clvlndr

Thanks, zace. :clap: All projects I like, sans Steelyards -- you can have it and Wal-Mart, imho. I am even trying to get a little excited about ECP, saying that "... well, at least it’s transit; it keeps RTA busy and maybe, maybe such general interest will bode well for other rail projects -- not just here, but around the state (it sure would be nice if both Cincy and C-Bus could get their light-rail off, er, ... into the ground). I’m hoping that cvsr into Cleveland and even Amtrak’s Midwest Initiative can come on line (but the later will involve a battle with the well-entrenched Bushies) Indeed, times seem good in C-town. But with all of these, I can't rest easy till the dirt slinging (literally, not figuratively) begins. I’m esp concerned about the most critical of these in my eyes: Wolstein’s Flats E. Bank project -- we thought the beautiful District Park condos were a sure thing, too, and, well... ... not trying to be a wet blanket, just a realist. :clap:

I'd read/heard that Battery Park was stalled and Riverview Hope has been put on the back burner. I could be wrong. Everything else is pretty accurate as far as I know... ... btw, any scuttlebutt on whether the US Defense office is interested in Wolstein's building on the E. Bank?

KJP ... points well taken.

mrnyc, I'm not rushing this. I'm only reacting to a blog letter from Rich Enty, cvsr chair and ex-RTA-er, who mentioned a 2008 as a target date (and maybe there are a bunch of folks upset he’s let the cat out of the bag). Obviously, much is going on positive behind the scenes already. I'm just saying, if that truly is a goal -- which is exciting -- we might as well do it right esp if cvsr is going to raise funding sources to get this done and try and get our blowhard, do-nothing local rail officials and politicians on board If this is, as we all hope, the match that could ignite commuter rail across NEO, then we should do all we can to assure that this project has be best change for success for we may not get another opportunity in the near future -- like, try, several decades. ... and to me, building a terminal along Canal Street along the river bottoms, distant and way below Tower City, isn't doing it right. And you know how it goes around here, once we spend a bunch of money and things don’t necessarily go exactly as planned (see the Waterfront Line where we waited for nearly a decade after it opened -- until last Monday to be exact w/ Scott Wolstein -- to develop serious TOD near its tracks leading naysayers, since practically the day it opened, to call the rail line a “failure”), riders will drop off and it will be difficult to raise more money to do the terminal right -- that's all I'm saying.

Wasn't Rich Enty the former RTA chief planner under Ron Tober? Also, I saw when searching cvsr/commuter news, a poster on a railfan website had recently stated that he had it on good authority that Akron Metro RTA was "quietly" improving cvsr bridges and roadway in planning for eventual commuter rail. Since the guy was merely a poster (like me) with no credentials or other evidence of credibility to buttress his statement, I didn't copy/post his message, but that would be interesting. I think a decision/statement needs to made, once and for all, whether this extension will be simply an extension of the tourist line or an honest to goodness commuter rail system. Cvsr, publicly at least, continues to insist they are dead set against commuter rail (yet, cryptically, they say on their website that using the expanded cvsr can remove drivers from traffic and stress -- something of a mixed signal, eh?). Frankly, it's not worth public money to extend what would amount to a Cedar Point-type amusement ride if it is not going to also be used as a serious commuter rail operation. I don't think families, pleasure riders, railfans, etc., really have any particular trouble driving down to Valley View to pick up the trains headed south as they have for decades. Nor do I think having the tourist terminal in downtown Cleveland is going to cause people to flock downtown to board the trains or, vice versa, cause Akron/Canton people ride slow, scenic old trains into downtown in any appreciable numbers -- not for the high dollar and political costs involved in building the facilities and negotiating with the freight carriers to use/improve their rails for the extended service. In that vein, if commuter rail is the goal, I think a determination must be made to route trains up the hill over Canal Rd and into Tower City's underground parking lot (where the old trains went) so COMMUTERS will be undercover and accessible to the short escalator or elevator rides into the mall/Rapid transit area/elevators to Public Sq. area. Leaving COMMUTERS off at the river bed level near the TC amphitheater at a location where they will have to climb extensive outdoor steps or ride shuttle vans or buses up to the TC parking lot (which is how you have to access the amphitheater currently), is no way to build a commuter railroad. If we're going to do this thing -- and Lord knows, this region is way behind the game in its total lack of commuter rail beyond the rapid -- let's do it right. KJP, do you think you could have any influence in this matter?

