Dear West Shore Corridor Regional Rail Stakeholders:

 

Please find below the schedule of upcoming meetings and a belated attendance list and meeting summary from the Oct. 20 stakeholders meeting held in conjunction with the Lorain County Community Alliance's annual summit. We had 86 persons in attendance. Thanks to LCCA for a wonderful event!

 

Note that the next stakeholders meeting will be at 8 a.m. Dec. 13 at Lakewood Hospital's Wasner Auditorium. Reports from the Community Station Subcommittee and the West Shore Law Directors will be given, plus there will be discussion of efforts to secure federal funding for an alternatives analysis and public involvement process. Thanks to Lakewood Mayor Tom George and Lakewood Hospital's Chief Administrative Officer Jack Gustin for hosting this meeting.

 

++++++++++

 

Schedule of upcoming West Shore Corridor Regional Rail meetings

 

Nov. 15, 9:30 a.m. Community Station Subcommittee, Council Chambers, Westlake City Hall, 27700 Hilliard Road. Contact: Bob Parry, 440-617-4307 [email protected]

Download agenda:  http://members.cox.net/kjprendergast/StationsSubcom111506agenda.doc

 

Nov. 18, 6 p.m. All Aboard Ohio Fall Rail Cocktail & Buffet, Black River Transportation Center, Downtown Lorain. Please register ASAP: 614-228-6005 or online with credit card at http://www.allaboardohio.com/cms/index.php

 

Dec. 13, 8 a.m. West Shore Corridor Regional Rail Stakeholders, Lakewood Hospital Wasmer Auditorium, 14519 Detroit Ave., Save the date! No RSVP required. Detailed agenda to follow. Download map of meeting location: http://members.cox.net/kjprendergast/lakewoodhospitalmaps.jpg

 

++++++++++

 

Summary of Oct. 20 2006 West Shore Corridor Regional Rail Stakeholders Meeting/LCCA Summit

 

Held at Lorain County Community College Spitzer Auditorium. 86 persons were in attendance:

 

Jean Anderson, Mayor, City of Vermilion

David Ashenhurst, City of Oberlin

Brian Barker, Lorain County Community Development

Andy Bemer, Law Director, Rocky River

Dan Billman, Director, Lorain County Solid Waste District

Betty Blair, Lorain County Commissioner

Linda Blanchette, Lorain County Community Development

Pat Cano, Lorain County Visitors Bureau

Ken Carney, Lorain County Engineer

Michael Challender, Lorain Growth Corp

Dennis Clotz, City of Amherst, Safety/Service

Dnnis Clough, Mayor, City of Westlake

Brian Cummins, Ward 15 Councilman, Cleveland

John Dietrich, City of Amherst

Gary Ebert, Law Director, City of Bay Village

Jon Eckerle, Century 21/Homestar

Richard Enty, Planning Team Leader, Greater Cleveland RTA

Rocco Fana, Northcoast BIA

Ed Favre, Lakewood Mayor Tom George’s office

Stephen Friedman, SB Friedman & Co., Chicago

Bill Gardner, City of Sheffield Lake

Dave Gillock, Mayor, City of North Ridgeville

Jack Gustin, Chief Administrative Officer, Lakewood Hospital

Gail Hall, L.C. Board of Mental Health

Steve Hambley, Medina County Commissioner

Jason Hammans, Team NEO

Barbara Harper, LaGrange Township

David Hartman, R. E. Warner

Deanna Hill, Lorain County Community Development

David Hintz

Bill Holtzman, Lorain County Engineer

Jennifer Hooper, Lakewood Community Progress Inc

Tony Iannoe, Vice President, United Transportation Union

Gerald Innes, Office of the Prosecuting Attorney

Denny Johnson, City of North Ridgeville

Rebbeca Jones, Lorain County Community Development

Kevin Kelley, Ward 16 Councilman, Cleveland

Pat Knight, Lorain County Community Development

Lori Kokoski, Lorain County Commissioner

Stan Kosilesky, Cuyahoga County Engineer’s Office

Tom Kowal, Lorain County Realtors

Dennis Lamont, Lorain Street Railway

Dennis Lechlak, Proudfoot Associates, Toledo

John Lescher, Village of Grafton

Neil Lynch, Amherst Township Trustee

Howard Maier, Executive Director, NOACA

Shelley Marrero, Lorain County Engineers

Ron Massimiani, Lorain County Engineers

Mike McCarthy, Burgess & Niple, Inc.

