What may get built, assuming they can even find as much as $25 million for it, is going to be a bare-bones project. . . This project would unite multiple modes in one location and give waiting people a warm climate-protected place to wait for their buses and trains. No architecture. No frills. Just a common point of transfer. That's all.

 

I'd be happy with this... it's all we need, really.

What may get built, assuming they can even find as much as $25 million for it, is going to be a bare-bones project. . . This project would unite multiple modes in one location and give waiting people a warm climate-protected place to wait for their buses and trains. No architecture. No frills. Just a common point of transfer. That's all.

 

I'd be happy with this... it's all we need, really.

 

Where are the people going to run for drinks and weed during layovers?

Will be interesting to see if Magabus ends up joining the transportation center or if it prefers to stay put at STJ facility by CSU. Though RTA could always force the issue by refusing to renew Megabus's lease.

And now this project has joined the ranks of those needing to be completed by the RNC convention. I don't see how that's possible unless federal funds will somehow be bypassed. The acceleration if this project was discussed at today's NOACA board meeting.

Now THAT would be amazing.

We'll just end up with an even crappier facility if it's a rush job.  I was so excited to hear there was movement on this, but I'm thinking more and more this is gonna be a huge dud.

^I'm assuming it's going to be more or less like a STJ transit center with some adjacent train platforms.

^I'm assuming it's going to be more or less like a STJ transit center with some adjacent train platforms.

 

... but an enclosed, temp-controlled environment is an absolute must; preferably considerable space and seating.

^I'm assuming it's going to be more or less like a STJ transit center with some adjacent train platforms.

 

... but an enclosed, temp-controlled environment is an absolute must; preferably considerable space and seating.

 

STJ has an enclosed, climate-controlled waiting area. It is very small, however, and lacks waiting space for surges of passengers. Since most of the Amtrak trains are scheduled to show up within a few hours of each other (and sometimes even more closely together), that station sometimes has 200 people jammed into its waiting room. It's even more crowded during the holidays.

^I'm assuming it's going to be more or less like a STJ transit center with some adjacent train platforms.

 

... but an enclosed, temp-controlled environment is an absolute must; preferably considerable space and seating.

 

STJ has an enclosed, climate-controlled waiting area. It is very small, however, and lacks waiting space for surges of passengers. Since most of the Amtrak trains are scheduled to show up within a few hours of each other (and sometimes even more closely together), that station sometimes has 200 people jammed into its waiting room. It's even more crowded during the holidays.

 

...and Greyhound can get very packed during peak times with numerous bus departures and arrivals, and they currently have a pretty large / open waiting space in their current facility.  I wonder if there is any layover between Greyhound and Amtrak peak times? These two users plus Megabus, RTA buses and trains and other regional transit agencies and this facility at the very least needs a sizable waiting area and preferably a cafe to serve those waiting for transfers. 

...and Greyhound can get very packed during peak times with numerous bus departures and arrivals, and they currently have a pretty large / open waiting space in their current facility.  I wonder if there is any layover between Greyhound and Amtrak peak times? These two users plus Megabus, RTA buses and trains and other regional transit agencies and this facility at the very least needs a sizable waiting area and preferably a cafe to serve those waiting for transfers. 

 

Good point. Greyhound often has lines/staging areas for boarding buses which can bisect their station. Sometimes they overbook their buses and have to run two or three buses to protect one departure schedule. BuckeyeB[/member] experienced that a few years ago between Cleveland and Columbus.

 

Joe C's Syracuse transportation center has a Dunkin' Donuts AND a Subway restaurant. We should be able to muster at least that. Plus it has a Great States News Stand. These tenants aren't possible with all the modes spread out at several stations and multiple boarding locations throughout downtown. How bad is it? These two maps are on a display stand/info kiosk All Aboard Ohio placed at the Amtrak station......

 

 

 

 

In addition to the project's $272 million budget, the county could access a $4 million contingency fund for design changes or additions, plus an additional $34 million set aside to compensate for risks including bad weather or labor issues, Appelbaum said.

http://www.cleveland.com/architecture/index.ssf/2015/04/hilton_downtown_cleveland_conv.html

 

If it turns that some or all of that funding isn't needed for the hotel, it would be a significant contribution to a very nice intermodal transportation center (including for charter/tour buses) and a fully-covered, climate-controlled walkway contribution from the transportation center into the convention center. The rest of the walkway, from the transportation center over the Shoreway to North Coast Harbor could be partially covered, as designed.

