If a combined station was to be created, would one connected to tower city work better since it has better connections and is already a transit hub? Perhaps Amtrak could be rerouted which would allow for a second station located in University Circle as well as an indoor station(tower city) connected to downtown and other transit routes.

If a combined station was to be created, would one connected to tower city work better since it has better connections and is already a transit hub? Perhaps Amtrak could be rerouted which would allow for a second station located in University Circle as well as an indoor station(tower city) connected to downtown and other transit routes.

 

The cost to return Amtrak into Cleveland Union Terminal/Tower City Center is likely in the $100 million to $500 million range. It was projected at $100 million in 1992, before the Waterfront Line ramps were built and the Stokes Courthouse Tower was placed in the "easiest" path for Amtrak to return. For four trains in the middle of night, that's not worth it.

 

NCTC will be a transfer station. It is not imperative that it be surrounded at the outset by office towers, etc. It could be in the middle of Lake Erie as long as there are multiple modes of transportation running through it. The fact that there are some supportive land uses nearby the proposed NCTC site is a bonus. And there may be more in the future.

Maybe it will look something like this.....

 

The location that KJP is proposing doesn't have to be in the middle of nowhere. If the lakefront plans pan out there will hopefully be apts, offices and other stuff around. Also a train station could be used as a catalyst for other development. In NY, Grand Central was built all the way up at 42 st. in the middle of nowhere. Now look at it.

 

Throw in a frequent shuttle to BKL and it'll be the place to be! Or maybe no shuttle, just including Burke in the ads as its walkable from this location. You could even let people check their luggage there, then jump on the rapid system to Hopkins. (I think you can do this, unless something has changed.) "Cleveland Lakefront Station" could truly be a powerful intermodal station.

I think we agree the location could be better as far as proximity to downtown workers, it'd probably get about 1/4 of the riders from downtown at most. However, a main station (provided it's not the only station) gives people an easy to find location to make it easier for occasional riders and new riders. In addition, the location is close to the stadium, GLSC, and Rock Hall which will generate a significant portion of the occasional riders. Also, the location is still fairly good for the Justice Center and Federal building which have higher than average ridership for downtown workplaces.

 

... and you do have the Waterfront Line that provides a 7/8-min ride from Public Square... 4/5 mins from growing/flourishing Flats East Bank.

I'm going to clean up that graphic a little bit. New one coming.

 

EDIT: done. See graphic in my prior post.

 

EDIT2: some of you may remember this: http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/grants/tiger4/Project%20Narrative/Project%20Narrative.pdf

I think we agree the location could be better as far as proximity to downtown workers, it'd probably get about 1/4 of the riders from downtown at most. However, a main station (provided it's not the only station) gives people an easy to find location to make it easier for occasional riders and new riders. In addition, the location is close to the stadium, GLSC, and Rock Hall which will generate a significant portion of the occasional riders. Also, the location is still fairly good for the Justice Center and Federal building which have higher than average ridership for downtown workplaces.

 

... and you do have the Waterfront Line that provides a 7/8-min ride from Public Square... 4/5 mins from growing/flourishing Flats East Bank.

And it'll be used regularly for that purpose as soon as you can use the same pass for both RTA and whatever collar county service you're transferring to.

And it'll be used regularly for that purpose as soon as you can use the same pass for both RTA and whatever collar county service you're transferring to.

 

Which is also a recommendation of the NEOSCC.

What development does anybody expect immediately next to this new multimodel center? There are 2 garages south of the proposed station and a third (new) proposed just east of it. The current Amtrak site is directly inline of the convention center windows so the county won't allow any real development there. Where is the developable land other than north/northeast of Cleveland Browns stadium, until (if) the city removes the shoreway and caps the rail lines. I like the project overall and agree we need a central multimodal hub. Maybe I just lack imagination.

What development does anybody expect immediately next to this new multimodel center? There are 2 garages south of the proposed station and a third (new) proposed just east of it. The current Amtrak site is directly inline of the convention center windows so the county won't allow any real development there. Where is the developable land other than north/northeast of Cleveland Browns stadium, until (if) the city removes the shoreway and caps the rail lines. I like the project overall and agree we need a central multimodal hub. Maybe I just lack imagination.

