I was referring to the ENTIRE transit system not just that station. It is difficult to be dependent on a system that doesn't go where you need to go, in a reasonable amount of time.  You are more likely to keep the car around or use other forms for of transportation that can do what the transit system cannot.

 

That hasn't stopped all the other developers and investors from moving forward. With 39 route miles of rail line and 52 stations, that's plenty of rail infrastructure to build a rail-only lifestyle around. Of course, rail riders will also use buses, walk, bike and, dare I say!, drive their own cars or car-share. In fact, most of the people who would live at this East 14th station-area development would probably have their own cars. But some will use transit (probably the usual 5-10 percent). But many more than that will use the station to reach jobs at shops and restaurants in the new neighborhood. My prediction is this neighborhood could easily accommodate 1,500 housing units. That's an average of about two persons per household, or 3,000 people. If 5% of those board at the station each day, that's 150 people. If 10% board at the station, that's 300. I also estimated about 300,000 square feet of commercial space -- of which about 150 to 250 square feet of commercial space is allocated per worker. So let's use 200 as the average. That's 1,500 workers. If 5% of them board at the station, that's 75 people. If 10% board there, that's 150 people. So the new development amounts to 225 to 450 people boarding at the station per day. There are 100 people a day who board at the existing East 34th station and will probably use the relocated station, although I think it will be more because it will be a new, more attractive and better-located station with respect to Campus District assets. But let's stick with the 100 people for sake of conservatism. So now we're talking 325 to 550 people boarding at the station per day, or 118,625 to 200,750 boardings per year. I'd call that justified.

^ Because they never intended on rail, just BRT, which lakewood is already getting.

 

Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense for a city that has pockets of density up to 15,000 people/mile and it doesn't sound like local transit planning is being done in a systematic, research-driven approach.

Doesn't seem to make a lot of sense for a city that has pockets of density up to 15,000 people/mile and it doesn't sound like local transit planning is being done in a systematic, research-driven approach.

 

Read the Green City Blue Lake article about transit expansion in Cleveland and note the quotes from Joe C. He believes Enhance Clifton project is the prototype for GCRTA-led transit corridor-wide improvements.

I think these problems will be solved. There is  a forty year trend towards development in dense downtown areas which is a reversal of the forty year trend out to the suburbs.

 

I like the Westshore transit idea a lot. With all the new bus booths being built on Clifton Ave., I am hoping that RTA will increase frequency and days of service on the bus that runs on Clifton.

 

Does anyone know about the rumor that there is  a plan to have trolleys run from downtown to the Edgewater neighborhood. One of the peopel working at a coffee shop told me that he thought stores and restaurant owners on Clifton were thinking of paying for trolleys to bring people from downtown to

Edgewater.

 

What I can't understand is why RTA proposed to study extending the Red Line to the NE from Stokes-Windermere where it passes mostly industrial sites along the RR ROW and NOT westward along NS ROW into/through Lakewood, the 2nd most densely populated city between NYC and Philadelphia (behind Hamtramck, MI)?

 

Because it's not in Cleveland proper, would be the short and blunt answer.

 

The privately funded trolley would be a tremendous idea, if it could be made to happen.  Mass transit need not be public transit.

Of course I drove here. There's no station here yet! Wow, this is chicken-n-egg silliness. If having all three rail lines here is good enough for a football stadium (which won't be here in my lifetime), then it's good enough to build a entire neighborhood from scratch. People with more influence and wherewithal than I have recommended a station and supportive development for this site. Maybe one day more of you will come along.

 

It’s not really comparable because Crocker Park came “pre-gentrified”, politically as well as economically.  It ‘s in an area where it could easily be built for the use of the more affluent.  It’s an example of how density can work, and work well, where everyone has certain things in common.  Chicago’s had some success with this as well.

 

I’m always skeptical of trying to build a neighborhood from scratch because of all the little details that need to come together to make one attractive, particularly to those with options.  It’s especially true in this area. 

 

However, if you’re going to spend this kind of money what I would recommend is building a series of more modern and well designed public housing areas to replace that ultimate failure of intelligent urban planning, Lakeview Terrace (the pet peeve of my urbanist side).  From what I understand, the conditions in those buildings will make many of them uninhabitable within the next decade anyway.  Mix them in with places for industry or retail, and serve it well with buses.

 

Then level that whole area in the old Angle, run your West Shore Line through it, and open it up to private development.  The amenities are already there.  You’ll expand the W. 25th momentum simply by removing this millstone from its neck, and even a cynic like me would expect it to take off from there.

 

I was referring to the ENTIRE transit system not just that station. It is difficult to be dependent on a system that doesn't go where you need to go, in a reasonable amount of time.  You are more likely to keep the car around or use other forms for of transportation that can do what the transit system cannot.

 

That hasn't stopped all the other developers and investors from moving forward. With 39 route miles of rail line and 52 stations, that's plenty of rail infrastructure to build a rail-only lifestyle around. Of course, rail riders will also use buses, walk, bike and, dare I say!, drive their own cars or car-share. In fact, most of the people who would live at this East 14th station-area development would probably have their own cars. But some will use transit (probably the usual 5-10 percent). But many more than that will use the station to reach jobs at shops and restaurants in the new neighborhood. My prediction is this neighborhood could easily accommodate 1,500 housing units. That's an average of about two persons per household, or 3,000 people. If 5% of those board at the station each day, that's 150 people. If 10% board at the station, that's 300. I also estimated about 300,000 square feet of commercial space -- of which about 150 to 250 square feet of commercial space is allocated per worker. So let's use 200 as the average. That's 1,500 workers. If 5% of them board at the station, that's 75 people. If 10% board there, that's 150 people. So the new development amounts to 225 to 450 people boarding at the station per day. There are 100 people a day who board at the existing East 34th station and will probably use the relocated station, although I think it will be more because it will be a new, more attractive and better-located station with respect to Campus District assets. But let's stick with the 100 people for sake of conservatism. So now we're talking 325 to 550 people boarding at the station per day, or 118,625 to 200,750 boardings per year. I'd call that justified.

 

how do i get to Crocker park from here?

 

Take the Redline to west 117th RTS then take a bus that runs every hour.

 

or a 30min Drive

 

how do i get to Beachwood place?

 

Take the Redline to tower city take green line to the end of the line then take a bus that runs every hour

 

or a 30min Drive

 

how do i get to Independence from here?

 

Take the redline to tower city take a bus that runs every hour

 

or a 30min Drive

 

How do i get to Cleveland state university from here?

 

Walk for 15-20 mins, crossing multiple freeway off ramps.

 

Pay 5 bux to take Redline to tower city and transfer to the HL or trolley.

 

By bike 10 minute ride though unfriendly and dangerous streets.

 

or a short drive

 

How do I get to the Heinens on East 9th street?

