KJP

That decision, made to hold down costs, was one of many widely acknowledged flaws in the system - including a route that bypassed the most populous corridors, stations without shops or other development, and a stop-and-go crawl though the Howard Street corridor. For a moment there, I thought I was reading an article about Cleveland's Red Line!

You can get police records, but you have to pay a visit to the crime records window on the 3rd floor of the Justice Center (Ontario Street entrance). I go down there each week to pick up brevity reports for Sun Newspapers from the first and second districts, but they know when we're coming so the reports are printed up ahead of time. The police department's public information officer (Lt. Stacho) and his sergeant also do this each week for the councilmembers and the community development corporations. I suspect other media also get the brevity reports -- but the information in them is very lean and inconsistent as to what the police choose to include. Sorry I can't offer a more positive appraisal of the situation. But I'm glad you've moved downtown and I welcome you here to this forum! I've had to witness some disturbances in my own neighborhood here in Lakewood, including car break ins, a few fights on the street, etc. Plus, kids tend to noisily roam the neighborhood well after 1 a.m., especially in the summer. I am not shy about 911.

Then does the nearly identical Halle's Annex across Huron (but since converted into a parking garage) also qualify as a landmark?

By the way, having read the Crain's piece, I think Stark jumped the gun in my articles when he said he was working with T.J. Asher on the Warehouse District "power block" (which is what that block used to be called). I don't think he's as far along as he led me to believe. And, to take it step further, if I was in his shoes last fall and a Sun reporter called to ask about his downtown designs, I would have said "stay tuned." I don't think he was far enough along in his due dilligence yet to publicly release as much info and images as he did. Don't get me wrong -- I'm grateful. But I also want to see this development happen (or more appropriately, those parking lots to go away!). As a developer said to me once: "Premature publicity puts plans for projects in peril."

There is going to be an article in this week's Lakewood Sun Post, updating the Rockport Square project. Ground is going to be broken soon for the loft apartments building, where the Fairchild Chevy dealership stood until last summer (at Detroit and Beach avenues). The writer of the article received three renderings of the loft apartments buildings, but we'll probably be able to get only one of them in the paper. I will see about getting copies to post here. Let me just say this: this loft apartments building is going to be fairly large for the neighborhood -- six stories tall. My building is seven stories tall, at the opposite end of Beach, and it also stands out over the smaller buildings and homes around it. But this new building down the street from me looks to have more girth to it. Stay tuned....

I also found it interesting too that Stark gave me the graphics for my articles, but apparently wouldn't even talk to Stan Bullard for the Crain's article. Wonder if there's some "history" there?Then again, Asher wouldn't return my phone calls, though I've never written anything about him before, so that's how it goes sometimes. Also, Bullard noted that Crocker Park is a $100 million development. It's actually more than $400 million. I realize sometimes it's difficult for a reporter to remember everything, especially for a complex story like this one. No big deal. Stuff happens. As for the parking, Sandvick is just making a general statement of concern since he hasn't seen any plans. All I've seen were Stark's renderings (one which I used for the Sun articles) and his verbal descriptions of what the parking supply would be. It includes 2-3 levels of parking above the ground-floor retail in just about every building he proposes. Above the parking would be the mixed use (office or retail). Armed with that information, a simple understanding of spatial use would tell you that there is going to be at least as much parking as there was before with the surface lots. I'm not crazy about so much parking either, but since lenders almost always insist on including it, that's something a developer has to do if they want their project to receive funding.

Weston is one of T.J. Asher's companies. He's the guy that owns many of the parking lots in the Warehouse District. He also owns a company called Greystone, which is redeveloping the 1.2-million square foot Tyler Village complex off Superior in the East 30s. The Asher family has been big into commercial development nationwide and in Canada for many years. They are a well-moneyed outfit.

Yes, one of them did. The CP&E had two routes through Euclid. One was the "Main Line" alongside Euclid Avenue and the other, "the Shore Line Division," alongside Lakeshore Boulevard (the latter entered downtown on St. Clair Avenue). East of the Euclid, the two routes joined at Willoughby. CP&E trains ran hourly on both routes, but during rush hours on the Shore Line Division, trains ran half-hourly. Not bad considering that everything east of Collinwood back in the 1920s was countryside.

