Topic: University Circle (Cleveland) accessibility

[KJP]

http://www.cleveland.com/economy/plaindealer/index.ssf?/base/cuyahoga/1154939452141440.xml&coll=2

Cleveland Foundation brings prominent players to the table
Monday, August 07, 2006
Tom Breckenridge
Plain Dealer Reporter

The Cleveland Foundation has used its money and clout to bring three turf-conscious titans into an informal planning task force known as the Greater University Circle Initiative.

Case Western Reserve University, University Hospitals and the Cleveland Clinic join more than a dozen other public, nonprofit and neighborhood entities in the initiative. The foundation wants the institutions to share their plans, think more broadly . . . and have a bigger impact, said Robert Eckardt, a top foundation officer.

It's especially important that the Clinic is involved. It sits outside a square-mile district served by University Circle Inc. The nonprofit, dominated by Case and UH, oversees security, parking and land-use planning.
 
The Clinic's fast growth, as well as expansions at a number of University Circle institutions, led Cleveland Foundation President Ronn Richard to call for the joint planning effort.

......

http://www.cleveland.com/news/wide/universitycirlce0807.gif

[KJP]

BTW, whoever did that map, must've done it with their eyes closed. The East 120th/Euclid & Mayfield station locations are in the wrong place. Do these guys know what a rail line looks like on an aerial photo??

[3231]

Yeah, I think the graphic shows that the Church of the Assumption would go the way of the wrecking ball to make way for the station. yeah right..

Also, the map mis-labels the area between Cornell and Mayfield as the Case campus.

[LovesIt]

Moving the E.120th & Euclid station is the project I'd most like to see be realised from all of these. Little Italy is a parking nightmare, but so is trying to get there on the Rapid. The current E.120th & Euclid station is so decrepit and downright scary that I never use it, and the University Circle stop is more than a mile away from Little Italy, which is a pain to walk when you've got a stomach full of linguini.

[Map Boy]

^And the VA label is on top of the Cleveland Institute of Music.  Good map, chaps!

I'm glad to see this stuff getting publicity, because there really is a lot of momentum behind them. 

[clvlndr]

About the E.120 Rapid station, when are they (RTA, Little Italy) going to stop talking and start building?  You'd like to think that the racial element is no longer motivating foot-dragging (as in Little Italy doesn't want a bunch of E. Cleveland blacks hopping off the Rapid in their neighborhood), so what's the problem?  A parking garage was mentioned before as a sticking point, but why?  I don't see why there should even be parking at this station; it's a traditional urban rapid transit site in a fairly dense residential/commercial area -- whose riders will be walk ups and bus transfers (assuming the #9 Mayfield is routed there).  Really, with the growth along Euclid with the new Case dorms, Little Italy is less a factor than before, and RTA could up the traffic count from around 100 people to in the thousands by simply building new station at or just adjacent to the current site. 

It was known the Euclid-E.120on was poorly located since, apparently, back in the old CTS days, and talk of relocating has been going on for over 2 decades... when are they going to do anything but continuing the endless search to reconcile divergin issues?  Or is the supposed issue reconciliation a pretext for doing nothing?

[3231]

^RTA has been waiting for the Triangle plans to be finalized before they do something at E120.

If the UARD were something else, I would worry more about it.  There are a lot of people who are interested in making this happen.  While this is definitely a setback, I highly doubt that it signals the death of the project.

[Map Boy]

From what I gather, the major issue right now is not opposition from the community, but rather constraints that exist because of the Norfolk Southern tracks that run parallel to the RTA tracks.  Basically, this would make construction of a station that would "bridge the gap" between the east and west sides of the railroad overpasses very difficult, if not impossible.  When you add a busy street passing under, such as Euclid or Mayfield, the situation becomes even more complex. 

This is one reason why I've heard that they would consider relocating it somewhere between the two and linking it up to the proposed University Arts and Retail District.  I'm not particularly thrilled about this because of the forgone visibility that they could get by building at Mayfield, but the current station is built like a secret bunker, so it would certainly be an improvement upon that one, as long as it's actually linked to the new development and not accessibly only from E. 119th Street.  My impression is that this station would be located near the bend in E. 117th Street.