 

I'm not an economic development expert or leasing agent or realtor, etc. But location always drives real estate investment decisions. And after the Amtrak station is relocated into a true intermodal center and the old station is razed, availing a buildable site of up to 1.3 acres, there will be few undeveloped parcels like this one anywhere in Ohio that's so accessible by car, foot, bike, urban bus transit, urban rail transit, regional bus transportation, intercity bus transportation and intercity rail transportation. By the way, there is also a sewage lifting station between the Amtrak station and the Waterfront Line tracks to get sewage lifted from the lake level. It exists mostly for First Energy Stadium, but also for the North Coast Harbor tourist attractions. I remember a similar sewage lifting facility was needed to be built new for Flats East Bank and it was not cheap to build (millions?).

 

So this site is VERY well connected in all senses of the word. To what? That's for real estate-minded professionals to identify.

YESTERDAY

 

TOMORROW

 

If you want a true multimodal transportation center uniting under one roof all of the disconnected transportation services now scattered throughout downtown (Amtrak, Greyhound, Megabus, Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority rail and bus, Laketran, Akron Metro RTA, Stark Area Regional Transit Authority, Portage Area Regional Transit Authority), then Monday is your chance! The city's proposed parking deck, placed between the Amtrak station and East 9th, can be augmented with these modes without changing their basic concept. Why do it? Because uniting all these modes into or through a Lakefront Multimodal Transportation Center will create convenience, connectivity and comfort with a single transportation center with as many boardings as the Akron-Canton Regional Airport -- about 800,000 per year -- right downtown! Let's make it happen!

 

Connecting Cleveland with commission's plan

Vision that is four years in the works could be boon for downtown

By JAY MILLER

Originally Published: June 22, 2014 4:30 AM  Modified: June 22, 2014 8:02 AM

 

People are coming back to downtown Cleveland. Some are coming to the Horseshoe Casino Cleveland at Public Square, others are coming to conferences at the new Cleveland Convention Center and the Global Center for Health Innovation. More people are living downtown in apartments and condominiums, some carved out of what used to be office buildings, from the Cuyahoga River to the Cleveland State University campus a mile-and-a-half away.

 

Now, civic planners are proposing a $60 million plan to entice those people and others like them to spend more time downtown. And, in a dramatic measure for a city that mostly has turned its back on the waterfront for more than 200 years, they even want to make it easier to enjoy Lake Erie.

 

It's all in the name of connectivity and bringing more life and comfort to a downtown that has been spottily developed.

 

Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson in 2010 created the Group Plan Commission to oversee this transformation. The commission hired James Corner Field Operations of New York to redesign Public Square, and Gustafson Guthrie Nichol, a Seattle landscape architecture practice, to work on the Mall.

 

The commission hopes to begin turning this vision into reality with a groundbreaking this fall for a redesigned Public Square. The central village green would run from Public Square north along the spaces of the city's central Mall to a bridge that would span the Shoreway and railroad tracks, carrying visitors to the museums along the lakefront....

 

The stretch run begins Monday afternoon, June 23, when James Corner, a landscape architect who has designed successful urban spaces around the country, will come to Cleveland to update the community on his plan to revive Cleveland's Public Square. The Group Plan Commission and the City Club of Cleveland are sponsoring Monday's event at the main Cleveland Public Library to encourage the public to add their ideas before the final drawings are inked.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.crainscleveland.com/article/20140622/SUB1/306229972/connecting-cleveland-with-commissions-plan

 

SADLY, THIS EVENT IS SOLD OUT. SO IF YOU ALREADY HAVE TICKETS, PLEASE ENSURE THAT A TRUE MULTI-MODAL FACILITY IS INCLUDED -- NOT MERELY THE CITY'S BASIC PARKING DECK THAT HAS SPACE FOR TOUR BUSES ONLY.

https://www.eventbrite.com/e/public-square-shaping-a-vision-for-downtown-tickets-11779060487

Although I dont want it on the Lakefront, as I think there are several places a Multi modal transportation center could go.

 

 

Where would you put it -- without breaking the bank (ie: exceeding $100 million) -- and allowing Amtrak to serve it from all directions or without back-up moves? There's only two places where that could be accomplished and still keep it downtown:

1. somewhere along the lakefront tracks between the river and roughly East 13th; or

2. somewhere along the NS tracks west of the Main Post Office off Broadway.

 

Coming up with $50 million to $70 million for the Lakefront Multimodal Transportation Center is going to be difficult enough. Spending much more than that is a huge challenge in this public funding environment and may preclude Tower City Center -- unless we get real estate developers in Cleveland and Chicago to join forces with a passenger-friendly, track-owning railroad company to imitate what All Aboard Florida is doing.