 

Walk for 15 mins, crossing multiple freeway off ramps.

 

Pay 5 bux to take Redline to tower city and transfer to the HL or trolley.

 

By bike 10 minute ride though unfriendly and dangerous streets.

 

or short drive

 

How do i get to South Park Mall from here?

 

Take the redline to tower city take the commuter bus to a park and ride and wait on a bus

 

or 30 min drive

 

 

You cannot expect anyone to go car free or even car light with a trabnsit system that isn't in any way competitive with driving, especially in an area built for cars and with few amenities within walking distance.

 

people with options are going car free and car light are doing so in Ohio City and Tremont because those areas have amenities within them and they are walk-able and bike-able areas.  transit is considered the 3rd to 4th option for them because it simply doesn't work well enough for them.

 

Of course I drove here. There's no station here yet! Wow, this is chicken-n-egg silliness. If having all three rail lines here is good enough for a football stadium (which won't be here in my lifetime), then it's good enough to build a entire neighborhood from scratch. People with more influence and wherewithal than I have recommended a station and supportive development for this site. Maybe one day more of you will come along.

 

It’s not really comparable because Crocker Park came “pre-gentrified”, politically as well as economically.  It ‘s in an area where it could easily be built for the use of the more affluent.  It’s an example of how density can work, and work well, where everyone has certain things in common.  Chicago’s had some success with this as well.

 

I’m always skeptical of trying to build a neighborhood from scratch because of all the little details that need to come together to make one attractive, particularly to those with options.  It’s especially true in this area. 

 

However, if you’re going to spend this kind of money what I would recommend is building a series of more modern and well designed public housing areas to replace that ultimate failure of intelligent urban planning, Lakeview Terrace (the pet peeve of my urbanist side).  From what I understand, the conditions in those buildings will make many of them uninhabitable within the next decade anyway.  Mix them in with places for industry or retail, and serve it well with buses.

 

Then level that whole area in the old Angle, run your West Shore Line through it, and open it up to private development.  The amenities are already there.  You’ll expand the W. 25th momentum simply by removing this millstone from its neck, and even a cynic like me would expect it to take off from there.

 

 

you do know that Lakeview terrace is adjacent to a water treatment plant, and the Port of Cleveland's bulk shipping docks, right?While the Shoreway effectively disconnects it from Ohio City, it has great views of the salt mines, piles of bulk material and alot of dust.

 

there are better areas to redevelop than lake view terrace, there is a reason they put poor people there, the land and it's environs have issues. 

I have no idea why you're bringing up developments that aren't on rail lines. Maybe you could have spent your time more wisely listing those that are. Whatever. I'm sorry you're having such a hard time understanding this, Biker. I hope we can discuss this again after it gets built. And it will.

Just a reminder, because it seems to pop up pretty often on the Cleveland transit threads, there is very little potential to use TIF for transit projects in Cleveland.  Residential development is already 100% tax abated for several years and new-build commercial development on raw land like this often uses TIF to finance the basic infrastructure or even the project itself.  There's really no property tax flow left to be redirected.  The only other tax flow is income tax, and I doubt the city (or the rating agencies) wants to go down that road.

Just a reminder, because it seems to pop up pretty often on the Cleveland transit threads, there is very little potential to use TIF for transit projects in Cleveland.  Residential development is already 100% tax abated for several years and new-build commercial development on raw land like this often uses TIF to finance the basic infrastructure or even the project itself.  There's really no property tax flow left to be redirected.  The only other tax flow is income tax, and I doubt the city (or the rating agencies) wants to go down that road.

 

Some developers in a specific area of the city are being approached about forgoing the abatement to instead use that tax revenue that would otherwise have been abated to pay for constructing and operating rail transit-supportive infrastructure. The response reportedly has been supportive. I hope to be able to discuss this in more detail in the future.

^^^ Biker, I’ve talked to, and know of, several (close to many) people who are carefree in Ohio City and a few car-lighters in Tremont.  Transit is the 1st option, not the 3rd or 4th in Ohio City – the above group practically lives on the Red Line (airport, downtown (including TC, E. 4th, WHD, FEB, etc.) U. Circle/Little Italy, Detroit-Shoreway and Edgewater, the W. 117 big box stores, etc…), and the (9) bus lines fanning out all over the West Side with short hops (ie Metro Health, Zoo, the Lorain Antiques area(s), etc.) and into the close-in burbs… Yeah, Tremont’s a little dicey-er transit-wise because they have is the #81 bus (although it’s a 24/7 route) or a .7 mile walk to the Red Line @ Ohio City… but transit still allows for a car-lite existence in Tremont… And you can’t dismiss cab services, which especially has been plentiful in Ohio City in the past few years with the explosive restaurant/retail growth in the Market Square district allow W. 25th. 

 

Also, you can’t dismiss the car-free options in University Circle, Detroit-Shoreway, Shaker Square, Cudell, West Park, Puritas, the Campus District and, yes, East Cleveland (even given the current very difficult living conditions there, although there are a few livable pockets, like the new Circle East development on the HL just up from U. Circle…

 

And downtown?  I wouldn’t even want a car if I lived down there – given it’s compact, walkable nature, let alone the abundance of transit (and taxi) options including free trolleys everywhere, the HL, the Rapid (yes, connecting FEB and Ohio City, which is almost like a sub-downtown) and regular bus lines, some 24-hour routes, the filter along Prospect, Ontario, Superior, and St. Clair, to name a few downtown streets.

 

I know you feel Cleveland’s transit network sucks and you constantly criticize its shortcomings (some of it fair, but a lot unfair imho), but I’ll take it over a majority of major cities in the USA, esp here in the Midwest.

 

^^KJP, if that kind of arrangement works out, I'll be very excited to hear about it, but I suspect it only begins to make sense to a developer in pretty narrow circumstances.  I'd be delighted to be proven wrong.

^^^ Biker,

 

I know you feel Cleveland’s transit network sucks and you constantly criticize its shortcomings (some of it fair, but a lot unfair imho), but I’ll take it over a majority of major cities in the USA, esp here in the Midwest.

 

I think Cleveland did decent with transit 30 years ago but continues to fall behind each passing year.  Here is a list of the top 25 metropolitan areas. Cleveland is better than some but I would say far from the majority. Which cities do you think Cleveland has better transit than? Ridership is near the bottom which reflects the system. Other cities are expanding and improving their systems while we sit back and strongly oppose any expansion which doesn't involve slow moving rubber wheels. Edit: also RTA has to be the worst transit organization in the country when it comes down to ridership/station ridership statistics and information.

