thanks!

I like the fact that you are taking action to plan ideas... but centralizing trains is almost always bad. Granted we are not the level of city that has to worry just yet, but when you put all your eggs in one basket of transportation you risk getting stuck with something thats 100% inexpandable. Also, in your plan, it looks like the old railway station building (P&R?) would have to be demolished, so I am immediately not a fan because I love that building :)

 

What happened to the Intermodal Transit Center going in on e9th by the front of the convention center? That would be a great spot for it, along with a completed downtown loop. Then you have commuter/long distance/business travel rail coming in on one side, and local train traffic on another, connected by a CBD of entertainment, etc.

Nothing needs to be demolished to access Tower City Center by intercity rail. The West Shore proposal is to build tracks on a bridge above Canal Road. My variation was to move Canal Road to reduce the future maintenance costs of keeping a bridge in good condition.

 

And I disagree very much on your comment about not having all your trains serving a common station. The goal is to make seamless the connections for passengers between intercity trains, commuter trains, scenic railroad trains and light-rail trains. The best way to do that is to unite all of them in one location -- the union station concept. If we want to attract people from their cars, then reduce the barriers to using rail. The fewer transfers you force on prospective riders, the more riders you will attract.

^I totally agree.  And even aside from connectivity, Tower City is a better terminal location for the foreseeable future given its location within downtown.

then i read your graphic wrong, because you have it as grass at the corner of canal and old river.

 

I guess I have my scales/lengths of time a bit confused with you as far as trains. I am thinking long-term like.. well I am considering Paris. There are levels of train transit that interact, but there are seperate hubs when it comes to long distance vs commuter vs local metro. In my opinion, Tower City is the best we have to offer. Its unique, full of activities, and all around gorgeous.

 

My only qualm is that I feel like the current amtrak station could do so much to interact with that environment. I would love tower city to get an upgrade, but just as much the end of our new convention center could spill out into a beautiful transit station that can ship you right back to NY or DC, etc.

 

Is tower city actually central to the work force? What about someone who works at erieview? Just thoughts here, but I would say keep Amtrak where it is with a new station, close the loop by using 12th like you had drawn in the other discussion, then put the commuter trains in TC. Once we add more commuter trains, the need for a loop becomes grander, and the addition of a new Amtrak would increase that. If we put the commuter trains at the Amtrak station (without financing and approved plans for a loop or another option) then we would shoot ourselves in the foot.

 

Sorry to veer off topic a little

Yep, you read it wrong. The little strip of grass is actually ON Canal Road. The B&O station is just south of that and still standing.

 

Paris, like London and other major European cities, has multiple stations because each railroad company built its own station with no regard for linking up or coordinating with their competitors. Europe did not go through a union station movement as America's railroads did in the 20th century. Had American railroads not done that, we also would have numerous smaller railroad terminals serving our cities right up until the advent of Amtrak in 1971 rather than one or two big stations serving multiple railroads -- and most importantly, serving travelers' needs.

 

Tower City is more central to the downtown workforce than the lakefront. Pull out a map and ponder how many office towers you can walk to in five minutes from Tower City vs. the lakefront. Yes, the tourist attractions/Browns Stadium are next to the Amtrak station, but the downtown workers and students are rail's bread-n-butter. And at Tower City you have The Q and Progressive Field which have more event dates than CBS, plus links to the HealthLine, etc.

thats really interesting about europe! never knew it. huh, well it was certainly amazing to live in that kind of rail network. kind of kills any chance you have at finding rail that nice in the US hah.

 

anyways, i see your map and I just didnt notice the station was still there. Its much smaller than I realized. And I am not trying to argue the lakefront is more connected to downtown than TC.. that would be ridiculous.. I am only saying that I would prefer it be in 2 different locations now because the growth might not be able to be sustained.

Rail making progress (with video)

Published: Thursday, June 02, 2011

By KELLY METZ

[email protected]

 

ELYRIA — The analysis of the proposed West Shore Commuter Rail, a commuter line proposed to connect Sandusky, Vermilion and Lorain with downtown Cleveland, is moving along. Planners updated the Lorain County Commission as to where they see the project going in the next 15 years.