Joseph McCormick, Lake Shore Railway Association

Will McCracken

Tony Mealy, City of Oberlin

Betsy Merkel, Regional Economic Issues, CWRU

Patrick Metzger, South Lorain Community Development

Anne Molnar

Ed Morrison, economic development consultant

Rick Novak, Exec. Dir., Lorain Port Authority

Thomas O’Leary, Deputy Director, Ohio Dept. Transportation, District 3

Frank Pakish, New Russia Township

Robert Parry, Planning/Econ. Development Director, City of Westlake

Peggy Paulick, Lorain County Community Development

Bette Pearce, Chronicle Telegram

Ken Prendergast, Dir. of Research & Communications, All Aboard Ohio

Steven Pyles, Village of Wellington

Joseph Reitz, City of Avon Lake

Larry Schuck, Norfolk Southern Rwy. Police

Toni Shanahan, Lorain County Children Services Board

Ken Sislak, Board member, All Aboard Ohio

Jerry Skully, United Way of Greater Lorain County

David Sonner, City of Oberlin

Donna Spanski, Lorain County Engineers

Phil Stammitti, Lorain County Sheriff

Kim Strauss, Mayor, Village of LaGrange

Gail Stumphauzer, Leadership Lorain County

Walt Sukey, Village of LaGrange

David Taylor, Mayor, City of Amherst

Beth Thames, Office of Congressman Sherrod Brown

Vince Urbin, Lorain County Community Development

Bob Verhoff, Great Lakes OLMC

Ginny Vigrass

Sparky Welnau, Erie County Commissioners

John Whitcom

George Zeller, Center for Community Solutions

Don Zickefoose, City of Vermilion

Freda Zickefoose, City of Vermilion

Gregory Zilka, City of Avon Lake

 

A presentation by Chicago-based real estate consultant Stephen Friedman showed how communities, developers and the Metra commuter rail agency are doing transit-oriented development (TOD). In some cases, TOD is used as a financing mechanism for adding or expanding rail transit service. Discussion of development densities, appropriate retail uses and mixes, residential and office uses and definitions of station areas was given. For more information, please see a primer on station-area development from Friedman available at:  http://members.cox.net/kjprendergast/FriedmanMetra.pdf (a 2.37mb download)

 

The law directors of  Bay Village, Lakewood and Rocky River had recently met to determine that their bosses (the mayors) want to pursue commuter rail while also wanting their communities' joint agreement with Norfolk Southern (which addresses limitations on freight train traffic) to be protected. The law directors reported that they are seeking a meeting with NS to determine how that can be accomplished. More on this will be discussed at the next stakeholders meeting on Dec. 13 in Lakewood.

 

Often, discussion following these meetings is as productive as the meetings themselves. In attendance was Tony Iannone, a vice president of the United Transportation Union. The UTU is a major national union and employer headquartered in downtown Lakewood, in the Lakewood Center North building. Iannone noted that his union not only would like to see the increased number of union jobs from the commuter service, but that the their headquarters would gain a station site. UTU officials said it will be a huge benefit to them to have people come in from out of town, take RTA's Red Line rapid transit from the airport and transfer to the commuter rail service at West Boulevard to downtown Lakewood, saving a $15 taxi cab ride. Lakewood city officials desire a station site next to the Lakewood Center North building. The UTU has indicated it will be of assistance to the West Shore Corridor Regional Rail effort.

 

###

Is it likely this would this route be assumed under RTA operation, or would another organization or company be in charge of operation?

I doubt that RTA would be the administrator or operator of this commuter service. I've asked the Lorain County Commissioners to designate Lorain County Transit as the project sponsor, at least so that funding for an alternatives analysis can be received and that bids can be solicited from consultants. LCT could administer or operate the trains, or contract out the operation to a private company.

anyone know if the new guv'na is aware and on board with this? and the ohio hub for that matter? i would assume homeboy sherrod brown is fully for it.

Strickland has said favorable things about rail during the campaign and was supportive of Amtrak while in Congress. He frequently signed on as co-sponsor of pro-rail legislation.

 

As for the West Shore Corridor proposal, it's still too early in the process to go to a governor-elect. Even so, this is something where you go to his staff, which he doesn't have yet.

 

Sherrod Brown is definitely for it. He was the one who got a funding authorization for Cleveland-Lorain commuter rail included in the last federal surface transportation bill. And he did that when there was no organized support for the project like there is now.

While not specifically related to a possible transit project, there is a correlation between the strategic land use plan being discussed tomorrow. Too bad they didn't give more advanced public notice....

___________________

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE:       

 

The first draft of the Strategic Land Use Planning Project for the W. 25th Street Corridor will be presented and opened up for discussion at a meeting at the Scott Auditorium of West Side MetroHealth Campus on Wednesday, November 15, 2006 form 6:30 to 8:30 pm.

 

“The W. 25th Street Corridor is a major Cleveland thoroughfare and the main traffic artery in Ward 14,” said Councilman Joe Santiago.  “The vitality of this Corridor is essential to the continued growth of community and the City and I encourage all residents to get involved in the planning process.”

 

The Planning Project encompasses W. 25th Street between the Train Avenue overpass and the border of the Brooklyn Centre neighborhood at I-71. 

 

The strategic plan includes three segments: the northern segment from Train Avenue to Wade Avenue; the middle segment from Wade Avenue to Meyer Avenue that includes the corner of W. 25th Street and Clark Avenue; and the southern segment from Meyer Avenue to I-71.

 

Plans for the northern segment of W. 25th Street include mixed residential and industrial use as the Nestle’s L. J. Minor Factor and the Former Forest City property are in this segment.

 

Plans for the middle segment of W. 25th Street include the possible conversion of the Aragon Ballroom into a museum and cultural center, a commercial revitalization of the W. 25th Street and Clark Avenue Corner, the incorporation of greenspace, more small boutiques and a Twinkie theme for the area.

 

Plans for the southern segment of W. 25th Street include connecting the MetroHealth Campus to the W. 25th Street Corridor with walking routes, more greenspace and development of vacant land.

