clvlndr

^Gotcha... I'm a little concerned we (collectively, not you redbrick) are potentially twisting around our very valuable transp system, the WFL, to conform to a corporate office building which, while important, is more on the periphery of importance to the mainly residential/retail aspect that brought Wolstein's FEB plan into being... I get somewhat suspicious, in this car-obsessed town when entities, particularly private ones, alter rail transit options - it almost always is to the detriment of transit (like Stokes’ Fed Courthouse cutting off any possibility for Amtrak/commuter rail to reenter Tower City). The WFL has not once in newspaper articles been mentioned as a benefit or advantage to FEB, but merely as an annoyance that’s in the way of development -- a development that, if not watched, could morph into a Beachwood office park. Progress...? This why I say, keep the WFL loop as is (as much as possible) and make Eaton more vertical than horizontal.

???? It seems a people are making a mountain out of a molehill re the WFL. Why can’t Eaton simply build up, around and even and over it, if need be? WFL’s elevated right of way is narrow… Chicago’s done this numerous times w/ the L. Why Level WFL and create yet another grade crossing? You guys are losing sight of how potentially crowded this area will be once all these buildings are built. Why mix trains, pedestrians, and cars even more? Eaton is going to have to work around the busy freight rail through the area anyway - it would be an engineering feat to depress these tracks b/c a short distance away, they must rise to cross the river. The WFL should remain elevated as it is. If Wolstein wants to pay to widen the loop for the building, OK, but leveling it and creating another street crossing? Where’s the logic?

Since KJP reports (here on UO and in last week's Sun article) that Heartland appears kaputsville, could possibly Ari Maron (MRN) purchase Jay Lofts and kick-start that promising, dead-for-1+ year project? ... or is the market so bad no developer would want to touch it right now, even in prosperous Ohio City?

^ I don't buy that. CC may just be built at TC because TC is the better site, period.

Nice. Clearly shows Cincy is the historic and architecture king (and queen) of big city Ohio. Obviously, OTR has much unrealized potential but, also there are clearly urban pioneers there (commercial and residential). Getting serious subway/light rail I think would go a long way to helping bring Cincinnati truly into its own.

Cleveland has a strong religious and patriotic influence. As such, on Sunday's and patriotic-type holidays (July 4th, Memorial Day, Veteran's Day, etc.) restaurants and a lot of retail close and entertainment districts seem dead... I've said, I wish the West Side Market should be open at least 6 days a week to help pump daytime life into OC. Somebody mentioned, I think, this is an old City/union issue. I really wish it could be fixed -- ours is the only big city farmer-type market that has such quirky days/hours and it really hurts OC.

Generally, I'd agree. Because Cleveland is smaller/less dense, we saved money by building more rail along railroad rights of way which, while adding to speed and grade separation, often puts stations further away from people centers and sandwiched btw some industrial plants that are attracted to railroads, w/ their freight sidings, to begin with. btw, I'd use the U.Circle or E. 120 stops to reach most of University Circle and, particularly (desolate though it seems), E. 120 is steps away from Little Italy's core... RTA even plans to relocate it to Mayfield Rd in a few years, which is right at the crown of Little Italy's main strip... And you certainly can't kick that the Blue/Green Line's Shaker Square station doesn't drop you right into the core of the square; Ohio City's really not bad, either. And the new Flats East viz the Waterfront Line...?

