Red Line/HealthLine Extension Major Transportation Improvement

Transcription

Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority
Red Line/HealthLine Extension Major
Transportation Improvement Analysis
Definition of Tier 2 Alternatives Report
April 2014
GREATER CLEVELAND REGIONAL TRANSIT AUTHORITY
RED LINE / HEALTHLINE EXTENSION
MAJOR TRANSPORTATION IMPROVEMENT ANALYSIS
DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT
Version 4
Prepared by:
AECOM
1001 Lakeside Avenue, Suite 1010
Cleveland, OH 44114
April 2014
AECOM
April 2014
Table of Contents
1.
INTRODUCTION.................................................................................................................................................1
1.1
Purpose of this Report ................................................................................................................ 1
1.2
Project Description ...................................................................................................................... 1
1.3
Summary of Purpose and Need .................................................................................................. 2
2.
DEVELOPMENT OF ALTERNATIVES ..........................................................................................................4
3.
ALTERNATIVE SCREENING PROCESS ......................................................................................................4
4.
SUMMARY OF FINDINGS FROM INITIAL SCREENING ...........................................................................7
4.1
Transit Technologies for Potential Red Line/HealthLine Extension ......................................... 7
4.1.1 Bus Rapid Transit ....................................................................................................................... 7
4.1.2 Bus Rapid Transit Lite (BRT Lite) ............................................................................................... 7
4.1.3 Heavy Rail Transit ...................................................................................................................... 7
4.1.4 Diesel-Multiple Unit (DMU) ......................................................................................................... 8
4.1.5 Rapid+........................................................................................................................................ 8
4.2
Alignment Options Considered .................................................................................................. 8
4.2.1 Alternative B ............................................................................................................................. 10
4.2.2 Alternative D ............................................................................................................................. 10
4.2.3 Alternative E ............................................................................................................................. 10
4.2.4 Alternative G ............................................................................................................................ 10
5.
REFINEMENTS TO ALTERNATIVES ......................................................................................................... 11
5.1
Alternative B ............................................................................................................................... 11
5.1.1 Operating Refinements to Alternative B .................................................................................... 11
5.1.2 Station Refinements to Alternative B ........................................................................................ 11
5.2
Alternative D ............................................................................................................................... 11
5.3
Alignment Alternative E ............................................................................................................. 12
5.3.1 Operating Refinements to Alternative E .................................................................................... 12
5.3.2 Station Refinements to Alternative E ........................................................................................ 14
5.4
Alignment Alternative G ............................................................................................................ 16
5.4.1 Operating Refinements to Alternative G ................................................................................... 16
5.4.2 Station Refinements to Alternative G ........................................................................................ 17
i
AECOM
5.5
6.
April 2014
Summary of Refinements to Build Alternatives ....................................................................... 19
BASELINE ALTERNATIVES ........................................................................................................................ 20
6.1
No Build Alternative ................................................................................................................... 20
6.1.1 Transit Service Characteristics ................................................................................................. 20
6.1.2 Roadway Service Characteristics ............................................................................................. 21
6.2
Do Minimum Enhanced Bus Alternative................................................................................... 22
6.2.1 Transit Service Improvements .................................................................................................. 22
7.
BUILD ALTERNATIVES ................................................................................................................................ 26
7.1
Alternative B ............................................................................................................................... 26
7.1.1 Physical Description ................................................................................................................. 26
7.1.2 Technologies ............................................................................................................................ 26
7.1.3 Operations................................................................................................................................ 26
7.1.4 Passenger Facilities ................................................................................................................. 27
7.1.5 Maintenance Facilities .............................................................................................................. 27
7.1.6 Supporting Bus Services .......................................................................................................... 27
7.2
Alternative E ............................................................................................................................... 31
7.2.2 Technologies ............................................................................................................................ 32
7.2.3 Operations................................................................................................................................ 32
7.3
Alternative G .............................................................................................................................. 36
7.3.2 Technologies ............................................................................................................................ 37
7.3.3 Operations................................................................................................................................ 37
8.
NEXT STEPS ................................................................................................................................................... 40
APPENDIX A-1 TIER 1 ALIGNMENT FIGURES ............................................................................................ A1-1
APPENDIX A-2 TIER 2 ALIGNMENT FIGURES ............................................................................................ A2-1
ii
AECOM
April 2014
List of Tables
TABLE ‎3-1: CRITERIA USED IN THE TIER 1 SCREENING………………………………………………………………5
TABLE ‎4-1: SUMMARY OF EVALUATION RESULTS .................................................................................................9
TABLE ‎6-1: SERVICE SPAN – NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE ....................................................................................... 21
TABLE ‎6-2: HEADWAYS – NO BUILD ALTERNATIVE ............................................................................................. 21
TABLE ‎6-3: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE HOURS, DO-MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE .................................... 22
TABLE ‎6-4: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE MILES, DO-MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE ...................................... 23
TABLE ‎6-5: ROUTE 28 HEADWAYS, DO-MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE ...................................................................... 24
TABLE ‎6-6: ROUTE 30 HEADWAYS, DO-MINIMUM ALTERNATIVE ...................................................................... 24
TABLE ‎7-1: RESIDENTS AND JOBS WITHIN STATION CATCHMENT AREA ...................................................... 26
TABLE ‎7-2: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE HOURS, ALTERNATIVE B ........................................................ 28
TABLE ‎7-3: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE MILES, ALTERNATIVE B ........................................................... 29
TABLE ‎7-5: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE HOURS, ALTERNATIVE E ......................................................... 34
TABLE ‎7-6: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE MILES, ALTERNATIVE E ........................................................... 35
TABLE ‎7-8: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE HOURS, ALTERNATIVE G ........................................................ 38
TABLE ‎7-9: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE MILES, ALTERNATIVE G .......................................................... 39
iii
AECOM
April 2014
List of Figures
FIGURE ‎1-1: STUDY AREA .................................................................................................................... 2
FIGURE ‎3-1: ALTERNATIVES SCREENING .......................................................................................... 5
FIGURE ‎5-1 REFINEMENTS TO ALTERNATIVE E BETWEEN FIVE POINTS AND E. 185 STREET ... 14
FIGURE ‎5-2 REFINEMENTS TO ALTERNATIVES E AND G IN EUCLID .............................................. 15
FIGURE ‎5-3 REFINEMENTS TO ALTERNATIVES E AND G: EAST 260TH STREET TERMINUS ......... 16
FIGURE ‎5-4 REFINEMENTS TO ALTERNATIVE G ALONG EAST 185TH STREET .............................. 18
FIGURE ‎7-1: BUS SERVICE CONCEPTS, ALTERNATIVE B ................................................................ 31
FIGURE ‎7-2 “RAPID+” LRT/STREETCAR ENTRANCE/EXIT RAMP TO/FROM RED LINE................... 33
FIGURE ‎7-3: BUS SERVICE CONCEPTS, ALTERNATIVE E ................................................................ 36
FIGURE ‎7-4: BUS SERVICE CONCEPTS, ALTERNATIVE G................................................................ 40
iv
AECOM
1.
Introduction
The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA) is conducting the Red Line/HealthLine
Extension Major Transportation Improvement Analysis to investigate opportunities for transit
investments in the northeast portion of their service area. The Red Line/HealthLine extension
study is building upon the assessment and recommendations of RTA’s Strategic Plan, which is
a roadmap to reimagining its future and describes actions for refocusing, restructuring,
renovating, reallocating and reenergizing RTA’s services and capital investment programs.
1.1
Purpose of this Report
This Definition of Tier 2 Alternatives Report provides a description of the alternatives that were
advanced from the Tier 1 screening process, describes refinements resulting from the
comments made by stakeholders and the public during the meetings held in December 2013
and provides the final definitions of alternatives that will be carried forward to the second tier
screening phase.
1.2
Project Description
The study area consists of three communities in Cuyahoga County as depicted in Figure 1-1. It
encompasses the Collinwood district of the City of Cleveland, the City of East Cleveland, and
the City of Euclid. The Collinwood neighborhood of Cleveland has become a place of interest for
artists seeking low-cost urban places to live and work. The housing and foreclosure crisis,
though somewhat detrimental to the urban fabric of the neighborhood, has provided
opportunities for artists to acquire properties very inexpensively. A collective known as “Arts
Collinwood” has been instrumental in helping to revitalize the Waterloo Road business district.
The City of Cleveland has launched several planning initiatives to re-zone the Collinwood
neighborhood to become more transit oriented in its development patterns strengthening the
urban fabric once served by a dense network of streetcar lines.
East Cleveland is Cleveland’s first suburb incorporated in 1911 and was home to John. D.
Rockefeller, the founder of the Standard Oil Company and the world’s first billionaire. There is
an abundance of abandoned apartment buildings and vacant residential lots reflecting the
severe decrease in population since 1990. Median household income is $21,070 with 32
percent of the total population living under the poverty line. However, East Cleveland enjoys
superb access to major educational, cultural and medical institutions located in adjacent
University Circle. With the rising cost of automobile travel, East Cleveland is poised to become
one of the best “live-work” communities in Northeast Ohio. The city also is home to General
Electric’s lamp division at NELA Park located on Noble Road, which has direct bus service to
the Red Line terminus at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere. A Red Line or HealthLine
extension to Noble Road could facilitate better transit mode share for trips to NELA Park.
The City of Euclid has launched several initiatives to restore its vitality and vibrancy by
embracing livable community concepts. The Euclid Waterfront Improvement Plan provides for
long-term lakefront development that will open close to three quarters of a mile of public access
to the shores of Lake Erie. Fishing piers, walking trails, wildlife habitat areas along with a marina
and other amenities in the future, are creating tremendous opportunities for investment, outside
enjoyment, recreational activities and relaxation. The redevelopment of Downtown Euclid is
also causing a great deal of excitement. The momentum created by the Downtown Euclid
Transportation for Livable Communities Initiative Master Plan (TLCI) has already spurred over
$16 million in public and private investment. Improvements in traffic patterns, streetscapes and
the presence of new businesses, will likely preserve the small town atmosphere of Downtown
Euclid, yet provide a vibrant retail and entertainment center for all to enjoy. A similar planning
effort is taking place on the Euclid Avenue Corridor. The city is confident the results will be
1
April 2014
AECOM
productive. Improved transit service with fast and reliable access to Downtown Cleveland and
University Circle would likely enhance opportunities for redevelopment in Euclid and spur
economic growth along the southern shores of Lake Erie.
Figure ‎1-1: Study Area
1.3
Summary of Purpose and Need
University Circle has the greatest concentration of medical, cultural and educational institutions
in the country and is the second largest business district in Ohio, second only to Downtown
Cleveland. An integrated transit system that better serves University Circle will improve
mobility, economic development and community livability. A summary of the purpose and need
is provided here. A more detailed discussion can be found in the Purpose and Need Statement
(October 2013).
The purpose of this study is to determine the scope, scale and type of transit investment to best
meet mobility needs, complement and enhance the transportation network infrastructure, and
support land use and community plans for targeted redevelopment and infrastructure
investment. The proposed Red Line/HealthLine extension project can potentially restructure
service on Greater Cleveland’s northeast side by improving access to University Circle, Midtown
and Downtown Cleveland and by reducing travel time and cost from the furthest reaches of
RTA’s eastern service area. The provision of additional mobility options and improving access
to the region’s core can increase redevelopment opportunities, potentially resulting in
substantial economic benefits that improve regional competitiveness.
2
April 2014
AECOM
Baseline conditions and analysis of current and projected market conditions provide a
comprehensive snapshot of past and future trends; the need for transit and transportationrelated improvements flows directly from these findings, which are outlined in the Baseline
Conditions Report (August 2013). The needs identified are:




