Does RTA have any plans for replacement of the HealthLine buses? The line is turning 10 this year, after all. I was just talking to a friend about it and I've never seen it discussed on here so I wanted to raise the issue. Those things are getting old, dirty, and worn out, and are some of the worst vehicles in the entire transit system. They make very loud fan noises, some seats right by the heaters are hotter than hell in the winter while others are cold. We all know the RTA is running things on a shoestring, but in spite of that many of the vehicles are in a nice condition and they seem to have good long term plans in place for their capital investment. But if this is our marquee transit line through a marquee area where we are trying to gain investment, nice buses would make a good impression. Maybe the Clinic and UH should pony up some more cash.

Does RTA have any plans for replacement of the HealthLine buses? The line is turning 10 this year, after all. I was just talking to a friend about it and I've never seen it discussed on here so I wanted to raise the issue. Those things are getting old, dirty, and worn out, and are some of the worst vehicles in the entire transit system. They make very loud fan noises, some seats right by the heaters are hotter than hell in the winter while others are cold. We all know the RTA is running things on a shoestring, but in spite of that many of the vehicles are in a nice condition and they seem to have good long term plans in place for their capital investment. But if this is our marquee transit line through a marquee area where we are trying to gain investment, nice buses would make a good impression. Maybe the Clinic and UH should pony up some more cash.

 

Yes, RTA has plans for their replacement. Thankfully, there's actually some state funds (from the Volkswagon emissions case) that can be used for transit and some new federal funds for bus replacements.

Without the merger, Maple Heights Transit wouldn't exist. Where would their operating subsidy come from? An inner ring community being weakened by sprawl? And where would their capital money come from? The state doesn't fund urban/suburban transit, only rural transit.  And not from the federal government either, because Maple Heights is part of the same shrinking county which is getting funds from a shrinking pot of money held by the feds. All urban transit systems get state-of-good-repair money based on a formula of ridership, population in its service area, and size of system(s). So the larger the system, the more money it gets from the feds. But in a shrinking county like Cuyahoga, the merger slowed the decline and ensured Maple Heights still had some transit.

 

It could have remained autonomous.  The feds were of the mindset that bigger was better.  MHTSs performance as an autonomous unit was embarrasing RTA.

So I saw a smashed window on the shelter at E. 161st and Grovewood the other morning, I found out someone shot it out.  A little kudos, it's not just cleaned up but it has been replaced, and not with plywood.

Does RTA have any plans for replacement of the HealthLine buses? The line is turning 10 this year, after all. I was just talking to a friend about it and I've never seen it discussed on here so I wanted to raise the issue. Those things are getting old, dirty, and worn out, and are some of the worst vehicles in the entire transit system. They make very loud fan noises, some seats right by the heaters are hotter than hell in the winter while others are cold. We all know the RTA is running things on a shoestring, but in spite of that many of the vehicles are in a nice condition and they seem to have good long term plans in place for their capital investment. But if this is our marquee transit line through a marquee area where we are trying to gain investment, nice buses would make a good impression. Maybe the Clinic and UH should pony up some more cash.

 

Yes, RTA has plans for their replacement. Thankfully, there's actually some state funds (from the Volkswagon emissions case) that can be used for transit and some new federal funds for bus replacements.

 

Do you have insight into the timeframe for replacement?

It could have remained autonomous.  The feds were of the mindset that bigger was better.  MHTSs performance as an autonomous unit was embarrasing RTA.

 

I'm sure it was. And as an autonomous transit agency, it could no longer afford to exist either with the service levels it had -- or at all.

Do you have insight into the timeframe for replacement?

 

I believe they are on a 12-year life cycle replacement schedule. If so, 2020 is the target year for having new buses on the property.

Thanks - I've been curious about this for a while.

Tonight 6-8 pm there will be a meeting at The Harvey Rice branch of @Cleveland_PL to discuss the design and enhanced safety of the new East 116th Rapid Station hosted by Councilman @GriffWard6Cle

 

http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2018/04/greater_cleveland_rta_ridershi_3.html

 

Do we have more people living by transit now but less ridership?

