When this plan was first proposed I think I remember Calabrese calling it a 'non-starter'. For everyone's sake I hope he doesn't have that much clout

The rail station at Tower City can't be moved, so Public Square will always need to be the city's main transit hub.  That doesn't have to be a bad thing.  There are ways we can add green to the square's quadrants without expanding them. 

I'm liking the commission's approach.  So far so good.  RTA should just breath a sigh of relief that the commission's not pushing to close Superior too.

The rail station at Tower City can't be moved, so Public Square will always need to be the city's main transit hub. That doesn't have to be a bad thing. There are ways we can add green to the square's quadrants without expanding them.

 

I have no objections to having the rapid at tower city. I want the cars/buses off the square to make it more pedestrian friendly.

RTA needs to get off its high horse on the Public Square issue.  In the end, do they really have any say in how the Square is reconfigured?  The city can really do whatever they want outside of affecting the federal right of way for route 6 no?

How much of a walk are we talking about for bus transfers then?  Encouraging excercise is one thing, disrupting the logistcs of our entire transit system is another.  At least supply a plan B.

hubz1124, really? Getting rid of buses to make a downtown area more pedestrian friendly is like getting rid of parking lots to make the suburbs more car centric. Get rid of public transit and you get rid of pedestrians. More than two-thirds of transit trips begin or end as pedestrian trips to destinations away from the transit stop.

 

Rerouting RTA buses around the square, which has been a transit hub for 150 years, will cost the transit agency hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. So whose route do we cut because we want to run buses around an already congested Public Square adding significant vehicle-hour costs spread among dozens of bus routes? Or worse by moving the buses off the square entirely, you force riders to deal with much more confusing transfers, and to walk blocks to their connecting bus far beyond Public Square? What impact do you think this will have on ridership?

 

Cities die without good public transportation. They become low-density, disconnected and poor like Detroit. This will not be allowed to happen here.

 

RTA needs to get off its high horse on the Public Square issue. In the end, do they really have any say in how the Square is reconfigured? The city can really do whatever they want outside of affecting the federal right of way for route 6 no?

 

U.S. Route 20 also passes THROUGH the square, and U.S. Route 422 comes into the square on Ontario.

hubz1124, really? Getting rid of buses to make a downtown area more pedestrian friendly is like getting rid of parking lots to make the suburbs more car centric. Get rid of public transit and you get rid of pedestrians. More than two-thirds of transit trips begin or end as pedestrian trips to destinations away from the transit stop.

 

Rerouting RTA buses around the square, which has been a transit hub for 160 years, will cost the transit agency hundreds of thousands of dollars per year. So whose route do we cut because we want to run buses around an already congested Public Square adding significant vehicle-hour costs spread among dozens of bus routes? Or worse by moving the buses off the square entirely, you force riders to deal with much more confusing transfers, and to walk blocks to their connecting bus far beyond Public Square? What impact do you think this will have on ridership?

 

Cities die without good public transportation. They become low-density, disconnected and poor like Detroit. This will not be allowed to happen here.

 

RTA needs to get off its high horse on the Public Square issue.  In the end, do they really have any say in how the Square is reconfigured?  The city can really do whatever they want outside of affecting the federal right of way for route 6 no?

 

U.S. Route 20 also passes THROUGH the square, and U.S. Route 422 comes into the square on Ontario.

 

I dint say the buses need to be miles away... I just feel it would be advantageous to get them off of public square.

 

Edit: And by doing so, helping to rid public square of the undesirable people who loiter around said bus stops.

Where do you move the buses to the east of Public Square? The next closest street that runs through downtown is East 9th. That's a half-mile walk from Prospect/West 6th. Nope, that's not going to happen.

 

Next idea....

 

 

Edit: And by doing so, helping to rid public square of the undesirable people who loiter around said bus stops.

 

OK, that's bullshit. What kind of high-and-mighty crap is this? First of all, I'm one of those people who loiter around bus stops. Second, if you want a city devoid of those people, then try the friggin suburbs. You make me sick.

I recognize the operational difficulty that reconfiguring the square will bring to RTA, but I will still be bitterly pissed if they scuttle the Ontario closure that the commission seems to be leaning toward.  If this becomes an issue, I will personally help finance an independent traffic study by an outside consultant to help determine cost effective alternatives for RTA.

 

Also, I don't know what the status is of RTA's planned WHD transit center, but maybe speeding that along would help make this more palatable for RTA.