Reverse Employment and Population Migration Trends. The trend in population and
employment migration to the east is undisputed. Transit must innovatively address this
trend to ensure convenient, attractive, and time-competitive access between
communities, employment and activity centers.
o
Serve existing and emerging employment and activity centers
o
Serve underserved or un-served employment and activity centers
o
Serve zero-vehicle households and transit dependent communities
o
Serve high transit propensity areas
o
Meet travel needs and markets by trip type
o
Maintain markets to current key activity centers
Improve Service Delivery Optimization. Refine network structure and operating plans
and derive service strategies to meet long term needs efficiently.
o
Develop effective and efficient high capacity transit
o
Define corridors by service type and mode – local, express, high capacity
o
Define improvements that can be implemented incrementally
o
Ensure long-term viability
o
Ensure travel time reliability with infrastructure improvements
o
Improve transit productivity and metrics
o
Internal trips and external trips by provider
Enhance Transit Connections and Integration. RTA and Laketran provide service to
what has become a cohesive community with travel needs that span the county line.
Improved integration of service between the Cuyahoga and Lake County portions of the
study area for work and non-work trips is essential.
o
Develop seamless interfaces and coordinated inter-county services
o
Provide direct convenient connections to activity centers for local and commuter
trips
o
Promote multi-modal integration – transit, shuttles, bicycles, alternative
transportation modes
Support Sustainable Land Use and Economic Development. Develop transit to
enhance and support land use and development plans and use and redevelopment
plans
o
Promote sustainable economic development
o
Support redevelopment and reuse of land in transit corridors
o
Serve affordable housing
o
Utilize existing infrastructure
3
April 2014
AECOM
2.
o
Coordinate transit investment with land use policies
o
Protect the environment and minimize environmental impacts
Development of Alternatives
Definition and evaluation of alternatives is the heart of this phase of project planning. The
alternatives consist of three separate categories: No-Build, Do Minimum, and a family of Build
alternatives. The No Build alternative is the existing transportation system and is essentially a
“status quo” baseline used to evaluate the comparative benefits and costs of the preferred Build
alternative in later tiers of the screening process. The Do Minimum alternative provides
improved transit services without a major capital investment and also is used as an additional
baseline for comparative evaluation. The Build alternatives consider alignment, technology and
station.
Potential transit technology options are the first component to be sifted in the alternative
development process to determine which have the greatest potential to address the needs of
the study area. The results of this initial sifting were then applied to the screening process for
alignments and station locations. Section 4.1 summarizes these findings with the full details
presented in the Technology Assessment Report (November 2013).
Alignment options developed during project scoping included two railroad corridors and three
other east-west roadway corridors (centering on Lakeshore Boulevard, St. Clair Avenue and
Euclid Avenue) with various north-south streets linking Windermere to each of these corridors.
The development of the initial alignments was based upon the transportation planning context
including:





Baseline conditions and travel market analysis;
Input received from the Community Involvement effort including input from stakeholders,
agencies, local jurisdictions and the public at Open Houses;
Analysis of regional and sub-regional destinations and land use resulting in potentially
promising candidate station locations;
Extensive field review of Study Area opportunities and constraints relative to candidate
alignments; and
Consideration of modal and configuration options with regard to the “fit” or applicability to
the Study Area routes, taking into account land use, physical constraints, and community
characteristics/existing plans as described further below.
Section 4.2 summarizes the alignments considered in the Tier 1 screening process. The Tier 1
Screening Report (December 2013) provides more detailed information. This report defines the
Build alternatives that are to be screened in Tier 2 to determine the preferred Build alternative.
During the Tier 3 screening, the No-Build and Do Minimum alternatives will be compared to the
preferred Build alternative to determine the eventual Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA).
3.
Alternative Screening Process
A multi-step screening process was used to evaluate the alignment alternatives and technology
options developed as part of project scoping. The process of sifting alternatives was based on
4
April 2014
AECOM
the emergent needs of the project and resulted in two levels of sifting with the Tier 1 screening
process. This process assures that RTA carefully weighs its choices in what could be a
significant investment for the community. This evaluation process also conforms to
requirements of the FTA before it considers funding such an investment. Figure 3-1 illustrates
the screening process. Alternatives are defined using Roman alphabet characters to distinguish
among the competing alternatives.
Figure ‎3-1: Alternatives Screening
The initial alternatives developed as part of project scoping were evaluated considering
operational characteristics and required infrastructure. The following table outlines indicative
criteria used in the Tier 1 screening.
Table ‎3-1: Criteria Used in the Tier 1 Screening
Goal
Mobility
Objective
 Minimize congestion
 Reduce reliance on automobile
 Minimize total travel times to points
accessible from the proposed rail and bus
extensions and network
 Provide convenient accessibility and
improve interchange with other modes of
public transportation
 Increase public transportation ridership
and mode share
 Provide improved access to employment
centers
 Provide for the long-term expansion of the
future public transportation system
 Provide pedestrian and bicycle
accessibility to transit
5
Indicative Tier 1 Screening Criteria
 Number of corridor residents within ½mile of alignment
 Number of corridor residents within ½mile of a station
 Number of corridor residents within ¼mile of a station
 Number of jobs within ½-mile of a transit
alignment
 Number of jobs within ½-mile of a transit
station
 Access to major activity centers along
an alignment (ranked as high, moderate
or low)
 Access to intermodal interchange
(number of intermodal interchanges and
ranked as high, moderate, low)
April 2014
AECOM
Goal
Economy
Environment
Livability
Objective
Indicative Tier 1 Screening Criteria
 Major attractions served by alignment
 Minimize adverse impacts on existing
neighborhoods and communities.
 Improve regional connectivity
 Improve health and safety for workforce,
passengers and communities
 Promote positive benefits of public
transportation access to significant sites
and neighborhoods
 Enhance the pedestrian realm
 Integrate transportation and land use by
locating stations where there is greatest
potential for TODs.
 Integrate with local development plans
 Enhance urban design features and
complete streets program
 Provide a cost-effective project that moves
the most people at the lowest cost
 Improve operating efficiency by lowering
operating costs
 Take account of life-cycle costs when
planning alternatives; and
 Optimize and prioritize investment
initiatives to maximize benefits.
 Preserve the natural environment
 Protect and enhance the cultural heritage,
landmarks, national symbols and
monuments of the study area
 Decrease dependency on single occupant
vehicle
 Decrease energy consumption and vehicle
miles traveled
 Improve air quality
 Provide more transportation choices.
 Promote equitable, affordable housing.
 Enhance economic competitiveness.
 Support existing communities.
 Coordinate and leverage federal policies
and investment.
 Value communities and neighborhoods.
6
 Consistency with local planning efforts
(ranked high, moderate or low)
 Transit Oriented Development potential
(ranked as high, moderate or low)
 Support for joint public-private land
development (ranked as high, moderate
or low)
 Assessment of potential construction
impacts on adjacent properties and
utilities (ranked as high, moderate or
low)
 Assessment of probable construction
cost using length as a proxy of cost
based on technology option.
 Operational issues and efficiency
 Potential noise impacts (number of
sensitive receptors within defined
distance of alignment per FTA Transit
and Noise and Vibration Impact
Assessment May 2006).
 Number or instances of potential
environmental impacts
 Environmental “Red Flags”




