^^RTA tweeted at lunchtime yesterday that "courtesy" stops would begin yesterday at 6pm, but I have no idea what that means.

 

EDIT: Vince answered the question.  I think trains were stopping at both stations last night.

 

They were. Starting at 6:00pm they stopped at both LI-UC and E 120th.

This new station is one of only 3, I believe, that will have heavy traffic but no parking; Cedar-University and Shaker Square being the others -- Lee Rd/Van Aken to a lesser degree.  This makes Little Italy-UC one of RTA's few "traditional" type stations, a la New York, Boston, Philly and Chicago.  Just like in the olden days, commuters either walk or bus to the station.  2-ton Tin Lizzies not invited.

This new station is one of only 3, I believe, that will have heavy traffic but no parking; Cedar-University and Shaker Square being the others -- Lee Rd/Van Aken to a lesser degree.  This makes Little Italy-UC one of RTA's few "traditional" type stations, a la New York, Boston, Philly and Chicago.  Just like in the olden days, commuters either walk or bus to the station.  2-ton Tin Lizzies not invited.

 

West 25th?

West 65th has a few spaces added post-renovation. So did East 55th.

 

Many stations have no designated parking spots. Heavy traffic is relative. So just among the stations with no parking, we're looking at Airport (Red Line), West 25th-Lorain (Red), all five of the Waterfront Line stations, Tower City (all lines), East 34th (Red, Blue/Green), East 79th (Red, Blue/Green), East 105th/Quincy (Red), East 116th (Blue/Green) UC-Cedar (Red), UC-Mayfield (Red), Shaker Square (Blue/Green), Coventry (Green), Southington (Green), South Park (Green), Lee-Shaker (Green), Lee-Van Aken (Blue), Attleboro (Green), Eaton (Green), Courtland (Green), Warrensville (Blue), Belvior (Green).

 

I count 25 stations with no parking.

This new station is one of only 3, I believe, that will have heavy traffic but no parking; Cedar-University and Shaker Square being the others -- Lee Rd/Van Aken to a lesser degree.  This makes Little Italy-UC one of RTA's few "traditional" type stations, a la New York, Boston, Philly and Chicago.  Just like in the olden days, commuters either walk or bus to the station.  2-ton Tin Lizzies not invited.

 

West 25th?

 

You're right, I forget W. 25 for some reason... Traffic there has really picked up in recent years.  Even though there's no parking, it has that goofy kiss 'n ride drop off area that I've never seen anybody but RTA cop cars use... It is still a strong urban station though, despite it's poor design.

I think the new station looks great. All I will really miss about 120th is the view from the platform. I was glad to see that Mayfield Road is emphasized on the platform signage and think that that is what the station will generally be known as.

 

Agreed.  Even though the formal station name is geographically correct, ... "Mayfield" or "Mayfield Rd" is much easier on the lips... and ears.

 

Even though I'd expect to see heavy usage of the station for this weekend's Feast of the Assumption (RTA is already trumpeting the station's use for the Feast on its website), I'm more interested to see how much it will be utilized in daily traffic, esp around rush hour... Any early reports?

 

I got on at the new station a little after 5pm to head westbound towards downtown and there were 11 riders who boarded. I have no idea what the normal rush hour ridership was at the old station as I normally use Cedar.

A friend of mine was heading to dinner at Little Italy and texted me. At 5:30 p.m., only five got off an eastbound and three were waiting for a westbound.

 

Just after 7 p.m., he said a dozen got on a westbound and on got off that same westbound. Sounds like a dinnertime ridership.

^  ^^Honestly, those numbers aren't much different than what I've witnessed at E. 120.  I do know, having used E. 120 a couple times en route to Uptown recently (from Ohio City then back to Shaker via E. 55), a number of Case & CIA students were using E. 120 since it's very close to that huge dorm complex Case built a decade or so ago as well as a lot of student apartments in/around E. 115 - E. 118 .. But I'm sure Little Italy-UC will pick up.  New riding habits will have to develop.

Here's some great photos by this young man....

 

Michael Collier ‏@MikeACollier  Aug 11

Ribbon-cutting ceremony for @GCRTA's new Little Italy station. Definitely a sight to see! #CLE

 

 

 

 

 

 

^Nice pics... what a who's-who line up of Cleve pols and muck-D-mucks.

