in the same mode as if TV-5 had a camera in my face. Please appreciate my position. Yes, I am at the table, but there restrictions as to what I can do.

 

3. If research is involved in answering a question, there may be a while between the post and the reply. Again, your understanding is appreciated.

FYI, the station design for Puritas was approved last week by the City Planning Commission and the Design Review Commission. Renderings should be posted soon on rideRTA.com.

Thank you!

Jerry, there's one thing you can do and as a taxpayer, I completely approve of this particular use of your time ;-) - read Dick Feagler's column today. We all know that he's a washed-up, waxing-about-the-good-ol-days blowhard who wouldn't know a good thing for Cleveland if it bit him on his ample and sagging posterior. He hurls insults from his mighty-white world of Bay and I'm sure the powers that be at the PD love him for it.

 

However, I think it would be great for RTA to develop some sort of campaign that basically says "no, you ignorant dipsh!ts, it's not just about someone hopping on a bus at Severance Hall to grab a nightcap* downtown, it's about...". I'm a designer, not a copywriter - for obvious reasons but you get the idea.

 

*Who the h#ll even says "nightcap" anymore? Do they recline on the Davenport? Oyyy...

^granted RTA uses "hepcats" in their Trolley Line Advertising.

. I have no doubt that some people may disagree with RTA policy, but if you have a chance to talk to Joe Calabrese one-on-one, and listen to him with an open mind, you will be impressed with his knowledge of transit (30 years and counting), his love of Cleveland, his strong managerial and people skills, and his firm desire to make RTA one of the best transit systems in the nation.

 

That may be but personally I think that's overrated.  If you're a great manager, have strong people skills and desire to make RTA great, that's only a good thing if your policies are sound.  I admit to not having the same knowledge that others who have problems with Mr. Calabrese, but arguments like, "When you meet him and interact with him you realize what a great guy he is and how sincerely he wants the best for everyone" stopped holding water with me given the same things were said about our last two presidents.

So you are the propaganda chief of the RTA? :yap:

 

After one week on Urban Ohio, I had several observations.

 

1. I am here to inform, to make sure you know RTA's position. You each have your own opinions, and that's part of what makes our nation great. If you think a station design is flawed, so be it, I will just inform you of the process that was used to create the design. Also, I will not debate the value of, or the need for, the Euclid Corridor Project. There were hundreds of public meetings and years of public debate. Our energies are now focused on completing the project, on time and on budget.

 

2. I am an employee of a public agency, monitoring Urban Ohio on taxpayer time, using a taxpayer-owned computer. No matter how strongly I personally feel, there is no way I can say, "Sir, you are a (fill in the blank with your own favorite putdown)." I must respond in the same mode as if TV-5 had a camera in my face. Please appreciate my position. Yes, I am at the table, but there restrictions as to what I can do.

 

3. If research is involved in answering a question, there may be a while between the post and the reply. Again, your understanding is appreciated.

Edsiou, he's contributed more to this forum in 14 posts than you have with ten times the amount. Glass houses, my friend...

Ah but this  house has tinted glass

 

Edsiou, he's contributed more to this forum in 14 posts than you have with ten times the amount. Glass houses, my friend...

So you are the propaganda chief of the RTA?

 

I just checked with Human Resources, and there is such job title at RTA. My title is Publications Manager, or more generically, a PIO, public information officer.

 

In 16 years as a newspaper reporter and city editor, I learned to follow the SPJ Code of Ethics (spj.org). I still refer to that document often.

 

According to Wikipedia, propaganda is "a concerted set of messages aimed at influencing the opinions or behavior of large numbers of people."

 

Gee, if that is the definition, then I do not think I can name anyone who does NOT spread propaganda about those issues which they hold dear.

 

But as long as you are interested in job titles...here are some names at RTA you should know.

 

Joe Calabrese is CEO & General Manager.

* Steve Bitto is Director of Marketing and Communications.

** Chad Self handles media relations, and is on call 24/7. He handles about 1,000 media calls a year.

*** Jerry Masek handled media relations for seven years, and requested a job change so his off-hours could be his own. His title is now Publications Manager, and he produces six publications.

 

The communications team also includes graphic designer Dave Clawson, and Webmaster Mike Cermak.

