Definition of Tier 2 Alternatives Report

Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority April 2014

Red Line/HealthLine Extension Major

Transportation Improvement Analysis Definition of Tier 2 Alternatives Report

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 DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT 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 DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

5.5 Summary of Refinements to Build Alternatives ...... 19

6. 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 7.2.1 Physical Description ...... 32 7.2.2 Technologies ...... 32 7.2.3 Operations ...... 32 7.2.4 Passenger Facilities ...... 33 7.2.5 Maintenance Facilities ...... 34 7.2.6 Supporting Bus Services ...... 34

7.3 Alternative G ...... 36 7.3.1 Physical Description ...... 37 7.3.2 Technologies ...... 37 7.3.3 Operations ...... 37 7.3.4 Passenger Facilities ...... 37 7.3.5 Maintenance Facilities ...... 38 7.3.6 Supporting Bus Services ...... 38

8. NEXT STEPS ...... 40

APPENDIX A-1 TIER 1 ALIGNMENT FIGURES ...... A1-1

APPENDIX A-2 TIER 2 ALIGNMENT FIGURES ...... A2-1

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT 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 ‎7-4: RESIDENTS AND JOBS WITHIN STATION CATCHMENT AREA ...... 32

TABLE ‎7-5: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE HOURS, ALTERNATIVE E ...... 34

TABLE ‎7-6: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE MILES, ALTERNATIVE E ...... 35

TABLE ‎7-7: RESIDENTS AND JOBS WITHIN STATION CATCHMENT AREA ...... 37

TABLE ‎7-8: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE HOURS, ALTERNATIVE G ...... 38

TABLE ‎7-9: CHANGES TO REVENUE SERVICE MILES, ALTERNATIVE G ...... 39

iii

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT 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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Baseline conditions and analysis of current and projected market conditions provide a comprehensive snapshot of past and future trends; the need for transit and transportation- related 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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

o Coordinate transit investment with land use policies o Protect the environment and minimize environmental impacts 2. 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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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 Objective Indicative Tier 1 Screening Criteria  Minimize congestion  Number of corridor residents within ½-  Reduce reliance on automobile mile of alignment  Minimize total travel times to points  Number of corridor residents within ½- accessible from the proposed rail and bus mile of a station extensions and network  Number of corridor residents within ¼-  Provide convenient accessibility and mile of a station improve interchange with other modes of  Number of jobs within ½-mile of a transit public transportation alignment Mobility  Increase public transportation ridership  Number of jobs within ½-mile of a transit and mode share station  Provide improved access to employment  Access to major activity centers along centers an alignment (ranked as high, moderate  Provide for the long-term expansion of the or low) future public transportation system  Access to intermodal interchange  Provide pedestrian and bicycle (number of intermodal interchanges and accessibility to transit ranked as high, moderate, low)

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Goal Objective Indicative Tier 1 Screening Criteria  Major attractions served by alignment

 Minimize adverse impacts on existing  Consistency with local planning efforts neighborhoods and communities. (ranked high, moderate or low)  Improve regional connectivity  Transit Oriented Development potential  Improve health and safety for workforce, (ranked as high, moderate or low) passengers and communities  Support for joint public-private land  Promote positive benefits of public development (ranked as high, moderate transportation access to significant sites or low) and neighborhoods  Assessment of potential construction  Enhance the pedestrian realm impacts on adjacent properties and  Integrate transportation and land use by utilities (ranked as high, moderate or locating stations where there is greatest low) Economy potential for TODs.  Assessment of probable construction  Integrate with local development plans cost using length as a proxy of cost  Enhance urban design features and based on technology option. complete streets program  Operational issues and efficiency  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  Potential noise impacts (number of  Protect and enhance the cultural heritage, sensitive receptors within defined landmarks, national symbols and distance of alignment per FTA Transit monuments of the study area and Noise and Vibration Impact  Decrease dependency on single occupant Assessment May 2006). Environment vehicle  Number or instances of potential environmental impacts  Decrease energy consumption and vehicle  Environmental “Red Flags” miles traveled  Improve air quality  Provide more transportation choices.  Total network length  Promote equitable, affordable housing.  Number of stations  Enhance economic competitiveness.  Average station spacing  Support existing communities.  Number of affordable houses within ½- Livability  Coordinate and leverage federal policies mile of station and investment.  Number of parks and acres of green  Value communities and neighborhoods. space within ½-mile of alignment.  Number of cultural resources within ½- mile of alignment