 

The commissioners, in 2009, approved the Alternatives Analysis study by consultant Parsons Brinckerhoff Inc., of Cleveland. The intent of the study is to identify and compare the costs, benefits and performance of different technologies for providing commuter rail service using existing rail corridors or for enhancing bus services, according to All Aboard Ohio. All Aboard Ohio is a statewide nonprofit organization that promotes improvements to passenger rail and public transportation.

 

Read more at: http://www.morningjournal.com/articles/2011/06/02/news/mj4615637.txt

How did All Aboard Ohio get lumped into this? We haven't been directly involved in the advocacy of this project in 2-3 years. This shows what happens when a reporter looks back at old articles as a source for their new article rather than picking up the phone.

Don't believe a whole lot that comes from the Morning Journal. I used to live in Lorain and they could never get any facts right in their stories.

They've interviewed me often over the past 20 years, so I'm well acquainted with them. I just like keeping the pressure on the media to avoid being lazy.

Just rolling around the transit threads and came across this. Never heard of it! Any update on its progress?

It is in a partial alternatives analysis, but a full FTA-compliant AA cannot be conducted due to lack of funds. There will be public meetings coming up soon, so look for updates -- especially at the West Shore website and Facebook page (http://www.ridewestshore.com/ and http://www.facebook.com/ridewestshore.

 

Look for employer-subsidized bus service to Lorain and Erie counties as a possible initial step forward.

What kind of trains would this line use?

Way too early to be able to answer that. The planning hasn't advanced far enough to identify what is the best mode for this corridor. The early returns show that rail between Lorain and Tower City would perform best, but if there's no money then bus would have to be considered. There is even some question as to whether this corridor will have any public transit beyond what it has now, considering the two project-sponsor agencies in Lorain County do not have the funding to do anything right now.

Well at least someone got to commute into downtown Cleveland on a really nice train on the West Shore Corridor tracks through Lakewood this morning....

 

 

 

 

In the 1980s, a few months after the Conrail business train passed down a line, things would start disappearing from along the tracks like old depots, interlocking towers, etc. Sometimes a rail line would disappear too. I hope that's not the case from today's visit by the NS biz train.

 

The train apparently stopped for a few minutes on top of the tall Rocky River trestle to take in the view or so NS execs could look down at the condition of the bridge. My Rocky River spy called me to let me know the train was coming. So I walked quickly about 500 feet to the tracks expecting to arrive just as the train did. But as I looked west down the 4-mile straightaway, there was no sign of the train. It would be a few more minutes before the train could be heard and then seen.

Federally funded transportation projects take an average of 10 years to go from idea to ribbon-cutting. But the $400 million is not correct. The reporter added all of the options on the table -- two bus options and two rail options.

 

The public meetings are coming up this month to hear more details, including one in Lakewood. I'm trying to get this list from the consulting team.

 

Commuter rail system for area called 10 to 15 years in future (with video)

Published: Tuesday, October 11, 2011

By ALLISON STROUSE

[email protected]

 

CARLISLE TOWNSHIP — Anyone hoping to see a commuter transit system connecting Erie, Lorain, and Cuyahoga counties might have to wait awhile.

 

The Lorain County Community Alliance, in a meeting yesterday, talked about putting in the commuter railway that would allow people to travel from Sandusky to Cleveland, Tim Rosenberger, technical specialist with Parsons Brinckerhoff, said a rail system is still 10 to 15 years away.

 

“If you’re ever going to have a successful commuter rail, you have to have successful busing into downtown Cleveland,” Rosenberger said.

 

READ MORE AT:

http://www.crainscleveland.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=framelink&link=www.morningjournal.com%2farticles%2f2011%2f10%2f11%2fnews%2fmj5130643.txt&oas=www.morningjournal.com_articles_2011_10_11_news_mj5130643.txt

http://lisacanter.com/teachcleveland/images/pdf/timeline/1957.pdf

 

"What downtown needed was more parking, which could be provided by tearing down old buildings." :bang:

 

 

What began as a simple google search has now ruined my day.  Mr. Albert Porter, ladies and gentlemen.