 

BTW..... I forgot to mention that Amtrak has pledged $4.25 million to upgrade its station building and trackside platform. But the Amtrak station needs to be demolished for a structure attached to the new parking deck, including an Amtrak/Greyhound/Megabus waiting room and leasable retail spaces. The current Amtrak station is on city-owned land for which Amtrak pays no rent. The city should issue an RFP to develop this property and use a value-capture mechanism to help finance adding on to the parking deck/walkway to provide a true intermodal transportation center. In the meantime, NOACA has formed the Northern Ohio Rail Alliance with other MPOs between Cleveland and Toledo to fund planning for rail service, station facility and infrastructure improvements: http://allaboardohio.org/2014/04/10/metro-planning-organizations-form-rail-alliance/

Although I dont want it on the Lakefront, as I think there are several places a Multi modal transportation center could go.

 

 

Where would you put it -- without breaking the bank (ie: exceeding $100 million) -- and allowing Amtrak to serve it from all directions or without back-up moves? There's only two places where that could be accomplished and still keep it downtown:

1. somewhere along the lakefront tracks between the river and roughly East 13th; or

2. somewhere along the NS tracks west of the Main Post Office off Broadway.

 

Coming up with $50 million to $70 million for the Lakefront Multimodal Transportation Center is going to be difficult enough. Spending much more than that is a huge challenge in this public funding environment and may preclude Tower City Center -- unless we get real estate developers in Cleveland and Chicago to join forces with a passenger-friendly, track-owning railroad company to imitate what All Aboard Florida is doing.

 

Why not Tower City?

Why not Tower City?

 

It's not justified for the passenger rail service we have.

Although I dont want it on the Lakefront, as I think there are several places a Multi modal transportation center could go.

 

 

Where would you put it -- without breaking the bank (ie: exceeding $100 million) -- and allowing Amtrak to serve it from all directions or without back-up moves? There's only two places where that could be accomplished and still keep it downtown:

1. somewhere along the lakefront tracks between the river and roughly East 13th; or

2. somewhere along the NS tracks west of the Main Post Office off Broadway.

 

Coming up with $50 million to $70 million for the Lakefront Multimodal Transportation Center is going to be difficult enough. Spending much more than that is a huge challenge in this public funding environment and may preclude Tower City Center -- unless we get real estate developers in Cleveland and Chicago to join forces with a passenger-friendly, track-owning railroad company to imitate what All Aboard Florida is doing.

 

BTW..... I forgot to mention that Amtrak has pledged $4.25 million to upgrade its station building and trackside platform. But the Amtrak station needs to be demolished for a structure attached to the new parking deck, including an Amtrak/Greyhound/Megabus waiting room and leasable retail spaces. The current Amtrak station is on city-owned land for which Amtrak pays no rent. The city should issue an RFP to develop this property and use a value-capture mechanism to help finance adding on to the parking deck/walkway to provide a true intermodal transportation center. In the meantime, NOACA has formed the Northern Ohio Rail Alliance with other MPOs between Cleveland and Toledo to fund planning for rail service, station facility and infrastructure improvements: http://allaboardohio.org/2014/04/10/metro-planning-organizations-form-rail-alliance/

 

This is all a pipe dream considering I have no idea what the cost of this would be.  I was thinking across from Gateway in between Tower City/LC Bridge or between LC Bridge and East 22. 

It could have the following direct connections:

• Direct to the IB Bridge, for Mega Bus, Greyhound and regional non Cuyahoga county RTA routes
  
• Tower City/Casino Phase 2 (if between TC and LC Bridge)
  
• A new RTA train station at 14 or 22 street
  
• Could also be used for regional rail station
  
• Parking on the condition that Gateway Parking garages are torn down.
  
• Street level convenience retail
  

or between LC Bridge and East 22. 

 

Which could be built if the station is not on the NS curve southeast of new Commercial Road/East 9th Extension. To comply with ADA, station platforms have to be built on straight track or gentle curves so the rail cars (in this case, the Capitol Limited's Superliners which have doors in the middle of the car) don't have a gap between door and platform that exceeds federal requirements.

or between LC Bridge and East 22. 

 

Which could be built if the station is not on the NS curve southeast of new Commercial Road/East 9th Extension. To comply with ADA, station platforms have to be built on straight track or gentle curves so the rail cars (in this case, the Capitol Limited's Superliners which have doors in the middle of the car) don't have a gap between door and platform that exceeds federal requirements.

