Another note from the newsletter:

 

April 19th, 2006 @ the Western Reserve Historical Society

 

The Future of Euclid Avenue:

Streetscape, Urban Design and Public Art Updates

 

 

Too funny - I participated in the oral history project. I wonder if they'll use my material?

Backers favor Bus Rapid Transit over rail for cost, convenience

 

By Eric Pryne

 

Seattle Times staff reporter

 

 

............

Here's an article from the current edition of Metropolis. Doesn't have any new information, but nice to see the EC getting relatively positive play in national media. I also like the graphic.

 

There's also an article in this month's Planning magazine (the magazine of the American Planning Association) on BRT.  It mentions Cleveland, but is centered on LA's project.  I've been too busy to post any of this, but now that finals are about over, I'm getting ready to be a full-time Urban Ohioan again!

That is nice. When was the article written? I looked online and could not find it. If you have a clean copy, could you post it?

The drawing looks a bit like the Derf comics.

 

 

check it out at http://planning.org/planning/member/2006may/LAbuses.htm

 

it sounds like they had many of the same issues as we do...budget constraints, stigma attached to bus riding, etc.  It's been very successful, by many standards, but LA's a different place.

The Metropolis article is just coming out. I'm not sure if it's on newsstands yet. It's not on the Web site.

Oh, were you talking about the Metropolis one Musky?  Sorry.  I'm sure you got the Planning one!  I got my Metropolis in the mail last week, so I'd assume it's on the newsstands.

Here is a photo tour from E.14 through E.40 from this afternoon

 

An overview, looking east:

 

New natural gas lines replacing these pipes:

 

 

 

New E.17th street extension:

 

 

A small patch of green...

 

More gas lines:

 

New CSU education building:

 

 

Fenn Tower nearing completion:

 

They have redone this entire side - it is all red brick painted.  who knew?

 

 

@ innerbelt:

 

How long will the wires stay buried?  Any takers?

]

 

Come on now... what's wrong with those pipes???  Friggin waste of money... we need that money for more asphalt in the suburbs!

I saw those pipes as well.  I wonder if they were actually being used for anything anymore.  How could they be?

^ the ones that were severely damaged at some point had another, smaller pipe run down the middle of them.

 

sadly, this is how many of the drinking water pipes looked when they dug those up earlier. 

Cool shots, thanks for posting.  Those gas pipes look like street demo could have been done a lot quicker with a lit match.

"^ the ones that were severely damaged at some point had another, smaller pipe run down the middle of them.

 

sadly, this is how many of the drinking water pipes looked when they dug those up earlier."

 

 

:-o :-o :-o :-o :-o :-o :-o

Pretty scary, really.  If you were ever wondering why the city stinks some days...well, there's part of the answer!

 

This pic is interesting:

 

 

It looked like they were meticulously working around this former row of trees one day and the next, they were gone!  Anyone know what happened to them?  They were pretty large and I hope they didn't just end up in the chipper!  There are some younger ones closer to E. 17th that were just hacked down and discarded...crazy.

 

 

Does anyone know when we will be seeing the new traffic islands and pavement put down in the first phase to be completed?

This phase should be complete by the end of 2006...I believe the medians are included in that.

^ everything between E.30 and E.55 is supposed to be completed by the end of summer (not sure the exact date).  The north side will be reconstructed, and then the work will move to the south side. 

 

So, hopefully in a few weeks we will have an idea of what the whole project will look like (by viewing the completed north side of euclid between E30 and E55). 

 

^ everything between E.30 and E.55 is supposed to be completed by the end of summer (not sure the exact date).  The north side will be reconstructed, and then the work will move to the south side. 

 

So, hopefully in a few weeks we will have an idea of what the whole project will look like (by viewing the completed north side of euclid between E30 and E55). 

 

 

As I recall the median islands/stations will be put in at the end, but at the time I heard that I wasn't clear on whether that meant after all of Euclid is finished or when each of the designated segments is finished.  The E55 to E79 segment is supposed to be completed first, sometime in the fall, so that's probably the area to watch.

While I would love to seen them put in place sooner than later, it makes sense to wait until the end.  Glass can get shattered, etc. 

From today's Compass section in the PD

 

Q: . . . What's up with the Euclid Corridor construction?

 

A: It's Public Square's turn to taste the Euclid Corridor construction-disruption. The square's rebuilding begins today at the southeast quadrant, bounded by Euclid Avenue, East Roadway, Superior Avenue and Ontario Street. That's just the first of four phases, and it is supposed to run until Aug. 30. Other phases will extend into next year, according to RTA spokesman Jerry Masek.

