As a Shaker resident we all referred to the trains as "the Shaker Rapid".  We had the "Shaker Rapid" and the "Van Aken Rapid" and we referred to the CTS as "the Cleveland Rapid".  My recollection is westsiders called the Rapid the "CTS".  I'm old school, my family members and people I grew up with still call it the "Cleveland Rapid".  I've never said "Red line" or "Blue line".  GTFOH!

 

 

You may be forgetting that I was an east-sider for my first 26 years, and lived in the Heights for 11 years until 1978. My church was on Shaker Boulevard. One of my first memories is from 1969, going with my oldest brother (he was 20) to drop off his girlfriend at the Green Road Rapid station so she could take the trains to the airport.

 

God I feel old  :|

 

You are.

 

I wasn't singling you out.  It was just a general comment.  My cousins who grew up on the westside, says "Cleveland Rapid to X station".  When I visit my cousin in Tremont, I'll say something like, "meet me at the West 25 Cleveland Rapid station" or, if I have an early flight and I can't take the Shaker rapid, I'll ask my cousin to drive me to the "University Circle Cleveland Rapid".  "Red Line" sounds so foreign and forced to me.  Or when we were younger and going to school my mom would say something like, "make sure jew look both ways so you wont get hit by thee Jay-ker Ra-peed"

^^Wow, I remember those old red & black Shaker schedules; that's a classic.  Used to have one ... probably buried somewhere in my stuff at Mom's place... CPL still does Book Mobile. 

^^Wow, I remember those old red & black Shaker schedules; that's a classic.  Used to have one ... probably buried somewhere in my stuff at Mom's place... CPL still does Book Mobile. 

 

I've got one from 1955 with ads for Halle's ("Take the shuttle bus from Union Terminal to our store!") and Higbee's.

^^Wow, I remember those old red & black Shaker schedules; that's a classic.  Used to have one ... probably buried somewhere in my stuff at Mom's place... CPL still does Book Mobile. 

 

I've got one from 1955 with ads for Halle's ("Take the shuttle bus from Union Terminal to our store!") and Higbee's.

 

Then when Halle's closed. Mr. Jing-a-ling would be on the train and it became the Higbee's Holiday train.

:wtf:

Is there anything left of the old Shaker lines,be it old tunnels,right of way,old station at tower city, that can used for future rapids?

^I've suggested that the Shaker station could be used for an LRT replacement of the Health Line.  It would follow the current HL (with a lot fewer stations), but at the western end of CSU, it would drop into a subway, doglegging under Huron to the Van Sweringen's grade separation KJP noted was built as part of the Union Terminal project in the late 1920s... This means the HL replacement line could move separately from the Blue/Green/Red trunk-line in/out of the reopened Shaker Station...

 

West of the Station, these LRTs could exit Tower City, then shift over to the lower level of the Detroit-Superior bridge where a still-extant station under W. 25th still exists. 

:wtf:

Is there anything left of the old Shaker lines,be it old tunnels,right of way,old station at tower city, that can used for future rapids?

 

Certainly. It's all still there.

:wtf:

Is there anything left of the old Shaker lines,be it old tunnels,right of way,old station at tower city, that can used for future rapids?

 

RTA will occasionally park off peak trains in the old shaker station.

 

 

an old schedule

 

 

It's a little lame that a trip from Green Road to Tower City takes 25% longer now than it did in 1974.

It's a little lame that a trip from Green Road to Tower City takes 25% longer now than it did in 1974.

 

I agree.  I see 2 major factors causing this... One is pretty obvious: that cab-signal/wayside signal switchover at E. 79 brings trains to a dead stop (with the driver manual locking/unlocking with a skeleton key), before trains can proceed... In the olden days, cars just cruised through E. 79, often without slowing down.

 

The other is at Shaker Square.  It seems that when the new traffic lights were installed there a few years ago, a concerted effort was made to allow auto traffic to clear the tracks by giving left turners off Shaker Blvd, both east and westbound, extra time -- with green lights on North and South Moreland...  Green lights for trains are on short cycles, and trains have a disproportionate amount of red-light time... This means that Shaker Sq. has become a major bottleneck in the system.  Westbound trains cruise slowly across the Shaker Sq. east roadway (NB North Moreland), only to get stuck in the square waiting for a green light at the west roadway (SB South Moreland)... Likewise, I've been on eastbound/outbound trains that take as much as 5 mins or more, just to get through the Square; rarely do such trains make the light after detraining passengers at the light...

