clvlndr

In other words, downstate Ohio = suburban/rural GA... scary! WTF is that supposed to mean?!?!?! First off 'downstate Ohio'...who the crap says that?? Second of all 'downstate Ohio' is progressing on a couple of rail transit systems as we speak, not to mention the Ohio Hub project. I'm not sure what 'upstate Ohio' has been up to, but I know 'downstate' is working on a streetcar system for Cincy, and a lightrail/commuter rail line for the Cincy region. So in other words don't be an pompous ass! ah, namecalling... thanks for proving my point.

In other words, downstate Ohio = suburban/rural GA... scary!

^Precisely, Amrap... There's something about the atmosphere in Pittsburgh that, well, is a turnoff -- there is a kind of down-'n-out hillbilly thing going on there -- although physically, building-wise (and even culturally, if you really consider Oakland and the Carnegie stuff), it's a very interesting town... I feel similarly about Boston: awesome city to look at, shop in and, even, hang out in the college-y districts near downtown or in Cambridge (which is as urban as Boston), but the locals suck imho; cold, mean, closed and bigoted, and I hate that accent. And the college aspect I like is usually b/c most of the people associated with the famous universities are form elsewhere, anyway...

It's historically odd that, at the moment, Cleveland has developed a slightly larger rapid rail network than Pittsburgh while, clearly, Pittsburgh is much more a natural transit city than Cleveland, with regard to the above. Cleveland, with wide streets and accessible typography, is much easier to drive in -- which, historically, has surpressed transit use as compared to other rail cities. But Pittsburgh is catching up and, probably, surpass Cleveland, esp with a regressive transit head like Joe Calabrese running RTA... Think of the opportunities lost by the retardation of Pitts' transit development, esp in terms of high-density residential development downtown (which is why, to date, despite its interesting nature, it is so dead at night; much deader than Cleveland's btw) ... Maybe it's a reach, but I think had rail been developed earlier, Pittsburgh could be a Boston; Pittsburgh, given its downtown narrow streets and tightness hard against the hills, wide rivers on a narrow peninsula, is even more challenging than Boston... but without the transit development, it's hard to really conceptualize 'what if' w/r to Pittsburgh...

Thanks, noozer... I didn't realize the light rail was nixed... I agree, commuter rail is the smartest option for the corridor, but won't really meet the needs for most airport users -- 6 to 12 trips simply isn't enough (unless the 12 trips are round trip btw the airport and downtown Detroit). Hourly service isn't the ideal, but a humongous leap over what exists now... Then comes the much-discussed problem of routing passengers directly into downtown and not just the fringes at either the New Center Amtrak or the currently-crumbling Michigan Central depot, both of which are outside of downtown. It'll be interesting to see how this project continues without the light rail component.

PAT is, however, extending the light rail to the North Side... a 1.2 mile extension that will tunnel under the Allegheny River at a cost of $393 million. While I'm glad to see any extension of the rail network... this is a misguided move... PAT should've went East to Oakland first. But the Federal Government apparently thought this was a good project and is paying for 80% of it... so it must go forward. Unfortunately, PAT had a lack of vision for its rail network. I hear you, and to Pittsburghers suffering transit woes, I'd tell them: "welcome to the club... and did you, btw, meet Mr. Calabrese?" Contrary to your belief -- and I understand why extending toward Oakland (preferably more along the Forbes corridor rather than the East Busway where the ROW exists), but the North Shore project under the river, sets up PAT for a massive extension (roughly 20 miles) out the river corridor to Pitts Int'l airport, which would be very worthwhile... But I agree, Oakland is such a populous, lively, academic, tourist/native destination spot (which should, btw, serve as a model for our very nice, though largely dead, University Circle... Given Pittsburgh's population density and typography, you'd think it's "T" would be a lot more like Boston's, in its comprehensiveness. Can you imagine would Pittsburgh would be like if it was?

