Think about that last statement "I'm sure there are dozens of Clinic and UH employees living downtown..."

Could you have said that before the HealthLine was constructed?

There are a lot of factors that have contributed to the surge in downtown living in the past 5 years, and the HealthLine is a significant part of that.  The numbers of people living downtown who work in UC will only grow, and the number of people who live in UC who work downtown will increase dramatically.

The investment in the HealthLine has paid back more than it cost to construct.  Remember also, that the majority of the money for the HealthLine went to a complete reconstruction of Euclid Avenue. 

I'd argue that there is plenty of land to develop housing in the few blocks north and south of Euclid. Especially when east of E.79th

Think about that last statement "I'm sure there are dozens of Clinic and UH employees living downtown..."

Could you have said that before the HealthLine was constructed?

 

Yes.  "Dozens" is a very small figure in this context, chosen for humor.

 

I would not attribute a significant amount of DT population growth to the HL, any more than I would have attributed to the 6 or any other bus route.  In both cases you're better off driving (or probably biking) time-wise.  The HL is used primarily by people who aren't in any particular hurry.  Speed is hardly the only disappointment for "choice riders."  Others include the inadequate stations, the crowded-by-design vehicle interiors, and the infamous fare machines.     

Well, as always, you are entitled to your opinions, and after a few years with you on this board, I know I have little chance of changing that opinion.

 

But let me try one more time. :)

 

Ari Maron of MRN is someone who has developed a lot of the new housing along Euclid Ave, and he credits the HealthLine for spurring the developments downtown and in UC.

 

Influenced by the HealthLine, MRN Limited Partnership has either under way or finished four projects (some of which involve multiple buildings) located on or near Euclid, with an estimated value of $300 million.

 

“What happens in University Circle is directly related to what happens in Midtown and in downtown,” Maron said. “When the HealthLine opened, people thought of Euclid Avenue as a connecting corridor for the first time.”http://nashvillecitypaper.com/content/city-news/mayor-pushes-brt-metro-look-cleveland-and-eugene-may-shed-light-system

Bah!  What does Ari Maron know about Downtown development?  He can't even maintain a continuous back and forth argument on UO after being proven wrong several times over!

Yes, but Maron said that only to the Nashville paper, so it didn't really happen. ;)

Given his investments, what are the chances Maron would say otherwise?  My opinions on this subject are based on the aggregated experiences of many regular riders, myself included.  I'm not likely to change them based on assertions in the Nashville City Paper.  Neither is anyone else who's personally familiar with the system.

 

What concerns me is that the system still receives a lot more praise than it does improvements.  Most of the "outside praise" we've seen is really just quoting self-interested local parties, which should be transparent at this point.  It's been repeated at intervals for years now.  Positive user reviews are few and far between, almost as if the system just opened and we're all abuzz with anticipation.  For years now.

OH my Jesus.  Give it a rest already!

OH my Jesus.  Give it a rest already!

 

x2

To paraphrase my 7th grade math teacher... I'm not Jesus, I'm 327. 

 

Now that you have the messenger's head on a stake before your castle walls, would anyone like to contend that the HL was properly targeted toward an upscale market, which was the suggestion from the posted article that I attempted to refute?

I like the Healtline but I actually agree with 327 that the adulation and press attention from other cities has been a bit over the top.  A big chunk of the positive spill-over is likely from the straight up urban beautification, not really the transportation aspect (not that I don't appreciate that too).  Is the signal prioritization (mentioned in the WSJ piece) even operational these days? I thought the city effectively nixed it a couple years ago after all the tinkering.

I'd say the "over the top' press has more to do with the $5 billion in development happening along the corridor. Proof that businesses invest near infrastructure, the Health-line being a significant piece of infrastructure.

I'd say the "over the top' press has more to do with the $5 billion in development happening along the corridor. Proof that businesses invest near infrastructure, the Health-line being a significant piece of infrastructure.