New York

Los Angeles

Chicago

Washington DC

San Francisco

Boston

Philadelphia

Dallas

Miami

Houston

Atlanta

Detroit

Phoenix

Minneapolis

Cleveland

Seattle

Denver

San Diego

Portland

Orlando

St. Louis

Tampa

Baltimore

Pittsburgh

Sacramento

Charlotte

I hear you DM4.  Few UOers have expressed more displeasure than me with the lackluster growth and vision of the current JoeC/RTA administration (in addition to NOACAction, other local officials like the Mayer, County exec and various city council members where rail goes right through their district).  This being true, it is also true that Cleveland is finally growing along WITH its transit system, most notably in the form of TOD around rail.  In MRN, Inc, you have a major local developer that explicitly has developed projects – E. 4, Uptown and in Market Square/Ohio City, to be near Red Line rail stations… Flats East Bank is developing around a waterfront station.  And in other areas, at Farnsleigh/Warrensville/Van Aken, at Lee Road, Detroit Shoreway, Little Italy and in/around Shaker Square, that have recently built or are building TOD development (and that doesn’t even count still planned/not yet started major TOD projects like Intesa, the Duck Island apts,  Market Square or the Univ. Circle high rise(s) or the 120+ units possibly being added to already dense Little Italy… Fact is, Cleveland experiencing more TOD growth since the Van Sweringen/immediate post Van Sweringen days ending in the 1940s…. Add to this the fact that just as Cleveland was completing its last major rail expansion in the late 1960s, the city, esp its downtown, experienced near-unprecedented (in the US) decline in population and business loss . . . and then there was the 2008 recession that clubbed the town like no other.  To consider where we are now development-wise/downtown-wise, with all these still-fresh obstacles (and still many more to overcome), is mindboggling.  And as we see, with downtown and TOD development, comes resurgent rider numbers… and even more encouraging is that young professionals are turning to the rails and buses unlike their oft-jaded older counterparts.

 

… and as for rider-ship, I don’t always look at those numbers as the Holy Grail.  Sure, they can be somewhat indicative, but don’t always tell the whole story.  In Cleveland, we have significant underused transit infrastructure plus an embarrassment of riches when it comes to the ease of movement in terms of driving (including easy-access freeways) and transit – few cities enjoy our balance.  And let’s face it, part of this is the collective mentality must overcome: like transit is for the poor and minorities; transit is so in convenient -- like it’s sooo tough to walk from Tower City to – how can I contain myself – Euclid/E. 9th… or even E. 6th – never mind that in that great transit mecca known as Chicago, L riders to hotspots along Michigan Ave, Streeterville and Navy Pier must often schlep 5, 6 and 7 blocks from rail stations … and we’re talking Chicago-sized blocks, not the smaller Cleveland blocks (and Chicago’s just one example) …. Ed FitzGerald said it best after people were shocked when we beat out Dallas for the 2016 RNC convention: Cleveland’s worst enemies/biggest critics are those who have either never been here or who have never been anywhere else.

 

Btw, we did add the Health Line in 2008 – not my cup of tea, but it IS a transit improvement.

Also, many of the cities you cite as having grown their transit systems recently are cities that had nothing and are trying to catch up with the Clevelands of the world – with many (Charlotte, Phoenix, Detroit and Orlando, to name a few) are still significantly inferior to Cleveland transit-wise. 

I have no idea why you're bringing up developments that aren't on rail lines. Maybe you could have spent your time more wisely listing those that are. Whatever. I'm sorry you're having such a hard time understanding this, Biker. I hope we can discuss this again after it gets built. And it will.

 

What isn't there determines whether or not people retain their cars, and the area is truly transit oriented.

you are asking people to live in a Area isolated from nearby amenities simply because there is a rail station there. 

 

People aren't moving to Little Italy just because there is good transit access, they are moving there because of everything else that the neighborhood provides. the same can be said about Ohio city, and FEB, there was already something there to build around, and it  happened to have good transit access.

 

^^^ Biker, I’ve talked to, and know of, several (close to many) people who are carefree in Ohio City and a few car-lighters in Tremont.  Transit is the 1st option, not the 3rd or 4th in Ohio City – the above group practically lives on the Red Line (airport, downtown (including TC, E. 4th, WHD, FEB, etc.) U. Circle/Little Italy, Detroit-Shoreway and Edgewater, the W. 117 big box stores, etc…), and the (9) bus lines fanning out all over the West Side with short hops (ie Metro Health, Zoo, the Lorain Antiques area(s), etc.) and into the close-in burbs… Yeah, Tremont’s a little dicey-er transit-wise because they have is the #81 bus (although it’s a 24/7 route) or a .7 mile walk to the Red Line @ Ohio City… but transit still allows for a car-lite existence in Tremont… And you can’t dismiss cab services, which especially has been plentiful in Ohio City in the past few years with the explosive restaurant/retail growth in the Market Square district allow W. 25th. 

 

You cannot tie that growth to transit if you could you wouldn't have the traffic and parking issue they have today.

 

this is why you need to move towards a streetcar on west 25th to simplify transit in the neighborhood.

 

Also, you can’t dismiss the car-free options in University Circle, Detroit-Shoreway, Shaker Square, Cudell, West Park, Puritas, the Campus District and, yes, East Cleveland (even given the current very difficult living conditions there, although there are a few livable pockets, like the new Circle East development on the HL just up from U. Circle…

 

And downtown?  I wouldn’t even want a car if I lived down there – given it’s compact, walkable nature, let alone the abundance of transit (and taxi) options including free trolleys everywhere, the HL, the Rapid (yes, connecting FEB and Ohio City, which is almost like a sub-downtown) and regular bus lines, some 24-hour routes, the filter along Prospect, Ontario, Superior, and St. Clair, to name a few downtown streets.

 

there Are Car free options available throughout the Region. the question is why would anyone expect one station in the middle of an former industrial area and cut off from downtown by massive roads and freeways to create a Car-free community? It's doesn't happen, it took decades to build a Car-free/car-lite environment in Ohio City, but as you mentioned above there are numerous options for transit other than Rail in that area, this doesn't exist at east 14th st and Broadway right now, and to create it there would take away from an existing transit service. it is smarter to improve service where it can help existing populations and not look to create TOD where it would never take hold.

 

I know you feel Cleveland’s transit network sucks and you constantly criticize its shortcomings (some of it fair, but a lot unfair imho), but I’ll take it over a majority of major cities in the USA, esp here in the Midwest.

 

this is "At least we're not Detroit" phrase.

 

look at this map of Houston and the transformation of their transit network to an modern frequent transit network.