Homeless people will be on PS regardless if bus stops are there or not.  Hint - they are not there to panhandle the people getting on and off the busses.  So.... which 'undesirable' people do you speak of that you hope to move off the square?  And waiting for a bus is not 'loitering'

So then how does moving the buses help?

I don't see how it would be that much worse to move the busses to W 6th/Prospect instead of having them go through Ontario. That's just as close to the station in TC isn't it?

Whooooa KJP,  I'm a DOWNTOWN resident, and take public transportation including the buses that go into and out of public square, so there's nothing high or mighty going on here. You know damn well that the beggers/loiters/people getting high on public square are not helping the area attract new businesses or residents and (lets be frank here) are the ones scaring the people who come up from the suburbs.

 

Edit: All I am really trying to say is that the area is not the most inviting for people who aren't used to it and maybe, just maybe KJP, moving the bus stops might help in that regard.

 

Sorry, but this is a city, a place where lots of people from lots of different backgrounds come together. If someone is not comfortable with that then I don't know what they were expecting by coming downtown. The next you know they'll start complaining about tall buildings or all of the lights.

 

And, again, Public Square makes it easier for people to use public transit by having a central transfer location. Having more than one transfer site makes transit more difficult to use. And that does not help a city remain a city.

^thanks KJP, that makes a lot of sense.

And, again, Public Square makes it easier for people to use public transit by having a central transfer location. Having more than one transfer site makes transit more difficult to use. And that does not help a city remain a city.

 

Key phrase here is "easier for people".  I think it's more accurate to say it's easier for the city.  Transforming Public Square into a bustop was a no-brainer in terms of easily directing transit but we all know the negative side effects that came with it.  Separating the space from being essentially a transit hub and nothing more, into something much more is what the overall goal seems to be here and I think the City and designers are shooting for the highest possible acheivement for the space.  Relocating all those bus stops has to be part of the plans if that's the case.

 

Detroit had a similar problem with a small inner city park which was made into a bus hub and became a magnet for deadbeats (much worse than our Public Square mind you).  They created a new bus transit hub a block & half over.  Turned out beautifully.  http://criticaldetroit.org/rosa-parks-transit-center/

 

Something to consider.  How much was the price tag for the STJ bus transit center over by CSU?  $5-10 million?

So to get back to Public Square design, please note that public transit has made Public Square its focus since the 1850s. Now why is transit suddenly the villain? Perhaps it's not transit that's causing the problems on Public Square but the city's poor economy and the lack of clean up, law enforcement and general maintenance? So tell me, how does suddenly eliminating transit from Public Square -- A NATURAL TRANSIT HUB FOR 150 YEARS -- solve these problems?

 

 

 

 

What has changed? It's not the sudden appearance of a public transit hub. Now what could the change be, then?  :|

So to get back to Public Square design, please note that public transit has made Public Square its focus since the 1850s. Now why is transit suddenly the villain? Perhaps it's not transit that's causing the problems on Public Square but the city's poor economy and the lack of clean up, law enforcement and general maintenance? So tell me, how does suddenly eliminating transit from Public Square -- A NATURAL TRANSIT HUB FOR 150 YEARS -- solve these problems?

 

 

 

 

What has changed? It's not the sudden appearance of a public transit hub. Now what could the change be, then? :|

 

You seem to have a pretty set position that it can only be transit, so KJP are you in favor of keeping the square in its current alignment?  Or is there another alternative that you favor that would combine some/all the quadrants?

I think transit can stay, and should, but the set up should be altered.

I don't know about any one else, but I wasn't suggesting removing them from the square just from Ontario. If you'll notice the first map you posted doesn't have any streetcars dividing the city's front yard. It shouldn't be that difficult to adjust routes to avoid Ontario through the middle of the square.

A WHD transit center would help

You seem to have a pretty set position that it can only be transit, so KJP are you in favor of keeping the square in its current alignment? Or is there another alternative that you favor that would combine some/all the quadrants?

 

"Only be transit?" Please explain.

 

I have no objections to any Public Square plan as long as it doesn't make the use of transit more difficult for riders or more expensive for RTA.

I think the solution is a transit center, much like the one gottaplan points out to in Detroit. How about on the vacant Jacobs property. A transit center could be designed so that something could still be built on top of it, much like the 515 structure. I would much rather have the buses concentrated in one place than how it is now. Saying that PS has been this way for 150 years doesn't mean that it wasn't a bad idea in the first place. A Public Square should be a more tranquil space where you can escape for a little bit, and that cant happen with a bunch of stinky busses running through it all the time. With the Casino just a year away the culture must change on PS. All it will take is for one Casino visitor from Indiana or wherever to have a bad experience and the media will eat it up. We all know that they will. And if that happens your reputation will spread as being unsafe and dangerous.