They are different cities, by far even though geographically close (Pittsburgh much more Northeastern, architecturally; Cleveland, Midwestern)... but I stand by my comment. Pittsburgh feels smaller and denser, and the constant hills heighten that feeling. Pittsburgh's homes are more often brick, which tend to have more architectural detailing and give neighborhoods more of a substantial feel of permanency. Cleveland, meanwhile, is flatter and more spacious with a generally wood frame housing base and, along with it, more of a rural feeling in certain areas. Plus, given our generally flat typography, and abundance of wood-frame houses on wide-deep lots, there's considerable space between many of Cleveland's best neighborhoods.. The vast, serveral-mile region on the East Side -- from downtown to U.Circle, is mainly still a wasted, industrial area we're still a long way from rejuvenating... Let's face it, that hurts our city a great deal.. .. We obviously have great nabes, don't get me wrong (I live in one, Shaker Square), but it's much different that Pitts hoods. Perhaps the Cleveland nabe that most mirrors a Pittsburgh one is Little Italy, which is tight, sits on a hill, mainly brick with a number of mulit-unit dwellings... Cleveland areas have their own beauty and, on many levels, are not quite as suffocating as many Pittsburgh areas are... Hey, I prefer living in Cleveland over Pittsburgh on many, many different levels... But fair's fair, when it comes to the character aspect, I'd give the nod to the Steel City... sorry.

I've been to Forest Hills a number of times, and of all the Cleveland areas mentioned -- all good btw -- Shaker Square would be the most familiar to you as it's very similar to Forest Hills albeit on a slightly smaller scale (hey, FH is New York, this is Cleveland, but still good). Like FH, Shaker Square is city but with a suburban feel -- it's right next door to old-money Shaker Heights, after all. Like FH, the Square has lots of classic old apartment buildings -- many in the Tudor style similar to FH, esp the classic, beautiful block-long Moreland Courts condo, which abuts the NE quadrant of the Square, proper -- stores, shops, restaurants and clubs, and this includes the nearby (1-block away) Larchmere Blvd district which also doubles as the East Side's prime antiques area. Also like FH, Shaker Sq is transit friendly -- a 12 min ride downtown by rapid transit with a connection to directly inside Hopkins Int'l airport... Also like FH, you can walk a few minutes from the urban milieu directly into the lush green winding roadways of mansions, small public (Shaker Heights) parks along the gorgeous Shaker Lakes... And last but not least, (and perhaps most importantly ... to me, anyway), the Square is super diverse, liberal, artsy and intellectual -- more so than most any area in NEO. Given this, it is very open-minded and open to all religions, races, ethnic groups and sex-orientation. And here's a super bonus, when you do decide to have kids: although Shaker Square is in Cleveland, kids attend Shaker Heights schools, still among the best public schools in the nation. ... check it out.

^KJP actually said it better ... and with visuals, no less.

Before 1920, the Shaker Rapid at some point merged onto the Fairmount line in order to get downtown. Because of the heavy trafic on Euclid Avenue, it took a great deal of time to get downtown, which is why the Vans wanted their rapid to have a separate right of way. However, until they could find a route to get downtown, the rapid cars had to take the Fairmount route down from the Heights. It would not be until April of 1920 that the Shaker Rapid was directly connected to Public Square via Kingsbury Run and the Nickle Plate Railroad right of way. Almost right... from 1920 to 1930, Shaker Rapid cars rode up a ramp at E. 34th street, and followed the route of the Broadway streetcars into downtown and Public Square. In 1930, Terminal Tower was finished, including the 1.5 grade-separated ROW (for the Rapid and electric intercity passenger trains) directly to Public Square, so Rapid cars then went directly into the Terminal and cars were removed from the the ramp at E.34. The ramp, though weed-covered, is still visible and was used as a drive/parking ramp (from Broadway) by E. 34th RTA fare booth workers until RTA eliminated the fare booth in the early 90s.

^Those pink-tinted photos reminded me of that Dr. Seuss "Cat-in-the-Hat" book where a small pink stain, stains all the snow... Nice job, though...Much as I love my Cleveland, there's just no way the home town can out-character Pittsburgh's hoods with their old, tight brick buildings and hills... 2 things always amaze me about Pittsburgh: 1) that, given such neighborhood density, this city isn't many times larger than its census lists and, 2) why rapid transit hasn't been developed more here -- this town, esp given its typography, esp with the rivers... ... which reminds me: ... isn't the plan to convert this silly busway into the rail rapid it should be, connecting East Oakland to the PAT "T" stub at Penn Station? Why is PAT dragging its feet with this?