^Your link is bad.

worked for me...sadly...

http://lisacanter.com/teachcleveland/images/pdf/timeline/1957.pdf

 

"What downtown needed was more parking, which could be provided by tearing down old buildings." :bang:

 

 

What began as a simple google search has now ruined my day.  Mr. Albert Porter, ladies and gentlemen.

 

Don't let Al Porter ruin your day. He's dead. Been dead for some 30 years. And don't let his followers stop you from making this city a better place.

http://lisacanter.com/teachcleveland/images/pdf/timeline/1957.pdf

 

"What downtown needed was more parking, which could be provided by tearing down old buildings." :bang:

 

 

What began as a simple google search has now ruined my day.  Mr. Albert Porter, ladies and gentlemen.

 

Don't let Al Porter ruin your day. He's dead. Been dead for some 30 years. And don't let his followers stop you from making this city a better place.

 

:)

According to the following release, GCRTA just received $1 million in funding toward the Red Line / HealthLine Extension and $3 million toward the Clifton Boulevard Enhancement Project, as well as $3.169 million toward the Bus Pavement Parking Improvement Program

 

 

 

U.S. Transportation Secretary LaHood Announces $928.5 Million To Put Americans Back to Work Repairing, Rebuilding, Modernizing the Nation’s Transit Infrastructure

 

Federal funds will create jobs nationwide by strengthening transit choices while improving safety and reliability

 

DETROIT – U.S. Transportation Secretary Ray LaHood today announced that transit providers across the nation will receive a share of $928.5 million in federal funds for more than 300 public transportation projects in urban, suburban, and rural areas.  The money will put people to work renovating and building much needed transit facilities, manufacturing new clean-fuel buses, and helping communities plan responsibly for their future transit needs. He was joined in making the announcement by Federal Transit Administrator Peter Rogoff.

 

 

 

The full list of selected projects can be found at http://fta.dot.gov/grants/13094.html

.

 

# # #

According to the following release, GCRTA just received $1 million in funding toward the Red Line / HealthLine Extension and $3 million toward the Clifton Boulevard Enhancement Project, as well as $3.169 million toward the Bus Pavement Parking Improvement Program

:clap:

According to the following release, GCRTA just received $1 million in funding toward the Red Line / HealthLine Extension and $3 million toward the Clifton Boulevard Enhancement Project, as well as $3.169 million toward the Bus Pavement Parking Improvement Program

 

From the FTA:

 

Cleveland (Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority)

Project: Red Line/Health Line Extension

Grant Amount: $1,000,000

The study will evaluate the opportunity to extend a higher level of transit service to the eastern

edge of the Regional Transit Authority's service area, while providing enhanced commuter

options to downtown Cleveland / University Circle and promoting redevelopment in existing

communities with significant economic challenges. The study will examine the potential for a

Red Line or HealthLine extension in the northeastern portion of Cuyahoga County bounded by

Lake Erie on the north and Lake County on the east and comprises portions of three cities:

Cleveland, East Cleveland, and Euclid.

PDF source --

http://fta.dot.gov/documents/AA_Descriptions-Final.pdf

 

^Where the heck did that come from?  First rumblings I have ever heard.

We (Euclid) are about to begin our own Euclid Ave Corridor study with NOACA (TLCI Grant). Maybe this is part of it... will find out more.

Red line extension to the Euclid Park and Ride / Euclid Square Mall please!  And if you could be sure to build a stop at E222 that'd be super!

That would be GREAT!!!  I would LOVE to have the train come out to Euclid!

Red line extension to the Euclid Park and Ride /FUTURE DOG PARK/ Euclid Square Mall please!  And if you could be sure to build a stop at E222 that'd be super!

^Where the heck did that come from?  First rumblings I have ever heard.

 

I've mentioned it here on UO (http://www.urbanohio.com/forum2/index.php/topic,2768.msg578077.html#msg578077) and in the All Aboard Ohio newsletter -- if you don't subscribe, you should!

 

All Aboard Ohio is getting much more involved in transit advocacy at the local and federal levels, especially since our state government is not going to help provide Ohioans with transportation choices.