[note: cvsr's projects a station on Canal Rd. near TC's amphitheater. KJP had suggested, and I had hoped, trains would rise from this right of way into TC's indoor parking lot to allow for a better connection with Public Sq and the Rapid Lines -- but Canal Rd. would be a start] COOL CLEVELAND BLOG CVSR response: On finishing the Scenic Railroad (See Scenic rail from Tower City to Akron here) Thanks for your recent story on extending Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad (CVSR) excursion rail service into downtown Cleveland. CVSR President/CEO Doug Cooper, staff, and trustees are redoubling their efforts to make this a reality by 2008. In conjunction with the Towpath Trail's pending downtown extension and possible Tower City area convention center, CVSR is very excited about someday linking downtown Cleveland with the nation's 3rd most highly visited national park. Once CVSR's downtown station opens on Canal Road near Tower City's Amphitheatre, the railroad will provide easy access to the Cuyahoga Valley National Park (CVNP) and ski areas for residents, tourists and cyclists from across Greater Cleveland. The terminal's proximity to the nexus of the region's entire public transportation system will be especially important for those who choose not to or don't drive autos (e.g. the very old, the very young, the transit dependent, and those wanting to save money). Furthermore, numerous other attractions in Cleveland, Akron and Canton will be opened up by the railroad such as the Metroparks in three counties and the Rock & Roll, Inventor's and Football halls of fame. CVNP, Cuyahoga Valley National Park Association, Ohio and Erie Canal Association, Cuyahoga County Planning Commission, Forest City Enterprises and Heidtman Steel have emerged as CVSR's principal partners in this effort. Through CVNP, CVSR has contacted trackage owner CSX to start exploring the technical feasibility of the extension. This Fall, with help from the Ohio Rail Development Commission, CVSR is planning a meeting with CSX to learn whether it believes the project is financially. If so, a full court press will be needed across Northeast Ohio to establish the project's political feasibility and secure local and federal funding to begin the needed planning and engineering. That also includes identifying the funds needed to upgrade the track, build stations and pay for daily operations. With CSX approval, public awareness and political support will be crucial to the project's success. To that end CVSR has done several things. Over the past year it formed three advisory councils of local leaders, one each in Cleveland, Akron and Canton. It also launched its "All Aboard for Cleveland" (ABC) campaign. Part of the ABC campaign involves a powerpoint presentation on CVSR history and the extension that is given to local interest groups. And preparations are in full swing for CVSR's All Aboard Ball black tie fundraiser event on June 4, 2005 at Heidtman Steel in the Cuyahoga Valley. For more about CVSR visit http://www.cvsr.com. To schedule an ABC presentation, contact Doug Cooper at [email protected] . And for tickets or information about the All Aboard Ball call 1.800.468.4070 ext. 3004. Again, thanks for the great story! from Cool Cleveland reader Richard M. Enty, Chairman, CVSR Board of Trustees [email protected]

... one note re the long time lag to completion (2009): that even after brownfield clearing, the PD article suggests sufficient street infrastructure -- water, sewers, electric -- must be significantly expanded/upgraded to support this kind of high density development of this project ... as opposed to the lighter needs of the mere part-time bars/restaurants along Old River Road, and the warehouses/bars that preceded them... and that this upgrading, along with the reconfiguring of the streets, themselves, must be done/will take time, before the actual sites can be graded and buildings can rise. ... makes sense.