 

So close, but yet so far. It's a long walk around the Great Wall Of MedMart!

 

Cleveland moves forward with design of intermodal transit center

 

"The bottom line is the project's going to happen," said Grace Gallucci, executive director of NOACA, which is underwriting most of the planning cost (RTA and Cleveland are kicking in another $30,000). "It's a great project. It's something that other cities have done."

 

Cleveland Mayor Frank Jackson, in a Feb. 10 letter to NOACA, said a transportation hub would improve the quality of life of residents and create "a stylish gateway to the city for visitors."

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/04/cleveland_moves_forward_with_design_of_intermodal_transit_center.html#incart_m-rpt-1

The interesting part is that Greyhound could be temporarily relocated to the Amtrak station which is used mostly at night while Greyhound operates mostly during the day.

 

Also, consider that "something" is likely to be left over from the $38 million convention hotel contingency fund. If some or all of the fund exists intact after the hotel is done, it could be used for the planning and construction of a transportation center more befitting of a major city. And these funds and project should be tied in with the $25 million lakefront walkway. But that would force the city to end its preoccupation with the muny parking lot and instead focus on a more pedestrian-friendly site west of East 9th Street.

The interesting part is that Greyhound could be temporarily relocated to the Amtrak station which is used mostly at night while Greyhound operates mostly during the day.

 

Also, consider that "something" is likely to be left over from the $38 million convention hotel contingency fund. If some or all of the fund exists intact after the hotel is done, it could be used for the planning and construction of a transportation center more befitting of a major city. And these funds and project should be tied in with the $25 million lakefront walkway. But that would force the city to end its preoccupation with the muny parking lot and instead focus on a more pedestrian-friendly site west of East 9th Street.

 

KJP, do you think the potential for unimpeded, long term spinoff development gives the Muny Lot an advantage?

 

KJP, do you think the potential for unimpeded, long term spinoff development gives the Muny Lot an advantage?

 

 

That's certainly a possibility. I know the city has considered proposals in the past 20 years or so to develop the muny lots. It was a potential site for the convention center and also for a HOPE IV CMHA mixed income housing project. So they have thought of the lots as having another, future -- apart from surface parking.

KJP, do you think the potential for unimpeded, long term spinoff development gives the Muny Lot an advantage?

 

 

That's certainly a possibility. I know the city has considered proposals in the past 20 years or so to develop the muny lots. It was a potential site for the convention center and also for a HOPE IV CMHA mixed income housing project. So they have thought of the lots as having another, future -- apart from surface parking.

 

I know conserving surface lot space is a sore subject on this forum, but I hope they never kill it all off around the stadium.  The tailgating scene would suffer!  Part of the reason the Bills pulled out of the Toronto series was the zero fan involvement.

I agree totally with this cleve.com-er.  I know $$ was an issue, but the phrase 'penny wise, pound foolish' comes to mind:

 

What's the rationale for studying only the east side of East 9th Street and not the west side where the current Amtrak station is?

 

The west side is closer to the new convention center, could be connected with the new proposed pedestrian bridge and is more pedestrian friendly in general. The fact that the convention center was built without a better connection to the waterfront line is a huge mistake, other cities such as Philadelphia connect their convention center directly to rail public transportation. The tracks are literally right outside the center but you have to walk to East 9th and cross shoreway ramps to get to the station.. what a waste.

 

This project could be huge for Cleveland but it needs to be done right, in a way that connects everything and is desirable to walk to...

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/04/cleveland_moves_forward_with_design_of_intermodal_transit_center.html#incart_m-rpt-1

And that wasn't even me who wrote that!

.com wisdom

I agree totally with this cleve.com-er.  I know $$ was an issue, but the phrase 'penny wise, pound foolish' comes to mind:

 

What's the rationale for studying only the east side of East 9th Street and not the west side where the current Amtrak station is?