And that growth is organic and will continue.  It's not a one project check off, the HL is (will be) the catalyst for many projects, present and future.

If that growth shows no signs of being transit-oriented, then on what grounds is it attributable to the HL?  A lot of this stuff was either in the works or practically inevitable.  Hospital growth comes to mind.

I like the Healtline but I actually agree with 327 that the adulation and press attention from other cities has been a bit over the top.  A big chunk of the positive spill-over is likely from the straight up urban beautification, not really the transportation aspect (not that I don't appreciate that too).  Is the signal prioritization (mentioned in the WSJ piece) even operational these days? I thought the city effectively nixed it a couple years ago after all the tinkering.

 

Virtually all media attention to transit, either positive or negative, ends up being over the top because the media years ago forget how to inform and tries to entertain instead.

 

I'm told the signal prioritzation is operational except that the East 9th intersection is turned off because of the traffic backing up from the Inner Belt construction.

I'd say the "over the top' press has more to do with the $5 billion in development happening along the corridor. Proof that businesses invest near infrastructure, the Health-line being a significant piece of infrastructure.

 

Let's be honest though.  Much of the billions of dollars in construction projects along the corridor was committed long before the project had any funding.  Projects like the $500 million Clinic heart center and the $350 million art museum expansion are routinely counted as part of the "development" spurred by the corridor.  Those projects were already in the pipeline when the corridor was still a pipe dream.  Not to diminish the impact of the project, but it's had nowhere near the impact cited in these articles.

Let's be honest though.  Much of the billions of dollars in construction projects along the corridor was committed long before the project had any funding.  Projects like the $500 million Clinic heart center and the $350 million art museum expansion are routinely counted as part of the "development" spurred by the corridor.  Those projects were already in the pipeline when the corridor was still a pipe dream.  Not to diminish the impact of the project, but it's had nowhere near the impact cited in these articles.

 

No question. But how would it be designed? Like the Cole Eye Institute was -- its pedestrian interface placed away from Euclid? Or like the Heart center was -- its interface placed facing toward Euclid?

^^Not to put words in his mouth, but I think that's exactly what Mov2Ohio was saying-- that the causal claims were "over the top".

 

I'm told the signal prioritzation is operational except that the East 9th intersection is turned off because of the traffic backing up from the Inner Belt construction.

 

Ah, good to hear, thanks.

Let's be honest though.  Much of the billions of dollars in construction projects along the corridor was committed long before the project had any funding.  Projects like the $500 million Clinic heart center and the $350 million art museum expansion are routinely counted as part of the "development" spurred by the corridor.  Those projects were already in the pipeline when the corridor was still a pipe dream.  Not to diminish the impact of the project, but it's had nowhere near the impact cited in these articles.

 

I don't know, what about the Aldi grocery store or suburban church built next door to it down in the East 80s.  I'm not sure the corridor had much impact on the design of the projects conceived before the project was funded.  Indeed, the Clinic's heart center and UH's Seideman Cancer building barely interface with the street at all, and are hardly pedestrian friendly. Indeed, Seideman doesn't even have a Euclid entrance.

 

No question. But how would it be designed? Like the Cole Eye Institute was -- its pedestrian interface placed away from Euclid? Or like the Heart center was -- its interface placed facing toward Euclid?

I've always wanted the Healthline to climb up Cedar hill and either continue out Cedar to 271, or somehow get to Mayfield from Cedar Hill and travel out to 271.  There are tons of engineering and political hurdles I know, but that would hit a great population corridor of "choice riders" where no freeway option exists for them.  It could be Cedar / Mayfield's answer to the blue/green lines on Shaker and Van Aiken.

Costs aside, I can't imagine what the ride times would be like for that.  Riding the Healthline from Cedar and Richmond (near 271) to, say, your office in Midtown?  During rush hour?

 

The reason the Blue and Green lines work is because they are commuter lines on dedicated rail.  Once you get passed Shaker Sq. most of the passengers are already on board and you're just riding into Tower City (I said most, not all).  But even a light rail with it's own right of way going down Ceder, let alone a BRT line, would have a lot of stops between the end of the line and Downtown, and the BRT would be subject to some of the east side's worst traffic.

