It looks like they took a panoramic shot.

 

I love the Healthline project...but I can't say I'm a fan of the aesthetics of the RTVs.  It looks more poky caterpillar than sexy transit missile or even friendly transit box to me.  I also think the color scheme is a big mistake in a city with an unwavering gray pallet for 6 months of the year.  Damnit I want more yellow in my life come January.  Subjective, I know, but I couldn't help but share.

On more than one occasion, RTA has tried to reduce service on a bus route by moving its end point at a rail station, instead of downtown. Riders clearly told us "no way" -- they strongly preferred bus to rail.

 

This makes sense to me- but I bet it's less about the mode and more about the route.  The buses have more than one stop downtown.  Different riders weigh speed and stop proximity differently.

the Chicago Metropolitan Planning Authority has "borrowed" a BRT vehicle from Cleveland for their press release on expanded BRT in Chicago...it looks like they twisted the front though...

 

http://www.metroplanning.org/articleDetail.asp?objectID=4399

 

 

From the "BRT Fact Sheet" at this link:

 

BOSTON

Silver Line ($1.43 billion)

9.6 miles

14 Stations

5-minute headway

17 sixty-foot articulated buses

 

CLEVELAND

HEALTHLINE ($168.4 million)

6.7 miles

21 sixty-foot articulated buses

5-minute headway

 

$1.43 billion for a BRT line. The amount of money Boston is able to garner/spend on infrastructure has always amazed me considering they are only about twice the size of Cleveland - I think around 600,000 city, 4 million metro population.

^Only twice the size, but a much, much higher transit usage rate.  Their BRT is partly underground which explains much of the high cost.

On more than one occasion, RTA has tried to reduce service on a bus route by moving its end point at a rail station, instead of downtown. Riders clearly told us "no way" -- they strongly preferred bus to rail.

 

I think you're mischaracterizing the preference. I will bet my life that they prefer a one-seat ride over a transfer, regardless of what type of vehicle is involved.

KJP, they said they did not like the "cattle-car" mentality of rail.

In my 25 years in the rail transportation field, that's the first time I've ever heard that description attributed to rail. Sounds like RTA needs to either add more capacity to its trains or create a more pleasant riding experience. It need not be a "cattle car" experience. Was there further inquiry to determine what was meant by the "cattle car" comments?

^ I have to agree..EVERYONE I have ever talked to about mass transit in Cleveland ALL have said they wish RAIL reached more areas of the city and inner ring suburbs, especially in higher density residential areas (such as the Clifton corridor from RR to Downtown).  Reasons being: Rail doesn't wait in traffic, rarely affected by weather, you always know the destinations and stops, and smoother and more comfortable than bus. 

  I would have to say that the reason that someone may have used the "cattle car" analogy is because RTA seems to only like to use a one or two car tandem for it's trains.  Why not three?  How much more does it cost per trip to add an extra car out of curiosity?  I believe Chicago uses 8 and NYC 11, I realize that would be overkill here in Cleveland, but the other cities mentioned don't change the amount of cars used from peak to non peak hours, so why not run three cars at all times here?

  On another note, I was on the red line and was riding on the rear car.  At the 150th street stop I was unable to exit from the rear car because the operator never opened the doors.  When I made it into the forward car, I asked the operator why she didn't open the doors and was quit rudely and abruptly told you have to exit from the forward car...with no explanation why?  Not quit sure what an out of towner would do if they were treated the same way.  I was lucky because I KNOW the area.  Has there ever been talk of automated voice stops similar to that of Chicago?  At least then ALL stop would be announced (upcoming and actual).  I found being from out of town on the L it was VERY helpful and professional.  Just curious.

It need not be a "cattle car" experience. Was there further inquiry to determine what was meant by the "cattle car" comments?

 

Or was this one comment?  I have NEVER heard any rail described that way, and have certainly never felt that way on the Rapid.  To me, a one-seat ride certainly would be the greatest asset when deciding what route to ride to get from Point A to Point B (similar to choosing a non-stop flight).

