^I would think Euclid Avenue through East Cleveland is MORE than wide enough to have dedicated bus lanes. The street is six to 7 lanes wide and stays that way into the city of Euclid.

 

Not anymore. It's all four lanes (that meets federal lane-width standards since it is US20) with a center turn lane. I'm working on a visual presentation of Euclid, similar to what I did above for the NS right of way. It could fit dedicated bus lanes with some landscaping/barriers only if one lane in each direction is kept for non-transit traffic. Not sure if that leaves enough room for curbside parking, however.

Here are the views along Euclid Avenue, heading east from the Windermere RTA station in East Cleveland, through Cleveland to Euclid.....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

What are the travel speeds of the red line?  When I rode between Tower City and University Circle, it seemed pretty slow and I'm wondering if that will be an issue if the line is extended as proposed here. 

HealthLine

 

Mid-block widths:

27 feet is the width of the two dedicated bus lanes (no station) with a low curb separating the bus lanes from each other, not including any other roadway features.

60 feet no curbside parking where there are two bus lanes, two through vehicle lanes and bike lanes on both sides (curb to curb).

70 feet with curbside parking on one side + two bus lanes, two vehicle lanes and two bike lanes (curb to curb).

100 feet with two bus lanes, two through vehicle lanes, curbside parking on one side, bike lanes, landscaped strip on one side and two sidewalks.

 

Intersection-area widths:

35 feet is the width of the two dedicated bus lanes (with station), not including any other roadway features.

95 feet with station, one turn lane, no curbside parking, but with two bus lanes two vehicle lanes, two bike lanes and two sidewalks at East 79th and at East 105th

100 feet with station, no turn lanes, no curbside parking, but with two bus lanes, two vehicle lanes, two bikes lanes and two sidewalks at East 40th

105 feet below railroad bridge at East 55th Street

108 feet in front of Gallucci's at East 66th Street

120 feet right of way width from East 66th to East 79th with stations or landscaped median or one turn lane, no curbside parking, but with two bus lanes, two vehicle lanes, two bikes lanes, two tree lawns and two sidewalks.

 

 

No-dedicated bus lanes, HealthLine section, Euclid Avenue

 

80 feet at Coltman Avenue with stations/shelters on both sides of street, four through vehicle lanes, two sidewalks, no bike lanes, no turn lanes.

85 feet at Emily Avenue and Wheeler Avenue, just west and east of Superior, with station/shelter on one side of street, curbside parking on one side of street, four through lanes, center turn lane, two sidewalks, no bike lanes with center turn lane.

 

 

East of Windermere station and east of the HealthLine section, Euclid Avenue

 

77 feet in front of the Sportsplant (19600 block of Euclid Ave) in Euclid, with four through lanes, center turn lane, two sidewalks, two tree lawns (right of way width continues as-is east to Chardon Road where it widens to 80 feet).

85 feet at East 222nd Street in Euclid, with four through lanes, center turn lane, two sidewalks, two treelawns, no bike lanes.

90 feet at Lee Road, with four through lanes, center turn lane, curbside parking on one side, two sidewalks, no bike lanes.

90 feet in front of Shaw High School, with four through lanes, center turn lane, curbside parking on both sides, two sidewalks, no bike lanes.

100 feet in the Cleveland-only portion, continues for about 7,000 feet (1.5 miles) from Hillsboro Road (just west of Belvoir) east to Upper Valley Drive at the Euclid line (just east of Green). It has four through lanes, a center turn lane, curbside parking on both sides (briefly replaced on one side of Euclid with a right turn lane at Ivanhoe) and two sidewalks. The roadway itself narrows to 55 feet for much of this distance but with a total of 100 feet of right of way width including tree lawns and sidewalks. East of Upper Valley Drive, this 100 foot wide right of way narrows to 85 feet (then narrows further to 77 feet, see above).

 

KJP note: I remember this section of 100-foot-wide right of way as having three through lanes in each direction. It appears this section of roadway was narrowed to four through lanes by adding a 22-foot-wide tree lawn on the south side of Euclid.