 

 

I've always wanted the Healthline to climb up Cedar hill and either continue out Cedar to 271, or somehow get to Mayfield from Cedar Hill and travel out to 271.  There are tons of engineering and political hurdles I know, but that would hit a great population corridor of "choice riders" where no freeway option exists for them.  It could be Cedar / Mayfield's answer to the blue/green lines on Shaker and Van Aiken.

 

They can't even get the Healthline to the bottom of Cedar Hill anymore but I would agree if it went all the way through the 7 and 32 routes you would have a lot more ridership

Costs aside, I can't imagine what the ride times would be like for that.  Riding the Healthline from Cedar and Richmond (near 271) to, say, your office in Midtown?  During rush hour?

 

It would only work with dedicated lanes and signal priority for the BRT to cut travel times.  Because rush hour traffic in this area is already terrible, with these  BRT improvements the Healthline might travel at a speed that would rival driving your car.  Even if it just went to Coventry...an ideally near the campuses of JCU or Notre Dame, you'd definitely get the college crowd. 

 

The beauty of BRT is it's flexibility...being able to more quickly alter routes to reach population and employment centers.  However I imagine drivers in these communities would make this idea nearly politically impossible, as their commutes would go from bad to worse...of course they could then take the Healthline instead!  :-D

I've always wanted the Healthline to climb up Cedar hill and either continue out Cedar to 271, or somehow get to Mayfield from Cedar Hill and travel out to 271.  There are tons of engineering and political hurdles I know, but that would hit a great population corridor of "choice riders" where no freeway option exists for them.  It could be Cedar / Mayfield's answer to the blue/green lines on Shaker and Van Aiken.

 

They can't even get the Healthline to the bottom of Cedar Hill anymore but I would agree if it went all the way through the 7 and 32 routes you would have a lot more ridership

 

You do realize the weekday #7 and #32 routes were extended to Euclid and E 89 to preserve the connection to the HealthLine, don't you? No, it's not a one-seat ride, but neither was the former situation of the HealthLine diverting down MLK. With the beginning of construction on the Cedar-University Rapid Station, HealthLine ridership from those feeders may see incremental growth from folks wishing to avoid the construction zone.

The HL in my opinion didn't work out as planned. I only take it when absolutely necessary (when the Red Line is down) or I have an important thing on Euclid.) I find it to be entirely to slow (40 minutes to get to Windermere from downtown as opposed to 17 minutes vs. the rapid) I feel as if the RTA or the city needs to work on a synchronization of the traffic lights to allow the bus to flow easier. When you have one green light then one red light right after throughout the entire route it's quite frustrating and leaves more to be desired.

As mentioned above, the synchronization is off for now because of traffic issues with the Innerbelt bridge project. The Healthline is still a bus, so the redline should be faster than it. Like you said you only use it when you have to do something on Euclid. That makes sense because the redline isn't near Euclid a majority of its route. I believe the Healthline is faster than what the 6 used to be.

 

I think that to get the most complete benefit from this route, more housing and business needs to be built in midtown and the synchronization needs to be on at all times. Also RTA and the city needs to work with shop owners to see if they can work with delivery/mail drivers and get them to not park in the car traffic lanes.

I think it took me about 30 minutes to get from Public Square to Uptown on the Healthline the other day. And speaking of the Red Line, I really wish it would have served the Cleveland Clinic and Cleveland State University. Its ridership could be so much higher if most of the route didn't suck. It misses a lot of major attractions and traffic generators.

I think it took me about 30 minutes to get from Public Square to Uptown on the Healthline the other day. And speaking of the Red Line, I really wish it would have served the Cleveland Clinic and Cleveland State University. Its ridership could be so much higher if most of the route didn't suck. It misses a lot of major attractions and traffic generators.