We took the Rapid to the Feast on Saturday, and the new station was jammed when we got off around 4:00 pm. The platform waiting for a westbound train was jammed, and there was a long line of people at the machine buying tickets.

 

 

Got a chance to visit/check out the new Little Italy-U. Circle station last weekend, and here are my takes:

Very well done, overall, given the challenges of this space and location.  It was very smart to utilize the old Van Sweringen vault.  The upper headhouse area is a lot more spacious in person than it appeared in the photos, and the building materials seemed well selected.  Also, contrary to my earlier statement viz TPH2’s photo, the stairwell is not as tight, narrow and foreboding as I thought (no knock at TPH2, it was just the low  angle of his photo, which I appreciated).  There was plenty of room, per ADA, for wheel chair access past the stairs to the elevator which, though a bit on the slow side, is nice, bright and wide, and has no urine smell (please RTA/folks, let’s keep it that way).  The stairs are very easy to navigate – definitely the Yin to W. 25ths terribly difficult stairway Yang.

 

The platform area was also wide enough and seemed exceptionally long compared to other platforms (maybe just an illusion), and unlike some other new stations I’ve noticed, like E. 55, there is a sufficient canopy over the tracks in case of precipitation.  (NOTE: E.55 was poorly done in this regard, because there’s a very long platform area and ramp to the Red Line platform, from the headhouse and the LRT (Blue/Green) lower platform, that is totally exposed to the elements – RTA may consider a redo-adding sufficient covering)

 

Overall I really like this station.  It’s modern, comfortable and, most importantly, open and very safe-feeling – in other words, the opposite of E.120 which it replaced.  It’s modern and state-of-the-art, but not gaudy, save those frilly wire-mesh things over the entrance that I could do without, but I’m not hating on these (and I’m sure they’ll be quite art-y once properly lit at night).  It struck me that this is the most urban and truly rapid-transit-like (ie NYC, Chicago, Philly, etc) of the Red Line stations as it is shoehorned into a tight dense walkable neighborhood (and will get even tighter/better once Intesa goes up next door)…  One major plus is that the area where the station sits has long been a heavy foot-traffic area anyway, probably even more so with the emergence of Uptown… For some reason, the RR underpass doesn’t seem as long, dark and foreboding as Euclid-E. 120 even though one passes under the same group of tracks.  Plus, with the greater number of peds in this area, as opposed to E. 120, it just feels safer as well… The temporary lighting helps and, hopefully, RTA will greatly improve this space in the coming year.

 

One question/potential flaw: I didn’t see any area or space where a fare collection-booth/turnstiles could be added if ever RTA decided to switch back to the old, non-POP method.  I guess a stand-alone system could be installed in the lower area, but it might be cramped and ugly (hopefully it won’t come to this unless ridership numbers jumped to the extent where it would be necessary – which would be a good thing).

 

The other flaw: there definitely needs to be station signage on the west side of the bridge.  There’s nothing at all indicating there’s a station and when there’s either a passing freight train, or one sitting there (as there was when we were there), the new station is not visible at all.  So for visitors not familiar with the area, it’s as if there’s no station there at all.

 

… all in all, though, job very well done.  This should be a major asset to the neighborhood as well as to RTA.

 

^Thanks for the report. I was very curious about the visibility from the Euclid side of the tracks, and am disappointed to hear there isn't any signage.  Maybe too tough to negotiate with the freight railroads to mount something on their bridges. In any case, even free-standing signage on the public ROW would be welcome, and hopefully it's part of the next phase of underpass improvements.

^^ I was originally worried about the narrowness of the stairwell from the photos as well, but I happened to board the rapid Saturday morning of the Feast with the entire Case Western football team (about 100 players/coaches) at Tower City. They also got off at Little Italy, and there was no back-up or bottleneck on the stairwell. I overheard some of the players discussing how the rapid is the quickest way downtown from Case.

For some reason, the RR underpass doesn’t seem as long, dark and foreboding as Euclid-E. 120 even though one passes under the same group of tracks.

 

Because the four parallel rail corridors with two track spaces each (two track spaces are no longer used) cross over Euclid Avenue at an angle, making Euclid's passage under those tracks perhaps twice as long.

