25Connects | Public Meeting 3.0

A TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR WEST 25TH STREET PUBLIC MEETING FEBRUARY 25 TH, 2021

25CONNECTS.COM 25CONECTA.COM

BEFORE WE BEGIN

ANTES DE QUE COMENCEMOS ZOOM ETIQUETTE PLEASE MUTE YOUR MICROPHONE

1

ETIQUETA DE ZOOM POR FAVOR SILENCIE SU MICRÓFONO

TURN ON PARTICIPANTS PANEL RENAME YOURSELF AS NEEDED

2

ENCIENDA EL PANEL DE PARTICIPANTES CAMBIE EL NOMBRE DE SU PERFIL SEGÚN SEA NECESARIO

USE THE CHAT BOX WE ARE MONITORING THE CONVERSATION; THIS IS A GREAT PLACE TO PROVIDE FEEDBACK!

3

UTILICE LA CAJA DE CHAT ESTAMOS MONITOREANDO LA CONVERSACIÓN; ¡ESTE ES UN GRAN LUGAR PARA PROPORCIONAR COMENTARIOS!

LIVE POLLING!

4

¡ENCUESTAS EN VIVO!

1

2

4

3

MEETING AGENDA 1 WHO WE ARE 2 WHERE WE ARE 3 WHAT WE HEARD (UPDATES) 4 TOD FEASIBILITY STUDY 5 BRT STUDY 6 TOD STUDY 7 WHAT WE LEARNED 8 NEXT STEPS

3

SECT IO N 1

WHO WE ARE

MONROE 4

SECTI O N 1

WHO WE ARE

BRINGING TOGETHER GLOBAL EXPERTS IN SMART MOBILITY, RESILIENCE, REAL ESTATE FEASIBILITY, PLANNING AND URBAN DESIGN, MIXED-USE ARCHITECTURE, SMART CITIES, AND BROWNFIELD REDEVELOPMENT, STANTEC’S URBAN PLACES TEAM IS UNIQUELY POSITIONED

PRINCIPAL,

PROJECT MANAGER

SENIOR PRINCIPAL

TO PROVIDE OUR CLIENTS AND COMMUNITIES WE SERVE

PROJECT DIRECTOR

CRAIG SKLENAR, AICP

RALPH DENISCO

INNOVATIVE AND CREATIVE PLANS AND DESIGNS FROM A COHESIVE, FOCUSED TEAM.

DAVID DIXON, FAIA

STANTEC.COM

SENIOR ASSOCIATE

URBAN DESIGNER

RHONDA BELL, ENV SP

AICHA LAKHSSASS

5

SECTI O N 1

WHO WE ARE

SEVENTH HILL IS AN URBAN DESIGN CONSULTANCY DEDICATED TO TRANSFORMING PEOPLE AND PLACES THROUGH MEASURABLE EXPERIENCES IN THE PUBLIC REALM THROUGH APPROPRIATE TECHNOLOGY AND INSIGHTFUL RESEARCH. SEVENTHHILLDESIGN.COM

ENGAGEMENT STRATEGY LEAD DAVID JURCA

ETHNOGRAPHIC RESEARCH

COMMUNICATION DESIGN

ROBERTA DUARTE

JACINDA WALKER

AREKO CONSULTING

designExplorr

STREET TEAM LEAD

STREET TEAM LEAD

DIANE HOWARD

SONIA MATIS

6

SECT IO N 2

WHERE WE ARE

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

MONROE 7

SECT IO N 2

WHY WE ARE HERE THIS IS OUR LAST PUBLIC SESSION WITH YOU BEFORE FINAL REPORTS. WE VALUE YOUR OPINION ON OUR FINDINGS. THIS MEETING IS TO HIGHLIGHT OUR WORK - A FINAL REPORT WILL BE PROVIDED AFTER THIS PUBLIC ENGAGEMENT SESSION.

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

8

SECT IO N 2

WHY WE ARE HERE COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT

› Further community engagement on future BRT station look and feel

TOD FEASIBILITY STUDY

› Created pro forma examples for catalyst projects › Developed financial toolkit

BRT STUDY

› Created station typologies › Reviewed existing ridership data › Reviewed operational opportunity of BRT corridor › Identified 5 catalyst site areas along the BRT Corridor for detailed study of TOD opportunity › TOD Concepts › Existing Parking Usage Study

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

9

SECT IO N 2

WHY WE ARE HERE

BRT PRELIMINARY ENGINEERING & DESIGN INITIAL BRT REPORT

25 CONNECTS

BRT CONSTRUCTION

WE ARE HERE

2018

2019

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

2020

2021

2022

2023

2024

2025

2026

10

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

MONROE 11

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD PROJECT TIMELINE

APR.

MAY

JUN.

JUL.

AUG.

SEPT.

OCT.

NOV.

DEC.

JAN.

FEB.

MARKET ANALYSIS COMMUNITY ENGAGEMENT TOD PLAN (ZONING & BRT DESIGN BOOK) FINANCIAL PLAN FINALIZE TODAY

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

12

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD ENGAGEMENT SCHEDULE

APR.

MAY

1 KICK OFF MEETING 2 3

JUN.

JUL.

AUG.

SEPT.

SITE CONDITIONS & DEMOGRAPHICS

4

5 STAKEHOLDER VIRTUAL MEETING 1 6

OCT.

DEC.

JAN.

FEB.

ETHNOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS USER EXPERIENCE (UX) WALKS

7 PUBLIC VIRTUAL KICK-OFF EVENT 1

NOV.

MOBILE WALKING & BIKE TOURS

CREATE & PROMOTE SURVEY 1.0 2 STAKEHOLDER VIRTUAL MEETING 2 3 COMMUNITY VIRTUAL MEETING 2 4 LATINX RADIO INTERVIEW 5 LAS DOS FRONTERAS EVENT

6

FOCUS GROUPS WITH KEY STAKEHOLDERS

STATION SURVEY 2.0 1

IN-PERSON STAKEHOLDER INTERVIEWS 2

YOUTH FOCUS GROUP 3

PHASE 1: ASSESSING EXISTING CONDITIONS PHASE 2: UNDERSTANDING OPTIONS PHASE 3: REFINING DESIGN PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 2021 TH

STEERING COMMITTEE 3 4

PUBLIC EVENT 5 UPDATE TOD PLAN & DELIVERABLES 6 PUBLISH FINAL DOCUMENTS 7

TODAY

13

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD MOBILE TOURS



Trees provide shade within a hardscape environment.



Outdoor patio fence is not in use, but creates an obstruction narrowing the space available for two people in a wheelchair and walker to pass by each other.



Due to the narrow effective width of the sidewalk, an individual in a wheelchair is forced to wait for another person with mobility limitations to walk past before she can continue on her way.

25Connects | Mobile Tour Detroit Avenue to Lorain Avenue

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

14

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD MOBILE TOURS

Lack of sufficient lighting.



Broken glass is very difficult for people in a wheelchair to avoid and can puncture tires.



Walkway is not wide enough for a wheelchair and stroller to pass by.



 

Person in wheelchair can enjoy the view over the low wall.

Feel vulnerable for a long distance without ability to avoid danger.

25Connects | ADA User Experience (UX) Tour Columbus Road to Clark Avenue — 3/4 Mile

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

15

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD MOBILE TOURS

25Connects | ADA User Experience (UX) Tour



Trees provide shade in the morning.



Sign is obstructed by tree branches.



Trees need maintenance.



No seating available.



No ground indicator of bus waiting area for the blind.



ADA ramp angle is too narrow and covered with dirt from cars driving over curb to enter the highway.

Columbus Road to Clark Avenue — 3/4 Mile

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

16

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD MOBILE TOURS

25Connects | ADA User Experience (UX) Tour



Trees provide shade in the morning.



Sign is obstructed by tree branches.



Trees need maintenance.



No seating available.



No ground indicator of bus waiting area for the blind.



