clvlndr

[RE: waterfront line extension to the West] Agreed. I think BRT would be horrible for Clifton Blvd; can you imagine marring that majestic broad blvd of lovely homes and old brownstone apts w/ BRT-type stations? I know, some will say, hey look at Shaker Blvd and Van Aken and even Fairmount (that one time had streetcars in its blvd). But it's much different when the trolleys are their 1st (and I emphasize TROLLEYS not diesel/electric buses) and homes follow, not vice versa. BRT’s a farce and with Rapid rail running near that corridor that could be cheaply extended – relative to building a whole new right of way, choosing a BRT extension would be a total, el-cheap-o cop out – but don’t put it past Joe C, who’s suddenly become the nation’s biggest BRT champion – figures, huh? (Joe despises the Waterfront Line, in case you missed it) I'm not sure, though, whether extending the Waterfront line along the West shoreline is the way to go; maybe. Yes, I know that empty subway deck of the Veteran’s Memorial Bridge looks too attractive to pass up. It's just that this western corridor not a particularly wide transit-less area before the lake line slopes inward toward the Red Line stop @ West Blvd/Cudell. However, I am all for extending Rapid service from their westward through the heart of Lakewood to Rocky River and beyond over the lightly used NS tracks, where service is so light I'm sure RTA could strike a deal to share tracks in a day passenger/night freight deal -- although I suppose sleepless Lakewood residents along that stretch would be none-to-pleased at that set up. Such a NS Lakewood line would give Lakewood riders a speedy shot directly into Tower City as well as an airport transfer option at W. Blvd.

I'm not really sure either, but I kinda thought the prop'd Boulevard would replace I-90 from Dead Man's Curve/the Inner Belt to around Gordon Park, where the Shoreway jogs inward from the Lake (at ritzy Bratenhal) and technically turns into the Lakeland Freeway. I didn't get the impression that the Blvd and 90 would coexist. Again, I could be wrong.

I'm just wondering what happens to the Interstate 90 designation if, in fact, Mayor Jane is successful in converting our hallowed lakefront freeway into local boulevard with at-grade street (& pedestrian) crossings, traffic lights and the like. Wouldn’t I-90 have to be re-routed? (like say, following 271 (south) to 480 to 77 to 490 (then home again)? How does that work? Would there be any adverse affects to our region in terms of, say, Fed maintenance and expansion money (not that we NEED any more freeways around Cleveland, but you get the point)?. Are Federally designated interstates like, say, FAA designated airports (s'pose all of those are such otherwise they can't possibly be allowed to operate), in the sense that, a city/region/state needs strict permission from the Feds to downgrade an interstate since it (probably) is designated as a major interstate (duh! -- hence its name) carrier of freight and even military equipment? And while you're on it, please feel free to opine on Jane's grandiose lakefront plan. Is it smart or a waste of time? Is it doable? And will it really have the positive impact on Cleveland's lakeshore she claims? Anybody?

As you know, I'm not a fan of the loop at all, but would go along w/ it only if there was a fully-electrified WFL extension along the lakeshore to the N.E. as you mention. If RTA built the loop connecting it w/ the current Red, Blue and Green lines, there would have to be a 3rd, (also as you’ve previously suggested) and possibly, 4th track built into Tower City. Otherwise, foresee horrific operational and rail traffic jams on those 3 lines into and out of downtown. Operating the 3 lines into TC during rush periods is bad enough even without the Loop. As for the Inter Belt bridge proposal, I'd love it to be monumental in design but not so gaudy as to distract from or overshadow our skyline. Contrarily, I would love, also, for the bridge and route to be removed from Tremont (as wimwar proposes) so that this wonderful old/new neighborhood could, once again, become reattached to the surrounding city. The multiple West Side freeways carving up West Cleveland have been so terribly damaging to the city’s urban fabric. Sadly, this fantasy bridge removal/traffic relocation via I-490 and 77 won't happen. ODOT would have to totally reconfigure and enlarge ingress/egress ramps to both I-71 and I-77 (off I-490), and you know they won't spend that kind of money or risk probable yelping from the highway lobby for the extra few minutes such a drastic alteration could cause drivers... ... wouldn't be nice if our transit lobby were so powerful? Such a pipe dream.. :|