 

The west side is closer to the new convention center, could be connected with the new proposed pedestrian bridge and is more pedestrian friendly in general. The fact that the convention center was built without a better connection to the waterfront line is a huge mistake, other cities such as Philadelphia connect their convention center directly to rail public transportation. The tracks are literally right outside the center but you have to walk to East 9th and cross shoreway ramps to get to the station.. what a waste.

 

This project could be huge for Cleveland but it needs to be done right, in a way that connects everything and is desirable to walk to...

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/04/cleveland_moves_forward_with_design_of_intermodal_transit_center.html#incart_m-rpt-1

 

I agree, but you can't compare Philly to Cleveland and  you know it.  The New Philly convention center was an old train station and right below is the EXISTING Market East Station.  Very very different situations.

 

I will agree that the CC should have been extended further North to connect with the current Amtrak station.  Even if that property did not remain an Amtrak station, the potential for connectivity to NCH is invaluable.

This past week, All Aboard Ohio officially requested Cuyahoga County support the intermodal station project and to consider using any unspent convention hotel funds to help support the station project. The county has a $38 million contingency fund for the hotel project in case there are any design changes, labor disruptions, etc. It has been assumed by some planners involved in the project that a basic intermodal station could be constructed for about $25 million, with the cost sharing 50/50 local/federal. So if $12+ million was being pledged locally, there could be significant local dollars put in play to leverage a far larger federal grant for an intermodal station.

 

City/GCRTA/Amtrak share of intermodal station: $12+ million

City/County/State funds for lakefront walkway: $25 million

County convention hotel excess funds: $30+ million

 

TOTAL non-federal contribution:  $67+ million

50% federal match: $67 million

 

TOTAL CAPITAL BUDGET: $132 million

 

With that kind of money involved, we could build something like this - building Mall D with a transit center below (as proposed in 1998). Of course the big question is how would the Shoreway/Mall D/transit center/walkway relate to each other? There are no active plans to convert the Shoreway to a boulevard through downtown...

 

^ If we could do this, I would be ecstatic. And it certainly seems plausible, as long as our local governments actually decide to put some serious effort into it. The pedestrian bridge, as it's currently envisioned, would not be worth the money. But this would absolutely be worth the investment, and it also functions as a pedestrian bridge!

 

I also agree 100% on the Shoreway. As far as I'm concerned, it doesn't need to be a proper highway until it's East of E. 9. Eventually the Main Ave Bridge will have to come down (similar construction to the innerbelt bridge which was on its last legs), and I think that will lead to some serious discussions of converting it all into a boulevard. Construction of a new mile-long bridge would be astronomical, especially considering that vehicular traffic on the Shoreway is steadily decreasing.

^^This one below looks similiar. Looks like mid 80`s.  Probably one of the many renderings around that time.

Unfortunately, based on some recents comments by Budish, sounds like the county is feeling pretty strapped for capital dollars given the MetroHealth projects and eventual Justice Center replacement/rehab. I suspect there's going to be a lot of competition for any left-over hotel contingency $.

 

I agree, but you can't compare Philly to Cleveland and  you know it.  The New Philly convention center was an old train station and right below is the EXISTING Market East Station.  Very very different situations.

 

I will agree that the CC should have been extended further North to connect with the current Amtrak station.  Even if that property did not remain an Amtrak station, the potential for connectivity to NCH is invaluable.

 

I totally disagree -- the situations are absolutely comparable.  Who cares whether the chicken came before the egg?  The bottom line is that Philly planners got it done.  Why?  Because they had the good sense to develop on the site of the old Reading head-house/train terminal (and legendary Reading Terminal Market beneath)... they did located the new convention center where they did  because it was at a major transportation hub.  And the end result has scored huge dividends for Philly.  In the later 80s early 90s before their CC opened,  that area of Philly was dumpy, rundown and dead.  The Reading Terminal Market and the then still new-ish, but mainly underground Gallery shopping mall (cue MTS to hate on Tower City all over again) were about the only things going on in that area.  Now it's teaming with hotels (including Philly's 1,200-room anchor Marriott, with several spin-off Marriott properties nearby in several then unused office buildings, including the 1893 mothballed/deteriorating aforementioned Reading RR head-house), restaurants and clubs, galore -- and even more quality hotels not named Marriott (like the Loew's in the 1932-built modernish Art Deco PSFS bank HQ). Philly planners get it; they highly value Philly's large transit infrastructure. 