 

Well if we built under the street we could straighten out the platforms

A North Coast Transportation Center designed to help bridge the mall to north coast harbor is the perfect addition to downtown.

 

Built anywhere else (unless they figure out how to get Amtrak at Tower City) is a wasted opportunity

A North Coast Transportation Center designed to help bridge the mall to north coast harbor is the perfect addition to downtown.

 

Exactly this! Throw up some TOD residential above it while we're at it. I could see it being a retail draw also.

A North Coast Transportation Center designed to help bridge the mall to north coast harbor is the perfect addition to downtown.

 

Built anywhere else (unless they figure out how to get Amtrak at Tower City) is a wasted opportunity

 

That why I don't like the location, it wont add more park or recreational space, but will bring more parking.

A North Coast Transportation Center designed to help bridge the mall to north coast harbor is the perfect addition to downtown.

 

Exactly this! Throw up some TOD residential above it while we're at it. I could see it being a retail draw also.

 

I have a question, would you really want to live above an active bus/train/rail station that included parking.  I live in front of the Shaker Rapid, that bell and whistle get on my last nerve especially Dec-March when there are no leaves on the trees.

I have a question, would you really want to live above an active bus/train/rail station that included parking.  I live in front of the Shaker Rapid, that bell and whistle get on my last nerve especially Dec-March when there are no leaves on the trees.

 

There are no crossings in the area that would require light-rail trains to use their bells and whistles. You would be living or working in the same proximity to the freight tracks as Cleveland City Hall. But having spent many hours in City Hall, I can tell you that you don't feel any vibration from freight trains nor do you hear any sounds from the trains.

 

The City of Cleveland could do an RFP for its property on which the Amtrak station sets, then use the money from that property sale combined with Amtrak's pledge of $4.25 million to pay the local share to leverage federal dollars, including either a Transportation Infrastructure Financing & Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan or a Railroad Rehabilitation & Infrastructure Financing (RRIF) loan to retired by station leases from Amtrak, Greyhound, Megabus, perhaps a car share and retailers/restaurants.

 

 

Are there any plans for Cleveland to apply again for a TIGER grant?  They've been shot down what three times now so maybe it's time to look for funding elsewhere?

I have a question, would you really want to live above an active bus/train/rail station that included parking.  I live in front of the Shaker Rapid, that bell and whistle get on my last nerve especially Dec-March when there are no leaves on the trees.

 

There are no crossings in the area that would require light-rail trains to use their bells and whistles. You would be living or working in the same proximity to the freight tracks as Cleveland City Hall. But having spent many hours in City Hall, I can tell you that you don't feel any vibration from freight trains nor do you hear any sounds from the trains.

 

The City of Cleveland could do an RFP for its property on which the Amtrak station sets, then use the money from that property sale combined with Amtrak's pledge of $4.25 million to pay the local share to leverage federal dollars, including either a Transportation Infrastructure Financing & Innovation Act (TIFIA) loan or a Railroad Rehabilitation & Infrastructure Financing (RRIF) loan to retired by station leases from Amtrak, Greyhound, Megabus, perhaps a car share and retailers/restaurants.

 

 

 

I'm talking about the regional rail, if that ever came to fruition and Amtrak.  I've riden Amtrack, MNRR, LIPP, SEPTA, etc.  Many times when a train enters a station that blow the horn or ring the bell.  I've witnessed that on various lines.    I've been at browns games and the train will blow it's horn, ring the bell or both when coming into the station.  Can it be gauranteed that wont happen?

 

I don't ride Greyhound or MegaBus, so I'm not sure they blow horns or what the sound would be like living about that.  IMO, I can see commercial real estate, but not residential.

As has been noted, bridging the tracks and Shoreway connecting the Convention Center area with the Lakefront would provide convenient access to the proposed North Coast Transportation Center as well as the lakefront itself.  But including a new RTA Waterfront Line stop would make the planned high-density lakefront residential/retail/office area accessible to the Rapid which would circulate riders through important parts of downtown, such as FEB and Tower City.  Tower City is within a block or 2 of the bulk of downtown's retail, office, restaurant and entertainment venues.  TC of course, also connects with the Red Line for 2.5 minute hop over-the-river to Cleveland's bustling "sub-downtown": Market Sq/Ohio City.