I hear you. One wants to believe in this town so much because it's nice comfortable town brimming with so much potential, but the naysayers seem to rule. I do think there was a brief period, say a decade, from the late 80s to the late 90s when a lot developed and a "can do" spirit permeated the town on many levels-- things got done; projects built and we were feeling good about ourselves -- kinda... But bad luck, bad economy and, more than anything, that old bear of selfishness/lack of cooperation/lack of confidence has reared its head, again -- the Cleveland we've all come to know and despise. ... and yes, going to Chicago, a Midwestern city like us, just bigger, can be humbling in that there seems nothing under the sun they CAN'T do. It's not a perfect place, either, but you'll never see them looking on the half-empty side like we do.... and so ODOT, Calabrese (what absurd answers both from Calabrese as well as his 2nd hand quotes from ODOT – we just don’t get the transit thing either in this city or in this state), Jane Campbell, et al., rule the day here... So I guess we just have to just be content to appreciate our baby steps... like the small scale Pinnacle condo a-building, nice though it is, while we have friggin acres and acres of ugly, density-adverse, wide open surface parking in the center of the WHD and abutting Public Sq (to name but one example)... So much for the WHD becoming our version of Soho… ... we can either appreciate it, or move, like your friend to Chicago (and there are many other towns like Chicago; it just happens to be a "rust belt" town, like ours - I could of said Boston, or the Twins, or Baltimore, or D.C., or,...)... you get the picture; ugh!

...geez, sorry for stepping on your title (but I thought you were the, more creative, MyTwoSENSE... not cents)... anyway, my bad.

TO KJP: well, if we can't get them to buy in we must FORCE THEM to buy in; back them into a corner w/ the “creative” facts such as yours; go public. Problem is, is that we, as a transit oriented/high-density/ped-oriented urban advocate group are wimps. The bad guys always win :whip: :evil: -- it only takes one man – Albert Porter killed the subway; Norm Krumholz (Porter, Jr.), the ex-Kucinichite shouted down the worthwhile "Mode Mixer": the Green Line ext to I-271, yelling that it would only benefit the "Fat Cats" , RTA backed down like a bunch of scared rabbits, and, most recently, Dennis himself killed off the West Suburb commuter rail plan w/ his "deal" to limit trains through Lakewood -- funny, it seems freights are back on that line w/ a vengeance; nearly all of my Red Line/airport runs have witnessed trains on this segment. And to top it off, apparently the City of Lorain has even built a commuter train station for no trains!!!! And now we have RTA Boss Joe Calabrese :evil:whose seeming goal is to choke off rail service, at least on the Waterfront Line which, I'm convinced, will be cut to a "special events only" line w/in the next year. Hell, it's at the bare bones now with 1/2 hourly service during the day and 25 min service at rush hour. Publicly, our Westlake domiciled transit chief, badmouths the WFL every chance he gets while cozying up to, and engaging in a public lovefest with the Bushies every chance he can get re his precious ECP bus… And we LET HIM get away with this. Why? TO THE POPE: OK, maybe you know a little more about Sherrod Brown than I but we/you need to put your/our differences with him aside as he's a powerful advocate behind commuter rail in Akron -- and he's about the only public official w/ juice who we can say this about. Let's do all we can to back the guy...

You're correct, wimwar, it does seem contradictory. And I'll bet you don't see big Joe on the freeway-flyer bus out to Westlake very often, either.

... to complete the thought, ... that said, I think it is imperative Stonebridge make Flats level entry to the Viaduct level a top priority – and the elevator in the County Engineers building is available to do so w/ no new construction – we went down through the elevator then back up to our car, it can be done. Sure, God willing I, like you, will have many more years of being vigorous and ambulatory enough to easily navigate walking up the back streets/hill to reach the deck. But what of those less fortunate? Why cheat them of the experience? -- it's a stiff grade uphill nonetheless. Also, why aren't we pushing Jane/Flats Oxbow to create a well lit, pleasant path from the Rapid (Settlers Landing station; East Bank, generally) through the back streets to the Center St. Bridge for the easy walk to Stonebridge. It takes all of 3-4 minutes to make the walk. There will be potentially more walkers/bikers once the Towpath is completed. We, along w/ the EcoCity folks, really need to push the powers that be to make the Flats more ped oriented rather than making it, like most things, totally beholden to the auto... ... just my 2 cents.

Good points, MGD. A couple new thoughts re the lack of street retail. First, the grade up the street Stonebridge is on (?) is rather steep and storefronts would have to be stepped; might be awkward. Second, and perhaps the more obvious, is that, in Stonebridge, Corna/Price have created this highly unique Main Street in the Sky along the upper level of the old Viaduct, so why would they want to compete w/ themselves w/ ground level retail? Wouldn't make much sense to me...

KJP, many regrets re your loss ... ... glad you're back in the saddle :clap:. A couple comments re your post: these ideas of creative transit financing are great, but can we get the pols/transit “leaders” to buy in? I mean, it's great we have a (hopefully soon to be Guv) Sherrod Brown who is spearheading the CVSR-to-commuter rail movement, but what about the others? Joe Calabrese, who I'm no fan of, gives lip service to TOD development (most notably to spanking new Crocker Park in his beloved home/sprawl-burb, Westlake), but can he be pushed to seriously consider the kind of creativity you propose? And what must we do to help Brown, yourself and others push CVSR commuter rail to reality?