 

###

"a Twinkie theme for the area."

 

Uhhh... WT flying F?

I missed that. That's funny.

^I wonder if you stuff the twinkie in the sushi or the sushi in the twinkie?

 

They should keep putting cryptic references in these announcements. People will grow curious (like 8SOG has) and will attend to see what the meaning is. Then, they should just repeat the process for every announcement. People will grow fascinated by the messages and try to decipher them. It will become the DaVinci Code of strategic land use meetings. I know I'd attend if they announced public funding for an octupus mausoleum as part of the Flats Redevelopment.

 

Or maybe not...

there used to be a millbrook baking facility and thrift store over on twinkie lane, one block east of the corner of w. 25th and clark.  LINK:  http://www.nhlink.net/ClevelandNeighborhoods/plainpress/PPStories/tremonthistory.htm (bottom paragraph)

 

here's a link for the twinkie lane aerial:

http://www.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=twinkie+ln,+cleveland&ie=UTF8&om=1&z=17&ll=41.470202,-81.698016&spn=0.003835,0.010815&t=h&iwloc=addr

So if I get this right, this is going to tie in with the study being done in Old Brooklyn, right?  Or this just another we are doing are thing, you do yours and hope they kinda match up in the end...

 

No they are trying to link them up, so that these studies will work off each other.

 

And I did not know about Twinkie Lane! But I see it is one block WEST of W.25th, off Clark.

So, did anybody go?

New graphic. Thought some of you might enjoy....

 

Ugh, I hate all that parking in front of the West Boulevard station. That is probably the most obvious place in the city for TOD, what with the dense housing and cool old buildings surrounding it on all sides.

True. I'd rather see a parking deck on the station's parking lot, with street-facing retail (ie: grocer, small clothier, cafe, etc) topped with residential. I think I've posted elsewhere on here a rendering of a concept I had for this station-area development. The track alignments changed with the new version shown above, but that doesn't change the station-area development that's possible.

 

There's also a faded beauty of a building across Detroit Avenue from the station that I'd love to see renovated into live-work lofts. I think it's at the corner of West Blvd. and Detoit, and has a stone arch above the corner door.

 

 

KJP, interesting graphic.  Does this schematic mean the current thinking is moving away from dual-powered railcar technology using the Red Line into Tower City in favor of conventional diesel push-pull trains, over NS’s main lakefront route, into North Coast?   Although the transfer with the Red Line is more arduous, plus there may be capacity issues viz the 2-track “Iron Curtin” bridge over the Cuyahoga River in the Flats, I think the conventional diesel option is superior, especially since it’s more compatible, and can easily interface, with Amtrak’s Ohio Hub service out of North Coast.

 

Strickland has said favorable things about rail during the campaign and was supportive of Amtrak while in Congress. He frequently signed on as co-sponsor of pro-rail legislation.  ... As for the West Shore Corridor proposal, it's still too early in the process to go to a governor-elect. Even so, this is something where you go to his staff, which he doesn't have yet. ... Sherrod Brown is definitely for it. He was the one who got a funding authorization for Cleveland-Lorain commuter rail included in the last federal surface transportation bill. And he did that when there was no organized support for the project like there is now.

 

I think we should have added push for getting this done with Brown and George.  Although Voinovich hasn’t been a huge transit guy, I at least get the sense he’s open to it, and he’s very much pro-Cleveland.  Now that we have 2 U.S. senators from this region, I’d like to think now is the hour to get the Lorain commuter rail going, as well as other rail projects, like the CVSR extension and, possibly, the WL extension along the East lakefront.

 

KJP, interesting graphic.  Does this schematic mean the current thinking is moving away from dual-powered railcar technology using the Red Line into Tower City in favor of conventional diesel push-pull trains, over NS’s main lakefront route, into North Coast? 

 

Nah, I just borrowed on an idea and graphic by Parsons Brinckerhoff for the NEORail study and altered it slightly so a station could be on the connecting track to link with the West Boulevard station.

 

Here's something of interest I learned recently: the NEOrail study considered a link between the Cleveland-Lorain commuter rail route and the West Boulevard rapid station -- BUT only as a secondary option. Thus, the ridership projection for the Cleveland - Lorain corridor did not include the potential additional ridership from such a passenger transfer point.

 

To me, that's astonishing. I would think the ridership would be so much better if downtown-bound commuter rail passengers had TWO downtown destinations they could reach, plus the airport, plus a more geographically direct routing to University Circle and other places along the east-side rapid lines.

 

PB said in its report that such a commuter rail/Red Line transfer point at West Boulevard would likely be expensive. That's probably true, but I also think it would be well worth it!

 

I think we should have added push for getting this done with Brown and George.  Although Voinovich hasn’t been a huge transit guy, I at least get the sense he’s open to it, and he’s very much pro-Cleveland.  Now that we have 2 U.S. senators from this region, I’d like to think now is the hour to get the Lorain commuter rail going, as well as other rail projects, like the CVSR extension and, possibly, the WL extension along the East lakefront.

 

Agreed.

