3 hours ago, Luke_S said:

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad names Canadian exec as its next CEO

August 28, 2024

Scott Suttell 

 

 

The nonprofit excursion railroad's board of trustees on Wednesday, Aug. 28, announced that Larry Stevenson will become president and CEO [of the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad] effective Tuesday, Sept. 3. Stevenson succeeds Joe Mazur, who announced in May that he would retire after seven years of leading CVSR.

 

Stevenson has "over 10 years of executive-level experience and 20 years of rail industry expertise," CVSR said in announcing his hiring. Most recently, he was CEO of the Island Corridor Foundation, a nonprofit organization in Vancouver, Canada. Stevenson in June stepped down from that organization, where he had worked since 2018.

 

At the Vancouver organization, Stevenson "was responsible for the strategy, planning and day-to-day management of a 180-mile rail corridor," CVSR said. It added that his leadership there was "instrumental in revitalizing the organization and securing its relevance and standing with stakeholders, the public and government entities."

 

https://www.crainscleveland.com/transportation/cuyahoga-valley-scenic-railroad-names-larry-stevenson-ceo

 

I wonder what the lure was.  CVSRR seems like a demotion from his last job (operating a 180-mile RR), unless there are secret growth plans. 

34 minutes ago, Dougal said:

 

I wonder what the lure was.  CVSRR seems like a demotion from his last job (operating a 180-mile RR), unless there are secret growth plans. 

 

^ Agreed!! I don't know anything about him and haven't done any research yet, but from that little clip of the article my first thought was.... to bad the RTA didn't get him to fix and lead our rail!!

CVSR hired Steve Wait who was president of the Wheeling & Lake Erie, an 800+ mile freight railroad. He went to CVSR prior to fully retiring and considered CVSR somewhat of a partial retirement since it didn't pay what W&LE did. He also dabbled a bit in business development for the shortline freight hauler Cleveland Commercial Railroad. Steve hired me to do some consulting work for CVSR and CCR after Kasich killed 3C and I was searching for some local rail work to do. Nice guy, but I wish he hadn't abandoned W&LE through Cleveland's North Broadway neighborhood into the Industrial Flats. 

I was looking around on Google maps the other day, as you do, and noticed a rail spur off the main line, east towards the old Jait Papermill site. Which got me thinking that if the rail line was still there it would be nice if CVSRR was able to restore this section and extend it a bit to Brandywine to run ski trains to Brandywine in the winter. 

 

I know this is just a fun little thought experiment and ultimately isn't at all practical; it doesn't lead to a year-round attraction or population center, and not only restoring the existing line would be expensive but extending the right-of-way would be more expensive. Led to a fun hike today though. 

 

 

 

When I was in middle school (1978-81), our ski club went to Brandywine. From the chairlift going up the long slope by the mill (I seem to recall that slop was called Brandy back then), I remember seeing the paper mill being active, with lots of steam coming out of it in winter and freight cars parked at the mill. Chessie System stopped using the line around that time when all the steel mills started shutting down and the Staggers Rail Deregulation Act passed in 1980, making it easier for railroads to abandon right of way. If it wasn't for the national park buying the tracks, that valley line would've been gone too.

21 hours ago, Luke_S said:

I was looking around on Google maps the other day, as you do, and noticed a rail spur off the main line, east towards the old Jait Papermill site. Which got me thinking that if the rail line was still there it would be nice if CVSRR was able to restore this section and extend it a bit to Brandywine to run ski trains to Brandywine in the winter. 

 

I know this is just a fun little thought experiment and ultimately isn't at all practical; it doesn't lead to a year-round attraction or population center, and not only restoring the existing line would be expensive but extending the right-of-way would be more expensive. Led to a fun hike today though. 

Doesn't the CVSRR go right past Boston Mills?  Seems like that would be more viable for ski trains in the winter, assuming the CVSRR could operate during the winter.