Great points about the buildings' - welcome though they are - lack of interaction with street level. In fact, the new restaurant on top Ponte Vecchio (?) is a very nice Italian Restaurant (not cheap, either), but can only be accessed by driving up top along the Viaduct, entering from W. 25th. For the heck of it, we parked and tried to enter from the Center St. Level (via the County Engineer's building elevator using the keypad) but were out of luck – there was no code for the restaurant. So don't think you can wander over from the E. Bank across the lovely/quirky Center St. swing bridge and think you're dining out in that elegant restaurant w/ its great views off the viaduct (they’ve already got umbrellas tied up/lying on the ground ready for the warm weather alfresco crowd. Hopefully the Stonebridge will correct this and allow peds to access the building from the street below... but again, security must be an issue. But dammit, if they're so damned skittish, why did the build there in the 1st place? Wasn't Price/Corna's goal to upgrade the property values in this area w/ this huge, upscale development? And if security is an issue, why not just hire a cheap rent-a-cop to sit on a stool by the elevators to shoo away the college punks and/or riff-raff? The Flats is a prime walking district so peds shouldn’t be discouraged.

A couple things: on the positive: Thanks mrnyc for raising the Q and, thanks KJP, as usual, you're on top of it (why can't the pols/state transit brokers think more like you and less like the Bushies? oops, I forgot, we're in THE state that put Bush over the top, esp downstate -- sorry, downstate neighbors and erstwhile contributors to this board, for the little poke). One Q regarding KJP’s excellent photo album: instead of building a new freestanding station, why not combine the Hopkins airport Amtrak option with the Brookpark Rapid station, which is about to get started rebuilding its surprisingly smart hotel/restaurant/parking garage TOD station, about a mile or so northeast of the airport (terminal). At such a combined station Amtrakers could detrain, stay over at the hotel or simply transfer for the one-station, 3-min ride into the airport? Seems like combining forces here would make more sense than building a separate Amtrak station across Ohio Rte 237 where separate moving ramp and roadway connections would have to be built to shuttle passengers into the air terminal. Your thoughts? Finally, the negative: on the rail 'racial/scare' line raised earlier; along those lines, isn’t it funny/strange that, here in Cleveland, the powers that be in our excellent, high-density Little Italy neighborhood have been mysteriously silent after the City implemented its ridiculous recent traffic light removal program along busy Mayfield which partially has converted the slow-moving, walkable Mayfield commercial ("Main Street") spine into a speedway? Aren't these LI leaders supposed to be hypersensitive about traffic issues, like, er, that erstwhile, highly sensible relocation of the Euclid-E.120 Rapid Station project? Of course, if the real reason for the objection isn't really the "traffic" problem (much like Berea's similar cry when it halted RTA's plan to extend the Red Line a few miles south into the burb from Hopkins a few years back), but really all those criminal Blacks from E. Cleveland and Cleveland, and, ... well, you know… and to think, I always thought of college-town Berea to be a cut above on the progressive scale of things... oh well, (sigh).

This is the single, key sentence in the whole article... leads me to believe this one, at least partially, might get done: The city has agreed to contribute between $15 million and $20 million to the project over several years, and the state has allotted $3 million of its 2005 capital budget toward the project.

I don't fault standing up to the corporations to a degree -- I'm on the liberal side, myself. In the end, Dennis proved right in protecting Muni Light (later, Cleveland Public Power) from the clutches of CEI to assure residents more fair and lower electric rates -- this was Dennis' shining hour. But his minuses greatly outweighed this victory. Kucinich was an alienator not a consensus builder. Then, as know, we were in desperate straights-- needed someone not to merely consensus builder on many issues, and Dennis was not that. He fought with then Cleveland Trust (now Key Bank) on forcing the city into too many concessions on loans that would have saved the city from a highly avoidable, humiliating default. He pitted rich (sic, the "fat cats") against poor (the "little people"), black against white, city against suburb, etc. Life in general, esp in Cleveland, was not that simple and we suffered greatly for it. Although it would be difficult to point a finger at him as a direct cause, certainly the anti-business atmosphere created Kucinich and his PD-dubbed "Kiddie Hall" (staffed by a bunch of young, idealistic often mean-spirited, inexperienced types who had zero people skills) by appeared to begin the steady exodus of corporations from Cleveland that ultimately led to our pitiful state, business wise, today. Like I said, I don't want to lay it all on Dennis' head, b/c there were in some cases other factors... but he sure didn't aid matters, either....