Questions: Is Wolstein's 400K office building, at the Waterfront Line curve, still on the drawing board? If so, who's the leading prime tenant? DFAS? Baker Hostetler? And if this office building is still viable, why are we talking taking away residential rooms for more offices in LL since, overall, the whole East Bank area under consideration is still is a very small area? ...just curious.

I'd love a hotel in one of the towers. This would enhance the probability of more diverse, spin-off retail in the immediate area.

Best news downtown's had in a while. I positively love the awesome adaptive reuse work we've been doing in the WHD and in Gateway... But our downtown sorely needs to mix in some new construction, esp high-rises. I liked Wolstein's original project. That Lighthouse Landing's high-rises are, now, going to be a part of it, is stunning. Now, w/ the 1,000 unit, for-sale, expansion to occur across the river at Stonebridge, the Flats is going to rise as though a new city. I miss, like hell, the old Flats, no doubt and that funky, warehouse, Bourbon Street-by-the-water will be gone forever... But this new, more permanent Flats, with thousands and thousands of new residents (and their friends -- as in, UOers) milling about at restaurants and retail, bodes for a much stronger, healthier Flats of the future.

^... Guess I was a little conservative in my recollection of 1950s dollars;...Tracks would have gone on the south side of Euclid Hts? ugh; I wouldn't have liked that. Too many nice apartments; houses would have been destroyed... I just wish we could revisit LTR going under the big intersection then rising up in the middle of Euclid Hts (as the old trolleys once did... Unfortunately, expansion past Coventry, now, is problematic. Putting tracks in Coventry -- as tracks once were -- wouldn't be good b/c of all the foot and slow auto traffic... Also, as you allude to, the corner of Euclid Hts & Coventry is at the summit of a hill; very challenging (and expensive) engineering would have been necessary... Relocation of Coventry? Turn the current street into a ped mall? Probably not feasible. This would cause the destruction of a number of old houses and apartments. Maybe it can be done, but... As I noted before, I think the central/NE Heights area is going to have to survive on feeder buses connecting with the Red, Blue & Green Rapids lines for some time to come. Look at it this way: there are parts of the county with much worse transit service than the Heights... There are a lot more doable rail projects -- particularly commuter rail -- which should have greater priority at this point.

sucks.

I think we have the hotels to support the Rock Hall induction ceremony. Detroit, really, has no more hotel space than we; if it does, it's not significant and, actually, I believe we have more hotel rooms downtown (if someone has the Mobil travelguide website, this can be checked)... Yeah, it pisses me off tremendously the ceremony is in New York-- a total slap in the face to Cleveland, esp since most everybody who even glances at a TV or NP associates the R&RHOF with Cleveland. We are THE Rock 'n Roll city. And, yes jamiec, we should have all those things you mention, esp retail-wise, but I don't believe the Rock Hall is too isolated; I'm fine with it on the lakefront. Museums, unlike live theatre, needs more space to 'present' itself; remember, a museum itself is the attraction, not necessarily any attendant program being hosted there... So don't ever buy into the crap that there's not enough to do here, or there's not enough to do. It does bother me Detroit gets things like the NCAA tourney and, now, 2 Super Bowls... But Detroit leaders pulled together (despite that city's huge urban maladies -- I'd much rather be here than there) to land these big events, unlike our leaders who are often balkanized and engage in turf wars rather than cooperating (which is why I'm encouraged by Mayor Jackson's regional initiative)... I'm not close enough to the situation, but I get the sense that the local group responsible for landing the Rock Hall are a rather timid bunch when it comes to New York... that they/we made a deal with the devil, as in: 'we'll concede the building to you guys if you shut up about ever moving the induction ceremony there.' Unfortunately, it once again puts Cleveland in its usual apologetic, 'excuse me' posture... At this point, as much as the current setup stinks, I don't see a way out of this thicket... One thing I DO KNOW is that building and developing all the things jamiec (and all of us) want for downtown should be built for their own sake and not to lure the Rock induction ceremony b/c, believe me, we could have all the Neiman's, Sak's, Gumps, or you name it, the snobby eastern powers that be are NOT going to change their view of this town and just cede over the ceremony too us... there's got to be a way to embarrass (nationally) and/or smack these guys in the pocketbook, in order to bring the thing here... I'm just not seeing it, now...