41 minutes ago, LibertyBlvd said:

Doesn't the CVSRR go right past Boston Mills?  Seems like that would be more viable for ski trains in the winter, assuming the CVSRR could operate during the winter.

 

Why not service both? They just bought two new locomotives so in theory, assuming they have enough rail cars, they could run two trains. 

 

And like I said, it's not actually a super practical service improvement but I think it would be cool. They definitely should run ski trains to Boston Mills.

Edited September 9, 2024Sep 9 by Luke_S

In terms of CVSR and Skiing, I always thought that there was a great opportunity for improved integration with Boston Mills. The tracks are a little over 100 yards from the BM lodge. Here is a picture of CVSR going by from Lift 6. 

 

The current CVSR Boston Station is roughly a 1/4 mile walk to the lodge.

 

The old station north of Boston Mills Road was slightly closer to the slopes though. I don't recall how far north the crushed stone platform stretched, but I think it may have been close to being in line with the lodge. 

 

With the improvements to the Boston Station and adjacent visitor center, the walkway between the station and lodge is mostly in place already. Sidewalks connect the station to the RV lot across Riverview, which is about ~50 feet from the old roadway that runs the length of the Boston Mills parking lot. If you build that short walkway connecting the parking lots and add some signage, the two could be properly connected. To make the easiest connection, you could possibly expand/rebuild the platform of the old station and build a new crosswalk across Riverview with a sidewalk connecting directly to the lodge. This new platform would then only be served during the ski season. This investment may not be worth it though since it would be so close to the existing station. 

37 minutes ago, NorthShore647 said:

In terms of CVSR and Skiing, I always thought that there was a great opportunity for improved integration with Boston Mills.

I wonder whether it's already too late for that idea.  Climate change is trending toward warmer winters generally, with fewer (but potentially larger) snow events.  Less frequent snow can be dealt with with snow machines, but warmer weather (and rain) may make skiing unprofitable as an ongoing business in Cleveland in coming decades.

14 hours ago, Luke_S said:

 

Why not service both? They just bought two new locomotives so in theory, assuming they have enough rail cars, they could run two trains. 

 

And like I said, it's not actually a super practical service improvement but I think it would be cool. They definitely should run ski trains to Boston Mills.

This is why I really want some DMUs sharing the CVSR route, and obviously getting it up to Cleveland. Easy access to hike/bike/ski in a National Park would make downtown Cleveland and Akron much more attractive places to live. Have the commuter trains go down to Canton again like CVSR did and you also hit both Akron-Canton and Akron-Fulton airports, Pro Football HOF, and President McKinley Library/Memorial. You could even have a special stop at Everett or Ira Rd with shuttle busses to Blossom. Those trains would be packed by people wanting to avoid the traffic. It has uses for residents, workers, and tourists all year. 

12 hours ago, PlanCleveland said:

his is why I really want some DMUs sharing the CVSR route, and obviously getting it up to Cleveland. Easy access to hike/bike/ski in a National Park would make downtown Cleveland and Akron much more attractive places to live. Have the commuter trains go down to Canton again like CVSR did and you also hit both Akron-Canton and Akron-Fulton airports, Pro Football HOF, and President McKinley Library/Memorial. You could even have a special stop at Everett or Ira Rd with shuttle busses to Blossom. Those trains would be packed by people wanting to avoid the traffic. It has uses for residents, workers, and tourists all year. 

 

I'm not entirely sure, but I assume that equipment traveling north of Rockside on the proposed extension to Cleveland would need to be FRA compliant. It that's the case it would limit the available railcars that CVSR could acquire for a theoretical service. I know that the Nippon Sharyo DMUs that get used in Sonoma are FRA compliant, but their US plant closed pre pandemic. 

 

There may be some Budd DMU Buddliners still in service that CVSR could acquire. I know Via Rail still uses some Budd DMUs on a few of their remote lines. If the Canadians get new rolling stock for that service (or if it is cut entirely), CVSR could go after them. The Budds refurbished for Trinity Railway Express initial service in the 90s were acquired by AllEarth Rail in Vermont, but weren't used for their intended service there. I'm not sure what happened to those units. 