Thanks for the info re CVSR's connection to Tower City, KJP. That would be great to have an indoor connection where people don't have to climb uphill through potentially bad weather. Years ago, trying to find our way from the Flats to Eagle road we got hopelessly lost in that area. It's rather spooky, truly the bowels of Terminal Tower. Canal Rd is dark and pockmarked w/ crater-sized chuckholes. There's nobody down there whatsoever, not even the homeless. I vaguely recall railroad tracks, but couldn't place them. My AAA map is kinda vague, too, just showing all kinds of lines twisting about (and crossing) the river all the way to the current Valley View CVSR terminus. I trust there will be enough track space at the loading area you mention for at least a couple trains. That NEOrail website RTA idiotically has had un-updated for now over 6 years even lists CVSR as ending on riverbed level with commuters either transferring to the WFL at Settlers Landing to make the trip uphill to downtown or by simply hoofing it. I'm not in love with the location of CVSR as a serious commuter rail line -- it's away from a lot of suburbanites btw Cleveland and Akron and probably will get flooded out often by its closeness to the Cuyahoga river -- but would be very happy that it would get us off the shnide and, at least, connect w/ the Valley View Corp center, as well as Akron and Canton (including the A-C airport, thus giving us Hopkins to A-C rail transit). Plus it serves a region that has no Rapid line even remotely serving it, so no overlap. Akron METRO RTA's website indicates that this transit agency has been aggressively buying up rail/freight rights of way in the area, including a line to Hudson. Any insight as to this? Also, it mentioned they'd purchased Maryland (MARC) commuter equipment. KJP, your earlier post gives me hope about CVSR. But is it hope ground in reality? If so, how far off are they (Akron) years-wise from getting this done? Thanks in advance for your answers...

Villain may be a bit strong, but Dennis really hurt this town's growth even if, intellectually, a few of his ideas made sense (like saving Muny Light from CEI) -- and actually, he's mellowed a great deal in older age. But Dennis was certainly the worst mayor we've had in modern times, ... but as a public official, he can't compare with Albert Porter -- not even close. HE certainly was a villain, big time.

I wasn't "rant"ing, but rather trying to spark discussion. The point being, as nice as it is to speculate, WE the few who know about and care about transit in this town need to focus, and we need to focus on what's best and viable for our town. Go look at Pittsburgh's PAT transit website, and the whole town, mayor, transit chief, chamber of commerce woman, etc, is focused on one project -- build a tunnel under the Allegheny River to eventually extend light rail to the airport. Most transit cities are this way... Cleveland? We're always a bunch of squabbling factions that can never get anything done -- my plan's better than yours, and his is better than both of ours, etc. Personally, I think the best program is to extend the Waterfront line along the east Lakefront. It will grow our lakefront, density/population-wise a hell of a lot faster than our do-nothing Mayor’s vague, general plan she’s put forth to turn the Shoreway into a boulevard – among others… Most can agree (I'd think) on this. Your idea of expansion of trolleys under the Det-Sup bridge to rail on the near West Side certainly isn't a bad idea; actually it's a good one, but we should play our strongest card. Frankly, I think are close in areas like Near West/Ohio City are pretty well served (for now) w/ the Rapid and multi bus lines -- you can get downtown in a flash and to most portions of the west side. The lakefront, though, has no transit save St. Clair buses several blocks to the south. The Waterfront is right their at the edge ready to be extended. Let’s not make this difficult people and blow it (like we did the simple 1.5 mile extension of the Green Line, logically, to I-271 – let’s come together and stop squabbling over our pet projects and throw our collective weight behind the BEST one) My thoughts about current, generally (for now) acceptable transit extends to the near east side – ie, while I'm not gaga over ECP but as it's transit and all we've got going right now, so I'll support it - maybe it can lead to something and, at least, we're building SOMETHING. I'm cautiously optimistic about KJP's info about Akron Metro "quietly" buying diesel MU cars for a potential expansion/creation of commuter rail over CVSR (but isn’t embarrassing that our smaller satellite suburb/city, Akron, is taking the lead on developing commuter rail over big bad RTA? – hey, however we can get it, I won’t look that gift horse in the mouth). Commuter rail and regional Amtrak (if, indeed, Amtrak can survive Bush) is critical to NEO. One Q, even though the focus on such a rail terminal has been on the North Coast, it seems the CVSR rail terminal is being listed as Tower City. How will that work? Will tracks be brought up to the parking area so passengers can use the TC parking lot escalators like drivers or will they have to make their way (somehow) all the way up from Flats/Cuyahoga river level up to Tower City and Public Square? If anybody's got insight on this, please let us know...