MGD, I was put off by the 2009 open date, too... maybe its the brownfield clieanup work to preceed it that will slow things down.

Great job MayDay! you could show Cleve.com a thing or 2 (as of 6:30p they STILL hadn't posted anything and I’m sure it won’t match what you’ve posted)... I am very excited about this and hope our public officials stay on task to get this thing through w/o major battles. Now for the sour note -- call me wet blanket #2: as nice as this more permanent, high-density development makes perfect sense, I can't but feel sadness that the old East Bank will be snuffed in this development. The exciting old Flats that helped make us one of the nation's top summer pleasure destinations, will be no more. As nice as this new stuff looks, it kinda screams: Joe Typical Waterfront Development -- really no different from a lot of cities including, now, Zinzinnati. As honky-tonk and rundown as the old E. Bank was, this aspect was also its charm. It had a certain raunchy edginess that sucked people in. -- I've always disliked plastic joints like Fisherman's Warf, or NY's South St Seaport or (double-ugh!) Baltimore's faux nautical Inner Harbor. But this is what we're getting. I just wish that when the Flat's was still hot, we could have meshed in much of these projected buildings behind the building line of ORR bars and restaurants that made the Flats what it was. We could’ve had our cake and eat it too… Why did it have to die first before we did the right thing? A truly special part of Cleveland is gone forever. BTW, re the RR: if the impressive drawings are true, it appears that the residential units will both be on a rise a level higher than the NS railroad tracks as well has have their backs to the tracks (and be slightly separated from them by small rear lots). I would assume, also, that these units will be thoroughly soundproofed – I’m sure the units backing up toward the tracks will be markedly cheaper. But the rumble of those heavyweights will, I'm sure rattle, a piece of china ware here and there, regardless of soundproofing... Also, I do like the office building directly connect by the Waterfront Line – which will finally get the ridership boost its always deserved. Hopefully this office building will be built even if the DFAS isn't saved. And as far as our prospect for saving it? My formula, unfortunately, is Kucinich + Tubbs-Jones + Campbell x Dubya = No Way Jose!

I think the Cleve Trust site is a good one. I wanted the W. 3rd site, at first, but well... then Higbee’s, but frankly, I'm still holding out hope that we can get some kind of retailer in the 1st 2 levels of that beautiful, sad empty shopping edifice. At the Cleveland Trust site, maybe the upwards of 2,000 workers can help pump some life into our largely vacant financial district and Playhouse Sq. Not to mention the fact that it’s a crime that the historic/gorgeous CleveTrust dome has sat empty for over a decade.

You're so right about people who move to "nuisances" and then complain about the noise. Kinda like all those folks who moved to Brook Park and gripe about airport noise and expansion. It's also why I shake my head at those ubiquitous "sound barriers" along urban freeways. I do have sympathy for those who have had their hoods/burbs cut in half by freeways -- OK, they can build the barriers. But many, if not most, of these burbs fought for these freeways and their populations swelled w/ people who wanted their "convenience" -- now they gripe of noise. Ugh! ... as for the Lakefront trains, that's a pity. I wish those trains could be relocated even though I, personally, have no desire to live in the planned Flats development. As an environmental/hazardous issue, I'm with Zone on this one ... why should we have dangerous materials shunted routinely through our downtown (which we’re desperately trying to make resident friendly) and high-pop areas? Cleveland is laced w/ rail lines that could shunt such traffic around these areas. As for the Flats/Lakefront development, while I do agree with/understand your argument about people freely opting to live in these areas, I do think these trains -- in such a high profile, highly developable area that is crucial to the city's long term residential growth and health -- are a serious negative. They are extremely fast and loud (as trains are wont to be) and they blow their horns around downtown in part, I guess, to warn the bridge guy operating the Iron Curtain over the Cuyahoga. Even if we could reduce them by, say, half, would be a plus... Why have they increased so much? I'm not a freight rail expert, but wouldn't logic dictate that in a city like Cleveland that's taken so many hits in industrial and manufacturing jobs, particularly in steel, the traffic would be less not more. It even seems like that Lakewood surface NS line that Kucinich "bargained" over which we held so much hope for commuter rail is now seeing more traffic. Talk a year or so ago was that this line may be totally abandoned by NS. It seems a large part of the hindrance in passenger rail transport regionally and nationally is the greedy and selfish freight operators. Call me a socialist, but it seems in countries where the rails are nationally owned and/or run – like say Germany – busy freight and passenger transport harmonize much better than here. It just seems like Clevelanders, once again, are getting kicked in the teeth. With all the passenger traffic we'd like to see, both on the rails and at skimpy Hopkins, the only increase we're getting is noisy non-people, freight traffic that doesn't seem to be enhancing us as a commercial center all that much, if at all -- I'll bet much/most of this traffic is merely passing through Cleveland rather than serving it. Like the old early 80s T-shirt said: "Cleveland: You've gotta be Tough"