 

Traffic is restricted to two lanes between Euclid and Superior. No left turns west onto Superior are allowed unless you are driving an RTA bus (borrowing one just for this purpose is discouraged). Euclid will be closed completely at East Roadway including no through traffic from East First to East Sixth streets. East Ninth Street is suggested as an alternate route for north-south travel.

 

There will be business access on East Fourth Street from Prospect Aenue and on East Sixth from Superior. Euclid construction continues from East 14th Street to the Innerbelt on Euclid's north side.

great!  real progress!  what a mess, though!

Clinic presented to Mayor Jackson on Monday RE: Closing Euclid through campus area except for ECP vehicles. 

 

Expect article in PD soon.  RTA apparently supports this as long as there are no impacts on the construction schedule for this segment (tentatively set for next spring start).

This has been on the table for a while. I don't know anyone who supported it other than the Clinic. Have some of the powers-that-be changed their stances?

http://www.cleveland.com/cuyahoga/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1152865871318090.xml&coll=2

 

Clinic wants to clear up congestion on Euclid

Plan to divert car traffic raises concerns about effect on RTA corridor project

Friday, July 14, 2006

Tom Breckenridge

Plain Dealer Reporter

 

The Cleveland Clinic, renowned for life-saving medicine and research, wants to perform its boldest surgery yet -- take cars off Euclid Avenue.

 

In a plan for its fast-growing campus, the Clinic wants to divert car traffic off Euclid Avenue for nearly 20 blocks, from East 86th to East 105th streets. Buses would continue to roll through.

 

Removing cars would create a pedestrian-friendly "campus center" along Euclid, as the nonprofit behemoth seeks to green up and soften its institutional look.

 

The Clinic has yet to file a formal plan with any public agency, but its vision is already generating concern.

 

.........

 

http://www.cleveland.com/news/images/euclid_avenue0714.gif

Yet another way to make the University Circle area less navaigatable for an outsider. 

Yeah, this strikes me as a bad idea. Euclid is the city's main East Side artery. It shouldn't be emasculated by turning it into some kind of quasi-suburban promenade. CSU tried something similar decades ago, turning its section of Euclid from a vital urban retail district into a half-assed greenway with 50-foot setbacks. They're just now realizing their mistake and are restoring Euclid back into what it wants to be: a city street. I just can't stand how the Clinic keeps trying to make itself into a suburban island in the middle of the city.

if they want to do that....bury the street for those twenty blocks.

In theory, I think that it could be a good idea if done well. I just don't have faith that they will pull it off.  There would be too many hurdles.  However, Peter Walker is an extremely well-respected landscape architect.  I'd love to see his plans.  Additionally Bill Peacock, the new chief of operations, supposedly 'gets it' in terms of architecture and urban form.

 

One fear is that this would force all new parking garages to line Carnegie and Chester. While I always applaud the transformation of surface lots into garages, I would hate to see a corridor of garages that turned the Clinic's back on those two main streets.  Counterpoint--the Clinic builds the best garages in the region. I don't see why they wouldn't continue to line then with office space.

 

I wouldn't condemn this until I see the plans.  The PD's graphic is pretty bad as it does not show much of the Clinic's future plans. They own a lot of the god-awful retail that is set back from Euclid. If that could be re-arranged around the perimeters of the campus and useable green space created around the buildings that draw folks out, I don't see this as all bad.  The devil is in the details. I can see how they would want to improve the worker and visitor experience. There are many national and international conferences that are held at the Clinic. Many people travel from all over the world for treatment. If the visitor experience can be enhanced by placing a twenty block-long park between all the current and future buildings, then I say that its a good idea.  The current situation is bad.  No one walks out onto Euclid for a pleasant stroll in this area.  If done well, this would change the CCF experience completely.

 

Of course there are traffic issues that have to been taken into consideration. I could imagine that the city could get some major concessions from the Clinic if they allow this.  That could be interesting.

 

 

Additionally, look for the Clinic and the Cleveland Foundation to make a big push to redevelop (residential) the land just north of Chester from E. 105 to about E. 89th.  They are already working with Finch and Heartland.. (and Fannie Lewis is totally on board!)

I never drive down Euclid from downtown to University Circle. I have always taken Chester - even before construction started on Euclid. I don't think traffic flow would be very much affected.

I never drive down Euclid from downtown to University Circle. I have always taken Chester - even before construction started on Euclid. I don't think traffic flow would be very much affected.