I wish the idea could be revived again (fat chance w/ you-know-who heading RTA). The idea of LRT technology would be more preferable than high-platform trains in the classic brownstone apt building area of Coventry. Fortunately, Coventry has maintained a compact, ped-oriented TOD-type presence over 1/2 century after the demise of streetcars -- it's absolutely perfect for direct connection into the Rapid system; in some ways, even better than Shaker Square (although Coventry's less populated than the Square area, its commercial area seems denser with businesses and apts immediately adjacent)... Methinks, though, Coventry's going to have to continue to make do with the current up-the-hill, Rapid connecting service of the No.s 7, 9 and round-about Community Circulator buses... At least the busy No. 9 bus "feeder" connection to Coventry will be much improved once the E. 120 Red Line station is relocated toward Little Italy with (hopefully) a No. 9 loop there...

I thought the original 50s/60s plan was to extend the, then, CTS (aka, the Red Line, as in heavy rail) service up the right side of Cedar, to Euclid Hts, Coventry and out Mayfield (to around Warrensville), as you're saying... The sad irony, as you note, is this surface routing was for the original streetcar interurbans built in the 1890s to fuel the 1st suburbanization on the Heights (some original mansions from the era still exist along Overlook Rd.), which was held extant after service was phased out in anticipation of this branch off the Rapid from Cedar Glen... If I recall, there was about $3M (in 1950s dollars, of course) left over from the original 1955 Rapid and a choice btw extending the West Side Rapid from W. 117 to West Park or the Coventry branch. The choice made is apparent; I once read that part of the rationale, aside from going for East vs. West Side balance, was the expense of building a necessary underpass for trains underneath Cedar & Euclid Hts at the top of Cedar Hill.

^yes, I've noticed... quite a feat, actually.

^regardless of the technicalities, we're both saying the same thing: the dude's going to be helming RTA a looooooooong time.

Excellent! I love theater. It's great, next to HOB, E.4th will have one more large venue for serious live entertainment (and FFB, around the corner @ Ontario & Prospect ups the ante, too). And I'm also pumped about plans for a jazz club ... just another example of how smart MRN has been to wards scoping out a wide variety of retail options for E.4th/Gateway... I love the WHD, but MRN's really giving the WHD a serious run for their money.

Amen, StrapHanger... I've learned to live with these excesses, and totally applaud MRN for all they've done. But, yes, I always thought the quaint architecture (don't you love Corner Alley's building?) and narrowness/tightness were enough to give E.4th a totally unique sense of place without all that stuff. I'd lose the light-standard/entrance things and, probably, the hanging string lights -- a tad to faux Bourbon Street, to me -- and, then, the brick pavers, the bollards and wavy street pattern?... But the bottom line, for me is E.4th such a better place than it used to be, I shrug off these things as minor annoyances ... I love the place!

^I thought JoeC was extended a year or so ago by the RTA Board, which seems very high on him. I know he's much beloved by the PD and Crain's, which considers him a visionary. Crain's especially praised Joe for his fiscal responsibility in favoring buses over expensive rail... Only in Cleveland can one be a hero for such a regressive orientation.

I'm sorry, I just can't get at all excited by , big-box sprawl/auto-oriented a strip mall in a poor city where most residents don't own cars. Seems like such a waste... At the very least, the proposed CVSR commuter rail goes right by the site, but then there's this: "But Kittredge said she is excited about other plans, including one that could extend the Towpath Trail and connect Steelyard with downtown and Harvard Avenue." I mean, is anyone "excited" about potential commuter rail connecting Valley View, Akron, A-C airport and Canton/Pro football HOF?... Maybe it's me, but I don't go to cities to walk on hiking trails near or where passenger rail tracks should be; I go out into the woods. Yes, I understand the Towpath is different, but the whole rails-to-trails movement seems a cop out for cities lacking the guts to build commuter rail/rapid transit.