Eventually, MGD, plans call for development north of the NS tracks as part of the Harborplace development, but I'm wondering whether more brownfields clean-up money will be needed for that parcel -- if I'm not wrong, $1M in such funds have been allocated for cleanup of the area Wolstein now plans to develop... Also, you’re right about adding a Waterfront Line stop on that elevated portion of tracks -- space for such was provided (the embankment widens allowing for potential train platforms in that area) for a station, originally, for a proposed Great Lakes Aquarium that sadly was never built -- slated to be, I think, just north of the tracks. It's very likely that RTA will revisit building a stop there with this new development which will give the development extremely intimate rail service -- much like that in Shaker Square... Also, I agree with X -- there are a lot of interesting, historic facades along ORR that I hope Wolstein incorporates into the project rather than bulldozes. Sadly, if I recall, his original stated intentions were to clear the area entirely and build anew... this wouldn't be good imho.

That article was a fine, detailed piece; it stood out in my mind as such -- no slight intended... but my question remains: now what? Is it a workable proposal and how willing will the railroads be towards doing it? Where would the $$ come from? I think it's all the more imperative to consider this plan since the recent announcement that ($230M) high-end residential development will abut the N-S right-of-way on the Flats East Bank. With the hefty rents/morts likely to be paid in this area, who's going to want a bunch of noisy rumbling freight trains going back 'n forth with the high frequency that exists now? They’re kind of interesting looking at from the deck of Shooters on a warm summer night, but not living next to… Someone posted on Cleve.com an article from San Diego about high-end, high-rise residents complaining about S.D.'s Port Authority traffic/noise/dirt after SD saw res development in an area, apparently, not unlike our Port Auth. So what's the next step towards moving freight trains off the Lakefront? Also, if that's done, couldn't RTA simply switch WFL trains to NS tracks and merely string catenary over those tracks extending service eastward at a fraction of new ROW building? This would save a bunch of money and extend the needed transit service to areas slated for development.

Answers part of my question (from the PD site): Location: north from Main Avenue to the Norfolk Southern railroad tracks and between West 10th Street and the east bank of the Cuyahoga River One big negative: I hear a chunk of $$ for this is coming from our already starving school system -- that really stinks, indeed. Kinda curbs a bit of my enthusiasm.

