According to the Enhance Clifton website the transit element of the current project will remain unchanged, save for some upgraded shelters and possibly added stops.  I'm not sure how the BRT version RTA is pushing to design with stimulus funds and the simple streetscaping as noted on their site are interconnected, if at all currently.

 

I'd be perfectly fine with BRT on Detroit and just redo Clifton with enhanced stops, street lights, medians and crosswalks. 

 

I unfortunately won't be able to make the meeting next week but hoping one of our fellow Urban Ohio members can attend and fill the rest of us Clifton/Edgewater residents in on the proceedings.

I'm sorry, but with frequent accordion (articulated) buses RTA is using along Detroit (the No. 26) during the week, why would BRT be some kind of boost?  There's no evidence the Health Line is encouraging development along Euclid, so why should this be different along Detroit which, by the way, is a much stronger, much more built up and much narrower street than Euclid?  The growth its experiencing predated and is unrelated to the Health Line and the space between E. 40th and the Clinic area starting with the low density suburban housing at E. 79th, is a ghost town.

 

So what, were looking for $200M more from the feds for for Detroit landscaping and modernistic, high-platform station-stops that probably will not boost ridership any significant amount?

^ One man's opinion. There are MANY who would disagree. Suit yourself.

^Agreed.  Once again I think those three letters just get inside people's heads.  I'm guessing many riders on the Detroit, Clifton and Lorain lines would be delighted to have (1) better waiting environments with schedule information, (2) prioritized lights (if it can be made to work) (3) fewer stops and (4) improved frequency.  Jerry, if you don't already, you might even think about describing these projects strictly as "enhanced bus routes" if the BRT backlash grows.

Perhaps also Jerry you can enlighten us as to what the status of this "Enhance Clifton Transit" project is as opposed to the actual proposed BRT?

 

The Enhance Clifton website simply says buses will continue to use the right lane and have no dedicated lanes--decidedly not BRT.  Transit waiting environments would be improved however.

 

 

^ One man's opinion. There are MANY who would disagree. Suit yourself.

 

The point being is that imho No. 26 Detroit bus service is fine as it is; it's among the best I've experienced in the RTA system.  Last summer I experienced the new extra-long buses into Downtown Lakewood from the West Blvd Red Line station.  They are frequent and easy to use... So why spend a ton of money to, essentially, rebuild bus service?  Why fix what ain't broken?

.

It also seems hard to justify a BRT for a route that can barely support enough riders outside of rush hours that its existence outside of those time frames was cut.

 

 

 

While it's going to be tough to argue for BRT on Clifton now due to the hacking the 55 is getting, midday weekday ridership is very good on the 55.  I've been on more than one bus midday that had a standing load not too far east of West 117th. 

I've been on numerous buses on Saturday that had close to full seated loads by West Blvd. 

 

The 26 does not run artics on the weekends right now.  I hope they're brought back on the weekends (at least by Memorial Day weekend).  Otherwise, the 26 may end up resembling a sardine can....especially on Saturdays. 

.

It also seems hard to justify a BRT for a route that can barely support enough riders outside of rush hours that its existence outside of those time frames was cut.

 

 

 

While it's going to be tough to argue for BRT on Clifton now due to the hacking the 55 is getting, midday weekday ridership is very good on the 55. I've been on more than one bus midday that had a standing load not too far east of West 117th.

I've been on numerous buses on Saturday that had close to full seated loads by West Blvd.

 

The 26 does not run artics on the weekends right now. I hope they're brought back on the weekends (at least by Memorial Day weekend). Otherwise, the 26 may end up resembling a sardine can....especially on Saturdays.

 

The 55 can get filled up mid-day, but don't forget that outside of rush hour, it's once an hour service. I once rode the 55 from Downtown to Lakewood at 9 am on a weekday, there were 3 passengers aboard (myself included). The demographics and commuting patterns of the area it serves will make it hard to increase ridership, except at rush hour, which will be a hard push for a true BRT.

 

It will be interesting to see what this enhance clifton ends up being all about. I do like the idea mentioned above about enhanced bus routes. Clifton could use a "branding" of sorts and improved bus waiting areas that are tasteful to the neighborhood might do the trick.