KJP (and others, a couple random thoughts to your statements) - KJP (I believe) reported that the new light-rail diesel "River Line" in South Jersey (Camden-to-Trenton, opposite Philly) cost 1$ Billion and is carrying around 6.000 per day – actually, less than that. It's kind of amusing that Cleveland pols feel that paying less than half of that for a wider ranging, potentially wider impact (1st) commuter rail line (connecting Cleveland, Akron & Canton – 60 miles) is too expensive. - about converting the Rapid to a streetcar downtown, your examples have some flaws. First, Portland is a smaller market than Cleveland. Second, the streetcar/downtown portion of Baltimore's Central Light Rail line has been a disaster of which officials are looking to correct by building a parallel subway to remove the street trackage -- Baltimore is goofy, they spent nearly a $1Billion to build a high-tech, computer controlled fully (downtown) heavy-rail Metro -- and then extended it 2 miles to Johns Hopkins Hospital complex. Meanwhile, the cheapened out and built this awful surface downtown light rail (that doesn't even have a transfer point with the Metro nor does it have transfer/fare privileges. Putting Light Rail in the middle of Howard Street wrecked that Colonial street, turning it into a rail yard that both people and retailers avoid like the plague. The traffic lights aren't tripped for rail cars, so they move through downtown like molasses (once, after leaving an Orioles game at Camden Yards w/ some guys headed for our car at a Holiday Inn, I literally OUT WALKED a train for 3 blocks as it was constantly caught at traffic lights. And Dallas, which was forced to go on the cheap in building its light rail, is now strongly considering burying the streetcar version the voters were too cheap to build in the 1st place now that they have fallen in love with their widely expanding light rail/diesel commuter rail network. Third -- Unlike these mostly Sunbelt (or far western) towns you site, they are all NEW transit towns. We here in Cleveland are a more discerning public having had rapid transit for over 80-90 years. We’re Midwesterners and tend to be naturally skeptical; harder to convince (just look at the nonchalant stance riders in jam-packed Chicago are taking toward their broke, crumbling “L” these days (more on that on a later post). People here won't buy converting their fast Rapid to a bunch of slow moving streetcars -- we're not of the "... aw shucks, ain't that neat" mentality toward rapid transit like the other places that have never had it you name... ... along those lines, you DIDN'T MENTION a couple other “similar” (to Cleve) cities, like – Pittsburgh (smaller than Cleveland) which buried it's failing old street car system for a full subway downtown, and now they're poised to spend $300+ millions to tunnel under the (Ohio?) river to connect the stadium complex and set the stage for a 20-mile extension to their huge new-ish airport. Obviously, streetcars weren't good enough for them. And what about ST LOUIS – another Midwestern/similar place whose central city is also smaller than Cleveland... St. Louis recently (10 years or so ago) built a high-platform light rail system that's fully in a tunnel/subway downtown,... and its rapidly expanding, ta boot. No streetcars for THEM. ... I tend to think we all (myself included) often fall into the "... hey, it's Cleveland, it may happen elsewhere but never happen here..." mentality. Without a long history discussion, we were the top dog city in the 1920s; growing, expanding, exciting!... all cities looked to us for leadership; for our efficient government (boy, that seems funny now, doesn’t it?); our beautiful and successful (Daniel Burnham designed) 1902 Group Plan of muni buildings (that no city save D.C. duplicated); and our amazing, pioneering air-rights Terminal Tower/Union Station rail terminal skyscraper. Sure, the Depression hurt us, but that was global; not Cleveland specific. But Albert Porter's late-50s destruction of the subway/downtown Cleveland has damaged our collective psyches beyond imagination (we also, during the Porter era, defeated a luxury, high-rise, 1,000-room hotel on the Mall). After these defeats, the Plain Dealer going into the new decade (the 1960s) commented in its editorial: We (Cleveland) seem incapable of accepting success in large doses... And that legacy lives on (look at the now failing Flats, the total destruction of the red-hot promising Indians by a new cheapskate owner, and RTA being stifled by an incompetent, subtly rail transit-hating GM (Joe Calabrese) after the initial momentum of the Waterfront Line, etc)... BOTTOM LINE -- in OUR environment of thumbing our noses at transit, to begin w/, I would much rather focus our efforts on a REAL city building, convenience sustaining REAL Rapid extension other than a snaky, out-of-the way, surface/traffic hogging/clogging non-convenience producing line like the proposed Waterfront Line "Loop." Besides, we're already dumping $300 Million (I'm sure that'll be the figure when it's all said and done) on a transit project I'm very less than thrilled with: ECP/BRT. This project (ECP) will at the very least cover the territory the streetcar "Loop" would more efficiently. With our town's limited tolerance (for rail) and collective limited attention span, WHY NOT focus on a REAL city building extension... and for this reason, I find no more important project than extending the (already there) Waterfront Line along the East lakefront... I'm surprised, KJP, you're not dead behind this extension with your extreme knowledge (and I'm very serious about this and not blowing smoke up your you-know-what, ... I deeply respect your hard work and knowledge of local/regional transit). I don't see why you would propose diesel light rail in this potentially high-density, high-profile territory when a full electric light rail line terminates right at the edge of this territory -- and one with high-speed access to our transit hub on Public Square... We need our strongest voices, like yours, on board for key projects such as these and we need not spin our wheels on projects that merely look nice but don't do much for our city like the WFL "loop" imho... ... OK, off the soap box, for now; sorry for getting long winded, but the fingers wouldn't stop... (which is why they hurt, now -- good night, will check in, tomorrow)