 

EDIT: so it appears Euclid Avenue is wide enough for dedicated bus lanes all the way from Windermere to Richmond/East 260th, IF there is only one through lane in each direction for regular vehicular traffic and no curbside parking (curbside parking may be kept if there are no bike lanes). The exception is in the 1.5 miles of extra-wide, 100-foot-wide right of way in the Cleveland-only portion of Euclid.

What are the travel speeds of the red line?  When I rode between Tower City and University Circle, it seemed pretty slow and I'm wondering if that will be an issue if the line is extended as proposed here. 

 

Interesting that you ran so slowly. Red Line trains usually cruise at 55-60 mph, except in the vicinity of the Central Rail Facility at East 55th Street.

 

I'm also looking at maps and wondering if the Healthline could instead be extended north up Hayden Avenue and then east on St. Clair? Hayden is 75 feet wide, St. Clair is briefly 85 feet wide east to East 140th, but only 60 feet wide east of there into Euclid. I suspect this is an option that could be considered.

 

EDIT: GCRTA's consultants may even look at something up along Lake Shore Boulevard too, since the Lake Erie shore is the northern edge of the study area.

^If I were in charge I don't think I'd invest BRT money into the Hayden and that short St Clair Avenue corridor. I think if anything I would maybe increase bus service to serve the area. Not sure if that area is ripe for the kind of investment we've seen on Euclid to put hundreds of millions of BRT funds into it, especially when short term demands might be able to be met simply with more frequent bus service.

 

 

What are the travel speeds of the red line?  When I rode between Tower City and University Circle, it seemed pretty slow and I'm wondering if that will be an issue if the line is extended as proposed here. 

 

Interesting that you ran so slowly.

 

 

 

Maybe it was ahead of schedule 

^If I were in charge I don't think I'd invest BRT money into the Hayden and that short St Clair Avenue corridor. I think if anything I would maybe increase bus service to serve the area. Not sure if that area is ripe for the kind of investment we've seen on Euclid to put hundreds of millions of BRT funds into it, especially when short term demands might be able to be met simply with more frequent bus service.

 

For purposes of this study, the St. Clair corridor isn't any shorter than Euclid Avenue. St. Clair continues all the way east to Euclid Square Mall. The eastern limits of the study area is the Lake County line, on the east side of the mall.

 

In the streetcar days, the St. Clair line carried more people than the Euclid Avenue line. Prior to construction of the HealthLine, the #6 bus on Euclid was carrying just under 3 million people per year with the #1 bus on St. Clair not far behind at 2 million per year.

I guess what I was saying was not never put BRT on Hayden/St Clair, but put it on Euclid for now if the Redline extension couldn't happen. It seems Euclid is better connected to other Main thoroughfares in this stretch and possibly better connected to a larger amount of the residential population. It might go either way in terms of employment centers as both Euclid and St Clair have large warehouses and business facilities.

Probably true, but at this point I'd like to get an idea of what options could/should be considered for evaluation. You are going to see so many wild and crazy alternatives in the initial round of screening that you will wonder why they ever even considered them. But they will do it just so that no one can come back later and ask why "XYZ" option wasn't considered.

 

EDIT: for example, an option that may be considered is extending the HealthLine north on Hayden/West 140th or Euclid/West 152nd to Lake Shore Boulevard and continue east on Lake Shore to near the Lake County line. If this, or a St. Clair HealthLine, or a rail option on the CSX right of way (or all of them) aren't among the options considered, North Collinwood Councilman Michael Polensek is going to raise a lot of noise. If a North Collinwood option isn't pursued, I would not put it past him to attempt to organize forces to block any transit investment anywhere as a result of this planning. The way to avoid this is to have a diverse steering committee overseeing this planning and let it make the final selection of the locally preferred alternative to advance to preliminary engineering.

It might go either way in terms of employment centers as both Euclid and St Clair have large warehouses and business facilities.

 

In regards to the City of Euclid, you are correct about the large employment centers... not so much on Euclid Avenue. It's mostly housing and retail... and the later is fleeing to Euclid's downtown district in droves.