Unlikely. With continued urban sprawl, we're reducing the cost-effectiveness of delivering all kinds of services, not just public transportation, but mail/deliveries, sewers, electricity, schools, roads, etc.

 

The funding mechanism for public transit in Cuyahoga County ends at the Cuyahoga County line so the more people that live beyond it and buy things outside of it are contributing less to Greater Cleveland's public transportation system. That has resulted in a loss of revenue to RTA of more than $60 million per year and growing.

http://www.cleveland.com/datacentral/index.ssf/2018/04/greater_cleveland_rta_ridershi_3.html

 

Do we have more people living by transit now but less ridership?

 

We have many, many fewer people living by transit. The unit count near east side Red Line and Blue/Green line stations and high frequency bus lines has plummeted.  The ongoing multifamily construction boomlet helps to some extent, but ridership still correlates pretty strongly with income, I suspect, so I doubt there's all that much ridership coming from new market projects.

I think the declining ridership is a function of the outages and service cuts.  People can only use the system if it meets their performance requirements.  We never needed brick bus stops on Clifton, we never needed any STJ transit center.  We need crosstown routes and we need circulators.

 

Bigger picture and longer term, the rail system absolutely must extend its reach to remain viable.  Obviously maintenance comes first, and obviously the funding situation has to change. 

We never needed brick bus stops on Clifton, we never needed any STJ transit center. 

 

If these things drive ridership increases (as they did on the Clifton Line) it's not always a question of need - it's a question of whether or not it's smart. The sources for capital and operating funds typically come from totally different places anyways. The funding situation is what needs to change. Extensions would be great, but increased density along the lines really should come first.

Increased density along the lines isn't entirely an RTA issue, but yeah I'd like to see that too.  The more jobs that are accessible via the rail lines, the more impetus there will be to live near them.  We have two Amazon job centers on the way that really ought to be rail accessible.  Our system heads straight toward both of them but fails to reach them.  In the case of the blue line, it gets tantalizingly close but RTA put a new parking deck in the way of any possible extension.  Thousands of jobs are located just beyond the reach of every one of our rail lines. 

Also, how about making most of the bus routes run on fully dedicated or "peak hour" dedicated lanes. It doesn't have to be costly like Euclid corridor. All you really need is some paint, right? It wouldn't take long for people sitting in traffic, continually seeing buses wiz by to convert to mass transit.

Also, how about making most of the bus routes run on fully dedicated or "peak hour" dedicated lanes. It doesn't have to be costly like Euclid corridor. All you really need is some paint, right? It wouldn't take long for people sitting in traffic, continually seeing buses wiz by to convert to mass transit.

 

The problem is Cleveland really doesn't have massive traffic issues.

 

 

 

The problem is Cleveland really doesn't have massive traffic issues.

 

 

Traffic congestion doesn't dictate transit use. Supportive land use, low fares, safe and reliable service all matter more. When a transit system is designed in reaction to highway problems, you get a transit system of limited utility and cost-effectiveness.

Also, how about making most of the bus routes run on fully dedicated or "peak hour" dedicated lanes. It doesn't have to be costly like Euclid corridor. All you really need is some paint, right? It wouldn't take long for people sitting in traffic, continually seeing buses wiz by to convert to mass transit.

 

Or inform whoever made the decision to convert the lanes that they can change them back or get de-elected.

 

Such "we know best" tactics work poorly in the US in general and away from the coasts in particular.

Also, how about making most of the bus routes run on fully dedicated or "peak hour" dedicated lanes. It doesn't have to be costly like Euclid corridor. All you really need is some paint, right? It wouldn't take long for people sitting in traffic, continually seeing buses wiz by to convert to mass transit.

 

Or inform whoever made the decision to convert the lanes that they can change them back or get de-elected.

 

Such "we know best" tactics work poorly in the US in general and away from the coasts in particular.

