KJP

I had to look this one up: PVG = IATA code for Shanghai PuDong Airport P.S., this is fantastic news. The Shanghai link is a big, pleasant surprise. I'm tired of seeing Greater Cleveland lose Fortune 500 HQs because, in part, we lack the international air service of other cities. This should help stem the tide. And just because I'm a rail/transit guy, doesn't mean I can't cheer another force for positive change for the region. In truth, I'm an intermodal guy. Look at what's available at the airports at the overseas ends of these flights and you'll see what I'd like to have happen on this side of the moat.

Good questions. Probably why RTA is asking questions about whether to include the Broadview/State corridors in the planning that's to come.

Here are the top-ten RTA bus routes, ranked by total riderhsip in 2005: 326 Detroit - Superior 3,547,361 6 Euclid Ave 3,071,548 1 St. Clair 2,144,667 22 Lorain 2,070,102 15 Union 2,069,559 14 Kinsman 1,932,469 35 Broadview - Quincy 1,125,976 20/A W.25-Broadvw/State 1,079,360 19 Broadway - Miles 1,059,658 25B/W Madison 874,478 It's from a more detailed message on ridership rankings, which I posted at: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=4504.msg109589#msg109589

I've been meaning to post the summary of the last (Aug. 30) meeting of the stakeholders. Here it is (it's long, but check out the highlights at the start, plus Hunter Morrison's message at the end)... ______________________________ MEETING SUMMARY West Shore Corridor Regional Rail Stakeholders August 30, 2006 Cleveland City Hall Selected Highlights (Full Summary follows attendees list): Dave Vozzolo, of HDR Inc. and was recently a Federal Transit Administration official, said federal funds are difficult to get for any transportation project. Even if they aren’t, a potentially quicker, less costly, and more beneficial (in terms of expanding a ridership base) way to fund a transit project is to use private financing via station-area real-estate developments. A station-area development subcommittee was suggested by Westlake Planning Director Bob Parry who agreed to lead it. Planning and development officials in communities along the route would identify potential station sites having development and redevelopment opportunities. Another subcommittee, comprised of West Shore law directors and led by Bay Village Law Director Gary Ebert, would meet with Norfolk Southern Corp. officials to review and discuss their agreements reached in the late-1990s addressing train traffic levels. NOTE: The next full meeting of the West Shore Corridor stakeholders will be held at 9 a.m. Oct. 20 at the Spitzer Conference Center at Lorain County Community College. __________________________ At the Aug. 30th meeting, there were 39 attendees (listed alphabetically by last name): Rob Berner, Mayor, City of Avon Lake Betty Blair, Lorain County Commissioner Tony Brancatelli, Ward 12 City Council, City of Cleveland Sean Brennan, Chairman of the Board, Lakewood Chamber of Commerce Angie Byington, Steering Committee, Elyria Plan 2015 Joe Calabrese, General Manager, Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) Len Calabrese, Director, Commission on Catholic Community Action Dennis Clough, Mayor, City of Westlake Michael Dever, Councilman At-large, City of Lakewood Gary Ebert, Director of Law, City of Bay Village Jon Eckerle, Senior Regional Realtor, Century 21 Commercial/HomeStar Rich Enty, Planning Team Leader, GCRTA Edward Favre, Office of Lakewood Mayor Tom George Maribeth Feke, Director, Programming & Planning, GCRTA Tom Ferguson, General Manager, Lorain County Transit Scott Frantz, Transportation planner, Cleveland City Planning Commission Grace Gallucci, Executive Director, Office of Management & Budget, GCRTA Bill Gardner, Service Director, City of Sheffield Lake Kate Giammarise, Staff Writer, Lorain Morning Journal Jack Hall, Senior Transportation Planner, Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency David Hartman, Director of Business Development, RE Warner & Associates, Westlake Jennifer Hooper, Executive Director, Lakewood Community Progress Inc. Bonnie Ivancic, Ward 4 City Council, City of Elyria Kevin Kelley, Ward 16 City Council, City of Cleveland Dennis Lamont, Lorain Street Railway Howard Maier, Executive Director, Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency Will McCracken, Oberlin Joe Medici, Staff Writer, Elyria Chronicle-Telegram Stu Nicholson, Public Information Officer, Ohio Rail Development Commission Rick Novak, Executive Director, Lorain Port Authority Joyce Parks, assistant to Lorain County Commissioner Blair Bob Parry, Director of Planning, City of Westlake Andrea Paspek, Law Department, City of Cleveland Ken Prendergast, Director of Research & Communications, All Aboard Ohio Ken Sislak, Board Member/Northeast Ohio, All Aboard Ohio Michael Skindell, District 13, Ohio House of Representatives Vince Urbin, Development Department, Lorain County David Vozzolo, Senior Associate, HDR Inc. Jay Westbrook, Ward 18 City Council, City of Cleveland FULL SUMMARY Councilman Kelley called the meeting to order. The gathering was a special meeting of Cleveland City Council's Aviation and Transportation Committee, chaired by Councilman Kelley. Principle issues to discuss, per the meeting's agenda, are funding and the late-1990s agreements between local communities and Norfolk Southern, resulting