 

Cleveland planners, meanwhile, are still stuck in Albert Porter World; that of 1950's societal genuflect to the mighty automobile: parking lots and freeway off-ramps for the suburbanite to access downtown's assets and then leave as opposed to those who either live downtown or in town, or close in, who would just as soon walk, take transit and not be bothered with cars. 

 

The RTA Waterfront Line goes literally right in front of the newly-rebuild Convention Center; the CC's giant windows toward the Lake literally look out onto the WFL's tracks.  When the CC was being rebuilt it would have been a golden opportunity to develop the NCTC directly adjacent to the Convention Center with access to the Waterfront Line, Amtrak, Greyhound, Megabus ... and even others, like LakeTran whose buses pull off the Shoreway at E. 9th and roll right by the site.  But no, our planners are more interested in pretty pedestrian bridges over the tracks to North Coast Harbor and even an analyst like Steve Litt, who I greatly respect, talks of shielding the public to 'those ugly railroad tracks.'  Bridging rail transit (or walking next to it, like the Red Line Greenway project underway now pegged to cross the Red Line Cuyahoga River viaduct) are deemed more important than transit itself... Welcome to Clevo-World!!

 

So Cleveland in my mind is still an oddball fish.  We've got a very good transit system but, yet, our planners don't do transit.  As I've said before, until the powers that be around here can yank their heads out of the paradigm that cars are desirable because they represent the privileged and desirable demographic planners crave, and transit is the domain of the poor and minorities (and a few college kids ... many of whom are temporarily deemed 'poor') who planners would rather ignore, things aren't going to markedly change for the better.  Other cities that are embracing transit -- even those late to the game like Detroit -- will move forward embracing TOD and connectivity while Cleveland has it's collective head stuck up its arse; HUGE gaffes like the non-connection of transit to the Convention Center are going to keep happening and only AAO and a few UOers are going to be the only ones who will even care. 

Probably should have ditched the Med Mart and spent that portion of the project budget on a lakefront link/transportation center.

 

That said, the south entrance of the convention center is a quarter mile away from Tower City. It already has excellent transit access.

^ Well said.  The CC was a County project, so there is no excuse for its failure to integrate with the County's rail system.  Someone was paid a large sum of County money to make that decision, yet no one has been held accountable and the mistake remains unacknowledged. 

 

That said, the south entrance of the convention center is a quarter mile away from Tower City. It already has excellent transit access.

 

Just as an example, our annual comics convention is held in January.  At that time of year, in our climate, excellent transit access is not a quarter-mile outdoor walk-- through an open area notably lacking in storefronts that might benefit from the foot traffic-- to a train station.  If that constitutes excellent transit access, then what do we call Philadelphia's solution?  We could have had that too.  We still could.  The tracks are literally right there in front of the facility we just built.  Of all the obstacles that prevent us from addressing that, none loom larger than the standing idea that we shouldn't even bother.  Officially, we're so certain we don't need NCTC that we're planning a bridge there instead.

^Good points 327...

 

I was in Philly much of this past winter, which was often as brutal and bitter as Cleveland's.  Meanwhile, they held major annual exhibits like their Auto Show and Flower Show, and they were packed with people coming into town on the trains and walking through the warm, temp-controlled rail station connection directly into the Convention Center... SEPTA even decorated the adjacent Jefferson (formerly Market East) train station in balloons, bunting and other decorations welcoming them to the Convention Center exhibits. 

 

I think the failure to connect our CC to our rail line just feeds planner's thesis that the Waterfront Line is useless and never should have been built, a wholly negative approach, instead of using it as a catalyst for growth and development.  At least FEB gives me some hope.

 

... oh yeah, Philly doesn't have an IX Center stuck out in the middle of nowhere sucking major exhibits away from downtown like we do.  Ugh!

If Ron Tober had been RTA's GM for the past few years, the NCTC (probably with commuter rail) and the connection to the Convention Center would have been built.