So no funds allocated for the Mayfield/Little Italy rapid station? 

So no funds allocated for the Mayfield/Little Italy rapid station? 

 

No. These funds were for projects that didn't quite fit into the FTA account (rail modernization) that normally awards funds for the RTA Rapid stations. These funds were awarded from the following FTA programs/accounts: Alternatives Analysis, State of Good Repair, and Bus Livability. I suppose the Mayfield Station could be funded under SOGR, but it's stretch considering the station was to be relocated.

 

I'm surprised that RTA wasn't able to get funding for the Red Line S-curve trench near West Boulevard, the second phase of the airport tunnel rehab, and a substation project or two.

 

But I'm pretty happy with what RTA was able to get.

Cross-posted from the Cleveland-Akron-Canton commuter rail thread.....

 

http://allaboardohio.org/2011/10/17/two-new-potential-rail-projects-among-ohio-winners-of-federal-transit-funds/

 

Two new potential rail projects among

Ohio winners of federal transit funds

 

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE — Oct. 17, 2011

Contact:

Ken Prendergast

All Aboard Ohio Executive Director

(216) 288-4883

[email protected]

 

Improved access to jobs for more Ohioans, including the state’s 1 million people living in households without cars, will result from $12.3 million in Federal Transit Administration (FTA) grants. Two grants will be for planning potential new rail development projects that could build off of existing passenger rail services in Cleveland and Akron (see: http://fta.dot.gov/grants/13094.html).

 

“As long as the State of Ohio refuses to consider passenger rail, be it streetcars, high-speed trains or anything in between, it will be up to regional transit agencies and local governments to take the lead,” said Ken Prendergast, executive director of All Aboard Ohio. “Fortunately they are finding a willing partner in the federal government which recognizes private capital follows public investments no matter if it’s in transit, passenger rail, highways or airports.”

 

FTA grants awarded today include nearly $3.5 million for new natural gas-fueled transit buses to replace older ones in Cincinnati, $368,000 for an improved transit maintenance facility and new bus equipment in Canton, and $1 million for an improved bus transportation asset management system in Columbus.

 

The Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) won FTA grants to upgrade two transit assets: $3 million to help build a scaled-down version of a more attractive and safer bus transit corridor on Clifton Boulevard in Cleveland and Lakewood; and nearly $3.2 to improve parking areas for buses and cars at transit centers and Rapid rail stations.

 

But two of the most exciting FTA awards for Ohio will start planning for potential new rail projects in Cleveland and Akron:

 

1. GCRTA was awarded $1 million for an alternatives analysis of extending a higher level of transit service to the eastern edge of the Authority's service area, while providing enhanced commuter options to downtown Cleveland/University Circle and promoting redevelopment. The study will examine the potential options for a Red Line rail or HealthLine bus rapid transit extension in Cleveland, East Cleveland and Euclid.

 

2. Akron Metro RTA was awarded $270,000 for an alternatives analysis of improving public transit service in an under-served area where it is difficult to provide bus service due to uneven terrain and roadway connectivity issues. The study area is along an eight-mile railway corridor used by the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad (CVSR) extending from the vicinity of the Valley Business District on Merriman Road southeast through downtown Akron and into the vicinity of the new Goodyear Corporate Campus in South Akron.

 

If these alternatives analyses show that one or more options could meet federal cost-effectiveness criteria, then local officials could select an option to advance to preliminary engineering. If the FTA finds the project would cause no significant environmental impacts, it could award federal funds to pay up to half of the construction costs. The federal planning process typically takes 10 years for a transportation project to go from idea to ribbon-cutting; more time is needed if many properties have to be acquired or buildings demolished.

 

That may not be the case with the Akron project, where the railroad corridor is already owned by the public sector – National Park Service northwest of Howard Street and Akron Metro RTA southeastward. Howard Street is also the address of Ohio’s busiest railroad station, used by about 100,000 passengers per year. Much economic development is occurring at the station in downtown Akron’s Northside district including new housing and shops, plus a hotel is planned.

