I can't necessarily speak to the appropriateness of the station enclosure design, which is more debatable and open to opinion.

 

Do you remember when these shelters went through design review? I need to go pull some meeting minutes so I know who to appropriately hate.

 

 

I can't necessarily speak to the appropriateness of the station enclosure design, which is more debatable and open to opinion.

 

Do you remember when these shelters went through design review? I need to go pull some meeting minutes so I know who to appropriately hate.

 

 

 

I don't, as I've only been a Cleveland resident for just about three years, and I suspect that occurred before then. I can certainly check with the project officer and let you know.

 

Easy on the hating, though... "design" is often synonymous with "opinion" (I say this as a design review representative for my local CDC).

Easy on the hating, though... "design" is often synonymous with "opinion" (I say this as a design review representative for my local CDC).

 

Design being synonymous with opinion (and I would assume that means subjective aesthetic considerations) is part of the problem with urban and architectural design.  We spend too much time arguing about the aesthetic, and forget about the practical needs of the user.  A shelter design that doesn't provide shelter from the elements it is most certainly going to face is a design failure.

Design aesthetics, yes. Design functionality? Uhh... if a shelter doesn't provide adequate shelter... ;-)

 

Regardless - got to/from an appointment at the Clinic's East 93rd station to East 6th in 15 minutes (give or take). Gotta love that!

Okay, I rode the healthline for the first time last night to go from Public Square to Sergio's in University Circle...

 

The Shelter on the South side of the square was nice but open on each side which gave no relief to the wind.  It was pretty cold last night, which made me wonder why the heat lamps were not installed in the shelters with the winter climate we have here.  We figured we would buy two tickets from the machine in the shelter.  One machine had signage saying "please pay on-board", the other machine did not, so we figured the one machine was broken and bought from the other. 

 

Like many of you on this site, I have been to Chicago and NYC many times.  The RTA machines are not nearly as easy to use.  The Metrocard machines in NYC are touch screen and are easy to understand what you are buying without having to go into many different steps.  We had to go through many steps, scroll out of buying disabled/senior tickets, try to figure out the many different buttons on the ride side of the screen before we finally made the purchase.  We purchased (2) tickets which cost $8.  We boarded the bus, went to dip the tickets and the driver said it was okay and not to worry.

 

The ride to UC was nice and quick, the bus was smooth and comfortable...basically a nice ride.  The signage for the stops in the bus were nice as well was the automated voice for stops. 

 

Dinner was nice!  Afterwards we made it to the stop just in time to catch the bus (thank God because we were cold!).  As we boarded the bus, I dipped my ticket and the driver said the ticket was no good!  She said it was a one way ticket and we had already used it.  We explained that we bought the tickets and never even dipped them on the first ride.  We explained we THOUGHT we bought round trip tix and we paid $8 for the two tickets.  She had NO CLUE as to what we could have purchased because all day passes are $4.50 each, not $4, and that the tickets said $2 on them.  She then asked if we bought the tickets at the machine, to which we replied yes.  She told us that the machine are not reliable and don't work correctly most of the time and it is best to always buy tickets on-board!!!  She believed our story and let us ride back to the square.  But what if she didn't!?!  That would have meant we got ripped off for a $4 ticket that apparently doesn't even exist!  It is sad to me that these machines are so confusing compared to others I have used and we are basically still forced to buy tickets ON the bus!

 

I would like to thank operator 00571 (Judy) on bus 2909, Sat night at approx 2130 hrs, for being so helpful and pleasent...I hope those at RTA can let her know that helpful actions like that make the difference in keeping repeat riders.

Be careful what you wish for regarding touch-screens.

 

Sincerely,

 

Cuyahoga County Board of Elections

From cleveland.com - some of her remarks are off-base (the buses have A/C, the stations aren't hard to figure out, etc.) but I included the first reader comment because quite frankly it's absolutely 100% spot-on:

 

A reader sounds off on negative aspects of the new RTA Euclid Corridor bus line

Posted by slitt January 02, 2009 13:14PM

 

Steven Litt/The Plain Dealer

 

Not everyone is happy about the new bus stations designed by Robert P. Madison International of Cleveland for the new Euclid Avenue Health Line.