 

The other flaw: there definitely needs to be station signage on the west side of the bridge.  There’s nothing at all indicating there’s a station and when there’s either a passing freight train, or one sitting there (as there was when we were there), the new station is not visible at all.  So for visitors not familiar with the area, it’s as if there’s no station there at all.

 

Good point. I seem to recall GCRTA having $1 million on hand to spruce up north-side sidewalk area and hopefully address drainage that is causing mud and stones to wash down onto Mayfield's sidewalk ledge below. Perhaps some signage (world-class or otherwise!) will be added as part of this pedestrian enhancement project?

^point well taken, the tracks do cut an angle (seemingly about 45-degrees) over Euclid which makes the underpass much longer and more foreboding.  It's far worse than Mayfield's, which seems easy comparatively.

Cross-posted in the East Side developments thread

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2015/pdf/SE2015-09-09Agenda.pdf

 

Southeast Region Design Review District

Agenda

5:00 pm, Wednesday, September 9, 2015

York –Rite Mason Temple, 13512 Kinsman Road

 

5:40 p.m. 5. SE 2015-021–Shaker & East 116 Rapid Station ©

Project Type: New Rapid Station

Project Address: Shaker Bld, and East 116th

Project Representative(s): Matt Stevenson, City Architecture

Approval Type: Schematic

 

I hate the design of this station, as well as it's neighbor down the rails at Woodhill.  I feel the design is discriminatory against the poor.  Why can't people in these low to moderate income neighborhoods have elevators like what is being designed at Lee Road and Van Aken ... in wealthy Shaker Heights?  Race may not be a factor since African Americans heavily use Lee Road's station, although there are more white people that live near Lee (with some using the station) as opposed to E. 116 or Woodhill.  Also RTA cried poor with regard to upgrading E. 34th and E. 79th on the Red, Blue & Green and Red Lines, respectively.  They did so mainly because of the expense of an elevator.  I can see the argument of stations with light patronage like 34th and 79th not meriting elevators, but you can't make that claim at E. 116 or Woodhill, which are very busy stations, esp. E. 116.  Calabrese's people seemed content with just letting the E. 34th and E.79th stations close as opposed to spending money to make them ADA compliant -- this even when the nearby Opportunity Corridor "boulevard" (which Calabrese heartily supported to run buses on) professed to help facilitate TOD and improve rail transit opportunities for residents (ha!).  Thankfully a community outcry changed his/RTA's minds..

 

And Lee Road is not getting 1 but 2 elevators for both it's east and westbound platforms.  I like Lee Road's design, but it's not fair.  Why should disabled people in the inner city zig-zag up and down long ramps like they're in some bizarre hamster slalom?  And E. 116 on the westbound platform, though saving patrons a long ramp, instead forces disabled riders to enter/exit the station away from E. 116 toward mid-block on Shaker where, seemingly, the City will have to install a traffic light to make the pedestrian crossing safe.  The expense of this traffic light could have gone toward at least 1 E. 116 elevator; preferably 2, ... similar to Lee Road.

 

RTA could have easily put in elevators at Woodhill... they spent an added expense of "art" with that weird looking giant metal microphone which is bathed in blue light at night. I think patrons would rather have elevators rather than strange art and a station, though modern looking, is of absurd, ridiculous design.

 

Just my two cents..

Station usage doesn't warrant elevators, which are expensive to build and even more expensive to maintain over their life. RTA isn't going install an elevator at East 34th either. That will use the ramp that the Shaker trains used to rise up to take Broadway into downtown before 1930. It's possible RTA may not have an elevator at East 79th either, but the design for that is just getting underway so I don't know what they have in mind there.

 

As for Lee Road having two elevators, that was deemed just a tad less costly than tearing out the Lee Road overpass and putting in a new, longer bridge so that the tracks below could be spread apart (ala Little Italy) to insert a single platform with a single elevator tower in there. Except at Little Italy, the cost of moving a steel bridge deck (yet leaving all of the concrete abutments in place) and spreading the tracks apart is the reason why that station cost $17 million. The Lee Road station's budget is $5.4 million -- quadruple that to redesign the station's surrounding in order to incorporate a single elevator tower.