KJP, interesting graphic.  Does this schematic mean the current thinking is moving away from dual-powered railcar technology using the Red Line into Tower City in favor of conventional diesel push-pull trains, over NS’s main lakefront route, into North Coast?  Although the transfer with the Red Line is more arduous, plus there may be capacity issues viz the 2-track “Iron Curtin” bridge over the Cuyahoga River in the Flats, I think the conventional diesel option is superior, especially since it’s more compatible, and can easily interface, with Amtrak’s Ohio Hub service out of North Coast.

 

Isn't it true, though, that by FRA regulations, a commuter train would not be able to switch onto the RTA Red Line tracks?  It doesn't seem to be an issue of diesel vs. dual-power as it is an issue of incompatibility (safety-wise) with the local rail transit system.

 

 

If the issue is compatibility with a transit facility, then the Federal Transit Administration would have to be approached for a waiver. If the compatibility issue is with the freight railroad, then it's the FRA.

 

In this case, both agencies would probably have to be approached to approve having a lightweight, self-propelled, dual-powered (electric and diesel) rail car operate on both the Norfolk Southern rail line and the RTA's Red Line. To operate on the NS line, the FRA would require a time-of-day separation between freight trains and lightweight rail transit trains (not be confused with heavier, locomotive-hauled commuter trains). In other words, as an example, freight would operate only from something like 10 p.m. to 6 a.m., and the rail transit service would operate within a 6 a.m. to 10 p.m. time frame. That's how the new RiverLINE in New Jersey operates, on a line that sees more freight traffic that NS's line through Lakewood. The Sprinter service north of San Diego will require the same time-of-day separation. The reason for the time separation is because a diesel light rail transit vehicle does not meet FRA buffer-strength standards that would allow the vehicle to "survive" a collision with a freight train.

 

On the Red Line, the compatibility issue is whether the diesel-electric light-rail vehicle can fit next to existing station platforms or safely negotiate tighter curves and steeper grades than you would see on a freight rail line.

 

By the way, Dan, I realize you know a lot of this stuff, so I'm writing much of this for the benefit of others who may also be reading this.

 

Here's a visual comparison of the two different types of train equipment...

 

Diesel light rail (can be retrofitted with pantagraphs atop the trains to switch over to electrical power and draw electricity from overhead catenary wires):

 

One of New Jersey Transit's RiverLINE trains, shown here in Camden NJ on streetcar-like trackage where freight trains don't travel -

 

 

The RiverLINE on a section where it shares trackage with NS freight trains -

 

 

This could just as well be in Rocky River (freight trains operate here, too, but only at night) -

 

 

 

Locomotive-hauled commuter trains (which cannot operate on RTA's Red Line due to these trains' physical size):

 

New Mexico's new RailRunner commuter train service -

 

 

Nashville's new Music City Express commuter rail service -

 

 

The Altamont Commuter Express between San Jose and Stockton Calif. -

 

 

There's more examples out there from around the country, but those show the differences in equipment types.

Locomotive-hauled commuter trains (which cannot operate on RTA's Red Line due to these trains' physical size)

 

Is this due to height or width?

 

More often due to width, but I suspect the double-decker commuter trains like those shown above would come a little too close to the overhead catenary wires on the Red Line for the FTA to be comfortable with. I doubt they would come into contact with the wires, however.

More often due to width, but I suspect the double-decker commuter trains like those shown above would come a little too close to the overhead catenary wires on the Red Line for the FTA to be comfortable with. I doubt they would come into contact with the wires, however.

 

If width is the issue, then locomotive-hauled trains are pretty much DOA.  I guess I'm a little confused, though, because when you mentioned dual-powered trains, I instantly thought of the equipment on the LIRR, which looks a lot like a subway train, and even uses a third rail for  power over a lot of its trackage.  I haven't looked at the relative dimensions, but even still, I believe the LIRR equipment (or something similar) would be FRA certified to operate on freight trackage.

 

How high are the overhead cateneries on the Red Line above top of rail elevation?  As you're aware, many commuter railroads in the electrified Northeast Corridor operate with double-decker passenger cars just fine, although I'm not sure if the catenary has a greater clearance than the Red Line. 

I don't know the distance between the top of the rail to the Red Line's catenary wires. I would be interested to see if double-decker railroad commuter cars are the same heighth if hauled by diesel locomotives or operated under wires. But a transit facility is different from a railroad facility (weight of rails, tie spacing, curvature, gradient, etc), so the type of equipment is different (railroad rolling stock is heavier, less capable of taking tight turns, etc. than transit equipment). Hybrid rolling stock is needed to operate on both facilities.

 

But if the goal is to start with second-hand bilevels hauled by used locomotives, then locomotive-hauled trains aren't DOA (but I suspect you were questioning if they could be used on the Red Line).

wikipedia discussion claims 14'6" height in NE.  I'll take my tape measure out in the morning and see what the clearance on the red line is.

 

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

 

"The north eastern US can accommodate split level (double deck) cars only if they are no higher than 14'-6" or 4420 mm. These double deckers run on the Long Island Rail Road: [1]: and on New Jersey Transit: [2]: (contact Bombardier Transportation: [3]) due to the size of the loading gauge (i.e. bridges, tunnels, etc. are too low). "

wikipedia discussion claims 14'6" height in NE.  I'll take my tape measure out in the morning and see what the clearance on the red line is.

 

Only here would you ever find people who are willing to physically measure the clearance at a transit station. LOL.

