OKAY

 

So here's the math for anyone interested about buses that would run through Public Square during the weekdays according to newest schedules starting later this month.

 

http://imgur.com/XHkIWo9

 

According to the data, if buses could run through public square you would have frequency for a bus every 2 minutes from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm. From 6:00 pm to 6:00 am it's less than that.

 

Why not let buses run through the square 12 hours from 6:00 am - 6:00 pm and then close it when there are less buses that need to be rerouted. That would save a lot on congestion woes which ARE very bad during rush hour when congestion is at its peak downtown -- let's be very clear about that.

 

Then in the evenings, programming can happen and people can relax in their nice downtown park with a bus every 4 minutes cycling around like a roundabout in a very happy pattern that we all can agree is a good compromise.

 

Compromise is good.

The downside? I know some passengers and transit advocates will object to stigma unloading/boarding bus passengers at TC's back door instead of the front door; as if passengers should be kept invisible from PS... and I get that, too.

 

That would be a more valid point if people's objections (spoken and unspoken) were about race or economic status instead of behavior.

KJP,

 

There's approximately 600 buses of 4000 buses that would cut through the square. That's about 15% of bus traffic that could go be kept from doing the roundabout thing. Obviously during rush hour this proportion is more meaningful than off-peak frequency. But just wanted to through that out there.

KJP,

 

There's approximately 600 buses of 4000 buses that would cut through the square. That's about 15% of bus traffic that could go be kept from doing the roundabout thing. Obviously during rush hour this proportion is more meaningful than off-peak frequency. But just wanted to through that out there.

 

Thanks for doing the research.

KJP,

 

There's approximately 600 buses of 4000 buses that would cut through the square. That's about 15% of bus traffic that could go be kept from doing the roundabout thing. Obviously during rush hour this proportion is more meaningful than off-peak frequency. But just wanted to through that out there.

 

600 buses a day?  Assuming 500 fall between 6am and 6pm, that's 42 an hour. 

KJP,

 

There's approximately 600 buses of 4000 buses that would cut through the square. That's about 15% of bus traffic that could go be kept from doing the roundabout thing. Obviously during rush hour this proportion is more meaningful than off-peak frequency. But just wanted to through that out there.

 

600 buses a day?  Assuming 500 fall between 6am and 6pm, that's 42 an hour. 

 

00:00-00:59 14

01:00-01:59 10

02:00-02:59 8

03:00-03:59 7

04:00-04:59 12

05:00-05:59 25

06:00-06:59 36

07:00-07:59 42

08:00-08:59 41

09:00-09:59 34

10:00-10:59 28

11:00-11:59 28

12:00-12:59 28

13:00-13:59 28

14:00-14:59 30

15:00-15:59 43

16:00-16:59 32

17:00-17:59 33

18:00-18:59 26

19:00-19:59 22

20:00-20:59 19

21:00-21:59 19

22:00-22:59 18

23:00-23:59 18

 

This is the buses per hour (excludes park and ride)

KJP,

 

There's approximately 600 buses of 4000 buses that would cut through the square. That's about 15% of bus traffic that could go be kept from doing the roundabout thing. Obviously during rush hour this proportion is more meaningful than off-peak frequency. But just wanted to through that out there.

 

600 buses a day?  Assuming 500 fall between 6am and 6pm, that's 42 an hour. 

 

00:00-00:59 14

01:00-01:59 10

02:00-02:59 8

03:00-03:59 7

04:00-04:59 12

05:00-05:59 25

06:00-06:59 36

07:00-07:59 42

08:00-08:59 41

09:00-09:59 34

10:00-10:59 28

11:00-11:59 28

12:00-12:59 28

13:00-13:59 28

14:00-14:59 30

15:00-15:59 43

16:00-16:59 32

17:00-17:59 33

18:00-18:59 26

19:00-19:59 22

20:00-20:59 19

21:00-21:59 19

22:00-22:59 18

23:00-23:59 18

 

This is the buses per hour (excludes park and ride)

 

How about just running buses from 0600-1000 and 1400-1800 when there are 30+ buses per hour. That leaves lunch hours open. Or would schedule changes be too complex for people to follow?