 

As readers of this blog know very well, not everyone agrees with yours truly when it comes to opinions about architecture and urban design in Cleveland. That's just fine with me. A major purpose of the blog - and our coverage in general - is to engender debate.

 

More at cleveland.com

http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2009/01/a_reader_sounds_off_on_negativ.html

 

^That reader raises some legit points about bus configuration and TWE, but: "I did not know which shelter went eastbound and which went westbound. There were no signs. So I watched as the bus passed me by, and I had to walk two blocks to the next stop."  OK, I'm not a huge fan of RTA's signage either, but seriously?  You couldn't figure this out by which traffic lane the shelter faced?  I don't think it would occur to me to even look for "eastbound" or "westbound" signs.  And all the business about the fare vending machines- yes, it's annoying, but it's not a design flaw, it will get fixed.  Eventually.  I hope.

 

^That reader raises some legit points about bus configuration and TWE, but: "I did not know which shelter went eastbound and which went westbound. There were no signs. So I watched as the bus passed me by, and I had to walk two blocks to the next stop."  OK, I'm not a huge fan of RTA's signage either, but seriously?  You couldn't figure this out by which traffic lane the shelter faced?  I don't think it would occur to me to even look for "eastbound" or "westbound" signs.  And all the business about the fare vending machines- yes, it's annoying, but it's not a design flaw, it will get fixed.  Eventually.  I hope.

 

 

Agreed. The statement about there not being signs is plainly, simply, and utterly incorrect. EVERY median station is clearly marked. Curbside stations, I would hope, don't need that marking (?!?), but I do believe they are just as clearly identified. You are also correct that the issues with the fare vending machines are completely out of place in a design discussion - the two have NOTHING to do with each other.

 

Unfortunately, I doubt that any answer will ever satisfy 100% of the critics. If we went with wood benches, people would eventually complain about rot and splinters, and if we went with plastic, they'd likely complain about cracks due to temperature changes/UV fatigue and scratches/scuffs/carved-in graffiti that would undoubtedly result.

 

I'd also like to know what 80-seat conventional buses Ms. Coppola has been riding (she did say that a HealthLine RTV has "less than half the seats of a traditional bus", so unless traditional = London double-decker, there's some creative math going on here).

Ms. Coppola was off with a number of specifics (especially re the signage), but her overall sentiments are pretty widely held.  Multiple design choices on the shelters seem like they were made without regard for the climate.  Having used both new and old RTA shelters recently, I noticed no real difference in how much wind they block.  So I can't say the new ones are colder... but they're absolutely positively not warmer, and that seems like it would be a leading consideration when replacing a series of structures in a northern town.

 

Regardless of the benches' material, there aren't enough of them, and it isn't clear why that is.  There appears to be room in the shelters for more seating.  The benches in the old shelters are far more accomodating, so these could have been as well.  What advantage is gained with the new ones?  If there isn't any, the new ones represent backwards motion. 

 

The interior layout of the buses is questioned by just about everyone as soon as they first see it.  The seats aren't big enough-- are these vehicles narrower than regular buses?  If so then why, if not then why is every aspect of the interior narrower? 

 

These complaints seem pretty consistent, months after the service opened.  I realize we can't just change out equipment at this point.  But if nothing else can be done, the people within RTA who approved these designs need to look at their methods.  It may be that the scoring system they use to evaluate designs is flawed and due for an update.  Someone has got to say "Gee Bob, this new system seems dramatically less user friendly on a number of axes all at once.  Is there anything we can do about that?"     

Out of curiousity, is there an estimated timeframe for when the fare machines will be up and running? I only rode the Healthline once (its a few blocks out of my way) but I'm anxious to ride again, and I'm waiting for the whole system to be up and running.

 

As for the shelters, I can't imagine how someone would be confused by them, but there's always one in each crowd. I can attest to them being freakin' cold though. Not moreso than standing outside of them, but the old shelters seemed to block the wind better. Maybe they didn't and its just psychological and the idea of 2 inch gaps around the edges of the shelter make it "feel" colder. I'm not a fan of the the metal benches, but I don't really mind them. I don't think there's enough seats, but again I don't really mind, I haven't sat down in a shelter in a long time anyway.