 

AGAIN.  At the time the Red Line (the first of many lines never built) this was where people and jobs were.

Take a look at Historicaerials.com and use the 1952 images. Then follow the Red Line's route from west to east. That's what was in place along the Red Line when CTS restarted construction of it (construction actually started before the Great Depression but was halted by the poor economy and WWII). You'll notice lots of new concrete streets (note the white pavement!) in West Park, the density of industries (no longer there -- note especially between East 79th and East 105th) along the rail lines followed by the Red Line, the density of neighborhoods along the east side portion, the number of bus lines that it intersected with (that was what put most of the ridership on the Red Line back then), and note how intact East Cleveland was back then.

 

Granted, putting the Red Line below Euclid Avenue from downtown to UC would have been much better. The density along Euclid in 1952 (especially from East 55th to East 105th) was truly what one would expect even beyond downtown in one of the nation's largest cities. There was no doubt what was the main street in Cleveland back when it was top-10 U.S. city. Maybe the HealthLine can help Euclid regain some active uses throughout its downtown-UC portion, or at least encourage those new/future uses to be designed more in a pedestrian-friendly manner. Maybe that's already started.

 

And if the many contaminated ex-industrial sites along the Red Line can be cleaned up, perhaps it too can be a magnet for redevelopment. Ironically, if an investor wants development-ready sites located near activity centers, low-cost labor and low-cost transportation, these transit routes will be the place for them to invest -- not at the urban fringe. Got to clean up the land first, however.

Nashville is now planning a major BRT line modeled after the Health Line:

 

http://www.eastwestconnector.org/

 

I don't have a good feeling about this project because it's going to be extremely expensive and I don't think the end result is going to change things much.  The main reason they're not going with in-street light rail on this corridor is because they'd have to raise taxes in order to do so, so they're basically doing what they can do without raising taxes, which is not a transformative project.

 

Nashville is in a very dire position moving ahead because its extremely dense rock does not permit basements, underground garages, or subway tunnels.  They do have one or two underground garages downtown, and they had to dynamite the whole thing.  When you drive down there, the walls of the parking garage are actually the bedrock.  If it were as big as New York, then there would be the incentive to laborously blast tunnels through solid rock, but the metro still isn't at 2 million.

 

So if they want to do grade separated rail, they are basically forced to do elevated lines, which aren't going to look good in a city with undulating terrain.  And West End Ave. is only 90 feet wide between property lines, so this BRT line is going to consume left turn lanes and on-street parking. 

 

 

 

Is there a reason why some of the Healthline stations (downtown) are shared Eastbound/Westbound, while others (Midtown) are either Westbound only or Eastbound only?

 

If no, seems like a waist of money.

Is there a reason why some of the Healthline stations (downtown) are shared Eastbound/Westbound, while others (Midtown) are either Westbound only or Eastbound only?

 

If no, seems like a waist of money.

Maybe it's spacing, maybe there isn't enough street space on Euclid for two Stations it's already cramped while when you get to UC the streets are wider so you have that luxury. That's just my guess.

Is there a reason why some of the Healthline stations (downtown) are shared Eastbound/Westbound, while others (Midtown) are either Westbound only or Eastbound only?

 

If no, seems like a waist of money.

 

I think in the initial proposals it details why.  Have you read those?  Why does it seem like a waste of money?  Are you saying one platform (per station) vs. the two is a waste?  If so, in downtown proper, space is most likely the major issue.

Is there a reason why some of the Healthline stations (downtown) are shared Eastbound/Westbound, while others (Midtown) are either Westbound only or Eastbound only?

 

If no, seems like a waist of money.

 

Yes.  Downtown, space constraints required shared middle platforms.  But outside of downtown, the goal was to have single direction stations located immediately after traffic lights to enable signal pre-emption.  Unfortunately, the signal pre-emption hasn't turned out to work very well.  And because of the two types of stations, the vehicles have to have doors on both sides, which reduces seating and probably increased production costs. 