...an option that may be considered is extending the HealthLine north on Hayden/West 140th or Euclid/West 152nd to Lake Shore Boulevard and continue east on Lake Shore to near the Lake County line.

For purely selfish reasons, if the Red line can't be extended this would be my vote. Sure it'll probably get less ridership than the other options, but then I could walk to the Healthline.    :-D

So can I expect the new E222 St Station on the Red Line to be ready by the first snow?  8-)

So can I expect the new E222 St Station on the Red Line to be ready by the first snow?  8)

For purely selfish reasons, if the Red line can't be extended this would be my vote. Sure it'll probably get less ridership than the other options, but then I could walk to the Healthline.    :-D

 

But think about this study in these terms: how can this study be used to find public transportation options that improve access to University Circle from the northeast? Are UC employees, students, clients, visitors and tourists coming from the northeast direction? From where, exactly? In what numbers? Are they growing? What are the trend lines pointing toward for the future?

 

And, where else are northeast commuters and others traveling to in Cuyahoga County? Could the Rapid rail network accommodate them as-is or with some minor restructuring? Or could they be incorporated into proposed rail/transit projects now under planning -- Blue Line extension, West Shore Corridor? If not, could a HealthLine extension meet their needs?

 

Imagine.......

 

> making a downtown rail loop a pre-requisite for extending the Red Line east to Euclid. After all, when the Euclid Corridor was planned, a Shaker Connector was also included as an option. An extended east-side rail line would certainly perform better if it could serve the east side of downtown. Indeed, commuters coming from the northeast are probably more sensitive to having to transfer from rail to a bus to backtrack to the east side of downtown. Otherwise an extended HealthLine would probably be competitive with rail transit travel times from the eastern suburbs to Playhouse Square, CSU and much of the East 9th business district since no transfer is required.

 

> a Rapid line service that runs between a redeveloped Euclid Square Mall and a redeveloped Randall Park Mall with a new connecting track built just east of East 55th Street. The trains would also ease commuting from the southeast suburbs to University Circle.

 

> maybe the Red Line could be retrofitted with new trains that can lower their electricity-collecting pantographs at the end of the wires at Windermere, turn on their diesel engines, and switch over to the NS tracks so they can run to Euclid and possibly beyond (if NS trains can be rerouted over the CSX tracks). And if this could happen, then why not run these trains west to West Boulevard where they again lower their pantographs, go diesel, and switch over to the tracks out to Lakewood, Westlake and beyond?

 

Those are just a few wild and crazy options that might be included in this alternatives analysis.

And, where else are northeast commuters and others traveling to in Cuyahoga County?

Well, personally, I know a lot more people in Euclid and western Lake County that are commuting down 271 than coming into downtown, but that doesn't really concern the corridor in question unless someone wants to propose having Red Line trains or Healthline busses running down 271. (Put the trains in the grass medians between the local lanes and express lanes?) Neither of which really sounds like a good idea to me.

I must admit, RTA getting $1M to study a possible Red Line extension to (around) Euclid Square Mall has totally (pleasantly) caught me off guard... It's made sense for decades (I think even the Vans proposed it in the 1920s!), but I figured our ineptitude at ... well, maybe this is a sign things are a changin'... finally.

 

One issue: it seems the still new-ish Windermere station would have to be seriously altered to extend tracks beyond it-- which seemed to me  poor planning when it was rebuilt.  The potential  eastbound track dead-ends into the handsome atrium.  Only the westbound track and a storage/non-revenue track to the north go through... Given this, how would extension happen?  Would RTA spend $Mils to rebuild the atrium to allow the Eastbound track to cut through?  Or, would RTA turn the storage track into the Westbound track (with the current through Westbound track to switch to Eastbound, and thus force riders to/from Westbound trains to walk across the Eastbound track at grade with a signal and cross-bucks (a la the current Brookpark's temp station), to a ramp and stairs to the platfrom? Hmmm.

>Interesting that you ran so slowly.

 

I've only ridden it once.  It definitely didn't go over 30mph and it walked past the rail yard. 