  On another note, I was on the red line and was riding on the rear car.  At the 150th street stop I was unable to exit from the rear car because the operator never opened the doors.  When I made it into the forward car, I asked the operator why she didn't open the doors and was quit rudely and abruptly told you have to exit from the forward car...with no explanation why?  Not quit sure what an out of towner would do if they were treated the same way.  I was lucky because I KNOW the area.  Has there ever been talk of automated voice stops similar to that of Chicago?  At least then ALL stop would be announced (upcoming and actual).  I found being from out of town on the L it was VERY helpful and professional.  Just curious.

 

Unfortunately, sometimes the train operators forget to announce it when  passengers have to exit from the front door at certain stops at certain times of the day.  It all depends upon whether or not there is a ticket agent on duty at the station stop in question.  If there is a ticket agent, then all doors are opened.  If there isn't, then everyone has to pay on the train, so to prevent people from riding for free, everyone is made to enter and exit from the front door. 

 

I've been on the Red Line at times when the drivers either don't announce that the stop is "front door out" or the internal PA system isn't working correctly.  It doesn't happen often, but it happens.  Also, there are always a few operators that come across as abrupt no matter what.  I've seen considerable improvement in this regard over the past several years, but unfortunately, I think, there will always be a few. 

 

One of the biggest blunders I've ever seen RTA do was about 3 years ago on a tribe game day  when RTA didn't schedule a ticket agent to work at Puritas.  Tons of people were taking the train downtown, but with no agent at Puritas, several dozen passengers were boarding, and all had to pay on the train.  In addition to the sheer volume on game days, lots of the Red Line riders on those days are ones who have never or rarely ever take the train, so they need more assistance while paying.  Anyway, we sat at Puritas so long, that the next train caught up to us and was waiting a couple hundred yards back.  Even the train operator was exasperated, and couldn't believe that such a mistake had been made.

 

The train also filled to the brim well before Tower City.  Game days are good days to run longer trains-- like 4 cars-- and have ticket agents on duty at all stations.  I'm looking forward to the all pre-pay ticketing system that RTA is supposed to adopt at some point. 

I encourage us to take this discussion over to the RTA thread....

^ I have to agree..EVERYONE I have ever talked to about mass transit in Cleveland ALL have said they wish RAIL reached more areas of the city and inner ring suburbs, especially in higher density residential areas (such as the Clifton corridor from RR to Downtown).  Reasons being: Rail doesn't wait in traffic, rarely affected by weather, you always know the destinations and stops, and smoother and more comfortable than bus. 

  I would have to say that the reason that someone may have used the "cattle car" analogy is because RTA seems to only like to use a one or two car tandem for it's trains.  Why not three?  How much more does it cost per trip to add an extra car out of curiosity?  I believe Chicago uses 8 and NYC 11, I realize that would be overkill here in Cleveland, but the other cities mentioned don't change the amount of cars used from peak to non peak hours, so why not run three cars at all times here?

  On another note, I was on the red line and was riding on the rear car.  At the 150th street stop I was unable to exit from the rear car because the operator never opened the doors.  When I made it into the forward car, I asked the operator why she didn't open the doors and was quit rudely and abruptly told you have to exit from the forward car...with no explanation why?  Not quit sure what an out of towner would do if they were treated the same way.  I was lucky because I KNOW the area.  Has there ever been talk of automated voice stops similar to that of Chicago?  At least then ALL stop would be announced (upcoming and actual).  I found being from out of town on the L it was VERY helpful and professional.  Just curious.

 

I meantioned this about the green line.  I know in the past RTA has run 3 car blue line trains and alternating 2/3 car trains on the green line.  It would be interesting to know what the cost is.  RTA Red line stations can accommodate up to 6 cars.

 

^  I would have to say that the reason that someone may have used the "cattle car" analogy is because RTA seems to only like to use a one or two car tandem for it's trains.  Why not three?  How much more does it cost per trip to add an extra car out of curiosity? 

 

Actually many cities vary the length of trains.

 

NY trains could consist of 8 or 3 cars on the IRT lines.  Not all stations are long enough to accommodate more than 8.  example 145/lenox or South ferry.

 

Most BMT and IND trains are 10 cars long, with exception of the shuttles which are 3 or 4.