 

Traffic engineers do happen to count cars other than the Vulpstermobile when determining traffic flow.  ;)

Anytime you have the opportunity to add a significant amount of greenspace in a city full of concrete-you do it. Because those opportunity's rarely happen in a city that is as 'built out' as Cleveland. Everyone is always worried about people being able to adapt, what are we all stupid? Lets see...you can't go all the way down Euclid anymore-o.k. I think I've got it. The clinic is so important to this city, it's one of our major assets. Let's do what we can to help them remain successful. O.k. Next problem plz...

ECP stops at 89th, 93rd, 100th, 105th. Making euclid ave innothing but ECP buss lanes, cleveland clinic campus space, and private greenspace, makes the whole segment useless. I cleveland clinic gets its way, I demand that they pay for all costs incurred for making the 93rd and 100th stops. This is a transportation network, not a circulator bus for cleveland clinic workers.

Traffic engineers do happen to count cars other than the Vulpstermobile when determining traffic flow.  ;)

 

True, but the PD article said the traffic on Euclid was 7,700 vehicles a day? Actually, that seems pretty low for Euclid east of East 79th to East 105th (I can believe it for Euclid between East 79th and about East 30th). But if the numbers are right, I don't see a major traffic problem for either Chester or Carnegie if Euclid's traffic is diverted.

 

There is, however, something that bothers me about losing a part of Cleveland's Main Street as a complete thoroughfare. Call me a traditionalist, sentimentalist or whatever. I guess I'd have to see a total masterplan of the area to understand the context within which the non-thoroughfare Euclid Avenue would function. IE: Clinic buildings fronting Euclid better add some "messy uses" on the sidewalk or the "transit plaza" will end up feeling like a 1960s commie block.

Traffic engineers do happen to count cars other than the Vulpstermobile when determining traffic flow.  ;)

 

yes, unfortunetly.

The current situation is bad.  No one walks out onto Euclid for a pleasant stroll in this area. 

 

Isn't that part of the point behind the ECP?  It seems they are solving a problem already in the process of being solved.

 

Anytime you have the opportunity to add a significant amount of greenspace in a city full of concrete-you do it. Because those opportunity's rarely happen in a city that is as 'built out' as Cleveland.

 

Why?  Greenspace to what ends?  Because it sounds good?  Seems to me that we ought to add greenspace where greenspace makes sense in terms of having uses and users.

 

If Euclid Ave. ceases to be a through corridor, then what will that do to traffic on the rest of Euclid, and therefore the prospects of Euclid as a mixed use street with at least some retail?  Are we strengthening our main street as a whole with this idea?  Are we creating needed greenspace that will be well used?  I doubt either of those very much.

^I agree this is a bad idea. Why add more greenspace when there is plenty of it in parks and plazas that are not used today? Keep Euclid as a through street. I wonder what would happen to Case's proposed entertainment and retail distict  if that diverted traffic continues on the other avenues mentioned?

I think the Clinic's proposal does present some interesting opportunities that include 1. adding cohesion and visual prestige to the Clinic's campus, and 2. increased ridership of the Silver line. Even though my vehicle is never counted as one of the 7,700 that use the route, I still think its fair to say that those vehicles still don't really need to use the route, and Chester and Carnegie could certainly handle increased volume in the event that Euclid was closed.

 

I still don't know if it is quite necessary to completely close off this portion of Euclid in order for the Clinic to achieve its goals of creating a better campus. It seems to me like they could still spruce up their portion of Euclid Avenue with enhanced streetscape and mixed-uses without closing it off to automobiles. I kind of think the reason why they'd like to turn Euclid into a pedestrian area is to kind of kill the businesses or value of property of other land-owners along this site that would force them to sell or turn it over to the Clinic.

I was kind of shocked that the Clinic would even propose this. First of all, if you have to drive to University Circle and you knew Euclid Avenue was diverted to Chester or Carnegie, why would you take Euclid in the first place? You wouldn't. So I'd bet the majority of Euclid's traffic would going to be virtually eliminated, preventing a lot of the economic growth that the ECP is trying to stimulate.

 

Rationality and reasoning aside, closing Euclid would just be down-right blasphemous to a lot of people.

^I agree - this seems like a really bad idea.  The Clinic campus already feels very disconnected from the surrounding area (yeah, you have to drive through it, but most of the entrances are on side streets) and this seems like they're just turning their backs on the community and focusing on their little island.  As I read it, I wondered when they were going to ask to put up a big fence around the whole thing so it could truly feel like a suburban office park plopped in the middle of a city...