 

In terms of operational flexibility, I do really like the idea of running DMUs on the CVSR though. If they could get some sort of exemption (potentially a separation agreement with fireght?) from the FRA to use DMUs like the Stadler GTWs on the extended line that would be great.

CVSR used to have RDCs but apparently doesn't anymore based on their current roster:

https://www.cvsr.org/history/our-fleet

 

This article is from 11 years ago:

https://akronrrclub.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/rdc-returns-to-the-cvsr/

1 hour ago, KJP said:

CVSR used to have RDCs but apparently doesn't anymore based on their current roster:

https://www.cvsr.org/history/our-fleet

 

This article is from 11 years ago:

https://akronrrclub.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/rdc-returns-to-the-cvsr/

They still have at least one - we saw it on our tour in June. I thought it was interesting that it isn’t electric motors for the drivetrain - the diesel motor is connected via a transmission to directly run the wheels . I’m hoping there are some much-newer DMUs out there that could better serve this need  

Interesting that it's not shown on CVSR's roster. I wonder why? Maybe someday CVSR/CVNP can piggyback onto another order to pick up several DMUs or if some temporal and physical separations from freight traffic are implemented, they could get trains that are non-AAR compliant for mixed-traffic use. That could also include getting second-hand trains like the O-Train's Bombardier Talent trains. They were supposed to be scrapped after only 14 years of service (there's nothing wrong with them except that Ottawa wanted to go with a new single rail vehicle type systemwide). But I don't know if they have yet.

9 hours ago, NorthShore647 said:

 

I'm not entirely sure, but I assume that equipment traveling north of Rockside on the proposed extension to Cleveland would need to be FRA compliant. It that's the case it would limit the available railcars that CVSR could acquire for a theoretical service. I know that the Nippon Sharyo DMUs that get used in Sonoma are FRA compliant, but their US plant closed pre pandemic. 

 

There may be some Budd DMU Buddliners still in service that CVSR could acquire. I know Via Rail still uses some Budd DMUs on a few of their remote lines. If the Canadians get new rolling stock for that service (or if it is cut entirely), CVSR could go after them. The Budds refurbished for Trinity Railway Express initial service in the 90s were acquired by AllEarth Rail in Vermont, but weren't used for their intended service there. I'm not sure what happened to those units. 

 

In terms of operational flexibility, I do really like the idea of running DMUs on the CVSR though. If they could get some sort of exemption (potentially a separation agreement with fireght?) from the FRA to use DMUs like the Stadler GTWs on the extended line that would be great.

Ya I know there are a lot of issues that are over my head on getting this done. I know some of the new Stadler FLIRTs being produced in the US are FRA compliant as well, and make for a very comfortable ride. The FLIRT is the only train I actually know of, because after riding on a few of them in Switzerland and the Netherlands I looked up what they were haha.  I needed to know which commuter trains I'd purchase if I was made dictator of NEO. 

On 9/10/2024 at 10:21 AM, PlanCleveland said:

This is why I really want some DMUs sharing the CVSR route, and obviously getting it up to Cleveland. Easy access to hike/bike/ski in a National Park would make downtown Cleveland and Akron much more attractive places to live. Have the commuter trains go down to Canton again like CVSR did and you also hit both Akron-Canton and Akron-Fulton airports, Pro Football HOF, and President McKinley Library/Memorial. You could even have a special stop at Everett or Ira Rd with shuttle busses to Blossom. Those trains would be packed by people wanting to avoid the traffic. It has uses for residents, workers, and tourists all year. 

 

I have one minor quibble with this; CVSR likely wont be able to run at a frequency or total transit time to be a competitive commuting option and to do so would sacrifice the scenic rail operations, resulting in doing both poorly. I know Canton has the tourist attractions you identified (First Lady's Museum too!), but I think the Akron to Canton leg would be too far and uninteresting for a scenic rail trip for CVSR. I'm also not sure Canton has the population density to support this either. 