My take on transit if I were the King of Greater Cleveland: - the Waterfront Line should be extended along the east lakefront, initially, at least to the Bratenhal border, preferably to Collinwood or Euclid Square Mall. While we're not often farsighted transit wise, the our politicos/planners inadvertently created, with the WFL, the foundations for a complete radial commuter rapid transit line with high-speed, grade separated entry to our main transit hub at Public Square (which despite a possible North Coast intercity train station, will always be the crossroads/hub of Cleveland transit). This extension should, as stated by some planners, be directly tied in to TOD high-density/high-rise residential building to create a Chicago-style Gold Coast along our largely abandoned industrial lakefront. The handsome Quay 55 condo adaptive reuse at the 55th Street marina should be just the beginning. As opposed to KJP's proposal, I would extend the fully electric Rapid rather than use diesel cars so trains may make the tight turns and close-spaced stops close in, utilize the elevated section over Front St. & the NS tracks as well as be able to make the steep incline and enter the Tower City rail hub -- even though diesel-electric technology is much less intrusive these days, I sill don't favor regular diesel car use inside an underground, enclosed station like Tower City. - I agree w/ KJP's plans to reroute trains off of the lakeshore. Even if transit were not a goal for the lakeshore, we should be about freeing this valuable land from the noisy, ground-rattling freight trains which will necessarily continue to depress shore land values. - I am staunchly opposed to completing a Waterfront Line loop like the proposal following the opening of the WFL in the late 90s. I am not in favor of converting portions of our high-speed Rapid system into a slow moving, street clogging, and snaking streetcar system. If we want to build a separate Heritage-type streetcar system perhaps to Ohio City or the new, thriving Stonebridge apt/retail/office complex on the old Superior viaduct and using the Detroit-Superior Bridge subway, that's fine; just don't water down (by slowing down) the current Rapid system. One thing, I think, that makes our system attractive to the relatively small ridership that uses it, is its high speed; it can compete successfully with cars in the city and some close-in suburbs. We’re too small a metropolis and of too light density for slow moving trains to be able to successfully compete with autos. Also, as a regular Shaker/Blue-Green Rapid rider, I can promise you that looping Waterfront cars back into the system at around E. 30th street would be an operational nightmare causing routine monumental backups. I can see legions of Blue-Green commuters in a hurry to get downtown or the airport glumly staring at tunnel walls while we wait for the log jam of trains ahead to "clear." Hell, it's enough of a headache dealing with non-revenue cars shuttling to and from the E. 55 Street main rail yard/shop area around rush periods. The more you have frustrated commuters on stuck and slow Blue/Green, as well as on East Side Red Line trains, too, for that matter, the more those people will turn or return to the mighty automobile for convenient travel. What's more, I see little utility in such a loop other than its, perhaps, looking attractive to some on a map. If I'm standing on Public Sq., why should I go inside Tower City and catch a slow, roundabout Rapid to, say, CSU, when a #6 bus or Loop bus up Euclid would get me there quicker – probably significantly so? Even those coming in on the Red Line from the West Side would be ill served by making such a CSU transfer to a new loop WFL when the buses present will do. Finally, you can bet the powerful auto lobby would convince ODOT/the County to block any attempt to electronically trip traffic lights to favor transit cars over the auto traffic on the busy auto arteries the streetcar/rapid would cross. While it's rare for me to actually oppose a rail project in this town, my hope is that this particular WFL Loop (extension) proposal die a peaceful death.... - Establish a commuter corridor over West NS line through Lakewood. While the route over the lakefront NS line into a new North Coast station would be attractive near W. 100 street, I could see a connection over the Red Line into Tower City, as well, but using some kind of diesel-to-electric hybrid vehicles although I realize, for weight problems such vehicles cause, this may not be feasible. Truth be told, the Edgewater-Lakewood-to-downtown-Rocky River portion of this corridor has such extreme high population density (Chicago-type density, one of the highest in the entire state), a full high-platform, high-frequency Red Line extension would actually do pretty well here. I think a look at Chicago's busy Red Line "L" north from about Wilson Station to Howard, hugging the Lake Michigan shoreline, could be a blueprint to how such a line could fare here. -- Continue to push for establishing commuter train service over the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Rail Line once it's extended to near the base of Tower City next to the towpath. Akron Metro already apparently owns much of the line and service south of Akron to Canton, where CVSL cars now operate (I understand), so this is not a far-fetched idea. -- Continue to press for commuter train service over the old Erie/North Randall lightly used tracks to Aurora. -- I can see establishing some kind of West Lake shore Waterfront Line extension, but it's not a priority to me. For one thing, the rundown industrial portion of the West lakeshore is much shorter than the eastern portion and, hence, in much less need of upgrading -- it's only a few miles jaunt and you're at Edgewater Park with its beautiful mansions at the base of the beautiful Lakewood Gold Coast and shore homes extending to beyond Bay Village. Not only that, there exist a couple Red Line stations, already that roughly serve a portion of the Edgewater/Lakewood area, and extended NS commuter service, as proposed above, would serve the rest. A western shoreline Rapid could be attractive if it used the Det-Sup subway, but I’d only favor a line under Superior all the way to Public Sq. -- Finally, while I'm open to using the "light rail" diesel car concept on some lines (but not on the above-noted WFL-lakeshore extension), I'd much prefer the traditional push-pull bi-level diesel trains being used in most modern commuter train cities. These offer the kind of maximum state-of-the-art comfort (including clean restrooms) and ride that a highly discerning suburban audience would demand. Plus, you don't have to limit their use to only non-freight rail service as you do with diesel light rail -- which is what the $ Billion Philly area River Line has to do.