Stonebridge also has just over 300 units, I believe, and you see how huge that project is. And it includes a small amount of office and commercial, too -- and this is expanding. Wolstein's tipping a lot toward commercial -- I too am a bit taken by the inflation from $170 to $230M since December -- maybe that's good. I'm not quite sure of the physical parameters, but I don't think, at this time, it will extend north of the Waterfront Rapid line (onto P.A. land) at this time. This project should spin-off development -- although let's not count on too much, this is a slow developing town that is not prone to multi-unit development on a large scale. Don't forget, the handsome Riverbend condo's been there since the early 1980s. We're not like D.C., Chicago or Toronto where they throw up huge developments at the drop of a hat. One disturbing note is I think Wolstein is oriented toward bulldozing all the storefronts on Old River, which would be too bad. While some of its junk, there’s a good deal of unique, historic architecture there. It would tend to presage the more boring, bland stuff like that in Baltimore’s Harborplace/Inner Harbor (gag). My biggest hope is that this development, whatever form it shall eventually take (and will probably evolve significantly from what's on paper, now -- that's the way development is), that it is a more substantial/permanent revival of the East Bank into something more than the fly-by-night bars and restaurants of the 1980s/90s -- by all accounts, it will be. Maybe, just maybe, this will generate more daytime foot traffic than exists right now (which is close to nil) And I hope that and expect the Waterfront Line will reap the traffic benefits, so its naysayers will shut the hell up and go away once and for all. :-D And let’s hope this will spell bye-bye to all that surface parking behind the building lines and the Waterfront Rapid. (btw – surface parking just grew in the area as the derelict, though fixable, buildings next to/behind the Flat Iron Café were torn down a month or so ago – double damn! :whip: I've got the feeling this development will be compact with a lot of density, which will be good. We'll learn more Monday, I guess, when Wolstein, Jane & co plan to go on a splashy media blitz.

... sure hurts C-bus' move to "big city" status imho...

Not sure what you mean. The only thing I've heard, recently, on W. 9th is the huge District Park condo project that most are now saying is dead. Hope you're on to something CtownD and not talking about Dist Park.

Actually, I heard it driving on WTAM, yesterday -- egad, I'm ashamed to admit I listen to that lowbrow station (you know it's bad when they bring in Jerry Springer and he actually RAISES the intelligence level of the discussion!) -- I'll just say I listen for the sports; I'll just say that...

KJP, wasn't "Proximity" the movie that started out with an opening panorama of Public Square? I know, I was just about to leave a friend's home after some sporting event in Philly (maybe an Eagle's playoff loss) a few years ago, and this movie came on HBO, to where he'd switched the channel, and I started freaking out: “That's the Soldiers & Sailors; hat's a Cleveland (RTA) bus and shelter; ... that's Cleveland!” I yelled; then apologetically I explained: "... well, you see, we don't often get films shot in Cleveland; it's so rare seeing it..." I'll have to rent "Proximity." Coburn, of course, is now dead.

MGD, did you, or anyone, mention that old standard bearer: Billy Wilder’s"The Fortune Cookie" w/ the late great messrs Lemon and Matthau? It's Cleveland (esp Browns) to the core, even mentions Art Modell (er, sorry...), the PD, etc. There was the moving "Antone Fisher" story directed/acted in, by Denzel Washington, a few years ago that got little attention. It was filmed mostly in San Diego, but ping-ponged back 'n forth btw the 2, and ended up here. And how about "Light of Day" (I think that's the name) that then healthy Mike J. Fox & Joan Jett filmed here that made the now defunct Euclid Tavern nationally famous... And what about that indie flim the "Battle of Shaker Heights"? I know it was the subject of that HBO "Project Green Light" a year or so ago. Apparently, though it was based on our famous burb, it was actually not filmed here and the woman who wrote it had never even been here but heard of the town through a friend from college... oy! I'm glad more of these are being filmed here, but few really show off Cleveland imho. It's as though our seedy side is what Hollywood is looking for. But you know Hollywood types: most are rather shallow -- easier to present the "perceived" Cleveland than that which really exists. "Against the Ropes" did have one quick, real nice scene facing the skyline from the R&RHOF basin -- one of the best vistas of downtown imho... Wasn't Joe Esterhauses "F.I.S.T" supposed to be set in 1930s union-town Cleveland (although, again, I don't think it was filmed here). Esterhaus, though, went on to make millions on "Flashdance" which REALLY made Pittsburgh look beautiful and sexy (er, well, in additon to Jenny Beals). AND ESTERHAUS IS A CLEVELANDER!!! Oy, II.