 

If Joe Calabrese had been RTA's GM in the early 90s, there would never have been a proposal to connect Gateway with an underground walkway from Tower City, meaning that Gateway likely would not have been built with the Cavs still playing out in Richfield, Summit County -- and the Indians?  who knows if they'd even still be in Cleveland.

 

 

Funny how that works.

[deleted]

If Ron Tober had been RTA's GM for the past few years, the NCTC (probably with commuter rail) and the connection to the Convention Center would have been built.

 

If Joe Calabrese had been RTA's GM in the early 90s, there would never have been a proposal to connect Gateway with an underground walkway from Tower City, meaning that Gateway likely would not have been built with the Cavs still playing out in Richfield, Summit County -- and the Indians?  who knows if they'd even still be in Cleveland.

 

 

Funny how that works.

 

If Tober had stayed, true we'd have more rail services by now. But GCRTA would be in FTA receivership and run by a federally appointed trustee.

 

Point is, Tober isn't here. Calabrese is here, and he's a huge supporter of the intermodal hub. So let's work with what we have organizationally and financially.

If Ron Tober had been RTA's GM for the past few years, the NCTC (probably with commuter rail) and the connection to the Convention Center would have been built.

 

If Joe Calabrese had been RTA's GM in the early 90s, there would never have been a proposal to connect Gateway with an underground walkway from Tower City, meaning that Gateway likely would not have been built with the Cavs still playing out in Richfield, Summit County -- and the Indians?  who knows if they'd even still be in Cleveland.

 

 

Funny how that works.

 

If Tober had stayed, true we'd have more rail services by now. But GCRTA would be in FTA receivership and run by a federally appointed trustee.

 

Point is, Tober isn't here. Calabrese is here, and he's a huge supporter of the intermodal hub. So let's work with what we have organizationally and financially.

 

Your point about FTA receivership is pure conjecture.  Clearly you didn't like Tober while I admired him.  ... I'm glad Calabrese supports the NCTC, but I don't see him being as proactive as he could have been -- and I'm talking about the NCTC as well as a connector to the CC -- like Tober certainly was about the walkway to Gateway (now named for him) that was a key element in saving Gateway; getting it over the hump for pols and voters.... 

 

You're entitled to your opinion, while I'm entitled to mine.

conjecture x2?

Your point about FTA receivership is pure conjecture.  Clearly you didn't like Tober while I admired him.  ... I'm glad Calabrese supports the NCTC, but I don't see him being as proactive as he could have been -- and I'm talking about the NCTC as well as a connector to the CC -- like Tober certainly was about the walkway to Gateway (now named for him) that was a key element in saving Gateway; getting it over the hump for pols and voters.... 

 

You're entitled to your opinion, while I'm entitled to mine.

 

My conjecture is akin to seeing someone earning $20,000 this year, $18,000 next year, $15,000 the year after that, etc. and shopping for cars at BMW, Cadillac and Jaguar dealerships. Unless he finds a new source of income, he should probably limit his car shopping to KIA, Scion and Hyundai. If he buys that BMW, Caddy or Jag, my conjecture is that he's going to be in financial trouble soon.

 

I liked Tober a lot. He and I were on a first-name basis. He was the most professional top executive for GCRTA since Ronis in the agency's formative years. Tober brought some respectability back to a troubled, corrupt agency. BTW, I seem to recall that the Gateway tax was passed first in 1989, then GCRTA applied for the $11 million in federal funds for the walkway.

 

But his dreams for Greater Cleveland didn't match its resources, be it local, state and federal -- all of which were and are in decline. And unless we find new funding mechanisms and/or revenue sources, I'm worried that the existing rail and bus system faces much more serious service disruptions than what we saw these last two winters. But that's a discussion for another thread (as is most of this).

 

What is relevant for this thread is that an intermodal center be funded out of non-traditional sources -- namely the county money I spoke of, as well as whatever the city hopes to get from developing the Greyhound station and surrounding area. The intermodal center should also help to boost ridership on all modes that will serve it, especially the underutilized Waterfront Line. There's no way GCRTA could afford to take on this project on its own without new capital funding of its own.