I love Cleveland; it's my born & raised home. It's greatness comes in the fact it has so many things like mega/international cities like Chicago, Boston and, on some levels, NYC: top rate culture/arts, library, and probably the finest and most diverse suburban network in terms of quality, diversity, architecture, country/city charm, etc, etc. And our public transit, esp the Rapid, for a city of our size and density, is better than most., and we have some really great walking districts. BUT… I’m a realist as well. Chicago trumps Cleveland in, for lack of a better term, the pure urban experience. In this case, sheer size matters: it starts with the neighborhood excitement and trickles into all aspects of city living, from more extensive, much better patronized mass transit to more retail (downtown, especially) to more and better quality restaurants (in general) and the infamous ‘more things to things do.’ In terms of neighborhoods, Straphanger’s dead on. Ohio City is certainly one of the best Cleveland has to offer in terms of the urban experience: cool old/historic architecture, some nice-to-great restaurants (with lots of hip alfresco dining experiences that ripple w/ an inviting urban context), a diverse/young outgoing populace, superior transit service – as good as you can get in a Chicago and a New York for, obviously, a more limited list of places to go in our smaller city – and yet, you can truly be car-less in OC without much sweat—all this with a nice touch of urban grit (I love that in cities because it shows their not some yuppie manufactured environment designed to ape city life.). But as Straphanger correctly notes, in Chicago, people live in areas like Ohio City (I’d say Bucktown/Wickertown is one of the closest Cleveland comparison’s to Ohio City), whereas Ohio City must survive, commercially, by attracting people from beyond the area; it simply cannot survive on the much smaller population base… Strap’s photos tell it all – unless you frequent Ohio City during rush hour on a warm summer evening or a ‘hot day’ like a Saturday, when the Market is humming, the neighborhood will seem like a ghost town with largely empty sidewalks and a bunch of homeless guys in Market square. The area’s still dependant on the West Side market for daytime street activity. At night, esp on the weekends, the club scene in Ohio City, esp on the weekends, keeps it fairly bustling. But it can be hit or miss. Either drive, walk (or do Google’s new “Street Views”) of a neighborhood street in Ohio City or Detroit Superior or Shaker Square vs. most anywhere on the North Side of Chicago, where the bulk of Chicago’s masses live. You can see how the residences, often row or Chicago’s ubiquitous row-like ‘flats’ (usually in brick or stone, but surprisingly often wood-frame, too) tower over Cleveland’s mainly 2 story wood-frame homes set way back from the curb with generous tree-lawns and driveways (Chicago mainly has alleys). In Chicago, on main streets and residential side streets, buildings crowd the curb and make you feel like you’re in a more exciting urban environment.. Cleveland has its moments – like the commercial OC photos, above, Shaker Square and Larchmere, and especially Little Italy. But even in most of these areas, whose commercial districts are small by comparison, if you go a block or 2 off the main drag, you’re back to the wood-frame houses – sprinkled with a walk up brick apt (and even a surprising row, now and again, set back from the curb. Detroit-Superior, for example, is surreal – you can go from brick apartments and Victorians, in one second, to shotguns and open lots, the next. Sometimes when driving through this area, and others in town, you feel less like your in a city and more like you’re on Tobacco Road… I guess you can say that’s part of Cleveland’s charm, but it doesn’t do much for feelings of urban excitement – in Cleveland, you find excitement in clumps/on islands and at certain times. In Chicago, it’s 24-hour in most of its popular areas. Walk 2-3 blocks on Lorain from W. 25th to the east or west, and you find yourself in zones that are dead (people-less) MOST of the time… A visitor once commented on visiting us in the Shaker Square area, ‘I can’t believe how quiet it is here in Cleveland; you don’t even here a dog bark!’ Kinda puts things in perspective; and I consider Shaker Sq one of our LEADING neighborhoods for urban excitement, diversity, convenience, walk-a-bility and architecture. The Rapid vs. the L? Chicago’s much bigger, so the comparison isn’t easy. It does appear, because of our Rapid’s big dip on the East Side away from popular destinations (where ECP is supposed to fill the void), the L hits more popular areas of Chicago, although there are wide swaths of bus-only areas of Chicago – like Cleveland, Chicago depends a lot on but-to-rail transfers for people to get downtown/around town. And, of course, the gigantic Metra commuter rail system is a backstop for many areas, (city, close-in burbs) where the L doesn’t go. Btw, I do think, while charming in places like the loop and even with its dominant alley-running els behind the building line, the L is falling behind in terms of providing state-of-the-art, fast mass transit. Those little old wood stations may be cute and historic, but the suck in terms of being, primarily, ADA-non compliant, lack escalators for the most part, are dank and dingy in many areas and don’t shield folks from the elements too often. And on older routes like the north side Red and Brown Lines, it stops way too frequently which slows it down and makes cars far more competitive, esp traveling up Lake Shore drive. Cleveland’s got a ton going for it, and we’re very competitive, often ahead, when you compare us to cities more close to our size and character – St. Louis, Milwaukee, Indy, Cincy, etc… even Detroit, which is twice our size. But Chicago?... we have neighborhoods and other aspect that seem similar to a mini-Chicago, ie, OC and the Gold Coast, … but overall, not quite. And that’s not a knock at Cleveland; just shows you how great Chicago is… … now if your balancing the urban headaches of a Chicago vs. Cleveland and you want your big-city experiences in a more bite-sized package? … that’s another thread, entirely.

Now that would be cool... amazing how in an older, denser, transit-pedestrian city (and nation), the auto is made to adapt to the urban environment but in the USA, it's the opposite.

Cool.... You'd think the Ohio/the Midwest would be eager to get on board with something like Acela.

Nice job, audidave... I think stops at Kent State Stark and, especially, the Pro Football Hall of Fame would be viable. Nevertheless, this service needs to be implemented all the way into downtown Cleveland. I don't think people realize how close we could be to starting this service. Most of the trackage is viable, there's a storage/repair facility near Brecksville and rolling stock already in place. Of course there are sticky issues, I'm sure, such as signaling, upgrading track for speed and, as mentioned before, negotiating rights with the freight railroads in Cleveland... But all that seems doable esp for such a potentially impact-ful, important line.

Very true, esp Playhouse Sq. I really hoped the dual-hub could have been build, but I’ve come to terms with our failure to build and its time to move on. We’re still much better off than most cities of our size, density and Midwestern/Great Lakes location in terms of transit. (seen Detroit, Indy or Milwaukee lately?)... I'm really surprised, and very pleased, at all the TOD development ECP is spinning off. As a big naysayer, initially, I have to say the stations look quite spiffy and the corridor is showing lots of sings of life (how wordy... oh well). ECP/BRT, for its faults, is a technology Cleveland is pioneering -- as we have so often, transit-wise, in the past -- and for that alone we should be proud.