Excellent, KJP, really good stuff. As the 50s CTS "loop" plan was, realistically, the closest to materializing, I've often agonized over "what if" for Playhouse Square which, while it has revived admirably, is a fraction of what it was/could have been had the subway been built. This area was Cleveland’s high-end, trendy retail district; our answer to 5th Ave, N. Michigan Ave, etc... Halle's, Sterling-Linder and others were our upscale department stores (just note the detail in the extant elegant Halle Building office/shopping food court today. Also, the Statler, I understand, was probably our most elegant hotel -- the Ritz of its day. And let’s not forget the stuffy Union Club. Playhouse Sq. would have probably been surrounded by apt high rises... this district, indeed most of downtown, suffered a huge setback and decades-long decline as a result of the subway's killing. Truly, from a city development standpoint, Albert S. Porter is hands down the biggest villain in Cleveland history by a wide margin. Even Dennis Kucinich is a piker compared to this guy.

Good points, MayDay, and thanks for the welcome. I've eyed this board for a couple months now and have been attracted by the higher level of urban discussion here but haven't had time until a day off today -- so I finally decided to weigh in (btw, if I could figure out how to transfer/post my digital pictures – I’m a techno-phobe, I admit it), I've got some nice ones of Chicago from this past weekend). A couple things: I know the Marous' (whom I have the utmost of confidence in) said what you said: that Dist Pk is being redeveloped b/c of construction costs; that they had robust enough presales to kick-start the project -- if it had been anyone else, I'd be more skeptical... let's keep our fingers crossed. As to your point about the WHD, somewhere on an urban discussions thread I noted the history of downtown compared to where we are now (if I recall, the tread was about "critical mass" for a healthy downtown population), and that downtown living for Cleveland, since it became a major city, is brand new in our history; so anything's a plus. Unfortunately, I take some issue w/ your slant about not being worried about the WHD. Yes, it's the best thing we've got going downtown. But our history of doing one thing at a time (which only under Mike White were we able to move on several projects at once), I think if we focus on Gateway, WHD will suffer. I HOPE I'M WRONG, DEFINITELY, but... Let's see. It seems counterintuitive to think that developing one part of downtown could in any way be adverse to another part, but we are going through bad economic and political times right now (and yes, I mean Jane), and all our building projects are stagnating except for a very, very few -- like the magnificent Stonebridge on the Flats' West Bank – with its nifty, elegant little Italian restaurant overlooking the Flats – I can’t wait till warm weather when they open the bridge to alfresco dining. I will all be watching closely to see if a condo tower can go up at 515 Euclid because that could be the linchpin in REALLY helping Gateway take off. And despite the total incompetency of Miller/Ratner at Tower City -- who, I understand from Crain's is quietly hinting at getting out of TC and Cleveland RE all together -- Tower City is humming w/ the best and most diverse set of restaurants in downtown right now, and it's getting very little notice. ... and what am I doing? I write, I call and, most importantly, I patronize what's here...