ADA ramp angle is too narrow and covered with dirt from cars driving over curb to enter the highway.

Columbus Road to Clark Avenue — 3/4 Mile

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

17

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD MOBILE TOURS

 Tree lawn is a sunken dirt hole hidden by water.



Frequent flooding makes the sidewalk impassable.



PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

Ample lighting

18

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

CURRENT STATUS OF ACTIONS & METRICS Distributed Items

Hold 7 events per each phase (3) = 21 events.



Engage 1% of entire corridor (44,000) = 440 participants.



Views from 100% of entire corridor = 44,000 impressions.



Materials



BRT Priorities Survey 1.0

162

Station Design Survey 2.0

327

Neighborhood flyers

700

Bus shelter handouts

200 4

4

4

Mobile tours

5

42

42

6

6

Ethnographic interviews Latinx events

6

Las Dos Fronteras event

1

16

16

Youth Focus Group

1

12

12

500

1,122

Email Campaigns Stakeholder Virtual Mtgs

3

98

98

Public Virtual Mtgs

2

65

65

Website

6,090

Social media ads

57,432

TOTAL PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

Impressions

User Experience (UX) walks

In-person

Distribute 5% of entire corridor (44,000) = 2,200 items.

Participants

1,600

Bilingual postcards

Online

Project Goals:

Events

2,500

22

732

65,387

19

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

PARTICIPANT DATA - 451 SURVEY RESPONSES

RACE / ETHNICITY Participants (P) vs. Corridor (C) Demographics

GENDER

100% 80%

65% 60%

57%

40%

21% 20%

14%

16%

18% 52% Female

0% White (P)

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

White (C)

Black or African American (P)

Black or African American (C)

Hispanic or Latinx (P)

Hispanic or Latinx (C)

48% Male

(Participants)

50%

50%

Female

Male

(Corridor)

20

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

PARTICIPANT DATA - 451 SURVEY RESPONSES AGE 75 & over

1% 8%

65 to 74

14%

55 to 64

11%

45 to 54

24%

35 to 44

29%

25 to 34

7%

18 to 24

4%

Under 18

0% PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

10%

20%

30% 21

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

AREA 1

SURVEY DATA

Q6 WHAT EXISTING PLACES, SPECIAL FEATURES, OR OTHER VISUAL ELEMENTS DO YOU SEE WHEN YOU THINK OF AREA 1? (THESE IDEAS WILL INSPIRE UNIQUE DESIGN ELEMENTS FOR BUS STATIONS WITHIN AREA 1: NORTH OF LORAIN AVENUE.) PARK DETROIT

SUPERIOR BRIDGE

AREA 2

LUTHERAN HOSPITAL FRANKLIN CIRCLE LAKEVIEW TERRACE

ST MALACHI BRICK CLEVELAND HISTORY

FLATS WELL IMPORTANT ACCESS VIEWS DOWNTOWN AREA 3

WESTSIDE MARKET LOCAL ELEMENTS TREES HISTORIC UNIQUE THINK FOOD AREA HOUSING DESIGN SHOPPING

WEST SIDE MARKET PEOPLE BRIDGES STREET LAKE BUSINESSES BUILDINGS ST IGNATIUS OHIO CITY STATION OLD INDUSTRY RIVER ART BREWERY CHURCH MURALS DISTRICT LAKEVIEW PUBLIC ART LAKE ERIE IRISHTOWN BEND PARK WATER

AREA 4

AREA 5

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

22

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

AREA 1

SURVEY DATA

Q7 WHAT EXISTING PLACES, SPECIAL FEATURES, OR OTHER VISUAL ELEMENTS DO YOU SEE WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT AREA 2? (THESE IDEAS WILL INSPIRE UNIQUE DESIGN ELEMENTS FOR BUS STATIONS WITHIN AREA 2: LORAIN AVENUE TO CLARK AVENUE.) FEATURE RED LINE W 25TH TRAIN

AREA 2

AVENUE CONNECTION MIX NEIGHBORHOOD

LORAIN FEEL HISPANIC WEST ALSO PLACE INDUSTRIAL LA VILLA HISPANA

AREA 3

BRIDGE NESTLE BUILDINGS MURAL AREA GOOD WEST SIDE MARKET CLARK TRAIN TREMONT COMMUNITY HOMES

OLD USED NEW GATEWAYS BUSINESSES NEW DEVELOPMENTS CLARKS NEEDS DUCK ISLAND HISTORIC TREES

AREA 4

AREA 5

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

23

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

AREA 1

SURVEY DATA

Q8 WHAT EXISTING PLACES, SPECIAL FEATURES, OR OTHER VISUAL ELEMENTS DO YOU SEE WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT AREA 3? (THESE IDEAS WILL INSPIRE UNIQUE DESIGN ELEMENTS FOR BUS STATIONS WITHIN AREA 3: CLARK AVENUE TO I-71.)

FEATURE CHRISTMAS STORY HOUSE

AREA 2

LATINX CLARK FULTON CHURCHES SPANISH

METRO HEALTH SHELTERS BUILDINGS TREMONT HISPANIC BUS SHELTERS PLACE AREA HEALTH

AREA 3

METRO LIVES

NEIGHBORHOOD USING HOSPITAL LATIN COMMUNITY NEW DICKEY LANES BUSINESSES AREA 4

AREA 5

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

24

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

AREA 1

SURVEY DATA

Q9 WHAT EXISTING PLACES, SPECIAL FEATURES, OR OTHER VISUAL ELEMENTS DO YOU SEE WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT AREA 4? (THESE IDEAS WILL INSPIRE UNIQUE DESIGN ELEMENTS FOR BUS STATIONS WITHIN AREA 4: I-71 TO BIG CREEK BRIDGE.)

AREA 2

NEED W 25TH PEARL HISTORIC DISTRIC PARK OLD CEMETERY

AREA 3

BROOKLYN CENTRE VALLEY AREA TREES ZOO RIVERSIDE CEMETERY SEE HISTORIC DISTRICT METROPARKS BUS

BRIDGE OLD BROOKLYN DENISON BUILDING AREA 4

AREA 5

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

25

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

AREA 1

SURVEY DATA

Q10 WHAT EXISTING PLACES, SPECIAL FEATURES, OR OTHER VISUAL ELEMENTS DO YOU SEE WHEN YOU THINK ABOUT AREA 5?(THESE IDEAS WILL INSPIRE UNIQUE DESIGN ELEMENTS FOR BUS STATIONS WITHIN AREA 5: SOUTH OF BIG CREEK BRIDGE.)

OLD CLEVELAND METROPARKS ZOO RESIDENTIAL SMALL

AREA 2

BUSINESSES BRIGHTON PARK

AREA 3

PEARL BUILDINGS OLD BROOKLYN BRIGHTON ZOO NEIGHBORHOODS AREA DOWNTOWN OLD BROOKLYN HISTORIC USING CHURCH COMMUNITY

NEW DEACONESS HOSPITAL OLD BROOKLYN NEIGHBORHOOD PARK AREA 4

AREA 5

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

26

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

SURVEY DATA - 261 SURVEY RESPONSES

TIMELESS URBAN

34%

FUTURE CONTEMPORARY

36%

URBAN INDUSTRIAL

38%

0% PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

10%

20%

30%

40% 27

25Connects | Station Survey 2.0 21

SECT IO N 3

22

SURVEY DATA

WHAT WE HEARD

I like the glassy exterior but am concerned by the ability of wind or rain to enter the stop. I don’t think this would dominate the corridor but would blend with it.

1/26/2021 5:12 PM

Obviously the most affordable.

1/26/2021 2:57 PM

I like it in general. I do not think the top should be clear as the sun seems like it would make it bake people while they wait!

Perhaps the frosted top on this design would be best to keep the shelter as comfortable, functional and practical as possible as it would give shade.