 

“The Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad is designed to serve the Cuyahoga Valley National Park, not commuters,” Prendergast said. “But people are filling trains and causing economic development at downtown Akron's station. So for Akron Metro to also consider a transit use for those rails outside of the park is a logical next step.”

 

The analysis of extending the Red Line or the HealthLine will generate data and debate. A large number of residents of Northeast Cuyahoga County and Lake County commute into Downtown Cleveland and University Circle – Cuyahoga’s two largest employment districts. University Circle is one of the fastest growing urban employment clusters in the United States today and is not served by any limited access highway. An extended Red Line may offer the fastest commute to University Circle, a traffic-free commute to downtown, and a cross-county, all-weather rail link to Hopkins Airport. However, the HealthLine’s more closely spaced stops would likely give commuters greater access to more of University Circle and to more manufacturing jobs in Euclid.

 

“The stunning job growth in University Circle is a big reason why ridership on the Red Line is growing at 17 percent and on the HealthLine at 13 percent,” said Prendergast. “The continued growth of University Circle depends on public transit and extending transit’s catchment area. Without quality transit reaching out to where more commuters live, University Circle is at risk of drowning in traffic.”

 

END

October 17, 2011

 

Public Meetings on Proposed WestShore Corridor Transportation Project Plan

 

GREATER CLEVELAND – In the near future, residents, regional visitors and commuter could have safe, convenient new options for travel between major points in Erie, Lorain and Cuyahoga Counties including commuter bus and rail, according to planners on the WestShore Transportation Project. However, new local funding sources must be identified, further studies undertaken, and railroad and intercounty agreements inked before a major new service like commuter rail service is ready to operate.

 

On behalf of project co-sponsors Lorain County Board of Commissioners/Lorain County Transit and Lorain County Community Alliance, the WestShore Commuter Rail Task Force and communities in Lorain County, Erie County and Cuyahoga County, will hold three public meetings to present study findings to-date for recommended travel options, costs, benefits and funding/financing for the WestShore Corridor.  Public comments are needed in order to finalize the proposed package of options designed to improve longer-distance public transit service between the WestShore counties of Erie, Lorain and Cuyahoga.

 

The public is invited and encouraged to attend one or more of the following meetings:

 

Cuyahoga County—October 24, 2011               

Lakewood City Hall                                   

Auditorium                                               

12650 Detroit Avenue                               

Lakewood, OH 44107                               

6-8 pm                                                   

 

Lorain County—October 26, 2011

Black River Landing

421 Black River Lane

Lorain, OH 44052

6-8 pm

 

Erie County -- October 25, 2011

Erie County Administration Building

3rd Floor Commissioner’s Chambers

2900 Columbus Avenue

Sandusky, OH 44870

6-8 pm

 

 

For more information, please contact Tim Rosenberger, PB at 216-832-2952, Nancy Lyon Stadler, Michael Baker, Jr., Inc. at 216-776-6814 or Marissa Beechuk, BrownFlynn at

440-484-0100, ext.211.

 

********************************************************************************************************************************

 

WESTSHORE CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION STUDY BACKGROUND

 

The WestShore Corridor Transportation Project (WCTP) seeks to address the lack of public transportation options for travel in the WestShore Corridor, which extends from downtown Cleveland through western Cuyahoga, Lorain, and Erie Counties to Sandusky. The need for improvements is based on several factors including a lack of public transit options for inter-county travel, lack of transit options within Lorain and Erie Counties, and the need for more sustainable land use patterns in suburban growth areas.

 

While the development of commuter rail service along the Norfolk Southern (former Nickel Plate) rail line that passes through Lakewood, Bay Village and much of northern Lorain County has been the goal for many citizens and political leaders in the WestShore Corridor, the analysis conducted for the WCTP indicates that a transit market must first be established within the WestShore Corridor before commuter rail can become a reality. Currently, commuter bus services to downtown Cleveland operate from Medina, Summit, Portage and Lake counties. Lorain County is the most populous county surrounding Cleveland that does not have bus service to downtown Cleveland. The WCTP suggests that an inter-county transit market could be established in several phases.