 

  On another note, I was on the red line and was riding on the rear car.  At the 150th street stop I was unable to exit from the rear car because the operator never opened the doors.  When I made it into the forward car, I asked the operator why she didn't open the doors and was quit rudely and abruptly told you have to exit from the forward car...with no explanation why?  Not quit sure what an out of towner would do if they were treated the same way.  I was lucky because I KNOW the area.  Has there ever been talk of automated voice stops similar to that of Chicago?  At least then ALL stop would be announced (upcoming and actual).  I found being from out of town on the L it was VERY helpful and professional.  Just curious.

 

Unfortunately, sometimes the train operators forget to announce it when  passengers have to exit from the front door at certain stops at certain times of the day.  It all depends upon whether or not there is a ticket agent on duty at the station stop in question.  If there is a ticket agent, then all doors are opened.  If there isn't, then everyone has to pay on the train, so to prevent people from riding for free, everyone is made to enter and exit from the front door. 

 

I've been on the Red Line at times when the drivers either don't announce that the stop is "front door out" or the internal PA system isn't working correctly.  It doesn't happen often, but it happens.  Also, there are always a few operators that come across as abrupt no matter what.  I've seen considerable improvement in this regard over the past several years, but unfortunately, I think, there will always be a few. 

 

One of the biggest blunders I've ever seen RTA do was about 3 years ago on a tribe game day  when RTA didn't schedule a ticket agent to work at Puritas.  Tons of people were taking the train downtown, but with no agent at Puritas, several dozen passengers were boarding, and all had to pay on the train.  In addition to the sheer volume on game days, lots of the Red Line riders on those days are ones who have never or rarely ever take the train, so they need more assistance while paying.  Anyway, we sat at Puritas so long, that the next train caught up to us and was waiting a couple hundred yards back.  Even the train operator was exasperated, and couldn't believe that such a mistake had been made.

 

The train also filled to the brim well before Tower City.  Game days are good days to run longer trains-- like 4 cars-- and have ticket agents on duty at all stations.  I'm looking forward to the all pre-pay ticketing system that RTA is supposed to adopt at some point. 

 

Jerry has given us information on how to report problems, so when a car/train/bus isn't operating properly or there is an issue, I sincerly hope you took the time to report it.

Well, to get us back on topic, I drove down Euclid from E 13 down to the clinic the other night.  It was my first time there since major sections opened, new traffic signals were installed etc.  I thought it looked pretty great - exciting, different, interesting.  While I can't imagine ever needing to use it, just knowing it was there and what it looked capable of doing in the area surrounding CSU to public square got me pretty excited.

 

Something really needs to be done about the midtown section, however.  Speaking for a strictly psychological standpoint, it feels out of place.  As "right" as the Healthline feels and looks downtown, it looks out of place and awkward right now east of 55th.  Maybe it was too late at night.

 

I like the single-lane for cars.  Of course I did because it was night and there was no traffic.  But as for the auto experience, the signals were clear, I had no real problems understanding the flow of where I was supposed to be, etc, and the bus lanes feel like more than just bus lanes, and I didn't even see any busses.  I didn't try to make a left turn onto Euclid - that seems like it might be a little bit of an adventure, if it's even allowed anymore.

 

 

Thank you for getting us back on topic, Matches. And thanks for your report on your personal experiences with the Euclid Corridor.

 

I can only hope some life returns to the Midtown section -- soon.

The Euclid Corridor Project website really needs to be updated more often.  I mean, this project is coming to a close, and it should be bloated with recent photos, video, a more detailed timeline calendar, etc...

The Euclid Corridor Project website really needs to be updated more often.  I mean, this project is coming to a close, and it should be bloated with recent photos, video, a more detailed timeline calendar, etc...

 

Agreed, I was trying to double check the target completion dates for the stretch outside of my Building. I found a diagram which had the estimated time lines for completions of various areas. However, Now I cant find that document anywhere and I've forgotten.

The Euclid Corridor Project Web site really needs to be updated more often.  I mean, this project is coming to a close, and it should be bloated with recent photos, video, a more detailed timeline calendar, etc...

 

Go to www.RTAHealthLine.com, a new and revised site.

 

Eventually, the old site will probably be taken down.