1/26/2021 11:44 AM

24

TIMELESS I like this one best. Across the top put the stops the bus 25Connects will make headed for Detroit Survey 2.0 Ave. from The Zoo. (Sackett, Meyer, | Station URBAN Clark, Chatham) Attractive and protects one from the elements. Doesn’t look as though it would be to expensive.

1/26/2021 10:53 AM

25

I like the clean and simplistic lines. The black would tie in well with the black historic light poles

1/26/2021 10:38 AM

I prefer this design. It provides the most wind-rain protection. Whichever design is chosen, please adjust seating to I can't seethat thediscourages correct details in the but the seat looks You heights need a that seatseat from one end to the other. something sleeping in photo the shelter.

I suggest cubessmall. of various only one person...no benches.

1/26/2021 8:24 AM

Do not have it open to the street. Cars and snow plows will splash on riders. Add 911 boxes like you have done on Euclid LittleLakewood. protective. and It will bend into the w25ht Street scoping.

1/26/2021 8:20 AM

5 29

I don't think it's very suitable for the weather. It must be something a little warmer Classy

2/12/2021 1/26/2021 8:05 AM

6 30

I like as long as it has the bench. lovethis theone design.

1/26/2021 7:46 AM 2/12/2021

7 31

Broken glassisis very no fun!

This model simple. I do not like.

1/26/2021 7:30 AM 2/12/2021

8 32

Good wind and rain protection. Not super attractive.

I like how it is designed and how modern it looks. Although I think the ceiling is a bit unsafe as it is glass.

1/26/2021 7:07 AM

I like 3 walls to block the wind because Cleveland winters can be brutal. I like all glass so you can see buses coming, and Concerned about a glass roof getting dirty very quickly.

Not sure ifThe there's reliable maintenance forpeople a glass roof. also I feel safer when cars can see me especially if 25Connects I'm traveling alone. glass does get scratches from carving | Station Survey 2.0 in it, but I still prefer it.

1/26/2021 7:01 AM

23

# 1 2

26 27

It is simple and quite similar to the booths today.

3 4

9

RESPONSES DATE Q1 WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON DESIGN IDEA 1: TIMELESS URBAN? (TYPE IN THE BOX BELOW WHAT YOU LIKE The stainless steel one with the seat is good.

1/26/2021 9:01 AM like thisLIKE booth better because it looks betterDESIGN.) and it has a bench to sit on and wait for the bus.

2/12/2021 ORI DON’T ABOUT THIS BUS STATION

28

33

10 34 42 35 43

11

44 36 1245 37

2/12/2021

2/12/2021

2/12/2021

2/12/2021

2/12/2021

In other cities with these structures I have seen broken glass panes and/or glass surfaces that are dirty with fingerprints, 2/10/2021 and Not a fan general.

Though inthe a tight it can offer a nice sense of openness and visual1/26/2021 like that that it'sgrime. clean looking and modern.

I worry about glassstreetscape getting cracked or broken.

IIpollen, like this design blends in in well with the surroundings.

1/25/2021 6:22 8:23 AM AM security. Still my least favorite of the options though. Clear station name / signage is a keeper!

Love one hasthey seating! dothey not like designahowever, it looks it will and hold 1/26/2021 I like that how this transparent are, Ibut alsothe do roof not make statement in the like same wayjust thecapture other options do.snow. Appears 1/25/2021 5:57 8:23 AM AM to offer the best wind protection and the bench has armrests love that!

I like this the most. However, I most want a design that is similar to/the next evolution of the existing stations in the city.

2/4/2021 Too open to the elements. doesfornot always have to be ultra-modern.

1/25/2021 7:59 AM Something similar to theUrban shelters the Healthline would be best. the seats It does not protect against the elements.

1/25/2021283:11 PM PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 2021 Not great if it is raining, snowing, or cold winds as it is very open 1/25/2021 7:51 AM 2/4/2021 They should be placed so you do not have to leave the shelter to look down the street to see if the bus is coming.

On the Looks nice. Needs broader roof to protect from precipitation and seating for mobility-challenged.

1/25/2021 2:18 PM TH

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD

SURVEY DATA

25Connects | Station Survey 2.0 19 20 21 22

FUTURE CONTEMPORARY They look uncomfortable for long waits and do nothing to protect from the wind

1/26/2021

Feels very contemporary and not quite in step with the current corridor Q2 WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON DESIGN IDEA #2: FUTURE CONTEMPORARY? (TYPE IN THE BOX BELOW Does not reflect the neighborhood and its past contributions to the city.

WHAT YOU LIKE OR DON’T LIKE ABOUT THIS BUS STATION DESIGN.) I like that the top is not clear and provides shade. The bench in image two does not look comfortable or practical though. Its a little futuristic, but all around okay!

1/26/2021

1/26/2021

1/26/2021

23

To skimpy. Although if well lit will let people use it at night without any trouble.

1/26/2021

24

Too modern and is out of context with the many historical buildings that exist on this corridor. May end up looking dated.

1/26/2021

25

Too wrong for W25th Street

1/26/2021

26

Boring

1/26/2021

27

It looks cool, but the bench doesn't seem very comfortable.

1/26/2021

28

Looks cold.

1/26/2021

29

Doesn't feel super Cleveland. Good wind and rain protection. Bench looks uncomfortable.

1/26/2021

30

Like this one

1/26/2021

31

I don't think this would look nice across the street from a hundred year old WSM. Too futuristic. Also the gaps between the glass sides and the top would let it too much cold air. I know fresh air is especially important during the pandemic, but if you're waiting 15 minutes outside in the middle of winter, it is not your top priority.

1/26/2021

32

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

It doesn't look welcoming. The style may be too pedestrian.

29

1/26/2021

1

Está bien

2/15/

Q2 ¿Qué opinas de la Idea de diseño #2: FUTURO CONTEMPO 2 Me gusta 2/15/ (Escriba en el cuadro de abajo lo que le gusta o no le gusta de e WHAT WE HEARD 3 Moderno y atractivo 2/15/ SURVEY DATA para la caseta de autobús).

SECT IO N 3

4

Me gusta porque es mas sencillo, mas limpio. Solo le pondria mas bancas.

2/15/

5

Answered: 21 Skipped: 6 El con temporero es okay pero no protege mucho es okay también pero muy abierto FUTURO

2/13/

No me gusta este.

2/13/

6 7 #

CONTEMPORÁNEO

Q2 ¿QUÉ OPINAS DE LA IDEA DE DISEÑO #2: FUTURO CONTEMPORÁNEO? (ESCRIBA EN EL CUADRO DE ABAJO Este si me gusta.

LORESPONSES QUE LE GUSTA O NO LE GUSTA DE ESTE DISEÑO PARA LA CASETA DE AUTOBÚS)

2/13/ DATE

8 1

Este mi favorito. Tiene metal y es duradero.

Está es bien

2/13/ 2/15/

9 2

No. Me gusta

2/13/ 2/15/

10 3

Este me gusta mas que todos.

Moderno y atractivo

2/13/ 2/15/

11 4

No. gusta porque es mas sencillo, mas limpio. Solo le pondria mas bancas.

Me

2/13/ 2/15/

12 5

Area sentarse es okay muy pequeño.

Diseñomucho es moderno y se vería bien areas donde están El condetemporero pero no protege es okay también peroen muy abierto arreglando No me gusta este.

Se ve lindo. El de tower city tiene asientos afuera ya adentro. Tiene mas protection.

Este si me gusta.

Se ve bien y seguro.

Este es mi favorito. Tiene metal y es duradero.

Este modelo me gusta mas que el primero. Es unico.

No. No agrada mucho etc.

Este me gusta mas que todos.

2/13/

6 13 7 14 8 15 9 16 10

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

30

2/13/ 2/12/ 2/13/ 1/27/ 2/13/ 1/25/ 2/13/ 1/25/ 2/13/

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD SURVEY DATA

URBAN INDUSTRIAL

65

25Connects | Station Survey 2.0

But I suppose there is less for people to smash with this design.