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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 grade- separated, 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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Table 4‎ -1: Summary of Evaluation Results Build Tier 1 Screening Result and Explanation Result Alternative Alternative A This alternative would lead to high adverse impact to CSX, Eliminated very high estimated cost to construct the junction at Superior from further CSX railroad Station, high probable cost for stations on elevated consideration. corridor 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. Alternative B This is retained as the logical extension of the Red Line. It Retained and would have the lowest capital cost and least adverse advanced to NS railroad environmental impacts when compared to Alternative A. Tier 2 corridor screening. Alternative C Although this alternative has adequate length and serves Five Eliminated Points and the Waterloo Arts District, it has relatively fewer from further Five Points TOD opportunities than Alternative E that also serves Five consideration. Waterloo via Points and the Waterloo Arts District. Hayden Alternative D This alternative would have relatively high TOD potential. It Retained and serves Five Points, Nottingham Village and strengthens E. advanced to Five Points th 185 Street corridor and Downtown Euclid. Tier 2 Nottingham screening. via Hayden Alternative E This alignment has the highest population and employment Retained and catchment, serves the most activity centers, serves all three advanced to Euclid; communities, strengthens Five Points, the Waterloo Arts Tier 2 Ivanhoe; District and is advanced to compare and contrast E. 152nd screening. Five Points; th Street alignment with Alternative D with the E. 185 Street Waterloo alignment. Alternative F Although this alignment is the logical extension of the Eliminated HealthLine BRT from Windermere east on Euclid Avenue, it from further Euclid has the lowest score of the BRT alternatives for TOD consideration. Avenue East opportunity. Bus improvements to Route 28 would be a low 276th cost alternative to full BRT. Alternative B would be a faster and more reliable service alternative than a BRT extension on this route. Alternative G This alternative has the second highest population and Retained and employment catchment, serves all three communities, and advanced to Euclid; th strengthens Five Points, Nottingham Village, East 185 Street Tier 2 Ivanhoe; Five and Downtown Euclid. Alternative G has the highest TOD screening. Points, potential of all alternatives examined. Nottingham Alternative H Although this alternative has adequate length and serves Eliminated Downtown Euclid and the Euclid High School and Euclid from further Euclid Municipal Center, it does not serve the Collinwood community consideration. Avenue; East and scores very low for TOD potential. 222nd Street

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Build Tier 1 Screening Result and Explanation Result Alternative Alternative I Although this alternative has adequate length and serves Eliminated Downtown Euclid, it does not serve the Collinwood community from further Euclid th and scores relatively very low for TOD potential. East 200 consideration. Avenue; East Street is primarily a residential street. Alignment 200th Street implementation would create severe construction impacts.

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 RTA- owned 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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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 subjected to more detailed technical analysis. 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:

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

 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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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;

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT 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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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 subjected to more detailed technical analysis. Alignment Option G2 Alternative G2 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. 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 Alternative G3 begins at Louis Stokes Station at Windermere and runs east along Euclid 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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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)

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

5.5 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 Refinement and Explanation Result Alternative Alternative B This alternative was retained as the only logical extension of the Red Refined and Line. Both HRT and DMU technology options are considered. advanced to NS railroad Tier 2 corridor The DMU option included changing the operational plan from a screening. transfer at Windermere or Cedar - University Station in University Circle to continuing through service on the Red Line to Tower City. No changes to station locations Alternative D Despite moderately high TOD potential, the alternative lacked Eliminated from community interest and support as it did not serve Euclid Avenue in further Five Points via East Cleveland. East Cleveland favored redevelopment efforts consideration. Hayden along Euclid Avenue in the Town Center and not along Hayden Avenue, which is primarily a residential street. Alternative E Highest population and employment catchment, serves the most Refined and activity centers, serves all three communities, strengthens Five advanced to Euclid to Points, the Waterloo Arts District and is advanced to compare and Tier 2 Ivanhoe; Five nd th contrast E. 152 /156 Street alignment with Alternative G and the screening. Points; East th nd E. 185 Street alignment. The alignment was refined to include 152 Street; th nd Waterloo and East 156 Street and the option along East 152 Waterloo Street eliminated. Stations were adjusted to serve the Collinwood Recreation Center and improve station spacing. Based on discussions with key stakeholders and comments from the public, the alignment was extended from Downtown Euclid to East 260th 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 Second highest population and employment catchment, serves all Refined and three communities, and strengthens Five Points, Nottingham Village, advanced to th East 185 Street and Downtown Euclid. Alternative G has the Tier 2 Euclid to highest TOD potential of all alternatives examined. One station was screening. Ivanhoe; Five removed and other station locations were modified along East 185th Points; Street to improve station spacing. Nottingham; Based on discussions with key stakeholders and comments from the East 185th public, the alignment was extended from Downtown Euclid to East Street; 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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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 diesel- electric 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;