 

BTW, I've heard some people complain about how long the Lee Road project is taking. What many people who just drive by on Lee (or even on Van Aken) don't realize is that GCRTA had to completely replace the tracks and drainage in that low spot. GCRTA is replacing tracks that have wood crossties with tracks that have concrete crossties (especially in areas with drainage issues) because they don't rot and moreso, because they are heavier and hold the tracks in place at the proper distance from station platforms. The old "Mind The Gap" English mantra is actually a federal regulation in the USA to comply with ADA as trains are required to be within a very small range of distance from the platforms they serve, especially where wheelchair ramps exist.

 

Consider the extent of work (which also explains why the Blue Line has been shut down most weekends this summer). Photos are courtesy of GCRTA.....

 

Lee-VanAken-Construction-Spring2015-5 by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

Lee-VanAken-Construction-Spring2015-3 by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

 

Lee-VanAken-Construction-Spring2015-4 by Ken Prendergast, on Flickr

For some reason, Lee Road seems (in my mind, at least) to have progressed rather rapidly (sorry)... I'm sure it's been a major pain for users of that station to schlep over to that temporary crosswalk and down the wooden stairs in front of the Shaker Library, then cross the tracks (if heading westbound) to that tiny platform amidst construction dust.  I like the design although I wonder if the extensive stairwell canopies (which appear to be less destructible than the plastic domes of the old station which were constantly smashed by rock-throwing vandals) is a bit too confining while going down into the "hole."  Some have advocated filling in the Lee Road Station and bringing it to the surface like the Shaker Lee station.  I think it makes sense (and cents) to keep it grade separated because of the busy Van Aken-Lee Road intersection above, but then again, I don't use this station and may feel otherwise if I did... It might be nice of a Shaker or RTA cop made an appearance there once in a blue moon, which they don't.

I hate the design of this station, as well as it's neighbor down the rails at Woodhill.  I feel the design is discriminatory against the poor.  Why can't people in these low to moderate income neighborhoods have elevators like what is being designed at Lee Road and Van Aken ... in wealthy Shaker Heights?  Race may not be a factor since African Americans heavily use Lee Road's station, although there are more white people that live near Lee (with some using the station) as opposed to E. 116 or Woodhill.  Also RTA cried poor with regard to upgrading E. 34th and E. 79th on the Red, Blue & Green and Red Lines, respectively.  They did so mainly because of the expense of an elevator.  I can see the argument of stations with light patronage like 34th and 79th not meriting elevators, but you can't make that claim at E. 116 or Woodhill, which are very busy stations, esp. E. 116.  Calabrese's people seemed content with just letting the E. 34th and E.79th stations close as opposed to spending money to make them ADA compliant -- this even when the nearby Opportunity Corridor "boulevard" (which Calabrese heartily supported to run buses on) professed to help facilitate TOD and improve rail transit opportunities for residents (ha!).  Thankfully a community outcry changed his/RTA's minds..

 

And Lee Road is not getting 1 but 2 elevators for both it's east and westbound platforms.  I like Lee Road's design, but it's not fair.  Why should disabled people in the inner city zig-zag up and down long ramps like they're in some bizarre hamster slalom?  And E. 116 on the westbound platform, though saving patrons a long ramp, instead forces disabled riders to enter/exit the station away from E. 116 toward mid-block on Shaker where, seemingly, the City will have to install a traffic light to make the pedestrian crossing safe.  The expense of this traffic light could have gone toward at least 1 E. 116 elevator; preferably 2, ... similar to Lee Road.

 

RTA could have easily put in elevators at Woodhill... they spent an added expense of "art" with that weird looking giant metal microphone which is bathed in blue light at night. I think patrons would rather have elevators rather than strange art and a station, though modern looking, is of absurd, ridiculous design.

 

Just my two cents..

 

So you think RTA actually sat down and said "hey, let's discriminate against poor people by not having elevators! That's a great idea!"? And then you brought up race? Really bizarre.  I think the RTA conspiracy theories have gotten way out of hand. Thank you KJP for bringing some actual facts, context, and knowledge of the situations and design issues to light, thereby debunking these ridiculous, knee jerk "theories".

Thanks KJP....facts rather than speculation are always nice.