 

 

As has been noted, bridging the tracks and Shoreway connecting the Convention Center area with the Lakefront would provide convenient access to the proposed North Coast Transportation Center as well as the lakefront itself.  But including a new RTA Waterfront Line stop would make the planned high-density lakefront residential/retail/office area accessible to the Rapid which would circulate riders through important parts of downtown, such as FEB and Tower City.  Tower City is within a block or 2 of the bulk of downtown's retail, office, restaurant and entertainment venues.  TC of course, also connects with the Red Line for 2.5 minute hop over-the-river to Cleveland's bustling "sub-downtown": Market Sq/Ohio City.

 

 

 

Ironically extending the convention center is an after thought.  IMO, it should be extended as well.  It will connect downtown, to the new neighborhood at North coast.  Out of all this how does this (along with FEB) connect the city to green and recreational space for the city?

^ MTS, I thought we were trying to maintain/expand areas along the lake and river like Voinovich Park, FEB (the new boardwalk) and Settlers Landing into green/recreational areas downtown that are connected -- by walkways (the proposed ped bridge over the Shoreway) and transit...

 

Also I would absolutely prefer passenger trains going into Tower City as the Vans planned and executed back in the 1920s.  Ironically, the very reason why they sold officials on the move -- congestion of the freight tracks along the lake, are what still stalls passenger trains to this day... I experienced it myself when our train entering the downtown Amtrak station was delayed over 2 hours due to freight train congestion into and along the lakefront.  Unfortunately because of poor planning we've made it very difficult to bring back passenger trains to Tower City as KJP has noted.  The North Coast Transportation center is not as attractive to me, either, but under the circumstances, it appears to be our best bet as our main train depot in the current era.

 

 

Are there any plans for Cleveland to apply again for a TIGER grant?  They've been shot down what three times now so maybe it's time to look for funding elsewhere?

 

Other than the planning grant that NOACA sought on behalf of the Northern Ohio Rail Alliance? No. The city originally sought $20 million in TIGER funds for walkways over the tracks and Shoreway, plus access roads. It would complement about $20 million the city was willing to provide for the parking deck. So in the absence of the TIGER grant, the county added $10 million and the state added $5 million. The $35 million amassed will provide the basic parking deck and a walkway over the tracks. I believe, but cannot confirm, that the walkway over the Shoreway is not part of the available funding package but the walkway over the tracks is. The reason why I think that is because the city and county are very eager to address a perceived parking shortage in and around the convention center/medical mart/hotel. They are so focused on addressing this that are not willing to consider adding non-car modes to the multi-modal center until the parking situation is addressed. Fortunately for those of us who seek more than a glorified parking deck, the parking deck is designed in such a way (including a high-ceiling first level in the parking deck for tour buses) that the multi-modal elements can be added to it. Think of what the city is building as the skeleton. We have to make sure the city is seriously interested in adding the multi-modal elements once the deck's construction is assured.

^ MTS, I thought we were trying to maintain/expand areas along the lake and river like Voinovich Park, FEB (the new boardwalk) and Settlers Landing into green/recreational areas downtown that are connected -- by walkways (the proposed ped bridge over the Shoreway) and transit...

 

Also I would absolutely prefer passenger trains going into Tower City as the Vans planned and executed back in the 1920s.  Ironically, the very reason why they sold officials on the move -- congestion of the freight tracks along the lake, are what still stalls passenger trains to this day... I experienced it myself when our train entering the downtown Amtrak station was delayed over 2 hours due to freight train congestion into and along the lakefront.  Unfortunately because of poor planning we've made it very difficult to bring back passenger trains to Tower City as KJP has noted.  The North Coast Transportation center is not as attractive to me, either, but under the circumstances, it appears to be our best bet as our main train depot in the current era.

 

 

 

Exactly, I just hope there is continuous green space, all the way around to the GLSC/RRHoF.

The Cleveland Foundation announces an $8 million grant for the revamp of Public Square that could spur a late 2014 groundbreaking

 

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2014/07/the_cleveland_foundation_annou.html#incart_river_default

 

In addition to the makeover of Public Square, the Group Plan Commission aims to add landscaping enhancements to the Mall, the 12.5-acre green roof of the city's new convention center, plus a pedestrian walkway from the northeast corner of the Mall to attractions at North Coast Harbor.

 

Paris said that $25 million has been raised to date for the pedestrian bridge, including $10 million from the city, $10 million from the county, and $5 million from the state of Ohio.

 

He said the process to seek a designer for the bridge could begin soon.