 

I didn't want to come across like "I know best" but as you're well aware our streets are very wide and built for a higher capacity then we have today. I don't see why we cant adapt a lane currently used for parking as a way to speed up the buses and make then a more attractive means of transportation.

"we know best"

 

I very much disagree with this characterization. If elected government officials make a decision, that's part of democracy, and all decisions can be framed as "we know best" if you happen to disagree with them.

 

It was "we know best" when they laid out the streets in the 1800s. It was "we know best" when they ripped up the streetcars. It was "we know best" when they built the highways." It was "we know best" when ODOT continually widens the lanes of every road in the state. So why are all those "we know bests" ok but if one of them benefits buses you denigrate it like that? You are operating with a double standard.

 

The fact that we have bus lanes and bike lanes means there is a constituency in favor of them, regardless of a loud opposition.

Traffic congestion doesn't dictate transit use. Supportive land use, low fares, safe and reliable service all matter more.

 

And frequency.

 

I didn't want to come across like "I know best" but as you're well aware our streets are very wide and built for a higher capacity then we have today. I don't see why we cant adapt a lane currently used for parking as a way to speed up the buses and make then a more attractive means of transportation.

 

All Aboard Ohio did a study a few years ago and found that the best way to speed up buses is to speed up the boarding/fare payment process. We have a local, real-world example of how this discourages ridership. Consider the loss of the proof-of-payment (and RTA's bizarre refusal to use non-law enforcement officers to check fares) on the HealthLine has greatly slowed it, despite still having dedicated lanes, and badly hurt ridership....

 

 

@jeffsleasman

24h24 hours ago

GCRTA suspended Proof of Payment on the Healthline around Halloween last year. We have complete ridership data for the 4 months since (thru Feb 2018):

 

November 2016-February 2017: 1,376,082 rides

November 2017-February 2018: 1,160,478

 

Change: -215,604 (-15.67%)

^^ At the risk of sounding all Cleveland.com and with the knowledge that I don’t know their methodology; isn’t the new number just showing that around 15% of people previously were non payers? Also, I’ve no problem believing that speeding up the payment process speeds up the bus, but would someone really not ride and find an alternative means of transportation (and associated extra cost and time) for the sake of a few seconds of boarding time?

Also, how about making most of the bus routes run on fully dedicated or "peak hour" dedicated lanes. It doesn't have to be costly like Euclid corridor. All you really need is some paint, right? It wouldn't take long for people sitting in traffic, continually seeing buses wiz by to convert to mass transit.

 

The problem is Cleveland really doesn't have massive traffic issues.

 

 

 

The irony is Washington does and Metro ridership is dropping anyway.

Also, how about making most of the bus routes run on fully dedicated or "peak hour" dedicated lanes. It doesn't have to be costly like Euclid corridor. All you really need is some paint, right? It wouldn't take long for people sitting in traffic, continually seeing buses wiz by to convert to mass transit.

 

The problem is Cleveland really doesn't have massive traffic issues.

 

 

 

The irony is Washington does and Metro ridership is dropping anyway.

 

Transit ridership is dropping pretty much everywhere in the US, except for a handful of cities. http://humantransit.org/2018/04/why-does-ridership-rise-or-fall-lessons-from-canada.html

 

 

^^ At the risk of sounding all Cleveland.com and with the knowledge that I don’t know their methodology; isn’t the new number just showing that around 15% of people previously were non payers? Also, I’ve no problem believing that speeding up the payment process speeds up the bus, but would someone really not ride and find an alternative means of transportation (and associated extra cost and time) for the sake of a few seconds of boarding time?

 

No, the methodology of counting riders hasn't changed, to my knowledge.

^^ At the risk of sounding all Cleveland.com and with the knowledge that I don’t know their methodology; isn’t the new number just showing that around 15% of people previously were non payers? Also, I’ve no problem believing that speeding up the payment process speeds up the bus, but would someone really not ride and find an alternative means of transportation (and associated extra cost and time) for the sake of a few seconds of boarding time?

