KJP

The Lakefront Boulevard is probably going to be in the same location. Look at the development sites that open up between the boulevard and the tracks. And, for access to the south side of the tracks, I would think the extension of West 65th Street northward will be quite beneficial. There are no plans for incorporating a rail transit line into the new boulevard. Plans are tol add transit stops for existing buses. Transitioning one lane in each direction as bus-only lanes shouldn't be too difficult, creating a defacto BRT. KJP

If you want to see a detailed vision of the Lakefront Boulevard and proposed development sites, check out the Cleveland City Planning Commission's website at http://planning.city.cleveland.oh.us/lakefront/cpc.html and click on "transportation" projects. KJP

Traffic is going to be lighter when your highway system is designed for a state where the population growth never materialized. I recall that the number of Ohio highways (and the width of them in urban areas) proposed in the 1940s-1950s and built in subsequent years was predicated on the state's continued population growth, anticipated 50 years ago. In the 1950s, only four other states added more population than Ohio, according to Census data. In the 1960s, the state's population growth remained in the top 10. That changed starting in the 1970s, when the state's population growth fell to 34th, and fell further in the 1980s, to 38th, when Ohio added only 49,493 residents. While the state's growth picked up again in the 1990s, ranking 16th, the highway system had been designed for a much more populous Ohio, with more traffic. I don't think ODOT deserves credit for that, especially since ODOT didn't exist before 1972. Ohio Population 1900: 4,157,545 1910: 4,767,121 1920: 5,759,394 1930: 6,646,697 1940: 6,907,612 1950: 7,946,627 1960: 9,706,396 1970: 10,657,423 1980: 10,797,622 1990: 10,847,115 2000: 11,353,140 Also, note that while Ohio's population grew 4.7% in the 1990s, U.S. population growth was nearly triple that, at 13.1%. As to the condition of roads, I cannot forget the sight of so many deep potholes on I-480 last winter, along with a half-dozen cars disabled on the side of the road with flat tires. My own car hasn't been the same since my left-front wheel struck a deep pothole on I-90 at night. My car vibrates at speeds above 65. I can't say much for the condition of roads elsewhere. It's very tough to keep a nice car nice anymore.... KJP

^Absolutely. No reason why they couldn't, as long as the route was chosen carefully. KJP

I feel a little better. All those at DDOT/SMART should have concrete blocks chained to their ankles and be dumped in the Detroit River. KJP

Here's what today's (7-30) Detroit Free Press said about it: A proposed rapid-transit line between Detroit and Ann Arbor -- $100 million to SEMCOG for the preliminary engineering phase. SEMCOG is studying alternatives for the project, which include a light rail line and other forms of rapid transit. Usually, preliminary engineering represents about 10-20 percent of a project's total cost. So we're talking a $1 billion to $2 billion project? Does anyone remember the thread on this forum in which we discussed how most cities started their first rail transit lines with a bare-bones approach? Sorry Pope, but I don't have a lot confidence in Detroit-area officials being able to carry off such a massive, first-attempt at building rail transit. Heck, give me the $100 million and I'll upgrade the Detroit-Ann Arbor rail corridor, acquire recently retired Chicago Metra equipment, some of the locomotives Amtrak has stored, and I'll run a pretty frequent and fast rail service along that corridor. If that draws ridership, then start building more grandiose services. KJP

But NEOrail is no longer an active plan (ditto with Waterfront Phase II, Blue Line extension and Red Line extension -- all of which completed the major investment study phase). Technically, those three transit planning efforts may be mothballed, as RTA may still be the projects' sponsor. But I don't think NEOrail has a sponsor anymore. Even if it does, it would be NOACA, which means I'll stick with my original contention that it has no sponsor.... KJP