Station usage doesn't warrant elevators' date=' which are expensive to build and even more expensive to maintain over their life. RTA isn't going install an elevator at East 34th either. That will use the ramp that the Shaker trains used to rise up to take Broadway into downtown before 1930. It's possible RTA may not have an elevator at East 79th either, but the design for that is just getting underway so I don't know what they have in mind there.[/quote']

 

I thought all stations using federal money had to comply with ADA regulations which requires elevators. I guess not. What's the cut-off point for needing or not needing an elevator.

I hate the design of this station, as well as it's neighbor down the rails at Woodhill.  I feel the design is discriminatory against the poor.  Why can't people in these low to moderate income neighborhoods have elevators like what is being designed at Lee Road and Van Aken ... in wealthy Shaker Heights?  Race may not be a factor since African Americans heavily use Lee Road's station, although there are more white people that live near Lee (with some using the station) as opposed to E. 116 or Woodhill.  Also RTA cried poor with regard to upgrading E. 34th and E. 79th on the Red, Blue & Green and Red Lines, respectively.  They did so mainly because of the expense of an elevator.  I can see the argument of stations with light patronage like 34th and 79th not meriting elevators, but you can't make that claim at E. 116 or Woodhill, which are very busy stations, esp. E. 116.  Calabrese's people seemed content with just letting the E. 34th and E.79th stations close as opposed to spending money to make them ADA compliant -- this even when the nearby Opportunity Corridor "boulevard" (which Calabrese heartily supported to run buses on) professed to help facilitate TOD and improve rail transit opportunities for residents (ha!).  Thankfully a community outcry changed his/RTA's minds..

 

And Lee Road is not getting 1 but 2 elevators for both it's east and westbound platforms.  I like Lee Road's design, but it's not fair.  Why should disabled people in the inner city zig-zag up and down long ramps like they're in some bizarre hamster slalom?  And E. 116 on the westbound platform, though saving patrons a long ramp, instead forces disabled riders to enter/exit the station away from E. 116 toward mid-block on Shaker where, seemingly, the City will have to install a traffic light to make the pedestrian crossing safe.  The expense of this traffic light could have gone toward at least 1 E. 116 elevator; preferably 2, ... similar to Lee Road.

 

RTA could have easily put in elevators at Woodhill... they spent an added expense of "art" with that weird looking giant metal microphone which is bathed in blue light at night. I think patrons would rather have elevators rather than strange art and a station, though modern looking, is of absurd, ridiculous design.

 

Just my two cents..

 

So you think RTA actually sat down and said "hey, let's discriminate against poor people by not having elevators! That's a great idea!"? And then you brought up race? Really bizarre.  I think the RTA conspiracy theories have gotten way out of hand. Thank you KJP for bringing some actual facts, context, and knowledge of the situations and design issues to light, thereby debunking these ridiculous, knee jerk "theories".

 

No you're right discrimination never is planned... some things just kinda happen, right? ... like say: red lining, for example....

I thought all stations using federal money had to comply with ADA regulations which requires elevators. I guess not. What's the cut-off point for needing or not needing an elevator.

 

The 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a civil rights law that requires access by disabled patrons to be equal to that of able-bodied patrons. If that's by elevator, OK. If it's by ramp, that's OK too. And if GCRTA can't afford to maintain lots of elevators, then ramps may be more reliable and readily available than an elevator. Thus a station may be more accessible with a ramp than with an elevator.

^thanks KJP for the clarification. One further question: so ADA compliance is elevator OR ramps, to be decided by the transit agency for its particular situation?

Yes, with design input from the Federal Transit Administration.

I thought all stations using federal money had to comply with ADA regulations which requires elevators. I guess not. What's the cut-off point for needing or not needing an elevator.

 

The 1990 Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) is a civil rights law that requires access by disabled patrons to be equal to that of able-bodied patrons. If that's by elevator, OK. If it's by ramp, that's OK too. And if GCRTA can't afford to maintain lots of elevators, then ramps may be more reliable and readily available than an elevator. Thus a station may be more accessible with a ramp than with an elevator.