I'm big supporter of the NCTC generally, but it makes far more sense for it to be located west of E. 9th adjacent to the Convention Center.  Placing it to the east of 9th Street, at Muni Lot, would put it in no-man's land at the fringes of downtown several blocks away from the relevant activity centers.  Of course there would be plenty of parking at Muni Lot, which seems to be the most important thing to too many leaders.  It's nice that the NCTC is even being discussed, because I had taken it for dead, but a far more up-front aggressive stance by local transportation authorities would have probably landed the NCTC in front of the Convention Center where it belongs...

 

Obviously RTA can't foot the NCTC bill alone; it will take a collaborative effort with probably a substantial State and/or Federal match.  However RTA is the primary public transportation agency in the region (and that includes LakeTran, Greyhound, Megabus, Akron RTA, PARTA, NOACA, etc), which gives Joe Calabrese the major bully pulpit to advocate for transit issues.  Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to use it very often to stump for important transit innovations like NCTC.  Had he really been vocal about this -- as he was regarding the Public Square rehab -- this project probably would have been developed properly and in the right place.  It's the kind of cooperative advocacy and leadership Chris Ronayne has shown in University Circle and, as you can see, the results there have been stunning... Maybe you heard something I didn't, but I sure haven't heard much of anything from Joe C until very recently regarding NCTC.... Instead, until the Pedestrian Bridge was recently postponed and people finally started discussing NCTC, NCTC had been almost completely ignored by public officials and the PD, and that's what pisses me off.

It's nice that the NCTC is even being discussed, because I had taken it for dead,

 

Glad to be of service! :)

 

... which gives Joe Calabrese the major bully pulpit to advocate for transit issues.

 

He's been that, especially when it comes to state funding issues. And he should since GCRTA comprises nearly half of Ohio's transit ridership.

 

Unfortunately, he doesn't seem to use it very often to stump for important transit innovations like NCTC.  Had he really been vocal about this -- as he was regarding the Public Square rehab -- this project probably would have been developed properly and in the right place.  It's the kind of cooperative advocacy and leadership Chris Ronayne has shown in University Circle and, as you can see, the results there have been stunning... Maybe you heard something I didn't, but I sure haven't heard much of anything from Joe C until very recently regarding NCTC.... Instead, until the Pedestrian Bridge was recently postponed and people finally started discussing NCTC, NCTC had been almost completely ignored by public officials and the PD, and that's what pisses me off.

 

Joe stumps for what he thinks he has the resources to accomplish. I think there are more resources to be had out there if he took a big risk by sticking his head up and lobbied for it. But he isn't a risk-taker. He's a public administrator. The renewed interest in the NCTC came after All Aboard Ohio got NOACA to organize a meeting of key officials between Cleveland and Toledo in January 2014 where I gave this basic presentation (since updated to reflect more recent progress): http://freepdfhosting.com/551d62cea8.pdf (10mb).

 

I also gave similar presentations in Elyria, Sandusky and Toledo, all of which are now pursuing station projects of various sizes and at various stages of planning and development. Point is, all civic leaders are mired in what has come before. If you want them to take on something new, you may have to be the one to speak up and you'd better give them a darn good reason why they should add new tasks to their already busy schedules.

... and I give Joe big props for consistently speaking out for more State transit funding.  Ohio is abysmal on that issue and Joe's voice should be heard.

Some items of interest.......

 

As was noted in this thread in late April, AAO sent a letter to Armond Budish regarding a possible funding contribution. No response yet. Here's the letter:

http://freepdfhosting.com/dee450f9a7.pdf

 

And in case you've never seen the 1998 North Coast Transportation Center study, here it is:

http://freepdfhosting.com/16b27fe39a.pdf

Man there are some sad looking Amtrak stations from coast to coast, including ours.

 

http://www.citylab.com/commute/2015/07/these-are-the-saddest-amtrak-stations-in-america/397817/

 

 

Let's use the Way-Back Machine.... Here's the Cleveland Amtrak station under construction in December 1976. It was a standard-design Amtrak station, and many in this style were built around the country as Amtrak tried to get out of cavernous, expensive rail terminals built in the heyday of USA rail travel. What's even more amazing is that mobile home (aka modular station) seen at right was Cleveland's temporary Amtrak station for the prior year! That station found a new home in Elyria starting in 1980 when Amtrak began service to that community. That modular station remained as Elyria's depot until it caught fire in 2013. It was the best thing that could have happened to it as the roof was falling in near the end of its life.