By the way, don't be mad at ODOT (yes, me of all people is actually saying that!). The way the congressional earmarks in the transportation reauthorization work is that each congressperson mails out a request to mayors, transit agencies, county engineers, etc etc. to see if they would like to request that a project be included in the bill. If no Ohio mayor, transit agency or other project sponsor told their congressperson to include a meaningful transit project, then ODOT shouldn't be blamed. Besides, other than the Columbus North Corridor LRT, what other rail project is far enough along in the planning process to be eligible for federal funding? None that I can think of. KJP

http://www.riderta.com/pressreleaselist.asp?listingid=776 RTA News Wednesday, July 27, 2005 Mid-year report: RTA ridership up 5 percent CLEVELAND – Boosted by high gas prices, RTA ridership continues to climb. In fact, ridership has risen for eight straight quarters. The last time that happened was 1996-1998, when the Waterfront Line began operation. Ridership for the first six months was up 4.9 percent, or 1.3 million rides, over the same period last year. “I believe this increase is the result of two factors,” says Joe Calabrese, RTA CEO & General Manager. “One factor is the increasing price of gasoline, and the other fact is that the quality of our service continues to improve. In a recent survey, more than 75 percent of customers interviewed rated our service value as good to excellent.” Looking at individual modes, Paratransit was up 40.5 percent, Circulators 10.4 percent, heavy rail 9.5 percent, light rail 7.7 percent and big bus 4.0 percent. These figures represent: The largest ridership increase since Circulators began operation in 1997. The largest bus ridership since 2000. The largest total Red Line ridership since 2001. The largest total Light Rail and total Rapid ridership 2002. RTA’s average weekday ridership is now more than 197,000, up 5.5 percent from last year. In June, Community Circulator ridership grew for the 13th straight month. June’s ridership was 194,437 – about 10,000 more riders than June 2004. The Lakewood Community Circulator continues to lead the pack, followed by Euclid, Tremont and Kamm’s-Puritas. The $3 All-Day Pass continues to be popular, as it usage grew 7.4 percent in June. END

$100 million for a commuter rail study? Are you sure that's just for a study? I would think that, for $100 million, they would be able to get some service running. KJP

^And would get rid of a crappy, low-class store! KJP

An interesting article can be found at: http://www.lightrailnow.org/facts/fa_brt007.htm Some cost data comparisons between BRT and LRT appear near the end of the article. KJP

Yes, the bus transit tunnel in Seattle, for one. It was built with rails in the pavement. Now, they are adding LRT on both sides of the tunnel to run trains through it. I'm not sure, but I think Pittsburgh's East Busway also was designed for a future conversion to rail. Their transit tunnel under Mt. Washington has both LRT and buses routed through it. I go back to my previous plan of extending one of the Shaker Lines across the lower level of the Detroit-Superior bridge, up through the center of the Main Avenue Bridge's western approach, and down the middle of the Shoreway/Lakefront Boulevard to Clifton. Using $25 million per mile as a guesstimate, it could cost about $250 million to extend it to the Westlake Park-n-Ride. As often happens, though, it will probably cost more. KJP

Any city that has an ounce of pride doesn't want to play second fiddle to another city of similar size, by requiring its residents to make transfers to access international flights. Airport planners reminded me that Cleveland use to have numerous international flights when United had a hub here, prior to the 1980s. The planners believe that market still exists here, but said Cleveland needs to be more aggressive in working with the airlines to restore those international services. KJP

Any updates to the list in the first message? I added the rendering of the Avenue District. Any other changes or modifications?? KJP

By the way, thanks for all your compliments! I recently started a nonprofit consultancy, called NEOtrans, as a program of a nonprofit organization. I am doing transportation and land-use visioning, public outreach and media relations for clients, as well as for the nonprofit organization. The consultancy's website is www.neotrans.org -- but is very early on the design process! But, I do have a public forum there (password-protected), so stop by! KJP

I live on Clifton and a subway would be totally out of proportion for the traffic and densities on this street. Through Lakewood, Clifton is all residential and mostly single-family homes. I would like to see light-rail here, but on the surface. KJP