Q3 WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON DESIGN IDEA 3: URBAN INDUSTRIAL? (WHAT DO YOU LIKE OR DON’T LIKE No feelings eitherSTATION way ABOUT THIS BUS DESIGN?)

1/12/2021

66

Warm look but still lacks enough sitting area

1/12/2021

67

I prefer the 3rd shelter overall

1/7/2021

68

Love the aesthetics but it looks even less likely to really shelter from the weather

1/6/2021

69

I like this a lot - It is unique, it establishes a BRT identity, it fits with the street without blending into the street, and it's visually interesting. That said, in this particular example picture, there is not enough shelter. The large roof is good, but the narrow/non-existed sides will let in too much rain/snow, rendering it a less-than-useful shelter.

1/6/2021

70

Like: wooden under-roof Dislike: least amount of shelter from elements

1/5/2021

71

There no seats people need to sit

1/5/2021

72

Again, I prefer an airier, uplifting design.

1/5/2021

73

Now this is much better than the other 2 options. I like the mix of architectural features and colors. This matches current trends in design.

1/5/2021

74

This would be my favorite if it were a little more enveloping like the ones above. I like the warmth of the color and the wood, which we need in our gray, cold climate. I'm not sure the wood would actually hold up, though. The bench looks the most comfortable. If the metal screens are mesh, they won't provide much protection from the elements. These shelters should PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 2021 not prioritize design over comfort or functionality (like Gordon Square--cool silver sculpture, but terrible shelter--cold in winter, hot in summer).

TH

1/5/2021 6 31

SECT IO N 3

WHAT WE HEARD CONCLUSIONS

› Most common desire was protection from the elements on all sides of the shelter › Want to have ample seating inside and outside the shelter (deep and wide) › Concerned about roofs with clear glass because of visible dirt buildup, vandalism, and heat in summer › Desire for glass/transparent side walls to maximize visual safety and provide protection from the weather › Many liked the wood seat and ceiling material option › Focus on function over form › Split between people who want a neutral design vs. a distinctive design › Do not obstruct direct line of sight of arriving buses from inside shelter with signs (maps, ads, etc) › Lighting is a critical consideration to provide a sense of safety › Should accommodate individuals who use a wheelchair to fit comfortably under the shelter

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

32

SECT IO N 4

TOD FEASIBILITY STUDY

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

MONROE 33

SECT IO N 4

TOD FEASIBILITY STUDY MARKET SCAN

AREA 1

COLUMBUS ROAD

Demand is present, however each area requires different approaches

AREA 2

ASTRUP AWNING

AREA 3

CLARK-FULTON

AREA 4

AREA 5

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

34

SECT IO N 4

TOD FEASIBILITY STUDY TOOLS FOR SIGNIFICANT FINANCING GAPS

ipsumand Abatements TaxLorem Credits Tax-Exempt and other Subsidized Interest Rate Financing Industrial/Commercial Land Bank Vacant Property Initiative Federal, State, and Local Grants Public Infrastructure Investment Foundation Grants Mission & Program-Related Investments Project-Based Vouchers Homeowner Assistance Programs

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

35

SECT IO N 4

TOD FEASIBILITY STUDY CONCLUSIONS

› The W25th Street Corridor is dynamic and sections of the corridor will develop based upon localized market demand, focused subsidy and for-profit and non-profit enterprises seeking opportunities to engage › The City of Cleveland, civic-minded institutions and community focused housing platforms are showing the way forward and providing resources to transition historically dis-invested communities to vibrant communities supported by public infrastructure › A public-facing resource that can provide financial literacy solutions, warehouse the many different supportive programs and provide tailored advice and guidance to community members could prove valuable › Densification of the corridor, through in-fill development as well as redeveloping and occupying currently vacant houses should contribute to community building, neighborhood investment and increased demand for public transportation › Reduction in available land will, eventually, lead to densification along the transit corridor

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

36

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

MONROE 37

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY RIDERSHIP AREA 5 : OLD BROOKLYN

AREA 4 : BROOKLYN-CENTRE

AREA 3 : CLARK-FULTON

AREA 2 : OHIO-CITY (SOUTH)/TREMONT

AREA 1 : OHIO-CITY (NORTH)

59

81

SWIFT

VEGA

ERIN 53

40

POTTER

258

145

BARBER

101

98

SEYMOUR

WALTON

CLARK

239

22

137 JAY

LORAIN

CHATHAM

29

44

12

GEHRING

55

158

101

MONROE

14

148 HOLMDEN

DAISY 22

90

SOUTHPOINT

58

MARVIN

36

568

79A

102

MEYER

64

165 201

MH/TROWBRIDGE

58

51C

13

79 45

MH/SACKETT

179

MAPLEDALE

51B

22 168

ARCHWOOD

51A

40

111

DENISON

51

40 WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

106

28 FRANKLIN

81

DETROIT/SUPERIOR

26

179

22

285

297

81

45

79 79A

22 81 26

187 377

134

81

19

81

› The combined MetroHealth Line (Routes 51, A, B, C) has a total average daily (weekday) ridership of approximately 5,409 riders. › The Study Area represents 43.5% of the combined ridership of the MetroHealth line.and the Study corridor also experiences the highest load factors on the entire route.

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

ROADWAYS RAIL 1/2-MILE STUDY AREA W. 25TH CORRIDOR OPEN SPACE WATER BODIES

BRT LINE BRT LINE PROPOSED BRT BUS STOPS NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND ALTERNATIVE NORTHBOUND ALTERNATIVE SOUTHBOUND EXISTING BUS STOPS TO BE STUDIED FURTHER NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND

0

0.25

0.5 mile

38

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY RIDERSHIP AREA 5 : OLD BROOKLYN

AREA 4 : BROOKLYN-CENTRE

AREA 3 : CLARK-FULTON

AREA 2 : OHIO-CITY (SOUTH)/TREMONT

AREA 1 : OHIO-CITY (NORTH)

59

81

SWIFT

VEGA

ERIN 53

40

POTTER

258

145

22

137 JAY

LORAIN

CHATHAM

29

BARBER

101

98

SEYMOUR

WALTON

CLARK

239

44

12

GEHRING

55

158

101

MONROE

14

148 HOLMDEN

DAISY 22

90

SOUTHPOINT

58

MARVIN

36

568

79A

102

MEYER

64

165 201

MH/TROWBRIDGE

58

51C

13

79 45

MH/SACKETT

179

MAPLEDALE

51B

22 168

ARCHWOOD

51A

40

111

DENISON

51

40 WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

106

28 FRANKLIN

81

DETROIT/SUPERIOR

26

179

22

285

297

81

45

79 79A

22 81 26

187 377

134

81

19

81

› Five other routes (22, 26, 45, 70-79A, & 81) also travel along the Corridor › The most active stop pairs (total boardings/alightings) on the corridor are: − Lorain Ave (945) − Detrioit/Superior (582) − Clark Ave (416) − MetroHealth (406) PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

ROADWAYS RAIL 1/2-MILE STUDY AREA W. 25TH CORRIDOR OPEN SPACE WATER BODIES

BRT LINE BRT LINE PROPOSED BRT BUS STOPS NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND ALTERNATIVE NORTHBOUND ALTERNATIVE SOUTHBOUND EXISTING BUS STOPS TO BE STUDIED FURTHER NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND

0

0.25

0.5 mile

39

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY RIDERSHIP AREA 5 : OLD BROOKLYN

AREA 4 : BROOKLYN-CENTRE

AREA 3 : CLARK-FULTON

AREA 2 : OHIO-CITY (SOUTH)/TREMONT

AREA 1 : OHIO-CITY (NORTH)