^I don't think car dealerships, however high end, work well in tight central biz districts like Cleveland. In fact, they tend to ruin the urban fabric of the streets their own. Look at Lorain Ave. It's popularly known as Antiques row. To me, it's more like Used Car Alley, with a dealership of some kind every few blocks, seemingly anyway. As to Tower City, I agree the CC should be there, but the plan is for it to be in the back of TC.

Obviously, I got my Sunshine and Golden State monikers mixed up. You're correct, long gone Jeb Bush deep-6ed Florida's high speed years ago.

^ Thanks, noozer.

Sorry to throw the wet blanket, but when it comes to these state bullet-train proposals: I'll believe it when I (finally) see it... Ohio's conventional Ohio Hub, for now, is the way to go. I'll admit, though, if any state can pull it off, its Cali w/ its strong decade + long advancement in State Amtrak, commuter rail and rapid transit (all across the state)... but I'm not holding my breath even for the Sunshine State.

^I'm all for Ashtabula being a part of the hub proposal. Ashtabula is a major satellite town and the various commuter rail studies I'm aware of have Ashtabula as a stop or the terminus for service out of downtown Cleveland. Makes perfect sense to me... Btw, the Ohio Hub proposals I've seen -- including sketchy proposed schedules -- don't seem to include any commuter rail component. Could that change? It would seem to make sense, esp given the proposed Hopkins airport stop on the west, south/west line from North Coast (downtown).

I agree, in this post-911 era, height isn't the be all and end all for downtowns (although towns like Philly are again talking about building the tallest buildings in the world; Philly's new Comcast tower just edged out Key as the tallest btw NYC and Chicago -- big whoop!). If Stark can pull off a lower rise/high density, mixed-use project linking up our great areas like E.4th Gateway, FEB and, hopefully, a reviving Tower City, we'll building on our rep of being a 'little Chicago' -- an unofficial title, for better or worse, we have already.

^Maybe Wolstein's advancement -- and, indeed, expansion -- of his FEB plans are putting some positive pressure on Stark whose probably still pissed at losing the big-time biz potential tenants. Either way, this is good news.

There's very much to like about this project and I think most here are thrilled it's finally moving forward. The devil's in the details and, frankly, nobody's going to be totally happy. There are aspects than could be tweaked. I just hope the residential end stays strong and, indeed, the fact the projection has raised from 300 to around 430 multi units is highly promising. With the diversity of entertainment, grocery, public space and even a hotel (sure wish the WHD had one!) in addition to the direct connection by/integration into rapid rail transit (how often can we say that in Cleveland or Ohio!?) means there's really little bad anyone w/ a right mind should be able to find with this program. And in fact, there's all indication it will jump-start other programs on nearby vacant plots to FEB's north and east, esp when the Port gets fully relocated.

Is it still a given a new elevated WFL stop will be built where the inside-the-loop office building will be built? Let’s hope so, but it seems that from the old to the new rendering, the building his now facing away from the WFL loop and flush with a new parking garage for traffic coming off the W. 9th ramp. Also, is that a ped-ramp from the office building that curls of the NS tracks over to Front Ave? I agree with the comment, Baltimore’s bland Inner Harbor should not be a model for this unique, more residential, more tightly-developed project.

I'm a little concerned FEB is morphing from a prime riverfront residential development into more of a sterile corporate center. Are we really just relocating corporate offices out of Cleve's CBD core, where vacancy his high enough, and robbing ourselves of prime residential land? -- remember, Wolstein’s footprint is not very large. I'm not seeing any high-rise condos/apts while this model has a 20-story corporate tower. I've always said Cleveland needs more high-rise residences and this would be a perfect place to have one. [in the last 30 years, I only count 3 10+ res high-rises built inside Cleveland's borders: Crittenden (18 fls) and Stonebridge's condo (12 fls) and Avenue District (?) -- this is far worse than comparable cities like St. Louis and even Milwaukee; and if we can't build them on the waterfront on a tight, TOD-oriented land mass; where?] .. What happened to the Lighthouse’s residential twin? Guess this is yet another: 'when future demand develops ...'

^even better!

Jerry, comment + Q: Lee-Van Aken station. Much nicer design than the present dungeon, but I thought the station was to be shifted to the east side of Lee so as to present more TOD possibilities re Shaker's grand plan for the area. Re the Red Line's new POP fare policy going into effect this summer, does RTA plan to shorten the Rapid's printed, off-peak schedules since w/ POP it can be expected that boarding and station dwell time should be radically reduced since train drivers will no longer engage in (extremely time wasting) fare collecting?

Joe C does raise some valid issues, esp regarding a serious study of maintenance costs. No question All Aboard and political advocates need to line their ducks in a row and have zero loose ends critics may try and pull. But from all I’ve seen, AAO has been doing a pretty good job on this score, but I’m sure there’s always room for some improvement however incremental it may be … I do have issues with Joe’s comments re profitability. While no one should expect 3-C rail swim in red ink from the start, the idea of profitability being a potential deal breaker misses the mark; I think that's the thinking that has dogged the larger Amtrak for years, esp under the Bush Admin. As much, really more, concern needs to be paid to how this 3-Cs line impacts/improves the overall financial viability of the State as opposed to the profitability of the service itself.