from the breakup of Conrail Corp. Prendergast, of All Aboard Ohio, gave a summary of the last meeting, held July 19, 2006 at Westlake City Hall (copy of that meeting's summary is available upon request). Prendergast also provided an overview of possible transit options for the West Shore Corridor between Cuyahoga, Lorain and Erie counties which could include: + Locomotive-hauled commuter trains - using second-hand train equipment, basic stations spaced several miles apart - existing all-Norfolk Southern tracks, terminating in Cleveland at either the West Boulevard Rapid station or at North Coast Harbor/Amtrak station area (latter requires more track work) - Nashville is using a similar model, which cost $40 million for their 33-mile line + Diesel/electric light-rail trains - new train equipment, more elaborate stations spaced a mile or two apart - mix of existing NS/GCRTA tracks, terminating in Cleveland at Tower City Center - New Jersey RiverLINE, Oceanside-Escondido (Calif.) are using similar models, use station-area development to help finance rail construction + High-capacity buses - bus-rapid transit/express buses - utilize existing street or freeway rights of way - Euclid Corridor is using a similar model + Transportation System Management – more efficient use of existing roads/highways + No build/do nothing – provides a baseline of information Funding issues David Vozzolo of HDR and former deputy associate administrator of the Federal Transit Administration (FTA) gave some facts of life when it comes to transit funding. Federal funding for building transit, such as in the West Shore Corridor, would come from the FTA's New Starts program, funded at $1.5 billion. The amount keeps increasing each year, yet demand far exceeds that amount. Decision-making over the total funding amount is in the hands of Congress. Cost-sharing for transit projects was 80 percent federal, 20 percent local, but demand has forced down the federal share to about 50 percent and may go even lower. Federal funding has gotten more complicated, as the FTA's level of scrutiny of proposed projects has increased. More project applicants are taking a step back to see whether federal funds are desirable. Avoiding the planning process required to receive federal funds typically saves 1-2 years and 20-30 percent of project cost. People want to see projects happen in their commuting lifetime and elected officials want to see them happen in their political lifetime. On the positive side when it comes to federal funding, the West Shore Corridor could build on the momentum of the Euclid Corridor project. A successful transit precedent raises confidence from the FTA, Congress and others that additional funding for more transit improvements will be well-spent. Also, complications involving federal funding have led more communities to look at private financing for transit projects. Bonding retired by revenues from station-area real-estate developments or pure private financing from a long-term revenue stream can fund anywhere from 30-50 percent of a project's start-up costs. Large investment firms are looking at those options and may be the future of transit funding. The same thing is happening on the highway side as well. It is not too early to think about how the West Shore Corridor could be funded as those ideas will steer the project in the right direction, Vozzolo concluded. Sislak, of All Aboard Ohio, gave examples of the complications involved in securing funding for transit projects. The Euclid Corridor project took 20 years to progress through the federally required planning process. In Nashville, planning for their first commuter rail line took 10 years, despite being exempt from the federal New Starts project rating and evaluation process and having a low start-up cost ($40 million). Nashville's new commuter rail service will begin operations in September 2006. By comparison, GCRTA's $77 million Waterfront Line used no federal funds and it was completed in just two years. NS agreements Sislak of All Aboard Ohio, read into the record an e-mailed statement from former Cleveland Planning Director Hunter Morrison who was unable to attend. A copy of the e-mail follows this summary. A brief of his letter notes that Cleveland's agreement with NS has these features: + Cleveland's main concern was freight trains blocking crossings which would cut communities in half (at the meeting, All Aboard Ohio provided two graphics which can also be e-mailed upon request; one is a bar-chart that shows a freight train blocks a crossing for an average of 220 seconds while a commuter train blocks a crossing for just 40 seconds; the other graphic shows a pie chart has to how many commuter trains per day [77] it takes to block a crossing for as many seconds as do 14 daily freight trains). + Commuter rail was never discussed in negotiations with Norfolk Southern. The agreements were silent on commuter or other passenger rail. + Local communities cannot limit freight train traffic, which is interstate commerce. The agreement only provides communities with compensation if train traffic exceeds certain levels. + NS provided $10 million to be deposited into a city fund for mitigating noise impacts on neighborhoods from increased freight train traffic. + If, within eight years, freight traffic exceeded 26 trains per day, NS would contribute $2.6 million for additional mitigation. + NS