Total network length
Number of stations
Average station spacing
Number of affordable houses within ½mile of station
 Number of parks and acres of green
space within ½-mile of alignment.
 Number of cultural resources within ½mile of alignment
April 2014
AECOM
4.
Summary of Findings from Initial Screening
The initial alignment alternatives were defined after a series of public meetings held in the study
area September 10-12, 2013. Potential transit technology options were screened to determine
which had the greatest potential to address the needs of the of study area, as determined by the
Purpose and Need statement and study goals and objectives. The findings of the Tier 1
screening were reviewed by the public and key stakeholders in a series of public meetings in
December 2013. These initial alternatives were screened in accordance with the Alternatives
Analysis Methodology Report (November 2013). Results can be reviewed in the Tier 1
Screening Report (December 2013).
4.1
Transit Technologies for Potential Red Line/HealthLine Extension
As discussed in the Technology Assessment Report (November 2013), the character of the
study area, existing and future development patterns, population and employment densities,
and number and type of trips were all considered in determining which transit technology option
would be most appropriate for this study. Technologies selected for alternatives analysis are
described in the following subsections.
4.1.1 Bus Rapid Transit
Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) is a bus operation generally characterized by use of exclusive or
reserved rights-of-way (busways) that permit higher speeds and avoidance of delays from
general traffic flows. The HealthLine in Cleveland is the best example of full BRT in North
America. BRT service operating in an exclusive lane could connect the Red Line to the study
area with high frequency service, at a medium cost
similar to the HealthLine west of MLK Blvd.
4.1.2 Bus Rapid Transit Lite (BRT Lite)
BRT Lite service operating in mixed traffic could connect
the existing Red Line to the study area with high
frequency service at a low-to-medium cost. Station
spacing would be flexible depending on the destinations
in the extended corridor. The characteristics of this
service would include substantial stations, passenger
information systems and transit signal priority, but would
operate in mixed-traffic similar to the existing HealthLine
east of MLK Blvd.
4.1.3 Heavy Rail Transit
Heavy rail transit (HRT) is an electrically-powered rail
system carrying passengers within urban areas, or
between urban areas and suburbs. Heavy rail rapid
transit systems use exclusive tracks that are fully gradeseparated, e.g., subway, aerial, in open cut, or fenced-in
at grade but with no at-grade street or pedestrian
crossings. High-capacity trains may serve stations that
typically are spaced one mile apart.
Maximum service speeds range from 50 up to 70 mph.
The existing Red Line between the Airport and Louis
Stokes Station at Windermere is electrified using a
600vDC overhead contact system (catenary) with high
7
April 2014
AECOM
platform loading. An extension of the Red Line would require a high capital expenditure. The
effort would include an additional catenary, power substations, high-platform stations and grade
separations for an extension of RTA’s Red Line east of Windermere or as a branch line
northeast of Superior Station adjacent to the CSX Short Line. An extension of the Red Line
would provide a one seat ride for many passengers from Euclid to University Circle, Downtown
and the Airport.
4.1.4 Diesel-Multiple Unit (DMU)
Diesel-multiple unit (DMU) railcars capable of operating
on the Red Line and freight railroad tracks present a
lower cost alternative to extending the existing electrified
Red Line. DMUs have been successfully deployed in
Portland, OR and Dallas, TX as coordinated service to
light rail. DMUs in Austin, TX and Trenton, NJ operate as
independent lines. The DMU option is considered an
appropriate technology for extending the Red Line. The
key benefit for the study area, unlike DMUs in the Dallas
and Portland areas, is that DMUs could operate along NS
tracks, then continue along the Red Line. The Denton
County A-Train connects with the DART light rail line at
the Trinity Mills Station in Carrollton, TX where
passengers can transfer at a shared platform to the DART Green Line serving Downtown
Dallas. In New Jersey, River Line DMUs operate between Camden and Trenton. DMUs
operate in city streets in Camden and then along a railroad right-of-way, the former Conrail
Bordentown-Trenton Branch. New Jersey Transit purchased the branch line from Conrail in
1999 and today shares tracks with Norfolk-Southern under an FRA approved operating
agreement.
4.1.5 Rapid+
Rapid+ is a technology option that could take advantage
of the Red Line infrastructure between Windermere and
the Airport by allowing light rail transit (LRT) trains or
streetcars to operate in mixed traffic on city streets east
of Windermere and on the Red Line west of Windermere.
However, this would require the procurement of new light
rail vehicles (LRVs) capable of operating on the Red Line
with high platform loading and in street running with low
level boarding. Such LRVs operate in San Francisco,
Buffalo and Pittsburgh. Rapid+ would provide significant
flexibility in tailoring operating plans to provide one-seat
rides from the study area to University Circle, Downtown and the Airport. This option also could
permit routing trains from the Shaker Heights light rail Blue/Green lines directly to the Airport.
4.2
Alignment Options Considered
Nine alignment alternatives with routing variations were evaluated as part of the initial screening
of alternatives in accordance with the evaluation criteria. These initial alternatives were
developed by the study team with advice and comment obtained through steering committee,
stakeholder involvement and public meetings. Maps of the Alternatives can be found in
Appendix A-1. Table 4-1 lists and describes the rationale for determining which Build
alternatives would advance to more detailed technical analysis as part of the Tier 2 screening
process.
8
April 2014
AECOM
April 2014
Table ‎4-1: Summary of Evaluation Results
Build
Alternative
Alternative A
CSX railroad
corridor
Alternative B
NS railroad
corridor
Alternative C
Five Points
Waterloo via
Hayden
Alternative D
Five Points
Nottingham
via Hayden
Alternative E
Euclid;
Ivanhoe;
Five Points;
Waterloo
Alternative F
Euclid
Avenue East
276th
Alternative G
Euclid;
Ivanhoe; Five
Points,
Nottingham
Alternative H
Euclid
Avenue; East
222nd Street
Tier 1 Screening Result and Explanation
Result
This alternative would lead to high adverse impact to CSX,
very high estimated cost to construct the junction at Superior
Station, high probable cost for stations on elevated
embankments, least number of stations, lowest numbers of
residents and jobs within catchment area, very low TOD
opportunities. Does not meet purpose and need of fostering
economic development.
Eliminated
from further
consideration.
This is retained as the logical extension of the Red Line. It
would have the lowest capital cost and least adverse
environmental impacts when compared to Alternative A.
Retained and
advanced to
Tier 2
screening.
Although this alternative has adequate length and serves Five
Points and the Waterloo Arts District, it has relatively fewer
TOD opportunities than Alternative E that also serves Five
Points and the Waterloo Arts District.
Eliminated
from further
consideration.
This alternative would have relatively high TOD potential. It
serves Five Points, Nottingham Village and strengthens E.
185th Street corridor and Downtown Euclid.
Retained and
advanced to
Tier 2
screening.
This alignment has the highest population and employment
catchment, serves the most activity centers, serves all three
communities, strengthens Five Points, the Waterloo Arts
District and is advanced to compare and contrast E. 152nd
Street alignment with Alternative D with the E. 185th Street
alignment.
Retained and
advanced to
Tier 2
screening.
Although this alignment is the logical extension of the
HealthLine BRT from Windermere east on Euclid Avenue, it
has the lowest score of the BRT alternatives for TOD
opportunity. Bus improvements to Route 28 would be a low
cost alternative to full BRT. Alternative B would be a faster
and more reliable service alternative than a BRT extension on
this route.
Eliminated
from further
consideration.
This alternative has the second highest population and
employment catchment, serves all three communities, and
strengthens Five Points, Nottingham Village, East 185th Street
and Downtown Euclid. Alternative G has the highest TOD
potential of all alternatives examined.
Retained and
advanced to
Tier 2
screening.
Although this alternative has adequate length and serves
Downtown Euclid and the Euclid High School and Euclid
Municipal Center, it does not serve the Collinwood community
and scores very low for TOD potential.
Eliminated
from further
consideration.
9
AECOM
Build
Alternative
Alternative I
Euclid
Avenue; East
200th Street
April 2014
Tier 1 Screening Result and Explanation
Result
Although this alternative has adequate length and serves
Downtown Euclid, it does not serve the Collinwood community
and scores relatively very low for TOD potential. East 200th
Street is primarily a residential street. Alignment
implementation would create severe construction impacts.
Eliminated
from further
consideration.
Build alternatives B, D, E and G were recommended to be advanced to more detailed technical
analysis at the conclusion of the Tier 1 screening process. They are discussed in the following
subsections.
4.2.1 Alternative B
Alternative B is an electrified heavy rail Red Line extension that begins at Louis Stokes Station
at Windermere and continues to run east adjacent to the Norfolk Southern (NS) freight railroad
corridor. Alternative B would terminate at the Euclid Park-N-Ride near the intersection of St Clair
Avenue and Babbitt Road in the vicinity of Euclid Square Mall. This line could potentially be
extended to Lake County with stations in Wickliffe, Willoughby and perhaps as far east as
Mentor. An alternative to heavy rail technology could be diesel-multiple unit (DMU) technologies
that operate on Red Line and Norfolk Southern tracks.
4.2.2 Alternative D
Alternative D is a HealthLine bus rapid transit/BRT Lite or Rapid+ LRT/streetcar extension that
begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs north to Hayden Avenue using the RTAowned private right-of-way. The alignment continues north on Hayden Avenue turning east
along St. Clair Avenue traveling to Five Points, which is the intersection of St. Clair, Ivanhoe
Road and East 152nd Street. At Five Points the alignment continues east on St Clair Avenue to
Nottingham Road and turns north under the railroad overpass until reaching East 185th Street.
At East 185th Street, the alignment turns north along East 185th Street serving the East 185th
commercial district up to Lakeshore Boulevard. At Lakeshore Boulevard the alignment turns
east to Downtown Euclid with a potential extension to the Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake
County.
4.2.3 Alternative E
Alternative E is a HealthLine bus rapid transit/BRT Lite or Rapid+ LRT/streetcar extension that
begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid Avenue to Coit, Noble
or Ivanhoe Roads. If the alignment follows Coit or Noble Road it turns northwest to East 152nd
where it turns north and travels along East 152nd Street to Five Points at Ivanhoe and St. Clair.
If the alignment follows Ivanhoe Road, the route turns from Euclid Avenue northwest and travels
along Ivanhoe Road to Five Points. At Five Points the alignment continues north on East 152nd
Street crossing over the CSX railroad on a bridge to Waterloo Road, then turning east through
the Waterloo Arts District to East 156th Street. The alignment again turns north on East 156th
Street until reaching Lakeshore Boulevard, where it turns east to Downtown Euclid, with a
potential extension to the Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
4.2.4 Alternative G
Alternative G is a HealthLine bus rapid transit/BRT Lite or Rapid+ LRT/streetcar extension that
begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid Avenue to either Coit,
Noble, or Ivanhoe Roads. If the alignment follows Coit or Noble Road, it turns northwest to East
152nd where it turns north and travels along East 152nd Street to Five Points at Ivanhoe and St.
Clair. If the alignment follows Ivanhoe Road, the route turns from Euclid Avenue northwest and
10
AECOM
travels along Ivanhoe Road to Five Points. At Five Points the alignment turns east on St. Clair
Avenue to Nottingham Road and then turns north under the railroad overpass until reaching
East 185th Street. At East 185th Street, the alignment turns northeast and travels along East
185th Street serving the East 185th commercial district up to Lakeshore Boulevard. At
Lakeshore Boulevard the alignment turns east to Downtown Euclid with a potential extension to
the Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
5.
Refinements to Alternatives
Stakeholder and public comments received during public meetings in December 2013 and
comments received from the study website and Facebook pages were used to refine the
alternatives that remained after the Tier 1 screening process. Each alignment is illustrated in
Appendix A-2 to facilitate review.
5.1
Alternative B
As described in Section 4.2.1, Alternative B is an electrified heavy rail transit (HRT) Red Line or
DMU extension that begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and continues east along the
Norfolk Southern (NS) freight railroad corridor, terminating at the Euclid Park-N-Ride near the
intersection of St. Clair Avenue and Babbitt Road in the vicinity of Euclid Square Mall.
5.1.1 Operating Refinements to Alternative B
Discussions with participants of the public meetings and key stakeholders suggested that the
DMU option be extended to Cedar - University Station in University Circle to provide a one-seat
ride for passengers traveling from eastern Cuyahoga County or western Lake County. It was
decided to test ridership with either a transfer at Windermere or extending service to Downtown
Cleveland terminating the DMU service at Tower City Station.
5.1.2 Station Refinements to Alternative B
During the December public meetings, a member of the public questioned the selection of East
193rd and Dille as station sites. The study team confirmed the site selections through additional
field review:

The East 193rd Street Station would be a walk-up station serving the very large Indian
Hills housing complex on the south ("Cleveland’s Newest 55+ Community"), which
consists of ten six-story buildings, 1,574 units on approximately 37 acres of land and the
intact neighborhood on the north—plus two large tracts of vacant industrial land
immediately northwest and northeast of the station site.