^ The spot on public square is not a good idea. And you dont have to look at detroit for a transit center, we already have one. The Stephanie Tubbs Jones Transit Center by CSU.

^ The spot on public square is not a good idea. And you don't have to look at detroit for a transit center, we already have one. The Stephanie Tubbs Jones Transit Center by CSU.

 

So how about an explanation as to why it's not a good idea and what would you do?

^It would be hard to design a building with a transit center underneath it with a huge gap in the bottom so busses can drive though it. A garage is a different thing and buildings can be built on top of them. But building a tower on top of a transit center seems impossible. And if transit riders are so "undesirable" who would want them hanging out around their building even if it could be done. Not going to happen.

I don't necessarily agree with the idea of a transit center on Public Square but I definitely believe a tall building could be built on top of one with no problem.

I would like to see Public Square turned into a single public space instead of 4 quadrants, but I don't think that is the biggest issue. Nor do I think transit can be reasonably removed from Public Square because it is a natural transit hub. There are other prominent plazas that I have seen which function as transit terminals. The biggest problem IMO is the lack of residential development around it, such that "riff-raff" waiting for buses becomes a dominate presence. Improve the design while adding some cafes, shopping, and more street life; and I bet the overall vibe of PS will be much improved.

^

I don't necessarily agree with the idea of a transit center on Public Square but I definitely believe a tall building could be built on top of one with no problem.

 

Agreed on your second point. And there is no perfect solution, but I think keeping the busses as close to PS as possible should be the goal.

You seem to have a pretty set position that it can only be transit, so KJP are you in favor of keeping the square in its current alignment? Or is there another alternative that you favor that would combine some/all the quadrants?

 

"Only be transit?" Please explain.

 

I have no objections to any Public Square plan as long as it doesn't make the use of transit more difficult for riders or more expensive for RTA.

 

Okay, that phrase-ology wasn't perfect.  But what I was that many of the statements you were making sounded as if there should be no change to the current set up.  Which I think would waste a golden opportunity to re-invigorate PS.  Is there a specific change or set of changes to PS that you feel would make it more hospitable while also keeping the same level of transit service?

 

First of all, did I miss something here?  There hasn't been a post to this thread in 3 months and there's suddenly a bunch of activity, beginning with a quote by hubz1124 that I wasn't able to follow: "When this plan was first proposed I think I remember Calabrese calling it a 'non-starter'. For everyone's sake I hope he doesn't have that much clout".  Was there a press release or news story that was deleted/moved?

 

But anyway...

 

RTA needs to get off its high horse on the Public Square issue.  In the end, do they really have any say in how the Square is reconfigured?  The city can really do whatever they want outside of affecting the federal right of way for route 6 no?

 

Agreed.  I feel RTA has too much power right now.  Anyone who speaks against it will be labeled as anti-poor or racist.

 

 

Edit: And by doing so, helping to rid public square of the undesirable people who loiter around said bus stops.

 

OK, that's bullsh!t. What kind of high-and-mighty crap is this? First of all, I'm one of those people who loiter around bus stops. Second, if you want a city devoid of those people, then try the friggin suburbs. You make me sick.

 

I think the issue is that Public Square doesn't have ENOUGH density.  If more people were on the square, KJP would have his diversity and the "undesirable people" wouldn't be as noticed by people like hubz1124.

 

 

I believe that the majority of people on the square will always be transit riders. You can add more "pedestrians", but the number will still be greatly out numbered by people waiting for busses.  So if you really want to separate the pedestrians from the transit riders, I believe one of the only ways to do so is the thread it idea they had before. Busses below, park above. Other then that I believe it would be hard to get enough "pedestrians" to lessen the feel of dominance of the "undesirables"

I for one would think it would be great if we stop referring to transit riders as undesirables in this thread.

First of all, did I miss something here? There hasn't been a post to this thread in 3 months and there's suddenly a bunch of activity, beginning with a quote by hubz1124 that I wasn't able to follow: "When this plan was first proposed I think I remember Calabrese calling it a 'non-starter'. For everyone's sake I hope he doesn't have that much clout". Was there a press release or news story that was deleted/moved?

 

But anyway...