59

81

SWIFT

VEGA

ERIN 53

40

POTTER

258

145

22

137 JAY

LORAIN

CHATHAM

29

BARBER

101

98

SEYMOUR

WALTON

CLARK

239

44

12

GEHRING

55

158

101

MONROE

14

148 HOLMDEN

DAISY 22

90

SOUTHPOINT

58

MARVIN

36

568

79A

102

MEYER

64

165 201

MH/TROWBRIDGE

58

51C

13

79 45

MH/SACKETT

179

MAPLEDALE

51B

22 168

ARCHWOOD

51A

40

111

DENISON

51

40 WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

106

28

179

FRANKLIN

81

DETROIT/SUPERIOR

26

22

285

81

297

45

79 79A

22 81 26

187 377

134

81

19

81 0

0.25

0.5 mile

› The Corridor is both an origin and destination, with different segments pointing North or South − Area 1 - Ohio City (North) is primarily a destination from the South − Area 2 – Ohio City (South)/Tremont show little directionality, with roughly equivalent boardings and alightings at all individual stops. − Area 3 - Clark/Fulton (which includes MetroHealth) appears the most directionally biased – likely combining neighborhood trips heading North and Southbound trips to MetroHealth. − Areas 4 & 5 serves mostly neighborhood uses with ridership originating here and heading North PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

40

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY RIDERSHIP AREA 5 : OLD BROOKLYN

AREA 4 : BROOKLYN-CENTRE

AREA 3 : CLARK-FULTON

AREA 2 : OHIO-CITY (SOUTH)/TREMONT

AREA 1 : OHIO-CITY (NORTH)

59

81

SWIFT

VEGA

ERIN 53

40

POTTER

258

145

22

137 JAY

LORAIN

CHATHAM

29

BARBER

101

98

SEYMOUR

WALTON

CLARK

239

44

12

GEHRING

55

158

101

MONROE

14

148 HOLMDEN

DAISY 22

90

SOUTHPOINT

58

MARVIN

36

568

79A

102

MEYER

64

165 201

MH/TROWBRIDGE

58

51C

13

79 45

MH/SACKETT

179

MAPLEDALE

51B

22 168

ARCHWOOD

51A

40

111

DENISON

51

40 WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

106

28

179

FRANKLIN

81

DETROIT/SUPERIOR

26

22

285

81

297

45

79 79A

22 81 26

187 377

134

81

19

81 0

0.25

0.5 mile

› The Corridor is both an origin and destination, with different segments pointing North or South − Area 1 - Ohio City (North) is primarily a destination from the South − Area 2 – Ohio City (South)/Tremont show little directionality, with roughly equivalent boardings and alightings at all individual stops. − Area 3 - Clark/Fulton (which includes MetroHealth) appears the most directionally biased – likely combining neighborhood trips heading North and Southbound trips to MetroHealth. − Areas 4 & 5 serves mostly neighborhood uses with ridership originating here and heading North PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

41

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY RIDERSHIP AREA 5 : OLD BROOKLYN

AREA 4 : BROOKLYN-CENTRE

AREA 3 : CLARK-FULTON

AREA 2 : OHIO-CITY (SOUTH)/TREMONT

AREA 1 : OHIO-CITY (NORTH)

59

81

SWIFT

VEGA

ERIN 53

40

POTTER

258

145

22

137 JAY

LORAIN

CHATHAM

29

BARBER

101

98

SEYMOUR

WALTON

CLARK

239

44

12

GEHRING

55

158

101

MONROE

14

148 HOLMDEN

DAISY 22

90

SOUTHPOINT

58

MARVIN

36

568

79A

102

MEYER

64

165 201

MH/TROWBRIDGE

58

51C

13

79 45

MH/SACKETT

179

MAPLEDALE

51B

22 168

ARCHWOOD

51A

40

111

DENISON

51

40 WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

106

28

179

FRANKLIN

81

DETROIT/SUPERIOR

26

22

285

81

297

45

79 79A

22 81 26

187 377

134

81

19

81 0

0.25

0.5 mile

› The Corridor is both an origin and destination, with different segments pointing North or South − Area 1 - Ohio City (North) is primarily a destination from the South − Area 2 – Ohio City (South)/Tremont show little directionality, with roughly equivalent boardings and alightings at all individual stops. − Area 3 - Clark/Fulton (which includes MetroHealth) appears the most directionally biased – likely combining neighborhood trips heading North and Southbound trips to MetroHealth. − Areas 4 & 5 serves mostly neighborhood uses with ridership originating here and heading North PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

42

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY RIDERSHIP AREA 5 : OLD BROOKLYN

AREA 4 : BROOKLYN-CENTRE

AREA 3 : CLARK-FULTON

AREA 2 : OHIO-CITY (SOUTH)/TREMONT

AREA 1 : OHIO-CITY (NORTH)

59

81

SWIFT

VEGA

ERIN 53

40

POTTER

258

145

22

137 JAY

LORAIN

CHATHAM

29

BARBER

101

98

SEYMOUR

WALTON

CLARK

239

44

12

GEHRING

55

158

101

MONROE

14

148 HOLMDEN

DAISY 22

90

SOUTHPOINT

58

MARVIN

36

568

79A

102

MEYER

64

165 201

MH/TROWBRIDGE

58

51C

13

79 45

MH/SACKETT

179

MAPLEDALE

51B

22 168

ARCHWOOD

51A

40

111

DENISON

51

40 WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

106

28

179

FRANKLIN

81

DETROIT/SUPERIOR

26

22

285

81

297

45

79 79A

22 81 26

187 377

134

81

19

81 0

0.25

0.5 mile

› The Corridor is both an origin and destination, with different segments pointing North or South − Area 1 - Ohio City (North) is primarily a destination from the South − Area 2 – Ohio City (South)/Tremont show little directionality, with roughly equivalent boardings and alightings at all individual stops. − Area 3 - Clark/Fulton (which includes MetroHealth) appears the most directionally biased – likely combining neighborhood trips heading North and Southbound trips to MetroHealth. − Areas 4 & 5 serves mostly neighborhood uses with ridership originating here and heading North PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

43

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY

PARKING IN THE CORRIDOR

P

› In general, parking along the corridor is underutilized, (below 80% occupied) and presents opportunities for re-regulation or can absorb additional parking demand. − Parking in the Franklin Station area experiences highest utilization levels during both AM and PM peaks (between 64% - 75%) − The Denison area experiences the lowest utilization levels (between 20% - 25%) › Much of the West 25th Street corridor itself already does not allow parking (No Parking regulation) − Even where available, parking on the West 25th Street corridor itself is lightly used. › Off-street parking is mostly privately owned, controlled and used, but with few exceptions is underutilized, offering opportunities to support new uses/demands › Curbside regulations and management is irregular, with time limits (15 min, 1hr, 2hr) and spans varying greatly

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

44

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND ALTERNATIVE NORTHBOUND ALTERNATIVE SOUTHBOUND

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

EXISTING BUS STOPS TO BE STUDIED FURTHER NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND

FRANKLIN

JAY

LORAIN

CHATHAM GEHRING

MONROE

SWIFT

OPPORTUNITY IRISHTOWN BEND PLAN

CURRENT PEAK HOUR RESTRICTION

POTTER

VEGA BARBER

ERIN SEYMOUR

WALTON

CLARK

MEYER

MH/SACKETT

MH/TROWBRIDGE

MARVIN SOUTHPOINT

PROPOSED BRT BUS STOPS

HOLMDEN

HIGHLY CONSTRAINED REQUIRES DETAILED REVIEW OF ANY ROADWAY WIDENING OR STRATEGIC OPPORTUNITIES TO INSTALL TRANSIT FACILITIES

OPPORTUNITY - GUIDEWAY METROHEALTH WIDENING

DAISY

MAPLEDALE

ARCHWOOD

DENISON

WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

OPPORTUNITY - PERMANENT NOTJUST PEAK HOUR GUIDEWAY

DETROIT/SUPERIOR

BRT OPERATIONAL OPPORTUNITY

BRT GUIDEWAYS 24/7 DEDICATED LANES PEAK HOUR DEDICATED LANES

0

0.25

0.5MILE

45

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY

BRT STATION TYPOLOGIES

Five station typologies have been proposed depending on location, ridership, and available space to insert the station: 1 CYCLE TRACK STATION 2 PREFERRED STATION 3 TYPICAL STATION 4 NARROW STATION 5 CONSTRAINED STATION