 

*red line indicated frequency of 15 minutes or less. *

 

^^ Very true about how easy it is to drive in Cleveland. Cleveland has very wide downtown streets, especially for our traffic levels, which also makes things very easy to drive. Also as we abandoned transit in the past, and welcomed cars with open arms, most of our office buildings were built with attached garages, making it very easy to drive to work, park (without looking forever), and get into the office with very little walking, and all of it being inside. The transit system also doesn't reach where most people live and requires those workers to still drive to the stations. Right now its just extremely easy and convenient to drive. Why drive all the way to a station(most of the region doesn't even have that ability), wait for train, ride train, and walk from Tower City to your office (possibly in rain, snow, cold, etc.) when you can drive directly into your office in half the time for only a few dollars more for parking. It will be very hard for things to change without a large expansion of the system, as well as the demolition of several parking garages and development on parking lots.

 

Edit: Also RTA needs to make the All Day Pass work for two adults and up to 2 children on weekends and every weekday after 5pm.

I hear you DM4.  Few UOers have expressed more displeasure than me with the lackluster growth and vision of the current JoeC/RTA administration (in addition to NOACAction, other local officials like the Mayer, County exec and various city council members where rail goes right through their district).  This being true, it is also true that Cleveland is finally growing along WITH its transit system, most notably in the form of TOD around rail.  In MRN, Inc, you have a major local developer that explicitly has developed projects – E. 4, Uptown and in Market Square/Ohio City, to be near Red Line rail stations… Flats East Bank is developing around a waterfront station.  And in other areas, at Farnsleigh/Warrensville/Van Aken, at Lee Road, Detroit Shoreway, Little Italy and in/around Shaker Square, that have recently built or are building TOD development (and that doesn’t even count still planned/not yet started major TOD projects like Intesa, the Duck Island apts,  Market Square or the Univ. Circle high rise(s) or the 120+ units possibly being added to already dense Little Italy… Fact is, Cleveland experiencing more TOD growth since the Van Sweringen/immediate post Van Sweringen days ending in the 1940s…. Add to this the fact that just as Cleveland was completing its last major rail expansion in the late 1960s, the city, esp its downtown, experienced near-unprecedented (in the US) decline in population and business loss . . . and then there was the 2008 recession that clubbed the town like no other.  To consider where we are now development-wise/downtown-wise, with all these still-fresh obstacles (and still many more to overcome), is mindboggling.  And as we see, with downtown and TOD development, comes resurgent rider numbers… and even more encouraging is that young professionals are turning to the rails and buses unlike their oft-jaded older counterparts.

 

… and as for rider-ship, I don’t always look at those numbers as the Holy Grail.  Sure, they can be somewhat indicative, but don’t always tell the whole story.  In Cleveland, we have significant underused transit infrastructure plus an embarrassment of riches when it comes to the ease of movement in terms of driving (including easy-access freeways) and transit – few cities enjoy our balance.  And let’s face it, part of this is the collective mentality must overcome: like transit is for the poor and minorities; transit is so in convenient -- like it’s sooo tough to walk from Tower City to – how can I contain myself – Euclid/E. 9th… or even E. 6th – never mind that in that great transit mecca known as Chicago, L riders to hotspots along Michigan Ave, Streeterville and Navy Pier must often schlep 5, 6 and 7 blocks from rail stations … and we’re talking Chicago-sized blocks, not the smaller Cleveland blocks (and Chicago’s just one example) …. Ed FitzGerald said it best after people were shocked when we beat out Dallas for the 2016 RNC convention: Cleveland’s worst enemies/biggest critics are those who have either never been here or who have never been anywhere else.

 

Btw, we did add the Health Line in 2008 – not my cup of tea, but it IS a transit improvement.

Also, many of the cities you cite as having grown their transit systems recently are cities that had nothing and are trying to catch up with the Clevelands of the world – with many (Charlotte, Phoenix, Detroit and Orlando, to name a few) are still significantly inferior to Cleveland transit-wise.

 

Joe C isn't the problem the problem is US.

 

Their isn't anyone advocating a transit first policy for this region.

 

Twin cities got their act together because their transit system operates at the discretion of the metropolitan government, and transit is considered a major part of regional planning. 

 

BTW look at the Access Data from the new Green line in the Twin Cities.

 

 

42,933 people live within 2 miles and work within 1/2 mile of the route.

 

268,387 jobs are within 1/2 mile of the route

 

29,936 workers within 1/2 mile of the line

 

145,933 workers within 2 miles of the line.

 

is there any wonder why this line is exceeding the ridership of our own heavy rail system.

Agreed.  We all need to demand this from our politicians.  IMO the RTA staff are not there to advance the cause of transit.  They are there making their check.  They are there paying their union dues.  As long as they have a job the next 30 years, they are not concerned with philosophical ideals of transit.  It's a gig....

Agreed.  We all need to demand this from our politicians.  IMO the RTA staff are not there to advance the cause of transit.  They are there making their check.  They are there paying their union dues.  As long as they have a job the next 30 years, they are not concerned with philosophical ideals of transit.  It's a gig....

 

Well said. their mandate is to stay solvent nothing more and nothing less.

How many people in the city government and county government are actually pro transit expansion? Does the mayor support transit expansion? City council? Planning commission? County council?

 

It also doesn't help that the head of RTA is against rail (based on everything i've read here). Then again why would he rock the boat when he is making $243,386 a year and is under contract until 2020.

^I can't remember when the last time was when anyone on council or the mayor mentioned transit expansion.  Seems as though it should be a County issue, since RTA is regional.  But then again, I don't know if there has been a story since the new government was put into place which mentioned County Council wanting any type of transit service expansion.  I would love to be wrong on that, however.

 

this is "At least we're not Detroit" phrase.

 

 

... you can insert Milwaukee, Indianapolis, Columbus, KC, San Antonio, Tampa/St. Pete, Birmingham, Buffalo (although they're not bad; still, Cleveland's better), Phoenix (despite the new LRT, that metro is sprawling), Austin (coming along, but...), Jacksonville, Orlando (new commuter rail is nice, but..), Tidewater, VA area (Norfolk's new LRT is nice, but...), and so on, and so on...  The point is not saying Cleveland's perfect and doesn't have a lot of work to do, but we're also in a pretty good place, transit-wise imho, esp given our battered economy, extreme population losses over the decades and relative ease of driving, which we share with most medium size, Midwest (dare I say "Rust Belt") metropolises. 

So many good things are happening here development-wise. I can't understand the skepticism.....

 

http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php?topic=1977.msg714615#msg714615

Some developers in a specific area of the city are being approached about forgoing the abatement to instead use that tax revenue that would otherwise have been abated to pay for constructing and operating rail transit-supportive infrastructure. The response reportedly has been supportive. I hope to be able to discuss this in more detail in the future.

 

KJP - In the crazy chance you may be able to divulge even the most minimal information......is this the above comment regarding the possible TOD at Lorain and 25th?

^I can't remember when the last time was when anyone on council or the mayor mentioned transit expansion.  Seems as though it should be a County issue, since RTA is regional.  But then again, I don't know if there has been a story since the new government was put into place which mentioned County Council wanting any type of transit service expansion.  I would love to be wrong on that, however.