 

RTA needs to get off its high horse on the Public Square issue. In the end, do they really have any say in how the Square is reconfigured? The city can really do whatever they want outside of affecting the federal right of way for route 6 no?

 

Agreed. I feel RTA has too much power right now. Anyone who speaks against it will be labeled as anti-poor or racist.

 

 

Edit: And by doing so, helping to rid public square of the undesirable people who loiter around said bus stops.

 

OK, that's bullsh!t. What kind of high-and-mighty crap is this? First of all, I'm one of those people who loiter around bus stops. Second, if you want a city devoid of those people, then try the friggin suburbs. You make me sick.

 

I think the issue is that Public Square doesn't have ENOUGH density. If more people were on the square, KJP would have his diversity and the "undesirable people" wouldn't be as noticed by people like hubz1124.

 

 

 

My initial quote was in reference to a public square 'master-plan' suggested by an organization of planners/business leaders, the article can found on cleve.com. When the idea was first suggested a couple of months ago, Calabrese, who is the head of the Cleveland RTA, said that if the master-plan called for moving the bus routes then it would be a 'non starter'.

This discussion always brings out extreme opinions and I'm confident there's a whole lot of middle ground for people to come together in.  I'm a fully unified square partisan myself, but I can get on board with the closing only Ontario or only Superior if that's what going to get the votes.

 

So who here would really object to:

 

*Close Ontario or Superior through the square

*Keep public square as the city's bus hub

*Accommodate RTA in several other ways they deem necessary, including, if requested, widening the remaining road that cuts through the square (partially by eliminating the planted medians if it's Superior), widening the roadway surrounding Public Square by an additional lane, and siting a transportation center in the WHD (perhaps with a parking garage above that would ease the development of all those surface lots someday).

 

I don't want to burden RTA, but that cannot be the only consideration here.  There has got to be at least some room to fuss with the traffic patterns in the area.

 

Okay, that phrase-ology wasn't perfect.  But what I was that many of the statements you were making sounded as if there should be no change to the current set up.  Which I think would waste a golden opportunity to re-invigorate PS.  Is there a specific change or set of changes to PS that you feel would make it more hospitable while also keeping the same level of transit service?

 

 

Yes, I posted my conceptual plan here....

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,6560.msg448651.html#msg448651

 

First of all, did I miss something here?  There hasn't been a post to this thread in 3 months and there's suddenly a bunch of activity,

 

You didn't miss anything. This discussion was in response to a PD article this morning about the Mall redesign. As often happens, the discussion in the Mall thread got onto a different topic: Public Square. So the off-topic messages were moved here.

 

I for one would think it would be great if we stop referring to transit riders as undesirables in this thread.

 

And I for one, second that.

 

Onward....

Please (please!) excuse the shoddy image, but I wanted to put out a physical representation for everyone...

 

I wonder why this idea doesn't get more consideration.  Unlike the one proposed as the "3rd" option in the Public Square redesign presentation from a few months ago (which had all sorts of asymmetric design elements) this would be more classical and simple.  Aside from the square with the Soldiers and Sailors Memorial, we would "pyramid style" build grand stairs that raise to a second level park that would be a single contiguous space.  The steps to get on top could contain sections that would be staggered gardens.  On top anything from simple plaza space to more interesting urban uses could be put in place.

 

Meanwhile, underneath much of the space would be supports for the upper park, but there would be plenty of space for the buses to pick up pedestrians, and the area would be enclosed during cold seasons.  In the long run, retail space could even go beneath the park with entrances along Ontario and Superior, as though P.S. had been developed.

 

I know some might say covering the area might encourage criminal behavior, but if done properly with lighting, and spacial purposing, I think we get the best of both worlds. 

^KJP I think you're asking this space to be all things and the end result is that it doesn't do any of them very well.  Already discussed by others that if you want to make Public Square a nice gathering place, getting rid of the heavy bus traffic coming & going is the first step.

 

And as much as I like your plan for public square and dropping down Superior to build park above, the cost of doing so would be astronomical.  The amount of utilities laying in the way which would need rerouted would be enough to create a new transit center nearby.  I don't think this needs to be done to remove any undesirables or transit riders.  It needs to be done to get rid of the bus traffic and create a better hub from a blank slate like the STJ site or others around.  Kill two birds with one stone.

 

The undesirables and transit riders can still feel welcome in Public Square, lets just get rid of the buses and reduce traffic lanes by 1 on all sides.

I for one would think it would be great if we stop referring to transit riders as undesirables in this thread.