 

Together, we produce info that people need to know to use public transit effectively. Our agenda? To get more people to ride the buses and trains, which results in cleaner air, less congestion on the highways, and a better return on your tax investment.

 

Thanks for asking.

 

So you are the propaganda chief of the RTA?

 

that should read...NO such job title at RTA. My title is Publications Manager, or more generically, a PIO, public information officer.

 

How much state funding does GCRTA recieve as a percent of budget?  How does that compare to other RTAs?

 

I am asking because here in Chicago the state did not come up with money the local RTA was hoping for.  Now next Thursday is being billed as "doomsday."  Chicago likes hyperbole.

that should read...NO such job title at RTA. My title is Publications Manager, or more generically, a PIO, public information officer.

 

Jerry, FYI -- you can edit your posts at any time on this site by clicking the "modify" button at the upper-right corner of the frame around your message.

Jerry,

 

one major beef I have since the dawn of the Calabrese Admin is the chintzy attitude towards rail.  Most notably this manifests on the Blue/Green/Waterfront light rail lines.  In particular, I hate the idea of RTA's forcing 1-car trains down our throats even during big events, of late, like the 4th of July fireworks and last weeks airshow.  Joe seems to treat Rapid rail service as though it is a mere expensive bus (where buses can do just as well... Not!) rather than the Cadillac/Mercedes of the system it's supposed to be.

 

It just seems dangerous and stupid -- penny wise and pound foolish.  As a county service for riders, I can't see how the cost of an additional driver, even if some overtime must be paid, is worth the costs.  Last week at North Coast, there were families and old people crammed into cars running every 15 mins, esp after the Air Show was over.  Many infants were with families who had strollers that struggled to be brought aboard through the crowds, even when folded.

 

It was so crowded and so bad the driver, driving carefully, had to warn families to hold on to their kids during the curvy, elevated stretch of the Waterfront Line.  Makes no sense.  I've often heard RTA drivers and scheduling personnel grumping out the unsafe nature of these operations.  Really, can 2-car trains be all that expensive to run?  And with the new proof of payment (POP) system about to go into effect, shouldn't RTA rewire Shaker LRV's so one man can drive 2 trains (as is done in Baltimore)?  Why risk injury or even death (which I'd really hate see) just to try to prove to the public you are saving money?

 

While I'm at it, don't you think RTA under Calabrese did a huge public DISservice by eliminating summer, late-night weekend rail service; extending trains a mere 2 hours on Friday and Sat nights when there are tons of people, often drinking, who could use a Rapid ride home to sober up and not putting these drunks behind the wheel?  Isn't that an important serivce rail transit is supposed to serve?  Ditto for Joe's elimination of all-night New Year's Eve rail service, which had been a Cleveland tradition stretching back to the beginning of RTA.

 

What say you on these issues?

 

Welcome to the board, Jerry.

 

Can you pass along a suggestion regarding the traffic light timing on Euclid? 

 

They have been installing new traffic lights on euclid, but 2 of the intersections were terribly timed during rush hour tonight - e18 and euclid and e21 and euclid.  both of these intersections had far too much priority for euclid traffic, while traffic that was traveling southbound toward the innerbelt had to wait, and it backed up more than usual.

 

maybe not all of the signals or actuators are timed or activated yet, and ultimately euclid may receive more priority, but in the near term, it seems that the cross streets should be able to cycle through much quicker (especially when there was NO traffic on Euclid going through the intersection after the initial 2 cars and a bus).

I know I'm not a mod, so I hope I'm not overstepping here but please, please people don't take this as an excuse to vent all your RTA related complaints or use this guy as a punching bag for whatever grievance you might have.  His participation as a "resource person" is far more valuable than his participation as an online complaint center or suggestion box- there are other ways to get those messages through, perhaps JMasek could elaborate on those. 

 

For example, instead of just complaining about what we perceive to be inadequacies in RTA's TOD initiatives, we could ask him for information on RTA policy or what is currently being planned and developed or what challenges and opportunities RTA perceives for the future of TOD initiatives.  And even better, how we can get involved.

 

I'd hate to see an opportunity burned up because of negativity.

...  The Lakefront East and the planned West Shore commuter rail proposal, ...