 

This is true... But putting any issue of discrimination aside I raised (economic, not racial, because poor white areas often get the short end of the stick, too, in terms of service/the lack thereof), it is curious as to why some station rebuilds get elevators and some don't... E. 105-Quincy, which currently is in a poor area (but that will likely change as the Clinic expands southwards to this area), already has one elevator and soon will get another when the platform is re-extended to a stairwell at E. 105th street.  I understand the Red Line generally gets heavier traffic than the Blue/Green lines and has stations mainly adjacent to  and below or above street intersections, but it seems odd to say RTA can afford elevators (2 in the cases of Lee-Van Aken and E. 105), but can't at E. 79, Woodhill and E. 116, with the latter two being busy and very busy stations, respectively.  There just seems to be no rhyme or reason for these determinations.  How are they made?

 

Forget elevator vs. no elevator. Think capital/operating cost vs. usage. The East 105th-Quincy station was rebuilt in 2005 for the grand sum of -- wait for it -- $1.3 million. That's one-third the cost of the Buckeye-Woodhill station ($3.5 million). This was the cheapest Red Line station rebuild of all. GCRTA cut costs here by building an abnormally short platform, totaling only about 80 feet vs. the normal length of 300 feet.

 

The station platform is being lengthened under the new East 105th bridge (where the old platform was) and a second elevator shaft planned for about $4 million -- up to $3.2 million (or 80%) of which is to be funded by ODOT. This is part of a station-area development masterplan called the New Economy Neighborhood that's been in the works since the Great Recession. http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/maps/pdf/FRDC_Master_Plan.pdf (big document!). East 105th/Quincy is seen as emerging as the third rail station for the UC area (even though it is in Fairfax). So East 105th-Quincy's current usage probably will be higher in the future.

Construction updates per RTA e-news - Oct. 1, 2015

 

Oct. 5-17: Buses replace Waterfront Line trains, rail upgrades continue

 

RTA continues to invest in rail improvements, and that means service must be interrupted at times. From Oct. 5-17, RTA's 67R buses will replace Waterfront Line trains. Crews will be improving two grade crossings in the Flats -- at Robert Lockwood Drive and St. Clair Avenue. Look for 67R bus stop signs. At Tower City, buses will stop in front of the Horseshoe Casino on Public Square.

 

Oct. 11-29: Brookpark Station construction causes Red Line bus bridge

 

From Oct. 11-29, buses will replace Red Line trains between the Puritas and Airport stations. This will allow RTA to continue construction on a new Brookpark Rapid Station. The Red Line will operate as far west as Puritas, where customers will board a 66R bus to reach the Brookpark and Airport stations. On Oct. 18, Browns fans who normally park at Brookpark should use parking lots at the Puritas, West Park or Triskett stations.

One design flaw in the otherwise well done Little Italy station is that there is no (open/close) door in the lower headhouse as there is in the upper station leading to the platforms.  This means that, although the inside waiting area is shielded from wind (which came in handy with yesterday's blustery gusts), it is not temperature controlled... Good luck on those near zero Cleveland winter days... Hopefully RTA can modify this... at some point.

Apparently the Lee-Van Aken station has had a partial "soft" opening... Driving to the Shaker Hts. Heinen's yesterday, I noticed commuters coming and going from the westbound platform of the new station while, apparently, the temporary eastbound platform is still in use.  It's a very impressive facility with lots of TOD possibilities, but there's still a lot of finishing work to be done, with fences and cranes still in place.  Any word from RTA about this?

Apparently the Lee-Van Aken station has had a partial "soft" opening... Driving to the Shaker Hts. Heinen's yesterday, I noticed commuters coming and going from the westbound platform of the new station while, apparently, the temporary eastbound platform is still in use.  It's a very impressive facility with lots of TOD possibilities, but there's still a lot of finishing work to be done, with fences and cranes still in place.  Any word from RTA about this?

 

Greater Cleve RTA ‏@GCRTA  Oct 2

Mon 10/5, westbound access via new stairs to the platform to be restored at Lee-Van Aken. Eastbound continues to use temporary stairs.

^OK... seems kinda weird they didn't just wait to open the whole station because, obviously, there's still a lot of work to be done... Commuters had a difficult navigaiton to access the new stairwell around all the fencing and construction (and live auto traffic).