 

Put this all together, including frequent slow zones with cars entering/exiting the E. 55th street yard where Cab signals often go off when there's no train anywhere nearby, ... and you've got much slower trains than the mid-70s when none of the above-mentioned schedule-slowing factors existed.

Sadly, all it takes is a trackside transponder to interact with a coded card attached to the side of a train (common on freight railroad cars to track shipments) to throw the switches and align the transit and street signals to get a Rapid train through Shaker Square. An All Aboard Ohio volunteer spent a few days last year measuring how long it took a Rapid to across from one side of Shaker Square to the other. I recall he said it usually took three minutes. That did not include station dwell time, if I remember correctly.

It's a little lame that a trip from Green Road to Tower City takes 25% longer now than it did in 1974.

 

I agree.  I see 2 major factors causing this... One is pretty obvious: that cab-signal/wayside signal switchover at E. 79 brings trains to a dead stop (with the driver manual locking/unlocking with a skeleton key), before trains can proceed... In the olden days, cars just cruised through E. 79, often without slowing down.

 

The other is at Shaker Square.  It seems that when the new traffic lights were installed there a few years ago, a concerted effort was made to allow auto traffic to clear the tracks by giving left turners off Shaker Blvd, both east and westbound, extra time -- with green lights on North and South Moreland...  Green lights for trains are on short cycles, and trains have a disproportionate amount of red-light time... This means that Shaker Sq. has become a major bottleneck in the system.  Westbound trains cruise slowly across the Shaker Sq. east roadway (NB North Moreland), only to get stuck in the square waiting for a green light at the west roadway (SB South Moreland)... Likewise, I've been on eastbound/outbound trains that take as much as 5 mins or more, just to get through the Square; rarely do such trains make the light after detraining passengers at the light...

 

Put this all together, including frequent slow zones with cars entering/exiting the E. 55th street yard where Cab signals often go off when there's no train anywhere nearby, ... and you've got much slower trains than the mid-70s when none of the above-mentioned schedule-slowing factors existed.

 

This sucks considering that trains would run at 4 min. intervals, during rush hour.  Recently I've seen trains wait in front of my building in order to create spacing.

Look at when these cities developed and how republican they are.

 

Like my friends there, they think public transportation is for the poor and under privileged.  Why should they ride a bus or train with the unwashed masses, that cannot afford a mid luxury or better vehicle.  The regional mentality is why spend for the "have nots"?

 

I hear you, but remember, Cleveland rejected Dual Hub in the late 1990s, when we had a Democrat in the WH (a Lewinsky-ed Dem, but a Dem nonetheless).  ... Then we ran our more progressive transit chief out of town, as I understand, largely b/c of his 'extravagance' in pushing Dual Hub and we got, actually sought out,. Joe C ...  A horrible trade imho, but whatareugonnado? … Point being: this episode is more reflective of Cleveland's political will towards transit (or more correctly, lack thereof) rather than the ability/non-ability to receive federal matching funds.

 

 

Don't be over dramatic.  You and I know that is hearsay.  Why is this all on Clevelands Lap?  The county and region also need to be better educated on the uses of public transportation.

 

Actually that's not hearsay.  Ron Tober left Cleveland when his Dual Hub was shot down as well as other rail expansion proposals, including commuter rail, were "shelved".  It's been reported on this board that he was seen as extravagant.  He went to Charlotte and opened their first LRT which is expanding.  Cleveland, instead, brought in Joe Calabrese, who is anti-rail and pro-bus (BRT that is).  Look, I know you're a big Joe C. defender and you're entitled to your own opinion, but you're not entitled to your own facts.

Cleveland didn't reject Dual Hub rail. The City of Cleveland was strongly in favor of it, so much so that it was willing to make a significant investment in it. However it had to pass muster with NOACA, of which its suburban board members said was too expensive and too much federal money for the region to spend on one project -- especially for rail in a dying part of town. There were also some inner city/social equity interests like Norman Krumholz who argued the region needed to spend more on bus services to serve the transit dependent. Their rationale was that rail could NOT generate development around stations. Sadly, all they had to do was point to our existing rail system to make their case. However, much has changed since (demographics as Millennials and downsizing Baby Boomers repping half the nation's population, greater interest in urban living, car-apathetic young people, high fuel/driving costs, environmental concerns, and the belated "discovery" of TOD by local developers, etc).