 

Wish I could hit a "like" button

 

 

I do sort of understand a bit of the frustration with RTA and the square.  With so many busses laying over between the end of one route and the start of another, the square looks more like a bus parking lot rather than a grand public space.

 

I hope the STJ transit center relieves some of this

Wouldn't one of the easiest and cheapest ways to improve the square would be to move the bus stops in the middle of the street, like on euclid avenue? Maybe you can add some pedestrian bridges. This would get people waiting off of the sidewalks and open it up and promote a more friendly place to walk and relax.

 

Here is my idea

 

http://tinyurl.com/4scx8qa

 

I for one would think it would be great if we stop referring to transit riders as undesirables in this thread.

 

Wish I could hit a "like" button

 

Sorry, I'll say this once and be done with it. Transit Riders (which I happen to be one of) were NEVER referred to as undesirable. I'm pretty sure everyone here is aware of who I was speaking of. The future of Public Square is huge for the city and its important we can discuss it openly here.

 

...And now were getting some sweet GIS maps out of the conversation!

I wonder why this idea doesn't get more consideration. 

 

I think gottaplan is right that cost is a major obstacle for something that bold.

 

Even aside from cost, I think we should be really careful playing with grade separation.  I'd be afraid that a pile of stairs would make a new space that much less likely to be used.  And I also think this sweeping view is one of public square's best attributes:  http://maps.google.com/?ie=UTF8&ll=41.498734,-81.693676&spn=0,0.006539&t=h&z=18&layer=c&cbll=41.498729,-81.693673&panoid=O5eKpvAqziedDh8-nAbo2A&cbp=12,353.04,,0,-4.89

Why not build a transit hub on the surface parking lot on the West side of Public Square?  It would be really nice to make it a part of a larger redevelopment plan for the site and turn it into a TOD development.  There is already one in Dayton and even in Cleveland near Cleveland State.

I agree that buses laying over on Public Square is not good. So that means finding someplace for this to happen. Here is my suggestion to accomplish that while still taking advantage of Public Square as a unique and easily identifiable space to transfer between transit routes (including linking the bus and rail systems in/near the geographic center of downtown):

 

1. All bus routes that come into downtown from the west side of the Cuyahoga River should travel through the Warehouse District (WHD) Transit Center, then through Public Square on their way to the Stephanie Tubbs Jones (STJ) Transit Center.

 

2. All bus routes that come into downtown from the east side of the Cuyahoga River should travel through the STJ Transit Center, then through Public Square on their way to the WHD Transit Center.

 

The end result is greater connectivity between bus routes at multiple locations, most bus and all rail routes at Public Square, and very frequent transit service between one end of downtown and the other end of downtown.

^Yes, definitely.  Isn't that what RTA had in mind with the two transit centers?  The goal should be to identify a common route between the two transit centers that most of the buses can use so riders can use this as a downtown circulation service without having to worry about knowing specific routes.  Buses arriving from the south can hook into the system at either the eastern or western end and avoid crossing N/S through Public Square all together.

 

Why not build a transit hub on the surface parking lot on the West side of Public Square?  It would be really nice to make it a part of a larger redevelopment plan for the site and turn it into a TOD development.  There is already one in Dayton and even in Cleveland near Cleveland State.

 

Oh man, you are so page 28! :)  I know I wouldn't be so keen to see Public Square frontage taken up by bus births or entry portals, even if there were a tower above.  Not when there's so much underused land east of Public Square where a transport center could go.

^Wasn't that the plan anyway when they built the WHD transit center? (Not that it isn't a good plan)

 

And to go along with KJP's plan, (since we're still using the PS roads of Superior and Ontario), why not close down the E/W roadways that skirt along the outside of the square.  Aside from the one connecting Euclid to Ontario, we could add hundreds of square feet to the park space of Public Square, and still have the major intersection. As it is right now we have too much concrete and too little green, its more like a patio than a park.  Imagine walking out of the Casino at 11pm on a Saturday night and in front of you is a span of green space, and soaring towers.

 

Also, though I'd like to connect the 4 quadrants, we should all bear in mind that we are getting a redesigned Municipal Mall (wasn't someone working on a new name for that... all the ABCs and such are no match for names like, Millennium, Forest, or even Central Park.

 

 

And to go along with KJP's plan, (since we're still using the PS roads of Superior and Ontario),

There's no reason under the suggestion the KJP made to leave Ontario open.

^Exactly.  In fact, this is the kind of thinking that will make the closure palatable to RTA and its riders.