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

46

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY

BRT STATION TYPOLOGIES CYCLE TRACK STATION PRIVATE PROPERTY SIDEWALK 5’ ALIGNMENT ZONE SINGLE 6’ OR BI-DIRECTIONAL 12’ CYCLE TRACK

APPLIES TO 4 OF 34 STATIONS 12%

Amentiy zone

BOARDING AREA 2’ SHELTER OFFSET 60’ ARTICULATED BUS

40’ BUS

PROPOSED BRT BUS STOPS STATION TYPOLOGY LOCATION SPECIAL STATIONS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

DETROIT

FRANKLIN

JAY

LORAIN

GEHRING

MONROE

BARBER

SEYMOUR

CLARK

MH/SACKETT

MH/TROWBRIDGE

DAISY

MAPLEDALE

ARCHWOOD

DENISON

WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

65’ TRANSIT STOP

0

0.25

0.5MILE

47

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY

BRT STATION TYPOLOGIES PREFERRED STATION 5’ ALIGNMENT ZONE

APPLIES TO 13 OF 34 STATIONS Amentiy zone

16’ MIXED ZONE

BOARDING AREA 2’ SHELTER OFFSET

38%

60’ ARTICULATED BUS

40’ BUS

PROPOSED BRT BUS STOPS STATION TYPOLOGY LOCATION SPECIAL STATIONS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

DETROIT

FRANKLIN

JAY

LORAIN

GEHRING

MONROE

BARBER

SEYMOUR

CLARK

MH/SACKETT

MH/TROWBRIDGE

DAISY

MAPLEDALE

ARCHWOOD

DENISON

WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

65’ TRANSIT STOP

0

0.25

0.5MILE

48

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY

BRT STATION TYPOLOGIES TYPICAL STATION

REQUIRES SOME PRIVATE PROPERTY AGREEMENT (EASEMENT, PURCHASE, SETBACK IF NO NEW BUILDING IN PLACE) 5’ ALIGNMENT ZONE

APPLIES TO 11 OF 34 STATIONS

PRIVATE PROPERTY Amentiy zone

PRIVATE PROPERTY

13’ 8’ MIXED ZONE

BOARDING AREA 2’ SHELTER OFFSET 60’ ARTICULATED BUS

32%

40’ BUS

PROPOSED BRT BUS STOPS STATION TYPOLOGY LOCATION SPECIAL STATIONS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

DETROIT

FRANKLIN

JAY

LORAIN

GEHRING

MONROE

BARBER

SEYMOUR

CLARK

MH/SACKETT

MH/TROWBRIDGE

DAISY

MAPLEDALE

ARCHWOOD

DENISON

WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

65’ TRANSIT STOP

0

0.25

0.5MILE

49

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY

BRT STATION TYPOLOGIES NARROW STATION 5’ ALIGNMENT ZONE

APPLIES TO 3 OF 34 STATIONS PRIVATE PROPERTY Amentiy zone

10’ MIXED ZONE

BOARDING AREA

9%

2’ SHELTER OFFSET 60’ ARTICULATED BUS

40’ BUS

PROPOSED BRT BUS STOPS STATION TYPOLOGY LOCATION SPECIAL STATIONS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

DETROIT

FRANKLIN

JAY

LORAIN

GEHRING

MONROE

BARBER

SEYMOUR

CLARK

MH/SACKETT

MH/TROWBRIDGE

DAISY

MAPLEDALE

ARCHWOOD

DENISON

WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

65’ TRANSIT STOP

0

0.25

0.5MILE

50

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY

BRT STATION TYPOLOGIES CONSTRAINED STATION 5’ ALIGNMENT ZONE DOES NOT MEET 96’’ X 60’’ PERDENDICULAR CLEAR BOARDING AREA ADA CODE 810.2.2

APPLIES TO 0 OF 34 STATIONS

6’ MIXED ZONE

BRIDGE WALL TURNING SPACE

60’ ARTICULATED BUS

40’ BUS

PROPOSED BRT BUS STOPS STATION TYPOLOGY LOCATION SPECIAL STATIONS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

DETROIT

FRANKLIN

JAY

LORAIN

GEHRING

MONROE

BARBER

SEYMOUR

CLARK

MH/SACKETT

MH/TROWBRIDGE

DAISY

MAPLEDALE

ARCHWOOD

DENISON

WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

45’ TRANSIT STOP

0

0.25

0.5MILE

51

SECT IO N 5

BRT STUDY CONCLUSIONS

› Ridership is strong compared to other lines in Cleveland › There is capacity along the corridor to accommodate growth in ridership › Station platform concepts can meet any increase in ridership, however some stations might require further study on potential addition of amenity in next study › Setbacks of new buildings along the corridor must consider these BRT platform insertions and this study should be reviewed at time of development applications. › The corridor is constrained to meet multiple mobility demands. › A large segment of the corridor can meet FTA requirements for dedicated guideway, however areas that cannot should be dedicated to peak period operations. › Bike infrastructure should focus on East/West connections to North/South Bike Facilities › Off street parking capacity studied notes underutilization, however will require a post-COVID study to confirm these observations › On street parking in the study areas (streets aside West 25th Street) show a lack of consistency in regulations, a holistic review of these regulations should be considered

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

52

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

MONROE 53

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS

PROPOSED BRT BUS STOPS NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND NORTHBOUND ALTERNATIVE SOUTHBOUND ALTERNATIVE

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

EXISTING BUS STOPS TO BE STUDIED FURTHER

DETROIT/SUPERIOR

FRANKLIN

JAY

LORAIN

CHATHAM GEHRING

MONROE

SWIFT POTTER

VEGA

FRANKLIN STATION AREA

BARBER

ERIN SEYMOUR

WALTON

CLARK

HOLMDEN

MEYER

MH/SACKETT

MH/TROWBRIDGE

MARVIN SOUTHPOINT

DAISY

MAPLEDALE

ARCHWOOD

DENISON

WILDLIFE WAY

BROADVIEW

CLARK STATION AREA DENISON STATION AREA WILDLIFE WAY STATION AREA METROHEALTH STATION AREA

0

0.25

0.5MILE

NORTHBOUND SOUTHBOUND

54

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS ASSUMPTIONS

› Zoning − setbacks, building orientation, etc.

P

› Parking Requirements − 1 stall per unit maximum − 0.15 stall per unit visitor parking − No parking required for ground floor or retail under 25,000 sqft › Local market opportunity considerations − Density − Affordability − Displacement Mitigation − Typologies of Housing › BRT OPERATIONS − Platform Placement − Setbacks that might be required in certain areas

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

55

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS BUILDING TYPOLOGIES

25’

TYPE 1: TOWNHOMES

* TYPICAL DIAGRAM ONLY

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

10’

10’

10’

10’

10’

10’

0’

3

5 0’-

0’

6 0’-

25’

4

TYPE 2: STACKED FLATS * TYPICAL DIAGRAM ONLY

56

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS BUILDING TYPOLOGIES

12’ 12’

10’

12’

10’

12’

10’

15’

10’ 12’

’

60

40’

TYPE 3: MULTIFAMILY RESIDENTIAL

* TYPICAL DIAGRAM ONLY

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

TYPE 4: OFFICE BUILDING * TYPICAL DIAGRAM ONLY

57

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS BUILDING TYPOLOGIES

10’ 10’

10’

10’

10’ 10’

10’

10’

10’

10’

10’

12’

10’

15’

15’

’

’

60

60

TYPE 5: MIXED-USE (RETAIL + RESIDENTIAL)