One issue: it seems the still new-ish Windermere station would have to be seriously altered to extend tracks beyond it-- which seemed to me  poor planning when it was rebuilt.  The potential  eastbound track dead-ends into the handsome atrium.  Only the westbound track and a storage/non-revenue track to the north go through... Given this, how would extension happen?  Would RTA spend $Mils to rebuild the atrium to allow the Eastbound track to cut through?  Or, would RTA turn the storage track into the Westbound track (with the current through Westbound track to switch to Eastbound, and thus force riders to/from Westbound trains to walk across the Eastbound track at grade with a signal and cross-bucks (a la the current Brookpark's temp station), to a ramp and stairs to the platfrom? Hmmm.

 

I was told the Windermere station was designed so it would allow the Red Line to be extended to the east. But you are correct, unless the Red Line ran single-track through the station, the glass atrium would have to be retrofitted to allow double-track through service.....

 

 

 

In this eastward-looking view, the eastbound track dead-ends on the other side of the glass at right....

 

 

 

In this view in a generally opposite direction as above, I am standing almost directly below where the eastbound would have to be extended (in about 7-10 years when the Windermere station is pushing 25 years old). Behind me (the photographer) is the eastward wall seen in the birdseye view above. To the right of the escalator and stairwell, beyond the glass with the banner "North America's best public transportation system" is the westbound track....

 

Who is the handsome guy wearing the ballcap in the second pic? Looks so suave and urbane!  8-)

 

I think the answer to the question above would be to build a second atrium between the CSX tracks and the westernmost RTA track and leave the existing setup as is. Short hops for rush hour could terminate at the stub track. Tracks just west of the station could be reoriented to make this work.

What are the travel speeds of the red line?  When I rode between Tower City and University Circle, it seemed pretty slow and I'm wondering if that will be an issue if the line is extended as proposed here. 

 

Interesting that you ran so slowly.

 

I know the construction between W. 25th and Tower City has slowed things down, but lately the trains seem very erratic.  I was meeting a friend at the University Circle stop on Saturday.  He called me at 11:57 to tell me he had caught the train which was scheduled to leave W. 25th at around 11:55 and I could hear the train moving in the background, so it was close to being on time.  It didn't arrive at the UC stop until 12:22, so it took over 25 minutes to cover what used to be 15 minutes, and arrived 12 minutes behind schedule after being pretty much on time just a few stops before.

 

Over 25 min to cover 6.5 miles is an average of about 15 mph.  That's awfully slow for trains that can and do reach 55-60 mph at times.  What is going on?  It's not like the train was ahead and had to wait.  It seems like the schedules are getting harder and harder to rely on being remotely accurate.

Who is the handsome guy wearing the ballcap in the second pic? Looks so suave and urbane!  8-)

 

I think the answer to the question above would be to build a second atrium between the CSX tracks and the westernmost RTA track and leave the existing setup as is. Short hops for rush hour could terminate at the stub track. Tracks just west of the station could be reoriented to make this work.

 

That loony guy was following me everywhere that day!

 

Actually, I think RTA's plan was to continue the eastbound track on a new bridge deck right above where I was standing. I think the existing atrium could be modified relatively easily.

 

Jam40jeff, Those are good questions for the general GCRTA thread where Jerry Masek could probably enlighten us.

I am seeing some vindication for KJP's  proposal to use  GTW DMUs for commuter rail, and Replacement of RTAs Redline cars.

 

One of the greatest cost of Adding commuter rail in Cleveland was how to traverse the city. from the east Collinwood yards was a challenge, from the west was how to get into Tower city or to the rails station on the lake.

 

think about this, RTA is extending its line to the east and to the south, following the paths for route 7 to Ashtabula (red line) and route 6 to Aurora (blue line).

 

Using RTA tracks and existing infrastructure, Depots, station and power, you could save money and increase the usefulness of the existing network.

 

You could have Fleet of dual mode Diesel/ electric DMUs operating the commuter routes, converting to electric when they reach the RTA Rails, servicing stations at University circle, West Blvd, Tower City, and even the Airport.  they would not stop at every station but they could provide express service where express service does not exist today.  Think express service from University Circle to Tower City or Shaker Square Non-Stop into Downtown. 

