clvlndr

^I actually thought Red Line trains could hit 60-65 MPH. It used to be on the Airport stretch next to I-71 they could match auto speeds. But that line has a slow zone now (at least the last, recent, time I was on it) so the trains are no match for autos at the moment.

^I never realized the Red Line as slower; I always thought those cars had considerable giddyap! It's hard though to experience this nowadays with all the friggin' slow-zones where cars rarely achieve speed... Anyway, I was actually I was talking about top speeds of trains. IIRC, 3rd rail trains' top speed generally is limited to about 100 MPH (it may have to do with the issue of electrical "arcing" w/r to 3rd rail; not sure) where, as we know, catenary-based systems such as Acela, the Bullet trains of Japan, TGV of France, etc., can achieve from 150 to over 357 MPH (the latter being the ground speed record).

Awesome. That building's going to be a substantial parcel on this rather small footprint. All the better. Can't wait to see the ground-level retail along with sexy living units above.

Does being underground improve the reliability? I would think it would. I'm not an electrical engineer so I can't say... I am aware there are differences in 3rd rail delivery vs. catenary, notably I've read that catenary allows for higher train free running speeds but, again, I couldn't tell you why. Maybe someone with knowledge of this can weigh in.

^The top floor they're working on should be the final one, no?

As for power, I'm pretty sure the NYC subway system is 600 volts as is, I believe, the Boston T -- both older systems like RTA. I think though that the Boston T's Blue Line upgraded its catenary to constant tension, which is important, because the extended, over-head wire portion, from Maverick to Wonderland, is contemporary with RTA's 1950s-built Red Line. The T's Blue Line, like RTA's Red Line, may be the only heavy rail transit lines operating with overhead wires in the United States. CTA's Skokie Swift dropped from that club when they switched power to 3rd rail.

I always wondered why RTA rebuilt the Shaker Lines with this old-style catenary when clearly the constant tension technology was the state of the art even at that time (early 80s). Just more evidence that the leadership of RTA was incompetent and we need more public involvement, interest and oversight when it comes to our local transit operation and decision-making.

Always loved this building. It's stately but kind of quiet and off to the side overshadowed, to a degree, by its larger, boxy International-Style, newer future home for 75's original tenant, the Illuminating Co., to the west and the historic Old Stone Church, to the east (esp. with its restored spire of a few decades ago)... The developers don't appear in a rush to convert and, as Michelle notes, their application for tax credits and subsidies even though their shooting for 16-24 months for completion.

I'm really glad the Breuer could be saved -- and not only saved, put to such an excellent people-friendly/population-generating use. I always thought it was an attractive tower -- not spectacular-- but attractive. And I was horrified at thoughts of demolishing it. Now it's instantly become that high-rise apartment and hotel tower that we've wanted for some time... It's all good!!

^Obviously the constant-tension catenary system discussed is very expensive to replace the older systems similar to RTA's. Out east, Philadelphia's regional rail has a similar (and older) system for almost its entire 200-mile regional rail network... Amtrak's NEC uses Acela trains -- our (so-called) bullet/answer to Japan and Europe (and now China). And yet, based on recent travels in the corridor, I don't think Amtrak has replaced very much of its old catenary (much of it contemporary with Philadelphia's) with the constant-tension technology. Metra Electric's commuter rail in Chicago uses an overhead power system that also appears very similar to the Red Line's, but to my knowledge it hasn't been updated either. So maybe Cleveland isn't so much out of step with the nation which, obviously, tends to lag behind most of the industrialized world on passenger train and transit issues.

^Interesting... Yeah, that area is definitely Flats-like -- in fact the Flats appears to be in a bit better shape per your photo. That indeed could be a model for the Cuyahoga viaduct. I'm not sure, but the photo indicates there may be at least an escalator up to those high platforms. These days they'd also have to have a handicap-accessible elevator too to be ADA compliant.

Yet another history lesson from KJP!... Man, you've gotta pull that book together capitalizing on your wealth of CLE history knowledge.

^I like the changes, esp the larger (6 story, 200-room) apartment which will similarly (to the original proposal) front along Lorain... Also, the new "Brickhaus" name is kinda cool.