 

Love it!

From knuckleheads in the news...

 

CLEVELAND -- A member of a highly regarded Web site was fried to crisp Monday morning after he attempted to use a metal tape measure to determine the distance between an electrical wire and a rapid-transit track.

 

The unidentied man, who used the UrbanOhio forum name Urbanlife, was seen near a west-side Red Line station attaching the tape measure to the steel rail and shimmying up a pole. He then dangled, pulling himself hand-over-hand, along a horizontal metal bar supporting cables that deliver eletrical power to Red Line trains.

 

After he attached the measuring tape to the cable carrying 600 volts, white smoke could be seen pouring from his orifices and a pungent odor filled the air, witnesses said.

 

"It was cool," said Bobby Bodacious, who was waiting at the Red Line station for a train to take him to St. Ignatius High School. "I didn't know RTA stations had barbecues."

 

 

For the rest of the story...buy the freakin' newspaper!

i should have clarified, it is a laser tape measure, similar to this model:

 

 

or maybe i'll call RTA and just ask them.  we'll see how warm it is...

Yeah, but the tape measure story is funnier. You must have pretty good aim to get the laser dot to hit a small copper wire!

I sure hope these West-burb pols can be kept on task... excuse me, but train horns seems like a trivial issue in light of the bigger picture.  It seems people are more angst about train noise and horns rather than working to get commuter service.  I sincerely hope this worthwhile service gets off the ground someday but, honestly, in my mind it'll be a minor miracle; quite often, when it comes to such a positive public works project that can encourage smart growth, officials (and residents) major in the minors and the project dies a slow death. 

 

I sure hope that's not the case here.  That commuter talks have gotten this far is a major positive.  But there are many miles to go, obviously.

We had another decent meeting of the stakeholders today. The agenda progressed again.

 

Lakewood Mayor Tom George welcomed the 50 persons in attendance, and said that while concerns remain about heavy freight traffic, he was excited about the prospect for commuter rail on the West Shore Corridor. He cited the opportunity for strengthening downtown Lakewood (one of the few Cleveland suburbs with a true downtown) and boosting property values along the corridor with better crossing protection and quiet zones.

 

Lakewood Hospital VP of Operations William Baddour spoke next, saying the hospital is a critical stakeholder in the West Shore Corridor and is excited about commuter rail. They see the rail service as a way to enhance access to the hospital, primilary for workers.

 

We had a very cool presentation by seven Lakewood High School students who prepared designs and a model of a proposed station for downtown Lakewood. I'll see if I can get a copy of their renderings and a photo of the model to post in this thread. They did a lot of research on Nickel Plate Railroad Co. station designs and visited the surviving NKP depot in Rocky River. They did a terrific job.

 

I gave a brief report from the stations subcommittee Nov. 15 meeting, in the absence of its chair Bob Parry, Westlake's director of planning and economic development. Basically I gave a rundown of the various station locations that were looked at during the NOACA NEOrail study from four years ago, and what conditions may have changed since. 

 

The best news followed. Bay Village Law Director Gary Ebert reported on a meeting held the day before between him, the law directors of Lakewood and Rocky River, and with Norfolk Southern VP Bill Harris. In that meeting, Harris told the law directors that adding commuter rail to its West Shore tracks would not be a problem for NS and would not break the agreement they have with Bay, RR and Lakewood. The agreement limits the number of daily freight trains to 14 -- the current number is about 4-7 daily. The law directors asked Harris for a letter from NS stating their position.

 

Following Ebert's report, I asked all those present who serve on city councils, county commissions, chamber boards and so on to consider passing a resolution to ask the Ohio Congressional Delegation to provide $1.5 million for an alternatives analysis that's needed to nail down the best way to improve transit in the West Shore Corridor, identify capital and operating costs, issues affecting the natural and built environments along the corridor and to carry out an extensive public involvement process. I brought copies of a sample resolution with me, and many officials took the copies with them.

 

All that, and we adjourned early.

Wow, fantastic!

Things would move along so much faster if people would stop bi**hing about train noise, horns ect.! Why the hell would someone buy a house next to the tracks and then think its ok to go and complain about the noise the trains make! Wake up, the train tracks were there first not your house, so DEAL with it!

^^^Good stuff

Excellent work.  N-S's verbal capitulation is huge.  Let's keep this train chugging along.

As long as Joe C doesn't mess it up. While everyone I spoke with at the meeting said it was a good event, even a terrific one, Joe C said it was a terrible meeting.

 

And, that same day, he met with a Voinovich staffer and said some unflattering things about the commuter rail project. Joe loves his buses. As a matter of RTA policy, he sees transit funding in Greater Cleveland as a zero-sum game. In other words, if you add a transit service somewhere, a transit service somewhere else has to be cut to pay for it, per RTA's current policy. He told me he thought he might have to cut the 326 route (along Detroit Ave) in order to pay for the commuter rail service.

 

I realize making do with what you've got was the sad situation under the Taft regime, but there's no reason to expect it to continue under Strickland. He seems to understand the importance that better transit means having healthier cities. And here's an emerging constituency for more transit in the West Shore to expand the funding pie.