 

I know this isn't the bridge thread, but this sounds like there's hope to perhaps get something better than the current renderings.

 

I think I need to see a clearer breakdown of what's being paid for what. If the pedestrian bridge over the tracks and Shoreway is $25 million, then is the parking deck another $10 million on top of that? Or is the parking deck not part of the picture? I'd be surprised if it wasn't included, since the parking deck can be debt-financed from parking fees.

I am sure these are preliminary designs for the parking deck, so I can only go with the only rendering we have seen so far. But from the looks of the parking garage the roof or top floor looks like there will be parking spaces with a ramp going down. To me that would be a disaster. The last thing that should be seen as you look down from the mall is a row of cars on top of the garage. The top should be a green roof with no parking spaces. But that may mean adding another floor to accommodate those lost spaces. But I just think visually it would not be appealing. I hope that can be addressed as the design evolves.

The one design aspect I would like to address is the view from our new convention center.  How will it be affected?  How will the building of, placement and design of this building, from inside the ballroom and from a top the hill be affected?

Could an exhibit hall with appropriate ceiling heights be added to the NCTC, along with all of the other entities and amenities needed to make this work?  Going north over the train tracks is the only place I can see our underground center expanding, and 230,000 SF of exhibit space is smaller than other nearby competitors (Pitt, Indy and Cbus come to mind).  Once the RNC is a hit here we may find we need more exhibit space.

 

Bringing in the Convention Center (and SMG) may be a way to help pay for the cost of the NCTC, along with all the transit entities.  Hopefully all of this could be accomplished with a green roof sloping down to the lakefront area.  This would be my dream scenario. 

 

Edit: I see MTS already ask this.  I should of hit refresh when I got back to my desk.  News is just moving to quick now!  :-D

I am sure these are preliminary designs for the parking deck, so I can only go with the only rendering we have seen so far. But from the looks of the parking garage the roof or top floor looks like there will be parking spaces with a ramp going down. To me that would be a disaster. The last thing that should be seen as you look down from the mall is a row of cars on top of the garage. The top should be a green roof with no parking spaces. But that may mean adding another floor to accommodate those lost spaces. But I just think visually it would not be appealing. I hope that can be addressed as the design evolves.

 

Good point. Ironically, the North Point garage across East 9th Street does have a roof and looks fairly decent for a parking deck.

Isn't Willard Park just the green roof to a parking garage, similar to mall a?

 

Why couldn't a NCTC have a green roof over the rail tracks?

Isn't Willard Park just the green roof to a parking garage, similar to mall a?

 

Why couldn't a NCTC have a green roof over the rail tracks?

 

Because building over the tracks -- assuming Norfolk Southern will give you the air rights -- will quickly turn a $35 million project into a $75 million to $125 million project.

 

Here's a photo of the area I shot on July 4, with a very late-running Lake Shore Limited departing the Amtrak station....

 

I can't quite tell from this rendering what's included in the "jog" of the walkway, but it doesn't including the previously proposed parking deck. I need to make some phone calls....

 

What's the deal with the ugly zigzag (longer walk) pedestrian bridge. Terrible design

Why not Tower City?

 

It's not justified for the passenger rail service we have.

 

Things are changing, when the time comes we must put trains and even intercity buses back into the CUT.

 

The lakefront cannot meet the needs for a full intercity rail network, as planned under the Ohio hub, NeoRail and Chicago HUB HSR.

 

 

Things are changing, when the time comes we must put trains and even intercity buses back into the CUT.

 

 

Agreed. Hopefully by then, we still can. Of course, with an unlimited budget, all things are possible!

Why not Tower City?

 

It's not justified for the passenger rail service we have.

 

Things are changing, when the time comes we must put trains and even intercity buses back into the CUT.

 

The lakefront cannot meet the needs for a full intercity rail network, as planned under the Ohio hub, NeoRail and Chicago HUB HSR.

 

 

Here is a thought.  We don't necessarily have to have JUST ONE regional or nation train terminal.  Some trains could go to the lakefront, if it become over burdened, Tower City or another location could be an option.

Why not Tower City?

 

It's not justified for the passenger rail service we have.

 

Wasn't there a design flaw with the tower city station that prevented Amtrak from relocating there when tower city reopened in the early 90s?

 

IIRC, it was either ceiling height or exhaust issues from the locomotive. 

 

KJP, do you remember that?

I thought the Stokes Building was built over the track access!

 

Wasn't there a design flaw with the tower city station that prevented Amtrak from relocating there when tower city reopened in the early 90s?