 

Cleveland Amtrak station under construction, December 1976 (Gary Morris photo):

 

Interior of Cleveland station a couple of winters ago (Ken Prendergast photo):

 

The station isn't being well-maintained by Amtrak. These aren't spots in the carpet that can be cleaned anymore. They're stains and only replacing the carpet can get rid of them. The seats date from the 1980s if not 1970s (Ken Prendergast photo):

 

Oh, and what happened to that temporary modular station from Cleveland that landed in Elyria? Here's what the inside of it looked like in March 2013 (Ken Prendergast photo):

 

That fall, the Elyria station caught fire from an electrical problem (C-T.com photo):

 

It was demolished and replaced a few months later by a bus shelter -- the other structure is a shed for a wheelchair lift (Dan Davidson photo):

Sad.  Just sad.  All around sad.

^^Any new meetings coming up about the NCTC?

any shots of the toledo station?

^^Any new meetings coming up about the NCTC?

 

No meetings have been organized relating to studies, etc. However, the subject will be discussed at the All Aboard Ohio local meeting this Saturday at 10 a.m. at the Cleveland Sustainability Center. It's free and open to the public.

 

any shots of the toledo station?

 

Since this is a Cleveland thread, I'll post some in the Amtrak Toledo-Cleveland thread:

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,1643.msg763471.html#msg763471

God, I hope not. The walk from the Greyhound station to Tower City isn't great as it is (E13 to Euclid or Chester to E9 have a very desolate feel at night/early in the morning -- and the panhandlers have been getting more aggressive my last few trips). But it's significantly better than walking from the Amtrak station to TC, which is twice the distance - and W3 isn't the most pleasant walk at those hours either.

 

Oh it's even worse than that. If a temporary Greyhound station is built to get it out of the way of development ASAP, it would likely be put in the Muny Parking lots east of the North Point Parking Garage on East 9th Street. There isn't a more pedestrian- and transit-inaccessible place downtown that I can think of. Perhaps such an awful site will only hasten action on a more permanent and accessible transportation center that's integrated into the new lakefront walkway, North Coast Waterfront Line station with expanded service hours, downtown trolleys, existing GCRTA/Akron/Laketran/Canton/Kent transit routes, and lakefront development.

 

The consulting team has ID'd that most local access to/from the Greyhound station is by car (being dropped off/picked up) or by taxi. Consultants said pedestrian or transit access won't be primary modes of local distribution to/from the new station site because they aren't now at the existing station site. Umm, maybe because they either don't exist or aren't attractive at the current site?? And maybe that situation will change if put in a more pedestrian- and transit-accessible site? Sometimes I scratch my head. Probably explains the hair loss....

^Would the StephTubbJones Ctr. be an option for a temporary home for Greyhound. Wonder if there is room.  I have passed it by many times when only one or two bays were taken.

I think it would be too small at the Tubbs center, though why couldn't they just rebuild it into a full fledged transit center?

 

Or maybe Greyhound buses could relocate behind Tower City at Huron (where Megabus used to pick up/drop off). And have Greyhound work a relationship with Tower City for a passengers only area inside?

Greyhound needs a waiting room, crew area, ticketing offices, package express facilities, some kind of food service, and parking for roughly 30 employees. These could probably be provided in a temporary, modular facility. And STJ transit center is an option, but the city's deal with Greyhound hinges on a property swap with the city. Now that the city and GCRTA have reached a joint agreement on developing a multi-modal transportation facility, perhaps Greyhound could temporarily relocate to a GCRTA facility.

Greyhound needs a waiting room, crew area, ticketing offices, package express facilities, some kind of food service, and parking for roughly 30 employees. These could probably be provided in a temporary, modular facility. And STJ transit center is an option, but the city's deal with Greyhound hinges on a property swap with the city. Now that the city and GCRTA have reached a joint agreement on developing a multi-modal transportation facility, perhaps Greyhound could temporarily relocate to a GCRTA facility.

 

That would be the best option, for them to be temporarily at an RTA location. Obviously this development pending is a big deal so let's get the show on the road