 

As for the busses themselves, obviously her math is off on the number of seats, but I agree that there aren't as many seats as I expected. I thought the seats were sufficient in width, and I'm a pretty big guy. I wouldn't want to sit between a few other fat folks, but I would think that designing a bus around larger people would be a poor use of space.

I would be interested to know what riders of the line think in aggregate about these kinds of practical, everyday things.  Litt is an architecture writer; his article focused on the aesthetics of the project, which I think most agree are not too shabby.  It's upsetting to learn that basic things like the efficacy of the shelters to actually shelter, the number of seats in at the stations, and more, may not grade well now that the project is finished.  Are the vehicles frequently SRO, as the writer says?  This when long stretches of Euclid remain vacant and/or underdeveloped?  Are there plans to increase capacity when the much vaunted redevelopment that this project claims it will catalyze actually take place?

"Are the vehicles frequently SRO, as the writer says?"

 

In my experiences, only when the busses bunch up (due to timing issues). They're never empty, but most of the times I've used it, I've never had a problem getting a seat.

I would be interested to know what riders of the line think in aggregate about these kinds of practical, everyday things.  Litt is an architecture writer; his article focused on the aesthetics of the project, which I think most agree are not too shabby.  It's upsetting to learn that basic things like the efficacy of the shelters to actually shelter, the number of seats in at the stations, and more, may not grade well now that the project is finished.  Are the vehicles frequently SRO, as the writer says?  This when long stretches of Euclid remain vacant and/or underdeveloped?  Are there plans to increase capacity when the much vaunted redevelopment that this project claims it will catalyze actually take place?

 

Have you been on the line yourself?

:-) No, that's why I said I would be interested in know what riders of the line think.  "In aggregate", meaning, not just anecdotal stuff from people here, or the complaints of one Jeanne Coppola, who seems to have some valid concerns on one hand, and on the other seems to be exaggerating her beefs on the other.  A HealthLine rider survey is what I'm thinking of.  I suppose that costs money they don't have and they don't want to do anything until they finally get their fare system working correctly.    For the foreseeable future I'm not going to be a regular rider of the thing, but even taking a trip just for kicks and to see what I personally think is not going to be the same as experiencing the pros and cons of the service from a the perspective of the daily user.

CLEVELAND – Officials of the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA) today released this statement.

 

“A number of individuals and members of the media have asked RTA about the results of concrete tests taken in mid-November along the Euclid Corridor Project.”

 

“Our thorough investigation is on-going.”

 

“All relevant information will be released upon the conclusion of this comprehensive investigation.”

 

It varies, but sometimes it really is crowded.  The 6 got crowded too.  Euclid Ave has a disproportionate share of social service agencies whose clients use RTA extensively.  I use the health line about twice per week average and it's rarely SRO.  But sometimes it can feel like SRO when it's not because of the interior design.  The layout is bewildering, and seats next to people of above-average width are effectively neutralized.  So people glance back and just decide to stand, which clogs the skinny aisle, which causes even more people to stand.

This is probably pretty obvious to everyone who has ridden the HealthLine, but one reason the interior layout is a little wacky and has fewer seats than the vehicle length might otherwise suggest is that there are so many doors and doors on both sides of the vehicles.  These doors are, of course, necessary for such a long vehicle and in order to serve the different station configurations.

It also comes down to the perception of the busses being longer than the typical bus, so it seems skinnier.  Also, with this Coppola person being obviously way off on her assumption of the busses having half as many seats as a normal bus, how can it even be published.  Again, we know this is false, but every suburban jackass probably takes this woman's word for gospel.  Does the PD actually check facts before they publish this stuff?  Apparently not.