Been to Constantino's twice, like it very much. The 2nd time we went there -- a week ago, Monday, the traffic had picked up considerably, and there even seems to be a few "regulars." The help's very friendly, esp. a swarthy-complected lady (Greek, perhaps? Owner or family?). Seems a lot of traffic is from the Bingham. Noticed a number of people coming and going to the building's back elevator. It's got to be a huge selling point for that building which, I believe, is now finished. I sure the market’s price was a selling point in setting of the Bingham’s fee schedule It would really be interesting to see how the District Park would impact the Constantino's, if it ever is built next door.

Cleve City councilman Matt Zone is sheparding a bill to limit what he says is dangerous freight rail traffic from going through downtown on a daily/weekly basis... A couple years ago, EcoCity Cleveland authored an extensive, detailed study on rerouting such traffic away from the lakeshore around the periphery of the city -- I'm assuming that downtown lakefront line is where Zone says this hazardous traffic is traveling. EcoCity's proposal had a lot of benefits, including issues addressed by Zone. Also, it seems that if the lakeshore line can be freed of thru freight traffic, we could extend passenger rail -- the extended WFL or commuter rail -- directly on that roadbed and, thus, save millions in new track/structure construction. Anyone familiar with this? Has there been any consideration of this proposal to relocate? What's the status of this proposal now?

As for the updated (Nov 04) lakefront slideshow, I'm sorry, call me Mr. Wet Blanket. Is it just me, but don't those "goals" seem very amorphous and intangible, and isn’t it rather late in the process for us to still be at this point with nothing of substance really happening yet? I mean, this has been Jane Campbell’s centerpiece program since early on in her administration Also, didn't too many of those artist renderings have a bunch of cars in them? And wasn’t there a good deal of emphasis on auto access – again, maybe it’s just paranoid me… There were none w/ Waterfront line trains in any artist rendering even though the plan gives some vague lip service to expanding the line eastward. Did you notice that? And what about the most vexing problems that must be addressed and solved before anything can really get going, like relocating the Port Authority (what's the latest since Jane's big blowup w/ the County Commissioners?). What about the cleanup of the brownfields -- mentioned as a program. The question is -- who pays? I don't know much about Superfund, even if it's still a viable program, so maybe someone can enlighten me.

Preach, KJP!! BRT as alternative for rail BECAUSE it's cheap is a farce auto interests and conservatives (one in the same?) are shoving down our throats. Boston's a perfect example of over planning. This city rates as my #2 transit system in the country, after NYC, but they've been marching in reverse in recent years – and let’s not even discuss that ghastly “Big Dig.” Boston was so anxious to tear down the old Orange Line el over Washington Street, they didn't stop and think how damaging to ridership relocating that line to a railroad ROW at the edge of its original corridor, they were forced to develop the "Silver Line" BRT along Washington St. Well, guess what? Savvy "T" riders shun BRT buses as if they virus quarantines and Orange Line totals have been hammered. So no, Pope, I don't see BRT as a viable alternative to rail in any context. And if the goal is to save money, why bother in the 1st place? -- and BRT ain't cheap either; not for meager "benefits" it reaps for cities.

With gas prices soaring as they are (and some say Dubya's artificially behind this to get public opinion behind a go-ahead for his much sought after Alaska drilling plan), we really need to stick this excellent plan in Taft/Bush/ODOT's face. Get public sympathy on our side. No longer can the naysayers claim we're trying to shove a gold-plated Maglev or even bullet train (which made sense to me) down their throats. This is conventional diesel rail using proven technology in heavily populated corridors that have too-long been neglected -- it will be done only with some upgrades to roadbeds that already exist. How can anyone with a brain in their head be against this smart plan in these crazy times?