 

IIRC, it was either ceiling height or exhaust issues from the locomotive. 

 

KJP, do you remember that?

 

You're probably thinking of the cinemas, the floor of which dropped into the space where the trains ran. This was at the east end of the complex where some suggested the trains could come into as a stub-end station without having to remove the new parking deck that was added as part of the Tower City project. The new level of parking deck was installed 10-12 feet above the nine passenger tracks and 10-12 feet below the former track-area's ceiling. But the cinemas floor blocked that.

 

I thought the Stokes Building was built over the track access!

 

Yes it was. Parsons Brinckerhoff suggested a way around by building over Canal Road. However the Phase II casino, if built without a 25-foot ground level clearance, would further complicate things.

 

Check the Cleveland Union Terminal-Tower City thread for graphics and photos, including PB's idea:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=11674.0

It does seem difficult for NCTC could be a full Ohio Hub Amtrak center with both the freight traffic and the verticle-lift bridge over the Cuyahoga.  Might be time to dust off that plan you drafted years ago in EcoCity Cleveland to remove freight trains from the lakefront route.

BTW, $750,000 per year would support a 20-year, 3% interest-rate, $10 million bond issue which I would use for the local share for the Intermodal Transportation Center on the lakefront. If the county wants to use the tax to support a tourism activity, what is more touristy than a transportation center that would host 1 million boardings per year? That's more than the annual boardings at Akron-Canton Airport.

 

Redirected from another discussion.....

 

It is common practive for multimodal transportation centers to be owned by public entities like a port authority, and then leased to a private company which manages the facility. The managing company then subleases space from transportation carriers, retailers, restaurants, hospitality companies, advertisers, telecom companies, etc. The collection of those sub-leases pays the operating costs of the center, and the overall lease pays debt retirement costs associated with constructing the center.

 

In Cleveland, Amtrak sits on city-owned land where it pays no rent or lease. If Amtrak paid a lease, the amount might be similar to what Amtrak is paying at the recently refurbished St. Paul Union Station which sees only one train in each direction per day. Amtrak pays $38 per square foot for a 3,800-square-foot space at the station for a waiting room, ticket counter, baggage facilities and a small office. That works out to $144,586 per year. Amtrak has a 20-year lease. That kind of long lease can help support a debt financing for capital expenditures.

 

A similar lease might be appropriate for Amtrak at a Cleveland lakefront multimodal center.

 

Megabus might need twice as much space as Amtrak, or a lease of about $300,000 per year.

 

Greyhound would likely need three times as much space, which suggests a lease of about $450,000 per year.

 

Other transportation service providers (GCRTA, Akron Metro, Laketran, SARTA, PARTA, etc) may not pay as much or any lease amounts since they probably do not need waiting room/ticket counter space. Also their buses will probably just pass through (ie under) the facility and make a brief stop as part of their overall routing to and through downtown. However a general information staff person in the station would be helpful and each of the transit services can contribute funding to pay this person. Their service to the transportation center will benefit the transit services (new ridership from more convenient connections) and incur costs for the transportation center. So perhaps an amount per passenger payable per year. If it were $1 per boarding, GCRTA might pay about $300,000, Laketran $185,000, Akron Metro $105,000, and SARTA and PARTA each about $10,000. Altogether, that could be about $600,000 per year.

 

There may be some retail/restaurant spaces in the transportation center, considering the volume of passengers coming through this facility (up to 1 million per year). Similar opportunities exist with having a rental car agency and/or car-sharing and bike-sharing services at the transportation center. There could easily be 30,000 square feet of retail space at the center. That could generate $1+ million in revenues.

 

Total lease revenues could be as much as $2.5 million per year. That could support a bond issue of about $33 million which could be used to leverage a Federal Transit Administration or Federal Railroad Administration grant on a 50/50 or even 80/20 federal/local matching basis. Amtrak and even ODOT has contributed capital funding to such multimodal centers and could be used to leverage an even larger federal grant.

I can't quite tell from this rendering what's included in the "jog" of the walkway, but it doesn't including the previously proposed parking deck. I need to make some phone calls....

 

KJP[/member] Did you ever make this phone call?  To your knowledge, are Greyhound, Amtrak, Megabus and/or others involved in the lakefront pedestrian bridge conversation at this point?

 

I ask because of this article (below) today in the PD talking about the expedited pace that the pedestrian bridge is almost sure to take.  Just wondering if this project can still kill multiple birds with one stone.