The skinniness of the interiors is caused by massive plateaus built around the wheelwells, not by any failure of perception.  It isn't the customers' fault.  Somehow, regular buses are able to have wider seats aligned in an sensible fashion.  Trains also have lots of doors yet their seats are sizeable and orderly as well.  The healthline buses make most sitting riders face each other (awkward) and puts many in small clusters at different altitudes.  I don't know what machinery is needed to operate those wheels, but it takes up a ridiculous amount of cabin space.  I don't understand why it's necessary in these but avoidable in traditional buses.  It really makes passenger seating seem like an afterthought.

It also comes down to the perception of the busses being longer than the typical bus, so it seems skinnier.  Also, with this Coppola person being obviously way off on her assumption of the busses having half as many seats as a normal bus, how can it even be published.  Again, we know this is false, but every suburban jackass probably takes this woman's word for gospel.  Does the PD actually check facts before they publish this stuff?  Apparently not.

 

This is Steven Litt we're talking about - "A major purpose of the blog - and our coverage in general - is to engender debate.". I don't know that I've *EVER* seen him reply to a comment posted on his blog (he barely responds to emails and makes little, if any, effort to engage sites like this), so I'm not expecting him to point out the portions of her comments that are inaccurate.

Do the buses use independent electric traction motors on each wheel similar to what diesel electric trains do?  That equipment would certainly take up a lot more room.

I thought the seats facing the inside of the bus as opposed to the front made for more standing room.  I've been on regular buses with a similar seating arrangement in other places than just Cleveland - most recently Disney World, where the old buses had your typical forward facing seating arrangement, while all their new ones had seats that faced inward with the exception of the very back of the bus where there were some forward facing seats.  There is much more standing room at the front of the bus, and everyone knows that you can generally fit more people standing than seated.  It's also easier to maneuver through standing people to exit the bus with a wider aisle.  People are just b*tching cause they don't want to stand.  Get over it, like commuters in all big cities do.

I don't think so docta, the way these buses are designed there doesn't seem to be an increase in standing room, it's pretty narrow.

I don't think so docta, the way these buses are designed there doesn't seem to be an increase in standing room, it's pretty narrow.

 

Well if that's the case, then there couldn't be 4 seats facing forward plus an aisle.

Mayday posted some good pix back on page 80 I believe, that show you the interior.

There aren't 4 facing forward, there are 2 together at most.  You get clusters or 3 and 4 together facing inward.  Some of these clusters sit more than a foot higher than others nearby.  This doesn't hurt anyone, it's just weird.  Standing room is definitely more scarce than on regular buses.  It's also frustrating because you look around and it seems like there should be more.

 

Bottom line is the interiors leave a lot to be desired.  They make poor use of space and they put riders in all sorts of awkward positions.  And people can call me fat all they want, I don't think the decision to go with narrower seats was advisable.  Ms. Coppola makes a very salient point about the summer and the shorts.

 

I guess I should point out that I still like this project a lot overall.  Suburbanites who hate it hate urban development and mass transit in general.  Certain missed calls do seem like they could have been avoided or could be fixed now with relative ease.

 

--Solidify the shelters, maybe install heaters.  The ones in the middle of the street really need help because of the additional wind-tunnel effect their design and placement invites. 

 

--Get landscaping into all the planters.  You don't spend that kind of money on a street, then line a premier section of it with gravel beds.  I don't understand the explanation that blames the property owners, when vacant lots got grass planters and playhouse square got gravel. 

 

--Turn off the 1980s robot voice.  It often announces the wrong location, and it sounds embarassingly cheap.  Why do the words sound cobbled together like a ransom note when it's reading off an entire essay about personal belongings?  There wasn't one employee who could have just read that into a tape recorder, with normal human inflection?

Mayday posted some good pix back on page 80 I believe, that show you the interior.

I didn't see MayDay's pix, but this post should do to remind people of the interiors. http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2840.msg337529.html#msg337529

I disagree with a majority of the posters regarding the bus lay-out and the crowds.  Here are my biggest complaints:

 

1) the non-shelters: art should never replace function

 

2) the bunching of the busses.  It seems to routinely happen

 

3) Depending on where you are sitting, I think the "stop" sensors are hard to reach

 

4) I still think it needs to be faster.  To my horror, I watched a trolley beat the BRT I was on from Public Square to E.22 the other day.  :-o

4) I still think it needs to be faster.  To my horror, I watched a trolley beat the BRT I was on from Public Square to E.22 the other day.  :-o

 

If that truly generates feelings of horror, you really need to get out more...