Dille is the extension of East 185th, and a more compelling regional development choice
than East 200th/Chardon, which the commenter suggested. Dille and East 193rd are
relatively close (0.6 mile), but the same would then be true of Chardon and East 222nd if
Chardon replaced Dille. The Route 94 bus could be re-routed.
Consequently, there are no changes to station locations.
5.2
Alternative D
As described in Section 4.2.2, Alternative D is a HealthLine BRT or Rapid+ extension that
begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs on Hayden Avenue, St. Clair Avenue,
Nottingham Road, East 185th Street, and Lake Shore Boulevard.
Public and stakeholder comment indicated very little support for this alignment that followed the
former CTS streetcar route along Hayden Avenue to St. Clair Avenue and Nottingham Village.
11
April 2014
AECOM
The alignment does not support community development goals and local aspirations to
generate economic development along Euclid Avenue in East Cleveland. Based on the lack of
community support, the project Steering Committee recommended that study resources be
used to investigate other alternatives that garnered more interest and support.
Alternative D, therefore, has been eliminated from further consideration and will not be
subjected to more detailed technical analysis.
5.3
Alignment Alternative E
As described in Section 4.2.3, Alternative E is a HealthLine BRT or Rapid+ extension that
begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid Avenue to either Coit
Road (E1), Noble Road (E2) or Ivanhoe Road (E3), where the route turns north to Five Points,
East 152nd Street, Waterloo Road, East 156th Street, and Lake Shore Boulevard.
5.3.1 Operating Refinements to Alternative E
During discussions with stakeholders and based on comments received during public meetings
in December, it was determined that an extension of the alignment from the proposed terminus
in Downtown Euclid to East 260th and Lake Shore Boulevard would be appropriate. This
refinement would permit more frequent and direct service to the residential towers located on
Lake Shore Boulevard overlooking Lake Erie. The City of Euclid endorsed this refinement as it
would serve potential new development at the former St. Robert Church, which is property it
acquired from the Diocese of Cleveland after the Bishop closed the parish. This extension also
reduces the length of a potential future extension of the improved transit service to the
Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
Alignment Option E1
Alignment option E1 begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid
Avenue to Coit Road. At Coit Road the alignment turns northwest to East 152nd where it turns
north and travels along East 152nd Street to Five Points at Ivanhoe Road and St. Clair Avenue.
From Five Points, the alignment option continues the route described in the general description
in the preceding paragraphs. The route terminates at East 260th Street and Lake Shore
Boulevard with a potential extension to Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
The Coit Road alignment option E1 did not receive community support and provided the least
amount of support for redevelopment opportunities on Euclid Avenue in East Cleveland. Based
on the lack of community support, the project Steering Committee recommended that study
resources be used to investigate other alternatives that garnered more interest and support.
Alignment Option E1 therefore, has been eliminated from further consideration and will not be
Alignment Option E2
Alignment option E2 begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid
Avenue to Noble Road. At Noble Road the alignment turns north to Woodworth Avenue where
it turns west to East 152nd Street where the route then turns north on East 152nd Street and
travels to Five Points at St. Clair, then continues on the refined route as described in the
preceding paragraphs. The route terminates at East 260th Street and Lake Shore Boulevard
with a potential extension to Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
Although the City of East Cleveland expressed a preference for Ivanhoe (E3), there are
compelling reasons for Noble as well. The economic development study team has expressed
continuing interest in the Noble Road option for the following reasons:
12
April 2014
AECOM

Both the Ivanhoe and Noble/East 152nd Street corridors could benefit from investment,
but potential land development impact from the BRT/Rapid+ alignment would be greater
along Noble because both sides of Noble Road between the railroad and East 152nd
Street, and East 152nd south of the football stadium, are vacant.

Routing the BRT/Rapid+ up Noble would facilitate integrating Five Points Station into the
planned public space in the tip of the East 152/Ivanhoe triangle. Also, the streetscape
treatment and transit activity would help integrate the parkland on the two sides of East
152nd.

A Noble/Euclid BRT/Rapid+ station would be within ¼ mile of the entire Ivanhoe/Euclid
intersection, and the streetscape treatment could be extended to Ivanhoe even if the
transit alignment turns at Noble.

The large vacant General Electric building occupying most of the Noble-Euclid-Ivanhoe
block is fully captured by the Noble BRT/Rapid+ station; Ivanhoe would be redundant for
this target site.

Operationally: even with the more circuitous Noble/East 152nd alignment, the total linear
distances of Noble to East 152nd to Five Points versus Noble to Euclid to Ivanhoe to
Five Points are virtually identical (approximately 5,000 ft. versus 4,900 ft.). Moreover, if
the Noble alignment went off-street and cut through the vacant property behind the
railroad bridge, straightening the dog-leg and putting the Noble/East 152nd station in the
potential joint development area, this alignment becomes shorter than the Ivanhoe
(4,700 ft. versus 4,900 ft.) option.

Also, the Ivanhoe BRT/Rapid+ alignment would be desirable because an additional
station just north of the railroad bridge: to serve the vacant industrial properties clustered
around the grade crossing.
Based on the strong sentiment expressed by the City of East Cleveland, alignment option E2
was eliminated from the more detailed technical analysis. However, economic development
benefits of the Noble Road alignment option and the potential benefits derived from a hybrid
alternative should be identified.
Alignment Option E3
Alternative E3 begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid Avenue
to Ivanhoe Road. At Ivanhoe Road the alignment turns north to Five Points at East 152nd and
St. Clair. From Five Points the route then continues on the refined route as described in the
preceding general paragraphs. The route terminates at East 260th Street and Lake Shore
Boulevard with a potential extension to Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
Alignment option E3, Ivanhoe Road, is the preferred alignment option for Alternative E.
13
April 2014
AECOM
5.3.2 Station Refinements to Alternative E
It was recommended that the optional sub-alignment along East 152nd rather than Waterloo and
156th be eliminated from further consideration. The Waterloo and East 156th Street right-of-way
is wider and better serves the Arts District and other commercial development. It is also the
historic route of the streetcars. This refinement eliminates the westerly station shown at East
152nd/McCauley (see Figure 5-1).
Figure 5-1 Refinements to Alternative E between Five Points and East 185th Street
Station spacing and location can be improved between Waterloo and East 185th. It was
suggested six new stations be identified and mapped/coded for ridership: Waterloo/Shiloh; East
156th/Grovewood; East 163rd/Lake Shore (Collinwood Rec Center); Marcella/Lake Shore;
14
April 2014
AECOM
April 2014
Ingleside/Hiller/Lake Shore; East 185th/Lake Shore. This is the same number of stations as
before but with more optimal locations.
Regarding a route extension east from Downtown Euclid, the City of Euclid identified three
potential target station areas (see Figures 5-2 and 5-3):

A station at East 228th would be ¼ mile east of the Downtown Euclid Station. It would
serve any future redevelopment of Lakeshore Plaza, the easternmost of the three
downtown strip shopping centers, or redevelopment of the strip retail in the rear along
Farringdon Avenue/Shore Center Drive. This is also a better lake access point than the
Downtown Station. This station could be included at the outset or held as a future infill. If
included at the outset, it would allow the Downtown Station to be sited west of the
“point”.

The key station is at East 238th/242nd Streets, ¾ mile east of Downtown, at the former St.
Robert’s property—a 7.5-acre development site acquired by the City from the Diocese of
Cleveland on the south side of Lake Shore Boulevard. This station would also serve
three major high-rise complexes on the lake side of the boulevard: Harbor Town (directly
across from the station), Harbor Crest (at East 244th), and Normandy Towers (at East
248th, ¼ mile away).

A station located at East 260th Street would capture the last large cluster of high-rise
residential density in Euclid and is 0.7-mile beyond the former St. Robert’s property and
almost 1.5 miles east of Downtown Euclid.
Figure ‎5-2 Refinements to Alternatives E and G between Downtown Euclid and East 238th
Street
15
AECOM
Figure ‎5-3 Refinements to Alternatives E and G: East 260th Street Terminus
5.4
Alignment Alternative G
As described in Section 4.2.4, Alternative G is a HealthLine BRT or Rapid+ extension that
begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid Avenue to either Coit
Road (G1), Noble Road (G2) or Ivanhoe Road (G3), where it turns north to Five Points, St.
Clair Avenue, Nottingham Road, East 185th Street and Lake Shore Boulevard.
5.4.1 Operating Refinements to Alternative G
During discussions with stakeholders and based on comments received during public meetings
in December, it was determined that an extension of the alignment from the proposed terminus
in Downtown Euclid to East 260th would be appropriate. This refinement would permit more
frequent and direct service to the residential towers located on Lake Shore Boulevard
overlooking Lake Erie. The City of Euclid endorsed this refinement as it would serve potential
new development at the former St. Robert Church, which is property the city acquired from the
Diocese of Cleveland after the Bishop closed the parish. This extension reduces the length of a
future potential extension to the Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
Alignment Option G1
Alternative G1 begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid
Avenue to Coit Road. At Coit Road the alignment turns northwest to East 152nd Street where it
turns north and travels along East 152nd Street to Five Points Ivanhoe and St. Clair Avenue.
From Five Points, the alignment continues on the route described in the general description in
16
April 2014
AECOM
the preceding paragraphs. The route terminates at East 260th Street and Lake Shore Boulevard
with a potential extension to Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
The Coit Road alignment option G1 did not receive community support and provided the least
amount of support for redevelopment on Euclid Avenue in East Cleveland. Based on the lack of
community support, the project Steering Committee recommended that study resources be
used to investigate other alternatives that garnered more interest and support.
Alignment Option G1 therefore, has been eliminated from further consideration and will not be
Alignment Option G2
Avenue to Noble Road. At Noble Road the alignment turns north to Woodworth Avenue where it
turns west to East 152nd Street. The route then turns north on East 152nd Street and travels to
Five Points at St. Clair. At Five Points the alignment continues on the route described in the
general description in the preceding paragraphs. The route terminates at East 260th Street and
Lake Shore Boulevard with a potential extension to Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
Based on the strong sentiment expressed by the City of East Cleveland, alignment option G2
was eliminated from more detailed technical analysis. However, the economic development
study team will continue exploring the economic development benefits of the Noble Road
alignment option and the potential benefits that may be derived from this route option.
Alignment Option G3
Avenue to Ivanhoe Road. At Ivanhoe Road the alignment turns northwest to East 152nd and St.
Clair. At Five Points the alignment continues on the route described in the general description
in the preceding paragraphs. The route terminates at East 260th Street and Lake Shore
Boulevard with a potential extension to Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County. Alignment
option G3, Ivanhoe Road, is the preferred alignment option for Alternative G.
5.4.2 Station Refinements to Alternative G
After review of comments from the public and other stakeholders and upon further field
investigations, it was suggested that number of stations along East 185th Street be reduced from
four to three. The stations currently shown at Neff, Harlan, Monterey, and Lake Shore are
1,500-1,600 feet apart (1/4-mile), a relatively close spacing for a BRT or Rapid+ operation.