Unfortunately, the signal pre-emption hasn't turned out to work very well. 

 

Because the city controls the traffic lights, maintains them and decides which ones should have their signal preemption hardware turn on or not. So the taxpayers paid for this hardware and the city doesn't want it activated at many intersections. If you think that's a waste, then tell your councilperson and congressperson.

Here's an article from Greater Greater Washington talking about rankings of BRT systems in the US. CLE comes out on top, but still only receives a mediocre ranking. It does make a good point about how corners are often cut on BRT systems, thus making the service inferior to rail despite promises from politicians to the contrary.

 

http://greatergreaterwashington.org/post/17389/the-us-has-only-5-true-brt-systems-and-none-are-gold/

FYI. This was my last article at Sun since Sun won't cover Cleveland anymore....

 

Cleveland Clinic police may get expanded authority at Fairview Hospital

Print Ken Prendergast, Sun News By Ken Prendergast, Sun News

on August 19, 2013 at 4:39 PM, updated August 19, 2013 at 4:48 PM

 

...As early as Sept. 16, council could expand those arrest powers to the sidewalks and streets within 300 feet of Fairview and Lutheran hospitals, both of which are on the West Side.

 

On the East Side, uniformed Clinic police officers would be allowed to make arrests on Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority's HealthLine buses and stations along Euclid Avenue, between Public Square and East Cleveland. The Clinic is seeking a separate agreement with that city.

 

GCRTA police already patrol the HealthLine bus route which operates 24 hours a day. However GCRTA's patrols are primarily to enforce the route's proof-of-payment fare system, said Cleveland Police Chief Michael McGrath.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.cleveland.com/fairview-park/index.ssf/2013/08/cleveland_clinic_police_may_ge.html

^hmmmm.... is this a good thing? I can't image CPD would like this---someone else with a gun and badge on their turf. Also, I thought RTA cops were on patrol like regular cops (and are there to police the public--not RTA employees). Seems wasteful to have a cop performing the role of fare checking.  Finally, your article ends: "The Cleveland Clinic Police Department is the third-largest police force in Northeast Ohio..."  what's the 2nd--is it RTAPD? CMHAPD? Thanks.

The only time I see RTA cops is at tower city and on Chester giving out parking tickets. They are hardly ever on the Healthline or Red Line or at any other station.

I just picked up a HealthLine timetable. I was very disappointed. Service is every 30 minutes on Saturday afternoons/evenings between 12:10pm and 2:40am? That's a horrible level of service. Who want to wait 30 minutes for a bus---the #6 was never this bad and the BRT was supposed to be an improvement. If this is to be a vibrant corridor, service can't be limited to weekdays. A 30-minute headway is extremely poor service at best for daytime and there is no difference to RTA between 2pm on a Saturday afternoon getting folks in downtown hotels to museums at UC than 3 in the morning any day of the week. 

The only time I see RTA cops is at tower city and on Chester giving out parking tickets. They are hardly ever on the Healthline or Red Line or at any other station.

 

hmmm interesting.  I see em all the time at W.65th redline station.  Just saw one early this AM on my way to work. 

I just picked up a HealthLine timetable. I was very disappointed. Service is every 30 minutes on Saturday afternoons/evenings between 12:10pm and 2:40am? That's a horrible level of service. Who want to wait 30 minutes for a bus---the #6 was never this bad and the BRT was supposed to be an improvement. If this is to be a vibrant corridor, service can't be limited to weekdays. A 30-minute headway is extremely poor service at best for daytime and there is no difference to RTA between 2pm on a Saturday afternoon getting folks in downtown hotels to museums at UC than 3 in the morning any day of the week. 

 

Looks like every 15 minutes to me.......

 

http://www.riderta.com/routes/healthline/schedules/current

^Ah, that's good to know---thanks. I picked up the timetable today at the CLE Visitor's Center on Euclid & E 4th and its dated "Effective April 21, 2013". Its an official timetable. Seems like those need to be replaced, or otherwise removed.