would pay to grade-separate West 117th Street if rail traffic increased above stated levels. Ebert of Bay Village noted that Cleveland's agreement with NS is separate and different from that of the West Shore suburbs (Bay, Rocky River & Lakewood). Some issues in the West Shore agreement are germane to commuter rail and some are not. West Shore communities' were concerned with the number of trains and blocked crossing, and how it would impact response times of emergency vehicles, as well as noise, vibration and dust. Mitigation from NS for communities kicks in if traffic levels exceed 14 trains per day. How would commuter rail impact the agreement? Our concern is that commuter rail would cause NS to void the agreement. Prendergast said that, after the July 19 stakeholders meeting in Westlake, NS Vice President Craig Lewis said to him, RTA's Enty and Ohio Rail Development Commission's Don Damron that NS would be willing to discuss amending the agreement to add commuter rail to it while keeping freight train traffic at existing levels. Since no NS representative was present at today's meeting, Prendergast suggested that law directors from the West Shore communities, Hunter Morrison and other affected parties meet with NS to discuss the matter. Ebert agreed to head up a group of West Shore law directors to meet with NS, as he is the remaining West Shore law director who was present during the negotiations with NS in the late-1990s. Other issues Nicholson of the ORDC said NS has told his agency "don't count us out of running passenger trains." He also gave information about how communities can seek funding for implementing Quiet Zones so that locomotive horns can be safely silenced at road-rail crossings. The application process starts at the Public Utilities Commission of Ohio to access state/federal funds for adding four-quadrant gates, cameras (may depend on pending court cases), median barriers and grade separations (overpasses or underpasses). North Carolina is implementing what it calls a "sealed corridor" to seal off passenger and freight trains from other vehicular and pedestrian traffic as the trains pass through communities. Calabrese of GCRTA asked what the demand was for regional rail. He noted an example of potential demand, which he witnessed that morning at the Westlake Park-and-Ride. A full Lorain County Transit bus arrived and its passengers transferred from there to an RTA express bus for downtown Cleveland. (NOTE: the travel time from Lorain to Cleveland by bus is 77 minutes, and yet the buses were full). He said consideration should be given to a direct Lorain-Cleveland commuter bus service to test the market. Eckerle of Century 21/HomeStar said Transit Oriented Development should be a key issue for the West Shore Corridor. NS has a large amount of property in Avon, which could be developed with TOD and tax-increment financing from it used to help pay for commuter rail. The stakeholders should identify developable land. Maier of NOACA said a key issue in the 2001 NEORail study was development around stations. Prendergast said that, unlike development along I-90, transit-oriented development is more compact, and would lock up some aspects of the real estate market, including demand and financing, for smart-growth rather than for sprawl. Redevelopment of existing communities should be a priority. Parry of Westlake suggested setting up subcommittee of the stakeholders group, have it be comprised of planners in each community, and identify sites for stations/station-area development. He agreed to head up the subcommittee and to contact persons to serve on it. Prendergast provided to Parry the stakeholders e-mail database. Calabrese also noted the need for stakeholders to contact their state elected officials to seek a boost in state funding for transit. Ohio has cut transit funding by 60 percent since 2001 while neighboring states like Michigan and Pennsylvania have boosted transit funding. Sislak agreed, noting that the Commonwealth of Pennsylvania provides more transit funding for Pittsburgh than the state of Ohio provides for the entire state. Next meetings Commissioner Blair arranged the next stakeholders meeting in conjunction with the Lorain County Community Alliance at 9 a.m. Friday Oct. 20 at the Spitzer Conference Center at Lorain County Community College, 1005 North Abbe Road. Directions: Exit I-90 at Detroit Road, turn east on Detroit. The next light east of I-90 is Abbe Road. Turn right (south) on North Abbe. The driveway to the Spitzer Conference Center is on the south side of the LCCC campus. An agenda for the stakeholders meeting will be sent in the coming weeks. In the meantime, please mark your calendars. Separately, a fundraiser to benefit All Aboard Ohio’s West Shore Corridor advocacy efforts, will be held starting at 4 p.m. Nov. 18 at the Black River Landing Transportation Center in downtown Lorain. All Aboard Ohio is a 501©(3) nonprofit educational organization, for which contributions may be tax-deductible. A social hour, dinner, dancing and auction of local railroad/transit memorabilia will be held. The keynote speaker at the fundraiser will be Pete Aadland, Director, Communications and Business Development, North San Diego County Transit District. The NCTD operates Coaster commuter trains on a 42-mile route, Breeze express buses on 50 routes and is building a 22-mile diesel light-rail