[3231]

I thought that I had heard that there would be a head-house (correct term?) at both Mayfield and Euclid/120.

[Map Boy]

You mean a station entrance?  I have no idea...I've seen so many different proposals!  If it's in the middle, I would like to see entrances at both ends, but at the same time, if riders were directed down well-marked, active streets, lined with retail, then these "headhouses" may not be necessary.

[3231]

^I heard that from a pretty reliable source. I think its great to have visibility from Mayfield.

[Map Boy]

^Agreed.  But even if there wasn't a station entrance, per se, on Mayfield, but they built some sort of "gateway" pieces that announced the station at both Euclid & Mayfield and guided pedestrians, cyclists and drop-off traffic down E. 117th, I think we could achieve the same end.

[3231]

Honestly, I think that a platform in between the two sites would give a greater sense of security to waiting passengers.  There is an eerie-ness to E120. There is not much action there. Funny thing is, the station is directly across from the UC police station. It should be a very safe place, but it doesn't necessarily feel that way to the majority of riders.  Maybe its because you way to walk underneath the rail bridge at Euclid--that place is a cave.

Also, I also heard that the curviture of the tracks at Mayfield made it a very difficult, if not impossible, place to put a station.

[Map Boy]

^Really?  I'm not picturing the curve... it seems pretty straight to me!

So, you think that a well-designed enclosed platform is less scary than a well-designed public street as far as a mode for getting from point A to point B?  I'm not debating the fact that a good station waiting area (complete with maps, signage, a "next train" ticker, and working light bulbs) is imperative once you arrive at the station, but I'm not sure I agree that all riders need to be herded down an eclosed corridor to get there.

I guess I'm picturing a done-up E. 117th, though, with lots of activity.  I'm not sure what could be done with E. 119th, though there are plans to build housing at the north end of it (Hemisphere) and perhaps a public garage in the middle.  It definitely wouldn't be as inviting as the E. 117th side, but I think the majority of riders would be approaching from the west side (117th) anyway.

[3231]

my idea on safety is this: standing on a platform, people will feel safer if that platform is closer to the action of Little Italy than they would if it is closer to E.120.  Its just a hunch.

[3231]

MGD,

We should invite some of the other urbanohioans to post on this thread.

[Map Boy]

more idea on safety is this: standing on a platform, people will feel safer if that platform is closer to the action of Little Italy than they would if it is closer to E.120.  Its just a hunch.

Now I'm confused.  We may be discussing two different things here!  Maybe we should just table this discussion until dinner.

By the way, why would we want anyone else to join this conversation?  We've already said everything that needs to be said on the subject!  (that's a challenge, suckas!)

[3231]

^i see how my post was confusing. here is what i meant:  a platform halfway between mayfield and 120 has a safer feel than a platform adjacent to 120. 

[Map Boy]

yes, I agree.  But it really shouldn't matter where it is along that block, as long as how you get there and what the environment is like once you're there are both amicable.

[musky]

^You two are so cute when you banter

[the pope]

my idea on safety is this: standing on a platform, people will feel safer if that platform is closer to the action of Little Italy than they would if it is closer to E.120.  Its just a hunch.

especially when the platform is on one of the more active roads in the east side of the city.

[StrapHanger]

^i see how my post was confusing. here is what i meant:  a platform halfway between mayfield and 120 has a safer feel than a platform adjacent to 120. 

Where's KJP with helpful diagrams?  Tough to say how the station will best work with out a better sense of what the Triangle development might look like (when are we going to see some smuggled renderings?!). 
But until then, it's fun to daydream about a station right at Mayfield even though it might-gasp!-begin to resemble a normal heavy rail station designed to conveniently serve an actually populated neighborhood!  I'm not sure those are permitted in the RTA Red Line field manuel.