The point being is that imho No. 26 Detroit bus service is fine as it is; it's among the best I've experienced in the RTA system. Last summer I experienced the new extra-long buses into Downtown Lakewood from the West Blvd Red Line station. They are frequent and easy to use... So why spend a ton of money to, essentially, rebuild bus service? Why fix what ain't broken?

 

Because it is broken. We can do better than a slow, unreliable ride (especially if we hit a lot of red lights) to downtown that I prefer not to take. I would like to see functional signal prioritization. The shelters could be so much nicer (there elegant, mass-produced shelters out there). There is no "next bus" passenger information available at major stops (W. 117th, West Blvd Sta., W. 65th etc). And imagine how much faster this route would be if it were POP.

 

I would rather take the 55, but I will soon lose that option on weekends. So now my choice on weekends is to take the 26 on Detroit or drive my own car downtown. Guess what I'll probably be doing....

KJP are you going to the Enhance Clifton meeting next Wednesday the 7th?

 

Their website said it was supposed to be the 24th, but then Jerry said that date was wrong--last time I checked they still hadn't updated it. 

Possibly. What's the time and location?

I checked back on the website and the date was indeed changed as Jerry Masek indicated last week.

 

http://www.enhanceclifton.com/node/5?q=node/45

Public Meeting #1

When: Wednesday, April 7th 2010 :: 7pm-9pm

Where: Emerson Middle School (13439 Clifton Blvd. Lakewood, OH) map

What: Initial public meeting joint session for Cleveland and Lakewood

    * Brief overview of previous planning effors and actions by Cleveland and Lakewood to date

    * Overview of scope, deliverables and timeline of this study process

    * Presentation of potential plan components to test residents priorities, qualitative desires and funtional needs

 

 

 

Also from the RTA website, the press release as promised by Mr. Masek:  http://www.riderta.com/nu_newsroom_releases.asp?listingid=1409

 

April 7 public meeting to begin Clifton Project

 

CLEVELAND – Officials of the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA) will host a meeting on April 7 to begin a public involvement process about the upcoming transit project on Clifton Boulevard.

 

The meeting will be held from 7-9 p.m. on Wednesday, April 7, at the Emerson Elementary School, 13439 Clifton Blvd., Lakewood.

 

Working with RTA, Congressman Dennis Kucinich (D-10) has requested a FY2011 appropriations earmark of $5.0 million for the construction of the Clifton Boulevard Transit Enhancement Project in the cities of Cleveland and Lakewood.

 

The project covers a little more than four miles of Clifton Boulevard, from the end of the West Shoreway to the Lakewood/Rocky River border. The goal is to make Clifton Boulevard more pedestrian friendly and visually pleasant with a landscaped medium, 30 upgraded curbside stations and dedicated bus lanes during rush hours.

 

The attractive curbside stations will fit into the neighborhoods, RTA says. They will “be designed to reflect the architectural characteristics of their neighborhoods in concert with residents and stakeholders. The stations will reflect current practices in urban design, sustainability and incorporate appropriate green technology.”

 

RTA says the design will be developed during meetings with planners, residents, stakeholders and community leaders.

 

The project will also include a transit-priority-based traffic signal system that uses current RTA activation technology, a 3M GPS-based system.

 

Clifton has always been a popular transit corridor. About 90 percent of residents in Lakewood live within a 10-minute walk to a bus stop. Over the past few years, bus routes on Clifton Boulevard have supplied about 600,000 rides annually.

 

Total construction cost of the project will depend on enhancements included in the final design.

 

Thanks!

I have to be out of town for work but would love to hear how meeting #1 goes.

 

Give us an update if you can attend!

A blurb in the Lakewood Observer on the Enhance Clifton project--nothing really new but wanted to note:

 

7:00 PM - 9:00 PM

Clifton Boulevard Enhancement Project Public Meeting

In 2007, the cities of Lakewood and Cleveland worked together to build a conceptual plan to enhance Clifton Boulevard. The plan seeks to calm traffic and enhance property values along the boulevard by improving the landscaping, lighting, pedestrian and transportation amenities along the boulevard. The plan is best known for its recommendation to install a landscaped median.