I think that would be too complicated. Having the Square open to pedestrians between 7 pm (22 buses) and 5 am (25 buses) during the weekdays and during all hours on the weekends could be a good compromise. If the bus signals are timed appropriately around the square, unlike the Healthline (Euclid Ave.) due to political considerations, then these queues could be further reduced.

Ladies and gentleman, it's time to blatantly rip off Crocker Park. We should line Superior Ave (good riddance!) with several of these:

It's not even a small alley street.  It's a damn highway! 

 

Yes... it's The Grand Army Of The Republic Highway and it spans this entire continent.  America's longest and perhaps most important road passes through Public Square.  And here we are lamenting that it can't become yet another downtown lawn, all because of that pesky transit system and our unfortunate neighbors who depend on it.  I cannot recall ever seeing so much anti-transit sentiment on this forum.  I grow more concerned every day about the increasing economic segregation of the city. 

 

The comments on this topic are beginning to bother me on a visceral level so I think I'll step away from it for a while.

For the pro-bus argument (which I am on) they should say the square was designed with bus traffic in mind.  We should at least see if the busses are a huge disruption before banning them.

 

Try it for a while, and if it is too burdensome, then give RTA some notice to reroute the busses.

 

 

 

I have not been there yet, but how many people congregate in the center of the square, rather than on grass lawn, in the fountain, near the cafe or by S&S monument?

 

My bet is once busses (and busses only) traverse the square, people will not even notice them

My bet is once busses (and busses only) traverse the square, people will not even notice them

 

I think that depends quite a bit on the speed of the buses and the proximity to pedestrians. I have seen some scary near misses when road construction pushed buses and confused pedestrians into close contact. Then again, I'm sure the new PS was designed in consideration of this, with public safety in mind.

^^I tend to be pro busway, too, but in fairness, the number of people who congregate in that space depends how it's used. If it's full of greenmarket vendors or food trucks, people will be (and already have been) there. If you saturate it with movable chairs, people will congregate there. I don't think it would take a major design intervention to make the space look less awkward if the city did decide to permanently close it all vehicular traffic.

 

Despite all the mudslinging and sometimes weird arguments, there seems to be a good faith disagreement here, with easy-to-see benefits from each outcome. Puts me squarely in the compromise camp of letting busses use it during weekday rush hours- maybe longer- but not on weekends or summer evenings (after rush hour).

 

Also make me wonder if we need to take a fresh look at our entire downtown street grid. In addition to bus congestion near PS, we also have wretched downtown bike-ability. It may even be time to consider looking at a system of one-way streets (which I don't say lightly).

On 8/2/2016 at 3:12 PM, StrapHanger said:

It may even be time to consider looking at a system of one-way streets (which I don't say lightly).

 

 

Edited July 15, 20204 yr by SixthCity

My bet is once busses (and busses only) traverse the square, people will not even notice them

 

I think that depends quite a bit on the speed of the buses and the proximity to pedestrians. I have seen some scary near misses when road construction pushed buses and confused pedestrians into close contact. Then again, I'm sure the new PS was designed in consideration of this, with public safety in mind.

 

We're talking about 600 vehicles a day, many stopping to pick-up and drop-off. There's also a signal. Set a speed limit for the buses. It's not that complex.

 

I'm with the through bus crowd. I don't see the big deal. We're talking 43 vehicles per hour max. That's nothing.

I am much less concerned about busses using the busway than I am about the way it was designed.  When you're on Superior it will look like a through street and I'm sure there will be vehicular confusion for some time with people unknowingly driving through the busway.  I'm also confused by the size of the busway.  It seems unnecessarily wide and unnecessarily striped.  In my opinion they could have done with 3 lanes, one in each direction and a center passing lane.  The center crosswalk and stop lights also seem unnecessary to me and make the space feel more broken up than it needs to be.  I have no problem with busses utilizing this busway I just dislike the features that I'm sure they added in the name of "safety".

Yeah, for such a low bus count, having a traffic signal is overkill. Do pedestrians need to push the button and then cross - even when there are no buses in the vicinity? You'll see that signal ignored by pedestrians the first day it's actually in use. When you condition pedestrians to ignore a signal because it's practically useless, then it'll never be adopted when it's actually in need.