Hey, homicide rates went up in ALL of Ohio's largest cities. That's nothing to be proud about, anyway you slice it. Shoot, I didn't mean to fire off a bad pun!

I think the article was a little unfair to city officials, who sought to support the Flats with business financing, street enhancements, parks and so forth. While cities should do those things to help spark a housing or nightlife district and then help it evolve, I'm leery of cities trying to invent such places. I recall cities like Toledo or Pittsburgh trying to create a Flats in their towns (see Portside in Toledo or the Strip District in Pittsburgh back in the early 1990s). As for the light-rail Waterfront Line, it opened in 1996 near the end of the peak years for the Flats. But I recall the Flats staying busy into 2001 or so, when I did some videotaping down there with friends. But it was nothing like the early 1990s, when the entire stretch of Old River Road was jammed with people and cars to the extent that it was virtually impossible to move anywhere. As a 20-something beer-drinking woman-chaser at the time, it was an awesome and wonderful place to be. The noise, the crowds, the new music and the energy was something to behold. It felt like you were part of a city's decade-long coming-out party, an awakening if you will, that gave a tremendous sense of optimism. Though admittedly, much of it was my own awakening to my own newly discovered social life that came during my college years. It was great to have a place like the Flats where it literally was Mardi Gras every weekend. But all good things come to end. The Flats and I both aged and had to come to terms with our partying ways. I really miss the old place, but neither the Flats or I can ever be the same. But it sure was fun.

That's one of the things that frustrates me about GCRTA's brass. They seem to look at transit routes/services as a response to the community and the transit agency as someone to decide how best to use transit to respond to that demand. But I look at transit routes/services (particularly rail) as a foundation on which to build, and the transit agency as the vision-setter, champion, nurturer, marketer and even financier of that spin-off development. Ironically, Joe Calabrese at GCRTA noted that his agency can get better bond rating than the port authority can -- which makes sense since GCRTA is funded by a permanent sales tax and the port authority's property tax has to be renewed every five years. Yet, the port authority has the development finance expertise and, just as important, the desire to use it.

As one of Cleveland's oldest landmark buildings, the Halle Building is located at 1228 Euclid Avenue. That's a stretch. How does the reporter define landmark?

That was prior to the 1930s, when the Cleveland Painesville and Eastern interurban railway operated from downtown Cleveland on the city's streetcar tracks to Euclid, then on CP&E tracks out to Ashtabula (where it connected with another interurban). Back before the 1930s, it was possible to travel by interurban electric railroad from New York City to Chicago, by transferring from one interurban to another. It would take a couple of days, whereas steam railroads New York Central and Pennsylvania RR could do it overnight without transferring. Sorry for the history diversion....

When Mark Mallory was in the Ohio Senate, he was helpful to those of us pushing the high-speed rail Ohio Hub System. He cosponsored a couple pieces of rail-related legislation we were seeking and did all the right things for us, like going to bat for us among his Senate colleagues and so forth. He will be an asset to pro-transit interests in Cincinnati, and it looks like he's off to an early start. Imagine what that subway could enable if used as a local match for a federal grant. I wouldn't be surprised if Cincy could leverage a large enough federal grant to afford going as far north as I-275 along I-75, and possibly south into Covington. The alternatives analysis is already under way with OKI's I-75 study. After 80+ years, it's time to finish the subway and start a new transit chapter in Cincy!

I've read from several places that light-rail trains should have no trouble fitting in the tunnels. In fact, below is a very interesting article from 2002, in which a Parsons Brinckerhoff rep and the former Metro GM were quoted as to the whether the tunnels could still be used. Plus, they also note the tunnels could provide a local contribution of up to $100 million to leverage a federal share. I believe St. Louis' local contribution (the combined appraised value of the Mississippi River bridge and downtown freight tunnels) was about $80 million. http://www.forgottenoh.com/News/sub2002.html (click on the link to see subway pictures) Monday, July 29, 2002 Abandoned subway could save light rail plan ----- Tunnels in right spots and still usable, planners say By James Pilcher [email protected] The Cincinnati Enquirer The musty smell and graffiti are definitely there, as is the long-standing reputation as one of the city's biggest embarrassments. But that's not what transportation planners see when they look at the 80-year-old subway tunnels underneath Central Parkway. In fact, the 2.2 miles of concrete tubes - never used for the purpose for which they were designed - could eventually become the savior of the effort to bring light rail to the region. ......... “That investment that the city initially made could be worth 40-50 times that now, and I would imagine people would take that,” says Paul Jablonski, chief executive officer and general manager of Metro. “They're there, so why not use them?” ........