 

Joe C is chair of the Ohio Public Transit Association. I would have hoped he would see that one of the goals of this emerging constituency is to seek more transit funding. While we'll probably need RTA's backing to use some of their station facilities and have feeder buses, we don't need their financial support for this project to move foward. This is going to be headed by Lorain County. By the same token, I certainly don't need someone in his position (as a transit agency GM and chair of OPTA) to say disparaging things about a transit project -- especially to a senator's staffer.

I think Joe C looks upon this (mistakenly) as some kind of turf battle.

In other words, if you add a transit service somewhere, a transit service somewhere else has to be cut to pay for it, per RTA's current policy.

 

Of course, what Joe C seems to overlook is that RTA collects tax dollars only from Cuyahoga County, whereas for this project, Lorain County would be expected to contribute. 

 

The "woe is us" attitude at RTA is really getting old.  How do they expect to improve anything if they spend all their time feeling sorry for themselves?

 

 

Sounds like Joe C needs to get some pointed letters.  I'll try to work on one this weekend.  He doesn't seem to get it that you need to make friends, not enemies.  How much longer is he going to be around anyway?

 

 

Don't worry that much about Joe. We need him and RTA for commuter rail's use of a couple of RTA facilities. We don't need or want their money.

 

BTW, Cleveland Councilman Joe Cimperman was at the meeting Wednesday in Lakewood. But I think he was at a different meeting than the one attended by the other "Joe C." Why? Cimperman said he thought the meeting was "thrilling" and "wonderful" and wants to get commuter rail added to the city's long-range plan.

BTW, Cleveland Councilman Joe Cimperman was at the meeting Wednesday in Lakewood. But I think he was at a different meeting than the one attended by the other "Joe C." Why? Cimperman said he thought the meeting was "thrilling" and "wonderful" and wants to get commuter rail added to the city's long-range plan.

 

IMO, it's about damned time that someone in city leadership has a vision!  Commuter rail to the collar counties (and beyond), followed by a more extensive light rail network (one can hope, right?) would enable the city to build on some of those parking lots downtown.

two joe's, one's a pro, one's a schmoe.

 

so who wants to bet calabrese has got some walking around money folded up in his money clip from that brt bus company? i mean how else could you explain it? dis guy runs da rta fer phuks sake, he should be promoting all forms of mass transit. geesh.

Let's not get carried away. Here's what I see separating those who support West Shore commuter rail and those who don't...

 

Supporters tend to be those who envision a dynamic urban core in their metro area's future and look for tools to build it. They see rail as one of those tools and are willing to take risks to push public policy toward that end.

 

Opponents see the trends of the past and believe it portends the future. Accordingly, they design their policy to fall in line with the trend. They feel powerless as Greater Cleveland fails to grow in population but keeps growing in land area. They see transportation investments more so as a means to serve the trend, and less of a means to change it.

 

So, let's focus on the positive, which isn't limited to Joe Cimperman on Cleveland City Council. Aviation & Transportation Committee Chair Kevin Kelley is a big supporter, as is Ward 15's Brian Cummins, and Ward 18's Jay Westbrook. Others are coming on line.

Yeah who cares what Joe C. thinks!

Thanks. But I encourage anyone reading this to tell their federal officials what you think! A sample letter appears below. Mail letters to their local offices, not to D.C. -- security screening of the mail takes forever. Here are their addresses:

 

The Hon. Stephanie Tubbs-Jones

District 11

U.S. House of Representatives

3645 Warrensville Center Road

Beachwood, OH 44122

 

The Hon. Dennis Kucinich

District 10

U.S. House of Representatives

14400 Detroit Avenue

Lakewood, OH 44107

 

The Hon. Sherrod Brown ---> add a congrats in the letter for his winning election to the Senate!

District 13

U.S. House of Representatives

205 W. 20th Street, Suite M230

Lorain, OH 44052

 

The Hon. George Voinovich

U.S. Senate

1240 East 9th Street

Cleveland, OH 44199

 

Betty Sutton  ---> add a congrats in her letter for winning election to the House!

Representative-Elect

13th District

1700 W. Market Street, #155

Akron, OH 44313

 

Here's a sample letter........

 

Dear _________:

 

I am writing to you today to ask for your support of developing commuter rail service in the West Shore Corridor, from downtown Cleveland west into Lorain County. I understand that $1.5 million in federal funds is needed for an analysis to see if commuter rail is the best way to get people to their jobs, school, shopping, medical appointments and other destinations in the corridor.

 

Add some personal thoughts about (pick a couple):

> economic development/job creation at stations/boosting downtown

> reverse commutes for city residents

> part of a new vision for the region

> compete with other urban areas for young professionals

> gas prices, environmental issues

> funding for Quiet Zones to eliminate train horns

 

And end with something like: "Please consider my comments as you consider whether to support this project" or "I hope you will be able to support funding for the analysis of the West Shore Corridor so the project can move forward."

 

But please use your own words as much as possible. Remember, you don't need to write a Pulitzer prize-winning piece. It's more important that you get it done and send it in so they can record your comments.

 

Thanks for any help you can offer.

Thanks, KJP.  I'll work on this.

 

 

I would also suggest email as well.  Email address can be found on most elected officials websites.