Cleveland.com gallery of our historic streetcars:

 

http://www.cleveland.com/metro/index.ssf/2015/03/clevelands_historic_streetcars.html#incart_gallery

 

I always enjoy looking at these, but then I always feel sad afterwards.

I always enjoy looking at these, but then I always feel sad afterwards.

 

Ditto.  I saw one of the commenters mention about the GM streetcar conspiracy, where GM had a major role in the decline of the streetcar.  How much of this is true as opposed to skepticism?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

I always enjoy looking at these, but then I always feel sad afterwards.

 

Ditto.  I saw one of the commenters mention about the GM streetcar conspiracy, where GM had a major role in the decline of the streetcar.  How much of this is true as opposed to skepticism?

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/General_Motors_streetcar_conspiracy

 

A federal district court in Chicago found GM et al guilty of criminal conspiracy charges, until it the appellate court reversed it. The Supreme Court refused to hear the case. Discuss here:

 

How, why and who tried to kill U.S. transit, cities

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,14860.0.html

 

Who Killed Cleveland's Streetcars?

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,10253.0.html

I've been looking through the old Plain Dealer archives about the Dual Hub saga, and the more I read, the more disappointed I am that the HealthLine was the end result of all that. One thing that I really don't like about the HealthLine is the difficulty of connecting to it from the other rail lines. The walk from the rail concourse in TC up to Public Square is a bit of a barrier. Once BRT was decided as the preferred alternative, was there ever discussion of bringing the bus line down into Tower City so that it could better connect with the rail lines? Obviously that would have involved more significant capital costs, but I was just curious if that had been studied. I wasn't able to find anything on that online.

There were no plans to bring the Euclid Corridor busway down into the rail station. The next best option would have been to have the buses serve Public Square and the portion of Prospect that runs directly over the rail station so that it would have been a quick vertical linkage between the two modes.

 

Another option that has been proposed in long-range plans was for an I-90 busway using the never-built Chicago-style rail line in in the median of I-90 from Lakewood to West 65th to join the existing Red Line corridor, share a station at Ohio City, and cross the RTA/CUT viaduct into downtown before ramping up on to city streets at Huron. The Ohio City station would have provided that easy rail/brt interface.

I've been looking through the old Plain Dealer archives about the Dual Hub saga, and the more I read, the more disappointed I am that the HealthLine was the end result of all that. One thing that I really don't like about the HealthLine is the difficulty of connecting to it from the other rail lines. The walk from the rail concourse in TC up to Public Square is a bit of a barrier. Once BRT was decided as the preferred alternative, was there ever discussion of bringing the bus line down into Tower City so that it could better connect with the rail lines? Obviously that would have involved more significant capital costs, but I was just curious if that had been studied. I wasn't able to find anything on that online.

 

As someone who uses the Green Line and the HL on occasion, I hate not only having to come up the long escalator then walk through TC then outside, but also having to cross the Public Sq roadway and come up to the HL station a distance from behind... not a few times, I've had to run for dear life (nearly getting hit by a cabbie) just to hop aboard a departing HL bus... The more you research the HL, the more you realize it was less a viable alternative for Dual Hub, for which it doesn't come close to duplicating, as it was a leverage federal funding for road/landscaping improvements along Euclid Ave.

Cool post from Reddit showing streetcar tracks still under the asphalt on Huron.  You can see a patch of old brick too.

 

It's about time!

 

Cleveland Detroit-Superior Veteran’s Memorial Bridge & Subway Tour will be 8/19/2017.

https://t.co/00Tn5g8vtK

Time for the Sparx City Hop August 18th

It includes access to and tour of the Veterans Memorial Bridge and Subway Station

 

It requires signing a waiver, however. Sign that waiver here: https://bit.ly/2bf2rep

 

BTW: DCA would like to remind SPARX City Hop hoppers that waivers are MANDATORY to access the Veterans Memorial Bridge and Subway Station and parking will NOT be available on site!

 

Glad Patton is doing this but it is ironic. Do a Google search on "Tom patton, lorain insurance crime" -- and while he's not the same guy as the state senator, they've run in the same circles with guys from a certain temporary employment firm on the East side.... YABO713[/member]

 

Avon Lake dedicates historic site, trolley

Bruce Walton ByBruce Walton | The Chronicle-TelegramPublished on Sept. 10, 2018

 

AVON LAKE — AVON LAKE — History was made Sunday as Ibrahima Sow of the Ohio History Connection dedicated Beach Park Station-Stop 65 as a historical site.