 

In addition to common stations, the storage and servicing could be done at RTA's under utilized E55th depot.

 

Most importantly the rails would be owned and operated by the transit agency.

 

questions would be :

Could RTA's existing control infrastructure be expanded to handle commuter rail?

What upgrades would be needed to allow the use of dual mode trains?

How difficult would it be the create express service on existing lines.

potential cost savings by moving the RedLine trains to a DMU type train?

Platform issues, heights?

Does Tower city need additional platforms for Commuter Service, or can the current platforms be used until a permanent solution is found?

 

 

why BRT and why not one of these

I am looking forward to the Lakewood meeting on Monday, Trying to convince more people to show up too.

 

I find the West-shore's Facebook page is in desperate need of help, they have event and hey don't bother to inform any followers of the page about that event.

 

I find curious how few people know about this project.

 

Any rail car can be designed to conform to its operating environment, including using GCRTA's power supply and interactive cab signal systems, as well as its mix of low- and high-level station platforms on its heavy- and light-rail lines.

 

I'm not married to this rail industry supplier, but Stadler of Switzerland has a piece of equipment and lots of PR stuff that visually shows what biker16 is talking about..

 

Imagine this train operating on all GCRTA rapid transit lines. As you can see, it is electrically powered, has doors for low-platform loading (ie: Shaker lines) and doors for high-platform loading (ie: Red Line), and these train floors and door heights can be designed in any way the customer wants. Right now these electrically powered trains operate only in Europe....

 

 

 

And now I present this train equipment below. What's different about it? Look carefully at it. Give up? There's no pantographs on top of the train to collect electricity from overhead wires because there are also no overhead wires! This is a diesel-powered version of the European train shown above, and this one operates right now in Austin, Texas on freight tracks extending some 30 miles out from the downtown (see: http://www.capmetro.org/metrorail/). It is possible for this train to switch back and forth between diesel and electric, as all diesel locomotives are electrics anyway. They use the diesel engine to power an electric motor which turns the wheels. So the diesel can be cut out when under the Red Line's existing wires....

 

There would need to be a lot of new switches built to accommodate running a commuter/express line on the same tracks.  Not every station but every other or every three stations and have the commuter trains throttle down to time it so they catch up with a local train as they enter a station area with bypass switches.

^^Windermere station conversion -- OK, I see how the Eastbound track could be extended through.  RTA would still have to seal off the track area with glass and/or metal to maintain the temp-controlled environment of the atrium.  Also, the atrium would also be cut in size; be more cramped feeling -- all this, plus the cost to retrofit, seems really unnecessary if RTA had simply built both tracks through in prep for possible future expansion; this is esp true given your overhead Bing shot showing the immense amount of land RTA had to work with. 

 

Diesel or EMU?  I understand the idea of using diesel/conversion cars which can access more parts of the system cheaply.  Still, I'd prefer we go whole hog -- extend the wires; all the way to Mentor, if need be, but certainly near the Lake County border.  Why electric?  Even given the greater expense, I believe the traffic-generating capacity of this long, dense corridor warrants electric trains, at least for a 6-10 mile extension.  Even with this, you could still extend conventional diesel commuter rail all the way to the Penna border.  I'm not sure DMU in a commuter-rail type format, from Windermere to Euclid/Lake County would adequately handle the traffic.  Also, from what I understand about the technology, the diesel switchover equipment for whatever reason (excess weight?) isn't feasible -- otherwise, why aren't older systems like Boston or New York using them (or newer ones like Dallas or LA?).  Besides this, our dominant physical plant is electric-train oriented; diesel cars would be

 

Denver (with its FasTracks), which has city/metro density lower than Cleveland's, is building a vast, mainly electric rail network, including a 3-prong electrified commuter rail system.  In Cleveland,  I just think we need to raise our sights a little bit and believe a little.  Projects like the amazing University Circle Uptown (which KJP cites as causing the renewed interest in Red Line/Healthline expansion) is a prime example of Cleveland breaking through a decades-long WE CAN'T barrier to accomplish something special that we know Clevelanders can and will support... Hopefully our increasing urbanization and Red Line patronage, will lead us to expanding the Red Line as propose -- but lets shoot for a Mercedes (as in fully electric expansion), ... and not a Ford Fusion (DMU).  We've been told too long that the best we deserve (and can afford) is 2nd rate.