* TYPICAL DIAGRAM ONLY

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

TYPE 6: MIXED-USE (RETAIL + OFFICE + RESIDENTIAL) * TYPICAL DIAGRAM ONLY

58

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY

TOD CONCEPTS FRANKLIN STATION

FRANKLIN AREA

› Located in Ohio City › Opportunity for large scale, multiphase mid-rise development in line with surrounding context development

1-1

DE OIT

TR

› Replacement of existing parking lot capacity with structured parking

E AV

CH AV

CHUR

› Use of townhomes, stacked flates, mixed use and apartment buildings

NKL VE IN A

VE E AV RY

W 25T

FRANKLIN SB VE YA JA

FRANKLIN NB

N HTOW E IRIS

BEND

PARK

R

FUTU

JAY SB

JAY NB

HOGA

CUYA

TOD DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (DETROIT-FRANKLIN-JAY STATIONS) PROPOSED TOD PROJECT PROPOSED TOD - BUILDINGS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

EET

H STR

ST

› Views across Irishtown Bend Park

› Only catalyst site where 1 story underground parking would be feasible

DETROIT NB

FRA

› Block permeability, ped-only spaces, unique urban character › Setbacks minimal along this alignment, consideration should be given

DETROIT SB

E

1-2

PROPOSED SURFACE PARKING

BELOW-GRADE PARKING BUILDINGS TO DEMOLISH

RIVER

SCALE: 1’’ = 150’

59

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY

T DE NB

TOD CONCEPTS FRANKLIN STATION

RO O TR DE SB

IT

IT

1-1

CU

IRISHTOWN BEND PARK

RI

YA H

VE

R

O

GA

1-1

TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 316 DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 50

P

RETAIL (SQFT)

21K

OFFICE (SQFT)

21K

PARKING STALLS

805 IN KL AN FR NB

1-2

RIVERVIEW TOWER

TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 73 DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 56 PARKING STALLS

116

W LUTHERAN HOSPITAL

I KL AN SB

8K

KLIN FR

P

RETAIL (SQFT)

FRAN

25 T

N

H

ST

1-2

RE

ET

W T 28 H ST RE

S VE

TR

Y

J N AY B

ET

Y JA FRANKLIN TOD 3D DIAGRAM TYPE 1: TOWNHOMES TYPE 2: STACKED FLATS TYPE 3: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

TYPE 4: OFFICE BUILDING TYPE 5: MIXED-USE (RET.+RES.) TYPE 6: MIXED-USE (RET.+OFF.+RES.)

PARKING TOD PROJECT BRT STATION

60

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY

CLARK AREA

TOD CONCEPTS CLARK STATION

› Small infill opportunity › Focused on vacant or underutilized sites

2-2 2-1

› Opportunity for creative office SEYMOUR AVENUE

ERIN AVENUE

WALTON AVENUE

› Surface Parking only viable parking potential for shared/pooled parking strategies

CLARK AVENUE

› Affordability will be key in this area

ATHEN AVENUE

› Influenced by other proposed development in the area

2-3 CLARK SB

2-4 W 25TH STREET

CLARK NB

SEYMOUR SB SEYMOUR NB

TOD DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (SEYMOUR-CLARK STATIONS) PROPOSED TOD PROJECT PROPOSED TOD - BUILDINGS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

PROPOSED SURFACE PARKING

BELOW-GRADE PARKING BUILDINGS TO DEMOLISH

SCALE: 1’’ = 150’

61

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS CLARK STATION

2-2

WA LTO

N

2-1 TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 48 DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 28

P

RETAIL (SQFT)

4K

PARKING STALLS

75

2-4

2-2

2-1

TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 80

CL ARK

P

RETAIL (SQFT)

12K

PARKING STALLS

85

CL A SB RK

DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 28

CENTRO VILLA 25

RE

ET

2-3

21

25 T

PARKING STALLS

W

P

8K

H

DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 45 RETAIL (SQFT)

2-3

ST

TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 27

KINKE

2-4 OFFICE (SQFT)

27K

PRAM

E

CLARK TOD 3D DIAGRAM TYPE 1: TOWNHOMES TYPE 2: STACKED FLATS TYPE 3: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

TYPE 4: OFFICE BUILDING TYPE 5: MIXED-USE (RET.+RES.) TYPE 6: MIXED-USE (RET.+OFF.+RES.)

PARKING TOD PROJECT BRT STATION

62

L

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY

METROHEALTH AREA

TOD CONCEPTS METROHEALTH STATION

› Small infill sites › Completed street edge that MetroHealth developments began

3-1

FUTURE METROHEALTH SOUTH DEVELOPMENT

SACKETT AVENUE

TROWBRIDGE AVENUE

› Surface parking

3-2

WOODBRIDGE AVENUE

MARVIN AVENUE

DAISY AVENUE

› 3-4 stories in height, mixed use opportunities

DAISY SB

DAISY NB

METROHEALTH/TROWBRIDGE SB

METROHEALTH CAMPUS MASTERPLAN

W 25TH STREET

FUTURE METR

OHEALTH PARK

SACKETT SB

SO

METROHEALTH/TROWBRIDGE NB

SACKETT NB

UT

FUTURE METR

INT

O HP

OHEALTH PARK

.

DR

ME

H LT EA OH

IVE

DR

TR

TOD DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (SACKETT-TROWBRIDGE-DAISY STATIONS) PROPOSED TOD PROJECT PROPOSED TOD - BUILDINGS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

PROPOSED SURFACE PARKING

BELOW-GRADE PARKING BUILDINGS TO DEMOLISH

SCALE: 1’’ = 150’

63

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS METROHEALTH STATION APPROX. RIGHT-OF-WAY 65 FT

LANE 11’

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

LANE 11’

TURN-LEFT LANE 11’

SETBACK

SETBACK 7’

BUS LANE OFF-PEAK SIDEWALK PARKING 12’ 9’

RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RETAIL

BUS LANE OFF-PEAK PARKING AMENITY ZONE 12’ 16’

PROPERTY LINE

PROPERTY LINE

RESIDENTIAL RESIDENTIAL RETAIL

APPROX. RIGHT-OF-WAY 65 FT

7’

BUS LANE OFF-PEAK SIDEWALK PARKING 12’ 9’

LANE 11’

LANE 11’

BUS LANE OFF-PEAK PARKING AMENITY ZONE 16’ 12’

APPROX. RIGHT-OF-WAY 65 FT

ADJACENT RESIDENTIAL HOMES DRIVEWAY

PARKING

MIXED-USE

TRANSIT-ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

W. 25TH STREET

METROHEALTH PARK

SCRANTON RD

OUTPATIENT PAVILION

DETAILED STREET SECTION

64

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS METROHEALTH STATION

METROHEALTH PARK NORTH

ET S SBACK

3-1 METROHEALTH PARK SOUTH

TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 26

SA

T

SACKETT

CK NB ET T

3-1

METROH

E A LT H D R

DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 52 26

T R O W B R ID

GE OH SB EAL T

ET M

3-2

METROHEALTH PARK

TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 36

WOODBRID GE 3-2 RE

22

ST

PARKING STALLS

H

9K

W

25 T

RETAIL (SQFT)

ET

DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 60

P

TO H NB EAL TH

PARKING STALLS

ME

5K

H

P

RETAIL (SQFT)

SOU

THP

OIN

TD

R

METROHEALTH TOD 3D DIAGRAM TYPE 1: TOWNHOMES TYPE 2: STACKED FLATS TYPE 3: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

TYPE 4: OFFICE BUILDING TYPE 5: MIXED-USE (RET.+RES.) TYPE 6: MIXED-USE (RET.+OFF.+RES.)