 

Despite challenging economic times, our communities strive to make strategic investments that improve quality of life and property values.

 

Full article at:

http://lakewoodobserver.com/calendar/2010-04-07

Did anyone go to this meeting?

 

I noticed the enhanceclifton site is up, but find it odd that they use a "photoshopped" picture of Clifton where they spliced several single family residential areas to form one picture.

I went to the meeting, as did 100+ other people. Several spoke out against changing Clifton at all, and one person suggested it go to a ballot vote. I do not feel that was a majority opinion.

I went to the meeting, as did 100+ other people. Several spoke out against changing Clifton at all, and one person suggested it go to a ballot vote. I do not feel that was a majority opinion.

 

Thanks for the report!

 

So will the BRT project eventually cross paths with this project?  Does RTA have plans of pushing the BRT into this Enhance Clifton plan?  The reason I ask is the Enhance Clifton site specifically states that there will be no bus lane changes--only cosmetic updates to the waiting areas.

 

I'm for anything that spruces up the neighborhood!

From what I heard last night, the Clifton Project is at least 75 percent about Clifton, and 25 percent, or less, about RTA.

From what I heard last night, the Clifton Project is at least 75 percent about Clifton, and 25 percent, or less, about RTA.

 

Either way it will be good for the neighborhood, where we still have many owner-occupied housing.  I think many homeowners will be inclined to make improvements once the street and sidewalks take shape, along with the pending West Shoreway enhancements as well. 

 

As far as RTA goes I'm actually fine with the enhance Clifton program of making the waiting environments better on a heavily-traveled line, and hopefully some TOD in the W117/Clifton area.  Not sure the route deserves BRT but this would be a good start.

I went to the meeting, as did 100+ other people. Several spoke out against changing Clifton at all, and one person suggested it go to a ballot vote. I do not feel that was a majority opinion.

 

Damn! I totally forgot about it!!

Driving down Clifton this morning, I saw one of those automated traffic counter things taped down on the road. Measuring traffic as part of the planning process?

From the Sun News via Cleveland.com (with it's usual cadre of negative comments)

 

Clifton Boulevard Project spurs questions from residents

By Kate Spirgen, Sun News

April 15, 2010, 10:54AM

 

LAKEWOOD - Residents fired questions at Clifton Boulevard Project consultants and officials from the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority, Cleveland and Lakewood Wednesday as the three organizations plan renovations to the 4-mile stretch of road.

 

Complete story at:  http://www.cleveland.com/sunpostherald/index.ssf/2010/04/clifton_boulevard_project_spur.html

Notes from the first public meeting are up on the Enhance Clifton website:

 

http://www.enhanceclifton.com/node/5?q=node/45

 

Since the project is really a road construction project with some transit components (and has nothing to do with BRT) I'm thinking it deserves a separate thread from this one.  Perhaps entitled "Enhance Clifton"?

Great info at the Streetscape download, this project looks fantastic.  I especially like the roundabout at Lake/West Blvd.  The new streetscape is going to do wonders for the the retail in the area.  Only potential downside I can think of would be for home owners that will have to go in a predetermined direction, then make a u-turn if their destination was opposite.

A lot of people I know in Lakewood prefer to take Lake Ave.  This number will probably increase if Clifton's capacity is significantly reduced.  But it doesn't look like capacity will be reduced all that much, and I think the median is a good idea here.  Medians make it a lot easier for pedestrians to cross.  And it's probably wise to avoid using "BRT" terminology altogether. 

 

The only concern I have here is that it this project seems like a want and not a need, when we have so many needs that deserve ARRA money. 

Another story hit the paper today about the Enhance Clifton project.  Since this is not limited to a transport or BRT project I thought it might be deserving of it's very own thread.

 

From Cleveland.com:

 

Conceptual designs for the Clifton Transportation Enhancement Program sparked many suggestions at a public work session Aug. 11 where officials from the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority, Lakewood and Cleveland met with residents and other interested parties.