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

h) ITS: No expected change.

Table 6‎ -1: Service Span – No Build Alternative Span Weekday Saturday Sunday Route 1 24 hours 24 hours 24 hours Route 28 24 hours 24 hours 24 hours Route 30 6:30 p.m. - 1:00 a.m. 4:30 a.m. - 12:30 a.m. 6:30 a.m. - 12:30 a.m. Route 34 5:00 a.m. - 7:00 p.m. no service no service Route 37 4:00 a.m. – 10:00 p.m. 5:00 a.m.-10:00 p.m. 5:00 a.m.-6:00 p.m. Route 39 5:00 a.m.- 6:00 p.m. no service no service 5:00 - 8:00 a.m. inbound Route 39F no service 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. 8:00 a.m.-6 :00 p.m. 6:00 - 8:00 a.m. inbound Route 239 no service no service 4:00 - 6:00 p.m. outbound Source: GCRTA Timetables December 2013.

Table 6‎ -2: Headways – No Build Alternative Weekday Headway Off- Saturday Sunday Peak 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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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 Route 28 3,247 5,756 2,509 77.3% 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%

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Do-Minimum Current Alternative Annual Projected Percent Day Change Revenue Annual Change Hours Revenue Hours Sunday Route 28 3,533 6,318 2,785 78.8% Route 30 2,507 3,552 1,045 41.7% Route 37 1,999 2,551 552 27.6% Route 94 1,233 1,233 0 0.0% Total 103,339 127,554 24,215 23.4% Source: GCRTA Vehicle Statistics, December 16, 2013

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 Route 28 31,979 56,690 24,711 77.3% Route 30 40,706 40,706 0 0.0% Route 37 17,494 24,816 7,322 41.9% Route 94 21,358 21,358 0 0.0% Sunday Route 28 34,458 61,619 27,161 78.8% Route 30 28,267 40,045 11,778 41.7% Route 37 19,513 25,122 5,609 28.7% Route 94 17,379 17,379 0 0.0% Total 1,137,630 1,409,958 272,328 23.9% Source: GCRTA Vehicle Statistics, December 16, 2013

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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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 Off- Saturday Sunday Peak 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.

Table 6‎ -6: Route 30 Headways, Do-Minimum Alternative Weekday Headway Off- Saturday Sunday Peak Peak Existing 15 30 30 60 Do-Minimum 15 15 30 30 Source: GCRTA Schedules, December 2013

6.2.1.3 Route 37 Route 37 currently operates between Severance Town Center and Euclid Hospital via Stokes- Windermere 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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Table 6‎ -7: Route 37 Headways, Do-Minimum Alternative Weekday Headway Off- Saturday Sunday Peak Peak Existing 30 60 60 60 Do-Minimum 15 30 30 30 Source: GCRTA Schedules, December 2013

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 Off- Saturday Sunday Peak Peak Existing 60 60 60 60 Do-Minimum 30 60 60 60 Source: GCRTA Schedules, December 2013

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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT 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% Route 39F 4,055 2,754 -1,301 -32.1% Route 94 12,635 12,635 0 0.0%