 

I think the better option would be to build a dedicated commuter rail line from Canton to at least Akron; though ideally this would continue north, east of CVNP, going through Hudson and up to Cleveland. You then only have to extend the southern terminus of the CVSR a little further east from the Akron Northside Station to around North Arlington St where you could transfer between the lines. 

 

This both connects Canton to CVNP and allows for a dedicated commuter rail that is going to run through more population centers. 

25 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

 

I have one minor quibble with this; CVSR likely wont be able to run at a frequency or total transit time to be a competitive commuting option and to do so would sacrifice the scenic rail operations, resulting in doing both poorly. I know Canton has the tourist attractions you identified (First Lady's Museum too!), but I think the Akron to Canton leg would be too far and uninteresting for a scenic rail trip for CVSR. I'm also not sure Canton has the population density to support this either. 

 

I think the better option would be to build a dedicated commuter rail line from Canton to at least Akron; though ideally this would continue north, east of CVNP, going through Hudson and up to Cleveland. You then only have to extend the southern terminus of the CVSR a little further east from the Akron Northside Station to around North Arlington St where you could transfer between the lines. 

 

This both connects Canton to CVNP and allows for a dedicated commuter rail that is going to run through more population centers. 

It's absolutely a half baked plan with a lot of issues haha. 

 

With how slow CVSR runs, I think it would be best if those trains continued running from Rockside to Akron. The Rockside to Cleveland ride would add a ton of time, and a lot of ugly views for a scenic train. And as you mention, taking the slow train down to Canton would add another hour to the ride for minimal gains. 

 

I think using the commuter trains to connect people from Downtown Cleveland and the Canton leg to the Rockside and Akron scenic stops would be best for everyone. Keep the scenic trains inside the park. 

 

I also see a ton of struggle getting the route through Hudson going due to the huge Nimby presence in Hudson and Silver Lake. The rails have been pulled out of the ground on portions of this stretch too. 

 

In a perfect world, the scenic trains and commuter rail run on CVSR tracks, along with another Cleveland Akron connection on the East side. 

4 minutes ago, PlanCleveland said:

It's absolutely a half baked plan with a lot of issues haha. 

 

With how slow CVSR runs, I think it would be best if those trains continued running from Rockside to Akron. The Rockside to Cleveland ride would add a ton of time, and a lot of ugly views for a scenic train. And as you mention, taking the slow train down to Canton would add another hour to the ride for minimal gains. 

 

I think using the commuter trains to connect people from Downtown Cleveland and the Canton leg to the Rockside and Akron scenic stops would be best for everyone. Keep the scenic trains inside the park. 

 

I also see a ton of struggle getting the route through Hudson going due to the huge Nimby presence in Hudson and Silver Lake. The rails have been pulled out of the ground on portions of this stretch too. 

 

In a perfect world, the scenic trains and commuter rail run on CVSR tracks, along with another Cleveland Akron connection on the East side. 

The CVSR has projected increasing ridership by 50% (from 200k annual to 300K annual) by extending to downtown Cleveland. To enable more people to access the park in a more efficient and inexpensive way, it is very much worthwhile to extend CVSR to Rockside to downtown. That section isn’t just ugly views, either. They would be different, but the industrial valley has its own appeal. Plus, it’s not like anyone is forced to ride that section. I just want to emphasize that even if we had proper regional rail from Cleveland through Bedford, Hudson, and Cuyahoga Falls to Akron, it would still be worth extending CVSR to downtown Cleveland 
 

(I do think it will be important for the CVSR to have a good downtown station location with easy RTA access.)