^btw, one way electric Red Line expansion could be made cheaper, and worthwhile, would be for NS to reroute it's daytime trains, north on the Superior Ave/Colinwood junction, so that Red Line trains could simply switch over, and wires strung over, the existing NS rails.  That way almost no infrastructure building would be needed -- NS could service its existing customers along Euclid with nighttime shuttles when the Rapid would be offline.

GCRTA doesn't run trains frequently enough to warrant the extra tracks for mixing expresses in with the existing locals. The system was designed to run trains every 3-5 minutes. The Red Line on the east side operates every 20 minutes including during rush hours. It is more frequent between East 55th and Tower City where the Shaker trains mix in with trains every 6 minutes. That's about the only section where the Rapid system is near track capacity. If the downtown loop were built, this could alleviate the worst capacity crunch area -- the eastern approach to Tower City.

 

Clvlndr, Uptown alone isn't a driver for the Red Line/HealthLine extension. The entirety of UC's growth is certainly a factor, however.

 

Here's a map showing how a Red Line Dual-Mode train could figure into the grand scheme by operating through to the West Shore Corridor out to Lorain (OK, I took a little liberty by extending the HealthLine west on Detroit Avenue to the West Boulevard station!).....

 

 

 

And here's some Red Line views I shot on Monday showing Tower City and Ohio City stations at midday. Some decent ridership for a midday....

 

 

 

 

 

And, no I didn't add those heavenly rays of sunshine. That's WAY beyond my Photoshopping expertise!

 

I've posted it on All Aboard Ohio's three Facebook pages and Tweeted it, too! We're trying to get the word out. Friend All Aboard Ohio's Facebook page. Follow us on Twitter. Share our updates and info!

Link? (for us lazy people that need info spoon fed to us)

Link? (for us lazy people that need info spoon fed to us)

 

http://www.facebook.com/pages/All-Aboard-Ohio-The-Official-Page/131908532861

 

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Linking-Ohio/181838151266

 

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100001092791841

 

http://twitter.com/#!/AllAboardOhio

^Actually, KJP, RTA (Jerry I believe) stated on UO a couple years ago that the 20-min (which is unacceptable to even the Windermere branch for base or rush hours), which was reduced from the 15-min intervals then in place, in order to allow construction at the Puritas Rapid station... Well, Puritas, of course, has been open for most of the year and, yet, we still have the 20-min schedules.  It seems RTA did this to save money more than necessity... Which I'm fine with as an emergency, financial measure, given our stingy state gov... I just wish RTA would be straight with us...

 

Mid-day Red Line... I've noticed the crowds, too; it's visual evidence of the 17+% ridership increase... And with this, the Red Line's infamous "silver bullet" single-car specials have all but disappeared.  Yay!!

 

I sure hope, once the casino opens, RTA may consider adding a few late night trains on Friday and Sat.  Downtown and Ohio City are really hopping with nightlife these days, and Midnight-ending trains seems so podunk-ish, as well as being anti-public service (consider all those liquored-up drivers removed from downtown streets!).

Jam40jeff was referring to delayed, slower trains rather than longer, scheduled waits.

Personally I wonder why we don't return to street cars like this

 

http://www.bombardier.com/en/transportation/products-services/rail-vehicles/light-rail-vehicles/flexity-trams?docID=0901260d8001269c

http://www.flexity2.bombardier.com/pdf/BT_Flexity2_210x280_19.pdf

 

To make up a downtown loop service, at first, to replace the blue and green line trains, and could be eventually offered as an upgrade for the health line.

 

With electric only GTW type vehicles to replace the redline, and dual mode Diesel/electrics to serve express commuters.

^ I want streetcars to replace the healthline busses so bad. The current busses wouldn't be a waste because they could be used to replace the other older articulated busses that currently run throughout the city. Personally I would like RTA to perfect the routes they have in place before expanding them. The Healthline already has too long of intervals and overcrowded busses. Extending it would only make an even worse nightmare.