Concrete info? :roll: I hope you didn't intend that! But, yes, here's a press release from last year... http://www.city.cleveland.oh.us/mayor/press/2004/200408/08_10_2004.html CLEVELAND, August 10, 2004 —Mayor Jane L. Campbell joined Airport Director, John Mok, and other civic and community partners to celebrate the new extended runway expansion at Cleveland Hopkins. The newly completed runway, designated as 6L-24R, opened for service on August 5th at 9,000 feet, with the landing of a Continental flight. Mayor Campbell also announced plans for extending the airport’s other main runway from 9,000 to 11,000 feet, which will support overseas travel to the Pacific Rim, and for possibly renovating or rebuilding the 50-year-old airport terminal. (The rest is available at the link above) KJP

Among all the service changes in the western suburbs, note the highlighted text in the following press release, which will be sent out by RTA tomorrow.... KJP __________________________ Thursday, July 28, 2005 MEDIA CONTACT: Jerry Masek or Colleen Verbus, 216.566.5211 Posted at rideRTA.com>releases Service changes set for Aug. 28 CLEVELAND – On Aug. 28, the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (RTA) will introduce service changes in Northwest Cuyahoga County. “We believe these changes will greatly improve service to the Northwest area, increase ridership and help the thousands of loyal customers we have there,” says Joe Calabrese, CEO and General Manager. “We held eight community meetings in May, and feedback from our customers significantly change and improved our original proposals.” New #822 RTA will introduce the #822 Southwest Community Circulator, which replaces the current #53 big-bus route. Service will operate from the Westgate Transit Center via Great Northern Mall to Westlake’s Crocker Park, where a new prototype bus shelter has been erected near Blake’s Seafood Restaurant. The Circulator, RTA’s 12th, was conceived by the staff of the former North Olmsted Municipal Line (NOMBL). Service will be hourly in both directions, six days a week, from 9:30 a.m.-6:30 p.m. Fare is 75 cents. The route: Westgate Transit Center to Center Ridge Road, W. 210th St., Lorain Road, W. 220th St., Mastick Road, Clague Road, Brookpark Road, Columbia Road, Country Club Blvd., Lorain Road, Dover Center Road, Center Ridge Road to St. John West Shore Hospital, and Crocker Road to Crocker Park. New #55X and #55F The #55CX, #55NX and #55SX will be restructured to form the #55X Clifton and the #55F West Shore Flyer. The #55X will operate between the Westgate Transit Center and downtown via Wagar Road, Detroit Road, Sloane Ave., W. Clifton Blvd., Clifton Blvd. and the West Shoreway. Some weekday trips will continue to operate via Nicholson Ave., Cove Ave. and Edgewater Dr. (- more -) Page 2, RTA service Customers seeking fast service to downtown will appreciate #55F West Shore Flyer service. It will provide rush-hour service in the peak direction from Avon Lake, Bay Village and Westlake. It replaces service currently provided by the #31X Avon Lake (west of Bradley Road), # 46FWestlake and #55CX Clifton-Lake. As a “flyer” bus, the #55F will make limited stops on Clifton Blvd. in Lakewood and Cleveland. It will stop to pick-up and drop-off customers at: W. Clifton Blvd., Belle Ave., Nicholson Ave., Cove Ave., W. 117th St., W. 110th St. and West Blvd. RTA will work to transition this premium service into a Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) zone, with features similar to the Euclid Corridor Silver Line now under construction, Calabrese says. These improvements are the first step in this transition. Because Clifton Blvd. is a heavily-used transit corridor, RTA officials want to ensure there is first-class service. “In peak hours, there should be a bus on Clifton Blvd. every five minutes,” says Calabrese. #43, #49/#49F Two new routes that should greatly enhance service. The #43 Lake-Wolf route will operate on weekdays between the Triskett Rapid Station and Bay Village. The route will operate via Lakewood Heights Blvd., I-90, Riverside Dr., W. Clifton Blvd., Clifton Blvd., Lake Road, Clague Road and Wolf Road. The #43 will provide weekday service to Bay Village and Rocky River during times the # 55F West Shore Flyer is not operating. Current #55SX service on Center Ridge Road will be provided by the new #49/#49F Center Ridge route. The #49/#49F Center Ridge route replaces the #55SX on Center Ridge Road, and offers a similar level of service. The #49 will operate seven days a week between St. John West Shore Hospital and the Triskett Rapid Station, via Center Ridge Road, Wooster Road and I-90. The #49F will operate during rush hours (AM eastbound, PM westbound) between the hospital and downtown via I-90. ( - more -) Page 3, RTA service No service, new service After Aug. 28, there will be no bus service on some segments of streets currently served: • Columbia Road, between Brookpark Road and Center Ridge Road • Wagar Road, between Detroit Road and Lake Road. • Lakeview Road, between Hilliard Blvd. and Detroit Road • Lake Road, between Cahoon Road and Clague Road. • Hilliard Blvd., between Columbia Road and Clague Road, and between River Oaks Dr. and Wagar Road. Weekend service will be discontinued on Lake Road, between Wagar Road and W. Clifton Blvd. These streets now have little or no service. Starting Aug. 29, they will have service six days a week. • Crocker Road, between Health Campus Dr. and Crocker Park. • Dover Center Road, between Lorain Road and Center Ridge Road. Elsewhere…. New timetables will go into effect for a number of other bus routes on Aug. 28. Timetables for these routes reflect minor schedule adjustments and/or map updates: #4, #7/7X, #9/9X, #10, #20A, #22, #25B/W, #30, #32/32X, #35, #38, #40, #45Y/R, #46, #48/48A, #70, #75X, #76X, #79A/B, #81, #86, #94, #247, #326, #804 and #808. New timetables are also being issued for the #14, #15/#15A, #15F, #19, #33 and #147, to incorporate minor route changes that are already in effect. The timetables for these routes may also contain minor schedule adjustments. The end of summer also brings the end of two seasonal RTA bus routes. The #20C, which operates between Public Square and the Metroparks Zoo, runs through Aug. 27. The #441, which operates from the end of the Blue Line in Shaker Heights to the entrance of Geauga Lake Park in Aurora, runs through Sept. 5. Where to pick up new timetables New timetables are now being printed and will be posted as soon as possible on www.rideRTA.com. They will also be available at: • RTA’s Main Office, 1240 W. Sixth St. • Customer Service Center at Tower City For more information or to receive a new timetable by mail, call the RTAnswerline, 216-621-9500. # # #