 

Complete article at:  http://www.cleveland.com/sunpostherald/index.ssf/2010/08/ideas_offered_for_clifton_boul.html

i'm disappointed by the initial median drawings here and overall street design.  There would seem to be a good opportunity to address storm water runoff (this area is in a combined sewer area, with a number of overflows within a mile of the project) with some of the plantings and street design, but it appears to be a solid concrete curb with much of the islands hard surfaced around the edges.  this looks very 1960 (but it's new construction, so it must be good!).  i'd like to see some 2010 thinking built into the project, and perhaps some better connection/attention to the lake nearby.

 

were there any discussions about stormwater/water quality aspects of this project that aren't represented by the presentations?  are there any goals for the project to try and control runoff in this area?

 

a couple of examples: 

DC - http://images.greatergreaterwashington.org/images/201003/bioretention.jpg

Michigan - www.semcog.org/LowImpactDevelopment.aspx

Buffalo - http://www.buffalorising.com/2009/02/pushing-green-at-canal-side.html#SlideFrame_0

Nashville - http://hpigreen.com/tag/green-streets/

 

  And it's probably wise to avoid using "BRT" terminology altogether. 

 

I've tried to start a new thread for this project, which is exclusive of any talks of BRT, and the moderators keep kicking it back onto this thread.

The reason is that GCRTA considers this a "BRT-light" and BRTs aren't limited to being a transportation project (at its root, the Dual Hub/Euclid Corridor/Silver Line/HealthLine main benefit was the replacement of a 100-year-old street system from the sewers up to the streetlights and from a building facade on one side of the street to the opposing side).

 

Whatever it this Clifton/Shoreway project is, we can't have several different threads about the same improvements to the same transit route, when we're still talking about the same thing. If you think this thread's title should be changed, such as to "Cleveland: Clifton/Shoreway corridor", then so be it. But the project that's being discussed is still the same regardless of what it should or shouldn't be called.

Thanks for the explanation KJP---makes sense.

 

And whatever it is--I do hope it happens to re-energize one of Cleveland's great neighborhoods.

ODOT TRAC funding apparently was awarded for this, or at least reconfirmed, yesterday. Still trying to get a handle on it.

Great to hear!  Where did you get confirmation?

"Reconfirm" probably wasn't the right word. "Preserving" is probably a better word. Funding had previously been recommended by the TRAC for planning the Clifton BRT-lite and the latest recommendation by the TRAC didn't cut anything. In fact, it added $7.1 million for construction in state fiscal year 2012 which starts July 1.

 

Here's the TRAC's latest draft projects list:

http://www.dot.state.oh.us/trac/Documents/2011%20Draft%20TRAC%20List%20(December%209,%202010).pdf

Was also mentioned in this PD article on Cleveland.com on Saturday:

 

http://blog.cleveland.com/metro/2010/12/streetscape_and_trail_projects.html

 

"Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority: Create 41/2 miles of bus-only lanes and add bus shelters on Clifton Boulevard from the east end of the Shoreway at Lake Avenue to the west end loop in Lakewood. The curb lanes will be bus-only, similar to those downtown, but just in peak hours. Federal contribution: $600,000"

This project won't make Clifton a true boulevard with a landscaped median though or will it?  I was under the impression that was part of the original project.  Did this get cut out or is it going to be done under a separate project?

In that case it seems like a real waste.  I used to ride the 55 on Clifton every day.  The buses showed up every 15 minutes or so and they were packed.  There is no sense in restrcting a lane - during rush hour - to one vehcle per 15 mintues.  That's insane, because this isn't Euclid Avenue.  Hopefully this project also involves adding more buses on the 55 route.  I'm not sure what we're gaining otherwise.

There will be a landscaped median, with a dedicated bus lane during each rush hour only when the crowded #55 buses run every 3-15 minutes....

 

http://www.riderta.com/pdf/55.pdf

 

 

^3-15 minutes sounds realistic from my experience with the Healthline.

Every 3 to 15 minutes is the current rush hour frequency on the #55.

This project won't make Clifton a true boulevard with a landscaped median though or will it? I was under the impression that was part of the original project. Did this get cut out or is it going to be done under a separate project?