 

Stop 65, which was an original stop on the Lakeshore Electric Railway, will be denoted by a state marker that will stand alongside a newly refurbished Lake Shore Electric Car No. 38 in front of Beach Park Shopping Center.

 

Tom and Tomi Patton, of Avon Lake, owners of the historic Lake Avenue shopping center and trolley car No. 38, moved the car to the center’s parking lot after restoring it. A self-described history enthusiast, Tom Patton said the effort grew from learning about the intriguing history of Avon Lake.

 

Read More: http://chroniclet.com/Local-News/2018/09/10/Avon-Lake-dedicates-historic-site-trolley.html

 

THREAD: Okay, so I coloured up that proposed Cleveland rapid transit station underneath Public Square so we can work out what the heck is going on.

 

Basically, services come into/out of the station along four streets: Superior Ave NE (red), Superior Ave NW (blue), Euclid Ave (green), and Ontario St (yellow). Full colours indicate inbound services, light tints indicate outbound.

 

All four lines use a loop to allow them to turn around and head outbound: multiple platforms within each group (which I've named "A" through "D") would seem to allow for high-capacity loading and unloading of multiple streetcars, as well as some cross-platform transfers.

 

Of the four lines, only the Ontario St services don't interline with at least one other line: they always loop back on themselves. However, it looks like a cross-platform interchange at platform group "A" is possible to head outbound on Superior Ave NW (light blue).

 

Interlining is also available for Superior Ave NE <-> Superior Ave NW; and also for Euclid Ave <-> Superior Ave NW. There's no interlining between Euclid Ave and Superior Ave NE: riders would use the mezzanine level to change, moving between platform groups "B" and "D".

 

At first glance, the "B" group of platforms looks almost superfluous (apart from the afore-mentioned Euclid/Superior NE connection), but I think that has something to do with the dotted lines marked "future rapid transit" out along Superior Ave NW.

 

Basically, if this "Phase 2" was completed, then the "B" platforms would be reconfigured to allow a direct connection between Euclid Ave and Superior NW for larger rapid transit trainsets (as opposed to smaller individual streetcars). That configuration might look like this:

 

 

(Note that I've speculatively deleted the older streetcar connections between these two lines in "Phase 2", as the straighter, more direct connection gets rid of the need for them.)

^Amazing

 

I recently noticed trolley tracks popping up through the asphalt on John ave at Woodbine in Ohio City. Never realized there was a line here. Sure enough, I found a map from 1990 and it looks like there was a short jog on John as part of the Bridge Ave line. 

^Amazing

 

I recently noticed trolley tracks popping up through the asphalt on John ave at Woodbine in Ohio City. Never realized there was a line here. Sure enough, I found a map from 1990 and it looks like there was a short jog on John as part of the Bridge Ave line. 

 

I noticed them too! I was taking a bike ride and my tire was gripped by the groove in the track

Found some cool old maps. @KJP SOURCE: http://legacy.lib.utexas.edu/maps/historical/street_railway/

 

1902:

NEO 1913:

 

1913:

 

1898:

Edited April 7, 20205 yr by MuRrAy HiLL

Thanks. There were additional lines added after that last map was published, and most of the lines shown were extended. Many of the company names were changed through consolidations with other electric railways or, more often, through expansion as electric utilities. Most of these are the forerunners to First Energy, long after the Supreme Court ordered the transportation and utility operations separated to force electric utility service into rural areas away from the rail-served cities. This is from the back page of a book I have by the late Harry Christiansen (aka stooge of Albert (pave Cuyahoga County) Porter)....

Edited April 7, 20205 yr by KJP

^ Much thanks!  Very interesting stuff.

@KJP or anyone who might know - was there ever a direct connection for streetcars from the lower level of the Detroit Superior bridge to the rapid tracks under Terminal Tower?  I thought the streetcars came back up to street level just east of W9. But this comment I just saw on Facebook has me wondering - can anyone confirm whether this comment is true?
 

“The Rockefeller Building has a "platform" at the basement level for the streetcars, when they traveled on the lower level of the Detroit/Superior bridge.  I don't know if it exists anymore, I saw it in the late 70's/early 80's.  Not quite a rapid stop but similar.”

12 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

@KJP or anyone who might know - was there ever a direct connection for streetcars from the lower level of the Detroit Superior bridge to the rapid tracks under Terminal Tower?  I thought the streetcars came back up to street level just east of W9. But this comment I just saw on Facebook has me wondering - can anyone confirm whether this comment is true?
 