 

JetDog knows about this than I do...I will ask him to stop in this afternoon.

 

 

 

oh wow, I didn't know about this.  Thank you, Mr. Masek!

JMasek, that site looks great - a few small nitpicks:

 

In the map section of downtown: it's "dinner at Lola with the Iron Chef", not "Lola's".

 

Under "Who it Helps", in the Economy section's "Redevelopment Facts", it should read $150 million Charter One initiative.

Is there some information on completed dates on that website?  I couldn't find anything?

 

Also, JMasek, do you have an update on the E. 12th St./Euclid Ave. intersection?  It seems as progress has stopped on it and looks like the end of May estimate for completion will not be hit.  Thanks.

Do you have an update on the E. 12th St./Euclid Ave. intersection?  It seems as progress has stopped on it and looks like the end of May estimate for completion will not be hit. Thanks.

 

Earlier, estimates were made because we could only do construction on one section of Public Square at a time. Now, with only five months left to the Oct. 25 opening ceremony, estimates are not being made. All work is being done ASAP. In some areas, the City of Cleveland has to finish underground utility work before we can finish paving.

OK, sorry to be a pain in your butt.  I'm just antsy because I will have a couple hundred out of towners at my wedding July 5 and I want to show them the best possible Cleveland I can (they are staying at the Wyndham and the reception is at the Union Club).  If they walk out the front door into a pit of dirt they may not be too impressed.

 

I know none of this is your concern, but it's obviously mine.  Just an explanation as to why I was wondering I suppose.  Keep up the good work.

Hm.  I just discovered that it'll still be cheaper for me to drive to work.

 

Do you get your parking paid for by your employer? If so, you can also get your transit trip paid for by your employer and it can get the same federal tax breaks that it enjoys by paying for parking. See:

 

http://www.gcrta.org/pro_commuter.asp

 

I work at the Clinic, and right now I'm parking in a free lot, but I may get moved to one that I would have to pay for by the fall.  I'm going to look at that link when I get a sec, here.

 

Either way, I still will use the bus once in a while, just to support it.

The Euclid Corridor Project Web site really needs to be updated more often.  I mean, this project is coming to a close, and it should be bloated with recent photos, video, a more detailed timeline calendar, etc...

 

Go to www.RTAHealthLine.com, a new and revised site.

 

Eventually, the old site will probably be taken down.

 

JetDog knows about this than I do...I will ask him to stop in this afternoon.

 

There is a wide range of content planned for the rtahealthline.com site, which will replace the existing euclidtransit.org site at some point in the future. Most of this will be very forward-looking and community-oriented, to appeal to both the casual out-of-town tourist and the long-time resident who may not be familiar with the range of what Euclid Avenue has to offer. Relevant information from euclidtransit.org will be carried forward into the new site.

 

As you can imagine, some of what is presently out there (such as construction updates) loses relevance as time goes by. What is on the new site now is just a sampling of what is to come, and suggestions for content are always welcome.

 

Many of the project updates can actually be found in the periodic presentations given to our Board of Trustees, which can be found in the Board meeting recaps on our Newsroom page at http://www.riderta.com/nu_newsroom.asp. There are a large number of regularly updated photos contained in those presentations.

 

MayDay, I've noted your points about the errors in the site content. This site is a compiled Flash application that was prepared for us by an outside agency. At this point in time, they'll need to make any corrections, and I have requested that they do so. That too will be changing in the near future, and content updates should be able to be made more easily.

I have just learned that the roadway around East 12th will be completed around mid-July.

OK, thanks for the update.

 

Edited after realizing the whip didn't look so good there.  Sorry, it was meant to be a joke, but didn't come out as such when translated to HTML.

Hey, he's saying that the road will be pretty much complete by then. At least you won't have to worry about big piles of dirt everywhere!

Hey, he's saying that the road will be pretty much complete by then. At least you won't have to worry about big piles of dirt everywhere!

 

right -- ten days out from completion (July 5), I would expect things will be in somewhat of a "wind-down" mode... keep your fingers crossed for good weather, and you might even be pleasantly surprised....