 

The median is tied to the overall design phase according to the Enhance Clifton website:  http://www.enhanceclifton.com/ 

 

I personally hope it happens--would be much nicer than the 7 lane freeway Clifton has become.

Man I hope weekend service (or at the absolute minimum Saturday service) is restored on the 55 as a result of this project (if not sooner).

Man I hope weekend service (or at the absolute minimum Saturday service) is restored on the 55 as a result of this project (if not sooner).

 

No Doubt. That is a huge hole in their service.

Don't count on it. :(

Man I hope weekend service (or at the absolute minimum Saturday service) is restored on the 55 as a result of this project (if not sooner).

 

No Doubt. That is a huge hole in their service.

 

Don't count on it. :(

 

This project sounds worse and worse the more I learn about it.  Infrastructure for a bus route that barely offers any off-peak service?  How much will really be gained by making this a bus-only lane?  Most drivers already treat it as such because they don't want to get stuck behind the bus.  And the Blue/Green line needs new stations far more than Clifton needs new bus shelters.  A grassy median here would be nice, but it hardly seems like a regional transit priority.

 

I'm (beyond) glad that RTA is finally talking more about rail expansion and less about BRT.

Then you may be disappointed that a major thrust of GCRTA is to develop more of its busiest bus transit corridors with BRT-lite projects like Clifton. By comparison there is only one GCRTA-sponsored rail expansion project, the Blue Line extension, which is still very problematic that it will get funded. GCRTA is having a hard enough time competing for funding for rebuilding/relocating its existing rail stations. And with increased pressure by Congress to reduce federal spending, these funds will probably be even more difficult to get. Consider that one rail station rebuild equals the cost of the entire Clifton BRT-lite project. Other BRT-lite projects that are likely to emerge in the coming years as a result of this long-range plan may carry similar price tags and they can benefit far more people -- each of the busier bus routes carry 1 million+ people per year while a single train station may serve a one or two hundred thousand (although each of RTA's rail lines carry 2-5 million people per year).

But the rail station is needed, and this isn't, which seems like a threshold issue.  I guess I don't understand the concept of "developing" bus corridors, if this is how it's to be done.  To paraphrase Yoda:  "Serve, or serve not.  There is no develop."  RTA is a transit agency, and Clifton already is developed.  I don't see how this expenditure gets us more transit or more development.

BRT seems a little overrated.

 

And I wish we had more communities that where better connected to rail station. A lot of them seem in awkward positions. I like how the trains in Shaker Square are at street level and you can see them going by and the surrounding neighborhoods there aren't in the best shape.

The short answer is that Cleveland built most of its rail system on the cheap -- next to existing rail freight lines that served aging industries that were on their last legs in the 1950s and 60s. Now that those industries are gone and the land has become practically rural in some areas, there is an opportunity to redevelop them in a transit-supportive manner -- if the land can be cleaned of industrial toxins (very expensive and risky for developers!). The Shaker lines, especially east of East 93rd/Woodhill, were built before the neighborhoods were. So they grew up around the rail lines and in a dense/mixed use or residential manner that benefited the rail lines -- just as many rail lines and their transit-oriented communities in Chicago and East Coast cities did.

 

As for the Clifton BRT-lite vs. the rail station rebuilding/relocating being needed or not, why is the rail station needed more when the Clifton route is used more than a rail station of equal expense? Both need to be improved and maintained to remain attractive to customers and their communities. As a resident living on Clifton, my opinion is that I welcome the landscaped median because I think it will make my neighborhood more attractive than having a 7-lane road through it. And having a more substantial, more identifiable transit corridor along it, with improved waiting environments, better pavement markings and signage should attract more ridership and residential occupancy through awareness. It doesn't offer the extent of identifiability that rail offers, but such a dramatic escalation of transit service is not on the table for this region given that we don't face the growth or traffic pressures that other regions face. So let's get what we can get, and scale up the transit service offerings in achievable steps.

 

When you have a chance, check out the extensive transit improvements that Canadian cities are undertaking, yielding big ridership gains and attracting extensive real estate developments -- with buses. Those are the kinds of enhancements GCRTA envisions with projects like BRT-lite on its bus corridors that have little chance of becoming rail.