service called Sprinter that is scheduled to open in December 2007. END See Hunter Morrison e-mail on next two pages .... From: Hunter Morrison Sent: Tuesday, August 29, 2006 11:47 PM Subject: NS West Shore Settlement Ken: I regret not being able to be with you and the West Shore group tomorrow morning. As I indicated, ODOT is opening a set of enhanced bridges on the YSU campus. This project is one of the first products of our Centennial Master Plan, and, as one of the authors of the plan, I must be there for the ribbon cutting. You have asked me for my recollections on the NS agreement with the City of Cleveland regarding train volumes on the Nickleplate line between Cleveland and Vermilion. I fortunately have a complete file of the Draft EIS, the agreement between the City and NS, and the press release and City Council briefing notes that accompanied the announcement of a settlement in June, 1998. You will recall that the settlement is the result of the complaint made by Cleveland and the West Shore communities following the announcement that, as a consequence of the Conrail breakup, freight rail traffic on the Nickleplate line would double from 13 to 27+ trains a day. The concern expressed by the impacted communities revolved around the safety consequences of such a dramatic increase in freight rail traffic. Specifically, the Nickleplate line along the lakeshore is an almost entirely at grade alignment from Edgewater west to Vermilion. The communities were concerned that long, often slow moving freight trains would effectively cut their communities in half, creating traffic congestion and--most importantly--blocking emergency vehicles trying to service all parts of their communities. Concern was also expressed regarding the dangers of carrying hazardous materials through densely-populated communities and the noise resulting both from the trains themselves and the requirement that trains use horns at grade crossings. I should note that at no time during the development of the communities' case against NS was the issue of commuter rail raised. While NOACA's commuter rail study was in the works at the time, the issue of impacts of short (one or two car) passenger train sets on the West Shore was never in play. Cleveland and its sister cities to the west were concerned exclusively with the impacts of dramatically-increased freight rail on their residential neighborhoods. I would further state that the negotiations between NS and Cleveland--which by prior agreement acted as agent for all of the impacted West Shore communities--was undertaken under the auspices of the Surface Transportation Board and in accordance with the provisions of the STB'S Draft Environmental Impact Statement of December 12, 1997. This DEIS governed the Federal Action entailed in the sale of the Federal asset, Conrail, to NS and CSX and did not address any local action (Federally supported or locally funded) involving the use of any of the impacted Conrail rights of way for future commuter rail or rapid transit service. The DEIS and the NS/Cleveland agreement are silent on the issue of commuter and rapid rail, both because these uses were not germane to the Federal Action for which mitigation was sought and because the impacts of such a use were speculative. If we had been asked a the time to opine on the possible impacts, we would no doubt have seen them as minimal in light of the scale of impacts resulting from the doubling of heavy freight rail traffic on the Nickleplate. After 6 months of intensive negotiations, NS voluntarily agreed to the following as pertains to the Nickleplate Line: 1) To construct at its own expense the Cloggsville Connection which would enable NS to accommodate additional freight traffic on Clark Branch trackage through Cleveland industrial districts and avoid increasing traffic on the Nickleplate. The cost of this improvement was $27 million. 2) To maintain freight traffic on the Nickleplate at 14 trains a day and absorb increased traffic of 14 trains a day on the Clark Branch. 3) To contribute $10 million, at the rate of $2 million/year to a Community Impact Fund, the proceeds of which would be available for noise mitigation and similar measures. 4) To contribute an additional $2.6 million to the Fund if, within 8 years of the completion of the Cloggsville Connection, freight traffic on the Nickleplate exceeded 26 trains/day. 4) To contribute 10% of the cost of grade separation at West 117th Street if traffic on the Nickleplate exceeded the projected train volume by 5 trains a day within 5 years of the completion of the Cloggsville Connection. In summary, the agreement is silent on commuter rail and, in my opinion, is not binding on NS should it agree to allow RTA to use the trackage for that purpose. The intent of the agreement between Cleveland and NS was to govern the use of the Nickleplate as a freight rail corridor serving the national interests and not as a commuter rail corridor meeting the needs of a local market. I would anticipate that, if Federal funds are used for the proposed commuter rail service, appropriate evaluation of environmental impacts will be required. At that time, any impacts from the use of this corridor for local passenger service can be evaluated. I hope that this clarifies the issue. As I indicated, I can make available source documents if you wish to delve more deeply into the record. Hunter