punch is right, Cleveland's come light years in a short period of time. Let's not forget, Cleveland has not had people living downtown since we were a small town in the late 19th Century (like the 1880s and before). For better or worse, the very industry that caused us to grow by leaps and bounds from that period to the Stock Market crash of 1929 fueled RE speculators like Pat Calhoun and the Van Sweringens to extend trolleys and rapid lines to encourage people to move up to places like the Heights (and to Lakewood, Rocky River and Bay Vill on the West Side) and to live away from the urban core. Meanwhile, our downtown was (since the late 1800s) ringed by a combo of freight rail lines and the deep, industrial valley we call the Flats. All that development encouraged factories on rail sidings and industrialization that choked off the once upscale residential areas like upper Prospect (and those gorgeous row houses) and fashionable Millionaire's Row even way back in the 1920s. We simply developed differently from other big cities, even industrial ones like Chicago. And even sad-sack Detroit managed to maintain some luxury, high-density res development along it's east riverfront along Jefferson Street. Even in the halcyon/salad days of downtown KJP (and my parents) like to reminisce about, we were NEVER a downtown living town but always a commuter downtown with folks (like my family) going there to work, eat, see a ball game, etc. as opposed to living down there and walking out your door for all those things. Simply put, the Cleveland downtown you see today is a Cleveland that has never existed before. We are not reviving anything in our history. Instead, we are emulating the Bostons, Torontos and Chicagos of the world and it's exciting to watch (if we could keep our collective eyes on the prize). So I always stop myself when I knock our lack of downtown living situation. It's always important to realize where you've come from as opposed to knocking where you are right now -- although few here are doing that -- you guys are too hip for that.

Thanks for the pics Mister Good Day. It's amazing just how massive and handsome the 33-year-old Park Centre-now Reserve Sq/Embassy Suites complex is. With the recent, once elegant Chesterfield apts across the street, we were on our way to really creating a vertical, dense Chicago-style ritzy neighborhood. And unlike the admirable adaptive reuse of what was left in the WHD, these were all new buildings!!!!.. Now close your eyes and imagine how great this area, along w/ Playhouse Square next door would have been if we HADN'T ALLOWED Albert S. Porter to kill off the Rapid/subway extension/loop to this important downtown neighborhood that the voters had already approved. Amazing and sad, isn't it? It just one of many examples of how, unlike places like Chicago, Boston and Toronto, we’ve been so tremendously ill served by our “leaders” over such along period. And the current crop shows this trend isn’t letting up. The most reason example? How about the most recent Whisky Island fight btw Jane and the County Commissioners (aka the 3 Stooges – the same trio swayed by the aforementioned Bert Porter to kill off the aforementioned downtown subway loop) which seems so pointless and is stalling development.

I guess I’m happy to see any new high-density housing development in Cleveland, PARTICULARLY DOWNTOWN, but I must be a fly in this good-news ointment because: 1st -- can we just finish off one neighborhood before jumping to a new one? As KJP correctly notes, any aerial shot of the WHD, alone, shows that there is a lot more sq footage of empty surface parking than there are buildings. And what about that huge and ugly diagonal building-less/surface lot hole extending from the corner if W. 6th & St. Clair all the way to the NW quadrant of Public Sq., 4 blocks away! And THIS IN OUR PREMEIRE DOWNTOWN RESIDENTIAL/COMMERCIAL/ENTERTAINMENT DISTRICT!!. Excuse me, but our collective urban attention spans are about 2 minutes long. And for all our praise of the Warehouse Dist as THE hotspot, there are only 2 new high density developments --- the Pinnacle and Crittenden Court (and THAT was built nearly 10 years ago!). And now with the apparent demise of the Marous Bros' massive, promising District Park complex, the WHD seems in limbo right now particularly with all the new found interest in Gateway (and if a spanking new apt/condo high-rise is built on the now-a building 515 Euclid parking garage/ground retail building as is planned, it will signal (I think) a complete shift away from the WHD, which can’t be good. 2nd. This development is a shadow of what the old Davenport Bluffs development would have been. Remember Davenport? You know, the one that was proposed under Mike White which was fought (by the Miller/Ratners I believe) and was allowed to die before we effectively walled off the lakefront from ANY attractive, high-density residential development we've always complained we lack on the lakefront at this location with those huge, ugly, people-unfriendly FBI and Channel 3 HQs? Isn't this sooooo Cleveland???? I mean, we are so damned quick to start planning the 'next thing' (which, itself, will probably never materialize but while its flash and dash helps divert attention from all we AREN’T DOING) when our biggest obstacles to downtown sit unaddressed. Things like: 1) the aforementioned unfinished downtown neighborhoods and the lack of plans for their development, 2) the lack of a coherent plan to lure companies and/or jobs to downtown (or Cleveland, generally), 3) the lack of a major downtown department store, 4) the stalling of the mayor's nice-but-short-on-details amorphous, long term (and I mean REALLY long term, as in decades; a half century, even) Lakefront Redevelopment plan, 5) no cogent plan for a downtown convention center, 6) ditto, for a major new hotel which we're told can only come with #5, the lack of diversification in restaurant/entertainment downtown (like say a people-generating mega Borders/Barnes & Noble) other than bar/restaurants with lots of blue jeans, booming rock music, fried food and elevated, big-screen TV's tuned into ESPN all the time... I could go on, and I’m sorry to seem so negative, but..... so, as you can see, I'm not doing back flips over this new "exciting" plan... I guess you can see why... whoopee!