1 hour ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

The CVSR has projected increasing ridership by 50% (from 200k annual to 300K annual) by extending to downtown Cleveland. To enable more people to access the park in a more efficient and inexpensive way, it is very much worthwhile to extend CVSR to Rockside to downtown. That section isn’t just ugly views, either. They would be different, but the industrial valley has its own appeal. Plus, it’s not like anyone is forced to ride that section. I just want to emphasize that even if we had proper regional rail from Cleveland through Bedford, Hudson, and Cuyahoga Falls to Akron, it would still be worth extending CVSR to downtown Cleveland 
 

(I do think it will be important for the CVSR to have a good downtown station location with easy RTA access.)

Sorry, didn't mean to make it seem like I was against the extension. I was just throwing out a potential solution for the total transit time and frequency of the CVSR trains comment. But you're right, the industrial portion isn't as bad as I made it seem, but I do think it'd get old if it takes 35-40 minutes to get through. My dream is having the CVSR stop Downtown also be another Visitors Center and Canal Museum for the park. Ideally as an attraction to get more people in Tower City. You could even throw in some EPA history stuff. 

 

Looking at the riverfront renderings, it looks like those rail lines in front of the power plant will be the new Canal Rd. So that eliminates a convenient riverfront stop. And on another it had a potential CVSR stop along W3rd under the Carnagie and 90 bridges. That seems like an awful spot for it. 

 

Part of my thinking with combining this with commuter rail is potential outside help with capital costs for the best potential CVSR set up. Building a tunnel starting near Central Furnace Dr going under the freight tracks and coming out along the RTA tracks would get it into Tower City. Or dig a trench and build a bridge over it for the freight rail. It would need to go up about 40 feet, so it would likely get back to grade right around the bridges. Could CVSR afford that or get assitance on its own? I'm guessing absolutely not. But if it's part of a commuter line connecting metro areas of 2.2M, 700k, and 400k while also providing more equitable access to a national park? That is a project that could get outside funding. 

Edited September 12, 2024Sep 12 by PlanCleveland

Related/unrelated/talking to talk but I've biked a decent amount of the ROW that it'd take into the city and honestly I think it'd be pretty cool perspective for a lot of people. It would help button up the story of the industry spurred by the towpath/canal/river. Also, maybe it'll spur some cleanup of places (talking to you Rosby landfill).

 

For instance here's a sunset right before you come into the heart of the steel plant and whatnot (taken right about here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/wqN4ARa7TtZ7MpeP7): 

 

Re: commuter rail it'd be nice to have faster trains/different set running during early morning/evenings that could connect Cle to Akron, but not sure how realistic that is (I know I'm probably repeating stuff that's already been covered upthread).

24 minutes ago, GISguy said:

Related/unrelated/talking to talk but I've biked a decent amount of the ROW that it'd take into the city and honestly I think it'd be pretty cool perspective for a lot of people. It would help button up the story of the industry spurred by the towpath/canal/river. Also, maybe it'll spur some cleanup of places (talking to you Rosby landfill).

 

For instance here's a sunset right before you come into the heart of the steel plant and whatnot (taken right about here: https://maps.app.goo.gl/wqN4ARa7TtZ7MpeP7): 

 

Re: commuter rail it'd be nice to have faster trains/different set running during early morning/evenings that could connect Cle to Akron, but not sure how realistic that is (I know I'm probably repeating stuff that's already been covered upthread).

 

I agree--it's a part of the city most people have never seen.  It could also spur short-term ridership for people who have ridden CVSR before, but want to explore this new route.   A terminus in Tower City would make it even more marketable. 

Thankfully no one was hurt! Hopefully they're able to quickly fix the issue.

 

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad train derails during North Pole Adventure

Jordan Unger and Emily Smith

 

PENINSULA, Ohio (WJW) – Crews are investigating after a Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad train derailed while passengers were on-board Saturday night.

 

According to a Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad spokesperson, the derailment occurred at 8:53 p.m. near Peninsula in Summit County.

 

Three cars came off the tracks but remained upright, a press release from Cuyahoga Valley National Park said.