By the way I noticed a couple nice signs of progress on my "corridor walk" today... the street lights have been put up on the north side of the street from E.9th to E.14th... I can't wait for these things to get "turned on" so I can see how bright the street will appear at night.

 

Also, in front of the city club, a large granite / stone marker (say 2'x2' or 3'x3') has been set in the sidewalk replacing some of the bricks, to mark the entrance... it looks really, really cool.  I hope some of the other prominent buildings / companies do this along the way.

I'll build a dome over the intersection if you need one (using TIF of course). :)

McCle, from what I have seen, the new lights ( and I am a street light junky) are not as bright as the sodium vapor bulbs they are replacing.  I do like the median lighting and I hope it goes from Public Square to Playhouse Square.  We were eating at Bricco Saturday night before last after the Broadway Show, looking out on the (deserted) scene (except for valets), between E14 and E17 wondering how it would be when the corridor project is completed.  Most people park in the garages and bolt after the show is over but a few of us stay down a while.  I considered whether the Health Line would be useful to go to an evening show and concluded probably not for me, but for people living in the corridor, it would work if the schedules supported that.

I was surprised the other night at how not-so-bright the lights were.  But only the median lights and south side of the street lights were on (which still make up 75% of the total lights).  Are the north side lights on now?

I know it's been probably stated a thousand times before, but RTA should have made this a streetcar line instead.  I know funding was an issue, but I think service is going to suffer because its still a bus no matter what they want to call it.

^ well they certainly like to call it a variety of things. now its the healthline? thats sounds like something you call after you eat the oysters rockefeller.

I know it's been probably stated a thousand times before, but RTA should have made this a streetcar line instead.  I know funding was an issue, but I think service is going to suffer because its still a bus no matter what they want to call it.

 

Why not keep an open mind and ride it six month or a year after completion and view the rider stats then make an informed opinion?

 

The 6 which is being replaced is one of the top lines in the RTA system and this project can only improve that line and once again, the "heathline" is SO MUCH more than just a "bus route".

pitchblende, welcome to the forum. Your question has been stated and answered often before, especially on this thread. It's been a while though, so I don't mind answering it again...

 

The short answer is that the alternatives analysis found that while rail would cause a small ridership increase over bus rapid transit, the cost of building and operating rail didn't justify pursuing the small increase in ridership. RTA wanted to get Federal Transit Administration funding, but they wouldn't get it if rail was the chosen mode when there is a much cheaper option that produced alomst as much ridership. Even if with the raw ridership and cost data, RTA had a tough time making the case to the FTA for funding without the economic development component of the Euclid Corridor. That's what got them a federal funding share for this project.

I know it's been probably stated a thousand times before, but RTA should have made this a streetcar line instead.  I know funding was an issue, but I think service is going to suffer because its still a bus no matter what they want to call it.

 

I've said this before...I live in Pittsburgh, which has three buslines. They're all wildly popular. The Healthline will be fine. Believe!

^^KJP, did the BRT-Rail comparison assume the same routing, or was the BRT compared to a dual-hub type project with the rail continuing west?  I am OK with BRT (at least willing to see how it does), but I do find it hard believe that BRT will even come close to what the Dual Hub would have done for ridership.

The only difference in routing was between East 9th and Tower City Center. Here, the subway would have taken a different route. The following graphic is from this thread...

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2726.0.html

 

 

 

 

 

^That's what I figured.  So the alternative analysis suggested that the dual hub alignment, which would have connected the west side park and rides (and east side ones too) directly to E9th, Playhouse Square, CSU, Midtown and the Clinic would only produce a small ridership increase over the BRT?  I find that conclusion pretty hard to believe. 

 

I certainly believe that lining up funding for the Dual Hub wasn't going to happen, so I'm not complaining about what we're getting.

^That's what I figured.  So the alternative analysis suggested that the dual hub alignment, which would have connected the west side park and rides (and east side ones too) directly to E9th, Playhouse Square, CSU, Midtown and the Clinic would only produce a small ridership increase over the BRT?  I find that conclusion pretty hard to believe. 

 

I certainly believe that lining up funding for the Dual Hub wasn't going to happen, so I'm not complaining about what we're getting.

