|
Grumpy
|
^^I, like many passengers, thought it was a bad move when they combined the 39x and 39bx and made all the routes go through Bratenahl. You're right that there are very few passengers that ever get on/off during that stretch.
I've been thinking about it a little and I don't think I'm terribly dissatisfied with the changes being made. Though the route gets packed outside of rush hour, most riders are only going a few miles, not all the way from Euclid to Downtown. The changes will inconvenience me, and my fellow riders, but if the choice is being inconvenienced vs. someone else losing the option of a ride, I'll suck it up.
Realistically, this probably means that outside of rush hour I'll be driving, but truth be told, I'd probably at least consider driving in an unusual circumstance where I have to get between downtown and home outside of rushhour anyway.
^^^I agree that there is very low ridership between E 260th and Shoregate, but there really isn't anywhere for the busses to turn around and park to await the next route. Plus if you don't have a bus going as far as shoregate, the transit dependent would lose the ability to transfer to Laketran. In addition, on the weekends the ridership on this stretch picks up with people headed to the stores at Shoregate.
|
|
|
|
cardsnxtyr
|
I ride the 39/39F as well and everytime I'm on it it is completely packed.
Last year I rode the bus home regularly from Cleveland state, leaving downtown at 715 or 745pm, and every bus had people standing on it. The latest I rode it home from downtown was 11pm and it was probably 80% full.
As far as Bratenahl is concerned, the only places i ever see people board and unboard is at Eddy Road and Bratenahl/E. 105th, and they usually always start to make the walk south to the other side of the 90. I wouldnt have a problem if the route bypassed all of Bratenahl and instead took the highway and got on/off at the Lakeshore Blvd ramp.
It would seem from these cuts that RTA is trying to maximize their transit hubs. Unfortunately, with so many one seat rides potentially becoming two seat rides, people who can drive will probably start, thus this strategy is smart and incredibly stupid all at the same time.
You can count me in the single person in a car, using precious resources and paying a h#ll of a lot more money to drive rather than taking a 2 or 3 seat trip that will double the normal bus ride.
|
|
|
|
KJP
|
OK, I'm not yelling here. I'm just using really large, red letters to make this flier easier for you to find in the future...... SAVE PUBLIC TRANSIT!Download the flier from: http://members.cox.net/corridorscampaign/Save%20public%20transit%20flier.pdfI need your help! Please print out this flier in large quantities and post them legally in visible places. Or just hand them out to people on your bus or train each day. If the driver asks you to stop, please comply. Thanks!
|
|
|
|
lakewood216
|
- Consider bringing back express fares. It's almost universally agreed that higher fares disrupt people's lives less than the kinds of draconian reductions in service that we're talking about here, and I for one would gladly pay more for 39, 39F, or 239 service if that were the only alternative to losing it.
If raising express fares can help preserve service (local and express), then I'm all for it. I would be willing to pay extra to ride my "home" line, the 55, downtown if necessary.[/list]
|
|
|
|
clvlndr
|
I think it's seriously time this state amend the law banning gas tax revenues from being spent for non-road improvement, notably mass transit... Time to shoot that old conservative sacred cow. I'm sure ODOT would fight this tooth 'n nail; I say: bring it on!... Drivers have got to get out of the outdated mentality that transit has no affect on them: dummy, the more people ride the buses or rails, the freer the roads are! Only a few farmer Bob's out in the sticks would be unaffected. I'm sure over a huge majority of Ohioans live in metro areas -- areas where some form of transit exists; and most of those in one of the 3-Cs, where only Cleveland has true mass transit (but really needs to expand it), while the other C's are furiously trying develop mass transit. Yeah, I know capital costs have a fed match, and we're talking operating expenses, but somehow, someway, this auto-happy state has to get into the wallets of those car-wedded people, many of whom are single-passenger commuters with SUVs or the equivalent guzzlers...
This state is struggling, esp the old industrial centers in the north. Those who fit the last profile I painted, are well off enough and can afford to bear more of a burden. Change the law and allow some of that money to fund our important transit operations.
|
|
|
|