 

Boarding time accounts for 1/3 of a typical bus route's trip time. So it's more than a few seconds. HealthLine buses regularly run 10-20 minutes longer than they did previously, with the higher number at peak travel times. That also greatly increases operating costs. RTA's average operating cost per service-hour is about $135.

I didn't realize that boarding time accounted for that much! I don't ride the health line much at all. An increase of 10-20 minutes is unacceptable.

 

One of the big factors in transit desirability is predictability. And the the less frquent the service the more this plays a larger role in transit riders satisfaction.  Boarding times definitely palys a part in this but to me the times alloted for boarding is a lot more consistent then being tied up in traffic. 1 minute stopped in traffic here, two minutes there. Before you know it your bus is not where it is supposed to be by 10 or 15 minutes. No one complains more at the bus stop than when the bus is late. This is a common occurance on the 22 depending on the traffic that day. When you start having the bus off schedule a few times a week consistently, people start finding more dependable modes of transportation. The only way I know how to fix that is dedicated lanes.

I didn't realize that boarding time accounted for that much! I don't ride the health line much at all. An increase of 10-20 minutes is unacceptable.

 

One of the big factors in transit desirability is predictability. And the the less frquent the service the more this plays a larger role in transit riders satisfaction.  Boarding times definitely palys a part in this but to me the times alloted for boarding is a lot more consistent then being tied up in traffic. 1 minute stopped in traffic here, two minutes there. Before you know it your bus is not where it is supposed to be by 10 or 15 minutes. No one complains more at the bus stop than when the bus is late. This is a common occurance on the 22 depending on the traffic that day. When you start having the bus off schedule a few times a week consistently, people start finding more dependable modes of transportation. The only way I know how to fix that is dedicated lanes.

 

You fix it with contactless fare collection, aka smart cards. Buy the fare cards off-vehicle or, if the vehicle is large enough (such as a light-rail vehicle) you can have a fare machine on board. But RTA has refused to adopt this technology, citing its high cost, even though it would likely save RTA millions of dollars per year in operating costs. But transit agencies don't think in terms of return on investment. If they don't see a grant available to do something, they often don't do it.

The streetcar in Tucson really has it down to a science. Walk in one of 4 double doors, tap your very reasonably priced card on the validator (cash not accepted)... and that's it. It isn't that complex, people pay (or I presume enough pay) via the honor code, and while the car isn't particularly fast, it does the job.

I didn't realize that boarding time accounted for that much! I don't ride the health line much at all. An increase of 10-20 minutes is unacceptable.

 

One of the big factors in transit desirability is predictability. And the the less frquent the service the more this plays a larger role in transit riders satisfaction.  Boarding times definitely palys a part in this but to me the times alloted for boarding is a lot more consistent then being tied up in traffic. 1 minute stopped in traffic here, two minutes there. Before you know it your bus is not where it is supposed to be by 10 or 15 minutes. No one complains more at the bus stop than when the bus is late. This is a common occurance on the 22 depending on the traffic that day. When you start having the bus off schedule a few times a week consistently, people start finding more dependable modes of transportation. The only way I know how to fix that is dedicated lanes.

 

You fix it with contactless fare collection, aka smart cards. Buy the fare cards off-vehicle or, if the vehicle is large enough (such as a light-rail vehicle) you can have a fare machine on board. But RTA has refused to adopt this technology, citing its high cost, even though it would likely save RTA millions of dollars per year in operating costs. But transit agencies don't think in terms of return on investment. If they don't see a grant available to do something, they often don't do it.

 

They could just return the vehicle to POP and have civilians randomly check fares.  Every time I reach out to RTA to offer suggestions they act like I'm speaking Japanese.  I think they are content to devolve the HL into just an OK bus because they don't care.

They could just return the vehicle to POP and have civilians randomly check fares.  Every time I reach out to RTA to offer suggestions they act like I'm speaking Japanese.  I think they are content to devolve the HL into just an OK bus because they don't care.