 

Isn't that crazy?  And look at the last 2 mayors: Campbell, grew up along the Rapid rails in Shaker Heights; Jackson, represented and still lives in one of the poorest, transit dependent districts in the City -- one where many constituents could be greatly aided by (to mention one innovation) KJP/AAO's proposed E. 79th Red Line station relocation to Buckeye/Woodland/E. 89th.  And yet both of these last 2 mayors didn't/haven't say/said peep about transit improvement or expnsion... Worse yet, Jackkson has publicly backed (when he was council pres) the W. 117 big box stores that wiped out 100 houses and, worse yet, the Opportunity Corridor which not only will relocate several constituents, but will provide better driving conditions to West Siders when Jackson's constituents largely don't own cars...

 

... I also noted a few days ago that the County is racing (for the 2016 RNC) to build the Mall/conv. Center-to-Lakefront pedestrian bridge directly over the Waterfront Line Rapid and Amtrak stations ... WITH NO CONNECTION TO EITHER... This seems to trouble myself, KJP and maybe you and a few others, but apparently none of the public officials directly involved... is something seriously wrong with this picture?  The good news is that the young professionals who are embracing downtown and other urban Cleveland areas, both as new residents or frequent visitors, ARE using transit in greater numbers which even RTA can't hide... The bad news is that the negative image of transit (as existing primarily for minorities and the poor) still permeates and poison's the mindset of way too many public officials here... and that particularly applies to our conservative, car-crazed major newspaper: the Plain Dealer.

 

If this city is to continue it's upward swing towards the true human-scale, walkable exciting urban place so many of us desire, this negative mentality toward transit has to change.

I still believe a huge issue is lack of access. I know a ton of people that would love to take a train downtown but don't have the option to.

KJP - In the crazy chance you may be able to divulge even the most minimal information......is this the above comment regarding the possible TOD at Lorain and 25th?

 

No.

 

I still believe a huge issue is lack of access. I know a ton of people that would love to take a train downtown but don't have the option to.

 

So then there should be more households within, say, a 2,000-foot walk of a rail station?

 

If so, I think we're having a huge failure to communicate. And that's on me. It's my responsibility to communicate an idea to an audience -- not for you to understand my language. So let me think of what I'm not saying that I should be..... Maybe a word-picture or a day-in-the-life type of story?

What you guys need is a success story.

 

You need to push to route one of those Shaker lines up to southern boundary of the Clinic, ideally through the 105th station.  Yes, the ideal time to have done this would have been before they rebuilt it.  If at all possible, you need a controlled access zone there with free transfer between the LRT and Red Line, syncing the schedules as closely as you can.

 

This greatly boosts the Shaker Square area (which doesn't really need it but could help grow it) as well as giving you a chance to develop a new area immediately south of the Clinic.  Here the OC helps you.  Perhaps even in a somewhat cynical way:  That area pretty much needs a clean slate to succeed and OC construction can give you some political cover for doing that. 

 

If this plan succeeds, and it should, you can use that to push for repeats.

I still believe a huge issue is lack of access. I know a ton of people that would love to take a train downtown but don't have the option to.

 

Don't have the option to because they choose to live in areas without rail access or because their jobs aren't located near a rail station?  I understand the frustration with the latter, but the former always sounds weird to me given that there are nice, reasonably priced neighborhoods in the area available to folks who really do put a high value on access. And if you factor in park and ride lots, a fairly large share of all county households have decent access.

 

EDIT: though to clarify, I am certainly not against adding rail serve to expand access! And understand that people need to trade off all sorts of factors when they choose a place to live.

What you guys need is a success story.

 

You need to push to route one of those Shaker lines up to southern boundary of the Clinic, ideally through the 105th station.  Yes, the ideal time to have done this would have been before they rebuilt it.  If at all possible, you need a controlled access zone there with free transfer between the LRT and Red Line, syncing the schedules as closely as you can.

 

This greatly boosts the Shaker Square area (which doesn't really need it but could help grow it) as well as giving you a chance to develop a new area immediately south of the Clinic.  Here the OC helps you.  Perhaps even in a somewhat cynical way:  That area pretty much needs a clean slate to succeed and OC construction can give you some political cover for doing that. 

 

If this plan succeeds, and it should, you can use that to push for repeats.

 

How is moving the Shaker Rapid going to help SS grow?  There is no logical route that would take the train to UC then to SS without damaging time and inconveniencing riders.  The only way this can be done is to rebuild the Fairmount and Euclid Hts lines.

What you guys need is a success story.

 

You need to push to route one of those Shaker lines up to southern boundary of the Clinic, ideally through the 105th station.  Yes, the ideal time to have done this would have been before they rebuilt it.  If at all possible, you need a controlled access zone there with free transfer between the LRT and Red Line, syncing the schedules as closely as you can.

 

This greatly boosts the Shaker Square area (which doesn't really need it but could help grow it) as well as giving you a chance to develop a new area immediately south of the Clinic.  Here the OC helps you.  Perhaps even in a somewhat cynical way:  That area pretty much needs a clean slate to succeed and OC construction can give you some political cover for doing that. 

 

If this plan succeeds, and it should, you can use that to push for repeats.

 

How is moving the Shaker Rapid going to help SS grow?  There is no logical route that would take the train to UC then to SS without damaging time and inconveniencing riders.  The only way this can be done is to rebuild the Fairmount and Euclid Hts lines.

 

A direct LRT from Shaker Square to Cleveland Clinic wouldn't be beneficial?  A quick transfer trip to UC?

 

What you guys need is a success story.

 

You need to push to route one of those Shaker lines up to southern boundary of the Clinic, ideally through the 105th station.  Yes, the ideal time to have done this would have been before they rebuilt it.  If at all possible, you need a controlled access zone there with free transfer between the LRT and Red Line, syncing the schedules as closely as you can.

 

This greatly boosts the Shaker Square area (which doesn't really need it but could help grow it) as well as giving you a chance to develop a new area immediately south of the Clinic.  Here the OC helps you.  Perhaps even in a somewhat cynical way:  That area pretty much needs a clean slate to succeed and OC construction can give you some political cover for doing that. 

 

If this plan succeeds, and it should, you can use that to push for repeats.

 

How is moving the Shaker Rapid going to help SS grow?  There is no logical route that would take the train to UC then to SS without damaging time and inconveniencing riders.  The only way this can be done is to rebuild the Fairmount and Euclid Hts lines.

 

A direct LRT from Shaker Square to Cleveland Clinic wouldn't be beneficial?  A quick transfer trip to UC?

 

 

There is no (build) route that is "direct".

What you guys need is a success story.