 

For a good example of poorly timed signals, see Euclid Avenue and how frequently pedestrians and automobiles ignore signals. Some left turn lanes do not cycle until the second iteration, leading many to simply run the left signal who think the light is broken (myself included, as I was led to believe the in-ground loops were broken). And unrealistically brief and infrequent walk signals in the busiest pedestrian district leads many to simply... walk on a don't-walk signal.

 

I'm sorry that productive and constructive dialogue upsets 327[/member], but do you expect everyone to have the same opinion as you?

Yeah, for such a low bus count, having a traffic signal is overkill. Do pedestrians need to push the button and then cross - even when there are no buses in the vicinity? You'll see that signal ignored by pedestrians the first day it's actually in use. When you condition pedestrians to ignore a signal because it's practically useless, then it'll never be adopted when it's actually in need.

 

For a good example of poorly timed signals, see Euclid Avenue and how frequently pedestrians and automobiles ignore signals. Some left turn lanes do not cycle until the second iteration, leading many to simply run the left signal who think the light is broken (myself included, as I was led to believe the in-ground loops were broken). And unrealistically brief and infrequent walk signals in the busiest pedestrian district leads many to simply... walk on a don't-walk signal.

 

I'm sorry that productive and constructive dialogue upsets 327[/member], but do you expect everyone to have the same opinion as you?

 

What's productive and constructive of your last question there? I think he was just being honest about how he felt. Why take the thread off-topic? Just let it go.

Honest? This is what a forum is for, to discuss ideas on projects that pertain to our interests. It doesn't need to be cohesive or similar in thought or pattern. If that was the case, this forum would be utterly boring to read. It's fantastic that everyone has different opinions about a project that is central to many lives in Cleveland and has the ability to impact not only transit users, but visitors to the square alike.

 

I think we are all in agreement, though, of why the city is raising the question now rather than when this project was being planned.

Honest? This is what a forum is for, to discuss ideas on projects that pertain to our interests. It doesn't need to be cohesive or similar in thought or pattern. If that was the case, this forum would be utterly boring to read. It's fantastic that everyone has different opinions about a project that is central to many lives in Cleveland and has the ability to impact not only transit users, but visitors to the square alike.

 

I think we are all in agreement, though, of why the city is raising the question now rather than when this project was being planned.

 

Sherman, let it go. He strongly believes in access to transit, especially for those that have no other option. Nothing wrong with that.

 

Yeah, the question is being raised because they're looking at a one month sample size and thinking that this will continue forever. Can the city ban winter weather too? Because it's going to be a hindrance on the user-friendliness of the square.

As I have stated before, riding a bus that once went through the square and now goes around it requires me to take an earlier bus so that I arrive at work on time. While I can make that adjustment, there may be others that can't.

 

Let's have a dose of reality, once K-12 schools open there won't be as many people enjoying the square. Also, I doubt there are many people on the square during the morning rush hour unless they are heading to work. Open the bus lanes and see what happens.

OKAY

 

So here's the math for anyone interested about buses that would run through Public Square during the weekdays according to newest schedules starting later this month.

 

http://imgur.com/XHkIWo9

 

According to the data, if buses could run through public square you would have frequency for a bus every 2 minutes from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm. From 6:00 pm to 6:00 am it's less than that.

 

Why not let buses run through the square 12 hours from 6:00 am - 6:00 pm and then close it when there are less buses that need to be rerouted. That would save a lot on congestion woes which ARE very bad during rush hour when congestion is at its peak downtown -- let's be very clear about that.

 

Then in the evenings, programming can happen and people can relax in their nice downtown park with a bus every 4 minutes cycling around like a roundabout in a very happy pattern that we all can agree is a good compromise.

 

Compromise is good.

 

Thanks for posting this. I wonder if there may be some missing routes, though -- the stop signage installed on Public Square includes stops for route 26 as well as one of the trolley routes. Next time I'm there (likely tomorrow) I'll take a closer look.

^ Yes, the 26 and the E-Line trolley would also run through Superior

Can someone explain how moving the pickup locations from the center of Public Square would make that much extra time for passengers to wait for the buses. It seems all these locations would be a closer to their offices.

Can someone explain how moving the pickup locations from the center of Public Square would make that much extra time for passengers to wait for the buses. It seems all these locations would be a closer to their offices.