FULL MEETING SUMMARY

 

West Shore Corridor Stakeholders

December 13, 2006

Lakewood Hospital

Wasmer Auditorium

 

 

Selected Highlights (Full Summary follows attendees list):

 

Bay Village Law Director Gary Ebert reports a positive meeting between the West Shore law directors and Norfolk Southern Resident Vice President of Public Affairs Bill Harris on Dec. 12. NS says the agreement with three West Shore suburbs limiting freight train traffic is indefinite, but wouldn’t be harmed by the introduction of commuter rail service.

 

Seven Lakewood High School students presented their designs for a train station in downtown Lakewood. Seven students, from computer-aided design/drafting and interactive media classes, showed renderings and a 3-D model of the traditionally designed depot.

 

Ken Prendergast of All Aboard Ohio presented a draft resolution for city council members, county commissioners, chamber boards, service groups, planning commissions and other bodies to consider. Passage of language in the sample resolution, which follows this full summary, would ask the Ohio Congressional Delegation to provide federal funds for an alternatives analysis of transportation improvements in the West Shore Corridor.

The draft resolution is available at:

http://members.cox.net/kjprendergast/SAMPLE_RESOLUTION.doc (MS Word, 24kb)

 

NOTE: The next full meeting of the West Shore Corridor stakeholders will likely be held in late January or early February. Its agenda will likely be a description and discussion of the funding process for the alternatives analysis.

 

For those receiving this e-mail for the first time and would like to get an overview of the regional commuter rail proposal, please see the PowerPoint presentation available at (LARGE FILE – 1.9mb):

http://members.cox.net/kjprendergast/West%20Shore%20Corridor.pdf

__________________________

 

ATTENDEES - At the Dec 13th meeting, there were 52 attendees (listed alphabetically by last name):

 

Nickie Antonio, At Large Lakewood City Councilwoman

William Baddour, Chief Operating Officer, Lakewood Hospital

Chris Bauer, Associate Planner, City of Lorain

Paul Beegan, Executive Committee, Lakewood Alive

Kathy Berkshire, Executive Director, Lakewood Chamber of Commerce

 

Betty Blair, Lorain County Commissioner

Jennifer Brady, representative-elect, District 16, Ohio House of Representatives

Kevin Butler, Ward 1, Lakewood City Councilman

Joe Calabrese, General Manager, Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA)

Michael Challender, Executive Director, Lorain Growth Corporation

 

Joe Cimperman, Ward 13, Cleveland City Councilman

Philip Copeland, Region 6 Director, National Association of Railroad Passengers

Lois Copeland, resident, Elyria

Mark Duluk, Principal, Arkinetics Architects+Urbanists

Maureen Duffy, Manager of Auxiliary Services, Lakewood Hospital

 

Gary Ebert, Director of Law, City of Bay Village

Jon Eckerle, Senior Regional Realtor, Century 21 Commercial/HomeStar

David Estrop, Superintendent, Lakewood City School District

Edward Favre, Lakewood mayor’s office and Lakewood Board of Education

Marty Gelfand, Staff Counsel, Congressman Dennis Kucinich

 

Tom George, Mayor, City of Lakewood

Debra Girman, First Federal of Lakewood; Vice Chair of Marketing, Lakewood Chamber of Commerce

Paul Gluck, Professional Engineer, CH2M Hill, Cleveland

Jack Hall, Senior Transportation Planner, Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency

David Hartman, Director of Business Development, RE Warner & Associates, Westlake

 

Jennifer Hooper, Executive Director, Lakewood Community Progress Inc.

John Hosek, Director of Transportation Programs, Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency

Kevin Kelley, Ward 16, Cleveland City Councilman

Therese Krevinko, Lakewood Hospital

Will McCracken, Oberlin

 

John Motl, Planning & Programs, District 12, Ohio Department of Transportation

Lisa Novatny, Staff Writer, Lakewood Sun Post

Anthony Palumbo, Chief of Operations, Electric Vehicle Institute, Bowling Green State University

Joyce Parks, assistant to Lorain County Commissioner Blair

Ken Prendergast, Director of Research & Communications, All Aboard Ohio

 

Jim Rowe, VP of Operations, Lakewood Hospital

Mark Schroeder, resident, Lakewood

Ken Sislak, Board Member/Northeast Ohio, All Aboard Ohio

Taylor J. Smith, President, Avon Historical Society

Bill Snorteland, resident, Lakewood

 

Beth Thames, District Director, Congressman and Senator-elect Sherrod Brown

Vince Urbin, Development Department, Lorain County

Paul Vernon, President, Cudell Improvement, Inc.; architect, KSU/Cleveland Urban Design Center

John G. Whitcomb, resident, Rocky River

George Zeller, Center for Community Solutions and GCRTA Citizens Advisory Board

 

Lakewood High School students:

CAD Drafting -

Brannon Mencke

Daniel Michaels

Samuel Norris

Morgen Schroeder

William Snyder

Interactive Media-

Nicole Muscatello

Kristen Vassel

_________________________

 

FULL SUMMARY

 

Lakewood Mayor Tom George welcomed attendees to the fourth West Shore Corridor stakeholders meeting. He said that while concerns remain about heavy freight train traffic, he was excited about the prospect for lighter commuter trains in the West Shore Corridor. He cited the opportunity for strengthening downtown Lakewood (one of the few Cleveland suburbs with a true downtown) and boosting property values along the corridor with better crossing protection and quiet zones.