Saint Luke's Foundation funds rapid station upgrades, community programs http://t.co/7EW5xthWXc @saintlukesfdn @NeighbProgress

 

Old River & W St Clair 'during' (about a week ago(

...and 'after.' Now open! no longer like drving on the moon

Robt Lockwood Jr Drive crossing closed now

 

 

 

 

 

All Aboard Ohio ‏@AllAboardOhio  9h9 hours ago

.GCRTA sreet crossing replacements on Waterfront portion of Blue/Green light-rail lines is moving north to Main Ave.

 

Plan to give RNC visitors better first impression

 

Tom Beres 6:48 p.m. EDT October 29, 2015

 

 

The effort will use graffiti-busting and repellent product from Sherwin Williams.

 

CLEVELAND -- About 40,000 people a month ride the RTA Rapid Transit Red Line between Cleveland Hopkins International Airport and downtown.

 

Many of them are visitors getting a first look and first impression of Cleveland by their ride along the route.

 

And there's plenty of trash, graffiti and dilapidated old buildings to see.

 

Carl Mixon was riding the Red Line, a first-time visitor from Georgia.

 

http://www.wkyc.com/story/news/local/cuyahoga-county/2015/10/29/plan-to-give-rnc-visitors-better-first-impression/74827206/

 

^ From the video: "This is something that should have happened decades ago."

 

Now let's spruce it up and keep it that way. I don't want to see those art installations rotting away in 5-10 years

Great work!

 

Greater Cleve RTA ‏@GCRTA  1m1 minute ago

Red Line service btwn @GoingPlacesCLE & Puritas to be restored EARLY. Regular rail to run w/ start of service Friday 11/6.

^Good news... Btw, as of Monday eve it didn't appear that the grade crossing at Flats East Bank had been upgraded.

2 questions:

 

1. When RTA recently closed the WFL for a week or so, why did they only rebuild 2 of the 3 grade crossings and not all 3?  The Main Ave/FEB crossing is still terrible.  You can wreck our tires there if you're not careful.

 

2. At the new Little Italy station, I thought they would maintain temporary lighting under the NS bridges until a new walkway is built in a year or so.  Yet, when I walked through there the other evening, the lights were gone and it was dark, dank, muddy ... generally horrible.  Why has the temp lighting been removed and when is the current horrible situation, at least, be fixed up?  At least throw some kind of lighting there -- or were officials only concerned with Feast of the Assumption foot traffic?  (Note: the great thing about the new RTA station's location is there is, due to the neighborhood density, lots of daytime foot traffic between LI and U. Circle; they deserve better)

Bump

Cross-posted in the general UC developments thread....

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2977.msg780155.html#msg780155

And although Norfolk Southern has shown a willingness to address those concerns, CSX appears to be dragging its feet. A spokesman told the editorial board that CSX would make a decision on "aesthetic" improvements and "proposed attachments" to one of the bridges by year's end, but that's not good enough. . . . Norfolk Southern has given its OK to the plan, but CSX has not, Calabrese said, nor has CSX agreed to let its Cedar Road bridge be painted.  CSX is reviewing the transit authority's plan for aesthetic improvements, including gutters and decorative elements, according to CSX spokesman Rob Doolittle, and a decision is expected by the end of the year.

 

I love ironic names.

The new E. 116th rapid station is on the CPC agenda this week

 

http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/designreview/drcagenda/2015/12042015/index.php

 

 

 

 

 

 

Here are Cleveland.com's photos from the Lee-Van Aken Station ribbon cutting yesterday

 

http://photos.cleveland.com/4501/gallery/rta_dedicates_lee-van_aken_sta/index.html#/0

^Nice to see.  RTA should be all smiles about the Lee-Van Aken station project.  It's a high-quality project that was extremely well done.  It will enhance passenger safety and comfort by light years (the crumbling concrete, shattered bubble station was bad enough, but I'm old enough to remember the old, unprotected spindly wooden stairs with those standard green Van shelters at the bottom).  The new station will also enhance the streetscape of this key intersection as well, melding nicely with the beautiful old Kingsbury mixed-use building along with Shaker City Hall and the set-back-from-the-curb-by-a-football-field Moreland School-turned Shaker Library.

^... and most importantly, the station will improve passenger accessibility.

First signs of work to replace 2 of 5 @GCRTA @ShopTowerCity station tracks. http://www.prweb.com/releases/2016/02/prweb13217188.htm