This project has got to be the speediest completed large-scale development Cleveland has ever seen.

You're right, at Center Street near the Waterfront Line junction, the bridge is relatively low -- it's not a bad idea, although I think I'd move the station more down the Scranton Peninsula toward where the new Merwin's Wharf restaurant is. There are a few small joints, including a pizza place, but a number of derelict buildings in that immediate area. There is still a number industrial sites and that little Flats RR services customers with their switcher engine. I'm thinking that placing a station at Center Street is awfully close to the existing Settler's Waterfront Line stop. I understand that Red Line riders can get a one-seat ride to the Flats, but I think I'd rather spread the stations out a little.

Stairs would only be an emergency backup. Elevators -- and there should be 2 -- must operate from that height. Remember, we're talking about a high-level bridge. For a lot of people, that's not a viable stair-climbing option.

^What a bunch of sicko, losers... Throw their sorry asses in juvy.

I would put an infill station at Lakeview Ave in East Cleveland -- and not just b/c the Vans planned one there (I guess there's still a station "vault" there) ... I may be one of the few people on the planet who actually believes EC can, and should, be saved, and Red Line TOD would be a great way to do so, even though after nearly 60 years of service, it hasn't yet been seriously explored... I also think that, with the relocation of E. 120 station to Little Italy, there'll be too wide a gap between Superior and the new stop and too much walkable area will be missed. Even though, apparently, some non-TOD use is planned for the recently cleared industrial site along Lakeview adjacent to the Red Line elevated tracks, the station would still be near the (still) new Circle-East townhouses right along the E.C. line at Euclid. More, and even denser development could come with a Lakeview station stop. I also think the WFL's Amtrak stop should be expanded with a connection to the new pedestrian bridge being planned to connect the Convention Center to the waterfront. Finally, I'm in total agreement with a West 85-Franklin Ave station. Not only is there quite a bit of higher density living already there, this station could really help struggling Madison Ave, which has a lot of potential.

^Everything Mitchell's has done has been gold... outdoor seating would simply continue their winning streak. It's such an awesome place.

Nah, it was the Opportunity Corridor which spurred it! Really? How is that? I thought the OC was supposed to terminate at E. 105 & Quincy... for now, that is.

I agree... RTA is being completely irresponsible in not communicating why this shutdown is taking so long or updating what the current status is, not to mention how much longer commuters are going to have to wait for the reopening. Situations like this leave no doubt as to why the public just doesn't trust RTA, esp the current management.

You know, loose rocks were similarly embedded this way under the old Woodhill-Buckeye-Shaker bridge at the Woodhill station until the storm washed them away a few weeks ago closing the Blue & Green lines for more than a day. Obviously the rocks here appear decorative and not (and least don't seem to be) in any structural support function as they were at Woodhill, but let's hope they are stable... We certainly wouldn't want to loose Chris (or anybody else) due to a rock avalanche.

Perhaps the Browns... The Pettine regime is stumbling out of the gate so far (the Hoyer/start decision is absurd on all counts), and the Browns' offensive weapons look like, well, ... not weapons.

I disagree. Windhorst is one of the best NBA analysts on ESPN. He's usually ahead of the others on most trades, and knows the nuts & bolts to each one in order to make it happen as he's cap-ologist. I'm not mad at him at all. He was a young, hungry beat reporter that happened to come along when the greatest player in the game turned the international spotlight on Cleveland... and Windy rode with it and left town on LeBron's coattails-- and became a national figure in his own right. And while I don't consider myself a sexist (Mary Kay Cabot is excellent with the Browns imho btw) and have no ax to grind with Mary Schmidt Boyer, Windy ran rings around her as the Cavs PD reporter -- her stuff is weak (more fluff than stuff) generally, and even more so compared to Windhorst. He's very detailed. I would say that probably only Jason Lloyd at ABJ is closest to Windy in terms of talent in this market.

I agree totally w/r to Cudell. So much potential there in terms of density, walkability, old (great) architecture, transit, nearness to the lake, etc., etc., ...