As a point of reference, I'm guessing this is what many people were expecting for the interior of the HealthLine vehicles:

 

http://xingcolumbus.files.wordpress.com/2008/07/por-lrt-stc-int-pax-2003br_d-clarke.jpg

 

(from http://xingcolumbus.wordpress.com/2008/08/02/euclid-avenue-vs-high-street-why-the-streetcar-would-work/)

I was making an issue regarding all them crooked streetlights last year - the tall ones on the walks, those on a median, and those cylinder lights in the Cleveland Clinic vicinity.

One of the most "disoriented" was in front of the Union Club, but it looks, imho, to be fairly straight now. Is it possible something was actually done about it?  Perhaps this one was straightened when others weren't?

I counted seats this morning and I believe the health line buses have 46.  How does that compare with a regular bus?

 

Speaking of "bus," something struck me when I read the xingcolumbus/wordpress article posted above.  It mentions how "they don't like to call them buses."  But they ARE buses.  Saying Euclid Corridor Transit Vehicle sounds like saying Manual Inertial Impact Generator when you mean hammer.  It makes people roll their eyes and mutter nasty things about government.  I realize these are better than typical buses in many ways, but that doesn't change their existential nature.

Speaking of "bus," something struck me when I read the xingcolumbus/wordpress article posted above. It mentions how "they don't like to call them buses." But they ARE buses. Saying Euclid Corridor Transit Vehicle sounds like saying Manual Inertial Impact Generator when you mean hammer. It makes people roll their eyes and mutter nasty things about government. I realize these are better than typical buses in many ways, but that doesn't change their existential nature.

 

They are totally buses.

 

I knew they wouldn't be as close to a Rapid as they were making them out to be, but after a few months of use, they are functioning much like a bus. I don't feel much difference between the 81 and the BRT. And neither do the other riders I've chitchatted with about it.

 

The time schedule is nice. The next bus arriving signs is nice when they work (although they're hung backward the way you'd be looking for that bus). But few of the problems of bus versus rail seem to be solved. The buses ROUTINELY bunch. (The other day coming out of work I saw SIX buses come within four minutes. SIX. Not an exaggeration but an actual count.) I had to wait 15 minutes for my bus. I was going to walk, but I wanted to see how long it would actually take. 

 

I do like the list of stops in a rail-esque sign. I do like the dinging they do, which gives them more of a rail feel. I do like how the bus drivers seem more rushed and not waiting for people, especially when buses are scheduled every five minutes.

 

But it fails in comparison to rail.

Saying Euclid Corridor Transit Vehicle sounds like saying Manual Inertial Impact Generator when you mean hammer.

 

Hehe :-D

I just got a message saying my recent inquiry had received a "response" but it did not.  Apparently the system considers a "response" any post following the post of the individual who leaves his or her E-mail address....

The new vehicles might be "totally buses" but the acronomy "BRTs" can always be used to imply these are not your standard bus.  Nobody needs to use the cumbersome four-word phrase mentioned above, obviously.  Can't imagine why someone would even suggest it when "BRT" is fully appropriate - and accurate.  The public must learn it, of course.

Once again, I was seeking a responses regarding the possibility of some of these blasted crooked streetlight poles' being straightened - in particular the one nearest the Union Club.

how about we compromise and call them "big buses"

today:

 

RTA responds to reader complaints about Euclid Avenue's new HealthLine

Posted by Steven Litt / Plain Dealer Architecture Critic January 07, 2009 16:35PM

Categories: Real Time News

 

Some readers have criticized the Regional Transit Authority's HealthLine bus rapid transit corridor. The agency is addressing the common concern that drivers aren't stopping close enough to station platforms. The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority is thrilled that buses on its new Euclid Avenue HealthLine are crowded during rush hours. It's trying to get drivers to stop closer to platforms to eliminate a potentially dangerous gap over which riders have to step. And it says it saved $15 million by leaving the corners open on its bus shelters.