 

The waiting for the buses is not the concern; it's the buses heading Eastbound have three extra traffic lights (1 in front of Terminal Tower - installed within the past 3 months, 1 at Euclid Ave and Ontario, and 1 at Euclid and East Roadway/Jesse Owens Way (road that runs north/south on the eastern side of the Square)) that the buses would miss if they went directly through Superior. Westbound only hits one extra traffic light (Ontario and North Roadway/Rockwell) but also hits 2 additional stop signs.

 

In both directions, the buses are also making an additional left-hand turn.

I thought it would be interesting to identify exactly which buses should be using Superior through the square and I found something interesting.  Of the new RTA schedules I checked, no buses or BRT's are going through the square.  Now perhaps RTA quickly made the adjustments, or they knew that the city was going to want to keep Superior closed.

OKAY

 

So here's the math for anyone interested about buses that would run through Public Square during the weekdays according to newest schedules starting later this month.

 

http://imgur.com/XHkIWo9

 

According to the data, if buses could run through public square you would have frequency for a bus every 2 minutes from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm. From 6:00 pm to 6:00 am it's less than that.

 

Why not let buses run through the square 12 hours from 6:00 am - 6:00 pm and then close it when there are less buses that need to be rerouted. That would save a lot on congestion woes which ARE very bad during rush hour when congestion is at its peak downtown -- let's be very clear about that.

 

Then in the evenings, programming can happen and people can relax in their nice downtown park with a bus every 4 minutes cycling around like a roundabout in a very happy pattern that we all can agree is a good compromise.

 

Compromise is good.

 

Thanks for posting this. I wonder if there may be some missing routes, though -- the stop signage installed on Public Square includes stops for route 26 as well as one of the trolley routes. Next time I'm there (likely tomorrow) I'll take a closer look.

 

Whoops! Can't believe I missed the 26. I'll do the math on that and add it to my spreadsheet. I was going through all the routes manually, so it was more of an art than a precise science.

 

Mea culpe.

No buses in Public Square? No problem, says renovation designer James Corner

 

Could the square's widely praised makeover have been even better if the city had decided on removing Superior Avenue and closing the square's interior to bus service permanently before starting the 15-month, $50 million project?

 

Even more to the point, did Cleveland in some sense blow the renovation and commit a needless, embarrassing and hard-to-fix mistake – a word that around here rhymes all too famously with lake?

 

James Corner, the internationally respected landscape architect who designed the square's renovation, doesn't think so.

He isn't inconvenienced by the longer bus trips, missed connections and the service cuts/fare increases caused by higher operating costs.

^I believe the point of Sherman's post was to address the concerns of the many posters who believe Superior should have been closed from the get go and it is a blunder to now go back and fix it with some inferior solution.  Corner indicates in the article that the original design always had in mind that Superior might be closed in the future and that fact was incorporated in the original plan.  The blunder is the cost to fix which I am sure will not be small.  He could not give an estimate.

Correct. It also refutes the point that the Square was not meant to be closed to buses on a more long-term basis. I'm surprised it wasn't posted considering the traction the idea is getting.

OKAY

 

So here's the math for anyone interested about buses that would run through Public Square during the weekdays according to newest schedules starting later this month.

 

http://imgur.com/XHkIWo9

 

According to the data, if buses could run through public square you would have frequency for a bus every 2 minutes from 6:00 am to 6:00 pm. From 6:00 pm to 6:00 am it's less than that.

 

Why not let buses run through the square 12 hours from 6:00 am - 6:00 pm and then close it when there are less buses that need to be rerouted. That would save a lot on congestion woes which ARE very bad during rush hour when congestion is at its peak downtown -- let's be very clear about that.

 

Then in the evenings, programming can happen and people can relax in their nice downtown park with a bus every 4 minutes cycling around like a roundabout in a very happy pattern that we all can agree is a good compromise.

 

Compromise is good.

 

Thanks for posting this. I wonder if there may be some missing routes, though -- the stop signage installed on Public Square includes stops for route 26 as well as one of the trolley routes. Next time I'm there (likely tomorrow) I'll take a closer look.

 

Whoops! Can't believe I missed the 26. I'll do the math on that and add it to my spreadsheet. I was going through all the routes manually, so it was more of an art than a precise science.

 

Mea culpe.

 

No problem, great info and I appreciate the compilation of the data.