Visit the Lorain-Cleveland rail thread. And, write to your City Councilman and to Congressman Kucinich and tell them what you want. Lakewood Mayor Tom George is already behind the West Shore Corridor regional rail proposal, as is Lakewood Community Progress Inc. The chamber of commerce and Lakewood Hospital are very interested in this project as well. But I would encourage you to post further comments on this at the other thread at: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=6001.0

I avoid the Trip Planner and the website version of timetables. They are based on the PDF/print timetables anyway. And why not just simply things by staying on the 55 or the 75 and ride to CSU, then walk north to Superior? It's a pretty easy walk -- past the Third District police station, no less. When I plan my transit trip, I use the PDF timetables from my destination and work my transfers (if any) back to my point of origin.

They should be busting ass anyway

There's a little cafe in the Statler where you can get a quick breakfast (or lunch or dinner). I know it's eight blocks east of east 4th, but hey.

started this thread in regards to the city's desire to be a "city of choice."

A Midwest example of political power being organized to seek high-speed rail.... Extending a hand New group sees Milwaukee, Madison cooperation as key to regional growth By TOM DAYKIN [email protected] Posted: Sept. 11, 2006 Better highways and high-speed rail, more university research dollars and stronger ties between Milwaukee and Madison are needed to build an economic dynamo in southern Wisconsin that competes with other regions throughout the world, political and business leaders said Monday. Cooperation between Milwaukee and Madison would help both cities "take on the rest of the world . . . rather than each other," said Trevor D'Souza, a managing director at Mason Wells, a Milwaukee venture capital firm. "To the extent we can lift each other up, we're going to lift the rest of the state," said Madison Mayor Dave Cieslewicz. They were among the speakers at a lunch meeting sponsored by the Wisconsin Technology Council, a non-profit group that serves as a technology adviser to state government. Cieslewicz and Milwaukee Mayor Tom Barrett spoke to about 200 people at the Hyatt Regency Milwaukee about their creation of the M2 Collaborative, which is seeking a stronger partnership between the two cities. The two mayors were then joined in a panel discussion by D'Souza and Tom Hefty, an attorney at Reinhart Boerner Van Deuren and former co-chairman of the Governor's Economic Growth Council. The event marked what Barrett jokingly called "a second date" for the M2 Collaborative, which was first publicly discussed in May. Barrett and Cieslewicz said there's a lot that leaders in both cities can learn from one another, including the use of best practices from both city governments. Hefty, former chief executive officer of Blue Cross/Blue Shield of Wisconsin, said the talk of collaboration is good. But he also said that the effort needs "bigger, concrete goals, not just talking," especially since the Milwaukee area is losing jobs and population. Barrett said a formal announcement of the group's members is expected by the end of the October. The members are then to begin creating a plan for specific actions that the two cities can take to better cooperate on economic development efforts and other issues, Barrett said. Some of that cooperation might come by emulating the approach taken by Denver and surrounding communities in Colorado. In that region, communities have agreed not to poach businesses from one another. The region also has a unified approach to marketing itself to businesses, including a commitment to keep a company in the area if it decides to move out of its community. Both Barrett and Cieslewicz said a business that doesn't want to locate in Madison should be encouraged to locate in Milwaukee, and vice versa. A similar approach has been discussed for Milwaukee 7, a new regional economic-development effort that's being created for Milwaukee, Waukesha, Ozaukee, Washington, Racine, Kenosha and Walworth counties. Rail service considered Other forms of cooperation between Milwaukee and Madison could include the exploration of possible high-speed rail service between the two cities, the mayors said. That would help improve productivity for commuters who could work while riding the train, Cieslewicz said. High-speed rail also would give dual-income families more work choices between Madison and Milwaukee when considering the region as a possible place to relocate, D'Souza said. Most prospering regions throughout the nation are characterized by a rising number of families in which both the husband and wife have jobs, he said. More funding is also needed for improving highways throughout the area, said Hefty, who lives and works in Waukesha County. He said dual-income families with children usually have one parent who drives instead of using mass transit in order to have the flexibility to drop off or pick up children at school. Barrett said the end to automatic annual increases in the state's gasoline tax, a change that the Legislature and Gov. Jim Doyle approved earlier this year, could create the political conditions to help drive funding increases for both highway improvements and mass transit in southern Wisconsin. Starting in 2007, increases in the gasoline tax, which provides funds for such projects, will require specific votes from legislators. Barrett said that this could require compromises among legislators from various regions, with delegations from the Milwaukee and Madison areas working together to secure funds in return for votes to fund projects in other areas of Wisconsin. University an issue Economically competitive regions typically need more than one major research university, D'Souza said. While the University of Wisconsin-Madison is among the nation's largest research universities, Milwaukee doesn't have anything comparable. Barrett said that when he served in the U.S. House of Representatives prior to being elected mayor, he once asked University of Wisconsin-Milwaukee officials why they weren't more aggressive in seeking federal grants. Their response: University of Wisconsin System officials wouldn't authorize a UWM push for more research funds. "That has to be a change in mind-set" among university system officials to allow a boost in research funding at UWM, Barrett said. Both he and Cieslewicz said that this should be done without taking funds away from University of Wisconsin-Madison. Barrett drew a laugh when he noted Milwaukee's creation in May of a sister-city relationship, including economic ties, with Ningbo, a Chinese port city. "If we can have a friendly relationship with Ningbo, why can't we have one with Madison?" he said. ###