 

https://fox8.com/news/cuyahoga-valley-scenic-railroad-train-derails-with-passengers-on-board/

14 hours ago, Luke_S said:

Thankfully no one was hurt! Hopefully they're able to quickly fix the issue.

 

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad train derails during North Pole Adventure

Jordan Unger and Emily Smith

 

PENINSULA, Ohio (WJW) – Crews are investigating after a Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad train derailed while passengers were on-board Saturday night.

 

According to a Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad spokesperson, the derailment occurred at 8:53 p.m. near Peninsula in Summit County.

 

Three cars came off the tracks but remained upright, a press release from Cuyahoga Valley National Park said.

 

https://fox8.com/news/cuyahoga-valley-scenic-railroad-train-derails-with-passengers-on-board/

This post has pictures from the derailment re-rail efforts:

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/CVSRFans/permalink/3766852173624979/?

 

 

 

7 hours ago, Boomerang_Brian said:

This post has pictures from the derailment re-rail efforts:

 

https://www.facebook.com/groups/CVSRFans/permalink/3766852173624979/?

 

 

 

 

I was down in Peninsula yesterday,I should have stopped to chat with one of the workers but it was chilly and my fiance was with me so I doubt she would have entertained that for very long. Anyway, the train had the Lock 29 parking lot blocked and Mill St closed just past that. From what I could tell there was only one locomotive and 3 or 4 cars at the Peninsula Depot for ~2 hours, so they were clearly trying to work something out.

1 hour ago, Luke_S said:

 

I was down in Peninsula yesterday,I should have stopped to chat with one of the workers but it was chilly and my fiance was with me so I doubt she would have entertained that for very long. Anyway, the train had the Lock 29 parking lot blocked and Mill St closed just past that. From what I could tell there was only one locomotive and 3 or 4 cars at the Peninsula Depot for ~2 hours, so they were clearly trying to work something out.

 

I was also inadvertently down there and had no idea what was going on haha, they would pull the locomotive forward for a min, then back it up, forward, etc. 

 

Eventually (around 3:45-4) they got the locomotive moving and majority of the cars out of downtown and went south. 

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad derailment under investigation

Ideastream Public Media | By Zaria Johnson

Published December 23, 2024 

 

The train was operating on a siding track that runs parallel to the main track at the time of the derailment. The train had been operating on the siding in Peninsula during the ongoing riverbank stabilization project, according to the statement, and the track was cleared for use following an inspection last week.

 

The railroad is now on winter break through January, said Jennie Vasarhelyi, a Cuyahoga Valley National Park spokesperson. But the need for long-term closures remains to be seen.

 

...

 

The investigation, overseen by the Federal Railroad Administration, will determine the cause of the derailment, Vasarhelyi said.

 

https://www.ideastream.org/community/2024-12-23/cuyahoga-valley-scenic-railroad-derailment-under-investigation

Suspected cause found in derailment of CVSR holiday ride that stranded hundreds for hours

- Craig Webb

 

Flatau said the preliminary probe into the mishap found the train was traveling no more than 2 mph when the railcars derailed while on its way back to the station in Independence. All the cars remained in an upright position.

 

"Preliminary findings suggest that the east side of the rail may have spread and rolled," federal authorities say. "This type of condition is akin to something known as wide gage, whereby there is too much distance between the rails at a given point. It is among the most common of track causes."

 

Although there will not be a full federal investigation, Flatau said, this is a reportable incident and the scenic railroad will have until the end of January to submit its official report to the agency.

 

https://www.beaconjournal.com/story/news/local/2025/01/03/cause-determined-cuyahoga-valley-scenic-rail-road-derailment-december-cvnp-peninsula/77434442007/

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Rail posting on their social media sites that they will be making a "big announcement" in less than a week. 

 

Would it be too soon for the release of feasibility studies for extending service from Rockside to Cleveland?

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/DEiQrzDInJX/?igsh=MWdpNThoN280eHFqeg==

Edited January 7Jan 7 by Luke_S

49 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Rail posting on their social media sites that they will be making a "big announcement" in less than a week. 