 

In case some people haven't seen it yet, here's some more photos of Public Square

https://www.mapillary.com/app/user/skorasaurus?lat=41.50015414&lng=-81.69293005&z=17&pKey=At8Jgzo5IfpmQasI8d0p5g&focus=photo

 

Hit the play button on top and you can follow me in my footsteps :-D

So, now things are getting more interesting. So, because of the actions of Cleveland City Hall, RTA is now getting warned about losing federal grants that helped pay for the HealthLine, even though it's not their fault...

 

Federal agency says closed Public Square is a violation of funding deal

 

By Ginger Christ, The Plain Dealer

Email the author | Follow on Twitter

on August 16, 2016 at 1:42 PM, updated August 16, 2016 at 1:52 PM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio – The Federal Transit Administration has put the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority "on notice" over allegations that the HealthLine is not operating as outlined in a 2004 funding deal.

 

The FTA regional administrator Marisol Simon on Aug. 10 sent a letter to RTA CEO Joe Calabrese, claiming that part of the funding agreement the FTA made with RTA stated that the Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) system would end in Public Square, what Simon referred to as the "heart of Cleveland's central business district."

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2016/08/federal_agency_says_closed_pub.html

Boy does that letter seem really fishy to me.  Like somebody at RTA saying to the FTA...."hey could you write a threatening letter to us...we need it to put the idiots at city hall in their place"

^It's totally plausible to me a transit advocate tipped off the FTA, but the substance of the letter doesn't seem far-fetched. The Transit Zone, though never heavily marketed or discussed even here, is a real thing.

I am glad this has surfaced. As great as Public Square is at the moment, what truly makes a city great is connectivity. I think having transit integrated makes Public Square and the city as a whole look much more progressive. I say a good compromise is allowing the buses to go through the square but moving the stops out of the square.

Something just doesn't smell right about the letter, RTA and this whole business... I have to look at the letter more carefully (no time at the moment), but I'm not clear on the Downtown Zone is and what FTA is calling crosstown buses, how they relate to the closing of Superior through PS and how the Health Line isn't being run properly in violation of some kind of contract between RTA and FTA.  As great as Public Square's redesign is -- and I really love it -- it just seems like this whole thing is becoming a mess.

Isn't not fully utilizing the signal prioritization a violation of the FTA also? Seems that they got around that.

The Downtown Zone involved reconstructing Superior with bus-only lanes and the construction of a new street, East 17th south of Euclid Ave to Prospect. These were all part of the federally funded Euclid Corridor project to ensure free-flowing traffic -- not the kinds of delays to transit riders we're now seeing by detouring buses around Public Square.

 

Of course someone tipped-off the FTA about this. The FTA has been involved in a million transit projects since it agreed to fund the Euclid Corridor project more than a decade ago. I wasn't smart enough to think that the closing of Superior through Public Square would violate the Full Funding Grant Agreement. But I definitely remembered that federal funding was used for Superior during the Euclid Corridor project. If the city chose to keep Superior closed, I was aware that legal action would be taken against the city by various groups alleging a violation of one or more federal laws. Indeed this could take place just for the delayed reopening of Superior.

The Downtown Zone involved reconstructing Superior with bus-only lanes and the construction of a new street, East 17th south of Euclid Ave to Prospect. These were all part of the federally funded Euclid Corridor project to ensure free-flowing traffic -- not the kinds of delays to transit riders we're now seeing by detouring buses around Public Square.

 

Did the Healthline run through the Square on Superior?

^ No, it's always gone around the square.

 

Also, note in the article below, "McCall declined to comment." Quite the irony that the chair of the American Public Transit Association, "Dr." McCall, is silent on this issue.

 

Public Square bus ban rightfully draws federal scrutiny: Mark Naymik

By Mark Naymik, cleveland.com

Email the author | Follow on Twitter

on August 16, 2016 at 5:06 PM, updated August 17, 2016 at 10:49 AM

 

CLEVELAND, Ohio – Mayor Frank Jackson's decision to delay the return of buses to the small portion of Superior Avenue that cuts through downtown's renovated Public Square has caught the attention of the federal agency that has helped pay for city transportation projects.

 

This is a good thing. It will keep everyone focused on passengers, not on picnics on the square.