The trip from Shaker Square to Tower City is 15 minutes, and another 8 minutes beyond that to South Harbor (half the trains from Shaker Square continue through to the harbor on the Waterfront Line). But you have to change trains at Tower City for Ohio City. But it's an easy transfer inside Tower City station to the Red Line. The section between Shaker Square and Tower City is actually the combined Blue/Green lines. So, during rush hours, you'll get a train every five minutes or so and, off peak, every 15 minutes or so. See, you assumed infrequent transit service just because it's not NYC! :wink: However, the only part of the route that is in "subway" is the section below Tower City Center -- maybe a quarter of a mile. The section from Shaker Square to Woodhill is below street level, but it's not covered. Here's a timetable you can download and print out: http://www.riderta.com/pdf/67X-AX.pdf And while the Shaker Square area plus areas to the north and east are safe, the areas to the south and west are not. It is not unusual at night to hear gunfire coming from those areas (esp. south of Buckeye Road).

Yep, those are former grain/oats silos. That's what I'd like to see done to the silos in the Flats near the Center Street bridge. I've always liked Akron. It's got quite a bit going for it even though it's only half the population of Metro Columbus (but probably has as many ex-West Virginians!).

I think that falls into the category of "bummer." But how are these guys marketing the homes? You can sell anything to anybody if you've got the right message and broadcast it to the right targets.

I think that's a candidate for "quote of the year"