During that time RTA cut back on the other routes up Euclid and forced riders to transfer to the HL causing part of the increase in HL ridership.

 

Notably the 32 (Cedar) and the 9 (Mayfield) no longer go downtown, forcing transfers at UC.

During that time RTA cut back on the other routes up Euclid and forced riders to transfer to the HL causing part of the increase in HL ridership.

 

Notably the 32 (Cedar) and the 9 (Mayfield) no longer go downtown, forcing transfers at UC.

 

Even more reason to convert it to street car rail.....

Even more reason to convert it to street car rail.....

 

Or to divert some HL buses up Cedar Hill to replace some or all of the 32 or 9.  RTA's current routes kind of punish people who live nearish to rapid lines by forcing them into two-seat commutes.

 

If they could do it over, I think RTA should have tried harder to eliminate the center island HL stations (maybe by using both Euclid and Prospect downtown) to allow standard equipment to run on the whole bus-only segment (all of which could be branded as the HL through wraps and signage).

Here is the original story I saw.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/09/15/bus-rapid-transit-spurs-development-better-than-light-rail-and-streetcars/

 

Giving the Healthline credit for those projects is a joke IMO. Cleveland State was going to build a student center, education buildings, and dorms either way. The Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals were going to expand either way. Uptown would have happened without the Healthline(but not without UC attractions/Case). The Casino, 668 Euclid Avenue, etc. all would have happened.

 

That is like saying the 49 bus is responsible for Crocker Park.

^Agreed, it's like giving saying the 94 is responsible for everything in Beachwood and Highland Hills and ignoring 271.

Here is the original story I saw.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/09/15/bus-rapid-transit-spurs-development-better-than-light-rail-and-streetcars/

 

Giving the Healthline credit for those projects is a joke IMO. Cleveland State was going to build a student center, education buildings, and dorms either way. The Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals were going to expand either way. Uptown would have happened without the Healthline(but not without UC attractions/Case). The Casino, 668 Euclid Avenue, etc. all would have happened.

 

That is like saying the 49 bus is responsible for Crocker Park.

 

There are folks who'd disagree strongly with your harsh dismissal of the HealthLine and its impact: http://www.nytimes.com/2011/11/30/realestate/commercial/cleveland-ignites-job-growth-with-rebuilding-project.html?_r=0

 

Hindsight is 20/20. Might the residential development project in Uptown, or any of the myriad other developments along the avenue, have otherwise gone forward? Possibly. Would they have taken the same form? Possibly. I, for one, think not -- IMHO.

Here is the original story I saw.

 

http://www.forbes.com/sites/jeffmcmahon/2013/09/15/bus-rapid-transit-spurs-development-better-than-light-rail-and-streetcars/

 

Giving the Healthline credit for those projects is a joke IMO. Cleveland State was going to build a student center, education buildings, and dorms either way. The Cleveland Clinic and University Hospitals were going to expand either way. Uptown would have happened without the Healthline(but not without UC attractions/Case). The Casino, 668 Euclid Avenue, etc. all would have happened.

 

That is like saying the 49 bus is responsible for Crocker Park.

 

I tend to agree.  I'm not saying that none of these projects were influenced by the HL, but I think it is way less than HL supporters like to tout.

 

As for the above “study”, I'm highly skeptical.  For one thing, it mixes LRT and streetcars, which absurd.  This ignores the fact that a number of cities have developed LRT and streetcars: Seattle, Dallas, Charlotte, to name a few.  The two are NOT the same and, as the article notes, streetcars lack the speed performance of true LRT (think Cleveland's Blue/Green lines) or HRT.

 

Also, BRTs are widely different as well.  Cleveland's HL is much different, and slower, than Pittsburgh's Martin Luther King/East busway, which is totally grade separated with limited stops along a RR ROW.

 

I wonder if these glitches in the "study" are not manipulative attempts to tout BRT while downgrading true LRT.  Seems like there's an agenda here.