 

There are developments popping up all over the map -- and mostly along rail/BRT lines. I will guarantee that in 5-10 years, 90-95 percent of everything that you want and need in terms of housing types, retailers, employers, education/training, medical care, etc. will be within 2,000 feet of a rail/BRT line in Greater Cleveland.

 

How is moving the Shaker Rapid going to help SS grow?  There is no logical route that would take the train to UC then to SS without damaging time and inconveniencing riders.  The only way this can be done is to rebuild the Fairmount and Euclid Hts lines.

 

By routing a rail service where most of the riders from the Heights and the Square are going -- to University Circle. Right now, UC is a bigger commuting draw than downtown from the Heights and Shaker Square. And look at employment and student populations in UC -- they're growing at double-digit rates whereas downtown employment is stagnant. UC is already the fourth- or third-largest employment district in the state. Yet we have two rail lines going downtown and none to UC. One of them needs to go to UC. Since GCRTA couldn't get federal funds to build a rail line as our region lacks the traffic congestion to justify rail expansion under the old federal scoring criteria, they are pursuing an  express bus service from suburban park-n-rides at Harvard/I271 and Northfield/I480 to Shaker Square and to UC. Hopefully that will build the transit traffic to UC and help justify upgrading it to LRT.

 

Here are some potential routings for running the Blue Line to UC. The routing north from Shaker via MLK/116/Fairhill to UC was a GCRTA option from the Dual Hub project. The routing via North Moreland/Coventry/Fairmount/Cedar to UC is a Biker16 idea. The routings in/through UC could take these or other paths.....

 

 

^Route 2 please.  With the option of future extensions further west on Euclid with an eventual tie-in to the WFL. 

What you guys need is a success story.

 

There are developments popping up all over the map -- and mostly along rail/BRT lines. I will guarantee that in 5-10 years, 90-95 percent of everything that you want and need in terms of housing types, retailers, employers, education/training, medical care, etc. will be within 2,000 feet of a rail/BRT line in Greater Cleveland.

 

[/color]

How is moving the Shaker Rapid going to help SS grow?  There is no logical route that would take the train to UC then to SS without damaging time and inconveniencing riders.  The only way this can be done is to rebuild the Fairmount and Euclid Hts lines.

 

By routing a rail service where most of the riders from the Heights and the Square are going -- to University Circle. Right now, UC is a bigger commuting draw than downtown from the Heights and Shaker Square. And look at  employment and student populations in UC -- it's growing at double-digit rates whereas downtown is stagnant. UC is already the fourth- or third-largest employment district in the state. Yet we have two rail lines going downtown and none to UC. One of them needs to go to UC. Since GCRTA couldn't get federal funds to build a rail line as our region lacks the traffic congestion to justify rail expansion under the old federal scoring criteria, they are pursuing an  express bus service from suburban park-n-rides at Harvard/I271 and Northfield/I480 to Shaker Square and to UC. Hopefully that will build the transit traffic to UC and help justify upgrading it to LRT.

 

Here are some potential routings for running the Blue Line to UC. The routing north from Shaker via MLK/116/Fairhill to UC was a GCRTA option from the Dual Hub project. The routing via North Moreland/Coventry/Fairmount/Cedar to UC is a Biker16 idea. The routings in/through UC could take these or other paths.....

 

Like I said there is no direct routing.  Having light rail from downtown, to Fairmount, to Coventry (like the original line), then via Shaker to Warrensville I can see.  If they don't want the train to go east, just have it lay up in front of my house and make Coventry the terminal.    I also wouldn't mind seeing a BRT service from Shaker Square to UC.  Since rail cannot be built, IMO, this is where BRT can and should be used.

The most direct routing is this (pay no mind to routing the Blue Line NE on the Red Line to Windermere):

 

 

This routing would take it along Fairhill west of North Moreland, past several elderly housing developments (Fairhill Towers, Benjamin Rose, Kindred, etc) that recently changed ownership or are otherwise being updated with newer senior housing. That's all good. Older folks ride transit too. But either way, it's the most direct routing. Doesn't mean it's the best though. It will be interesting to learn someday what will be the best routing.

The most direct routing is this (pay no mind to routing the Blue Line NE on the Red Line to Windermere):

 

 

This routing would take it along Fairhill west of North Moreland, past several elderly housing developments (Fairhill Towers, Benjamin Rose, Kindred, etc) that recently changed ownership or are otherwise being updated with newer senior housing. That's all good. Older folks ride transit too. But either way, it's the most direct routing. Doesn't mean it's the best though. It will be interesting to learn someday what will be the best routing.

 

A train down fairhill wouldn't work because of the grade and in winter with the ice and snow a train wouldn't be able to start/stop.  That is why I'm suggesting BRT for any route between Shaker Square and UC.

^I tend to agree with you MTS, I think improved bus and/or BRT is the better idea.  It's just to expensive to build rail in this corridor given the steep grade issues, the built-up nature of this area and lack of ROW.  (Fairmount had streetcars on it 100 years ago, but do you really think those mansion dwellers want rail in front of their houses today? -- remember, on Shaker Blvd, the trains came first before the houses ... and never left).  The planned Harvard/I-271, Van Aken, SS, Univ. Circle express bus will help, although I still don't like the idea of buses on Van Aken when you have LRT; just seem wasteful.  But that's just me... People still have the option of transferring to the #48 bus at Shaker Sq. down to U.C.  I know I plan to make the out-of-the way transfer from Green-to-Red at E. 55 and backtrack to the new Little Italy station... It may be out of the way, but it doesn't take that long because of the speed of the trains + the 15 minute Red Line frequency... I won't mind it at all; in fact, I really look forward to it!

A train down fairhill wouldn't work because of the grade and in winter with the ice and snow a train wouldn't be able to start/stop.  That is why I'm suggesting BRT for any route between Shaker Square and UC.

 

The Breda cars will have no problem with the Fairhill grade, which is why GCRTA proposed Fairhill as their preferred routing for the Shaker Connector in the Dual Hub plan. In fact, I don't think Fairhill is any steeper than the two "chutes" between Settlers Landing and Tower City on the Waterfront Line.

A train down fairhill wouldn't work because of the grade and in winter with the ice and snow a train wouldn't be able to start/stop.  That is why I'm suggesting BRT for any route between Shaker Square and UC.

 

The Breda cars will have no problem with the Fairhill grade, which is why GCRTA proposed Fairhill as their preferred routing for the Shaker Connector in the Dual Hub plan. In fact, I don't think Fairhill is any steeper than the two "chutes" between Settlers Landing and Tower City on the Waterfront Line.

Fairhill between MLK/116 and Kemper is very steep.  I thought that is why the route South down MLK to the St. Lukes/116 station was considered an option.