 

Would it be too soon for the release of feasibility studies for extending service from Rockside to Cleveland?

That would be stellar!

56 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Rail posting on their social media sites that they will be making a "big announcement" in less than a week. 

 

Would it be too soon for the release of feasibility studies for extending service from Rockside to Cleveland?

 

I have a feeling they are cancelling next season for repairs due to the derailing, but hope I'm wrong.

5 minutes ago, E Rocc said:

 

I have a feeling they are cancelling next season for repairs due to the derailing, but hope I'm wrong.

 

I don't think so, their post on IG said it would be an exciting announcement. 

 

The cause of the derailment seemed to be pretty minor and a quick/easy fix. 

Just now, Luke_S said:

 

I don't think so, their post on IG said it would be an exciting announcement. 

 

The cause of the derailment seemed to be pretty minor and a quick/easy fix. 

 

I hope you're right, but their FB page didn't even mention it in passing.

The announcement will be about a return of Steam In The Valley.

6 hours ago, KJP said:

The announcement will be about a return of Steam In The Vally.

 

Not surprising that this would be the announcement, but I feel like they may have over sold it a little bit...

On 1/7/2025 at 2:41 PM, Luke_S said:

Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Rail posting on their social media sites that they will be making a "big announcement" in less than a week. 

 

Would it be too soon for the release of feasibility studies for extending service from Rockside to Cleveland?

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/DEiQrzDInJX/?igsh=MWdpNThoN280eHFqeg==

 

Independently of this announcement, it does appear that they're ready to present the feasibility study.  At the November NOACA Executive Committee meeting, it was proposed to present the extension study at the December Board of Directors Meeting.  I don't see any indication that that actually happened, so maybe it got pushed back.  There's a NOACA Board of Directors in two weeks on 1/24, so maybe it'll be presented then?

Not sure if this was the big announcement or not, but they posted to their IG yesterday that they will be returning to their full service, Akron Northside to Rockside, in 2025.

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/DEn8mqTPZVD/?igsh=am4yYzVneWM1bXl2

I’m looking forward to watching this - Railroad Street’s videos are excellent. 
Riding through history: the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad

 

On 1/9/2025 at 12:16 AM, KJP said:

The announcement will be about a return of Steam In The Valley.

 

And Ken was right. Again...

 

https://www.instagram.com/p/DExR_o8NYf0/?igsh=MTNrcjZ2bGliOWp5dQ==

 

CSX makes CVSR downtown extension infeasible
By Ken Prendergast / January 19, 2025

 

Except for one brief instruction, property-owning freight railroad CSX Transportation didn’t participate in a feasibility study for extending the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad‘s (CVSR) passenger trains into Downtown Cleveland. But that instruction, described as “a gold-plated” request, forced the study team to conclude that the CVSR extension would not be feasible — for now.

 

MORE

https://neo-trans.blog/2025/01/19/csx-makes-cvsr-downtown-extension-infeasible/

7 hours ago, KJP said:

 

CSX makes CVSR downtown extension infeasible
By Ken Prendergast / January 19, 2025

 

Except for one brief instruction, property-owning freight railroad CSX Transportation didn’t participate in a feasibility study for extending the Cuyahoga Valley Scenic Railroad‘s (CVSR) passenger trains into Downtown Cleveland. But that instruction, described as “a gold-plated” request, forced the study team to conclude that the CVSR extension would not be feasible — for now.

 

MORE

https://neo-trans.blog/2025/01/19/csx-makes-cvsr-downtown-extension-infeasible/

 

Informative update, as always. This is disappointing, but it sounds like there's still some hope. Ken, would you be able to share the route map so it is easier to see the detail and where bedrocks proposed station is? 

 

I get CVSR trains alone likely wouldn't be enough volume to make a difference to Tower City, but I really feel like Bedrock missed a huge opportunity by pushing for a multimodal station returning to TC. 