“The Rockefeller Building has a "platform" at the basement level for the streetcars, when they traveled on the lower level of the Detroit/Superior bridge.  I don't know if it exists anymore, I saw it in the late 70's/early 80's.  Not quite a rapid stop but similar.”

 

There was a provision for routing the streetcars from the lower level of the Detroit-Superior bridge directly into the Traction (aka Shaker Rapid) portion of Cleveland Union Terminal.

The Youtube channel Vanishing Underground has been producing some good videos on high capacity transit in Canada this past year. Recently though they've made a few videos south the border on the Network Evolution of Pittsburgh and now of Cleveland:

 

 

Redirected from the RTA thread....

 

On 1/19/2022 at 6:48 PM, LifeLongClevelander said:

 

When the rail line was proposed along Euclid Avenue, there were plans to build the line so that it would diverge from the Blue/Green joint tracks to run on Euclid.  It was also proposed that at Euclid and E.120th, the Red Line tracks would come down from the rapid transit right-of-way for street running.  Opposition to that routing grew from the reasoning that if the tracks would diverge at that point, it would mean the loss of the Free Clinic building on Euclid Avenue (nobody brought up that it could have meant a new, bigger and better location).  The operation on Euclid Avenue would have been provided with the Breda LRVs.  Mayor Mike White's opposition helped kill the Euclid Avenue rail line.

 

There was also a proposal to run electric trackless trolleys (the ones that run from overhead wires) on Euclid Avenue.  When Hayden Bus Garage was rebuilt during the 1990's, provisions were included that would have permitted overhead wires to be installed.

 

I don't remember Mike White opposing the Dual Hub rail line at all. In fact, I recall he was very supportive and heeded the advice of his Planning Director Hunter Morrison who was very supportive. What I recall is that while Cleveland officials on the NOACA board supported it, the suburban and ODOT officials did not as they said it was too much transit money ($700+ million) to spend on the city while the suburbs complained about not having enough transit service. The Dual Hub Corridor included a subway from Tower City to near CSU with a subway station at East 9th. In fact, one option had a $400+ million subway on that portion and dead-ending at CSU/PHS with the expectation that RTA could come back to NOACA later on an ask for more money to extend the rail line on a surface alignment down the middle of Euclid Avenue to UC and return to the Red Line alignment at Stokes/Fairhill. The $100+ million Shaker Connector would provide direct rail access from the Heights to both UC and downtown.

 

Here's some graphics from the 1995 Dual Hub Corridor Transitional Analysis (some alternatives were already removed by then -- Alt 4D was RTA's Locally Preferred Alternative).....

 

 

44 minutes ago, KJP said:

Redirected from the RTA thread....

 

 

I don't remember Mike White opposing the Dual Hub rail line at all. In fact, I recall he was very supportive and heeded the advice of his Planning Director Hunter Morrison who was very supportive. What I recall is that while Cleveland officials on the NOACA board supported it, the suburban and ODOT officials did not as they said it was too much transit money ($700+ million) to spend on the city while the suburbs complained about not having enough transit service. The Dual Hub Corridor included a subway from Tower City to near CSU with a subway station at East 9th. In fact, one option had a $400+ million subway on that portion and dead-ending at CSU/PHS with the expectation that RTA could come back to NOACA later on an ask for more money to extend the rail line on a surface alignment down the middle of Euclid Avenue to UC and return to the Red Line alignment at Stokes/Fairhill. The $100+ million Shaker Connector would provide direct rail access from the Heights to both UC and downtown.

 

Here's some graphics from the 1995 Dual Hub Corridor Transitional Analysis (some alternatives were already removed by then -- Alt 4D was RTA's Locally Preferred Alternative).....

 

 

I believe Mike White "cooled" on the Dual Hub Corridor rail project after RTA refused to throw the substantial money he wanted towards the construction of the new Cleveland Browns Stadium.  He was a very vindictive individual.

Edited January 25, 20223 yr by LifeLongClevelander

1 hour ago, LifeLongClevelander said:

I believe Mike White "cooled" on the Dual Hub Corridor rail project after RTA refused to throw the substantial money he wanted towards the construction of the new Cleveland Browns Stadium.  He was a very vindictive individual.

 

Combination of the two, if I recall correctly.  

 

The southern suburbs were already irked that they had handed over their systems to GCRTA and ended up with a system where pretty much every suburb-suburb trip had to bounce off downtown and no rail ventured into the southern half of the county.   They first heard “dual hub” and thought it was a great idea…until they found out the second hub was UC, not somewhere like Independence or Brecksville.   The way they perceived things, it was GCRTA demonstrating how much they truly rated and I’m not going to say they were wrong. 

