clvlndr

2 years (2012) ago Pittsburgh opened its North Shore Connector LRT tunnel under Allegheny River to the tune of nearly $500M. North Shore included significant street subway components and terminates in a short elevated section. In 2006, St. Louis opened its 9-mile Blue Line (Light rail) to Shrewsbury that is totally grade separated – it contains significant subway tunnel, open-cut and elevated sections. Both Pittsburgh and St. Louis are very similar to Cleveland in terms of size, (rustbelt/industrial) character, demographics and recent population loss. And while I don’t know when St. Louis’ Blue Line was green-lighted, it was completed in the 6th year of the Bush Administration … as in conservative Republican. So while I don’t doubt that the FTA grant process is competitive, I don’t understand why Cleveland should be scared away from a worthy LRT simply because it requires some grade separation when other cities, including some nearly identical to us, were successful. THAT SAID I'm not sure a full-fledged, grade-separated rail expansion all the way to BP can be justified, esp. given the fact that the Green Line is relatively close by and RTA, no doubt, would have to explain why a shorter/cheaper extension of the Green Line to BP (as flawed as I noted earlier) wouldn’t do… I DO think, however, a grade-separated Coventry route possibly extended to Severance (essentially the 1968 Battelle study only using an LRT branch rather than HRT) shouldn’t be looked at considering University Circle’s stunning growth and the still high density of the Coventry corridor with a high number of apt dwellings/units.

We've had worse, looks-wise. But it's size and scale are to minimal for this important parcel. The hotel, obviously, is a far superior use... so good riddance!

It has 30 - 60 minute intervals. With those it will never serve as a viable transportation option for those who can choose. An elevated rail line with 5 - 15 minute intervals would do much better and not only serve rush hour commuters but also shoppers throughout the day. It would be the best routed line in the system. Good point.

^I honestly never thought I wouldn't live to see any serious residential development on those empty lots at Euclid btw Ford Rd. and E. 115, because the Hessler Rd. neighbors were all powerful (and had stopped a development proposal in the 1990s), UCI was a weak, disorganized lapdog to University Hospital, whereby the only UC development you saw was a new UH parking garage rising from some historic and/or residential property and, of course, and CWRU was in disarray with the firing of president Hundert. So bad was it that, when someone apparently had the temerity to ask the (now) late Peter B. Lewis for help, he took the lectern and ripped all parties a new one ... and then left town... Around this time Ronayne left the sinking Campbell Admin and took over UCI and, in about 4-5 years, ... we have Uptown! ... given this episode, the man has magician status in my eyes... If he can pull off Uptown from the (sadly, too often) typical Cleveland development inertia/abyss, he can shepherd even Coral to the finish line. With Ronayne at the table, trust me it's gonna happen.

Great to hear... If I'm a betting man, I'll place my chips on Chris Ronayne (UCI) any time.

It's about density and narrow streets downtown, not hills.

^Unfortunately the tunnels were never extended south of Canal Street/Central Parkway, along Walnut St. to Fountain Sq. and even further south as projected in the 1910s plan. This expansion, in tandem with using the existing tunnels, would seem a worthy FTA grant (with a local match (50%?)) since these areas are Cincinnati's main nodes of CBD activity, esp. given the high-density apartment growth near the river around the stadiums. While I'm very happy to see the streetcar plan finally moving forward, I just think that Cincy's narrow streets and high density downtown make subway tunneling, in some form or fashion, a necessity, if the city wants to maintain its current downtown growth rate... Those early 20th Century planners had it right then, ... and they're just as right 100 years after the fact.