^ I want streetcars to replace the healthline busses so bad. The current busses wouldn't be a waste because they could be used to replace the other older articulated busses that currently run throughout the city. Personally I would like RTA to perfect the routes they have in place before expanding them. The Healthline already has too long of intervals and overcrowded busses. Extending it would only make an even worse nightmare.

 

Agreed.  We have plenty of Healthline already.

there shouldve already been rail service to euclid (and beyond) years ago. also commuter rail to mentor & painesville.

 

please no more bus rapid transit. the healthline was a huge waste of money, there should be street cars or a subway down euclid to UC (i know i know, $$$$). this was a big fail. what on earth would the point of running a bus beyond windermere when you have tracks right there. all you need is equipment and stations now.

 

also, the majority of cleveland's most populated neighborhoods are not served by mass transit. we need to expand rail in the city of cleveland before extending it out in the burbs. 

 

The Healthline already has too long of intervals and overcrowded busses. Extending it would only make an even worse nightmare.

 

I think you just stated why, if something gets built, will probably be an extension of the Red Line. They would have to run a lot of buses to handle the number of passengers over long routes taking a long time. That's a lot of labor, service hours and late-running buses. Why would buses run late? Because over longer routes, all it takes is one wheelchair passenger and that bus falls back in the service pattern, into the catchment timeframe of the next bus behind. So the slightly late bus starts picking up more passengers than it would normally, and it runs later and later. The bus behind it is having to pick up fewer passengers so it catches up to the bus ahead of it. Although this happens less on the HealthLine because it has level boarding and pre-payment of fares, we know it still happens. And then there is the signal preemption at intersections which never seems to work right....

 

Even before the HealthLine, the #6 bus ran with the same type of regular buses as the #28. The #6 ran the same route as the HealthLine runs today, from Windermere to downtown. Meanwhile the #28 ran along Euclid from Windermere to Euclid, carrying 1 million people per year, just as it does today. There's a reason why these were two separate routes then, even when they used the same kinds of buses -- because running the #6 all the way out to Euclid Square Mall would have overwhelmed that route and destroyed what reliability it had. By forcing a transfer from the #28 at Windermere, some of the riders transferred to the Red Line and some to the #6. When you don't force a transfer, it's only human nature to want to stay in the same seat. You might even match the train's travel time on a slower bus because you don't have to wait for the train.

 

By forcing a transfer at Windermere, the ridership gets dispersed between the Red Line and the #6, or the HealthLine today. If the HealthLine is extended out to Euclid, most if not all of the Euclid Avenue transit ridership east of Windermere would likely stay on the HealthLine west of Windermere. Because a two- or three-car Red Line train can carry 160 to 240 seated passengers with just one driver, it may be much more cost-effective to extend the Red Line.

Thanks KJP, Ill move my comment to the healthline thread so this thread doesnt get too off topic

... Because a two- or three-car Red Line train can carry 160 to 240 seated passengers with just one driver, it may be much more cost-effective to extend the Red Line.

So it really becomes a matter of which type of funds are more limited. If capital funds are the limiting factor, we'll get either nothing or a Healthline extension. If the capital funds can be found to extend the Red Line, it would be in RTA's interest because it would reduce operating costs and I think we all know that operating funds are always limited (though maintenance on the extended line does significantly eat into the savings of a single train operator vs. a bunch of bus drivers.)

I am sitting here at my computer considering options and pre-analyzing them and coming to conclusions based on my experience. Others here at UO are doing it too. But we don't yet know what the raw data will say, or what it will say after it is run through ridership models, or what the FTA requirements will be several years from now, or who will be in the White House, who will be in the governor's mansion, who will be representing us in Congress, etc.

 

So many variables come in to play including many that we haven't thought of yet and take a lot of analyses. It's like planning to buy a wardrobe for your community for what the climate and fashions will be 200 years from now. Except in this case, the economy, consumer preferences, social issues, demographics and politics change must faster. That's one of the reasons why these federal project planning processes cost so much money and take so long -- not the least of which is that the federal government wants to give the public and property owners due process if their properties are to be appropriated or otherwise affected.

there shouldve already been rail service to euclid (and beyond) years ago. also commuter rail to mentor & painesville.