 

I think it still connects them.  You'd have to transfer anyway.  Now you just step outside to the BRT instead of being underground.  Not that big of a difference.  I think everyone would have perferred some version of rail.  But regardless of what this thing (BRT) looks like, it functions like rail... And I think that is really the most important thing.  And after watching videos of BRT in Bogata... I am actually pretty pumped up for this to get running.

^That was the beauty of the Dual Hub- you wouldn't have had to transfer.  One seat ride from Airport and the big West Side ridership base to most of downtown (not just Tower City), Midtown and the Clinic.  Yes the BRT will still reach these places, but as soon as you add a transfer, the ridership takes a big hit (especially when the transfer means walking from the Tower City platforms to the BRT station).  Again, I'm pumped for BRT, so I'm not complaining, but the Dual Hub really would have been a huge improvement in transit beyond the rail v. BRT mode difference.  Which is also why I'd love to see the BRT line extended west some day to pull more riders into the one seat ride...

What would have then happened to the existing red line heading east?  Would you not have had to exit the red line at TC and then transfer to the line heading down Euclid?

^The dual hub tracks would have reconnected with the existing Red Line tracks near University Circle (just west of the Cedar station if I remember it correctly)- so the Red Line would no longer have served the existing E34th, E55th, E79th and E105th stations.  There was also a segment of rail that would have connected the Shaker lines to UC via MLK, but I'm not sure how this would have worked (e.g., would there be a new fleet of vehicles?  Would Shaker trains run on the Euclid rail?).  Really, it would have been totally awesome and probably would have allowed for significant bus route economizing.

Strap, you are correct in your memory of the alignment at the east end. However only one of the Shaker lines was to be rerouted via the Euclid Corridor. It was to be routed north from Shaker Boulevard at East 116th then down Fairhill. At the bottom of the hill, it would have joined the new Red Line alignment and head over to Euclid Avenue along Stearns Road.

 

The other Shaker line would have stayed on the present alignment, preserving rail service to the East 55th and East 34th stops. The East 79th and East 105th stations would have been abandoned.

^The dual hub tracks would have reconnected with the existing Red Line tracks near University Circle (just west of the Cedar station if I remember it correctly)- so the Red Line would no longer have served the existing E34th, E55th, E79th and E105th stations.  There was also a segment of rail that would have connected the Shaker lines to UC via MLK, but I'm not sure how this would have worked (e.g., would there be a new fleet of vehicles?  Would Shaker trains run on the Euclid rail?).  Really, it would have been totally awesome and probably would have allowed for significant bus route economizing.

Strap, you are correct in your memory of the alignment at the east end. However only one of the Shaker lines was to be rerouted via the Euclid Corridor. It was to be routed north from Shaker Boulevard at East 116th then down Fairhill. At the bottom of the hill, it would have joined the new Red Line alignment and head over to Euclid Avenue along Stearns Road.

 

The other Shaker line would have stayed on the present alignment, preserving rail service to the East 55th and East 34th stops. The East 79th and East 105th stations would have been abandoned.

 

Ahhh... Then yes, I agree that would have been outrageously better.  But if my memory serves correct and I'm sure it's on the thread somewhere it would have been OUTRAGEOUSLY more expensive.  And with that in mind, it is only 1 transfer.  But there is no doubt, 1 seat rides get more people interested.

The final rail option that was considered dropped the Shaker connector but kept the downtown subway shown above. The estimated cost of this option, if I recall correctly was about $500 million to $600 million. I'll have to double check to see the exact figure.

^Thanks, as always, KJP for the info (your facts are a lot better than my crap memory). 

 

So for sure, that $500-$600M is definitely a lot more expensive than the $200M for the BRT.  I guess my only point was that for that kind of money, you were getting a lot more than just a mode change.

 

^Thanks, as always, KJP for the info (your facts are a lot better than my crap memory). 

 

So for sure, that $500-$600M is definitely a lot more expensive than the $200M for the BRT.  I guess my only point was that for that kind of money, you were getting a lot more than just a mode change.

 

 

I can't disagree at all... But I guess it would take a long long time for that increase in ridership to make up that $3-400 million gap.  SIGH, would have been really cool though.