 

continued at>>>>

http://blog.cleveland.com/architecture/2009/01/rta_responds_to_readers_compla.html

 

$15 mill--you gotta be kidding me. Give me about 10k and I will go over to home depot and have it fixed by the weekend...and still have money left over for dinner for 12 at Mortons.

What if RTA purchased thick, transparent plastic covers for the shelters which could be put in place in November and then removed in March/April?  It would be like putting a winter coat on all the HealthLine shelters!  It could be made out of the material they use for tent windows.  I know it's added cost plus the yearly installation and removal could be a pain and they could be vulnerable to being vandalized... but it's a solution.

That's insulting.

 

$15 million. Give me a break.

^I thought the engineer that gave the city the option to leave the corners open was doing his job and provided the city a huge cost savings.  I personally think it was probably a good decision to save the money upfront and down the line when they start replacing broken window panels.  If they close the corners the shelters are unbearable in the summer and if you leave them open they don't protect much in the winter... just another decision that needed to be made and after hearing that it saved the taxpayers $15 million I must agree with the decision.

Let's say they spent that $15 million more on the shelters.  If someone found out that RTA could have saved $15 million the story would be much much bigger with far more people freaking out about it.

That's insulting.

 

$15 million. Give me a break.

 

saving $15 million is "insulting"? speaking as a fellow taxpayer, I do not think that word means what you think it means...

"That design feature saved us $15 million," Schipper said. Installing windows that made a tight seal where the glass met the structural columns of the stations would have meant welding mullions to the columns. Each station would have required 1,000 linear feet of custom welds, Schipper said. If such windows were broken, they'd be far more expensive to replace than the current windows, which can be changed easily within an hour, Schipper said.

 

As for ventilation, Schipper said, "I know it's winter and everyone's worried about wind and chill, but in summer it keeps the shelters cooler. Otherwise, they'd be like little greenhouses."

 

If whoever designed these shelters couldn't figure out a cheaper way of attaching the windows than welding mullions to the columns, than he/she is incompetent and needs to be in a different line of work, or didn't spend 5 minutes thinking about this issue.

 

As far as the greenhouse effect in summer, was RTA really getting significant complaints about how hot the shelters are in the summer? And even if they were to be hot in the summer, wouldn't adding

benches on the outside

take care of the problem?

 

That's insulting.

 

$15 million. Give me a break.

 

saving $15 million is "insulting"? speaking as a fellow taxpayer, I do not think that word means what you think it means...

 

Saving $15 million isn't insulting, saying that it would cost $15 million to extend the windows 2 inches in each direction is insulting.

 

Now as far as the following statement goes,

"We like too crowded. We want it to be crowded. We want people to ride it. So for us, at RTA, if something's too crowded, it means it's working."

where do I go to sign up for the opportunity to hit Mike Schipper upside the head with a blunt object? A full bus is a good thing, an overfull bus means you didn't buy a big enough bus. Does this man not realize that most of us would want to ride a comfortable bus with enough seats for everyone if it was possible? We understand that standing room only happens, but we accept that because we know RTA can't afford to give us all a seat. Most people expect that the goal is to give us all a seat. If the goal is for a large portion of the riders to stand, than that should have been planned for with wider aisles. By definition, if something is "too crowded", it means something is wrong. At a minimum someone needs to tell him to be more careful with his phrasing, this makes it sound as if RTA is happy that I don't get to sit down.

 

Grumpy, welcome to the world of working mass transit as it is in other cities.

 

I haven't personally experienced the line, but reading that buses are full to me seems like a good thing.

I like having to stand.  To me, it means a city is doing well.

Yeah, I don't mind the buses being packed with people so long as it's not due to poor scheduling i.e. one packed bus followed closely by 2 empty ones that came either too late or too early.

As for ventilation, Schipper said, "I know it's winter and everyone's worried about wind and chill, but in summer it keeps the shelters cooler. Otherwise, they'd be like little greenhouses."

 

As everyone knows, the heat is a huge problem here in Miami.

Is any of this stuff really THAT big of a deal??