 

please no more bus rapid transit. the healthline was a huge waste of money, there should be street cars or a subway down euclid to UC (i know i know, $$$$). this was a big fail. what on earth would the point of running a bus beyond windermere when you have tracks right there. all you need is equipment and stations now.

 

also, the majority of Cleveland's most populated neighborhoods are not served by mass transit. we need to expand rail in the city of cleveland before extending it out in the burbs. 

 

I agree. Extending either of these lines should not at all be a priority of the RTA. A downtown loop of the waterfront line and a western extension of light rail out to Lakewood make way more sense than this.

 

The Healthline pretty much serves its purpose for now, which is providing a connection from downtown to University Circle as well as spurring development in between. Anything beyond East Cleveland could be served by an extended Red Line on the railroad right-of-way that parallels Euclid Ave; but again, I think there are much more productive expansion projects that should be considered before that.

 

While I do think that the Healthline is an obvious improvement from what was there before, I also think that BRT is a half-a**ed form of rapid transit under most circumstances. A subway down Euclid Ave in lieu of BRT would have never happened at this point in time, but I think a light rail could have.

 

I would eventually like to see light rail put down the center of Chester Ave, replacing the Euclid BRT, and serving this corridor when it reaches a critical mass in terms of development. A Chester Ave light rail could branch out from a potential downtown loop created by the waterfront line (somewhere near CSU). This light rail would terminate at University Circle, making a loop around the area before heading back to downtown. Chester Avenue is much better suited for light rail since it's much wider than Euclid Avenue, and a revitalized midtown would mean more traffic on Euclid that makes operating transit on it more difficult.

Until KJP's photos, I didn't realize the density that already exists along Euclid Ave into Euclid.  Red Line expansion to that area would encourage much more.  I think extending the Red Line right up to the Lake County border would make the most sense (at least, until RTA remains strictly a Cuyahoga County-only entity).  The convergence of the 2 super highways (I-90 & Rte 2) right at the western base of large/growing Lake County would really open up passengers to the Red Line high-speed option to Univ. Circle, especially... Downtown and Ohio City would be made much more accessbile to these riders as well...

 

... like many UOers have stated: it's amazing this extension wasn't built decades ago... At least RTA is seriously looking at it now... kudos to them!

also, the majority of cleveland's most populated neighborhoods are not served by mass transit. we need to expand rail in the city of cleveland before extending it out in the burbs. 

 

The suburbs have 2/3 of the population of the county and pay anywhere from 2/3 to 3/4 of the taxes that subsidize the system.

I have a feeling that a red line park and ride at I-90 would be very popular for those working in University Circle.  MLK is just a mess at rush hour.

I knew there would be debate about this! But that's good. And I'll keep supplying photos from the study area, road dimensions, ridership data, maps, and whatever else so that we can have an informed debate. And most of all, we can go into the required public meetings held by GCRTA's corridor planning team and surprise them with our informed points of view, even if we aren't in agreement with each other.

I was taking a look at Mapquest and how the Red Line just fails to match up with Cleveland Clinic.  Obviously, if your buses are full, there's demand there.  Plus, it's always seemed kind of stupid to me that we spent all this money on a rail system that passes really close to the biggest employer in the region, but you can't get "there from there" without passing through some shall-we-say "uninviting" turf.

 

I turned on the satellite images and took a look at said turf, specifically south of Cedar between 100th and 105th. Damn.  Lots of empty lots and I can't imagine that the remaining buildings are in the best shape, either.

 

Why not put a Waterfront-line type of light rail line through there, expand the 105th-Quincy Station so you can transfer seamlessly between the two, and run over to the Clinic?  Perhaps add a stop for the new juvie court center at 93rd and Quincy as well...

^Why not just gentrify that stretch so it's no longer "uninviting." That way the area becomes safer or atleast its perception does and there's new investment in the area, which would add much needed new housing and retail in the area.