 

So there was already strong opposition, which Mayor White passively "joined" for the reason stated.

6 hours ago, E Rocc said:

 

Combination of the two, if I recall correctly.  

 

The southern suburbs were already irked that they had handed over their systems to GCRTA and ended up with a system where pretty much every suburb-suburb trip had to bounce off downtown and no rail ventured into the southern half of the county.   They first heard “dual hub” and thought it was a great idea…until they found out the second hub was UC, not somewhere like Independence or Brecksville.   The way they perceived things, it was GCRTA demonstrating how much they truly rated and I’m not going to say they were wrong. 

 

So there was already strong opposition, which Mayor White passively "joined" for the reason stated.

There was also considerable resentment towards the money spent on rebuilding the former Shaker Rapid, money expended on rail equipment replacement and the new rail shop complex.  There had been no expansion of the system (aside from the Waterfront Line) and the lines served fairly limited areas.  In particular, the location of the Shaker lines through and near some of the wealthier suburbs coupled with the money invested to that part of the rail system jaded opinion.  The rest of the county felt that they were short-changed on capital improvement money.

 

When White could not get RTA to give in and make a considerable fund contribution for the new stadium, his attitude towards RTA changed significantly.  In his plans, he factored in tens of millions in funding from RTA to craft a financial package to get the new stadium built.  All RTA was willing to do was the West 3rd Station and that was it.  Remember, most of the Waterfront Line was self-funded by RTA instead of going the government funding route.  RTA did not have the extra funds to contribute.

 

As an aside regarding White's pettiness, it held no bounds.  It is well known that White likes trains.  He used to have a large layout set up in the city hall during the holiday season.  There was once a model train shop on Grovewood and E.156th in Collinwood.  As that area went downhill (nearby businesses were being broken into, damaged and robbed), the shop's owner relocated it to Euclid on East 200th.  Where White was a frequent patron of the shop when it was in Cleveland, he refused to set foot in the new location, even though it was extremely close to the city's border.  He took it as a personal insult that the shop relocated out of Cleveland.  This information was told to me by the shop's owner.

Edited January 26, 20223 yr by LifeLongClevelander

Love seeing past transit plans

 

 

On 1/25/2022 at 1:56 PM, E Rocc said:

The southern suburbs were already irked that they had handed over their systems to GCRTA and ended up with a system where pretty much every suburb-suburb trip had to bounce off downtown and no rail ventured into the southern half of the county.   They first heard “dual hub” and thought it was a great idea…until they found out the second hub was UC, not somewhere like Independence or Brecksville.   The way they perceived things, it was GCRTA demonstrating how much they truly rated and I’m not going to say they were wrong.

Are there any suburban communities today with the density and ridership to justify a remote hub?

Yesterday:

 

Update : great to see Ronayne observing this too:

And one more:

 

 

 

CTS history buffs, here’s another treat at the Northern Ohio Railway Museum in Seville. I think we need an AAO field trip down there. 

 

https://www.facebook.com/100063864240213/posts/pfbid0RStnndTiVegNdahtsERXbHyMaoUHzpWoZ3QVbwiJokN7ay6LtgQEoxmg6mqSWVYzl/?mibextid=tejx2t

 

 

This person makes extremely high quality videos. This one is on the history of Geauga County interurbans. 
 

 

Happy Birthday to the Red Line

 

Amazing that the line is 69 years old and the cars we ride on are 50ish? 

13 hours ago, Cleburger said:

Amazing that the line is 69 years old and the cars we ride on are 50ish? 

 

Red Line cars turn 40 this year. Shaker trains are 3-5  years older.

Matt Moss is going through the archives - look what he dug up:

 

17 minutes ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

Matt Moss is going through the archives - look what he dug up:

 

When was that plan/proposal made?. Must be pre 1968. An estimated cost of 1 billion back then would be about 10 billion or more today depending on the precise year. Unfortunately it would almost certainly be even more than that today with our inability to build things. That would make for a pretty comprehensive system though.

3 minutes ago, Ethan said:

When was that plan/proposal made?. Must be pre 1968. An estimated cost of 1 billion back then would be about 10 billion or more today depending on the precise year. Unfortunately it would almost certainly be even more than that today with our inability to build things. That would make for a pretty comprehensive system though.

The billion dollar estimate from that blurb was for the local highway system, not the CTS expansion.