Dear MIPRC Commissioners and Allies, The full Senate is expected to vote on S. 1516 -- the Passenger Rail Investment and Improvement Act -- either late this week or early next week. S. 1516 is the 6-year Amtrak reauthorization act which also includes a state grant program and authorizes a rail bonding authority for intercity rail facility bonds. The primary sponsors of the bill are Sens. Trent Lott (R-Mississippi) and Frank Lautenberg (D-New Jersey). The Midwestern co-sponsors are Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-North Dakota); Sen. Mike DeWine (R-Ohio); and Sen. Richard Durbin (D-Illinois). It has been over a year since this legislation was introduced, so you have heard from me several times on this, and its companion bill, HR 1630 (the House bill provides reauthorization for three years, and does not contain the state grant or rail bonding language). This is a major, and important, piece of legislation which, if passed, would not only provide stability for Amtrak for the next six years (Amtrak reauthorization legislation has not been passed since 1997), but also provides funding for corridor improvements, while requiring certain Amtrak reforms. The full text of the bill can be found at http://frwebgate.access.gpo.gov/cgi-bin/getdoc.cgi?dbname=109_cong_bills&docid=f:s1516rs.txt.pdf. You can also read about it at Sen. Lott's website: http://lott.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.Detail&PressRelease_id=317&Month=8&Year=2006 and http://lott.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=PressReleases.View&PressRelease_id=163 Please call your U.S. senators this week to express support for passage of S. 1516. You can include in your message how important Amtrak is to your state, as well as the need for further development of passenger rail corridors in our region, as planned in the Midwest Regional Rail Initiative and the Ohio Rail Hub plans. Also, NARP has reported that two unfriendly amendments are likely to be offered: "one by John Sununu (R-NH) that would kill the long-distance network by requiring Amtrak to discontinue trains that lose more than a certain amount of money per passenger, the other by Jeff Sessions (R-AL) that would strike language aimed at facilitating reduction of Amtrak’s debt." (NARP website) I would recommend that you encourage your U.S. senators to oppose both of these amendments -- the MIPRC has long supported continuation of all long-distance trains, at least until a multimodal plan for the nation is adopted, and facilitating the reduction of Amtrak's debt seems in the best interest of the future of passenger rail (see Sec. 103 -- Repayment of Long-Term Debt and Capital Leases beginning on page 115 of the pdf of the bill (link above) and Sec. 215 -- Restructuring Long-Term Debt and Capital Leases beginning on page 153 of the bill). Laura Kliewer Director Midwest Interstate Passenger Rail Commission

Sad thing is, I have lots of Akron pics that I've never posted. Shame on me. The Northside Lofts are being built near the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad station and the developer is marketing that -- transit-oriented development? Another railroad tidbit -- the area next to the railroad car shown inside Quaker Square was the temporary Amtrak station from 1990-1994, after Amtrak service was rerouted through Akron in 1990. They had a waiting room set up in that space, and the ticket office was in a wood-paneled room next to it. Despite the afterthought-quality facilities, the middle of the night trains, and freight train-induced delays, ridership out of Akron wasn't too bad.

I think #18 is that funky "statue" off Chester near the Dunham Tavern.

More from highway rail-crazy Dallas.... 9/6/2006 Project Update DART launches construction on system expansion Dallas Area Rapid Transit (DART) recently began a construction project that will more than double the agency’s light-rail system to 93 miles by 2018. DART is building the $1.7 billion Green Line, which will extend 27.7 miles southeast of Dallas from Pleasant Grove to Carrollton. During the next two years, DART will demolish the Deep Ellum Tunnel, and build a rail line and Deep Ellum Station in the median of the Good-Latimer Expressway. Construction already is under way on the Deep Ellum Station, as well as the Baylor, Fair Park and MLK stations, which are scheduled to be complete by September 2009. When the entire Green Line is complete in 2010, it will serve Deep Ellum, Baylor University Medical Center, Fair Park, Victory Park, the Dallas Market Center the UT Southwestern Medical District, Love Field Airport, and the cities of Farmers Branch and Carrollton. The agency also expects to open the Orange Line from northwest Dallas to the Las Colinas Urban Center in North Irving in 2011; an Orange Line extension to DFW International Airport in 2013; a Blue Line extension from Garland to Rowlett in 2010; a second Blue Line extension to Interstate 20 in 2018; and a second rail line in the Dallas Central Business District in 2013. ###

FYI... On Sept. 18, the Regional Transportation Authority (RTA) will launch service on the Music City Star ( http://www.musiccitystar.org/ ), a 32-mile commuter-rail corridor linking Nashville and Lebanon, TN. Trains will operate along existing Nashville and Eastern Railroad Authority tracks. RTA spent about $40 million to install continuous-welded rail, replace ties, upgrade crossings, align track and install a new signal system. The five-station line is expected to average 1,300 passengers daily. The above was from a write-up by the Nashville RTA. My own comment is that 1,300 riders daily isn't bad, especially since they spent only $40 million for the Music City Star (an obscenely low amount of money for a 32-mile rail service). Similar ridership is likely in Greater Cleveland's West Shore Corridor, too, if only a few rush hour-only trains are offered.

I didn't realize she was the same writer. Agreed -- a nice bit of redemption.

That's why I kept my mouth shut and my keyboard silent. When a newspaper is the only one that wins by printing a story first, it often means that everyone else loses. Here is the case in point...