Your guess is correct. Now that you mention it, RTA officials did say that part of their reasoning was the proximity of the Tower City station and because they made an investment in the walkway to Gateway. However, the two stations aren't much farther apart than downtown stations in other cities. Yet, Cleveland has only one downtown station on the Red Line. My proposed station would be a logical second downtown stop. All of this is why Tower City needs some high-rise housing around it so it doesn't have to rely on a few traffic sources to survive. Build the traffic base and both stations become viable. I proposed a development scheme for the second station. Forest City needs to develop one for theirs. KJP

I spoke to RTA and Cleveland Growth Association. RTA said the station couldn't be there, because it would conflict with the diverging trackage into/out of Tower City Center. My response was: then shorten the lead tracks. Their response: do you know how much that would cost? My response: yes, so what? My contact at the Growth Association asked what RTA said about my idea. Now you know why I get so pissed off at this f***ing city sometimes. KJP

Yes. I posted it in the transportation section, at: http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=4426.msg43163#msg43163 KJP

Another poster asked me to make available a diagram I drew, based on the future plans for Hopkins developed by airport officials. Thus, what appears below is not an official diagram -- just my interpretation of what's planned based on conversations I've had with airport officials. And, of course I had to add a high-speed rail link, next to a rerouted RTA Red Line. The Red Line should be part of the new terminal, officials said.... Please do not publish this image without my permission. KJP

Here is what I proposed for that site several years ago... KJP

Wimwar, I was looking at the office building Paul posted, thinking that was the proposed project (I wish it was!). I since visited the Ontario Pointe website and adjusted my response (OK, I totally re-wrote it!). KJP