 

Everyone including Joe C is waiting for Joe C to retire in 2020. There's no leadership anymore. The ship is sinking and the crew is looking for answers for what to do next but they're getting no direction except to stay the course.

End of the day it probably doesn't matter if RTA manages the problems better. Population stagnation and job sprawl are the fundamental reasons why things are so rough, so much more so than RTA management inadequacy.

End of the day it probably doesn't matter if RTA manages the problems better. Population stagnation and job sprawl are the fundamental reasons why things are so rough, so much more so than RTA management inadequacy.

The problems still have to be fixed.  If you think sprawl is bad now, wait until our rail system dies, and, with it, downtown Cleveland as well as the handful of successful TOD projects along what rail we do have.  That is not a distant possibility.  It seems more likely at this point than not unless something changes very dramatically.  And I don't know that the Cleveland area survives without its urban core.  We need to preserve at least the core of RTA, and particularly the rail network, no matter how lean times may be (or how much worse they may become).  For all its problems, transit is a huge part of what is keeping millenials in or near downtown Cleveland as well as the handful of other neighborhoods that remain relatively safe.  Otherwise, Cleveland proper has no future, and as Cleveland goes, likely so does the entire region.  I'm not disagreeing with you.  We have a huge challenge ahead.  But the stakes are much too high IMO for us to give up, or even to wait for Mr. Calabrese to retire. 

Outstanding post, jtadams.

Like Nashville, there's a Koch-funded group emerging in Cleveland to block any attempt at boosting local funding for RTA which continues to lose funding to sprawl, state funding cuts....

 

Unbelievable.  Anti-transit group in Nashville warns of more mass shootings in Waffle Houses if transit tax passes:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/04/23/anti-transit-group-slammed-warning-more-crime-after-waffle-house-shooting-nashville-tn/541774002/

 

 

In a Facebook post hours after the shooting, the volunteer advocacy group Better Transit for Nashville wrote, "4 killed in shooting in Antioch at a restaurant at about 3 am this morning. we are sorry to post this, but 'transit' will bring more crime like this. #voteagainst."

 

The post was later deleted.

 

 

I didn't realize that boarding time accounted for that much! I don't ride the health line much at all. An increase of 10-20 minutes is unacceptable.

 

One of the big factors in transit desirability is predictability. And the the less frquent the service the more this plays a larger role in transit riders satisfaction.  Boarding times definitely palys a part in this but to me the times alloted for boarding is a lot more consistent then being tied up in traffic. 1 minute stopped in traffic here, two minutes there. Before you know it your bus is not where it is supposed to be by 10 or 15 minutes. No one complains more at the bus stop than when the bus is late. This is a common occurance on the 22 depending on the traffic that day. When you start having the bus off schedule a few times a week consistently, people start finding more dependable modes of transportation. The only way I know how to fix that is dedicated lanes.

 

You fix it with contactless fare collection, aka smart cards. Buy the fare cards off-vehicle or, if the vehicle is large enough (such as a light-rail vehicle) you can have a fare machine on board. But RTA has refused to adopt this technology, citing its high cost, even though it would likely save RTA millions of dollars per year in operating costs. But transit agencies don't think in terms of return on investment. If they don't see a grant available to do something, they often don't do it.

 

They could just return the vehicle to POP and have civilians randomly check fares.  Every time I reach out to RTA to offer suggestions they act like I'm speaking Japanese.  I think they are content to devolve the HL into just an OK bus because they don't care.

 

"Random" checks never really are and certainly aren't perceived as such, and it has shades of "papers, please".  It also can make the experience even more unpleasant for that "borderline" rider that they are ideally trying to get and keep.

^ This is why fare checks should be performed by civilian RTA employees and not law enforcement. Non-payment should be a fine similar to parking ticket.  There should be no criminal charge for not paying.

Unbelievable.  Anti-transit group in Nashville warns of more mass shootings in Waffle Houses if transit tax passes:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/04/23/anti-transit-group-slammed-warning-more-crime-after-waffle-house-shooting-nashville-tn/541774002/

 

 

In a Facebook post hours after the shooting, the volunteer advocacy group Better Transit for Nashville wrote, "4 killed in shooting in Antioch at a restaurant at about 3 am this morning. we are sorry to post this, but 'transit' will bring more crime like this. #voteagainst."