[NCDOT] News Release N.C. Department of Transportation Rail Division 1553 Mail Service Center, Raleigh, NC 27699-1553 919-733-7245 Phone ... 919-715-6580 Fax http://www.bytrain.org Date: July 24, 2006 Contact: Joan Bagherpour 919-733-7245, ext. 261 Release No. 228 Distribution: Statewide NC Travelers Seeking Transportation Alternatives Turning to Trains Ridership up more than 30 percent RALEIGH — As travelers seek alternative modes of transportation, the N.C. Department of Transportation is seeing consistent increases in the numbers of passengers riding North Carolina trains, with ridership up more than 30 percent. The Piedmont , which runs between Raleigh and Charlotte, was up 38 percent over last summer’s June ridership from 3,217 to 4,442. The Carolinian, which runs between Charlotte and Raleigh and continues to the Northeast, increased ridership 31 percent from 15,705 to 20,628. More than 25,000 travelers rode either the Piedmont or Carolinian service in June. Ridership was strongest on the weekends. “More and more travelers are discovering that our trains provide a safe and modern alternative means of transportation,” said NCDOT Secretary Lyndo Tippett. “We have had double digit growth in ridership and revenue over the past nine months alone.” For the period October through June, ridership on the Piedmont is up 25 percent and the Carolinian is up 17 per cent. Revenue growth has outpaced ridership, increasing by more than one third. North Carolina ’s June ridership figures are among the highest of state-supported train systems in the country. Overall the nation’s state-supported trains enjoyed a 7.4 percent increase in ridership. Long distance interstate passenger trains had a sharp 4.1 percent upswing. Ridership growth can also be attributed to continued infrastructure improvements on the Raleigh to Charlotte route with the average travel time now at 3 hours and 9 minutes, making it auto competitive. NCDOT has also partnered with local communities to build new or restore existing historic train stations along the corridor. “One key item on NCDOT’s agenda is to seek out and expand ways to partner with communities across the state,” Tippett said. “Partnering with local communities to offer other transportation options, preserve historic stations and revitalize downtown areas is really showing results.” -more- Although work continues to be done to improve on-time performance, upgrade equipment and add additional frequencies—the marketplace is responding. Travelers who are actively looking for transportation alternatives are discovering that trains offer affordability, comfort and an opportunity to arrive at their destination relaxed. The Piedmont and Carolinian trains are sponsored by NCDOT and paid for through state funding, Amtrak and passenger fares. The two trains provide daily service to Raleigh, Greensboro , Charlotte and nine other North Carolina cities and to the Northeast. Complete schedule and train information is available at bytrain.org. Reservations are required. Tickets can be purchased at Amtrak.com or by calling 1-800-USA-RAIL. ***NCDOT***

Outstanding! Wouldn't it be great to have more building rehabs like Hyacinth Lofts, especially downtown near the convention center. If that's not going to be our convention center in the future, and major filmmaking will be its reuse, then we need more facilities like Hyacinth Lofts downtown. If I were an aspiring filmmaker, I would love to be within walking distance of a place where major filmmaking is being done. There might be subcontracting opportunities, chances to schmooze and share inspiration and ideas. Of course, isn't being a site of meeting and exchange why cities were invented in the first place?

You're a news machine, Grasscat. :type:

All - Senate Bill 1516, the bipartisan rail passenger reauthorization, apparently has a good chance of reaching the Senate floor next Friday, September 15. Votes on amendments and passage could come Monday, Sept. 18, or everything could slip a few days. Two bad amendments are likely: one by John Sununu (R-NH) would aim to kill the long-distance network by requiring Amtrak to discontinue trains that lose more than a certain amount of money per passenger, the other by Jeff Sessions (R-AL) would strike language aimed at facilitating reduction of Amtrak's debt. Call your Senators and urge them to 1) support S.1516, but 2) oppose the Sununu anti-long distance and Sessions debt amendments. You may use a toll-free Congressional Action hotline at 1-800-679-1581. When prompted, enter our access code: 1189. Please make this call during normal Senate business hours which are generally 9am to 5pm, Eastern Daylight Time. After responding to the voice prompt to enter your zipcode, please press "1", then after completing the first call, press "2" to connect to your Senators' offices (do not contact your House member at this time) The National Association of Railroad Passengers will update the Action Alert section of its Web site <http://www.narprail.org> as more information becomes available.