I think many of the GCP’s requested items are very worthy, especially affordable housing and community health center development in Cleveland’s low and moderate income neighborhoods. But in terms of downtown development items, I wish there was some emphasis on greater positive impact items the N. Coast Transportation Center and, maybe, extending CVSR into downtown … not just on expanding public parks and Towpath hiking trails. I’m all about nature and natural areas, but we have abundance of parks, beaches and natural areas in/around Cleveland – it’s one of the City’s true strengths and we need to take care of what we’ve got. But where we need improvement is on is in transportation/transit (the Transportation Center would be a huge boost) and developing residential and retail building density, especially along our lakefront, and not just more open space. As I’ve said before, I don’t think the pedestrian bridge is a bad idea, but I sense it’s largely being built to move people from parking garages in/around Lakeside Ave to the lakefront while ignoring, totally, the rail transit and transportation (Amtrak) facilities that need enhancement and connectivity with the new Convention Center, hotel and potential North Coast office (and hopefully some retail) development.

OK, thanks for the clarification.

Not to dwell on or quibble over unhappy recent transit history, but this is misleading and not entirely accurate. The initial MetroMoves starter line settled upon was an $875M, 19-mile line from Blue Ash to 12th street in Covington. However, the project that became MetroMoves was the end result of an Ohio- Kentucky-Indiana compact (Regional Council of Governments) and the eventual 30-year plan called for a $4.2 regional (multi-line) LRT, streetcar, commuter rail, express bus/BRT project of which Ohio’s portion was $2.6M. One of the future legs, which I recall being one of priority lines following the starter system, was expansion to the Greater Cincinnati Airport in KY.

^One general exception to this is D.C.'s Metro, where a number of biz travelers seem to take it because of its higher profile and good reputation, as opposed to other city's transit that are often looked as simply "subways". Part of this is, as we know, Metro being seen by many as a D.C. tourist attraction in itself.

That’s pretty much always the case with airport rail. But pleasure travel is a significant subset of airport travel though much more elastic than business travel where, you’re correct, the travelers who are “expensed,” less familiar with a city and are on strict time restraints, will opt for some form of private transport or shuttle van. Independent contractors or, often, convention goers will be more open to airport rail service although, even then, many fear confusion in a “strange” city and opt to foot the bill themselves for cabs and shuttle vans. Out-of-state and long-distance in-state College students seem to be the biggest regular and most loyal users of airport rail, if Cleveland’s 46-year-old experience is an indicator. But generally bigger tourist cities (Chicago, D.C. or even Philly) will generally have more airport rail usage than lesser tourist cities like Cleveland… Still, the opportunity to tie in Cincy’s hub airport to downtown Cincy will hopefully not be overlooked – obviously, it was a key component in the doomed Metro Moves of the early 2000s. The relatively close-to-downtown distance of the airport to downtown coupled with the light population density beyond Covington to the airport and the potential of ROW in I-71/75 and I-275 should make a fast LRT line tying into streetcar downtown attractive.

... btw DM4, your 1874 photo is the 1st showing Superior cutting through Public Square as opposed to the 1857 shot showing the Square as peaceful village square -- talk about Back to the Future in terms of what we saw then, and see now as "progress" given our endless talk and plans to return it to an unbroken park... Do you (or anybody) know the date when Superior and Ontario were cut through the Square?

Wonderful essay, DM4... What an evolution of downtown Cleveland from pastoral/bucolic to a real city. I'm always captivated seeing photos from the 19th and early 20th century. The “old” buildings and architecture that we treasure (some of us, anyway) and fight to save as “historic preservation” were just regular, normal buildings to those living then… To see the evolution of technology and the lack thereof, (seemingly) “primitive” lifestyle of the people who were, nonetheless getting on with their lives dealing with loved ones, family and all the arcane details of living, just like ... us. … Somebody 100 years from now will look at old videos and/or photos of us (on God knows what type of device), and think the same things.

^My guess is they built this section 1st because it was cheapest and easiest relative to the other routes: the 5+ mile subway to the north and the East Bay (floating) bridge line... Transit agencies tend to develop the easiest and cheapest rail lines first in order to get the system up and running quickly so as to show the public, which is often new to transit, the advantages of rail transit and that it was brought in (relatively) within budget.

^I'm not at all bothered by this building's height. It's a good size and, really, bonus office space in an off-beat location (for new class-A office development) based on the success of the E-Y tower… which IS a substantially tall office building.