 

The post was later deleted.

 

 

 

Like Nashville, there's a Koch-funded group emerging in Cleveland to block any attempt at boosting local funding for RTA which continues to lose funding to sprawl, state funding cuts....

 

Jason Sonenshein may be behind this. He's the guy who was an organizer for the campaign that killed Cleveland's red light cameras and is a local libertarian. The location of their phone bank was the local field office for Americans for Prosperity, the group funded by the Koch brothers. Here's there Facebook page:

https://m.facebook.com/events/230614064349640

Unbelievable.  Anti-transit group in Nashville warns of more mass shootings in Waffle Houses if transit tax passes:

https://www.tennessean.com/story/news/2018/04/23/anti-transit-group-slammed-warning-more-crime-after-waffle-house-shooting-nashville-tn/541774002/

 

 

In a Facebook post hours after the shooting, the volunteer advocacy group Better Transit for Nashville wrote, "4 killed in shooting in Antioch at a restaurant at about 3 am this morning. we are sorry to post this, but 'transit' will bring more crime like this. #voteagainst."

 

The post was later deleted.

 

 

 

Like Nashville, there's a Koch-funded group emerging in Cleveland to block any attempt at boosting local funding for RTA which continues to lose funding to sprawl, state funding cuts....

 

Jason Sonenshein may be behind this. He's the guy who was an organizer for the campaign that killed Cleveland's red light cameras and is a local libertarian. The location of their phone bank was the local field office for Americans for Prosperity, the group funded by the Koch brothers. Here's there Facebook page:

https://m.facebook.com/events/230614064349640

 

I'm a pro-transit libertarian, however odd that may seem.  I believe transit in some form is essential to the proper functioning of any city, even those that were largely designed around cars (e.g., L.A., Atlanta, Houston, but *not* Cleveland).  But I also am aware that if you put government in charge of sand in the desert, pretty soon, you're going to have a shortage of sand.  :)  So I favor solutions that are at least in large part funded privately, and/or through capture of the positive externalities that transit creates (e.g., the existence of cities).  In our particular city, I acknowledge that bus and BRT services can be added when needed even after a period of neglect, but rail infrastructure has to be maintained or else it tends to go away forever.  That's why, as I'm seeing every traditional source of funding for transit dry up, I am starting to feel very protective of our little rail network, such as it is.  Any future I can envision will need it, and especially the one I prefer, the one in which better and more courageous leadership makes Cleveland an increasingly safe and attractive location for businesses and jobs and population to return.  That may sound far-fetched, but it's happened elsewhere, in places like Boston and New York and Philadelphia.  My commitment to freedom does not stand opposed to transit in cities like ours.  If anything, it acknowledges it as an absolute necessity.

In its pure form, the government can be as poor of an allocator of resources as can the private sector. For a capitalist snake has an ever greater profit motive to eat more of its tail.

 

But in a delicate balance, both have very important roles to play. That's true of transit as well, as the private sector alone cannot capture all of the benefits it creates in society and too many of our transit agencies and their predecessors operated in a Keynesian world in which the external economic environment has no role to play in the internal management of an organization. That's why the public benefit corporation model makes sense, especially for transportation providers like RTA, Amtrak, ODOT, Hopkins International Airport, etc. When a public benefit corporation/organization partners with the public sector in clearly defined roles, the result can be synergistic.

 

So what does transportation do? It increases the value of the area surrounding a transit route or facility. How do we capture that value? You can capture it with property taxes (ie: TOD), income taxes (2/3 of riders use transit to get to work), sales taxes (business activity occurs along transit routes), tax land not buildings (density tends to occur around transit), parking land use permits (less parking means more transit riders), etc.