 

Is it also maybe worth CVSR looking south? I know there isn't the same population density in that direction but doesn't Akron MTA own the rail right of way to Canton and they could link to the McKinley Library and First Ladies Museum. Would also preserve that rail corridor if Akron-Canton ever decided they want to invest in that rail connection to CAK.

I don't have a route map that's any better than one I put in the article. What's wrong with the AECOM station site map?

 

Bedrock could have located at least an interim station below Tower City's walkway to Gateway, which is going to be replaced anyway. 

 

CVSR used to operate from Akron to Canton. The tracks were preserved by Akron Metro RTA but no one uses the middle section of it anymore. Metro doesn't maintain it, including keeping it clear of vegetation so nature is taking it back.

15 minutes ago, KJP said:

I don't have a route map that's any better than one I put in the article. What's wrong with the AECOM station site map?

 

Bedrock could have located at least an interim station below Tower City's walkway to Gateway, which is going to be replaced anyway. 

 

CVSR used to operate from Akron to Canton. The tracks were preserved by Akron Metro RTA but no one uses the middle section of it anymore. Metro doesn't maintain it, including keeping it clear of vegetation so nature is taking it back.

 

I meant the full route map, it looses definition when zooming in. My mistake though, the AECOM map is just fine. 

 

I didn't know they ran all the way to Canton, why did they stop? 

Edited January 19Jan 19 by Luke_S

15 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

 

I didn't know they ran all the way to Canton, why did they stop? 

 

Poor track conditions.

Crazy how expensive this kind of project is.  

 

Just out of curiosity Ken, how many CSX trains use that line daily?  It can't be many.  

Excuse me if i entirely off base here i dont entirely understand track rights and all that but lets say i was elected mayor on the single promise of making this happen, could the city, state or what have you then use eminent domain for the rights?

If i were the head honchos at CSX id mandate my name would have to be incorporated somehow to immortalize myself that alone would have me sold, these guys dont know how to Rockefeller. 

Its so frustrating not being able to see this extension come through.

 

i feel like when it comes to passenger rail of any kind it takes a biblical amount of effort every single time.

Edited January 20Jan 20 by FutureboyWonder

3 hours ago, Cleburger said:

Crazy how expensive this kind of project is.  

 

Just out of curiosity Ken, how many CSX trains use that line daily?  It can't be many.  

 

It's in the article.

 

1 hour ago, FutureboyWonder said:

Excuse me if i entirely off base here i dont entirely understand track rights and all that but lets say i was elected mayor on the single promise of making this happen, could the city, state or what have you then use eminent domain for the rights?

If i were the head honchos at CSX id mandate my name would have to incorporated somehow to immortalize myself that alone would have me sold, these guys dont know how to Rockefeller. 

Its so frustrating not being able to see this extension through i feel like when it comes to passenger rail of any kind it takes a biblical amount of effort every single time.

 

To pursue eminent domain, the public benefits of the passenger rail service would have to exceed those of the freight service on that line. That might actually be a worthy argument considering that the CSX property south of Jennings Crossing (near Harvard-Denison) is so limited. And north of there, CVSR intends to have its own track, separate from the freight operation.

 

BTW, the article is updated with a quick note from CSX.

I hope NOACA and the city and county get on board and keep pushing CSX. If all sides were to work toward a reasonable compromise we could get this done. And l think Bedrock is missing a great opportunity here. What makes a project successful? Money and people using it. Not supporting and encouraging CVSR to expand through their development is incredibly shortsited. 

 

Christ, bringing a GREAT idea to fruition around these parts is like pulling teeth. 

Is the alternate route to the Lakefront Amtrak station still a possibility?

2 hours ago, Dougal said:

Is the alternate route to the Lakefront Amtrak station still a possibility?

 

What alternate route? 

7 hours ago, KJP said:

 

What alternate route? 

 No? I thought you once described one using the west side of the river.