 

http://www.cleveland.com/naymik/index.ssf/2016/08/public_square_bus_ban_rightful.html

^

"This [the FTA threat] is a good thing. It will keep everyone focused on passengers, not on picnics on the square."

 

Nice-- let's now tacitly vilify the families and others who are now enjoying the well-redeveloped Square as a bunch of idle loafers standing (or sitting) in the way of progress, or at least RTA's beleagured passengers... Us against them; so what else is new?...  Mark Naymik rarely adds anything to a discussion; just usually lobs grenades.    :-o

^

"This [the FTA threat] is a good thing. It will keep everyone focused on passengers, not on picnics on the square."

 

Nice-- let's now tacitly vilify the families and others who are now enjoying the well-redeveloped Square as a bunch of idle loafers standing (or sitting) in the way of progress, or at least RTA's beleagured passengers... Us against them; so what else is new?...  Mark Naymik rarely adds anything to a discussion; just usually lobs grenades.    :-o

 

I'm pretty sure that guys m.o. is simply to stir up commentary. He's a paid troll.

I'm really getting tired of this whole issue with buses on Superior.  Bottom line, Monday through Friday between 7am and 7pm, moving buses through Superior will significantly reduce the congestion around the Square and minimize travel times.  There is no way you can tell me anything different. 

I can't wait for a snow storm that starts at 4pm and watch traffic barely moving.

^

"This [the FTA threat] is a good thing. It will keep everyone focused on passengers, not on picnics on the square."

 

Nice-- let's now tacitly vilify the families and others who are now enjoying the well-redeveloped Square as a bunch of idle loafers standing (or sitting) in the way of progress, or at least RTA's beleagured passengers... Us against them; so what else is new?...  Mark Naymik rarely adds anything to a discussion; just usually lobs grenades.    :-o

 

I'm pretty sure that guys m.o. is simply to stir up commentary. He's a paid troll.

 

I think you're right.

Didyaknow? RTA's $2.6 million of added costs of going around Public Square represents 37% of RTA's $7 million worth of service cuts/fare increases that went into effect Monday. A correlation?

Nelson\Nygaard's final report... I don't have the Phase I data showing signal delays for the first batch of intersections (including Superior and W 3rd which is of particular interest because it seems to be especially delay prone for buses turning left onto Superior from W 3rd) but here is the link; hopefully this will be useful data: https://drive.google.com/open?id=0B3M2XkEFDB65ZmE5SmZuRW5DWXdVNkNsQlhTUUpENGE4eGFv

^

"This [the FTA threat] is a good thing. It will keep everyone focused on passengers, not on picnics on the square."

 

Nice-- let's now tacitly vilify the families and others who are now enjoying the well-redeveloped Square as a bunch of idle loafers standing (or sitting) in the way of progress, or at least RTA's beleagured passengers... Us against them; so what else is new?...  Mark Naymik rarely adds anything to a discussion; just usually lobs grenades.    :-o

 

His stories about the two bars near Asiatown were a classic in this regard.  He was clearly shilling for the side that was clearly in the wrong, and got roasted in the comments.

So the new study is done. If the new study recommends keeping Superior open to buses, then why must stakeholders be consulted?? About what, an affirmation of the facts?

 

City's Public Square Traffic Data Collected, but no Timeline for Discussions

Posted By Sam Allard on Thu, Sep 1, 2016 at 4:32 pm

 

Via a City Hall spokesman, the city of Cleveland has now completed its studies of traffic patterns on Public Square. The studies were undertaken at the behest of Mayor Frank Jackson, who wanted intel gathered post-RNC to determine whether or not buses should be allowed on Superior Avenue, in the lane through the Square built expressly for them.

 

The city is now reportedly "in discussions" with partners and stakeholders, but the spokesman could not offer a timeline for when those discussions would conclude.

 

It has now been exactly one month since buses were supposed to have been let back on Superior Avenue following the RNC. As others continue to note, the current "studying" seems redundant, given that the firm Nelson Nygard conducted a $120,000 study in 2014 which concluded that keeping Superior Avenue open to buses made the most financial sense.

 

MORE:

http://www.clevescene.com/scene-and-heard/archives/2016/09/01/citys-public-square-traffic-data-collected-but-no-timeline-for-discussions