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2014/09/city_county_press_ahead_on_dow.html#incart_river

KJP[/member] Did you ever make this phone call?  To your knowledge, are Greyhound, Amtrak, Megabus and/or others involved in the lakefront pedestrian bridge conversation at this point?

 

I ask because of this article (below) today in the PD talking about the expedited pace that the pedestrian bridge is almost sure to take.  Just wondering if this project can still kill multiple birds with one stone.

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2014/09/city_county_press_ahead_on_dow.html#incart_river

 

I spoke to some people at the city who said the only thing being built is the walkway. No parking deck. Nothing else. Amtrak officials are aware of this project, but seem less interested in the walkway. I don't know about Greyhound. An Amtrak official contacted me several times to find out if any funding exists or has been pledged to pay for preliminary engineering or construction of the parking deck or a full-blown intermodal. There are funding applications pending to pay for planning, but nothing imminent. Amtrak has postponed major repairs or improvements to its station, parking area and platform because it was waiting to see what the city will build.

 

One thing that has me concerned however is that city officials viewed their past, failed applications for constructing the parking deck "aka transportation center" as their best shot of building it. Some concerns I have with this is:

 

> The city had yet to advance the project to a stage where preliminary engineering had been completed, which is one explanation why federal construction funds were denied. City officials are aware of this, yet believe it is the only explanation why funds were denied.

> Federal funding for preliminary engineering (PE) is no longer being made available. Instead, local/regional/state governments will have to come up with funding for PE on their own. PE typically equals about 5-7% of project costs. So, for a $50 million transportation center, PE could cost at least $2.5 million. That's a lot of expense for cities to take on.

> City Planning Commission staff are very proud of the design of their proposed transportation center. They thought it was truly intermodal while pointing out that it had a bike station, bus bays on the ground level, an Amtrak station next to it, a GCRTA station there, etc. etc. However I've heard from several people who worked on public transportation engineering projects worldwide who called the city's proposed transportation center "a glorified parking deck" that lacked the kinds of shared waiting, ticketing and other facilities for all travelers under a single roof that a true intermodal station would have. I suspect the station's design was another reason why the project was denied funding.

Damnit.  Well, thanks for the follow up.

KJP[/member] Did you ever make this phone call?  To your knowledge, are Greyhound, Amtrak, Megabus and/or others involved in the lakefront pedestrian bridge conversation at this point?

 

I ask because of this article (below) today in the PD talking about the expedited pace that the pedestrian bridge is almost sure to take.  Just wondering if this project can still kill multiple birds with one stone.

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2014/09/city_county_press_ahead_on_dow.html#incart_river

 

I spoke to some people at the city who said the only thing being built is the walkway. No parking deck. Nothing else. Amtrak officials are aware of this project, but seem less interested in the walkway. I don't know about Greyhound. An Amtrak official contacted me several times to find out if any funding exists or has been pledged to pay for preliminary engineering or construction of the parking deck or a full-blown intermodal. There are funding applications pending to pay for planning, but nothing imminent. Amtrak has postponed major repairs or improvements to its station, parking area and platform because it was waiting to see what the city will build.

 

One thing that has me concerned however is that city officials viewed their past, failed applications for constructing the parking deck "aka transportation center" as their best shot of building it. Some concerns I have with this is:

 

> The city had yet to advance the project to a stage where preliminary engineering had been completed, which is one explanation why federal construction funds were denied. City officials are aware of this, yet believe it is the only explanation why funds were denied.

> Federal funding for preliminary engineering (PE) is no longer being made available. Instead, local/regional/state governments will have to come up with funding for PE on their own. PE typically equals about 5-7% of project costs. So, for a $50 million transportation center, PE could cost at least $2.5 million. That's a lot of expense for cities to take on.

> City Planning Commission staff are very proud of the design of their proposed transportation center. They thought it was truly intermodal while pointing out that it had a bike station, bus bays on the ground level, an Amtrak station next to it, a GCRTA station there, etc. etc. However I've heard from several people who worked on public transportation engineering projects worldwide who called the city's proposed transportation center "a glorified parking deck" that lacked the kinds of shared waiting, ticketing and other facilities for all travelers under a single roof that a true intermodal station would have. I suspect the station's design was another reason why the project was denied funding.

 

Sounds like a mess.  As usual in this town, pedestrians and public transit get the bum's rush in local officials' genuflection to the almighty automobile.