One station can be eliminated, with the new stops at Kildeer, Landseer and Lake Shore.
These would be about 1,800 feet apart and would be clearly visible from one another on
this straight segment of the route. No location on East 185th Street would be greater
than 900 feet from a station, most of them closer (see Figure 5-4).

There would be a gap of about 4,000 feet between the St. Clair/Nottingham Village
Station south of the CSX/freeway bridges and the Kildeer/East 185th Station north of it,
but this is a non-development stretch where a station is not needed.
17
April 2014
AECOM
Figure ‎5-4 Refinements to Alternative G along East 185th Street
Extending the route east from Downtown Euclid identical to Alternative E, three new stations
would be added, as described in Section 5.3.2 and shown in Figures 5-2 and 5-3)
18
April 2014
AECOM
5.5
April 2014
Summary of Refinements to Build Alternatives
Table 5-1 summarizes the refinements to the Build alternatives that resulted from the Tier 1
screening process and stakeholder and public comments.
Table ‎5-1: Summary of Refinements to Build Alternatives
Build
Alternative
Alternative B
NS railroad
corridor
Refinement and Explanation
This alternative was retained as the only logical extension of the Red
Line. Both HRT and DMU technology options are considered.
The DMU option included changing the operational plan from a
transfer at Windermere or Cedar - University Station in University
Circle to continuing through service on the Red Line to Tower City.
Result
Refined and
advanced to
Tier 2
screening.
No changes to station locations
Alternative D
Five Points via
Hayden
Alternative E
Euclid to
Ivanhoe; Five
Points; East
nd
152 Street;
Waterloo
Despite moderately high TOD potential, the alternative lacked
community interest and support as it did not serve Euclid Avenue in
East Cleveland. East Cleveland favored redevelopment efforts
along Euclid Avenue in the Town Center and not along Hayden
Avenue, which is primarily a residential street.
Eliminated from
further
consideration.
Highest population and employment catchment, serves the most
activity centers, serves all three communities, strengthens Five
Points, the Waterloo Arts District and is advanced to compare and
nd
th
contrast E. 152 /156 Street alignment with Alternative G and the
th
E. 185 Street alignment. The alignment was refined to include
th
nd
Waterloo and East 156 Street and the option along East 152
Street eliminated. Stations were adjusted to serve the Collinwood
Recreation Center and improve station spacing.
Refined and
advanced to
Tier 2
screening.
Based on discussions with key stakeholders and comments from the
public, the alignment was extended from Downtown Euclid to East
th
260 and Lake Shore Boulevard to serve the high-rise residential
towers located along the Lake Erie shore. Three new stations were
added east of Downtown Euclid.
Alternative G
Euclid to
Ivanhoe; Five
Points;
Nottingham;
th
East 185
Street;
Second highest population and employment catchment, serves all
three communities, and strengthens Five Points, Nottingham Village,
th
East 185 Street and Downtown Euclid. Alternative G has the
highest TOD potential of all alternatives examined. One station was
th
removed and other station locations were modified along East 185
Street to improve station spacing.
Based on discussions with key stakeholders and comments from the
public, the alignment was extended from Downtown Euclid to East
th
260 and Lake Shore Boulevard to serve the high-rise residential
towers located along the Lake Erie shore. Three new stations were
added east of Downtown Euclid.
19
Refined and
advanced to
Tier 2
screening.
AECOM
6.
Baseline Alternatives
As part of the project justification and appraisal process alternatives other than the Build
alternatives must be considered as a baseline for evaluation. The Federal Transit Administration
(FTA) requires that a No Build alternative be used as an environmental baseline alternative.
FTA believes project evaluation based on existing conditions provides the most easily
understood, most reliable, and most readily available information for decision-making. Thus,
FTA is requiring all project sponsors to calculate the measures for the evaluation criteria based
on current year inputs. Use of current year data increases the reliability of the projected future
performance of the proposed project by avoiding reliance on future population, employment,
and transit service levels that are themselves forecasts. Consequently, FTA is defining “current
year” as close to today as the data will permit.
The RTA required the Build alternatives also be compared to transportation system
management actions, known as the Do Minimum alternative, that could be taken to provide the
best transit service in the project area without a major capital investment as defined by the Build
alternatives. These two baseline alternatives will be carried forward throughout the project
appraisal process and will be used to evaluate the preferred Build alternative.
6.1
No Build Alternative
The “No Build” alternative is essentially the present condition but it includes existing and
committed conditions (E+C) that will be constructed in the near future. The No Build alternative
includes the existing highway network that is a part of all alternatives plus highway
improvements that are likely to be implemented within the next several years, except for the
Red Line/HealthLine extension Build alternatives being considered in this study. The No Build
alternative provides a baseline for comparing travel benefits and other environmental impacts
associated with the other alternatives.
The No Build alternative assumes normal maintenance and replacement of existing facilities
and equipment as their design life is exceeded. The No Build alternative provides a baseline for
comparing travel benefits and other environmental impacts associated with the preferred build
alternative during the Project Development phase of the New Starts process. Key features of
the No Build Alternative are listed below.
6.1.1 Transit Service Characteristics
Public transportation services under the No Build alternative consist of existing rail and bus
routes and operating frequencies scheduled during December 2013.
a) Configuration: Continued operation of Red Line, HealthLine and local bus services in
mixed traffic in the service area;
b) Passenger station stops: Euclid – East 120th Street Station closed and new Little Italy –
University Circle Station opened.
c) Vehicles: 40-foot, low-floor, clean diesel fueled buses; 40-foot, low-floor CNG fueled
buses, 60-foot, articulated, low-floor, clean-diesel buses; and 60-foot articulated dieselelectric hybrid bus rapid transit vehicles, 75-foot heavy rail vehicles which require high
platforms and 80-foot light rail vehicles which require low platforms.
d) Service span: No expected change (see Table 6-1);
e) Headways: No expected change (see Table 6-2)
f) Background bus network: No expected change;
g) Park-N-Ride facilities: No expected change;
20
April 2014
AECOM
April 2014
h) ITS: No expected change.
Table ‎6-1: Service Span – No Build Alternative
Span
Weekday
Saturday
Route 1
Route 28
Route 30
Route 34
Route 37
Route 39
24 hours
24 hours
24 hours
24 hours
6:30 p.m. - 1:00 a.m.
4:30 a.m. - 12:30 a.m.
5:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m.
no service
4:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m.
5:00 a.m.-10:00 p.m.
5:00 a.m.- 6:00 p.m.
no service
5:00 - 8:00 a.m.
inbound
Route 39F
no service
3:00 - 6:00 p.m.
outbound
Route 94
4:30 a.m.-9:00 p.m.
6:00 a.m. - 8:00 p.m.
6:00 - 8:00 a.m.
inbound
Route 239
no service
4:00 - 6:00 p.m.
outbound
Source: GCRTA Timetables December 2013.
Sunday
24 hours
24 hours
6:30 a.m. - 12:30 a.m.
no service
5:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m.
no service
no service
8:00 a.m.-6 :00 p.m.
no service
Table ‎6-2: Headways – No Build Alternative
Weekday
Headway
Saturday Sunday
OffPeak
Peak
Route 1
10/20
10/20
20/40
30
Route 28
12
15
30
30
Route 30
15
30
30
60
Route 34
60
60
n/a
n/a
Route 37
30
60
60
60
Route 39
30
45
n/a
n/a
Route 39F
18
n/a
n/a
n/a
Route 94
60
60
60
60
Route 239
30
n/a
n/a
n/a
Source: GCRTA Timetables December 2013.
6.1.2 Roadway Service Characteristics
Highway improvements include ongoing roadway reconstruction projects as identified in the
NOACA Transportation Improvement plan, including construction of Opportunity Corridor
between I-490 and East 105th Street and Quincy Avenue; widening East 105th Street between
Chester Avenue and Quincy Avenue and reconstruction of the Innerbelt Freeway (I-90) in
Downtown Cleveland. These projects are funded and will likely be constructed and completed
21
AECOM
in the next several years. NOACA in consultation with RTA and the Ohio Department of
Transportation (ODOT) will provide a network map and list of specific committed highway facility
improvements that are considered to be part of the No Build alternative.
6.2
Do Minimum Enhanced Bus Alternative
As with the No Build Alternative, the Do Minimum Enhanced Bus Alternative includes all existing
and committed transportation projects as outlined in the region’s TIP and fiscally constrained
long range transportation plan. The primary rail and bus network changes in this alternative are
modifications of existing local bus routes to improve service in underserved areas of the study
area, particularly Euclid and connections with Laketran, the transit service provider in Lake
County.
6.2.1 Transit Service Improvements
The Do-Minimum Enhanced Bus Alternative includes a number of improvements over the No
Build Alternative that will improve bus service by focusing service to potential high-density
development along various alignments in the study area, notably Lake Shore Boulevard, St.
Clair and Euclid Avenues and north-south connector streets. Effectively, these frequency
enhancements serve to address similar improvements as would be provided by the various
build alternatives. The enhanced routes included in the Do-Minimum Alternative include RTA
Routes 28, 30, 34, 37, 39, and 94. All other routes in the study area would operate at the same
frequency and span as they do currently.
An overview of the Do-Minimum Alternative is described including changes to revenue hours
and miles, and descriptions of proposed modifications and charts showing current and proposed
TSM headways. Table 6-3 presents changes to revenue hours and Table 6-4 presents changes
to revenue miles if the Do-Minimum Alternative were to be implemented. No routes see a
reduction in service. Service hours and miles either remain the same as they are currently or
increase. More detailed route by route proposals can be found following the tables.
Table ‎6-3: Changes to Revenue Service Hours, Do-Minimum Alternative
Do-Minimum
Current
Alternative
Annual
Projected
Percent
Day
Change
Revenue
Annual
Change
Hours
Revenue
Hours
Weekday
Route 28
30,167
30,167
0
0.0%
Route 30
23,069
27,875
4,806
20.8%
Route 37
17,595
24,190
6,595
37.5%
Route 94
12,635
17,838
5,203
41.2%
Saturday
5,756
2,509
77.3%
Route 28
3,247
Route 30
4,052
4,052
0
0.0%
Route 37
1,781
2,501
720
40.5%
Route 94
1,521
1,521
0
0.0%
22
April 2014
AECOM
Do-Minimum
Alternative
Projected
Day
Change
Annual
Revenue
Hours
Sunday
6,318
2,785
Route 28
3,533
Route 30
2,507
3,552
1,045
Route 37
1,999
2,551
552
Route 94
1,233
1,233
0
103,339
127,554
24,215
Total
Source: GCRTA Vehicle Statistics, December 16, 2013
Current
Annual
Revenue
Hours
April 2014
Percent
Change
78.8%
41.7%
27.6%
0.0%
23.4%
Table ‎6-4: Changes to Revenue Service Miles, Do-Minimum Alternative
Do-Minimum
Current
Alternative
Annual
Projected
Percent
Day
Change
Revenue
Annual
Change
Miles
Revenue
Miles
Weekday
Route 28
306,450
306,450
0
0.0%
Route 30
251,893
304,371