 

BTW, I don't think it would hurt Case's plans for the Triangle and the Beach as Chester pretty much dumps you back on to Euclid right at their proposed retail area, but any hopes for redevelopment Euclid between CSU and CCF (the shabbiest part today) would be pretty much killed. 

http://www.wkyc.com/video/player.aspx?aid=25028&bw=hi

 

Video of the project, it shows conceptual drawings of it, and at about 1:54 it shows a "better" site  plan of the clinic. Contains pointless meandering sidewalks.

^"People will want to live near the Clinic because it will be like a park." -- from the WKYC video.

 

What is this, 1960? Urban parks only work if there's a vibrant city around them. The Clinic, on the other hand, has created a suburban dead zone in the middle of what was once a thriving uptown entertainment district. I might support this plan if the Clinic also intended to add street-level retail and residential units at its main campus, but it doesn't.

 

Green space alone isn't enough to attract people, at least not in an urban setting. You have to enhance the whole pedestrian experience around it.

This whole thing smacks of poor planning.  I'm not ECP fan but if it is to has a modicum of success, why the Clinic divert traffic to other streets?  And why are we building this "Opportunity Corridor" to divert EVEN MORE such traffic; despite all the talk of beefing up Fairfax 'opportunities', the OC is 1st and foremost, a quick, backdoor route to U. Circle and the Heights, period.

 

And why is the Clinic -- big and bad enough, of course, to always demand and get its way -- jumping in at the 11th hour screwing around w/ RTA's federally mandated timeframes for completing ECP?  Why, after RTA's even began moving earth to complete its project?  Like the confrontation going on down in the Flats East Bank, this is classic Cleveland, go-it-alone planning which is why we can't ever seem to get anything big and worthwhile done in this town.

I'd really like to see the video, but I can't get the video player to work.  I have Explorer and my AV/Firewall set to prompt me on Java applets.  I'm not even getting a prompt.  Anybody have any ideas?

I swear, you go on vacation and stop reading the blog for one week and the Clinic goes and does something like this!

 

I have to say I think this would be a deplorable use of space. It has been so exciting to see the redevelopments that are slated for University Circle, to imagine a time when I don't fear for my safety when trying to catch the bike trail through Rockefeller Park and to envision a stronger and more economically integrated community in proximity to Case and the cultural institutions. I am an eastsider through and through, but one of my biggest complaints about my side of town is how cut off the city proper is from the relatively affluent Heights. I have always speculated that this type of planning was purposefully inequitable and that the street barriers were intentionally used to segregate those of lower means from those of higher means. Now we're talking about creating a major barrier that not only could affect the desirability of University Circle as a destination for visitors/residents but would also impede integration and development opportunities along the Euclid Corridor, without creating meaningful walkability for anyone but Cleveland Clinic staff.

 

Has anyone seen if major players like UCI or NOACA have made public statements about this proposal?

Euclid Ave. merchants just try to hang on

Construction takes a toll on businesses

Tuesday, July 18, 2006

Christopher Evans and Amanda Garrett

Plain Dealer Reporters

 

......

This isn't unexpected, but it's still a shame.  I think it would all be a little more bearable if RTA had been doing more PR and had kept to its initial timetables.  As it is, completion of the corridor still seems so far off.  I know they've done a lot to keep in touch with property owners, businesses and neighborhood stakeholder groups, but it just never seems like it's enough.

 

Also, in relation to the Halle Building, didn't they just remodel the whole thing?  They were working on it the past winter and I was expecting some sort of opening...

Has anyone seen if major players like UCI or NOACA have made public statements about this proposal?

 

I don't think that you will ever see a statement by NOACA about this. I don't think its in their nature to comment on such things.  Additionally, UCI is trying to court CCF for various reasons. I would be surprised if they come out publicly against the proposal. 

 

Why?  Greenspace to what ends?  Because it sounds good?  Seems to me that we ought to add greenspace where greenspace makes sense in terms of having uses and users.

Are we strengthening our main street as a whole with this idea?  Are we creating needed greenspace that will be well used?  I doubt either of those very much.

 

Greenspace for visitors with money.  Greenspace for healing in the outdoors environment.  Greenspace for taking a break while cycling down Euclid.  Greenspace to unify the suburbanized campus of the Clinic.  How many patients to you suppose are "locked up" inside the Clinic afraid to come outside into what is a rather frightening urban area.

If the Clinic can better orient the strip shopping centers in order to make them ped-friendly and keep the bike lanes, I'm basically all for this project.

 

Are we strengthening our main street as a whole?  What exactly do you mean by MAIN street? Car carrying capacity?  Transit capacity? Historical Significance? People Experience? Who/What are streets for anyways?  I think Euclid would be better utilized in the long run and in it's entirety without car lanes at all.