 

Areas within 2,500 feet of a rail station have shown to benefit most from rail access; 1,750 feet is a good catchment area for BRT and 1,000 feet is the range within which most benefit from regular bus access. That could be the value capture districts established for additional revenues to benefit regional transit. Similar, the organizational model of Greater Cleveland's transit agency needs reform. It needs to be multi-county, the board needs more transit rider representatives, the planning for its routes needs to occur in municipalities and at NOACA, and the provision of transit services and maintenance (not just facility construction and vehicle manufacturing) needs to be competitively bid. The regional transit agency needs to be a financing mechanism which should also include assisting the development of land use around transit routes and facilities in partnership with CDCs, municipalities and NOACA. And yes, I'd keep the 1-cent county-wide tax while giving this new entity authority to expand into surrounding counties should their voters embrace it too. There should also be the means for citizens of a municipality to initiate a petition against an expansion of a route (and thus the value capture district). But it should be on the basis of a city-wide vote, not a precinct-by-precinct vote because the common good of a route needs to be debated in its broader purpose, rather than reacted to by those whose backyard the route would run.

 

That's my basic concept of how to shake the dust off a 43-year-old obsolete organizational model for delivering public transit in Greater Cleveland and to build for the next half-century.

What do you do with a problematic station escalator? Junk it....

 

Sat 4/28-Sun 4/29, Red Line trains will NOT STOP at West Blvd. station in order to remove the escalator at the station. To reach West Blvd by Red Line, ride to W. 117 and take special 66R back to West Blvd.

http://www.riderta.com/service-alerts/west-blvd-escalator-removal

Credit where it’s due. Although I was surprised to read that 6,800 is considered a good service interval for a bus. Thought it would be at least 10k.

 

http://www.fleetowner.com/fleet-management/government-fleet-year-greater-cleveland-regional-transit-authority

 

Credit where it’s due. Although I was surprised to read that 6,800 is considered a good service interval for a bus. Thought it would be at least 10k.

 

http://www.fleetowner.com/fleet-management/government-fleet-year-greater-cleveland-regional-transit-authority

 

The article actually says that they improved the "service interruptions" interval from 2,800 miles to 6,800 miles by implementing a predictive maintenances program.  That's different from saying that that is the goal for a "good" service interval.  Good that they're reducing service interruptions -- may it continue to go up! 

 

I encourage your attendance at this May 10 event at the City Club

 

State of Downtown -- Enhancing Mobility

https://www.cityclub.org/forums/2018/05/10/2018-state-of-downtown-enhancing-mobility

Let's still do this, Cleveland. And keep open the offer to incentivize urban core job growth to all comers, not just Amazon....

 

“NOACA's documents also say the city promised to "accelerate" plans to triple RTA's capacity, including increasing commuter rail lines from 37 miles to 111 miles by 2029.”

 

Here's Cleveland Amazon HQ2 location leaders didn't want you to see: Mark Naymik

http://www.cleveland.com/naymik/index.ssf/2018/05/heres_cleveland_amazon_hq2_loc.html

Let's still do this, Cleveland. And keep open the offer to incentivize urban core job growth to all comers, not just Amazon....

 

“NOACA's documents also say the city promised to "accelerate" plans to triple RTA's capacity, including increasing commuter rail lines from 37 miles to 111 miles by 2029.”

 

Here's Cleveland Amazon HQ2 location leaders didn't want you to see: Mark Naymik

http://www.cleveland.com/naymik/index.ssf/2018/05/heres_cleveland_amazon_hq2_loc.html

 

Is there any actual substance or reality to their claim?  How could they possibly accomplish this with the current state of our transit funding etc. ?

It probably would  have ended up with RTA having a bunch of bus lines sponsored, given semi-dedicated lanes, the promise of traffic signal priority, and deemed BRT, and thus part of the rapid transit routes/maps.  Using the word 'rail' would have been noted as an oversight on their part.

111 miles is such a specific number. Surely that came from somewhere, a pie-in-the-sky master plan? Anybody have a clue what that would encompass?

I forgot about traffic signal priority. Still waiting on that fantasy.