I don't doubt the LRT's can handle the grade, even though it would be very windy/twisty along Fairhill along the Doan Creek canyon -- I just don't see a cost justification for it...Even with the high employment/education of Shaker/Heights/Beachwood, etc. people in the UC area, I just don't see the cost justification... and once again, I just don't see Clevelanders forsaking their beloved cars for a relatively short (compared to going downtown), slow (stopping at many un-tripped traffic lights), surface-trolley  ride.  If our lethargic transit agency is going to invest a major capital project like a rail extension, I'd much prefer projects like the Red Line Windermere-to-Euclid one being looked at currently, or a westward expansion from West Blvd through Lakewood ... which ain't happenin'.

 

Part of this is the Cleveland drive-first mentality... I was down by the E&Y/Aloft Hotel FEB complex the other day for drinks (on the lovely deck overlooking the River and the new apts rising there) during rush hour.  That surface parking lot across from the buildings was packed and buzzing: worker/pedestrians were flooding across the WFL tracks to their cars, and there were traffic jams on both W. 10th and Old River Road with everybody trying to flee the Flats... And yet there was only the usual modest, loyal clutch of (smarter) folks at the WFL/FEB station catching Rapid trains, despite the station's being across the street from the FEB complex! ... As Straphanger correctly pointed out, you can't tell me a large chunk of these drivers don't live accessibly to one of RTA's rail lines given the fact that each one terminates at or near one of our circumferential or radial freeways; as well as the fact that the Rapid offers and abundance of free parking at those outer stations ... These folks just PREFER to drive as opposed to the Rapid not being convenient to them.

 

It's a mindset.

I don't doubt the LRT's can handle the grade, even though it would be very windy/twisty along Fairhill along the Doan Creek canyon -- I just don't see a cost justification for it...Even with the high employment/education of Shaker/Heights/Beachwood, etc. people in the UC area, I just don't see the cost justification... and once again, I just don't see Clevelanders forsaking their beloved cars for a relatively short (compared to going downtown), slow (stopping at many un-tripped traffic lights), surface-trolley  ride.  If our lethargic transit agency is going to invest a major capital project like a rail extension, I'd much prefer projects like the Red Line Windermere-to-Euclid one being looked at currently, or a westward expansion from West Blvd through Lakewood ... which ain't happenin'.

 

Part of this is the Cleveland drive-first mentality... I was down by the E&Y/Aloft Hotel FEB complex the other day for drinks (on the lovely deck overlooking the River and the new apts rising there) during rush hour.  That surface parking lot across from the buildings was packed and buzzing: worker/pedestrians were flooding across the WFL tracks to their cars, and there were traffic jams on both W. 10th and Old River Road with everybody trying to flee the Flats... And yet there was only the usual modest, loyal clutch of (smarter) folks at the WFL/FEB station catching Rapid trains, despite the station's being across the street from the FEB complex! ... As Straphanger correctly pointed out, you can't tell me a large chunk of these drivers don't live accessibly to one of RTA's rail lines given the fact that each one terminates at or near one of our circumferential or radial freeways; as well as the fact that the Rapid offers and abundance of free parking at those outer stations ... These folks just PREFER to drive as opposed to the Rapid not being convenient to them.

 

It's a mindset.

 

I completely agree.  But based on the terrain I would love to see high speed BRT.  I would also like to see the Fairmount and Euclid Hts trains return.  Personally, I would love to see a subway down Lorain using the L/C Bridge.  A train down West 25 with a stop a the zoo, into the Parma.

There is also a lack of housing inventory where people can walk out the front door to a station and ride to places like FEB. If someone is walking out their front door to get into a car, they will likely stay in that car all the way to their destination. You have to get these folks the moment they step out their door. There are two ways of accomplishing this: bring the rail line to the housing, or bring the housing to the rail line.

 

Right now, the easier, less expensive way that has broader support is to bring the housing to the rail. Indeed, it's already underway and occurring at an increasing pace. And I also have a philosophical belief that if the core rail system has stations surrounded by lots of vacant land, then you need to make better use of what you have first before considering adding on to the rail system. There are city's with fewer miles of rail that a lot more housing, offices, retail, education, services and entertainment around them per mile than what Cleveland has. A 39-route-mile system with 50 stations is significant enough to be able to offer a much larger ridership base than what Cleveland's system currently has. And given what's already underway development-wise, I have no doubts that this will be the case due to the ever-increasing momentum brewing around an increasing number of stations.

^ (Edit: @clvlndr)

 

Its convenience. If it takes 10+ minutes to drive to a station its not worth it it many cases. Westlake, Bay Village, Strongsville, Southern Suburbs, Eastern Cuyahoga County, and all of Lake County do not have convenient connections. Yes maybe some of the Western suburbs pass stations, but that is already 15 minutes into their trips. Why stop and park, wait for train (could take awhile), and then take the longer journey on the train? Then transfer to the waterfront line (could take awhile as well). If its two people, RTA will cost them $10. a way bigger hassle and longer trip. You can easily find parking for cheaper than that. Make that a family of four, or a group of friends, and thats $20 for RTA.  And that is for the people who technically have access. Like I mentioned earlier, most of the region does not. Lake County alone is home to 230,041 people, none of which have access to rail.

^ (Edit: @clvlndr)

 

Its convenience. If it takes 10+ minutes to drive to a station its not worth it it many cases. Westlake, Bay Village, Strongsville, Southern Suburbs, Eastern Cuyahoga County, and all of Lake County do not have convenient connections. Yes maybe some of the Western suburbs pass stations, but that is already 15 minutes into their trips. Why stop and park, wait for train (could take awhile), and then take the longer journey on the train? Then transfer to the waterfront line (could take awhile as well). If its two people, RTA will cost them $10. a way bigger hassle and longer trip. You can easily find parking for cheaper than that. Make that a family of four, or a group of friends, and thats $20 for RTA.  And that is for the people who technically have access. Like I mentioned earlier, most of the region does not. Lake County alone is home to 230,041 people, none of which have access to rail.

 

Well anything outside of Cuyahoga County should fall under Commuter Rail, not subway.  I do agree the Westside has large avenues and those streets are ripe for rail projects, using the existing bridges as trunk links.  The redevelopment would be amazing.

^ (Edit: @clvlndr)

 

Its convenience. If it takes 10+ minutes to drive to a station its not worth it it many cases. Westlake, Bay Village, Strongsville, Southern Suburbs, Eastern Cuyahoga County, and all of Lake County do not have convenient connections. Yes maybe some of the Western suburbs pass stations, but that is already 15 minutes into their trips. Why stop and park, wait for train (could take awhile), and then take the longer journey on the train? Then transfer to the waterfront line (could take awhile as well). If its two people, RTA will cost them $10. a way bigger hassle and longer trip. You can easily find parking for cheaper than that. Make that a family of four, or a group of friends, and thats $20 for RTA.  And that is for the people who technically have access. Like I mentioned earlier, most of the region does not. Lake County alone is home to 230,041 people, none of which have access to rail.