 

In Phase 1, during the next five years, would include implementation of commuter bus service between Lorain County and downtown Cleveland.  The proposed service would include basic commuter bus service between the city of Lorain and downtown Cleveland with stops at Black River Landing, Midway Mall, and two new park and ride lots located in Sheffield and Avon. In this phase, Lorain County Transit would be restored to its pre-2009 service levels to distribute passengers throughout Lorain County.

 

Implementing this service would cost approximately $11 million per year in buying buses and outfitting park-and-ride lots in Lorain County. The annual estimated annual operating cost of Phase 1 is $8.3 million. While commuter bus service is made operational, work would continue on the analysis of the benefits and environmental impacts of the commuter rail service to allow for that service to be developed in the future. Discussions with the Norfolk-Southern Railroad about use of their rail line for commuter rail service began as part of the West Shore study, and would continue through the first phase of development.

 

In Phase 2 (Years 6-10), commuter bus service in Lorain County would expand, and commuter bus service between Erie County and downtown Cleveland would begin. In this phase two new bus routes would be started to supplmenet the route operating between Lorain and downtown Cleveland. One new route would operate between Sheffield and downtown Cleveland, with one park and ride lot located in Sheffield and two in Avon. A third commuter bus route would begin providing service between Sandusky and downtown Cleveland, with stops at park and ride facilities located in Sandusky, Huron, and Vermilion.

 

The estimated cost of this second phase of service would be about $16 million for additional buses and park and ride lot, and about $10 million in additional annual operating cost.

 

Also in this phase, regional transit officials would complete the analysis of commuter rail service and reach an agreement with the Norfolk Southern railroad regarding use of their rail line, and would begin the design of improvements to the rail line, stations and other infrastructure needed to operate commuter rail service.

WESTSHORE CORRIDOR TRANSPORTATION STUDY BACKGROUND - Continued

Page 2

 

 

In Phase 3 (Years 10-15), commuter rail service would begin operation and would replace some or all of the commuter bus services in Lorain County, and would perhaps replace some bus services in Cuyahoga County.  The commuter rail service would operate between Black River Landing in Lorain and downtown Cleveland. Stations would be located in Lorain, Sheffield, Avon, Westlake, Bay Village, Rocky River, Lakewood and Cleveland. It is hoped that many of the park and ride facilities developed in the first two phases of the project would now function as park and ride lots at the commuter rail stations. Commuter bus service would continue to be operated between Sandusky and Cleveland as in Phase 2. Extension of commuter rail service to Sandusky and other Erie County locations would be re-examined as a possibility for the future.

 

The WestShore Study has estimated that it would cost nearly $160 million in improvements to the Norfolk Southern rail line and associated stations and park-and-ride lots, and in purchasing new rail cars and other equipment, to operate a startup commuter rail service.  The estimated annual cost of operating the commuter rail and commuter bus services in Phase 3 is approximately $17 million.

 

There are many challenges to developing intercounty transit service in the WestShore corridor. The most important of these is the establishment of a sustainable funding source to support the service. Currently, Lorain and Erie Counties lack a secure dedicated funding source for mass transit service to match the 1% county wide sales tax that supports the Greater Cleveland Regional Transit Authority (GCRTA) in Cuyahoga County. A source for those county’s portions of the cost of operating the service would be necessary to allow service to be operated. Identifying a potential operator of the commuter bus and rail service-whether it be Lorain County Transit (LCT), GCRTA, Erie County Transit, some combination of those agencies, or a new agency, is another issue that must be resolved before operation can begin. The high cost of commuter rail may be beyond the funding capacity of the region at this time, but the phased approach may allow for the more fiscally manageable commuter bus service to begin operating while the region works toward the goal of developing commuter rail. 

 

The budget for this phase of the WestShore Corridor Transportation Project is $423,000 and was managed by Lorain County.  Funds for 80% of this budget came from a Federal appropriation secured by Congresswoman Betty Sutton in 2008.  The remaining 20% of the project budget was contributed by local sources including the private sector, municipalities, transit authorities and government agencies from all three project area counties. Representatives from the Northeast Ohio Areawide Coordinating Agency (NOACA), GCRTA, ODOT, Lorain County Transit and other organizations helped in manage the project via the WestShore Corridor Commuter Rail Task Force.