52,478
20.8%
Route 37
194,583
266,391
71,808
36.9%
Route 94
173,550
245,012
71,462
41.2%
Saturday
56,690
24,711
Route 28
31,979
Route 30
40,706
40,706
0
Route 37
17,494
24,816
7,322
Route 94
21,358
21,358
0
Sunday
61,619
27,161
Route 28
34,458
Route 30
28,267
40,045
11,778
Route 37
19,513
25,122
5,609
Route 94
17,379
17,379
0
1,137,630
1,409,958
272,328
Total
77.3%
0.0%
41.9%
0.0%
78.8%
41.7%
28.7%
0.0%
23.9%
6.2.1.1
Route 28
Route 28 operates between Stokes-Windermere Station and either East 276th Street at
Tungsten Road or East 222nd Street at Lakeshore Boulevard (downtown Euclid) along the
Euclid Avenue corridor, a major corridor through the study area. Currently, every other trip
23
AECOM
operates to downtown Euclid between the approximate hours of 6:00AM and 7:00PM on
weekdays.
The Do-Minimum Alternative increases the amount of service on Saturday and Sunday,
increases the span of service for trips to and from downtown Euclid on weekdays, and initiates
service to downtown Euclid on Saturday and Sunday. See Table 6-5 for headways. Expanded
service hours to downtown Euclid are proposed for weekdays, and new service to downtown
Euclid is proposed for Saturday. Route 28 would operate between Windermere Station and
downtown Euclid between 6:00AM and 10:00PM on weekdays, 7:00AM and 10:00PM on
Saturday, and 8:00AM and 10:00PM on Sunday. The 15 minute headways on Saturday and
Sunday would allow the route to provide half hourly service on both branches of the route during
those hours.
Table ‎6-5: Route 28 Headways, Do-Minimum Alternative
Weekday
Headway
Saturday Sunday
OffPeak
Peak
Existing
12
15
30
30
Do-Minimum
12
15
15
15
Source: GCRTA Schedules, December 2013
6.2.1.2
Route 30
Route 30 runs between Stokes-Windermere Station and East 222nd Street and Lake Shore
Boulevard with select trips operating between Stokes-Windermere Station and Shoregate
Shopping Center in Willowick, Lake County. The route is a major route in the study area that
connects to Laketran bus services in Lake County and trip generators such as Shoregate
Shopping Center, downtown Euclid, Euclid Hospital and Stokes-Windermere Station. Increases
in service are proposed on weekdays, during off-peak hours, and on Sundays. See Table 6-6.
Weekday
Headway
Saturday Sunday
OffPeak
Peak
Existing
15
30
30
60
Do-Minimum
15
15
30
30
6.2.1.3
Route 37
Route 37 currently operates between Severance Town Center and Euclid Hospital via StokesWindermere Station. More service is proposed in the study area through the use of short turn
trips between Euclid Hospital and Stokes-Windermere. The northern portion, the part of the
route within the study area, will see increased service on weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays.
The southern portion of the current route, areas not in the study area, between Severance Town
Center and Stokes-Windermere Station, will have the same service span and frequency as the
route does currently. See Table 1-19.See Table 6-8.
24
April 2014
AECOM
Weekday
Headway
Saturday Sunday
OffPeak
Peak
Existing
30
60
60
Do-Minimum
15
30
30
60
30
6.2.1.4
Route 94
Route 94 operates between East 222nd Street and Lakeshore Boulevard in downtown Euclid
and Cuyahoga Community College Eastern Campus in Highland Hills. The route is relatively
long and serves downtown Euclid, Richmond Heights Hospital, shopping centers on Richmond
Road and the Green Line. The Do-Minimum alternative for the route would increase service
along the entire route during weekday peak periods. See Table 6-8 for headways.
Table ‎6-8: Route 94 Headways, Do Minimum Alternative
Weekday
Headway
Saturday Sunday
OffPeak
Peak
Existing
60
60
60
60
Do-Minimum 30
60
60
60
6.2.1.5
Other Key Features
Other key features of the Do Minimum Alternative include all features of the No Build
Alternative, plus the following:
a. Alignment: Adjusted bus network with focus on alignments between Windermere and
Downtown Euclid;
b. Configuration: Continued operation in mixed traffic;
c. Passenger station stops: Construction of Super Stops at Five Points in Collinwood and
Downtown Euclid and improved transit waiting environments to include real-time
passenger information, improve shelters and waiting areas, and adjust and consolidate
some stop locations to provide more efficient service and better mirror Build alternatives;
d. Vehicle: Same as the No Build..
e. Service span: Same as the No Build, match Red Line service hours;
f. Peak headways: Same as the No Build. 7 minute peak headways to match current Red
Line service and 15- minute off-peak headways;
g. Park-N-Ride and transfer facilities: Added Park-N-Ride along Lake Shore Boulevard
h. ITS: Development of a communications system along Lake Shore Boulevard, St Clair
and Euclid Avenues that allows for provision of real-time passenger information and
enables monitoring of signal systems and transit operations from a central transit
operations control center.
25
April 2014
AECOM
i.
Storage and Maintenance Facility: Assumes use of existing bus and rail facilities.
Street improvements: Ongoing roadway reconstruction projects as identified in the NOACA
Transportation Improvement plan; Streetscape improvements along Lake Shore Boulevard and
Euclid Avenues; construction of Opportunity Corridor between I-490 and East 105th Street and
Quincy Avenue; widening East 105th Street between Chester Avenue and Quincy Avenue and
improvements to the Innerbelt Freeway (I-90).
7.
Build Alternatives
The following provides a brief description of the alignment alternatives and key operating and
service features associated with each of the reasonable Build alternatives being advanced to
more detailed technical analysis in the Tier 2 screening process.
7.1
Alternative B
Alternative B is a Red Line extension and provides a direct route to the Euclid Square Mall area
where the extension terminates at the Park-N-Ride lot near Babbitt Road. The alignment is
located in and adjacent to the Norfolk Southern (NS) freight railroad right-of-way. The alignment
is parallel to Euclid Avenue, which is generally about ¼-mile south of the railroad alignment and
never more than ½-mile away. The East 193rd Street Station serves Duggan Park with easy
walk access. Connectivity to RTA local buses occurs at Noble Road Station and East 222nd
Street. This alternative is marginally consistent with City of Cleveland planning efforts to
revitalize the Collinwood neighborhood centered on St. Clair Avenue between Five Points and
Nottingham Road. The station at Dille Road supports the Nottingham Village redevelopment
efforts. This alternative does support revitalization efforts in East Cleveland and Euclid. The
number of residents and jobs located within the station catchment area are noted in table 7-1
below.
Table ‎7-1: Residents and Jobs within Station Catchment Area
Criteria
¼- Mile
½-Mile
Population
7,385
24,752
Jobs
2,233
10,050
Total
9,618
34,802
7.1.1 Physical Description
Alternative B begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and continues east adjacent to the
NS freight railroad corridor. Alternative B would terminate at the Euclid Park-N-Ride near the
intersection of St. Clair Avenue and Babbitt Road in the vicinity of Euclid Square Mall. This line
could potentially be extended to Lake County with stations in Wickliffe, Willoughby and perhaps
as far east as Mentor.
7.1.2 Technologies
The technologies most appropriate for this route alignment are heavy rail transit (HRT) and
diesel multiple unit (DMU) rail transit as defined in Section 4.1 earlier.
7.1.3 Operations
Alternative B would be a Red Line extension from the existing alignment at Louis Stokes Station
at Windermere and would operate east to Euclid with the potential for a future extension into
26
April 2014
AECOM
Lake County. The rapid transit extension is characteristically designed as a double track line
with a terminal for turning back. The HRT technology option would operate on the same
schedules and headways as the existing Red Line service. On weekdays the Red line operates
from the Airport to Tower City every 7½ minutes and from Tower City to Windermere every 15
minutes during peak periods. The Red Line operates every 15 minutes during off-peak. The
schedule on Saturday/Sunday and holidays is every 15 minutes.
The DMU technology option would share tracks with the Red Line and NS and could operate as
a shuttle train from either the Cedar – University Station at University Circle or Windermere to
the eastern terminus of the extension. An option would allow the DMU to operate on the Red
Line into Tower City using the center track on the light rail station. The DMU would operate
every 15 minutes subject to negotiation with the NS for trackage rights. A service track
connecting the Red Line to the NS lines is required at the Windermere Station. A third mainline
track would be constructed in the NS right-of-way east of Windermere to Babbitt Road to
provide operating flexibility to the freight railroad.
7.1.4 Passenger Facilities
New stations include Shaw, Noble Road, London, East 193rd Street, Dille Road, East 222nd
Street and the Euclid Park-N-Ride terminus. One major interchange station is already
established at the Louis Stokes Station at Windermere. A second major interchange station
could be located at Noble Road for connections with optimized local connecting bus services.
Another major interchange could occur at the Cedar –University Station at University Circle
where passengers could transfer to local shuttle/circulator services and local bus routes serving
the University Circle area institutions.
The DMU option would require modifying existing stations to allow boarding and alighting from
low-floor rail vehicles similar to the passenger platforms at the East 55th Street, East 34th Street
and Tower City Stations that permit low platform light rail trains and high platform Red Line
trains to share station facilities. At a minimum, the stations at Windermere, Superior, Little Italy
– University Circle and Cedar – University Stations would have to have platforms lengthened to
accommodate the DMU. RTA provided temporary low-platform boarding at these stations in the
mid-1980’s to permit operation of the Red Line with light rail vehicles prior to the delivery of the
current Red Line railcars. If the DMU were to operate into Tower City, the Quincy – East 105th
Street Station would also have to be modified. No modifications to the East 79th Street are
recommended.
7.1.5 Maintenance Facilities
The RTA Central Rail Maintenance Facility is located within the City of Cleveland adjacent to
the East 55th Street Station and yards and comprises approximately 170,000 square feet of
heated workspace used to perform ongoing maintenance and repairs on both the heavy and
light rail fleets. The Central Rail Maintenance Facility is capable of performing 90 percent of all
work required to service, maintain and overhaul the light rail and heavy rail fleets. The balance
of the repairs (10%) involves specialized and expensive tooling or skills not resident in the
facility. This facility includes a number of repair and service shops which support the repair and
servicing of most vehicle related equipment.
Should RTA decide to invest in a new fleet, this facility has the capabilities to service such an
acquisition. However, should the DMU technology option be pursued, an investment in a facility
ventilation system will be required to exhaust diesel fumes from the work area.
7.1.6 Supporting Bus Services
The bus service plans for Alternative B are designed to feed the Red Line extension at planned
station locations and to minimize duplication of Red Line service by eliminating competing
27
April 2014
AECOM
April 2014
services. The changes to existing RTA bus services that are proposed for this alternative
include:






Route 28 weekday headways decreased to 15 minutes at all times
Reroute Route 34 to serve Dille Station
Reroute Route 37 to serve Noble Station
Reroute Route 94 to serve Babbitt Station
Modify Route 39F to operate between Shoregate Shopping Center and Dille Station only
via Lake Shore Boulevard and East 185th Street
Eliminate Route 239
Based on the proposed changes to RTA bus services, distances from stations on the Red Line
extension to the nearest connecting RTA bus services are shown below.







Shaw: Routes 28 and 41 (0.19 miles)
Noble: Route 28 and 41 (0.16 miles), Route 37 (0.18 miles)
London: Route 28 (0.30 miles), Route 1 (0.43 miles)
E. 193rd: Route 28 (0.37 miles), Route 1 (0.41 miles)
Dille: Directly served by Route 34 and 39F.
E. 222nd: Directly served by Route 28
Babbitt: Directly served by Routes 1, and 94
There will be a reduction in both revenue hours and miles due to reduction of Route 28 service
frequency. Modifications to Routes 34, 37 and 94 will result in a slight increase in revenue miles
but should not cause a change in revenue hours. (The changes should cause about a 1 minute
increase in travel time per trip on Route 34, no noticeable increase on Route 37, and about a 3
minute increase in travel time per trip on Route 94.) Changes to the Route 39F route path and
the elimination of Route 239 will cause a decrease in weekday revenue hours and miles. See
Table 7-2 for changes to revenue service hours and Table 7-3 for changes to revenue service
miles for Alternative B. The tables represent only the RTA bus routes for which changes are
proposed and not all routes in the study area.
Table ‎7-2: Changes to Revenue Service Hours, Alternative B
Alternative B
Current
Projected
Annual
Day
Annual
Change
Percent Change
Revenue
Revenue
Hours
Hours
Weekday
Route 28
30,167
28,062
-2,105
-7.0%
Route 34
8,687
8,687
0
0.0%
Route 37
17,595
17,595
0
0.0%
4,055
2,754
-1,301
-32.1%
12,635
12,635
0
0.0%
Route 39F
Route 94
28
AECOM
Current
Annual
Revenue
Hours
Day
Route 239
Alternative B
Projected
Annual
Revenue
Hours
1,938
0
Change
April 2014
Percent Change
-1,938
-100.0%
Saturday
Route 28
3,247
3,247
0
0.0%
Route 34
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Route 37
1,781
1,781
0
0.0%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1,521
1,521
0
0.0%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Route 39F
Route 94
Route 239
Sunday
Route 28
2,051
2,051
0
0.0%
Route 34
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Route 37
1,999
1,999
0
0.0%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1,233
1,233
0
0.0%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
86,909
81,565
-5,344
-6.1%
Route 39F
Route 94
Route 239
Total
Note: The hours represented are only for the RTA bus routes for which changes are proposed
and not all routes in the study area.
Table ‎7-3: Changes to Revenue Service Miles, Alternative B
Day
Current
Annual
Revenue
Hours
Alternative B
Projected
Annual
Revenue
Hours
Change
Percent
Change
Weekday
Route 28
305,441
284,131
-21,310
-7.0%
Route 34
108,934
111,153
2,219
2.0%
29
AECOM
Day
Route 37
Current
Annual
Revenue
Hours
Alternative B
Projected
Annual
Revenue
Hours
April 2014
Percent
Change
Change
194,583
196,062
1,479
0.8%
75,329
30,753
-44,576
-59.2%
Route 94
173,550
179,619
6,069
3.5%
Route 239
40,496
0
-40,496
-100.0%
Route 39F
Saturday
Route 28
31,979
31,979
0
0.0%
Route 34
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Route 37
17,494
17,681
187
1.1%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
21,358
22,450
1,092
5.1%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Route 39F
Route 94
Route 239
Sunday
Route 28
34,458
34,458
0
0.0%
Route 34
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Route 37
19,513
19,722
209
1.1%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
17,379
18,272
893
5.1%
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
1,040,514
946,280
-94,234
-9.1%
Route 39F
Route 94
Route 239
Total
Note: The miles represented are only for the RTA bus routes for which changes are proposed
and not all routes in the study area.
30
AECOM
Figure ‎7-1: Bus Service Concepts, Alternative B
7.2
Alternative E
Alternative E provides a direct route to the Collinwood area of the City of Cleveland from the
existing Red Line/HealthLine branching at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere. This streetrunning alternative would serve Euclid Avenue, Five Points, Waterloo Arts District, Euclid Beach
Metro Park, Wildwood Lakefront Metro Park, Humphrey Park, Villa Angela – St. Joseph High
School, Euclid General Hospital and terminate at East 260th Street and Lake Shore Boulevard.
Potential route extensions to Shoregate Shopping Center would provide connectivity to Laketran
local bus service.
This alternative is consistent with City of Cleveland planning efforts to revitalize the Collinwood
neighborhood centered on Five Points and the Waterloo Arts District. This alternative is
consistent with City of Euclid planning efforts to revitalize the lakefront and downtown area.
This alternative provides some revitalization opportunities in East Cleveland along Euclid
Avenue up to Ivanhoe Road.
The number of residents and jobs located within the station catchment area are noted in Table
7-4 below.
31
April 2014
AECOM
Criteria
¼- Mile
½-Mile
Population
20,696
47,089
Jobs
4,109
7,905
Total
24,805
54,994
Alternative E begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid Avenue
St. Clair. At Five Points the alignment continues north on East 152nd Street crossing over the
CSX railroad on a bridge to Waterloo Road, then turning east through the Waterloo Arts District
to East 156th Street. The alignment again turns north on East 156th Street until reaching Lake
Shore Boulevard, where it turns east to East 260th Street, with a potential extension to the
Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake County.
7.2.2 Technologies
The technologies most appropriate for this route alignment are either bus rapid transit (BRT) or
Rapid+ (high/low platform, LRT/streetcar) transit as defined in Section 4.1.
7.2.3 Operations
The HealthLine BRT option would continue beyond Windermere following the alignment as
described. The BRT option would operate in the median along Euclid Avenue and on Lake
Shore Boulevard east of Downtown Euclid; in other areas it would operate as a BRT Lite option.
The Rapid+ extension extends from the existing alignment just east of the Louis Stokes Station
at Windermere and descends the reconstructed former HRT turning loop to street level and then
follows the alignment as described. The extension is typically designed as a double track line
with crossovers at terminals for turning trains. The reconstructed loop could be a single track
ramp signaled for ascending or descending train movements. The alignment would be in the
median along Euclid Avenue and on Lake Shore Boulevard east of Downtown Euclid. In other
locations, Rapid+ would operate as a streetcar in mixed traffic. See Figure 7-2.
Windermere remains the major interchange station for optimized change to local bus routes. A
possible interchange point with Laketran could be constructed at the proposed East 260th Street
terminus or at a potential future terminal at Shoregate Shopping Center as part of an extension
to Wickliffe in Lake County.
32
April 2014
AECOM
Figure ‎7-2 “Rapid+”‎LRT/Streetcar‎Entrance/Exit‎Ramp‎to/from‎Red‎Line
There are 21 new stations, which include:
1) Lee
11) East 163rd /Lake Shore
2) Shaw
12) Marcella/Lake Shore
3) Coit
13) East 185th/Lake Shore
4) Noble
14) Hiller-Ingleside/Lake Shore
5) Ivanhoe
15) East 185th /Lake Shore
6) Five Points
7) E. 152nd and School
8) Waterloo/Shiloh
18) Downtown Euclid
th
9) E 156 Govewood
10) East 156th Lake Shore
33
April 2014
AECOM
April 2014
The stations will conform to the design criteria established by RTA for the HealthLine bus rapid
transit stations and stops and for light rail stations in the case of Rapid+ station options. Each
station will be designed based on location, travel demand, and existing and future adjacent land
uses. Each station site will have a passenger loading platform area to allow passengers to
board and exit BRT vehicles or Rapid+ trains at the platform level. Typically, the platforms will
be either center-loading (one platform between the bus-lanes or tracks to serve BRT vehicles or
Rapid+ trains operating in either direction) or sidewalk-loading. Each station will be electrically
lit, have a passenger information display, ticket vending machines, trash receptacles and bench
seating. Context sensitive design, security cameras and emergency call-boxes would be
included as part of a safe waiting environment.
HealthLine BRT vehicles would be maintained at the existing Hayden District garage. Rapid+
LRT/streetcars would be maintained at the existing Central Rail Maintenance facility. No
modifications to either facility are contemplated.
Several changes to existing RTA bus routes are proposed if Alternative E is built. The changes
to existing bus services assume that local bus service underlying the BRT or Rapid + route is
not necessary since stops are spaced about ¼ mile apart in more densely populated areas. The
service changes include:


Terminate Route 37 at Stokes-Windermere Station instead of its current northern
terminal at Euclid Hospital.
Route 30 covers eliminated segments of Route 37 on east 185th Street, Villaview Roads
and Grovewood Avenue
The reduction in route length of Route 37 will result in a decrease in revenue hours and miles on
weekdays, Saturdays and Sundays. Rerouting Route 30 to serve eliminated segments of Route
37 north of Stokes-Windermere Station will result in an increase in miles for the route but not an
increase in hours since the additional time needed to operate the route is negligible and built
into existing layover times. See Table 7-5 for changes to revenue service hours and Table 7-6
for changes to revenue service miles for Alternative E. The tables represent only the RTA bus
routes for which changes are proposed and not all routes in the study area.
Table ‎7-5: Changes to Revenue Service Hours, Alternative E
Current
Alternative E
Annual
Projected
Percent
Day
Change
Revenue
Annual
Change
Hours
Revenue Hours
Weekday
Route 30
23,069
23,069
23,069
0
Route 37
17,595
9,202
-8,393
-47.7%
Route 39
12,406
12,406
0
0
0
0.0%
Saturday
Route 30
4,052
4,052
34
AECOM
Day
Current
Annual
Revenue
Hours
Alternative E
Projected
Annual
Revenue Hours
April 2014
Percent
Change
Change
Route 37
1,781
668
-1,113
-62.5%
Route 39
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Sunday
Route 30
2,507
2,507
0
0.0%
Route 37
1,999
756
-1,243
-62.2%
Route 39
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
51,003
40,254
-10,749
-21.1%
Total
Source: RTA Vehicle Statistics, December 16, 2013
Table ‎7-6: Changes to Revenue Service Miles, Alternative E
Current
Alternative E
Annual
Projected
Percent
Day
Change
Revenue
Annual
Change
Miles
Revenue Miles
Weekday
Route 30
251,893
273,313
21,420
8.5%
Route 37
194,583
103,191
-91,392
-47.0%
Route 39
199,009
199,009
0
0
Saturday
Route 30
40,706
43,691
2,985
7.3%
Route 37
17,494
6,179
-11,315
-64.7%
Route 39
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Sunday
Route 30
28,267
30,216
1,949
6.9%
Route 37
19,513
6,892
-12,621
-64.7%
Route 39
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
552,456
463,482
-88,974
-16.1%
Total
35
AECOM
Figure ‎7-3: Bus Service Concepts, Alternative E
7.3
Alternative G
Alternative G provides a direct route to the Collinwood area of the City of Cleveland from the
existing Red Line/HealthLine branching at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere. This streetrunning alternative would serve Euclid Avenue east to Ivanhoe Road, where it would turn north
to St. Clair Avenue and Five Points. The route would serve Euclid Avenue, Five Points, Upper
St. Clair Avenue, Nottingham Village, East 185th Street commercial district, Villa Angela – St.
Joseph High School, Euclid General Hospital, Downtown Euclid and terminate at East 260th and
Lake Shore Boulevard. Potential route extensions to Shoregate Shopping Center would provide
connectivity to Laketran local bus service.
This alternative is consistent with City of Cleveland planning efforts to revitalize the Collinwood
neighborhood centered on St. Clair Avenue between Five Points and Nottingham Road. This
alternative is consistent with City of Euclid planning efforts for Lake Shore Boulevard. This
alternative provides revitalization opportunities in East Cleveland along Euclid Avenue.
The number of residents and jobs located within the station catchment area are noted in
Table 7-7.
36
April 2014
AECOM
Criteria
¼- Mile
½-Mile
Population
18,901
41,844
Jobs
4,621
9,045
Total
23,522
50,889
Alternative G begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid Avenue
St. Clair. At Five Points the alignment turns east on St. Clair Avenue to Nottingham Road and
then turns north under the railroad overpass until reaching East 185th Street. At East 185th
Street, the alignment turns northeast and travels along East 185th Street serving the East 185th
commercial district up to Lake Shore Boulevard. At Lake Shore Boulevard the alignment turns
east to East 260th Street with a potential extension to the Shoregate Shopping Center in Lake
County.
7.3.2 Technologies
The technologies most appropriate for this route alignment are bus rapid transit (BRT) and
Rapid+ (high/low platform, LRT/streetcar) transit as defined in Section 4.1.
7.3.3 Operations
The HealthLine BRT alternative would continue beyond Windermere following the alignment as
described. The BRT option would operate in the median along Euclid Avenue and on Lake
Shore Boulevard east of Downtown Euclid; in other areas it would operate as a BRT Lite option.
The Rapid+ extension extends from the existing alignment just east of the Louis Stokes Station
at Windermere and descends the reconstructed loop to street level and then follows the
alignment as described. The extension is characteristically designed as a double track line with
crossovers at terminals for turning trains. The reconstructed loop could be a single track ramp
signaled for ascending or descending train movements. The alignment would be in the median
along Euclid Avenue and on Lake Shore Boulevard east of Downtown Euclid. In other areas,
Rapid+ would operate as a streetcar in mixed traffic.
Windermere remains the major interchange station for optimized change to local bus routes. A
possible interchange point with Laketran could be constructed at the proposed East 260th Street
terminus or at a potential future terminal at Shoregate Shopping Center as part of an extension
to Wickliffe in Lake County.
There are 20 new stations, which include:
1) Lee
11) East 185th/Kildeer
2) Shaw
12) East 185th/Landseer
3) Coit
4) Noble
5) Ivanhoe
6) Five Points
7) St. Clair/London
8) St. Clair/East 172
17) Downtown Euclid
nd
37
April 2014
AECOM
9) St Clair/Larchmont
10) St. Clair/Nottingham
April 2014
The stations will conform to the design standards outlined in Section 7.2.4.
HealthLine BRT vehicles would be maintained at the existing Hayden District garage. Rapid+
LRT/streetcars would be maintained at the existing Central Rail Maintenance facility. No
modifications to either facility are contemplated.
No changes to existing RTA bus routes are proposed given the build out scenario of Alternative
G. The overlap between Alternative G and existing services is relatively minimal and all existing
routes contain independent segments that should continue to receive bus service.
Consequently, there will be no changes to revenue service hours or revenue service miles given
for Alternative G.
See Table 7-8 for revenue service hours and Table 7-9 for revenue service miles for Alternative
G. The tables represent only the RTA bus routes supporting Alternative G and not all routes in
the study area.
Table ‎7-8: Changes to Revenue Service Hours, Alternative G
Alternative G
Current Annual
Percent
Day
Projected Annual
Change
Revenue Hours
Change
Revenue Hours
Weekday
Route 30
23,069
23,069
0
0.0%
Route 39
12,406
12,406
0
0.0%
Saturday
Route 30
4,052
4,052
0
0.0%
Route 39
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Sunday
Route 30
2,507
2,507
0
0.0%
Route 39
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
42,034
42,034
0
0.0%
Total
38
AECOM
Day
April 2014
Table ‎7-9: Changes to Revenue Service Miles, Alternative G
Alternative G
Current Annual
Percent
Projected Annual
Change
Revenue Miles
Change
Revenue Miles
Weekday
Route 30
23,069
204,408
0
0.0%
Route 39
12,406
105,358
0
0.0%
Saturday
Route 30
4,052
4,052
0
0.0%
Route 39
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
Sunday
Route 30
2,507
2,507
0
0.0%
Route 39
n/a
n/a
n/a
n/a
519,875
519,875
0
0.0%
Total
39
AECOM
Figure ‎7-4: Bus Service Concepts, Alternative G
40
April 2014
AECOM
8.
Next Steps
The Build alternatives that emerged from the Tier 1 screening have been refined (Alternatives B,
E and G) based on stakeholder and public comments. The final alternatives are being
advanced to the Tier 2 screening and will be subjected to more detailed technical analysis,
including the computation of estimates of probable capital, operating and maintenance costs,
indicative ridership and cost effectiveness indices for each alternative under investigation.
The comparative analysis of alternatives will be documented in the Alternatives Analysis Report,
which documents the Tier 2 screening findings and determinations. The Alternatives Analysis
Report will recommend a Preferred Build Alternative to be considered by RTA.
The Preferred Build Alternative will be examined in greater detail as part of the Business Case
and Environmental Analysis. The Preferred Build Alternative will be appraised using the
NOACA regional travel demand model currently undergoing revisions. The Preferred Build
Alternative will be compared to the No Build and Do Minimum alternatives.
The Business Case will further develop the locally preferred alternative configuration and
technical parameters to address FTA New Starts evaluation criteria. The results of this task will
include estimates of capital and operations and maintenance costs and operating revenue from
fares and other incomes stream as part of the preparation of a business case. An Initial
Operating Segment will be evaluated as part of the Business Case preparation.
Following acceptance of the Alternatives Analysis Report by the RTA Board of Trustees, the
Locally Preferred Alternative (LPA) will be presented to NOACA for adoption and inclusion in the
region’s long range transportation improvement plan.
If the build alternative is selected as the LPA, RTA will then seek entry into the Project
Development phase of the FTA New Starts program. During Project Development, RTA will
complete all the necessary environmental impact assessments and seek all necessary
approvals under the National Environmental Policy Act, Section 4 (f) of the Transportation Act
and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act as well as Tile VI and Executive
Orders regarding environmental justice.
41
April 2014
AECOM
Appendix A-1 Tier 1 Alignment Figures
42
April 2014
AECOM
A1-1
April 2014
AECOM
A1-2
April 2014
AECOM
A1-3
April 2014
AECOM
A1-4
April 2014
AECOM
A1-5
April 2014
AECOM
A1-6
April 2014
AECOM
A1-7
April 2014
AECOM
A1-8
April 2014
AECOM
A1-9
April 2014
AECOM
A1-10
April 2014
AECOM
A1-11
April 2014
AECOM
Appendix A-2 Tier 2 Alignment Figure
A2-1
April 2014
AECOM
A2-1
April 2014
AECOM
A2-2
April 2014
AECOM
A2-3
April 2014
A2-4

Red Line/HealthLine Extension Major Transportation Improvement

Transcription

Similar documents

Proposed Xpress Route 423 Schedule, Fare, and Route:

Brochure - Premier Commercial Realty

50000 in free upgrades!

muttaburrasaurus - Clyde Peeling`s Reptiland

c O n TA c T jiM SPEROS

Geoconcept TourSolver: the simple tool for optimized routes!

Shops and Offices at Lower Southampton Village

available - RK Centers

join nordstrom rack

Trail Map - Lakes Region Snowmobile Club