PARKING TOD PROJECT BRT STATION

65

SECT IO N 6

DENISON AREA

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS DENISON STATION

› Catalyst sites in truest sense along corridor › Replacing existing auto-centric uses BRADWELL AVENUE

› Surface parking

ARCHWOOD AVENUE

› 3-5 story mixed use residential and townhomes

4-2

DENISON SB

W 25TH STRE

ET

4-1

DENISON NB

ARCHWOOD SB ARCHWOOD NB

FORESTDALE

D AVENUE

DENISON AVENUE

TOD DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (ARCHWOOD-DENISON STATIONS) PROPOSED TOD PROJECT PROPOSED TOD - BUILDINGS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

PROPOSED SURFACE PARKING

BELOW-GRADE PARKING BUILDINGS TO DEMOLISH

SCALE: 1’’ = 150’

66

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS DENISON STATION

F

TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 44

DAL

E

4-1 AR

4-1

ST ORE

CH SB WO

OD

AR

CH NB WO

OD

DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 22

P

RETAIL (SQFT)

10K

PARKING STALLS

93

4-2

W

25 T

H

4-2

R GA

ST

RE

TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 44

P

9K

PARKING STALLS

35

N

ET DE

N NBISO N

DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 62 RETAIL (SQFT)

DE

DE

N

N ISO

DE

N SB ISO

N

DENISON TOD 3D DIAGRAM TYPE 1: TOWNHOMES TYPE 2: STACKED FLATS TYPE 3: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

TYPE 4: OFFICE BUILDING TYPE 5: MIXED-USE (RET.+RES.) TYPE 6: MIXED-USE (RET.+OFF.+RES.)

PARKING TOD PROJECT BRT STATION

67

SECT IO N 6

BROADVIEW AREA

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS BROADVIEW STATION

UE MEMPHIS AVEN

› Missing housing typologies in Old Brooklyn › Shared parking concept – MetroHealth Parking structure

5-1

IEW

RO AD

5-2

ST

NIN

RE

ET

OA DV IE

W

RO AD

BROADVIEW NB

WAY

5TH

HE N

BROADVIEW SB

W2

WILDLIFE

GE

RR

› Better opportunity for ped-only spaces, gardens and unique urban character unlike anywhere else in Cleveland.

OA D

KR

AT HE R

BR

RO AD

OA DV

› No onsite parking, 2-minute walk to parking structure

HE N

NIN

GE RR

OA D

BR

WILDLIFE SB

WILDLIFE NB

TOD DEVELOPMENT POTENTIAL (WILDLIFE WAY-BROADVIEW STATIONS) PROPOSED TOD PROJECT PROPOSED TOD - BUILDINGS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

PROPOSED SURFACE PARKING

BELOW-GRADE PARKING BUILDINGS TO DEMOLISH

SCALE: 1’’ = 150’

68

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY TOD CONCEPTS BROADVIEW STATION

5-2 5-1 TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 37 DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 53

P

RETAIL (SQFT)

8K

PARKING STALLS

33

RE 25 T

MH

W

PARKING STALLS

W

EW

17K

IE

OA D SB VI

5-1

BR

BR

OA NBDVI

EW

P

RETAIL (SQFT)

DV

H

DENSITY (UNITS/ACRE) 65

OA

ST

BR

TOTAL HOUSING UNITS 241

ET

5-2

BROADVIEW TOD 3D DIAGRAM TYPE 1: TOWNHOMES TYPE 2: STACKED FLATS TYPE 3: RESIDENTIAL BUILDING

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

TYPE 4: OFFICE BUILDING TYPE 5: MIXED-USE (RET.+RES.) TYPE 6: MIXED-USE (RET.+OFF.+RES.) ADDITION TO EXISTING

PARKING TOD PROJECT BRT STATION

69

SECT IO N 6

TOD STUDY CONCLUSIONS

› Market demand and financial feasibility of new projects along West 25th Street is strong - but varies area to area › Focus on TOD should be both on new development directly on West 25th Street but also rehabilitation and reoccupation of existing housing stock › Concepts shown are catalyst opportunities - we encourage the development community to think creatively on new housing typologies in collaboration with CDCs, the City and RTA › Changes to Zoning regulations and design standards will assist in both types of new development › Parking will continue to be a driver of density and design, communities should be open to thinking creatively of accommodating parking to maximize the design opportunities of development.

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

70

SECT IO N 7

WHAT WE LEARNED

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

MONROE 71

SECT IO N 7

WHAT WE LEARNED WHAT WE HEARD

› Most common desire was protection from the elements on all sides of the shelter › Want to have ample seating inside and outside the shelter (deep and wide) › Concerned about roofs with clear glass because of visible dirt buildup, vandalism, and heat in summer › Desire for glass/transparent side walls to maximize visual safety and provide protection from the weather › Many liked the wood seat and ceiling material option › Focus on function over form › Split between people who want a neutral design vs. a distinctive design › Do not obstruct direct line of sight of arriving buses from inside shelter with signs (maps, ads, etc) › Lighting is a critical consideration to provide a sense of safety › Should accommodate individuals who use a wheelchair to fit comfortably under the shelter

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

72

SECT IO N 7

WHAT WE LEARNED TOD FEASIBILITY STUDY

› The W25th Street Corridor is dynamic and sections of the corridor will develop based upon localized market demand, focused subsidy and for-profit and non-profit enterprises seeking opportunities to engage › The City of Cleveland, civic-minded institutions and community focused housing platforms are showing the way forward and providing resources to transition historically dis-invested communities to vibrant communities supported by public infrastructure › A public-facing resource that can provide financial literacy solutions, warehouse the many different supportive programs and provide tailored advice and guidance to community members could prove valuable › Densification of the corridor, through in-fill development as well as redeveloping and occupying currently vacant houses should contribute to community building, neighborhood investment and increased demand for public transportation › Reduction in available land will, eventually, lead to densification along the transit corridor

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

73

SECT IO N 7

WHAT WE LEARNED BRT STUDY

› Ridership is strong compared to other lines in Cleveland › There is capacity along the corridor to accommodate growth in ridership › Station platform concepts can meet any increase in ridership, however some stations might require further study on potential addition of amenity in next study › Setbacks of new buildings along the corridor must consider these BRT platform insertions and this study should be reviewed at time of development applications. › The corridor is constrained to meet multiple mobility demands. › A large segment of the corridor can meet FTA requirements for dedicated guideway, however areas that cannot should be dedicated to peak period operations. › Bike infrastructure should focus on East/West connections to North/South Bike Facilities › Off street parking capacity studied notes underutilization, however will require a post-COVID study to confirm these observations › On street parking in the study areas (streets aside West 25th Street) show a lack of consistency in regulations, a holistic review of these regulations should be considered

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

74

SECT IO N 7

WHAT WE LEARNED TOD STUDY

› Market demand and financial feasibility of new projects along West 25th Street is strong - but varies area to area › Focus on TOD should be both on new development directly on West 25th Street but also rehabilitation and reoccupation of existing housing stock › Concepts shown are catalyst opportunities - we encourage the development community to think creatively on new housing typologies in collaboration with CDCs, the City and RTA › Changes to Zoning regulations and design standards will assist in both types of new development › Parking will continue to be a driver of density and design, communities should be open to thinking creatively of accommodating parking to maximize the design opportunities of development.

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

75

SECT IO N 8

NEXT STEPS

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

MONROE 76

SECT IO N 8

NEXT STEPS 1

ZONING UPDATES AND POLICY RECOMMENDATIONS TO CITY OF CLEVELAND (ONGOING)

2

CONTINUED MONITORING OF NEW DEVELOPMENT (ONGOING)

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

77

SECT IO N 8

NEXT STEPS 3

PRESENTATION TO RTA BOARD OF TRUSTEES (APRIL 6, 2021)

4

PRESENTATION TO CLEVELAND PLANNING COMMISSION (APRIL 2021)

5

BRT DETAILED WORK (2022) − STATION CONCEPT REFINEMENT

PUBLIC MEETING - FEBRUARY 25 TH 2021

78

THANK YOU! STAY CONNECTED CHECK OUR WEBSITE FOR THE LATEST UPDATES WWW.25CONNECTS.COM WWW.25CONECTA.COM CONTACT-US HELLO@25CONNECTS.COM

+

+