Below is another way the Blue-Green lines can be rerouted to Buckeye Road to reach the Opportunity Corridor. It should be noted that ODOT is planning to replace the Rapid "tunnel" beneath the Buckeye/Woodhill/Shaker intersection with a bridge. I don't know how far along these plans are, but if it's still early in the planning stage, maybe they can hold off to instead use the funding to fill in the tunnels someday for this new Blue-Green line routing. And perhaps some or all of this investment might be counted as part of the non-federal contribution to this project?

Gotta start somewhere. I reiterate an old message of mine that Ohio cities should follow St. Louis' lead, in which that city used the appraised value of an old Mississippi River bridge and some underground freight railroad tunnels downtown as part of that city's local match to leverage a federal grant to build light rail. That federal grant was large enough to build an 18-mile light rail line, including a half-dozen downtown subway stations. In other words, local governments in St. Louis didn't spend a single cent for building their first light-rail line. When that line exceeded ridership projections, there was enough local support for a new transit tax to build a second rail line and now a third is under construction.

That's great to see! I hope they look at this objectively, and with a strong land-use impact component.

A little insider info... I can't provide more details until RTA talks to ODOT (probably next week), but Calabrese will direct staff work with ODOT on developing data for a rail-in-the-boulevard alternative. If the data shows no fatal flaws and that the project can compete with other federal funding requests nationwide, then we will have something. If that's the case, it will still be a while before we see rail in the boulevard. Given the backlog of federal funding requests, it will probably mean that RTA would seek an OC right of way designed for the future inclusion of rail. We'll see!

Poll Question: http://www.dispatch.com/issue/issue.php?story=168458 The Columbus Dispatch Friday, February 24, 2006 The Hot Issue: If Columbus installed streetcars, would you use them to get around the city? 76% Yes 24% No ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ http://www.dispatch.com/news-story.php?story=dispatch/2006/02/24/20060224-A1-00.html Streetcars a desire for mayor Coleman outlines ambitious agenda in speech Friday, February 24, 2006 Jodi Andes THE COLUMBUS DISPATCH Picture dining in the Brewery District and hopping a streetcar to a hockey game in the Arena District. Or riding a trolley to Ohio State University from Downtown for a noon class — without paying, or hunting, for another parking spot. It’s an idea reminiscent of Columbus in the last century, rather than "the 21 st-century city" Mayor Michael B. Coleman talks about. But during his seventh State of the City speech last night, Coleman said businesses and the city will spend $250,000 to study whether a return to streetcars would be right for Columbus. .........

I'm a map guy, so a map of this would really help.

That's very good news. Remember that this is similar to how the mega-system ($4 billion plus) rail system in Denver got its meager start. It began with a short downtown rail line that was later extended. A second route was added. And then a third longer route to the southeast. That's when voters approved the mega expansion. You've got to start somewhere, just to overcome the skepticism and to create a buzz about rail so that more parts of the city say "me too." Noozer, do you have information as to the routing of Columbus' starter line? And the length in miles?

I noticed a few typos in the report, so I corrected them and put the updated report at the same web location as I listed several messages ago.

Thanks for the feedback. I don't think RTA will get rid of the rail service if they add buses to the OC Boulevard, at least not intentionally. They have too much invested in the rest of the Red Line on the East Side to simply throw it away. And two more stations are in the redevelopment pipeline -- East 55th and relocating East 120th to midway between Mayfield and Euclid. Having said that, I believe that adding buses to the OC Boulevard for access into the heights would weaken all East Side rail lines, and lead to the eventual downgrading or possibly abandoning one of them (namely, the east-side Red Line). I referred to that rail-weakening in this revised report. Odd thing, as RTA tries to limit increases in service hours, adding duplicate bus service to OC Boulevard would cause an increase in their service hours.

I should note that many suburbs also offer tax abatement for new construction or renovations to existing buildings. In Fairview Park, for example, their abatement policy is 100% for seven years. But I believe theirs applies only to commercial structures. I'll have to check.