 

Public comments will be accepted through November 2, 2011 at [email protected].

This was posted in "Cleveland Transit Ideas For the Future" and should be shared here for orientation, possible options that may be considered, etc....

 

Musky, be sure to reach out to Lincoln Electric, they are really high on trying to show their "green" side. 

They are very VERY proud of the windmill, and would likely be receptive to other green initiatives.  Public transportation to their front door might be a good fit

Agreed, Pat.

 

KJP, could you update that illustration to show where the existing park and Ride  on St. Clair in Euclid is?

OK, but for now, the Euclid Park & Ride is between the "c" in Euclid (in the graphic above) and the line marked "NS ROW."

 

I was following the NS right of way east from Windermere on Google and Bing last night, and my earlier concern about having to demolish buildings is unfounded. I see only a few boarded-up, dilapidated houses in East Cleveland that would need to be razed. The only tight fit I see is trying to get the double-tracked Red Line and the three tracks of the NS line in between the old TRW plant and the Northern Ohio Scrap Services Corporation/Hose Master Inc. buildings on the east side of East 222nd Street. The NS line might have to be moved a little bit to the south, which could require demolishing four small appendage structures on the north side of the TRW plant or putting the centerline of the Red Line's closest track to less than 25 feet of the centerline of the closest active freight track (see http://ntl.bts.gov/lib/42000/42300/42377/ord0316.pdf). This could require a reinforced concrete barrier between the transit and freight tracks. The regulations about the proximity of new transit tracks to freight tracks are very different today than compared to when the Red Line was built 43-56 years ago.

 

Then, between Shaw and Coit avenues, I would have the Red Line cross over the NS line to the north side of the right of way to avoid having to bridge over numerous industrial siding tracks. Still, I see two industrial sidings that might have to be bridged, one is west of East 222nd and the other is about one mile east of that, for Lincoln Electric. If one or both of the sidings is sparingly used (once a day or less) and doesn't have time-sensitive shipments, then an at-grade crossing might be possible with a chain that lifts the Red Line's overhead catenary wires to allow for large freight cars to fit underneath (this is the current practice at the Port of Cleveland and at the West Park station). But the industrial sidings would have to be served only in the middle of the night when the Red Line isn't running. This is up to NS and the shippers. RTA will have to work around their needs.

 

So I was costing this project in my head, and if the double-tracked, electrified, grade-separated Red Line is proposed to be extended six miles east to the Euclid Square Mall area along the NS right of way with five or six added stations, then I suspect this is probably a $150 million to $200 million project.

Agreed, Pat.

 

KJP, could you update that illustration to show where the existing park and Ride  on St. Clair in Euclid is?

How about a map I drew the last time we discussed this?

 

http://maps.google.com/maps/ms?msid=203308980444636244129.00048297013150e5b575b&msa=0&ll=41.57205,-81.543274&spn=0.044435,0.133896

Not that I ever expect to see this in my lifetime, but it looks as though the most practical and cost effective  Red Line extension, as described by KJP, would continue (as currently) in basically an unpopulated "trench" surrounded by industrial buildings, if anything.  May be good for an end of line park and ride but don't see much TOD possibilities.  While I prefer rail, maybe a Heathline Extension down Euclid is the better route to go (and my dream of someday turning it into light rail)

Not that I ever expect to see this in my lifetime, but it looks as though the most practical and cost effective  Red Line extension, as described by KJP, would continue (as currently) in basically an unpopulated "trench" surrounded by industrial buildings, if anything.  May be good for an end of line park and ride but don't see much TOD possibilities.  While I prefer rail, maybe a Heathline Extension down Euclid is the better route to go (and my dream of someday turning it into light rail)

 

You're not planning to croak in 10 years, are ya? ;-)

 

The rail right-of-way is actually elevated from Mayfield Road eastward through East Cleveland and at-grade eastward into Cleveland or Euclid. There are a number of neighborhoods and active/growing industrial and distribution facilities along the right of way. In fact, RTA's initial interest in this extension (be it rail or BRT) was to give Cleveland and East Cleveland residents better access to the commercial and industrial employers east of East Cleveland.