Is there a commuter rail planned east of Cleveland?  Dreamed of??

 

And welcome to our forum, Mr. Jerry Masek !!  :clap:  :wave: :type:  :wave: :clap:

Jerry, thanks for signing on to the forum.

 

X, very well said.

"I know I'm not a mod, so I hope I'm not overstepping here"

 

Not at all, and I couldn't have said it better myself. :-)

I know I'm not a mod, so I hope I'm not overstepping here but please, please people don't take this as an excuse to vent all your RTA related complaints or use this guy as a punching bag for whatever grievance you might have.  His participation as a "resource person" is far more valuable than his participation as an online complaint center or suggestion box- there are other ways to get those messages through, perhaps JMasek could elaborate on those. 

 

I agree that we shouldn't "use this guy as a punching bag".  However, Jerry said in his introduction that he was a Public Information Officer for RTA and was interested in learning about legitimate concerns that he heard were discussed on this board. 

 

I don't know what role exactly that Jerry will end up playing and I'm happy to have him on board.  If he doesn't choose to play a problem resolution type role, and is strictly communicating RTA's policy position or providing information, that's fine.  But, it seems that he can choose to shape his own participation here, what he responds to, what he lets go, and he has begun to do that. 

 

I'll rephrase to a more generic comment:

 

What is the best way for riders and others to communicate with the RTA on compliments, complaints and concerns about service or other RTA related matters?  In the past, the website comment form has not been effective, usually elicting a form response that whatever was asked will be loaded into a maintenance list or that someone is looking into it.  Unfortunately, these requests usually die or get lost somewhere within RTA and small issues such as fixing burned out lights at stations, outdated schedules or maps, a broken bench, or timing traffic lights to improve the downtown experience through the euclid corridor, never seem to happen.

 

I've personally emailed people who are listed on the RTA website, and haven't had a response.  I've also personally used the online comment form, and haven't had a response.

 

Jerry, if you are able or comfortable, can you:

1) articulate what is the best way to communicate legitimate issues to RTA's attention so that they are resolved;

2) Provide some insight into RTA's overall customer service model and expectations (should a customer expect a response from a direct email to someone listed on RTA's website?);

3) Perhaps work to establish (or provide any insight into) some kind of "RTA Action Center" like the city of Cleveland has set up, where you can email something to [email protected] or something and the person reading those emails is empowered and expected to get things done? 

 

It seems that much of the organization is in a reactive mode, only fixing the "squeaky wheel", after multiple tries, instead of proactively solving some simple issues.  I just want the RTA to work properly and to be an efficient system that the region is proud of, and uses.  As an everyday rider, the lack of perceived accountability (even a response detailing why something can't or won't happen) leaves much to be desired.

^I posted a similar comment/question earlier.  This is a big problem in my eyes.  For the most part, the RTA isn't going to hear from people who are pleased with their ride.  We just assume it's going to work for us.  But when we do have problems and we want to be constructive about getting them taken care of, we need to feel that we've been heard and that our concerns are taken seriously.  There should be action, as urbanlife said.  Whether the comment be about the attitude of a particular operator or the function of a facility or vehicle, it is important that RTA be responsive to the communication, even if no direct action can/will be taken. 

 

This is the same as anything else I choose to spend my money on.  If I am displeased with my service at Dave's, I'll drop them a line.  If I don't get a response, I'll be less likely to stay loyal to them for my shopping needs.  Unfortunately, there aren't too many alternatives for transit in Cleveland.  I'll just end up driving more. 

How much state funding does GCRTA recieve as a percent of budget?  How does that compare to other RTAs?

Not much. At some time in the last few years (I cannot recall exactly when), state funding for transit had dropped to 1983 levels. We have taken far more than our share of state funding cuts. RTA GM Joe Calabrese is President of the state transit group, and he has gone to Columbus often to talk to legislators, and testify on the budget. Here are some links that can explain the issue better than I.

 

Press release on 2007 budget overview:

www.riderta.com/nu_newsroom_releases.asp?listingid=983

 

Ohio Public Transit Association (OPTA)

www.ohiopublictransit.org

From here, you can download both a Power Point and a PDF on state funding issues

Cleveland may host the annual meeting in June.