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Alternative B Current Projected Annual Day Annual Change Percent Change Revenue Revenue Hours Hours Route 239 1,938 0 -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% Route 39F n/a n/a n/a n/a Route 94 1,521 1,521 0 0.0% Route 239 n/a n/a n/a n/a 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% Route 39F n/a n/a n/a n/a Route 94 1,233 1,233 0 0.0% Route 239 n/a n/a n/a n/a Total 86,909 81,565 -5,344 -6.1% Note: The hours represented are only for the RTA bus routes for which changes are proposed and not all routes in the study area. Source: GCRTA Vehicle Statistics, December 16, 2013

Table 7‎ -3: Changes to Revenue Service Miles, Alternative B Alternative B Current Projected Annual Percent Day Annual Change Revenue Change Revenue Hours Hours Weekday Route 28 305,441 284,131 -21,310 -7.0% Route 34 108,934 111,153 2,219 2.0%

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Alternative B Current Projected Annual Percent Day Annual Change Revenue Change Revenue Hours Hours Route 37 194,583 196,062 1,479 0.8% Route 39F 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% 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% Route 39F n/a n/a n/a n/a Route 94 21,358 22,450 1,092 5.1% Route 239 n/a n/a n/a n/a 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% Route 39F n/a n/a n/a n/a Route 94 17,379 18,272 893 5.1% Route 239 n/a n/a n/a n/a Total 1,040,514 946,280 -94,234 -9.1% Note: The miles represented are only for the RTA bus routes for which changes are proposed and not all routes in the study area. Source: GCRTA Vehicle Statistics, December 16, 2013

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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 street- running 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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Table 7‎ -4: Residents and Jobs within Station Catchment Area Criteria ¼- Mile ½-Mile Population 20,696 47,089 Jobs 4,109 7,905 Total 24,805 54,994

7.2.1 Physical Description Alternative E 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. 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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Figure 7‎ -2 “Rapid+”‎LRT/Streetcar‎Entrance/Exit‎Ramp‎to/from‎Red‎Line

7.2.4 Passenger Facilities 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 16) East 200th/Lake Shore 7) E. 152nd and School 17) East 211th/Lake Shore 8) Waterloo/Shiloh 18) Downtown Euclid 9) E 156th Govewood 19) East 228th/Lake Shore 10) East 156th Lake Shore 20) East 238th/Lake Shore 21) East 260th/Lake Shore

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT 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. 7.2.5 Maintenance Facilities 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. 7.2.6 Supporting Bus Services 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 Saturday Route 30 4,052 4,052 0 0.0%

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Current Alternative E Annual Projected Percent Day Change Revenue Annual Change Hours Revenue Hours 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 Total 51,003 40,254 -10,749 -21.1% 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 Total 552,456 463,482 -88,974 -16.1% Source: RTA Vehicle Statistics, December 16, 2013

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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 street- running 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.

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Table 7‎ -7: Residents and Jobs within Station Catchment Area Criteria ¼- Mile ½-Mile Population 18,901 41,844 Jobs 4,621 9,045 Total 23,522 50,889

7.3.1 Physical Description Alternative G 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. 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. 7.3.4 Passenger Facilities There are 20 new stations, which include: 1) Lee 11) East 185th/Kildeer 2) Shaw 12) East 185th/Landseer 3) Coit 13) East 185th/Lake Shore 4) Noble 14) East 195th/Lake Shore 5) Ivanhoe 15) East 200th/Lake Shore 6) Five Points 16) East 211th/Lake Shore 7) St. Clair/London 17) Downtown Euclid 8) St. Clair/East 172nd 18) East 228th/Lake Shore

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

9) St Clair/Larchmont 19) East 238th/Lake Shore 10) St. Clair/Nottingham 20) East 260th/Lake Shore

The stations will conform to the design standards outlined in Section 7.2.4. 7.3.5 Maintenance Facilities 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. 7.3.6 Supporting Bus Services 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 Total 42,034 42,034 0 0.0% Source: RTA Vehicle Statistics, December 16, 2013

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Table 7‎ -9: Changes to Revenue Service Miles, Alternative G Alternative G Current Annual Percent Day 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 Total 519,875 519,875 0 0.0% Source: RTA Vehicle Statistics, December 16, 2013

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

Figure 7‎ -4: Bus Service Concepts, Alternative G

AECOM DEFINITION OF TIER 2 ALTERNATIVES REPORT April 2014

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.