 

The population doesn't determine whether a location has rail. It's whether there's dedicated funding source for transit. Yes, Lake County has a dedicated funding source for transit -- but it's barely large enough to sustain the existing hourly bus service on major thoroughfares.

 

Could be worse. You could be living in Lorain County, population 300,000, which has no dedicated funding source for transit at all. And so Lorain County has only four bus routes with service every two hours with no service to Cleveland (except for the $15/ride Airport-Oberlin Shuttle).

^ (Edit: @clvlndr)

 

Its convenience. If it takes 10+ minutes to drive to a station its not worth it it many cases. Westlake, Bay Village, Strongsville, Southern Suburbs, Eastern Cuyahoga County, and all of Lake County do not have convenient connections. Yes maybe some of the Western suburbs pass stations, but that is already 15 minutes into their trips. Why stop and park, wait for train (could take awhile), and then take the longer journey on the train? Then transfer to the waterfront line (could take awhile as well). If its two people, RTA will cost them $10. a way bigger hassle and longer trip. You can easily find parking for cheaper than that. Make that a family of four, or a group of friends, and thats $20 for RTA.  And that is for the people who technically have access. Like I mentioned earlier, most of the region does not. Lake County alone is home to 230,041 people, none of which have access to rail.

 

You're proving my point.  You are presenting a Cleveland-type argument against using the trains that you hear less of elsewhere with rapid rail.  Note also that, during rush hour, West Side Red Line trains into downtown leave about every 7-8 minutes.  Not much of a wait.  And Cleveland offers relatively cheap fares and free parking, which many systems (like the DC Metro, among others, do not).  Btw, I do know of people in Strongsville who drive in to Brookpark and take the Rapid downtown everyday.  But the mentality you are espousing is typical here.  People go out of their way not to ride the rails... The good news is, that seems to be changing for the better.

 

I completely agree.  But based on the terrain I would love to see high speed BRT.  I would also like to see the Fairmount and Euclid Hts trains return.  Personally, I would love to see a subway down Lorain using the L/C Bridge.  A train down West 25 with a stop a the zoo, into the Parma.

 

I'm definitely down with your last idea.  But I would have the trains branching from the W. 25 Red Line station and rising to up to meet W. 25th for the trip southward onto Pearl Rd and into Parma (stopping specifically at Clark, Metro Health, the Zoo and Brooklyn Center)...

 

An alternative would be that, as the trains rise from the W. 25/Ohio City station, they would instead turn 90 degrees to the East, then SE run along curvy Willey Ave to W. 14th Street where trains would then turn South and immediately stop along side (to the west of) Lincoln Park for a "Tremont" station... from there, they would head south on W. 14 to the I-90 bridge, turn west, drop down into the median of I-90 West for .5 miles traveling under bridges for I-71 and Scranton Rd before rising up to meet the W. 25th street bridge over the freeway and THEN head south along W. 25 for the Parma run I noted above.

 

I completely agree.  But based on the terrain I would love to see high speed BRT.  I would also like to see the Fairmount and Euclid Hts trains return.  Personally, I would love to see a subway down Lorain using the L/C Bridge.  A train down West 25 with a stop a the zoo, into the Parma.

 

I'm definitely down with your last idea.  But I would have the trains branching from the W. 25 Red Line station and rising to up to meet W. 25th for the trip southward onto Pearl Rd and into Parma (stopping specifically at Clark, Metro Health, the Zoo and Brooklyn Center)...

 

An alternative would be that, as the trains rise from the W. 25/Ohio City station, they would instead turn 90 degrees to the East, then SE run along curvy Willey Ave to W. 14th Street where trains would then turn South and immediately stop along side (to the west of) Lincoln Park for a "Tremont" station... from there, they would head south on W. 14 to the I-90 bridge, turn west, drop down into the median of I-90 West for .5 miles traveling under bridges for I-71 and Scranton Rd before rising up to meet the W. 25th street bridge over the freeway and THEN head south along W. 25 for the Parma run I noted above.

 

I have shown a map.  My (Southern Line) traveling down west 25 would start in the flats, and have stops at Detroit, Luthern Hosptial, Lorain (with connection to the Current Cleveland Rapid) then southern.  My (Lorain Line) would go across the L/C bridge, first stop would be at the current Cleveland station then continue west under Lorain to Rocky River Drive.  I would also send it down to the airport during the day, via RRD.

^ (Edit: @clvlndr)

 

Its convenience. If it takes 10+ minutes to drive to a station its not worth it it many cases. Westlake, Bay Village, Strongsville, Southern Suburbs, Eastern Cuyahoga County, and all of Lake County do not have convenient connections. Yes maybe some of the Western suburbs pass stations, but that is already 15 minutes into their trips. Why stop and park, wait for train (could take awhile), and then take the longer journey on the train? Then transfer to the waterfront line (could take awhile as well). If its two people, RTA will cost them $10. a way bigger hassle and longer trip. You can easily find parking for cheaper than that. Make that a family of four, or a group of friends, and thats $20 for RTA.  And that is for the people who technically have access. Like I mentioned earlier, most of the region does not. Lake County alone is home to 230,041 people, none of which have access to rail.

 

You're proving my point.  You are presenting a Cleveland-type argument against using the trains that you hear less of elsewhere with rapid rail.  Note also that, during rush hour, West Side Red Line trains into downtown leave about every 7-8 minutes.  Not much of a wait.  And Cleveland offers relatively cheap fares and free parking, which many systems (like the DC Metro, among others, do not).  Btw, I do know of people in Strongsville who drive in to Brookpark and take the Rapid downtown everyday.  But the mentality you are espousing is typical here.  People go out of their way not to ride the rails... The good news is, that seems to be changing for the better.

 

You ignored the point that RTA doesn't make sense for many couples or families traveling downtown. I was originally responding to your post about the Flats East Bank and your comments about people not taking the train there. Obviously there will be and are people who take the train from a lot of places where its not necessarily convenient, but id argue that your point is actually reversed. People go out of their way TO ride the rails... atleast some of them.

 

My point is that the rail system doesn't reach enough people. Our rail ridership isn't at the bottom just because our citizens choose to bypass convenient rail, as you imply. Our ridership is at the bottom because it doesn't reach the areas where people live and where they want to go. RTA still has decently expensive fares and a lack of options for families which makes the price skyrocket, therefore also tilting families towards cars even if a convenient station is present.

 

Im not anti rail at all btw. Im actually the opposite. But I think expansion and rerouting is the only way to build a truly successful rail system, as well as one that doesn't rely solely on park and ride stations.

 

 

Edit: Just to clear things up, Im not saying the entire system is terrible, Im just saying it has a lot of flaws and is far from where it should/could be.