_______

 

Lakewood Hospital VP of Operations William Baddour spoke next, saying the hospital is a critical stakeholder in the West Shore Corridor and is excited about commuter rail. They see the rail service as a way to enhance access to the hospital for workers, clients and visitors.

_______

 

Ken Prendergast of All Aboard Ohio provided an overview of the Nov. 15 Community Stations Subcommittee, as subcommittee chair Bob Parry, Westlake Planning and Economic Development Director, could not attend due to a conflict. Prendergast listed the potential station sites identified by the NEOrail feasibility study, but noted that some in attendance at the subcommittee meeting remarked that, at least in some communities, other sites should be considered and analyzed. Prendergast said copies of the station sites briefing report were provided by the Northeast Ohio Coordinating Agency, and that anyone seeking additional copies should contact Steve Jones at NOACA. 

_______

 

One of the highlights of the meeting was the presentation by seven Lakewood High School students who prepared designs and a model of a proposed station for downtown Lakewood. The site identified is between Belle and St. Charles avenues. School Board member Ed Favre introduced the students and said they were given a broad set of criteria and goals for designing the station.

 

Favre said the station should be of a traditional design like those of other stations built elsewhere along the former Nickel Plate Railroad Co. line which runs through Lakewood. One of those historic stations still stands in downtown Rocky River. Bay Village also has one, but it was moved to a park in that city. The station design should be compatible with other structures in the surrounding neighborhood, not be too large to spread beyond existing railroad property, and be accessible for pedestrians and cyclists. Safety also was an issue, so the station needed openness/large windows for visibility while having a fence to prevent commuters from walking across the tracks in between the crossings of Belle and St. Charles.

 

The students showed the renderings and 3-D model they designed, and discussed the extensive research they conducted to come up with the design concepts. They visited the historic depot in Rocky River, looked at numerous photos and used their classroom lessons to pull it all together. Everyone in attendance agreed the students did a tremendous job. To get copies of the students’ designs and/or photos of their station model, please contact Ed Favre in the Lakewood mayor’s office at (216) 529-6602.

_______

 

Bay Village Law Director Gary Ebert reports that he and the law directors from Lakewood (Brian Corrigan) and Rocky River (Andrew Bemer) had a productive meeting with Norfolk Southern Resident Vice President of Public Affairs Bill Harris on Dec. 12. NS confirmed his company’s agreement with the three West Shore suburbs limiting freight traffic to 14 trains daily is indefinite in term. The current volume of train traffic on the West Shore line is four to seven trains daily. Harris also said his company is not opposed to the general concept of running commuter trains on its West Shore tracks and doesn’t believe adding commuter rail would jeopardize the integrity of the agreement. The West Shore law directors have asked for a written opinion from NS’s Law Department.

_______

 

Prendergast asked all those present who serve on city councils, county commissions, chamber boards and so on to consider passing a resolution to ask the Ohio Congressional Delegation to provide $1.5 million for an alternatives analysis that's needed to nail down the best way to improve transportation in the West Shore Corridor. The study would take the next step after the NOACA NEOrail feasibility study conducted several years earlier, but a number of developments since (higher gas prices, the availability of second-hand and therefore more affordable train equipment, the option for diesel light-rail, use of economic development to help finance capital costs, etc.) might make regional rail or some other public transportation enhancement more feasible.

 

An alternatives analysis would identify capital and operating costs, issues affecting the natural and built environments along the corridor and includes an extensive public involvement process. Conclusion of the alternatives analysis would make the preferred option funding ready. While many officials took sample copies of the draft resolution, it is requested that the following, slightly revised version be used as a starting point instead.

 

Meeting was concluded at roughly 10:45 a.m.

 

_________________________

 

... As a matter of RTA policy, he sees transit funding in Greater Cleveland as a zero-sum game. In other words, if you add a transit service somewhere, a transit service somewhere else has to be cut to pay for it, per RTA's current policy. ...

Joe C is chair of the Ohio Public Transit Association. I would have hoped he would see that one of the goals of this emerging constituency is to seek more transit funding...

 

KJP-

 

To address a couple of points you've raised -- Joe Calabrese doesn't see transit FUNDING as a zero-sum game, at least not from the standpoint of money coming into the Authority. However, since RTA is prohibited from operating at a deficit, the ALLOCATION of said funding, once it is secured, is most definitely zero-sum. There's a fixed pool of money with which to provide services, and to provide additional services, you can either attempt to wring out additional efficiencies from the services you have, or move service around (cut one area to increase another area).

 

Also, he better than anyone understands the need to seek greater funding of public transit. In his position as chair of OPTA, he has been tirelessly professing his distress at the way public transit funding has been cut in the state of Ohio over the last five years, and nearly every nudget-related press release from RTA echoes these facts ("funding for public transit from the State of Ohio has been reduced by 63 percent from 2001 to the present", a direct quote from the press release regarding 2007 budget approval.).

 

I do concur with your hope that state funding will improve under Strickland, but I'm not holding my breath...

JeTDoG, it's OK to be optimistic. Optimism is a contagious thing. Plus, it's a source of energy and energy leads to getting things done.

 

Besides, you know what an advocate is without optimism? A bureaucrat.