^That's nice. Such exquisite old architecture as the church should not so easily be lost. Let's home NIA wins this.

As Smith's experience indicates, one can be ticketed for not clearing snow off their car, esp their car's roof, and it flies off into the roadway while the person drives as it's deemed a safety hazard for obvious reasons. It's only a pet peeve, therefore, if the perp isn't caught.

Oh OK, my mistake. Then I guess the route would have standardized Blue/Green and Red Line cars, ... probably low floor. . . I think there's merit to expanding the Blue and/or Green lines to U. Circle. But I do maintain that grade separation would be needed to make it work. The auto traffic in the area is bad enough, esp. along Euclid and through the Cedar Glen area so that mingling cars with trains just would make matters worse; wouldn't be feasible.... Since the E. 116 Blue/Green section is already below the surface, turning north into the median of E. 116/MLK in an open cut would be workable, along with shift to a side-of-the-road portion down the (windy) bluff section into the MLK-Cedar-Carnegie intersection.

I didn’t know RTA was planning on eliminating Blue/Green service west of E. 116 completely viz the Shaker Connector. Even if they were, it was only in tandem with the Dual-Hub subway planned along Euclid, meaning that, Shaker, et al. passengers still had quick access into downtown – trains wouldn’t have just ended at UC. Also, I thought the planning was to route the Blue/Green University Circle service in grade-separated manner and not as a slow moving streetcar stopping at traffic lights intersecting for autos.

Bingo!

I happen to like Mike Brown and I think he is really trying to teach this team. But I think the Gilbert ax to make the playoffs may be poised over his head, even though if Mike is fired, he has 4 more years of $5M/year payments coming in... You can see the growth in wins like LA and Denver on the recent trip and even the comeback yesterday after spotting Dallas 24 points early in the 3rd. But you CANNOT keep having these end of game failures like we do on these last second shots -- ball going to Andy for a 3 pointer; Clark standing out of bounds on the Delly pass, and an egregious 5-second call yesterday ... the 2nd of the game!... You just can't have that in the NBA, even on a young team. Brown didn't call the guy out, but you could tell he was pissed at Jack, a veteran no less, who couldn't get the ball in. Brown kept repeating that Kyrie was open, which he was... I'm surprised that Mike didn't have a bigger guy, like Deng, inbound the ball, but it appeared Jack could have gotten the ball to Kyrie even though he claims he couldn't see him... And I just don't get Waiters at times. I've been his biggest champion against critics. But games like Sacramento -- where he scored 4 points and obviously pouted, and yesterday (only 4 shots and zero points) give me pause. As the ABJ noted, Kyrie was on the brink of bringing us all the way back until Dion's momentum-killing 3-point brick. He seemed to be ball hogging and turned it over shortly thereafter. Brown got him out of the game and scrapped the usual 3-guard rotation -- at least the Waiters version, down the stretch -- he did use Delly a bit (who was a Coach's DNP in Denver, oddly enough)... I really think that Grant is feverishly working on moving Waiters before the trade deadline. I could be wrong, but...

Of course, LA Metro's LRT routes, in part, ride along some pretty narrow residential streets (like the below Gold Line section in Marmion Way), while still maintaining overall route speed. https://maps.google.com/maps?q=cleveland&ie=UTF-8&ei=kX_eUvS_L7PKsQSm_oCACA&ved=0CAgQ_AUoAg Don’t know all the Cincy routes, but the LA Model may be workable there.

Btw DM4, if you Google maps satellite or street view LA Metro's Gold Line at the Lincoln Heights/Cypress Park station, you'll notice they've built a multi-building complex of (seemingly) upscale apartments/condos directly across the street from an auto shop and a junk yard; graphic evidence that while some folks gripe that RTA’s Red Line’s RR ROW location near some industrial sites is a reason TOD can’t be developed, other cities refuse to make excuses and move forward to make TOD happen.

^That could indeed work in the Heights. If the line were compatible with, and thus could share tracks with, the Red Line into downtown, all the better.