[3231]

Ok, I've heard something about PBL being possibly interested in helping move the rapid station away from E120th.  Does that mean he's interested in helping adjacent development? I'm not sure.

[Map Boy]

I've got some photos and maps to post later.  Stay tuned!

[KJP]

Where's KJP with helpful diagrams? 

He's too busy right now trying to assemble a new office chair bought on discount for $18!

[the pope]

Where's KJP with helpful diagrams?

He's too busy right now trying to assemble a new office chair bought on discount for $18!

i need a new one for my home office, where did you get it?

[KJP]

I got it at Staples for the list price of $89, but I had a $73 Staples rewards card. Tax on the $16 difference brought the total to $18 plus change. The discount card was mailed to me because I'm enrolled in Staples' rewards program where past purchases count toward future discounts.

[clvlndr]

I'm actually of a mind that a location closer to the current one, maybe a few hundred feet to the SW toward Mayfield, would be better.  The Euclid E.118th area's that much better, now activity-wise.  I'd get rid of that nursery at Euclid-E.118 to have a clear path to the station.  Problem is, though, is the 4-track (6-track wide) RR right of way you mention as the Rapid's on the east side of this ROW... To my knowledge, only Puritas has a Rapid passenger tunnel that goes under an active RR ROW... but it can be done.

... that said, the ideal location probably is still over or adjacent to Mayfield.  Incidental, the boarded up underside of the Rapid bridge there is where the Van Sweringens built stairs up to a never-built station there.

[KJP]

And the right of way was actually designed to be 10 tracks wide, but eight tracks was the max, from 1955-1970:

CTS/RTA Red Line: 2 tracks (active)
NKP/N&W/NS: 2 tracks (active)
NYC/PC/CR/CSX: 2 tracks (active, second track restored in 1999)
CUT/PC: 2 tracks (abandoned in 1971)
CUT: 2 tracks for future expansion (never built)

[Map Boy]

What's this?

Incidental, the boarded up underside of the Rapid bridge there is where the Van Sweringens built stairs up to a never-built station there.

[KJP]

When the railroad right of way through University Circle was widened from four tracks to 10 for the Cleveland Union Terminal project, much preliminary work was also done for building the Rapid line. In addition to grading the right of way, erecting metal poles for the Rapid's overhead wires and installing bridges, some preliminary station work was done. However, not all stations were ultimately built in 1955 where station foundations were put in 1930. The Mayfield Road station was one such location. Cleveland Transit System decided to put the Rapid station at Euclid/East 120th. I don't know their reasons, but hindsight shows the Van Swerigens were smarter (big surprise!).

[clvlndr]

There were other stations the Vans built that CTS ignored, including Buckeye-Woodland and Lakeview Rd.  Obviously, given the extreme population density of Little Italy -- my understanding is, it's the dense-ist nabe inside Cleveland -- the Mayfield Rd one would have had the greatest walk up traffic of any station (maybe Shaker Square would top it).  A book I read years ago said CTS cut a deal with a private bus company operating on Mayfield not to build a station there -- hence, we have out-of-the way Euclid-E.120 where the Vans had not built a station.

[clvlndr]

my idea on safety is this: standing on a platform, people will feel safer if that platform is closer to the action of Little Italy than they would if it is closer to E.120.  Its just a hunch.

That's a true assessment, there's a feeling of greater safety standing out in the open on a platform on a bridge... Funny, RTA had that concept going for the new Superior station in E. Cleve -- which sits on a Rapid bridge over Superior, but then blew it by enclosing the new platform in a small building thus negating the 'safety' feeling.  The last I've seen of this station, the large glass panels facing off the bridge toward the Euclid-Superior intersection have been removed.  I wonder if this is part of the reason why...

[KJP]

The last I've seen of this station, the large glass panels facing off the bridge toward the Euclid-Superior intersection have been removed.  I wonder if this is part of the reason why...

Wonder if the locals "removed" them?

[clvlndr]

Hooray for Steve Litt!!  He's my hero.