 

There is a very large apartment building complex of 10 six-story apartment buildings (the Indian Hills Senior Community) between Euclid Avenue and the rail line. Plus it appears to me there are some TOD possibilities of varying sizes at Noble Road, London/Wayside Roads, Dille Road and, of course, in and around Euclid Square Mall. If I were king for a day, I'd demolish Euclid Square Mall and build a downtown for Euclid with the Red Line running right into the middle of it (possibly with an Amtrak station for trains to/from Buffalo/Toronto on the north side). I can also envision some large park-n-ride facilities at Dille Road to catch Richmond and Highland Heights residents coming down Highland and Chardon roads who now head for I-90 to get downtown.

BTW all you Clevelanders, former Cincinnati Mayor Tom Luken was ragging on Cleveland rail transit yesterday in his relentless campaign against the Cincinnati Streetcar.  Nothing in Cleveland resembles what is proposed in Cincinati in the slightest, but that doesn't stop Luken, nor does anything else in the real world.

Luken said something unfounded and irrational? :-o

Not that I ever expect to see this in my lifetime, but it looks as though the most practical and cost effective  Red Line extension, as described by KJP, would continue (as currently) in basically an unpopulated "trench" surrounded by industrial buildings, if anything.  May be good for an end of line park and ride but don't see much TOD possibilities.  While I prefer rail, maybe a Heathline Extension down Euclid is the better route to go (and my dream of someday turning it into light rail)

I haven't been shy about my preference of extending the Red Line, but if the Healthline gets extended instead I'd be ok with it. I'd like to be able to get between Euclid to University Circle without going through downtown or having a long layover at Windermere.

 

There is already a fair amount of density along this corridor, both from employers and residents. It's not ideal for TOD, but at the moment TOD isn't happening even in the places where it would be ideal, so why not build where you already have ridership? Plus if the stations are built right, some TOD would be possible. I'd love to live in condo across the street from a train station in Euclid, if it happens to be at the site of an old mall, that sounds like good reuse of the space to me.

 

This probably won't happen for 10 to 15 years at a minimum, but 15 - 20 years from now my kids will be out of the house and I would consider it. The wife has said she's not going to live in the city again, but would be ok with Euclid. Sounds like a nice place to move to once we're empty nesters. I can't say that a healthline station would be enough to entice me to consider moving though. 

Damn...it'd still be about a 25-30 min walk from the North Collinwood neighborhood to the closest stop.

 

EDIT: wait...I think I misread something.  Rail access to North Collinwood please!!!  KJP's most northern proposal seems to allow this.

This is a fantasy, but I would like to see it go as far as Mentor. So many in our region are denied access to transportation....  yet RTA, a regional transpiration entity, hardly reaches areas of the region that could lead to people leaving their cars at home.  But getting it to Euclid is like pulling teeth...so back to reality.

FYI, this study area is about one mile longer than the length of the dedicated HealthLine busway on Euclid between Downtown and University Circle.

 

One reason why I prefer the rail option is because it would allow for GCRTA to get rid of the #239 park-n-ride flyers and possibly the #28, then restructure existing routes (34, 37, 39/F, 40 and 41) to compensate for it. It might also let Laketran eliminate some of their freeway express buses and instead feed them (and their existing street-based routes 2, 3, 6 and 13) into the Red Line at Euclid.

 

EDIT: the red X at the lower left is the site of GCRTA's Euclid park-n-ride. Euclid Square Mall is to the above-right (or east) of the park-n-ride.......

 

 

 

Here's some Streetview photos showing the existing conditions along the NS right of way. As you can see, it's not in a trench. But the economic stress of East Cleveland is quite evident in some of these pictures. This is from west to east (East Cleveland to Euclid)....

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

^I would think Euclid Avenue through East Cleveland is MORE than wide enough to have dedicated bus lanes. The street is six to 7 lanes wide and stays that way into the city of Euclid.

I was thinking the same thing. Although a large portion of it is only four lanes. The west edge of EC gets a little tight near the RR bridge.